Personhood and Abortion Rights

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Markk »

Themis wrote:The best line is birth. It makes sure the women has proper rights over her body. I am not in favor of late term abortions, but in reality it is not an issue. Few happen and almost all of those are due to health concerns over the mother or fetus. There are also established ethical rules Doctor have to follow.


How do you view that then...the women has right of life over another human, or the child up until birth is not human, or other?

Why aren't you in favor of late term abortions, and where is the line between mid and late term?

As far as rules for doctors that is so subjective, in history, today's medicine, and a doctor personal ethical code, I am not even sure where to start.

So far I am at after sex with my line, Kevin is at when the fetus feels pain, and you are at birth, even if you assume a late term (where ever that line is) abortion is wrong?

Do you believe the state should allow a abortion days before a normal birth, if it is the will of the mother?
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Markk
_Emeritus
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:04 am

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Markk »

Themis wrote:That is definitely a strange answer. I suspect you don't have a good argument here which is why you go with being lazy. How is it lazy for someone to use this as there preferred way to avoid having to have a baby, and how do you know they have not taken other methods but want to make sure by taking this drug after having sex? It's not lazy to take take the shortest route to the store to buy food, but maybe if you were supposed to go but got someone else to go for you.


I have written a lot here, so it is more than just being lazy. I think human life and having the ability to produce it, demands a certain amount of responsibility. I suppose it is more "humane" to take a MAP than having an abortion later, but it does not in my view make it right. I would not compare the responsibility of bring a life into this world with find the shortest view to the grocery store, but is show how we view this subject.



Are you fine with a women making the choice even if you think abortion is the wrong choice?


No not at all... I am not fine with it. I am not sure what word fits my view on this, but maybe I would "respect her view in regards to the law, and understand it is a very personal and heart aching decision for most women."

I know women, family, and friends that have gotten abortions, people I love and care deeply about...I don't love or respect them any the lesser...but I am certainly not "fine" with it. I honestly can't think of a word for it. It's a big deal for me, and I understand it is not so much for you Themis, and I am not judging you or condemning you but am tell you very honestly how I feel.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Markk wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Why? I would like you to explain why you would support the procedure in this particular situation.

Selfish pride, anger, spite, hate, weakness, and I am sure other emotions would rise out in me that would want it.

Why would you support it in this situation, and more importantly why would you support it is a "pleasure" conception, say a condom fail?


This is what I support. I quickly nabbed a stat from 2015 off the CDC website.

The number of abortion procedures performed in the United States in 2015:

638,169

In my mind that represents 638,169 stories of women.
It also represents 638,169 stories of men.

All total, well over a million stories are represented by that stat.

I have no way of knowing each person's individual story, what their motivations to go forward with the procedures were, much less am I in a position to judge them.

I see no point, at this point, in discussing whatever random "what if" scenario may be at work and making determinations based on those scenarios.

When discussing instances of rape or incest, people typically say they're okay with the woman having the procedure. They rarely if ever, say they're okay with the woman having the procedure if she wants to. What if she looks at her pregnancy as a blessing? What if, what if, what if, what if.

I can't discuss theses issues in absolute terms. There are no absolutes. There are represented in the above stat alone, well over a million stories. Well over a million particular and specific stories the details of which are unknown so we're just spitting in the wind here keeping ourselves occupied with something we can never know.

I am pro life. I am pro choice. Being pro choice doesn't rule out my pro life position. So long as there is choice, women ultimately have the right to choose to have or not to have such a procedure.

I support the choices that do not belong to me.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Markk wrote:Every time two people have sex, they don't always conceive...far from it, so just taking the MAP after every time a person has sex does not mean the pill terminated the potential for life.


That's not how they determine the effectiveness of the pill. I mean, really?

Markk wrote:That said, I disagree with your view, I think it leads to another slippery slope. I have read it can be anywhere from a hour or so, to five days...so you numbers are exactly accurate.


No, this is the second time you're making stuff up to suit your viewpoint. It takes 3 at the minimum but usually 5 days.

Markk wrote:I also am a person of faith Kevin, I do believe in God, and I while I do not even pretend to remotely understand how it all works, I do believe life is a special and God given.


You'll have to do better than just ''life." Sperm itself is alive. And you still haven't answered the question other than to recreate reality by saying sometimes people get pregnant within an hour of having sex. That's scientifically false. If you really believe a zygote failing to reach implantation means it was suffering a gruesome death, then 60% of them die that way and there is no one to blame but God.

Markk wrote:I think one thing we have learned from this exchange, its that to a degree I am pro choice, in that it is indeed a choice all women have the right to make, and you believe the state should determine when life is in the womb by science, and enforce that on a woman.


I've never once said anything about the "state" enforcing anything onto a woman. What ever in the hell are you talking about? You're too busy trying to make false equivalencies and recreating what's real because the question is just too difficult for you to answer. If women do not get pregnant until 3-5 days after having sex, and there is only a 40% chance a blastocyst attains implantation, then what is the harm in nipping it in the butt on day one?

Markk wrote:When is that line? For you it is not about the potential for life, but whether or not the potential child feels the pain...is that fair?


The sperm already is life. So is the egg. The "potential" child is a long, long ways from being anything remotely similar to a child. It feels nothing, it sees nothing, it knows nothing.

Markk wrote:Also you believe the state should be able to take away a woman's right to choose, but at a later time within 280+- days of gestation?

Can you give me a day or month, when your line takes effect?


Science tells us a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. It is already illegal to abort a fetus in the third trimester unless it is medically necessary.
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Themis »

Markk wrote:How do you view that then...the women has right of life over another human, or the child up until birth is not human, or other?


No one said it wasn't human, but yes a women should have the right to decide what happens with her body. If you think if a Women has the right to abortion if she was been raped or her health is at risk you support a right to choose, and that the mother has greater rights then the fetus.

Why aren't you in favor of late term abortions, and where is the line between mid and late term?


Same as others, but I don't think it is an issue that comes up hardly ever. I wouldn't complain about some legal restrictions, but it does get into dangerous territory of taking away a women's right to her body.

As far as rules for doctors that is so subjective, in history, today's medicine, and a doctor personal ethical code, I am not even sure where to start.


There not that subjective and it would be hard to find a doctor who will do an abortion when a fetus is considered developed enough to survive outside of the womb. Plus it is hard to find a women seeking an abortion for no other reason then not wanting to be pregnant anymore.

Do you believe the state should allow a abortion days before a normal birth, if it is the will of the mother?


How many times does this come up Markk? Birth is the best legal area to avoid many taking away more and more rights.
42
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Themis »

Markk wrote:I have written a lot here, so it is more than just being lazy. I think human life and having the ability to produce it, demands a certain amount of responsibility. I suppose it is more "humane" to take a MAP than having an abortion later, but it does not in my view make it right. I would not compare the responsibility of bring a life into this world with find the shortest view to the grocery store, but is show how we view this subject.


You have yet to show it is lazy and came up with it alone to argue against. Not a good argument. How is taking a MAP inhumane? At most you would only have a small mass of cells. There is no thinking feeling being capable of pain thought or consciousness.

No not at all... I am not fine with it. I am not sure what word fits my view on this, but maybe I would "respect her view in regards to the law, and understand it is a very personal and heart aching decision for most women."

I know women, family, and friends that have gotten abortions, people I love and care deeply about...I don't love or respect them any the lesser...but I am certainly not "fine" with it. I honestly can't think of a word for it. It's a big deal for me, and I understand it is not so much for you Themis, and I am not judging you or condemning you but am tell you very honestly how I feel.


I may not like abortion, but I'm fine with a women having the choice and think women should have that right. That is what I am asking you. Not about whether you think having an abortion is fine.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
42
_subgenius
_Emeritus
Posts: 13326
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _subgenius »

Kevin Graham wrote:Science tells us a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. It is already illegal to abort a fetus in the third trimester unless it is medically necessary.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you have anhidrosis, congenital analgesia, or CIPA then its perfectly acceptable to kill you...because Science.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Markkkk wrote:I know women, family, and friends that have gotten abortions, people I love and care deeply about...I don't love or respect them any the lesser...but I am certainly not "fine" with it. I honestly can't think of a word for it. It's a big deal for me, and I understand it is not so much for you Themis, and I am not judging you or condemning you but am tell you very honestly how I feel.


"None of your damn business" usually works for me.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Right Wing media is having conniption fit over Virginia Governor's remarks about late term abortions, which they intentionally distort for their agenda.

GOVERNOR’S COMMENTS ON VIRGINIA ABORTION BILL LEAD CONSERVATIVES TO CLAIM HE SUPPORTS INFANTICIDE (HE DOESN’T)

A new proposal in Virginia that would loosen regulations on third-trimester abortion has been blasted by Fox News and Republicans who claim that the bill would allow women to kill their children after they have been born. The allegation is provably false, but continues to be spread by President Donald Trump’s oldest son, elected officials and various media outlets.

Virginia currently allows third-term abortions when a mother’s life is at severe risk and if three doctors sign off. The bill, proposed by Virginia House Democrats, would require only one doctor’s approval and omit the words “substantially and irremediably” when referring to the health risk posed to the mother.

This week, Democratic delegate Kathy Tran said that the new rules would allow abortions up until the moments a woman gives birth. The bill was rejected.

On Wednesday, Republicans began circulating a shortened clip of Virginia governor Ralph Northam appearing to say that an infant could be killed after birth.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” said Northam in a radio interview. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

The clip, however, left out a preamble where Northam clarified that this would only be done with a severely deformed, nonviable fetus, an infant that was stillborn or would die imminently.

“No woman seeks a third trimester abortion, except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances, such as a nonviable pregnancy or in the event of severe fetal abnormalities, and the governor’s comments were limited to the actions physicians would take in the event that a woman in those circumstances went into labor,” said Northam’s spokesperson, Ofirah Yheskel, told The Washington Post. “Attempts to extrapolate these comments otherwise is in bad faith and underscores exactly why the governor believes physicians and women, not legislators, should make these difficult and deeply personal medical decisions.”

Still, Conservatives harped on the truncated clip. “This is insanity. Seems like advocating for Post Term Abortion a.k.a. MURDER by any standard I’m aware of,” wrote Donald Trump Jr.

“I never thought I would see the day America had government officials who openly support legal infanticide,” wrote Republican Senator Marco Rubio.

About 65 percent of all abortions performed occur during the first eight weeks of gestation, and 91 percent are performed during the first 11 weeks. Only 1.4 percent of all legal abortions occur after 21 weeks gestation. Studies show that tough abortion laws lead to an increase in second and third-term abortions. There was a 27 percent increase in second-trimester abortions in Texas after the state closed clinics and increased wait times.
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Personhood and Abortion Rights

Post by _canpakes »

Markk wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Why? I would like you to explain why you would support the procedure in this particular situation.

Selfish pride, anger, spite, hate, weakness, and I am sure other emotions would rise out in me that would want it.

This list is one of perceived self-failings. It’s more than just this.

Consider, as example, that this is a sort of forced adoption. I wonder how well that would play out within conservative circles that already have a tough time dealing with sharing health care costs for others via insurance.

Imagine that the government ruled that you needed to carry and birth a child because someone else forced the decision on to you.

Imagine forcing that decision on to someone who did not have the resources to raise a child that they absolutely did not concede to. Tell them that they’ll need to devote the better part of a year being reminded of the event that put them into that situation. Tell them that they’re now responsible for providing for that child for nearly two decades after birth.

Tell them how they may possibly have to deal with having the rapist or abuser be a part of their life for another two decades or longer. Tell that family that it is, perhaps, God’s will that they will need to navigate their lives with a dangerous abuser or criminal claiming ‘rights’ to be involved after having forced a pregnancy.

Tell these people why their basic human rights are being trumped by someone else’s need to impose a particular religious ideology upon them, and why having another person impose their ‘right to impregnate by force’ should be held high above all other considerations.
Post Reply