What's the Abortion Debate Really About?

[Willamena]

It's an old way of remembering when we were born, hence birthdays.

Just so. An idea "born" has just come to life.

 

[oldbadger]

Just so. An idea "born" has just come to life.

Hi.....

Nah...! An idea is born in the foetus way before birth. These are just some of the medical reports on fairly recent research:-

First magnetoencephalographic recordings of the brain activity of a human fetus - BLUM - 2005 - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology - Wiley Online Library

First magnetoencephalographic recordings of the brain activity of a human fetus
T Blum, E Saling, R Bauer - BJOG: An International Journal of …, 1985 - Wiley Online Library
Summary. Using a one-channel neuromagnetometer adjusted to a special site on the
mother's abdomen, we succeeded in recording prenatally, for the first time, human fetal brain
activity in late pregnancy. It was possible to record both the fetal auditory-evoked ...
Cited by 81 Related articles All 4 versions Cite Save


Magnetoencephalographic recordings of visual evoked brain activity in the human fetus
THE LANCET
Magnetoencephalographic recordings of visual evoked brain activity in the human fetus
H Eswaran, JD Wilson, H Preissl, SE Robinson, J Vrba… - The Lancet, 2002 - Elsevier
We investigated the feasibility of recording visual evoked brain activity in the human fetus by
use of non-invasive magnetoencephalography (MEG). Each recording lasted 6 min and
consisted of a sequence of 180 flashes with 33 ms duration delivered 2 s apart over the ...

Imagine that....... the thinking foetus.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Imagine that....... the thinking foetus.

Congratulations: if those studies are accurate, the fetus has demonstrably reached the status of a dead salmon.

 

[oldbadger]

Congratulations: if those studies are accurate, the fetus has demonstrably reached the status of a dead salmon.

It looks like your ship is headed for the 22-26 week rocks. As technology advances, so more proof of intellectual and thought development will surface.

No doubt early 'fertilised egg' termination will eventually become a certain, safe and easy 'Do it at home' process, and unwanted 'late stage terminations' will end. Let's hope so.

It's interesting how you do not respond to certain posts. You seem to be unable to acknowledge points that even move a short way to your position. I do believe that for you the concrete has set..... fast and solid.... into denial. The doctors and specialists are moving ahead, making rules and guiding legislators....... and leaving you far behind. You cannot win. As more women take up the reins of power you will see that, I feel sure.

I notice that some people who strive for (for instance) Left-Wing values and conditions can become Right-Wing and dictatorial over such issues..... a complete loss of their true horizon, which (no doubt) they then struggle even harder to regain sight of. This has been a very interesting experience for me, because I have learned quite a lot more about the issues and surrounding issues than I previously knew.

I need to leave this debate now....... have no more to offer...... but my thoughts remain with the people who have to extract 'still living' foetuses from women, wait for them to die, and then put them in the Medical Waste containers. May they receive all the empathy and counselling care that they no doubt need.


Peace....

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It looks like your ship is headed for the 22-26 week rocks. As technology advances, so more proof of intellectual and thought development will surface.

I doubt that any study would ever demonstrate that a fetus is more intellectually developed than a fully-grown adult, and when an adult's life is weighed against the bodily security of someone else, the adult's life loses.

You still haven't explained why we should value fetuses more than people. Until you do that, your argument fails.

It's interesting how you do not respond to certain posts. You seem to be unable to acknowledge points that even move a short way to your position.

Actually, it has more to do with me not having all that much time for RF. When threads blow up, I can't always go back and sift through for posts I might want to reply to.

I notice that some people who strive for (for instance) Left-Wing values and conditions can become Right-Wing and dictatorial over such issues..... a complete loss of their true horizon, which (no doubt) they then struggle even harder to regain sight of. This has been a very interesting experience for me, because I have learned quite a lot more about the issues and surrounding issues than I previously knew.

Granting respect to pregnant women is not a "right wing" or "left wing" value.

I need to leave this debate now....... have no more to offer...... but my thoughts remain with the people who have to extract 'still living' foetuses from women, wait for them to die, and then put them in the Medical Waste containers. May they receive all the empathy and counselling care that they no doubt need.

And when you realize the immorality of your position, I hope you get whatever help you need to work through that.

 

[dawny0826]

I voted that it boils down to controlling women's reproductive choices.

It's part of this. But, I won't blanket label this as comprising the full problem.

For every group that scoffs at contraception, another scoffs at the concept of speaking honestly with youth, particularly impoverished youth, as to the benefits of making wise decisions regarding their reproductive health.

Pregnancy is seen as either a gift or a punishment

You forgot to mention burden on society. People tend to be more vocal as to the rights of others when they're paying more to support their care and necessities.

and the health or life risk to a woman carrying the pregnancy is glossed over or seen as inconsequential.

I don't know any women, pro-life who wouldn't have a change of heart if any woman was enduring a serious health or life risk as a result of pregnancy, regardless as to the circumstances.

Should this negate a greater "fight" on the part of pro-lifers to push for that which they feel is morally right? I personally don't think so. Pregnancy is preventable. I didn't have an overwhelming amount of education handed to me. I have great parents, fortunately and I've always cared enough about myself to want good things for myself.

You can't really point fingers at other people for not caring about women when women may not care enough about themselves. There's a plehora of situations that we could be talking about here. I won't blanket label this.

If legislation is faulty, then you have to push for what's right.

But, I'm intelligent enough to make my own choices, regardless as to what my church might say.

Many of the same protestors of birth control (especially the pill) are also against elective abortion both surgical and chemically induced miscarriages.

It matters little - if any - of the health of the woman. And if her health is that inconsequential, then her choices matter even less. Until some see her choice as an opportunity to say "I told you so."

Heather, statistically, how many women are aborting their babies during the first and second trimester for health reasons?

Per above, does a woman not ultimately, need to care about her own health, first and foremost? In the commonwealth of VA, abortion is legal through the 2nd trimester and VA is a very moderate-conservative state. So, if you haven't gotten your **** together to electively abort your unwanted fetus by 27 weeks gestation, the problem is with YOU, not the rest of the world.

I think that many of these protestors that you speak of who object to elective abortion and contraception are those that are proponents of the nuclear family, born and raised within the auspices of a marriage. I'm not claiming that any type of family unit is the "right" type of family unit. There are no doubt benefits to the strong, nuclear family, per biblical design. I get where people are coming from. It's just important to acknowledge that there's flaw in every system and people aren't perfect.

In a perfect world - within these households, Mom and Dad work together and work hard, to make sure that there is a roof over heads, food on the table, medical care and that all needs are met. Kids are loved, nurtured and spiritually fed. Family is part of a church family which is part of a community family.

These families should not need to burden society, as they have a network of support to pull from.

Regardless, the Catholic (or whatever) woman can remain very Catholic and plan in the way that works best for her.

We always have choice.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

It's part of this. But, I won't blanket label this as comprising the full problem.

For every group that scoffs at contraception, another scoffs at the concept of speaking honestly with youth, particularly impoverished youth, as to the benefits of making wise decisions regarding their reproductive health.

I agree. Comprehensive sex education covers that.

You forgot to mention burden on society. People tend to be more vocal as to the rights of others when they're paying more to support their care and necessities.

I don't think I forgot it. A burden to society could fall under the "punishment" generalized blanket judgement against pregnant women. If people see a woman as making bad choices, whether how she got pregnant or whether she chooses to have the baby and keep it, this helps groups decide whether or not to intervene on her bodily rights by telling her she either needs to abort or she needs to carry the fetus to term - and call it morality.

I don't know any women, pro-life who wouldn't have a change of heart if any woman was enduring a serious health or life risk as a result of pregnancy, regardless as to the circumstances.

Should this negate a greater "fight" on the part of pro-lifers to push for that which they feel is morally right? I personally don't think so. Pregnancy is preventable. I didn't have an overwhelming amount of education handed to me. I have great parents, fortunately and I've always cared enough about myself to want good things for myself.

Anti-choicers can fight for whatever they want, but ya know, I'll push back.

You can't really point fingers at other people for not caring about women when women may not care enough about themselves. There's a plehora of situations that we could be talking about here. I won't blanket label this.

I disagree. It's heartless to blame former military veterans who are homeless and struggling with drug and alcohol addiction. They obviously may not care enough about themselves either. We have entire organizations that seek to help with outreach programs in the same way that we have entire organizations to help women who are facing an unwanted pregnancy, but culturally we frown upon people who point the finger at homeless veterans. Why should we treat pregnant women any differently?

Heather, statistically, how many women are aborting their babies during the first and second trimester for health reasons?

I get the feeling I'm not being understood what my argument is regarding a woman's health and her right to elective abortion. Your the second person who have misunderstood my point, so I'll try again.

I'm not pulling from women's accounts as to what motivated them to seek abortion in the 1st and 2nd trimester, though I respect their personal intentions (just so that's clear too). Instead, I'm looking at IMO the overall picture of what pregnancy entails, that it is a health issue for the woman, and not a moral issue of sanctity.

Per above, does a woman not ultimately, need to care about her own health, first and foremost? In the commonwealth of VA, abortion is legal through the 2nd trimester and VA is a very moderate-conservative state. So, if you haven't gotten your **** together to electively abort your unwanted fetus by 27 weeks gestation, the problem is with YOU, not the rest of the world.

My position is similar to the constitutional provision of fetal viability being the marker for legal elective abortion services. Regardless of our personal feelings about the woman in question and how they may be similar and how they may be different, what is legal in VA is agreeable IMO.

I think that many of these protestors that you speak of who object to elective abortion and contraception are those that are proponents of the nuclear family, born and raised within the auspices of a marriage. I'm not claiming that any type of family unit is the "right" type of family unit. There are no doubt benefits to the strong, nuclear family, per biblical design. I get where people are coming from. It's just important to acknowledge that there's flaw in every system and people aren't perfect.

Me too. Heck, I even fight for the right to have power-distinct households where there is male headship and female submission if that works for them. People have the right to protest whatever they want, and I have the right to counter if I wish. If people protest male headship, that's fine. I'll speak my mind on how dom/sub relationships are not necessarily immoral or unethical.

Just don't try to push for it to be written into law and enforced, regardless of what the marriage model du jour is supposed to be, whether it's utilitarian or whether it's dom/sub. And just don't try to push for the model of pregnancy or abortion to be restricted into what one feels is moral and ethical. When it comes to these freedoms, I'll push back, regardless of how I may respect their choices or not.

In a perfect world - within these households, Mom and Dad work together and work hard, to make sure that there is a roof over heads, food on the table, medical care and that all needs are met. Kids are loved, nurtured and spiritually fed. Family is part of a church family which is part of a community family.

These families should not need to burden society, as they have a network of support to pull from.

Regardless, the Catholic (or whatever) woman can remain very Catholic and plan in the way that works best for her.

We always have choice.

Yeah, it's cool. Hubbie and I used to consult with Natural Family Planning groups about how to pay attention to bodily signals on fertility. Some folks thought we were nuts, but I found them engaging, intelligent, and respectful. The group we consulted with was after I met with an OB/GYN at the military hospital who personally ethically shared those values, and I asked for the referral from the previous OB/GYN when he refused to offer Natural Family Planning as a viable method.

So I agree, everybody has a choice. I learned a lot about my options over those years. But to be clear, the demonization isn't about people, but about the systemic dehumanization I see regarding female sexuality and the ignorance of how pervasive that dehumanization is.

I look at it in the same way as how misinterpreted a position such as mine can take as to mistakenly be assumed to be anti-male instead of anti-patriarchy. I'm not against pro-lifers, I'm against anti-choice.

 

[ChristineES]

A few thoughts: Women don't usually don't even know they are pregnant until at least 4-8 weeks after they conceive. That means that when the baby is a zygote, women don't even know they are pregnant yet. Second: We pro-lifers don't are just speaking of abortion as a means for birth control, not those that are because the mother's life is in danger, children conceived by rape or child molestation. And finally, I certainly don't go around and tell women who have had abortions that they are immoral. I can guess that these women have made a very tough choice. I also know that not all pro-choice women would choose to have an abortion themselves.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

A few thoughts: Women don't usually don't even know they are pregnant until at least 4-8 weeks after they conceive. That means that when the baby is a zygote, women don't even know they are pregnant yet. Second: We pro-lifers don't are just speaking of abortion as a means for birth control, not those that are because the mother's life is in danger, children conceived by rape or child molestation. And finally, I certainly don't go around and tell women who have had abortions that they are immoral. I can guess that these women have made a very tough choice. I also know that not all pro-choice women would choose to have an abortion themselves.

Within 7 weeks of conception, a woman can take RU486, which can chemically induce a miscarriage and has a 95% success rate. So, if a woman missed her last period, goes to take a pregnancy test and discovers it's positive that she's pregnant, that option remains for her until roughly week 9. Plus, the process needs to be overseen by a health care provider who can see if the abortion was successful or if a pregnancy is ongoing.

Also, "abortion as a means for birth control" is something where you and I part ways in regards to the ethics of abortion, given that a pro-lifer might agree to a woman having an abortion if she is victimized enough. But a woman making an autonomous choice for her body how she sees fit is not within that ethical paradigm. There's a fetus to consider more than her and any health or financial risks that pregnancy may bring.

That kind of shaming tactic also brings into the debate the notion that women are "ending a life because of a simple inconvenience." Those of us who have been pregnant before know that pregnancy is much more than a "simple inconvenience."

 

[Amechania]

For me the principal ethical dilemna has always been whether it is moral to force a woman to raise an unwanted child. In my own case an unexpected pregnancy at a time in my life in which I was unable to provide for a child left me with only one option. It has always seemed to me the ethical choice to sacrifice a potential life in order to prevent the ruin of two.

 

[idav]

Within 7 weeks of conception, a woman can take RU486, which can chemically induce a miscarriage and has a 95% success rate. So, if a woman missed her last period, goes to take a pregnancy test and discovers it's positive that she's pregnant, that option remains for her until roughly week 9. Plus, the process needs to be overseen by a health care provider who can see if the abortion was successful or if a pregnancy is ongoing.

Also, "abortion as a means for birth control" is something where you and I part ways in regards to the ethics of abortion, given that a pro-lifer might agree to a woman having an abortion if she is victimized enough. But a woman making an autonomous choice for her body how she sees fit is not within that ethical paradigm. There's a fetus to consider more than her and any health or financial risks that pregnancy may bring.

That kind of shaming tactic also brings into the debate the notion that women are "ending a life because of a simple inconvenience." Those of us who have been pregnant before know that pregnancy is much more than a "simple inconvenience."

Thats the reason for birth control, because we know the ramifications. Nevertheless, if a pregnancy is unwanted and is terminated then the abortion is being used as a form of birth control. It isnt to speak lightly of pregnancy, quite the opposite. It isnt a shaming tactic either it is just facts. I dont have problems with birth control, thats some of the conservative religious folks that speak against any form of birth control. Not that it stops any of those conservative type hypocrites from having sex and getting pregnant. Its about consistency but unfortunaltely pro-life and pro-choice are contradictions and we end up having to base decisions on circumstances since there is no moral absolute that fits every circumstance.

 

[Me Myself]

Within 7 weeks of conception, a woman can take RU486, which can chemically induce a miscarriage and has a 95% success rate. So, if a woman missed her last period, goes to take a pregnancy test and discovers it's positive that she's pregnant, that option remains for her until roughly week 9. Plus, the process needs to be overseen by a health care provider who can see if the abortion was successful or if a pregnancy is ongoing.

Also, "abortion as a means for birth control" is something where you and I part ways in regards to the ethics of abortion, given that a pro-lifer might agree to a woman having an abortion if she is victimized enough. But a woman making an autonomous choice for her body how she sees fit is not within that ethical paradigm. There's a fetus to consider more than her and any health or financial risks that pregnancy may bring.

That kind of shaming tactic also brings into the debate the notion that women are "ending a life because of a simple inconvenience." Those of us who have been pregnant before know that pregnancy is much more than a "simple inconvenience."

I am not following, a lot of women do abort as birth control and shrug it off with no major emotional involvement on the issue.

The pro life stance is that a human life shouldnt be discarded as if it was nothing in that way.

 

[Falvlun]

Do you honestly pretend to know my intentions?

Here's an example: You claimed that we all are "Just a clump of cells". This completely ignores the vast difference between a zygote-- which is two cells, and a person. If you conflate the two, as you did, then yes, I think that's an intentional misrepresentation of what is meant when someone says that a zygote is a "clump of cells".

It would be like saying that a sandcastle is "just some grains of sand", when someone is pointing out the difference between a sandcastle and a couple of sandgrains in your shoe.

There are people that can draw things as realistic as to look real.

I wont assume you are saying that things are what they look like, so I ll wait for you yourself to elaborate on your point so you wont then assume I "intentionally" misrepresent you

My point is that no one, No one can look at a photo of a zygote and feel that they are looking at someone. A zygote is not a person, by any normal sense of the meaning of the word.

It is dishonest to apply words like "person" or "someone" to a zygote because it utilizes a word with a set meaning, and makes it mean something else, in order to further an agenda.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I am not following, a lot of women do abort as birth control and shrug it off with no major emotional involvement on the issue.

The pro life stance is that a human life shouldnt be discarded as if it was nothing in that way.

Do you think pulling out to prevent fertilization also "discards" a human life? After all, there is potential for the development of a life that is wasted with the sperm. Do you consider that to be any different than abortion?

 

[Curious George]

Do you think pulling out to prevent fertilization also "discards" a human life? After all, there is potential for the development of a life that is wasted with the sperm. Do you consider that to be any different than abortion?

I was going to say "you mean, like a tissue" but didn't, because it would just spiral into "sperm" doesn't count"

 

[idav]

My point is that no one, No one can look at a photo of a zygote and feel that they are looking at someone. A zygote is not a person, by any normal sense of the meaning of the word.

It is dishonest to apply words like "person" or "someone" to a zygote because it utilizes a word with a set meaning, and makes it mean something else, in order to further an agenda.

Have you seen the new technology they use on some ultrasounds. We can see a real looking baby, authentic looking organs and all that. Makes it difficult for people wanting abortions as they do mandatory ultrasound probably to sway their opinions.

 

[Me Myself]

Here's an example: You claimed that we all are "Just a clump of cells". This completely ignores the vast difference between a zygote-- which is two cells, and a person. If you conflate the two, as you did, then yes, I think that's an intentional misrepresentation of what is meant when someone says that a zygote is a "clump of cells".

It would be like saying that a sandcastle is "just some grains of sand", when someone is pointing out the difference between a sandcastle and a couple of sandgrains in your shoe.



My point is that no one, No one can look at a photo of a zygote and feel that they are looking at someone. A zygote is not a person, by any normal sense of the meaning of the word.

It is dishonest to apply words like "person" or "someone" to a zygote because it utilizes a word with a set meaning, and makes it mean something else, in order to further an agenda.

We all looked like a clump of cells at first. I dont think its reasonable to judgepersonhood merely by how much pitty the person inspires TBH.

I use the word person because thats precisely what it is, its how a person starts.

Its only dishonest if I dont think its a person, by saying it is depishonest you imply to knnow intention and beliefs of mine that you cant possibly know.

Sure, you can believe I am lying (you d be wrong) but it would be very naive to think no one thinks its a person and thus anyone saying its a person is being dishonest.

 

[Me Myself]

Do you think pulling out to prevent fertilization also "discards" a human life? After all, there is potential for the development of a life that is wasted with the sperm. Do you consider that to be any different than abortion?

Of course, there is no zygote. There is no complete DNA of the human being.

That sperm (whichever of the winning ones) could be many different human beings depending on ovule to match.

I certainly dont believe menstruation to be mass murder from the evil woman body machine.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Thats the reason for birth control, because we know the ramifications. Nevertheless, if a pregnancy is unwanted and is terminated then the abortion is being used as a form of birth control. It isnt to speak lightly of pregnancy, quite the opposite. It isnt a shaming tactic either it is just facts.

Yeah...."it's a baby, not a choice" is a shaming tactic and attempts to paint a woman as a murderer if she wishes to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

I dont have problems with birth control, thats some of the conservative religious folks that speak against any form of birth control. Not that it stops any of those conservative type hypocrites from having sex and getting pregnant. Its about consistency but unfortunaltely pro-life and pro-choice are contradictions and we end up having to base decisions on circumstances since there is no moral absolute that fits every circumstance.

We're more alike than we are different, which is the beauty of Roe vs Wade. The constitutionality of the court opinion introduces us to the compromise of "fetal viability." Once a fetus is determined to be viable and to have a solid chance of surviving outside the uterus, the law places a cap and restrictions for having elective abortion services.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I am not following, a lot of women do abort as birth control and shrug it off with no major emotional involvement on the issue.

People can abuse their bodies in myriad of ways. People have a right to be idiots. Doesn't make them murderers.

The pro life stance is that a human life shouldnt be discarded as if it was nothing in that way.

I'm aware of that. I'm more concerned for the human life of the woman first, and that her life shouldn't be discarded as if it was nothing but a vessel for a fetus.