I thought I'd start a thread on Abortion

searchlightsoul

angelica wrote:

I look at life in a holistic perspective. I see that when I break life into fragments, I'm not seeing realistically, within the context of what is.

In a holistic comprehensive view, one can move in either direction, in time, seeing the physical beginning of the individual with it's DNA, to the other end of the spectrum, to the potential of it's life, which can be conceptualized at different places, like birth, first day of school, marriage, death, etc. In a holistic view, once conceived, this physical entity with it's unique DNA cannot be denied as a human being. To do so is merely to close one's perspective down to a limited and unrealistic perspective for reasons of personal bias, out of synch with the truth.

One can minimize the reality...one can call this unique individual a "bit of DNA", or cells, and yet, it is what it is in the big picture, within nature.

The perspective we choose will determine the choices we make on this subject, and the outcome we receive. And whether or not we experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc.

I spent many years living a fragmented and subsequently pained existence.

Seeing realisitically and being attuned to the big picture, including the depths and textures of life not only allows one to continually create a life of joy, but it also eliminates creating negative life consequences to learn from.

Pass the dutchie

_

angelica wrote:

When you compare a DNA test, which has the intent to test something, while leaving it integrally intact and whole, with an abortion, where the intent is to completely and permanently terminate the entity in question, I see a minimization of the actual issue. When sloughing off cells, while leaving an integral being at-one and whole is being compared with terminating the integral entity, I see a minimization of the actual issue.

If this difference is not being comprehended, then the subject in question is not being comprehended.

Not to speak for Jeanie, but I believe the whole point is that some people don't see an embryo as an integral entity. Just because you do see it this way doesn't mean someone who disagrees is minimizing or failing to comprehend the issue.

angelica

scb wrote:

And yet your so-called "holistic comprehensive view" seems itself to break life into fragments, making a distinction between human life and other life. So claiming to have a truly holistic, comprehensive, unfragmented view of life is what seems to me to be not seeing realistically and out of sync with the truth.

"seems" being the operative word.

Are you saying there is not a difference between human life and other life? Do you value the life of an ant as much as you value the life of your mother, for example? Is an ant a human?

Are you saying that women who have abortions or believe in abortion rights don't "experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc."? Are you saying they live a "fragmented and subsequently pained existence"? Are you saying they don't create lives of joy but instead create negative life consequences? That's what it sound like you're saying to me, so I would like to clarify.

When people detach from their spiritual nature or emotional nature, they detach from their spiritual and emotional nature.

When we reduce our vision to 3-dimensions and to science, being devoid of emotional/spiritual assessment, we are absolutely acting in a fragmented sense. By doing so, we minimize, interestingly, our symbolically feminine intelligences. Which is pretty common in the western world. And we will experience the consequences of such fragmented, un-whole, unattuned choice, whether we do this when choosing a mate, what to do with our time, or in having an abortion. It occurs from moment to moment, choice to choice. In myself as well. 100%.

_

decides2dream wrote:

honestly....does it matter?
i truly could NOT care less what ANYone believes...as long as they do not try to infringe on MY, or other womens...personal rights to make their own choices. there will ALWAYS be those whose own thoughts will run counter to my own. i do not see the need, besides i think it would be utterly exhausting, as well as a waste of time..to try to make others see the world from MY perspective. i think it better to simply respect we all have unique views....and ALLOW others to make their own choices. that is ALL i ask of anyone. believe as you see fit, i shall do the same...but lets mutually respect each other to make our own choices.


btw - not speaking for anyone...was simply just sayin'....:)
i find many topics, this one most definitely...go round and round and round...where i think the heart of the matter simply is, respect for individual choice. as long as the law remains on the side of allowing women personal choice...than all is good imo.

I agree with you that not interfering with someone else's choice is what's important. But, legalities aside, I have a total pet peeve about people judging or looking down on women who have abortions or who support abortion rights. Since it seems to me like Angelica is doing that, I thought I should at least double-check before making that assessment.

decides2dream

Abuskedti wrote:

we haven't talked much about abortion. This is the toughest issue I have ever pondered. In the end, I find myself being pro-choice even though by all counts abortion is bad and should be stopped. Yet, circumstances today in America seem to be such that the people need not to have this type of thing legislated.

Debate on such a tough issue is rendered impossible because of politics. Because of the misrepresentation of both sides. I'd like to start with one of the conservative sides.

Can we just talk about one thing for now?

The Conservatives use Pro-Life as their platform and the single greatest vote producer. They vow basically to appoint supreme court justices that will overturn Roe v Wade.

These are the same people that preach that they don't want these judges to "legislate from the bench". Yet that are going to pervert the Supreme Court by proudly proclaiming on the comapaign trail that they will select judges based on their desire to overturn one particular law.

Don't they owe respect to the constitution and our legal process? This is currently the law of the land. There are many reasons this is the law of the land. There is a process to challange laws.

This is one simple contradiction in a long list rendering our country incapable of even addressing something.

getting back on point.....



you are so right really! it had beomce such a devisive issue and too many do vote on this one issue, alone....and forget all else. it IS a contradiction, but how do you create change? is it possible to force them to look at other issues...or to own up to this discrepancy? and the power of judge selction...and the bias that can come into play...which in itself is such a discrepancy of what the law, and the supreme court are to be all about....what has happened to the objectivity? i AM thankful the law still stands....but there are those always trying to not so quietly chip away and chip away....and is this what we as a country want to see?

i don't have any answers there.
i can only hope we CAN overcome this..or at least counter it, and hope that in time...we see and believe again in individual freedoms and TRUE freedom OF religion, including the freedom to allow others to make decisions for thesmelves outside ANY religious interference.


and for now...i can only hope as an american that enough americans feel the same, as in...not allowing this to happen, and not electing a president who is in support of such ideads.


and...

scb wrote:

I agree with you that not interfering with someone else's choice is what's important. But, legalities aside, I have a total pet peeve about people judging or looking down on women who have abortions or who support abortion rights.

and i agree, to a degree.
i hate 'judgements'...but then again, it's all our own personal persepctives. as an individual, i have come to realize...i simply don't care...as long as whatever perceived judgements don't interfere with mine, or others' indivuduals rights. beyond that, there are only a few people who's ideas and judegments are a concern of mine....but they really are few and far between. on this board, there are very, very few who's opinions matter to such a degree...so that's all i was getting at. people believe, judge, whatever...as they wish. fuck all i can truly do about it...and i realizer, i just don't care. to me, that's their own shit...and their own loss...if they are to dismiss or 'look down' on those who make such decisions. those who i admire and drespect..would never do so...so it's a-ok by me.

angelica

scb wrote:

Not to speak for Jeanie, but I believe the whole point is that some people don't see an embryo as an integral entity. Just because you do see it this way doesn't mean someone who disagrees is minimizing or failing to comprehend the issue.

I'm not debating the view of others at all. I am debating when the view of others seeks to counter the view I speak of.



It takes some mental gymnastics to not see an embryo as an integral entity, which basically means it's one thing. People see what they want to see. Unless they seek to see what is.

_

angelica wrote:

"seems" being the operative word.

Are you saying there is not a difference between human life and other life? Do you value the life of an ant as much as you value the life of your mother, for example? Is an ant a human?

Of course I make a distinction between the life of my mother and the life of an ant - just like I may make a distinction between the life of my mother and the life of my embryo. I haven't said there's anything wrong with that.

But you said it's not right to break life into fragments and I'm merely pointing out that you DO in fact break life into fragments and so your so-called holistic comprehensive view is a farce.

angelica wrote:

When people detach from their spiritual nature or emotional nature, they detach from their spiritual and emotional nature.

When we reduce our vision to 3-dimensions and to science, being devoid of emotional/spiritual assessment, we are absolutely acting in a fragmented sense. By doing so, we minimize, interestingly, our symbolically feminine intelligences. Which is pretty common in the western world. And we will experience the consequences of such fragmented, un-whole, unattuned choice, whether we do this when choosing a mate, what to do with our time, or in having an abortion. It occurs from moment to moment, choice to choice. In myself as well. 100%.

Wow. What a way to avoid a question! :rolleyes:

If you are saying that women who choose to have abortions are "being devoid of emotional/spiritual assessment", I completely disagree.

Jeanie

scb wrote:

Not to speak for Jeanie, but I believe the whole point is that some people don't see an embryo as an integral entity. Just because you do see it this way doesn't mean someone who disagrees is minimizing or failing to comprehend the issue.

Oh by all means, speak for me! You're doing a great job scb! Thank you.

It's not that I don't think dna is alive or even individual but it is not a person.
It is a building block to a person, or a cancer or a non malignant tumor, or a disease. It is a code to a potential person but many things can step in along the journey to end the journey at any time.

Do I think that a fully formed human female has more right to decide what happens to her body than a cluster of dna and cells that have yet to develop a body and cannot do so on their own? Yes.

I always remember my grandmother saying to me that she would always support a woman's right to an abortion because had she known that the government could conscript her son and send him off to the horrors of war to suffer permantly for the rest of his life, she'd have made the decision herself.

If we are going to say that all life is sacred, then I think there are far more important issues that we need to address to show that we are serious about the sanctity of life.

angelica

scb wrote:

Of course I make a distinction between the life of my mother and the life of an ant - just like I may make a distinction between the life of my mother and the life of my embryo. I haven't said there's anything wrong with that.

But you said it's not right to break life into fragments and I'm merely pointing out that you DO in fact break life into fragments and so your so-called holistic comprehensive view is a farce.

I didn't say it's not right to break life into fragments. In the holistic view there is not "right" or "wrong". You've openly assigned numerous assumptions to me, that are innaccurate.

Wow. What a way to avoid a question! :rolleyes:

If you are saying that women who choose to have abortions are "being devoid of emotional/spiritual assessment", I completely disagree.

Your ongoing assumptions reveal your lack of perceiving my points.

decides2dream

Jeanie wrote:

Oh by all means, speak for me! You're doing a great job scb! Thank you.

It's not that I don't think dna is alive or even individual but it is not a person.
It is a building block to a person, or a cancer or a non malignant tumor, or a disease. It is a code to a potential person but many things can step in along the journey to end the journey at any time.

Do I think that a fully formed human female has more right to decide what happens to her body than a cluster of dna and cells that have yet to develop a body and cannot do so on their own? Yes.

I always remember my grandmother saying to me that she would always support a woman's right to an abortion because had she known that the government could conscript her son and send him off to the horrors of war to suffer permantly for the rest of his life, she'd have made the decision herself.

If we are going to say that all life is sacred, then I think there are far more important issues that we need to address to show that we are serious about the sanctity of life.

i think it comes down to their being MANY differing perspectives on life, living...and there IS no one 'right' way to see it. some may disagree with that...so be it. now someone's views may be VERY different from yours, mine, or anyone....doesn't make them 'wrong'...just different. the respect of those differences are key.


one can see a zygote, an embryo as a distinct human being. i see it as the possibility of a distinct human being. neither are right..or wrong.....and we are free to choose. and most especially in regards to 'the sanctity of life'...when exactly was this designated? truly? it gets bandied about a LOT....but just about every creature on this planet does not treat life as sacred. life simply is....and then it is not...and that IS the cycle of life. things die of their own accord ALL the time, things are killed all the time...cells...plants...animals...humans....and so it goes. if someone wants to place higher 'value' on humans....all fine and good. if they want to do so with a zygote...go for it. just do so for youself. animals of ALL kinds have killed off their own, throut existence....it is not really an 'unnatural' thing at all. humans ARE animals. i don't have a problem with it.

_

decides2dream wrote:

and i agree, to a degree.
i hate 'judgements'...but then again, it's all our own personal persepctives. as an individual, i have come to realize...i simply don't care...as long as whatever perceived judgements don't interfere with mine, or others' indivuduals rights. beyond that, there are only a few people who's ideas and judegments are a concern of mine....but they really are few and far between. on this board, there are very, very few who's opinions matter to such a degree...so that's all i was getting at. people believe, judge, whatever...as they wish. fuck all i can truly do about it...and i realizer, i just don't care. to me, that's their own shit...and their own loss...if they are to dismiss or 'look down' on those who make such decisions. those who i admire and drespect..would never do so...so it's a-ok by me.

And I agree... to a degree.

It's true that everyone has a right to their opinions and we shouldn't care what they think. But I see these negative attitudes & stereotypes have negative affects on women, particularly those who have had or are considering abortion. And I believe they collectively serve to stigmatize abortion, which in turn contributes to women feeling isolated, and to them not seeking timely abortion services and not knowing about their options and resources, etc. So, while I may never change anyone's judgement (and I'm not even saying that's my goal), it's hard for me to not speak up against these nagative judgements - or at least to clarify that someone is making a negative judgement before I form my opinion of them.

_

angelica wrote:

It takes some mental gymnastics to not see an embryo as an integral entity, which basically means it's one thing. People see what they want to see. Unless they seek to see what is.

I'm sorry, but that is so fucking condescending! :rolleyes:

angelica

scb wrote:

I'm sorry, but that is so fucking condescending! :rolleyes:

You don't think an embryo is one thing?

decides2dream

scb wrote:

And I agree... to a degree.

It's true that everyone has a right to their opinions and we shouldn't care what they think. But I see these negative attitudes & stereotypes have negative affects on women, particularly those who have had or are considering abortion. And I believe they collectively serve to stigmatize abortion, which in turn contributes to women feeling isolated, and to them not seeking timely abortion services and not knowing about their options and resources, etc. So, while I may never change anyone's judgement (and I'm not even saying that's my goal), it's hard for me to not speak up against these nagative judgements - or at least to clarify that someone is making a negative judgement before I form my opinion of them.

i hear you.
it DOES and continues to have negative consequences...i just really meant in the purpose of this debate......b/c really, the only thing we really can ever possibly agree on is the right to disagree...to offer THAT respect to all. to me, that alone would remove the ideas of judgement and attitudes...sure they will continue to exist...but as long as they don't interfere.....then it should simply be a non-issue.


i think my biggest 'issue' with the whole situation is how some groups that support a pro-life stance also seemingly support LACK of education, diminshed or no access to birth control, etc. knowledge IS power, absolutely...and the power to limiting, maybe almost ending the necessity, of abortion lies in that knowledge. some seem to miss the bigger picture as it were...by focusing on the smalllest details. those agains the morning after pill...cmon....the morning after?! seriously....i just don't get that. access and education...that should always be the focus...and then no one would give a shite about judgements....b/c they'd be superfluous.

_

angelica wrote:

I didn't say it's not right to break life into fragments. In the holistic view there is not "right" or "wrong". You've openly assigned numerous assumptions to me, that are innaccurate.

I knew you were going to bust me for using the word "right". I'm sorry I didn't feel like finding and directly quoting what you said. But I know what you said. And you know what you said. And I'm saying that what you said is a farce.

angelica wrote:

Your ongoing assumptions reveal your lack of perceiving my points.

Haha. I didn't even make an assumption. I said "if" so as to suggest that I'm not sure I understood what you were saying. I would have asked straight up if that's what you were saying, but I had just done that and you completely failed to answer my question.

angelica

Abortions create many harmful consequences for women, as evidenced by websites that foster healing for women, like:

http://www.afterabortion.com/



The following are sources that show the consequences of abortion on women:

- Thomas Strahan's Major Articles and Books Concerning the Detrimental Effects of Abortion
. Ashton,"They Psychosocial Outcome of Induced Abortion", British Journal of Ob&Gyn.[/b
- "Risk of Admission to Psychiatric Institutions Among Danish Women who Experienced Induced Abortion: An Analysis on National Record Linkage,"
- "Postpartum and Postabortion Psychotic Reactions,"
- "Bereavement in Post-Abortive Women: A Clinical Report", World Journal of Psychosynthesis
- The Long-Term Psychological Effects of Abortion, Portsmouth, N.H.:
- Herman, Trauma and Recovery
- Adler, "Sample Attrition in Studies of Psycho-social Sequelae of Abortion: How great a problem."
- Speckhard, "Postabortion Syndrome: An Emerging Public Health Concern," Journal of Social Issues,
- Psycho-social Stress Following Abortion
- "Predictive Factors in Emotional Response to Abortion: King's Termination Study - IV," Soc. Sci. & Med
- Psycho-social Stress Following Abortion
- "Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94: register linkage study," British Journal of Medicine
- "Abortion in Adolescence," Adolescence,
- "Characteristics of Pregnant Women Reporting Previous Induced Abortions," Bulletin World Health Organization,
- "Outcome of First Delivery After 2nd Trimester Two Stage Induced Abortion: A Controlled Cohort Study," Acta Obsetricia et Gynecologica
- "Association of Induced Abortion with Subsequent Pregnancy Loss," JAMA, 243:2495-2499, June 27, 1980.
- "Pregnancy Complications Following Legally Induced Abortion: An Analysis of the Population with Special Reference to Prematurity,"
- "An Overview: Maternal Nicotine and Caffeine Consumption and Offspring Outcome," Neurobehavioral Toxicology and Tertology, 4(4):421-427, (1982).
- "Sexual Experience and Drinking Among Women in a U.S. National Survey," Archives of Sexual Behavior,
- "Patterns of Alcohol and Cigarette Use in Pregnancy,"
- "Stressful Life Events and Alcohol Problems Among Women Seen at a Detoxification Center," Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
- "Perinatal Cocaine and Methamphetamine Exposure Maternal and Neo-Natal Correlates,"
- "Cocaine Use During Pregnancy Prevalence and Correlates,"
- "Drug Use Among Adolescent Mothers: Profile of Risk,"
- Speckhard, Psycho-social Stress Following Abortion,
- "Psychoses Following Therapeutic Abortion, Am. J. of Psychiatry
- Ritual Mourning in Anorexia Nervosa,"
- "Maternal Perinatal Risk Factors and Child Abuse,"
- "Relationship between Abortion and Child Abuse," Canadian Journal of Psychiatry,
- Aborted Women - Silent No More (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1987), 129-30, describes a case of woman who beat her three year old son to death shortly after an abortion which triggered a "psychotic episode" of grief, guilt, and misplaced anger.
- "Contraceptive Practice and Repeat Induced Abortion: An Epidemiological Investigation," J. Biosocial Science,
- "First and Repeated Abortions: A Study of Decision-Making and Delay," J. Biosocial Science,
- "The Characteristics and Prior Contraceptive Use of U.S. Abortion Patients," Family Planning Perspectives,
- "The Abortion Experience in Private Practice," Women and Loss: Psychobiological Perspectives,
- "Predictive Factors in Emotional Response to Abortion: King's Termination Study - IV," Social Science and Medicine,
- "Emotional Distress Patterns Among Women Having First or Repeat Abortions," Obstetrics and Gynecology,
- "Repeat Abortion: Is it a Problem?" Family Planning Perspectives
- "The Social and Economic Correlates of Pregnancy Resolution Among Adolescents in New York by Race and Ethnicity: A Multivariate Analysis," Am. J. of Public Health,
- , "Repeat Abortions - Why More?" Family Planning Perspectives
- The Repeat Abortion Patient," Family Planning Perspectives,
- "Reflection on Repeated Abortions: The meanings and motivations," Journal of Social Work Practice
- "Repeat Abortion, Blaming the Victims," Am. J. of Public Health,

Jeanie

decides2dream wrote:

i think it comes down to their being MANY differing perspectives on life, living...and there IS no one 'right' way to see it. some may disagree with that...so be it. now someone's views may be VERY different from yours, mine, or anyone....doesn't make them 'wrong'...just different. the respect of those differences are key.


one can see a zygote, an embryo as a distinct human being. i see it as the possibility of a distinct human being. neither are right..or wrong.....and we are free to choose. and most especially in regards to 'the sanctity of life'...when exactly was this designated? truly? it gets bandied about a LOT....but just about every creature on this planet does not treat life as sacred. life simply is....and then it is not...and that IS the cycle of life. things die of their own accord ALL the time, things are killed all the time...cells...plants...animals...humans....and so it goes. if someone wants to place higher 'value' on humans....all fine and good. if they want to do so with a zygote...go for it. just do so for youself. animals of ALL kinds have killed off their own, throut existence....it is not really an 'unnatural' thing at all. humans ARE animals. i don't have a problem with it.

Agreed. Completely.

Medicated-Genius

angelica wrote:

It has it's own unique individual DNA of a human, that no one ever has or ever will again have. It is not it's mother, or it's father.

Yes but it receives this DNA from its parents and until it's a viable fetus, cannot survive without its mother and wouldn't exist without her or its father.

angelica

scb wrote:

I knew you were going to bust me for using the word "right". I'm sorry I didn't feel like finding and directly quoting what you said. But I know what you said. And you know what you said. And I'm saying that what you said is a farce.

And I'm saying that as long as you are replying to your misunderstandings and false assumptions about what I'm saying, you will continue to miss my actual points.

Haha. I didn't even make an assumption. I said "if" so as to suggest that I'm not sure I understood what you were saying. I would have asked straight up if that's what you were saying, but I had just done that and you completely failed to answer my question.

You didn't make an assumption?

I stated very clearly my response, in detail. You accused me of avoiding the question.

When I actually judge a woman for her choices, then you may condemn me for doing so, if you like.

_

angelica wrote:

You don't think an embryo is one thing?

I didn't say an embryo isn't one thing; I said your post was condescending.

But since you ask... an embryo is many things put together... and embryo is one small part of a larger thing... an embryo is connected... etc. (Why don't you try to suck an embryo out of a woman's uterus and see if you only get one thing. It won't work.)

(Aren't you the one who's always talking about how we're all one and to see us as individual reveals an unenlightened view?)