I Finally Understand Why Abortion Can't Be Discussed Logically.

reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71

Dear Hoosierdaddy7,

Nice to see you. I think you're right in your conclusion, but I'm asking a slightly different question.

These issues will never be resolved until everybody agrees when life begins. That's not going to
Happen any time soon. The Catholics say no birth control, others say partial birth abortion is
Ok. There will have to be a compromise somewhere in the middle like maybe the first trimester.

You seem to be talking about a political solution where people are taking votes and lobbying each side in order to come up with a law everyone can accept.

I find it interesting that in this age where "science" is king and Obama promised to make his decisions based on science and not on politics, people don't ask the scientists about this question. I have never seen a reputable physician or text book say the foetus is not alive, that it is a dead mass. There is likewise no source that indicates it has the same DNA as the mother or the father; everyone agrees that it is a different being, unique in itself. Finally, everyone agrees that it is a member of the human species, developing more and more each day.

Given that, which seems more scientific? That it is a human life at conception or that we will pick a certain number of days based on an average pregnancy and say that on that day it's protected as a human, but on the day before it isn't.

I'm sorry, but the second option seems to be a political one, ignoring science and logic, designed to keep people from getting too upset.

Do you feel that a boyfriend or husband slipping his lady an abortion pill is murder in a state that allows abortions in the eighth month of pregnacy? Killing the fetus at that late of a stage is definitely murder in my opinion, but not in the eyes of some states.

I think it is. Federal law says it is, but some states might not.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by MOMof3

Dear MOMof3,

You've lived through a lot. I'm sure you have picked up a lot of wisdom along the way and I hope to see more of you.

I am an older woman and remember the days before abortions were legal. My own mother did backalley abortions three times. It was not easy for a woman to escape an abusive alcoholic local WW2 hero husband back then. Divorce was a scandal in southern baptist country.

You're absolutely right. There were many problems a woman faced which could make her life terrible. Many desperate things were done to escape an intolerable situation. I wonder how many women killed their husbands, had illegal abortions, or just packed up everything they could carry and ran for a new life in another state.

I never see any real answers on the obviously male dominated site and subject of women's bodies, just judgments about an experience you will never have.

You're right that this is a male dominated site. I think it's about 80% male, but you can check site statistics if you care. You're also right that I have never been pregnant, but I have been a parent and have a deep love for my children, watching over them carefully as they grew up. I assume you're not taking the position that because men can't be pregnant, they can't have an opinion or a vote on the matter.

This is the age of science. Viagra, ciallis, but we cannot create a birth control pill for the sperm donators?

I don't know what the status of that is, but I have a question for you. A man meets a woman in a bar and tells her "Don't worry, I'm on the pill." Do you believe him? I certainly wouldn't. And if you can't believe the guy is taking precautions, then the woman has to. Ugly, I know. Unfair, probably. A bad idea to have sex with someone you're not connected to by marriage? Definitely.

With respect,
Charles1952

Thank you for the thought provoking topic, Charles. Yes, it is sad that the only life with value is the one that is wanted.

I would like to say a few things, but this whole discussion has me bluer than bluer. So I will just say life is precious. Ask anyone that has lost a love one if that isn't true.

To the women who have no remorse over their abortions, know that I mourn for your babies. They are loved. You can't tell me I shouldn't do this. I have no way to stop caring, It is part of my makeup. Tell me it's my problem. Not a problem at all. Love and compassion are a gift IMHO and they come with a heavy pricetag. One I will gladly pay.

Peace to all.

Happy1
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

I think that people your age - the age where your mother could have easily had an abortion due to her circumstances - but choose not to - to choose the harder choice of giving her "child/fetus" a chance -

I think that's why (thank God) we have more people choosing anti-abortions more than pro-abortion.

Most women do feel guilty for abortions - I am 50 years old - the number of women my age that has had abortions is incredible - and they do feel guilty.

Yes, there are women who couldn't care less - but that is the minority.

How can a woman go through a pregnancy and not understand that the fetus is a being - not a "bag of cells"?

I won't even comment on the "rights that a father" should have in this event.

If humanity builds a artificial incubator for the fetus to be in while it grows to 9 months then the father should have the same right as a woman to choose that the baby should be kept. But keeping the baby for the one who carries the baby trumps any wish from the partner to have it removed. If you do not want a child be more careful where you put your tool.

From a spiritual point of view where death is just a change for the soul I cannot really be that upset with souls leaving earth to be other things when they have only spent a little time in the womb. I might have had other feelings about it if I thought life here is a real joy to live.

But the reason it is not, is because humanity have not evolved enough for me to feel I want to really stay here any longer than I have to. Do you really think a soul dressed in a human suit will have more fun here than on the other side surrounded by the light feeling the love all around it?

Sometimes i feel that the anti abortionist seem to be wanting more souls to share their fate/imprisonment than the real fate of that soul and how happy the soul will be. The no abortion, but no help for the kids that are born, because of our want of their not being any abortions is so telling on how small minded the conservatives are.

reply to post by Happy1


From what I hear, it takes guts to admitt your regret publicly. I am sorry about your loss. There was a time when I advocated abortion. If I may ask, what changed your mind? Or was the abortion against your will?

charles1952
reply to post by eletheia

 

Dear eletheia,

..... But it is, its 'her body' plus a tiny mass of cells ... fit on a salt spoon? far from a 'life'

If so, how do you account for laws charging people with murder for attacking and killing it? How do you account for women who mourn over the loss of a child when they miscarry? And how do you account for the many, many women who have serious psychological trauma resulting from an abortion and the loss of their child.

From the very first, in my OP, I've been trying to point out that pro-choicers insist that the foetus is not a child, and they insist that it is a child. That's why this can't be discussed logically. At least the pro-lifers say, it's a child and don't waver from that position.

With respect,
Charles1952

Laws charging people with the 'killing' of a foetus are usually directed at a third party ...
as the woman concerned is in a position to have it done legally. The accused (third party)
will either have done the crime surreptitiously, as in the case of your OP or as I have
seen reported violently. We here are talking about abortion, but the 'law' wraps up such
charges in fancy terminology.

A woman is bound to mourn a miscarriage (which is a natural occurrence in nature)
because she has already come to terms with the fact that she is pregnant and is very
probably looking forward to the birth, and now has to deal with a huge
disappointment.

Yes some women do, and then again some don't suffer psychological trauma after an
abortion. After all though not a pleasant place to be at, abortion is her choice
unlike a miscarriage. No one gets through life without trauma we have to learn to deal
with things and move on.

I am not making 'blanket statements' here or being flippant... without going into detail I
have had my own share of trauma in life, when very young I lost a two and a half year old
daughter, and a few years ago I lost another who left two teen age daughters.

I have traveled many countries where abortion is illegal a good portion were catholic dominated. Abortions still happened it was just hidden and botched ones where the woman died were covered up.

One of the things all those countries had in common were the throw away kids as they were referred to. You wanted to save them all but the shear number of them was overwhelming that it would be impossible. The ones who made it to there teens were well versed scam artists at best at worst they were scary criminals who were hardened to the world. I am sure there were some who escaped or managed to find field work but I think they were the exception not the rule.

That environment always breeds those who prey on children and even in the best countries where the government cracked down on such things they could only do so much. Mothers often turned to prostitution to take care of their kids which would often add to the problem. It seemed like a endless cycle of dispare and abuse was created.

In a perfect world women would only get pregnant when they choose to and neither gender would have the sex drive that overrides rational thought but we are what we are and morales, values, laws, and religion will never change that. It didn't all throughout human history and I doubt it ever will but one thing is for sure is that it will not change in my lifetime. So arguing things like just keep your pants on is simply an argument from ignorance.

Abortion isn't anything any woman wants to go through but that option needs to exist because without it there will be more pain and suffering created for the parent and child than most can imagine. Lives ruined on a massive scale and it will effect our entire society maybe by overburdening the already stretched welfare system or the crime wave that insue when those unwanted angry children grow up. It isn't like time will reverse to the 50s which some think it was better(not me). We need to deal with today's realitys 7 billion people and rising. Jobs declining and inflation rising. To me the prospect of bringing a child into the world right now seems selfish and almost cruel. For those who are well off it's probably different but it is usually those who are closest to the bottom who would be hurt the most by taking away a choice.

Lightseeker77
reply to post by RealWoman

 

I never said a woman can't have sex with her husband, but if you are married I would assume children would have been discussed.
I think your stance is quite irrational. And I find nothing funny about the topic. I believe in the right to choose. What I don't believe in is in abortion as birth control. Any REAL WOMAN, takes responsability for the actions they have taken. I am sure married women have abortions, but then we would have to get into the why's.. That is something I CHOOSE not to do with you.

edit on 15-9-2013 by Lightseeker77 because: (no reason given)

So you believe in the full quiver breeding? As I've said before, married women WITH children make up a large percentage of women who have abortions.

Further, I think your stance is colored by your all-consuming guilt. It appears you think every women who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy should be punished for your mistake. Instead of projecting your guilt and self-loathing others, perhaps you need to forgive your self and move on with your life.

Quadrivium

RealWoman

Quadrivium

RealWoman

gottaknow
Pro choice and I sympathize for the father in this situation. I have never understood why the decision is up to the mother and that if she chooses to keep it, he is bound to a lifetime of payments.

While I don't agree with the way he went about it, he has little or no choice in today's world.
I believe if a woman conceives and wants to keep it and the man is on the side of abortion/doesn't want to support the baby, there should be a civil understanding that he is without responsibility if she decides to keep it. Too often, women use this power to trap a man and then live off the payments that he works to earn.

The male DOES have a choice... not have sex or personally take responsibility for the use of birth control. Rarely does the male take responsibility to protect himself, but he certainly howls when he has to deal with the result.

True the male often ends up paying child support, but again, it's his decision to whine rather than take responsibility - and look for more options - like 50 / 50 parenting. Try to get a single male to agree to that!

As far as living off of meager child support payments? ROFLMAO. Unless you're a billionaire, it does not happen. It's more misogynistic mythology spouted by the male who willingly threw away his responsibility in the situation.

Several times now I have witnessed you spouting off about the males responsibility. I think you said something like "They made their choice when they dropped their drawers" .
You do understand this applies to the woman as well, don't you? "Biology 101".....right?
I contend that the woman made the choice as well when she "dropped her drawers" and opened her thighs.
Unless raped women have control in any given sex act. It's simple biology. It's the difference between testosterone and estrogen.
You say that the man gave up the right of property by dropping his drawers. Surely you see that the woman did so as well. You can't really be that shallow...........can you?

So what you've just said is that males have no responsibility in preventing an unwanted pregnancy and it's all the woman's fault. And how dare she not march to the male''s orders. LOL! Yeah, women are so over that. And that's what males can't handle. They can't control women anymore.

No what I said was that women and men both have a part to play. It's like YOU said, "biology 101“.
You are the one constantly trying to lay all the blame on the man.
I am not sure what kind of "men" you have been with or been around. But a real man, in my opinion, does not "control women". My wife has a mind of her own and trust me SHE USES IT.
I have brought my three boys up knowing that women should be respected.
It just amazes me that you could twist my post in such a way to fit your own perspective.
Fact: Men have just as much responsibility as women for using birth control. Sex (unless forced) is a mutual act.
Fact: Men produce the sperm, women produce AND CARRY the egg. Biology 101.
Fact: Both parties know their role before engaging in sexual activities and are aware of the possible out come.

My point, in short, is this: The roles have been set from the time you were in the womb. No amount of feminism will change it. If a man and woman have consensual sex then at that moment they BOTH made a choice. They BOTH knew their biological roles. If a pregnancy occurs because of that choice it should not be "offed" because both parties already made their choice and knew the roles they played.

You seem to be very hostile toward women. Why is that?

]post by charles1952[/url]


The day I grow a womb and become capable of giving birth to another human is the day I will tell a woman how I truly feel about her getting an abortion.

Not a day sooner.

Until then, I will meekly commit to declaring it a nasty bit of humanity that could be remedied best by supporting single mothers and not with laws.

windword
reply to post by libertytoall

 

That's bull.. Birth control is NOT an insurance policy.. An insurance policy transfers the risk to another entity. Your risk of getting pregnant is not being transferred to someone else's responsibility when taking birth control. It's still YOUR responsibility.

INSURANCE:
1. A practice or arrangement by which a company or government agency provides a guarantee of compensation for specified loss, damage, illness, or death in return for payment of a premium.

2.A thing providing protection against a possible eventuality.

Definition 2 applies here.

It's more like a seatbelt than an insurance policy. There is no protection for you after the fact which is what insurance is for. This is protection before the fact as a preventative measure but like a seatbelt there is no guarantee you get to walk away from an accident and like a seatbelt it's not there to help you after the fact.

There seem to be two arguments being made here.

1.) It's a woman's right, indeed, her God given right, to choose whether to kill the kid or use laws to protect it.

The idea that God wants us to kill our unborn has no support in Christianity, and was condemned as early as the 1st Century. The idea that God wants death is so counter-intuitive as to be breathtaking. Further, it is not a right as humanity has understood rights, it is a claim. The claim is that my desire to have a few months pregnancy-free is greater than your right to life (which is indeed a right).

Further, exercising that right is nearly always without a logical basis. The child can be viable or not, healthy or not, the right sex or not, the first child or the fifth, and the death sentence is handed down regardless. Not according to any rule, standard, or law, but simply because the mother feels like it. What is more illogical?

2.) The child is better off dead.

Well then, why do those accused of murder do everything they can to avoid the death penalty, preferring a non-productive life in a cell? If they want to avoid the death penalty and accept a miserable life in prison, why do we say that the child should face the death penalty because of the chance that he will have an unhappy life? Who are we to make that decision for someone else?

Some of you may know that I am living off disability income. In the usual sense I don't have a productive life. Why not kill me? And what about the elderly in hospital? Kill all of them? Kill all children who are born with a defect discovered after birth? What happens when we find a gene and a test for homosexuality? Is that grounds for death? Do we subject all parents to psychological tests, and if we find one who may have a tendency for violence, kill the kid to prevent child abuse?

Remember when the abortion movement started? The founder said that Black children were defective and hoped to stop the transmission of those genes.

For those men who believe they are not allowed an opinion on the subject, remember that it was a male Supreme Court which decided Roe v. Wade. And if a male is not allowed to have an opinion on the value of life in our society, what is he allowed to have an opinion on? Germany placed a high value on Nordic genes, China placed a high value on male genes. I think all Americans should try to think this through rationally, and not based on some emotion or slogan.

reply to post by charles1952


My personal stance is pro choice. I don't think anyone can disagree that, with th exception of the mother being endangered, that its a selfish act. No matter the reason, school, work, not ready, etc BUT its still not my place, we are all selfish at times, and I would never try to take that choice away. I doubt any intelligent woman that makes that decision does so lightly and I'm sure it has an effect on them.

My big question for this case.. how did he trick her? "Take this pill?"

reply to post by charles1952

This is a no win topic. Both sides will twist logic and definitions to their will.

But you do make a good point.

Murder is wicked and immoral. At the same time, killing for a cause is justified?

reply to post by charles1952


-i've always thought that abortion cannot be discussed logically because....it is a very PRIVATE matter....

reply to post by aries58

Dear aries58,

To some extent, you're quite right. In part it is a private matter.

But consider, is it private to the father? Is it private to society that we've lost, what, 50 - 60 million lives? Does it affect society that we have diminished the right to life for a segment of our population, indeed even changed the idea of what lives are worth saving? And what about the parents waiting two years to adopt?

I'm afraid that the effects of abortion extend further than just the mother and child.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by ChuckNasty

Dear ChuckNasty,

As an irrelevant aside, I wish I had a neat nickname like that. I'm just plain old Charles.

But you said something I'd really like to explore. I offered an opinion in the OP, but if my opinion is wrong I'd really like to know it so that I can change my thinking on the subject.

This is a no win topic. Both sides will twist logic and definitions to their will.

I would like to see what logic is used by those who are supporters of the pro-life side. If it is twisted, maybe we can point out the twist and correct it. If it is not twisted, then I'd like to adopt it as my own. Or, even if my own logic is twisted, I'd like to know that as well.

Murder is wicked and immoral. At the same time, killing for a cause is justified?

I think sometimes it is. The most obvious example is self-defense, or defense of innocents. The Church condemns the death penalty while allowing that in some circumstances it can be justified. I haven't studied that subject well enough to have a strong opinion.

Syria, Iraq, that sort of thing? That's also tough. I lean against war, with some exceptions. Another subject I haven't thought about sufficiently.

If you don't mind a suggestion, why not start a thread on those topics. I'll try to weigh in if I can think of anything useful to say.

With respect,
Charles1952

RealWoman

Happy1
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

I think that people your age - the age where your mother could have easily had an abortion due to her circumstances - but choose not to - to choose the harder choice of giving her "child/fetus" a chance -

I think that's why (thank God) we have more people choosing anti-abortions more than pro-abortion.

Most women do feel guilty for abortions - I am 50 years old - the number of women my age that has had abortions is incredible - and they do feel guilty.

Yes, there are women who couldn't care less - but that is the minority.

How can a woman go through a pregnancy and not understand that the fetus is a being - not a "bag of cells"?

I won't even comment on the "rights that a father" should have in this event.

I absolutely disagree. I am 50 years old. I had an abortion 19 years ago and have zero remorse; zero guilt. It was the right choice for me then, and time has not changed my mind. In fact, as time passes, I see exactly how correct that decision was for many reasons.

Further, I know many women who've had abortions and not one regretted the decision. Not one. Therefore is highly presumptuous on your part to say most women feel guilty.

And I'm glad you're not commenting on father's "rights" - because they don't have any until the child is born.

Sounds like something a pathetic excuse for a human would say.

reply to post by RealWoman


I am really trying to understand where you are coming from. I will try one more time to explain myself because it's the only thing I can do because you clearly lack reading comprehension.

A woman is just as responsible as a man for an unwanted pregnancy. Yes, a man should of course be mindful of who he has sex with and how he goes about it. A woman has a greater responsibility because the consequences are harder on her. Psychologically, physically and emotionally. Follow me so far?

I do not think quiver breeding is even relevant, but since you brought it up, if it's a married couple with children and neither wants anymore children, why not get a vasectomy? why not get her tubes tied? Your argument makes no sense.

As far as the other ridiculous stuff you are saying, pressuming you know me, I must say that it is comical. I have been pregnat ONCE in my 36 yrs on this earth. I have one child. I learned very quickly that it was all I could handle, I am not single and enjoy a very healthy sex life. Why do you think that I hate anyone? Why do you think that I have any self-loathing? These are not rhetorical. I am quite interested as to why you would believe this.

I have said more than once that I respect and believe in the right to choose. It was just not something that I would do. My point has been all along(maybe now you will get it) that responsible adults should learn how to have sex, it is not difficult. We choose who we sleep with, we choose how to do it, we are both responsible. Women are NOT idiots. We know how to take care of ourselves.. How is that a bad stance?

reply to post by charles1952


Charles, thank you for your start of this thread, and for the provocative dialog from both sides.

I want to interject another facet of of the societal change in the 40 years since Roe v. Wade.

I have a very dear friend with whom I work. She is AfAm and has been devastated by the violence of young men in her community and the continual loss of young lives. For background she was raised Jehovah's Witness and has been Evangelical most of her adult life. At our work place we have downtime & she/we have alot of time some days to talk.

She is convinced that the disproportionate number of abortions in the AfAm community (and the non value of humanity) figures into the violence. Young men who grow up knowing that mom aborted my siblings (aunts have aborted cousins) so what value do they place upon their own lives (or the lives of their contemporaries).

I doubt any empirical data or studies have been run or would be permitted to be done giving the political leanings of most of Academia.

In a larger context, the older I get the more I view the world in a questioning, conspiratorial way. On abortion what better way to fundamentally change Judeo/Christian thinking than to make life (in it's weakest forms) discretionary by declaring its a "right." I truly believe Margaret Sanger spoke the intents of TPTB publically. Basically, her eugenics policy ENCOURAGES a society to destroy its self for
within. Her (and PP) early targeting and using of Black preachers proves that nicely.

Instead of my usual TinFoil that I sport at time here in ATS, I'll don asbestos instead.