Zika virus sparks abortion debate in Brazil

Examples? Because all I have ever seen is vitriol from the so called "pro-life" groups

 

There is no "granting of legal ownership" because there is no person under the law

So, let us suppose you grant legal personhood to a foetus - when does that kick in? Is the foetus legally a "person" at 21 weeks? 12 weeks? 6 weeks? First positive pregnancy test? On implantation? Soon as conception occurs? Perhaps we should declare "every sperm sacred"?

 

You are joking right? We are talking here about something that grows into an organ of the woman's body. The placenta implants itself into the uterus and although the two circulations are distinct there is cross over with foetal material entering the maternal circulation and vice versa
This is only the briefest of explanations and does not go anywhere near the complex interaction that occurs - there are texts written on the subject

 

BZZZT Wrong again!

The rational Pro-Choice position has the weight of the Law of the Land and Individual Rights behind it.

It is your inane attempt to deny women their Constitutional Rights that has the BURDEN of changing minds to meet.

So far that has been an abysmal failure on your part for the last 40+ years.

The future is not looking any better for you either.

 

Lung cancer is not a human being. Does a cancer cell have the same genes as a human being, will it grow into a human being? No. Will lung cancer "cure itself" if left to run its natural course? No. Quite different from pregnancy.

 

A cancer has the same rights as a non viable fetus. Cut it out

 

And that natural process which all women are specifically designed for is "attacking" the mother? You are joking.

 

Now you ask a real question, the first in this thread. Its obviously a person at 21 weeks, at that point it gets all the protections of a person. How much earlier is open to debate, but following the fundamental legal principle of innocent until proven guilty, and err on the side of caution (Blackstones formulation), the starting assumption is that it is a person at conception unless the point at which it is not a person can be proven.

Many secular people will grant that it is not a human at conception, or very "early" in the pregnancy, although the arguments are based more on convenience and to avoid all kinds of legal and moral issues than logic.

 

Do you read and try to comprehend these threads? Obviously not. The "law of the land" is imperfect, and it can be wrong. It was wrong with slavery, it was wrong with Jim Crow, it is wrong with abortion.

But if you continue to tie your entire argument to the "law of the land" and have no other moral compass, then when abortion is no longer the "law of the land", I expect you to fully support the pro-life side.

 

Yeah....that's not gonna happen

 

And how many of those late term abortions were for foetal abnormality incompatible with life? There is little research on the proportion of women having late term abortions but what little there is has shown that the vast majority of late term abortions are for foetal abnormality


A survey by Bosma et al.8 of the late terminations of pregnancy performed in North Holland from 1994 is reported in this issue of the Journal (pages 478–487). All the terminations were requested by the parents. Of the 97 fetuses for whom full information was available, 77 had an abnormality that would have resulted in death, either in utero or shortly after birth, and 19 had severe abnormalities that would have necessitated the use of life-supporting procedures after birth and which would have severely limited the quality of life; only one fetus had a condition in which the chance of long term extrauterine survival would have been high even without medical support. The numbers of very late terminations did not vary widely from year to year, indicating a stable rather than an evolving pattern of practice. It appears that Dutch women and their doctors have defined their view of when it is right to terminate pregnancy after 24 weeks. Bosma et al. report that each year in North Holland there are, on average, 21 very late abortions, 340 live or stillborn infants with congenital structural abnormalities and 31,500 total live and stillbirths. This gives ratios for late abortions of 6.5:10,000 births and for congenital abnormalities of 1.1:100 births

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11489.x/full

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11489.x/full

http://journals.lww.com/greenjourna...ants_of_Parental_Decision_to_Abort_Or.12.aspx


Objective: This study evaluated factors influencing the decision to abort after abnormalities in the karyotypically normal fetus were found through ultrasonography.

Methods: We reviewed all pregnancies complicated by ultrasound - detected abnormalities managed on our service from April 1990 through August 1991 {N=262). Cases with associated karyotypic abnormalities were excluded (N=35), as were cases diagnosed after the legal gestational age limit for abortion (N=6. The remaining 159 cases were stratified into prognosis groups of "severe," "uncertain," and "mild."

Results: The prognostic severity of the ultrasound abnormality strongly correlated with the decision to abort (P<.0001). Rates of termination were 0, 12, and 66% in the "mild," "uncertain," and "severe" groups, respectively. The patients' age, gravidity, and parity, and the fetal gestational age at diagnosis did not differ significantly between the groups.

Conclusions: 1) In non-aneuploid pregnancies with an ultrasound diagnosis of fetal abnormality, the major predictor of the decision to abort was the severity of fetal prognosis. 2) The gestational age at diagnosis was not an important variable in the decision to abort for fetal structural abnormalities. 3) Parents who had fetuses with abnormalities associated with uncertain prognoses usually opted to continue the pregnancy. This appeared to be particularly true for defects that were potentially correctable in utero or by neonatal intervention (even if investigational).



http://journals.cambridge.org/actio...age=online&aid=46441&fileId=S096318019980406X
https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2008...bnormalities-forgotten-people-abortion-debate
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/07/late-term-abortion-29-weeks-dana-weinstein
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/pregna...mination-abortion-for-foetal-abnormality.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy
https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Fetal_Anomaly_Vietnamese_Women's_Experiences
http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/aad4.php

 

This is the USA, all the references I provided are for the USA. This isn't Holland or Bosnia.

 

Ironic given your abysmal comprehension of the Law of the Land.

This is not about your "moral compass" and if you go there you open yourself up to hypocrisy because you are stomping with hobnailed boots all over the rights of women. There is no "moral high ground" to enslaving women to bear your children. There is no "redeeming morality" to forcing women to die from pregnancy complications because theists like you have outlawed abortion.

So once it becomes crystal clear that you have no "moral compass" but instead are just wanting to violate the Constitution by imposing your theist beliefs on others you are left with nothing but the Law of the Land.

Would be enslavers of women like yourself are not going to overturn Constitutional rights that have been the Law of the Land since the inception of this nation.

So what is it like to suddenly realize that you are no better than those who owned slaves?

They used the bible to justify their slavery of others too.

 

Why would the rates per thousand be any different here in the USA for fetal abnormalities causing late term abortions?

Are the Dutch not human beings?

Is that what you are alleging now?

 

So ? Did you have a point?

 

But the original post related to Brazil. Now unless you can prove a distinct difference between late term abortions that are carried out in the USA (where it is mostly illegal) and those carried out in other parts of the world then please concede that the vast majority of later term abortions are done for severe foetal abnormality

 

Yours is a very weak and uninformed opinion.

I understand the law, I argue the law is wrong and should be changed through the proper process. That should be obvious to anyone who reads the posts - and you should read the posts.

The law is composed of rules a society agrees to live by, laws are based upon and reflect morality. When laws become a means for a select elite to impose upon and dictate to society, then the legal system is nothing more than dictatorship.

On slavery, who led the way in the opposition to and overthrow of slavery, then led the way in the fight against Jim Crow, and led the nation and the government in the civil rights movement of the 1960's? Christians. Perhaps you have heard of Harriet Beecher Stowe, the author of Uncle Tom's Cabin? Maybe you have heard of Reverend Ralph David Abernathy and Reverend Martin Luther King? Or the Ebenezer Baptist Church?

The New Testament clearly opposes slavery, read Paul's letter to Philemon for one example.

Its true some people co-opted the Bible in false attempts to justify slavery, just like some people co-opt the law in false attempts to justify murdering babies.

You should really read more, particularly American history, and legal philosophy. Then you might be able to create factual arguments and address the real issues.

 

Really? You really don't understand such differences?

For the same reason life expectancy and disease incidence vary by nation. People in different nations have different diets, different susceptibility and predisposition to various diseases, different genetic makeup, different levels of medical care.

Look at heart disease, which is a non-political and easy statistic to look up. The Netherlands has one of the lowest rates of heart disease in the world (34 deaths per 100,000), at 78 deaths per 100,000 the USA rate is 2.3 times higher than the Netherlands. Despite a heart unfriendly diet, the French incidence of heart disease is 25% the rate in the UK. The Canadian Institute for Health Information shows heart disease is twice as prevalent for Canadians on the Canadian Atlantic coast then the Canadian Pacific coast.

The world is not monolithic.

 

Its obvious. Abortionists deliberately and methodically and for financial gain murder over 1,000 babies a year in late-term abortions, its fundamental to the abortion industry. Violence rightly or wrongly attributed to the pro-life community is very rare, 11 murders in 30 years. Clearly the abortion industry is steeped in violence.

 

Were they legal or illegal late term abortions? You fail to specify.


Clearly there is no "abortion industry".

 

Revisionist drivel!

Let's put the above in context by quoting Jefferson Davis who spoke for pro-slavery Christians who were prepared to die fighting for their right to enslave others.

So it was Christians who were FOR slavery that were fighting against the abolitionists. Christians don't get credit for only one side when there were responsible for the slave trade to begin with and the opposition to ending slavery too.

So that point is null and void!

Complete and utter gibberish!

Morality defines behaviors as either "good" or "bad".

The law defines relationships such as the rights of citizens, incorporation, contracts, etc.

Nothing establishes the point better that it is ALWAYS WRONG to LEGISLATE MORALITY than Prohibition. Yes, you have to assume responsibility for the Christians who were pushing for the abolition of alcohol and you also have to take credit for the massive criminal organizations that were spawned by that insane attempt to legislate morality.

And it doesn't stop there either. Christians tried to legislate morality by banning gay marriage too. How did that work out for you? The American people won't tolerate that kind of petty bigotry any longer.

Ironic that you ignore the parts of American history that prove your attempts to legislate morality as being complete and utter failures.

Trying to legislate your "Christian morality" by banning abortions is not going to work either because women aren't about to let a bunch of theists take away their rights.

Enslaving women to your theist beliefs is never going to happen here in the USA because there will always be those who have learned the lessons of history of what happened when Christians tried, and FAILED, to legislate morality.

 

Fallacious comparison.

The heart is directly affected by diet and lifestyle.

Onus is on YOU to PROVE that fetal abnormalities are affected by diet and lifestyle.

[video=youtube;HuABhumm6fY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY[/video]

 

You truly do not read the posts. I will quote from my previous post:

For the same reason life expectancy and disease incidence vary by nation. People in different nations have different diets, different susceptibility and predisposition to various diseases, different genetic makeup, different levels of medical care.

Of course diet is a factor. But it is not the only factor in heart disease. Fabry Disease is a genetic disorder of which greatly increases the persons predisposition to heart disease. Then there is the "French Paradox", the French have a very low rate of heart disease even though their diet is very heart unhealthy - a case of heart disease being uncorrelated to diet. Another is Germany, which has a much lower rate of heart disease than the UK despite eating a much more heart unhealthy diet.


The bottom line is that your "response" proves my point. The medical experience in one nation does not automatically translate directly to all nations. <MOD EDIT - Removed Flamebait and crude insult>

 

Charming post


Women's needs do NOT change with the country they're in. Needing an abortion is universal....