Time Limits on Abortion?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Time Limits on Abortion?
40
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 2:45am

Hello to all,


I have been a lurker on this board for quite sometime. I have read thousands of messages that attempt to debate the topic of abortion. I have seen people that claim to be PC who are clearly pro-abortion, and I have seen people who claim to be PL who make far to many "exceptions".


I, myself have read much information relating to both sides of the abortion debate and find definite holes in both arguements.


There is absolutely no way to civily and effectively debate this topic because it doesn't rely solely on scientific facts ,morality and religion is also involved. I have seen PLers present accurate and true arguements that are cited from valuble sources only to have a PCer diregard it as "bias, fake, censored, etc." I have also seen PLers desperately resort to religion as a fail safe, when truly

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 12:12pm

<>

I can say from my POV, that I object purely on the grounds that is not the government's right to intervene in the health care choices of a woman, and that in doing so, it has set a dangerous precedent for her full civil rights.

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 12:22pm

Ladies I have definitely enjoyed chatting with you. I absolutely love the fact that people can discuss different issues in such a mature fashion.


As I sit on the fence I respect the people that stand true in their beliefs whether other people like their views or not, and for that matter whether or not they can be factually proven. It is undeniable to say that their is no place for feelings and emotions in the abortion debate. Yes, we are biologically animals just like a worm, the difference is that we mourn the loss of an abortion whether it be elective, or spontaneous. That point alone

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-07-2007
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 12:42pm

I've lurked on the abortion support board and have read a lot of interesting situations, some I had never even considered, about why women choose abortion or end up having them later.


The part about me reading about some I had never even considered is why I don't want restrictions put on abortion.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 1:04pm

>> If you can get an abortion after 24 weeks in the UK if something is wrong with you or the fetus (this apparently, according to some, is the likely reason for late abortions) why is there such a resistance to making it a law?<<

wrong by who's standards? I would not want to make my child live with certain conditions but my doctor (or politician) may not consider them serious enough to warrant an abortion. So simply saying "something is wrong with the fetus" is a lot of gray area





&_c02_owner=1&_c=blogpart" />



Photobucket
Photobucket
*
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 1:29pm

Here is why we shouldn't place such legal strictures: because once we make a procedure difficult to obtain legally and put doctors in a difficult legal position to do it, medical students will not bother to study and perfect the procedure for fear of being put into a difficult legal position. We have seen it happen with women who seek intact D&X procedures for dead fetuses. We've also seen some of this in other countries, like the case in Poland where a woman sought an abortion after her doctor informed her that continuing her pregnancy to childbirth would result in blindness (she had a rare condition.) She could not receive the requisite approvals for an abortion and so had to continue the pregnancy. She is now blind.


A woman who has had to make the very difficult decision to terminate a pregnancy late term for medical reasons should not be forced to jump through legal hoops to get one. Yes, there are a very small percentage of individuals who obtain very late term abortions for non-medical reasons, but those are even rarer than the individuals needing an abortion for medical reasons.

Sandy
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 1:58pm

"Why are you assuming that they are lies? How do YOU know?"

I have personally seen an abortion protest (a couple of years ago, on a college campus) where the protesters were presenting a full-term stillborn baby as the average first trimester aborted embryo/fetus. I'm sorry, but an 8-week fetus does not have a crown-rump length of 11 inches.

"When someone starts "debating" about whether they are PL or PC, they should be either one or the other, not both. One exception is to many, it shows your views as hypocritical, and it makes the people who you are trying to defend (PC/PL) look bad."

On this, we are in complete agreement. I do not believe that abortion is a good thing (only that sometimes it may be the right thing), but I do not believe it should be limited in any way. Anyone who wants to put limitations on it is not pro-*choice* in my opinion. I also don't believe that anyone who claims to be "pro-life" should be able to say that abortion in any instance- including saving the mother's life- is acceptable.

"Then there are people who blatantly have no disregard for life of the child growing within them. They poke at, make fun of and joke about abortion."

Is this really a common occurrence? I don't think I've seen anyone on this board (except the occasional troll, who doesn't count) espousing these beliefs.

"They have no moral dilemma, and no feelings what so ever about taking a life."

This does not mean that they love abortion and think everyone (men included) should have one. Morals by definition are subjective, so you can't expect everyone to have the same moral dilemmas that you do.

"I agree with you 100% but do you honestly believe that all the information that PLers are presenting is from PL websites. I hardly doubt that."

I think you mean that you hardly believe that. Hardly doubting something means you believe it is probably true. That said, we've gone around and around this particular debate. Someone posted up a myth and fact about abortion here a week or two ago, and I went through and debunked all but one (because I didn't have access to the actual court cases to dispute it).

"The people they are trying to convince are the PCs themselves."

I don't doubt that there are at least a few PL people/organizations who take a serious scientific approach to proving their points. It's just that they don't tend to come up here. Care to post up a few for analysis? Most of the PL organization websites I've been to (and I've been to more than I care to say) rely on personal opinion, polls, and religious beliefs to "prove" their points.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 2:03pm

>>I also don't believe that anyone who claims to be "pro-life" should be able to say that abortion in any instance- including saving the mother's life- is acceptable.<<

I think a lot of the problem here is semantics. There are only 2 groups in which to classify ourselves and it leaves people like myself trying to figure out what group we have the MOST in common with.

I don't really fit in PL because I am not all about making it illegal (as I feel there are better ways to stop elective abortion)

But I don't fit PC because I am I am all about making sure elective abortion stays legal

So I had to pick up a PL tag because it is the closest to encompassing my beliefs as either side is gonna get.

What I don't get is how someone could be pro LIFE and demand the mother die. Sounds like a bit of an oxymoron to me





&_c02_owner=1&_c=blogpart" />



Photobucket
Photobucket
*
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 2:09pm

"I am very against second and third trimester abortions. If there are so few women getting them why should there not be a law to restrict them?"

If there are so few women having them, then why is a law needed to restrict them? Do you have data (besides personal anecdotes, of course) to support that a majority of 2T and 3T abortions are done for convenience- i.e. in need of restriction, in your opinion?

Remember here that the term "elective" does not mean "for convenience." Elective means anything but saving the mother's life, including terminations for catastrophic fetal abnormality. In other words, the woman on my EC who induced at 24 weeks because her very-much-wanted fetus had Trisomy 13 (an extremely serious genetic anomaly) and had less than a 5% chance of survival had what would be considered an elective termination.

"My objection to the PC stance is that there must be some way the two sides can meet."

I don't see how that can happen, especially since you believe that PC people should not be able to argue restrictions. How can I be truly pro-choice if I keep saying, "but only if you do this, and haven't done this"?




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 2:14pm

"why is there such a resistance to making it a law?"

Because there is a difference between a decision made by a doctor who has made it through years of medical school and residency, and a decision made by a politician who made it through years of political science and Congress. I don't trust Congress to make decisions about what I can do with my gallbladder (I bid it a fond farewell ten years ago), so why would I trust it to make decisions about what I can do with my uterus? What are its qualifications to do so?

My OB appts are awkward enough without inviting the 535 members of Congress to join in. And there is absolutely no way I'm allowing Larry Craig to give me a pelvic exam.




Edited 3/13/2008 2:20 pm ET by hollyelizabeth2007




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Thu, 03-13-2008 - 2:37pm

"What I don't get is how someone could be pro LIFE and demand the mother die. Sounds like a bit of an oxymoron to me"

I find the name "Pro-Life" to be fundamentally paradoxical in terms of the commonly-accepted belief structure there, and that is why I argue what I said. If one truly is pro-life, and believes that all life is equally important, then how can one justify terminating a life for one reason but not others? I also believe that people who call themselves PL should not be able to say that they are in favor of euthanasia, the death penalty, or any war that leads to the loss of human life. If "life" really is the most important part- superseding all other concerns- then why would they vote to end it for any reason?

I understand that you identify as PL, and you do not feel this way. I think that it is my way of reacting to the fact that "pro-life" does not really mean what it should logically mean. It is inherently infinitely regressive, and limits one to preferring life in all circumstances, in my opinion. That's why I think it's an incorrect term.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks