Bans 'do not cut abortion rate'

[HAL 9000 96]

Again, you are missing the point. It's not that a fetus is dependent in that sense - it's a fundamental life and death dependence. The fetus CANNOT LIVE without the mother. END OF STORY.

Once you get that point, you'll cease with this drivel.

Its another slippery slope argument to which you responded to. Boil it down to a reductionist approach with bold, simple words for them to understand along black and white lines of reasoning.

A fetus is not considered as a separate entity from the point of view of human rights prior to birth.

Many people would disagree. That's the point. The abortion argument essentially boils down to whether or not the fetus can be considered as a human with rights of its own. If you take as a premise that the baby doesn't have rights, you're correct in saying that the debate is pretty pointless.

Either way, it's not a debate about female rights. It's a debate about fetus rights.

The way the 'law' considers it- female rights trumps any consideration of fetal rights based on X, Y, and Z factors that are quite clear. I understand the moral argument and some folks should just stick with that.

Pretty much. The right to "choose" is just that: to give women the choice of when they have offspring. In fact it doesn't require any sort of judgement or moralising from other people as to the behaviour or choices of the individual.

They have a right to choose whether they spread their legs.

But we're not talking about the cooperation of just anyone else - so pulling out analogies about vegetative people in hospitals is irrelevant. We're talking about the cooperation of one specifically identifiable person who would be forced to go through biological changes and financial burdens if they were forced to go through with the pregnancy.

Didn't have a problem going through with the sex though!

And they also have a right to their bodies that you have NO say over.

The baby has a right too. Murder is immoral.

Define baby. You have no right to redefine what a gestating fetus because you are ignorant of fact.

Want to redefine murder, try your congressional representation, winner.

[Peikko 1,575]

Eventually science will invalidate our current thinking, always has always will.

If the hoped for breakthroughs in birth control come about much of this debate will indeed become moot so long as there is concensus that access to birth control is also a fundamental right

Of course it is. But even if babies can be raised from conception outside the womb, the libs will still hold to their holy sacrament of abortion on demand.

Enjoy your stay on planet Joe. Women don't have abortions for fun and those who support the right of women to have access to abortions aren't doing so because of some fetish for fetus killing.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

.

Imposing pregnancy? NO one is imposing pregnancy - She CHOSE to be pregnant when she spread her legs. In case anyone hasn't heard, that is how babies are made.

And in case you haven't heard, if HE would use a freaking condom that wouldn't happen.

Your misogyny is record setting, Bubba. Momma must be so proud of you.

[HAL 9000 96]

Eventually technology will allow fetuses to grow outside a human womb...what then?

Excellent question. Women that WANT motherhood that are willing to have an oocyte removed from their bodies for the reproductive means would likely be happy to see that fertilized oocyte go to zygote, embryo, fetus, and living baby. Fathers too I guess.

Perhaps the ones who don't want motherhood should have thought of that during the conception?

Because the event of conception is exactly planned and the woman knows exactly when this occurs.

You might want to call it now, winner.

Then again, in the tangent you're sprouting nonsense on, you'd be smart to re-read and notice that unwanted pregnancies would hypothetically transfer over to these devices that are as yet nonexistent.

More Joelogic pulling something from where it ain't.

[_Simpson_ 250]

You just said there that "people need to be held accountable for their actions in the bedroom and the operation room".

What else is to be drawn from that - except that in your view a woman who gets pregnant should be forced by law to go thruogh with it, whether she wants to or not.

That is an ideological agenda. Its not a stretch of interpretation either - you said this explicitly.

Yes people to need to be accountable for there action, not rocket science.

I said early on that what is at the heart of this for me is the moral aspect. Where were you when I said that, why not run with that, no need to answer I know why. At this point were just talking past each other, you will choose to believe what you want and all power to you.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

The fact is that late term abortions are carried out extremely rarely and in cases where the mother's life is in danger or where there is massive disfigurement that would result in still birth.

I don't agree with it beyond those criteria and the window of opportunity to take care of it at an early stage is pretty generous.

what a stretch but like I said before these technicalities are going to cut it for me, theres something bigger here that needs to be addressed.

Its not a technicality - its a fact.

Why don't you like late term abortions?

Its a more dangerous procedure.

Is that really why?

Imposing pregnancy? NO one is imposing pregnancy - She CHOSE to be pregnant when she spread her legs. In case anyone hasn't heard, that is how babies are made.

That would only be true if pregnancy was guaranteed each time someone has sex.

Even you must know that that isn't the case.

No sir, but you're guaranteed not to get pregnant if you abstain.

When I go fishing, I don't necessarily go for the fish. Sometimes I get one, sometimes I don't. But I know for sure that its a good possibility.

So what?

Exactly... No answer.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Do you really don't know or are you seriously that stupid?

1. The risk to the woman's life is higher, much higher.

2. The fetus could be viable.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Again, you are missing the point. It's not that a fetus is dependent in that sense - it's a fundamental life and death dependence. The fetus CANNOT LIVE without the mother. END OF STORY.

Once you get that point, you'll cease with this drivel.

Its another slippery slope argument to which you responded to. Boil it down to a reductionist approach with bold, simple words for them to understand along black and white lines of reasoning.

A fetus is not considered as a separate entity from the point of view of human rights prior to birth.

Many people would disagree. That's the point. The abortion argument essentially boils down to whether or not the fetus can be considered as a human with rights of its own. If you take as a premise that the baby doesn't have rights, you're correct in saying that the debate is pretty pointless.

Either way, it's not a debate about female rights. It's a debate about fetus rights.

The way the 'law' considers it- female rights trumps any consideration of fetal rights based on X, Y, and Z factors that are quite clear. I understand the moral argument and some folks should just stick with that.

Pretty much. The right to "choose" is just that: to give women the choice of when they have offspring. In fact it doesn't require any sort of judgement or moralising from other people as to the behaviour or choices of the individual.

They have a right to choose whether they spread their legs.

But we're not talking about the cooperation of just anyone else - so pulling out analogies about vegetative people in hospitals is irrelevant. We're talking about the cooperation of one specifically identifiable person who would be forced to go through biological changes and financial burdens if they were forced to go through with the pregnancy.

Didn't have a problem going through with the sex though!

And they also have a right to their bodies that you have NO say over.

The baby has a right too. Murder is immoral.

Define baby. You have no right to redefine what a gestating fetus because you are ignorant of fact.

Want to redefine murder, try your congressional representation, winner.

No, the fact is that you've already redefined what life and murder is. We're trying to restore it back to where it should be. Back to reality, and truth.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Eventually technology will allow fetuses to grow outside a human womb...what then?

Excellent question. Women that WANT motherhood that are willing to have an oocyte removed from their bodies for the reproductive means would likely be happy to see that fertilized oocyte go to zygote, embryo, fetus, and living baby. Fathers too I guess.

Perhaps the ones who don't want motherhood should have thought of that during the conception?

Because the event of conception is exactly planned and the woman knows exactly when this occurs.

You might want to call it now, winner.

Then again, in the tangent you're sprouting nonsense on, you'd be smart to re-read and notice that unwanted pregnancies would hypothetically transfer over to these devices that are as yet nonexistent.

More Joelogic pulling something from where it ain't.

She does know exactly when it occurred. At least one of those times she was screwing, correct? It doesn't happen from swimming in the sea.

Do you really don't know or are you seriously that stupid?

1. The risk to the woman's life is higher, much higher.

2. The fetus could be viable.

Whatever makes you feel better.

[Peikko 1,575]

No, Hal has not redefined anything. You want to do that based on your own version of what is morally acceptable.

The fact is that murder is a moral judgment and one that we place on the act of killing another human being based on a particular set of circumstances. Killing a fetus does not come within these criteria.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Resorting to uncouth language isn't going to support your position, Joe. Just a tip.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hard to believe, I know, but birth control does fail.

But let's see - it would seem that these "moral" arguments can be summarized as follows:

"Well you should have considered that before you opened your thighs, you silly tart".

"I'm don't give a ####### if your child grows up in squalor or in a care home, the important thing in this overpopulated world is that you have a chance at life, regardless of the quality of it"

Ding ding! Huzzah!

[Peikko 1,575]

Fail? Of course the Joe's in this thread are simply seeing abortion as a US teen phenomena. The fact is that most abortions take place world wide because women do not have access to reliable birth control.

Edited October 15, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[_Simpson_ 250]

No, the baby outside the womb can be cared for by anyone. Inside the womb only one person.

Imposing pregnancy on women who do not wish to go through with it will save no lives at all in fact, I would predict a greater number of deaths. Pregnant women who do not wish to be pregnant will attempt to kill the fetus, even if in the process they kill themselves. This is documented fact.

Whats a documented fact? That SOME woman have went to these extremes, well yes but I think that goes with out saying. I hope your not trying to make the argument that this number is huge because I would have to pull out the BS card.

I got a kick out of the first sentence in the second paragraph, because according to what you said it would only take one woman to die when attempting to kill the fetus for what you said to be true. What were you comparing it to, I mean you dont consider the fetus a life, maybe your looking down the road(finally) to birth. That said are you trying to make the argument that the population would decrease in a society that doesn't allow abortions? BS

You can't have that debate while this is not reality. I suspect, and I hope that the ability to regulate whether one would become pregnant during intercourse will have improved leaps and bounds by that time, and that women who are currently prevented from using contraception for whatever reason, will no longer be prevented from doing so. Abortion is not the first resort for anyone - it is the last.

No apparently adoption is, sad very sad. With options like adoption why is abortion even on the table.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

**SIGH**