Prochoice/ proabortion

[Cairber]

Another item of note. My sister lives in California so you'd think that an abortion in this type of case would be easy to come by. That is not the case. She had to travel to L.A. from the Lancaster/Palmdale/Edwards AFB area because, according to her doctor, the procedure could not be preformed anywhere in the Antelope Valley. I have trouble thinking that it would be against the law in one part of California but ok in other so I'm guessing that it's a choice by the medical service providers in that area to not provide this particular service.

So many doctors in the USA will refuse to perform any elective abortion. 88% of all counties in the USA have no abortion provider.

A woman I know from a parenting site found out about a severe abnormality with her child in the 38th week of pregnancy and they decided to abort rather than deliver a child that would live for only minutes. They wanted the child whole so that they could have a funeral but could not because of the so-called "partial birth abortion" ban in her state. I don't know all the details but it was really horrible for her and you could just feel her anguish in her writing.

[Cairber]

Sorry that should be 28th week not 38th.

[Haruko]

I remember only a few years ago that the anti-abortionist argument that the woman already made her choice when she decided to have sex held much sway to me, and I even used it in a debate in class, though I did exclude instances of rape. However, I soon was convinced by the argument of woman's choice and learned much of the secular argument against abortion. One of the more convincing articles I read was one by Paul Tobin at his Rejection of Pascal's Wager site.

I do not like using "pro-choice" or "pro-life". I say "pro-abortion" or "anti-abortion".

[Darth Wong]

At the end of the day, I find that most of the really hardline anti-abortion people are all about attacking the character of women who want to have abortions. That's why they exclude rape victims, even though it makes a mockery of their own "life begins at conception" rhetoric. It's all about self-righteous pseudo-moralizing judgments.

In other words, it all boils down to one word: slut. People like this assume that a woman seeking an abortion is either a rape victim (in which case it's OK) or she's a slut who has no values or morals and is generally a despicable person. It's all about dividing the world up into two groups and punishing the "other".

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Another item of note. My sister lives in California so you'd think that an abortion in this type of case would be easy to come by. That is not the case. She had to travel to L.A. from the Lancaster/Palmdale/Edwards AFB area because, according to her doctor, the procedure could not be preformed anywhere in the Antelope Valley. I have trouble thinking that it would be against the law in one part of California but ok in other so I'm guessing that it's a choice by the medical service providers in that area to not provide this particular service.

The Antelope Valley is notoriously narrow minded and conservative (not necessarily identical sets, but with quite a bit of overlap), so I'm not surprised. I'm almost certain, though, that it's not illegal, just not avalailable by choice of available medical personell (a number of which are, by the way, Muslim). I'm not sure, though, how articulate the general Muslim policy on abortion is compared to most Christians. Does anyone have experience or knowledge?

[Surlethe]

Interestingly enough, this came up in conversation a while back with a very hardline pro-life friend (one who would prohibit it for every single woman past the point of conception, even rape and incest victims). While it may not seem like much, I pointed out the distinction between "pro-life" and "pro-abortion", noting that even someone like me and someone like her have a common ground. While we differ on whether abortion should be legal or illegal, we agree that abortion is not something that should have to happen to anyone; while people who are pro-choice feel that it's often the lesser of two evils, or is a necessary evil, they still acknowledge that it's an evil nonetheless. The common ground is trying to bring about social change to prevent abortions from having to occur -- increased birth control education, for example, and free and widely available condoms.

I was actually thinking about contacting the local Planned Parenthood and the student pro-life group and seeing if I could engineer some drives with them together this semester. It'd be pretty neat, I think, if something like that could be worked out.

EDIT: On reflection, no need for that anecdote.

[Spin Echo]

The Antelope Valley is notoriously narrow minded and conservative (not necessarily identical sets, but with quite a bit of overlap), so I'm not surprised. I'm almost certain, though, that it's not illegal, just not avalailable by choice of available medical personell (a number of which are, by the way, Muslim). I'm not sure, though, how articulate the general Muslim policy on abortion is compared to most Christians. Does anyone have experience or knowledge?

There are two camps regarding abortion and islam. The first camp says that abortion is always forbiddon unless the mother's life is in danger. The second camp says that abortion is permissible up to 120 days. The reason behind this is that 120 days is when Allah supposed gives the fetus its soul and before that, it's not truly a person.

[glass]

I do not like using "pro-choice" or "pro-life". I say "pro-abortion" or "anti-abortion".

But those labels are not accurate.

Nobody is 'pro-abortion'. People aren't getting pregnant just so they can have an abortion because they think they are fabulous.*

Sometimes, though, it is a less bad option than the alternatives. In the opinion of some people. And really, the only opinion that matters is that of those directly involved, it is their choice and I support that. Thus, 'pro choice'.


glass.

* Well there might be, there are some pretty fucked up people in the world, but that is beside the point

[Tolya]

In Poland, its a fucking disgusting that 95% of public spokespeople who are anti-abortion (totally, even in the case when it dangers mother's health) are...males.

The other 5% are old women (mostly fundie catholics) who are grandmothers now and know that this problem does not concern them directly.

And pro-choice...well, young women, young mothers and the like. People who are not really detached from reality.

I do not support abortion in a way that it can be used simply as a contraception thing. But in some situations, when the mother's life is endangered, I think abortion should be made a legal option.

[Eris]

In Poland, its a fucking disgusting that 95% of public spokespeople who are anti-abortion (totally, even in the case when it dangers mother's health) are...males.

Normally I have absolutely no problem with men weighing in on the abortion debate. So long as their arguments are good, it shouldn't matter where they come from. A ratio that grossly unbalanced, though, looks like it speaks more of a premiss of misogyny rather than one of morality.

And frankly, so many of the anti-abortion arguments are so hilariously bad and internally inconsistent it would make me laugh if they didn't betray how ill-thought the people accepting them are. Thank you Abraham, you fucking loser. It's things like these that make me reject the notion of religions as a valuable, if flawed, institution rather than a grossly abusive and harmful one with a (very) few redeeming features.

[Jew]

In Poland, its a fucking disgusting that 95% of public spokespeople who are anti-abortion (totally, even in the case when it dangers mother's health) are...males.

Normally I have absolutely no problem with men weighing in on the abortion debate. So long as their arguments are good, it shouldn't matter where they come from. A ratio that grossly unbalanced, though, looks like it speaks more of a premiss of misogyny rather than one of morality.

I'd bet money that Tolya pulled that statistic out of thin air. Pay no attention to it unless and until it's backed up with some evidence.

Haruko wrote:
I do not like using "pro-choice" or "pro-life". I say "pro-abortion" or "anti-abortion".

But those labels are not accurate.

Nobody is 'pro-abortion'. People aren't getting pregnant just so they can have an abortion because they think they are fabulous.

Better terms would be "pro-legalized abortion" and "anti-legalized abortion." That sums up the beliefs of each side without implying that those in favor of legalized abortion think abortion is a good thing. Or conversely, we could say "anti-abortion prohibition" and "pro-abortion prohibition."

[ray245]

I think that the issue with abortion should come to mind when they are going to have sex. Why the hell are there people who wanted sex, but not babies didn't think of birth control methods in the first place?

I think it's the male responsibility to ask about birth control rather than the female doing so. Look at it this way. As the father, you do not have to suffer the pain of pregnancy, birth or abortion. The after-effects of abortion will affect the girls much more than the guys.

I am ok with it when abortion can be life-threatening to the mother, the child will be very disabled that abortion is better for the child and the decision has been carefully considered by both soon to be parents, the effects was taken into account, and the male MUST have some responsibility over the girl well-being.

A guy should at the least ASK about the issue of birth control first, what the hell is so hard about that?

What I hate is guys who are willing to have sex with girls, when the girl got pregaunt, you simply ask her for abortion and pay for the money required without considering anything.

After that, you say you have done your responsibility and take it like it was the girl's fault. I hate a person who did not even care what happens to the girl after that, even if the girl was his ex. Did you even think of what's going to happen when you are willing to accept the sex?

And back to the issue of birth control. Don't give me reason like birth control ruins the experience of sex. At the least work out the dates when conception will NOT take place.

You don't want a child from sexual activity, fine. But can you at the least ensure you did SOMETHING about it rather than complaining about the responsibility you have to do later on?

There are couples who tries so hard to have a child of their own, yet they are people who don't accept their very least responsibility as A parent?

[Darth Wong]

That's your personal opinion. Any reason why it should apply to anyone but yourself?

[Patrick Degan]

I think that the issue with abortion should come to mind when they are going to have sex. Why the hell are there people who wanted sex, but not babies didn't think of birth control methods in the first place?

I think it's the male responsibility to ask about birth control rather than the female doing so. Look at it this way. As the father, you do not have to suffer the pain of pregnancy, birth or abortion. The after-effects of abortion will affect the girls much more than the guys.

I am ok with it when abortion can be life-threatening to the mother, the child will be very disabled that abortion is better for the child and the decision has been carefully considered by both soon to be parents, the effects was taken into account, and the male MUST have some responsibility over the girl well-being.

A guy should at the least ASK about the issue of birth control first, what the hell is so hard about that?

What I hate is guys who are willing to have sex with girls, when the girl got pregaunt, you simply ask her for abortion and pay for the money required without considering anything.

After that, you say you have done your responsibility and take it like it was the girl's fault. I hate a person who did not even care what happens to the girl after that, even if the girl was his ex. Did you even think of what's going to happen when you are willing to accept the sex?

And back to the issue of birth control. Don't give me reason like birth control ruins the experience of sex. At the least work out the dates when conception will NOT take place.

You don't want a child from sexual activity, fine. But can you at the least ensure you did SOMETHING about it rather than complaining about the responsibility you have to do later on?

There are couples who tries so hard to have a child of their own, yet they are people who don't accept their very least responsibility as A parent?

Guess what? Birth control occasionally fails.

[Superman]

I made a crappy point

This Dr. Laura-esque argument is really a bunch of BS. I'm not going to repeat what the other people here said, so I'll get to my point.

I can always sum up the argument of the tard, usually religious idiots, by saying, "'well you SHOULD have...' or 'well you shouldn't have...'"

Let's deal in reality here for a second and stop moralizing. I can use this stupid logic for any situation, and it's just as stupid.

"I have a stomach ache, I think I need medicine..."
"Well, you shouldn't have eaten that burrito!"

How does this even come close to addressing the issue? Imagine if medical doctors adopted this attitude...

[Superman]

What I hate is guys who are willing to have sex with girls, when the girl got pregaunt, you simply ask her for abortion and pay for the money required without considering anything.

Is that really why, or do you just hate that people may have no consequences for doing something you're not allowed to do?

[Tolya]

I'd bet money that Tolya pulled that statistic out of thin air. Pay no attention to it unless and until it's backed up with some evidence.

You can go fuck yourself. How much about Poland and its current political structure do you know anyway? Nothing? Because if you knew ANYTHING you wouldnt be spouting shit like this.

Do you realize that women have so few to say regarding political matters in this country that a few weeks ago a prominent female writer by the name of Manuela Gretkowska started her own political party (Women's Party) precisely because there are almost no women in politics that have the power to influence the debate.

And you know what constitutional amendment was proposed by one of the parties (LPR) from the currently ruling coalition? "Upholding of life up from conception untill death". Its a fucking disgrace that this amendment was proposed by males and so far I've only heard one female voice that is supporting it - the voice of the said Anna Sobecka. A grandma who lives comfortably and has really no business in this abortion stuff.

All the other women that I heard on TV or on the radio are against it.

[Sean Gray]

So...how about that evidence?

[ray245]

I made a crappy point

This Dr. Laura-esque argument is really a bunch of BS. I'm not going to repeat what the other people here said, so I'll get to my point.

I can always sum up the argument of the tard, usually religious idiots, by saying, "'well you SHOULD have...' or 'well you shouldn't have...'"

Let's deal in reality here for a second and stop moralizing. I can use this stupid logic for any situation, and it's just as stupid.

"I have a stomach ache, I think I need medicine..."
"Well, you shouldn't have eaten that burrito!"

How does this even come close to addressing the issue? Imagine if medical doctors adopted this attitude...

Firstly, I am not forcing anyone to accept my views. I am simply voicing out mine, is there anything wrong with it?

Also, I know that my view may not apply to everyone, and birth control are not 100% effective. But can people at least try using birth control first?

And I did NOT say I was anti-abortion.

What I am trying to imply was, many teenagers in my country has the tendency not to use birth control in the first place. So why can't we at the least teach people about the importance birth control?

Will anything bad happen if we teach that? Not all will follow what they learn, but telling teenagers about the moral issue of abortion can't be bad can it?

And also, I am just saying abortion should not be considered lightly.

I mean come on, is it bad to consider about the impact of abortion? Yes or no?

And regarding the people that I dislike, what the hell do you care superman? Just because you personal view does not fit with mine, must I agree to everything you said. What? You are telling me I cannot hate someone?

It's a personal opinion; you cannot force people to like someone if you find his way may be considered incorrect to you.

Try telling Darth Wong to like Darkstar just because in your point of view, Darth Wong must accept Darkstar. Is that logical?

Must everyone listen to your thinking 100% just because you feel that you are right? In some way I may agree with you superman, but that does not mean I totally agree with you.

No one likes to admit defeat or the fact that they are wrong. No one can say their view is always correct, so at the least respect other people right to their own view if they are not hurting anyone.

[Tolya]

Okay, my mistake for not being specific. The debate that is going on right now is about making the abortion laws stricter = to outlaw it in all circumstances. The people who advocate this are members of League of Polish Families party.

Sorry for the confusion, when I wrote about the "anti-abortionists that are males" I mean people who want to outlaw the abortion completely. The fundie part of anti-abortionists. Of course there are many people on the political stage who are opposed to abortion AND are women.

And this 95% is not some actual statistic that I pulled from somewhere. I never claimed it was. If you took that number literally, well, then my bad, I should probably have written "almost all".

And this is the stuff that I was talking about.

http://www.crlp.org/ww_eu_poland.html

Currently, the Constitution is similar to almost all constitutions in Europe in that it protects the right to life. Extending this protection to the fetus threatens to further restrict and could potentially ban all abortions in Poland. Poland's current law permits abortion only to save a woman's health and life, in cases of fetal impairment, and when the pregnancy is a result of a crime. Giertych is also President of the conservative League of Polish Families (LPR), a political party that has consistently pushed to ban abortion in all circumstances. The Polish Parliament will soon vote on the proposed amendment.

To get an idea of what the LPR party is, here is a summary in wiki. Their actual website is www.lpr.pl but they dont have the english version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Polish_Families

You have to understand that in Poland abortion is a very hot political tool rather than an actual topic for a social debate. Currently its hard to even call it a debate. Any rational arguments put forward by people who oppose this change meet with a very stiff wall of ignorance built by the proponents of complete ban on abortion.

Another piece of news in English

http://www.astra.org.pl/articles.php?id=153

Ban on abortion may soon be even stricter. 2 August, Warsaw. In a few weeks, the League of Polish Families (LPR) will propose a draft law to further restrict anti-abortion law in Poland. According to Wojciech Wierzejski, Vice-president of LPR and former Member of the European Parliament, abortion for medical reasons, when a woman’s health is threatened, should be banned.
“Abortion on medical grounds cannot be used as a precedent to kill a human being. It is unacceptable that abortion could be granted if pregnancy threatens a woman’s eyesight. It must be eliminated.”
Wierzejski alluded to the famous case of Alicja Tysiac which is now pending in the European Court for Human Rights. Ms. Tysiac, a Polish woman, was forced to carry her third pregnancy to term in spite of the fact that her eyesight was in danger. Her eyesight eventually worsened as a result of delivery.
According to the present abortion bill, abortion is legal to save a woman’s life and health, when the fetus is badly deformed or when the pregnancy is a result of a crime.
The LPR is planning to consult with the Catholic clergy on the draft law.
The LPR president, Roman Giertych, is now Vice Prime Minister of the Polish government and Minister of Education. Last year, Maciej Giertych, Roman Giertych’s father and member of the European Parliament, organized a radical anti-abortion exhibition in the European Parliament in Strasbourg.
Wanda Nowicka

Again, sorry for not being specific, but I was thinking in terms of the Polish debate and didnt think that it would be confusing. Still, people who advocate to dispose of abortion completely, are mostly males.

Still, it's a sad fact that women's rights in Poland are not really cared for. Lower wages for women, worse employment chances. It sometimes even happens that when a young woman joins a company, she must sign a statement that she will not get pregnant in a set number of years. You would also be surprised for the conditions in which they give birth in public hospitals.

As for the proof, well, I don't have the time right now to go through archives of Polish news agencies. If you really want some "written proof" I will find it, but not now.

[Superman]

Firstly, I am not forcing anyone to accept my views. I am simply voicing out mine, is there anything wrong with it?

Your view on this amounts to a red herring. You haven't even addressed the issue; all you have done is say that the person should not have gotten pregnant in the first place.

Also, I know that my view may not apply to everyone, and birth control are not 100% effective. But can people at least try using birth control first?

And I did NOT say I was anti-abortion.

Of course they can. How does that help someone who is now pregnant?

What I am trying to imply was, many teenagers in my country has the tendency not to use birth control in the first place. So why can't we at the least teach people about the importance birth control?

Yes, we absolutely should. It is taught (to a degree) here, and the religious jackasses fight it ever step of the way.

Will anything bad happen if we teach that? Not all will follow what they learn, but telling teenagers about the moral issue of abortion can't be bad can it?

The woman who is considering abortion is the person who gets to consider the 'moral issue.' I really doubt she needs some self righteous pie-in-the-sky screwball telling her she could go to hell.

I mean come on, is it bad to consider about the impact of abortion? Yes or no?

Do you know what the hell you're even talking about? Any clinic that performs abortions here in California informs the woman of any and all possible complications. Medically speaking, there is a risk with ANY invasive surgery, but it's usually minimal.

And regarding the people that I dislike, what the hell do you care superman? Just because you personal view does not fit with mine, must I agree to everything you said. What? You are telling me I cannot hate someone?

It's a personal opinion; you cannot force people to like someone if you find his way may be considered incorrect to you.

First of all, what the fuck are you talking about?

Secondly, there are rules to any debate that fall under the category of what are known as logical fallacies. For example, your failure to address that pregnancy issue by redirecting the argument to "he/she should have used birth control" amounts to what is known as a Red Herring. Look them up.

Try telling Darth Wong to like Darkstar just because in your point of view, Darth Wong must accept Darkstar. Is that logical?

Must everyone listen to your thinking 100% just because you feel that you are right? In some way I may agree with you superman, but that does not mean I totally agree with you.

No one likes to admit defeat or the fact that they are wrong. No one can say their view is always correct, so at the least respect other people right to their own view if they are not hurting anyone.

Thanks for confirming that the "well, you should have" argument always come from the tard. You have demonstrated my point beautifully.

[Korvan]

I've always been pro-choice, but sometimes I feel a bit funny about the whole issue. I was born and put up for adoption by an unwed woman during a time when abortions were illegal. While I don't know if she would've considered an abortion, I may only exist because someone was forced to have me, something I find a bit sickening.

Well, its not something I had any control over, so all I can do today is support the right of women to have abortions if that's what they want. It does set up an interesting RAR! scenerio for me though. What if I could go back in time and legalize abortions at an earlier date, possibly preventing myself from ever having been born?

[ray245]

Look, I really don't want this to turn into a debate with you superman, I feel that you have misunderstood some of my point. Well...my sentence structure is weak, so bear with me for a while.

Your view on this amounts to a red herring. You haven't even addressed the issue; all you have done is say that the person should not have gotten pregnant in the first place.

I did not mean the person should not have sex. I simply mean the person involved should have CONSIDERED the possibility of pregnancy.

Of course they can. How does that help someone who is now pregnant?

Look at this from another angle. Who is safer from pregnancy, the couple who use birth control, or the couple who don't?

Yes, we absolutely should. It is taught (to a degree) here, and the religious jackasses fight it ever step of the way.

Ok....you understand this point.

The woman who is considering abortion is the person who gets to consider the 'moral issue.' I really doubt she needs some self-righteous pie-in-the-sky screwball telling her she could go to hell.

I never say telling that to a Pregnant women. I said, telling that to teenagers before they view abortion as the easy way out of abortion.

Do you know what the hell you're even talking about? Any clinic that performs abortions here in California informs the woman of any and all possible complications. Medically speaking, there is a risk with ANY invasive surgery, but it's usually minimal.

Err...that's not what I mean. I am not saying about physical damage to the women, but the physiological impact. The women might suffer from depression.

Are you saying women who cannot support the child must abort? I just want to know your stand.

First of all, what the fuck are you talking about?

Secondly, there are rules to any debate that fall under the category of what are known as logical fallacies. For example, your failure to address that pregnancy issue by redirecting the argument to "he/she should have used birth control" amounts to what is known as a Red Herring. Look them up.

Well...you don't seem to understand what I mean...my bad if you find my sentence too weird.

Anyway, back to the point. What I said was, must you tell me I cannot hate someone from your post here?

Is that really why, or do you just hate that people may have no consequences for doing something you're not allowed to do?

Thanks for confirming that the "well, you should have" argument always come from the tard. You have demonstrated my point beautifully.

Oh come on superman, don't straight away assume that my post mean I am saying I'm admit that you are TOTALLY right.


What I mean was, not everyone view is totally right, including yours superman. We all have flaws in our reasoning, or else there will be not need to debate. Let historians judge us if we are right or wrong for that.

I am not strongly pro-abortion, nor am I strongly anti-abortion. I find that it will be best if the government try the gray area solution. They are not 100% anti-abortion, as in abortion is not a crime to get to you fined or anything, while on the other hand DISCOURAGE people that abortion should not be taking too lightly.

However, the decision to abort the child lies with the women. If the women agreed with the government policy that abortion is bad, go ahead. If she disagree, she is welcome to.

From your point superman, I feel that the present state should remain as it is. A number of hospitals do not wish to perform abortion, allow them to. It's their choice, not yours. If they do, the government will do nothing about it, other than checking the health standard of the hospital.

We do not have to force the hospital to perform abortion if they find the pregnancy will not be life threatening to the mother. If we do, are we any different from the strongly anti-abortion crowd?

To moderates, forcing abortion to take place is just as bad.

[BrandonMustang]

I would probably be considered part of the religious right wing. I am a music minister in southern baptist church and a conservative republican. Members of my congregation use this forum to so ::gulp:: here goes.

Ethically, I believe that abortion is Biblically wrong. Citing the Bible won't do me much good here so I won't (I can if you'd really like me to). If I were ever asked for my opinion (which is obviously applied by a forum setting) I would make that known. I do not, however, believe that it is the government's place to make that decision for everyone. I have always had a problem with anyone that tries to force their beliefs on others whether they are Christians, Atheists, Muslims, etc. I believe in the separation of church and state and I believe that many of my right wing comrades are failing to uphold that concept. I guess that makes me pro-choice/not pro-abortion.

I would also never call someone with different beliefs than my own a hopeless moron. This particular issue always results in a lot of mud-slinging on all sides. I wish people would do more to avoid that. Sorry, I know many of you like to rant. Me too, sometimes.

Conservative? Yes. Fundie? No.

[Surlethe]

Ethically, I believe that abortion is Biblically wrong. Citing the Bible won't do me much good here so I won't (I can if you'd really like me to).

You know, since it's come up, unless this thread gets locked for necromancy, I'd be interested in seeing the Biblical basis for the belief that life begins at conception. I've never seen it laid out before.

You are correct, however, that even if it exists, it is not grounds for saying that abortion is objectively wrong.

If I were ever asked for my opinion (which is obviously applied by a forum setting) I would make that known. I do not, however, believe that it is the government's place to make that decision for everyone. ... I guess that makes me pro-choice/not pro-abortion.

Yes, it does make you pro-choice.

I would also never call someone with different beliefs than my own a hopeless moron. This particular issue always results in a lot of mud-slinging on all sides. I wish people would do more to avoid that. Sorry, I know many of you like to rant. Me too, sometimes.

You will very rarely find here someone being called a hopeless moron for having different beliefs. You will often find people being called stupid for presenting irrational or illogical arguments, or for behaving dishonestly. There is a subtle difference, and one which is good to learn.