Rape, Abortion, and "Personhood"

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Tiassa, Nov 1, 2012.

?

Do I support this proposition?

Poll closed Nov 1, 2013.
  1. Anti-abortion: Yes

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Anti-abortion: No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Pro-choice: Yes

    61.5%
  4. Pro-choice: No

    15.4%
  5. Other (Please explain below)

    23.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    agreed. I find it ironic that women can bash men all day long and they are called feminists. If a man disagrees with or criticizes a woman in the least he is a misogynist.

    And Neverfly gets insulted and accused of misogyny and controlling me and thats a terrible terrible thing if he does, but no one bitches about Fraggle Rocker's wife who controls how he even interacts on this forum. It's sad to think we will never know what Fraggle really thinks because his wife doesn't allow him basic human rights of free speech. But no one should dare call his wife a misandrist.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828

    Yes, I still find myself looking in on this thread. Certainly Fraggle can speak his mind without fear of reprisal, can't he?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    This, of course, is based on the assumption the method outlined in my post Is the method I arrived at the earlier figure.

    And I didn't say the wiki page, I said the actual study that the wiki page refers to.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    He has stated otherwise, but maybe he was joking. However joking in such a way in such an emotional thread about such a sensitive subject would be in very poor taste, IMO.
     
  8. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    Well if that isn't the method you used, then what method DID you use? It makes no sense to justify figures stated with a method that does not support the results in question if that is not the method used at arriving to said results.

    If you have another source for your 75-80% results, please do share. If you don't then admit you just made the figures up.
     
  9. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    That's tough to get in this thread...
    The point is intact, I agree. But the figures are a problem.
    From what I've seen in this thread- extremely... All the while projecting their own behavior with the claim that it's the men who are sexists.
    If I say, "You have the right to choose to abort.
    At the third trimester, it's a human brain established and killing that is to kill a human, no one has that right."
    They lose zero rights- yet they pretend that they do. It's like they want more rights to kill than anyone is granted. They don't want equal rights they want more rights than anyone. Some kind of special status rights, I guess.
    Post 233- I seriously can make no sense at all of how they justify that. It's mind boggling. It's no wonder that they flat refuse to address that post.
     
  10. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,509
    (Insert Title Here)

    I referred to a specific, politically controversial method; D&X was at the heart of the Supreme Court cases for which the previously-cited amicus brief was crafted. Intact Dilation and Extraction (D&X) is what is referred to as “partial birth abortion”.

    Thus—

    If purely elective D&X (partial birth abortion) was more common, it is possible I would try to figure another line.​

    —something about your point doesn't quite add up for me here.

    But that doesn't specifically dismiss the question.

    I would like address your point, though, in a slightly roundabout manner.

    I asked a female friend of mine, earlier this week: Barring mental illness, why would a woman put herself through thirty weeks of a pregnancy and then decide she doesn't want it?

    I explained that I asked because the idea that a woman, two-thirds or more through a pregnancy, would decide to abort on a lark is something that, to the one, I can't comprehend, and to the other, is a stock myth of the anti-abortion canon. I don't think she would mind my relating that the question is as confounding to her as it seems to me.

    Thus I would put the same question to you.

    Because while Neverfly noted, “Even more figures- the highest figure was: Birth Control!” it isn't a complete point.

    Of course, neither was mine, although the “twisted fantasies” I noted earlier are, well, pretty twisted. I have even heard before the suggestion that a woman would abort minutes before delivery as an act of revenge against the father. I should mention that it was in fact one of your posts, when you asked, “Tell me something, if a woman doesn't want a pregnancy, does she not figure that out before the third trimester?

    But, in the end, you've answered your own question better than I did. These are not decisions made on a lark, and, as it turns out, there are some difficult issues leading to late-term abortions.

    In the question of methods, my understanding is that late-term elective abortions did not generally use D&X when it was more widely available. These used D&E or EASI induction, which procedures are not as restricted today in the United States as D&X.

    I would also note, as you mentioned relevancy to the thread topic, that the actual purpose of this thread is to discuss the implications of LACP, not, as has developed, the justifications for the principle. Naturally, in the face of the implications, the justifications become important.

    But LACP does not simply affect the question of abortion; it affects all pregnancies.

    It's a fine argument in the abstract, but what are the practical, living realities? They can be pretty brutal; as Rose Aguilar reported in 2010:

    Starting from the beginning means revisiting the case of a 17-year-old girl from Vernal, Utah, who was seven months pregnant last May, when she paid 21-year-old Aaron Harrison $150 to beat her up after her boyfriend threatened to leave her if she didn’t terminate the pregnancy.

    According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Harrison brought the girl to the basement of his parent’s house and attacked and kicked her, leaving bruises on her stomach and a bite mark on her neck. The baby survived the assault, was born in August, and has since been adopted.

    Harrison, who faced 15 years in prison, pleaded guilty to second-degree felony attempted murder, but instead got up to five years, after District Judge A. Lynn Payne sentenced him under Utah’s anti-abortion statute, saying a charge of third-degree “attempted killing of an unborn child” better fit the facts of the case, according to the Tribune.

    In June, the 17-year-old girl, whose name has not been released because of her age, pleaded no contest to a second-degree felony count of criminal solicitation to commit murder. Juvenile Court Judge Larry Steele ordered that she be placed in the custody of Utah Juvenile Justice Services until she turns 21, but she was released in October after the judge said that, under state law, “a woman who solicits or seeks to have another cause an abortion of her own unborn child cannot be criminally liable."

    Perhaps that whole sad situation could have been avoided if the girl didn't need to travel over 170 miles to the nearest medical facility that provides abortion services. As it is, Utah's response was to tighten their anti-abortion laws.

    And maybe the Vernal case is extreme, but Utah is a place where people between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four, in 2007, were statistically more likely to contract chlamydia than the flu. That's a whole state that lends to the point; the fine argument in the abstract becomes incredibly complicated. And, of course, something goes here about issues not being simple.

    There are no definitive answers to the abortion question, but I think the point you raise oversimplifies the considerations of deciding to terminate a pregnancy. Which, of course, is one of the big problems I have with the absurd, fanatical anti-abortion arguments.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Aguilar, Rose. "Utah Governor Signs Controversial Law Charging Women and Girls With Murder for Miscarriages". AlterNet. March 9, 2010. AlterNet.org. November 7, 2012. http://www.alternet.org/rights/1459...women_and_girls_with_murder_for_miscarriages_
     
  11. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    I wish i could lock this post invisible from everyone for 2 days but I would put money on the fact someone is going to say that the boyfriend is evil and the girl is a just a poor victim
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,594
    The manner in which you pose the question is absurd. In short, you are asking why should a woman be allowed to have an abortion up to a few seconds before birth, because you know, women in the middle of childbirth often think "I want an abortion and cross their legs until one can be performed"..

    Considering the fact that third trimester or late term abortions factor to be less than 1% of all abortions committed in the US (approximately 1000 per year), you are carrying on as if these are all frivolous abortions.

    From Dr Tiller:

    Dr Tiller was murdered by pro-life activists after he was gunned down in a church on a Sunday. His reproductive health clinic was also bombed on previous occasions. The women he helped saw him as a hero who willingly put his own life on the line to "help them through their darkest hour".

    Can you understand now why I refused to answer your absurd question based on your equally absurd hypotheticals?

    Women do not have frivolous 3rd party abortions Neverfly. The reasons behind the horrendous decision they are making is valid. Aside from the medical problems of the foetus, the risk to the mother's health either from the pregnancy or from outside sources, her mental health, victims of rape or incest who possibly find themselves unable to get an abortion earlier for example, young girls who are desperate and aren't able to get it sooner is another example. You discount family pressure or threats of violence.. I find discounting such reasons to be frivolous themselves. From a study by a pro-life group about the issue:

    Even they understand why women facing threats of violence or death from family or the father of the baby (for example) are making the decision to abort.. Because they fear for their own lives.

    And keep in mind, of the less than 1% who have an abortion in the third trimester, it is the extreme minority of that number who are terminating for reasons that are not for medical issues that may arise or be discovered with the mother or foetus.

    So yes, I found your question absurd and why it was a waste of time and energy in this debate.

    But carry on behaving as if women are making that horrible decision for "frivolous reasons". What is frivolous for you is understandable even to pro-life groups. Which kind of says something about your attitude in this whole debate.
     
  13. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    I am not sure why the method of abortion makes any difference. The end result is the same. The fetus is removed and dead in the end. The result is the concern of pro-lifers, not the process. Meaning, to a pro-life advocate, you cannot present any method of abortion that will result in them saying, " Oh well if you want to kill it THAT way, then that's cool." They do not care how or when you are ending the development of the fetus, they only care that you are.

    In terms that to some abortion is seen as murder, I offer this analogy/question. Would murder by strangulation, be more or less acceptable to you than some other form of murder? (rhetorical question- but feel free to answer if you like)

    I may be able to help if you could restate in your own words what you think my point was. It is possible you may have misunderstood me in some way. Also, I have attempted to make several points throughout the thread, so I am not sure which one you are referring to.

    First of all, much to my surprise, it is not actually a myth. Second, the question begs us to comprehend the state of mind that a person may be in as a result of all their life experiences up to a particular point. Gladly most people have not had the experiences required to be able to relate to the feelings a 3rd trimester mother, finding herself in desire of an abortion, may be feeling. I can't imagine that her life has been all puppies and lollipops. But who knows? Maybe it would be an arrogant spoiled little rich girl who would choose to do so just to hurt someone else. Maybe the girl has a mental illness. Maybe she had a fascination with pregnancy itself but not motherhood. I personally enjoy being pregnant, even when it made me sick as a dog, I still enjoyed it. Labor was traumatizing though and raising the kids is far more difficult than birthing them. I met a surrogate mother who told me she also loved being pregnant but could not see herself as a mother. She feared not raising a child right and ruining their lives.

    The same kind of question can be asked about any one who makes a decisions to do something that we can not bring ourselves to do. Like putting a child up for adoption after going through the pregnancy. I don't think I could do it and I can't imagine what a woman must be thinking or feeling when she makes the decision and then follows through with it. But my inability to relate does not mean it doesn't happen, or even that it is a rare occurrence.

    This is true, I did say that. During the course of this discussion I have been researching and learning; I hope we all have. I am not going to pretend I didn't see the statistics just because they go against an assumption that I made earlier. We have all been making assumptions. It's time to lay them aside.

    I am not sure who brought up the question of methods. Methods have never been a concern of mine. My concern was late term in general where the mother's life or the life of the fetus was not threatened in any way.

    Indeed.



    I agree that there was a large percentage of women (48%) who said a reason for getting a late term abortion was due to difficulties making arrangements for abortion. Those specific barriers to abortion were documented as stated below:

    So of the 48% that had trouble arranging abortion in the 1st or 2nd trimester, 60% said money was the issue, while 32% said they wanted to use a different clinic and 26% said there was no nearby provider.

    If insurance companies and/or medicaid (and I believe medicaid should be approved automatically for the duration of when an application is being evaluated- but that is another thread) would cover abortions and even provide transportation as many do for routine doctor visits this would be less of a problem, add to that abortion should be something available in all state hospitals. This, in my opinion, could greatly reduce late term abortions.
     
  14. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    myth busting

    Let's do some myth busting

    bolding mine
    bolding mine
    bolding mine

    See table 4.

    Myth-
    It is rare that a woman would have a late term abortion for any reason other than immediate health risks. Meaning most late term abortions ARE due to immediate health risks.​

    Busted -
    Only 2% of women who have late term abortions due fetal problems being diagnosed late in pregnancy.​

    11% reported other reasons that MAY include immediate threat to mother's life.Though maternal death risk in late term was not specifically addressed.​

    In regards to abortion in general, only 7% of women who have had an abortion reported having a personal health problem as a reason for the abortion.​



    Myth-
    Women often get late abortions because others pressured them not to get an abortion.​

    Busted-
    only 8% of women getting late term abortions reported pressure from others to not get an abortion as a reason.​





    Myth -
    Women usually choose to abort because of abusive men.​
    Busted-
    Only 6% of women report choosing abortion in general (at any stage of pregnancy) because her husband or partner mistreats her or her children.​

    see table 2


    Why U.S. women have abortions- Study
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  15. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    The only one talking about women having abortions 30 seconds before delivery is YOU. You're misapplying another absurdity I had pointed out, how something is a person literally 30 seconds after birth, but not before. That was all I was pointing out was that arbitrary line. I did not, ever, as you keep insisting, claim that bunches and oodles of women go in for abortions an hour before delivery or thirty seconds before delivery-or that any do. There was, however a side rebuttal where I pointed out that some do seem to kill them after birthing it, which is odd when compared to Bells argument of incredulity, that "no one would carry it to near end of term and abort."
    You're missing the point Bells. You're claiming that absurdity- I am not. Post 233 does not make that claim at all.
    I will paste it for the third time for you now. (Sigh... it's 234 now, due to queue bump ins..)

    I cover the the depth of the absurdity again, here:
    Seagypsy covers your other errors in your post above, so I left this one at just this. FOr rebuttals about Later Term abortions, see the post above mine which covers the studies, statistics, myths and facts.
    1%?
    Or is it 2% are for Medical reasons and 24%-Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
     
  16. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    I think they were both unfortunate victims of a system screwed up and society gone wrong.
     
  17. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    If emotional abuse is the only way that you and your partner can communicate, or what you and your partner consider "having input" into each others decisions, then I pity the pair of you.

    Still, at least you're keeping two other people from being miserable.


    I have given you no information to formulate a reasoned opinion on my stance on the matter. The only thing you know is that for some reason I chose to ignore your earlier post until now.
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,014
    Correct. And if biology permitted it would be a RIGHT for a man to have a child when he wants no matter what their partner thinks. Biology does not permit that. Yes, that is quite literally sexist; human biology unfairly discriminates and does not allow men to become pregnant. C'est la vie.
     
  19. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    I love that You're making such a big fuss out of this figure, and I love that Seagypsy has finally gotten around to taking the time to tracking down one of the versions of the paper, because it means I get to point out how dishonest you're being.

    This, from the paper which I know that Seagypsy has a copy of:
    Woman took time to decide to have an abortion (N=74)
    She found having an abortion to be a difficult decision 78%
    She had religious or moral reasons for waiting 19%
    She talked with her parents/husband/partner 11%

    So yes, while 24% of women may have taken their time about making a decision, the reason why they took their rime was because they found the decision difficult, had religous or moral reasons for waiting, or they consulted with parents or spouses.

    None of which amounts to "You know, I can't be stuffed with this anymore."

    And this is why we don't give amatures statistics:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The worst I have done is forget to normalize a figure before posting it (If we accept Seagypsy's assertions). This is orders of magnitude worse...
     
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Speaking of dishonesty:
    Yes. Lets.

    Here's what Bells said, from your post:
    Bells has been quite specific in this. She is, in the portions you cited referring to third trimester abortions.

    The third trimester begins at 28 weeks. The figures you are citing are for abortions after 16 weeks. This study is silent on the statistics for post 28 week abortions, and can not be used to reasonably infer anything about such as the majority of post 16 week abortions are done by the 20th week.

    And that's why we don't let amatures do statistics.

    I'm sorry what? Did I miss something?

    Ummm..? OK, maybe I've missed something here, but...

    [/quote]
    Oh right, so you haven't found the full version yet?
     
  21. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,594
    Yes.. Lets..

    Your table 4 does not specify if "late" classifies as third trimester or "late" as in after the first 20 weeks of gestation since what is generally classified as "late" especially is after the 20-21'st week of pregnancy, which would greatly skew what I had been discussing with Neverfly, which was third trimester abortions. So your myth busting is applying a false or misleading standard to what I was discussing, which was late third trimester abortions.

    Again, "late" and third trimester are two totally different things in the context of the discussion I was having with Neverfly. Late is after the 20th week of gestation. And even you applied that you would support abortion up to the 27th or so week or viability, much earlier in this thread?

    Late is after the 20th week and late term third trimester is fully into the 3rd trimester.

    But even factoring this in, the number of 'late' abortions is still very very low as compared to those who get it before the 20th week. In fact, it is around 1.3% and of that 1.3% and then factor in that less than 1% do it in the third trimester. And as Trippy pointed out previously, 3rd trimester is even less - and as I pointed out previously, third trimester abortions factor as being less than 1000 in the US per year. And the leading doctor who performed 3rd trimester abortions stated that the over all majority of the ones he performed were for health reasons.. Unless of course you are saying he is incorrect?

    In discussing late term third trimester abortions abortions, Dr Miller found that threat to the woman's life or threats of violence were a major factor for those who decide to abort in the third trimester (ie after the 27th week). In fact, a pro-life study about why women abort because of threats of violence found that almost all comply and get an abortion when faced with such threats - and of course are applying reasons over all abortions instead of 3rd trimester (since table 2 is not for late or late term abortions but over all abortions). But I can understand how an overall application over all abortions are you are trying to pass off here for late term reasons can mislead you to abortions which are in the 3rd trimester and which I had been discussing above.

    So if you wish to bust the mysts of why women have 3rd trimester abortions, which was what I had been discussing in my previous post in response to Neverfly's absurd 'what if she can abort 1 minute before birth' scenario and which you seemed to gleefully bust a gut trying to supposedly "bust", maybe it would behoove you to look at figures that apply to third trimester abortions and not ones that start from the 20th week while disregarding the actual studies I had posted which deal specifically with third trimester abortions because you know, you got the terminology wrong.

    A study in France into the reasons for third trimester abortions was also found to support Dr Tiller's reasons that women came to him for such abortions:

    Now, looking at Roe v Wade, the reason allowed from that case, for 3rd trimester abortions, is for health reasons (and all that that entails). So yeah, continue the myth busting. I can't say for anyone else here, but this is quite funny to see how well you are doing at it.

    I mean it took you what? 7 or so pages to understand what was meant by personhood in the context of this thread? So we probably have a few more pages to go before you understand what third trimester means in the context of abortion and of this thread which is what Neverfly keeps flashing his hypothetical's about..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    As I pointed out to Sea Gypsy, the paper she's referencing classifies anything after 16 weeks as being "Late".

    From the JSTOR version of the paper:
    Which of course underlines the other problem with that paper - six facilities is not a large sample size.
     
  23. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Further to this:
    I have found another source which deals specifically with third trimester abortions:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Source

    I should warn you though, the website I have linked to contains a graphic image of ancephaly.

    So it seems then that Bells assertion that the majority of third trimester abortions are for medical reasons is not, in fact, busted.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page