Abortion discussion

[Mlle. Zabzie]

My wife and I went through a miscarriage a few months ago, I was definitely uneducated on the situation before it happened. It's a tough process. I don't know if you've ever watched Marley and me, but that's exactly how it happened for us. We were all excited going to the doctor, and then we got the news.... and my wife is still not over it. Good luck with everything, you have my condolensces.

Marley & Me made my husband cry. On a plane. On a plane full of people. I fortunately seldom watch in-flight movies.

My condolences to you as well. :grouphug: We keep telling ourselves that at least we have no problem getting pregnant. I hope you are in the same situation.

[EHK for Darwin]

thread title is only part of how disgusting this thread is. push your agenda in church, don't rub people's faces in where they shouldn't have to deal with it.

I don't really see why the topic should be off limits. Personal experiences can make many issues touchy ones, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed. I think the abortion/miscarriage angle is a fair comparison. Particularly if you couch it in terms of inadequate or lack of medical care leading to higher frequencies of miscarriage & infant mortality. If ardent anti-abortion advocates oppose extending access to medical care to the poor and/or uninsured, which most of them do, are they not helping to bring about the death of tens of thousands of babies (their definition) each year from preventable (with proper care and monitering) miscarriages? Are they not providing a financial incentive to poor and/or uninsured women to get abortions themselves rather than face the much more costly medical expenses of full pre/post-natal care? It seems that they're effectively leading to more infant death and more abortions, yet there is no acknowledgment of this issue from those parties. Its simply abortion is an outrage and every other preventable catastrophe or major violation of church tenets (besides homosexuality) doesn't much matter.

I don't think its a stretch to call them hypocritical on this.

[Guest thebadlady]

Rhelle,

We were talking about it in the other thread. A new thread was requested. I started one. If you think I've overstepped decorum please report me to Ran or a Mod.

Because we've never had an abortion thread here before? You are the general of your fingers, you may have obsessions but maybe its time to realize that not everyone shares your opinion and you can just shut up about abortion for once. No need to make sensationalist threads to stroke your own agenda, esp if it includes such tasteless comparisons. i don't need to run to a mod to be utterly disgusted and speak up.

ehk, not offlimits, but with something this touchy, a classier thread title and premise for OP surely is in order.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

I don't really see why the topic should be off limits. Personal experiences can make many issues touchy ones, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed. I think the abortion/miscarriage angle is a fair comparison. Particularly if you couch it in terms of inadequate or lack of medical care leading to higher frequencies of miscarriage & infant mortality. If ardent anti-abortion advocates oppose extending access to medical care to the poor and/or uninsured, which most of them do, are they not helping to bring about the death of tens of thousands of babies (their definition) each year from preventable (with proper care and monitering) miscarriages? Are they not providing a financial incentive to poor and/or uninsured women to get abortions themselves rather than face the much more costly medical expenses of full pre/post-natal care? It seems that they're effectively leading to more infant death and more abortions, yet there is no acknowledgment of this issue from those parties. Its simply abortion is an outrage and every other preventable catastrophe or major violation of church tenets (besides homosexuality) doesn't much matter.

I don't think its a stretch to call them hypocritical on this.

EHK - Yes. And there's a real debate on how much "pre-natal" or fertility assistance the state should provide. Should the state be paying for someone like me, who is quite frankly something of a freak of nature (full disclosure - I pay for everything out of pocket)? I say no. From society's perspective, those dollars would probably be better spent on producing a flu vaccine and my husband and I should probably adopt. I can afford to do otherwise though, so I will. Proper prenatal care (sonograms, folic acid, monitoring blood sugar, blood pressure, etc. etc., IMO should be provided better than it is.

[lokisnow]

I agree with EHK.

additionally if we have legally mandated and enforced pregnancy to term in every instance, regardless of circumstance, shouldn't we also be able to justify legally mandated and enforced adoption as well? A bit communistic, perhaps, but it makes sense to distribute orphaned and abandoned babies regardless of circumstance of the people the government requires to adopt them. Especially since legally enforcing every pregnancy to term would mean we'd soon have a much bigger surplus of orphaned and abandoned babies which we will need to do something with. :)

[Annelise]

A new thread was requested. I started one.

'preciate it. :)

[needle]

I didn't visit the original thread, but this thread seems to be about miscarriages, and the title was about abortion. Am I the only one who thinks these are different things?

ctually, one thing that interests me about this is that the natural process that the Plan B pill induces happens very frequently to fertilized eggs (or so I'm told, I'm a liberal arts major). And yet, no one treats it as a big deal, as they tend to do in the case of miscarriages. So I'd say that this certainly indicates that we do have some spectrum, at least unconsciously, of the progression of whether or not a fetus is "human".

Alright, I'm probably not making sense, but it's just something I wanted to share.

Actually, you aren't making any sense. This is an international board and 'plan B pill' means nothing to anyone outside America. Explain?

Zabzy - tough times. Big hugs to you.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Needle,

We were talking about both in the politics thread. My original thread title was thoughtless so a changed it to a general discussion about abortion so the topic didn't continue to derail the politics thread.

[The_BlauerDragon]

I don't think its a stretch to call them hypocritical on this.

I'm having flashbacks from the thread about the 9 year old rape victim that was excommunicated for having an abortion to save her life. Anyone else remember that thread?

Personally, I think it is a very valid debate. If we are going to treat abortions like they are such a monumental thing that must be a major point of contention for political debates and policies; then it is only fair that we show an equal amount of concern for the prevention of miscarriages.

IMHO, preventing women who want to have children from suffering the pain and agony of a miscarriage (or multiple miscarriages) should take a much higher priority than debating whether or not abortion should be made illegal. Then again, I'm kind of odd that way. I think abortion is wrong 90% of the time, but I do not think that it should be illegal (and I certainly don't think that it is something that I should be poking my nose into).

[turinturambar]

Marley & Me made my husband cry. On a plane. On a plane full of people. I fortunately seldom watch in-flight movies.

My condolences to you as well. :grouphug: We keep telling ourselves that at least we have no problem getting pregnant. I hope you are in the same situation.

Thankyou.

It was our first try, so ya we tell ourselves that. On another note, we've decided to put it off for a year. I graduate in a year, so we're just going to wait until then.

[Guest thebadlady]

I didn't visit the original thread, but this thread seems to be about miscarriages, and the title was about abortion. Am I the only one who thinks these are different things?

Yeah, thats my point. Entirely different things

Plan B is also called the morning after pill.

[mashiara]

Marley & Me made my husband cry. On a plane. On a plane full of people. I fortunately seldom watch in-flight movies.

Zabz, big hugs for you. This is so hard, what you're going through.

A hug for Turinturambar as well.

[Annelise]

Personal rights stop when the next person begins. The mother can do whatever she wants with her body so long as she does not harm the person that happens to be inside it. In fact, defending abortion with the "mother's own body" argument is very much like the old "master's own property" argument. (It even comes from the same party.)

Interestingly, why is the fetus-carrying female almost always called the "mother" if she does not contain a human being?

Putting it here because it doesn't deal with politics.

And this:

Did you read the story about the, I think it was 9 year old girl who was raped by her step father and got pregnant (twins)? She was excommunicated after the pregnancy was terminated, since, you know, 9 year olds aren't capable of bringing twins to term. Should she be tried for murder, in addition to the excommunication?

Your argument suggests it was her duty to die in the attempt to carry those fetuses.

[Lightning Lord]

QUOTE (El-ahrairah @ May 19 2009, 21.40) *

Personal rights stop when the next person begins. The mother can do whatever she wants with her body so long as she does not harm the person that happens to be inside it. In fact, defending abortion with the "mother's own body" argument is very much like the old "master's own property" argument. (It even comes from the same party.)

Did you read the story about the, I think it was 9 year old girl who was raped by her step father and got pregnant (twins)? She was excommunicated after the pregnancy was terminated, since, you know, 9 year olds aren't capable of bringing twins to term. Should she be tried for murder, in addition to the excommunication?

Your argument suggests it was her duty to die in the attempt to carry those fetuses.

ETA: Didn't know how to move my post, but it does belong here much more than in the political thread. Didn't see this topic. Sorry!

[Jaxtile]

I recall that thread. Thinking back, I STILL can't see any reasonable, logical reason for the church to do what they did.

when it comes to things in wombs, those adjectives in front of reason that give the church trouble.

[Annelise]

ETA: Didn't know how to move my post, but it does belong here much more than in the political thread. Didn't see this topic. Sorry!

No worries & thanks. :)

[El-ahrairah]

Putting it here because it doesn't deal with politics.

And this:

Yes, it should be in here - thanks.

As for that case, I do admit it is hard to condemn it in the circumstances, especially as the twins likely would have died regardless. But in most other such "life of the mother" cases I would have to say it's a poor mother who sacrifices her child's life to save her own.

[Annelise]

Interestingly, why is the fetus-carrying female almost always called the "mother" if she does not contain a human.

Oh yes, there was this.

In the context of my post in the other thread, I was writing from the pro life POV. Hence mother & unborn. As for any greater linguistic trend, I cannot say. It does seem that the language is more divided (mother/woman, unborn/fetus) than you are crediting on the board though, but I'm not sure re: the accuracy of my memory of past threads.

ETA:

Yes, it should be in here - thanks.

No prob. :)

[Angalin]

As for that case, I do admit it is hard to condemn it in the circumstances, especially as the twins likely would have died regardless. But in most other such "life of the mother" cases I would have to say it's a poor mother who sacrifices her child's life to save her own.

So... the mother should be suicidal, then?

I suspect that in many cases where the mother's life is at risk, the child's chances of being born full-term and healthy are pretty low; in any previous era, they'd probably both have died. As well, depending on the nature of the problem, the mother may not be in a position to make a decision on the nature of her treatment: if it's a real emergency, someone else may be advised by the medical team as to the odds. For instance, I know someone who had to make the decision between saving his wife's life and ending her chances of having children; she, being comatose and near-death, didn't get a say. :(

[Dornish]

While I don't agree with the argument of the OP it points to another point: There are very few that actually believe the unborn to be people. To use a less incendiary example:

Say you're in a burning building and you have the choice to save either a single infant or a freezer containing thousands of fertilized eggs. Which do you choose?

If you honestly believe life begins at conception, that a zygote is a full human being, you HAVE to pick the freezer. However no one in their right mind will do this. Why? They're not the same thing. An infant is infinitely more valuable than a fetus.