The Nature of Evil

[GostHacked]

God forbid you have a misscariage.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/26/georgia-lawmakers-anti-abortion-proposal-punish-women-miscarriages/

A Georgia state representative has reintroduced an anti-abortion bill that would make miscarriages a felony if the mother cannot prove there was no "human involvement."

Guilty till proven innocent.

[ToadBrother]

And I pointed out the eerie similarity how the Nazis viewed the Jew as non-human, and how the fetus is now deemed non-human.....so atrocities (from tortures to maiming to killings and indignities) can be justified, and be acceptable to society.

There is no similarity. Jews had legal rights removed from them in Germany. At no point in Western legal history was personhood any conferred prior to birth. Your vital statistics do not list the day that you were conceived, they do not list the day that you developed toes, they do not list the day that your primitive ganglia began firing in an organized pattern, they do not list the day you started moving. What they list is the day you were born.

Maybe some legal systems had some recognition of a fetus, but they were damned few and far between, and were never a part of European or Common Law. The fetus has a long tradition of being a non-entity.

You've created a false connection, nothing more, nothing less. You have produced a non sequitur.

[BubberMiley]

I just can't see how someone can, on one hand, call people pickaninnies, and on the other hand equate having an abortion with racism.

[betsy]

I didn't know "pickaninny" is a racist term. I thought it's just one of those term that means silly or something like that!

[betsy]

There is no similarity. Jews had legal rights removed from them in Germany. At no point in Western legal history was personhood any conferred prior to birth. Your vital statistics do not list the day that you were conceived, they do not list the day that you developed toes, they do not list the day that your primitive ganglia began firing in an organized pattern, they do not list the day you started moving. What they list is the day you were born.

Maybe some legal systems had some recognition of a fetus, but they were damned few and far between, and were never a part of European or Common Law. The fetus has a long tradition of being a non-entity.

You've created a false connection, nothing more, nothing less. You have produced a non sequitur.

To say that the fetus has a long tradition of being a non-entity in our society is false. The fact that abortion was punishable by law, and is only allowed if there's health risk to the mother attest to that. The fetus was not considered a non-entity by our society.

It's only when the Feminist Movement was guided and convinced by Lader to push for woman's right with her body that the movement for how the fetus is regarded had changed. Now you can abort the baby at anytime as long as he's still partly inside the womb.

So of course there is a stark similarity between the Jews in Hitler's 3rd Reich and the status of the fetus. Being considered non-human means any atrocity is acceptable! The Jews were tortured, starved, raped, killed, maimed and subjected to all sorts of indignities.

Of course, it's worse for the fetus since the fetus cannot verbalize what he's going through. There was a film that showed the fetus trying to avoid the instrument that was trying to kill him...so obviously the fetus can feel it!

Since he is inside, who can see what's going on unless you are there viewing it through ultra sound.

Some say the fetus can feel pain in 20 weeks...some say it's later than that...some say it could be earlier than that....well, who's to say?

Some would justify that those atrocious cruel acts like the ones we read in the papers are only "isolated" incidents. Who's to say for sure they're only isolated incidents? There are no accurate data available! Besides whether it's only isolated incident, it is still a horrendous act!

Animals have more protection.

[betsy]

I'm wondering if you have children, since that would give you some perspective on what is being asked of primarily young girls who get pregnant and are faced with either the abortion option, or putting everything on hold for nine months and then going through labour and childbirth. And, I have no personal perspective on how great or not so demanding this requirement is, or whether or not the statements by many young women that it's an ordeal to give it up for adoption afterwards. I don't have any daughters, but if I did, I wouldn't want society to close off all of the options for young women because of some exaggerated importance given to the interests of fetuses and embryos.

BUT it's not like we're back in 1969.

There is no longer the stigma or shame attached to an unwed mother - one of the main reasons why women in those days seek abortion.

There are contraceptives nowadays. Birth control of all kinds. From devices to pills. There's even the morning-after pill. Getting carried away by the heat of the moment is no longer an excuse. Take a morning-after pill.

If you fear the pains of childbirth, wouldn't you take the extra precautions not to get pregnant? I bet anyone who has the fear of chidlbirth pains will treat birth control devices as one would treat his bank card - never leave home without it. And will put any boy scout to shame for always being prepared!

And if you did forget to take precautions, wouldn't you be running to get the morning-after pill the moment you get the chance?

Besides, what with HIV and other STD, use of condoms is another sensible tool, if not a must!

For AIDS and HIV being a global threat....aren't we suppose to really promote and make it a must, if not impose the use of condoms???

Any unwanted pregnancies that happen in this day and age is just the result of sheer wilfull negligence.

Why is the fetus the one paying the price for this?

So it is really odd that despite all these things available to prevent pregnancies, society would still opt for the senseless killing of the fetus as just another alternative.

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[cybercoma]

God forbid you have a misscariage.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/26/georgia-lawmakers-anti-abortion-proposal-punish-women-miscarriages/

Guilty till proven innocent.

I don't even have the words to described how shocked and appalled I am at this.

[ToadBrother]

To say that the fetus has a long tradition of being a non-entity in our society is false. The fact that abortion was punishable by law, and is only allowed if there's health risk to the mother attest to that. The fetus was not considered a non-entity by our society.

Abortion was a crime, but it wasn't murder. The fetus still wasn't deemed a erson.

It's only when the Feminist Movement was guided and convinced by Lader to push for woman's right with her body that the movement for how the fetus is regarded had changed. Now you can abort the baby at anytime as long as he's still partly inside the womb.

So of course there is a stark similarity between the Jews in Hitler's 3rd Reich and the status of the fetus. Being considered non-human means any atrocity is acceptable! The Jews were tortured, starved, raped, killed, maimed and subjected to all sorts of indignities.

Of course, it's worse for the fetus since the fetus cannot verbalize what he's going through. There was a film that showed the fetus trying to avoid the instrument that was trying to kill him...so obviously the fetus can feel it!

Since he is inside, who can see what's going on unless you are there viewing it through ultra sound.

Some say the fetus can feel pain in 20 weeks...some say it's later than that...some say it could be earlier than that....well, who's to say?

Which is all pretty irrelevant, and you still have demonstrated any connection to Hitler. I'm telling you right now that at no point in the history of the Western legal system has a fetus been deemed a person. Doctors who performed abortions were not charged with murder, mothers who sought out abortions were not charged as accessories to murder, parents, husbands and boyfriends of women who sought out abortions were not charged as co-conspirators. The crime was a far lesser one than one would expect if your assertion of personhood were true.

As I said, your birth certificate only shows when you actually made it out of your mother alive. Stillbirths don't even get birth certificates. In other words, what you're saying is rubbish; ignorant made-up rubbish.

Some would justify that those atrocious cruel acts like the ones we read in the papers are only "isolated" incidents. Who's to say for sure they're only isolated incidents? There are no accurate data available! Besides whether it's only isolated incident, it is still a horrendous act!

Animals have more protection.

Spare me the t-shirt slogans. You'll find no traction with me.

[bloodyminded]

There are contraceptives nowadays. Birth control of all kinds. From devices to pills. There's even the morning-after pill. Getting carried away by the heat of the moment is no longer an excuse. Take a morning-after pill.

Does the response to this really need to be spelled out?

[betsy]

Abortion was a crime, but it wasn't murder. The fetus still wasn't deemed a person.

Which is all pretty irrelevant, and you still have demonstrated any connection to Hitler. I'm telling you right now that at no point in the history of the Western legal system has a fetus been deemed a person. Doctors who performed abortions were not charged with murder, mothers who sought out abortions were not charged as accessories to murder, parents, husbands and boyfriends of women who sought out abortions were not charged as co-conspirators. The crime was a far lesser one than one would expect if your assertion of personhood were true.

As I said, your birth certificate only shows when you actually made it out of your mother alive. Stillbirths don't even get birth certificates. In other words, what you're saying is rubbish; ignorant made-up rubbish.

Did it need to be spelled out in big bold letters that the fetus was a human? It was a given.

The fact that it was not even deemed needed to say that the fetus is human only shows your claim that "it has always been traditionally a non-entity" is entirely false!

The first wave of Feminist Movement OPPOSED abortion....even after the fact that desperate women were getting abortions due to the shame and stigma, their lives ruined! If there was ever a time to fight for abortion, that time would've been it! Don't you think?

And yet the Feminist Movement sought to put the welfare of the fetus before their own.

Betty Friedan, credited with reawakening feminism in the 1960s with her landmark book, The Feminist Mystique, did not even mention abortion in the early edition. It was not until 1966 that NOW included abortion in its list of goals. Even then, abortion was a low priority.

The fact that abortion was not mentioned at all in the early edition obviously showed how women felt towards the fetus. It was not a "non-entity!"

Boy, you tell a mother she's carrying a non-entity....you'd probably hear the worst tongue-lashing you'd ever heard, that is if you're still conscious and not counting stars.

It was a man -- abortion rights activist Larry Lader, who remains active today -- who credits himself with guiding a reluctant Friedan to make abortion an issue for NOW. Lader teamed up with a gynecologist, Bernard Nathanson, to co-found the National Alliance to Repeal Abortion Laws, the forerunner of today's National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL).

Lader suggested to the NOW leadership that all feminist demands (equal education, jobs, pay, etc.) hinged on a woman's ability to control her own body and procreation.

If Ms Friedan stuck to her own guns, and did not allow herself to be manipulated by this man Larry Lader - who ended up taking credit for the "success" of the Feminist Movement - we wouldn't be going on in a senseless bloodbath, killing our young and our future!

So for those who truly wish to associate anything with religion.....consider Larry as the serpent and Friedan as the dozie Eve! Ironically playing the typical stereo-type of a mindless woman!

Of course, as a supporter of the Movement, why would you wish to associate it or compare it with something so evil in history - so evil that even now we're still talking about it.

You can go on with your blind support....seeing what you want to see.

You can go on pulling everything and anything that would make this evil become "good" and justifiable in your eyes. You need that. That is expected of you. Proving the philosophical premise that no movement set out to say, "we're going to do something evil. period."

Proving that followers/supporters of the movement (like the soldiers, concentration camp guards, Hitler boys, the pro-Hitler population) need to see and believe in something "good" in order to justify this evil.

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

Does the response to this really need to be spelled out?

Yes. Kindly spell it out for me.

[betsy]

Methods of Abortion

Induced abortion is the active removal of the human embryo* or fetus† from the uterus before the stage of viability, or 20 weeks’ gestation. ”1

Although abortion is defined as termination up to 20 weeks’ gestation, a lack of restrictions on abortion in Canada has made it legal and accessible through all 40 weeks/nine months of pregnancy.

There are many methods of abortion used in Canada. The method used depends mainly on the stage of the pregnancy and the size of the developing fetus. Other factors considered include the status of the woman’s health, personal preference, and where the abortion will occur.

Included in the following section are the methods reportedly used in Canada in 2004, the latest year for which statistics have been released. Abortion methods used in Canada are incomplete in the statistical report

*Embryo refers to the developing human from the second to eighth week of development. All major organ systems develop during this stage and are present in the embryo at eight weeks.

*Fetus refers to the developing human from approximately 60 days up to birth. During the fetal phase, the organ systems become more mature, and the fetus grows from approximately 3cm and 2.5g at 60 days to 50 cm and 3300g at term. 3 sp;

Surgical abortion

Surgical abortion refers to abortion done using surgical instruments. Procedures vary due to the stage of the pregnancy and size of the fetus at the time of the abortion.

Suction Aspiration

(surgical aspiration, vacuum abortion, suction dilation and curettage (D&C))

Suction aspiration was the method used for approximately 90% of all abortions reported in Canada in 2004,4 and is generally used between six and 14 weeks of pregnancy.

A hollow plastic tube is inserted into the uterus through the cervix and attached to a suction machine. The suction tears the fetus into small parts, which are sucked through the tube into a collection bottle. Often a sharp loop-shaped knife called a curette is then inserted into the uterus to loosen any remaining tissue so that it can be suctioned out. When the suctioning is finished, the abortionist must examine the fetal parts and tissue to see if the abortion is complete.5,6,7

Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)

Statistics are not clear on how many D&E abortions occur in Canada each year. In 2004, the most recent year for which abortion statistics have been released, at least 11% of abortions in Canada occurred after 13 weeks’ gestation.11 In the US, the majority of abortions that occur after 13 weeks are performed using a variation of this method.12

D&E abortion refers to an abortion done using forceps to dismember and extract the fetus instead of, or together with, suction. In reality, a combination of methods is generally used in abortion after 13 weeks. As the fetus grows larger and its bones become harder, the fetus becomes more difficult to extract. The cervix must be opened wider, and the head of the fetus is large and must be crushed before it can be removed. Bone fragments are sharp and must be carefully removed to avoid damage to the uterus and cervix. The fetal parts removed must be identified to make sure the abortion is complete and no parts are left in the uterus. Suction is used for a final clean out of any bits of fetal or placental tissue that may remain.13,14

Sometimes medications such as digoxin or potassium chloride are injected into the fetus through the woman’s abdomen, to kill it before the D&E procedure.15 After 19 to 20 weeks, a solution of urea or saline is sometimes injected into the amniotic sac before the abortion. This kills the fetus and stimulates contractions. Urea also begins the breakdown of fetal bones and other tissue to make removal of the parts easier for the abortionist and less painful for the mother.16 Oxytocin may be used to stimulate contractions and bring about delivery of the fetus.17

Dilation and Extraction

(D&X) (intact D&E, partial birth abortion)

There are no laws in Canada restricting abortion. Since abortion reporting and recording is inconsistent and incomplete across Canada, it is not known if, or how many, abortions occur by this method in Canada each year.

D&X abortion is a variation of the D&E method, and is used after the first 20 weeks of pregnancy. Laminaria treatment over several days causes wide cervical dilation. The abortionist, guided by ultrasound, uses forceps to grasp the fetus and position it face down and feet first. The fetus, intact and often still alive at this point, is delivered up to the head. The head is too big to pass through the cervix. After puncturing the base of the skull, the brain is suctioned out, the skull collapses, and the dead fetus is delivered. Digoxin, potassium chloride, saline or urea are sometimes used to kill the fetus before delivery.18

Surgical Dilatation and Curettage (D&C)

Approximately 6% of abortions reported in Canada in 2004 used this method.19

Local or general anesthetic is given to the mother before her cervix is dilated. The cervix is dilated with laminaria or rigid dilators; sometimes, the prostaglandin Misoprostol is also given to soften and dilate the cervix.

A loop-shaped knife called a curette is inserted through the cervix. The curette cuts the fetus...

More....

http://www.abortionincanada.ca/methods/index.html

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[bloodyminded]

Yes. Kindly spell it out for me.

Many who are opposed to abortion consider the morning after pill to be merely another form of it.

[betsy]

Many who are opposed to abortion consider the morning after pill to be merely another form of it.

Because of religious belief. And as a Christian I'm one of those who do, and instead pushing for abstinence. That being said, I am using reason without dragging my own personal belief into this.

I am accepting the fact that in this hedonistic climate we now have, when instant gratification is the order of the day...abstinence is almost certainly out of the question!

Now that modern science had provided us with the tools to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies.....and AIDS/HIV and other std..... there is no longer any excuse for the senseless killings.

The choice regarding the female's autonomous right to her body can be made PRIOR to getting pregnant...not weeks after!

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[BubberMiley]

Yes. Rape victims should choose to be abstinent!

[betsy]

Speaking of condoms...

I'm still waiting for the Movement calling for the legislation that will criminalize the non-use of condoms outside of marriage/common law relationship.

Why not? It only makes sense, doesn't it....if we want to be consistent.

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[cybercoma]

Did it need to be spelled out in big bold letters that the fetus was a human? It was a given.

For Pete's sake, stop confounding "human" with "person". Human is a biological definition and person has a very specific legal definition. In this context they are distinct things.

[cybercoma]

Speaking of condoms...

I'm still waiting for the Movement calling for the legislation that will criminalize the non-use of condoms outside of marriage/common law relationship.

Why not? It only makes sense, doesn't it....if we want to be consistent.

Please walk me through how this is consistent. Why does this follow from the abortion law being shot down by section 7 of the Charter?

[betsy]

Please walk me through how this is consistent. Why does this follow from the abortion law being shot down by section 7 of the Charter?

So you're back from sulking, are you? Herr Cybercoma.

Why do you think I should bother walking you through it....you insist on not being on the same page anyway.

Edited February 27, 2011 by betsy

[GostHacked]

Because of religious belief. And as a Christian I'm one of those who do, and instead pushing for abstinence. That being said, I am using reason without dragging my own personal belief into this.

No your religious view is clouding your belief. To say your religion has no influence whatsoever on your stance on abortion is completely ignorant. You call out atheists for having no morals because they are atheists, and yet you say your religion does not play a factor in your views on abortion.

100% bullshit Betsy.

Now that modern science had provided us with the tools to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies.....and AIDS/HIV and other std..... there is no longer any excuse for the senseless killings.

The choice regarding the female's autonomous right to her body can be made PRIOR to getting pregnant...not weeks after!

Birth control is not 100% effective. Anyone with a couple brain cells and limited capacity to think, understands this. There is no more room for your sensless rants. And you are still my favourite troll.

[GostHacked]

Speaking of condoms...

I'm still waiting for the Movement calling for the legislation that will criminalize the non-use of condoms outside of marriage/common law relationship.

Why not? It only makes sense, doesn't it....if we want to be consistent.

How you plan to enforce that? AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHH Good luck, you are gonna need it.

[cybercoma]

So you're back from sulking, are you? Herr Cybercoma.

Why do you think I should bother walking you through it....you insist on not being on the same page anyway.

Because you apparently have a point to make and I don't see the logic in it. Walk me through the logic, so I can understand your point.

[ToadBrother]

Did it need to be spelled out in big bold letters that the fetus was a human? It was a given.

The fact that it was not even deemed needed to say that the fetus is human only shows your claim that "it has always been traditionally a non-entity" is entirely false!

The first wave of Feminist Movement OPPOSED abortion....even after the fact that desperate women were getting abortions due to the shame and stigma, their lives ruined! If there was ever a time to fight for abortion, that time would've been it! Don't you think?

And yet the Feminist Movement sought to put the welfare of the fetus before their own.

I love how you ignored every single one of my points. I will reiterate:

- Our legal system does not recognize a fetus as a person. You don't get a conception certificate, you get a birth certificate. Stillbirths do not get birth certificates, indicating that in utero death is not considered the death of a person.

- Doctors, pregnant women and anyone else facilitating abortions have never been charged with murder. It was illegal, but as an independent charge, so not even the criminal code recognized fetal death as murder.

As to the rest of your post, just absurdities and irrelevancies. What one generation of feminists wanted does not bind future generations.

[betsy]

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2010/05/gallop_poll_the.php&usg=__g_Fc1izh4D3YCjwafX1GQKql93E=&h=438&w=584&sz=53&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=tukAjB1u89RZ3M:&tbnh=167&tbnw=247&ei=AJJzTZfTN8GB8gbznfTYCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dabortion%2Bpictures%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D513%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=160&vpy=137&dur=210&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=77&ty=75&oei=AJJzTZfTN8GB8gbznfTYCw&page=1&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0'>http://www.google.cat/imgres?imgurl=http://www.hyscience.com/abortion.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2010/05/gallop_poll_the.php&usg=__g_Fc1izh4D3YCjwafX1GQKql93E=&h=438&w=584&sz=53&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=tukAjB1u89RZ3M:&tbnh=167&tbnw=247&ei=AJJzTZfTN8GB8gbznfTYCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dabortion%2Bpictures%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D513%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=160&vpy=137&dur=210&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=77&ty=75&oei=AJJzTZfTN8GB8gbznfTYCw&page=1&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0

"Pro-life" has apparently become the new normal in America.

Gallop reports that the conservative shift in Americans' views on abortion that was first recorded a year ago has carried over into 2010.

Gallop's report shows other measures are also highly relevant to the abortion issue - age and gender. Over the last ten years, every age group has seen and increase inidentification with pro-life. The percentage of seniors identifying as pro-life has gone up seven points; young adults ages 18-29 has gone up in pro-life identification four points; those in the 50-64 age group have increased in pro-life identification by five points; and those in their 30s have increased in their pro-life identification by two points in ten years.

And as Ed Morrissey points out, women may provide the most surprising demographic of all, however.

Ed also suggests that Gallup may be working the analysis in the wrong direction - we may be looking at a cultural shift rather than a political shift:

We are looking at a cultural shift on abortion, where its perceived morality (consistently rejected by majorities over the same period of time) has finally come into closer relationship with personal identification on the issue. It's not the political divide that's driving these numbers -- but it may be that the cultural shift has started to impact political identification as well. If so, pro-choice Democrats could find themselves in a minority party in the next several years.

Regardless of how one frames it - be it political or cultural, what is clear is that the evidence points to Americans growing more wary about the morality of abortion per se - and it's about time they're finally waking up to the big lie of the Left - that unborn children are nothing more than a lump of tissue.

More...

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2010/05/gallop_poll_the.php

Edited March 6, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

I repeat:

There is no longer the stigma or shame attached to an unwed mother!

There are contraceptives nowadays. Birth control of all kinds. From devices to pills. There's even the morning-after pill!

If you fear childbirth pains, wouldn't you make darn sure - doubly or triply sure - you never get pregnant? Duh?

There is no more excuse for the senseless killings of the most defenceless humans on this planet! NONE!

This is where your so-called compassion lies:

http://www.google.cat/imgres?imgurl=http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/abortion-rights.jpg&imgrefurl=http://tothewire.wordpress.com/2008/12/07/cavemans-response-to-fox-news-post-by-tothewire/&usg=__r0y4D_DXgzYFzde5WpiRvszEI4Q=&h=405&w=500&sz=43&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=g-MZ2-ypPDNLoM:&tbnh=167&tbnw=206&ei=pending&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dabortion%2Bpictures%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D513%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=156&vpy=216&dur=481&hovh=202&hovw=250&tx=178&ty=208&oei=cpNzTaKSHsK88gbLy62KDw&page=1&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:0

It's just for expediency! For whom? For those women who don't want to be inconvenienced for

9 months!

Hitler had "rationalized" his evil for what he considered "good" for his race. Oh how you hate Hitler....and yet you rationalize your evil for plain and shallow expediency. EXPEDIENCY.

If you have the gall to rabidly defend and support mass-murders of fetuses, at least have the gall to call it for what it is!

Edited March 6, 2011 by betsy