Quote mined and cherry picked biased blogs are not "facts" Now the $64,000 question - the one that is usually avoided How do you define "convenience"? Is aborting a foetus that has microcephaly a "convenience"? Is economic hardship a "convenience" Is mental illness a "convenience"?
Just like slavery used to be legal and the slavers plied their trade citing the temporary legality of their barbarity in an attempt to quell the moral disgust, one day abortionists will be thrown out the door and into the dumpster of history. Then you will lie and deny you ever supported the murder of babies.
For someone who once claimed to be the master of research, you don't even read the posts. From the Guttmacher studies, abortion for convenience includes: unready for responsibility is too immature or young to have child woman's parents want her to have abortion has problems with relationship or wants to avoid single parenthood husband or partner wants her to have abortion has all the children she wanted or all children are grown can't afford baby now concerned about how having baby would change her life doesn't want others to know she had relations or is pregnant Those account for about 93% of all abortions in the USA. I have not included rape, incest, true risk to the life of the mother, or severe birth defect of the baby, in my labeling of abortion for "convenience". However, personally I consider abortion due to severe birth defect of the baby is an abortion for convenience.
Post # 105 due to system glitch I am credited with that stupid post (and I don't mean Bowerbird's)...and it isn't mine.....just sayin'
I want to know where you got the idea that "convenience" is against the law? Do you always strive to do the INconvenient? Wouldn't that almost be a form of mental illness, like repeatedly hitting your head on the wall? Or is it just women who are not allowed "convenience" ? """"""unready for responsibility is too immature or young to have child woman's parents want her to have abortion has problems with relationship or wants to avoid single parenthood husband or partner wants her to have abortion has all the children she wanted or all children are grown can't afford baby now concerned about how having baby would change her life doesn't want others to know she had relations or is pregnant"""""""""" Sound like reasons to have an abortion..... so?????
Thank you for DISQUALIFYING yourself from any further meaningful participation on this topic. Have a nice day.
This all seems similar to a woman getting back a test result positive for Down's early in the pregnancy; it isn't 100% accurate. If she aborts, she risks killing a perfectly normal developing child.
Except that mictocephaly can be detected by ultrasound - so are you FOR women being forced to carry a severely affected foetus to term? If you had seen the ABC report that went with this story (I do not post links because you cannot access it outside of Australia) you would have seen woman after woman with these poor abnormal babies - some of whom were barely more than anencephalic - all of whom were "irritable" and who cried most of the time These poor little ones will never understand a mothers love let alone be consoled with it. Should we bring children into the world if they are only going to suffer? (((((((((((((sigh))))))))))))))) And what is not 100% about the Downs test is how affected the foetus is - whether it is a full Downs with the extra chromosome in every cell of the body or whether it is a "Mosaic" where only some cells are affected. Downs children can have a multitude of problems including heart abnormalities and leukaemia. And lots and lots of luck finding an adoptive parent for an infant with a medical condition
Believe me there is nothing about microcephaly that is "advantageous" these poor wee ones are profoundly mentally disabled and often deaf and blind as well. The bits of brain that are missing and damaged are those bits we use for "higher functions" like feeding yourself, using a toilet not a nappy and even plain walking. While they are infants care is reasonably simple - even though the constant crying is heartbreaking - what though happens if they survive to adulthood? These are children that need 24 hour care - and that means either a member of the family has to be full time carer or they have to be institutionalised
Wrong. From a 2004 AGI study. You lose once again. - - - Updated - - - That's it? That's your retreat? Just cannot bear to admit you are completely incorrect?
Thank you fopr two really good posts. YOU truly CARE about these children. I can't imagine the thoughts of those who insist these children be brought into the world only to suffer horribly so they, the hilariously and erroneously named "Pro-Lifers, can feel all warm and fuzzy and dominating and controlling...
I can't help but wonder whether some of these Brazilian women will be intentionally infecting themselves with Zika so they can get abortions. One woman in the U.S. faked cancer so she could get a late-term abortion...
You cannot be certain that every single baby with Zika would be born with these symptoms. But you can be certain that if you aborted every single one of them, any potential mutation that afforded humans a resistance to Zika would be eliminated.
And I can imagine what would have happened if your side was able to abort every single baby that was ever afflicted with the sickle cell gene...less resistance to malaria for humans. Glad you didn't succeed there, and I hope you don't succeed in aborting these children either.
From my previous post:"""I can't imagine the thoughts of those who insist these children be brought into the world only to suffer horribly so they, the hilariously and erroneously named "Pro-Lifers, can feel all warm and fuzzy and dominating and controlling...""" I guess I don't have to imagine the cruelty of Anti-Choicers, you stated it plainly....
Nature is cruel, not me. I would say it's cruel to doom millions to suffer through malaria because you thought you knew better than nature that a "deformity" was "bad" and should be aborted.
