Abortion revisited

[bush_cheney2004]

....The authors of American Grace say many young couples now take ultrasounds of their babies-to-be. "Both of us have had many friends and relatives display ultrasound photos and never once has an expectant mother used the impersonal word 'fetus' to describe what we are seeing. Ultrasounds are pictures of their baby-to-be."

That's true....they are called "baby showers", not "fetus showers".

[betsy]

That's true....they are called "baby showers", not "fetus showers".

[Guest American Woman]

Support for abortion is going down. [..]

But just to be clear, you do support abortion when a pregnancy is the result of rape?

[betsy]

But just to be clear, you do support abortion when a pregnancy is the result of rape?

Personally no. And this is because of my religious belief.

[Guest American Woman]

Personally no. And this is because of my religious belief.

Then you realize that your religious belief negates your previous argument re: 'a person's rights can't infringe on another's,' right?

[betsy]

Then you realize that your religious belief negates your previous argument re: 'a person's rights can't infringe on another's,' right?

Of course not. Because to me, a fetus is a human being. He has the right to be protected. All the more so when he has no voice, and is defenseless. I see abortion as murder.

me, murder is a grievous sin.

FYI, the so-called "sovereignty of a woman's body" was just made-up...there's no such right.

She doesn't have the right to shoot up heroin. She doesn't have the right to commit suicide.

This so-called "sovereignty of woman's body" was just simply a privilege invented to accomodate abortion.

Women's Lib just had a powerful lobby group. And society was reeling with guilt over the mistreatment of women....and "empowered" them I guess as an act of atonement.

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[Guest American Woman]

No. Because to me, a fetus is a human being. He has the right to be protected. All the more so when he has no voice, and is defenseless.

The woman/girl carrying the fetus is a human being and she has the right to be protected, also. When I pointed out to you that your argument re: 'rights not intruding on another's' applied to the woman also, you said that her having exercised her right to have sex meant that the fetus' rights overrode hers; but when it's rape, the woman/girl who ends up pregnant had no part in it. She is a victim. So how do you explain that? Why can a fetus' rights override another's - while a rape victim's can't? You do realize that a rape victim is defenseless too, right?

As I said, your argument re: "rights" holds no water. You are contradicting yourself.

Edited June 1, 2012 by American Woman

[betsy]

The woman/girl carrying the fetus is a human being and she has the right to be protected, also. When I pointed out to you that your argument re: 'rights not intruding on another's' applied to the woman also, you said that her having exercised her right to have sex meant that the fetus' rights overrode hers; but when it's rape, the woman/girl who ends up pregnant had no part in it. She is a victim. So how do you explain that? Why can a fetus' rights override another's - while a rape victim's can't? You do realize that a rape victim is defenseless too, right?

As I said, your argument re: "rights" holds no water. You are contradicting yourself.

I said, the woman's choice had been exercised when she chose to have sex, or unprotected sex (knowing full well what the possible conseqences could be, which may include STD).

The baby is just the consequence of the choice that she made. She had choices. She made her choice.

The baby did not have any choice at all!

Actually I am consistent. My personal view - the fetus being human and deserving of the same rights (human rights issue, remember?) - is the reason why I don't support abortion by rape.

It is more so compounded by my religion since to Christians, murder is a grievous sin.

Rape victims do not have the choice. Well I do feel sorry for any rape victim, but that should not negate the status of the child.

Killing the baby will not negate the rape.

It will only mean there will be two victims: the rape victim and the child.

I'm all for the state giving the best support for the mother until she delivers, and adopting or taking the child under its wing until adulthood!

Btw, here's the suggested precedure for victims of rape:

Here’s what happens during the medical exam:

1.Brief History Taken – including information about the rape.

2.General Examination – to check for injury. Pictures may be taken but only with your permission.

3.Pelvic Examination – tests and swabs are performed for sexually transmitted diseases/infections, and checks for injuries.

4.Blood Test – for sexually transmitted diseases/infections.

5.Evidence Gathering – specimens may be collected, such as fingernail scrapings, pubic hair combings, hair samples, also some clothing (especially underpants) may be kept for evidence.

The rape exam is paid for by a special fund at the Attorney General’s Office, if the victim chooses to prosecute. Be sure to get the appropriate forms filled out to charge it to this fund.

If you are afraid of pregnancy resulting from the rape, you should consult the examiner about pills to be taken with 72 hours of the assault, which prevent pregnancy. Be sure possible side effects are explained.

A follow-up medical examination is important! Your examiner will provide recommended guidelines for additional tests for sexually transmitted diseases/infections or other health concerns.

http://www.advocacysupportcenter.com/article-whattodo.asp

American Woman,

If you were raped, will you followthe advice given above?

Will make sure you don't get pregnant?

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[Wilber]

Why? If you want to use that reasoning, Paul Bernardo was a fetus at one time too.

As well as Einstein, Sister Theresa, Nelson Mandela etc, Black Dog, you and I. If you want to use that reasoning.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Wilber

[The_Squid]

As well as Einstein, Sister Theresa, Nelson Mandela etc, Black Dog, you and I. If you want to use that reasoning.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and say that everyone was a fetus at one point and that it has absolutely zero bearing on this debate, such as it is.

[betsy]

The woman/girl carrying the fetus is a human being and she has the right to be protected, also. When I pointed out to you that your argument re: 'rights not intruding on another's' applied to the woman also, you said that her having exercised her right to have sex meant that the fetus' rights overrode hers; but when it's rape, the woman/girl who ends up pregnant had no part in it. She is a victim. So how do you explain that? Why can a fetus' rights override another's - while a rape victim's can't? You do realize that a rape victim is defenseless too, right?

As I said, your argument re: "rights" holds no water. You are contradicting yourself.

Who raped her? The baby did not rape her. It was the rapist who stepped on her right when he committed this criminal act against her. The child is just an innocent result of this violation of her rights - which was committed by her rapist.

What does society do to rapists??? Don't we punish them for raping?

If the raped woman kills this human being - the baby - then she' violating this baby's right just the same way the rapist violated her right!

Anyway, you keep bringing up unwanted pregnancy by rape which actually is practically nil.

As I've given you the medical advise/procedures for raped victims - I would imagine any unwanted pregnancy as the result of rape is rare. For the simple reason that any woman raped in this modern age of HIV, AIDS, and who knows what else....it will truly be a dim-witted woman who will refuse to run to the nearest clinic after getting raped! Taking that pill before 72 hours surely sounds more convenient than having to go through all the pains of abortion!

You didn't answer my question. If you were raped, wouldn't you go see the doctor?

Now, show me the statistics of unwanted pregnancies caused by rape. You have to back up your claim. Otherwise you're just spitting out a useless opinion.

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

As I said, your argument re: "rights" holds no water. You are contradicting yourself.

Actually, it is you - and those who use the mantra "sovereignty of woman's body" - who are contradicting yourselves.

With the exception of rape, the very fact that you guys claim the woman has the absolute authority over her own body begs the question, "how did she lets herself get into this pickle?" You say she's supposed to be the authority over her own body. Well? She's gotten herself pregnant, didn't she? She made her choice. Where's responsibility? Accountability?

At the least, she should be held accountable for her irresponsible action which causes the torture and death of an innocent.

What's the difference between her and a drunk-driver who knowingly drives the car and killing someone in the process?

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[waldo]

What's the difference between her and a drunk-driver who knowingly drives the car and killing someone in the process?

That's for the law to decide.

[betsy]

Betsy: That's for the law to decide.

Bingo!

That's what re-opening the debate is all about.

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[cybercoma]

I'm going to take a wild guess here and say that everyone was a fetus at one point and that it has absolutely zero bearing on this debate, such as it is.

exactly

[Black Dog]

Since 10% occur after 13 weeks, there's your reason.

Nine per cent of those take place between 13 and 19 weeks so we're really only talking about 1 per cent of abortions here. And it's probably a safe bet that those later abortions are often medically necessary, so they'd likely be excluded from any ban.

Furthermore, it sounds as if abortion statistics in Canada are far from accurate. Private clinics aren't required to report abortions, and the statistics don't always include all of the provinces and territories.

The numbers line up pretty well with those from the States. I also wonder what evidence you have that the incidence of late abortions is greater than the statistics suggest.

[Black Dog]

I said, the woman's choice had been exercised when she chose to have sex, or unprotected sex (knowing full well what the possible conseqences could be, which may include STD).

The baby is just the consequence of the choice that she made. She had choices. She made her choice.

The baby did not have any choice at all!

That's right: fetuses can't make choices. That's why they aren't persons.

[Guest Manny]

The statistical incidence of late term abortion doesn't matter, if the question narrows down to the whether or not abortion is murder of a person.

In my town murders are extremely rare. That doesn't mean murders shouldn't be a crime. So in that regard I think statistical occurrence has no bearing on this debate, such as it is.

[Black Dog]

Who raped her? The baby did not rape her. It was the rapist who stepped on her right when he committed this criminal act against her. The child is just an innocent result of this violation of her rights - which was committed by her rapist.

What does society do to rapists??? Don't we punish them for raping?

If the raped woman kills this human being - the baby - then she' violating this baby's right just the same way the rapist violated her right!

Anyway, you keep bringing up unwanted pregnancy by rape which actually is practically nil.

As I've given you the medical advise/procedures for raped victims - I would imagine any unwanted pregnancy as the result of rape is rare. For the simple reason that any woman raped in this modern age of HIV, AIDS, and who knows what else....it will truly be a dim-witted woman who will refuse to run to the nearest clinic after getting raped! Taking that pill before 72 hours surely sounds more convenient than having to go through all the pains of abortion!

You didn't answer my question. If you were raped, wouldn't you go see the doctor?

Now, show me the statistics of unwanted pregnancies caused by rape. You have to back up your claim. Otherwise you're just spitting out a useless opinion.

Aren't you people against contraception and birth control as well?

[Guest Manny]

That's right: fetuses can't make choices. That's why they aren't persons.

Not quite as easy as that. A person in a coma cannot make choices.

[betsy]

That's right: fetuses can't make choices. That's why they aren't persons.

I guess you can say the same thing to people who are in vegetative state. To senile seniors. To mentally retarded people. To a toddler.

See how easy it is for this to go slipping down the slippery slope? All it takes is someone thinking like Blackdog. And some others here who will no doubt second his motion. Lots a lemmings.

I rest my case.

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

Aren't you people against contraception and birth control as well?

Getting desperate? What religious people think about contraceptives is not the issue. We're talking abortion.

Besides what are you on about? What is the best - and the surest - form of contraception?

Isn't it celibacy?

So how can you say we are against contraception and birth control?

Edited June 1, 2012 by betsy

[Black Dog]

Getting desperate? What religious people think about contraceptives is not the issue. We're talking abortion.

For many religious people, they are tantamount to the same thing. I mean, what's the difference between aborting a seven week old fetus and destroying a fertilized egg that would become a fetus in seven weeks? If the fetus is deserving of the exact same rights as a person, isn't a potential fetus worthy of the same consideration?

Besides what are you on about? What is the best - and the surest - form of contraception?

Isn't it celibacy?

Sure, celibacy is effective when it's practiced, but there's the rub (as it were). What's your point?

So how can you say we are against contraception and birth control?

Because many religious groups are.

[BubberMiley]

Let me put it in a simple question you will be afraid to answer: If life begins at conception, why are you advocating use of the morning-after pill? Isn't that murder too? Or are you saying that life forms gradually, and that killing a newly formed fetus isn't as bad as killing an older one?

I anticipate your cowardly avoidance of the question.

[Black Dog]

I guess you can say the same thing to people who are in vegetative state. To senile seniors. To mentally retarded people. To a toddler.

You could say the same thing. But you'd be wrong.

See how easy it is for this to go slipping down the slippery slope? All it takes is someone thinking like Blackdog. And some others here who will no doubt second his motion. Lots a lemmings.

You're the one making life choices based on the ramblings of some ignorant peasants from 2,000 years ago and we're the lemmings?

I rest my case.

If only that were true.