Heating up General. (Abortion)

[Amber Williams]

Ok Peeps! Listen up!
After talking with the mods/admins, we figured we'd try opening the floor to some of the more heavy-hitting conversation topics. You know...the ones that sometimes bring out the drama and the heated emotions.  The hope is that everyone here will be cool and mature about things...and if not...well consider this opening post the warning.

Seriously. Opinions will differ, heads may butt, but there best be no personal attacks or insinuation that just because the other side is not agreeing that they are wrong stupid-heads.  Be smart, stay cool, and keep in mind this is hopefully a thread of sharing ideas and concepts and not a "last man standing" battle to see who can outrant the other side.

Ok now.
--------------------------

Everyone knows I don't like chainletters.  They annoy me to no end...TRIPLY so if I have no clue whatsoever as to who the person sending them is.  It aggravates me when I am put on someone's friend list and the only reason I know this is because I get a chainletter telling me about how Bonzai Kitten is horrible and must be stopped.

So I open my mail...and I get this:

Month one
Mommy, I am only 8 inches long, but I have all my organs. I love
the sound of your voice. Every time I hear it, I wave my arms and legs. The sound of your heart beat is my favorite lullaby.

Month Two
Mommy, today I learned how to suck my thumb. If you could see me, you could definitely tell that I am a baby. I'm not big enough to survive outside my home though. It is so nice and warm in here.

Month Three
You know what Mommy, I'm a boy!! I hope that makes you happy. I always want you to be happy. I don't like it when you cry. You sound so sad. It makes me sad too, and I cry with you even though you can't hear me.

Month Four
Mommy, my hair is starting to grow. It is very short and fine, but I will have a lot of it. I spend a lot of my time exercising. I can turn my head and curl my fingers and toes, and stretch my arms and legs. I am becoming quite good at it too.

Month Five
You went to the doctor today. Mommy, he lied to you. He said that I'm not a baby. I am a baby Mommy, your baby. I think and feel. Mommy, what's abortion?

Month Six
I can hear that doctor again. I don't like him. He seems cold and heartless. Something is intruding my home. The doctor called it a needle. Mommy what is it? It burns! Please make him stop! I can't get away from it! Mommy! HELP me!

Month Seven
Mommy, I am okay. I am in Jesus's arms. He is holding me. He told me about abortion. Why didn't you want me Mommy?

Every Abortion Is Just . . .

One more heart that was stopped. Two more eyes that will never
see. Two more hands that will never touch. Two more legs that will never run. One more mouth that will never speak

If you're against abortion, post this

Ok. First off, I want to apologize to Pro-Life. Cause seriously...this is a terrible representation to start off from and already makes Pro-Life look like morbid individuals...much less incapable of math since I'm 90% sure that the fetus does not reach 8 inches in the first month alone.  I already hate the power-play where each side tries to bring to mind the most heart-string pulling stories and plights they can.  And yes, Pro-Choice can be just as guilty when they go into horrible scenarios about girls being raped and forced to back-alley. 

I think we can all agree no one likes abortion...and that there is likely more to the situation than each side trying to villainize the other.  So I guess the reason I'm posting is I'm curious as to what people here personally feel, why they feel it, and what they beleive an ideal solution would be that would benefit the most parties involved.

That and it was a really lame chainletter and I needed to share my pain.  PAAAAIN.

[RJ]

I've never really liked getting into the whole abortion debate. Maybe because I've never known someone who's been through that sort of thing. But there's always been one truth I've supported when it comes to kids-
There are some people who would make wonderful parents, but don't have kids; and then there are just some people who shouldn't have kids but have them anyway.

[Zedd]

I dont like talking about the whole abortion issuie as well...I mean its a womans choosie do what she wants not anyone else or for any relgious fantic to say..Horse is dead...And no seince beating onto that factor for those creepy church peoples...nuff said and oh yeah...Pro life makes me think though...Even though the go suck a cheetahs dick for I care...Leave those people alone bible welders! 

[Dakata]

Bah. I dunno what to think of abortion. I just don't want dumbass high school whores using it when they're too stupid/lazy to use birth control or somethin'.

Sadly, most of my femme-classmates think that it should be legal. And they give me weird looks when I say weird things that I usually say.

"Abortion doesn't make you unpregnant. It makes you the mother of a dead baby."

I'm such a bitch.

[Sunblink]

I'm not too surprised that such a chain letter was floating around... such a terrible, manipulative one, too (my apologies to pro-lifers out there). While I have no clue as to whether or not a fetus obtains sentient thought at a certain point in their life, or if they do at all, I do believe that it's up to the mother to do what she wants to her own body. There are some situations in which it may absolutely be necessary, as well, when the mother's life is endangered.

I used to be a very pro-life person, though, up until I saw some truck zooming around the neighborhood with pictures of dead babies plastered all over it. For the love of God, people...

~Keaton the Black Jackal

[Amber Williams]

It's one of those situations where I really feel bad for a lot of Pro-Life/Choice people because both sides do have their share of overzelous boogers to the point it sometimes feels like they are more about promoting a cause and getting attention rather than trying to work on a solution or want to find out what other possibilities are out there.

My biggest beef on Pro-Life is that many people like to really push the third-trimester or partial birth abortions when those particular cases are actually very uncommon (and in many cases are done for very particular reasons like medical complications or the fetus has actually died by natural means and they need to expell the body.)

Vice versa, my big beef on Pro-Choice is many people like to really push the rape/incest scenario...which is also a very uncommon thing in the general scheme of it. (and in many cases the actual reason are more societal and financial pressure than something severly traumatic.)

Really its usually a lot better to try to separate the content from many of the people who are pushing it.  Yeah, there might be a lot of bible-thumpers...but there might also be valid reasons for being Pro-Life being given by rational and intelligent people.  And there isn't anything wrong if your religion is an influence on your decision...thats kind of what religion is about.  It all boils down to how you use it and how you handle yourself.  And yeah...people who like to wave signs and yell at women going to the clinic aren't any better than people who slam someones religion because the person doesn't want to sign a petition they don't agree with.

[RJ]

I don't get some people and religion... I'm a Christian and all, but I'm at least a respectful one. If people want to go do something, it's their choice. I shouldn't push my religion onto them if they don't want it.

[Netami]

I move that everyone sticks to oral sex.

[Gabi]

Your instinct was right, Amber, the numbers are wrong. Both my parents are doctors who specialize in ultrasound diagnosis and I've worked as a secretary for them a few times. Not only do embrios (not yet fetuses) not have all their organs after just one month (they have a rather basic heart but that's about it), but the sexual organs don't develop until after the 4th month, and there are several other details that are wrong. In any case, I agree that it was tasteless.

Now on to the abortion topic. Personally, I have mixed feelings about it. I would agree with it when it's a matter of life or death for the mother (in which cases it is legal here). In other cases I don't like the idea. I think the baby deserves to live and if his/her parents can't look after him/her, they could at least try to give the baby to someone who can. But I know it's rarely as simple as it sounds. So I don't know, really. I just know I'll never do it myself unless my life depends on it.

[superluser]

Alas, the issue here is one of excluded middles.  Either the fetus is a living human being or it isn't.  It can't be 90% alive or 30% human.  For me, it's clearly alive.  Life is defined by the following criteria:

1.) Organization (cellular structure)
2.) Metabolism
3.) Growth
4.) Adaptation
5.) stimulus-response
6.) reproduction

A fetus/embryo/blastocyst/zygote:

1.) is organized into cells
2.) metabolizes things into energy
3.) grows
4.) adapts(1)
5.) responds to stimuli, such as attaching to the uterine wall
6.) reproduces(2)

It's clearly human; it has human DNA.  It's clearly a unique organism, since it has different DNA than its mother.

Ergo, it's a living human being.

This explains why I don't believe that abortion is right for me.

As to why I believe that abortion should be illegal, there is a legal principle that is commonly expressed as ``My right to express myself ends at my neighbor's nose.''  Since we've already established that the fetus/embryo/blastocyst/zygote is an independent living human being, it is deserving of the same protections against homicide as any other human.  Which means that unless you kill it trying to protect yourself, you're committing murder.

My cousin has a daughter who was born eight weeks premature (and doing great nowadays), so I'm a little bit biased about this.

As to the nutsos on both sides of the issue--yes, they're all nuts.  You've got the chauvinists, the eugenicists, the fundamentalist know-nothings, the zero population growth idiots...

They seem to think that forcing people to look at images of botched coathanger abortions or aborted fetuses are going to turn people to hteir point of view, rather than making the viewer think that the nutso is...well, a nutso.

We here in the US saw these strange folk on display during the Schiavo debate.  There's a debate to be had when you have a kid who can't express his own opinion, but when you have someone who clearly said what she wanted if she were ever in such a position, it's no longer a case of religion; it's a case of her free will.

In other cases I don't like the idea. I think the baby deserves to live and if his/her parents can't look after him/her, they could at least try to give the baby to someone who can.

We are getting to the point where we can actually transplant a fetus from one person to another.  I think that that would be an excellent method for getting rid of these debates.

(1) Physical sexual characteristics begin to develop very early on in response to hormones present.  This is not a stimulus-response, but rather an adaptation.  Even earlier, we can see adaptations such as implantations in the fallopian tubes, or even in the abdomen.

(2) Technically, this covers the cell division that causes growth.

[Faerie Alex]

My feeling is thus: If the unborn child isn't able to survive on its own yet (it's incapable of surviving without its mother), then it's the mother's decision what happens to it. If it could survive outside of the mother (eat, breathe, etc.), then killing it is wrong.

[Gabi]

Probably, superluser.

I'll have to argue against your points (1) and (2), though. Hormones come from inside, not from the exterior. And cell reproduction is not the same as the reproduction of the individual. But you can't say that anything that does not reproduce is not alive anyway. A fetus is likely to be able to reproduce eventually, but is too young and physically immature at that stage. In any case, all those points only prove a fetus is alive in the same way that moss is. And there are many species which are not organized into cells but are considered to be living (like bacteria).

Anyway, I've strayed from the topic. My apologies. Back to the topic... yes, transferring embrios from one womb to another (and fetuses if that's ever possible) would make things easier... for those who can afford it.

modelincard: so are you sying it's right to kill anyone who can't survive on his/her/its own? Because little children normally can't, nor can many sick or very old people.

[Faerie Alex]

Eh...Sorry, that's not quite what I meant.

More like this: Modern medicine (as far as I know) can only raise an babies outside of the womb after a certain point. Before that, they would need everything from the mother. To some extent then, the baby is part of its mother. After a child is born (what I think you mean by "little children") it would still need it's mother, but not in the same way. It might still take nourishment from the mother, it would likely seek guidance from its mother, but the mother isn't the only one who can now provide nourishment/care to the child. (I'm not saying that a child should be raised without its mother/birth mother, only could.) I suppose then that "on its own" was a bad choice of words. (Heck, I probably couldn't survive on my own yet.) Rather, could it be brought to maturity (for lack of a better term) outside of its mother.

[Gabi]

Ah, I understand what you mean now.

[Prof B Hunnydew]

My take on this is that both side are Hypercritics...

The Pro-lifer want the mother to have the child even if it is very badly deformed and would not survive without modern medicine...Yet, they cry out if you raise taxes to help the mother with medical bills and feeding their new kids or for better schools for them or reform adoption systems.  We have people going oversea to adopt, because the US system here is so broken, good people lose out and the kids still get to predators who are temperary Foster parents.

The Pro-choicer often ignores the fact that most adbortions are for a mistake in judgement on the woman part or the males.  One drunken night activities which a young woman regrets later, will end a life that is an inconvenance for her.  Responability of the both male and female is never questioned, and even the asking about this is frowned on.

 There was a time when an unimarried pregnant girl was a shame and looked down on her peers... Now, she is seen as courageous, and a role model?  Well, that was the normal in my teen years, it may have changed, since.  Maybe it has gotten worst, where a boy's maleness is measured by how many children, he has "forced"/tricked on girls.

Abortion/unwanted pregnancy is the result, but either side will look at the reasons why, or the real reason why?  The Right will blame the Media, and the Left will blame the lack of /faulty sexual education..

Abortion should be between the doctor, and the woman, she will have to live with the guilty of her child's death.  Society should look at itself and question why young women and men don't feel responible to the lives, they created...and hold them responible somehow.  This is too complex even for my short answer.

PBH    

[Manawolf]

Abortions are already out there, and trying to stop them is only going to mean that more people will take to the back alley and endanger their health, or they may chuck the kid in a dumpster soon after giving birth, when it can actually feel pain.

What I'm trying to say is, once you give people something, you can't just take it away.  Some are still going to want it, and will be willing to do what they can to get it.

[ITOS]

I don't get some people and religion... I'm a Christian and all, but I'm at least a respectful one. If people want to go do something, it's their choice. I shouldn't push my religion onto them if they don't want it.

But then you have to ask yourself: What is religion and what is common sense? Killing is prohibited by the bible and thus a religious law. At the same time it's a very common law that many people follow regardless of religion.

When it comes to abortion, I think the real question is what you consider to be human life and if it is right to kill someone in order to prevent that person from suffering for a life time. The later links back a bit to the first when you consider how we handle termination of nonhuman life.

[Jim Halisstrad]

I move that everyone sticks to oral sex.

There is so much WIN in this statement.


Personally my view on abortion is since I lack the necessary equipment to give birth that means I am not qualified to try and push my opinion on others. 
That being said (Here is my opinion ), unless the baby is going to be mentally retarded, unable to live past a few years, or stands a good chance to kill the mother when it is born I would prefer that the woman has the child.  Being adopted might not be the best life but at least it's a life.  One of my good friends was adopted, I'm pretty glad they didn't give him the surgical coat hanger.

But, no parts, no 1000 prolife bumper stickers on the back of my car.

[thegayhare]

Wow
I'm going to differ from some folks I like on this one

My personal feelins
I don't like abortion
however since it's highly unlikely I'll ever get some one pregnent (that would realy be a suprise) I feel it should be legal because it's not my place to judge

My feelings on abortion is that it should be Safe, Legal, and Rare.

It should not be used as an alternitive to birthcontrol,  but if because of what ever reasons the mother can't care for the child the choice is here.

proper sexual education is whats needed I think,  comprehensive education,  Abstenance my be the best form od birth control but abstanence only programs are a failer (they on average delay the first sexual encounter by a year or two,  but these kids are much more likely to use no form of cnraceptive at all).  Teach them everything, and there will be far less need for this service.

I'm tempted to post a link to an intereting page I've come across

[Aridas]

You know, birth control does sometimes fail... What then?

[Jim Halisstrad]

Baby Sandwiches.

[Kenji]

Heh... I laugh at that e-mail. Since unborns can't hear anything till month 3...

Anyways, my whole view on it is that, I guess, it shouldn't be a debate if it's before the point that the brain has formed. Cause until then, I just think of it as a little bunch of fluids wrapped up in a very soft package, attached to a tube.

In most cases I would assume that the person would make the choice of yay or nay before that happens anyways.
All in all, though, I can't disagree with the pro-choice thing. This is going to sound harsh to some, but there's so many people around now, there could stand to be less babies being born. I mean, there's tons of overfilled orphanages as is. Is it really better that a new baby is born into a family that would possibly ditch it, not love it, or inadvertantly raise it in horrible conditions? I say that part cause it's usually the lower income classes that tend to do this. At least form what I've seen. Most higher classes would be able to afford a new baby no problem, and wouldn't mind.

Anyways, I already forgot what I was typing, so I'm out.

[Prof B Hunnydew]

First Jim....Ewww... And if you say "MMMMmm Kitten Stew"  I'll shoot you.

My feelings on abortion is that it should be Safe, Legal, and Rare.

It should not be used as an alternitive to birthcontrol,  but if because of what ever reasons the mother can't care for the child the choice is here.

proper sexual education is whats needed I think,  comprehensive education,  Abstenance my be the best form od birth control but abstanence only programs are a failer (they on average delay the first sexual encounter by a year or two,  but these kids are much more likely to use no form of cnraceptive at all).  Teach them everything, and there will be far less need for this service.

I was trying to state the two (extreme) views over this issue, I will agree with you for the most part TGH... But this also touches on the moral issues of ourselves and our respect for ourselves and others..  Sexual Education must teach that respect, and it should also show the consequencies of our sexual adventures even if it don't lead to pregnancy or a STD.

Truth is always more effective than scare tactics...Because all caution is often thrown into the wind, once the Scare is overcome or proven false

PBH

[superluser]

(I'd do my typical quote thing, but I'm not)

Kenji, strictly speaking, the brain isn't fully formed until age 3 or so.  Does that mean that we should allow infanticide until age 3?  Some of the Greeks (including Plato) thought so.

Wow, that comes across as spiteful.  It wasn't meant that way.  My question is more one of, ``where in the continuum of brain formation does the brain come into existence?''

PBH's comments about sex ed and health infrastructure are well taken, as well.  I'm not too sure about national health care as a general principle, but I do know that we in the US have to do something to fix it.

Finally, in a 2004 study (*), 14% of of abortive mothers surveyed said that one of the reasons that they were having an abortion was that their partners wanted them to, and 6% said that their parents wanted them to.

I'm also unsure of what sort of correlation there is between income and abortion, but it looks like 57% of the women having abortions are severely impoverished. (+)

I think this severely undermines the concept that this is a woman's right to choose.

(*)Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives
    Lawrence B. Finer; Lori F. Frohwirth; Lindsay A. Dauphinee; Susheela Singh; Ann M. Moore 
    Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, Vol. 37, No. 3. (Sep., 2005), pp. 110-118.
(+)Patterns in the Socioeconomic Characteristics of Women Obtaining Abortions in 2000-2001
    Rachel K. Jones; Jacqueline E. Darroch; Stanley K. Henshaw
    Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, Vol. 34, No. 5. (Sep. - Oct., 2002), pp. 226-235. 

Baby Sandwiches.

[Kenji]

(I'd do my typical quote thing, but I'm not)

Kenji, strictly speaking, the brain isn't fully formed until age 3 or so.  Does that mean that we should allow infanticide until age 3?  Some of the Greeks (including Plato) thought so.

I didn't say anything about being fully formed. But personally speaking, I don't see something as "alive" unless it has a brain and a heart.
Well... fauna, speaking. Obviously plants are a different story.

[EvilIguana966]

The abortion debate tends to annoy me insofar as it becomes a debate about "a woman's right to choose".  The key issue in contention is not whether a woman has the right to control her own body, it is whether the developing embryo has rights of its own that supersede the parent's.  Nobody is seriously contending that we should be able to tell a person they cannot have a cancerous growth excised because it is a living "thing", nor are many people seriously contending that a newborn child can be killed and disposed of at the adult's leisure.  The honest abortion debate centers around which of those situations more accurately describes a woman carrying a child at any given stage of the pregnancy.

Now on to the meat of the argument, whether or not an embryo is distinct person or simply a part of the mother's body.  Genetically, an embryo is not the same person as the mom.  It has it's own unique set of genetic code, distinct from any  other human being on the planet (other than an identical twin), making it, in that respect, it's own person.  It is also undeniably a member of the human species, even if it is at a very early stage in its life.  And it will eventually, barring extreme circumstances, grow and develop into what we easily recognize as a human being.  On the other hand, it is inside of a woman and for a significant portion of the pregnancy it cannot survive without the help of that woman. 

I can understand people who support abortion on an early term fetus, but I cannot say the same thing for perfectly viable late term babies.  The further into viability the child progresses, the harder it is to justify an abortion.  Is it really possible to say with a straight face that killing a newborn child a minute after it's been delivered is murder, but that partially delivering that same child then killing it before the law recognizes it as a person is morally acceptable?  I'd argue not.  As such, I support a near total ban on partial birth abortion.  The procedure is barbaric and you would be hard pressed to find even a hypothetical case where it is a medical necessity, much less any real world example of it being done as such.  What you have with a partial birth abortion is a procedure that combines all the risks of going through a long pregnancy and delivering a child with the death of a viable fetus.  Its sole purpose seems to be allowing someone who doesn't want a kid to delay the decision as long as possible. 

On the subject of early term abortions, debate is much more meaningful.  Carrying a child to term has it's risks, as does delivering, and obviously a child is a very big commitment that a lot of pregnant women aren't ready for.  Incest, Rape, and the health of the mother are all generally accepted as circumstances that may make abortion the right choice.  However, most pro-lifers, myself included, will concede these.  How common they are proportionally among all abortions is an issue, but not a central one.  If we concede those cases as acceptable then we need to discuss the remaining, however common they may be.  There are things to consider besides the child's/fetus's life.  First off, just as there are medical consequences of pregnancy and delivery, there are negative medical consequences of abortions.   Drugs always have side effects and they vary among patients, surgical procedures can go bad, and the body will not always react predictably to being messed with in ways not found in nature.  Abortions are not completely safe, and for some people they may be more dangerous than delivering a child.  There are also noted negative psychological side effects to aborting a child, unsurprising given how much the mind and body invest in creating and nurturing a child.  Evolution has made women of our species especially inclined to care about their children, frequently in ways they don't even realize.  This makes a lot of biological sense, given how relatively few we have, how helpless they are at birth, and how dependent they are on nurturing to become functional adults. 

I have also read reports that a not insignificant portion of mothers who have abortions do it at the urging of their partners and against their own instincts.  And of course you have rapists, who go beyond simple urging when it comes to seeing that their crimes leave no evidence.  The amount of anonymity guaranteed to people seeking abortions has greatly helped rapists in hiding their deeds.  I perfectly understand that someone who has been raped would not want to have a child who is the product of that deed, and they should not be forced to.  What is surprising is how many women would willingly carry that child to full term in spite of all that.  There really is a lot more at stake than just an errant pile of cells. 

Something else to consider.  Assume for a moment that an early term fetus can be definitively considered not to be a person.  Are they possibly something else, with less value than a person but more value than, say, a cancerous lump?  We certainly revile people who murder humans the most, but we don't just ignore crimes against other creatures.  Do you not have negative feelings about someone who abuses or kills their dog?  I know I do.  What about someone who, while doing nothing technically illegal, goes out of his way to kill small animals for no purpose beyond his own cruel satisfaction?  If aborting a child in an early stage of development is not killing a person, is it perhaps equivalent to needlessly killing an animal a bit lower on the evolutionary ladder?  Think about it.

The last thing to consider regarding abortions is how necessary a lot of them really are in counteracting pregnancy.  It is incredibly easy not to become pregnant, all you have to do is not have sex.  Now, admittedly, the urge to go ahead and have sex is strong, but people have the ability to suppress that urge and to satisfy it in a responsible manner.  The ease of acquiring an abortion and doing it anonymously can not be a positive factor in convincing people to behave more responsibly.  I think that if you were to magically remove abortion from the table, a lot of (but not all) people would behave a bit more responsibly, and the majority of those who do have a child they aren't prepared for would find good adoptive parents for it.  I also think that in general it is the men who would be the ones bearing the brunt of such a change.  Men have a bigger stake in the abortion debate than you may think. 

So basically, I am almost categorically against allowing any late term abortions, leaving a tiny bit of wiggle room for truly extreme circumstances.  Early to mid term abortions are ambiguous enough that some restrictions ought to be enacted, but a total ban is not something that I could likely support at this time.  However, legality aside, I still instinctively feel that there is something not quite right about aborting your unborn child at any point along the way.  Anything that could become a person like you or I with enough time and effort has to have some value beyond what meets the eye. 

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

While I agree with much of what you've said, EI, or at least grant you the courage of your convictions, I disagree with this slice:

I think that if you were to magically remove abortion from the table, a lot of (but not all) people would behave a bit more responsibly, and the majority of those who do have a child they aren't prepared for would find good adoptive parents for it.

I don't think any of them would. People are incredibly, surprisingly, and short-sightedly stupid. It's a fact of life. Take away the option, and most of the stupid ones will reproduce, because they're not bright enough to not stick tab A in slot B.

There's value there, there's reasons for and against, but, when you get right down to it, people will do stupid things. "Any stupid fsck can have a baby, and usually does."

[thegayhare]

You know, birth control does sometimes fail... What then?

Like I said Abstenance is the only 100 percent effective meathod, and while modern birthcontrol isn't fool proof it's a damn sight better then nothing at all which, do to the mis information thats often used in abstinance only programs, is whats left to those kids when they do begin exploring there sexuality

In the caseswhere birth control fails abortion, and adoption should still be an option if the woman feels they can not care for the baby. 

I was trying to state the two (extreme) views over this issue, I will agree with you for the most part TGH... But this also touches on the moral issues of ourselves and our respect for ourselves and others..  Sexual Education must teach that respect, and it should also show the consequencies of our sexual adventures even if it don't lead to pregnancy or a STD.

Truth is always more effective than scare tactics...Because all caution is often thrown into the wind, once the Scare is overcome or proven false

Ohh Of course thats part of  what I mean by a comprensive sexual education hon

[Zedd]

Anti-Abortions suck no privacy sucks...Nuff said..No more to be said about it...

[Prof B Hunnydew]

While I agree with much of what you've said, EI, or at least grant you the courage of your convictions, I disagree with this slice:

I think that if you were to magically remove abortion from the table, a lot of (but not all) people would behave a bit more responsibly, and the majority of those who do have a child they aren't prepared for would find good adoptive parents for it.

I don't think any of them would. People are incredibly, surprisingly, and short-sightedly stupid. It's a fact of life. Take away the option, and most of the stupid ones will reproduce, because they're not bright enough to not stick tab A in slot B.

There's value there, there's reasons for and against, but, when you get right down to it, people will do stupid things. "Any stupid fsck can have a baby, and usually does."

I am with you on this, Ilearch... The Right would like us to believe that abortion has not been around for centuries... It is only that modern medical science makes it more survivable for the mother. "Ladies" in the past often had many ways to end unwanted pregnancy that more often than not led to her death.  Or the unwanted child was killed after birth or spirited away somewhere.

And who says the good parents can be found for the waif, or the woman will not be change her mind at the last minute, and try to make it with the child without support from the father or family, and ends up poorer and worst mother because the stresses, she had to face alone with her child.  Or that the State won't let the adoption to go through, as the dad or the grandparents fight for the child which may take years, as the kid sits or moves from froster home to home.

Now, third term abortions are really terrible, especially since with the advances in pre-mie care.  It is a Prochoice mistake to try and defend it.  Mid term abortion should be very rare and only in the cases of medical emergencies.  Lastly first term abortion should be thought of on a case by case bases.

 Until the father can be know by DNA early on, and he wages automatic deducted to support the child, and the mother's wages also deducted if she is not raising the child.  Then people will not think about the consequencies for getting drunk or high and getting knock up and having children.  If it is sad but you have to hold a few feet to the fire, before the stupid/lazy take charge of their own lives and bodies... [And the really stupid will always never believe that they will be caught/it will happen to them.]

PBH