Late term abortion is an issue?

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
There is a difference between being "pro-life" and being "anti-choice". While the latter movement has succeeded in stealing the term that best describes the former, that doesn't mean they are the same thing. Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and many other Democrats are in fact ACTUALLY pro-life...in other words, they personally oppose abortion and would like to reduce the number of abortions through any method short of making abortion illegal. That's the distinction that's lost in this debate, opposition to anti-abortion laws doesn't mean you can't also be "pro-life", it just means you don't think it's a problem that can be solved by legislation.

That's a good point. :thumbsup:

I'd disagree. The point of the criminal code isn't so much to stop crime (although that's part of it, obviously), but also for society to set a consensus standard on the morality of an action. Legislation hasn't stopped murders, rapes, or robberies either, but no one is suggesting those laws be repealed simply because they haven't worked.

I don't understand how someone can be personally pro-life but publically pro-choice. Aren't all pro-lifers pro-life because they believe the fetus is human, and has rights (unlike say, 5 pounds of fat removed from a body during liposuction, a similar procedure no one is protesting)? Thus, if the fetus has rights, doesn't the state have the right to protect that life? It's no different than the state exercising the same rights in taking minor children from unfit/abusive parents. I can understand, for example, an Orthodox Jew saying he considers eating pork immoral, but wouldn't want it to be illegal, since the 'sin' only affects one person - the person who eats pork - but if there's anything immoral about abortion, it has to involve taking the life of another, and who opposes the state's right to protect those who cannot protect themselves?

There's the mistake you're making. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm against the basic idea of abortion because I think the fetus has the POTENTIAL to become a human, and I personally not too comfortable (in most situations) with ending that potential. In other words, I'm personally against abortion because of how *I* feel about aborting something that could have become my son or daughter, it has nothing to do with the "rights" of a fetus.

 

[BeauJangles]

My mom said it best: "Before you, I was adamantly pro-choice. After I had you, I still adamantly pro-choice, I would just never make that choice for myself, but who am I to force my opinion on other women?"

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: spittledip
Just b/c a child does not get adopted does not mean it should be killed.. That is kinda sick logic you are using

1. The vast vast majority of abortions are done in the first trimester and it's the evacuation of a few cells, which even if you refer to as life, is not a thinking, feeling, conscious person.

2. Of that vast majority of women, they make the choice between going through 9 months of general discomfort, social stigma, time consumed, personal behavior modification, health risk, topped off with the most excruciating natural process man can experience, only to give the baby away versus having the pack of fetal cells vacuumed out. It's not between adoption and killing a baby.

3. Funny though how so many of the people who are anti-abortion are also small government anti-welfare conservatives that would want their elected leaders to vote down measures that allocate public money to care for other people's children. So they shouldn't be killed, but they shouldn't be on the dole either. Some on this board equate taking their hard earned tax dollars and using it to care for other people's mistakes with slavery. I completely disagree, but at least that's consistent.

Hey Genius, the topic is late term abortions

Also, you can stop your generalizations and abstain from the self rightteous attitude. I have no problem with govt money being spent on worthy causes like healthcare and the welfare of children.

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: whylaff

Originally posted by: spittledip

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: DerekWilson
I was just looking around at candidate's positions on stuff when I realized that every single democrat running in the primaries is in favor of allowing late term abortion.

What the fuck is up with that. Seriously.

If a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy and the baby is potentially viable, why not just terminate the *pregnancy* early and see if the baby can survive in the NICU for someone to adopt? Why do we have to suck the brains out before removing the fetus?

Tho I am pro-life, I can understand the argument that a woman should have a right to chose whether she carries a baby to term. I support the morning after pill / etc. I think there should be some leeway for abortion in rape/incest cases. I totally agree that a doctor and patient should have the ability to make the best uninhibited decision about how to handle medical issues. But I don't see how determining to terminate a pregnancy early *requires* that the fetus not survive.

But why should the woman even want or care to chose what the doctor does with the fetus once it is removed. If it is viable, it is its own life at that point and doesn't need to be a concern of the woman. How is it not just a way to avoid knowing you spawned someone and having to live with that? Why would a woman even want the responsibility of making a decision to remove any chance of survival a fetus might have had even if she wants to terminate the pregnancy?

If the abortion is because of an abnormality in the fetus, again, why not let it be born and see how it does either in the parent's hands or in the hands of someone else who would care for it?

I'm not trying to sound as indignant as I'm coming across ... I actually do want some answers because I'm just so confused as to how this is even something to debate.

And how many kids have you and your anti-abortion friends adopted now?

Probable the same number as about 50+ people that stand on the side of the road every year saying abortion is death, and give adoption a chance, etc...

NONE.

Put your money where you mouth is, if they mean that much then get yourself fixed and adopt all these kids that are in foster homes and keep getting moved around till they are 18. If not put a cork in it.

Just b/c a child does not get adopted does not mean it should be killed.. That is kinda sick logic you are using

I don?t think he is suggesting they should be killed; just trying to get people to think. No one seems to have planned for the future.
Unwanted children won?t go away. Something has to be done with them if they are not adopted. Most of them go from foster home to foster home. Once they reach the age of eight, their chances of ever being adopted are pretty slim. Once they are 18, they are on their own. Most of them find their way on to public assistance by the age of 19, for themselves alone or with their kids now. Adoptions and foster care are not all like the peachy made for TV movies. Obviously, if more unwanted children go into the system, there will be more costs and more requirements to take care of them. No one seems to have thought this through. One hand is saying let?s cut public assistance, people need to take care of themselves. The other saying let?s add more fuel to the fire. The problem isn?t going to go away if we all just think happy thoughts.

And my point was not that they are getting killed- I am questioning the validity of the idea that the late termers lives should be forfeit b/c they have no one to adopt them or care for them. It might be better to grow up in foster homes or on the street than to never be given a shot at life at all.

 

[Kadarin]

I believe that the woman has the absolute right to determine whether she chooses to bring the baby to term. In my opinion, late-term abortions can be irresponsible, but sometimes they are appropriate, and I don't have a moral problem with them.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
I think you'll find the vast majority of those who are pro-choice are not in favor of third trimester abortions as a matter of convenience. Even Roe v Wade allowed states to ban third trimester abortions except in the case of the mother's health.

Only 11% support third trimester abortions according to this poll:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections...ortion_poll030122.html

Good find. I dont know anybody who claims to be pro-choice that thinks third trimester abortions should be legal. Most people I know find it a disgusting procedure on both sides of the aisle. As to why the democrats are so gung ho? I'd have to say it is because one of their special interest groups is the pro-abortion crowd. Any sign of waivering and you may lose those votes.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I thought only total lunatics supported late-term abortion except in dire medical circumstances. It is unequivocally murder. Children are regularly born at 25 weeks now (late term is 20 weeks+) and despite a great liklihood of serious illness, they are quite able to grow and grow, speak, walk, interact, etc; real people. Just as we protect a new born child, so to at the very least and agreeable by all, should we be able to protect a child who, if not given late-term and instead simply cut out of the mother, would have a pretty good chance of living and become a full grown adult.

The fact is that viability continues to decrease and at a fairly good rate. It's generally around 25 weeks now, but a decade or two ago it was basically a death sentence. In time viability will creep down lower and lower and abortion may become less palatable.

Yeah, I'm pretty pro-choice (although I personally don't like abortion), but I can't imagine supporting the right to late-term abortions unless there was a serious medical reason for it. I didn't used to think this way, but I changed my mind when I met a girl who's currently one of my best friends. She was born around 20 weeks, and she's basically fine as far as health and development goes (she's in her 20's now). I know this is slightly unusual, but it's hard to make the argument that a 20 week old fetus isn't a child when it can survive and grow into adult-hood.

I also have some trouble buying the argument that this in any way impacts the choice a woman should have regarding pregnancy. There is plenty of time to decide to have an abortion before "late-term", unless it's for medical reasons, I don't see why a woman would hold off and then suddenly want to have an abortion that far along in her pregnancy. I suppose some women might change their minds or something, but since she's had several months up to that point to figure it out, I don't think prohibiting late-term abortions by choice impacts her rights very much.

I think your opinion is what many people carry. The falacy about late term abortions is in the case of the mothers life. Partial birth abortions are nothing but delivering the baby until the head is stuck in the vagina then opening a hole in the back of the head and sucking the brains out. If the mother can deliver to that point, there isnt any medical reason why she cant deliver the head. IMO delivering the baby to that point and sucking its brains out is one of the most disgusting things we as humans have ever done. This would make the eugenics crowd in the Nazi party proud. No need to build concentration camps, kill them at birth.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sirjonk
I think you'll find the vast majority of those who are pro-choice are not in favor of third trimester abortions as a matter of convenience. Even Roe v Wade allowed states to ban third trimester abortions except in the case of the mother's health.

Only 11% support third trimester abortions according to this poll:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections...ortion_poll030122.html

Good find. I dont know anybody who claims to be pro-choice that thinks third trimester abortions should be legal. Most people I know find it a disgusting procedure on both sides of the aisle. As to why the democrats are so gung ho? I'd have to say it is because one of their special interest groups is the pro-abortion crowd. Any sign of waivering and you may lose those votes.

Maybe, but it could also be the fear that they have to push the extreme always legal position because ceding the third trimester as illegal then makes the 1st and 2nd trimesters the primary legal battlegrounds. If they can keep the prolifers focused on the horrors of 3rd trimester abortions, they have some bargaining room.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sirjonk
I think you'll find the vast majority of those who are pro-choice are not in favor of third trimester abortions as a matter of convenience. Even Roe v Wade allowed states to ban third trimester abortions except in the case of the mother's health.

Only 11% support third trimester abortions according to this poll:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections...ortion_poll030122.html

Good find. I dont know anybody who claims to be pro-choice that thinks third trimester abortions should be legal. Most people I know find it a disgusting procedure on both sides of the aisle. As to why the democrats are so gung ho? I'd have to say it is because one of their special interest groups is the pro-abortion crowd. Any sign of waivering and you may lose those votes.

Maybe, but it could also be the fear that they have to push the extreme always legal position because ceding the third trimester as illegal then makes the 1st and 2nd trimesters the primary legal battlegrounds. If they can keep the prolifers focused on the horrors of 3rd trimester abortions, they have some bargaining room.

Prolifers are fighting for the day of conception. There isnt any room to bargain.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sirjonk
I think you'll find the vast majority of those who are pro-choice are not in favor of third trimester abortions as a matter of convenience. Even Roe v Wade allowed states to ban third trimester abortions except in the case of the mother's health.

Only 11% support third trimester abortions according to this poll:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections...ortion_poll030122.html

Good find. I dont know anybody who claims to be pro-choice that thinks third trimester abortions should be legal. Most people I know find it a disgusting procedure on both sides of the aisle. As to why the democrats are so gung ho? I'd have to say it is because one of their special interest groups is the pro-abortion crowd. Any sign of waivering and you may lose those votes.

Maybe, but it could also be the fear that they have to push the extreme always legal position because ceding the third trimester as illegal then makes the 1st and 2nd trimesters the primary legal battlegrounds. If they can keep the prolifers focused on the horrors of 3rd trimester abortions, they have some bargaining room.

Prolifers are fighting for the day of conception. There isnt any room to bargain.

Check the link again. 8% of women are in favor of third trimester abortions, i.e. 92% are pro-life with regard to the 3rd trimester. But, 40% feel it should be legal to end an unwanted pregnancy prior to the 6th month. People aren't simply pro-life or pro-choice. There are degrees, and thus negotiation is possible among the majority of people. Sure, there's a dedicated core of hard core pro-lifers who feel abortion should be illegal even in the cases of rape or incest, since it isn't the baby's fault the mom was raped or incested (TM), but the overwhelming majority of people feel abortion should be allowed in those situations.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Where is DMcowen saying "Save the cells! Save the cells!" ?

Baby not born = no rights
no rights = not human

So really, those who support abortion should be fine with abortions up to a minute before birth.

We already know you're a jerk, you don't need to keep pointing it out.

Honestly, you're an ass if you believe that's what "pro-choice" people think.