10-year-old rape victim denied abortion in OH

[Lucidus]

(07-04-2022, 10:13 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Just so we are sure we are talking about the same statements. Are you saying this statement, “ I don't want the state to have unfettered control over a uterus; in any scenario at all.” is consistent with what you are now saying about viability? “any scenario at all” would seem to exclude viability.

Of course the autonomy is violated after viability. Saying it isn’t because, well, you don’t think it is isn’t really a reason. You could say the state’s interest in protecting the now viable fetus supersedes autonomy

Yes, I'm opposed to any scenario where the pregnant individual's autonomy is violated. I'll post my previous response again:

To understand autonomy, is to understand the limitations of autonomy. I'm sure you've heard the expression "your personal liberty to swing your arm ends where my nose begins". Once a fetus attains the status of being highly viable outside the womb, it should be afforded that same consideration. That consideration, at that point, is in no way in opposition the autonomy of the pregnant individual."

Quote:Of course the autonomy is violated after viability. Saying it isn’t because, well, you don’t think it is isn’t really a reason. You could say the state’s interest in protecting the now viable fetus supersedes autonomy.

How is the pregnant person's autonomy violated post-viability? Once a fetus reaches viability, it should be granted the same protections it would be afforded sans womb. Personal / bodily autonomy doesn't give a parent the right to end a life post birth, expect in extreme circumstances, because it would be causing harm external to themselves. Therefore, said autonomy isn't being violated.

In addition, you seem to be leaving certain parts of my replies out when responding, which seems to be causing some confusion.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-04-2022, 11:36 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Yes, I'm opposed to any scenario where the pregnant individual's autonomy is violated. I'll post my previous response again:

To understand autonomy, is to understand the limitations of autonomy. I'm sure you've heard the expression "your personal liberty to swing your arm ends where my nose begins". Once a fetus attains the status of being highly viable outside the womb, it should be afforded that same consideration. That consideration, at that point, is in no way in opposition the autonomy of the pregnant individual."


How is the pregnant person's autonomy violated post-viability? Once a fetus reaches viability, it should be granted the same protections it would be afforded sans womb. Personal / bodily autonomy doesn't give a parent the right to end a life post birth, expect in extreme circumstances, because it would be causing harm external to themselves. Therefore, said autonomy isn't being violated.

In addition, you seem to be leaving certain parts of my replies out when responding, which seems to be causing some confusion.

Yes I read your response. You want to redefine autonomy to fit your comfort level. The harm is not external to themselves. Still inside and You said uterus and no scenario at all.
Personally if you have the ability to change definitions I’d ask you to eliminate the word. I’ve never heard so many people use a word that they probably hadn’t used twice in their life a month ago.

[treee]

Using fetal heartbeat as a marker of being alive does not make sense. The heart isn't what gives humans sentience, it is the brain. Abortion bills restricting based on heartbeat are not based on logic or science. It's a thin veneer for the ideological extremists to push their agenda.

[basballguy]

(07-05-2022, 03:19 AM)treee Wrote: Using fetal heartbeat as a marker of being alive does not make sense. The heart isn't what gives humans sentience, it is the brain. Abortion bills restricting based on heartbeat are not based on logic or science. It's a thin veneer for the ideological extremists to push their agenda.

“I don’t like it so it’s not based on science”

[Lucidus]

(07-05-2022, 01:26 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Yes I read your response. You want to redefine autonomy to fit your comfort level.  The harm is not external to themselves. Still inside and  You said  uterus and no scenario at all.
Personally if you have the  ability to change definitions  I’d ask you to eliminate the word. I’ve never heard so many people use a word that they probably hadn’t used twice in their life a month ago.

Is it your position that autonomy is unlimited; without restriction? If not, then I'm not sure I understand your objection. Stating the reality of where autonomy must necessarily give way to a fetus' scientifically determined right to life is not redefining, but rather coming to a logical conclusion.

You seem to be focusing on certain aspects of my posts, like no scenario at all, without including the prior sentences that give full context. Respectfully, that makes it very difficult to have an honest discussion of a very nuanced topic.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-05-2022, 03:53 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Is it your position that autonomy is unlimited; without restriction? If not, then I'm not sure I understand your objection. Stating the reality of where autonomy must necessarily give way to a fetus' scientifically determined right to life is not redefining, but rather coming to a logical conclusion.

You seem to be focusing on certain aspects of my posts, like no scenario at all, without including the prior sentences that give full context. Respectfully, that makes it very difficult to have an honest discussion of a very nuanced topic.

You edited that sentence in post 2. I copied it without realizing you edited it. When did it stop showing if people edited their posts? Why did you edit your post?

No I don’t believe in unlimited autonomy. But I’m not the one who made absolute statements. There were other statements on this board about how the unborn baby isn’t given a SS number and you can’t declare them on your tax returns etc.That’s still true in the third trimester. Do you object to that line of reasoning?

[Lucidus]

(07-05-2022, 07:55 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You edited that sentence in post 2. I copied it without realizing you edited it. When did it stop showing if people edited their posts?  Why did you edit your post?

No I don’t believe in unlimited autonomy. But I’m not the one who made absolute statements. There were other statements on this board about how the unborn baby isn’t given a SS number and you can’t declare them on your tax returns etc.That’s still true in the third trimester. Do you object to that line of reasoning?

Sir, you quoted me directly, as did another person in this thread. Yet, every time you referenced the post, for some reason, you only offered snippets of what I said. 

As to the second part; those things aren't applicable to the fetus an hour before birth either, but it still had the right to life under Roe -- and what I consider reasonable -- because it's been determined viable. The same would be true at any point in the third trimester.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-05-2022, 09:04 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Sir, you quoted me directly, as did another person in this thread. Yet, every time you referenced the post, for some reason, you only offered snippets of what I said. 

As to the second part; those things aren't applicable to the fetus an hour before birth either, but it still had the right to life under Roe -- and what I consider reasonable -- because it's been determined viable. The same would be true at any point in the third trimester.

No it said something about the owner of the womb and nobody else. I’ll put that on hold for now. Something doesn’t make sense but I’ll say it’s on me. I’ll figure it out.

Snippets? It’s separated out into its own paragraph.

So what I’m saying is those arguments are not valid as they don’t apply during the whole pregnancy. If it’s not valid month eight then it’s not valid month four.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(07-05-2022, 09:04 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Sir, you quoted me directly, as did another person in this thread. Yet, every time you referenced the post, for some reason, you only offered snippets of what I said. 

As to the second part; those things aren't applicable to the fetus an hour before birth either, but it still had the right to life under Roe -- and what I consider reasonable -- because it's been determined viable. The same would be true at any point in the third trimester.

(07-05-2022, 09:13 PM)michaelsean Wrote: No it said something about the owner of the womb and nobody else. I’ll put that on hold for now. Something doesn’t make sense but I’ll say it’s on me. I’ll figure it out.

Snippets? It’s separated out into its own paragraph.

So what I’m saying is those arguments are not valid as they don’t apply during the whole pregnancy. If it’s not valid month eight then it’s not valid month four.

You both seem to favor opposite sides, are either of you willing to compromise on your stances?

[*michaelsean*]

(07-06-2022, 12:53 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: You both seem to favor opposite sides, are either of you willing to compromise on your stances?

Oh I think abortion should be legal. I just get a kick out of all the statements I’ve been reading around the internet about autonomy.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-04-2022, 09:13 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Yeah that's around the age when they stop asking if I recall correctly - menopause is right around the corner.

I believe my sister 27 or 28 and my daughter was around the same age.

Jesus. Don't say that to a 35 year old woman. 

[GMDino]

(07-03-2022, 08:54 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Unless it's a one night stand, I imagine most couples would have that discussion.

For arguments sake, I'd like to point out that a wife does not have to sign off on a vasectomy, but most nearly all doctors require spousal consent for a woman to get her tubes tied. Now why do you suppose that is?

I think that is for hysterectomies, not tying tubes.

My wife was able to sign off on tying her tubes when our son was born because pregnancy was killing her.  They wouldn't even take my signature at all.

But our daughter is 24 and has many "woman's problems" and doesn't want kids for a multitude of reasons I will not go in to but she cannot get a hysterectomy because she is "too young and might change her mind". 

Now, I have recently seen some posts around the web of doctors and clinics that will do it .

[GMDino]

(07-05-2022, 08:49 AM)basballguy Wrote: “I don’t like it so it’s not based on science”

Saying it is a "heartbeat" is not based on science.

https://www.livescience.com/65501-fetal-heartbeat-at-6-weeks-explained.html

Quote:But what exactly do we mean when we talk about a "fetal heartbeat" at six weeks of pregnancy? Although some people might picture a heart-shaped organ beating inside a fetus, this is not the case.

Rather, at six weeks of pregnancy, an ultrasound can detect "a little flutter in the area that will become the future heart of the baby," said Dr. Saima Aftab, medical director of the Fetal Care Center at Nicklaus Children's Hospital in Miami. This flutter happens because the group of cells that will become the future "pacemaker" of the heart gain the capacity to fire electrical signals, she said.


But the heart is far from fully formed at this stage, and the "beat" isn't audible; if doctors put a stethoscope up to a woman's belly this early on in her pregnancy, they would not hear a heartbeat, Aftab told Live Science. (What's more, it isn't until the eighth week of pregnancy that the baby is called a fetus; prior to that, it's still considered an embryo, according to the Cleveland Clinic.)

It's been only in the last few decades that doctors have even been able to detect this flutter at six weeks, thanks to the use of more-sophisticated ultrasound technologies, Aftab said. Previously, the technology wasn't advanced enough to detect the flutter that early on in pregnancy.

Although a lot of weight seems to be put on the detection of this flutter, "by no means does it translate to viability of the heart" or viability of the pregnancy, Aftab said.

Related: Having a baby: Stages of pregnancy by trimester

The heart still has a lot of development to undergo before it is fully formed. Indeed, the entire first trimester of pregnancy is a time of "organogenesis," or the formation of organs, Aftab said.

After the detection of the flutter at six weeks, the heart muscle continues to develop over the next four to six weeks, undergoing the folding and bending that needs to happen for the heart to take its final shape, Aftab said.

"A lot of the heart development is still ongoing" during the first trimester, she said.

[basballguy]

(07-06-2022, 11:06 AM)GMDino Wrote: Saying it is a "heartbeat" is not based on science.

https://www.livescience.com/65501-fetal-heartbeat-at-6-weeks-explained.html

When do doctors declare time of death? Not when the brain stops working. You can find random “science” articles with an agenda but I can find a billion that say the heart determines life and death

[*Nately120*]

(07-06-2022, 01:56 PM)basballguy Wrote: When do doctors declare time of death?  Not when the brain stops working.  You can find random “science” articles with an agenda but I can find a billion that say the heart determines life and death

Yea but why do conservatives complain about Biden?  It ain't cause he has a bad ticker. 

[basballguy]

(07-06-2022, 02:08 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Yea but why do conservatives complain about Biden?  It ain't cause he has a bad ticker. 

"Because he's a brain dead idi........oh"

Excellent wit.

[*Nately120*]

(07-06-2022, 02:11 PM)basballguy Wrote: "Because he's a brain dead idi........oh"

Excellent wit.

That was my witty take.  Now for my cynical take...

This wouldn't have happened if this country didn't disarm 10 year old girls who need open carry to dissuade or even kill rapist family members.  

[basballguy]

(07-06-2022, 02:16 PM)Nately120 Wrote: That was my witty take.  Now for my cynical take...

This wouldn't have happened if this country didn't disarm 10 year old girls who need open carry to dissuade or even kill rapist family members.  

Personally, I'd support abortion in that case.  However, the morality of it is still difficult.  

I haven't really read much of the story....so I'm guessing there's limited health risks?  I just can't wrap my head around finding someone who was child of rape and saying "hey bro, it's not your fault you exist, your mom wanted to abort you but couldn't.  You shouldn't have even deserved a chance at life"

[GMDino]

(07-06-2022, 01:56 PM)basballguy Wrote: When do doctors declare time of death?  Not when the brain stops working.  You can find random “science” articles with an agenda but I can find a billion that say the heart determines life and death

Is there where I quote you: 

Quote: “I don’t like it so it’s not based on science”

Even if you were right...at six weeks that is not a heart or a heartbeat.

"science"

[BigPapaKain]

(07-06-2022, 11:02 AM)GMDino Wrote: I think that is for hysterectomies, not tying tubes.

My wife was able to sign off on tying her tubes when our son was born because pregnancy was killing her.  They wouldn't even take my signature at all.

But our daughter is 24 and has many "woman's problems" and doesn't want kids for a multitude of reasons I will not go in to but she cannot get a hysterectomy because she is "too young and might change her mind". 

Now, I have recently seen some posts around the web of doctors and clinics that will do it .

You may be right, but the point remains - no woman should need spousal consent to do with their organs what they will.

We give more autonomy to corpses than women.