Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Abortion: Legal or Illegal
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAbortion: Legal or Illegal

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2627282930 41>
Author
Message
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2012 at 22:45
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

By the way I think there is a big prejudice, a big divide that is threatening all of us and that I see displayed in Pat's horrendous Nazi-level post.

"I'm a dog guy".

Why can't we all get along? Some of us are dog AND cat guys... It IS possible.


I suppose I meant I'm a dog guy and only a dog guy. I find cats to be relatively annoying, more like burdens than pets. I realize I have just made myself the manifestation of evil for 70% of the internet.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - January 29 2012 at 22:46
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Gamemako View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 31 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2012 at 22:50
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

I suppose I meant I'm a dog guy and only a dog guy. I find cats to be relatively annoying, more like burdens than pets. I realize I have just made myself the manifestation of evil for 70% of the internet.


Must... resist... urge... to start... posting... CAT PICTURES.

Oh wait, no I don't.



HOW CAN YOU NOT LOVE IT? Wink
Hail Eris!
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2012 at 23:01
Cat man.

Look dogs are pretty cool and I like them, but cats are the lazy persons pet. They pretty much take care of themselves and all you need to do is clean up and feed em. They dont even want to be trained, which is not only easy but pretty awesome. It's like f**k you I'm gunna just sleep here, you can fetch that little jingly mouse for me.


edit: Though one of my cats, without any training from us, used to fetch things until she got old and lazy, and we caught our other using the toilet twice. Again, not trained of course. That is some animal intelligence! Or we are not much smarter, either way.



Edited by JJLehto - January 29 2012 at 23:04
Back to Top
Jim Garten View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin & Razor Guru

Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 06:58
OK, I think the dog/cat side debate has run its course - back on topic please?

Many thanks.

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 07:06
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

OK, I think the dog/cat side debate has run its course - back on topic please?

Many thanks.

That was a little odd. 

So if you were to abort an animal would you prefer a dog or a cat? Tongue

Sorry about that, just trying to find a link. LOL


Edited by Slartibartfast - January 30 2012 at 07:14
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 09:58
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Failing to identify an embryo or fetus as a unique human person to be protected by the Constitution is not only arbitrary, it's dangerous.


I partially agree with you Robert.

I believe in the concept of viability, if a phoetus is able to survive outside mother's womb, it's already a full human in all the sense, I believe that the case of the 21st week is unique, but it's already valid, no abortion (except therapeutic) should be allowed .

Abortions (except therapeutic, because you must choose the full life over a life in project), shouldn't be accepted after the 8th week, and only for valid reasons like rape or imminent and painful death of the future born baby).

The concept that woman owns her body is lame, because the phoetus is not a part of her body

Iván.

.


            
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:07
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:



The concept that woman owns her body is lame, because the phoetus is not a part of her body

Iván.

.



If it's not she should be free to dispose of it.  If someone sneezes on you are you obligated to carry their snot around?


Edited by Slartibartfast - January 30 2012 at 10:08
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:19
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:



The concept that woman owns her body is lame, because the phoetus is not a part of her body

Iván.

.



If it's not she should be free to dispose of it.  If someone sneezes on you are you obligated to carry their snot around?

Slarti you said the man carries no responsibility. Yet your weird sneezing analogy seems to push responsibility away from the woman to somebody else. Contradicting yourself? Wink

But yes, a woman owns her own body, and a totally dependent fetus is but a part of it in my view, until it acquires this viability.   
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:23
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:



The concept that woman owns her body is lame, because the phoetus is not a part of her body

Iván.

.



If it's not she should be free to dispose of it.  If someone sneezes on you are you obligated to carry their snot around?

That's absurd, she has accepted a responsibility (or the consequences of her irresponsibility), if she was mature enough to have unprotected sex, she has to be considered mature enough to accept the consequences.

A dog (not a comparison),. is not part of your body, but if you kill it for pleasure, you go to jail for animal cruelty...Isn't it a paradox that dog has more protection than a viable phoetus? 

Just in case, I'm not against animal protection, I'm member of the animal protection society and the anti-bullfight group, but if an animal has protection, a human life deserves it more.

Killing a phoetus is not an act of freedom of choice , it's a crime, unless you have valid reasons.

BTW: The argument that the woman owns her body,is the main one used by USA feminists to support  abortion.

Quote  Society has no right to control what happens to a person's body, and does not try to manage men's bodies in such a manner, so the right to abortion has equalized women by giving them the right to manage their own bodies.

This is STUPID, men don't get pregnant because of God or nature (blame whoever you want) not because of men making laws or whatever they want to say, so the argument is flawed and plain stupid.

Iván

            
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:26
Men don't get pregnant because..... we're damn lucky
Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:34
A few things...
 
A fertilized egg is a unique living human individual. Any argument to this is semantic game play.
 
Not all unique living human individuals have the same rights. This is also not arguable. Terry Shaivo is an extreme example, but any human who cannot communicate their will instantly loses some of their rights to autonomy. Someone else MUST make decisions on their behalf.
 
Very very few cultures condone infanticide, though some do. Infants are dependent. Someone MUST care for them or they die.
 
At 40 weeks, if a woman delivers the baby alive, it is no more risky to her life or autonomy than if the baby is intentionally killed and then delivered. The court that decided Roe v Wade actually made this clear.
 
This comes down to conflicting rights. The rights of a human in early development to continue life against the rights of fully developed human to complete personal autonomy.
 
Again the Roe v Wade court said the tipping point where these rights cross over is viability. That is, that once the baby can be delivered live just as safely as dead, the woman's right to autonomy can be reasonably said to be less than the child's right to continue living.
 
They went on to say that before that the issue is too nebulous for the government to have the right to intervene. It was on this argument that they then struck down any law that outlawed abortion in the first two trimesters (as 26 weeks, or 2 trimesters, was then the reasonable limit of viability). Since no abortion law specified anything about viability, all abortion bans were struck down.
 
Now, viability has changed since 1973 based on our technology. For certain, it has at least improved to 24 weeks. The record for survival is now around 21 weeks. However, the vast majority of pre-23 weekers have major health and mental issues.
 
The reason this matters is that using viability as our cutoff is very technology-dependent. Technology determining the right to life is at least a little dicey.
 
 
 
I have spent time working in Neonatal ICUs, delivered a few babies, and now help families make decisions about withdrawing life support several times a year. This is not easy stuff.
 
 


Edited by Negoba - January 30 2012 at 10:36
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:42
In the end when it comes to life or death decisions revolving around reproduction it really is best that the government step out of the way of making the choice.
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:46
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

In the end when it comes to life or death decisions revolving around reproduction it really is best that the government step out of the way of making the choice.
 
In my ideal world, this would be true.
 
Unfortunately, many (perhaps the majority) of abortions are lazy birth control. This is not ok, at least in my book.
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:49
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:


Now, viability has changed since 1973 based on our technology. For certain, it has at least improved to 24 weeks. The record for survival is now around 21 weeks. However, the vast majority of pre-23 weekers have major health and mental issues.
 
The reason this matters is that using viability as our cutoff is very technology-dependent. Technology determining the right to life is at least a little dicey.
 
 

Roe v Wade is not carved in stone, Chief Justice Roberts has said that the Supreme court can overturn it in specific cases.

But the point is, that Roe v Wade is extremely vague, they say that if a baby can be viable after 26th week, then they can allow abortions in 26 week....Why not be safe and take at least 8 weeks less?

We know health care can improve in one day and laws can't be changed every day...Thenb take a life saver and give some extra time. A woman knows in the fourth week she's pregnant...Give her a month more to think it, but if she decides to cross this line, she has accepted the responsibility.

Iván
            
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 10:57
Originally posted by Negoba Negoba wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

In the end when it comes to life or death decisions revolving around reproduction it really is best that the government step out of the way of making the choice.
 
In my ideal world, this would be true.
 
Unfortunately, many (perhaps the majority) of abortions are lazy birth control. This is not ok, at least in my book.

That's true:

Quote

  • The overwhelming majority of all abortions, (95%), are done as a means of birth control. 
  • Only 1% are performed because of rape or incest; 
  • 1% because of fetal abnormalities; 
  • 3% due to the mother's health problems.

This is CRIMINAL

You say that two are required to dance a tango, but the woman can say NO to unprotected sex, woimen are no longer the defenseless beings of decades ago, that's insulting for them, they took a decision when having sex without control, then they must accept the consequences.

This doesn't mean men are free of guilt, they must be forced to pay, that's all they can do.

The fact that a law is hard to impose doesn't justify that we shouldn't try to enforce it.

Iván 



Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - January 30 2012 at 10:58
            
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 11:01
How much does it cost to get one?  Where can you go to get one?  Lazy birth control, really?
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Negoba View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 11:11

Your point is that an abortion is more expensive than a condom, I assume.

The lazy part is having unprotected sex and just hoping nothing bad will happen. (For both men and women). It's a gamble, for some majority of the time, (I don't know the exact number) these encounters result in neither STD nor pregnancy.

Yes it's more trouble to get an abortion, but then you've already lost your gamble.

I don't support gambling with sex. Pregnancy is just one of the issues. HIV is another. Enormous cost to society simply because someone didn't want to accept the fact that sex has consequences.

You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 11:12
I would say some cases when it's used as birth control are not so lazy, for example when methods have been used (condoms, pills, etc) and yet they fail and the woman becomes pregnant nevertheless. Yes, it's used as birth control. No, it's not lazy nor is it "criminal".
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 11:20
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

How much does it cost to get one?  Where can you go to get one?  Lazy birth control, really?

1.- In USA it's FREE in some clinics

Free Abortions 



 

 TWO LOCATIONS 

LOS ANGELES

 


BEVERLY HILLS

 

Beverly Hills?.....Not a very poor location to be honest.

2.- You can go everywhere (There are abortion clinics in any state and almost any city


It's la}zy birth control, there are:
  1. Condoms, 
  2. Contraceptive pill 
  3. Morning after pill
  4. Early abortion
Please, the choices are there, if a woman decided to keep a baby for more than two months or a trimester in you want, she has already accepted the consequences, she had options.

Iván

BTW: I don't place the addresses, because I won't make them free propaganda, but this is in the net in one search


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - January 30 2012 at 11:29
            
Back to Top
Jim Garten View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin & Razor Guru

Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2012 at 11:24
I've not been party to this debate, so I'm not going to go into a majority of the issues raised, but I do think the term 'Lazy Birth Control' is a little disingenuous. It implies a situation of "whoops, forgot/didn't bother to use a condom/contraceptive pill/device, I'll just get an abortion"

Speaking as a friend to a couple of people who have had terminations, I know full well this is not a decision ever taken lightly; although the procedure itself is relatively straightforward, it's still a surgical procedure & not at all pleasant... or cheap, for that matter.

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2627282930 41>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.121 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.