Lol, I’d forgotten what I’d set my location as. It is a good place to be, though, away from the appendix and that whore uterus.
Bravi, bravi, bravissimi! This is what matters–that assholes cannot intimidate others.
Key quote from the article:
Maybe that’s our **OMG **in the flesh? He sure sounds worried about the dread pro-abortion forces to me.
Would you be okay with a law that says a woman can have four abortions but need a permit for the fifth?
Sure. It’s very irresponsible behaviour, but that doesn’t make her medical decisions my business.
To me, pro-lifer is a label that means one opposes abortion, full stop. That’s why the more strident ones shoot the doctors or try to burn down the clinics. So you think some stranger you read about is very, very bad. Fine. You think she’s in the wrong. That is no argument for outlawing abortion, because her medical decisions are no more your business than those of someone of whose behaviour you approve. You can sniff and let forth a “Well! I never!” at your examples up there if you want, that’s up to you, but abortion should still be legal.
Are you seriously claiming that the decision to have an abortion is always a casual decision, akin to putting ketchup or mustard on a sandwich? Either you have no clue what the word cavalier means or you’re beyond ignorant on this subject.
I know someone who was raped and got pregnant as a result of that rape. Her decision to have or not have an abortion was, according to her, almost as traumatic as the rape. The event that she said was worse than the rape was when she went to her country’s embassy to report the child’s birth–the consular agents there berated her for, get this, not marrying the man who raped her so “the child can grow up with her real father.”
No, abortion is not always a cavalier decision. While I don’t doubt that there very well may be some women who initially think that way, I find it incredibly hard to believe that such a procedure would remain that for them very long after one abortion. And for those women who have had to undergo the procedure due to what even their own faith considers “exceptions to the rule,” there is still a lot of emotional trauma involved.
So, tell us the truth here: do you know what you’re talking about?
Abortion is the overwhelmingly vast majority of cases is not a decision the mother makes cavalierly. And if I were living in a world entirely of my own fashioning, you wouldn’t be in it.
Does it matter if the decision to get an abortion is a harried or casual one?
No. The issue came up in a tangentially related way- and OMG made it a big deal.
Yeah, he does that, doesn’t he?
CIte?
Beyond proving that this is so, you’ll need to explain why it’s meaningful? People use their rights in order to do many things that others find distasteful and even immoral every day, but that doesn’t translate into a reason to restrict those rights. Free speech turns into salacious smear biographies in print and on television. Free association allows people to hang out with the Klan. The right to privacy and self-determination allows people to have medical procedures of all sorts without having to explain themselves to other people.
No. Painting all women either one way or the other is just foolish. It seems likely that the process of making that decision varies from person to person.
OMGABC
Do you believe abortion may be justified to save the life of the woman?
If so, would you like to quantify the level of risk to her life at which point abortion is morally justifiable?
Would you care to give evidence to support this opinion?
CLHP hasn’t cared to offer an opinion thus far, and I wouldn’t want to think you were holding back because the question hadn’t been directly put to you.
I’m looking for something like this from you:
“Abortion is morally justifiable when the risk to the woman’s life if the pregnancy continues is __% or greater. I believe ___% is the correct level of risk because of _____________.”
Please get back to me with a response. Thank you.
I can only guess at the word games ahead. You’ve already demonstrated that you’re reluctant or incapable of admitting a mistake or that you’re incorrect. I’ll play along for a while. You’re making your claim that pro abortion is an accurate or even better term.
page 34 post 1666, you said
**to which I responded **
"You’re wrong. The term choice assumes nothing about the choices being equal in any way. You inserted that in your imagination. Not only that, since you liked to mention the technicalities of science earlier, one choice does not result in a dead baby. What pro choice indicates is that concerning this issue, pro choice supporters consider the individuals choice about their body to be the primary consideration. That is demonstrated by supporting full term or termination of a pregnancy. "
and then **you responded ** page 34 #1682
emphasis mine. To which I responded
"We’ve already given several examples in this thread where people are allowed to make choices which have a great negative impact on others and are allowed.
Can I choose to not give my blood in a life saving transfusion? A kidney, bone marrow? Can a businessman decide to close a factory and put hundreds of people out of work, with no pay or benefits. Your argument obviously fails with just a little thought. "
on page 34 post #1700 you comment to Bryan
note that you include, “as it is used in abortion” If that’s your qualifier, fine. We could have saved a lot of time if you had clarified that up front rather than use such mundane irrelevant examples. Even with that qualifier you’re dead wrong.
page 36 #1701 you continued to play games
A lot of word games when you could take one sentence to be specific and clarify.
in the same post you say
Here’s the crux of your error. You assume what’s in the hearts and minds of those choosing and those supporting women’s choice. You seem to be doing this by also assuming your own moral perception of abortion {the killing of a baby} is the correct one. Maybe that explains your questions about the nature of murder. What a convoluted mess to get to a very simple point. If everyone saw abortion as murdering babies it wouldn’t be allowed. Well duh, no kidding. It’s also obvious that not everyone sees it that way. That doesn’t lead to the conclusion that pro choice supporters see the choices as qualitatively the same, or that pro abortion is an accurate term. It was a convoluted mess for you to be continuously wrong.
in the same post you offer this nonsense
No, that isn’t the only difference. Clearly the issue is much more complex than that. Of the elements involved in the abortion issue , the women, the embryo or fetus, and the morality and rights involved, human life, it’s stages, and potential, pro choice supporters have decided that allowing the woman to choose is of primary importance. That’s why pro choice is the correct term, and pro abortion is incorrect, regardless of all the word games you’ve played.
I’ll save the rest of your post for a separate response.
You have the ability to engage in a fact based discussion on the subject that could help clarify the issue, dispel some common misunderstandings, and bad info, and define terms more accurately. Instead you muddy the water with a bunch of frivolous semantic acrobatics. Your choice, but to bad, IMO.
That’s great to know, but what a scare. I can’t imagine going through that.
Someone else (Lynn?) mentioned pre-eclampsia which is pretty common (and getting more common). This can be life-threatening. The only point of trivializing pregnancy is to degrade the woman.
Another point of trivializing pregnancy is to minimize or eliminate the need for abortion. The idea that 15% or so oppose abortion to save the life of the mother shows how warped some anti-abortion people are.
The correct terms are actually “pro-legal abortion” and “anti-legal abortion.” I will go with “pro-choice” and “anti-abortion.” Pro-abortion makes it sound like we favor women being forced into abortions, which is ridiculous.
If you remember correctly I mentioned that maybe this subject was to emotional for you to have a rational discussion, and you thanked me. I didn’t mock your experience , that’s not my style. I’ll point out again that your experience doesn’t ad value to your opinion in this thread, or change your abuse of facts and logic. You’ve continued in the thread voluntarily and it’s the pit so please stop whining about how picked on you are.
Why should I? Half the people on this thread have accused me of being a 16 year old boy. It’s understandable though right? We all know that 16 year old males just looove to post their beliefs against abortion:rolleyes:
They wouldn’t rather be hanging out with their firends, talking about girls and surfing for porn or texting on their iphones.They get their jollies here on the SDMB.
i’m pro-life and contrary to popular belief I’m not a lunatic. The ones who shoot the Dr. are sick in the head and give the rest of us a bad name.
Why are we even debating this anymore? Abortion has been legal for a long time and that is highly unikely to change. You guys have already won.
Bravissimi? Really? Non penso che sono che sono bravi.
We’ve lost on access. So many places have no abortion providers for hundreds of miles or pharmacists that won’t give Plan B. We’ve lost on privacy with enforced parental consent laws. We’ve lost on dignity with offensive laws requiring waiting periods and worse. We’ve lost with the vilification and harassment of women seeking abortions.
There is still so much work to do to allow women to avail themselves of this legal procedure with privacy and dignity.