Abortion

[Marisa]

Forgiveness is also in my repertoire as a Christian. I used the term pro-a once, and have been upbraided for it multiple times. Will you forgive me or will you bring it up again?

And I think you are right, and that everyone on this thread is pro-life, with some of us being pro-choice and some of us wanting to limit pro-choice to life of the mother in danger, etc. which is of course, anti-choice.

I have a problem with forgiving. It tends to send the message that it's okay that a person mistreated someone else. I will accept that you are who and what you are, and likely will never be anything more than what you are until something shakes you to your core. For many people, that never happens. I can accept that in this circumstance, you might have been wounded enough to "get" how you've wounded others. No one likes to be dismissed, and I can accept that you have more of an understanding of how dismissive you've been in this conversation than you did before. I will note, however, that this is the first example of contrition you've actually shown, previously it's been a lukewarm feigned apology followed by a doubling down on why you're right and we're wrong. No one likes to have their intellect misjudged by patronizing attempts at placation, either.

ETA: attempts to shame others are unattractive as well. just sayin'.

 

[Marisa]

And I think you are right, and that everyone on this thread is pro-life, with some of us being pro-choice and some of us wanting to limit pro-choice to life of the mother in danger, etc. which is of course, anti-choice.

It's alarming how you don't see the inherent contradiction such a perspective embodies. But then, within this thread, you've shown no particular willingness or eagerness to know actual facts regarding the subject of elective abortion, so I'm not all that surprised. Needless to say, a desire to shut down elective abortions presents a clear and present danger to women's lives, since I'm sure we all know how swimmingly attempts to force others to adopt our own morality go.

 

[Marisa]

Medical records are of course PC. I think you're well aware that people who are counseled for miscarriages, where they birth a dead body, speak in their counseling sessions about their grief for losing a baby, not a fetus (or a parasite). I think you are foolish for not allowing more emotions to help you make decisions. It's called "trusting your gut" and by others "having a living soul".

This position is predicated upon projecting your feelings onto others. Any person who loses a pregnancy that was desired will feel regret. That simply does not mean that every person who becomes pregnant WANTS to be pregnant. It's commendable that you have feelings. Stop projecting them onto everyone else, and please do stop trying to drag us around by the nose hairs of your emotions.

 

[Nietzsche]

I find your relativistic viewpoint here disturbing. I've never seen any woman as an incubator for a parasite.

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough.

Woman who wants to be pregnant and have children: Mother & baby

Woman who is forced to remain pregnant with something she does not want; Incubator for parasite.

I am not saying they are incubators, or that fetuses' are parasites. Those in power born with a silver spoon in their mouth(and their religious-right backers), who don't have the first inkling of what it means to be pregnant, or what it means to raise a child without access to daddy's massive bank account, who would render abortion illegal(while also cutting social services, government help programs, ect) have MADE that woman into an incubator. They are the ones turning a woman into an incubator. And because she does not want this, but is being FORCED TO DO IT ANYWAY, they have ALSO reduced a fetus to a parasite, because a parasite is any organism that leaches nutrients from the host-organism against its will. Obviously, in the most technical of terms, all fetuses are parasites. But if the mother wants the child, it is simply a baby-to-be.

With illegal abortion, the woman has no say in the matter. If she gets pregnant, does not want children, but is forced to carry it to term anyway, she has been rendered nothing but a baby-making incubator by those who removed her choice.

Are you following now? I don't know how much more clear I can make this. Let me try an analogy;

What is the difference between a volunteer and a slave? They both perform some task or another, free of charge. A volunteer shows up to do it because they want to do it. They can also leave whenever they please. They are not obligated to stay there and do it, it is purely of their own volition.

A slave does the precisely the same work. Like the volunteer, they are not being paid. But they have no choice in the matter. They must do it, as someone or some group(likely far better off financially than the slave) who've never worked a day in their lives, say they're gonna do it and that they're gonna like it.

Get it now?.

 

[McBell]

Medical records are of course PC.

What a load of crap.
If medical records were Politically Correct, then you would not see the word fetus.
Medical records are medically accurate.

I think you're well aware that people who are counseled for miscarriages, where they birth a dead body, speak in their counseling sessions about their grief for losing a baby, not a fetus (or a parasite).

When dealing with emotional problems one uses the emotional terms.
When dealing with medical. one uses the medical terms.

I do not find it hard to understand, why do you?

I think you are foolish for not allowing more emotions to help you make decisions. It's called "trusting your gut" and by others "having a living soul".

Ah, so when a person who just walks in on their significant other cheating you are fine with them going with their emotional first thought and killing one or both of them?

 

[McBell]

Please read my posts before replying. I said if everyone votes/decides/agrees, etc. But as important, the legality of an act does not denote the act is moral. Sometimes the law coincides with morality. Other laws are inappropriate. It was legal to segregate before people stood for civil rights. Was it moral? Of course not.

Nice little sermon.
But the fact of the matter is calling a legal killing murder is wrong, regardless of what you think the morality of the act is.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That is my point. The term "murder" is not dependent on morality, it is dependent on legality.

Murder is a term found in the Bible also, which contains both moral and legal codes. I don't want to argue about words with you in this case, because I know murder is wrong whether or not the murderer is caught or receive the full penalty of earthly law.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I have a problem with forgiving. It tends to send the message that it's okay that a person mistreated someone else. I will accept that you are who and what you are, and likely will never be anything more than what you are until something shakes you to your core. For many people, that never happens. I can accept that in this circumstance, you might have been wounded enough to "get" how you've wounded others. No one likes to be dismissed, and I can accept that you have more of an understanding of how dismissive you've been in this conversation than you did before. I will note, however, that this is the first example of contrition you've actually shown, previously it's been a lukewarm feigned apology followed by a doubling down on why you're right and we're wrong. No one likes to have their intellect misjudged by patronizing attempts at placation, either.

ETA: attempts to shame others are unattractive as well. just sayin'.

I think there are two things occurring here:

1. Most spoken communication includes 90% nonverbal communication. It's hard to express on a forum contrition and etc. and you are continuing therefore, to accuse me of many things, unpleasant things. I don't think you would make these allegations or insinuations in person if we spoke in a friendly manner over a cup of coffee. Nor was I appealing to your "intellect" with my apologies. I was appealing to you as a person.

2. You are right. You have a problem with forgiving. I find it doesn't send a message that bad behavior is okay. I find it frees both the forgiver and the forgive... forgiveness is a command of Jesus to Christians, who wants Christians to live in freedom.

 

[Marisa]

Murder is a term found in the Bible also, which contains both moral and legal codes. I don't want to argue about words with you in this case, because I know murder is wrong whether or not the murderer is caught or receive the full penalty of earthly law.

Our laws are, and should remain, secular.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough.

Woman who wants to be pregnant and have children: Mother & baby

Woman who is forced to remain pregnant with something she does not want; Incubator for parasite.

I am not saying they are incubators, or that fetuses' are parasites. Those in power born with a silver spoon in their mouth(and their religious-right backers), who don't have the first inkling of what it means to be pregnant, or what it means to raise a child without access to daddy's massive bank account, who would render abortion illegal(while also cutting social services, government help programs, ect) have MADE that woman into an incubator. They are the ones turning a woman into an incubator. And because she does not want this, but is being FORCED TO DO IT ANYWAY, they have ALSO reduced a fetus to a parasite, because a parasite is any organism that leaches nutrients from the host-organism against its will. Obviously, in the most technical of terms, all fetuses are parasites. But if the mother wants the child, it is simply a baby-to-be.

With illegal abortion, the woman has no say in the matter. If she gets pregnant, does not want children, but is forced to carry it to term anyway, she has been rendered nothing but a baby-making incubator by those who removed her choice.

Are you following now? I don't know how much more clear I can make this. Let me try an analogy;

What is the difference between a volunteer and a slave? They both perform some task or another, free of charge. A volunteer shows up to do it because they want to do it. They can also leave whenever they please. They are not obligated to stay there and do it, it is purely of their own volition.

A slave does the precisely the same work. Like the volunteer, they are not being paid. But they have no choice in the matter. They must do it, as someone or some group(likely far better off financially than the slave) who've never worked a day in their lives, say they're gonna do it and that they're gonna like it.

Get it now?.

Of course I get it. You use terms that bring to mind women tied down for nine months, like something out of the Matrix or Coma.

You use terms like "forced to carry it to term" and I use terms like "legal status making it non-legal to terminate". Can we find a happy middle ground? It seems a dilemma, and I'm indeed open here, but can we find a way where BOTH parties have their rights protected? The mother's right to freedom and body freedom and the child's right to live?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Our laws are, and should remain, secular.

Secular or religious, Marisa, we both agree murder is wrong. I know this.

We also disagree on whether abortion and at what stage/month/time of pregnancy abortion might be a murder. Maturity has to do with allowing for others' consciences, too. You might say mine is the weaker faith, the weaker conscience. But when babies are termed it hurts me. I understand mothers could suffer from a pregnancy, but when the mothers suffer from the abortion trauma it also bothers me. What should I do? What are your recommendations for me?

 

[Marisa]

I think there are two things occurring here:

1. Most spoken communication includes 90% nonverbal communication. It's hard to express on a forum contrition and etc. and you are continuing therefore, to accuse me of many things, unpleasant things. I don't think you would make these allegations or insinuations in person if we spoke in a friendly manner over a cup of coffee. Nor was I appealing to your "intellect" with my apologies. I was appealing to you as a person.

Somewhere else on this board you'll find a comment from me that says basically the same thing. But you are wrong. I did not accuse YOU of anything. I questioned your CPC, based on the information YOU provided about your time there and what I already know about CPC's, a document descriptive of which I posted here and which I have my doubts as to whether you even glanced at, let alone read. And these are not accusations, they are assertions, and they are assertions I would make TO YOUR FACE. Your response to having had your CPC's tactics questioned was an attempt to move the goalposts and indict Planned Parenthood, accusing them of the same things you felt your CPC was being accused of. The problem with that is that there is a sufficient amount of data available to you to allow you to learn that such an attempt by you was foolhardy, and there is a sufficient amount of data available to you to learn that the tactics you feel are completely legitimate (either because you possess an opinion of superior morality, or god is on your side) are objectionable to the vast majority of people.

2. You are right. You have a problem with forgiving. I find it doesn't send a message that bad behavior is okay. I find it frees both the forgiver and the forgive... forgiveness is a command of Jesus to Christians, who wants Christians to live in freedom.

I'm not impressed by what you think you're required to do as a christian. In the future, you might be interested to know that prefacing your attempt at an apology with what you're required to do as a christian sends a very clear message. And that is that you probably don't really mean what you're about to say, but feel you're god demands it of you. As apologies go, those are massively uncompelling in terms of honesty.

 

[Marisa]

Secular or religious, Marisa, we both agree murder is wrong. I know this.

We also disagree on whether abortion and at what stage/month/time of pregnancy abortion might be a murder. Maturity has to do with allowing for others' consciences, too. You might say mine is the weaker faith, the weaker conscience. But when babies are termed it hurts me. I understand mothers could suffer from a pregnancy, but when the mothers suffer from the abortion trauma it also bothers me. What should I do? What are your recommendations for me?

You don't get it. Something that is LEGAL can never be illegal. It is one or the other. Abortion is legal, therefore it will never be illegal. Period. You're emotional reaction to abortion is moot to the subject, no matter how morally superior you think you are.

And you're also wrong about feeling murder is wrong. Unless, of course, you are unaware of legal terms like "manslaughter" or "self defense". There are all sorts of situations in which murdering someone is okie dokie in our society. Ask George Zimmerman. Or officer Wilson. Got it?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Of course I get it. You use terms that bring to mind women tied down for nine months, like something out of the Matrix or Coma.

You use terms like "forced to carry it to term" and I use terms like "legal status making it non-legal to terminate". Can we find a happy middle ground? It seems a dilemma, and I'm indeed open here, but can we find a way where BOTH parties have their rights protected? The mother's right to freedom and body freedom and the child's right to live?

I have a great solution and one that has been shown to reduce the number of elective abortions.

Safe and unlimited access to comprehensive sex education, to family planning services, and to contraceptives.

Married women and non-married women and girls will have options regarding their reproductive health and autonomy by ensuring unwanted pregnancies do not occur.

The math is actually quite simple. Less unwanted pregnancies = less elective abortions.

 

[Marisa]

but can we find a way where BOTH parties have their rights protected?

Yes. It's called keeping abortion safe, and legal. You CANNOT place a fetus' "right" above it's hosts without NECESSARILY stripping that same right from the host. PERIOD. You may not be aware of this, but you don't get to speak for anyone but yourself. Or your own underaged child. You can restrict yourself further than the laws allows and NOBODY WILL CARE. But you don't get to force MY CHILD to live by your restrictions. That it MY choice to make until she turns 18, and then it's HER choice to make, It will NEVER be your choice to make.

 

[Revoltingest]

You don't get it. Something that is LEGAL can never be illegal. It is one or the other. Abortion is legal, therefore it will never be illegal. Period. You're emotional reaction to abortion is moot to the subject, no matter how morally superior you think you are.

And you're also wrong about feeling murder is wrong. Unless, of course, you are unaware of legal terms like "manslaughter" or "self defense". There are all sorts of situations in which murdering someone is okie dokie in our society. Ask George Zimmerman. Or officer Wilson. Got it?

Those aren't examples of murder though.
Better choices.....
Freddie Gray
James Boyd

 

[Marisa]

I have a great solution and one that has been shown to reduce the number of elective abortions.

Safe and unlimited access to comprehensive sex education, to family planning services, and to contraceptives.

Married women and non-married women and girls will have options regarding their reproductive health and autonomy by ensuring unwanted pregnancies do not occur.

The math is actually quite simple. Less unwanted pregnancies = less elective abortions.

Quite right. What makes the anti-choice crowd seem so intellectually dishonest is that many who hold such views are also against contraceptives. For many, it's far and above about shaming women who are sexually active than any feigned concern for a fetus. How do we know this? Because of things like politicians who pander to this crowd by coining phrases like "legitimate rape" and saying the weather is like rape, or that rape is just another form of conception (Todd Akin, Clayton Williams, Rick Santorum). We know this because when a young woman has the unmitigated gall to address congress and speak for greater access to contraceptives, pundits like Rush Limbaugh go on tirades calling her a prostitute and demanding to see sex tapes. It does certainly seem that many in the anti-choice crowd have serious problems with women enjoying sex, let alone controlling their own reproductive destinies.

 

[Marisa]

Those aren't examples of murder though.
Better choices.....
Freddie Gray
James Boyd

Precisely why I chose them.

 

[leibowde84]

Murder is a term found in the Bible also, which contains both moral and legal codes. I don't want to argue about words with you in this case, because I know murder is wrong whether or not the murderer is caught or receive the full penalty of earthly law.

Why don't we just go with "unjustified killing"? Is that better?

 

[thau]

Quite right. What makes the anti-choice crowd seem so intellectually dishonest is that many who hold such views are also against contraceptives. For many, it's far and above about shaming women who are sexually active than any feigned concern for a fetus. How do we know this? Because of things like politicians who pander to this crowd by coining phrases like "legitimate rape" and saying the weather is like rape, or that rape is just another form of conception (Todd Akin, Clayton Williams, Rick Santorum). We know this because when a young woman has the unmitigated gall to address congress and speak for greater access to contraceptives, pundits like Rush Limbaugh go on tirades calling her a prostitute and demanding to see sex tapes. It does certainly seem that many in the anti-choice crowd have serious problems with women enjoying sex, let alone controlling their own reproductive destinies.

>>What makes the anti-choice crowd seem so intellectually dishonest is that many who hold such views are also against contraceptives.<<

No, you need to be specific in your charges. Who is against artificial contraceptives? Essentially only Catholic teaching and devout Catholics. That is because we are convinced that God’s wisdom far surpasses man’s wisdom. God created man and sexuality and for its intended purposes to create life. But if you want to play the defiant creature and tell God he does not exist and if he does you do not care what he thinks, well, you were given free will to do so.


>>For many, it's far and above about shaming women who are sexually active than any feigned concern for a fetus.<<

You sound pretty inane here, IMO. You do all you can to make this “fetus” be some kind of incidental in all this. You try so hard to pretend that human life is just some chance happenstance that once was nothing more than some algae in the water and over time, voila! we have created a human. And we are expected to be impressed with your knowledge and resolutions?


>>We know this because when a young woman has the unmitigated gall to address congress and speak for greater access to contraceptives, pundits like Rush Limbaugh go on tirades calling her a prostitute and demanding to see sex tapes.<<

Don’t make me laugh. I should feel worse for a college student who wants "greater access to contraceptives" (LOL) but who really wants the government to pay for her pills or condoms and sexual fun, than I should for a baby ripped apart in its mother’s womb? Yes, you surely strike me as the compassionate one here.