Alternatives to Abortion

[The Horn]

Laws against murdering born people can be enforced . But laws against abortion are not enforceable . No country has ever been able do this or ever will . The proof ? More abortions happen in countries where it's illegal than where it's legal .
For example, Brazil , ironically the world's largest Catholic nation . More abortions happen there than in America .
The Brazilian government's efforts to stop abortion have been totally futile and will remain futile . Ironically , if they were to legalize abortion and do more to help poor women have access to contraceptives , the abortion rate would decrease markedly there .

 

[genuineoriginal]

More abortions happen in countries where it's illegal than where it's legal .

if they were to legalize abortion ... the abortion rate would decrease

That is not true.
In 1969 (four years before Roe v. Wade) abortion was illegal in America and the abortion rate was 57 women out of every 100,000 women.
In 1977 (four years after Roe v. Wade) abortion was legal in America and the abortion rate was 2,640 women out of every 100,000 women.
(source)

The data includes the estimates from the Alan Guttmacher Institute (the research branch of Planned Parenthood).

Comments on abortion statistics Currently, the Alan Guttmacher Institute is an important source for estimates of both legal and illegal abortions worldwide. AGI is an extension of an organization engaged in intense political lobbying for the completely unrestrained practice of abortion. High abortion rates are in their political (and financial) interests for a number of reasons. For example, high numbers of illegal abortions are an element of their rationalization for legalized abortion. Thus, when AGI estimates high rates of illegal abortions in the developing world these estimates bear scrutiny.

​

 

[ok doser]

Laws against murdering born people can be enforced .

and yet people are still murdered

But laws against abortion are not enforceable .

sure they are - arrest, try, convict and execute abortionists

No country has ever been able do this or ever will .

we did it, before roe v wade

it's simple

arrest, try, convict and execute abortionists

 

[Jacob]

Laws against murdering born people can be enforced . But laws against abortion are not enforceable . No country has ever been able do this or ever will . The proof ? More abortions happen in countries where it's illegal than where it's legal .
For example, Brazil , ironically the world's largest Catholic nation . More abortions happen there than in America .
The Brazilian government's efforts to stop abortion have been totally futile and will remain futile . Ironically , if they were to legalize abortion and do more to help poor women have access to contraceptives , the abortion rate would decrease markedly there .

So murder of the unborn is not murder? No.

 

[The Horn]

No ! Only an infinitesimally tiny fraction of all the illegal abortions which took place before Roe were ever criminally prosecuted . Abortionists were almost NEVER arrested, tried and convicted before Roe. And what about the poor women who try to abort themselves ? Are we gong to rest and prosecute THEM ?

 

[Jacob]

No ! Only an infinitesimally tiny fraction of all the illegal abortions which took place before Roe were ever criminally prosecuted . Abortionists were almost NEVER arrested, tried and convicted before Roe. And what about the poor women who try to abort themselves ? Are we gong to rest and prosecute THEM ?

Those who don't know should be educated, that is for sure.

When a person does not know that murder is murder they are seriously confused.

Yes, murder is punishable by death.

 

[ok doser]

No ! Only an infinitesimally tiny fraction of all the illegal abortions which took place before Roe were ever criminally prosecuted . Abortionists were almost NEVER arrested, tried and convicted before Roe.

that's just not true

And what about the poor women who try to abort themselves ? Are we gong to rest and prosecute THEM ?

what about the poor women who try to kill their newborns, their infants, their toddlers? Should they be arrested and prosecuted?

 

[ok doser]

In any case, murder is murder whatever the age even if unborn or preborn.

that's the bottom line



the horn makes a forceful statement!

Women MUST have control over their lives, their bodies, their health and their futures .

doser spots a potential flaw in horn's reasoning:

based on the above statement, can you explain clearly and rationally, why women should not be allowed by law to kill their newborns, their infants, their toddlers if they wish to?

horn's response?

Spoiler

Laws against murdering born people can be enforced . But laws against abortion are not enforceable .

they would be if the law recognized abortion as murder - enforcement would then be a matter of addressing the crime after it occurred, same as we do with all murders, with the expectation that the penalty would be severe enough to have a deterrent effect on future potential murderers

 

[The Horn]

Nobody in America is calling for the murder of babies once born . There isn't going to be any legalized infanticide . But an early abortion is not "infanticide " because a partially formed fetus is not an infant.

 

[ok doser]

Nobody in America is calling for the murder of babies once born .

new york state is - the governor just celebrated the passage of a law through the legislature that allows exactly that

There isn't going to be any legalized infanticide .

one would certainly hope not

but you fail to answer the question as asked - why does your willingness to sacrifice the child to the convenience of the mother end at birth?

But an early abortion is not "infanticide " because a partially formed fetus is not an infant.

ummmm - ok - did anybody use the word "infanticide"?

besides you?

 

[ok doser]

... a partially formed fetus is not an infant.

and a partially formed newborn/infant/toddler is not an adult

so why should a partially formed newborn/infant/toddler have the same rights as an adult?

that's not a rhetorical question - it's a question you will avoid, i'm sure, because there's no reason that the answer shouldn't apply equally to the unborn child

 

[ok doser]

the horn makes a forceful statement!

Women MUST have control over their lives, their bodies, their health and their futures .

doser spots a potential flaw in horn's reasoning and asks:

based on the above statement, can you explain clearly and rationally, why women should not be allowed by law to kill their newborns, their infants, their toddlers if they wish to?

horn's response is, unfortunately, neither clear nor rational and instead avoids answering the question altogether:

Nobody in America is calling for the murder of babies once born . There isn't going to be any legalized infanticide . But an early abortion is not "infanticide " because a partially formed fetus is not an infant.

so i'll ask it again:

based on your statement "Women MUST have control over their lives, their bodies, their health and their futures", can you explain clearly and rationally why women should not be allowed by law to kill their newborns, their infants, their toddlers if they wish to?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

based on your statement "Women MUST have control over their lives, their bodies, their health and their futures", can you explain clearly and rationally why women should not be allowed by law to kill their newborns, their infants, their toddlers if they wish to?

I'm surprised how many people involved in this debate have never actually read Roe v Wade. The answer to this question is in the findings. Roe never said a child is not a human life. The answer is quite simply that the mother can obtain all those things immediately by a less drastic alternative of giving the child away. Several states even allow mothers in such situations to drop the child off anonymously at fire departments and hospitals. This is not a viable option for most of the period the child is still in the womb.

 

[ok doser]

I'm surprised how many people involved in this debate have never actually read Roe v Wade. The answer to this question is in the findings. Roe never said a child is not a human life.

The answer is quite simply that the mother can obtain all those things immediately by a less drastic alternative of giving the child away.

Several states even allow mothers in such situations to drop the child off anonymously at fire departments and hospitals. This is not a viable option for most of the period the child is still in the womb.

congrats kit, you're the first one in years to actually answer this question :first:

So the answer is that if the mother wants to be rid of the baby, she can just abandon it? Just set it down and walk away?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Pro-choice kills.

 

[ok doser]

fifteen bucks a pound? :noway:

 

[genuineoriginal]

My name was Chloe, I wanted to live.
Your 'Personal choice' killed me!
Don't choose abortion.

 

[Kit the Coyote]

congrats kit, you're the first one in years to actually answer this question :first:

So the answer is that if the mother wants to be rid of the baby, she can just abandon it? Just set it down and walk away?

Depends on how she does it, she can't leave the child in a place where it is endangered but in the increasing number of states that have laws like the ones I mentioned she can hand it to a nurse, policeman or fireman and yes walk away.

 

[ok doser]

Depends on how she does it, she can't leave the child in a place where it is endangered ....

what if it's inconvenient to abandon it in a manner that insures the baby's safety? What if complying with that requirement conflicts with one of the following over-riding criteria: "Women MUST have control over their lives, their bodies, their health and their futures"

what if, for example, the mother is in the north woods or the Labrador coast and the nearest nurse, policeman or fireman is many days' journey away? Would it be acceptable in those situations to abandon it to the elements?

 

[aikido7]

that's just not true

I’m glad I found you.

Here’s a bit of advice:

If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone.