If you truly believe this tumbleddown I’m going to have to conclude that you would condone the killing of a 2 week old baby.
If pregnancy could cripple her then why was she dumb enough not to get sterilized.
Machine guns for arms? How barbaric:p
How about you replace your hands with scissors instead? Just like Edward scissorhands:dubious:
It’s your choice you know?
You are willfully blind, and you have proven AGAIN that you have no knowledge of these matters. I know that I’ve already posted at least once, and possibly several times, the fact that doctors WILL NOT sterilize a woman unless she has reached a certain age. Even if a pregnancy will kill or cripple her, she is told to just use birth control. She won’t be sterilized, because medical technology might advance, or she might change her mind.
Go ahead, call up some gynecologists and ask them if they’re willing to sterilize women in their 20s or 30s. We’ll wait.
C’mon Lynn, you know that Doctor Always Knows Best!! Of course a woman will change her mind, because every woman wants to be a mother. She’s just in denial at the moment.
I see very well thanks.
I don’t recall anything about her aged being mentioned in the scenariio. How do I know she’s not in her 40’s???
You may have finally gotten there. That’s what it is, and that’s what I’ve always viewed it as.
Abortion is. If you feel other things are but shouldn’t be, start another thread about them.
I see very well thanks.
I don’t recall anything about her aged being mentioned in the scenariio. How do I know she’s not in her 40’s???
Gee that didn’t take long at all. See the link oh wise one.
http://www.obgyncanada.com/female_sterilization.htm
Counselling is very important before a sterilization procedure. In the days of paternalistic gynaecology, the gynaecologist decided what is the best method of contraception for a patient and the patient agreed. Often the criteria applied for sterilization were: women in their late 30’s, married for several years with three or more children with at least one of each sex. Today, one cannot apply these criteria, although the regret rate and request for reversal will be very low if one applied these criteria. The gynaecologist is a councillor who explains the various contraceptive options and risk/benefit. The patient/client makes an informed choice. They should be aware of the various reversible methods of contraception and vasectomy as an option for the male. Tubal ligation is meant to be a permanent and irreversible with occasional failure. When tubal ligation fails there is an increased risk of tubal pregnancy. The surgical procedure itself is associated with a small risk related to the general anaesthesia, risk of bleeding and infection and trauma to bladder and bowel.
Your links show that ONE ob/gyn in Canada is willing to consider sterilizing a woman in her 20s. ONE. Will consider it. Not that he’ll do it, just that he’ll consider it.
The other links show that most ob/gyns are reluctant (to say the least) to sterilize younger women.
As for how you’d know that this was a young woman, you were expected to read her posts in this thread. As for me, I started having sex when I was five days short of 18. I knew that I never wanted kids. I didn’t think that my birth control would fail, though, or fail several times in a row, so I hadn’t really gone searching for a doctor to sterilize me.
Still waitin’.
And sterilization fails as well. I know two darling babies who were born after a vasectomy/tubal. Nothing is perfect.
Because there are states where the doctors will not sterilize you until the number of your children times your age equals 100. Meaning if you have no children, you are never going to get sterilization. Other states require the signature of the spouse, so if you don’t have a spouse…
I didn’t even live in one of those states at the time of my tubal and it took me getting to 33 and a couple of medical conditions to get my tubal, and even then the doctor really thought it was a bad idea and did his best to talk me out of it.
Besides, sterilization can fail.
Sterilization for women is invasive surgery. Some women choose not to take the risk of surgery, often for health reasons, and use multiple forms of BC. BC fails too.
It’s so more complex and gray than you will accept.
Should someone who is unable to exercise self determination, and feeding off of someone’s body, take precedent over the self determination of the person who can exercise it, and is biologically enslaved to the other individual?
Sheesh. Yes I know, but that’s still incorrect as I’ve pointed out. You’ve done nothing to support it other than repeat the assertion.
An argument only has merit and relevance in how it relates to this topic so rather than waste time fucking with your semantic gymnastics you can cut to the chase.
We don’t usually get to choose to kill other people , that’s true, but other people aren’t usually feeding off our body and asking us to do that for nine months.
You keep talking about how the other life is minimized or discounted, which I don’t think is true in all cases, although if people see it as a non person clump of cells that’s their business. Let’s talk about what that other life is demanding of the women and how we would allow that or expect that in any other situation.
Surely it couldn’t be your style of posting. The way you make broad inaccurate arguments and take several posts to finally make the specific point you could have made for the start? Couldn’t be that? Couldn’t be that a good portion of your arguments assume that your personal view of abortion and the value of an embryo as a person is the correct one?
This is more of your, correct by a semantic technicality routine. !st.) I said it’s often not a fetus that’s aborted which remains true. 2nd) An embryo is not a him or her to the woman having the abortion or the people preforming it, because they can’t tell and that matters. The anti abortionists who like to use disgusting photos to scare or shame women into not having one don’t use an image that represents most abortions because an accurate image wouldn’t look like a baby or a him or her.
So, you can have your technically correct.
That’s not what I said. Maybe you could respond to what I actually wrote instead of rewriting it to suit your argument. {recognize the style? How’s it feel?}
Wow, you respond to something I didn’t say and then accuse me of playing a game. Nice try. {recognize it again? not very productive is it?}
Not playing. Express your point and how this question relates
Are you kidding me? You’re ridiculous. For one thing, we both know that “doing wrong” is pretty subjective, so for that reason alone your request is pretty useless. But just for giggles , let’s say I got really drunk last night and called my ex to tell her what an ignorant cunt she is. Would the law allow that? How about if I said something incredibly cruel and mean to a small child? Would the law allow that? Or, an example I gave before. A businessman decides to sell his business on a whim and puts 100s of people out of work and without benefits. Is there a law against that? Or, how about if my younger brother is ill and completely dependent on me, draining my resources, requiring a transfusion from me on a regular basis? Would the law allow me to refuse to give him a transfusion, and continue to foot his medical bills?
Again, you’re playing the correct on a technicality game, which you could have explained posts ago. Sure proponent can mean just that people want abortions to be safe and legally available. I guess I’m pro root canal , and pro triple bypass as well. Who knew.
See, the thing is, you began this little game by 1st claiming that Pro-Choice is a misnomer, and pro abortion, the more accurate term. Then you proceeded to make your ridiculous argument for how choice applies. Now that I’ve demonstrated that was nonsense, and why Choice, is actually what we advocate first, and are proponents of, much more than abortion. So, turns out you’re still wrong.
and pro root canal, and pro triple bypass, which I hope nobody ever has to have. By first and foremost, pro-choice.
nope, I defined them accurately. You can have your little correct on a technicality thing , now that I’ve shown your overall argument was nonsense.
They certainly do determine things: whether to cry or not, and what kinds of soothing they prefer, and things of that nature.
OMGABC
I wouldn’t limit abortion to just those circumstances, they’re just a few things I picked at random.
While abortion is safer than continuing a pregnancy and pregnancy still carries a significant risk of death and disability I don’t believe that anyone should have to endure those risks against her will.
You obviously disagree.
But you still haven’t given me a number- what level of risk to life and health is acceptable to force on someone?
Is it best decided on a case-by-case basis by a woman and her doctor?
Or is it an arbitrary risk of, say, 90%?
You may not feel it is relevant to the discussion, I do, and I’d like to hear your thoughts please.
Re: contraceptive failure.
Assume a woman is theoretically fertile until 50 and sexually active from 15, that is 35 years where pregnancy could occur.
The most effective contraceptives (including female sterilisation) have failure rates of about 0.2% with perfect use.
That is, if 500 women use it for a year, or 50 women use it for 10 years, or 10 women use it for 50 years, one will get pregnant.
You really don’t have to be that unlucky to get pregnant when you didn’t mean to.
It would be interesting to live in a world where 30% of women refused to have sex though…
Women who are getting abortions at the clinics are not the ones aborting due to ectopic pregnancies. Those abortions are done at the hospital. The majority of women going to those clinics are the ones doing it for retarded reasons. They had unprotected sex, got pregnant and don’t want to take responsibilty for their actions.
I threw in the word retarded for the mental case who sent me that PM. You’re retarded.
This is the pit dear mental case. If you are offended by the word retarded it is because you are retarded. If you don’t like it don’t read it. It’s an expression imbecile. You don’t have to be politically correct here. Off to block private messages so I don’t get anymore emails from freaks of nature.
A ridiculous comparison and you know it.
[QUOTE=classyladyhp;]
They had unprotected sex, got pregnant and don’t want to take responsibilty for their actions.
[/QUOTE]
They are taking responsibility by choosing what to do about it.
How do you know?
Really, now? A women’s clinic only performs one medical procedure? I find that rather odd. You wouldn’t happen to have anything other than your own say-so to prove that’s the case, would you now?
How do you know?
How do you know?