Most of the stories of abortion in Ireland involve traveling to England. I did a search on illegal abortions, but I found it hard to find ANY stories of illicit abortions in Ireland. Perhaps I was using the wrong terms. (Mostly because all I got back were about abortion law). Anyone want to help?
It seems to me that women have had to suck it up and live by the morality and laws dictated by a bunch of Christian penis’s for like how many hundreds of years?
Finally, and at long last, the tables turn. Suddenly they get to determine what is right for them. Not according to your interpretation of what is moral or what is right or what is a sin. It’s my body dammit and it’s my decision. I’m not trying to tell you what to do, when it’s your child you go ahead and live by whatever outdated moral code you like. But you’ve lost the right to tell me what’s the ‘right’ thing for me.
So now it’s your turn to suck it up, Bub.
It’s not much fun when no one sees it your way, is it?
Come back and see me in a couple of thousand years, we’ll talk!
http://www.counterpunch.org/schulte01202006.html Since abortion was illegal before, this is what it was like. Do you really think your beliefs justify putting women through this crap again? It was before your time so you have no knowledge of it. It is not a simplistic cartoon world. Your faith would trump the beliefs of many who do not share them. Better give a little more thought to it.
Preach it, sister!!!
BTW, Curtis, ever see Dirty Dancing?
Usually when Der Trihs goes on about how pro-lifers hate women and want to see them die, I sigh a little. Now that I’ve actually seen one cheerfully admit that twenty-five to fifty thousand deaths would be okey-dokey, I guess I owe DT a leetle apology.
WTF?!?! And that’s OKAY to you?
On that basis, why do you consider a comatose human to be a human life? They are not currently sapient; their future sapience depends upon medical technology, and indeed it may not be possible, with current tech., to bring them back at all. Is such a person “human life” to you?
Too, technically speaking, there is a natural abortion rate; that is to say, a fertilised egg may be naturally aborted due to no actions on the mother’s part. What would be, to you, the rate of natural abortion at which it would no longer be reasonable to assume that any given fetus will, in the future, become sapient? I mean, for example, if 70% of all fertilised eggs are naturally aborted, it would not longer seem reasonable to me to assume that any given fertilised egg would become sapient. What, for you, would be the cutoff point?
Ah. Then your measure of determining worth is something that is not inherently human - that is to say, another species could also possibly hold the factor you consider to be worthy of protection. So it would not be reasonable to say your defining factor was “human life” because there are some situations in which non-human life would fulfil it.
So far, it seems, your major point is sapience. At what point of sapience do you consider worth at? That is to say, by what measure you take do humans pass and all other animals fail? What’s your “test”?
As i’ve said, there is a natural abortive rate, so that actualyl isn’t a fact, nor inevitable. Too, the problem still remains that you’re treating something as something that it is not yet. Why should we treat something that is not yet sapient as though it is currently sapient? Why does that it may well be mean that it must be treated as though it is now? I don’t understand why we should treat fetuses as though they are human, which they are not yet, but we shouldn’t treat them as though they are dead, which they are also not yet. Death is even more inevitable, even more certain a result, than is sapience. If anything, it should be the more reasonable argument. Why isn’t it?
You could say the same thing about prostitution laws, rich Americans can go to Nevada or Rhode Island for prostitution but poor Americans can’t.
Even if one views this from a utilitarian perspective as long as you think fetuses are indeed human I think 1,000,000<25,000 and even then I don’t think that many women would have abortions and or so many who do have one will die. Mind you, I do not wish the women to die but it’s a million lives in exchange for a several thousands. All other pro-lifers more or less imply this but I have stated this flatly and factually.
No you do not have right granted by Providence, nature, or anything to take the life of your child.
See above: I do not wish to see them die but the rate of women dying from abortion will be higher than when abortion is legal however is one million human lives more than 25,000 to 50,000?
Yes I do since unless he is irrevocably dead and can’t be treated.
I’d place the start of life at the moment of conception. Even if a large portion of fetuses are miscarriged, just because it’s a mistake of nature doesn’t mean humans have the right to commit abortion. Also by my statement I mean that once another life becomes human-like in sapience they will be given the respect of humans.
By your logic, all humans are destined to die, thus do any humans have any inherent value?
Something else that should be legal; and another example of people like you asserting their ownership of other people’s bodies. Especially women’s bodies.
Which is one reason why the “pro-life” position is evil, and most certainly not “pro-life”.
When the “human life” in question is nothing but a mindless lump, no they don’t outweigh the right of a woman to not be treated like an animal. And that’s what a fetus is; you can call it a “human life”, call it a person; call it what you like but it’s all just word games. And treating a woman’s life, health and happiness as less important than a lump is why the “pro-life” movement is innately evil. Your word games don’t diminish the immense insult and threat to women that your position is.
Then “life” as you define it isn’t worth much. All you are doing is degrading words like “life” and “human”; you aren’t making those few cells anything more than a few cells.
As long as they are male. You and those like you demonstrate no respect whatsoever for women.
Okay, legalize prostitution.
Something you’re going to have to decide, then, is what is more important to you:
[ul][li]That your country get more Americans as fast as possible, even if they’re not wanted[/li][li]That your country has Americans who are as free as possible, even if you personally don’t want that[/ul][/li]
On this issue, you can’t have both. Either woman can decide how many children they will have or she can’t. And if they can’t have the control legally, many will take the control illegally. And some of them are going to die in the attempt.
Anyway, I’ve made all the arguments I can.
What about prostitutes who are manipulated to do so by their families?
I told you if the woman’s life is threatened I support abortion. Also yes the life of a fetus is more important than a woman’s right to convenience. Besides fetuses are not mere mindless lumps.
HA HA HA. Do you think I support abortion for female fetuses? No I do not.
What a naive statement not concerning the full impact of it possible.
If freedom is the freedom to murder than no I do not wish such freedom to be tolerated.
A separate issue. And a fairly close to non existent problem as far as I know, at least in this country.
But any family that did so, would probably be one that thought like you. Your view of women as just things to be used, as undeserving of making their own choices is the sort of attitude that could lead to a family using their daughters for prostitutes. After all, they are women; not really human.
Yes, they are mindless lumps. And even the slightest whim of a woman is more important than such a lump. I don’t care if she wants to play fetus tennis; it is a thing, and she is not.
Of course not; you want them born so they can suffer, and be treated as breeding animals if they reach adulthood.
If abortion is “murder”, that just means some forms of “murder” are ethical. you are just degrading words again.
No, no, no. I do not support male prostitution either BTW>
Than do you think a man has a right to torture a dog for pleasure?
Stop making me into misogynistic sadist. Early feminists were pro-life and I in general support women’s rights, for instance I support women fighting in combat and being drafted during wartime.
No. Dogs aren’t mindless lumps; morally, I would be perfectly happy to sacrifice a handy unwanted human fetus to save a dog. Dogs are less than people, but more than a fetus.
Then stop pushing for things that are cruel and anti-woman.
Well, you made the point the Nevada (and Rhode Island?) has legal prostitution (which it does, except in the cities). Nevada has not turned into a lawless hellhole as a result. Why couldn’t legalization be extended nationwide? Of course, that’s an issue for another thread.
Well, I don’t think you can get your country to agree to extend the legal definition of “murder” in this fashion. Or I least I hope you can’t, because the nebulous “good” of bringing an extra million babies that their own mothers don’t want is outweighed by the significant “bad” of turning a large segment of your population into criminals. Read up on Prohibition sometime.
First, I’m guessing prostitutes would be required to be of age. Second, way to treat women (and men!) like children! Besides, if you want to talk about prostitution, start another thread.
So obviously, I’m guessing you’re against the morning after-pill, no? What about IUDs?
Making abortion illegal will not end it. It will drive it underground, back in back allieys like it was before. But people of means will just go to a country where it is legal. It will be the poor who will be forced to have children they do not want ,or can not afford. You would force a child to be raised by someone who does not want it, someone who may be too young or too poor to raise it properly.
The cost of abortion would go way up. Many years ago before it was legalized, it was hard to raise the money. Then you often got involved with an unsanitary, unprofessional people who preyed on the poor who were desperate. You do not want to go back there again. Abortion doctors did their work late at night, in places that had to move frequently to escape the police. many were botched. Girls died or were disfigured. Many could never have children after it was done. It was ugly, ugly times.
You’re wrong Curtis, I do have the right and it was granted to me by the democracy in which I live.
You may believe that ethically it’s wrong, but it’s the law because your opinion is not in the majority.
Anytime you want to stop living in a democracy I encourage you to move, there are many countries where abortion is illegal.
I can see that you find it challenging to live under a system that is at odds with your belief. Stop and think about all the women who, for hundreds of years lived under a system that was at odds with their belief.
No one is forcing you to live by any other beliefs than the ones you value, when you have an unwanted pregnancy you may choose to do as you believe. However your suggestion would indeed force all women to live not as they feel is morally correct, but as you do.
Rail away about how wrong it is to have to live with a moral practice you so disagree with, but recognize that women have 2000 years of it under their belt. We’re just not that impressed with your outrage.
And what would you say to the millions of women who passionately agree with Curtis?
“That’s okay. I’ll defend your right to choose, too.”