~ MOD ALERT ~ Why is Pro-Life seen as Anti-Woman?

It already is being used as a form of birth control since it controls birth. So quite frankly I don't understand the question. You can't not use abortion as a form of birth control, because that's what it does, it controls 'birth'. I have no issues with women choosing abortions up to the 40th week and I don't know why any pro-lifers would have issues with them either since they are done for health issues.

- - - Updated - - -

So then it would be acceptable to abort fetuses in all trimesters provided they are properly anesthetized/numbed of pain in your opinion?

 

Originally Posted by Right Wing

The fetus has obviously never known life as we know it, but that doesn't mean he or she doesn't have the natural instinct of survival. Sure, they don't know what it's like to swing on a swingset, go for a walk, watch a sunset, or get excited about the holidays. Again, these are limited concepts of life, but not life itself. A fetus can still, and I believe he or she does, have the natural instinct of survival.

Do you know for a fact there is no inherent instinct of survival in the unborn?

 

People often draw the line at using abortion for birth control later in the pregnancy, but they believe abortion is acceptable for the life of the mother at this stage in the pregnancy. In fact, many pro-choicers also draw the line at late term abortions and/or partial birth abortions, unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother. I was wondering if you personally believed in later term abortion solely on the ground of saving the life of the mother, or if you also found it acceptable at this stage as a means of birth control. You answered my question. What if the head starts to penetrate and is partially exposed? Is abortion still acceptable at this point?

If I am opposed to murder and the painful way it is carried out, such as feeding the victim feet first into a wood chipper, would it mean I would find murder acceptable if carried out in a less painful manner? When you see in the news or in a movie a victim being tortured and murdered and you are outraged, does it mean you would find the murder acceptable if there were no torture?

 

I really have no idea why the Abortion Issue cannot be seen by both sides in the way that the VAST MAJORITY of American's see it....as something to be avoided but at time absolutely necessary.

Now for some reason the extremists upon BOTH sides of this issue have extreme tunnel vision and this is UNHEALTHY for the country, the women effected.....and the Doctors and Nurses that work at Planned Parenthood Clinics.

THE FACTS.

Just about EVERYONE abhors the idea of aborting a fetus but there are cases where it absolutely must be done.

Such as when the woman's life or health is at stake.
Cases of Rape.
Cases of Incest.
When Doctors have determined the Fetuses development to be Non-Viable.
When Genetic Tests done very early on during pregnancy determine the fetus if brought to term will be born with severe Genetic Abnormalities and these can vary to a great extent.
When Doctors determine a Fetus will come to term having a specific disease that when balanced against quality of life.....death is preferable.
And there are many more examples.

Now....the absolute best, most ethical and one could even say MORAL....method of reducing the number of abortions being done is to simply use EDUCATION about methods of Contraception widely available and taught to both young boys and girls as well as teaching abstinence and most importantly teaching EVERYONE that if a woman has unprotected sex that the very best way to prevent pregnancy is to get to the Drug Store ASAP to purchase either Morning After or Plan B.....as the taking of these Pills will not allow the IMPLANTATION OF A FERTILIZED EGG INTO THE UTERINE WALL....and as such will not allow the woman to become pregnant.

Plan B and Morning After should be made widely available to ALL AGE GROUPS....if people here REALLY want to see the end of ABORTIONS of viable Fetuses.

And lastly....right around shortly after the beginning of the 3rd Trimester we can know see the EXACT MOMENT by using a new scanning technique....that SENTIENCE STARTS TO DEVELOP IN A FETUS.

At this point the Fetus does not actually achieve full sentience but it does begin to obtain sentience and the new scan can see the parts of the Brain where Higher Brain Functions occur just LIGHT UP like a Christmas Tree.

I believe if at all possible any Abortions of Viable Fetuses with Healthy Women should be done as soon as possible and BEFORE this now determinable moment.

Preferably any abortions being done as for reasoning such as Mistakes, Unwanted Pregnancies...etc...should be done as soon as possible if Plan B or Morning After was not used as it is much better to simply evacuate a clump of cells than to deal with the obvious emotional and ethical issues of aborting a highly developed fetus.

And a bone for the Pro-Lifers.

Although this RARELY OCCURS....and is WAY OVERSTATED BY PRO-LIFE GROUPS....the very tiny number of very late term abortions should be made ILLEGAL....when a Fetus has developed to a certain point that will be DETERMINED BY A COMMITTEE OF DOCTORS.....this point of Illegality to abort being NO EARLIER than 2 weeks or so past a Medical Fetal Brain Scan that determines the beginning of fetal sentience.

And that's it.

The thing is folks.....the VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS....believe and agree that this is what should be done....and eventually it will be.

AboveAlpha

 

and despite all that the pro-life side will NEVER be satisfied until they have made it illegal from the moment of conception, they have made that very, very clear.

Just to note - you do realise how close you above comment is to the actual legal position of abortion as it stands now, if pro-lifers can't or won't accept that what makes you think they will accept anything other than complete control over the issue.

 

What I have posted is OBVIOUS to the vast number of Americans.

And as far as who will be satisfied or not....they will eventually will die out much like the Burger Meister Meister Burger! LOL!!

AboveAlpha

 

Modern sexual liberty is often focused on freeing sex from traditional consequences.
Abortion eliminates the consequences. If a person has an amoral attitude towards sex, more than likely they will regard the issue of abortion
equally from an amoral position.

Amorality is not a religious term, it means unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something. While morals can have religious foundation, the rightness or wrongness of something can exist independent of religious beliefs.

Abortion is then, the tip of the iceberg with the underlying "problem" being a rather casual approach to sexuality viewed primarily not as reproductive but as pleasure seeking.

30 percent of all data transferred across the Internet is pornographic in nature.

It has permeated our culture to unprecedented levels. Sex is literally a form of entertainment....

The danger herein, is that historically, cultures which tend to empower sexuality on such extreme levels typically suffer moral decline in other areas.

While I don't advocate Puritanism, or a complete denial of a person's sexuality, which we all possess regardless of how attractive a person...we are sexual beings, the problem is the constant stimulation and need for arousal.

It's a wonderful thing, it is...however the consequences are in place as nature's circuit breaker. No one, well maybe the Duggars is an extreme example, wants to have a child every single time they have sex, and contraceptives can prevent that...but the casual approach to sex is such that even that appears to be too much "work," and with the abortion option, aside from the very real risk of disease, the act of sexual intercourse is literally without consequence.

I fail to see the societal benefit to that, in fact the statistical correlation of the breakdown of the traditional marriage, coincides with the progression of sexual liberty.

I'd advise to wake up and smell the coffee...we're eroding from within...morally.

 

Herk...this is a very well written.....thought provoking.....concern generating....very logical and cohesive post you have put together.

While I might not agree with you upon every point....you do have several points I do agree with.

Congratulations for writing this.

AboveAlpha

 

As was and is the current laws governing abortion .. as far as Roe is concerned the majority of Americans do not want it overturned, and the pro-lifers have never accepted Roe in all the years it has been in force.

 

Well...there are Pro-Lifers....as even though I would want to make certain a woman's right to have an abortion remain legal....I consider myself both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.

I know some here might say..."You can't be both!"

Actually....if anyone on either side of this issue think that then THEY are part of the FRINGE elements on both sides that needs education.

The VAST.....and I mean....VAST number of Americans are like me...BOTH as well.

American's believe abortion is abhorrent....but sometimes necessary....and will ALWAYS make certain it remains legal.

AboveAlpha

 

I could be mean and say that the above is nothing more than an appeal to tradition - appeal-to-tradition
but as you have expanded on it then I feel it deserves a more detailed response.

Throughout our history we have been able to free ourselves from traditional consequences (not a lover of the word consequences, it always brings to mind punishment for me) ie the traditional consequences of getting small pox was usually death.

You are right moral and amoral do not require religious foundations, problem is for the majority of pro-lifers their moral foundation IS religious, and there is still the issue of whose morals are we supposed to follow .. yours, mine etc etc, it is not as if there is a universal code we can look at because there isn't, sure a government can attempt to guide people to the moral outcome they believe is most beneficial to the country as a whole, but they cannot force a moral viewpoint onto anyone .. we already tried that in the Dark Ages and is the very thing that a number of the people who founded the USA were trying to escape from.

If pregnancy were the result of every unprotected sexual intercourse you may have had a point, thing is it is only a small risk (15-20%) that a woman will become pregnant after unprotected sexual intercourse, and of those ova that do manage to become fertilized upto a 1/4 will fail to implant, so in reality, even in the worst case scenario only 15 out of every 100 women who had unprotected sexual intercourse will become pregnant .. when you factor in contraception that figure drops to 4 out of every 100 . .so I'm sorry to say that the reality is that sexes primary function is not reproduction.

Sorry don't see how this is relevant to abortion, unless you are trying to draw a line between pornography and increase in sexual activity .. good luck with that.

and always has been.

Name one and the moral decline "in other areas" they suffered

I'm sorry but now you are dropping into the realms of fantasy, unless you can provide some evidence to support this, because I cannot.

Sorry but no, contraceptives help lower the risk of pregnancy from 15-20% to 4%, even without contraception the risk is only a moderate one, so there is no "have a child every single time they have sex", and why should sex have consequences (or punishments), just as we have changed the nature of the things that can kill us, so we change the nature of how we come to be.

Correlation does not imply causation, did you know that women over 5 feet 7 inches are statistically more likely to get cancer .. does that mean that all women over 5 feet 7 inches will get cancer? There are numerous factors you have not even looked at.
There have been a number of societal benefits .. including a drop in crime exactly 18 years after Roe.

I'm sorry that the world moves forward and no longer adheres to your moral viewpoint, all I can suggest is that you perhaps find a group of people who feel the same way and live your life, as to the rest of us we will continue to explore the process of equality for all, regardless of colour, sexuality or sex.

 

The vast amount of pro-choice people are pro-life as well, myself included.

 

Thank you AA, honestly I thought it was a bit rambling without a cohesive message. I suppose what I meant was that while the notion of removing traditional consequences may appear empowering, it can also enable unhealthy excess.

 

And I agree...to a point. LOL!!

AboveAlpha

 

Do you feel the same about removing the traditional consequences of cancer, small pox, TB, etc etc etc, if not why not?

 

Awww...give Herk his moment in the Sun....I bust him a lot....but I will admit although I might not agree with what he wrote....it was a great read!

AboveAlpha

 

I think you missed my point, or maybe I'm missing yours.

Abortion, in part, removes the natural consequences of intercourse...chiefly pregnancy. I'm not implying the procedure itself is without consequences. In comparison to the commitment required to bring a pregnancy to term and the extreme commitment to raising the child...abortion is the easier route.

My point was that by removing these traditional consequences it enables the behavior to potentially be reckless. I don't think using smallpox vaccine is a valid comparison in this instance. These are behavioral issues were dealing with here, not the prevention of diseases per se. Though placing limits on one's sexual partners, and on unprotected sex...can in fact...prevent diseases. That's another issue though, my focus is mainly on the perception women may have that legalized abortion is empowering.

The traditional consequence of over eating, is to gain weight...as an example. Binging and purging can circumvent the caloric intake in the short term yet in the long term it can prove to be unhealthy. Similarly, while on the surface sexual liberty may be empowering for the woman, with legalized abortion as the birth control of last resort, this same empowerment with all governors removed..may have unforeseen consequences down the road. I brought up the correlation of the diminishing attitude towards traditional marriage as a case in point. Being blunt...from the male's point of view, why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free. Marriage used to be an expression of commitment, now it seems fewer want to commit and instead linger in the "single" aisle and enjoy the sexual freedoms this entails.

What perhaps a woman may think is empowering her, chiefly sexual liberty, is in some ways...cheapening her. At least from the male's perspective.

My opinion anyway.

I appreciate Alpha's comments, I rarely get much positive feedback on these forums...so yes a moment in the proverbial Sun...is welcomed.
We don't have to agree to appreciate a good argument. Your counter-argument to my discussion on just war theory as applied to abortion was a good one. Some of the points I had to think a long time for a reasonable rebuttal. I didn't agree with it, but a sound argument...is a sound argument regardless.

 

Ah....but where there is a Sunny Sky.....there is always clouds just LURKING on the other side of the mountain waiting to spoil the fun! LOL!!!

And remember as far as caloric intake.....there is a method that is a sure fire way to both prevent pregnancy as well as include High Protein into a persons diet.

AboveAlpha.....p.s....I believe it is called the...At the Chin Diet?