Olentzero - I’d like to discuss the pros and cons of partial birth abortions or even late term abortions. There are a number of other active threads dealing with abortion in general. Please help me keep this on track.
:: With that being said, let me semi-hijack long enough to answer ::
Thousands dying every month in Iraq is truly deserving of sympathy and attention. So are the tens of thousands dying every month in Africa. Let’s not forget the thousands worldwide that are killed for political reasons, the thousands that will die because they step into the wrong church, or the one that will die this week at a friend’s home because he and medical science were “unlucky”. (Sorry – a little personal interjection there.)
Premature death caused by the failings of others or a ludicrous “system” is truly shameful. But I’m at a complete loss as to how to prevent them. The world doesn’t seem to agree on how to handle these things and we certainly can’t elect someone to be the final authority in these matters. World politics today is done by committee. And the U.N., encumbered as it is by the strings of its puppeteers, is unable to end this kind of suffering. On the flip side, never in recorded history has there been a time where an individual has had nearly absolute power and fairness and justice been the norm as power passed to the successors.
Tell me how to stop the starving in Iraq. (In another thread.)
Mr. Z I’ve been watching your views in the “unfair taxation” thread. You quite intelligently and articulately argue on the same side as would I. So well in fact, that I’ve been reluctant to get into that discussion. You fooled me completely in this thread. I guess that just shows that being a fiscal conservative is not necessarily a measure of other beliefs.
To all. If you want to discuss partial-birth and late term abortions count me in. If we can’t keep on topic, I’m outa here.
Adoption is a great option and to me, a preferable one IF…BIG “if” you have a family that wants to take the child and care for it. Unfortunately, there is not a huge market for babies of color, those that are handicapped or those that come from a mother who might impart birth defects.
You are right that a baby doesn’t have to ruin your life. I never said it did. But I am betting that a 14 year old hispanic girl with a catholic family is going to see her life options shrink dramatically if she carries an infant full term. THat is the point. It is up to her to decide if it will ruin her life…not you.
My point was that if you make a mistake, and are facing results that will seriously mess up your life, you should be able to avoid the consequences. This is different than failing to take responsibility for your actions. Avoiding disaster is not the same as shirking responsibility.
ummm…sex education is taught in a lot of schools, and you can get free birth control from clinics, planned parenthood, etc.
(Bolding mine) That’s a fundamental point that we won’t agree on, so I’ll just let it go.
Again, I say adoption is an option. I think it’s sad that some parents (I’m including the dads here) don’t want their children, but if you really feel that you cannot or just don’t want to raise it, at least let it have a future. For those of you who like to bring up the argument, “why don’t all those pro-life people raise them or pay for it?”…my family has adopted children. I have not myself, because I am not married and believe that whenever possible a child should have two parents. When I am at that stage in my life, though, I do plan on it.
To drag this back somewhere near the OP, Lissa wrote:
A local reporter, Ruth Padawer, wrote an piece entitled “The Facts on Partial Birth Abortions: Both Sides Have Misled the Public” on September 15, 1996 for the Bergen Record, which found that the procedure was a lot more common than pro-choice groups had claimed.
(and describing misleading rhetoric on the other side)
and one last note on frequency:
I recommend reading the article to anyone interested in the subject; Padawer seems to be unbiased and simply doing her job as a reporter: tracking down the truth.
It is, however, four years old, so much of the data may have been overtaken by later events (such as the fact that this prodcedure has been outlawed in two dozen states for the past few years, New Jersey among them). The one indisputable fact, though, is that this procedure was very much more common than abortion-rights advocates claimed, and that it was, in most cases, not done to safeguard the health of the mother.
The fundamental rights issues, of course, still remain.
OK, back to topic. I don’t see a problem with late term abortions, partial birth abortions OR infantacide (up to a few minutes after birth). All we are doing is drawing a somewhat imaginary line. On one side we call it a zygote, on the other side it is a human being.
I personally believe that abortion is killing. My wife worked at an abortion clinic as a nurse. SHe described what it was like. Trust me, what they take out looks pretty damn human.
But that is not the point (to me anyway.) What matters is what is best for society. Abortion is a better option than poor teens perpetuating the cycle of poverty with unwanted children they can’t care for (and noone else wants.)
Furhtermore, the law should always be much broader than morals. Because something is considered immoral does not necesarily mean that it should be illegal.
I simply can’t subscribe to a system where we advocate infantacide. Like most everything else where someone is given absolute authority and/or power over human life, I’m incapable of entrusting any person or known methodology to make the decisions and execute the plan. (My sole exception is capital punishment – even with all of its shortcomings.)
For centuries, the unborn were given moral protection because, “that’s my baby in there”. In less that one lifetime we’ve progressed from sacred, through abortion “on demand”, to open support for infantacide. And it scares the hell out of me.
For myself, I want a clearcut line drawn that states that abortion prior to “X” is allowed, and post “X” is criminal and I believe that the line should be positioned prior to the third trimester.
We can argue about where to move the line once there is one.
Depends on what society you are talking about. Various native societies practiced infanticide. The Japanese have always practiced abortions and I believe that the Incas had special potions to induce abortion. Heck, even God aborts roughly 1/3 of all fetuses through miscarriage.
[qoute]For myself, I want a clearcut line drawn that states that abortion prior to “X” is allowed, and post “X” is criminal and I believe that the line should be positioned prior to the third trimester
[/quote]
This is probably the most palatable place to put it. As I said though, a second semester fetus is pretty damn human looking. It is just easier to stomach it at that point.
I didn’t say we couldn’t put the line prior to the second trimester, or even at conception. Just that I want it somewhere prior to the third trimester.
And I do understand that nature aborts as many as 1/3 of all conceptions. It also tears apart and feeds to the lions any human that is foolish enough to walk across the Serengetti.
Humans are separate from nature because they’re “civilized” and follow higher social orders and have morals and :: cough cough gag gag ::
Maybe I should have phrased it differently. Do you feel that partial birth abortion is legitimete in cases of rape, incest, or when it will put the mothers life at risk? You still haven’t answered that question
**
You and other anti-late term abortionists seem to think that as long as the fetus is not viable outside of the womb it’s ok to commit abortion. The problem with this is that medical advances have made it possible to keep alive fetuses tat would have died in the 50’s. Fetuses that couldn’t be supported now, will be able to in the future. What those who oppose late term abortion are saying is that something that would have been legal in the 50’s should be illegal now, and that which is legal now should be illegal in the future. Why? Because of advances in medical science.
The question is so broad that it encompasses many of the standard abortion debates. For a moment let me duck the general debate and say unambiguously that I oppose all late term abortions. The method doesn’t matter. If we’re talking about aborting a fetus that’s not yet considered a human being simply because it hasn’t had the good sense to be born, then the fact that the mother was an unwilling participant in its conception is irrelevant. The abortion, if there was to have been one, should have happened long ago. It’s kind of like Mr. Z’s endorsement of infanticide – can we then support killing children because they were the product of a rape and cause the mother undue stress?
I didn’t say that either. I’m trying to argue the anit late-term abortion position without injecting general anti abortion discussion.
Medical advances are on the doorstep of being able to nurture the fetus for the entire 9 month gestation period. (I shudder to think what that gestation would yield without the mother’s varying chemistry, emotions, movement, antibodies, etc. but that’s also for a different thread.) It’s a moral dilema to which I don’t have the answer. But I can certainly sympathize with the argument that the same medical treatment that is available to “fully developed humans” should not be withheld from a fetus “by choice”.
SouthernStyle - point taken. I’ll try to stay a little more focused.
So we have some quotes from Da Ace regarding estimates of the numbers of intact D&Es performed in New Jersey, at the least. What I’d like to see is a breakdown of when this procedure is performed. It looks like the article quoted above has a section on this, so let’s take a look.
**
**
So we’ve established that 99.96% of all abortions, using any method, are performed before the fetus would have been able to survive outside the womb in any case.
**
There’s some information about third-trimester abortions in this article - untangling it is in order:
**
This is assuming, as it was not expressly indicated, that the other doctor who provided figures does not perform third-trimester abortions. So we have a grand annual total of 56 late-term abortions performed on an elective basis. To me, that’s absolutely no reason to decry intact D&E as “infanticide”.
There is also a section on why it’s done, and a rough breakdown of elective vs. medically indicated abortions. It may be a discussion point for some of you, but to me it’s irrelevant simply because I believe that a woman has an unconditional right to an abortion.
How would you feel if a known carrier for Tay-Sachs disease has an amniocentesis at 18 weeks (mid second trimester) which reveals her fetus will have Tay-Sachs? Or to extend the argument : Cystic fibrosis? Sickle cell disease?
Some background -
Tay Sachs is an autosomal recessive disease in which one of the cellular structural molecules is unable to be broken down. Prevalence of carriers is 1/10000 in normal population, 1/30 in Ashkenazi Jews. It causes a slow neurological degradation and inavoidable death with current therapy by age 3.
Cystic fibrosis is an autosomal recessive disease in which one of the chloride channels in the cell membrane is mutated. Prevalence of carriers is 1/25 I believe in the Caucasian population. This mutation leads to a thickening of mucus and secretions, leading to chronic pulmonary infections and pancreas problems. Death with current medical therapy is before 30 usually.
Sickle cell disease (or sickle-cell anemia) is an autosomal recessive disease which is a point mutation in one of the hemoglobin genes (usually). Prevalence of carriers in the African-American population of the US is 1/6 (I think). While there are medications to stave off complications, usually it leads to severe pain crises and other complications throughout life. Average lifespan is into the mid 40s.
What exactly is the definition of viable? I have heard people saying that the fetus “can’t survive on its own” Well, how long will a new born survive on its own?
What is the measure folks?
Just for clarity, I use the same rule but I say “couldn’t survive on its own without medical technology.” Which of course gives one quite a bit of lattitude. If you don’t use that definition, then the day will soon come that we are looking at viable fetuses at 5 weeks.
I agree with you here Mr. Z. Goddamn it why can’t the anti-abortion people just admit that they won’t accept abortion in any case ever. That’s what they want. Why? Cause they are sissies.
Why can’t the pro-abortion people admit that we are snuffing out a life. Why? Cause they are sissies.
On abortion after rape, I’m torn. On one hand, I was conceived by an act of rape myself, so, as a matter of identity politics, I can’t favor legalising what is, in character, my own killing.
On the other hand, I believe very strongly in natural law, rather than in positive law. I am coming to realise that man must live as in the state of nature, thus effectively in anarchy. (If you’re gonna follow the invisible hand, best follow it all the way!) Thus I must concede that murder, arson, and so forth need to be legalised. Lest you think I am merely an anarchist, understand that I am an eco-centrist, who would gladly execute someone who marred the ecosystem–but individual human rights are less transcendent.
:P:p;P;p
(or,)
No! You have to like it! The perfection of the human soul is conformity to the mind of God, thus to the Tao, and the workings of nature! Pain is part of the order of the universe, and to dislike it is to sin in your heart against the will of God!
:Wally:
I was actually going to say something along the lines of “pain and death are necessary to maintain the flow of things, in both a spiritual and ecological sense,” but figured that might piss someone off.
I think what you’re referring to is Pennyroyal, a plant belonging to the mint family. It is known to induce abortions (and why there’s such a furor over the RU-486 pill you got me) which was originally documented by the ancient greeks. However, it can be fatal if it is an ectopic pregnancy.
Back to the OP- does anyone know a reliable source for unbiased stats for 3rd trimester abortions as well as the number/percentage of D& E procedures, or should I just take the figures from Planned Parenthood and Operation Rescue and average them? Do they track stats for “reason for abortion”?
Personally, I find abortion to be the most reprehensible form of birth control. But I also found that “Breech baby, breech baby” line funny so it looks like I’ll be joining you in hell.
It’s good to see people post with humor in these “entirely too serious” threads. It keeps the debate reasonable and delays their degenerating into personal attacks.
edwino - Are you trying to take the intermediate step of supporting abortion to prevent the birth of someone with a likely defect? (A discussion worthy of its own thread.)
Mr. Z - Devil’s Advocate, huh? You want posters to express their opinions from well thought out ideas and to express themselves in a way that reflects not only their commitment, but their reasoning. Olentzero - You seem to be basing your arithmetic on numbers that are known to be false. This gets pretty sticky as most everyone admits that there are no publicly available numbers that accurately reflect the numbers in question.
