• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Texas bans abortion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomboy said:
You've said that several times. How likely do you think it is that a woman considering abortion due to lack of finances, lack of a stable home environment, lack of ability to care for the child when born, etc. would have the financial, physical, environmental and psychological resources to do all of that while it's developing in utero, and why should anyone other than that woman be responsible for making a decision that will have such an immense impact on her life? Please, seriously, try to put yourself in that hypothetical woman's shoes and think about whether or not you'd want someone making that kind of decision on your behalf without any thought to your wishes or circumstances.

Full disclosure: My biological mother was 13 when she gave birth to me and decided to put me up for adoption. She was lucky enough to have the support of her parents and grandparents, received proper prenatal care, and did her best to carry me full term. Even so, I was born almost 3 months premature and almost died. I don't know the details of the pregnancy or delivery, but it's not lost on me that she could very well have jeopardized her own life by trying to carry me full term, and that's not necessarily something that is known in advance.

Even given my personal situation, I'm pro choice because I believe a woman's right to body autonomy trumps that of any developing zygote or embryo. To put it another way, I'm pro life - pro the life of the existing pregnant woman, because as a woman, I know the last thing I ever want is someone deciding that they know what's best for me and making major, life altering decisions on my behalf.



Yes, I think you do. My biological mother made what has to be one of the most difficult decisions a woman could ever have to make. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind about the difficulty of giving a child up for adoption, one you've carried inside of you and cared for and nurtured and worried about and even loved despite the pregnancy being unwanted. The body is really good at triggering all sorts of biochemical reactions to ensure that there's a bond between mother and child. How can breaking that bond be anything other than traumatic?

I'm not speaking from personal experience. I've never given birth, put a child up for adoption, or had an abortion. Even so, I don't find it hard to believe that giving a child up postpartum can be far more traumatic and psychologically damaging than aborting it when it's a clump of cells.

(Apologies to all if this is off topic and/or if the conversation has moved on, and for the wall of text in general.)
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Warbler said:
Then why are are criticizing my replacing the word creator with the word natural when it comes to a quote from the Declaration of Independence?


no.





Okay, all I will say is that I don't think you need to be religious to believe in the idea of natural rights.
Click to expand...

I give up.



 
Tomboy said:
You've said that several times. How likely do you think it is that a woman considering abortion due to lack of finances, lack of a stable home environment, lack of ability to care for the child when born, etc. would have the financial, physical, environmental and psychological resources to do all of that while it's developing in utero, and why should anyone other than that woman be responsible for making a decision that will have such an immense impact on her life? Please, seriously, try to put yourself in that hypothetical woman's shoes and think about whether or not you'd want someone making that kind of decision on your behalf without any thought to your wishes or circumstances.

Full disclosure: My biological mother was 13 when she gave birth to me and decided to put me up for adoption. She was lucky enough to have the support of her parents and grandparents, received proper prenatal care, and did her best to carry me full term. Even so, I was born almost 3 months premature and almost died. I don't know the details of the pregnancy or delivery, but it's not lost on me that she could very well have jeopardized her own life by trying to carry me full term, and that's not necessarily something that is known in advance.

Even given my personal situation, I'm pro choice because I believe a woman's right to body autonomy trumps that of any developing zygote or embryo. To put it another way, I'm pro life - pro the life of the existing pregnant woman, because as a woman, I know the last thing I ever want is someone deciding that they know what's best for me and making major, life altering decisions on my behalf.



Yes, I think you do. My biological mother made what has to be one of the most difficult decisions a woman could ever have to make. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind about the difficulty of giving a child up for adoption, one you've carried inside of you and cared for and nurtured and worried about and even loved despite the pregnancy being unwanted. The body is really good at triggering all sorts of biochemical reactions to ensure that there's a bond between mother and child. How can breaking that bond be anything other than traumatic?

I'm not speaking from personal experience. I've never given birth, put a child up for adoption, or had an abortion. Even so, I don't find it hard to believe that giving a child up postpartum can be far more traumatic and psychologically damaging than aborting it when it's a clump of cells.

(Apologies to all if this is off topic and/or if the conversation has moved on, and for the wall of text in general.)
Click to expand...

Thank you for expressing this so much better than I probably would have. And thank you for sharing your personal story.
 
Warbler said:
yes it is in her body, but it is not part of her. It may have rights, one of them being the right to live. That is why is may not be her choice alone.
Click to expand...

I am fully willing to grant the fetus all the rights of any human being. It has the right to exist. To live.

But just like any human being it has no right to infringe on other's rights. Just like if you need a kidney or liver tissue and our tissues match does not mean you're entitled to mine. Just because you need my blood does not mean I have to give my blood. It matters not that you will die if I don't or that it is barely of any consequence to me. The state forcing me to comply would be an infringement on my rights. Just as is a fetus demanding that a woman carry and deliver it would be an infringement on hers.
 
Stacyhs said:
Really? It is LITERALLY part of her.
Click to expand...

It is a second body forming. That is why I have a problem with the "my body, my choice" rants. Yeah, that would work, if there were only one body involved. If you say that the umbilical cord makes it "part of her", and not its own life, then just exterminate them when they come out of the womb.
 
Warp12 said:
Err...uhh...

Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post W12, what would accountability look like in the following: There is some small percentage of women who know correctly that they will never, ever want a child, even if they became pregnant and even if they delivered the child. Also, besides abstinence, no form of birth control is 100% effective. That means that there will be some small number of women who don't, have never, and never will want a child but will become pregnant unless they are abstinent. Unless you're willing to say that such women should be abstain from sex throughout their entire lives (because no form of birth control is 100% effective), what form would accountability look like for those women who did use birth control as best as would be possible, yet it still failed and they became pregnant? Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post It might look like an early term abortion. Of course, some will decide to carry a baby to term, even under these circumstances. I mean, if you have taken precautions (and even if you haven't) and a pregnancy occurs, the next decision is whether to carry to term. Being personally accountable is to make that decision as early as possible. I don't support this TX law, because 6 weeks is earlier than many women will even know they are pregnant. I have stated repeatedly that I understand that things occur in life that require a reactive response. I understand that birth control is not perfect, and I am not suggesting that women abstain from sex. Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post I don’t understand how your response had anything to do with accountability, legal, personal, or otherwise. In my scenario, you agreed with the woman doing exactly what she wanted to do - have an abortion early on. To what or who was the woman personally accountable? Herself!? Err...uhh... Quote: What Is Personal Accountability? When you're personally accountable, you take ownership of situations that you're involved in. You see them through, and you take responsibility for what happens – good or bad. You don't blame others if things go wrong. Instead, you do your best to make things right.
What exactly do you think "personal accountability" means??? :confused:
Click to expand...

Seriously:rolleyes::boggled:
If you think this addresses personal accountability, you are deranged. This is a nonsense dodge. It's pablum. Absolute swill.

Women have unwanted pregnancies. Almost all of them deal with the situation fairly quickly because the health related issues of abortions grow with each passing day. 99 percent of them terminate their pregnancies by the 23rd week. Sounds pretty accountable to me.
Sometimes unforeseen health concerns become apparent later in a pregnancy and women and their doctors choose to terminate their pregnancy because of it. Sounds accountable to me.

Time for you to get off that personal accountability hobby horse.
 
Warbler said:
my intent was to try to get the pro choice side see a little of the pro life side, that it isn't just Bible thumping and shaming and objectifying women. That maybe in pregnancy and a decision whether or not to abort affects not just the woman but the other life inside her. That maybe something should be said for that other life. I think too many times it is just dismissed in favor women's rights.
Click to expand...

Here's your problem though. There are comparatively few actual hard-core, "true-bleever" - "pro-life" people out there - as in those who hold that sex before marriage is a sin against God, and that contraception goes against God's will. Those are the ones that protest against and bomb abortion clinics, and murder doctors who carry out abortions. (how they reconcile their "pro-life" stance with murder is an act of pretzel logic beyond my comprehension).

However, those people are far outnumbered by the "anti-choice" crowd. These are the misogynist politicians who are playing to their political base, do not want women to have autonomy over their own bodies; the people who, on the one hand, bleat about the fetus' right to life, and will do everything they can to declare their interest in the life of the unborn - that is, until the child is actually born, at which point they promptly lose all interest, and will even vote against measures that would increase the welfare of mother and child, such as housing subsidies, childcare subsidies, minimum wage increases, and healthcare and food assistance.

What you don't seem to understand is that "pro-lifers" know all this, and they use the "anti-choicers" to achieve their ends.
 
I think he's confusing "accountable" with "responsible." He's describing the actions of a woman making personally responsible decisions, who is accountable to no one for them.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
I think he's confusing "accountable" with "responsible." He's describing the actions of a woman making personally responsible decisions, who is accountable to no one for them.
Click to expand...

What Is Personal Accountability? When you're personally accountable, you take ownership of situations that you're involved in. You see them through, and you take responsibility for what happens – good or bad. You don't blame others if things go wrong. Instead, you do your best to make things right.
Click to expand...

I think it is a combination of the two. But the major point is, it is not something that I am saying must be enforced through legislation. It is something that I wish more people preached. Instead, by far, more people whine about legislation. To the extent that you have some of the extremist arguments we see in this thread. If more people held themselves "personally accountable" they might make more "personally responsible" decisions.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I think it is a combination of the two. But the major point is, it is not something that I am saying must be enforced through legislation. It is something that I wish more people preached. Instead, by far, more people whine about legislation. To the extent that you have some of the extremist arguments we see in this thread. If more people held themselves "personally accountable" they might make more "personally responsible" decisions.
Click to expand...
Then why are you defending the legislation at hand? And before you say you aren't, you ARE. People here aren't stupid, we can recognize concern trolling when we see it. If all you wanted to say was "golly no one likes abortions, amirite?" people have expressed exactly that sentiment many times throughout the thread, you could have agreed with any of them and called it a day. Yet you're still here having pointless semantic arguments with definitions copied from self-help powerpoint slides. Long enough that it doesn't fit the act you put on when someone calls you on it.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Then why are you defending the legislation at hand? And before you say you aren't, you ARE. People here aren't stupid, we can recognize concern trolling when we see it. If all you wanted to say was "golly no one likes abortions, amirite?" people have expressed exactly that sentiment many times throughout the thread, you could have agreed with any of them and called it a day. Yet you're still here having pointless semantic arguments with definitions copied from self-help powerpoint slides. Long enough that it doesn't fit the act you put on when someone calls you on it.
Click to expand...

Completely incorrect. I do not support this legislation, for the reasons I have repeatedly outlined. The rest of your statement has no merit, based upon your initial fallacy.
 
Warp12 said:
Completely incorrect. I do not support this legislation, for the reasons I have repeatedly outlined. The rest of your statement has no merit, based on your initial fallacy.
Click to expand...
You may not be trying to support this legislation, but right now you absolutely are supporting it. You're in this thread about it spouting apologetics, arguing for its morality, defending its sentiment, trying to get people to empathize and agree with the kind of people who put it in place in Texas and are attempting to copy it everywhere else. You flip from "aww tink of the widdle bebes" to "women must be held accountable" to "well actually I'm all for abortion, abortion yay" as each gets challenged in turn.

Again, there are numerous people who have commented in this thread that their stance is broadly against abortion in general principle, but that trying to make that into a law is a terrible idea. That hasn't been enough for you. If you really think you don't support the law, you should reread your posts here, because you're sure acting like it.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
You may not be trying to support this legislation, but right now you absolutely are supporting it. You're in this thread about it spouting apologetics, arguing for its morality, defending its sentiment, trying to get people to empathize and agree with the kind of people who put it in place in Texas and are attempting to copy it everywhere else. You flip from "aww tink of the widdle bebes" to "women must be held accountable" to "well actually I'm all for abortion, abortion yay" as each gets challenged in turn.

Again, there are numerous people who have commented in this thread that their stance is broadly against abortion in general principle, but that trying to make that into a law is a terrible idea. That hasn't been enough for you. If you really think you don't support the law, you should reread your posts here, because you're sure acting like it.
Click to expand...

Boring, inane, bloviated, and fully discredited argument. I am moving on.
 
Shalamar said:
Why do you value a potential human being over that of an actual human being?
Click to expand...

Do you deny that in some cases that a born child might be worth more value than the mother?

I'm not saying it is the norm, but in some cases I bet this is true.

Your position is faulty, at best.
 
Warp12 said:
Do you deny that in some cases that a born child might be worth more value than the mother?

I'm not saying it is the norm, but in some cases I bet this is true.

Your position is faulty, on this.
Click to expand...

I will not discuss this with someone who dehumanizes women. I'm sorry.. 'Split Tails'.

Your position is faulty.
 
Shalamar said:
I will not discuss this with someone who dehumanizes women. I'm sorry.. 'Split Tails'.

Your position is faulty.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. You repeatedly harp on the "split tails" comment, which was already decisively revealed as sarcasm (and not part of this thread). On a different note, there is no problem in this thread with people dehumanizing the unborn by referring to them as "parasites". There are probably 5 pages of such justification, from many different forum members. So, your comment is ironic, at best.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom