Legal restriction of abortion doesn't change the rate

[Big Don]

Christ, a figure central to Christianity, DUH!, was depicted a few years ago in a jar of urine. Was the "Artist" arrested, beaten, killed? NO!
Mohammad was depicted in some rather famous cartoons not too long ago and Muslims rioted.
Was either act nice? Probably not. Were we lectured in and by the media about how we must be nice to Christians? God forbid. (pun intended!) Were we lectured about depictions of Mohammed? YES, we were. Is that equal treatment? Not by a long shot.

 

[Big Don]

you can bet Theo van Gogh didn't find Muslims all that tolerant of his views.

 

[tellner]

Don, I'll address your longer post later. Right now I'm cooking Chicken Tikka Masala, and it's at a tricky point.

But I'll deal with your little tidbit of bigotry now.

Before you sprain your arm patting yourself on the back consider your own religion's history of unprecedented murder on an industrial scale...

Theo van Gogh was murdered by Muslim extremists. Definitely. But if you won't distinguish between the backwards salafist fanatics and the vast bulk of decent Muslims one can only extend the same courtesy to your religion. You deserve, by your own standards, to be tarred with the same broad brush that you apply to a billion people. Beams and splinters as someone famous once said.

This sort of atrocity is not the exclusive province of Christianity. It is a regrettable human trait against which we must be constantly vigilant. "In the whole world there's no group quite as cool as my group. In my group there's nobody quite as cool as me," is everyone's secret motto. The same tendencies can be found in every land and among every group of people. But since you're setting your religion and people up with smug superiority you're getting both barrels.

Thousands upon thousands of Black men were murdered by Christian extremists in this country, many in our lifetime, because G-d Almighty didn't want them to get uppity. Lynching in the Post WWI era was undeniably a tool of social control to keep Black people in line with Christian expectations. At least that's what the White churches preached.

We have gone to war to kill Muslims and are doing so right now by the hundreds of thousands. Remember Undersecretary of State Boykin, a disgrace to the uniform and a criminal to boot? He's there because "Allah is Satan". How about Anne Coulter and her "Invade them, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"? The United States military has been forced to allow outside groups to come into training areas to convert recruits to Protestant Fundamentalism. For the first time ever chaplains are allowed to proselytize. The USAF Academy has become notorious, relegating Jews and other non-believers to "punishment formations" and "heathen flights".

Christianity has a long history of killing absolutely everyone who refused to worship their deity in precisely the correct way? Waldenses, Albigensians, Protestants, Papists, Aryans, Copts, Nestorians, Orthodox, Jews, Pagans, the Irish Christian Church, Mithraists and so on and so forth world without end have all been on the receiving end of the Church's tender mercies. Most of these groups are extinct or well on their way.

My own ancestors were the absolute lowest of the low in Europe - Romanian and Ukrainian Jews. What's worse, some of them were Gypsies. They were raped, murdered, hunted and driven mercilessly until they finally left the continent. Those who remained? Up the chimney to the applause of the Romanian and Ukrainian Churches.

Further East a century and more ago we went to war to force the Chinese to accept our drug pushers. The missionaries were right there in the forefront killing the innocent and exhorting the troops. That's why there's a Chinese saying "Buddha came into China on a white horse. Christ came in on a cannonball."

In recent times it has gotten somewhat better in the West. Why? Precisely because of Enlightenment values and the spirit of humanistic tolerance and recognition that all people are human beings. The Church has tended to fight it bitterly every step of the way. It is precisely the extent to which the Church has been weakened that has determined the progress of the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions, the valuing of reason over superstition, the progress of women, the poor, the infidel and the dark-skinned.

Does Islam today suffer from the same malady? Of course. But there were centuries when the West was the home of backwards, ignorant, vicious murdering savages. Say, up until the seventeenth century or so. For hundreds of years before it was the Caliphate that was the seat of civilization West of China. When the Jews and Muslims were driven from Spain it was the Ottoman Sultan who took them in and said "Who are these Spanish Christians who enrich me by impoverishing themselves?"

"What ye do to the least of these my bretheren ye do to me."

Here endeth the lesson.

 

[Cruentus]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

What the hell!? How did we end up talking about Mormons, Muslims, Van Gogh, etc.?!

I think we have seriously gotten off track here.

Here is what Shesulsa presented:

She cited and article that showed that the legal status of abortion does not effect the amount of abortions, and has not dissuaded people from seeking an end to pregnancy.

I think the discussion here has little to do with whether abortion is right or wrong (per say), whether the liberals are trying to make traditional values illegal, or whether the right is trying to enslave women, or whether the mormons should be tolerated, and on and on.

For Pete's sake...

The discussion here is if you think that abortion should be legal or not legal in light of the article that has been presented.

I'll restate my opinion. I don't like to call myself "pro-life" or "pro-choice" because I really don't want to be associated with either camp, as my views don't comfortably fit in either. But, I am not for abortion most of the time. However, I also knew before this thread that making it illegal doesn't dissuade it from occuring. So making abortion illegal is something that I think would be at the very least useless to the "pro-life" agenda. Because of this, and because I do think that it is a personal decision that a mother needs to make, I don't think that abortion should be regulated by the government (ie. making it illegal). Furthermore, I would rather be in support of fighting against abortion through education and fighting against poverty, both of which are in my mind the #1 cause of abortion.

Now, what is your point of view in regards to the topic?

C.

P.S. I know that in these discussions, people can't usually read past three sentences before getting emotionally charged and turning off the brain in lew of construing their own response. Evidence can be seen in this very thread as the topic has been derailed more than once. So, I apologize for being long winded, as I am sure many people have already shut off their brains because I was unable to make my point in a more concise manner. ahem.

 

[Kacey]

Now, what is your point of view in regards to the topic?

Are there times when abortion should be an acceptable choice? Yes, I think there are - when the mother's life is at risk, when the pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the fetus is not viable - and let's not get into a discussion of "viable"; in this instance, I am referring to cases such as happened to a woman I used to work with, whose fetus died in utero - but the Catholic hospital her insurance used would only perform abortions when the life of the mother was clearly in danger, so they would not perform a therapeutic abortion until after she went into toxic shock, even though that hospital is the one that told her the fetus had died (and was, therefore, quite clearly not viable in any sense), and they kept her in the hospital knowing that she would develop toxic shock within several days... then they performed an abortion, and treated her for a now-life threatening illness that could have easily been avoided.

When a fetus is clearly severely disabled (not suspected, but visibly), I think the decision of whether or not to continue the pregnancy should be up to the mother, the father (if actively present in the mother's life - a whole other issue in itself), and any people that the mother and father choose to consult - and no one else.

On the other hand, I personally know of several cases in which the mother has had repeated abortions because she just can't be bothered with contraception - and that I take serious exception to. As I stated previously in this thread, I see a significant moral/ethical difference between preventing conception, and ending conception once it has occurred.

In the end, I think that if you don't approve of abortions, for whatever reasons - don't have one. But don't force others to live by your personal moral/ethical code unless you are personally willing - and able - to raise the child whose abortion you prevent.

 

[crushing]

In the end, I think that if you don't approve of abortions, for whatever reasons - don't have one. But don't force others to live by your personal moral/ethical code unless you are personally willing - and able - to raise the child whose abortion you prevent.

I'll admit that I don't have the resources to house all the people I don't think should be killed, independent of whether they live in Burma, Rwanda, or Darfor; if they are Sunni or Shiite, Jewish or Gypsie, or whether they are post-natal or pre-natal. To me, age and location doesn't matter.

Live and let live.

 

[Kacey]

I'll admit that I don't have the resources to house all the people I don't think should be killed, independent of whether they live in Burma, Rwanda, or Darfor; if they are Sunni or Shiite, Jewish or Gypsie, or whether they are post-natal or pre-natal. To me, age and location doesn't matter.

Live and let live.

I don't dispute anything you've said - but I do think that, if you are an abortion protester who talks a woman out of having an abortion, you have made yourself responsible for the child(ren) who will thus be born - and that responsibility extends until the child(ren) is/are adult(s). I personally know of several women who were talked out of aborting a child they did not want, were not emotionally or financially able to raise properly, who were housed by an abortion protester, given a baby shower, and sent on their way as soon as the baby they didn't want was born. Putting the child up for adoption to anyone - never mind the protester who talked the woman out of the abortion - was never mentioned. How to raise a child - wanted or not - was never mentioned. As soon as the child was born, the women were sent on their way, by very satisfied abortion protesters who had saved a life and then divested themselves of any responsibility for the child. I have a real problem with that.

 

[Big Don]

Tellner,
Like I said: Prove any of your idiotic and frankly, offensive assertions, i.e. punishment formations, etc, or admit you're as full of crap as a Christmas Turkey.

 

[tshadowchaser]

folks I know this is the study but lets try to keep to the topic of legal restrictions on abortion
if anyone has the numbers to go along with whatever study befor and after abortion laws lets see them
If anyone has the facts and can show where they got them on abortions in whatever country and the laws for or against abortion in that country lets see them
If you want to argue abortion take it to another thread maybe in horror stories or the bar and grill
if you want to call each other bigots take it elsewhere completly

 

[Cruentus]

I don't dispute anything you've said - but I do think that, if you are an abortion protester who talks a woman out of having an abortion, you have made yourself responsible for the child(ren) who will thus be born - and that responsibility extends until the child(ren) is/are adult(s). I personally know of several women who were talked out of aborting a child they did not want, were not emotionally or financially able to raise properly, who were housed by an abortion protester, given a baby shower, and sent on their way as soon as the baby they didn't want was born. Putting the child up for adoption to anyone - never mind the protester who talked the woman out of the abortion - was never mentioned. How to raise a child - wanted or not - was never mentioned. As soon as the child was born, the women were sent on their way, by very satisfied abortion protesters who had saved a life and then divested themselves of any responsibility for the child. I have a real problem with that.

I see what you are saying, but I frankly disagree with that. There is an element of personal responsibility here that I think that many of the "pro-choicer's" like to ignore. If a woman gets pregnant, it's her fault unless she was raped. And regardless of who's "fault" it is, really, it still remains her responsability. Unless there is a serious health issue (of the baby or mother) I view abortion as a cop out on that responsiblity, plain and simple. And it isn't nor shouldn't be a requirement for someone who offers some help to someone to now take care of them or take care of a baby. It's not anyone elses responsability but the mothers and the fathers, and the unfortunate circumstance is that fathers can cop out more easily because the baby is not inside of them. And a lot of times life is not fair, too.

So, I don't buy that. Furthermore, adoption and foster agencies have strict requirements in regards to placing children with families, so the notion that it would be so horrible to have to give the child up for adoption without knowing the adoptive parents isn't a big deal when one considers the alternative, in my opinion.

And I don't buy into the idea that abortion is a viable solution to problems of unwanted kids, either.

But, as I mentioned before, just because I don't buy into these arguments, that doesn't mean that I should support government or medical community control over the issue.

 

[Carol]

It's not anyone elses responsability but the mothers and the fathers, and the unfortunate circumstance is that fathers can cop out more easily because the baby is not inside of them.

Yup. I'm not a man basher, not in the least. I love men. But sadly, when the abortion debate is raised, there seem to be more men that criticize women for their actions than their are men criticising men for their actions. And personally, I think that is extremely misguided.

 

[michaeledward]

Several month ago, I tripped over this intersting article. It based on anecdotal evidence, which certainly does not qualify as statistically significant.
But, one of the axioms about a woman terminating a pregnancy, is that it does take place behind closed doors. Because of this, we on the other side of that closed doors, can project much of our bias and belief to what we imagine is going on, and what is motivating those goings on.

http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

Behind closed doors, we often find hypocrasy.

"The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion"
When the Anti-Choice Choose
By Joyce Arthur

Abortion is a highly personal decision that many women are sure they'll never have to think about until they're suddenly faced with an unexpected pregnancy. But this can happen to anyone, including women who are strongly anti-choice. So what does an anti-choice woman do when she experiences an unwanted pregnancy herself?

....

"I've had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, 'You're not going to tell them, are you!?' When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn't want this to interfere with it." (Physician, Texas)

...

"In 1973, after Roe v. Wade, abortion became legal but had to be performed in a hospital. That of course was changed later. For the first 'legal abortion day' I had scheduled five procedures. While scrubbing between cases, I was accosted by the Chief of the OB/Gyn service. He asked me, 'How many children are you going to kill today?' My response, out of anger, was a familiar vulgar retort. About three months later, this born-again Christian called me to explain that he was against abortion but his daughter was only a junior in high school and was too young to have a baby and he was also afraid that if she did have a baby she would not want to put it up for adoption. I told him he did not need to explain the situation to me. 'All I need to know', I said, 'is that SHE wants an abortion.' Two years later I performed a second abortion on her during her college break. She thanked me and pleaded, 'Please don't tell my dad, he is still anti-abortion.'" (Physician, Washington State)

The article, I believe, ends on a note that is hopeful. Hopeful toward some in society that need hope, at a time when they most need hope.

On occasion, an abortion turns out to be a momentous, life-affirming experience for an anti-choice woman. A doctor from a north-western state shared the following personal story with me:
"I was born into a very Catholic family, and was politically pro-life during college. After dating my first real boyfriend for three years, we broke up, and the day my boyfriend moved out, I discovered I was pregnant. It was an agonizing decision, and something I never thought I would do, but I decided an abortion was the only realistic option. Thanks to Planned Parenthood counseling, I worked through some very tough conflicts within myself. I had to learn that my decision was a loving one. That 'my god' was actually a loving and supportive god. And that men don't have to make this decision, only women do. That it is a very personal, individual decision. I had to own it. I became much more compassionate towards myself and others as a result of my experience. Two years later I began medical school. When it came time to choose a practice, an abortion clinic opportunity came up. In working there, I began to feel that this was my calling. Having been in my patients' shoes, and coming from an unforgiving background, I could honestly say to patients, 'I know how you feel.' Deciding to have an abortion was THE hardest decision I've ever made in my life. Yet it has brought me the greatest transformation, fulfillment, and now joy. I am a more loving person because of it, and a better doctor for having experienced it. I love the work that I do, and the opportunity to support women seeking to end an unwanted pregnancy. My patients and my work are life's gifts to me, and I think my compassion and support are my gifts in return."

 

[Makalakumu]

And that's the rub isn't it. People will find ways to have abortions no matter what. Even the people who scream the loudest against them. This begs the question, what is it about abortion that weaves its way into the human mind?

My thoughts on this are that abortion is the new infanticide. For 80,000 years, if a homo sapian couldn't take care of a baby, this often was the only option available, however unpleasent.

Knowing this, I would say that the urge to terminate unwanted pregnancies is hard wired into us all. If you can't take care of a child for whatever reason, will never go away, it will always be something that humans do.

Abortion is a human trait as much as any other trait we all share.

 

[crushing]

Yup. I'm not a man basher, not in the least. I love men. But sadly, when the abortion debate is raised, there seem to be more men that criticize women for their actions than their are men criticising men for their actions. And personally, I think that is extremely misguided.

I don't think it's necessarily criticism of women for their actions, but criticism of the system. Men have a lot of responsibility forced on them, but no rights depending on the woman's choice. If the woman chooses life, then he could be responsible for 18 years. If the woman chooses otherwise, he has no rights to the new life they have created. Usually rights and responsibility go hand in hand.

That being said, I think the most pro-abortion of people are also men. It's just that their politicking and counseling is done privately in the ears of their girlfriends.

 

[michaeledward]

That being said, I think the most pro-abortion of people are also men. It's just that their politicking and counseling is done privately in the ears of their girlfriends.

That is a claim that begs substantiation.

But, even if you do substantiate it, what you are saying is still that men make the decision for women.

Personally, I tend to think that women are completely capable of making a decision, all on their own.

 

[tellner]

Don, I know that facts and reason aren't any match for smug self satisfaction and self righteousness, but really. Reading a simple history book once in a while shouldn't be too difficult. I know you're offended by some of this, but it's quite simply true. You won't be convinced by anything I say. You've made it clear that you are going to believe what you want, and that's that. But because you ask...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/12/13/weinstein/index.html
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/berkowitz.php?articleid=6326
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/03/AR2005050301499.html
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/127799.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3942/is_200507/ai_n14685219
http://www.religioustolerance.org/relintolafa.htm
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/12/13/weinstein/index.html
http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review/2005/07/23/feldman/index.html

Now, as to just a few of the others...

The Opium Wars, involvement by the Church in the Klan and lynchings, the rights of women prior to the twentieth century, the mass murders of Jews, the Albigensians, the Waldenses, Protestants, Catholics, non-Christians and Orothodox by the Church? Those are all matters of simple undeniable fact. Women not owning property separate from their husbands, voting and the rest? The prevalence of prostitution in pre-20th century America? The demographic transition? The Church's role in all of these? If you can't crack a book, at least learn how to do a simple web search. These are all, every one of them, so completely parts of the public record that denying them is insane.

The Religious Right is against sexuality other than strictly prescribed within marriage and is hostile to contraception and women's rights? Listen to your own Ayatollahs like Dobson, Schlafly, Randall Terry, Robertson and Coulter. They say it every single day. Heck, look at who your Beloved Leader, the Commander Guy, the Decider is picking for to head up family planning, Susan Orr. Look at the record of his women's health commissioner.

Things aren't true because you like them. They aren't false because you find them offensive. They aren't idiocy because they wipe the self satisfied smirk off your face and challenge you.

What sort of evidence do you need?

Sorry, that's a stupid question.

There isn't any standard of proof that would satisfy you. Facts aren't facts if they make you uncomfortable, so there's no point throwing the pearls out for the swine.

 

[crushing]

That is a claim that begs substantiation.

But, even if you do substantiate it, what you are saying is still that men make the decision for women.

Personally, I tend to think that women are completely capable of making a decision, all on their own.

I see what you are trying to do there. Nice try.

I did not say women do not make the decision, nor did I say that they are incapable of making the decision.

 

[michaeledward]

I see what you are trying to do there. Nice try.

I did not say women do not make the decision, nor did I say that they are incapable of making the decision.

OK, then. What were you saying, when reconciled with this prior statement?

I think the most pro-abortion of people are also men. It's just that their politicking and counseling is done privately in the ears of their girlfriends.

If the women are making the decision, why do you mention an impact of a boyfriend/husband's 'pro-choice' "politicking and counseling'?

 

[Gordon Nore]

Yup. I'm not a man basher, not in the least. I love men. But sadly, when the abortion debate is raised, there seem to be more men that criticize women for their actions than their are men criticising men for their actions. And personally, I think that is extremely misguided.

Which is why I seldom appear in these rigorous online debates about abortion -- they tend to be male-dominated.

Shhh, ladies, the men are talking. Please refrain from making decisions about your own uteri until the facts are in.:idunno:

 

[Grenadier]

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Senior Moderator-