Another abortion thread

cincybearcat

scb wrote:

On a related note (context)..... I just read that 220,000 children wordwide lose their mothers every year because of deaths due to unsafe/illegal abortions.

That is terrible...as is this...

"Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million"

Does anyone have a better number from a potentially better source? Most of the ones I found were anti-abortion websites and I know some sensationilze the subject matter...I'd just like the facts.

CJMST3K

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

cincybearcat

CJMST3K wrote:

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

Well, I don't think they are the same...but, strangely enough, I am ok with physician assisted suicide.

CJMST3K

cincybearcat wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

Well, I don't think they are the same...but, strangely enough, I am ok with physician assisted suicide.

I think that if abortion is to help a mother from suffering (either physically or financially), then why isn't physician assisted suicide allowed for terminal people, or for people in perpetual severe pain? It only leads someone to risky suicide attempts that may leave them worse off.

Seems like P.A.S. should be even less controversial. It doesn't involve a third party (for those who choose to believe that a baby/fetus/whatever-name-fits-your-agenda is a third party).

CJMST3K

cincybearcat wrote:

scb wrote:

On a related note (context)..... I just read that 220,000 children wordwide lose their mothers every year because of deaths due to unsafe/illegal abortions.

That is terrible...as is this...

"Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million"

Does anyone have a better number from a potentially better source? Most of the ones I found were anti-abortion websites and I know some sensationilze the subject matter...I'd just like the facts.

Didn't have time to read much of it but this may help. I googled "abortion" "statistic" ".gov".
http://www.cdc.gov/ReproductiveHealth/D ... ortion.htm

decides2dream

cincybearcat wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

[....and i get tired of people referring as such. of course, it makes for a more sensational/emotional arguement, but the fact remains...not a baby. then, sure.

And I get tired of people referring to what will most undoubtably be born a baby as something else to make them feel better abotu their choice. It's not growing to become an apple.

point is, if it ceases, it never will be....and thus, it never was (a baby, to be clear). a blastocyst is a blastocyst....an embryo is forever an embryo, a fetus forever a fetus, if it doesn't get born and becomes a living, breathing, thinking and feeling baby. it's NOT a baby, so no one is killing a baby. i don't need anything to 'make me feel better' about what i believe and support.

again, it all depends on your perspective.


*edited for clarity of thought.

decides2dream

CJMST3K wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

Well, I don't think they are the same...but, strangely enough, I am ok with physician assisted suicide.

I think that if abortion is to help a mother from suffering (either physically or financially), then why isn't physician assisted suicide allowed for terminal people, or for people in perpetual severe pain? It only leads someone to risky suicide attempts that may leave them worse off.

Seems like P.A.S. should be even less controversial. It doesn't involve a third party (for those who choose to believe that a baby/fetus/whatever-name-fits-your-agenda is a third party).

agreed!
and hell, quite honestly, i think assisted suicide should be legal, period. perhaps not for *everyone*...but when i - hopefully - grow good and old, and if i may simply wish to cease to live, i think i should be able to do so, successfully...thus, get some help to do so if i desire. again, my life, my choice.



ever see the flick children of men?
the rationale behind it, quite different....but in it the government gave out suicide kits to all citizens. i believe in space missions astronuats were also given such things, 'just in case'.....or perhaps that is all bunk, idk. either way, i'd like one of those when i get good and old.

CJMST3K

decides2dream wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

[....and i get tired of people referring as such. of course, it makes for a more sensational/emotional arguement, but the fact remains...not a baby. then, sure.

And I get tired of people referring to what will most undoubtably be born a baby as something else to make them feel better abotu their choice. It's not growing to become an apple.

point is, if it ceases, it never will be....and thus, it never was. a blastocyst is a blastocyst....an embryo is forever an embryo, a fetus forever a fetus, if it doesn't get born and becomes a living, breathing, thinking and feeling baby. it's NOT a baby, so no one is killing a baby. i don't need anything to 'make me feel better' about what i believe and support.

again, it all depends on your perspective.

Just to confirm (since I don't have a medical manual handy, and I can't find it easily on google), a "fetus" is not a "baby" even 1 hour before they are born, correct? And thus, inducing an abortion at that time does not abort a baby - so even at that late of a date, since the name is not a "baby", no harm no foul? Do I have it right?

decides2dream

CJMST3K wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

And I get tired of people referring to what will most undoubtably be born a baby as something else to make them feel better abotu their choice. It's not growing to become an apple.

point is, if it ceases, it never will be....and thus, it never was. a blastocyst is a blastocyst....an embryo is forever an embryo, a fetus forever a fetus, if it doesn't get born and becomes a living, breathing, thinking and feeling baby. it's NOT a baby, so no one is killing a baby. i don't need anything to 'make me feel better' about what i believe and support.

again, it all depends on your perspective.

Just to confirm (since I don't have a medical manual handy, and I can't find it easily on google), a "fetus" is not a "baby" even 1 hour before they are born, correct? And thus, inducing an abortion at that time does not abort a baby - so even at that late of a date, since the name is not a "baby", no harm no foul? Do I have it right?

i knew someone would go there.
and yes, you are right...of course not. imo, once a fetus has sensory perception, there should be no right to abortion except in absolute extreme circumstances.....as in, medical necessity for the health of the mother. and even there, absolutely tragic, b/c we all know this fetus can feel pain, and what a difficult decision....but i still would put the life of the mother before the fetus.

i should know better, and be much more specific in my words.

'technically' though.... it would still be a fetus. but NO where did i state that one can kill a fetus at ANY time. i merely stated the fact that a fetus is a fetus and not a baby. obviously, right at birth....even an hoiur before...in the birthing process. if you want me to pinpoint that magical, exact moment that a fetus becomes a baby, i cannot. however, for all practical purposes....especially given that 89% of abortions occur before this time....i am mostly referring to fetuses at 12 weeks gestation or less. definitely NOT a baby.

_

cincybearcat wrote:

scb wrote:

On a related note (context)..... I just read that 220,000 children wordwide lose their mothers every year because of deaths due to unsafe/illegal abortions.

That is terrible...as is this...

"Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million"

Does anyone have a better number from a potentially better source? Most of the ones I found were anti-abortion websites and I know some sensationilze the subject matter...I'd just like the facts.

Yes, that's accurate as of the most recent data (2003). It's down from 46 million in 1995.

Perhaps they're both terrible. I'm just trying to give some context. People can say abortion should be illegal because it's terrible to "kill unborn babies", but they need to also consider what happens to the born children when abortion is illegal. Is that what they want - orphaned children? They'll say that's not what they want & they're just trying to protect the unborn babies. But then those of us who are pro-choice should point out that we are trying to protect the born children. Therey's no one side that's evil or immoral. It sickens me when people think their "pro-life" stance has no consequence except to get them into Heaven.

_

cincybearcat wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

Well, I don't think they are the same...but, strangely enough, I am ok with physician assisted suicide.

Interesting. I think they're almost exactly the same. We've probably discussed this before, but remind me, please, of why you think they're necessarily different. Do you think they're even sometimes the same?

_

cincybearcat wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

[....and i get tired of people referring as such. of course, it makes for a more sensational/emotional arguement, but the fact remains...not a baby. then, sure.

And I get tired of people referring to what will most undoubtably be born a baby as something else to make them feel better abotu their choice. It's not growing to become an apple.

But it's not a baby YET, especially at the gestational age at which most abortions occur.

decides2dream

scb wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

scb wrote:

On a related note (context)..... I just read that 220,000 children wordwide lose their mothers every year because of deaths due to unsafe/illegal abortions.

That is terrible...as is this...

"Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million"

Does anyone have a better number from a potentially better source? Most of the ones I found were anti-abortion websites and I know some sensationilze the subject matter...I'd just like the facts.

Yes, that's accurate as of the most recent data (2003). It's down from 46 million in 1995.

Perhaps they're both terrible. I'm just trying to give some context. People can say abortion should be illegal because it's terrible to "kill unborn babies", but they need to also consider what happens to the born children when abortion is illegal. Is that what they want - orphaned children? They'll say that's not what they want & they're just trying to protect the unborn babies. But then those of us who are pro-choice should point out that we are trying to protect the born children. Therey's no one side that's evil or immoral. It sickens me when people think their "pro-life" stance has no consequence except to get them into Heaven.

or that is simply ends with 'saving babies'....b/c as much has been discussed, many of these babies are hardly 'saved'. sure, they may get to live, or not. they may still get aborted, by illegal and dangerous means...they may survive a botched abortion done by unskilled hands....they may be abused, thrown out in the trash....they may end up addicted to drugs or alcohol, health issues....they may end up forever within the foster care system......they may glive in utter poverty....and of course, they may be 'saved' and have a wonderful family life with their birth mother...or they may be adopted into a wonderful home. point is, to think that the last 2 scenarios are the norm of what will happen to this baby, is foolhardy at best. beyond which, some of us simply believe it is the mother's choice to decide what she wants for herself.

cincybearcat

scb wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

One thing I can't understand is that if physician assisted abortion is allowed, why isn't physician assisted suicide?

Well, I don't think they are the same...but, strangely enough, I am ok with physician assisted suicide.

Interesting. I think they're almost exactly the same. We've probably discussed this before, but remind me, please, of why you think they're necessarily different. Do you think they're even sometimes the same?

Sometimes the same...after thinking, yes, when the health/life of the mother is at risk, it is very similar.

I think they are different because in assisted suicide, the person is making the decision themselves and it effects themself. In abortion, the decision is made by 1 person and it effects a different person (my point of view).

_

cincybearcat wrote:

scb wrote:

Interesting. I think they're almost exactly the same. We've probably discussed this before, but remind me, please, of why you think they're necessarily different. Do you think they're even sometimes the same?

Sometimes the same...after thinking, yes, when the health/life of the mother is at risk, it is very similar.

I think they are different because in assisted suicide, the person is making the decision themselves and it effects themself. In abortion, the decision is made by 1 person and it effects a different person (my point of view).

Yes, good point. I guess I was thinking more of "pulling the plug" on someone. Do you think that can be the same as abortion?

CJMST3K

decides2dream wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

Just to confirm (since I don't have a medical manual handy, and I can't find it easily on google), a "fetus" is not a "baby" even 1 hour before they are born, correct? And thus, inducing an abortion at that time does not abort a baby - so even at that late of a date, since the name is not a "baby", no harm no foul? Do I have it right?

i knew someone would go there.
and yes, you are right...of course not. imo, once a fetus has sensory perception, there should be no right to abortion except in absolute extreme circumstances.....as in, medical necessity for the health of the mother. and even there, absolutely tragic, b/c we all know this fetus can feel pain, and what a difficult decision....but i still would put the life of the mother before the fetus.

i should know better, and be much more specific in my words.

'technically' though.... it would still be a fetus. but NO where did i state that one can kill a fetus at ANY time. i merely stated the fact that a fetus is a fetus and not a baby. obviously, right at birth....even an hoiur before...in the birthing process. if you want me to pinpoint that magical, exact moment that a fetus becomes a baby, i cannot. however, for all practical purposes....especially given that 89% of abortions occur before this time....i am mostly referring to fetuses at 12 weeks gestation or less. definitely NOT a baby.

I think this whole thread is about going there.

And I wasn't trying to pull one over on you. You made a clear statement that was basing abortion on the name we call the living-thing, rather than the developmental stage it's at.

My GF who has her masters in marine biology and is a high school life sciences teacher says a fetus/baby/whatever-name-fits-your-agenda isn't "alive" until it takes it's first breath. I asked her the same question, what about a day before birth, and she said again "not until it takes it's first breath". And I said "what if there is a problem with it's lungs, so in the womb doctors stick tubes in it's veins which will oxygenate the blood without breathing. The "thing" could be 2 years old and still not "alive" because it hasn't taken it's first breath, right? ...she did not enjoy me using her own logic against her, but I still stand by the point.

One of my nieces was a premie and needed to be in one of those protective cases for a few weeks. I'm sure abortions have occurred at a later date than her birth, but in one case it's a "fetus" and ok for abortion, yet in another case it's a "baby" and illegal to kill. Which one is right? Are both right? If so, how can that be?

decides2dream

cincybearcat wrote:

I think they are different because in assisted suicide, the person is making the decision themselves and it effects themself. In abortion, the decision is made by 1 person and it effects a different person (my point of view).

i actually agree with you here. i do think they are different, for the exact reasons you state (tho on a technicality, i disagree with the use of the term 'person').

no matter my personal beliefs in regards to abortion, i fully accept the fact that ending the life of an embryo or fetus is ending a seperate (albeit entirely dependent/not fully developed) life from the mother.




CJM..i know you weren't trying to 'pull one over on me'....and i admit my wording was shoddy and lacking for what i truly meant to express. you can certainly 'go there'....but for me, as i do not advocate late-term abortions for anything outside of medical necessity, when exactly the fetus becomes a baby isn't such a great concern of mine....except to see that when i do fully support the right to abortion (outside of the above mentioned) it is not a baby. it is not fully formed, it cannot exist outside of the mother's womb....not a baby. i guess i would say once a fetus is to the point of full formation and could survive outside the mother's womb, that then would be a baby. when is that exactly...i am unsure....5 or 6 months at the earliest?



btw - a blastocyst is 'alive'...i fully agree the point of conception that life begins. two live cells join, a sperm cell and an egg.....both alive.....and they form a new, merged life. ad i know people get offended when i say such things, and i mean no offense by the comparison...but a germ cell is alive, an amoeba, a paramecium, every cell in my body, etc. every cell in my body is a human cell, but human cells, alone, even with unique DNA, do not make A human being, merely they are human.

embryos/fetuses have a parasitic relationship with their mothers, as long as they are dependent on that mother to live, cannot survive outside the womb, imo, they are embryos/fetuses......not babies.



edit - as to your preemie story, i have one too. one of my nephews was a preemie. however, obviously, they could survive outside the womb. with assistance, but still, could survive. and again, idk enough about when or how many late-term abortions there are, but they are not preformed as a matter of 'convenience' so i really don't see the comparison at all. and sure, they are both 'right'......b/c the fetus is still inside the woman's body, needing her to live...whereas the other is a born baby, can live on outside the body. 'personhood' as a legal term, does not begin until birth.

_

0.08% of abortion in the U.S. are performed when the fetus may be viable (24 weeks). (I'm sure far fewer are performed at the gestational ages of the premies most of us know.)

decides2dream

i'm borrowing this from the palin thread, simply b/c i think it brings up a good point to pass on in this thread:

Cosmo wrote:

Gov. Palin dragged her daughter, Bristol into the fray with her opinions on 'abstinence only' sex education in the public school systems. If an upper class, all-American, God Fearing Christian family raises a teenaged daughter in an abstinence only sex education environment... and ended up with a pregnant, un-wed teenaged daughter... what chances do middle or lower class single parent families living in large metropolitan cities have?

and yes, i realize she did choose to have her baby....which is also a big part of the "choice" portion i am so "pro" for. things is though, she also has a lot of familial, and financial help......many, many others do not. also why i am a huge supporter of REAL sex education AND access to BC.

cincybearcat

decides2dream wrote:

i'm borrowing this from the palin thread, simply b/c i think it brings up a good point to pass on in this thread:

Cosmo wrote:

Gov. Palin dragged her daughter, Bristol into the fray with her opinions on 'abstinence only' sex education in the public school systems. If an upper class, all-American, God Fearing Christian family raises a teenaged daughter in an abstinence only sex education environment... and ended up with a pregnant, un-wed teenaged daughter... what chances do middle or lower class single parent families living in large metropolitan cities have?

and yes, i realize she did choose to have her baby....which is also a big part of the "choice" portion i am so "pro" for. things is though, she also has a lot of familial, and financial help......many, many others do not. also why i am a huge supporter of REAL sex education AND access to BC.

Well then, we agree on 2/3rds.