Abortion Laws, Pro Life or Pro Chice?

One thing that some what annoys me is that those against abortions dont do anything to help those who think about getting them. Instead of counsoling, or setting up some sort of addoption agency or maybe even offering to adopt the kids themselves, they are too quick to damn the women who usally are going through a very hard time (I tend to doubt that they are happly and gleefully going there...).

Personally, I believe abortions are wrong, but I will not (because I do not have the moral authorty, and i cannot think of anyone who does) judge and give them more pain and grief and fear that they probably are already going through with such a desision.

Outside some abortion centers, it is allot of time "Repent you murdering sinners." The people outside the abortion centers should instead maybe offer to adopt the child, or line things up with an addoptin agency. You know, be helpful and forgiving.

 

Pro Choice.

My definition of human life is when the fetus becomes intelligent, has 90% developed into a human infant or aware of its surroundings. Which is either in the final stages of pregnancy or after birth.

Before that, its just a lump of cells.

Yeah, cells are alive too, but you dont hear people calling smokers, sun-tanners, and alcholics murderers. They are killing their lung, skin, and brain cells.

So what's the difference if you abort an embryo that has yet to resemble a human infant or show signs of intelligence?

A woman should have the right to choose if she wants to continue a pregnancy or not. Whether she became pregnant via fornication with her boyfriend/husband or raped by a rapist matters not. It is her body, her energy, her life she is sacrificing each time a child is brought into this world.

And should a woman be forced to give birth to a child she did not want in the beginning, either accidently after taking precautions or was forced upon her, and later has to give up that child to adoption agencies can be very taxing on a woman's emotions.

I suggest you watch the movie that talks about this issue. Its based on the lawsuit Supreme Court vs Roe, I believe is the lawsuit. It depicts a womans delima[sp?] about going through birth and than having to give up that child because, one she couldn't support another one, two because she didn't want another one, and three she couldn't have it legally aborted. It can be very enlightning to those willing to keep an open mind on the issue.

Not everyone uses rubbers and not everyone likes the feel of rubbers. And birthcontrol products are not 100% accurate in preventing pregnancy.

 

I'm against the abortion laws!


The Democrats and Liberals support it! I blame them!

All hail Republicans!


Elect Bush in 2004!

 

Bush get elected in 2004?

Unlikely....as gleeful as the republicans were at Clinton's sexual misconduct, look what has been dropped into the democrats lap-a web of corporate fraud and deceit that it is becoming increasingly harder for Bush to talk his way out of.


As far as abortion laws and republicans, the last time I looked, abortion was still legal. The last time the Court considered an abortion case, several years ago, it upheld Roe v. Wade. As the makeup of the court hasn't changed, I doubt the legality of abortion will as well.

If a liberal court member (or a moderate) drops off, then I'll get worried. But with the economy slowing, the stock market going down the drain, and the public tiring of the administrations labelling of anyone who questions Bush's policies as 'anti-american' or 'unpatriotic', the mid-term elections don't look good for the republicans. Especially in the senate.

But who knows?

Peace,

V-03

 

Definitly pro-life. I've seen three very different pictures, all of which brought me to the conclusion [along with information, of course.]
1. aborted fetuses. They are torn up, burned alive, torn or vacumed out, and tossed away. Children have been born after three months gestation [only three months in the womb] and lived. They are born with all the proper organs and tissues. They had nerves. Had they been aborted, they would have felt it.

2. Procedures of abortions. Watch "The Silent Scream." I believe that after the doctor who preformed the abortion viewed it, he/she never performed one again.

3. There is a picture out there of an operation done on a baby still in the womb. During the operation, the baby slips its arm out of the wound and grabs on to the doctors finger, and grips it for the rest of the procedure. I think we all know how important touch is, and remember how when we are falling or we're scared, we reach out and grab for someone else. This child did the same.

 

To the guy above me, PPOR with items 1 and 3.

Then again, maybe I dont really want to see some of that stuff.

An odd ball question. How many MEN are pro choice/pro life, and how many WOMEN are pro life/choice? Given that I am male, I will never be able to fully understand the choices and emotions going through a womans mind if they are in a situation where they concider an abbortion. I may not like abbortions, I may even believe they are wrong, but I could never think badly of a woman who has to go through something like that, and I have to wonder what gives some people the moral authroity that lets them say it is wrong or right.

Another odd ball question. If a 100% effective form of birth control was found that didnt interfear with sex at all, what then? Would everyone use it? Would everyone support it? Would people who are pro life for religious reasons support that form of birth control? Would the only abortions performed from that day on be for medical or rape? Just something to think about.

 

I think that if a woman has been raped, or used contraceptives that failed, an abortion is justified.
What we could do is use the system the Soviets used with abortion. If the pregnancy is 3 months or under, abortion can be carried out. Yawn...me tired. zzzzzzz

 

Xian-Me,

As a senior medical student, I can assure you on behalf of the medical community that no fetus born at the end of the first trimester has EVER survived. It is not even considered birth at this point, it is a miscarriage.

As far as 'burning alive' and the such that you labelled 'abortions' your argument shows a common flaw in many anti-choice writings on this board: an abundance of passion, but a lack of information. This is NOT a personal attack, but just how a lot of people have come across here. So let me provide a few facts.

Abortions can be performed medically, which means with drugs, or surgically, with dilation of the cervix and suction removal of the fetus. I posted about this previously here and will not rewrite it now. But I can assure you that 'burning alive' and things of that nature are NOT done by ob/gyn's during abortion procedures. And unless you are a doctor, you should refrain from speaking on their behalf when commenting on how they 'must' react following an abortion. Obviously your analysis is wrong, or no abortions would be performed. Incidentally, a fetus at three months gestation cannot scream or grab.

Factually, most abortions are performed using medical techniques in the first trimester. Late-term procedures are almost always done for medical reasons alone. Although I am unsure about state-to-state legal wordings regarding late-term procedures, elective terminations of second and third-trimester fetuses generally is not an accepted practice in most states, and also by most doctors. They just simply wouldn't do them without a pressing medical reason.

The debate rages on.....

Peace,

V-03

 

1. aborted fetuses. They are torn up, burned alive, torn or vacumed out, and tossed away. Children have been born after three months gestation [only three months in the womb] and lived. They are born with all the proper organs and tissues. They had nerves. Had they been aborted, they would have felt it.

I'm not a doctor, but I know a fetus cannot survive outside of the mother at that point. I learned about it in health. And I saw pictures in my textbook of fetuses inside the womb at that point, they did not even remotely resemble a newborn baby.

 

If I can find the name of the little boy who did live, I will post it. I got the information from my aunt, a nurse.

Children have the organs, I believe, to survive after the first or second trimester. I'm not a medical student, so I may be wrong, and don't be condenscending about it. I believe it's that they may not be developed enough to properly use.

 

First and second trimester - big difference. Infants born at the end of the second trimester survive rather often, I think. And for that reason, I believe an abortion at that point is wrong, unless it is being done to save the mother's life. But if it's at a point where the fetus has no chance at all of survival outside the mother, an abortion should be allowed.

 

If you're removing the fetus at the point at or after it can survive outside the mother, it is no longer an abortion, it is a delivery.

V-03

 

V-03, that is exactly right, and I will be against an abortion done at that time (unless for medical reasons) for the simple reason that the mother should have made a choice by then. It will have been half a year after all. If done well before that...that is where IMHO it is a gray area.

 

I am definately Pro-Life ... because for every second before the person has sexual intercourse, they are in complete control of their actions. After that mistake, then they have lost contol and have taken the very LIFE of a living creature into their hands. And yes, even a fetus is more important than any animal on earth. No animal can have a soul, and even a fetus has a soul.
Even in rape situations, it is still a living creature and should be treated as one. Same soul as one that is conceived within wedlock.
Too many people overlook the option of adoption (hey, that rhymes). Even though there might be a lot of talk about it on boards like this ... not many people think of it as an option.

 

I am definately Pro-Life ... because for every second before the person has sexual intercourse, they are in complete control of their actions. After that mistake, then they have lost contol and have taken the very LIFE of a living creature into their hands. And yes, even a fetus is more important than any animal on earth. No animal can have a soul, and even a fetus has a soul.
Even in rape situations, it is still a living creature and should be treated as one. Same soul as one that is conceived within wedlock.

First off, not everyone belives in a soul. I don't. And it sickens me that people would force a girl who has already been raped to go through a pregnancy against her will. Also, there is the chance that even properly used birth control will fail.

"because for every second before the person has sexual intercourse, they are in complete control of their actions" and this arguement makes no sense in relation to a pregnancy caused by a rape.

 

EnforcerSG-

We are in agreement, as most abortions are performed in the first trimester. It becomes dangerous to the mother to try to remove a fetus in the second trimester, and by the third, with modern technology the way it is, no doctor will 'abort' the fetus without a pressing medical emergency. If a fetus has to be removed during the third trimester, it ends up in the neonatal ICU until it is ready to go home-in other words, it is delivered.

Statistically, very, very few abortions are performed after the first trimester, and practically none of those done later are elective. There is usually a health threat to the mother that necessitates the procedure.

Peace,

V-03

 

V-03, yeah, but could you post a link or something saying when most abortions are performed, just for use in future arguments i will be in. It makes compleat sense, that once a woman finds out that they are pregnate that they would choice quickly, but some people will want to hold on to the beliefe that...

BatzDarker. Would you be willing to adopt the child of a woman who wants an abortion? Would you be willing to sit outside of abortion doctors and line things up between the woman and an adoption agency?

And prove that we have souls or that animals dont have souls. We are one of, if not the most advanced animal on this planet, but prove the whole soul thing.

because for every second before the person has sexual intercourse, they are in complete control of their actions. After that mistake, then they have lost contol and have taken the very LIFE of a living creature into their hands.

So people lose control after intercourse...? That does not really make sense. I would think afterwards they would think about it and regain control. Please explain.

I do believe that couples should be careful, but accedents happen, both simply having sex and with birth control, accedents happen.

 

No problem EnforcerSG, I'll see what I can do .

I'll be out of the house most of tomorrow though, so give me until later in the week...thanks!

Peace,

V-03

 

Just to be going on with, here are some figures which I happen to have handy because I posted them in a previous thread on this topic. They relate to the UK, of course, but IIRC the pattern in the USA is similar. They're also not very up-to-date but, again IIRC from my previous research, the pattern is consistent from year to year.

In England and Wales, in 1999, 89% of abortions were performed before 13 weeks gestation, 10% at 13-19 weeks and only 1% at 20 weeks or later.

(In the UK, the cut-off point for abortion is 24 weeks except in extreme circumstances, e.g. to save the life of the mother. Prior to 1990, the time limit in England and Wales was 28 weeks and in Scotland there was no limit. Interestingly, this change was not reflected by a change in the statistics, which strongly suggests, to me at least, that late abortions tend to be performed for medical reasons rather than because the pregnancy was unwanted.)

 

Hey EnforcerSG-

Go here:

prochoice.org for some great data and facts on abortion.

Hope that helps!

Peace,

V-03

 

Thank you so much V-03, I owe you a favor.

EDIT:

MJO, I have to think about that. To me, it would be up to the woman. Again, being a guy, I cant know what it would be like. But I will give it some thought.

 

I have been told that this is a good substitute for abortion they have been seriously considering. Safely removing the fertilized egg from the womans uterus and grow it using some tequnuic and then putting it up for adoption sound good to you

 

EnforcerSG-

Don't mention it! It's all good

Jedi_Master_Orion, that should be an option if it can be safely and cheaply developed, but only if the mother consents and only if:

1. Adoptive parents for the baby are found beforehand.

2. The biological parents are fully absolved of any financial or legal obligations towards the baby following birth should the adoptive parents change their minds or be declared unfit for any reason.

Unless those two conditions are met, it really is no solution. Also, such an enterprise would be an enormous undertaking, involving great expense in both dollars and man-hours, not to mention liability insurance. Since in vitro fertilization and test-tube technology is far from perfect now, there would be a very high rate of fetal losses to contend with.

So we'll just have to see....

Peace,

V-03

 

we can leave the soul part out of this discussion, cause that leads to a whole new can of worms that doesn't need to be opened.

 

But the can of worms has been opened, obi-wan mccartney. Abortions do happen, and if the fetuses have souls, the souls have died and gone to heaven/hell/wherever.