Because, for many people, it is. It’s an inconvenient truth, but a truth nonetheless. There’s a reason, for example, contraceptive use is affected by the ability to access abortion and is why a woman is less likely to use contraception when an abortion is readily obtainable versus when when it’s not.
But I’ve been over this ad nauseum, and I’m usually just met with people sticking their fingers in their ears, so I’m not akin to go over it again. As it was, I was just pointing out that there’s a bit of truth to what Starving Artist said, and there’s empirical data to back it up.
I didn’t have to stretch at all. It’s amazing what you can find on the internet.
I’ve asked a similar question before of people, and they can provide me with no response. If, say, an abortion costs $300 and a condom costs $1, then why do approximately 46% of women who obtain an abortion not use, at the very least, a condom? It is, after all, 300 times less costly than an abortion. The answer is quite simple; because people typically weigh the costs of having an abortion to the costs of having a child instead of weighing the costs of contraceptives to the cost of having an abortion.
I’m glad that you don’t think that there aren’t a sizable portion of women who think “Oh, I’m not worried if I get pregnant because I’ll just get an abortion!”, but simply because you think it to be so doesn’t make it so.
You cannot ignore what does not exist.
And again, this is true. There’s empirical data to back it up. Simply because you do not like something, doesn’t mean you get to dismiss it.
I strongly suspect that the percentage of women who have breezily and earnestly uttered the phrase “I’ll just get an abortion!” is really quite small. An abortion is not a mani-pedi that you just pop in for and then go dancing later. It’s an internal medical procedure which carries with it low but real risks of complications, even discounting any emotional side effects.
I’m tempted to relegate the Happy Aborter to the same mythical conservative pantheon as the Welfare Queen and the Lazy Illegal Immigrant but I’ve heard it from some on the left as well. The common factor seems to be “clueless men”.
After some thought to expand on this, I oftentimes see the reasons someone is exercising a right get used in an argument, i.e. the reason some women get an abortion is… and the reason presented is meant to be something unpleasant or distasteful, i.e. the reason she is getting an abortion is because she wants to fit into her party dresses, or the reason he is producing pornography is because he wants to make money. Thing is, the exercising of rights doesn’t need a reason, or if it did it would represent a radical redefinition of what a right is, i.e. changing something the government cannot punish you for doing into something you need to justify.
So, OMG, I take it you object to the reasons some ill-defined number of women are getting abortions. Before I continue, is that basically correct?
What doesn’t happen all that often? Women not using any forms of contraceptives (or using them inconsistently), getting pregnant and having an abortion? Only in your mind. Feel free at any time to join me in the real world.
…Seriously?
You know what was meant. Women can buy them for their partner to use. A dollar, which was your figure, is a lot cheaper than $300. Your half-assed attempt at playing semantics in order to avoid having to answer the question makes you look rather foolish.
It really doesn’t matter what you doubt, as doubting something doesn’t make it untrue. As abortions become less easier to procure-- either because they become more expensive or they simply become unavailable-- the number of pregnancies go down as contraceptive use goes up and women’s sexual practices change (they either restrain themselves from having sex or they use they use contraceptives they otherwise would not have). I realize that’s contrary to the usual talking points from abortion supporters, but reality has a well-known conservative bias
I have been over this exact point before, pulling out cite after cite after cite and example after example after exampler, only to have them flatly ignored. At some point in time, sticking your finger in your ear and going “La la la la la, I can’t hear you. Nope. Can’t hear you!” has to be considered to not be a valid debate tactic.
They exist, but their existence has no bearing on a woman choosing not the use any form of contraception.
I’m glad to see you flatly state that you get to dismiss something because you don’t like it.
I see. So you dismiss what was provided to you on the basis that it’s only “one PDF”. If, hypothetically speaking, I were to find for you another source, then would you accept what is being sourced to you as indeed true, or would you dismiss that one as well on the basis of being “only two”?
Something I’ve always wondering. What, exactly, are you basing your assertion on what?
The internet, if you know no one in real life, is literally rife with obstinate women who proudly proclaim they’ve had <x> number of abortions, feel absolutely nothing regarding it and/or would have another one in the future if/when they get pregnant.
Though I must say, it strikes me as odd that you’ve never heard someone flatly say that if they get pregnant, they’d have an abortion without any hesitation, for example.
That has absolutely nothing to do with any of my posts.
Anywho, as it stands, the original point remains; Starving Artist is at least correct when he says that liberal policies have/do contribute to things such as higher STD rates.
There might be a correlation (possibly even a causation) between legalized abortion and some incidence of STD transmission, but why does the woman’s lack of worry worry you?
More directly, you undercut possibly valid arguments you might be making when you can’t resist throwin in digs like this.
Incidentally, what does “smaller government” mean to you? Just curious.
Because it was a response to curlcoat who somehow showed skepticism over the fact that some woman would use abortion as the proverbial back-up plan. Or even first plan, as it sometimes (often times) is.
You have this knack of putting words in people’s proverbial mouth. Where was I worrying about the woman’s lack of worry? Obviously, my memory must be failing me since I don’t remember every doing that.
Various periodicals I’ve read over the years. There are a lot of women who feel strongly about the right to have an abortion. It doesn’t mean they talk about it like it’s a day in the park.
Well, as long as some people on the Internet say it, it must be true in most cases.
That’s not quite what I’m arguing about. I’ve also heard a lot of people say that if they ever got Alzheimer’s they’d kill themselves when they began to seriously deteriorate, but I’ve never heard anyone say “It’s just death!”.
So I’m going to hazard a guess and say that you’re proof is from, generally, abortion doctors who’ve said “In all my years, I’ve only seen one or two women who take the decision to have an abortion lightly”. Did I get that right? You do realize said people would have a vested interest in saying that.
Yeah. Stupid lying women!
As it is, there’s a funny thing about the internet. When people are allowed to congregate into like-minded groups and are afforded some level of anonymity they tend to type. A lot. A whole lot. And usually if you go into a group which is generally open to the idea of abortion, you’ll find such comments as:
“It was an easy decision.”
“Best decision of my life.”
“I don’t think about it at all.”
“I have no regrets.”
“I saw an ultrasound and it was just a clump of cells.”
“If I got pregnant again, I’d have an abortion without hesitation.”
Etc. etc. etc. and so on and so forth
Basically, comments which kind of make you roll your eyes at the idea that no woman has an abortion leisurely or treats it as a “tragic and heartbreaking” decision-- even moreso since there are quite a few prominent groups trying to “normalize” abortion.
You mean you’ve never heard pro-choicers utter “It’s just a mass of cells” or something similar? Because, you know, I can find a hell of a lot of examples of this, even on this forum, as it’s pretty common. A cavalier attitude towards abortion would naturally derive from a cavalier attitude regarding that which is aborted, don’t you think?
Why would you assume I was reading quotes from abortion doctors? I was reading quotes from women who’ve had abortions.
I wasn’t suggesting they were lying. I was suggesting that your assertion that “often” the “first choice” for contraception is abortion is not supported by what some people on the internet have written. I’ve got just as much evidence of women saying that it was a difficult, worrying decision as you do that it isn’t.
I’m sure many do. What I am disputing is that this is a significant percentage of the women who have abortions, which is what you’re asserting.
Maybe I’ll do a poll here.
That doesn’t mean that a D&C is something one takes lightly. It’s still an invasive surgical procedure. I mean, I can get fillings (and if I get a cavity I will) but that doesn’t mean it’s my first choice for dental hygiene care.
I have no problem with partisan assholes. I am one myself…the key is to have the balls to be honest about it.
The Tea Party movement is fucking worthless. They haven’t even gained total control of Washington yet, and they’ve already negatively impacted economies around the globe. Between their retard economic beliefs and their dumb fucking God, I feel they should be exiled to a place north of the Arctic Circle.
Of course, when arguing with a douchebag conservatives, it’s a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” type of situation.
If women who have abortions don’t express misery and remorse, they are criticized as heartless baby killers who just treat abortion as a useful alternative to contraception.
And if they do express remorse, and describe their abortion as “tragic and heartbreaking,” then abortion opponents point and say, “Look at the trauma it causes. This is the type of misery we’re trying to prevent when we call for an abortion ban.”
Well, I cheerfully invite you to compose your own words at length, but the words you end up saying are of course subject to analysis and questioning. I’m confident I haven’t put words into your mouth simply by questioning what words YOU put into your mouth.
Okay, I’ll ask flat out - do you care why a woman seeks an abortion and, if the answer is yes, why do you care why?
In a more general sense, I figure the “partisan asshole” thing comes from believing and behaving as though people with different viewpoints didn’t reach those viewpoints becasue they hold different opinions or grew up under different circumstances, but because they are evil and/or the people who taught them are evil. I’ve no doubt on some issues, I personally qualify, as do numerous posters here (for some reason, Der Trihs and Diogenes the Cynic come quickest to mind, possibly because I agree with them on many issues but just can’t go full-retard the way they do). When it comes to the abortion issue specifically, I figure partisan assholery takes one of two forms, the relevant one here being “women get abortions because they are stupid selfish short-sighted sluts.”
Another relevant form is where you make up a position and assign it to someone else. Then you can proceed along arguing against that position instead of genuinely engaging in any kind of discussion.
Well, that sounds more like strawmanning than partisan assholery, but I admit this isn’t an exact science.
Of course, if your point was that there are reasons other than a dislike of immature female motivation to oppose abortion, you could just come out and say it. I simply chose the example that seemed most relevant in the minor discussion with OMG.
