Abortion

If you don't mind CK, I'll pause on that a while. The other discussion my possibly bring something to bear on that issue. I'm trying to get my landing craft onto Normandys pro-abortion, blood soaked beaches. I'll leave the stormin' of Berlin 'til later.(reference: World War II, Allied Normandy landings June 1944, Cited in "Why Hitler didn't take precautions" by Sean O'Blanchard )I gathered it from nearly my first post CK that I gotta be careful of you. Maybe I got it wrong but your comin' across as bit of an 'oul lurker you know. A couple of folk get chatting and get a feel for each others styles and form some unspoken rules of engagement. Then you come in from left field, Holmes-like, with a "Ve haf vays of maykink you gif us your sourzes" number. Saying things like "this is how its done here", threatening to 'grass me up' and force me to fuck around until I figure that name, rank and serial number is all I gotta give in the first place.Like, if folk (me for instance) are exposing themselves repeatedly to counter arguement and you sit there sniper-like picking off any grunt-like comment that happens to stray into the kill-zone you can hardly expect me to take me up on your offer and expose my self to continuous headshots. Can you?

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

This is awful close to saying "Those sluts are being punished for their behavior." My main problem with the abortion debate is that the pro-life side always seems to fall back to a possition of blame.It seems like they are hell bent on punishing sexually active women for their "immoral behavior".I agree that these people SHOULD be using condoms, but when we're talking about a 15 year old girl and her 15 year old boyfriend, "responsibility" is kind of abstract.Additionally, the same people arguing pro-life are the same people arguing AGAINST sex education in schools. They want abstenence only as the ciriculum. How are these kids supposed to learn about proper use of birth control / available methods? They aren't going to get that information from their teachers or their parents.

Nice one Nuggin! I was getting bogged down under enemy self-centred-philosophy-masquerading-as-humanitarianism fire. This will sure take the heat off me!p.s. This is WWII. We don't use the walk upright across the battelfield, line abreast tactic anymore.(cut to the scene where iano scrambles to distance himself from incoming directed at Nuggin )

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

I'm really confused by all the WWII references.Am I Italy in this scenaro? Or the Swiss?I think the people who don't want to get pregnant and aren't using birth control should have abortions, cuz I sure don't want them raising another generation of like minded idiots.I think the argument of "when is a life a life" is an impossible one to answer. Conception vs 1st trimester vs birth - all arguments have merit, and, so long as the person arguing them is internally consistant, I'm not going to try to dissuade them.I think the abortion argument should be about practicality. The number I've heard is 1,000,000 US abortions a year.The majority of those kids would be born into underprivledged situations.People say, "What about adoption?" Got news for you, white babies get adopted. What percentage of the 1 million are minority? 1/5? 1/3? 1/2? No idea whatsoever, but I know that 200,000 new unadopted children in the orphanages would pretty much destroy that system

They are not being punished for their behavior. What is happening is what happens in every arena in life. There are consequences for choosing particular actions. Abortion is an attempt to escape from under those consequences. And it is understandable. We are human.When a drunk driver runs after hitting, he is trying to avoid the consequences of his actions. He isn't evil - he's just doing what we would all like to be able to do. Most of us understand though, that we have chosen and must face the consequences - no matter where they may lead.(Not for CK/Holmes eyes)
M.Scott Peck in his bestselling book "The Road Less Travelled" made the point that it was the desire to avoid of the consequences of our actions that leads to neurosis. Facing the consequences has strengthening tendencies for people. People grow when they face adversity. People wilt when they shrink back from it and chose the 'easier' option ( I don't say abortion is easy - I know people for whom it has been traumatic. It's just less difficult than the other option. Which is why it is chosen in so many cases)

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

quote:

---

Should the woman who really wants a boy instead of a girl as a lifestyle choice, be permitted to allow her welfare to supercede the small (your philosophy) chances that it's a person she is killing?

---

Since the chances that the fetus is a person are so small as to be almost zero, I would say the answer is "yes".I was told in college that everytime you turn off your stereo in the middle of a song, an angel dies. Well, I think that the chances of that being true are so small that my convenience in not waiting for a song to end outweigh the very, very miniscule chance that an angel will die.

Having read some of what you say I think your a WWI kraut. On the wrong side but not as mechanized in your warfare as your WWII Blitzkrieg komrades here. I'm surprised there ain't a withering hail of machine gun fire coming your direction. Probably because the good guys are outnumbered 4:1 (see Suggestions & Questions). I'm calling in an airstrike on this one. Any calvary around here RAF/Luftwaffe it don't matter My childhood could reasonably have been described as underprivileged. Sure glad my mam didn't read your manifesto Not if folk took the idea of educating people as to what sexuality/relationship/marriage/responsibility meant somewhat more seriously than they do.Me, I was told by a schoolfriend at the age of 14 that the real name for a vagina was "a vagina". I didn't believe him. "You mean to tell me that a 'gee' is really called a 'vagina' - feck off will ya - your having me on!!" I have a married friend who is under the impression that the G-spot is located at the cervix (much to his wifes chagrine I imagine)We reap what we sow - in all manner of ways.But you've opened a good point here. State permitted abortion as a means to ensure the adoption system doesn't get swamped. Hmmm

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

You a boxer CP. Your getting me punch-drunk with this philosophical jab, jab, jab followed by a scientific right hook. I'm reeling on the ropes By what do you gauge with ANY degree of probability "I AM" to be the sole function of the brain? I ain't doing a CK/Holmes on you. Your comments will suffice for me. Given that it is the base from which all the cognitive rest extends out - the hub of the wheel as it where - then 'I AM' it would be I imagine the most investigated of the lot. The evidence would be compelling.What is it? Is there anything except "I just think so" and "there is no reason to think otherwise" Them fundis do have a lot to answer too. If they told you that your good deeds will get you to heaven then don't believe that either. Hogwash the lot of it. Obviously your angels-rationale was that angels being eternal creatures means that they cannot die. You'd have been right

heheheh... the fact that you feel "spelling it out" is an answer to my argument, shows how little you appreciate your actual position. Hey I'm up on all the possible ways to avoid pregnancy and still get off. And yes you can reach 100% with certain techniques (mainly no reproductive sexual acts).My argument is only against your equivocation between anyone doing something that allows for slightly less than 100% protection, with making a lifestyle choice with credible risk such that it leaves them culpable for any and all outcomes. You can't think of any way to avoid unwanted rape and, even more so, unwanted pregnancy through rape, than suicide? Who is being disengenuous, now? You yourself mentioned sterilization as an option, why is that not proper here? And there are of course other physical ways of making rape impossible.Just as with wanted sex, one does know that just stepping out the door or being alone with a man allows for the chance of rape, and therefore the chance of pregnancy through rape. How come allowing that probability to exist (less than 100% protection) does not leave one culpable in this instance? They do. One of the consequences is having to then weigh the life of the fetus against that of the mother. What's great is that you answered this to a quote which specifically told you not to answer this because I was moving to a different argument. Did you feel better saying this totally pointless thing? Whoaaaaaaaaaa, nelly! See, now we circled right back around to the beginning. You care to support the above assertion?But anyway, you can't simply remove an analogy and its implications by stating "at the moment it's..."I just stated your motorcycle analogy was not complete as you were making it. For ease of analogy I am going to make it a car, though it could just as easily be you and your wife on a bike. The actual analogy to having sex is everytime you decide to get into a car with your family. Every instance is a risk to the whole family, including the unborn.Do you advocate abstinence from driving, or once crashed no hospital service at all? Or if you allow hospital service, if medical treatment forces a decision on who should live, the adult's lives are automatically forfeit because they took the risk?Here, let me spell it out for you...Adults having sex are like you getting on a bike, or into a car, with your wife and kids. They take precautions to avoid accidents, but they know full well accidents can happen despite all the best precautions. If an accident occurs they do (or should) accept the risk they took, and then must decide how to deal with the medical issues/risks they face due to the accident. The immediate and logical answer is not "the adults must pay any and all costs no matter what it means for the family, because they chose to X". The answer is that they will weigh the risks and decide for themselves what is tolerable risk, and when it is intolerable such that a child must be lost rather then the adult.I doubt, if you have a family, you will refuse to drive anywhere just to avoid facing those consequences, though they will always be there. Same with sex. You avoid what you can responsibly.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Hello, iano.

quote:

---

By what do you gauge with ANY degree of probability "I AM" to be the sole function of the brain?

---

Here is the answer I have already answered: Someone else said it even better: This is not made up. It is clear that intellectual capabilities reside in the physical brain; it is clear that emotional states reside in the physical brain. This is the result of actual scientific investigations where we can see the brain function during intellectual tasks and emotional states; we can see how specific damage to the brain has a definite effect on the intellectual abilities and emotional states of the subject. This isn't a question of "philosophy" -- it is simple fact.

quote:

---

Hey I'm up on all the possible ways to avoid pregnancy and still get off. And yes you can reach 100% with certain techniques (mainly no reproductive sexual acts).

---

Webcam but you need to send your name,address and various documents off to George bush and his mates - "for protection".

Reasons given for having abortions in the United StatesREASONS GIVEN FOR ABORTIONS: AGI SURVEY, 1987 [3, 4]
A 1988 study [3] by the Alan Guttmacher Institute surveyed 1,900 women who had abortions. The results of this survey are among the most commonly cited figures regarding reasons for abortions in the United States.reason /% of abortions
rape or incest 1
mother has health problems 3
possible fetal health problems 3
unready for responsibility 21
is too immature or young to have child 11
woman's parents want her to have abortion <0.5
has problems with relationship or wants to avoid single parenthood 12
husband or partner wants her to have abortion 1
has all the children she wanted or all children are grown 8
can't afford baby now 21
concerned about how having baby would change her life 16
doesn't want others to know she had relations or is pregnant 1
other 3We have discussed what lifestyle choice means. The pollsters put it this way: "personal choice" 98% (78%-99%)--too young/immature/not ready for responsibility 32%
--economic (21-28%)
--to avoid adjusting life 16%
--mother single or in poor relationship (12-13%)
--enough children already (4-8%)Holmes. You were told that hard evidence wouldn't be forthcoming and why. You proceeded. Now you return to it. If you going to holler "Whoooooaaaa!!!", in future, would you do me the courtesy of ensuring your reason for doing so is even in the slightest way a credible one. Anybody who hasn't got their head stuck in the sand doesn't need the above survey to know that rape/incest/medical is just a drop in the ocean as a reason for abortion. So quit with the red herrings...I'm not going to discuss common knowledge with you. Okay?REASONS GIVEN FOR ABORTIONS: AGI SURVEY, 2000-2001 [8]reason or situation % of abortions
not using contraception 46.40
forced to have relations 0.6
using contraception 53.60
contraceptive failed despite proper use 16.9
total (10,683) 100.0Looks like 46% took a complete er...shot-in-the-dark gamble and didn't like the consequences. 53% used contraceptive but didn't fall into the 'proper use' category - which implies they didn't really know what they were up to re: contraception (top marks for getting the sex bit spot-on though) - but took the risk anyway.Fuck...this makes for sickening readin." I want what I want when I want it and I don't want this - take it away....WAAAAAAAAAA". Spoilt little children who just want (and can get) their way. And they don't give a flying fuck about 1st/2nd/3rd semester semantics. "TAKE IT OUT NOW!!!". You guys may dress it up in smart argument about humanitarianism and a womans body is her own. Bullshit. Rape, incest, medical complications? One big smelly pile of red herrings which by their very introduction as a defence just goes to show what a bankrupt defence it is. It's about people wanting to live life as they want it and nothing is going to get in the way of that...Fuck this for converstation. I've had enough. It just makes me want to puke.

---

Romans 10:9-10: " if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved....."

It isn't common knowledge. Indeed current state of data itself is questioned within your link. Oh by the way I should warn you, when someone cites something, I actually go and read what is cited. Thus its a good idea for you to do the same before citing something to me.Since you have cited this study, and so I assume you have read it, I will simply state here that the author questions manipulation of studies, and indeed points to the limitations of the statistics due to the nature of their collection. If you want me to pull up the quotes I will.So I repeat again, I do not know, because as far as I know there is no common knowledge on the subject, which makes your comments simple ad hominem blather.Now let's assume for a moment that the stats presented in this citation are nonproblematic and wholly representative. I will do that for sake of moving this debate along. You have conveniently built a strawman of my position. My argument was not just rape/incest (indeed I excluded incest)/and imminent known medical issues. I have openly discussed as reasons social/economic concerns and risks posed by pregnancy itself. One does not have to know there is a specific medical problem to be concerned with the risk of pregnancy which means that problems may develop down the line. When a person knows they have a greater chance dying from childbirth complications than abortion complications, the risks of continuing with childbirth are something which that person may want to avoid in general.If you look throughout that article you will find stats from different states as well as the AGI survey. Some support the AGI survey, and some do not. I notice you did not bother to mention the other results and what they might mean.In any case, let's just take the AGI survey results... just for argument's sake. The reds are what you strictly define as r/i/m =7%
The yellows are what I was discussing as real issues which can go into determining whether to continue the pregnancy, and may arise after pregnancy occurs = 53%
The purples may or may not include issues I am talking about = 28%
Unknown = 3%
Which leaves the other parts which could be called wholly (undisputed) lifestyle = 9%Now lets assume the greens and unknowns are purely lifestyle decisions then the total is 40%. That is at best, the majority is not "lifestyle". I can cut you ten percent of the rest and it still doesn't give you a way to claim "most" abortions are about lifestyle. The pollsters didn't put it that way, whoever put this piece together (and it does look like it is biased) did. In any case, the following look like good concerns to me, and may involve estimate of risk... ... and that is at lowest 65%.If the argument was that rape and immediate known physical issues make up the smallest amount in total, I would agree and the stats definitely support that. My issue has been the equivocation of all remaining reasons as independent of general health and social concern, and just being a case of neglectful sexual behavior or callous disregard (example: abortion for sex of the child). You don't seem to understand data. Just because 46% did not use conception, does not mean that they did not have good reason to abort at a later time. Yes, rape did not account for much of the issue, but the rest may have thought it was okay and indeed may have initially been trying for a child, only to realize pregnancy would not be a good idea.But for sake of argument lets say the 46% were all people just winging things, knowing full well they were taking a risk (wonder how many were using the rhythm/withdrawal methods you suggested). That clearly does not allow you the ability to claim most were making a lifestyle choice which involved great risk.Nearly 17% were inherently identified as victims of an accident beyond their control, and the other portion (making up the clear majority) tried to prevent pregnancy and had it fail for unidentifiable reasons. If you want to complain about the stupidity of someone who doesn't know how to use contraceptives properly, that is a whole other issue. Yes it must given your insistence on reading beyond numbers to impose rather strong stereotypes on others. I can only assume you are not a practicing Xian? What % was that, and where did you get that total. Please be explicit on how you read past the generic, sometimes vague, and inconsistent self-reporting tallies to generate the above position.I especially love the specifics regarding no concerns about trimesters. Do you know what the data is on when most abortions are performed? As a hint, it is floating around EvC somewhere and it doesn't suggest the irrationality you just portrayed. First of all my main two points were to call you on the fact that we don't (and certainly you don't seem) to have accurate knowledge on what goes into the decision making process for most abortions and to attack your broad definition of "lifestyle choice" which as has already been shown you have chosen it to create a guilt by association argument. I was not trying to defend abortion, just criticize the nature of your argument.Second, in defending abortion rights, I didn't say anything about humanitarianism nor a woman's body is her own. My position is different than most I suppose, but if you are going to criticize me you better get my position right first.And why you keep harping on rape and incest I'll never know. Point to where I addressed either as an argument for why women are having or should have abortions.The only herrings appear to be coming from you. Is it the conversation, or the amount of beer you were drinking while trying to put together your shamble of a response? Next time try it sober.This message has been edited by holmes, 08-31-2005 05:03 PM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm(that's CDC, a government site, and not one study touted from a baptist website ... without reference to others than may (or may not) validate it) That's 88% of abortions before the {alive flesh} was remotely possibly human and where many would have resulted in spontaneous abortions anyway.And only 1.4% after a point where some (but not all) would consider {personhood} to begin to be a factor: at 20 weeks the fetus is about 8 inches long, and premature births before 24 weeks generally do not survive, to say nothing about developing into fully funtional humans.Your survey does not give the timing of the abortions, so we don't know when the {medical reason abortions} occur as opposed to {personal reason abortions}, but I would assume that they are generally (much) later in the development stages, as (1) the person has already made the decision not to have one for personal reasons (they decided to continue the process until the medical problem arose) and (2) the ability to detect the medical problems is only possible late in the develpment.I also consider "unmarried women (81%)" a perfectly valid reason for an early abortion, whatever other reason they give in the survey you quoted. I am also 100% behind any teen that wants an abortion, but that is my opinion.Enjoy.This message has been edited by RAZD, 09*01*2005 10:44 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

See Message 119it's less than 1.4%

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}