80 replies to this topic

[Zimbochick]

Opinions regarding abortion seem to be littered about in other threads, so let's talk about it.

Here is Roe v. Wade:

http://caselaw.lp.fi...l=410 &page=113

Personally I have no problem with the way the law is written now, and would not support any of the changes I have seen proposed.

[LISA]

fuck it. abortion is a CHOICE issue..I do not agree with it as a METHOD of birth control but if I or any female feel the need to end a pregnancy, IT is OUR choice,OUR body...there are circumstances for everything..hence the morning after pill...people fuck up, and if we know we did, why subject an innocent child into a fucked up life? I dont agree with babies having babies..a young woman in her teens is not only ruining her life but the chance of a normal life for the child as well..how many welfare success cases do you actually see? Sorry guys, unless it is a committed,loving relationship and you both made a spur of the moment decision and the result is pregnancy, THEN and only then may you have a say in what goes on and even if you disagree, there isnt a fucking thing you can do about it because it isnt your body. Abortion, absolutely...PRO CHOICE as a method of birth control because you are poor ass,uneducated trailer trash whore who cant keep your legs together and has a series of abortions throughout her life-NO safe to say I am a little on the fence,lol...personally I have two almost grown children...Ihave had to have 2 medically requested abortions and a D&C for placenta privia in the first trimester...not the same shite but I get it

[freedom78]

Sometimes when I eat too much, I claim a desperate need for a foodbortion.

[Hula]

pro choice all the way. I think we have enough restrictions now and would not support new ones.

[PERM BANNED]

pro choice all the way. I think we have enough restrictions now and would not support new ones.

Just out of curiosity, what restriction do you think are too much? Abortion is pretty damn easy to come by. Nearly every insurer covers them because its cheaper than paying for all the care incurred during pregnancy. I fully support abortion being legal, but I do get bothered when it's done later on in the term. Assuming it's a total unexpected accident because birth control failed, that would mean any woman should know she's carrying by the 2nd month. When someone chooses to have an abortion in month five, I have to ask why did you wait so long.

The whole "it's my body" thing falls flat for me. I think a woman's right to privacy is obviously covered under medical guidance and treatment. But to say it's my body, my choice doesn't pass the common sense test. As I said in an earlier thread, if you try to off yourself, the authorities don't say it's okay because it's your body. They put you in an instiution. The same with drug and alcohol abuse. If you are sitting on a street corner drunk off your ass, they charge you with public intox. The whole "my body" thing doesn't play. If you're 6 months along, and I kill you by crashing into your car while drunk, there have been plenty of examples of the offender being charged in a double homicide. When you tie in the fact that a man is legally or at least financially liable for a "choice" a woman makes, it kind of goes against the whole feminist notion of my body my rights. You're forcing someone else to pay for your decision at that point. Though no legal standing has been set in this regard, I read that some feminist literature argues that even without a right to privacy in the 14th amendment, forcing a women to have a child would be a violation of their 13th amendment rights by essentially making them an indentured servant or even slave. I don't know how strong that argument is, but if it holds weight, an equal argument can be made by a man force to contribute.

I'm in no way advocating that a man shouldn't bear responsibility for creating a child. Just that if a woman claims the right is entirely hers, there has to be some medium in which a man has a voice in a decision that affects them both.

[wedjat]

Guys want a say in whether or not a woman gets an abortion? Fine. Then give married women the right to tell their husbands to get his nuts cut if she doesn't want anymore kids. It makes about as much sense as a guy having the right to tell a women to abort or not. Rights to your nuts is a fair trade off to rights to my womb. What you're forgetting is that when guys screw around they've already made a decision that could end up creating a baby. At that point it shouldn't come as a big surprise if they end up sharing support for a child for the next 18 years. If they don't want to take that change then they have a choice of getting themselves fixed before they screw around or keeping their penis in their own pants. No one is holding a gun to a man's head and saying go forth and screw every woman who will let you. Granted, your choice comes several months before a woman's choice but it's no less important.

Do you know that two of my friends husbands have gotten snipped? It's so much less invasive than having the woman get her tubes tied.

[freedom78]

I don't like the idea of a vasectomy. What if your wife and children die in a car wreck? It's not nearly as "reversible" as many believe. Most forms of birth control have their problems, but a vasectomy is among the few that you can't stop "using".

[PERM BANNED]

Randall, Late term abortions are never easy emotionally or normally done without a compelling reason like the fetus doesn't have a brain or is missing bones in its limbs, etc. etc, or the woman's health is compromised so badly that her life is in danger. Not all women know they are carrying by their 2nd or 3rd month, especially if there is something wrong with the fetus. Late term abortions absolutely needs to stay on the table. Not as a form of birth control but used to circumvent tragic situations.

As for your being charged for a double homicide argument if you kill a pregnant woman. That's just another Pro-LIfer generated tactic, trying to chip away at Pro-Choice rights by trying to establish person-hood of a fetus earlier or earlier. So it holds no weigh with me. I'd like to see those kinds of charges disappear off the books as quickly as it came into being in the past 10 or 15 years.

Guys want a say in whether or not a woman gets an abortion? Fine. Then give married women the right to tell their husbands to get his nuts cut if she doesn't want anymore kids. It makes about as much sense as a guy having the right to tell a women to abort or not. Rights to your nuts is a fair trade off to rights to my womb. What you're forgetting is that when guys screw around they've already made a decision that could end up creating a baby. At that point it shouldn't come as a big surprise if they end up sharing support for a child for the next 18 years. If they don't want to take that change then they have a choice of getting themselves fixed before they screw around or keeping their penis in their own pants. No one is holding a gun to a man's head and saying go forth and screw every woman who will let you. Granted, your choice comes several months before a woman's choice but it's no less important.

I'm not arguing against abortion in any case for medical reasons. My argument was and still is I find it very hard to believe that a woman could be that far along and not have known for a while she was carrying a child. Morning sickness, weight gain and lack of a menstrual cycle are pretty obvious symptoms. I'm not saying that it should be limited at this point, merely that it is something to consider and I would personally weigh moral judgement on someone who waited to this point to have the abortion - assuming nothing abnormal occured.

I'm not saying a man has a right to tell a woman to keep a child or get rid of it. My argument rests on that it takes two equal partners to conceive a child. Now, the people who claim "it's my body" want total control over a future life that will ultimately affect all 3 people involved. While I would not condone any law that allowed the man to force the woman one way or the other, I think some consideration should be given to a man being legally removed from responsibility if he desires the child to be aborted and the woman does not. Outside of marriage, why should the man be required to pay income to a woman for 18 years if the decision to have a child is entirely her choice? If we removed abortion, you would say it was unfair to force women to have children. Can't the logic be applied to woman who either for personal or financial reasons, use the birth of a child to force some sort of obligation from their partner?

If you want to use the "it's my body argument" then no one else should be responsible for what you choose to do with "your body." by using that line of logic, you are inherently placing all responsibility on yourself for YOUR decision. That's my point. Adamanat supporters hide under the mask of individual choice, but ultimatley expect someone else to suffer for their choice.

I'm not saying one way or the other. It's a very complicated issue philosophically speaking, but quite clear legally. Legally, we have the answer and that won't change soon. But as this is a message forum and all of us saying "yep, it's the law" would be rather boring, a deeper examination of the theme and connected principles are required.

[Hula]

randall late term abortions are not had for funzies only for dire medical reasons. it takes two doctors to sign off on them and only a handful of places preform them. the restrictions already on the books are fine in this area. like the right to bear arms, you start chipping away at it people worry the right will be gone. as for women knowing they are pregnant you might want to watch a few episodes of I didn't know I was pregnant on the TLC discovery channel. not all women stop having periods or they have them off and on just like they did when they were not pregnant. same thing with morning sickness, not all women have them. my niece in law gained 6 to maybe ten pounds when she was pregnant. if she didn't know no one else would be able to tell by looking at her thats for sure. I have great trouble imagining what would happen to women if abortion was illegal, besides the self induced or back alley abortions that kill and maim women, what about the women too afarid to try this that don't want to be pregnant? like you mentioned forced indentured servant status. the only trouble with giving the man the right to op out of taking care of his child is that many would op out just because they can't be bothered and why should a man be free of it if the birth control failed and or the woman didn't have it in her to abort. she may not really want to have a baby either but she does because she is morally against abortion and can not give the child up for adoption. a man shouldn't get a pass just because he doesn't want to deal with things. the problem with restrictions, men getting to opt out is who gets to decide if the "reason" for it are just? some board of people? who would get to make the choice? what value and morals would they apply? it is far too subjective which is the reason it should always be left up to the individual and her doctor

[AxlsMainMan]

I don't like the idea of a vasectomy. What if your wife and children die in a car wreck? It's not nearly as "reversible" as many believe.

Unless you're a soap character, in which case you can miraculously conceive even after a hysterectomy

[TAP]

http://motherjones.c...penalty-georgia

[wedjat]

http://motherjones.c...penalty-georgia

That's just another crazy person engaging in crazy talk. There's no way that would go through so they just look like idiots right now.