"Therefore, Abortion Must Remain Legal"

[quip]

Nearly all anecdotal evidence that you're so hesitant to mention can be countered with one word.

Adoption.

The adoption-option. Of course, it's one of her choices viz choice.

Don't want the baby? There's a way out and :idea: the baby can even not be killed!

Novel idea.

Don't want to be pregnant..........?

 

[Huckleberry]

Well, no...if you'd bother to apply some grey matter to your rhetoric..one can't supply evidence to something that's yet to happen. (Hint: abortions happen prior to the circumstances they would have experienced if they had been born into them.)

What "evidence"? Who's asking for evidence of anything at all? I asked you for an example of "environmental circumstances" that you believe would justify abortion as an act of mercy.

Either way, any anecdotal evidence would have simply been rejected by you..matter of fact you've had plans all along to reject anything I might say..because you're silly question was a (straw)rhetorical question..no?

You know, you'd have been much better off with just not answering. :nono:

So you won't even attempt to offer an example of these terrible "environmental circumstances" that pro-lifers so heinously subject unborn babies to...rather than killing them to spare them. No, no. You won't do that because I'm just going to reject anything you say. Huh. lain:

 

[WizardofOz]

Complex perhaps but extreme?

Yes. To say that ALL abortion should be legal is extreme. What is complex about it? There is no complexity to the position whatsoever.

Abortion is a complex issue, there's no easy answers...that is, if you're viewing abortion from an non-biased/objective perspective.

You're biased in favor of choice.

Objectivity? Please lain:

From your perspective...perhaps.

Shall we go through it again? What does who I personally know have to the issue at all?

The charge of red-herring is a rich one considering being robbed has nothing to do with abortion.

It has to do with the law.

The robber and the robbed aren't conjoined by physical bounds...at least not on the crime dramas I've been watching. That physical link is key to my "red herring" and the circumstances as to why a woman would desire to sever this link is precisely the abortion issue pro-lifers utterly refuse to discuss. I've repeatedly attempted to discuss such...to no avail. TH being the latest one to simply ignore a discussion regarding the mother. As if the fetus subsists in abstract space somewhere.

You're missing the point of the comparison.

Your red herring was mentioning that I do not know the parties involved.

So what?

Actually I'll have to retract the charge seeing as how you feel that all abortions should be legal.

Doctor: "You're due to give birth any moment"
Woman: "I've changed my mind, abort the baby"
Doctor: "Sign here and we'll abort"
quip: "Late-term abortion should be legal, so :idunno:"

Because they're relative to each pregnancy/woman. I could give you a worst-case yet, you all would still scream bloody murder anyway. So, it would be pointless hoop jumping...I don't hoop jump without adequate compensation $$

Wost-case (rape or threat to life of the mother) amounts to less than 1% of abortion.

The "hard cases" of the mother's life, rape and incest, and fetal deformities (negative eugenics) account for only about 0.69 percent of all abortions in the United States each year. This means that 99.31 percent of all abortions are committed "to save the mother's lifestyle" (actual reasons the aborting mothers give are in the next section, and they confirm these numbers).

The rationalizations are made every day. Anything you can come with has been heard already.

• "I want no (more) children" (30.9%); • "I want to postpone childbearing" (21.1%); • "Having a child will disrupt my education or job" (19.9%) • "My mental health is at risk" (9.8%); • "I can't afford a baby now" (6.6%); • "I have a problem with my relationship or my partner does not want this pregnancy" (4.4%); • "There is a risk to fetal health" (negative eugenics) (3.1%); • "I am too young; my parent(s) or other(s) object to my pregnancy" (1.5%); • "My physical health is at risk" (1.1%); and • Other reasons (1.6%).[17]

 

[WizardofOz]

Let's say, a woman elects to abort because it may interfere with her career aspirations. Lifer's would undoubtedly take an indignant stand against such a choice yet, it's only a matter of moral degree...all such choices are subjective...per the life/death choice to abort so aptly illustrated by the lifer...no?

Being pregnant and having a baby may interfere with career aspirations. Therefore, abortion must remain legal.

-OR-

Some women may die during pregnancy unless action is taken, therefore all abortion must remain legal.

 

[PureX]

I'm certainly not blanket "pro-choice", however "life begins at conception" is untenable as well. It's almost impossible to enforce very early term abortions and many forms of contraception would be illegal if a so called "Life Amendment" were passed.

I think a fetus is a person, or at least close enough to be protected at a certain point after conception. I'm not entirely sure when that is, but somewhere between a heartbeat and quickening might be good places to draw the line. I do not think a fertilized egg or a ball of undifferentiated cells is a person.

Research shows that making abortion illegal doesn't reduce abortion rates at all, it simply makes it less safe for the woman. Countries where abortion is illegal have similar rates to those where it is legal.

I do think abortion should, at the very least, be illegal after fetal viability with exceptions for the life of the mother and *severe* fetal defects. I could see more restrictions being placed, but a blanket life amendment type law wouldn't be supported by much of the population at all.

I am also interested in addressing unplanned pregnancy with greater access to birth control as well as better social support for women who choose to have their children. It's these latter two that many right wingers object to, which makes me think instead of being pro-life, they are simply "pro-birth". once the kid is born it's up to the parents to take care of the child. "Government provided social services just reward bad behavior!" they say. Unfortunately the lack of them punishes the very children they insist must be born.

Post #3 pretty much said it for me. Though I would add to it the extreme importance of respecting individual freedom of choice until it is very clear how and at what point we can conclusively say that the fetus is an individual human being, too.

 

[WizardofOz]

My response to Alate

 

[quip]

Being pregnant and having a baby may interfere with career aspirations. Therefore, abortion must remain legal.

-OR-

Some women may die during pregnancy unless action is taken, therefore all abortion must remain legal.

Do these straw-takes have a point?

 

[WizardofOz]

Do these straw-takes have a point?

Just exposing weak pro-choice rationalizations, that's all :e4e:

 

[WizardofOz]

Until a person is self aware, there is no reason to count them among those who are.

It's a self-evident fact: you would abort a fetus to save your already born child if such a circumstance arose. Don't fool yourself.
Therefore, abortion is not murder.

You would kill your fetus to save your already born child therefore abortion must remain legal :hammer:

I wonder under what circumstance this would possibly occur...:idunno:

 

[gcthomas]

You would kill your fetus to save your already born child therefore abortion must remain legal :hammer:

I wonder under what circumstance this would possibly occur...:idunno:

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

It didn't take me five seconds to come up with an example - you must think harder before asking easy questions, WoOz.

 

[WizardofOz]

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

It didn't take me five seconds to come up with an example - you must think harder before asking easy questions, WoOz.

'There might not be enough food to go around. Therefore, abortion must remain legal'.

 

[gcthomas]

'There might not be enough food to go around. Therefore, abortion must remain legal'.

Misrepresenting me again. You do make a habit of the dishonest paraphrasing, don't you? :sigh:

You asked for a possible scenario, which I gave. You will notice I didn't use it to justify any law. You made that bit up.

 

[WizardofOz]

You would kill your fetus to save your already born child therefore abortion must remain legal :hammer:

I wonder under what circumstance this would possibly occur...:idunno:

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

It didn't take me five seconds to come up with an example - you must think harder before asking easy questions, WoOz.

'There might not be enough food to go around. Therefore, abortion must remain legal'.

Misrepresenting me again. You do make a habit of the dishonest paraphrasing, don't you? :sigh:

You asked for a possible scenario, which I gave. You will notice I didn't use it to justify any law. You made that bit up.

:doh: It's not my fault that you are not reading carefully. I already had included the "therefore abortion must remain legal" phrase in the post you decided to respond to.

Or, see the OP. This thread IS about the law.

 

[Rusha]

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

She is so poor she can't even afford condoms? She doesn't have enough time to put in extra hours of work, but is able to use those hours to have unprotected sex?

It didn't take me five seconds to come up with an example - you must think harder before asking easy questions, WoOz.

Your example is not valid. Poverty is not an excuse to kill unborn babies. There are superior options which do not include sacrificing an innocent, unborn child on the altar of convenience.

 

[Tambora]

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

It didn't take me five seconds to come up with an example - you must think harder before asking easy questions, WoOz.

Or the mother's hours of work were cut back, so she now needs to murder some of her existing children to have enough food for the rest of the family.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Don't want the baby? There's a way out and the baby can even not be killed!
Novel idea.

Don't want to be pregnant..........?

Keep your pants on.

 

[Lighthouse]

You would kill your fetus to save your already born child therefore abortion must remain legal :hammer:

I wonder under what circumstance this would possibly occur...:idunno:

The idea this moron thinks that is self-evident clearly proves them to be a monster.

She is so poor she can't even afford condoms? She doesn't have enough time to put in extra hours of work, but is able to use those hours to have unprotected sex?

Your example is not valid. Poverty is not an excuse to kill unborn babies. There are superior options which do not include sacrificing an innocent, unborn child on the altar of convenience.

Exactly!

 

[gcthomas]

In places of extreme poverty, where a pregnancy means the mother cannot work as much and there may not be enough food for the rest of the family when the child is born.

She is so poor she can't even afford condoms? She doesn't have enough time to put in extra hours of work, but is able to use those hours to have unprotected sex?

Your example is not valid. Poverty is not an excuse to kill unborn babies. There are superior options which do not include sacrificing an innocent, unborn child on the altar of convenience.

Do you think the woman in this picture has any choice about unprotected sex, or has access to a pharmacist for contraceptives, even if she did put in a few more hours in at work?

 

[Catholic Crusader]

She is so poor she can't even afford condoms? She doesn't have enough time to put in extra hours of work, but is able to use those hours to have unprotected sex?

Your example is not valid. Poverty is not an excuse to kill unborn babies. There are superior options which do not include sacrificing an innocent, unborn child on the altar of convenience.

Great post! You belong on the right, not the left.

Do you think the woman in this picture has any choice about unprotected sex, or has access to a pharmacist for contraceptives, even if she did put in a few more hours in at work?

Do you think the women in that photo even care about condoms? I don't see any sex fiend sluts in there.

 

[WizardofOz]

Do you think the woman in this picture has any choice about unprotected sex, or has access to a pharmacist for contraceptives, even if she did put in a few more hours in at work?

:doh:

Do you think uncontacted tribes have abortion providers?