Here's the new abortion thread so that J-Rod can stop clogging up discussion in the presidential election thread every few pages with his crusade. Here are a few of the latest posts from that thread to kick us off:
A point I want to address, since the discussion is so singularly focused on defining human life: The question about whether a fetus is a human life is only one part of the debate. Even if we settle that, then we have to ask if there are circumstances in which it is permissible to end a human life. A pregnant woman is the sole support system for the fetus growing inside her - we have to address whether it is legally and morally permissible to require her to support another human life at the cost of her own bodily autonomy. We don't require people to sign up as marrow donors or organ donors despite the fact that these policies would save many lives that are unable to live without the proper donors. People cannot be required to donate organs even after they are dead, but if we outlaw abortion, pregnant women will be required to support a fetus regardless of their desires. Do we really want to give women less bodily autonomy than corpses? Consider also the violinist problem: Do you have the right, in this situation, to choose to unhook yourself from the violinist?
May I add the following issue: What exactly is the argument that life begins at conception? I've seen no sound basis for this in either science or religion. That life begins before delivery? Sure. But who came up with this idea that this means it is the very first second of conception? This seems to me to be at the heart of a lot of the objections to the practice. Could someone offer some insight here?
I don't know the origins of life begins at conception. I assumed for years it was a catholic belief but I really have no idea.
it is my understanding that some religious beliefs do define life as beginning at contraception (and some at implantation). Others define "humanness" as at some point when the developing fetus can feel pain or somewhat (medical professionals please correct me if wrong). I'm one of those "pro-choicers" who truly wish more folks would take precautions to avoid unwanted pregnancies. I admit I'm uncomfortable with those who use abortion as birth control, but I really can't say why. Until the cells differentiate, the brain and nerves develop - yeah, there's some point where the mass of cells that will become human crosses the threshold. Still, it's not my place to intervene in another person's decisions when: 1. There is literally no consensus when "life begins" 2. It's another person's right to make decisions for her own body (but please try to make the decision to try to avoid pregnancy in the first place)
In the United States that's down to poor sex education and availability/price of birth control (condoms, the pill, Plan B). It's a failure of policy-- often because of pro-lifers-- not individuals.
The thing I don't understand about a lot of right-wingers is the failure to understand that the very first step in reducing the number of abortions is increasing the availability of birth control.
The idea is that easier access to birth control enables either pre-marital sex (oh, the sin!) or that any sex should be open to conception - in short, foisting a certain religious viewpoint even on those who don't share it. While I'm no expert, it certainly also seems that a lot of folks don't use the available birth control because it can't happen to them (or in that position, yada yada yada) or they don't want to think before engaging.
Exactly, hence my statement above. When birth control is less expensive and more widely available, and people understand how to use it correctly--and are not subjected to some sort of puritanical shame for buying it--abortion rates are lower.
Less expensive? You can buy a 3 pack of jimmy hats for under $10 or get them for free at the baby murdering establishment Planned Parenthood.
And right-wingers want to shut down the free establishment. Also, if a parenting message board that I used to post on, is any indication, there are still women who get pregnant unplanned because their partners "don't like" using condoms. To which my reaction is always, there are two choices here: either use something yourself, or say "I 'don't like' having sex with you if you 'don't like' using condoms." At least some of the OTC options that women had when I was in my teens and 20s are now off the market, and getting the Pill requires a few more hoops than poor underinsured women working 2-3 jobs are able or willing to jump through. It shouldn't be that way. Whatever we can do to make it easier for women to plan their pregnancies will reduce abortions.
Isn't there talk of the Pill going OTC? ONE problem is a certain segment of women (girls, actually) who have openly expressed the "I want a baby so I have someone to love me"? Maybe more "this is the reality of parenthood" needs to be louder than the "romance" of it?
Introducing the RealCare Baby This American Life: Amateur Hour http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/549/amateur-hour
Probably should be required at the jr high level - though I expect a lot of parents would object (my child is too young to be exposed to that).
Jabba-wocky asked about religious beliefs and life beginning at conception. I think Psalm 139 is relevant: 13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. And from Luke 1, Elizabeth was 6 months along with the unborn John the Baptist when Mary, newly pregnant with Jesus, came to visit. 39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.
Just an FYI, but in Texas, if you're pregnant and brain-dead, the law says you have to be kept alive until the fetus reaches viability and can be delivered. There was a case about this early last year (I think). If the Internet on the ship wasn't slow as molasses I'd try and find the link, but it's gotta be somewhere. Peace, V-03
...and just as thought JRod had hit the basement, and could go no lower, he grabs the shovel and goes for the sedimentary.
Vaderize03, wasn't that the case where the mother wasn't just brain-dead, but actually decaying physically as well?
Sarge : I get the Psalms reference, but most pro-choicers are not in favor of third-trimester abortion so I'm not sure Luke 1 applies.
yeah, today in the stacks at the library i found a 400 some page book that used the bible to defend and justify the practice of slavery. just sayin'.
Between Diggy, Rylo Kens and Rogue_Ten, the pics are getting absolutely creepy. tom, the antebellum South was full of those. Was it James Henry Hammonds? He also used Cicero.
