The Insanity of Abortion in America

Republican Gov. Dave Heineman signed both bills, one barring abortions at and after 20 weeks of pregnancy and the other requiring women to be screened before having abortions for mental health and other problems. Both sides of the abortion debate say the laws are firsts of their kind in the U.S.

Wow, a governor wants to limit late term abortion and make sure women are mentally stable in making this extremely volitile decision.... And this is how the pro-abortion crowd replies.

A national abortion rights group already appeared to be girding for a legal challenge, calling the ban after 20 weeks "flatly unconstitutional" because it is based on the assertion that fetuses feel pain, not on the ability of a fetus to survive outside the womb.

Carhart (a doctor that provides late term abortion) told The Associated Press, "they can pass any law they want to ... and spend millions of dollars to go to court and lose."

"There is certainly no solid scientific evidence establishing that a fetus can perceive pain at these earlier stages, so any court decisions to uphold such broader laws could only do so by disregarding the importance of good scientific evidence," said Caitlin Borgmann, a law professor at The City University of New York.

Alright, I guess that clears that up. Is it not enough that a baby (They use the medical term fetus as to not associate the BABY with life) might feel pain as their being ripped apart in the womb. NOPE, women have the right to choose!!!

So what things are held near and dear to these people... This is what they fight so hard to protect...



That's right, the same people that fight to kill babies are the ones that climb trees to protect them from being bulldozed. Do the trees feel pain? Will the trees grow to be a President, a Policeman, etc. etc? Will the tree talk to you, go to school, produce technology that can benefit society?

Please ATS, help me understand why we risk arrest to protect TREES while we spend MILLIONS in legal fees to block legislation to protect babies from being slaughtered??

I see a mayor who has his priorities straight and is trying to give a voice to babies that have no voice through smart legislation, and here come the mountain of legal battels.

If this is not US Political Madness, I don't know what is.

Well...

This liberal is pretty supportive against late term abortions unless it endangers the physical health of the mother...

Not in favor of the mental health test...but would be in favor of a discussion beforehand to make sure its not a panic move and that the person has all the information and choices available before they go through with it.

banning late term abortions however is a bit daft...most late terms happen because of the fact that the mother may end up dying if carried through...so what is this law truely reflecting besides posturing.

I see life starting when the central nervous system is fully developed and working...pain = experience, and life is little more than a series of experiences to begin with. This typically happens around the 3 month mark.

I agree with you, it is a bit insane but to be expected when there is such polarization over an issue. As is often the case when there is this kind of polarization people have trouble finding middle ground or having rational discussion on the issue. I'm not religious at all so my belief has nothing to do with faith. However I believe it's common sense to only allow abortions in extreme circumstances and only after all other options have been exhausted.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Ok, I have read alot from you so please answer (not tryin to trap you)...

Ignoring the whole "when does life begin thing", why is it even deabted about abortion? I mean it is undisputable that the BABY will be a human being. So why are there people so vehament about letting women kill a baby in the womb, alive or not it is GOING to be a human.

Isn't that like attempted murder??? You were GOING to kill the guy until you failed, or got caught. I will never ever understand the rationale.

Yes, all women who seek abortions are mentally-unstable.
I'm pro-choice but believe their should be limits in how far along a woman is when she seeks an abortion. Of course there are other cases where one may be needed late in term. A woman should have control over her own body and not have others force her otherwise.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by ItsAgentScully]

That's right, the same people that fight to kill babies are the ones that climb trees to protect them from being bulldozed.

Do you have any actual evidence of this? It would help to see some groups that actively campaign on both issues. I'm sure there are some, but I doubt this blanket generalisation is accurate.

In fact, the entire OP is so one sided and opinionated that I'm put off properly considering the merits of your arguement.

I understand it's a very sensitive issue but nit-picking about terminology does nothing to support your arguement. In fact, it could be said that your use of the word 'babies' adds unnecessary emotion to the issue. It works both ways.

Personally don't like argueing about this because both sides tend to go a bit crazy.

reply to post by ItsAgentScully


Wait a minute now. NO one said anything about religion. And as the topic starter I don't want it to be descussed. It is not about religious beliefs AT ALL. It is about the rationale between protecting a already-is OR soon-to-be human being and climbing a tree to protect that instead.

Please don't make this a religious thread.

reply to post by March of the Fire Ants


One sided?? Look at the merits of my arguments....

It is mostly the case that left leaning people are extreme pro-choice...

And it is mostly the case that left leaning people are extreme enviromentalist...

What part of the world are you from? This is basic societal norms in the US. You know exactly what I'm talking about, but you are trying to deflect from the topic at hand in order to avoid the issue.

Originally posted by trueperspective
reply to post by ItsAgentScully

 

Wait a minute now. NO one said anything about religion. And as the topic starter I don't want it to be descussed. It is not about religious beliefs AT ALL. It is about the rationale between protecting a already-is OR soon-to-be human being and climbing a tree to protect that instead.

Please don't make this a religious thread.

It is no stranger a dichotomy than that between the rabid pro-death penalty evangelicals and the same anti choice wackos. Such rational disconnects can only result from mental defect or religion. But I'm being redundant.
Edit to add - Or the disconnect between Catholics, who want to prohibit aborting a baby but think it's fine to rape them.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by 4nsicphd]

reply to post by trueperspective


I understand what you're saying, both viewpoints are typical left wing ones, but as with all 'groups' there is no universal concensus on issues like this within the left wing 'community' (?!) If you can show me a prominent activist group who campaign on both issues then I'll eat my hat so to speak.

I'm not trying to deflect from the topic at hand, not quite anyway. I'm trying to explain that as an undecided left leaning guy who can't really (be bothered to?! maybe..) make his mind up, you have done little to convince me. Yet? possibly!

reply to post by ItsAgentScully


I am pro-choice. One of the worst positions any person can be in is being a woman who is considering an abortion. Women who consider having abortions are almost always in desperate predicaments. Perhaps one of those predicaments is having a severe mental health issues.

The mental health screening requirement could lead to possibly tragic results. For example, a mentally retarded rape victim who did not know she was pregnant until late in her pregnancy may be forced to carry a baby with all sorts of health issues to term. A drug addicted woman in a similar situation may also be forced to carry a baby to term. Do we really want such strict requirements for abortion?

Originally posted by trueperspective
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Ok, I have read alot from you so please answer (not tryin to trap you)...

Ignoring the whole "when does life begin thing", why is it even deabted about abortion? I mean it is undisputable that the BABY will be a human being. So why are there people so vehament about letting women kill a baby in the womb, alive or not it is GOING to be a human.

Isn't that like attempted murder??? You were GOING to kill the guy until you failed, or got caught. I will never ever understand the rationale.

I went to catholic school when I was young. We (the boys) were once given a speech by the teacher nun about the moral issues against masturbation...she explained that every sperm had the potential to be life, and that when you masturbate, you eliminate the potential of that sperm...every sperm is sacred was the motto

so ya...potential for life does not equal life...the sperm requires an egg, the fertilized egg requires a growth chamber for close to a year..got to draw the line between potential and actual.

I potentially could be a millionaire does not mean I should start my down payment on a ferrari.

Oh, it's this again...

Just to state I don't think anyone is "Pro-abortion", it's pro-choice. Pro-abortion implies a belief that all babies should be aborted.

To argue that some Pro-Choice people also like saving trees and that there's an inherent contradiction in there is fine and a point that perhaps deserves scrutiny.

To refute bringing religion and scrutinising the role of it in this discussion seems flawed.

This is one of those topics that can become VERY heated, but I would like to present a simple question to abortion opponents. What is worst -- bringing a child into the world by parents incapable or undesirable of having such an addition, or the quick process of abortion? In regards to the "pain" aspects, I feel that the pain a child would receive by being born into an environment to which they were not wanted, or in which the parents are incapable of properly caring for, is MUCH, MUCH more torment (most cases a lifetime) than an abortion. It would be nice if folks could have 100% effective means of birth control to eliminate this occurrence, but when it does occur, I personally would rather be aborted then suffer a lifetime of torment which is the most probable case for such children.

Originally posted by SunIsSon
This is one of those topics that can become VERY heated, but I would like to present a simple question to abortion opponents. What is worst -- bringing a child into the world by parents incapable or undesirable of having such an addition, or the quick process of abortion?

And that my friend is the very point. What rationale do you or anyone else have to make that kind of decision. Guess what...

Obama was a mixed race kid born to a destitute white single mother. The PERFECT canidate for the senario you speak of...

And yet he is now the MOST powerful man in the WORLD... and I don't even argee with his politics, but the point I think is made.

NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE can decide what is BEST for a human that hasn't even had a CHANCE!!

reply to post by SunIsSon


You don't know the future though. I grew up in an orphanage and my life was hard when I was young but I have a good life now. I'm glad to be alive and even when I was younger and things were not so good I was glad to be alive. It just doesn't seem like fair play to end the life before it can fend for itself. All other issues aside.

personally, I think politicians and male religious leaders make a fairly mundane and rational discussion into a insane debate, often leading to fierce violence. I think society would to best to ignore both in their personal decisions and have the best debates, not fueled by politics or religion, and simply discuss life, potential, and methods to both curb abortion and practice it safely.

Politicians dont matter...they dont care, and any politician that is saying they are going to fight the RvW thing is flat out lying and playing to the unaware segments of society. The far right had complete control over the government for 6 years and nothing changed...yet they keep the same voice of pretend opposition.

Religious leaders should be tuned out...your connection to something greater than yourself is not represented in some old man wearing funny clothes talking about what God does or doesn't like...unless he is God, then he is simply running a business that is pretending to know the mind of God. They are corrupt to the core and will not help in the debate overall.

You and you alone have to decide what is the true philosophy here...is every sperm sacred, or are you going to the other extreme where the day before labor, it is still just replicating mass.

I suggest using a bit of science and wisdom...define what humanity is and decide what input is required for a object to transition from replicating mass to a actual human...I personally find it a developed central nervous system firing off experiences to the brain as the first signs of something greater than a cancer cell with a lucky break.

I am far more in favor of implants that stave off fertilization to begin with...and a person purposefully having to remove said implants to choose preganacy...this would clear up the whole issue almost overnight.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Extremely well said, you already know that I am religious, but I want to keep it out of this debate because it just doesn't matter. Think about it rationally.

When I think about it rationally, I can't see how someone could not even flinch knowing that a human OR soon-to-be human has just been denied the right to exist.

I mean think about this...If your mother was pro-choice and aborted you, you wouldn't even exist.

To me abortion is the systematic extinction of humans for the "greater good" of the society (over-population) or individual mother (economic reasons). The ends don't justify the means. Being poor is not a good enough reason to destory a potential life. Rationally that is sound as can be.

I will say those are VERY good points mentioned in opposition to my opinion. There are pros and cons in either of the two situations. But again, I personally would rather be aborted if I had the probability of being born of parents incapable or undesirable of my birth.

The abortion issue is one that runs deep and hits the very ideology of the American public. It is not one that should be taken lightly, nor should the idea be outright banned, cause there is always a case where such is needed and the people who have to decide and perform such should put great weight into such.
Unfortunately the original concept and ideals behind Roe V. Wade decision is one that started with the right of privacy, not abortion, where a woman has the right to having privacy between her and her doctor, keeping the santicity of the patient/doctor relationship.
Those who are against Abortion, most of the time uses religion for argument against such, and here is the one question that everyone tends to dance around. When does life and namely a soul inhabit a body? That is a question that can not be reasonably answered beyond a shadow of a doubt. The other question that is danced around and not answered is who has the right of determinence the mother or the unborn child?
There are many questions that are danced around and the ramifications for such is a door that no one wants to go through. For example you are a parent and your daughter gets pregnant, knowing that you and your family may be financially liable for her acts of indescretion and could end up responsible for that baby till it is 18, what are your options and feelings? This is becoming an all too occuring even in the country. And then there is the other lill question that no one wants to answer and dances around: You are a woman, do you think it is right for anyone beyond you and your doctor to tell you what you can and can not do as it may be detrimental for the life of your child or future children or any medical care that you may or may not recieve? And what is to stop the abuse of the federal government from going on into other aspects of all of our medical proceedures? If they outright ban abortion, then the door is flung open and it could lead to abuse on the part of the government to interfer in the privacy between a doctor and patient, a husband and wife and a partent and their child.