yes, and it sure plays out as sensationalistic, when you quote the article:
The statistics for 2006 showed that nearly 15,000 women in the UK have had three or more abortions, with 54 having had eight or more abortions. A total of 193,737 women in England and Wales had an abortion in 2006, 17,173 of which were on women under 18 years.
54 women, out of just how many live in the UK? that is hardly a "majority' of women who have that # of abortions. and the increase in women having abortions, again, does not mean they are having LOTs of abortions, each, just simply many women are choosing that option for themselves. all stats can spin however you like to spin em.
54 serial killers in 1 country is a big deal.
indeed it would be!
however, we both know each others views, are not about to change each other's minds....so i have something else i would like to focus on if i may. i have this question a few times in this thread, and gotten no answers....but you also weren't around. so then, it's my understanding that you are a fairly 'moderate' pro-lifer, as in yes, you believe abortion is murder....but you do also support the use of BC. that said, are you also against the use of the morning after pill? and if so, may i ask why? are you also against the use of all hormonal forms of BC ( such as the pill, IUDs, the ring, BC injection, etc) i ask this b/c all of these methods of BC MAY prevent a pregnancy by not allowing implantation of a fertilized egg. they may also work before then, as in, prevent fertiliization itself, but there is no way of knowing just when/how these BC methods do/will work in each given situation. the only methods of BC that work ONLY on preventing fertilization, are condoms and diaphraghms, since they are physical barriers to the sperm ever reaching an egg....whereas this other methods, again, may or may not prevent fertilization, or may or may not prevent implantation.
.
the other, new abortion thread 'reminded' me of this one, and my unanswered Q. i AM genuinely interested in thoughts from tho pro-lifers who do also believe in the use of BC. just pure curiosity, no ambush/judgements...just wonderment on the topic.
i have never in my life known of a woman who conscoiusly chooses not to use BC simply b/c " they can just as easily take the morning after pill or have an abortion if pregnancy happens." do you honestly believe there are women who think like this? and if so, what makes you think that?
just jumping in and quickly out of this thread.
I've been involved with women like this, so they are around.
ADD 5,200 to the post count you see, thank you.
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
[ so then, it's my understanding that you are a fairly 'moderate' pro-lifer, as in yes, you believe abortion is murder....but you do also support the use of BC. that said, are you also against the use of the morning after pill? and if so, may i ask why? are you also against the use of all hormonal forms of BC ( such as the pill, IUDs, the ring, BC injection, etc) i ask this b/c all of these methods of BC MAY prevent a pregnancy by not allowing implantation of a fertilized egg. they may also work before then, as in, prevent fertiliization itself, but there is no way of knowing just when/how these BC methods do/will work in each given situation. the only methods of BC that work ONLY on preventing fertilization, are condoms and diaphraghms, since they are physical barriers to the sperm ever reaching an egg....whereas this other methods, again, may or may not prevent fertilization, or may or may not prevent implantation.
It's a good question and a topic I've discussed here before I believe, maybe with you. I don't know enough about some of the forms of birth control specifically. I guess I have to say I'm for the pill, etc. It's can be natural for a fertilized egg to not be implanted, so, as you say, there is no way of knowing if it would or wouldn't have. Though, I have thought and rethought my opinion on BC that prevent implantation many times.
[ so then, it's my understanding that you are a fairly 'moderate' pro-lifer, as in yes, you believe abortion is murder....but you do also support the use of BC. that said, are you also against the use of the morning after pill? and if so, may i ask why? are you also against the use of all hormonal forms of BC ( such as the pill, IUDs, the ring, BC injection, etc) i ask this b/c all of these methods of BC MAY prevent a pregnancy by not allowing implantation of a fertilized egg. they may also work before then, as in, prevent fertiliization itself, but there is no way of knowing just when/how these BC methods do/will work in each given situation. the only methods of BC that work ONLY on preventing fertilization, are condoms and diaphraghms, since they are physical barriers to the sperm ever reaching an egg....whereas this other methods, again, may or may not prevent fertilization, or may or may not prevent implantation.
It's a good question and a topic I've discussed here before I believe, maybe with you. I don't know enough about some of the forms of birth control specifically. I guess I have to say I'm for the pill, etc. It's can be natural for a fertilized egg to not be implanted, so, as you say, there is no way of knowing if it would or wouldn't have. Though, I have thought and rethought my opinion on BC that prevent implantation many times.
no, i've never actually discussed BC in such depth with any pro-lifer, not to my recollected knowledge in any case.
it is already in this thread, but to sum up:
BC pills, IUDs, the patch, BC injections, the ring : all hormonal forms of BC. therefore they all can prevent fertilization (egg and sperm merge aka conception) and they also may prevent implantation ( fertilized egg's implantation onto the uterine wall). there is no way of knowing, definitively, exactly which way any of these methods are preventing, b/c it is entirely dependent on when exactly in the woman's menstrual cycle she is engaging in intercourse. non-hormonal forms of BC, condoms and diaphragms, prevent fertilization only since they form a physical barrier to sperm.
so my question is, if one is ok with say BC pills....why not the morning after pill? they basically are one and the same - morning after pill being a super high dose of regular BC pill. yes, one is taken before and the other after.....but again, since they both can work in the exact same manner...prevention of implantation, why not support it? to me, if one believes life begins *right* at conception (fertilized egg)....well then BOTH methods (and all other hormonal forms of BC).....are "murder" if that is one's beliefs. obviously, it is not my belief, but i still far rather higher usage of morning after pills rather than abortions, simply b/c it is less traumatic for the woman/girl, cheaper, etc.
also, it is estimated that almost all sexually active women have at least one miscarriage (aka spontaneous abortion) within their lifetimes, completely unaware...simply b/c it happens so early in their cycle. egg and sperm meet, fertilize, but it's usually a few days later before implantation on the uterine wall. obviously, w/o implantation, there can be no pregnancy. the woman's body does this all quite naturally, dispels the fertilized egg. so basically, the body is aborting a conceptualized egg, again in some people's minds...murder then.
it is genuine curiosity that there ARE those who support all forms of BC, but not the morning after pill....or are so vehemently opposed to abortion, no matter how early it may occur. and no, i realize i will not be changing anyone's minds, but if it at least makes some people think more about it - especially about acceptance of the morning after pill - that's a good start imo.
i do agree, i think many people do not educate themselves enough about the varying forms of BC (though i am so glad they use/believe in it!).....but i just think if they DID, they'd be making more informed decisions, and perhaps remove some of the stigma for morning after pill usage.basically, if you are ok with BC pills, theoretically, you should be ok with the morning after pill....tis all the same. that's why often (not saying you) i think this subject is loaded with a lot more judgements than actual discernment of facts.
thanks for answering tho, glad you gave it some thought. i was hoping for a more definitive opinion so i could 'understand' more.....especially since you did not weigh in one way or another on the morning after pill.....but i appreciate you addressing it. i just think, as long as one is a-ok with BC pills, but against abortion....more widespread support of the morning after pill would be a really GOOd thing, and could help reduce the amount of abortions, overall....and i think we all would desire that.
There is so much going on in this thread. It's crazy. I just wanted to share my feelings on abortion. I believe in pro-life under any circumstances. Not a whole lot of people agree with me and that is okay : ) I'm not going to get into the dialogue right now. . .but maybe later.
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
There is so much going on in this thread. It's crazy. I just wanted to share my feelings on abortion. I believe in pro-life under any circumstances. Not a whole lot of people agree with me and that is okay : ) I'm not going to get into the dialogue right now. . .but maybe later.
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
every CHILD is a precious gift.....but a blastocyst, an embryo, even a fetus.....NOT a child. and hey, i respect you have your own pov, but many of us simply do not have the same, not even close. and i am all for respecting individual's choices and rights to said choices.
ending life that has no sensory perception - aka can feel no pain - is not cruel at all. if one is unaware, can't think or feel....how can it be 'cruel'......? so while you might think the methods 'horrible'.....just being realistic, if one wants to terminate something living within their own bodies, well, they have to do so, some way, some how.
a living thing, a cluster of cells.....even with the potential to become a thinking/feeling human being....imo has no more 'right to life' than anything else that is not fully existing/formed on it's own. but of course, is certainly a matter of opinion there.
many things break my heart, but a woman choosing to have an abortion is not one of them. i do lament a girl or woman being faced with such a decision, since obviously she has gotten pregnant when she does not desire it...so i feel for her and her choices.
There is so much going on in this thread. It's crazy. I just wanted to share my feelings on abortion. I believe in pro-life under any circumstances. Not a whole lot of people agree with me and that is okay : ) I'm not going to get into the dialogue right now. . .but maybe later.
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
It's nice to see a new face (and new color ) in this conversation.
For the record, some people who believe abortion should be a legal option - and can be a moral option - HAVE researched the methods and researched fetal development.
I would encourage anyone who is anti-abortion under any circumstance to research the horrible circumstances under which some women choose abortion.
There is so much going on in this thread. It's crazy. I just wanted to share my feelings on abortion. I believe in pro-life under any circumstances. Not a whole lot of people agree with me and that is okay : ) I'm not going to get into the dialogue right now. . .but maybe later.
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
It's nice to see a new face (and new color ) in this conversation.
For the record, some people who believe abortion should be a legal option - and can be a moral option - HAVE researched the methods and researched fetal development.
I would encourage anyone who is anti-abortion under any circumstance to research the horrible circumstances under which some women choose abortion.
Thank you for the welcome : )
I have researched for several years on abortion to debate people who are for it. I'm curious what horrible circumstances you are referring to. 93% of abortions are because of social reasons and not incest/rape or mother's health. Also, if a baby in the womb is diagnosed with a disease, that is no reason to terminate the life. I call that being prejudice. In fact, most women who choose to have abortions are working women with careers. Again, I say everyone has the right to life.
There is so much going on in this thread. It's crazy. I just wanted to share my feelings on abortion. I believe in pro-life under any circumstances. Not a whole lot of people agree with me and that is okay : ) I'm not going to get into the dialogue right now. . .but maybe later.
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
every CHILD is a precious gift.....but a blastocyst, an embryo, even a fetus.....NOT a child. and hey, i respect you have your own pov, but many of us simply do not have the same, not even close. and i am all for respecting individual's choices and rights to said choices.
ending life that has no sensory perception - aka can feel no pain - is not cruel at all. if one is unaware, can't think or feel....how can it be 'cruel'......? so while you might think the methods 'horrible'.....just being realistic, if one wants to terminate something living within their own bodies, well, they have to do so, some way, some how.
a living thing, a cluster of cells.....even with the potential to become a thinking/feeling human being....imo has no more 'right to life' than anything else that is not fully existing/formed on it's own. but of course, is certainly a matter of opinion there.
many things break my heart, but a woman choosing to have an abortion is not one of them. i do lament a girl or woman being faced with such a decision, since obviously she has gotten pregnant when she does not desire it...so i feel for her and her choices.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
i'm not calling it 'what i want'...i am calling it what it IS. these are all scientific terms for the beginning stages of a potential human being.
and of COURSe it is living, it is living cells! idk anyone who ever denied that, nor hav ei ever known anyone to deny that at all stages it is human. however, every cell in my being is human, but that doesn't make even a cluster of those human cells A human being. i think all of this is wherin lies many of the differing beliefs in regards to all opinions on abortion. a potential human being is NOT a human being to me. most abortions are performed before 12 weeks gestation, about 89% i believe. before 12 weeks, no central nervous sytem exists. therefore, no sensory perception, which would include pain. that is my personal main concern. i have no desire to inflict unnecessary upon on any living thing, if it can/may be avoided. until fully formed, imo, it's not a 'baby'.....tho obviously the further in development a fetus gets, the more it is a baby. a fetus under 12 weeks of age imo is in no way a baby. again, it is the potential. BIG difference in my mind.
i've said this often enough in these abortion threads....including this one....but i know you are new to the discsuuons around here (welcome! ) it is estimated that every sexually active woman has at least one miscarriage (aka spontaneous abortion) within her lifetime, unbeknownst to her, simply b/c it happens so early in her cycle she is unaware. many, many more have miscarriages they ARE aware of. point is, the body naturally dispels fertilized eggs quite often. so would you consider then the body is then commiting murder? there are a myraid of reasons why a fertilized egg would not implant on the uterine wall, thus ending the possibility of continuing pregnancy. as it is, many eggs get fertilized and take a few days before attching in the first place. tis the norm. so here are these fertilized eggs (human babies to you) that are naturally dispelled from the body. this is not odd, this is not rare. i do not see this as something horrific...tho it certainly IS sad when one desires a pregnancy and it happens, especially when the mother is aware.
as our dear departed hippiemom who used to post here used to say......an acorn is not a tree, an embryo is not a baby. just b/c it has ALL the makings of a fully formed human, doesn't make it one. hell, my DNA has all the makings of a human, but my heart cells, my lung cells, my blood cells, all living within my body, and yet....none ARe a human being.
and i agree, being pregnant and having a child is a privilege, if it's what you want. not everyone wants that, and even amongst those who do...sometimes abortion still becomes the 'best option' for them. you say 93% of abortions are a matter of 'convenience'...i'd take issue with your language, but it's not worthwhile. however, going with your stats....that means 7% are a result of rape, medically necessary and/or due to a fetus that will be born dead, or die. so you believe those 7% should still be FORCED to carry thru a pregnancy they do not desire? more power to ya....but that is a 'privilege' mayn a woman would gladly not have, and i am glad they have the option NOT to.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
In what context are you claiming that most abortions are not performed until 9 weeks?
I have researched for several years on abortion to debate people who are for it.
Why would you spend years researching a topic just to debate people who disagree with you? Are you part of one of those groups like Justice for All or something?
1) Why is it all of a sudden a problem for you that someone researces a topic for debate? Seems very reasonable and appropriate.
2) Social reasons can't be valid? You have to ask that question to someone that believes that human life begins at conception? (which is what I thin he/she believes)
And, now you are going to suggest that there are "unborn fetuses" that don't want to live? Seriously? Wow, just wow.
I have researched for several years on abortion to debate people who are for it.
Why would you spend years researching a topic just to debate people who disagree with you? Are you part of one of those groups like Justice for All or something?
I think this statement implies that all fetuses want to be born, which I don't think is true.
1) So you are wondering why I take time to research information. Well, if you are passionate about something you want to learn more. It's like every member in the 10club. People are passionate about Pearl Jam and want to know more and more about their lives and music. There is nothing wrong with being passionate for pro-life. As a woman and a Christian it is a big deal to me.
2)I have't taken time to read the issue around the abortion ban.
3)There is no excuse for a mother (working mother) to have an abortion. I do not believe that social reasons are valid. It's an inconvenience . . . and that's all. The revelance of a working mother means she has the means to support a child.
4)Aborting a baby because of a disability/illness is the height of prejudice. We don't cure the illness by killing the patient. The worth of that unborn baby means absolutely nothing if it is aborted because of poor health.
5) Please don't twist my words around to mean something different. It means exactly what I intended to say. Every human being has the right to live!
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
In what context are you claiming that most abortions are not performed until 9 weeks?
I say that most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of pregnancy because that means by then there is a heartbeat and brainwaves. For those who do not believe life begins at conception would argue that if there is no heartbeat there is not life.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
i'm not calling it 'what i want'...i am calling it what it IS. these are all scientific terms for the beginning stages of a potential human being.
and of COURSe it is living, it is living cells! idk anyone who ever denied that, nor hav ei ever known anyone to deny that at all stages it is human. however, every cell in my being is human, but that doesn't make even a cluster of those human cells A human being. i think all of this is wherin lies many of the differing beliefs in regards to all opinions on abortion. a potential human being is NOT a human being to me. most abortions are performed before 12 weeks gestation, about 89% i believe. before 12 weeks, no central nervous sytem exists. therefore, no sensory perception, which would include pain. that is my personal main concern. i have no desire to inflict unnecessary upon on any living thing, if it can/may be avoided. until fully formed, imo, it's not a 'baby'.....tho obviously the further in development a fetus gets, the more it is a baby. a fetus under 12 weeks of age imo is in no way a baby. again, it is the potential. BIG difference in my mind.
i've said this often enough in these abortion threads....including this one....but i know you are new to the discsuuons around here (welcome! ) it is estimated that every sexually active woman has at least one miscarriage (aka spontaneous abortion) within her lifetime, unbeknownst to her, simply b/c it happens so early in her cycle she is unaware. many, many more have miscarriages they ARE aware of. point is, the body naturally dispels fertilized eggs quite often. so would you consider then the body is then commiting murder? there are a myraid of reasons why a fertilized egg would not implant on the uterine wall, thus ending the possibility of continuing pregnancy. as it is, many eggs get fertilized and take a few days before attching in the first place. tis the norm. so here are these fertilized eggs (human babies to you) that are naturally dispelled from the body. this is not odd, this is not rare. i do not see this as something horrific...tho it certainly IS sad when one desires a pregnancy and it happens, especially when the mother is aware.
as our dear departed hippiemom who used to post here used to say......an acorn is not a tree, an embryo is not a baby. just b/c it has ALL the makings of a fully formed human, doesn't make it one. hell, my DNA has all the makings of a human, but my heart cells, my lung cells, my blood cells, all living within my body, and yet....none ARe a human being.
and i agree, being pregnant and having a child is a privilege, if it's what you want. not everyone wants that, and even amongst those who do...sometimes abortion still becomes the 'best option' for them. you say 93% of abortions are a matter of 'convenience'...i'd take issue with your language, but it's not worthwhile. however, going with your stats....that means 7% are a result of rape, medically necessary and/or due to a fetus that will be born dead, or die. so you believe those 7% should still be FORCED to carry thru a pregnancy they do not desire? more power to ya....but that is a 'privilege' mayn a woman would gladly not have, and i am glad they have the option NOT to.
I don't even know where to begin with your comment : ) I'm going to be brief.
You say most abortions are performed before 12 weeks. I agree. However, in the time between 6-12 (when most abortions take place) there is a heartbeat, detectable brainwaves and fingers/toes (yay!!).
For that 7% of women who are confronted with difficulties need to be treated with compassion, support and nurturing. Forcing is a strong word which I'm not suggesting. For babies that have a detectable medical problem there is no reason to have an abortion. Aborting a baby because of an abnormality is nothing less than blatant discrimination against the disabled.
For women struggling with rape/incest (rare) need to be handled with care and professional guidance. Instead of aborting a baby that has done nothing wrong the woman should consider other options. One act of violence against the woman is enough.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
i'm not calling it 'what i want'...i am calling it what it IS. these are all scientific terms for the beginning stages of a potential human being.
and of COURSe it is living, it is living cells! idk anyone who ever denied that, nor hav ei ever known anyone to deny that at all stages it is human. however, every cell in my being is human, but that doesn't make even a cluster of those human cells A human being. i think all of this is wherin lies many of the differing beliefs in regards to all opinions on abortion. a potential human being is NOT a human being to me. most abortions are performed before 12 weeks gestation, about 89% i believe. before 12 weeks, no central nervous sytem exists. therefore, no sensory perception, which would include pain. that is my personal main concern. i have no desire to inflict unnecessary upon on any living thing, if it can/may be avoided. until fully formed, imo, it's not a 'baby'.....tho obviously the further in development a fetus gets, the more it is a baby. a fetus under 12 weeks of age imo is in no way a baby. again, it is the potential. BIG difference in my mind.
i've said this often enough in these abortion threads....including this one....but i know you are new to the discsuuons around here (welcome! ) it is estimated that every sexually active woman has at least one miscarriage (aka spontaneous abortion) within her lifetime, unbeknownst to her, simply b/c it happens so early in her cycle she is unaware. many, many more have miscarriages they ARE aware of. point is, the body naturally dispels fertilized eggs quite often. so would you consider then the body is then commiting murder? there are a myraid of reasons why a fertilized egg would not implant on the uterine wall, thus ending the possibility of continuing pregnancy. as it is, many eggs get fertilized and take a few days before attching in the first place. tis the norm. so here are these fertilized eggs (human babies to you) that are naturally dispelled from the body. this is not odd, this is not rare. i do not see this as something horrific...tho it certainly IS sad when one desires a pregnancy and it happens, especially when the mother is aware.
as our dear departed hippiemom who used to post here used to say......an acorn is not a tree, an embryo is not a baby. just b/c it has ALL the makings of a fully formed human, doesn't make it one. hell, my DNA has all the makings of a human, but my heart cells, my lung cells, my blood cells, all living within my body, and yet....none ARe a human being.
and i agree, being pregnant and having a child is a privilege, if it's what you want. not everyone wants that, and even amongst those who do...sometimes abortion still becomes the 'best option' for them. you say 93% of abortions are a matter of 'convenience'...i'd take issue with your language, but it's not worthwhile. however, going with your stats....that means 7% are a result of rape, medically necessary and/or due to a fetus that will be born dead, or die. so you believe those 7% should still be FORCED to carry thru a pregnancy they do not desire? more power to ya....but that is a 'privilege' mayn a woman would gladly not have, and i am glad they have the option NOT to.
I don't even know where to begin with your comment : ) I'm going to be brief.
You say most abortions are performed before 12 weeks. I agree. However, in the time between 6-12 (when most abortions take place) there is a heartbeat, detectable brainwaves and fingers/toes (yay!!).
For that 7% of women who are confronted with difficulties need to be treated with compassion, support and nurturing. Forcing is a strong word which I'm not suggesting. For babies that have a detectable medical problem there is no reason to have an abortion. Aborting a baby because of an abnormality is nothing less than blatant discrimination against the disabled.
For women struggling with rape/incest (rare) need to be handled with care and professional guidance. Instead of aborting a baby that has done nothing wrong the woman should consider other options. One act of violence against the woman is enough.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
and again, never did i deny there was a heartbeat, some brain activity nor fingers or toes....none the less...there is NO central nervous system by that time, thus, no sensory perception. just b/c it is alive doesn't mean it has a 'right to life'...nor is it a baby, or fully formed, etc. it cannot live without the mother, so it is still very much a part of the mother. so i really don't get why you keep pointing out a heartbeat, as i and no one else has never denied it.
as to the 7% that you say must be 'treated with compassion and care'.....earlier you stated that you are pro-life under all circumstances, so dress it up all you want....you are still suggesting to FORCE a woman or girl to have a child against her will, and in a very dire situation: rape, medical necessity, fetus sure to die or be born dead, etc. hey, you may put the rights of the unborn above all else...i do not.
anyhoo, i realize you're new here...but i have explained my position on the topic numerous times on this board, and have been pretty clear on this thread as well. if you are interested in my views, they are already here, no point in rehashing. obviously, it is clear you hold a pretty passionate opinion on the topic, and so do i. neither of us are going to sway the other. i will continue to post when i feel factual information is misrepresented or to elaborate on/throw support behind ideas i believe in, but i am not going to debate 'when life begins'....etc.
a potential human being is NOT a human being, anymore than an acorn is a tree....and imo, has no more 'right to life'.....my concerns are first and foremost with the already fully formed, thinking and feeling beings already existing out in the world. i will always be pro-choice.
and ya know, i don't know where you get your stats....but i call bullshit on 'every aborted fetus being desired and having a home' elsewhere. i hate to point out the obvious, but quite often, people are not open to children outside their own race....so there is limits right there. also, many people want perfectly healthy babies - no disabilities....again, more limits. add in the fetuses that will be born dead or die immediately (NOT talking about disabilities, but will die) you are just forcing a woman to endure undue pain and psychological trauma. beyond that...it really doesn't matter what 'someone else' would want, as it is not someone else who has to carry a pregnancy to term, only the woman/girl. therefore, imo, it should be HER decision, and no one else's...what she would desire for her own pregnancy - to continue or to terminate.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
In what context are you claiming that most abortions are not performed until 9 weeks?
I say that most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of pregnancy because that means by then there is a heartbeat and brainwaves. For those who do not believe life begins at conception would argue that if there is no heartbeat there is not life.
I think my statement is pretty clear. : )
of course LIFE begins at conception. every cell in my body is alive. hell, an amoeba is "alive" too. a cluster of cells, is NOT a human being, tis the POTENTIAL to become one. again, sperm fertilizing egg is just the start. if it does not implant on the uterine wall, that happens OFTEN, there will be no pregnancy, and that life will be dispelled from the body, usually unbeknownst to the woman or girl. living cells are living cells....but that does make it any more a person. to become a person takes time and nutrition within a woman or girl's womb...without that, the life will cease, whether naturally or unnaturally. btw - there is no heartbeat upon conception, so idk why you keep bringing it up. and again, a heartbeat does not mean anything beyond a heartbeat. some of us are focused on what we deem more important things, such as a central nervous system. we all choose to focus on what matters most to us.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. It has been interesting have this conversation on this post. Pretty much what is expected.
To touch on a few points before closing, I would like to say how disgusting your comment is on "just because it is alive doesn't mean it has a right to life". It's really cold and bitter.
I do not believe in FORCING but RIGHT TO LIFE at every stage of development and under any circumstance. My heart isn't hard towards struggling women but very much open. The only difference is my heart is also open for the small growing life inside her.
As for my stats they are not BS as you so crudely put it, but instead solid and researched facts.
The only thing I am trying to bring is some clarity and light on a dark and deadly subject.
1) Why is it all of a sudden a problem for you that someone researces a topic for debate? Seems very reasonable and appropriate.
Who said I had a problem with it? It was a question. I found it odd that someone would research a topic for the purpose of debate rather than to learn about the subject.
2) Social reasons can't be valid? You have to ask that question to someone that believes that human life begins at conception? (which is what I thin he/she believes)
I guess we have to agree to disagree. It has been interesting have this conversation on this post. Pretty much what is expected.
To touch on a few points before closing, I would like to say how disgusting your comment is on "just because it is alive doesn't mean it has a right to life". It's really cold and bitter.
I do not believe in FORCING but RIGHT TO LIFE at every stage of development and under any circumstance. My heart isn't hard towards struggling women but very much open. The only difference is my heart is also open for the small growing life inside her.
As for my stats they are not BS as you so crudely put it, but instead solid and researched facts.
The only thing I am trying to bring is some clarity and light on a dark and deadly subject.
Blessings : )
absolutely.
they may be 'disgusting' to you, and perhaps others....but obviosuly i disagree. i am a compassionate person, just not perhaps in regards to this topic or life you deem important. i don't consider a spider's life important, i regularly will squash bugs if they are in my home/in my way....definitely have it in for mosquitos......i am a meat eater/wear leather, etc, etc. and we as species don't seem to have much respect for life in general, and most especially towards other creatures in general. so in regards to 'rights to life' i just simply do not see life in that light, period, no matter the species. we have no more right to be born than any other creature on this earth...and again, a woman's body 'makes the decision to abort' naturally, aka miscarriage, all on it's own, so i wonder where the 'right to life' is there? life and death ARE.
and i guess it was just misrepresentation of your view then when you stated quite clearly, even underlined, you are pro-life under all circumstances, which i inferred to mean....you want the fetus to take precedence, always. to me that means, woman's life is in danger? too bad. been raped? still have that baby. your baby will be born dead? well, you can still carry it to term and give birth. all of that seems pretty cold and heartless to me towards the mother, but differing perspectives...
and the only stats i called "BS" on was that every aborted fetus would actully have a welcome home if it were not destroyed.....and i still will say that. it's easy for some to say oh yes..i want a baby...i'd adopt. however, when the reality may well be a child that is not exactly what they want...it could well be an enirely different story. beyond which, many might say they'd like to adopt, be willing to adopt...but when it comes down to it, don't meet the criteria - which is pretty stringent - to become adoptive parents. bottomline, as i said, imo, makes no difference what someone else desires. tis the woman's body, her choice.
sorry if i don't see any 'clarity and light" being added....and the only thing i see as dark and deadly is when a woman is not allowed to make her own choices, especially for her own body, her own life and said risks to her life.
1) So you are wondering why I take time to research information. Well, if you are passionate about something you want to learn more. It's like every member in the 10club. People are passionate about Pearl Jam and want to know more and more about their lives and music. There is nothing wrong with being passionate for pro-life. As a woman and a Christian it is a big deal to me.
I'm not wondering why you take time to research information. I am wondering why someone's sole purpose in researching information would be to debate people with alternate opinions, which is what I read in your statement. I agree that if when people are passionate about something they want to learn more, which is why it seemed odd to me that that didn't seem to be your purpose.
3)There is no excuse for a mother (working mother) to have an abortion. I do not believe that social reasons are valid. It's an inconvenience . . . and that's all. The revelance of a working mother means she has the means to support a child.
What about a mother who's not working? What if she's working for minimum wage and already has other kids to support? Just trying to clarify your position here.
4)Aborting a baby because of a disability/illness is the height of prejudice. We don't cure the illness by killing the patient. The worth of that unborn baby means absolutely nothing if it is aborted because of poor health.
What if they are incurable illnesses? Again, just trying to pinpoint your position.
5) Please don't twist my words around to mean something different. It means exactly what I intended to say. Every human being has the right to live! [/quote]
Didn't mean to twist your words. Let me try again. Plenty of people have rights they choose not to exercise. For instance, I have the right to bear arms but feel that it would not be in the best interest of me or my community to do so, so I choose not to. A right is not a mandate. A right just means someone can have/use something if they want to, right?
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
In what context are you claiming that most abortions are not performed until 9 weeks?
I say that most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of pregnancy because that means by then there is a heartbeat and brainwaves. For those who do not believe life begins at conception would argue that if there is no heartbeat there is not life.
I think my statement is pretty clear. : )
Maybe my question wasn't clear. When I asked the context of your statistic, I meant: Are you referring to abortions in the U.S. or in the world? Is this recent data?
I ask because, in the United States as of a 2007 report (using 2004 data), 63% of abortions were performed at less than 9 weeks. So, in fact, MOST abortions are performed before 9 weeks of pregnancy.
I don't even know where to begin with your comment : ) I'm going to be brief.
You say most abortions are performed before 12 weeks. I agree. However, in the time between 6-12 (when most abortions take place) there is a heartbeat, detectable brainwaves and fingers/toes (yay!!).
For that 7% of women who are confronted with difficulties need to be treated with compassion, support and nurturing. Forcing is a strong word which I'm not suggesting. For babies that have a detectable medical problem there is no reason to have an abortion. Aborting a baby because of an abnormality is nothing less than blatant discrimination against the disabled.
For women struggling with rape/incest (rare) need to be handled with care and professional guidance. Instead of aborting a baby that has done nothing wrong the woman should consider other options. One act of violence against the woman is enough.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
How is compelling/requiring/whateverf a woman to have a baby she does not want to have not forcing? It is a strong word - and people who want this to happen should own that.
I agree that one act of violence against a woman (rape victim) is enough - and many would consider being forced into pregnancy and childbirth to be another act of violence against her.
Please provide your source for the statement that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. I simply don't believe that's true.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
well that sure is and awesome and precious statement
i've worked in foster care for 18 years
it's not reality... maybe awesome and prercious... but certainly NOT reality
even with abortion being legal there are so so so so so many unwanted children.
i work in group homes now... mostly kids that have been adopted and thrown back in the system again and have NO familes
what a fucking mess they are and the entire foster care system is... partially because we already have too many unwanted children in the world
I am Pro-Choice as I have posted previously
this because I believe we are here on this earth to learn and love, to understand compassion, to experience the good and bad from our decisions - to grow- to look back on a life when we leave this world and realize it ALL.
A Gov or another's beliefs can not dictate the experiences of our lives. We must make those decisions ourselves. I can not imagine a world where a woman is FORCED to carry an unwanted child. Forced to experience that.
It must be a choice there is no going back to before 1/22/73.
I do not like the pro choice argument though about fetus not being a child or when exactly it is etc- it seems weak and ridiculous to me. I think we all know that left to grow that will be a child. For me the only argument is Choice. A woman must have a choice.
With this thought I am also grateful for the pro life advocates. Their view point we need to learn compassion for the unborn child. They speak for the unborn.A woman, because of this debate, may think of giving up of herself to give Life.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
well that sure is and awesome and precious statement
i've worked in foster care for 18 years
it's not reality... maybe awesome and prercious... but certainly NOT reality
even with abortion being legal there are so so so so so many unwanted children.
i work in group homes now... mostly kids that have been adopted and thrown back in the system again and have NO familes
what a fucking mess they are and the entire foster care system is... partially because we already have too many unwanted children in the world
it's very fucking sad.
oh well, cmon now....ksacco is only referring to babies! and doesn't everyone want babies! they're like puppies....we all want one!
seriously, thank you. that's the point, isn't it? if sooo many people would be willing to adopt all these unwanted babies, well WHY do we have so many unwanted children in the foster care system, including babies? perhaps b/c they are not the 'right' color, or in perfect health, etc.....not the *ideal* that most who want to adopt a child do desire. and again, many who say they would like to adopt, those 'willing families' may well be denied. there's just no way to say so simply 'every aborted baby would have a home'....
I ask because, in the United States as of a 2007 report (using 2004 data), 63% of abortions were performed at less than 9 weeks. So, in fact, MOST abortions are performed before 9 weeks of pregnancy.
thanks for the stats. 63% under 9 weeks, 89% under 12 weeks - all without central nervous systems....so that leaves only 11% beyond that. i have no stats as to the 'whys' of the later dates, but i would imagine a good # of that percentage would also be apart of the 7% mentioned earlier....most escpecially, the medically necessary abortion (when the mother's life is in danger)....and also when it is deemed the fetus will be stillborn.
btw - in regards to the career women having the most abortions ( a claim i will neither agree or disagree with b/c i honestly just don't know).....but even if true, so what? what exactly does that prove? that women with careers are aware of their legal options and choose to utilize them? they have access to doctors and clinics and choose to go? a woman with a career means nothing more than she is employed. i know plenty of 'career women'.....well-educated women....who in no way could afford to support a child, especially on their own, and yes....who will care for their baby while they are at work? just b/c one earns a paycheck doesn't mean they make a lot of $$$, nor does it mean they have any support network in place either. and even if she can afford it, you think being able to afford a child is the only reason one choose to have, or not have, a baby? there's so much more to it. besides which, thankfully, women have the legal option to make a choice for themselves of what they truly want. either way, it's her choice.
btw - in regards to the career women having the most abortions ( a claim i will neither agree or disagree with b/c i honestly just don't know).....but even if true, so what? what exactly does that prove? that women with careers are aware of their legal options and choose to utilize them? they have access to doctors and clinics and choose to go? a woman with a career means nothing more than she is employed. i know plenty of 'career women'.....well-educated women....who in no way could afford to support a child, especially on their own, and yes....who will care for their baby while they are at work? just b/c one earns a paycheck doesn't mean they make a lot of $$$, nor does it mean they have any support network in place either. and even if she can afford it, you think being able to afford a child is the only reason one choose to have, or not have, a baby? there's so much more to it. besides which, thankfully, women have the legal option to make a choice for themselves of what they truly want. either way, it's her choice.
Exactly. I think it's especially significant that:
1. There is a huge and increasing disparity in unintended pregnancy based on income, with unintended pregnancy increasing by 29% among poor women in the United States from 1994 to 2001.
2. MOST women (73%) having abortions in the U.S. cited inability to afford a baby right then as one of the reasons for choosing abortion.
3. MOST women (74%) having abortion in the U.S. cited concern for and/or responisibility to other individuals (such as their existing children) as one of the reasons for choosing abortion. MOST women (61%) having abortions are mothers.
4. MOST women (57%) having abortion in the U.S. are living at less than 200% of the poverty level ($28,300 gross for a family of three). The abortion rate is increasingly higher as income decreases (10 per 1,000 women of reproductive age for those who live at or above 300% of the poverty level compared to 44 per 1,000 for those who live at less than 100%).
So, although I don't know whether or not it's true that most women who have abortions are employed (I would guess that "career women" is a stretch though), I think it's obvious that employment itself does not make one financially able to care for a child.
I would love for some people who are so concerned about abortion to actually see the bigger picture and maybe even address these issues.
And that's just the income factor. Don't even get me started on how maternal mortality is still the leading cause of death among women worldwide, and the death rates due to abortion in countries where it is illegal.....
Speaking on the cost of a child... this is an aisde... and lends itself to another HUGE problem is the US
Ok... It costs approximately $17,000 a year to send your child to a SUNY school (State University of New York) that is an estimate from their website and incudes room and board and books.
You know what is costs to send a 2 year old to full time day care on Long Island? OVER 16,000 a year!
Average is between $285-$310 a week. Theres is a "summer camp differential" and/or a seperate tuition at most for the months of July and August. And an annual enrollment fee each September.
I was paying $290... then he moved to "preschool" which is $10 less... but now we have our $35 summer camp differential! AND... all the school runs the same way. You must pay by the week... because they are holding your child's spot. SO if your child is sick... or does someting like two years olds sometimes do... scratches or bites or something and can't go to school... it's $10 an hour IF YOU ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO FIND A DECENT BABYSITTER!!!!!!! There were about two months were i had an average of about 6 missed days a month... that's an extra $350 a month!!!
Financially, I can barely afford to keep my kid in a decent daycare .... and i have a masters degree!! Granted they dont pay me much to help care for all the unwanted children (already) roaming the planet... but still...
Before anyone says that "career women" (LOL) have the means to care for a child ... EVEN IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT..... there are also a lot of other factors... like familial supports and the ability to provide the child with a loving, stable, nurturing environment. At times this can be quite a feat.
Comments
the other, new abortion thread 'reminded' me of this one, and my unanswered Q. i AM genuinely interested in thoughts from tho pro-lifers who do also believe in the use of BC. just pure curiosity, no ambush/judgements...just wonderment on the topic.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
just jumping in and quickly out of this thread.
I've been involved with women like this, so they are around.
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
It's a good question and a topic I've discussed here before I believe, maybe with you. I don't know enough about some of the forms of birth control specifically. I guess I have to say I'm for the pill, etc. It's can be natural for a fertilized egg to not be implanted, so, as you say, there is no way of knowing if it would or wouldn't have. Though, I have thought and rethought my opinion on BC that prevent implantation many times.
no, i've never actually discussed BC in such depth with any pro-lifer, not to my recollected knowledge in any case.
it is already in this thread, but to sum up:
BC pills, IUDs, the patch, BC injections, the ring : all hormonal forms of BC. therefore they all can prevent fertilization (egg and sperm merge aka conception) and they also may prevent implantation ( fertilized egg's implantation onto the uterine wall). there is no way of knowing, definitively, exactly which way any of these methods are preventing, b/c it is entirely dependent on when exactly in the woman's menstrual cycle she is engaging in intercourse. non-hormonal forms of BC, condoms and diaphragms, prevent fertilization only since they form a physical barrier to sperm.
so my question is, if one is ok with say BC pills....why not the morning after pill? they basically are one and the same - morning after pill being a super high dose of regular BC pill. yes, one is taken before and the other after.....but again, since they both can work in the exact same manner...prevention of implantation, why not support it? to me, if one believes life begins *right* at conception (fertilized egg)....well then BOTH methods (and all other hormonal forms of BC).....are "murder" if that is one's beliefs. obviously, it is not my belief, but i still far rather higher usage of morning after pills rather than abortions, simply b/c it is less traumatic for the woman/girl, cheaper, etc.
also, it is estimated that almost all sexually active women have at least one miscarriage (aka spontaneous abortion) within their lifetimes, completely unaware...simply b/c it happens so early in their cycle. egg and sperm meet, fertilize, but it's usually a few days later before implantation on the uterine wall. obviously, w/o implantation, there can be no pregnancy. the woman's body does this all quite naturally, dispels the fertilized egg. so basically, the body is aborting a conceptualized egg, again in some people's minds...murder then.
it is genuine curiosity that there ARE those who support all forms of BC, but not the morning after pill....or are so vehemently opposed to abortion, no matter how early it may occur. and no, i realize i will not be changing anyone's minds, but if it at least makes some people think more about it - especially about acceptance of the morning after pill - that's a good start imo.
i do agree, i think many people do not educate themselves enough about the varying forms of BC (though i am so glad they use/believe in it!).....but i just think if they DID, they'd be making more informed decisions, and perhaps remove some of the stigma for morning after pill usage.basically, if you are ok with BC pills, theoretically, you should be ok with the morning after pill....tis all the same. that's why often (not saying you) i think this subject is loaded with a lot more judgements than actual discernment of facts.
thanks for answering tho, glad you gave it some thought. i was hoping for a more definitive opinion so i could 'understand' more.....especially since you did not weigh in one way or another on the morning after pill.....but i appreciate you addressing it.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I am very passionate on this subject and it breaks my heart that so many individuals are having abortions and are in favor of them. If you believe in abortion, I encourage you to reseach the methods and research fetal development. The methods are horrible! And at every stage, even the very beginning you can see life beginning to form. Every child is precious and is a gift, and deserves a right to life.
every CHILD is a precious gift.....but a blastocyst, an embryo, even a fetus.....NOT a child. and hey, i respect you have your own pov, but many of us simply do not have the same, not even close. and i am all for respecting individual's choices and rights to said choices.
ending life that has no sensory perception - aka can feel no pain - is not cruel at all. if one is unaware, can't think or feel....how can it be 'cruel'......? so while you might think the methods 'horrible'.....just being realistic, if one wants to terminate something living within their own bodies, well, they have to do so, some way, some how.
a living thing, a cluster of cells.....even with the potential to become a thinking/feeling human being....imo has no more 'right to life' than anything else that is not fully existing/formed on it's own. but of course, is certainly a matter of opinion there.
many things break my heart, but a woman choosing to have an abortion is not one of them. i do lament a girl or woman being faced with such a decision, since obviously she has gotten pregnant when she does not desire it...so i feel for her and her choices.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
It's nice to see a new face (and new color
For the record, some people who believe abortion should be a legal option - and can be a moral option - HAVE researched the methods and researched fetal development.
I would encourage anyone who is anti-abortion under any circumstance to research the horrible circumstances under which some women choose abortion.
Thank you for the welcome : )
I have researched for several years on abortion to debate people who are for it. I'm curious what horrible circumstances you are referring to. 93% of abortions are because of social reasons and not incest/rape or mother's health. Also, if a baby in the womb is diagnosed with a disease, that is no reason to terminate the life. I call that being prejudice. In fact, most women who choose to have abortions are working women with careers. Again, I say everyone has the right to life.
First, call it what you want, but when it truly truly comes down to it the "blastocyst" or "embryo" is a baby. Those are scientific terms for baby. According to science, from the moment of fertilization the woman is holding a growing human. Most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of gestation. By then the heart is beating and brain waves are detectable.
You said. . . "if someone wants to terminate something living within their own bodies". . . so then you must agree to some degree that a fetus, if you will, is living. And it is! A woman who carries a child has the privilege to help it grow! It certainly is forming on it's own. The mother is only providing a safe haven and nutrients. It's amazing.
i'm not calling it 'what i want'...i am calling it what it IS. these are all scientific terms for the beginning stages of a potential human being.
and of COURSe it is living, it is living cells! idk anyone who ever denied that, nor hav ei ever known anyone to deny that at all stages it is human. however, every cell in my being is human, but that doesn't make even a cluster of those human cells A human being. i think all of this is wherin lies many of the differing beliefs in regards to all opinions on abortion. a potential human being is NOT a human being to me. most abortions are performed before 12 weeks gestation, about 89% i believe. before 12 weeks, no central nervous sytem exists. therefore, no sensory perception, which would include pain. that is my personal main concern. i have no desire to inflict unnecessary upon on any living thing, if it can/may be avoided. until fully formed, imo, it's not a 'baby'.....tho obviously the further in development a fetus gets, the more it is a baby. a fetus under 12 weeks of age imo is in no way a baby. again, it is the potential. BIG difference in my mind.
i've said this often enough in these abortion threads....including this one....but i know you are new to the discsuuons around here (welcome!
as our dear departed hippiemom who used to post here used to say......an acorn is not a tree, an embryo is not a baby. just b/c it has ALL the makings of a fully formed human, doesn't make it one. hell, my DNA has all the makings of a human, but my heart cells, my lung cells, my blood cells, all living within my body, and yet....none ARe a human being.
and i agree, being pregnant and having a child is a privilege, if it's what you want. not everyone wants that, and even amongst those who do...sometimes abortion still becomes the 'best option' for them. you say 93% of abortions are a matter of 'convenience'...i'd take issue with your language, but it's not worthwhile. however, going with your stats....that means 7% are a result of rape, medically necessary and/or due to a fetus that will be born dead, or die. so you believe those 7% should still be FORCED to carry thru a pregnancy they do not desire? more power to ya....but that is a 'privilege' mayn a woman would gladly not have, and i am glad they have the option NOT to.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
In what context are you claiming that most abortions are not performed until 9 weeks?
Why would you spend years researching a topic just to debate people who disagree with you? Are you part of one of those groups like Justice for All or something?
See the other thread about the total abortion ban in Nicaragua. (Just curious... would you support such a ban?)
Social reasons can't be valid?
Not even depending on what the disease is?
What is the relevance of that?
I think this statement implies that all fetuses want to be born, which I don't think is true.
1) Why is it all of a sudden a problem for you that someone researces a topic for debate? Seems very reasonable and appropriate.
2) Social reasons can't be valid? You have to ask that question to someone that believes that human life begins at conception? (which is what I thin he/she believes)
And, now you are going to suggest that there are "unborn fetuses" that don't want to live? Seriously? Wow, just wow.
1) So you are wondering why I take time to research information. Well, if you are passionate about something you want to learn more. It's like every member in the 10club. People are passionate about Pearl Jam and want to know more and more about their lives and music. There is nothing wrong with being passionate for pro-life. As a woman and a Christian it is a big deal to me.
2)I have't taken time to read the issue around the abortion ban.
3)There is no excuse for a mother (working mother) to have an abortion. I do not believe that social reasons are valid. It's an inconvenience . . . and that's all. The revelance of a working mother means she has the means to support a child.
4)Aborting a baby because of a disability/illness is the height of prejudice. We don't cure the illness by killing the patient. The worth of that unborn baby means absolutely nothing if it is aborted because of poor health.
5) Please don't twist my words around to mean something different. It means exactly what I intended to say. Every human being has the right to live!
I say that most abortions are not performed until about 9 weeks of pregnancy because that means by then there is a heartbeat and brainwaves. For those who do not believe life begins at conception would argue that if there is no heartbeat there is not life.
I think my statement is pretty clear. : )
I don't even know where to begin with your comment : ) I'm going to be brief.
You say most abortions are performed before 12 weeks. I agree. However, in the time between 6-12 (when most abortions take place) there is a heartbeat, detectable brainwaves and fingers/toes (yay!!).
For that 7% of women who are confronted with difficulties need to be treated with compassion, support and nurturing. Forcing is a strong word which I'm not suggesting. For babies that have a detectable medical problem there is no reason to have an abortion. Aborting a baby because of an abnormality is nothing less than blatant discrimination against the disabled.
For women struggling with rape/incest (rare) need to be handled with care and professional guidance. Instead of aborting a baby that has done nothing wrong the woman should consider other options. One act of violence against the woman is enough.
I read once in a journal that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. How about that awesome statement?? I love stuff like that.
and again, never did i deny there was a heartbeat, some brain activity nor fingers or toes....none the less...there is NO central nervous system by that time, thus, no sensory perception. just b/c it is alive doesn't mean it has a 'right to life'...nor is it a baby, or fully formed, etc. it cannot live without the mother, so it is still very much a part of the mother. so i really don't get why you keep pointing out a heartbeat, as i and no one else has never denied it.
as to the 7% that you say must be 'treated with compassion and care'.....earlier you stated that you are pro-life under all circumstances, so dress it up all you want....you are still suggesting to FORCE a woman or girl to have a child against her will, and in a very dire situation: rape, medical necessity, fetus sure to die or be born dead, etc. hey, you may put the rights of the unborn above all else...i do not.
anyhoo, i realize you're new here...but i have explained my position on the topic numerous times on this board, and have been pretty clear on this thread as well. if you are interested in my views, they are already here, no point in rehashing. obviously, it is clear you hold a pretty passionate opinion on the topic, and so do i. neither of us are going to sway the other. i will continue to post when i feel factual information is misrepresented or to elaborate on/throw support behind ideas i believe in, but i am not going to debate 'when life begins'....etc.
a potential human being is NOT a human being, anymore than an acorn is a tree....and imo, has no more 'right to life'.....my concerns are first and foremost with the already fully formed, thinking and feeling beings already existing out in the world. i will always be pro-choice.
and ya know, i don't know where you get your stats....but i call bullshit on 'every aborted fetus being desired and having a home' elsewhere. i hate to point out the obvious, but quite often, people are not open to children outside their own race....so there is limits right there. also, many people want perfectly healthy babies - no disabilities....again, more limits. add in the fetuses that will be born dead or die immediately (NOT talking about disabilities, but will die) you are just forcing a woman to endure undue pain and psychological trauma. beyond that...it really doesn't matter what 'someone else' would want, as it is not someone else who has to carry a pregnancy to term, only the woman/girl. therefore, imo, it should be HER decision, and no one else's...what she would desire for her own pregnancy - to continue or to terminate.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
of course LIFE begins at conception. every cell in my body is alive. hell, an amoeba is "alive" too. a cluster of cells, is NOT a human being, tis the POTENTIAL to become one. again, sperm fertilizing egg is just the start. if it does not implant on the uterine wall, that happens OFTEN, there will be no pregnancy, and that life will be dispelled from the body, usually unbeknownst to the woman or girl. living cells are living cells....but that does make it any more a person. to become a person takes time and nutrition within a woman or girl's womb...without that, the life will cease, whether naturally or unnaturally. btw - there is no heartbeat upon conception, so idk why you keep bringing it up. and again, a heartbeat does not mean anything beyond a heartbeat. some of us are focused on what we deem more important things, such as a central nervous system. we all choose to focus on what matters most to us.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
To touch on a few points before closing, I would like to say how disgusting your comment is on "just because it is alive doesn't mean it has a right to life". It's really cold and bitter.
I do not believe in FORCING but RIGHT TO LIFE at every stage of development and under any circumstance. My heart isn't hard towards struggling women but very much open. The only difference is my heart is also open for the small growing life inside her.
As for my stats they are not BS as you so crudely put it, but instead solid and researched facts.
The only thing I am trying to bring is some clarity and light on a dark and deadly subject.
Blessings : )
Who said I had a problem with it? It was a question. I found it odd that someone would research a topic for the purpose of debate rather than to learn about the subject.
Just trying to clarify his/her position.
You and I have had this conversation before, so I'm surprised that you're surprised.
absolutely.
they may be 'disgusting' to you, and perhaps others....but obviosuly i disagree. i am a compassionate person, just not perhaps in regards to this topic or life you deem important. i don't consider a spider's life important, i regularly will squash bugs if they are in my home/in my way....definitely have it in for mosquitos......i am a meat eater/wear leather, etc, etc. and we as species don't seem to have much respect for life in general, and most especially towards other creatures in general. so in regards to 'rights to life' i just simply do not see life in that light, period, no matter the species. we have no more right to be born than any other creature on this earth...and again, a woman's body 'makes the decision to abort' naturally, aka miscarriage, all on it's own, so i wonder where the 'right to life' is there? life and death ARE.
and i guess it was just misrepresentation of your view then when you stated quite clearly, even underlined, you are pro-life under all circumstances, which i inferred to mean....you want the fetus to take precedence, always. to me that means, woman's life is in danger? too bad. been raped? still have that baby. your baby will be born dead? well, you can still carry it to term and give birth. all of that seems pretty cold and heartless to me towards the mother, but differing perspectives...
and the only stats i called "BS" on was that every aborted fetus would actully have a welcome home if it were not destroyed.....and i still will say that. it's easy for some to say oh yes..i want a baby...i'd adopt. however, when the reality may well be a child that is not exactly what they want...it could well be an enirely different story. beyond which, many might say they'd like to adopt, be willing to adopt...but when it comes down to it, don't meet the criteria - which is pretty stringent - to become adoptive parents. bottomline, as i said, imo, makes no difference what someone else desires. tis the woman's body, her choice.
sorry if i don't see any 'clarity and light" being added....and the only thing i see as dark and deadly is when a woman is not allowed to make her own choices, especially for her own body, her own life and said risks to her life.
certainly...all the best to you too tho.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I'm not wondering why you take time to research information. I am wondering why someone's sole purpose in researching information would be to debate people with alternate opinions, which is what I read in your statement. I agree that if when people are passionate about something they want to learn more, which is why it seemed odd to me that that didn't seem to be your purpose.
It's interesting reading, and I'd be interested to know your opinion about it if you get the chance.
What about a mother who's not working? What if she's working for minimum wage and already has other kids to support? Just trying to clarify your position here.
What if they are incurable illnesses? Again, just trying to pinpoint your position.
5) Please don't twist my words around to mean something different. It means exactly what I intended to say. Every human being has the right to live! [/quote]
Didn't mean to twist your words. Let me try again. Plenty of people have rights they choose not to exercise. For instance, I have the right to bear arms but feel that it would not be in the best interest of me or my community to do so, so I choose not to. A right is not a mandate. A right just means someone can have/use something if they want to, right?
Maybe my question wasn't clear. When I asked the context of your statistic, I meant: Are you referring to abortions in the U.S. or in the world? Is this recent data?
I ask because, in the United States as of a 2007 report (using 2004 data), 63% of abortions were performed at less than 9 weeks. So, in fact, MOST abortions are performed before 9 weeks of pregnancy.
How is compelling/requiring/whateverf a woman to have a baby she does not want to have not forcing? It is a strong word - and people who want this to happen should own that.
I agree that one act of violence against a woman (rape victim) is enough - and many would consider being forced into pregnancy and childbirth to be another act of violence against her.
Please provide your source for the statement that there are more than enough willing families to adopt babies being aborted. I simply don't believe that's true.
well that sure is and awesome and precious statement
i've worked in foster care for 18 years
it's not reality... maybe awesome and prercious... but certainly NOT reality
even with abortion being legal there are so so so so so many unwanted children.
i work in group homes now... mostly kids that have been adopted and thrown back in the system again and have NO familes
what a fucking mess they are and the entire foster care system is... partially because we already have too many unwanted children in the world
it's very fucking sad.
i never post in this forum, but fuck...when i read the part about unwanted children...NO family. shit...that made me really upset.
this because I believe we are here on this earth to learn and love, to understand compassion, to experience the good and bad from our decisions - to grow- to look back on a life when we leave this world and realize it ALL.
A Gov or another's beliefs can not dictate the experiences of our lives. We must make those decisions ourselves. I can not imagine a world where a woman is FORCED to carry an unwanted child. Forced to experience that.
It must be a choice there is no going back to before 1/22/73.
I do not like the pro choice argument though about fetus not being a child or when exactly it is etc- it seems weak and ridiculous to me. I think we all know that left to grow that will be a child. For me the only argument is Choice. A woman must have a choice.
With this thought I am also grateful for the pro life advocates. Their view point we need to learn compassion for the unborn child. They speak for the unborn.A woman, because of this debate, may think of giving up of herself to give Life.
oh well, cmon now....ksacco is only referring to babies! and doesn't everyone want babies! they're like puppies....we all want one!
seriously, thank you. that's the point, isn't it? if sooo many people would be willing to adopt all these unwanted babies, well WHY do we have so many unwanted children in the foster care system, including babies? perhaps b/c they are not the 'right' color, or in perfect health, etc.....not the *ideal* that most who want to adopt a child do desire. and again, many who say they would like to adopt, those 'willing families' may well be denied. there's just no way to say so simply 'every aborted baby would have a home'....
and as ever
thanks for the stats. 63% under 9 weeks, 89% under 12 weeks - all without central nervous systems....so that leaves only 11% beyond that. i have no stats as to the 'whys' of the later dates, but i would imagine a good # of that percentage would also be apart of the 7% mentioned earlier....most escpecially, the medically necessary abortion (when the mother's life is in danger)....and also when it is deemed the fetus will be stillborn.
btw - in regards to the career women having the most abortions ( a claim i will neither agree or disagree with b/c i honestly just don't know).....but even if true, so what? what exactly does that prove? that women with careers are aware of their legal options and choose to utilize them? they have access to doctors and clinics and choose to go? a woman with a career means nothing more than she is employed. i know plenty of 'career women'.....well-educated women....who in no way could afford to support a child, especially on their own, and yes....who will care for their baby while they are at work? just b/c one earns a paycheck doesn't mean they make a lot of $$$, nor does it mean they have any support network in place either. and even if she can afford it, you think being able to afford a child is the only reason one choose to have, or not have, a baby? there's so much more to it. besides which, thankfully, women have the legal option to make a choice for themselves of what they truly want. either way, it's her choice.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Exactly. I think it's especially significant that:
1. There is a huge and increasing disparity in unintended pregnancy based on income, with unintended pregnancy increasing by 29% among poor women in the United States from 1994 to 2001.
2. MOST women (73%) having abortions in the U.S. cited inability to afford a baby right then as one of the reasons for choosing abortion.
3. MOST women (74%) having abortion in the U.S. cited concern for and/or responisibility to other individuals (such as their existing children) as one of the reasons for choosing abortion. MOST women (61%) having abortions are mothers.
4. MOST women (57%) having abortion in the U.S. are living at less than 200% of the poverty level ($28,300 gross for a family of three). The abortion rate is increasingly higher as income decreases (10 per 1,000 women of reproductive age for those who live at or above 300% of the poverty level compared to 44 per 1,000 for those who live at less than 100%).
So, although I don't know whether or not it's true that most women who have abortions are employed (I would guess that "career women" is a stretch though), I think it's obvious that employment itself does not make one financially able to care for a child.
I would love for some people who are so concerned about abortion to actually see the bigger picture and maybe even address these issues.
And that's just the income factor. Don't even get me started on how maternal mortality is still the leading cause of death among women worldwide, and the death rates due to abortion in countries where it is illegal.....
Ok... It costs approximately $17,000 a year to send your child to a SUNY school (State University of New York) that is an estimate from their website and incudes room and board and books.
You know what is costs to send a 2 year old to full time day care on Long Island? OVER 16,000 a year!
Average is between $285-$310 a week. Theres is a "summer camp differential" and/or a seperate tuition at most for the months of July and August. And an annual enrollment fee each September.
I was paying $290... then he moved to "preschool" which is $10 less... but now we have our $35 summer camp differential! AND... all the school runs the same way. You must pay by the week... because they are holding your child's spot. SO if your child is sick... or does someting like two years olds sometimes do... scratches or bites or something and can't go to school... it's $10 an hour IF YOU ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO FIND A DECENT BABYSITTER!!!!!!! There were about two months were i had an average of about 6 missed days a month... that's an extra $350 a month!!!
Financially, I can barely afford to keep my kid in a decent daycare .... and i have a masters degree!! Granted they dont pay me much to help care for all the unwanted children (already) roaming the planet... but still...
Before anyone says that "career women" (LOL) have the means to care for a child ... EVEN IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT..... there are also a lot of other factors... like familial supports and the ability to provide the child with a loving, stable, nurturing environment. At times this can be quite a feat.