Abortion Ban

[linderlizzie]

If YOU are not the one that is pregnant, you should not have a say! I don't see how men are the ones making these laws.

Also, Separation of church and state!

Investigate and find out what separation of church and state really means before you throw it into an argument. It's actually to keep the state (government) from forming a state religion and not at all about keeping religion, or God, out of governmental affairs. It's not in the Constitution per se. It was a paraphrase by Thomas Jefferson.

The following quote is from from Teachinghistory.org.:

"The United States Constitution does not state in so many words that there is a separation of church and state. The first part of the First Amendment to the Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Therefore, it is more accurate to say that the Constitution promotes freedom of religion and prohibits the federal government from inhibiting its citizens’ ability to worship as they wish."

BTW, men should definitely have a say on whether or not their babies are slaughtered before they're allowed to be born. It shouldn't only be the woman's prerogative. The daddies might actually want to be a daddies. Why doesn't anyone think about them?

And even if they are not the daddies, why should they necessarily be for murdering babies by anyone? Unborn babies are still human beings (albeit quite small and helpless) and deserve the right to live. And if men want to fight for the defenseless little babes, I say, "Go for it!"

I didn't feel the need to be technical about "separation of church and state" but it seems like you clearly understood that I was referring to "keeping religion, or God, out of governmental affairs."   

So we should go by what you mean instead of the original meaning of the text?

You understand that there is a difference between a fetus and a baby, right?

The definition of fetus is an unborn human baby.

Also, I hope you don't truly think it is simply a matter of wanting or not wanting to be daddies/parents.

Just what do people become after they have a baby? What do you call them other than mommies/daddies/parents? Or do you mean that they are okay with being mommies/daddies/parents (or whatever name you what to ascribe to them) as long as they can have the authority to end their fetus/baby's life?

And why would anyone think they have the right to make a decision that doesn't regard their own being in the first place? And the woman should be able to decide what happens to the "unborn babies" she (NOT the "daddies" or other men it may/may not concern) is carrying (in HER body, in case that isn't clear) especially if it endangers her "right to live."

I would respect a woman's decision to have an abortion if it really threatened her life, but those cases are extremely rare. And I still hold that a man should be involved in a decision that will end the life of his own offspring. He was definitely involved in the conception. Many men are capable of being responsible and caring.

Also, "slaughtered" made me giggle.

If the word "slaughtered" in reference to unborn babies made you giggle, then you already have a heart problem.


When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Do  u understand what that scripture means?Elizabeth was carrying John the Baptist and Mary was to be Jesus mom.It certainly looked like "Life"existed in Elizabeths womb.Ponder that!!

I'm familiar with the scripture and I do realize that life existed in both of the women's bodies. What is the point you're trying to make? And I'm very happy that Elizabeth and Mary elected to have their babies. Ponder that.

I knew when this thread was started that there would no changing of opinion on either side. I expected it might become ugly and that was never my intention. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think it's tragic if that opinion takes another person's life.

[Legslangevan]

To Linder

My last post was only based on the bible.Above that looks like my post but it isnt.That was NOT directed at you cos i see you are against abortions as i am and i support Gods word on it.Your ending comment "ponder that"was directed at me cos u thought i was talking to you.I wasnt!!!Slaughtered made me giggle was NOT my post.Im sure i directed it at Nicky.

The only thing we disagree with is you think babies go to heaven and that ws addressed by me already.

[nickylanena]

If YOU are not the one that is pregnant, you should not have a say! I don't see how men are the ones making these laws.

Also, Separation of church and state!

Investigate and find out what separation of church and state really means before you throw it into an argument. It's actually to keep the state (government) from forming a state religion and not at all about keeping religion, or God, out of governmental affairs. It's not in the Constitution per se. It was a paraphrase by Thomas Jefferson.

The following quote is from from Teachinghistory.org.:

"The United States Constitution does not state in so many words that there is a separation of church and state. The first part of the First Amendment to the Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Therefore, it is more accurate to say that the Constitution promotes freedom of religion and prohibits the federal government from inhibiting its citizens’ ability to worship as they wish."

BTW, men should definitely have a say on whether or not their babies are slaughtered before they're allowed to be born. It shouldn't only be the woman's prerogative. The daddies might actually want to be a daddies. Why doesn't anyone think about them?

And even if they are not the daddies, why should they necessarily be for murdering babies by anyone? Unborn babies are still human beings (albeit quite small and helpless) and deserve the right to live. And if men want to fight for the defenseless little babes, I say, "Go for it!"

I didn't feel the need to be technical about "separation of church and state" but it seems like you clearly understood that I was referring to "keeping religion, or God, out of governmental affairs."   

So we should go by what you mean instead of the original meaning of the text?

Yes.

You understand that there is a difference between a fetus and a baby, right?

The definition of fetus is an unborn human baby.
Yes, unborn.

Also, I hope you don't truly think it is simply a matter of wanting or not wanting to be daddies/parents.

Just what do people become after they have a baby? What do you call them other than mommies/daddies/parents? Or do you mean that they are okay with being mommies/daddies/parents (or whatever name you what to ascribe to them) as long as they can have the authority to end their fetus/baby's life?
The way you speak of it makes it sound as if the man is missing out on an opportunity [of being a parent], and the issue is deeper than that.

And why would anyone think they have the right to make a decision that doesn't regard their own being in the first place? And the woman should be able to decide what happens to the "unborn babies" she (NOT the "daddies" or other men it may/may not concern) is carrying (in HER body, in case that isn't clear) especially if it endangers her "right to live."

I would respect a woman's decision to have an abortion if it really threatened her life, but those cases are extremely rare. And I still hold that a man should be involved in a decision that will end the life of his own offspring. He was definitely involved in the conception. Many men are capable of being responsible and caring.
Life threatening abortion cases are only a fraction to the whole, as you mentioned. Sadly, additional realities include women and girls getting pregnant as a result of rape who do not desire to keep the child. Then, there are the families who conceive and find out that their unborn has a fetal anomaly (ie. rare disorder,defect) making them want to terminate the pregnancy. Furthermore, there are people who just aren't ready or able to care for a child (adoption doesn't work for everyone).
People are not just having abortions on a whim.

Also, "slaughtered" made me giggle.

If the word "slaughtered" in reference to unborn babies made you giggle, then you already have a heart problem.
No, my heart, as of now, is A-Okay.  But, yes, in this context I giggle at the tone in which I consider to be over-dramatic.


When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Do  u understand what that scripture means?Elizabeth was carrying John the Baptist and Mary was to be Jesus mom.It certainly looked like "Life"existed in Elizabeths womb.Ponder that!!

I'm familiar with the scripture and I do realize that life existed in both of the women's bodies. What is the point you're trying to make? And I'm very happy that Elizabeth and Mary elected to have their babies. Ponder that.

I knew when this thread was started that there would no changing of opinion on either side. I expected it might become ugly and that was never my intention. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think it's tragic if that opinion takes another person's life.

This is from another person who also replied, not me, so I have no idea what point he/she was trying to make...
And, yes, it would be foolish to think an online forum would change anyone's opinions on such a topic (but if that's anyone's goal - they can give it a go). I don't think this has turned ugly, but I don't mind civilly challenging views I don't necessarily agree with.

[linderlizzie]

95% is a made up statistic.  When you have to make up the numbers, you know it is a bogus argument.

I apologize for the wonky formatting. I was trying to make it more readable, and it messed up the columns and format a bit.


It looks like JediJohnnie's number is actually pretty close since the top six or seven reasons can all be boiled down to some sort of convenience excuse/argument. Is it exactly 95% - no, obviously not... But it is much closer to that (hovering around 90-95% depending on which you consider to be convenience arguments and since you cannot really classify the 4% other - can't rule it in, but also can't fully rule it out either) and far far far far away from being a "made up" statistic to support a bogus argument.


So before you decide to disregard someone's argument by accusing them of making up numbers, maybe do a little bit of research first. Dismissing an opposing viewpoint as bogus simply because it cites to a statistic is being just as shortsighted as what you are [wrongfully] accusing JediJohnnie of (i.e. making up numbers). That is the sort of tactic people who have no convincing counter argument usually resort to.


I pulled this list from this website under the heading The vast majority of abortions are elective. But if you look at their source (cited below) you can track it back to the original source - one that is widely cited elsewhere.




 

		Why Women Choose Abortion
Inadequate finances to raise a child	21%
Not ready for responsibility	21%
Woman's life would be changed too much	16%
Problems with relationship; unmarried	12%
Too young; not mature enough	11%
Children are grown; woman has all she wants	8%
Unborn child has possible health problems	3%
Woman has health problems	3%
Pregnancy caused by rape, incest	1%
Other	4%
			(Average number of reasons given:   3.7)
			Source: Torres and Forrest, as cited by Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health and the Alan Guttmacher Institute in An Overview of Abortion in the United States
	(October 2001)

None of the statistics equal "convenience."

IMO, yes they do. Perfectly.

[nickylanena]

95% is a made up statistic.  When you have to make up the numbers, you know it is a bogus argument.

I apologize for the wonky formatting. I was trying to make it more readable, and it messed up the columns and format a bit.


It looks like JediJohnnie's number is actually pretty close since the top six or seven reasons can all be boiled down to some sort of convenience excuse/argument. Is it exactly 95% - no, obviously not... But it is much closer to that (hovering around 90-95% depending on which you consider to be convenience arguments and since you cannot really classify the 4% other - can't rule it in, but also can't fully rule it out either) and far far far far away from being a "made up" statistic to support a bogus argument.


So before you decide to disregard someone's argument by accusing them of making up numbers, maybe do a little bit of research first. Dismissing an opposing viewpoint as bogus simply because it cites to a statistic is being just as shortsighted as what you are [wrongfully] accusing JediJohnnie of (i.e. making up numbers). That is the sort of tactic people who have no convincing counter argument usually resort to.


I pulled this list from this website under the heading The vast majority of abortions are elective. But if you look at their source (cited below) you can track it back to the original source - one that is widely cited elsewhere.




 

		Why Women Choose Abortion
Inadequate finances to raise a child	21%
Not ready for responsibility	21%
Woman's life would be changed too much	16%
Problems with relationship; unmarried	12%
Too young; not mature enough	11%
Children are grown; woman has all she wants	8%
Unborn child has possible health problems	3%
Woman has health problems	3%
Pregnancy caused by rape, incest	1%
Other	4%
			(Average number of reasons given:   3.7)
			Source: Torres and Forrest, as cited by Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health and the Alan Guttmacher Institute in An Overview of Abortion in the United States
	(October 2001)

None of the statistics equal "convenience."

IMO, yes they do. Perfectly.

Was this reposted for me to see? If so, this pretty much sums up what I said - there are many realities/reasons in which a woman would choose to get an abortion. Each of the aforementioned is a reason. Whether a woman feels ready or not to give birth/raise a child or whether they are facing complications with a pregnancy is still a valid reason for that woman. You/him/her/they/we may not like the reasoning but who is anyone else to decide (despite beliefs and feelings)?

Either way, IMO these are decisions that are thoroughly thought out and not merely whimsical.

If this wasn't posted for me to see, thanks for sharing regardless.

[Legslangevan]

Many wanna put a lot of emphasis on the thought out process when the woman IS pregnant.Too bad most of the time that same thought out process didnt come into play sooner.<like being carefull>

But we all err.DONT continue to do so taking away a life.

[UGetPaid]

None of the statistics equal "convenience."

EVERY of the statistics I referenced in my earlier explanation of this post equals "convenience"

[paints]

None of the statistics equal "convenience."

EVERY of the statistics I referenced in my earlier explanation of this post equals "convenience"

In your opinion. 
Since you will never be faced with making that choice, your opinion doesn't matter.

[UGetPaid]

None of the statistics equal "convenience."

EVERY of the statistics I referenced in my earlier explanation of this post equals "convenience"

In your opinion. 
Since you will never be faced with making that choice, your opinion doesn't matter.

 
The eye roll is for your faulty logic and unwillingness to have a rational discussion about a topic when someone presents a legitimate response to your faulty logic - I've already given a rational response to your "statistics are made up" argument. Your response is that I am not entitled to an opinion because I am a man.  That is the most BS asinine argument out there and I have lost quite a bit of respect for you for making it.  There are many women who share and would echo my opinion verbatim. In your mind, do they have a right to the same opinions I profess because at least they are women who might be faced with an unexpected pregnancy? Why or why not?


The teary eyes are for all of the children (not inanimate lifeless tissue) who will die as a result of entitlement thinking such as yours.


Inadequate finances to raise a child = it will cost too much to have/raise this child - making it inconvenient for me. Having $ is more important than the life I have created, which will suck away all of my fun money. Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Not ready for responsibility = raising a child is too big of a responsibility - it would be inconvenient for me to end my selfish me first lifestyle and be a nurturing mom to this life I have created. I'm not ready to do that, so I will kill the unborn child instead. Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Woman's life would be changed too much = having and raising this child will impact my daily schedule and where my focus and energy are directed. It will change my world from top top bottom. I don't want to change my life, so I will instead end the life of that child which would otherwise change it. Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Problems with relationship; unmarried = My boyfriend is going to hate/leave me if I have a baby and he is forced to man up and pay child support; or I cannot do this alone as a single mother. Since I am not married and my baby's father is a worthless piece of crap, I will kill the life we have created to avoid the struggles that come from single motherhood.  Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Too young; not mature enough = I am not old enough or experienced enough to raise a child myself. I might actually have to grow up and take responsibility for my actions. It would be much easier if I just kill this life I've created instead. Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Children are grown; woman has all she wants = I thought I was completely done with dirty diapers, potty training, school programs, sassy teenagers, etc. It's my turn to be the center of my universe again. This baby I've created is going to ruin that plan.  Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

Unborn child has possible health problems = I don't want a child that isn't perfect or is more difficult to take care of than a 'normal' child without special needs or one that might die anyway. Instead of the unconditional love that I will get from a sick or special needs child, my focus is on the pain or embarrassment that I will suffer as a result of this imperfect child and I should kill it now rather than wait to see what blessings he or she might bring into my life.  Abortion = Convenience Objective truth... not my opinion.

The last two categories: Woman has health problems and Pregnancy caused by rape, incest I am not going to classify as convenience arguments - although depending on the specific circumstances they still could be.

I have known women who have been in each one of these possible situations and have chosen the inconvenience of having a baby over the convenience of killing a baby. I have also known women who have been on the other side and had to make a really difficult and heart wrenching decision to terminate a pregnancy. I have compassion and love for those women (and their deceased babies) and the truly awful decisions they faced. To anyone in this forum who has been in that horrible position, you have my sympathy and support, even if you feel like I am lashing out at you. It is my belief that you can be forgiven for that decision just like any other sin can be forgiven... but that doesn't make the next convenience killing of an unborn child right or okay.

I stand by my earlier point. The vast majority of abortions are performed for convenience sake. My male gender or @paints strong opposing viewpoint does not change that fact.

Women and young girls are both burdened and blessed with the responsibility of being the child-bearers. It absolutely sucks when they are scared and alone in facing that situation and the young men who have a hand in the life creation should also have something at stake. Thankfully, in many circumstances, the fathers do step up and take responsibility. Sadly, in many other cases - they show their true colors and skate away free.
This does not change the fact that a young innocent beautiful little boy or girl is just beginning to start a life journey and deserves a chance to make something special happen on that journey.

When the start of that little one's big journey is seen as nothing more than an inconvenience to mom it makes me cry inside.

[UGetPaid]

[quote author=nickylanena link=topic=89122.msg1284053#msg1284053 date=1562996796]
Was this reposted for me to see? If so, this pretty much sums up what I said - there are many realities/reasons in which a woman would choose to get an abortion. Each of the aforementioned is a reason. Whether a woman feels ready or not to give birth/raise a child or whether they are facing complications with a pregnancy is still a valid reason for that woman. You/him/her/they/we may not like the reasoning but who is anyone else to decide (despite beliefs and feelings)?

Either way, IMO these are decisions that are thoroughly thought out and not merely whimsical.

If this wasn't posted for me to see, thanks for sharing regardless.



@nickylanena, it was originally posted to counter another member who attacked JediJohnnie's earlier post about roughly 95% of abortions being performed for the sake of convenience and that member's baseless claim that Johnnie was spouting fake made up statistics.  When Johnnie was proven correct with verified sourced statistics, she devolved into lower and more baseless arguments until finally hitting rock bottom with: men have no right to any opinions.

You are correct that each category is a legitimate reason given - valid or not - they are the reasons truthfully given and thought out by the person facing the abortion. The point though - is that the vast majority of these categories boils down to convenience rather than health.  The main shouting points are always: Health of the mother!!! and Rape & Incest!!!  Yet statistics show that these make up such a small number of the overall abortions.

[paints]

The faulty logic comes in when any person other than the woman who is pregnant insists that she must stay pregnant.
Not your body, not your business.

[UGetPaid]

Okay - well I didn't expect to change your mind anyway, but hopefully gave you something to think about.

[nickylanena]

[quote author=nickylanena link=topic=89122.msg1284053#msg1284053 date=1562996796]
Was this reposted for me to see? If so, this pretty much sums up what I said - there are many realities/reasons in which a woman would choose to get an abortion. Each of the aforementioned is a reason. Whether a woman feels ready or not to give birth/raise a child or whether they are facing complications with a pregnancy is still a valid reason for that woman. You/him/her/they/we may not like the reasoning but who is anyone else to decide (despite beliefs and feelings)?

Either way, IMO these are decisions that are thoroughly thought out and not merely whimsical.

If this wasn't posted for me to see, thanks for sharing regardless.



@nickylanena, it was originally posted to counter another member who attacked JediJohnnie's earlier post about roughly 95% of abortions being performed for the sake of convenience and that member's baseless claim that Johnnie was spouting fake made up statistics.  When Johnnie was proven correct with verified sourced statistics, she devolved into lower and more baseless arguments until finally hitting rock bottom with: men have no right to any opinions.

You are correct that each category is a legitimate reason given - valid or not - they are the reasons truthfully given and thought out by the person facing the abortion. The point though - is that the vast majority of these categories boils down to convenience rather than health.  The main shouting points are always: Health of the mother!!! and Rape & Incest!!!  Yet statistics show that these make up such a small number of the overall abortions.

Hi UGetPaid,

I was asking linderlizzie if she had reposted this for me. I do agree that they are the main points people bring up (maybe even more so when justifying late-term abortions). But I wanted to point out to her, like you also mentioned, that each of the aforementioned is a reason.

[UGetPaid]

Hi UGetPaid,

I was asking linderlizzie if she had reposted this for me. I do agree that they are the main points people bring up (maybe even more so when justifying late-term abortions). But I wanted to point out to her, like you also mentioned, that each of the aforementioned is a reason.

They are reasons certainly. And in all fairness and honesty, there are crossovers among these listed reasons and other individual specific circumstances that cannot be known in a general poll like this. Everything doesn't fit into a neat and tidy little box. But generally speaking I think this sheds significant light on the disparity between health risks to the mother versus convenience of termination.


It's not an easy topic to address and strongly held opinions are not going to change. I have yet to hear a compelling argument for allowing full access, no questions asked abortions - and I can frankly say that I don't believe there is an argument out there that would satisfy me.  But I will gladly listen if anyone wants the challenge of changing my mind or of expressing an opposing position, which I was willing to do with paints.  (Still am willing to listen if she will concede that I have a right to my own opinion).


But it is difficult to have a productive discussion about it if one side fails to acknowledge the other side's right to an opinion or refuses to address specific points made which argue against their own opinion.


Many people on many topics - religion, politics, etc. have opinions that differ from mine. I think that they are wrong and I will point that out when the topic is one I am especially passionate about - like this one. My opinion that they are wrong has ZERO impact on my belief that they have a right to have and voice their opposing opinion.

[paints]

Okay - well I didn't expect to change your mind anyway, but hopefully gave you something to think about.

As a woman who has gone through 2 life-threatening pregnancies and several miscarriages,  I have thought it through extensively.  Up close and personal.