j8ear

As long as you think so. Not even the courtesy to define what exactly was nailed, huh?

Bonbon sanctimoniousness indeed.

I expected so much more then hyperbole and platitudes. You really are nothing more then repetion of false "facts" in the hopes that your audience will begin to believe you.

Best of luck in all future endeavors.

It's ashame you couldn't continue to discuss ABORTION...I enjoyed pointing out your folly. Tumor removal and all ;-)

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

docbungle

As far as the abortion issue, of course there should be compromise. The only reason nothing is ever accomplished is because both sides refuse to compromise. Kind of like war. No compromise=no progress and/or alienation.

__________________
Bad Luck City

Locobot

I don't feel any sort of compromise is in order. Why should the majority of the people compromise their reproductive rights to apease the religious belief of a minority? Only one side here seeks to take freedoms away.

cellophanedeity

I responded "Female: I agree close to 100% with the Democrat platform."

Firstly, I don't tend to consider the fetus a baby until third trimester. I don't agree with third trimester abortions, unless having the child will seriously harm the mother physically. After six months, you ought to have made your decision and gone to the clinic. I know it may seem trivial to place a "month of life" upon the fetus, but I do believe that there must be a time when the pregnant woman must take 100% responsibility for the child.

With this, I am not necissarily saying that the third trimester is when the fetus suddenly becomes a Person, but it seems like a good cut off date for abortions. (especially since third trimester abortions are also quite a bit more dangerous for the woman as well)

I disagree with the "potential" aguments, ie. "The fetus holds so much potential! What if you're aborting a nobel prize winner!" I got this one from a female anti-choice friend of mine. I reasoned with her (to no avail) that each time she menstrates, she's technically passing up potential. She has half of the beginnings of a Person! She, of course, didn't take this well.

I don't like the idea of abortions. I really don't, and I doubt most people do. But as a woman, I want the choice. I want to know that if I end up with an unwanted pregnancy, that I have the choice of getting rid of the fetus safely. I figure that seeing as the fetus is inside of my body, it is a part of me for those first nine months. I do with myself what I see best, and I believe each woman deserves this right.

Oh, and liquidlight, I don't know about where you are, but from what I've learned in my training for sex-ed counselling that all women who are going to have an abortion in Toronto go through a process to determine their psychological health and also to see if they are having the abortion for themselves or for someone else. These women are also counselled on methods of birth control, and are offered group and personal counselling after the abortion to make sure that they are getting through okay.

alansmithee

My main problem with current abortion laws is that they unfairly discriminate against men. A woman has all the power-she chooses if a man is tied down for the rest of his life with an unwanted child or if a child he would gladly raise gets killed. I think that men should have access to some sort of abortion where they can deny their paternity and not have any obligation. It would be irrevocable, but that would really help end the imbalance of power currently held over the fate of children. Otherwise, I have some religious objections to abortion and I also don't like the fact that it allows people not to have to deal with the concequences of their actions, but honestly anything that cuts down on the number of people in the world is OK by me. IF some woman wants to kill her kid, it doesn't affect me so I say go for it.

I just really wish that liberals would get away from the euphamisms and just be honest-they are pro-murder in some cases. They aren't pro-choice, they are anti-life. It's just that won't sell as many bumper stickers. It's not a choice issue, and if they really didn't have any problem with abortion they wouldn't frame the issue that way.

astrahl

A woman has all the power because she is the one who has to deal with the permanent biological changes that come with pregnancy or abortion, not you.

And abortion doesn't allow "people" to deal with the consequences of their actions. NO, what you mean is that it doesn't allow <i>women</i> to deal with the consequences of their actions. How convenient that none of you are holding men to that high standard.

A man can go around impregnating women - he walks away, she has an abortion - everybody is okay with him - just a youthful transgression. A woman makes a mistake, FORCE her to carry the kid, it was HER mistake, put HER through the trauma and forever-life-changing event of pregnancy and birth. Make her accountable. What kind of sick bastard would want to force a 14 or 15 year old girl to carry a child just to teach her a lesson?!?

And I don't care what kind of education you have in reproductive biology, a concieved zygote is no more an autonomous human with rights that supercede its host than a sample of cheek cells from my mouth.

__________________
Maybe it was over when she chucked me out the Rover at full speed.
Maybe Maybe...
~a-Ha

roachboy

insofar as compromise on this is concerned, have a look at the pattern of posts above:

conservatives operate within their particular discursive frame..it seems that if they focus on the accusation "murder" shrieked early and often, the complexity of the question can be erased. because it works for them in that way. the agency of women, their control over their bodies, is not an issue for the right.

MURDER! MURDER! (words usually thrown about by folk who also support bush's colonial war--which is arguably illegal--across which every single death is arguably murder--no problem--not with murder as such)

these accuations are usually followed by my favorite move, which a friend refers to a "wave the fetus."

why?

because the opponents of abortion know that if they even acknowledge the other frame of reference, they loose. they cannot argue their case on across the question of the right of women to control what happens to thier bodies. the best they can do is that it "discriminates against men" which is of course absurd, as astrahl points out above more eloquently than i could.

this "discrimination against men" thing is itself yet another example of the reductio ad absurdium of arguments about discrimination that the right indulges in constantly--on questions of affirmative action (echoing petit bourgeois arguments against reconstruction, a great lineage) for example--the ridiculous legacy of the bakke decision. why this argument? because if they acknowledge the opposition, their frame of reference on this, they loose. same thing with the gay marriage question, which is obviously one of equal protection--but on these grounds, the right would loose, so it is for them a "moral" issue.

a sorry state of affairs.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

lurkette

What I would like to see is more emphasis on pregnancy prevention - education, access to birth control, etc. - and therefore fewer abortions. I don't think the Republicans can have it both ways - insisting on flawed "abstinence only" sex "education" that results in more pregnancies than other comprehensive education programs, and then turn around and demand that nobody can have an abortion. If they want to stick their head in the ideological sand and pretend that it'll work to just wish people wouldn't have unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancies because it's bad bad bad, fine; but at some point they are going to have to accept the reality of the situation and look for what works to accomplish their end goal - reducing the number of abortions - in the Real World (where you have to worry about silly little things like people's rights) and not in Jesus LaLa Land.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

lurkette

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

samcol

I don't buy that for a minute. The man is every bit as responsible for the child as the women is. You're the one who's not holding men to the high standard by saying they have no responsibility in the pregnancy or raising the child. You can't have it both ways, either they are responsible and have a say, or they do not. Maybe women should start looking for a man who wants to get married and raise a family instead of someone who's just looking for sex. I almost get the sense from your post that you hooked up with a dead beat and now have some kind of hatred for men period.

It takes two for the pregnancy to happen. Likewise, both parents have the duty to raise the child.

filtherton

I think what she's saying is that men aren't biologically forced to carry a child to term. When it comes to creating a child a man just has to point his semen in the right direction. I can potentially knock up a couple of women in a single day and even though i'd be douche bag in doing so, more scorn would probably be put upon any woman who aborted one of my zygotes than myself. The people who want to criminalize abortion could care less if men are behaving responsibly in terms of procreation. If they gave a shit about it you could bet they'd be trying to find a way to criminalize absentee fatherhood. They aren't, they don't.

Maybe women should start looking for men who want to get married and raise a family, but not all of them have been blessed, as you obviously have, with relationships that never fail with people who never misrepresent themselves or change their minds. I find your perspective wholly unrealistic. People have premarital sex. Despite how you come across, you've probably had premarital sex. Sometimes you can be in a committed relationship, get pregnant, and still end up a single parent. Finding a man who wants to get married and have children can also be the same thing as finding a man who for whatever reason is completely incapable of being anything that resembles a good father. Don't call me a man hater either, because i am a man, and even if i did hate them it'd be beside the point.

j8ear

rhetoric moderated.

I am here to tell you that my daughter was born in the second trimester, and I can assure that she was a "child" or "baby" at the time.

rhetoric moderated.

rhetoric moderated.

Here here...Lurkette, my old nemesis...you rock. And you rock hard.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

alansmithee

When you get by all the anti-Christian, anti-conservative rhetoric I essentially agree with you. There should me more emphasis on pregnancy prevention, and educating people on ways of preventing pregnancy. But for the last 10 years (at least) I don't think that there has been any shortage of information about ways to prevent pregnancy.



That's because it's already criminal. Many people are prosecutued yearly for being deadbeat dads. Many local news stations (including two near where I live) have taken to showing photos and amounts owed for people who have been lax and have warrants for child support.

I'm not going to be foolish enough to think that people will stop having premarital sex. But there are many ways to have premarital sex and not get pregnant. People who have premarital sex and get pregnant are extremely stupid or grossly irresponsible.

astrahl

I am saying that when a pregnancy occurs and the woman doesn't want it, it was implied earlier that she should go through with the pregnancy as a lesson about dealing with the consequences her actions. So the guy shells out some money, BIG-FRICKEN-DEAL! The WOMAN is the one who goes through nine months of having her body hijacked and then the <i>lovely</i> process of birth.

Those biological changes are permanent and are not minor. So the guy "learns his lesson" by paying some child support?!? I hardly call that a fair reckoning for the men who contribute to the problem.

I think you fail to take the biological toll of pregnancy into account when you are discussing you opinion on abortion and judgement. To be forced to carry a pregnancy to term is having somebody force their will on your body and THAT is the same imposition as rape.

My buttons get pushed when people think it is okay to punish a woman for her mistake by forcing her body into servitude while the man involved gets off (no pun intended) without any REAL consequences. Even if you could devise a punishment for the men involved, it wouldn't make the forced pregnancy any less vile and disgusting.

And, if you don't mind me saying, you don't appear to be very sharp in deducing my circumstances if that is why you think I have this opinion. I don't have a hatred for men, I've never experienced a so-called "dead-beat;" I think men are wonderful. That is why I married one.

Reproductive rights are very important to me because I am a woman, but I am first a human being. A human being with a brain and individual rights and it is arrogant of you to think that you should have any say about what I do to and with my body, ever. If I want to cut off my finger, you don't have a say; if I want to shave my head and drink abscinth, you don't have a say; if I want to abort a pregnancy, you don't have a say. You are welcome to an opinion, but that is where your rights stop. You cannot ethically impose a law that violates a person's individual rights to their own body.

You may want to go on and on about the sanctity of life and spout all the half-truths and propaganda the pro-birth yahoos push, but in considering this issue please understand that I have taken into account, not only my own personal opinion, but also the biology and ethics of abortion. I may be wrong. As a scientist I must admit to the possibility. And perhaps when the karma comes back to me, I may see that I WAS wrong. But until then, I would rather err on the side of the people already walking the planet than on the side of a "possible/potential, may-perhaps person."

__________________
Maybe it was over when she chucked me out the Rover at full speed.
Maybe Maybe...
~a-Ha

alansmithee

You never really deal with the inequality present. You just repeatedly state what a woman goes through. If women can have a dodge, so should men, they are nearly as effected as women. If you don't think child support is a big deal, go ahead and take 33% of your gross paycheck, and just send it away for the next 18 years. That is a REAL concequence.

Me personally, I would gladly trade 9 months of a rapidly growing tumor and one or two days of being drugged out of my mind/in pain for 33% more earnings.


I don't think this was directed at me, but I will say that judging by the above posts you don't have much respect for fatherhood, or a man's contribution to the creation of a child.

If what you want to do to your body is against society's best intrests a law can certainly be passed that limits that action.

And you can go on spouting the euphamisms, lies, and propaganda of the pro-death nuts, but all it's doing is skirting the issue, and not addressing it.

astrahl

Fatherhood is a beautiful thing, I'm sure, but when it comes to this issue, we are talking about the rights of a woman to be in control of her own body and that has nothing to do with fatherhood.

And the issue is...you think you should have a say about what I do with and to my own body, right?

__________________
Maybe it was over when she chucked me out the Rover at full speed.
Maybe Maybe...
~a-Ha

FoolThemAll

Sure we can.

A woman normally has control over what happens to her body (excluding harming herself in certain situations, use of illicit drugs for example). But when there's another being relying on her for life support, it changes. A mountain climber shouldn't cut his rope to the climber below him on the basis that it's his rope, and a mother shouldn't cut life support on the basis that it's her body. (Not a great analogy, I know, but there is no good analogy for it.) It's an unfortunate fact in unwanted pregnancies - and especially in those unwanted pregnancies resulting from rape - that a human being is suddenly physically dependent on another human being. But once that unfortunate situation becomes reality, one shouldn't be able to remove that system of life support merely on the basis that "it's part of my body, my property, and I can do what I want with it, it's not relevant if someone's depending on it". Imagine if hospitals took that attitude with their artificial life support systems. No, that would never happen.

"Discriminates against men" is most certainly not the best we can come up with. You were either being ignorant or dishonest when you typed that.

For what it's worth, I've heard 100% pro-choicers agree with the "discriminates against men" argument and hold to the position that men should have both no say in an abortion and no obligation to pay child support. I'd take the complete opposite of that position, but the argument itself doesn't interest me much.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

Disk_Pusher

alansmithee and samcol:

As a woman, I agree with you. I believe that pregnancy is a joint endevour - you can't get pregnant without a male, and regardless of who acts as the portable incubator the baby is BOTH people. I am 6 months pregnant right now. Simply because I have what feels like an acrobat in my gut, should I have more rights over it's life? No. It is a 50-50 genetic split, and I believe that males should have a say in the child's life or death.

Yes, pregnancy is difficult, and birth is hell. The more I read about it, the more terrified I become of this August when I'll be giving birth. But that doesn't change the facts. This is as much my child and his, and simply because I have to endure 9 months of gestation doesn't negate his rights as a father. We had our conversation about abortion. We checked out the clinics, got the options when we had time. We decided to keep our child anyway. And yes, I still consider myself VERY pro-choice. Why? Because I had a choice, and every mother deserves to have that choice. Every father deserves the right to be involved in that choice if he wants to be as well.

I hate to say it, but regardless of even if abortions are made illegal again, they will still happen. Women will have their guts torn out by backalley "doctors", and some will die miserable deaths simply because other people chose to deny them propper medical care. You tell me, what's a greater strain on society - thousands of abandoned children, mutilated women, and families pushed to the psychological and financial breaking point because of an unplanned birth, or Planned Parenthood?

Yes, birth control and education are critical to the process. But guess what Planned Parenthood does? Just that. But they go a step further - they offer choice. There is no going back once you are pregnant if birth control and education are your only choices, and that's a disservice to the society that will have to absorb these unwanted children, or have to foot the medical bills of women in the hospital after botched back alley abortions.

I apologize to those I have offended - I know there is no way to discuss this issue without hurting someone, and for that, I am sorry.

~Liz

hannukah harry

politically speaking, it doesn't do the right much good to push sex education and pregnancy prevention. i read an article (print, not web) that claimed the number of abortions rose starting about 2 years after bush took office and started his abstinence only education policies. now, there could be two reasons for that that i can think of...

1) economy went down the crapper... people who lost jobs or were making less money/unsure of their employment future chose to put off having the child in the uncertian financial times. rather than having a child they could not afford to raise they had the abortion.

2) lack of good sex ed -> higher teen pregnancy -> more abortions.

so if it was #2, it's the prefect scenario for the right. they've got higher abortion numbers to further push their abstinence only education and they can rail against abortion citing the higher numbers and the need to get make abortions illegal. both of these are things that the rights religous base highly support. it seems pretty win-win for them politically.

if the abstinence only education is causing the higher abortion rates, it's almost like an internal viscious circle.

/what do y'all think?

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer