Would you support a Constitutional ammendment making abortion illegal?

[GodLovesCats]

Unless you are a medical doctor, you are not qualified to say there are medical reasons a mother can't finish her pregnancy.

My BIL is a gynecologist/obestetrican, so I could ask him what they are.

 

[SPF]

My BIL is a gynecologist/obestetrican, so I could ask him what they are.

if that's your response, you missed the point I was making.

 

[GodLovesCats]

if that's your response, you missed the point I was making.

I know what you did there.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Does the cause of conception change the value of the life in the womb? If so, under what grounds? Obviously it cannot be biblical grounds because the Bible is clear that the life in the womb is precious regardless of how the mother became pregnant.

It’s not about the value of a future baby, it’s about the health and well-being of the woman carrying it. It is a level of physiological and psychological torture to the woman and her family/partner to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term under that condition, especially since legal precedent has clearly established that the rapist can assume parental rights. Now we have a woman who is pregnant by force with a baby that her rapist can make demands of. She won’t be able to adopt out, enroll the child in school, make medical decisions, without involving her rapist.

If somebody like me were made pregnant via a rape (God in heaven forbid Amen), it would compromise my life, not just tie me to my rapist.

Furthermore, the only abortions that this proposed amendment would ban are abortions made out of convenience to the mother. Not abortions that are medically necessary. Yes, a woman choosing to abort the baby solely because it is a child of her rapist is a convenience based decision.

So by admitting to abortions by “convenience,” you are admitting a pregnancy and a baby is a burden. Is it really “pro-life” to call babies “burdens” and stick them with unwilling parents? What do you hope to gain by classifying babies as burdens and legislating their birth? And what legislation are you approving to help assist with this influx of burdensome children? Pumping money into a universal health care system? Agreeing to higher taxes so as to bolster the already struggling public school system? Increases to social services like food and housing support for low-income families? I’m sure hearing that cuts were being made to the food stamp and welfare systems must have enraged you for how brutally it impacted low-income/high-need parents and families.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

It’s not about the value of a future baby, it’s about the health and well-being of the woman carrying it. It is a level of physiological and psychological torture to the woman and her family/partner to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term under that condition, especially since legal precedent has clearly established that the rapist can assume parental rights. Now we have a woman who is pregnant by force with a baby that her rapist can make demands of. She won’t be able to adopt out, enroll the child in school, make medical decisions, without involving her rapist.

If somebody like me were made pregnant via a rape (God in heaven forbid Amen), it would compromise my life, not just tie me to my rapist.

So by admitting to abortions by “convenience,” you are admitting a pregnancy and a baby is a burden. Is it really “pro-life” to call babies “burdens” and stick them with unwilling parents? What do you hope to gain by classifying babies as burdens and legislating their birth? And what legislation are you approving to help assist with this influx of burdensome children? Pumping money into a universal health care system? Agreeing to higher taxes so as to bolster the already struggling public school system? Increases to social services like food and housing support for low-income families? I’m sure hearing that cuts were being made to the food stamp and welfare systems must have enraged you for how brutally it impacted low-income/high-need parents and families.

First, studies have shown that women who are raped generally feel worse after having an abortion. Therefore, it would be better to spare the woman from dealing with the additional grief of murdering her own unborn child after being raped. I would argue that if a woman feels that carrying a rapist's baby to term is too psychologically and physiologically traumatizing, it is likely that an abortion would be more traumatizing.
Bishop suggests that abortion after rape is 'sometimes far worse' than rape itself

Second, I never said that all pregnancies are "burdensome". I said that it is very inconvenient to be impregnated by the man who raped you. I think everyone can agree to that, including those who are pro-life. Your statements in absolutely no way diminishes the fact that seeking an abortion after rape is a decision based on convenience not necessity.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Absolutely not Look at what happened to Amendment 18. People were totally confused and found ways to get around it, smuggling alcoholic drinks from Canada to the United States. It did not take long for people to realize adding alcohol to the U.S. Constitution was a big mistake. If abortion is banned that way, we're going to see 18/21 all over again.

Yet slavery was banned, but I don't see anyone seeking to repeal the 14th amendment?

 

[GodLovesCats]

Yet slavery was banned, but I don't see anyone seeking to repeal the 14th amendment?

Of course nobody sought to repeal the 14th Amendment. Everyone agrees slavery was horrible and there is no reason to support it.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Of course nobody sought to repeal the 14th Amendment. Everyone agrees slavery was horrible and there is no reason to support it.

Did "everyone agree"? I seem to remember that a war was fought over slavery. Perhaps if we made an amendment banning abortion, eventually "everyone will agree" that abortion was horrible and there is no reason to support it.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Did "everyone agree"? I seem to remember that a war was fought over slavery. Perhaps if we made an amendment banning abortion, eventually "everyone will agree" that abortion was horrible and there is no reason to support it.

Notice my use of the present tense. Of course there was a lot of disagreement during the Civil War. Now? Nope.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Notice my use of the present tense. Of course there was a lot of disagreement during the Civil War. Now? Nope.

So perhaps there may presently be a lot of disagreement in regards to abortion. But eventually, like slavery, we all will agree that abortion is wrong.

 

[GodLovesCats]

So perhaps there may presently be a lot of disagreement in regards to abortion. But eventually, like slavery, we all will agree that abortion is wrong.

It took centuries for slavery to be abolished. European nations had slaves in 1400. Pro-lifers need to be a little more patient than they are right now because it will not be a quick fix or an easy fix.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

It took centuries for slavery to be abolished. European nations had slaves in 1400. Pro-lifers need to be a little more patient than they are right now because it will not be a quick fix or an easy fix.

How do you think the slaves would respond if you told them to "be a little more patient"? How do you think the Jews would respond when you tell them from the other side of the barbed wire fence, "Yeah, you all are probably going to die, but we will eventually stop the Nazis after your are dead" ?

 

[GodLovesCats]

How do you think the slaves would respond if you told them to "be a little more patient"? How do you think the Jews would respond when you tell them from the other side of the barbed wire fence, "Yeah, you all are probably going to die, but we will eventually stop the Nazis after your are dead" ?

Remember you are talking about non-Christians. Would you, being a Christian, feel the same way about a little more patience as a persecuted Jew or Muslim?

 

[Brightmoon]

I’m going to post accurate medical info from a ob/gyn about late term abortions and how they’re done and the reasons behind them. As usual I can’t link. Sorry ! . A lot of anti abortion people aren’t going to like what this doctor has to say

 

[GodLovesCats]

Don't even think about posting graphic images or videos when you do it Bright. I don't think many people even want to read about the procedures.

 

[Brightmoon]

This is an article written by an ob/gyn who had undergone a problem pregnancy herself . She accurately explains the medical terminology ( which means that fetuses aren’t babies and she also explains what a live birth is ) .the live birth info was shocking as its only used to bill people for insurance purposes. There aren’t any pictures . you’ll have to google as my phone won’t let me link for some weird reason

 

[SPF]

which means that fetuses aren’t babies

Sure, a fetus is not a “baby” in the same sense that my toddler is not a teenager. Meaning, while they are at different levels of development, they are still equally human beings.

We know scientifically at this point that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. As Christians, we know that all human beings are created in God’s Image and possess inherent moral and value.

Therefore, we should be able to recognize that the 98.5% of abortions committed for non-medical emergencies are certainly immoral.

 

[Brightmoon]

Eventually it might become a viable human but at that stage it’s a fertilized egg . That old saying about slips betwixt the cup and the lip comes to mind here. Iirc only about one third of fertilized eggs even make it to the implantation stage. The rest die off because of some abnormality . The poor women who’ve had miscarriages aka natural abortions have them because something is wrong with the fetus or her body rejects it because it’s causing too much damage. The fetus is not viable without being a sort of parasite on the mother’s body resources after the implantation stage. This is one of the reasons women are given the choice to continue the pregnancy or not. The biggest problem I see is that women who desperately don’t want the pregnancy are going to use the back alley coat hanger option. Abortion laws were originally passed as a lesser of 2 evils choice. They’re going to have the abortion anyway and the risk to the woman is lessened if done by medical personnel. I’m old enough to remember back alley coat hanger abortions and the deaths and mutilations they caused . No one in their right mind wants those bad old days back

 

[GodLovesCats]

This is an article written by an ob/gyn who had undergone a problem pregnancy herself . She accurately explains the medical terminology ( which means that fetuses aren’t babies and she also explains what a live birth is ) .the live birth info was shocking as its only used to bill people for insurance purposes. There aren’t any pictures . you’ll have to google as my phone won’t let me link for some weird reason

What article without any pictures can be considered accurate? An article must include photographs for me or anyone else to trust the author. And if you do not have a link in your post, I cannot believe one actually was written.

 

[usexpat97]

A constitutional amendment which explicitly relegated to the states the right to decide how to handle abortion, I would not oppose.