Question for pro-choicers

ThatOwlWoman said:
Before we can discuss that medical procedure, let's define it.

"But "partial-birth" is not a medical term. It's a political one, and a highly confusing one at that, with both sides disagreeing even on how many procedures take place, at what point in pregnancy, and exactly which procedures the law actually bans.
...
"The further along a pregnancy is, the more complicated — and the more controversial — the procedures are for aborting it. Abortions performed after the 20th week of pregnancy typically require that the fetus be dismembered inside the womb so it can be removed without damaging the pregnant woman's cervix. Some gynecologists consider such methods, known as "dilation and evacuation," less than ideal because they can involve substantial blood loss and may increase the risk of lacerating the cervix, potentially undermining the woman's ability to bear children in the future."
...
"...the procedure is also performed in cases where the woman's health is at risk, or when the fetus shows signs of serious abnormalities, some of which don't become apparent until late in pregnancy.

Take, for example, cases in which the fetus develops hydrocephalus (commonly known as water on the brain). Often undetectable until well into the second three months of pregnancy, the condition causes enlargement of the skull up to two-and-a-half times its normal size. It not only results in severe brain damage to the fetus, it can also create severe health risks to the mother if she tries to deliver it vaginally."

https://www.npr.org/2006/02/21/5168163/partial-birth-abortion-separating-fact-from-spin
Click to expand...

ok? so how does that correct the post you quoted from me?
 
Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
Exactly. Men who are against abortion should be keeping it in their pants, and instructing their sons to do likewise.
Click to expand...

here's a thought.....instead of blaming either men or women for having sex, let's just blame them for cutting their children into tiny pieces and flushing them down a toilette.......
 
Gonzomin said:
Nobody is in love with abortion.
Click to expand...

I disagree......I think there are lib'ruls who think their lives would be ruined there were no abortion.......not that they might need to have one, but simply that conservatives have stopped them from being able to have one........some of you just like the thought of killing children......
 
g r i n d said:
ok? so how does that correct the post you quoted from me?
Click to expand...

You asked if I support so-called, mis-named, "partial birth abortion." I support saving the life of the mother. Period. The already-here, viable, life trumps the possible maybe life. Using inflammatory code words in this discussion leads us no where, which is why I quoted from an article explaining what it really is.

"Intact dilation and extraction (IDX, intact D&E) is a surgical procedure that removes an intact fetus from the uterus. The procedure is used both after late-term miscarriages and in late-term abortions.

"It is also known as intact dilation and evacuation, dilation and extraction (D&X, or DNX, disfavored term), and, in United States federal law, as partial-birth abortion. However, partial-birth abortion is not an accepted medical term, and is not used by abortion practitioners or the medical community at large.

In 2000, although only 0.17% (2,232 of 1,313,000) of all abortions in the United States were performed using this procedure, it developed into a focal point of the abortion debate. It was outlawed in most cases by the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which was upheld in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dilation_and_extraction
 
StoneByStone said:
Yes, but I also get that it's complicated. You can make the argument that when a man and a woman are having sex, they are entering into a contract, and part of the deal is that the woman could get pregnant. So if you don't want to carry a baby for 9 months, just don't have vaginal sex. But then there's the issue of rape. It's not a black and white topic, which is why I wish people would be more understanding of people who disagree on abortion.
Click to expand...

Does the man still get to have vaginal sex with others after he impregnates someone?

If so, can he be sued for damages since it’s a “contract” (biggest laugh ever)!
 
Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
And what if the mother didn't want to BE a parent, but was forced to -- by the government?
Click to expand...

she could put the kid up for adoption and NOT BE A PARENT........oh gosh, did I just educate someone?......
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
You asked if I support so-called, mis-named, "partial birth abortion." I support saving the life of the mother. Period. The already-here, viable, life trumps the possible maybe life. Using inflammatory code words in this discussion leads us no where, which is why I quoted from an article explaining what it really is.

"Intact dilation and extraction (IDX, intact D&E) is a surgical procedure that removes an intact fetus from the uterus. The procedure is used both after late-term miscarriages and in late-term abortions.

"It is also known as intact dilation and evacuation, dilation and extraction (D&X, or DNX, disfavored term), and, in United States federal law, as partial-birth abortion. However, partial-birth abortion is not an accepted medical term, and is not used by abortion practitioners or the medical community at large.

In 2000, although only 0.17% (2,232 of 1,313,000) of all abortions in the United States were performed using this procedure, it developed into a focal point of the abortion debate. It was outlawed in most cases by the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which was upheld in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dilation_and_extraction
Click to expand...

yes I know it's rare, but the rarity of the procedure is pretty irrelevant when we are discussing moral principles and core beliefs. You said in this thread that if it was a fully formed baby, you would not support abortion (unless I take it.. in the case where the health of the mother enters the equation). I am confused now because it seems you are having two beliefs at once, so can you clarify?
 
distraff said:
My answer is she should be allowed to abort the fetus if it can't be safety recovered. This is because she shouldn't be forced to use her body against her will for the life of another. In the same way, I shouldn't be forced to donate my kidney to you even to save your life.

So here is my tricky question for you. Lets say that sometimes pregnancies happened randomly without any sex and produced a fully formed 9 month fetus immediately. These fetuses prevented the woman from ever walking, having sex, or independently urinating again. Surgically removing this fetus would fix all these problems but would kill the fetus. However, the fetus will never be born and will exist in her belly for the rest of her life. Should she be allowed to abort it?
Click to expand...

through out history abortions have been considered appropriate for reasons of the mother's health.......your question is hardly tricky......
 
g r i n d said:
yes I know it's rare, but the rarity of the procedure is pretty irrelevant when we are discussing moral principles and core beliefs. You said in this thread that if it was a fully formed baby, you would not support abortion (unless I take it.. in the case where the health of the mother enters the equation). I am confused now because it seems you are having two beliefs at once, so can you clarify?
Click to expand...

My position has always been crystal clear on this. Please re-read my comments. There are no contradictions.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
My position has always been crystal clear on this. Please re-read my comments. There are no contradictions.
Click to expand...

I was confused before so I don't see how I would be less confused now. Could you clarify? You said you woulnd't support partial birth abortions if the baby was fully developed. (unless in case of health of the mother) What am I missing?
 
g r i n d said:
I was confused before so I don't see how I would be less confused now. Could you clarify? You said you woulnd't support partial birth abortions if the baby was fully developed. (unless in case of health of the mother) What am I missing?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are missing. I have already explained it more than once. I'm not going to continue a discussion where inflammatory code words are used instead of the proper terminology. It means you're more interested in arguing than in receiving actual knowledge. Thanks.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I have no idea what you are missing. I have already explained it more than once. I'm not going to continue a discussion where inflammatory code words are used instead of the proper terminology. It means you're more interested in arguing than in receiving actual knowledge. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I have been straight up with you in this whole thread. Your detour talking about the term partial birth abortion is irrelevant to our conversation on morals. You know what I am talking about and referencing, so why are we having a discussion on preferred nomenclature? The term partial birth abortion is completely mainstream, a common colloquialism, and has the full backing of the federal government. It's not like some rando on the street corners pet term for it. But again, this is pedantry. We can call it whatever you want. Lets call it flippity flopity.

From earlier in this thread, you said you would not support flippity flopity if the baby was fully formed. Now you are seeming to take a different tune. So could you please clarify your position for me?
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I have no idea what you are missing. I have already explained it more than once. I'm not going to continue a discussion where inflammatory code words are used instead of the proper terminology. It means you're more interested in arguing than in receiving actual knowledge. Thanks.
Click to expand...

You said that this didn't really have a meaning:

partial birth abortion

Partial birth abortion, medically known as intact dilation and extraction (IDX), is a method of late-term abortion that ends a pregnancy and results in the death and intact removal of a fetus from the uterus. In the United States, as of late 2008 the procedure was illegal.

Description

IDX first involves administration of medications to cause the cervix to dilate. Dilation usually occurs over the course of several days. Next, the physician rotates the fetus to a footling breech position. The body of the fetus is then drawn out of the uterus feet first, until only the head remains inside the uterus. The physician then uses an instrument to puncture the base of the skull, which collapses the fetal head. Typically, the contents of the fetal head are then partially suctioned out, which results in the death of the fetus and reduces the size of the fetal head enough to allow it to pass through the cervix. The dead but otherwise intact fetus is then removed from the woman's body.

:facepalm:
 
g r i n d said:
I have been straight up with you in this whole thread. Your detour talking about the term partial birth abortion is irrelevant to our conversation on morals. You know what I am talking about and referencing, so why are we having a discussion on preferred nomenclature? The term partial birth abortion is completely mainstream, a common colloquialism, and has the full backing of the federal government. It's not like some rando on the street corners pet term for it. But again, this is pedantry. We can call it whatever you want. Lets call it flippity flopity.

From earlier in this thread, you said you would not support flippity flopity if the baby was fully formed. Now you are seeming to take a different tune. So could you please clarify your position for me?
Click to expand...

Sorry, words mean things. There is more than one procedure to abort a fetus, even in mid- to late-term pregnancies. Your focus on one particular method to the exclusion of other methods regarding morality makes no sense. Either you deplore all late-term abortions regardless of method, or you're okay with one method but not others because you're triggered by its ominous colloquial name, or you're okay with late-term abortion because reasons.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Guess what? If the mother dies during a DIY abortion, so does the fetus. Here, I got this for you. Sorry, didn't have time to wrap it first.

SaNqEZ9.png
Click to expand...

That doesn't look like the "be responsible" image. Taking a stand against murder ultimately results in fewer lives being murdered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top