Abortion is wrong, yet I am pro choice

SundaySilence

saveuplife wrote:

Please provide evidence that it doesn't. And please, don't act as though you know when suffering begins. To make a law stating that at a certain point, let's say 3 months no pain is felt for all babies is silly. What about at 92 days... that's when pain is felt? It's ridiculous. These people act like they know. They don't. So, I'd prefer to err on the side of not sucking a baby into a vaccum or pulling it out and sticking a knife in it's head (partial birth abortion).

From The New England Journal of Medicine and Harvard Medical School:

"The neural pathways for pain may be traced from sensory receptors in the skin to sensory areas in the cerebral cortex... The timing of the thalamocortical connection is of crucial importance for cortical perception... neurons in the thalamus produce axons...These fibers then "wait" just below the neocortex... and finally establish synaptic connections between 20 and 24 weeks of gestation... intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks"

http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/anand/

Abuskedti

saveuplife wrote:

Are you serious? Do you really think the Catholic church does nothing for the poor and abused? Whether you agree with them or not on many issues is one thing, to say they don't do anything for children is absolutely a full-fledged lie. Look at Catholic Charities, look at missionaries, look at the poor collections that come out of Catholic Churchs.



I'm not personally attacking you... I'm saying your take on this issue is not consistent whatsoever. You are assuming that if the law is revoked, babies will be left in dumpsters and mothers will die. Better yet, the sky will fall on us all. You crack me up. All that would change is less babies would die.



Nope. It's the equivalent of slavery. It won't be reversed because it's wrong.



The government would be protecting the right of that unborn child to live. That's all. The government would continue to protect that right... but that's all they need to do.



They do.


Congrats. You've successfully exposed yourself for what you are.... pro-abortion rights. It was funny how you started the thread and how you've finished it. Inconsistent.... just like your take on this issue.

I can't read on past your first comment which after previous posts is becoming your style. You might take a look in the mirror at your own principles when you have to alter what I say before you can formulate a response. I did not even come close to saying Catholics do nothing. I am sure they do very much work.. however their contribution to this massive problem is negligable. Today, the government in fact, protects the catholic church from having to help. If woment started leaving their hungry children at the doorstep of a church - they will be arrested for abandoning their children and the children are taken away.

Yes, on their huge agenda, there is a place for catholics to help needy children.. but it is wrong to charactorize that as though it was a solution. It is a drip in the ocean.

saveuplife

SundaySilence wrote:

The neural pathways for pain may be traced from sensory receptors in the skin to sensory areas in the cerebral cortex

Hmmmm.... "may be". I hate to break it to you, but even if this was true... it's certainly not fact. The truth is there are arguments (and studies supporting these) on both sides for when pain is felt. But, neither side can factually know unless you they could feel what it feels like to an unborn child in a womb at said time and get sucked out by a vaccum.

As I said before, let's say the law states that no abortions after three-months are permitted,... who's to say that "unborn child in womb A" develops quicker than "unborn child in womb B"? Who's to say that it's possible that "unborn child in womb A" develops a hell of a lot quicker than the average? Who's to say he/she doesn't feel pain in under 3 months, where as (given this theoretical example) a number don't?

Even if it was true, that "on average" limited to no pain is felt up to 3 months, that's not saying you aren't causing pain for "a number" of these unborn children. Bottom line: legislating a "date" when it's OK and when it's not, is granting the "pro-life" side a moral victory because it shows the inconsistency of the opposition's stand point. If abortion really wasn't killing a life, the timing of it wouldn't be an issue.... you should be able to do it whenever... until the unborn child is born.

saveuplife

Abuskedti wrote:

I can't read on past your first comment which after previous posts is becoming your style. You might take a look in the mirror at your own principles when you have to alter what I say before you can formulate a response. I did not even come close to saying Catholics do nothing. I am sure they do very much work.. however their contribution to this massive problem is negligable. Today, the government in fact, protects the catholic church from having to help. If woment started leaving their hungry children at the doorstep of a church - they will be arrested for abandoning their children and the children are taken away.

Yes, on their huge agenda, there is a place for catholics to help needy children.. but it is wrong to charactorize that as though it was a solution. It is a drip in the ocean.

I said it's part of the solution. You can't keep assuming nothing else works besides abortion, and act like you don't like it. There's alternatives,... ie adoption. The market for adoption abroad in this country is very very big.... Moreover, the waiting lines for adoption by prospective parents (even domestically) in aggregate (domestically and internationally) far outweighs the number of children. Therefore, if we could have these children adopted domestically rather than internationally and increase the rate at which the domestic adoption process occured, it could offset a large portion (if not all) of the annual abortion numbers (1.3 million).

The remainder could be cared for by religious institutions, until they are ready to support themselves. If you really want to throw the government in, fine, the government could also run foster homes.

Bottom line: The children benefit... why? Because they are alive due to a reverse of the abortion law. The adoptive parents benefit... why? Because they get the child they wanted (and get it at a faster rate). The government benefits.... why? how? They now have more future tax payers. Population growth is very very important (regardless of what people on here think) for supporting a progressive society (look to welfare in Europe for proof) and fueling aggregate demand.

The person seeking an abortion is the only person that doesn't necessarily benefit, off first glance because they have to go through the pregnancy. However, I personally think they do benefit personally. They don't have to live with regret/guilt that they put on themselves via abortion. They helped a family that desperately wanted a child. They allowed their child to live. All of this, IMHO, will actually be benefiical to them when they look back on it.

But, that's my opinion.

urbanhippie

saveuplife wrote:

The person seeking an abortion is the only person that doesn't necessarily benefit, off first glance because they have to go through the pregnancy. However, I personally think they do benefit personally. They don't have to live with regret/guilt that they put on themselves via abortion. They helped a family that desperately wanted a child. They allowed their child to live. All of this, IMHO, will actually be benefiical to them when they look back on it.

But, that's my opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion, but what makes you think that women neccesarily feel regret or guilt about an abortion? I'm sure some DO, but not all and maybe not even the majority.

Abuskedti

urbanhippie wrote:

You are entitled to your opinion, but what makes you think that women neccesarily feel regret or guilt about an abortion? I'm sure some DO, but not all and maybe not even the majority.

I doubt there are many at all that don't experience a sense of loss.

urbanhippie

Abuskedti wrote:

I doubt there are many at all that don't experience a sense of loss.

You don't know that. No one does. Maybe it's your opinion that they should feel that. What about those that may feel relief, or nothing because they feel justified in their decision.

Abuskedti

saveuplife wrote:

I said it's part of the solution. You can't keep assuming nothing else works besides abortion, and act like you don't like it. There's alternatives,... ie adoption. The market for adoption abroad in this country is very very big.... Moreover, the waiting lines for adoption by prospective parents (even domestically) in aggregate (domestically and internationally) far outweighs the number of children. Therefore, if we could have these children adopted domestically rather than internationally and increase the rate at which the domestic adoption process occured, it could offset a large portion (if not all) of the annual abortion numbers (1.3 million).

The remainder could be cared for by religious institutions, until they are ready to support themselves. If you really want to throw the government in, fine, the government could also run foster homes.

Bottom line: The children benefit... why? Because they are alive due to a reverse of the abortion law. The adoptive parents benefit... why? Because they get the child they wanted (and get it at a faster rate). The government benefits.... why? how? They now have more future tax payers. Population growth is very very important (regardless of what people on here think) for supporting a progressive society (look to welfare in Europe for proof) and fueling aggregate demand.

The person seeking an abortion is the only person that doesn't necessarily benefit, off first glance because they have to go through the pregnancy. However, I personally think they do benefit personally. They don't have to live with regret/guilt that they put on themselves via abortion. They helped a family that desperately wanted a child. They allowed their child to live. All of this, IMHO, will actually be benefiical to them when they look back on it.

But, that's my opinion.

again you are making my position up from thin air so you can respond. I never said anything close to "nothing else works besides abortion"... does background music play in your mind as you conjure thises things up.

I have said over and over that abortions are bad in my opinion. our efforts should be toward preventing unwanted pregnancy and toward education and help so that when they do occur, the parent will be ready and able to raise a child.

forcing women to raise children that do not want to is torture of both the woman and the child.

this is not a federal government issue.. this is a humanity issue. lets improve humanity - not sentence them. I raised a few children.. and made very few laws. Instead I informed and assisted and loved. they did the rest. My job was much more managable than 400 million americans.. and yet, my children were always the ones that know best how to handle their situations. Not me. And some how you know what is best for millions of americans... ???

Abuskedti

urbanhippie wrote:

You don't know that. No one does. Maybe it's your opinion that they should feel that. What about those that may feel relief, or nothing because they feel justified in their decision.

you can feel all of those: relief, and justified and a sense of loss

you are right, I don't know that.. but I know people, and can't imagine anyone would not feel a sense of loss.

saveuplife

urbanhippie wrote:

You are entitled to your opinion, but what makes you think that women neccesarily feel regret or guilt about an abortion? I'm sure some DO, but not all and maybe not even the majority.

I believe that most do. That's my opinion. These women had (in my opinion) a living being inside of them. They most likely felt some sort of connection to him or her (in my opinion) or what he/she could be.

saveuplife

Abuskedti wrote:

again you are making my position up from thin air so you can respond. I never said anything close to "nothing else works besides abortion"... does background music play in your mind as you conjure thises things up.

I have said over and over that abortions are bad in my opinion. our efforts should be toward preventing unwanted pregnancy and toward education and help so that when they do occur, the parent will be ready and able to raise a child.

forcing women to raise children that do not want to is torture of both the woman and the child.

this is not a federal government issue.. this is a humanity issue. lets improve humanity - not sentence them. I raised a few children.. and made very few laws. Instead I informed and assisted and loved. they did the rest. My job was much more managable than 400 million americans.. and yet, my children were always the ones that know best how to handle their situations. Not me. And some how you know what is best for millions of americans... ???

Why doesn't adoption work as an alternative to abortion then? I gave substantial reasons for why this is a viable option. Do you think that they are reasonable?

urbanhippie

saveuplife wrote:

I believe that most do. That's my opinion. These women had (in my opinion) a living being inside of them. They most likely felt some sort of connection to him or her (in my opinion) or what he/she could be.

OK. But what if you don't believe that a 6 week old fetus is a living being?

I believe that it has the potential to become one, but then so does every egg and every sperm. But this is by no means assured and pregancies end for a multitude of reasons.

I am not picking on you, just trying to contrast opinions.

Abuskedti

urbanhippie wrote:

You don't know that. No one does. Maybe it's your opinion that they should feel that. What about those that may feel relief, or nothing because they feel justified in their decision.

There was a lady that once worked for me. We had become pretty close friends. We didn't do things outside of work, but good friends at work. She once confided that she thought she was pregnant. She was desperate.. was having difficulty with her husband.. she had a 7 year old daughter.. and was absolutely sure she did not want a baby. She told me that if she was pregnant she would surely have an abortion. She spoke very much as though the pregnancy was nothing but a inconvenience and she would take care of it directly. I did not give my opinion as I felt this was no place for advice or judgement.. I just listened and encouraged her to talk and think about it. Only two days later, she was sitting alone in the corner crying. When she finally pulled herself together, she told me she had gone to the doctor and learned she just had a miscarriage. She had been pregnant only a few weeks.

I learned something that day.

saveuplife

urbanhippie wrote:

OK. But what if you don't believe that a 6 week old fetus is a living being?

I believe that it has the potential to become one, but then so does every egg and every sperm. But this is by no means assured and pregancies end for a multitude of reasons.

I am not picking on you, just trying to contrast opinions.

My point is that (in my opinion) even if one doesn't believe that a 6 week old fetus is a living being beforehand, they will feel the connection during the pregnancy and will feel like it may have been alive after the abortion, but will forced to deny that feeling. Hence, the regret/guilt that I was speaking about. I think an example of this is Row (from Row v Wade).

Once again, this is my opinion.

urbanhippie

saveuplife wrote:

My point is that (in my opinion) even if one doesn't believe that a 6 week old fetus is a living being beforehand, they will feel the connection during the pregnancy and will feel like it may have been alive after the abortion, but will forced to deny that feeling. Hence, the regret/guilt that I was speaking about. I think an example of this is Row (from Row v Wade).

Once again, this is my opinion.

I have spoken to a few women who have had abortions (as a healthcare professional, but also as a friend). I'm not saying that none of them regret it, but for the most part, the over-riding negative emotion felt was shame and a reluctance to let anyone else know what they had done. That's why guilt is felt. That's wrong imo.

decides2dream

SundaySilence wrote:

From The New England Journal of Medicine and Harvard Medical School:

"The neural pathways for pain may be traced from sensory receptors in the skin to sensory areas in the cerebral cortex... The timing of the thalamocortical connection is of crucial importance for cortical perception... neurons in the thalamus produce axons...These fibers then "wait" just below the neocortex... and finally establish synaptic connections between 20 and 24 weeks of gestation... intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks"

http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/anand/

i *heart* sundaysilence's posts on this topic, always. always a voice of calm and reason, and full of information.


how anyone can possible disagree with lack of central nervous system = no pain perception is beyond me.




abuskedti - just an fyi - your friend may've been crying as a 'release'.....and no matter what, it all can be traumatic. we can all 'guess' or have an opinion on what we think women may feel/think about having an abortion, experiencing an abortion and it WILL be different for every woman. however, imo, most women who choose abortion, even if some sadness, i would think mostly relief. no one would choose abortion if they did not truly NOT want to have the child. and please, while sure i think most certainly all would feel like there is 'something' living inside of them....if a pregnancy is only 6-8 weeks along, depending on the timing of your cycle you may only know of your pregnancy 2-4 weeks....hardly time to form a true 'bond' with an unwanted entity. obviously, women who DO want to be preganant, they are so ecstatic from the moment they 'know'...it's almost an instant connection. i know of a few women ho have had abortions, and the overwhelming consensus was absolute relief....and sure, from then on the bulk did a far better job with BC, and all have since had families.

saveuplife

urbanhippie wrote:

I have spoken to a few women who have had abortions (as a healthcare professional, but also as a friend). I'm not saying that none of them regret it, but for the most part, the over-riding negative emotion felt was shame and a reluctance to let anyone else know what they had done. That's why guilt is felt. That's wrong imo.

Well, we disagree. As I said, I think that they feel guilt for a reason. It's not the other people that make someone feel guilty.... it's themself. If they don't believe this was wrong or have regrets about the situation, then there's no need to feel guilty.

That said, I feel bad for women in that situation. IMHO it's got to be an absolutely awful feeling, the regret, the guilt. To live with that must be horrible. That's why I'd like to see a law prevent that from ever occuring. IMHO it's not only damaging to the unborn, it's damaging to the mom. Meanwhile, so much good could come out of alternatives like adoption. But, once again, that's my opinion.

urbanhippie

saveuplife wrote:

Well, we disagree. As I said, I think that they feel guilt for a reason. It's not the other people that make someone feel guilty.... it's themself. If they don't believe this was wrong or have regrets about the situation, then there's no need to feel guilty.

That said, I feel bad for women in that situation. IMHO it's got to be an absolutely awful feeling, the regret, the guilt. To live with that must be horrible. That's why I'd like to see a law prevent that from ever occuring. IMHO it's not only damaging to the unborn, it's damaging to the mom. Meanwhile, so much good could come out of alternatives like adoption. But, once again, that's my opinion.

Do you think that those who choose adoption feel no guilt, shame or regret?

Could you imagine telling your family, friends, co-workers or even a childs siblings that you were putting your child up for adoption rather than keeping it?

I am not saying adoption is not a viable alternative, it is for some. But it's not cut and dried.

decides2dream

urbanhippie wrote:

Do you think that those who choose adoption feel no guilt, shame or regret?

Could you imagine telling your family, friends, co-workers or even a childs siblings that you were putting your child up for adoption rather than keeping it?

I am not saying adoption is not a viable alternative, it is for some. But it's not cut and dried.

absolutely.



also, i certainly believe in adoption, keeping a child and abortion...i think all 3 are viable options. however, i often see people mention adoption as 'the' choice over abortion if one does not want to keep a child. while i understand that thought process, and i know there are many people who want to adopt...and yet we have soooo many childen in the foster care system, so why is that? perhaps b/c most people want to adopt babies...and they want to adopt healthy babies....and quite often healthy babies that look like them. it just is what it is, no 'right' or 'wrong' there......just pointing out the fact that it IS rather simplistic to say that all unwanted pregnancies, if given up for adoption rather than aborted, all babies would end up in a happy, loving, wanted home. obviously, it simply is not the case.

saveuplife

urbanhippie wrote:

Do you think that those who choose adoption feel no guilt, shame or regret?

Could you imagine telling your family, friends, co-workers or even a childs siblings that you were putting your child up for adoption rather than keeping it?

I am not saying adoption is not a viable alternative, it is for some. But it's not cut and dried.

Personally, I don't see the connection at all.

I don't think they would feel guilty/shameful or regretful for bringing their child into the world and giving him/her to loving parents (or keeping it). Especially, when the alternative was to terminate that child. IMHO society is on my side here, or moving in that direction.... look at movies like Juno and Knocked Up.

As for the family insinuation,.... there's another option.... keep the child, if you really feel the need to tell your children, you can say that the pregancy was not planned but in life you just can't wash mistakes away.... talk about a lesson in personal responsibility and love in an age of immediate gratification and me, me, me.