Fletch,
It’s easy, while inside the womb, the woman has the last word on what happens, once outside of the womb the legal standing of a human life is undisputed.
Nards,
Making it clean and guilt free at certain stages is impossible, a fetus in the 30th week is viable, it looks like a baby, it can live if birthed, it can feel pain, it has sensation, but it is legal to abort. Taking the Morning after pill and destroying a zygote (possibly) should be a guilt free experience.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Fletch,
It’s easy, while inside the womb, the woman has the last word on what happens, once outside of the womb the legal standing of a human life is undisputed.
[/quote]
Why?
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Fletch,
It’s easy, while inside the womb, the woman has the last word on what happens, once outside of the womb the legal standing of a human life is undisputed.
[/quote]
Why? [/quote]
Because passage through the sacred vagina bestows the magical right to life upon born children. Before this, the Vacuum Tube of Damacles and a woman’s “choice” are the only arbiters of its fate.
Of course, this STILL fails to explain about the special protected status bestowed upon the unborn human after 90 some-odd days.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Fletch,
It’s easy, while inside the womb, the woman has the last word on what happens, once outside of the womb the legal standing of a human life is undisputed.
[/quote]
Why? [/quote]
Because passage through the sacred vagina bestows the magical right to life upon born children. Before this, the Vacuum Tube of Damacles and a woman’s “choice” are the only arbiters of its fate.
Of course, this STILL fails to explain about the special protected status bestowed upon the unborn human after 90 some-odd days.
[/quote]
The circularity in this thread hurts my head!
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Fletch,
It’s easy, while inside the womb, the woman has the last word on what happens, once outside of the womb the legal standing of a human life is undisputed.
[/quote]
Why? [/quote]
Because passage through the sacred vagina bestows the magical right to life upon born children. Before this, the Vacuum Tube of Damacles and a woman’s “choice” are the only arbiters of its fate.
Of course, this STILL fails to explain about the special protected status bestowed upon the unborn human after 90 some-odd days.
[/quote]
The circularity in this thread hurts my head! [/quote]
It’s really, really bad. I wish we could do polls to see what the 2000 some-odd viewers of this thread are actually thinking. Not, do you agree or disagree with abortion, but a measure of what kind of rhetorical validity each argument is seen to possess. It wouldn’t tell us anything about the truth of either statement, one way or another, but neither does the pro-abortion side of the argument in this thread. (^=^)V
Nope, last point I made - “What is the ‘future child’ if it is not a human being?”
Secondly; If you are for abortion, you in fact are [i]PRO-DEATH[/i] meaning for the abortion-rights movement
The choice is either for DEATH of the child, hence pro-DEATH.
[b][u][i]OR[/b][/i][/u]
The only other possible option is for LIFE of the child, hence pro-LIFE.
Other than the government, what gives women the “right” to kill a child she helped create?
If YOU play with a loaded gun and shoot yourself, should we feel sorry for YOU?
I would like to think the majority of the viewers are just looking to see if they can learn something about a subject they don’t fully understand. I hope my thoughts can be followed. I know I am a neurotic gimp, but I have to stand up for the children with no voice. It is the right and just thing to do!
Fletch,
There is nothing circular about the argument, it is a straight line, while inside the womb the fetus is the responsibility of the woman, her choice, whether you agree or not, is the only one that matters with regards to the fetus.
If you remove the “wrong” or “right” notion from the equation the simple fact is this, a woman and a woman alone should be the final say on matters regarding her health and wellness. Trying to draw a parallel between a zygote and a living breathing child (or disabled adult as this thread seems to be doing) is ridiculous, they are not the same.
On a separate note, I find it fascinating that people that are against “big government”, “high taxes” and the “nanny state” would have a stance that promotes all three. If there are 1.6 million abortions each year you have to make the logical leap that the majority of those would be unwanted, abandoned, abused, neglected or some combination of those.
The amount of children in foster care/institutions/awaiting adoption is roughly the same now as 1970 despite an increase in US population of over 105,000,000, I wonder why that number of unwanted children hasn’t increased by 50%? Probably has nothing to do with abortion though, right?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
In what way?
[/quote]
It is hard to explain without appeal to emotion, but on the topic of the child isn’t guilty for the sins of the father:
I know it is true. I know 100% that is a fact.
I also know I wouldn’t be able to see it that way if it were my wife or daughter that were violated. It is profound because I’m pretty damn sure my rage would blind me from the truth, and I can’t imagine I would be the only one.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
This was from over two decades ago! [/quote]
I am a couple pages back still, but…
You do know you quoted a study that was 16 years old 3 posts up from this right?
Please put your goal posts in one spot as to what is an acceptable source and its age.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Well luckily for me. I have plenty of evidence. I have personally known more than a few women, among whom were extremely close friends of mine. One of them was my own grandmother. They confided to me the unimaginable guilt, pain, sense of loss, regret and self-loathing they felt at their act. A pain many of them seemed to feel would never leave them. I can imagine if there are a few that I know, there are a lot more. A whole lot more.
On a related note, I have never once met anyone who spoke anything but roundly negatively of the experience. And I’ll bet there are some I know who’ve never let me know. There’s a reason for that, too, and it doesn’t match up with your study, either. [/quote]
That’s a great start, now talk to a few hundred more women covering several demographics as they did in the studies.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
What are you trying to prove, exactly? That this does not occur? That we shouldn’t worry about it? That it isn’t a problem?[/quote]
I’m trying to find scientific evidence for your (and other prolifers here) assertion that there is a causal relationship between abortion and poor mental health.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Because if that’s what you are trying to show, one of us will indeed come away looking pretty foolish, and you won’t need a single scientific study to determine why. [/quote]
Oh?
I get it, when science agrees with your beliefs it’s great, you’ll shout it from the rooftops. “Human life begins at conception!”
But when it doesn’t, you can disregard science’s findings without batting an eyelash.
KD,
The “future child” has been argued to death I think, a zygote has the potential to a child, it is a future blastocyte, as blastocyte has the potential to be a child as well, neither of them are, they are quite possibly going to become vaguely human looking fetus (70% of the time) and then they will keep growing and developing until they look just like people with brains and features and spines and organs etc. Your personal moral views not withstanding, there are no similarities (outside of DNA) between a zygote and a child.
as to the 2nd part, if I am “Pro-Death” you are clearly “Anti-Woman” regardless of what you think, or what your wife or circle of close friends think, your statements are clearly anti-woman and anti-free will. When you state that a woman would gladly give up her life for her “unborn child”, you pretend to speak for 51% of the population, a group you are not a part of and a group that is capable of making their own decisions without your unnecessary meddling.
Do you think women are not capable of making the right decision or do you just not accept that women are equal? Would you enjoy if women got to make the decisions regarding your health? If women could outlaw a lifesaving procedure for you? If women got to determine how you would live the rest of your life? These are all things you are trying to decide for them, because clearly you “know better” than they do how to live their lives. Or maybe you are just a closet misogynist that thinks women should be submissive to men.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
On a related note, I have never once met anyone who spoke anything but roundly negatively of the experience. And I’ll bet there are some I know who’ve never let me know. There’s a reason for that, too, and it doesn’t match up with your study, either.
[/quote]
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Having or not having regrets about something is not criteria for whether something is wrong or right. If you go down that road, than anything a total sociopath does isn’t wrong because they don’t regret it. [/quote]
Huh?
I’m saying that there’s no evidence for a causal link between abortion and mental health. My recents posts have nothing to do with whether abortion is right or wrong.
Based on KD’s comments I’m assuming you were directing this post towards me.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
On a related note, I have never once met anyone who spoke anything but roundly negatively of the experience. And I’ll bet there are some I know who’ve never let me know. There’s a reason for that, too, and it doesn’t match up with your study, either.
[/quote]
Quit being condescending. It isn’t an argument. It’s a common sense observation about a sub-topic. It seems I have to explain every little detail to you every time we talk about anything.
Am I arguing the overall topic? You betcha. I notice these kinds of accusations of fallacy don’t pop up when we are on topic. Because the science IS solid, there. I am NOT, however, “arguing” a point here. I am not “arguing” a point that involves a subject that is inescapably subjective and almost certainly contains some degree or another of self-deluded reports by women who would rather not face head-on what they have done. I made this quite clear in my first reply to you about this.
You like science. You’ve read about the stages of grief, right? Cognitive dissonance? You’ve been a member of this very board long enough that you should know damned well how good people are at fooling themselves, particularly when it involves something they don’t want to face. You think a study about subjective feelings and a subjective measure of mental health could somehow control for these factors?
I am not going to pay a bunch of money to subscribe and read that study, but I would like to read it. I suppose you are already a subscriber and have read beyond just the abstract, right? How about you throw it up, at least the methodology, and let’s have a look at it. I would be genuinely interested in reading this, not only to fulfill my confirmation bias, har har, but because it seems so counter-intuitive that my curiosity is genuinely piqued.
You have read the actual study you linked, right?
Again: my statement was about common sense. Does abortion damage women mentally? Well, for certain it does to some; I have firsthand accounts. And if it does to some, it’s just common sense that a whole lot of others won’t even talk about their experience. How many of these do you think agreed to be questioned for that study? My grandmother didn’t speak of her owb experience until over 50 years after it happened. You don’t think that people who don’t want to be part of a study in the first place, yet have had abortions, might be exactly the kinds of people we are discussing here?
My opinion (note: not argument) is that if there are a bunch of women who are mentally damaged from having abortions, then that is not a good thing, and there are almost certainly a whole bunch. I will continue on a related issue in a new post.
I thought I’d posted this earlier but I either screwed something up or something screwed up.
Another observation about abortion and the way people regard them. On the one hand, we are assured that, at least before the second trimester, this is nothing more than the removal of some superfluous tissue, certainly not a CHILD, God forbid, haha, or even a full-fledged human. In other words, this is nothing more or less ethical than any other operation to remove unwanted tissue, or an organ or such.
However, if this IS true, then why on earth is the removal of this tissue NOT viewed anything like the removal of an appendix, or a nose job. Why is it that, in the case of successful, as-planned operations, you never, never hear of people “regretting” having had their appendix removed, or, their nose made less bulbous, or of having a wart removed. Yet, for some reason, even though we are assured that abortion is essentially the equivalent of the aforementioned operations, we here many, many reports of guilt, pain, regret, sadness, depression and anger.
Why? If it’s just a mass of cells, why get so worked up over it?
Why do you continue to act as if you don’t get it when you do get it?
It’s the same tired old tactics you’ve used countless times before Cortes, and they’ve been refuted or explained as many times.
This is a battle you’re not going to win, not unless democracy turns theocracy.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Quit being condescending. [/quote]
I like to generally give as good as I get. Read your foolish line from your previous post.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
It isn’t an argument. It’s a common sense observation about a sub-topic. It seems I have to explain every little detail to you every time we talk about anything. [/quote]
It’s a common sense observation? Really?
My common sense would lead me to the OPPOSITE conclusion.
Most women are pro-choice > Pro-choice people do not consider a “clump of cells” a person and therefore not murder > If this is their opinion, why on earth would they suffer from mental health issues post abortion?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Am I arguing the overall topic? You betcha. I notice these kinds of accusations of fallacy don’t pop up when we are on topic. Because the science IS solid, there. I am NOT, however, “arguing” a point here. I am not “arguing” a point that involves a subject that is inescapably subjective and almost certainly contains some degree or another of self-deluded reports by women who would rather not face head-on what they have done. I made this quite clear in my first reply to you about this. [/quote]
So you’re not arguing that many if not most women suffer mental health issues from having abortions?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
You like science. You’ve read about the stages of grief, right? Cognitive dissonance? You’ve been a member of this very board long enough that you should know damned well how good people are at fooling themselves, particularly when it involves something they don’t want to face. You think a study about subjective feelings and a subjective measure of mental health could somehow control for these factors? [/quote]
No study will ever be 100% perfect, but for the length of time that this topic has been studied, there should be at least a few studies that demonstrate what you believe.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
I am not going to pay a bunch of money to subscribe and read that study, but I would like to read it. I suppose you are already a subscriber and have read beyond just the abstract, right? How about you throw it up, at least the methodology, and let’s have a look at it. I would be genuinely interested in reading this, not only to fulfill my confirmation bias, har har, but because it seems so counter-intuitive that my curiosity is genuinely piqued.
You have read the actual study you linked, right? [/quote]
I did while I was on campus (school comps have access), but I wrote my last exam yesterday actually. I’ll look around for some free ones though. However let me point this out: no medical or psychological organization recognizes “post-abortion syndrome.”
Let me ask you something. Why do you think that is?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Again: my statement was about common sense. Does abortion damage women mentally? Well, for certain it does to some; I have firsthand accounts. And if it does to some, it’s just common sense that a whole lot of others won’t even talk about their experience. How many of these do you think agreed to be questioned for that study? My grandmother didn’t speak of her owb experience until over 50 years after it happened. You don’t think that people who don’t want to be part of a study in the first place, yet have had abortions, might be exactly the kinds of people we are discussing here? [/quote]
It’s possible. However, in one of the studies I linked (again sorry for the lack of access) it stated that pre-abortion influences such as emotional attachment to the pregnancy, conservative views or pre-existing mental conditions increased the likelihood of post-abortion mental issues.
So if you grew up in a hardcore catholic family, chose to have an abortion, you’re likely going to feel guilty or stressed out after.
This makes perfect sense to me. I grew up in a Hindu family and following the first time I consumed beef (only a few years ago) I felt extremely guilty afterwards. To this day I generally avoid consuming cow and get almost all my red meat from Lamb.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
My opinion (note: not argument) is that if there are a bunch of women who are mentally damaged from having abortions, then that is not a good thing, and there are almost certainly a whole bunch. I will continue on a related issue in a new post.
[/quote]
Okay.