The ban on partial birth abortions

[Twrecks]

So post-partum abortions are ok too?.

Euthanasia is still on the books.

If you haven't turned into DaVinci or Einstein yet, you're just not going to. There's still a chance you could become Charlie Manson or Ted Bundy though, so maybe we shouldn't be so harsh on procedures that could prevent that.

Aren't we the product of our environments? A child has potential, not predestination. DiVinci and Einstien didn't achieve their greatest work till their later years, much older than Manson or Bundy did. By your agruement DiVinci and Einstien were predestined while Manson and Bundy were products. A contradiction where we blame society for evil and attribute good to a creation of God. Every child has potential, but one less does not deny that potential to the next. Playing "what if" is a waste of time.

 

[oosyxxx]

DiVinci and Einstien didn't achieve their greatest work till their later years, much older than Manson or Bundy did.

LOL! The sentence is funny because it implies that Manson and Bundy did great work. I likey! :tup:

 

[JTRipper]

Euthanasia is still on the books.

As a crime, but that's not the issue. By the definition you gave, it should be perfectly ok to deliver a baby and decapitate it. Is that correct?

Aren't we the product of our environments? A child has potential, not predestination. DiVinci and Einstien didn't achieve their greatest work till their later years, much older than Manson or Bundy did. By your agruement DiVinci and Einstien were predestined while Manson and Bundy were products. A contradiction where we blame society for evil and attribute good to a creation of God. Every child has potential, but one less does not deny that potential to the next. Playing "what if" is a waste of time.

DaVinci and Einstein were both well on the path long before their greatest achievements, and Beethoven had scarcely learned to stop sh*tting himself before he was a brilliant musician. Maybe you're on such a path, but it kinda gets less likely every year, dunnit? At this point, a homicidal killing spree is probably a better bet than a fountain of brilliance that reshapes human understanding - assuming of course that you haven't already gotten started on the spree. By the standard you gave, if it's not wrong to kill a child because they have equal potentials, killing you should actually be regarded as a good move.

And as for preferring to help kids that "actually need help" - what kid needs more help than one who's about to be disected?

 

[diddlysquat]

When a guy has to worry about getting an abortion, then maybe he can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what women face concerning this issue, and the consequences of their actions regarding it.

Just my 2 and a 1/2 cents worth from being on both sides.

 

[JTRipper]

When a woman has to worry about getting her head collapsed, then maybe she can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what children face concerning this issue, and the consequences of others' actions regarding it.

Another half cent from the third side.

 

[diddlysquat]

When a woman has to worry about getting her head collapsed, then maybe she can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what children face concerning this issue, and the consequences of others' actions regarding it.

Another half cent from the third side.

Actually, in some cases she has that, as well as many other things to 'worry about' considering the sometimes violent and abusive nature of our relationships with men. And when she gets her head collapsed, by fist, bat, or whatever, it is not a medical procedure.

Rape, incest, pressure from family and society to be a good little breeder, or intimidation to 'please her man' when he gets horny.

Sometimes choices are only between bad and worse, giving in or getting hurt or killed.

But then, that is another thing men rarely if ever have to worry about, isn't it?

 

[JTRipper]

And they're also crimes, aren't they? At any rate, the woman doesn't start out restrained in a container that's trying to be smaller than she is - she has at least a sporting chance.

So is it your contention that these things are only wrong when the victim might be able to complain? Maybe that's why abortion proponents also tend to shun the death penalty. I never understood that, but it's making more sense now.

 

[Evil_Cope]

diddly- that isnt the issue, and you know it.

 

[diddlysquat]

And I was not the one who brought that up as the issue, I merely pointed out that men, in general are not really equipped physically, mentally, or emotionally, to understand or deal with this issue in the same way as a woman can.
Simianboy was the one who decided to get cute and twist my post around. I just responded to his attempt at obsfucation.

 

[JTRipper]

Sorry Diddly, but you're obfuscating - you're calling the right to infanticide a "women's issue". You can pretend all you like that the woman is the only relevant part of the issue, but the chief problem with that is that you're wrong.

 

[Nachimir]

Diddly, you're right. Despite that the stereotypes here, true or not, are of council-estate Kappa-slappers who drink lots, sleep around, and get knocked up. Oh wait, I forgot. If there's ever anything wrong with a woman, it was originally caused by a man.

Yeah, we're all just unfeeling thugs. Every damn one of us. I may never have treated a woman abusively yet, but by gum, knock me out hold me down and pour a few gallons of Stella Artois down me and I bet I'd be up and living the misogynist cliché like buggery. But wait...

Introducing Grey!

It sits snugly between black and white, and might have interesting implications for popular ideologies... if only we could find a dad-burned example!

 

[Balton]

Diddly, you're right. Despite that the stereotypes here, true or not, are of council-estate Kappa-slappers who drink lots, sleep around, and get knocked up. Oh wait, I forgot. If there's ever anything wrong with a woman, it was originally caused by a man.

Yeah, we're all just unfeeling thugs. Every damn one of us. I may never have treated a woman abusively yet, but by gum, knock me out hold me down and pour a few gallons of Stella Artois down me and I bet I'd be up and living the misogynist cliché like buggery. But wait...

Introducing Grey!

It sits snugly between black and white, and might have interesting implications for popular ideologies... if only we could find a dad-burned example!

I think I once tried to explain the "grey" theory to diddly on irc once.
for some reason I believe that he/she/thy/may/schnick/schnack just changed the side and now bollers from white to black instead of vice versa
OR diddly is here to troll, in this case I rather have a hundred diddlys than one betty

 

[SpiritWalker]

When a guy has to worry about getting an abortion, then maybe he can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what women face concerning this issue, and the consequences of their actions regarding it.

Just my 2 and a 1/2 cents worth from being on both sides.

I am a guy.. not gay, not TS, just straight.. gender and wannabe gender has nothing to do with it. It's all about life. If the baby came outside the mom, and the doc punctured it's skull, or "removed amniotic fluid kills the fetus before it enters the birth canal; some doctors inject drugs into the fetal sac or cut the umbilical cord first." what would happen to the doctor?

you are talking about a baby that is 3ish months for needing to be breast fed or bottle fed..

There comes a time.. and it should be LONG before the final trimester.. that a woman should be held responsible for the walfare of the child.. and since that happens so very rarely.. the doctors should at least be stopped from killing perfectly viable childeren, just cause the "mother" changed her mind. If the mother is in some type of distress.. then maybe a C-section would be safer, and gaurentee the life of the child as well as the mom.. but if for some reason that the mother is in real danger of losing her life.. then "whatever is needed".. but I wouldn't be able to find a mother that would take a risk...

And as far as me not being able to speak on the issue.. what the **** do you think you are doing.. your whole take is pointless.. just going by your own points... the father of the child should have some say so...maybe not the deciding "vote".. but a child is just as much a part of the man as it is woman.

And at least with your proclivities.. we don't have to worry about you coming to a position where you can make law... or at least a law that will make anyhead way.

merely pointed out that men, in general are not really equipped physically, mentally, or emotionally, to understand or deal with this issue in the same way as a woman can.

you just blew away any respect that I ever had for you.. I personally don't care about gender.. be a try-tri-bi-uni-whatever-sexual for all I care.. respect is based on actions.. or at least on a BBS.. thoughs/posts.. and you just proved yourself a self loathing person.. with little or no respect for others who are better at being what you were physically born as.




you're calling the right to infanticide a "women's issue".

couldln't agree more

 

[SpiritWalker]

BTW

 

[Balton]

btw. I am losing track of all this.
until one or two weeks ago I thought abortions are only allowed until the 3rd month of pregnancy but now everybody is talking about aborting fully grown children. Are there really so many while/post birth abortions or is this discussion dealing with a minor percentage of all abortions?

 

[JTRipper]

Here in the US, abortion has been available "on demand" since Roe Vs Wade - that means no reason needs to be given at any time. Any pregnant woman can decide that she wants to terminate the pregnancy pretty much any time before natural birth takes place. The ban that was signed and suspended prevents some 3rd trimester procedures unless the mother's life is in danger. While these procedures aren't common in terms of statistics - fewer than 1% of all abortions happen this late, and often for medical reasons - there are still an average of a couple thousand pregnancies per year aborted in the third trimester when there isn't a life-threatening condition.

Before Roe vs Wade, each state had its own abortion laws. As far as I recall, they ranged from states which outlawed it completely, to ones that were like they are now. I don't know exactly, but the "until the third month" thing rings a bell, that may have been a common standard. I'd have no trouble agreeing with that as a new standard today, or even until maybe the 5th month. This "any time at all" stuff is homicidal though.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that it's been the case since Roe vs. Wade - I think there were originally more restrictions. Roe vs. Wade can go out with partial birth anyway, as far as I'm concerned. It isn't federal purview no matter what kind of toads the Supreme Court licks.

 

[BangOut]

I want the parents of many of my students to have post-partum abortions

lol... "introducing gray"

 

[Twrecks]

sorry, had to go to work.
As to Euthanasia being a crime, taking ppl off life support is done every day in nearly every state of the union. I guess "neglect" is not considered murder then, just like pitching a baby in a dumpster. Same thing in many ways.
And LOL at Divinci and Einstien. Leo primarily made his living designing military contraptions, and Albert?, uh, "Father of the Atomic Bomb". And why is it so much easier to become evil than good? How much effort does a smile take over say, loping the heads off new borns? Everyone notices when you kill screaming infants, but you do a good deed like donating food and clothing, taking payroll deductions to United way and caring for the elderly, you get ignored. BTW I'm a sucker for Girlscout cookies and Boy Scout raffles.

Certainly I am evil incarnate and do not deserve a future, I might invent something devistating like anti-gravity. If my mom had had an abortion then I wouldn't be posting here, pretty simple really. The choice wasn't just her's, she is a responsible individual who weighs the facts. If my fetal mass had been a danger to her exsistance then you can bet your sweet ass my embionic fluids would have been one with sewage. Problem here is ppl having abortions because pregnancy and the possibility of a child interfers with their life styles. I already stated my opinion on those miscreants.

As too Bush signing legislation. LOL. I'm glad that as head of the Federal Government he is actually taking a stand. But really, unless he gets an ammendment to the Bill of Rights, States can do as they will, at the sacrafice Federal funds (monitary arm twisting tactics). Example: Federal Speed Limit over turned by Wyoming, hence Wyoming does not recieve Federal Interstate funding. SInce there is no "National Health Care", Bush is an idiot looking for public support for what? Maybe the Republican party? Wait, could we be coming up on an election year? Uh yea.

And dOOds, arguing over what the woman feels, wants, needs, whatever. She has a voice and can assimilate her own opinions just as good as any man. On the same note, let us ask the fetus:
"Blob of protien, do you want to live?"
"..."
"Hey you moved, that must mean yes"
"..."

Pity, I'm sure you would get a stronger response from the millions of Dogs and Cats that are "put to sleep" (awe, that sounds so nice) each year. Extermination seems to be a logical response to that dilema, and so does sterilization. Hey, didn't some German guy provide free spay and neuter clinics and gas millions of "animals". Funny, when things are taken to extremes, even "partial" practices become ugly and abohorant. However totally disgusting things that are common place get wide acceptance. If abortions were like wiping your ass, noone would demand legislation for butt plugs. Stupid arguement yet demonstrates a point.

Problem with abortions 3 basic questions need to be answered: How, When and Why. If you ban abortions, the "where" moves out to more hazardous locals. How is the easy one, what ever is safest,and for the insurance companies, the least expensive. When? the moot point I take it. How about "when required or requested". That leaves Why. Why? because it has been granted or needs to be done. Abortion clinics break some of the rules governing the Why. Because the woman wants to becomes the only reason, her reasons. Why men want to influence that decision is acceptable, but controlling that decision, no, not acceptable. There are quandries even on every instance. Is the woman being rational? Is the woman being responsible or just selfish? If strigent screening processes were adopted (heh, adopted) and the mandated sterization for offenders enforced, maybe this wouldn't be such an issue. Oops, I forgot religion... Sh1tcan woman's rights back to the dark ages, and while you're at it science and medicine. Afterall the church is good, whoever heard of religeous groups killing anyone. Well, not fetuses anyways.

 

[PsychoMoggieBagpuss]

When a guy has to worry about getting an abortion, then maybe he can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what women face concerning this issue, and the consequences of their actions regarding it.

Just my 2 and a 1/2 cents worth from being on both sides.

Not trying to be anal or anything, but as far as I was aware a female who used to be a male can't physically have children, so they can't particularly speak about the issue anyway.
At least men (who originally were men) have more of an input (not as much as the woman mind you) as its their kid, (with all the emotional attachments that having a child brings), thats getting hoovered.

 

[Frostblood]

When a guy has to worry about getting an abortion, then maybe he can speak to this issue, otherwise, you can't hope to understand fully what women face concerning this issue, and the consequences of their actions regarding it.

Just my 2 and a 1/2 cents worth from being on both sides.

You could say that about anyone, though. A non-psycho killer can't hope to understand fully what psycho killers face concerning the issue of murder, and the consequences of their actions regarding it...but it doesn't mean sane people can't say it's wrong and prevent the psycho's from doing it. And no, I'm not using this example because I nessicarily think abortion is murder. But "it's a women's issue" is a pretty poor argument.