Well, more importantly…this is Great Debates, not IMHO. This is not the place to just toss out personal opinions about a topic without providing some basis for debate.
(I’m saying this as a poster who notes that he can’t really “debate” a personal opinion…not as a “junior mod”).
Well, I gave an example of a pro-abortion… and patriotic… stance, before. Mandatory Abortions for All! Negative Population Growth!
Here’s a pro-choice one: A woman has the right to choose if she brings another life into the world or not. Reproductive rights are the essence of personal freedom. It his her body, and her choice.
Is there a difference?
I am minded, by the way, of a definition of pro-life. “Well, every time an egg is unfertilized, a potential life is lost. We need a squad to hunt down fertile women and make sure their eggs become implanted so not one potential life fails to come to term!”
So you think implantation=fertilization?
Perhaps you could provide a link to the science behind that?
(I’m not sure how an “egg” becomes “unfertilized”).
Yep, that was my point exactly.
Bob
Dave, it’s all about choice. If an egg can’t decide to become unfertilized, then are any choices real? 
Oh no, uh-uh. If you won’t offer your definition of the term “pro-abortion” then your use of it is meaningless. I feel entirely uncompelled to defend my position against undefined labels.
Here’s a cite for you:
Given a tubal ligation failure rate of 0.5%, and a vasectomy failure rate of 0.05% - 0.15%, the percentage of couples who will have a baby even though both are sterilized is 0.00025% - 0.00075%, for an average of 0.0005%. That is one out of every 2000 couples.
I doubt that anyone is saying that. What if a couple is barely getting by with their three children, and then they accidentally conceive again (due to a broken condom, for instance)? Suddenly they are burdening the welfare system.
Oh, and as for cites, here’s a link to information on various birth control methods, including failure rates. It seems that condoms have a failure rate of a whopping 14%! So my above scenario is not at all unlikely. Even if the wife is on the pill, there is still an average combined failure rate of 0.77%, which is much greater than that for sterilization. And considering that sterilization is not as cheap as a condom, someone who is hovering on the edge of welfare is not likely to take advantage of it.
The problem here is that abortion is one way to take responsibility.
That’s not 100% effective, either. In fact, It’s only 85% effective. That is based on your comment of “during and near ovulation time”. If it’s used perfectly (i.e. only have intercourse after the fertile period has ended rather than before), it’s still only 99% effective.
But it does happen. And just because it hasn’t happened to you or any of your acquaintances doesn’t mean that it can’t. It’s all probability.
Don’t be obtuse. Just because someone wants to allow others to choose whether or not they have an abortion doesn’t make them pro-abortion. Think about it:
pro-choice = everyone should have a choice
pro-life = everyone should have life
following that pattern
pro-abortion = everyone should have an abortion
Now seriously, one can hate the idea of abortions while still believing that it’s a woman’s right to make that choice for herself.
So you want to play games? Okay. I totally agree with that pro-choice statement. I absolutely do.
The difference is when it’s applied. What I’ve been advocating and what you advocate are before and after. One involves abortion, the other does not.
It’s the woman’s choice alone. The only opinion she should even remotely consider is the father’s, but she’s certainly not bound by it.
And I, for one, am really disgusted that the extremist bible-thumpers have managed to make this issue be a central plank for conservatives in the political world. It’s the woman’s choice, pure and simple. Everyone else, butt out.
My $0.02 worth…
And if all that fails, thank Christ abortion is legal.
Actually, it’s one in every 200,000 couples, if I follow your math correctly. In any case, in a country the size of the United States, there are going to be some couples who go the double-sterilization route and still get unlucky.
A woman does not lose her right to make reproductive decisions simply because she becomes pregnant.
:smack: That’s what I get for attempting to do math in a hurry. You know, I thought that 2000 sounded pretty low. I made the mistake of equating 0.0005% with 0.0005 instead of its actual decimal representation of 0.000005.
Exactly. Only abstinence is 100% effective, and asking a married couple who are both sterilized to abstain is just plain silly.
No, I got a little annoyed, clarifyed my post, then took a break so as not to type anything stupid when I was annoyed. I don’t know exactly how “hotheaded” that is.
[hijack]On a lighter note, **hothouse orchid ** would make a great username. May I? [/hijack]
Continue.
You’re actually advocating the rhythm method? Not only has it been totally discredited as an effective method, but a few months ago a study was done at the University of Saskatchewan which found that many women ovulate more than once per month. link
I’m of two minds here. First, I agree with the pro-choice notion of legal, safe and rare. I do know people who have had abortions, and it has, so far, never proved to be a pleasant experience for anyone involved, to say the least.
Second, I don’t think abortion is morally wrong at all. Even if the fetus is a human life, I don’t believe in any inherent sanctity of human life. I believe that death is bad because of the emotional repercussions on those who lost someone, not because there is something special about life.
To sum up: I hope to never need an abortion. I take precautions. I will also not hesitate to get one if I find myself pregnant and unwilling to have a child.
Joe
Your cite gave stats for either sterilization procedure individually. However, what you calculated to be one in every 200,000 for a failure rate would have to involve the failure in both the man and the woman’s sterilization. What are the real odds of that happening?
As far as married couples abstaining from sex, have you no imagination what you can do during four days of the month if you “just have to”?
Really, it isn’t difficult.
LaurAnge
No, I’m not advocating the rhythm method. Please read again what I wrote. If you followed it you wouldn’t “find” yourself pregnant.
I found it sad that you do not see your life (or another’s) as being special. It is.
All too often the status of that union changes because of death or divorce and the sterilization can have a negative affect on the second marriage(s).
I think that the “morning after” pill is a good solution. One doctor said that most often it actually prevents conception rather than just causing spontaneous abortion of an hours old zygote.
But even if the effect is to cause the body to throw of the zygote, since this is not illegal, why is their objection to this medication being sold over the counter? Whose business is it?
BTW, I had always assumed that abortions were first legal in the 20th Century. Not so. When our country was founded, abortions were legal.
Florence Kennedy, I think.
As for the rest of this debate, it becomes pretty pointless if those who are anti-abortion (wanting it to be illegal) realize that no matter what law they pass, there is absolutely no way to prevent a determined woman from having an abortion.
There are too many ways, too many other countries, too many doctors who will save cells from their non-pregnant D&Cs and preform them on pregnant women to ‘correct irregular periods’, too many years of women using home remedies like herbs. The bell’s been rung, and it cannot be unrung. The only thing left to do is to make it as safe and rare as possible by keeping it legal and developing better and better birth control.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by adaher *
**Abortion is wrong, except when the life of the mother is at stake, or in cases of rape. In my view.
This is the sort of comment I really hate. Abortion is wrong except… If you think it is wrong to kill a fetus how does it suddenly become ‘right’. If the mother is raped how is that the baby’s fault, do they suddenly deserve to die? And what determines whose life is more important, the mother’s or the baby’s. If you try to put limits on it when does it end? Is it okay when the mother has a drug addiction? Or when the baby is going to be born with aids?
If abortion consititutes murder it should be wrong unconditionally. If you are going to make exceptions for one you must allow it for all.
By the way, I am a firm believer in the right to abort.