Abortion as a social good?

So one can't use lethal force in self defense to prevent permanent disability or injury? It always has to be perfectly binary? Life vs life? But if it is life vs disability, life always wins in the hierarchy of rights?

"Many people don’t
consider that human worth much moral consideration, and so some of them are pro-abortion,
as Rosin clearly is. Fine. But pretending that a death isn’t happening means
ignoring why the entire subject continues to divide Americans."

I'm trying to put myself in Rosin's shoes here. Because if I believed that human beings before birth were essentially body parts, I would obviously want to see women/people assigned female granted control of their own body parts with no stigma or shame. I would guess that people like Rosin genuinely believe that the only reason to believe human beings before birth are equal to those after is if one had overt or internalized beliefs that women should be punished for sex. Despite the obvious difference in the contraception and abortion debates. :/

I don't know how I would express my belief that abortion should exist without restrictions or stigma while acknowledging that my main beef is with those who think human beings before birth have rights. It seems difficult.

The funny thing about this is that even though an article was published that literally says "abortion is great", I'm still going to see on a daily basis people claiming that NOBODY is pro-abortion. I can't help but wonder why they don't just say very few people are pro-abortion as opposed to merely pro-choice. Then they would be at least making a claim that can't be refuted with an individual example.

I agree with Pollitt, "This is not the right time for me, should be reason enough to have an abortion"

I ask this in all sincerity; do you believe it is better to have a crappy life than never to have been born?

I remain puzzled at the high level of existential angst I see amongst the anti-choice, so I am hopeful that you will actually respond as to why a crappy life is better than never having existed at all and not knowing the difference as a result.

Pro lifers have told me that this is preferable to aborting a mindless embryo
http://wgntv.com/2014/08/19/california-boy-forced-to-eat-cat-feces-own-vomit-before-allegedly-being-beaten-to-death-by-mom-boyfriend-testimony/

Starvation. Beating. Forced to eat shit and vomit. Locked up in a dark closet. Torture. All more humane than abortion at 5 weeks.

So the woman forces the blastocyst to implant on her fallopian tube in an ectopic pregnancy?

She also forces the sperm to penetrate her ovum? I guess that this is why IVF is never necessary, right? Women can just magically will fertilization and implantation?

I am not sure why the only options are a) being aborted or b) having a crappy life.

"Women can just magically will fertilization and implantation?"

Obviously not, but that doesn't mean that responsibility for those events lies with anyone other than the mother and father, or sometimes doctor, who caused them to occur.

Yes, I did mean it literally. I was a bible-thumping anti-choicer with what I thought were clever arguments, such as "it's not a choice, it's a child," and "abortion is murder" … much as one sees here every single day.

When you are telling a woman that she does not have the right to make her own medical decisions, you are against choice (hence anti-choice).

I no longer possess the hubris to pretend that I know what is best for some total stranger to do when it comes to pregnancy. I don't know her health situation. I don't know her financial situation. I. Don't. Know. And neither do you. You don't get to decide for me, and vice versa.

Let me put it very simply: I personally believe that Michelle Duggar is an overbreeding nitwit. However, you don't see me out there trying to legislate away her right to have children until her uterus prolapses. Her reproductive choices are *hers,* and I support them whether or not I personally agree with them. That is the largest difference between you and me: you think you have the right to make my reproductive decisions for me, which is something I would never do to you.

PS: If you don't think that the bottom line of the anti-choice position is pregnancy as punishment, I suggest you look at how often your fellow travelers refer to it as "paying the consequences."

The people who said that to you are disturbed and disgusting.

Nope, not unless you think that ovulation itself is a crime that must be punished with denial of bodily rights and the infliction of bodily harm and sometimes even death.

Other medical procedures don't kill individual, living humans. I don't "dislike" abortion, I consider it a grave moral injustice. I "dislike" bean soup.

If you have sex and get pregnant, then you have knowingly and willingly created a child, put it in a condition of responsibility, and placed it in your own womb. So yes, you are responsible for it. If you create a helpless person who needs you, then you have a responsibility to that person.

There are numerous and exhaustive arguments given for this [the notion that abortion is immoral] on the SPL blog, as well as many other pro-life groups, articles, papers, blogs, etc. Just because this particular blog doesn't go into it, doesn't mean the evidence isn't there.
—–
WRONG. All the "arguments" you mention are based on Prejudice and/or Hypocrisy and/or Bad Data, in the form of lies and/or distortions of fact and/or denials of fact and/or incomplete truths. I've worked my way through every one of them that I could find, at the wordpress blog named "fightforsense". None are actually based on valid evidence supporting the notion that an unwanted unborn human animal organism is somehow inherently worthy of being treated differently than any other unwanted animal/pest.
=====

Sperm and ovum aren't entities.
—–
THEY MOST CERTAINLY ARE. Look up the definition of the word!
=====

They're not organisms; they're parts, not wholes.
—–
An entity is not always the same thing as an organism. If I thought sperm and ovum qualified as organisms, I would have used that word instead of "entity".
=====

They're only obeying the genetic programming of the organism to which they belong.
—–
FALSE. They are obeying built-in genetic programming. Look up the phrase "fire and forget" sometime.
=====

Placing responsibility on them makes as much sense as pricking someone with a needle contaminated with harmful bacteria and then defending yourself from an assault charge by claiming that you didn't make them sick, the bacteria did. It's not your fault, you just pricked them with a needle.
—–
YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION VERY WELL. Remember, when a wanted pregnancy does not happen, sperm and ovum very often receive the blame! You cannot have it both ways without being a Stupid Hypocrite!
=====

The blastocysts is an organism/entity, you're right,
—–
OF COURSE.
=====

but it has no responsibility for implantation, or any control over the situation whatsoever.
—–
FALSE. It's built-in DNA tells it to implant. Else an ectopic pregnancy, inside a Fallopian tube, would never happen. Only if its DNA is defective would it fail to attempt to implant. (Even in the womb, it might still fail, for reasons outside its control. The womb has a coating of mucus that protects it from bacteria; if the coating is too thick, the blastocyst can fail to implant. And if there is scar tissue in the womb, say from a previous pregnancy, the blastocyst would fail to implant if it randomly happens to try to do it into the scar tissue.)
=====

It exists, and implants, because of the parents' actions.
—–
MISCHARACTERIZATION. The parents' actions can set a sequence of events in motion. Those events still involve independently-acting entities. The statistics are, about 50% of the time a conception fails to yield a confirmed pregnancy, at least partly because one of those independently-acting entities failed to function in a successful way.
=====

Blaming the embryo for implanting is like throwing a baby out the window and blaming it for crushing your flower beds when it lands.
—–
FALSE. Blaming it for implanting is exactly like blaming it for implanting, nothing more, and nothing less. Remember, if it fails to implant when you want it to implant, you DO blame it! To say you can't blame it for implanting when you don't want it to implant is Stupid Hypocrisy.

Honestly, I think bodily autonomy to justify killing the unborn child is a terrible, awful, morally and logically bankrupt argument, except in the case of rape, in which case I think it's probably the strongest pro-choice argument. But what would we do if a woman had a newborn child who was conceived from rape, who could not transfer care immediately? Would she be responsible for the child's welfare, if the child would die without her care? I'm believe so, but I'l admit it's a bit murkier. She would definitely not be justified in outright killing the child, which most abortion procedures do. There's also the consideration that the child may have greater bodily rights to the uterus than to the mother's other body parts, because the uterus, unlike all the mother's body parts, is not actually there for her use, but rather is designed specifically shelter and care for unborn children, and humanity could not have survived unless we were all able to be in the womb during our most vulnerable months.

The first part of your reply, I applaud you. This question I think is a litmus test for whether a pro-life position is held purely for humanitarian reasons (and I accept those as valid, though I might disagree) rather than due to religious or other dogmatic reasons, for which I think the person is not only a lazy thinker, but also doesn't actually care about the woman. You come across as a thoughtful individual who cares about humanity, and your pro-life position is based on that, and I respect your position. I'm personally pro-life, in that I can't ever imagine suggesting an abortion to anyone I know, but I do think that it is in the end the woman's decision, and recognize that in certain situations, abortion is just the best solution in a world of compromises.

Thanks, and likewise thanks for being willing to discuss this thoughtfully. You seem like you've given your position thought. If you don't mind my asking, why are you personally pro-life? Why wouldn't you have an abortion?

Because I think abortion has the potential to be traumatic, not for all mind you, and if you have the means and resources, I don't see why you wouldn't have the kid, unless you really don't want children. I personally love kids, love my own, and want a reasonably large family. All the things I say about how one fetus is as good as another is me thinking rationally. But emotionally, I would think of the fetus as a great gift, and personally could not bear to see it aborted. I also understand that I am fortunate with resources and a stable family life right now, and most of my friends and family are in a similar situation. To such people, I see no reason to ever suggest an abortion, and even if its a minor financial hardship, they are all in good enough shape that I think they'd be able to work it out. I am personally pro-life because I am fortunate. I realize not everyone is, and sometimes in life one has to prioritize. It is sometimes not possible to have everything. In those situations, I just believe the woman and family going through such an ordeal is the only one qualified to make difficult decisions, and that a one-size fits all pro-life stance is not sufficient.

Of what did I "accuse you" with regard to adoption?

It's okay to admit that you can't answer the question, sweetie. Actual critical thought is hard, after all.

On the other blog where I asked about improvement on adoption… You lashed me out over there…

If I recall correctly, you have a disability and crappy life, you have no reason to live. Normal people always come first, as it seems so…

You quoted a passage listing multiple options besides abstinence, and then claimed I was insisting people be abstinent. It's almost as if you're trying to assign me a perspective I don't hold, rather than understand my actual perspective.

I guess you missed the second clause of the sentence: or behave only in ways that you deem appropriate,

You are trying to dictate behaviors that are none of your business whatsoever.

The fetus is not entitled to the woman's whole body. If she chooses to shut off the blood supply to her lower body that is her right.

BTW, your argument fails because it could be used to justify rape – vaginas are designed expressly for penises, therefore, penises are automatically entitled to women's vaginas, whether women want them there or not.

I would love it if men could get pregnant. It would change everything.

I see…

By the way, one of my comments is not really angst but true. Most pro-choicers said it's better to be nonexistent than living. Also, they often said about every child should be wanted and healthy. You did ask me the question why I think 'having a crappy life is better than nonexistent.' So, do you believe that people with disabilities are better off nonexistent because they have a poor quality of life, right?

Yeah? I smell bull crap.

Unwanted pregnancy is not a happy positive thing under any circumstances. All the choices you have suck big time. You make the best choice for your life at the time, just like you do in any crisis situation.

I think you need to look up the definition of "individual." And no, I have no bodily responsibility to a fetus or anyone else. Even you. Go pound sand. You use your OWN body to "assist" 'needy persons.' You have no authority to use mine.

Well see, that's just the thing! I won't be HAVING any "newborn child conceived from rape." I'll keep that from ever happening. You get to BUTT OUT.

LOL @ "quantity of life." NO I guess I DON'T value "quantity" over "quality." So sue me. If I had the choice between 1 more year of relative good health and happiness versus 5 years of misery… I'd take the one great year. But then I have a lot of experience with those who are suffering. And I'll be honest with you. I would administer as much morphine as it takes to keep someone comfortable… even if it shortens their life a bit. I've already awoken a doctor three times overnight because the patient was still writhing in pain. When he stopped writhing, I stopped calling. You see, I didn't want that to be the last thing his family saw. The man's family came by the next morning to say goodbye, and he passed away in peace later that morning. I felt good about that.

There was no "offspring."

I see… *shrugs* Okay then.

Is existence always objectively better than non existence?

"I would argue that this is 100% at odds with the new pro-abortion line that this book is trying to promote, though. Abortion is a horrible option that women chose in the middle of a crisis. It is not positive. It is not the moral high ground."
This isn't an argument. This you proclaiming your opinion with no evidence behind it. Other people have different opinions on the matter, and their position is just as valid as yours. Women aren't obligated to allow their lives to be derailed by a single sperm. It just isn't all that important. We're not short on people, by any means. That means not every pregnancy has to come to term. Nobody thinks a fetus is "a malignant parasite." It's human, it's alive, it may be unwanted. But it's not a person. Pregnancy is 1) expensive, 2) inherently dangerous, and 3) life-altering to the degree that gestation can't be forced upon anyone. Even with all these abortions, population isn't declining. For over forty years women have been able to legally have children only when they want them. i.e. planning and spacing their families. The sky hasn't caved in. Women can be trusted to handle this themselves. They've been handling it themselves for many thousands of years. I see no evidence that you ought to stop trusting them suddenly.

She seems to neglect the many post-abortive women and men who became pro-life because of their abortion experiences.

Well, a woman who's hypocritical enough to think other women should be forced through pregnancy and childbirth against their will, after she herself got to make the decision to have a safe legal abortion, is hardly a typical prolifer. And no man can ever have an "abortion experience" – well, except for some trans men.

But the basic view of prolifers is the extreme position that girls and women should be forced through pregnancy and childbirth against our will, because we can be made to gestate unwanted babies. In the US there are over hundred thousand children who wait for adoption for over three years – yet prolifers want to force more unwanted babies to be born? Forced use of other human bodies is an extreme,. anti-human rights position.

Safe legal abortion, accessible on demand by any girl or woman who's decided she needs it, is an obvious social good, since all the consequences of opposition to this are social evils.

But no one except fantasising prolifers supposes that a girl or a woman who decides she needs an abortion does so because she thinks of abortion as a fun Disneyland ride.

Honestly, I think bodily autonomy to justify killing the unborn child is a terrible, awful, morally and logically bankrupt argument

You think you have the right to make use of another human being's body against her will, and if she says no, her justification for saying no is "terrible, awful, morally and logically bankrupt"?

So, do you believe that people with disabilities are better off nonexistent because they have a poor quality of life, right?

Perhaps you need to ask that of some people with disabilities, or of some abused children (do you think children are aware when they are unwanted)? I'm not in the business of speculating about what other people think about their own situations. I happen to know a good many people with disabilities who would rather not have been born. I know an equally good number of people who were abused as kids who would rather not have been born.

Each situation is different, despite your best attempts to cram everything into little boxes that fit your personal comprehension. If there is one thing I have noticed that unifies the anti-choice, it is the black-and-white thinking that you folks tend to apply.

You still haven't answered my question, though; all you've done is deflect it. Why is that?

What? I'm not. Look at you, you said it yourself again. I'm not nitpicked your words. Most pro-choice people tend to just say people with disabilities should not be existed. Sure, they tend to say that they wish they're not here. I'm not ignored them. I pointed out that a lot of people like you do say about disabilities.

I'm sorry that you believe disability is less valueless than healthy. I have my terrible life and my disability, hearing, yet I don’t wish to be not here. Yeah, I am soo "wrong" to say it. I refuse to allow myself to teach me that I'm not matter just because I have disability. I consider both abled and disabled equally matter. *shrugs*

That's why I don't need to owe you an answer, otherwise you'd hate to read my answer would say. You'd dismiss it, anyway.

What about the humanity of the already born woman, doesn't she count for anything? By definition a fetus is a parasite, existing off a host. However, few women will give that as a reason for an abortion and aren't thinking like that at all when they make a decision to terminate a pregnancy.

They would all be pro-choice or really pro-abortion and abortion would be available for free on every corner with some good coffee afterwards.

Waiting until a woman's life is in immediate danger is waiting too long, she will most likely die and if she's in such critical condition performing a C-section might kill her. Women absolutely should have the legal (and moral) right to terminate a pregnancy when her health is severely impacted. My aunt died from complications of pregnancy, an abortion does not help a woman who has kidney failure.

I'm sorry that you believe disability is less valueless than healthy.

Since I never said any such thing, I am calling bullshit once again.

I have my terrible life and my disability, hearing, yet I don’t wish to be not here.

And I'm glad for you. That doesn't mean your experience is universal, which is why I said that Each. Case. Is. Different.

Jesus wept. Can you not read?

it is okay to admit that you cannot answer the question; that's become blatantly obvious anyway at this point.

It should always be the decision of the woman and whoever she chooses to involve in that decision making (husband/partner). Not yours, you aren't going to be taking care of a child with a disability or supporting it or risking your marriage over it.

Offspring have, you know, been "sprung off" — born.

that is trying to kill its host

You really have no idea of the biological realities of pregnancy, do you? The zygote starts to suppress the pregnant woman's immune system the minute that it implants. It takes nutrition away from her body. It uses her kidneys to cycle its waste. It quite literally *does not care* whether its host dies; it is as opportunistic as any parasite.

Every single pregnancy is risky; what risks will manifest are not apparent until a woman is already pregnant. When a potentially fatal complication arises during pregnancy for you, the chances of it happening then become 100 percent. My source on this is primary; I nearly died gestating a wanted pregnancy.

You talk about the humanity of the fetus, but I notice that there is not one single, solitary mention of the humanity of the pregnant woman. Why is that?

Or beer.

No, you kept a lot of people do not want to be here. I pointed out that it is not in that case. I'm not one of them who want to die or don't want to be here, anyway. I read just fine, thanks.

it is okay to admit that you cannot answer the question; that's become blatantly obvious anyway at this point.

Please! That's easy for you to say that. You will dismiss and mock my answer, so no, it's not worthy.

I said each case is different but that I personally know a good many people who wish they had not been born. Seriously, I think you just cannot read.

You haven't answered jack shit, just sidestepped the question i keep asking. The same applies to this most recent non-response. So, I can only continue to surmise that you have no answer. ::shrug::

Once a child has actually been born most forced birthers loose interest, do not really care about quality of life

QFT.

“You really have no idea of the biological realities of pregnancy, do you?”

I know quite a bit more than you give me credit for. However, this is the internet, and a pro-life blog at that, and I do not need to submit my credentials for your approval in order to voice my position here. I have spent the past decade working in women’s health and absolutely understand the physiology and “biological realities” of pregnancy. Which is why I understand that your gloom-and-doom picture of pregnancy is inaccurate. I respect that you had a life-threatening pregnancy. I am very glad that you and your child are okay after what you both went through, and I recognize that your experience understandably affects your view of pregnancy and its risks. That said, anecdotes are not accurate data upon which to base policy and procedure. You are correct that pregnancy CAN be life threatening, but most of the time women’s bodies are perfectly capable of adjusting to and recovering from pregnancy. Unless you respond to any and all pregnancy announcements in the same way that you would respond to a diagnosis of cancer, I suspect that you are perfectly aware that pregnancy is not the life threatening ordeal you make it out to be.

"You talk about the humanity of the fetus, but I notice that there is not one single, solitary mention of the humanity of the pregnant woman. Why is that?"

Because the last time I checked there is no movement in the United States advocating for the termination of inconvenient or unwanted pregnant women. There are about 800 maternal deaths annually in this country out of nearly 4 million births. In the same year, there are just over 1 million documented abortions. To look at those numbers another way, you would need to count the maternal deaths over nearly 4 years to equal the abortion deaths that occur in just one day. To equal the abortion deaths in a year, you would need to count 1,250 YEARS of maternal deaths. If pregnant women were losing their lives at the rate of thousands per day because someone else decided they were inconvenient non-persons based on their level of development, I would absolutely oppose that in every way that I could think of.

This maternal mortality rate is in no way acceptable or dismissible. It is horrifying that 800 women per year lose their lives while bringing their children into the world. Many of the causes of maternal deaths are related to preexisting chronic conditions such as diabetes or hypertension, which tells me that we as a nation need to improve our overall health through prevention and access to care. The fact that there are incredible race disparities in the death rates between white women and women of color, particularly Black women, tells me that white privilege and societal racial inequality have a major impact on women’s health and maternal mortality. None of these issues, however, negate or excuse the fact that a million lives a year are lost to abortion. ALL of these deaths are tragic.

Would you oppose abortion if "only" 800 prenates were aborted per year?

Reproduction is not complete when a man ejaculates. It takes 9 months to make a baby, not one lucky sperm penetrating an egg

If a woman will 100% become permanently paralyzed from the waist down from pregnancy, should she still be forced to gestate against her will?

Right, so you are saying that women do not have an inalienable right to life because, according to you, a single cell is more valuable.

Do you have problems with reading comprehension? That is not even remotely close to what I said. I very clearly stated that in situation where pregnancy actually threatens a woman's life, such as ectopic pregnancy, I support the termination of that pregnancy because the choice is to lose only the embryo, or to lose them both. I would always chose to lose fewer lives.

I'm not sure how you're reading "the single cell is more valuable" into my post. Talking specifically about ectopic pregnancies, most are discovered and aborted between 5-10 weeks of pregnancy, vastly beyond the single cell stage, and even then I would opt to save the mother because I understand that she can survive past the end of the pregnancy, and the fetus (while no less important) is not yet developed enough to do so.

Check this out: http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-england-29594304

If they're okay with killing imprefect unborn ZEFs, then they are probably all right with killing born kids with disabilities.

My ex-husband is a 'post-abortive man'. No, he didn't have an abortion, obviously, but his girlfriend at the time did. It was his child. He didn't pressure her into it, but he definitely supported the abortion. He said it took him him about 20 years to get over the guilt he felt later. He's not religious and no one ever told him that he should feel guilty. But, he did. Yes, there are men who regret abortions.

There are men who regret marriages, too. Regret is a normal human reaction to being in a bad situation, even when you know you're doing the right thing.

Well, I found the news on Tumblr, and most people said they understood her action and not all disabilities are equal. Do you agree that death is solution to everything, right?

I'll quote someone's quote (http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2012_09_01_archive.html?m=1):

Would it not be better to be looking for an option that allows the child — and the family — to have the good while mitigating the bad as much as possible? Would it not be better to provide families with love and support that would enable them to cherish every possible moment of love and happiness? Would it not be better to strive for treatments and cures? And for the families who simply can not cope with the ordeal, would it not be better to place the child in a setting where his or her daunting needs can be met? Would it not be better to offer adoption, foster care, and hospice care?

Even with the best of help, Tay-Sachs is a hellish disease. I can not stand in judgment of the parents who fled to the abortionist.

That's example of why people with disabilities should have some real assistances rather than killing them. I can't see how the killing can "help", but I let pro-choicers think what's best for the disability, anyway.

I stated my words on the other blog: "If she still wants abortion, there is nothing I can do."

*shrugs*

That's strange. I'm sure that I replied to your comment, but it seems it's not there anymore. O.o

Did you see my other comment? Well, it's in a case if you don't see the comment. Here. (Noted: I kinda forget what I originally said, but I tried to do my best to memorize everything I had said.)

Well, I found the news on Tumblr, and most people said they understood her action and not all disabilities are equal. Do you agree that the death is solution to disabilities, right?

I'll quote someone's quote ( http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-viral-tay-sachs-story.html?m=1 ): "Would it not be better to be looking for an option that allows the child — and the family — to have the good while mitigating the bad as much as possible? Would it not be better to provide families with love and support that would enable them to cherish every possible moment of love and happiness? Would it not be better to strive for treatments and cures? And for the families who simply can not cope with the ordeal, would it not be better to place the child in a setting where his or her daunting needs can be met? Would it not be better to offer adoption, foster care, and hospice care?

Even with the best of help, Tay-Sachs is a hellish disease. I can not stand in judgment of the parents who fled to the abortionist."

That's an example of why people with disabilities should have real assistances. I can't see how the killing can " help ", but I will let pro-choicers think what right things for those disabled people, anyway. As I stated my words on the other blog: "If she still wants to have an abortion, then there is nothing I can do."

*shrugs*

I gave up. I'm pretty positive that I did reply to your comment, but I don't see my two comments. I'm not sure what's wrong with this comments section.

So, nevermind..

And what you said makes you seem incredibly irresponsible and beyond selfish. Here's your point of view: 'It's worth it to me to kill someone so that I can have vaginal intercourse. Yay! Look at me be free! Who cares if abortion is a violent and aggressive attack on an innocent life! I'm having fun! Weee!' So sad that people like you exist.

"It exists, and implants, because of the parents' actions."

False. The parents do not control whether or not the blastocyst comes into being after sex or whether the blastocyst implants after coming into being.

Please PLEASE explain how you think the parents POSSIBLY are responsible for implantation. You stupid fool.

If it is your proposition that the parents are responsible for implantation, then every parent—especially those who are practising natural family planning- are also responsible for the failure of blastocysts to implant and their subsequent deaths.

So tell me, why are you not going after all of those sinful catholic women who are practising natural family planning for causing the blastocysts to fail to implant?

My mantra = I – ME – MY – MINE.
Who else should I be concerned about? YOU?
You skeeve me.
When I take the very best care of myself that I can, I find that I have taken good care of all around me for the most part.

Well, they have argued here that it does not matter if the abortive sloots injure themselves with unsafe abortion, because after all, you wouldn't legalize murder just to protect the health of killers, right?

HEY! I like football too.

NOPE. It's a random biological occurrence. 50-70% of all embryos fail to implant, and the woman's body can be expected to reject 25% of those that do implant. That's just how we have evolved to handle reproduction. Not all embryos will result in pregnancy. Not all pregnancies will result in a live birth.

Yeah, it's sickening all right. "You can't have an abortion because it upsets ME ME ME."

MYOB.

This is the summary of a WHO report that asserts that abortion and contraception are human rights. The entire report is available at the link.
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/66/254

Interim report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of
everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable
standard of physical and mental health

Summary
In the present report, the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health considers the interaction between criminal laws and other legal restrictions relating to sexual and reproductive health and the right to health. The right to sexual and reproductive health is a fundamental part of the right to health. States must therefore ensure that this aspect of the right to health is fully realized.

The Special Rapporteur considers the impact of criminal and other legal restrictions on abortion; conduct during pregnancy; contraception and family planning; and the provision of sexual and reproductive education and information.

Some criminal and other legal restrictions in each of those areas, which are often discriminatory in nature, violate the right to health by restricting access to quality goods, services and information. They infringe human dignity by restricting the freedoms to which individuals are entitled under the right to health, particularly in respect of decision-making and bodily integrity. Moreover, the application of such
laws as a means to achieving certain public health outcomes is often ineffective and disproportionate.

Realization of the right to health requires the removal of barriers that interfere with individual decision-making on health-related issues and with access to health services, education and information, in particular on health conditions that only affect women and girls. In cases where a barrier is created by a criminal law or other legal restriction, it is the obligation of the State to remove it. The removal of such laws and legal restrictions is not subject to resource constraints and can thus not be seen as requiring only progressive realization. Barriers arising from criminal laws and other laws and policies affecting sexual and reproductive health must therefore be immediately removed in order to ensure full enjoyment of the right to health.

Dear women and future women of today, let us take a united stance and curse mother nature for our ability to get pregnant. In fact, let us all unite and take a pack in not ever allowing another woman to give birth again. Since the embryo is a parasite and since pregnancy and birth is so life threatening and since the only way we can show the world how women are not worthless is by abortion then abortion should be ENFORCED and BIRTH OF CHILDREN OUTLAWED. That will teach the world the worth of women – are you fuqing kidding me? I am being sarcastic but seriously that is the message your post implies. Do YOU hate women and yourself for our reproductive powers?

Are we humans slaves to nature? You use an IUD, do you not? Why do you hate nature and your biology? Pregnancy is natural and wonderful, you should always embrace it even if it can kill and disable you. In fact, nature made you specifically for pregnancy, so why should you have a CHOICE in the matter?

Abortion is not taxpayer funded. Hyde amendment. Nice histrionics though.

Do you know what the word "choice" means?

Abortion opponents want to force women to gestate, which does in fact put women's lives and health at risk.

Last I checked, no one is forcing you to swim, to drive, to fly, or to eat.

Not yet but there is a push to make it tax-payer funded or did you forget about that?

Moving the goalposts tsk tsk.

I'm not the one advocating an extreme opposite. There is nothing wrong with menstruating, with conceiving, with being pregnant and with giving birth. There is no shame in it and women should not be degraded for it or be mislead to fear it or be ashamed of it. I love being a woman. You should too.

And I suggest you look up the red herring fallacy
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

The fact that pregnancy is a medical condition is true. It is a FACT that pregnancy can maim kill and injure. It is also a FACT that abortion can't always save a woman's life when pregnancy goes wrong. A red herring is an irrelevant distraction. My rebuttal was no such thing and is completely FACTUAL.

No, there is no shame in that. But it shoukd also be a CHOICE, considering the risks, don't you agree?

Note the word "most". "Gestational complications are the number one cause of death among women worldwide" Really? What about cancer, heart attacks, and domestic violence to name a few?

No one said that you must love motherhood and children and pregnancy but neither should it be degraded and feared and encouraged as something to be ashamed.

I think motherhood and children are fantastic, for women who choose that route. Nothing wrong with it at all. But it should be a choice.

Yes, life is about risk. That's why we should leave the decisions to the person who would actually be assuming that risk–the woman who is actually pregnant

She is like Muriel, but with more anger.

Unless you can be pregnant for someone else, you don't get a say in how much risk they should be willing to assume.

WTF are you even talking about? I point out that no tax dollars are used for abortions because of the Hyde Amendment and you go off about my vagina?

Seek help for whatever the hell is wrong with you.

Actually, I just don't like think that I should have my bodily integrity violated on behalf of another. Also, the risks, the pain, make it even less desirable.

Now what is objectively wrong with that?

Do you think that you should be able to have a say in how much risk someone else should be willing to assume?

Your analogy, sweetie.

Okay. I'm going to get some more coffee, because I don't even know what the hell you're babbling on about. The only one who's been talking about being ashamed of their bodies is you. Perhaps in future discussions you might actually try addressing my point instead of sidestepping?

You are so full of shit. Back your fear mongering statements up with science and facts. Go ahead. I dare you.

Clearly, the CDC hates vaginas too:
http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregcomplications.htm

He already has. More than a few times now.

Do you think it's okay to scare women with bogus statistics and bad science into not getting pregnant or giving birth?

No, I am not. I am merely refuting the oft made claim that pregnancy is a minor inconvenience.

That's not what night porter is saying at all.

No one here is doing that.

Oh, where does it state that maternal conditions are the number one cause of death for women in the world? Where? Because the leading cause for death for women in the world is Heart disease.

Prove that the science and statistics are incorrect. Non biased peer reviewed publications only.

There's nothing wrong with a woman choosing to get pregnant and give birth. No one ever said there was, as long as it's a freely-made choice.

Oh, here we go, when all else fails, play the victim card.

Explain what is objectively wrong with not wanting one's bodily integrity violated?

Nice? Personally, I think that refusing to give straight answers and misrepresenting someone else's position is not nice at all. But that's what you've been doing here. In fact, that's all you've been doing. You haven't been trying to have a discussion.

Nothing I said has anything at all to do with fear mongering.

How is night porter 'playing the victim card'?

Playing the shame to be pregnant and give birth game comes from negative MALE centric view of female bodes. Wake the fuck up.

So forced childbearing is the solution to that?

So forced childbirth will overthrow teh patriarchy?

Bullshit. The three of you preached how pregnancy and birth are bad because it kills women. Stop back pedaling.

That's not what we at all did. All we said was that pregnancy carries risk, and the decision about whether to assume that risk should be made by the woman who is actually pregnant. So you can stop lying now.

Do you think women should be able to legally end a pregnancy if they decide they want to?

Straw man. No one has been advocating that. And you still haven't answered my question.

Bullshit. That's exactly what has been advocated. Stop running away and backpedaling.

Stop misrepresenting Jennifer Starr. Nowhere has she advocated for forced abortion.

Medical reality to counter pro life lies is not "fear mongering", sweetie.

Nope.

The only one who has been talking about forced abortions is you. Is it possible for you to have a debate without lying about what the other person represents?

Bullshit. Porter brought it up. It's a very effective guilt inducing tactic and one that was attempted to be used against me. Nice try though.

Do you really want me to flood you with copied and pasted messages that you wrote? Instead of getting your feelings hurt, next time bring up a valid counterargument without attacking someone and then you might be amazed how a healthy discussion can be achieved. Would you like me to give you some valid pro-abortion arguments? I'm all about helping others out.

I'm sorry you're so stupid, sweetie. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maternal-deaths-in-childbirth-rise-in-the-us/2014/05/02/abf7df96-d229-11e3-9e25-188ebe1fa93b_story.html

No love, someone who nearly died due to gestational complications.

Now, GFY.

I did acknowledge but YOU chose to act like a bitch about it and tried to turn that acknowledgement into an attack. Now you want to play victim? Sweetie, the three of you are better than this. Women are better than this.

Actually what I disagree with is teaching women to fear their bodies. I disagree with using abortions as a societal Band-Aid instead of addressing issues like domestic violence, educational and employment opportunities and the advertisement of abortion as a fucking cure all for women's issues with primarily male owned clinics that make mad profits off of the bodies of women and their unborn children. I'm disagree with women being so ashamed of their bodies and themselves that they falsely believe that adopting male behavioral traits promotes equality for women. It's time to stand up against the bullshit. It's time to stand against assholes making mad money off of our bodies like some kind of medical form of prostitution. It's time for women to have REAL CHOICES instead of option one -carry the baby and risk baby taken away by violent spouse, or lose educational opportunities, or lose employment, or be slut shamed to option two- just kill the baby and be slut shamed anyway and fool ourselves into thinking that we shafted male domination by having an abortion.

Abortion is a real choice. Just like the choice to have a child and either raise that child or give them up for adoption. Nothing to do with 'adopting male behavioral traits' or 'shafting male domination'. If a woman is pregnant and she doesn't want to be, she should have the choice to end that pregnancy.

Right. Let's just cling to that and ignore all the women out there that have been through this and are going through this. Well, you can. I choose to fight for women because women do deserve better than this nonsense.

Oh, look who is butt hurt because I called her bullshit out.

No one is teaching women to fear their bodies you dishonest twit.

As has been repeatedly explained to you, pro-lifers like to pretend that abortion is the greatest of all evils, and that pregnancy is the best thing that can happen to a woman – that a woman isn't a 'real woman' until she's given birth, and that pregnancy cures cancer, diabetes and auto-immune diseases. All bullshit. What we are doing is countering that, and simply saying that pregnancy is a medical condition, and that ONLY the person facing the risk should decide whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term. No one else can make that decision for them.

There's only one person here who has been tossing bullshit out, and it isn't me or night porter.

Basically it's a combination of Muriel, Anglel and that other girl who said that she had 'refruited' us. .

Human greed includes the utterly selfish desire to reproduce. And the total biomass on the planet is finite. That means the more biomass that gets tied up in the form of human bodies and human food sources, the less biomass is available for everything else, trees, flowers, birds, whales, etc. THAT is why 3 species are going extinct every hour, a direct consequence of human greed/selfishness/overpopulation. What right do humans have to do that? "Might makes right?" Ego? Stupid Prejudice? I greatly doubt you can present ANY valid reason for forcing more human mouths-to-feed to get born!

Again, you came out with the butt hurt bullshit. Don't dish it if you can't take it.

Oh, Christine! Yes, she "refruited" us all right. BWAHAHAHAHA!

What complete and utter bullshit. You do not get to decide how much medical risk anyone other than yourself is going to take. Please feel free to gestate any pregnancies you so desire, regardless of their risk. That's your choice. Another woman need not do the same.

No, dummy. No one did any such thing. Everyone has pointed out ACCURATELY that every pregnancy is risky, and that those risks cannot be predicted until the woman is actually pregnant.

Jesus wept. Were you homeschooled by imbeciles?

You took the time to write that, but couldn't take the time to answer the question?

Denial. Wow. How about earning the vagina you were born with and actually step up to tactics that you supported.

Kindness? Please. Dishonest and disingenuous, yes, but trust me, I never thought of you as 'kind'. And no one here is 'pro-abortion'. We are pro-choice and you are anti-choice.

You seem to be really obsessed with other women's vaginas. Why is that?

Are you trying to position yourself as kind?

What a frigging laugh.

No. What you did is ignore the fact that not only inadequate healthcare is the primary reason why we have maternal deaths but also refused to acknowledge other very serious conditions cause the deaths of more women than pregnancy and childbirth. And your solution for maternal deaths that do happen? Abortion instead of access to healthcare for these women. Yet another way of using abortion as a Band-Aid instead of actually finding real solutions for women.

Not in cases when it could have been easily prevented.

Such as?

Jenn, this is ALL about your vagina. Don't be shy.

And I'm supposed to 'earn it', apparently. Stranger and stranger.

What if Jennifer can't earn it? Should she give it up? Hand it over to someone who can handle the awesome responsibility of owning a vagina?

Perhaps Jennifer should start out with a training vagina:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqAjWoToDPo

Do you think she can handle the responsibility?

Reading her replies reminds me of why I no longer call myself 'pro-life'.

No. Childbirth and pregnancy is not the leading cause of death for women. I know it's hard for you to accept and would rather call me a liar than accept that but it does not make it any less true.

Why don't they deserve to have one?

I'm sorry you don't have a sense of humor.

You do realize that I was using it as a metaphor representing feminine courage, right?

I do kegel exercises–wonder if that counts.

Does it count if i do kegel exercises?

And as long as we're going to be talking about who's courageous here, might I point out that you've already said that if you got pregnant again that you would abort to preserve your health. Or would your abortion be more 'moral' than others?

Probably, but I still think vaginas are awesome and tired of the way people treat vaginas like it's something to be ashamed of – in fact there is no reason for any woman to be ashamed or fearful of any part of her body. There is no reason for women to resent their bodies. There are different reasons why people support or do not support abortions, some valid. Some not. And most people on either side of the coin even share similar views if the could just sit down and talk without allowing irrelevant and divisive rhetoric to stand in their way. Fact is that abortion is legal and a constitutionally protected right within the United States. Fact is other countries that have practiced zero tolerance for abortion and banned it have contributed to easily preventable deaths. Fact is that extremists on the pro-life side have gone as far as to try to make miscarriage itself as validation to hold women as murder suspects. However, many pro-lifers do not endorse that kind of extremism. I may personally despise abortion and because I despise it I will advocate for alternate solutions to abortions, which many pro-choicers also do but I would never vote to make abortion illegal, judge a woman for having an abortion, slut-shame a woman for having an abortion, rally outside an abortion clinic or stand by or agree to a woman's medical records (or anyone else's) and/or treatment plan to be violated . I consider an unborn child to be a life but mom's emotional, mental and physical health come first. Still, it doesn't change the fact that abortions aren't always the best solutions for women and in some cases have harmed women more than it has helped them. If women are to make a true choice, whether it's to keep her unborn child or abort, then women deserve all the facts, without fallacies, without bad science, without emotional and mental manipulation from either side. She can not undo either decision once she is pregnant. Society owes it to women to help her make the best choice for herself and her child and not force political agendas on her.

It was funny. Doesn't mean that I had to admit it.

Choosing to engage in sexual activity without using protection. At sixteen, though I was staunchly pro-choice, I bought my own birth control because I knew that at sixteen I did not want to get pregnant (my guardian refused to take me to Planned Parenthood or a doctor to obtain birth control) and abortion was not an option for me (my guardian would never have consented to an abortion either). When birth control fails and sometimes it does, okay, got it. But there is no excuse not to be responsible (unless of course a woman or young lady was not educated in the birds and bees).

You should, you're the one who is obsessed with her vajayjay.

Do you seek to criminalize abortion?

I kind of wonder if you're talking about the uterus now, seeing as how that's where a fetus would be carried.

First there is denial of endorsing women to fear their bodies and now you go back to it? Which is it? Can you make up your mind? You think calling me stupid and your refusal to stop manipulating facts is going to make you right? Yes women develop such conditions while pregnant but guess what? Women also develop these conditions without being pregnant! And the data is separate from women that have these conditions without being pregnant from those that developed these conditions while being pregnant, did not have access to medical care to treat these conditions and in this country it's more likely to happen to a woman of color than a white mom; and lack of medical care for treatable conditions is causing the deaths of these women and NOT BECAUSE SHE "FOOLISHLY" HAD A BABY. In fact, a friend of mine was rejected by North Carolina Medicaid though she was pregnant, a very much wanted pregnancy because she was planning on allowing her gay sister and her partner to adopt the baby. The state kept "losing" her paper work. She had no access to medical care and unknowingly developed gestational diabetes. She gave vaginal birth to a 19lb stillborn because the doctors wouldn't listen to her in the emergency room to go ahead and deliver the baby before the baby died. Then she was denied pain medication after losing the baby because they mistakenly believed her to be an addict – just because she is black. And guess what? Cape Fear Hospital is so well connected that no lawyer would touch the case and ironically, the state came through after the baby died. There are many women like her and promoting fear with glorifying abortion as an answer to maternal deaths is not a solution. Making sure that women have healthcare is the solution. And please leave the slut-shaming out of any response you may have. I really don't want to read how she asked for it by deciding to have a baby while being poor because she didn't.

Lying about what, Jennifer? Pregnancy and childbirth is not the leading cause of death for women. Saying that it is the leading cause of death promotes fear.

You will be carrying one in your fleshlight, because you haven't yet earned the right to carry a fetus in your http://win.allbestsoft.com/scr/391/free-pussy-cat-screensaver-big-2.jpg

"Gestational complications ARE the leading cause of death for women world-wide". No it is not. And your words, not mine.

You need help.

Or even how some artists have made gory works of "art" out of aborted fetuses?

Do you mean people responsible for the photos that anti-choicers love to brandish?

Right. I also needed three other people to be at my side to gang up on you. Oh, wait.

You should look into a career writing fiction; you have a very vivid imagination.

I'll concede your point. It does seem that way but on the other hand, not a single one of you offered an original point except the person that seems to have ancient middle eastern beliefs that giving birth is selfish.

"Gestational complications ARE the leading cause of death for women world-wide". Your words. False information. Promotes fear.

It is NOT false information, you clot-brained laggard. It is accurate.

You are too stupid for color TV.

You and me both, sister. I'm embarrassed to have ever been part of that idiotic movement. Perhaps she will grow up some day.

Wow. So many straw men in so little space.

Your "metaphor" is absurd.

Should Jennifer be proud of her Fleshlight? Does she even deserve one?

The other girl who claimed to be black or something, and told us that she believed in the intrinsic worth of fetuses, however, fetuses could be killed provided the woman used birth control – but if the slut had unprotected sex, the fetus suddenly had a right to life.

She impressed us with her superior knowledge by throwing around the word 'eroteme' a lot.

Next you will be praising Nazis.

Yes, the World Health Organization consists of nothing but liars.

Actually, the WHO goes on at great length about how dangerous pregnancy is.

Oh, look how clever and cool you are! I'm sure you will win some popularity points.

Well, should she? Stop evading, it's a serious question.

"Only an imbecile" blah, blah, blah. Because when logic hurts, then throw out constant name calling.

Only the ones you refer to, right?

Actually, Hitler was anti-choice – he banned contraception and abortion and strongly encouraged aryan women to breed like rabbits.

Yes. Of course we do. I mean, fiona almost died to give birth to her much loved child, clearly she hates children. In fact, the majority of pro-choice women that I know chose to have kids, often multiples, I guess they hate children too eh?

Oh no. She claims I'm laughable. How will I ever survive?

Or you would like for people to believe as such?

Who the fuck endorsed a "candy coated drivel"? PMSing much?

You are right. Women should fear their bodies. Fear pregnancy. Fear birth. Fear chicken little falling out of the sky. Fear the bogey man under the bed. Be good humans and not procreate so that big industry and corporations can rake in profits and the rich can inherit the earth.

Straw man.

You'd make an unwilling teen gestate as punishment? How do you think she'll feel about the baby when it's born?

I have answered. You just haven't read.

Bullshit.

And that's homosexual shaming how?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe it has something to do with rejecting societal degradation of women and their body parts. But if you are okay with that……

Citation needed.

No one else is saying that. Except for you.

You're the one who gets her panties in a knot over talking about the realities of pregnancy.

My pro-choice grandparents chose to have seven.

Yes, clearly they are heartless babykillers.

Worry about your own and let others worry about theirs. That generally works best. It works for pregnancies as well.

I'd be fascinated to know how I pick what you write.

Overconsumption of the planet's resources. Humans are using at least two earths worth of resources right now. We can't sustain the population we have now. Add to that climate change and we have mass starvation and war.

How does any of what I said above translate to hating my vagina?

That is not at all true.

Is that even a response?

We don't know each other here. I wouldn't make assumptions.

Yes, we hate children so much that we want them to be born wanted and loved. What a terrible thing.

Considering I wasn't talking about you and just the four people I have been having this ridiculous argument since this morning and you just decided to pop your head in, I would say that I'm not the one making assumptions, dear.

Well the space was not exactly blank, was it?

Really? Please enlighten me.

No one here has been doing that.

That they consider only the data they provide as relevant. Even though it didn't support their claims.

While ignoring a whole paragraph that I wrote on it. I'm not going to write that again. Find it and read it if you want an answer.

Yes they did. Did you read the thread?

I agree that it is a private decision between a woman and her doctor. What I don't agree with is the nonsense that childbearing is the leading cause of death for women and that abortion is the solution.

Oh. So when women are raped. Be silent about it. When women are abused. Be silent about it. When women are sexually harassed in the work place, school or rape victims are slut-shamed, be silent about it. In fact it seems that the only thing you think women should stand up for is abortion.

Nice copycatting.

Straw man. You can speak up about all that without being overly concerned with someone else's genitalia.

Oh, because I don't support your panic campaign. I didn't support the Eubola panic campaign either. Yes, I know, it's crazy.

On the contrary, your friend was the one preaching for the 800 women that die from childbirth and that abortion is the solution for those issues and promoting it is the leading cause of death, when it isn't.

My friend said that women should have the right to choose abortion–not that it is the only solution.

Oh, I'm sorry. You and your friends were accusing me of being obsessed with your vagina because you bore me good will and intentions and of course, no one has ever used such an analogy to convey that someone else is a homosexual. Nope. Not at all.

Bullshit, happens to be my coin phrase on this particular forum. Can't you be more creative and come up with something different? While you're at it, perhaps if you are really that concerned about my reply then actually stop being lazy and look for it yourself? That's not to much to ask, is it? I'm not actually risking injuring your brain by asking you to do your own work, am I?

Balderdash.

No. Falsely claiming that childbearing is the leading cause of death for women is a straw man. Actually, it is just intellectually dishonest because I have hard time believing that you are truly that stupid. If anything, I believe you know it's not true but like to influence others to believe as such. I have to admit, it works well.

Which is why I made sure not to include biased sources. That did take awhile. Extremists from both sides seem to dominate the internet with bullshit. But hey, if rejecting the truth makes the clouds a little more pink and fluffy on your planet, then so be it.

Well, finally, you demonstrated some originality and creativity. Good for you!!!!

I don't think that lesbians share the level of obsession. I have several lesbian friends and strangely enough, the subject of our vaginas never enters the discussion.

Um. Abortion is illegal in Ireland and they have a lower rate of maternal deaths. In fact, Saudi Arabia has better healthcare for women then we do and they have a much lower rate of maternal deaths. Also, maternal deaths are increasing in our country due to lack of healthcare. Globally, it is lack of access to healthcare that is the primary cause of maternal deaths. I have only repeated this like a broken record, even after providing resources. I just don't get why people want to hold on to that fallacy. I would think people would be relieved and at least try to advocate for healthcare for women.

Women do have the right to choose abortion.