South Dakota Senate passes abortion ban bill
POSTED BY: Arcadia
UPDATED: Friday, March 24, 2006 07:38
VIEWED: 11467
PAGE 7 of 9
I'd like to add some more 2 cents and say that I believe Pregnancy is a sacrifice.
It's supposed to be. I, as a Catholic believe that God made it this way, he knew that rapes were going to happen and problems at birth were going to happen. But he probably made it this way so it wound up being a choice that was made in the goodness of our hearts.
It's just one of those tough choices that people have to face that's just part of life. I just think that a new younger life is more important than the life of the older more mature woman. Though the woman who is carrying the child is still very important.
I understand how a lot of you won't agree with me, I just wanted to add my opinion :).
And as for not being able to afford to take care of a child, there's always those Adoption companies. It's better than killing the poor baby.
"Th3re !s n0 spo0Ne." -The Matricks
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Actually, I did read your post. And I'm left to believe that abortions performed for the reasons you stated above are likely to be a minimal number. (Anyone have such figures?) I'd guess that the vast majority (if not nearly all) abortions are done as a means of birth control (convenience)(i.e. the selfish reason I stated above), and not for the reasons you mentioned above.
These are stats posted on about.com ( http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm). The majority of these statistics were taken from The Alan Guttmacher Institute. I'll search for a more realiable source, but, for now...
Quote:
* 25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing.
* 21.3% of women cannot afford a baby.
* 14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child.
* 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy.)
* 10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career.
* 7.9% of women want no (more) children.
* 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health.
* 2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health.
Most women who have abortions do intent to have children at one point in their life, or already have children.
"Objects in Space"
River: It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In my opinion, the problem of abortion will never be a simple one. It's just not black and white.
a) It is true that it's an entirely selfish act at the expense of a developing life. That can't be denied away and most pro-choice people will admit that.
b) It's also true that "Don't have sex!" is an over-simplified counter-argument.
People have always had sex for reasons that were not "Let's have children". Always. No matter how officially prude the society. It's a fact that won't ever change. It's human nature to have sex for pleasure.
(These days, it's simply that women get to enjoy it with an amount of freedom that approaches that of men.)
It's an issue that has to be approached with pragmatism. Everything else is like trying to ban alcohol. Pointless.
Fact: Not every pregnancy is planned or wanted.
When unwanted, it's at the very least a big inconvenience, worse it can be mentally traumatizing (rape, incest, etc.), at worst life-threatening.
And it's not even touching the burdens of either raising the kids or giving them away.
That's not nothing.
(Aside: It's a consequence of sex that men do not have to deal with. I think that point is of some meaning.
If the consequences of sex were more equally distributed in nature, maybe we as intelligent thinking creatures would find it easier to deal with an unwanted consequence. As a society certainly, but maybe also as individuals. But that's pure speculation.)
Anyway. So long as women are [unequally] burdened with the consequences of sex, some will strive for options to avoid that. Which is forever. Hence that fact that abortion has been around since the dawn of time, as well.
My suggestion: artificial wombs for all. Science, march ahead!
Call me cold, but as long as a human life requires one specific other person to survive, it remains that person's choice whether they want to play along. Just like with the kidney transplant comparison further above, except that denial of service becomes an act, not a lack of one.
People who feel that every fetus needs to be saved should start working on viable alternatives to the natural womb. It's the pragmatic solution.
Not to mention: contraception improvement, sex education, transparent and encouraging options for unwanted children that ARE born and so on. It's easy to point the finger and punish. It's more effective to prevent.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Dinky:
I'd like to add some more 2 cents and say that I believe Pregnancy is a sacrifice.
It's supposed to be. I, as a Catholic believe that God made it this way, he knew that rapes were going to happen and problems at birth were going to happen. But he probably made it this way so it wound up being a choice that was made in the goodness of our hearts.
To that I say, what choice?
pregnancy by rape + abortion is immoral = no choice at all.
It's not even a sacrifice, because that, too, involved choice. It's a bad thing that happens to you with no asking for your input, whether you're filled with mild serenity or bitter hate.
That's more comparable to the hardships he rained down on Job, if compare you must.
Quote:
It's just one of those tough choices that people have to face that's just part of life.
Again, I ask where in the equation of rape and pregnancy it is that you set the concept of choice.
Quote:
I just think that a new younger life is more important than the life of the older more mature woman.
Why, though? What did the poor woman do to rate second? Equal worth I could deal with, but less?
Basically, if a woman is raped, is pregnant as a result and then is in danger of dying during childbirth, then you stand by and say "tough luck, no help for you, God wants you to die", did I get that right?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Dinky:
I'd like to add some more 2 cents and say that I believe Pregnancy is a sacrifice.
But not today, Dinky. Today, it's "do what's best for me at the moment".
That's why a lot of marriages fall apart, everything is the convenience of the moment. Sacrifice (or heaven forbid -- actually thinking about someone else above ourselves) is a thing of the past -- or for prudes.
We're foolish and/or naive if we actually believe that a society raised on instant gratification will ever embrace a concept like sacrifice (or delayed gratification, or life-long committment, or any other such antiquated notions)...
Welcome to the progressive, enlightened 21st century. At this rate, I'm glad I won't be around to see the 22nd.
P.S. Arcadia, thanks for those figures. Even if they're remotely accurate, they're enlightening.
P.S.S. Geezer, I wasn't trying to take you out of context or pick on you. I disagree with you on much of this issue, but I have to respect someone who served their country -- as I'm imagining you have (if that pic is of you -- and I'm guessing the Corps). No matter what I think of your views, I'm grateful for your service.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
P.S.S. Geezer, I wasn't trying to take you out of context or pick on you. I disagree with you on much of this issue, but I have to respect someone who served their country -- as I'm imagining you have (if that pic is of you -- and I'm guessing the Corps). No matter what I think of your views, I'm grateful for your service.
Although I did serve my country in the late south-east Asian unpleasantness (Vietnam conflict), the picture is of a youngish Robert Heinlein, although he does look strangely like my father's WWII photos.
And I got no problem with you having your own opinion of morality or immorality in the 21st century. When you attempt to force it, and its results, on other folks who have different opinions, I do have a problem.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Although I did serve my country in the late south-east Asian unpleasantness (Vietnam conflict), the picture is of a youngish Robert Heinlein, although he does look strangely like my father's WWII photos.
I, myself, have never been called to serve (and haven't volunteered). I missed Vietnam by 5 or 6 years, so I'm probably a few years younger than you (although, undoubtedly, a lot of folks in here would find me "geezerly", as well).
My thanks to you and your brothers in arms is sincere. I have always respected our military and those who serve. Thank you very much. I do not envy what it must have been like for you.
I wasn't sure about the pic, but I thought it was a bit "older". Thanks for the clarification.
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
And I got no problem with you having your own opinion of morality or immorality in the 21st century. When you attempt to force it, and its results, on other folks who have different opinions, I do have a problem.
I don't believe in forcing my morality on anyone, although I'm aware that others would like to if they could. While I am deeply sorrowed that so many today seem to be devoid of any morality (or even a sense of common dignity), I know from my own experience that one has to want to do something from their own heart. It wouldn't be geniune if forced, so I wouldn't force it if I could.
I do, however, believe it's the government's responsibility to protect all those living under its jurisdiction (as I stated above), and I believe that unborn humans deserve that protection as much as the rest of us (if not more, because they are the most defenseless of human beings). On that, I'm afraid, it seems as though we're going to respectfully disagree.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Infertility is not abortion, and a fetus never conceived cannot be killed so it cannot add to the causality list. You’re just grasping at straws now.
Originally posted by citizen:
I think a fair few of illegal abortions won't be in the statistics, strangely enough.
But it's not just death, figures I've seen put infertility at quite a high rate, so many subsequent children that would have been born don't.
You know the potential for creating a child is there, whether there is a child or not, so making a Woman infertile, based on the RTL argument as I see it, is as bad as abortion.
In fact random thought, shouldn't hysterectomies be banned for the same reasons?
Quote:What about them? Children die of genetic deficiencies, abandonment, neglect, and murder today. But I still say that illegal abortions and all that went with it preformed in the years prior 1973 do not add up to the number of abortions preformed in the years since.
Originally posted by citizen:
But what about all the babies that are born that are left too die or are killed, or abandoned, or died as a result of genetic deficiency, or the Mothers that died during child birth, shouldn't they also be counted in the figures?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Cumhal:
Infertility is not abortion, and a fetus never conceived cannot be killed so it cannot add to the causality list. You’re just grasping at straws now.
Not really, four cells with slightly differing genetic code to the host aren't exactly alive either. Even the RTL argument supports that, they say that it has the potential to become life, well so does a Sperm, so does an Egg, and by extension destroying fertility is destroying this potential, it's not grasping a straws, it's taking the argument to its logical conclusion.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Actually, an embryo is alive, but that’s not the point. You’re trying to pad the numbers with abortions that could never have occurred. By your argument masturbation is tantamount to abortion. How many sperm exists in an ounce of semen? Millions I would guess. Hustler and Playboy then become responsible for conceivably billions or trillions of aborted fetuses every year. And every women between puberty and menopause have abortions every month.
Originally posted by citizen:
Not really, four cells with slightly differing genetic code to the host aren't exactly alive either. Even the RTL argument supports that, they say that it has the potential to become life, well so does a Sperm, so does an Egg, and by extension destroying fertility is destroying this potential, it's not grasping a straws, it's taking the argument to its logical conclusion.
The reality is that between c. 1950 and 1973 there were on average around a couple hundred deaths due to illegal abortions per year. I don’t know that anyone knows how many illegal abortions occurred during that time, but considering the difficulty of getting such abortions problaby not as many as today, when all you have to do is go down to the local clinic.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME