Pro-Choice People: Babies Feel Excruciating Pain During Abortions

[Beaker]

We euthanize pets/strays all the time. When its an old pet, we do it out of compassion. When its a young stray and unwanted we call it a necessary decision. Same parameters seem to apply to human lives.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-19-2018, 06:44 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Yes you are. Find a way to get it out and grow it yourself. Or else you are telling someone else what they can do with their body. Take out that fact it is growing inside someones body and I would reconsider my position.

We are talking about the reason people oppose it. They do not oppose it because they want to tell women what to do; because they want to control women.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-19-2018, 06:49 PM)jj22 Wrote: I'd support Republicans pro life argument if they didn't turn around and abandon the baby once it's born by calling their mom Welfare Queens and trying to cut programs like CHIP and WIC.

If we as a nation can't afford to help the mother/baby then we should stay of of the decision to have the baby.

If life begins at conception, it surely doesn't end at birth.

But it's not about the baby, that's why they are against the morning after pill and even birth control in many cases.

First of all they aren’t abandoned. Please check out the amount of miney spent on all the different entitlements for women and children.

Secondly, I don’t know who they are as if there are a large or even statistically significant contingent of Republicans against birth control. The Catholic Church is, but those are different reasons entirely.

[*bfine32*]

My contention whenever abortion threads are brought up is unchanging. IF someone germane to the situation wants the child then the child should be given a chance to live. A mother's choice of convenience should not trump another parent's choice to raise a child.

If the father didn't want the child why must he pay child support? Is it because he must take responsibility for his actions?

If the father doesn't want the child, the parents get into a physical altercation, and the baby is aborted can the father be charged in the death of the child?

I get we all come up with reasons to sooth our cognitive dissonance; hell, even I accept the reality of abortion if no one involved wants the child, as much as it sickens me. But if one of the parents/grandparents wants the child why not give him/her a chance? IMO we have to come up with something better than her body her choice. She chose to participate in an activity and only she doesn't have to be held responsible if she chooses not.

[fredtoast]

(12-19-2018, 10:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  IMO we have to come up with something better than her body her choice.

Until we can raise a fetus outside of a womans body we have no other choice.

The day will come when that is possible, then we can revisit the law, but until then there is no other way.  You can't give a man control over a woman's body.

[Benton]

(12-19-2018, 10:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: My contention whenever abortion threads are brought up is unchanging. IF someone germane to the situation wants the child then the child should be given a chance to live. A mother's choice of convenience should not trump another parent's choice to raise a child.

If the father didn't want the child why must he pay child support? Is it because he must take responsibility for his actions?

If the father doesn't want the child, the parents get into a physical altercation, and the baby is aborted can the father be charged in the death of the child?

I get we all come up with reasons to sooth our cognitive dissonance; hell, even I accept the reality of abortion if no one involved wants the child, as much as it sickens me. But if one of the parents/grandparents wants the child why not give him/her a chance? IMO we have to come up with something better than her body her choice. She chose to participate in an activity and only she doesn't have to be held responsible if she chooses not.

That pretty well sums up my opinion. My only asterisk there would be if it was consensual. If not, there isn't a lot of good choices for the victim. But they should have a chance to have some say after that choice was taken from them.

[*bfine32*]

(12-20-2018, 12:44 AM)Benton Wrote: That pretty well sums up my opinion. My only asterisk there would be if it was consensual. If not, there isn't a lot of good choices for the victim. But they should have a chance to have some say after that choice was taken from them.

Of course in cases of assault or danger to the mother there should be exceptions. 

[*bfine32*]

(12-19-2018, 10:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Until we can raise a fetus outside of a womans body we have no other choice.

The day will come when that is possible, then we can revisit the law, but until then there is no other way.  You can't give a man control over a woman's body.

Or unless a woman can get pregnant on her own. 

[BrownAssClown]

Well I think Hank Williams Sr. said it best, "Mind your own business and you won't be minding mine." I also like the bumper sticker that reads, "Don't like abortions? Don't have one." Now, do I like the idea of women getting abortions?, as a matter of fact, I think it's a disgusting practice,(and only should be used in cases of rape, incest,or if the mothers life is in danger)not as a birth control method. I consider myself a good christian, or at least a decent one, going to services weekly, yet I respect the right of people to make their own decisions when it comes to abortion. Now you might say, "What about the rights of the unborn?" Well, I have struggled with this, but ultimately decided that the fetus/ baby is attached to the woman and the woman has the ultimate say in the matter. With the advent of "the morning after pill" I would hope women would only choose an abortion as a last resort, I would prefer they not choose it at all. I think my beliefs are rare in the fact that I'm "pro life" and "pro choice", yes, I believe an individual can be both. Just my 2 cents.

[jmccracky]

(12-20-2018, 02:48 AM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Well I think Hank Williams Sr. said it best, "Mind your own business and you won't be minding mine." I also like the bumper sticker that reads, "Don't like abortions? Don't have one." Now, do I like the idea of women getting abortions?, as a matter of fact, I think it's a disgusting practice,(and only should be used in cases of rape, incest,or if the mothers life is in danger)not as a birth control method. I consider myself a good christian, or at least a decent one, going to services weekly, yet I respect the right of people to make their own decisions when it comes to abortion. Now you might say, "What about the rights of the unborn?" Well, I have struggled with this, but ultimately decided that the fetus/ baby is attached to the woman and the woman has the ultimate say in the matter. With the advent of "the morning after pill" I would hope women would only choose an abortion as a last resort, I would prefer they not choose it at all. I think my beliefs are rare in the fact that I'm "pro life" and "pro choice", yes, I believe an individual can be both. Just my 2 cents.

I'm really socially liberal.....but I agree with you. 

[ballsofsteel]

(12-20-2018, 02:48 AM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Well I think Hank Williams Sr. said it best, "Mind your own business and you won't be minding mine." I also like the bumper sticker that reads, "Don't like abortions? Don't have one." Now, do I like the idea of women getting abortions?, as a matter of fact, I think it's a disgusting practice,(and only should be used in cases of rape, incest,or if the mothers life is in danger)not as a birth control method. I consider myself a good christian, or at least a decent one, going to services weekly, yet I respect the right of people to make their own decisions when it comes to abortion. Now you might say, "What about the rights of the unborn?" Well, I have struggled with this, but ultimately decided that the fetus/ baby is attached to the woman and the woman has the ultimate say in the matter. With the advent of "the morning after pill" I would hope women would only choose an abortion as a last resort, I would prefer they not choose it at all. I think my beliefs are rare in the fact that I'm "pro life" and "pro choice", yes, I believe an individual can be both. Just my 2 cents.

Well said.

[GMDino]

(12-20-2018, 01:54 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course in cases of assault or danger to the mother there should be exceptions. 

Why?  You are then saying it is okay to kill a living being because of the woman.  What if the father agrees to raise the child by himself? 

When you (universal you) leave the door open for exceptions you (universal you) are no longer standing on the high moral ground of all life is sacred. 

Same as if you support the death penalty.

All life is sacred or it isn't.  

That's not a shot at you per se (because I agree there must be exceptions if it is made illegal again...I just don't think it should be illegal)...it's the fact that a lot of people wanted to deny the choice from women but "allow" them to have the procedure if it meets other people's parameters.  (Which ignores that there are already parameters set up for suck things.)  And then in the next breath say it's "not about controlling a woman's body".

Any time the state tells you what you can and cannot do with your own body it is controlling your body.  From abortion to euthanasia to prostitution.  

[*michaelsean*]

(12-20-2018, 08:29 AM)GMDino Wrote: Why?  You are then saying it is okay to kill a living being because of the woman.  What if the father agrees to raise the child by himself? 

When you (universal you) leave the door open for exceptions you (universal you) are no longer standing on the high moral ground of all life is sacred. 

Same as if you support the death penalty.

All life is sacred or it isn't.  

That's not a shot at you per se (because I agree there must be exceptions if it is made illegal again...I just don't think it should be illegal)...it's the fact that a lot of people wanted to deny the choice from women but "allow" them to have the procedure if it meets other people's parameters.  (Which ignores that there are already parameters set up for suck things.)  And then in the next breath say it's "not about controlling a woman's body".

Any time the state tells you what you can and cannot do with your own body it is controlling your body.  From abortion to euthanasia to prostitution.  

I can give you the opposite why.  Why isn't their abortion on demand in week 39?  Her body her choice.  I'm not going to accuse you of wanting to control a woman's body if you agree with restrictions on late term abortions.

[Au165]

(12-20-2018, 09:45 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I can give you the opposite why.  Why isn't their abortion on demand in week 39?  Her body her choice.  I'm not going to accuse you of wanting to control a woman's body if you agree with restrictions on late term abortions.

A baby can realistically survive outside the womb at 23 weeks (roughly 50% chance). One could argue when you start getting past the 20th week you could technically attempt to deliver the baby premature and it would have a chance to survive, versus before 20 weeks it really has very little chance without the mother.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-20-2018, 09:47 AM)Au165 Wrote: A baby can realistically survive outside the womb at 23 weeks (roughly 50% chance). One could argue when you start getting past the 20th week you could technically attempt to deliver the baby premature and it would have a chance to survive, versus before 20 weeks it really has very little chance without the mother.

I understand the reasoning, but that doesn't answer "my body my choice."  Is it or isn't it? There are dichotomies (if that's the right word) on both sides.

[GMDino]

(12-20-2018, 09:45 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I can give you the opposite why.  Why isn't their abortion on demand in week 39?  Her body her choice.  I'm not going to accuse you of wanting to control a woman's body if you agree with restrictions on late term abortions.

Because at that point the fetus can survive without the mother's body.

At that point the "choice" of abortion is simply to have the fetus removed.  All abortions removing the fetus in one way or another.

Again, I am against abortions...I just want to end them through education about sex and preventive methods and other choices.  I don't want them sent back to alleys.

[Au165]

(12-20-2018, 09:51 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I understand the reasoning, but that doesn't answer "my body my choice."  Is it or isn't it?

It does actually because at one point the baby can't live without your body i.e. it's your choice because the mother and baby are stuck in a symbiotic relationship. At 39 weeks, per your example, if you didn't want it to live inside your body anymore it could very well survive outside of it so there is now an alternative to it being in your body. Now this is all hypothetical because I doubt many doctors or insurance companies would go for it, but that is really why the "choice" changes.

At 39 weeks if we had premature delivers instead of calling them abortions would people still throw a fit?

[*michaelsean*]

I think you guys are skirting the issue. My body my choice is stated as an absolute. It's OK. There are inconsistencies on both sides, and I think acknowledging them, and trying to figure out why could help a lot.

I'll go first. Here's a tough one that I've never been able to answer. Why am i not a fan of Eric Rudolph? Logically I'd have to say that I don't actually believe that an unborn child is equal to a born one. Who would object to someone blowing up a place that murders children? And who would care if someone involved in that process were killed along the way?

[jj22]

(12-19-2018, 10:05 PM)michaelsean Wrote: First of all they aren’t abandoned. Please check out the amount of miney spent on all the different entitlements for women and children.

Thanks to Democrats.

Unless you are trying to sell board members that Republicans are the ones behind "entitlement" programs? Tough sell given the facts out there and available.

[jj22]

(12-20-2018, 01:54 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course in cases of assault or danger to the mother there should be exceptions. 

Then you're pro choice.