Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9176 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,657 Year: 4,914/9,624 Month: 262/427 Week: 8/64 Day: 4/2 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   should IUD's be considered instruments of murder?
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2730 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 316 of 327 (442746)
12-22-2007 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by LinearAq
12-22-2007 9:01 AM


Re: Linear, the same question goes for you.
Huh? Could you provide a little more clarity? You are saying something besides a fertilized egg can become a child.
SCNT. Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer.
The nucleus of a somatic cell is placed in an egg et voilá.
And before you protest, no it hasn't been done with humans ... yet.
But that doesn't change the fact that a somatic cell (any of the cells in your body), if given the right conditions, contain the genetic blueprint necessary to produce a child.
So. Why is a zygote special?
Or would you consider an egg that contains a somatic cell's nucleus a "child" too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by LinearAq, posted 12-22-2007 9:01 AM LinearAq has not replied

Am5n 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5990 days)
Posts: 106
From: New York City, New York, United States
Joined: 02-21-2007


Message 317 of 327 (443349)
12-24-2007 4:44 PM


Re: Rape and Forced Birth
Overall I have read this whole entire topic! all of its posts, but I'm really not surprised about what some of you said.
hello brennakimi, in many cases sexual activity is considered to release stress, though along with the giggles and laughs after or during sex. Many people consider it fun, why wouldn't they? it relieves stress and brings us closer to the ones we love. Prostitution is also 1 of many factors of releasing stress. Lets say your wife isn't in the "MOOD", so your really stressed out and say,"wow I could use a major stress relief right about now", So you pick up a prostitute and pay her for her service. at the end you get what you wanted[get rid of your daily stress]. Yes I agree some people make mistakes, but also they should learn from those mistakes. I don't consider abortion a good example for a woman to learn from her mistakes, nor would I agree with your so called statement:
we're not talking about things getting in the way of fun.
When you say we, who are you talking about? your family/friends?
Many people have sex, why? because it relieves stress, it is fun, it is enjoyable, and it is emotional. The main purpose for sex is to populate and to show your wife you love her, therefor she is your spouse and soul mate. Sex is a very emotional subject and practice performed by 2 people that love each other so much they would die just to protect eachother from harm. Sex is a very extreme subject to discuss.
1 person said something about sex-ed. I really disagree with that subject. I'd rather see them teaching high school students, rather then seeing students in junior high being taught sex-ed. a teacher teaching sex-ed in junior high is providing information about Safe Sex[condoms and birth control] isn't really helping the main reason why sex is a performed activity by a man and a woman.
you'll have to tell me where in the constitution it says that you have a right to be ill-informed and stupid.
If person thinks their taking responsibility by paying for their abortion, then they are confused. They are taking the easy route[a lot of people do that]. If your looking for sympathy, your better off to look to your peers[aka some women]. Sex is a serious thing. If someone calls themselves a responsible person, but decides to have sex, they should have some intelligence and use it to be responsible. sex is a serious thing! you should take it very seriously! its not our fault if you weren't so serious and accidentally got pregnant! What right do we have to judge another person? I don't see it anywhere in the constitution saying I can't judge another person.
brennakimi:
do you really think the best way to bring children into the world is as a consequence?
Hell ya! Woman suffer a lot of pain while giving birth to a baby, not to mention carrying that sucker around for 9 months will cause her to suffer some pain in her back, but hey! what do you expect? sex is what animals do when mating with 1 another. it's something Robbin Williams the comedian calls "its time to party!" ya baby! lets get this party started! LETS MAKE SOME BABIES! w00t!
What business is it of theirs to decide if a woman's reasons to get an abortion are "good enough".
I'll make it my business if I want, because you can't simply telling me what I can and cannot do.
molbiogirl:
If a woman were impregnated by her rapist, should she be compelled to carry it to term?
Well I suggest you do some research on offenders who commit rape and stop watching those silly Crime buff t.v shows[CSI,WT,CM]. A higher percentage of sex offenders that committed rape used condoms or masturbated on their victims, therefor getting pregnant after being raped becomes a rare possibility.
then a woman who has been impregnated by her rapist has the right to abort.
My source proves your theory wrong. Those offenders who have implanted their seed inside their victim, are actually not trying to impregnate them, but once they are done with the victim, they will indeed kill,dismember,mutilate, or decapitate the victims body.
how is going to the doctor and paying for a medical procedure not taking responsibility for my actions?
thats like paying for your parole and not willing to do the time for a crime you committed. Sex isn't a crime but its a serious thing to engage into.
now. linear ag thinks he has a right to judge whether they were all using them properly or not, but his statistics didn't bear it out. so. what evidence do you have that women are being irresponsible?
to use something properly is being careful, but when it comes down to a serious action about to take place, then you should increase your own awareness and try to be very,very,very,very careful.
ugh, there's your reading problem acting up again.
yep I know what your talking about.
By being held responsible, I meant not having an abortion.
someone who takes the easy way out is irresponsible correct?
Wow, you're the stupidest bitch I've seen in a while. You're so fucking retarded that you can't even comprehend what I'm saying.
And then to tell me that I think something that I don't.
Fuck you and piss off.
I felt like saying things like this on here about some people but damn dude I have to admit, I agree with you so far on this OP.
1. What should you do if you don't want to get pregnant?
Answer: Don't get pregnant
I don't plan to have sex for a long,long,long,very long time.
2. In the event that you try not to get pregnant, but do in anyhow, what should you do?
Answer: Adopt your child. All three parties win, whereas with abortion, only one person wins.
That is really easy and fair.
3. What should you do about bad parents?
Answer: The Child Welfare Act is designed to protect the lives of children from abuse or neglect. They handle the situation like any other criminal investigation.
Very True.
responsible people get pregnant all the time.
an unplanned pregnancy does not depend on irresponsibility.
Its better to plan ahead and be ready for whatever may come your way.
And whether you object to the religious connotations or not, there really is a clear sense of "sin" and what it does to people, and how it erodes any given society.
brennakimi:
says you.
no brenna alot of people say that, because a sin is something a person does wrong. a sin doesn't stand for anything that is right. so it is very clear to alot of people and they see what it does to other people.
CS, if you are going to question the Guttmacher stats, you need to be consistent. You can't cite one self-reported Guttmacher stat and use it as proof and then in the next breath critique another self-reported Guttmacher stat. You can't have it both ways.
Hahahaha... just to let you know she likes to have it both ways when she's the one arguing. She's dismissed portions or the entirety of her own cites three times with me. When I called her on it she just hand-waved or disappeared.
Hahahahahaha! very well said silent-H.
I think people who are not prepared to be parents should terminate pregnancies.
if their not prepared to be parents why the fuck are they wanting to have sex then?! MAYBE THEY WANT TO HAVE SOME FUN! sheesh, woman your starting to drive me crazy. *grabs some aspirin*
If you go looking for trouble, then trouble is what you shall find
same thing applies to sex. If you want sex, be ready to take some responsibility. sex isn't a 1 way street! 2 people are involved, therefor the man is just as responsible as the woman.
sincerely yours, Amen.
Edited by Amen., : noyb.

"He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride."
[JOB 41:34]

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-26-2007 1:40 PM Am5n has not replied

LinearAq
Member (Idle past 4765 days)
Posts: 598
From: Pocomoke City, MD
Joined: 11-03-2004


Message 318 of 327 (443643)
12-26-2007 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by macaroniandcheese
12-22-2007 12:12 PM


Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
LinearAq writes:
Are those problems worse than what the child would suffer under the biological parents?
brennakimi replies: it is the same as if a biological parent raised and then abandoned them. it is the same as when adults are abandoned by spouses or friends. it is the reaction to being left behind. it's human.it is negligent and abusive to turn a child over to the dcf in florida. they are so beyond not a workable system it's criminal. they've been blamed, if not charged, in tons of child neglect cases and a few cases of kidnapping and murder of children.
I am sure it is in the papers all the time so you can provide a reference to the kidnapping or murder cases involving members of the dcf in florida? Perhaps a statistic showing the numbers of these types of problems in the last...say...5 years?
they fail to do complete background checks.
You did not show an example of a person with a prior arrest for child molestation has been hired by the dcf. While I don't doubt that this could happen, it would be easier if we could put some verifiable facts out rather than something easily criticized.
It is implied by the fact that 1-2% of adopted children are adopted as infants
how does that imply that infants get adopted quickly?
The entire statement in msg 302 was:
LinearAq writes:
It is implied by the fact that 1-2% of adopted children are adopted as infants combined with the fact that it is difficult to adopt an infant since there are not many available.
If you intend to take only partial sentences from my statements for rebuttal then maybe you should become an admin so you can make my statements match what you want to address. That way no one can go back and see that you are quote mining. Regardless, I will see what I can find concerning infant adoption since my statement about the difficulty is not supported.
you didn't show me a chart. you said that there were 120some k children in the system but the adoption rate was 220k. the numbers didn't make sense.
Understood. However, I didn't know that I was required to reproduce the entire article I was referencing in my entry. In fact, I actually thought it was discouraged here. Silly me. You could have gone and read the referenced material if you felt confused.
i'm not interested in painting them as hypocrites. if you insist on reading it that way, i'm sorry. i'm trying to understand why they think that the decision they made is so different than the decision every one else makes.
The circumstances are the same...unintended pregnancy. The decisions are different; one is pro abortion and chooses to abort; another is anti abortion and chooses to keep the child to term; still another chooses to abort despite her position against abortion. Individual choices require individual justifications. Your pointing out the apparent hypocrisy in a discussion of anti and pro abortion stances has little purpose except to tarnish the reputation of individual and, a little, the whole anti abortion group. Unless you can show me another reason for bringing up hypocrisy of individuals within a group, I would have to assume that was your intent.
Why do you assume that it automatically is not beneficial for the infant which, it seems, you think is better of dead?
because abandonment causes mental issues.
First, this is a bullshit bare assertion to imply that the "mental issues" suffered from abandonment are so bad that it is better to be dead. You haven't linked these mental problems to infant adoption nor provided any reliable reference or statement concerning severity. If abandonment issues are so severe and cause such horrid mental problems, then shouldn't we just kill children that are abandoned by their parents? Certainly that is better than having them suffer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-22-2007 12:12 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 319 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-26-2007 1:06 PM LinearAq has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 319 of 327 (443697)
12-26-2007 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by LinearAq
12-26-2007 8:35 AM


Re: Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
It is implied by the fact that 1-2% of adopted children are adopted as infants combined with the fact that it is difficult to adopt an infant since there are not many available.
since you're criticizing my bare assertions, how about fixing yours. prove to me that it's difficult to adopt an infant.
Regardless, I will see what I can find concerning infant adoption since my statement about the difficulty is not supported
that's all i'm asking.
However, I didn't know that I was required to reproduce the entire article I was referencing in my entry. In fact, I actually thought it was discouraged here. Silly me. You could have gone and read the referenced material if you felt confused
i don't recall a link.
The circumstances are the same...unintended pregnancy. The decisions are different; one is pro abortion and chooses to abort; another is anti abortion and chooses to keep the child to term; still another chooses to abort despite her position against abortion. Individual choices require individual justifications. Your pointing out the apparent hypocrisy in a discussion of anti and pro abortion stances has little purpose except to tarnish the reputation of individual and, a little, the whole anti abortion group. Unless you can show me another reason for bringing up hypocrisy of individuals within a group, I would have to assume that was your intent
what i'm trying to call attention to is not a "trashing" but rather the fact that they recognize that these are individual circumstances with individual solutions regardless of whether they support it. they don't support putting these women on trial for murder, they just want abortions to be reduced or ended. they're just going about it all wrong.
and on your last point which i can't copy because my browser is being stupid. you haven't demonstrated to me that especially an early abortion is killing a child.
but as it is, it is entirely possible that it would be better to kill both children and adults who have been abandoned. as it is, i'm discussing individual justifications. having been abused and abandoned many times in my life, i cannot do that to my children. i know how they will respond. as such, i will, if necessary, prevent them from being born and protect them from the circumstances they would enter into. what i'm really trying to discuss here is that whole idea of why an anti-abortionist would have his daughter abort her child. there are a large number of these individuals and they all cite that these were "unique" circumstances and it was a difficult decision but one they had to make. if it was really about the precious little babies (tm), it wouldn't be a hard decision, and it wouldn't have ended the way it did. these people are really, clearly interested in some other goal. what that is shall remain to be seen.
my concern is this. answer a few questions for me.
i have a miscarriage. should i have to prove to a jury that my miscarriage was genuine?
compound it. after a miscarriage, pregnancy, or just randomly, i'm suffering from some endometrial buildup. while sorting through the material afterward to check for abnormal growths, the lab tech discovers a fertilized egg that had just begun to implant but hadn't yet produced HCG. should the lab tech inform the authorities that a murder has taken place and should my normal medical procedure turn into a trial with all that entails?
i have an ectopic pregnancy. should i have to prove that the fetus will kill me before i am permitted to protect myself? should i have to wait till it bursts my body apart and i bleed to death?
i'm 11 years old and was molested for years by my father. i finally became pregnant with his child. should i have to prove to a jury that i wasn't just screwing around and that the child really is my father's before i'm permitted a "rape or incest" exception? should i really be put through the public shaming of all of that in addition to the invasion of my body?
i'm 19 and just started college. i'm drugged and raped after a ball game, but the fellow was very careful and left little evidence. there's no conviction. should i have to go through a second trial and additional public exposure to prove that i was in fact raped when there's no perp to point the finger at so that i can get my "rape or incest" exception?
i suffer from serious depression and have been treated continuously for many years. the idea of having a child is utterly contemptuous to me and given my fragile state, inadvisable. my doctor won't provide me a sterilization and i discover i'm pregnant. every day i dig at the flesh around my stomach with my nails. every day i hit myself. every day i try to kill myself because this thing growing inside me is such a strain on my sanity (i know someone this happened to, it was awful). should i be forced to prove that this pregnancy is harmful to me? even if i do, they'd probably simply institutionalize me until the child is born. should i be forced to do this?
late in my pregnancy, my doctor discovers that my child will have a severe disability leaving him technically an infant for his entire life, unable to experience anything but the most basic of interactions. i have a disability that prevents me from caring for him. (note: disabled children are rarely adopted.) should i have to prove to a jury that this child will be all but brain dead or be stuck with a child i can't care for?
same situation, but it's a fatal illness with no treatment? should i have to wait for the child to be born, to bond with it for a few weeks, and then be forced to have death rip it from my arms? is that humane to you?
because, you see, if abortion becomes illegal because life legally begins at "conception" (whatever the hell that is), those scenarios will all come to pass, and with great frequency.
the issue here is that there are so many justifications and they are all "unique" situations. the reason abortion was legalized is because the specific nature of the issue has a time limit. the system that would be required to prove to law enforcement and judicial bodies that the circumstances were pressing enough to warrant an abortion would negate the ability to pursue anything but a late term abortion, if that. and i'm willing to venture that those are undesirable given other options. that is the nature of the ruling. that this system creates an undue burden on an individual in distress.
this is the point. having to present your body and your medical records to an uniformed jury of your peers or some judge who took an ethics class in his first year at law school and has a morality chip on his shoulder is an obscene invasion of medical privacy. there are precisely two people capable of making an informed decision on these various situations, maybe three. the woman, possibly her spouse or partner, and her doctor. no one else has standing, period. even if my interest in an abortion is "frivilous" that is not anyone's place to decide besides my doctor and myself, and certainly not people who neither understand women's health nor pregnancy, nor businessmen who became legislators.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by LinearAq, posted 12-26-2007 8:35 AM LinearAq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by LinearAq, posted 12-27-2007 12:26 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 320 of 327 (443703)
12-26-2007 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Am5n
12-24-2007 4:44 PM


Re: Rape and Forced Birth
your post might be easier to find if you actually reply to people individually so they know you posted.
Sex is a very emotional subject and practice performed by 2 people that love each other so much they would die just to protect eachother
would you really?
I really disagree with that subject. I'd rather see them teaching high school students, rather then seeing students in junior high being taught sex-ed. a teacher teaching sex-ed in junior high is providing information about Safe Sex[condoms and birth control] isn't really helping the main reason why sex is a performed activity by a man and a
and that's why you have a right to excuse your child from the lesson. however, if you'd pick up a book (namely the third chimpanzee by jared dimond) you'd know that procreation is rare enough that the purpose of sex in humans really becomes group bonding. and it is group bonding. monogamy is pretty recent and generally not present in other apes. do you really think married people should be irresponsible and produce a child every time they have sex? are you aware that one of the worst things you can do to a child is have another within two years afterward? not only is it hard on the mother, but it creates hardship for the child.
If person thinks their taking responsibility by paying for their abortion, then they are confused. They are taking the easy route[a lot of people do that]. If your looking for sympathy, your better off to look to your peers[aka some women]. Sex is a serious thing. If someone calls themselves a responsible person, but decides to have sex, they should have some intelligence and use it to be responsible. sex is a serious thing! you should take it very seriously! its not our fault if you weren't so serious and accidentally got pregnant!
do you think that the best way for a child to be raised is in the circumstances of being a punishment to a slut? do you think that the resentment built by an unplanned pregnancy is healthy for a child? what do you think is "easy" about an abortion?
What right do we have to judge another person? I don't see it anywhere in the constitution saying I can't judge another person.
the constitution establishes a judicial branch for the purpose of creating a court system. you not being a member of that branch means you are not entitled to that. further, jesus says not to judge others.
Hell ya!
unbelievable.
Woman suffer a lot of pain while giving birth to a baby, not to mention carrying that sucker around for 9 months will cause her to suffer some pain in her back, but hey! what do you expect?
do you normally revel in the suffering of others, or just women?
I'll make it my business if I want, because you can't simply telling me what I can and cannot do.
i can simply "telling" you anything i want. as it is, i have a right to my privacy. you're infringing on my rights. i will have you arrested.
My source proves your theory wrong.
show us your source if you're so sure of it.
once upon a time, someone lied to me and said that a woman has to orgasm to become pregnant, therefore, if she became pregnant after a rape, it wasn't a rape because she enjoyed it, regardless of her interest in having sex or "makin babies!". of course, some 50-70% of women have never had an orgasm and can't have one from vaginal intercourse, so that's clearly a lie since we'd have a lot fewer babies if 70% of women were incapable of having them. not to mention that it's patently incorrect that a pregnancy can only occur after an orgasm.
i'm willing to bet your source is more lies, but i will wait patiently to see it.
thats like paying for your parole and not willing to do the time for a crime you committed. Sex isn't a crime but its a serious thing to engage into.
you keep saying it's serious, but you haven't demonstrated that. show me mainstream sources that demonstrate that people who engage in casual sexual activity later suffer from serious mental illness or are sociopaths incapable of forming close relationships.
and, if sex isn't a crime, why do you keep describing it that way?
to use something properly is being careful, but when it comes down to a serious action about to take place, then you should increase your own awareness and try to be very,very,very,very careful.
who gets to decide who was being careful enough? you are aware that sterilization even carries risks? my grandfather was sterilized before my uncle was born. i know a woman who had her 8th child after being sterilized. how careful is careful enough?
someone who takes the easy way out is irresponsible correct?
i have to bring a cake to a party. i can bake one from scratch, bake one from a mix, or buy a cake at the store. this is not a competition with rules defining that i have to make the cake from scratch. which of the easy ways out is irresponsible?
and again, what about an abortion do you think is "easy". is it the waiting, the decision, the being abused by screaming protesters who throw things at you and call you a murderer, or the invasive procedure? if we're only talking about responsibility and not "murder" then what does it matter to you. are you out campaigning against all forms of irresponsibility? how about people who throw lit cigarretes out of cars? people who pollute public water sources? people who let their children swim without a lifeguard? people who don't teach their children to swim? businesses that don't take responsibility for the actual ability of their employees to make a living?
I felt like saying things like this on here about some people but damn dude I have to admit, I agree with you so far on this OP.
is a second to an eggregious personal attack enough to warrant a suspension? yu clearly wanted me to read this post.
Its better to plan ahead and be ready for whatever may come your way.
have you written your will for the bus that may hit you tomorrow? do you have a full 529 savings account for the children you might accidentally have? do you wear an aluminum foil hat in case aliens attack? it is unreasonable and impossible to plan for all the potential things that might happen to you.
no brenna alot of people say that, because a sin is something a person does wrong. a sin doesn't stand for anything that is right. so it is very clear to alot of people and they see what it does to other people.
a lot of people say that cracking your knuckles causes arthritis. this is a myth. a lot of people say a lot of things. it's most likely all bullshit.
if their not prepared to be parents why the fuck are they wanting to have sex then?! MAYBE THEY WANT TO HAVE SOME FUN! sheesh, woman your starting to drive me crazy. *grabs some aspirin*
because the risk of pregnancy with sex is very low. you would know this if you read the book i mentioned. sex isn't about "makin babies!" it's about bonding with members of your social group.
further, what business is it to you if people are having sex? should we outlaw all non-procreative sex? should sterile people be forbidden from having sex?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Am5n, posted 12-24-2007 4:44 PM Am5n has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 321 of 327 (443704)
12-26-2007 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by Hyroglyphx
12-21-2007 6:59 PM


Re: Being accountable for one's actions
Her using that brain would be most beneficial then
so if she hasn't made the decision you would have made, she isn't using her brain?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-21-2007 6:59 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 322 of 327 (443706)
12-26-2007 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 311 by Taz
12-22-2007 12:18 AM


Re: Rape and Forced Birth
i wish there were more requirements for childbearing. we would certainly have fewer social problems. but as it is, i have no right to say that another person can't procreate, just as no one has the right to say that i must.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by Taz, posted 12-22-2007 12:18 AM Taz has not replied

LinearAq
Member (Idle past 4765 days)
Posts: 598
From: Pocomoke City, MD
Joined: 11-03-2004


Message 323 of 327 (443901)
12-27-2007 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by macaroniandcheese
12-26-2007 1:06 PM


Re: Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
prove to me that it's difficult to adopt an infant.
I have gone through the adoption web sites for 23 states and found out that infant adoption is expensive and the wait time is approximately 2 years.
Adoption of a child 2 years and up is paid for by the state and the wait time is considerably less.
Contrary to that are statements by adoption agency sites that there are infants waiting to be adopted if you are willing to pay their fees along with the state required fees. However, those adoption agency web sites cater to infant adoption and advertise heavily to women with unintended pregnancies to get them to put their babies up for adoption.
It is a bit confusing but I feel this still points to a high rate of adoption among infants. Sorry I don't have better information.
and on your last point which i can't copy because my browser is being stupid. you haven't demonstrated to me that especially an early abortion is killing a child.
Amazingly, you haven't demonstrated that it is not. My evidence is that an implanted blastocyst will very likely become a child given time and, oxygen and nourishment. Your evidence is that if you remove it from it's source of oxygen and nourishment it cannot sustain itself. I could say the same about a 2-year old.
but as it is, it is entirely possible that it would be better to kill both children and adults who have been abandoned. as it is, i'm discussing individual justifications. having been abused and abandoned many times in my life, i cannot do that to my children. i know how they will respond. as such, i will, if necessary, prevent them from being born and protect them from the circumstances they would enter into.
It is sad that you had a bad childhood. However, that doesn't mean that other children will go through the same thing. What do you remember from before age six? Not much I'd wager. Sure abandonment can be traumatic but the earlier it happens the less impact it has later in life. By your logic we should just sweep through the streets in Rio-de-Janiro and kill all the poor little street urchins or go to New Delhi and terminate the lives of those girls who have been sold into prostitution by their families. It's easier, cheaper and permanent.
what i'm really trying to discuss here is that whole idea of why an anti-abortionist would have his daughter abort her child. there are a large number of these individuals and they all cite that these were "unique" circumstances and it was a difficult decision but one they had to make. if it was really about the precious little babies (tm), it wouldn't be a hard decision, and it wouldn't have ended the way it did. these people are really, clearly interested in some other goal. what that is shall remain to be seen.
Please, paint with a broader brush you didn't indict the entire anti-abortion movement with the one you are using. Why must their decision made under significant duress be indicative of their sinister "real goal"? What percentage of anti-abortion parents placed in that same situation actually encourage their daughter to abort vs the percentage who encourage their daughter to keep the child? Wouldn't that statistic be more indicative of the real goal of the majority rather than individual high profile stories?
i have a miscarriage. should i have to prove to a jury that my miscarriage was genuine?
No, your doctor is able to declare it as a miscarriage.
compound it. after a miscarriage, pregnancy, or just randomly, i'm suffering from some endometrial buildup. while sorting through the material afterward to check for abnormal growths, the lab tech discovers a fertilized egg that had just begun to implant but hadn't yet produced HCG. should the lab tech inform the authorities that a murder has taken place and should my normal medical procedure turn into a trial with all that entails?
Accidental death is not murder. I suppose if your brother fell to his death while working on the roof of your house that you would expect your parents to be indicted for murder.
i have an ectopic pregnancy. should i have to prove that the fetus will kill me before i am permitted to protect myself? should i have to wait till it bursts my body apart and i bleed to death?
Doctors already know the severity of those problems and are well able to declare a life threatening situation.
i'm 11 years old and was molested for years by my father. i finally became pregnant with his child. should i have to prove to a jury that i wasn't just screwing around and that the child really is my father's before i'm permitted a "rape or incest" exception? should i really be put through the public shaming of all of that in addition to the invasion of my body?
{Sarcasm mode on}No, you should just have a secret abortion and allow your father to get away with the molestation so he's better at it when he starts on your younger sister {Sarcasm mode off}
i'm 19 and just started college. i'm drugged and raped after a ball game, but the fellow was very careful and left little evidence. there's no conviction. should i have to go through a second trial and additional public exposure to prove that i was in fact raped when there's no perp to point the finger at so that i can get my "rape or incest" exception?
You mean he left no DNA? How did you get pregnant then? Why do you equate being raped with shame on your part? Would you feel ashamed if you were robbed? Beaten? This question makes no sense or requires utter stupidity on the part of the forensic scientists and the police. Oh yeah...you live in Florida...The woman hating-child-molesting-home-to-stupid-Neanderthal-men State.
i suffer from serious depression and have been treated continuously for many years. the idea of having a child is utterly contemptuous to me and given my fragile state, inadvisable. my doctor won't provide me a sterilization and i discover i'm pregnant. every day i dig at the flesh around my stomach with my nails. every day i hit myself. every day i try to kill myself because this thing growing inside me is such a strain on my sanity (i know someone this happened to, it was awful). should i be forced to prove that this pregnancy is harmful to me? even if i do, they'd probably simply institutionalize me until the child is born. should i be forced to do this?
Did she get an abortion?
late in my pregnancy, my doctor discovers that my child will have a severe disability leaving him technically an infant for his entire life, unable to experience anything but the most basic of interactions. i have a disability that prevents me from caring for him. (note: disabled children are rarely adopted.) should i have to prove to a jury that this child will be all but brain dead or be stuck with a child i can't care for?
Seriously, this is one that I don't have an answer for. It is a situation where I would think the child has no real human life. However, I also don't know what limits you can place on disability before is qualifies a fetus for death. Down's Syndrome? Failure of an optic nerve to develop? Brown hair instead of blond? What is the basis for determining where the line is drawn? Convenience for the parents? I guarantee the child will not know that it is missing out, at least not in the case you mentioned or for Down's Syndrome. The blind child will eventually suffer from realization that she lacks an ability that others have. So if we say suffering of the child is all-important then the blind child will have more reason to be killed than the other two.
same situation, but it's a fatal illness with no treatment? should i have to wait for the child to be born, to bond with it for a few weeks, and then be forced to have death rip it from my arms? is that humane to you?
Another one I don't know about. However, you are already bonding with the child while it grows inside. Your grief may be somewhat less but maybe not, because you decide to kill your own child before its time.
there are precisely two people capable of making an informed decision on these various situations, maybe three. the woman, possibly her spouse or partner, and her doctor. no one else has standing, period. even if my interest in an abortion is "frivilous" that is not anyone's place to decide besides my doctor and myself, and certainly not people who neither understand women's health nor pregnancy, nor businessmen who became legislators.
Actually, the spouse has no say either [Roe-v-Wade].
Could you make the same argument in favor of infanticide? In either case a human life is in the balance. Sure, the unborn one never had a breath of air, but how does that disqualify the already born from being considered for destruction?
Edited by LinearAq, : Fixing quotes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-26-2007 1:06 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-27-2007 2:31 PM LinearAq has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 324 of 327 (443924)
12-27-2007 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by LinearAq
12-27-2007 12:26 PM


Re: Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
It is a bit confusing but I feel this still points to a high rate of adoption among infants. Sorry I don't have better information.
do you think the wait time and the fee might be to prevent people from adopting infants on a whim because they're "cute" like how the humane society has stricter requirements for puppies and kittens than for adult animals?
Amazingly, you haven't demonstrated that it is not. My evidence is that an implanted blastocyst will very likely become a child given time and, oxygen and nourishment.
between 30 and 60% of fertilize ova fail to implant. how many more do you think are "likely" to fail somewhere along the way? "likely" is an assumption not based on fact.
http://www.emcom.ca/health/abortion.shtml
Spontaneous abortion is defined as the loss of a fetus weighing less than 500 grams before 20 weeks gestation counted from the first day of the last menstrual period. The known causes of spontaneous abortion in the first trimester are primarily chromosomal abnormalities. In the second trimester, spontaneous abortions are often attributed to uterine abnormalities. Risk factors for spontaneous abortion include advanced maternal age, increasing parity, and increasing paternal age preconception solvent exposure of fathers and maternal heavy lifting.
...
The incidence of spontaneous abortion is estimated to be 50% of all pregnancies, based on the assumption that many pregnancies abort spontaneously with no clinical recognition.
so if 30-60% of pregnancies fail to implant, and 50% of implantations are sponaneously aborted (not including, then, miscarriages and stillbirth) what part of developing into a live-birthed child is "likely"?
Error
Ultrasonographic detection of a live fetus in recurrent spontaneous abortion during the first trimester | Human Reproduction | Oxford Academic
there's some material on spontaneous abortions when pregnancy is detectable and repeated spontaneous abortions.
Page Not Found
this article describes "natural" spontaneous abortion as similar in rate to spontaneous abortions among those utilizing assistive reproductive technologies.
Clinical Commentary
As many as 50% of very early pregnancies abort; about 15% of clinically recognized pregnancies result in a loss. Most commonly these losses have a genetic etiology, but several other factors can play a role (uterine, immune, infectious, endocrine, and environmental). These causes can be divided into 2 groups: oocyte related and host related. The use of ART introduces new factors (medications, procedures, luteal phase support) that can negatively or positively influence pregnancy outcome. This study evaluated spontaneous abortion rates and factors that influence this rate in a large database.
...
Pregnancy loss rates were lower for multiple gestations. It is important to point out that a loss was defined as the loss of all products of conception. Spontaneous or interventional reduction of multiple gestations was not defined as a pregnancy loss. This means that if a triplet pregnancy is spontaneously reduced to a singleton gestation (loss of 2 out of 3 embryos), it is not considered a loss in this analysis. As more than 40% of the pregnancies were multiple gestations, such a definition of loss would underestimate the overall loss of embryos. When we look at what proportion of the pregnancies (regardless of the order of the pregnancy) resulting from ART progress beyond 20 weeks, this study shows that spontaneous abortion rates are not increased following ART.
so we all know how very often "babies" are lost during the pursuit of assisted pregnancy, and this demonstrates that normal pregnancy failure occurs at the same rate.
this study
http://www.popline.org/docs/0568/015013.html
says that the number of induced abortions masks spontaneous abortions that would have happened.
High rates of induced abortion in a population may distort currently employed measures of the rate of spontaneous abortion. 2 different ratios have been used to represent the spontaneous abortion rate in cross-sectional studies of populations with high rates of induced abortion. The numerator in both is the number of spontaneous abortions, while the denominator of 1 is the number of spontaneous abortions plus the number of births after 28 weeks. The denominator of the other adds the number of induced abortions to this sum. Variations in the frequency and patterns of induced abortions influence both measures. Inflation of the 1st ratio will be greatest in a population where women undergo induced abortion of late gestations but abort spontaneously at early gestations, while the 2nd ratio will be most seriously diminished when women elect induced abortion at early gestations but abort spontaneously at a late stage. The simplified estimate of the "true" rate (STR) of spontaneous abortion is a simple and convenient statistic that offers a good estimate. The numerator of the STR is the number of spontaneous abortions while the denominator is the sum of the number of spontaneous abortions, the number of live and stillbirths after 28 weeks, and 1/2 the number of induced abortions. The simplified estimate generally yields a result close to the "true" spontaneous abortion rate, because induced abortions are concentrated during the same period of gestation as spontaneous abortions; as a result, on average induced abortions represent pregnancies that survived approximately 1/2 the risk for spontaneous abortion that a live birth survived. The simplified equation can be modified if discrepancies are found on applying the full procedure for estimating the true rate.
It is sad that you had a bad childhood. However, that doesn't mean that other children will go through the same thing. What do you remember from before age six? Not much I'd wager.
i have a full complement of memories between ages 3 and 6 and quite a few from age 2. it was a very active time in my life. i know things i wore on certain days and things i ate and walks i took and swim lessons and swimming with my mom at the base and poking dead crows at mayport and walks to the beach and caroling at 3 and sitting with my mom talking about philosophy over frozen orange juice at the florist shop near my daycare and... it was the most important time in my life and where most of my memories of my father took place. i don't really lose memories until my dad got sick at 8.
By your logic we should just sweep through the streets in Rio-de-Janiro and kill all the poor little street urchins or go to New Delhi and terminate the lives of those girls who have been sold into prostitution by their families. It's easier, cheaper and permanent.
no. my logic impacts only my children. i have no standing to make decisions about other people, just my body.
No, your doctor is able to declare it as a miscarriage.
my doctor might lie to protect myself and him. even when abortion was illegal before, doctors lied to protect women. when my mother was in school, any girl who had an emergency appendectomy was assumed to have had an abortion.
Accidental death is not murder.
but the fact that it was an accident has to be proven.
I suppose if your brother fell to his death while working on the roof of your house that you would expect your parents to be indicted for murder.
no, i'd assume he was being an idiot. however, the police would first look for signs of foul play.
Doctors already know the severity of those problems and are well able to declare a life threatening situation.
yes, doctors, not legislators or judges. and what should they do when they determine that it is a life-threatening situation? and what if it only becomes apparent late in the pregnancy?
{Sarcasm mode on}No, you should just have a secret abortion and allow your father to get away with the molestation so he's better at it when he starts on your younger sister {Sarcasm mode off}
should i be required to report molestation?
You mean he left no DNA? How did you get pregnant then?
i suppose eventually, you would be able to do a dna test on the fetus. but what if his dna isn't in a registry? just because there's dna doesn't mean they'll catch him.
Why do you equate being raped with shame on your part? Would you feel ashamed if you were robbed? Beaten?
you try being raped.
This question makes no sense or requires utter stupidity on the part of the forensic scientists and the police.
no, it doesn't. you see. most people's exposure to forensics is tidy little shows where every crime gets solved and it all gets wrapped up in a clean one hour package. life doesn't work that way. just because you even have dna evidence doesn't mean you'll find the guy who did it.
Did she get an abortion?
i don't remember. it was a friend of my grandmother's many years ago. all i remember is the description of how she abused herself because of the baby.
Seriously, this is one that I don't have an answer for. It is a situation where I would think the child has no real human life.
see? these decisions are hard, yet you want them to be made by lawmakers and not decided by women and their doctors on a case-by-case basis.
However, I also don't know what limits you can place on disability before is qualifies a fetus for death. Down's Syndrome? Failure of an optic nerve to develop? Brown hair instead of blond? What is the basis for determining where the line is drawn?
blindness is not a significant disability. hair color is not a disability.
Convenience for the parents?
convenience to you may be undue hardship to someone else. your idea of inconvenience should not have bearing on their decision. you think having a child with a disability means buying a van so you can put a wheelchair in it. i know having a child with a disability means carrying a child to the toilet, watching him so he doesn't fall off (assuming he can be toilet trained). feeding him, sometimes all liquids. paying for a nurse to stay with him while you work. watching him suffer from seizures, wondering if the next one will kill him. listening to a 21 year old with the brain of a six month old screaming because he can't tell you what he needs. and supporting this child through the end of your life and beyond. sometimes it goes way beyond "inconvenience".
I guarantee the child will not know that it is missing out, at least not in the case you mentioned or for Down's Syndrome. The blind child will eventually suffer from realization that she lacks an ability that others have. So if we say suffering of the child is all-important then the blind child will have more reason to be killed than the other two.
downs syndrome is a variable disorder and not as cut and dry as you might think it is.
it is my opinion that lawmakers do not have enough insight into individual cases to make these kinds of decisions.
Another one I don't know about. However, you are already bonding with the child while it grows inside.
not necessarily.
Actually, the spouse has no say either [Roe-v-Wade].
no. legally, the spouse cannot enforce his or her will over the woman who is pregnant. however, many spouses make decisions together. that is why i said "maybe". pay attention.
Could you make the same argument in favor of infanticide?
yes, i'm sure. and, i have little problem with it. it depends on the situation and the reasoning. there are lots of reasons infanticide might be excusable. but that is unpopular and will never be legalized.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by LinearAq, posted 12-27-2007 12:26 PM LinearAq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 325 by LinearAq, posted 12-28-2007 8:42 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

LinearAq
Member (Idle past 4765 days)
Posts: 598
From: Pocomoke City, MD
Joined: 11-03-2004


Message 325 of 327 (444076)
12-28-2007 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by macaroniandcheese
12-27-2007 2:31 PM


Re: Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
do you think the wait time and the fee might be to prevent people from adopting infants on a whim because they're "cute" like how the humane society has stricter requirements for puppies and kittens than for adult animals?
I might except for the fact that the investigation of the adopting couples is the same no matter what age the child is. (Maryland, Delaware, Virginia and Pennsylvania from a quick look). It is just that the fees are waived. An interesting fact I found out: African-American babies are less likely to be adopted and sometimes actually have to go to foster homes for a year.
so if 30-60% of pregnancies fail to implant, and 50% of implantations are sponaneously aborted (not including, then, miscarriages and stillbirth) what part of developing into a live-birthed child is "likely"?
First of all, I already said implanted so the first part of your statement is invalid.
Secondly, you seem to be saying that since most fertilized eggs die anyway, the ones that don't die aren't worth anything and it doesn't matter if you kill them.
So, since a good portion of brain cancer patients die from it, the ones that don't die aren't worth anything and it doesn't matter if you kill them.
Seems like a rather tenuous argument.
I have consistently stated that I am not against legalized abortion but I do consider it a choice of the lesser of two evils. What's wrong with me being allowed to think that it is killing a person? That was the point of my position and no one has made a good argument that it is not killing. Each of those situations that you provided requires difficult decision making on the part of the doctor and the woman. I have agreed that such decisions cannot be legislated. So why are you arguing with me about a position that I don't hold?
Could you make the same argument in favor of infanticide?
yes, i'm sure. and, i have little problem with it. it depends on the situation and the reasoning. there are lots of reasons infanticide might be excusable. but that is unpopular and will never be legalized.
Why wouldn't it be? Abortion was unpopular until the women's movement became powerful enough to affect politics. Maybe if you got enough distraught mothers together you could change the laws. The Bible actually supports this killing disobedient children so I'm sure you'd get the fundamentalists on board and we could institute "Lived until Two" certificates. Maybe "Made it to Ten" certificates or "I'm 18 and My Parents Didn't Kill Me" Certificates. There certainly would be a lot less government paperwork to deal with.
I mean really, who are we to say if the reason the mother had to kill her child is "good enough" or frivolous?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-27-2007 2:31 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-28-2007 9:27 AM LinearAq has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4016 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 326 of 327 (444086)
12-28-2007 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 325 by LinearAq
12-28-2007 8:42 AM


Re: Well known facts, common knowledge, and bare assertions
An interesting fact I found out: African-American babies are less likely to be adopted and sometimes actually have to go to foster homes for a year.
try looking at it for children with health problems or disabilities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by LinearAq, posted 12-28-2007 8:42 AM LinearAq has not replied

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 327 of 327 (444243)
12-28-2007 7:09 PM


End of Thread
300's the limit
Stow the prose,
No more discussion
It's time to close.
Finis
See you in another thread. Magic Wand

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024