Abortion

[Ben Kenobi]

Even if you accept that abortion is a very bad thing, it seems that the reality must be faced that, should abortions be banned, they will not dissappear - as many pro-choice people argue, they will continue in a 'black market' fashion without the kind of protection they have now by being legal.

You are correct that as with any law, there will be those who choose to disregard and evade the law. This will be no different for a law banning abortion, as it is for any other law.

However, given the fact that the system does not openly report the consequences of abortion, nor do they report patient deaths due to abortion, what structures are in place to make sure legal abortions are as safe as they are claimed to be? Right now, under legal abortion, women are not being adequately protected or informed of the consequences.

Secondly, up here in Canada, there have been bills put forth to ensure that those who are not doctors will be able to perform abortions. If we keep abortion legal to keep women safe, why would anyone want to allow someone who is not a doctor to perform them? The argument the legislators put forth is that the technology surrounding abortion has improved so much that even those who are not doctors ought to be able to perform them safely.

I don't see illegal abortion resulting in the deaths of women, since there will be qualified doctors willing to flout the laws. Even in the 50's the vast majority of illegal abortions were performed by doctors, and I see no reason why that would be any different today.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

dare you compare facial expressions on a child that is born to a ultrasound of a fetus?? that is nothing more but your own personal interpertation of what you want to believe that fetus is doing tsk tsk BK i figured you were a bit smarte then that. For One you may claim all you want, to say look at that ultrasound by the look of that fetus it is crying doesnt make it so nor can it be proven when in fact you are not even sure it isnt merely taking a Piss or jee i dont know opening and closing its mouth just as you cant actually prove the fetus is really suking its thumb.
I am not even understanding you when you say one doesnt have to see the the birth of child to understand an ultrasound. What daresay does that have to do with the price of tea in china? i merely mentioned that i never said late term abortions are illegal and you come back to me with this?? If you were trying to make a point i am afraid i missed it with that statment. I hardly see a woman giving birth and throwing her baby in the trash as an abortion in this case, last time i checked the fetus is now born and if it was to die then that would be murder. I do not and will not argue the fact that the termination of a pregenancy is murder to. In one case you hve a fetus dependant on the mother to survive. in the other the baby can survive with out the mother. I can see now were you say this kid is depedent on the mother that just birthed it to protect and feed it, is the same thing but your wrong after birth this kid can be taken care of by any one doesnt need the mother for support like the unborn one does.
Last but not least you dare lecture me as a father which last time i checked you arent one nor are even close to becoming one, on your choices with a womans body because of child support??? That is by far the largest crap of smack I have ever heard in my life. For one when you as a man can give birth and substain a pregnancy in your body then talk to me. Using financial responsibility to say you have a choice on whether a woman will carry this child for 9 months is insane. Child support is out there for a reason and is not put in place to say you as a father have a choice what i do with my body. You have a choice in how that now born child is raised and that is it. Oh and by the way you dont have to pay child support to have that right, all you have to have in that instance is have that child be a part of your gene pool. I know this for a fact, years ago when i was going through my divorce my husband wasnt paying child support and in this case the law told me he doesnt have to pay child support to see his children and you may not withhold visittion rights due to the fact that he isnt paying, so no your duty to pay for children after they are born is not a right for you to decide what a woman does with her body

[chequita guevara]

I believe in mandatory and retroactive abortion for stupid people, i.e., everybody.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I don't see illegal abortion resulting in the deaths of women, since there will be qualified doctors willing to flout the laws.

I hate to be rude, but you're ****ing stupid. People still die today from botched illegal abortions. It's one of the leading causes of death among young women in Latin America.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
You are correct that as with any law, there will be those who choose to disregard and evade the law. This will be no different for a law banning abortion, as it is for any other law.

However, given the fact that the system does not openly report the consequences of abortion, nor do they report patient deaths due to abortion, what structures are in place to make sure legal abortions are as safe as they are claimed to be? Right now, under legal abortion, women are not being adequately protected or informed of the consequences.

You have a point that, form what I have heard reported, some dangers of abortion may not be discussed fully. However, as long as a doctor is performing it legally, isn't the doctor at risk from malpractice suits, etcetera? I'm not arguing that women now are totally protected; I'm just wondering if they are better protected than they would be if abortion was illegal. Perhaps measures could be taken to make legal abortion more safe, but I think I have a basis to claim that it is still more safe currently than it would be if it was illegal, or was when it was illegal.

Secondly, up here in Canada, there have been bills put forth to ensure that those who are not doctors will be able to perform abortions. If we keep abortion legal to keep women safe, why would anyone want to allow someone who is not a doctor to perform them? The argument the legislators put forth is that the technology surrounding abortion has improved so much that even those who are not doctors ought to be able to perform them safely.

I was not aware of the canadian law on the issue. That, to me, does not seem like a very good law. Let's proceed with the assupmtion that we are working within the US (I don't believe such a provision exists here, at least not in most states).

I don't see illegal abortion resulting in the deaths of women, since there will be qualified doctors willing to flout the laws. Even in the 50's the vast majority of illegal abortions were performed by doctors, and I see no reason why that would be any different today.

I'm a bit baffled by this. There seems to be quite a bit of evidence and discussion floating around in the ether about deaths from illegal or unsafe abortions; it's the bread and butter of many pro-choice groups arguing to keep abortion "safe and legal." Even if many doctors will perform abortions if they become illegal again, it seems inevitable that the safety will decrease as fewer abortions will be handled by doctors, and that even an abortion conducted by a doctor will be more dangerous. The doctor will not be answerable if he screws up.

Additionally, making something illegal tends to lead to its demonization in popular culture, or at least reinforce that demonization; see drugs, for example. You have argued in the past, I believe, that there are serious psychological issues with abortions. Wouldn't a woman be even harder pressed to deal with these issues in a society that saw abortion on the same level with, say, drug use? Counseling surely wouldn't be as available to women, and certainly not any counseling provided by the government or health organizations.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


It is enough to be a living human being to be considered a person.

Great news for the anencephalic. They've clearly been making great progress, despite not having a brain.

"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history."

Pat Robertson, 1993 interview with Molly Ivins

Pat of course is a well-known charismatic (ahem) Christian who is anti-abortion.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


No, but if you believe that mothers and fathers are different and have different roles with respect to their children,

Fathers and mothers are different ?

How on earth did you find that out ?

You should share this startling information with the world- there may still be deluded men out there attempting to get pregnant.

You're simply extrapolating from gender to societally determined roles- not every culture (thankfully) adopts the same rigid sex division of parental care as some sects of Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

So again, you're moving from a biological fact- there are two main human sexes- to biological determinism for human societies.

Who'd have guessed that you view humans in the same way as livestock.

However, would you find that a single parent, in general, would be preferred to a mother and a father?

You seem to naively assume that mother/father = good parent.

As children's homes, the N.S.P.C.C., police forces, social services and hospital staff could reassure you, being fertile and able to conceive doesn't make you a good parent.

An abusive father or mother or abusive parents is hardly ideal is it ?

I'd think that a loving caring single parent would be infinitely preferable.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

You can usually tell from someone's facial expression if they are crying without necessarily seeing tears. You've had kids, and I bet if you plugged your ears, you would have no difficulty understanding their faces when they cry.

So in other words, you've no proof that a foetus can or needs to cry....

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by molly bloom
You seem to naively assume that mother/father = good parent.

As children's homes, the N.S.P.C.C., police forces, social services and hospital staff could reassure you, being fertile and able to conceive doesn't make you a good parent.

An abusive father or mother or abusive parents is hardly ideal is it ?

I'd think that a loving caring single parent would be infinitely preferable.

I think it's pretty clear here that he's arguing that, assuming all parents are equally loving, it is preferable to have a mother and a father, because they each have different and important roles in parenting. It should be obvious that he is not arguing that it's better to have two abusive parents than one loving one.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
However, given the fact that the system does not openly report the consequences of abortion, nor do they report patient deaths due to abortion, what structures are in place to make sure legal abortions are as safe as they are claimed to be?

This is a lie.