"After-birth abortion"...

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

inlet13 wrote:

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

I think your method of debate is flawed (not just in this thread). I find I don't have the energy or desire to deal with it, because it's pointless. No matter what anyone says, you twist it up and create new meanings for yourself so you can reassert your argument despite anything that may poke holes in it. Fox newsy. I've accused you of this before... Not trying to attack you; you'll do what you want of course, and more power to you. Just explaining why I don't really get into it with you or bother responding to a lot of your points; I find many of them to be very clouded, your interpretations of what others say very off-base, and your assumptions applied to what they say rather convenient and irritating. Some like to engage with these methods, but not me. It gets boring after a while, so I bail (flaw on my part, perhaps). And in the end, I just disagree with most of your points that make any sense, find your "facts" dubious at best, and IMHO you rely too much on theory rather than the realities of the issue. With all due respect, seriously. I do admire your tenacity. You've got more than I do.

First, I'd say simply: you don't "bail". You continue to engage, in some cases when you throw up your arms you focus on the style of discussion (see above), and pick and choose what you respond to. If you really did "bail", this message I'm quoting wouldn't be here. You would stop engaging. That's bailing.

Second, I'd say it's not really a debate if when a question is presented one side chooses to not respond. Further, I don't really want a debate, I'd prefer a discussion. I have my opinion and I'm aware others have theirs. On this issue, I do think I have a bit of passion maybe because I've just had children, and believe they were alive when I saw the ultrasound. Anyway, I was curious why anyone would involve themselves in a discussion by saying that late-term abortion is not relevant in regards to the subject of the morality of abortion. So, I asked questions to see what this person really thinks. I asked you a few questions, and in my humble opinion, you got so lost in what you believe that you felt the need to stop and start discussing the style of questions. But, maybe that's just my take. Regardless of my questions, you engaged with me in this thread, not the other way around. I asked questions in response and you continued to engage, sometimes not responding to certain questions.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Are you a man, btw? Or a woman?
Oh, and I have no prob discussing partial birth. It doesn't make me uncomfortable. I just do find it relevant; I don't understand why you keep bringing it up like it matters.

I am a man, but don't see how that's relevant.

Partial birth abortion was relevant in our discussion for a variety of reasons. For example, it's commentary on abortion (which this threads about) and the thread title is "after-birth abortion". Partial birth abortion would certainly fall into that conceptual compartment of discussion. Moreover, you originally engaged with me when I was discussing a subject very close to parital birth abortion if not identical.

You never once said whether you support partial birth abortion or, further, infanticide of botched abortions. I was simply trying to understand your thoughts on those issues, which certainly is topically involved with the thread.

I think it's very relevant that you're a man. I don't think men have any business whatsoever sticking their nose into the issue, honestly. They cannot EVER understand abortion or the many different levels of reasoning and emotions around the issue. They just can't. Because it's not their bodies that have ever or will ever be the bodies that carry a fetus. Sorry. I find it fairly offensive when men act like they think they really know what they're talking when it comes to abortion. I'm a woman who has had an abortion as well as a miscarriage ... I think I have a much clearer view of the issue that you ever could, no matter how much you want to wax-on about it, which is why I tend to kind of blow off men who have all this blah blah blahing to do on the matter of pro-life (men who just respect the woman's right to choose is what I can respect). It means nothing to me. You just don't know (not that you don't have a right to your opinion... I just can't muster any interest in what it is). Sorry. :?

I don't think you'd be engaging continuously with me if you didn't care about my opinion. If you didn't care, you'd probably be doing something else.

Couple things:

First, men are aborted as are women. So, men can and should care about the issue.

Second, if it's really only about women having a choice, then who's defending the female fetus' choice? They seem to be tossed out in plastic bags with no choice.

Third, IMHO if it's really only females who should have a say, would you support freedom of choice when it comes to child support? You're pro-choice, right?

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

No, I don't care about your actual opinion on abortion, as in I couldn't care less if you're against it or why on a personal level, because I don't think you have any business suggesting that it's not the woman's choice. I mean, you just talked about how men are aborted as well and that's why they care about it, LOL!!!!! That is so off-side on a few levels. Why are you talking about the gender of the fetuses?? Like that has anything to do with anything;

You brought up the gender in terms of the discussion, remember. You said men shouldn't be allowed to hold opinions on the issue (or something along those lines). I responded - then if it's just females who are entitled to a take on the issue, why can't we hear what the female fetus would have to say on it? If they can't properly respond yet, does that make it ok to terminate them? Why not kill a 6 month old then? So, let's ask that fetus 10-20 years later if it's ok in their opinion to be killed when "THEY" (key word themselves) were in their Mom's belly. Their answer would effect their reality. Let's see some stats on those responses.

You basically are claiming that men have no right to feel one way or the other on this issue,... I'll use an example - male pedophiles going after boys. Should women not be concerned about the boys because they are female? Of course they should. Your argument on this being strictly gender-related is silly. I understand women have to carry the baby. But, that doesn't make it ok for them to kill it. If that was the point on this issue, then it would be ok for them to kill it all along, say at 9 months too.... wouldn't it?

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

also, obviously, a fetus doesn't have a choice - the woman does, that's the whole point, duh.

Right; the pro-choice camp won't let them have a choice.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

As for child support... yeah, too bad so sad. The woman gets to choose, and then if she chooses to have the baby, the man is stuck with child support. Ain't life hard men? I guess men need to think about where they stick it, since the woman is in charge of whether or not a little him will be running around in 9 months. Complain to mother nature about that one. Sorry.

I agree men need to think about "where they stick it" to quote you. But, woman shouldn't?

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

But anyway, I'm frustrated by what you say and the way you present it, even though I still don't care about what your opinion actually is, and I'm a bit of an idiot I guess, because that makes me get into it. Nasty little habit. I think just that the ideas you have make me uncomfortable, because I know they're out there, and it's like one more drop in the bucket for those pro-life politicians, and that scares me.

lol. Uh huh. Most likely you're frustrated because I'm making some good points and making you really think about the issue.

All I know is, I wouldn't want to be an aborted fetus and I'm glad my Mom and wife didn't abort me or my kids. I'd simply advise women and men to think about what they're doing before they bang. Basically - if the contraception fails, then be prepared to have a kid. It's not rocket science and I don't feel bad about saying there are repercussions for human action, including sex. People hate taking responsibility for their actions these days. If you don't want a kid, and want to be positive you won't have one, don't have sex. If you want to have sex, go ahead, just use protection and know there's risk someone will end up pregnant. If that happens, you knew the consequences. So, you shouldn't just kill it. That could haunt someone for the rest of their life.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Haha. No, you are not making good points or making me think anything I didn't already think, but it's nice that you are a positive thinker.. or maybe just egotistical. You must be... since now you are preaching abstinence.
Whether or not an abortion haunts someone for the rest of their life is none of your business. And you wouldn't know one way or another (it doesn't haunt me, btw).

I don't know why you keep responding if you don't want to hold a discussion.

I'm not preaching abstinence at all. I'm preaching personal responsibility. As I stated, human beings, when they have sex, risk pregnancy (amongst other things, like STDs). That's human nature. Talk to God about that, or whatever supernatural being you believe in... mother nature, if need be. So, if we assume that with sex comes risk of pregnancy (and STDs), humans should be aware of that risk. Contraceptives mitigate a large portion of that risk, but small portions remain. So, as I said, if you want to have sex (and not pro-create), great... use protection and know the risk.

If you roll a bad die with the risks you knew about, one shouldn't go back in time and kill the byproduct of the risk they knew about to make their own life easier. To me, there's nothing more sloth-oriented and vile that that sort of mind-set. But, that's my opinion.

inlet13 wrote:

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Why do you care if I'm responding or not? I feel like it - who cares? I already said, it's a nasty habit. Maybe I thrive on conflict, I dunno.

Because you keep saying you don't want to engage in a dialogue, but then you engage. It's silly.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

I don't believe in God, or any other supernatural being. I'm an Atheist. I believe in Nature or course, but it's not conscious. Plus, who is to say that aborting unwanted fetuses isn't human nature? It's certainly been going on for all of modern human history. Maybe selective abortion is naturally womankind's imperative... like a footnote to miscarriage. You don't know.

If you get off on abortions being a power trip for women, that's your prerogative. Sounds pretty sick though.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Risk schmisk. It's still just up to the woman whose body is involved. Once you have people trying to dictate what you're going to do with your body or something in it, then your opinion can matter. Until then, I think anything you have to say is irrelevant and misinformed.

Risk schmisk. Yeh, let's just never worry about consequences to our actions. If your kid ends up with a STD, be sure to tell them "Risk Schmisk".

Also, it's not just the woman though. Men play a part in making the baby, and probably most importantly, Doctors are paid to kill it. So, it still IS NOT just up to the woman. It's an industry. And our culture gives the moral ok.

I'm not standing in anyone's way. Go get 10 abortions for all I care. What I will say, however, is abortion is wrong. I think our society is wrong for allowing it to be legal. Deep down, although you'll never say it here, I think you think it's wrong too.

But, I digress.

Ha. It's not a power trip or anything close to it (where the fuck did that conclusion come from?? You make so many assumptions). It's about others not having the right to dictate what women do in this regard. Nothing to do with power. Everything to do with human rights. Yeah, I am done now, as you carry on your infuriating method of reinterpreting everything anyone says who doesn't agree with you. Grrrr. You are on you own little power trip - you know perfectly well how your bullshit way of debating gets under people's skin. While I'm to blame for letting you irritate me, I think you enjoy the hell out of it; I can just picture you smirking yourself into self-righteousness, wherever you are. And trust me, deep down I do NOT think abortion is wrong. I really don't. I've been there, and I don't. But of course, that IS NOT THE POINT AT ALL.
I have no idea what your point about doctors performing the abortions is about. That doesn't impact the right of a woman to have full control over her own body at all, including whether or not she's going to give birth. It's actually very simple concept - you sure have managed to make it messy and convoluted, but it still comes down to that one very simple concept, no matter what you or anyone thinks is right and wrong morally. That's all just white noise IMO.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I am pro choice. However, I find it utterly offensive when anyone says it's the woman's choice and the woman's only. we BOTH got pregnant. yes, you carry the fetus, but if I was willing to allow you to sever all parental obligations after the birth, I think that would be something worth discussing. Of course, if it meant the woman going through something that would be ill advised health wise, I think the man has rights too.

not in the judicial system yet, as it's very tricky to "force" a woman to have a baby to term if she doesn't want to, but there's got to be some common ground.

I'd be incredibly upset if I found out someone I got pregnant aborted without even giving me the consideration of consultation first.

Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.

but you were going much further in your stance than just "yeah, it sucks that it's not the man's choice". you were telling him that his opinion on abortion as a whole doesn't matter because he's a man. is that not what you said?

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.

but you were going much further in your stance than just "yeah, it sucks that it's not the man's choice". you were telling him that his opinion on abortion as a whole doesn't matter because he's a man. is that not what you said?

Yes. That's what I said, and that's what I meant (of course, that stands for pro-life women as well, which I never mentioned... it's just more galling when it's a man, because a man isn't capable of understanding the issue the way a woman is). That doesn't mean that I don't personally think it's proper (in some circumstances at least) for a woman to discuss it with the father. That's respectful. The fact is, though, that in the end what he thinks about it is still moot. It still has to be her decision. And plus, since men are incapable of fully understanding the matter because they are incapable of knowing what it's like to be pregnant or even know what it's like to have the capacity to be pregnant, they opinion is doubly moot. Doesn't mean the father of a fetus shouldn't be included in the woman's decision-making process... I don't know about you, but for me, very few things are completely black and white; I consider that a given.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

PJ_Soul3388 wrote:

That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.

Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.

of course it makes sense! that's the basis of a democratic society! all we can hope for is that the "right" opinion is held by the majority!

You're right. That is all we can hope for... or, actually, not really. Even if 90% of the population believed in something that is still clearly against the constitution/Bill of Rights, it doesn't mean the law changes just to placate the 90% (at least, that's how it's supposed to work assuming the Supreme Court Justices are doing their jobs properly). Also, American isn't really a democracy, c'mon, you know that (but that's another thread! ). But I didn't even say that wasn't the case. I'm saying that a horrible opinion that is against basic human rights isn't equal to one that is for basic human rights. What didn't make sense is that you said "I can't have it both ways - if a male pro-lifer's opinion doesn't matter, then a male pro-choicer's opinion can't matter to me either." That doesn't make any sense.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I am pro choice. However, I find it utterly offensive when anyone says it's the woman's choice and the woman's only. we BOTH got pregnant. yes, you carry the fetus, but if I was willing to allow you to sever all parental obligations after the birth, I think that would be something worth discussing. Of course, if it meant the woman going through something that would be ill advised health wise, I think the man has rights too.

not in the judicial system yet, as it's very tricky to "force" a woman to have a baby to term if she doesn't want to, but there's got to be some common ground.

I'd be incredibly upset if I found out someone I got pregnant aborted without even giving me the consideration of consultation first.

very tricky??... try impossible. not to mention a gross abuse of human rights.

im sure you would find it utterly offensive if a woman you got pregnant aborted without your consent let alone discussing the isssue with you, but when it comes down to it, you dont really have a say..sure you can voice your opinion but the ultimate decision lies with the womans. there can be no common ground if the woman decides to abort. be incredibly upset... thats fine but do it without piling guilt on the woman. you find a way to deal with her decision just the same as she finds a way to deal with her decision. hang on... theres some common ground for you right there.