Pixies Place Forums - One Step Forward...Alito Steps Backward...our country recedes????

wyndhy

01-19-2006, 09:31 AM

What are your feelings on "Women's Rights"? jeepers that's a tricky, convoluted, multifaceted thing but i'll keep it short. since they needed to make it a law in the first place, then i believe they should have afforded men those same rights. if a woman knows who the father is, he needs to be notified. (of course, i realize that there is no way to tell if a woman is lying when she says she doesn't know but still, they left them (men) out of it completely.) i feel the same way about minors, parents should be notified. exceptions to both cases would be emergency life-saving situations

Roe vs. Wade? it still amazes me we actually needed a law.

The Supreme Court? it is a necessity, and an extremely important part of our govn’t.

The retirement of Ms. O"Connor? i wish she would have waited a few more years, but it’s her life.

The placement of Mr. Alito? only time will tell

Mrs. Alito's breakdown as Judge Alito was questioned by the Democratic party? boo-hoo. didn’t get much sympathy from me. buck up, lady.

And finally...

What good or bad will befall us upon his appointment? no clue. again, only time will tell

Add anything that is on your mind! * drools *

fredchabotnick

01-19-2006, 09:26 PM

My feelings are that this is just another step towards the far religious right. My problem with this is simply that many of them feel that their beliefs should be the beliefs of everyone, and are taking steps to legislate it that way. My feelings on this are simple, if you feel something is wrong, don't do it. Don't make it illegal or try to control it.

But that's just me.

Steph

01-19-2006, 09:32 PM

It's the same way with our Supreme Court & I think it gives the gov't too much power. Bush has been able to nominate two? three? judges now? Same with the papacy. When are we ever going to see a liberal pope?

rabbit

01-19-2006, 09:38 PM

What are your feelings on "Women's Rights"? I think the biggest body of work left is in the workplace (inequalities in pay, opportunities for advancement, work/family flex, etc.)

Roe vs. Wade? I think it is legalized murder though I do believe there are circumstances where it should be permitted.

The Supreme Court? A generally wise institution.

The retirement of Ms. O'Connor? Good luck and long life to her. And many thanks for her service to our country.

The placement of Mr. Alito? Too early to tell yet.

Mrs. Alito's breakdown as Judge Alito was questioned by the Democratic party? She should have been prepared for the rough questioning her husband was going to get.

What good or bad will befall us upon his appointment? Too early to tell yet.

dicksbro

01-20-2006, 07:05 AM

When are we ever going to see a liberal pope?

Makes me think of Lincoln's response when asked if he thought God was on the Union's side in the civil war. His response, "I just hope we're on His."

Point, I wouldn't hope for either a liberal or a conservative pope, only one that, to the best of his ability, attempts to communicates what he believes is God's intent. Same is true for religious leaders of all faiths.

Roe v Wade ... I was sympathic at the time of the ruling, but it concerns me that over 50 million new lives have been done away with and that we continue to lose over 3,000 new lives each day. It also concerns me that I've read of significant numbers of post abortion complications ... physical and psychological for the ladies that have undergone abortions ... including many deaths. I read that the Center for Disease Control has said that the abortion death rate increases 40 to 60 percent per week for each week of delay after the eighth week. These never seem to get reported by the mainstream press. In a European study, almost 25% of the women who "interrupt their first pregnancy" have remained permanently childless. It also troubles me that suicide rates for women who have had abortions is many times higher than for those that carry their babies to term.

I wish there were more emphasis on the harm we may be doing to women without giving them all the information to let them make informed decisions and more focus on making all medical procedures safer. I think it's a sin when we hurt people and then hide the hurt.

Does this mean I'm pro-life. I guess it does, but, more than that ... I think we need to have really open and honest discussions of what's happening. Too many lives are being lost and too many people hurt to assume there's nothing here worth discussing.

And, on Alito. It's interesting that two of three rulings he has made upheld the RvW. I really think as a judge on the Supreme Court, his task is to rule on the constitutionality of issue at hand, not to make new policy. It troubles me whenever a judge displays an activist agenda because his/her rulings than can become law without any vote. I keep thinking creating laws is supposedly the reason we have congress.

BIBI

01-20-2006, 08:11 AM

I would love to comment here but since I am trying to come to terms with the three stooges vying for the opportunity to form our next government I must button my lip and move on......AND bite my tongue lol :)

Steph

01-20-2006, 09:01 AM

Makes me think of Lincoln's response when asked if he thought God was on the Union's side in the civil war. His response, "I just hope we're on His."

Point, I wouldn't hope for either a liberal or a conservative pope, only one that, to the best of his ability, attempts to communicates what he believes is God's intent. Same is true for religious leaders of all faiths.

LOL DB, I heard that quote the other day, too. Great one!

I am Catholic born & bred and but all I wish is that condoms are permitted (OK, that's not all but that's the big one for me).

Aqua

01-20-2006, 12:16 PM

LOL DB, I heard that quote the other day, too. Great one!

I am Catholic born & bred and but all I wish is that condoms are permitted (OK, that's not all but that's the big one for me).
I completely agree with that Steph.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 04:11 PM

Roe v Wade ... I was sympathic at the time of the ruling, but it concerns me that over 50 million new lives have been done away with and that we continue to lose over 3,000 new lives each day. It also concerns me that I've read of significant numbers of post abortion complications ... physical and psychological for the ladies that have undergone abortions ... including many deaths.

I would think that if the numbers were truly that significant for a procedure that by your figures is done 3,000 time a day in America there would be a bigger outcry by insurance and other health care initiatives. I personally have only heard the dangers of abortion pointed out those who are pro life, never a neutral organization.

As for parental notification, I walk the fence here because as a parent I feel I have the right to know but as a child advocate I know that some young women who become pregnant have been the victims of incest and in that case the parent should be relieved of all decision making, without it taking an injunction to have that happen.

Father's rights, another line... if a father is given the right to know prior and have a say in whether the woman can abort then could that be flipped to where a pregant woman could be taken to court to force her to have an abortion if the father chose NOT to have the baby or could he be excused from providing support if he would have preferred the woman abort?

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 04:37 PM

interesting point lil. imho ... NEVER should any woman be forced to have an abortion. the father could, instead, be required to legally give up any claim to the child and yes, not be required to provide support.

your concerns regarding victims of incest are totally legit and i wish there was a way to wave a wand and determine who is a fit parent and who isn’t. however, there are no other circumstances where they withhold medical info from parents, abortion should be no different. it would make it hard for child advocates like yourself to help the victim make that decision, i know, but to make it illegal or unnecessary to notify parents essentially takes away parent's rights. and for those of us who would never hurt our children, it’s a real slap in the face. it just doesn’t seem to me that we (parents) should lose rights across the board because it would make it easier for legal purposes.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 04:42 PM

Aqua

01-20-2006, 04:57 PM

I know...and I agree basically, it's just one of those places where I can't make my heart and mind both agree on a position.

I think if we start allowing men to avoid support by simply saying they don't/didn't want the child we will be in a world of hurt.
I agree with you on that point Lilith, however (and at the risk of straying from the topic), I think there needs to be a change in the support/visitation system. If a man is responsible for the creation of a child he is responsible for supporting that child. I also would hope he would do his best to be a father for the child and not just a paycheck. In cases where he is not given that opportunity because the mother decides she doesn't want to tell him about the child (until, say, 10 years down the road) I don't believe he should be financially responsible at that point, unless he wants to be. In this scenario he was not given the choice of being a father for those ten years so he should not be charged support for that time. Given a case where the mother believes the father's involvement in the life of the child would be harmful then she names him as the father and has the court limit his access.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 05:00 PM

I agree there is a huge problem with that. I have seen it in my district dependency court. The problem is that often it's a he said/she said regarding whther the man was told.

BIBI

01-20-2006, 05:01 PM

My thoughts are real simple on this matter.

When men can carry a baby and give birth, only then should they have any say in the matter. A woman's body is just that...hers.

No one should tell a woman what she can and can't do regarding her body. If a man does not want to live up to his responsibilities and rights as a parent, he will find a way not to anyway without having any say in the matter of abortion.

I am of the belief that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control, yet in saying that I will not judge any woman who decides for her own personal reasons to terminate a pregnancy. It is easy to say that there are other alternatives but until you have walked in the shoes of someone facing such a decision any discussion IMO is moot.

I have taken a few of the girls that I have had in my care for abortions and each time my heart broke for them and their decisions but I never once placed my views above theirs and offered anything other than support for the decision that they made.

I think I will get back to the three stooges here in Canada.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 05:02 PM

i know, it's damn tricky. but when it comes down to it, men have just as much right to see their child come into the world as the mother does.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 05:04 PM

it's a tough one because with rights come responsibility and some of that just can't be placed with a man.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 05:09 PM

that's true, but again i think that in order to make it easier for legal puposes, it steps all over the good guys... or at least the people just trying to do what's right for them.

i see it everywhere: becasue of the assholes of the world, normal, decent people get stripped of their rights.

Aqua

01-20-2006, 05:12 PM

it's a tough one because with rights come responsibility and some of that just can't be placed with a man.
Could you please explain which responsibilites, that come with parental rights, those would be?

WildIrish

01-20-2006, 05:38 PM

I would be devastated to learn of having lost a child to abortion without even being made aware of it's existance.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 05:38 PM

i am not speaking for lil here aqua, but i took it to mean prenatal responsibilities.

jseal

01-20-2006, 06:06 PM

Aqua

01-20-2006, 06:13 PM

Ah, I think you are likely correct wyndhy. If such is the case I am inclined to agree with Lil. In my feeble mind I can think of no workable solution in allowing the father an option when it comes to an abortion. As it stands, abortion is legal, so the choice should be with the woman.

On the subject of RvW... My views mirror that of Rabbit and dicksbro.

I also agree with WI's statement above, and take it a step further in that I would feel the same if I were aware or not.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 06:28 PM

there isn't a workable solution. this is why i think it annoys me there need be any laws in the first place. whether it's legal or not, it's going to happen so let people work it out amongst themselves, for themselves and by themselves and govn't should stay the hell out of it...they should literally have no position.

i feel the same way about right to die

Aqua

01-20-2006, 06:40 PM

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 06:51 PM

of course not. i meant laws regarding abortion.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 06:53 PM

or anything else that has to do with a person's body and no-one elses. drugs, seatbelts, right to die, etc.

Aqua

01-20-2006, 07:01 PM

I didn't want to assume. There are some people that have the viewpoint that there should be no laws. Some feel there should be no Govt. Some may even feel I should be Supreme Dictactor of Earth. (If there is such a person(s), I'm thankful I don't know them... that's lunacy right there!)

I don't think that anything should be made legal on the basis that people are going to do it anyway.

wyndhy

01-20-2006, 07:11 PM

i understand. the first part of my post was not clear. what i'm saying is i don't think abortion should be legal or illegal. the govn't should have no position. if a woman, or a couple, want to terminate a pregnancy it is between them, not them and the govn't.

but it's too late to go back now

Lilith

01-20-2006, 07:33 PM

Insurers are for profit organizations. Full term pregnancies cost more than abortions, most of which are performed early in pregnancy. An early pregnancy abortion costs less than an advanced pregnancy abortion. As it is not in an insurer’s best interests to publicize information which may increase its operating costs, such publication does not occur.

In the U.S.:

Early pregnancy abortions can cost anywhere from $350 to $600. The cost for a late second trimester procedure can cost up to as much as $3,000.

The estimated cost of delivery alone is $6,000 – $8,000 for a normal pregnancy and the cost increases if it is a high risk pregnancy. Well Baby visits add to the cost

I was not referring to the cost to health insurance per procedure but more the cost to insurance companies if it were true that abortions were leaving a wide trail of death and disaster to the women having abortions. I would think the lawsuits and out of court settlements would make insuring those doctors prohibitive if it were the case that the procedure was so dangerous to women.

I've had the procedure and in my personal observation it was physically easier to bear than wisdom teeth removal. Emotionally it was life altering.

And yes TY wyndhy I meant men can't take the responsibility of gestation and delivery.

jseal

01-20-2006, 07:42 PM

A full term pregnancy carries significantly higher risks for women under the age of 20. One in every 400,000 women dies from an abortion while 7 out of 100,000 (28 times greater) die from carrying a pregnancy full term.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 07:51 PM

Oh and Lixy as for Mrs. Alito's tears...I'm sure it's difficult to watch your spouse be placed under a microscope but too bad so sad. If he is going to hold a position that in this country bears lifelong power, he damn sure should be prepared to have every hair examined.

lizzardbits

01-20-2006, 08:40 PM

I've had the procedure and in my personal observation it was physically easier to bear than wisdom teeth removal. Emotionally it was life altering.

Oh Lilith, how very strong of you to share something that personal. I was going to keep my nose out of this thread, but i now feel that i can share too.

Although i am sure that my story is not unique, i am sure that there are other's out there that come close. My child was conceived through force from an unknown man (i still have difficulties with saying the "R" word) When i found out that i was PG, i knew that I couldn't live with myself if i terminated. I had the questions of deformity, diseases, and other complications but I knew that i could love the child however the child was born. My ex, whom i didn't tell about my baby's conception until many years later, has chosen to remain my child's father and is as active in my child's life as distance allows. As far as he is concerned he is my child's "daddy" and that is all there is to it. (I know he lurks, so props to you ex) Everyonce in a while i see certain looks that my child does that gives me the heebie jeebies, but i don't love my child ANY less for it, and both of my children are miracles to me.

I used to be of the opinion that no abortions should happen unless the mother's physical life, and not lifestyle, was threatened. I was waaaaaaaaaaay Pro-Life and did some demonstrations back when i was a teen. Today, i still lean towards pro-life, but after "walking" in other's shoes, i no longer have the heart to condemn. Every woman who becomes pregnant, unless they spontaniously miscarry, makes the choice to carry it or terminate, some are just more obvious than others.

It is my opinion that Bush won his presidency on these Supreme Court nominations. People knew that there were going to be vacancies in this term and who ever was elected had the chance to sway the S C to his ideals and beliefs. I agree that S C nominations should be done differently, by a popular American vote (leave the electoral college out) perhaps? Thusly, the American public having more say in how their Constitution is upheld.

Lilith

01-20-2006, 08:55 PM

jseal

01-20-2006, 10:03 PM

dicksbro,

Was this the study you were referring to? Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94 (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1431)

scotzoidman

01-21-2006, 12:25 AM

You are the brave one. I had the procedure but not by choice. My baby died or was never physically viable. I was 10-12 weeks pregnant but the baby was only 8-10. When I began to miscarry I had the procedure. I had tried for years to get pregnant. Luckily 3 months later I was blessed with the news that my son was on the way.
Very similar to what happened to Mrs Zoid, Lil...twice she began to miscarry at 12 weeks, but she had to have the D&C procedure or risk hemmoraging to death...the Dr assured us that they were likely "blighted ova," or bad eggs that would never really develop, & many women probably have them & never know anything beyond they missed a period or two...she began to feel she might be cursed to never have babies, but eventually we did have 2 boys...
personally I don't like the idea of using abortion as routine birth control, because it's NOT routine...but in the complex real world, I don't like seeing my government limit our options...sometimes medical neccesity has to override squemish concerns...

dicksbro

01-21-2006, 06:19 AM

I would think that if the numbers were truly that significant for a procedure that by your figures is done 3,000 time a day in America there would be a bigger outcry by insurance and other health care initiatives. I personally have only heard the dangers of abortion pointed out those who are pro life, never a neutral organization.

I wasn't making up the number 3,000. The statistics on the number of abortions is based on the annual numbers ...

1996 - 1,365,700
1995 - 1,363,700
1994 - 1,431,000
1993 - 1,500,000
1992 - 1,528,900
1991 - 1,556,500
1990 - 1,608,600
1989 - 1,566,900
1988 - 1,590,800
1987 - 1,559,100
1986 - 1,574,000
1985 - 1,588,600
1984 - 1,577,200
1983 - 1,575,000
1982 - 1,573,900
1981 - 1,577,300
1980 - 1,553,900
1979 - 1,497,700
1978 - 1,409,600
1977 - 1,316,700
1976 - 1,179,300
1975 - 1,034,200
1974 - 898,600
1973 - 774,600

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats_2.htm

... and, as far as risks go ... there are many reports. I susggest at least looking at

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abriskeditorial.html

Lilith

01-21-2006, 09:56 AM

I wasn't suggesting you made up the number DB I was referring to the number of dangerous incidents or deaths due to abortion complications. If there are 3,000 abortions a day then there would be much more real evidence of a problem with the procedure if it were the case that it was exceedingly dangerous to the woman. As for issues like breast cancer, that risk is present in cases of miscarriage as well. My understanding is that women who are overweight are at a much greater risk of breast cancer but I don't think the government needs to make decisions about their grocery lists.

osuche

01-21-2006, 07:46 PM

My thoughts are real simple on this matter.

When men can carry a baby and give birth, only then should they have any say in the matter. A woman's body is just that...hers.

No one should tell a woman what she can and can't do regarding her body. If a man does not want to live up to his responsibilities and rights as a parent, he will find a way not to anyway without having any say in the matter of abortion.

I am of the belief that abortion should not be used as a means of birth control, yet in saying that I will not judge any woman who decides for her own personal reasons to terminate a pregnancy. It is easy to say that there are other alternatives but until you have walked in the shoes of someone facing such a decision any discussion IMO is moot.

That ^^ sums up my views on the subject. I believe a woman has a right to choose whether to have an abortion...although I don't want anyone to make such a decision lightly, or to view abortion as an easy form of birth control.

LixyChick

01-22-2006, 05:03 PM

If the particulars of Roe vs. Wade were overturned and tweeked...the "hanger abortion" and the "back alley" abortion rate would be booming...therefore posing more of a health risk on a woman than legal abortion is today!

This country has taken sooooooooooooooo many steps back into the past since the current Bush administration. I can't bear to see another in such a delicate subject.

For those who think that abortion is "murder"...where is the support of these mothers-to-be and the willingness to care for ALL of these babies when the mother carries it to term and cannot care for it...whatever the circumstance? I may be wrong (it's happened...once!), but I know of NO SUPPORT GROUPS OR ADOPTION AGENCIES OR AFTER-CARE CLINICS directed by Pro-Lifer's!!!!!! All I know is that pro-lifer's, in front of a clinic, badger and demean a woman into feeling 5000x's worse than they already do! They spend more time on posters than they do on help for the person they are demeaning!

These babies could end up in orphanages and never be adopted! A lot of the babies would have special needs...ie: addictions, birth deffects...etc. Some would spend their lives with their birth mother in sub-human situations that you and I can hardly imagine.

You can say it all you want, "abortion is murder"...but to ever have to walk a mile in the shoes of one who chooses to abort is the most compelling walk you'll ever take! It's not an easy decision!!! Most of the girls/women educate themselves of the hazzards, know the risks, understand the moral issues, hide in shame, get pelted with relentless accusations upon entering a clinic, live with depression before and after, and keep a secret for the rest of their lives! A LEGAL secret at that!

I'm with BIBI on this issue! If it isn't YOUR body...don't tell me what I can and can't do with mine! I'll handle the morals in my life! You've no right to tell me how I should live...according to YOUR rules and morals. Just because you wouldn't do it...doesn't make me a monster! You don't know me or my circumstance. Don't inflict your feelings on me and I'll return the favor! I would NEVER go around preaching to you that you should abort! Don't tell me I shouldn't! You didn't know me before...and you'll not know me or care for me after, no matter what I choose!

Conversely...If there is any chance that you can carry to term and know that you can make a childless person/couple happy with your gift of life...more power to you!

Abortion isn't about being FOR death. It's about choice. Clinics don't overwhelm a girl with the pros of abortion...but instead, talk of ALL the choices available so that she can make an educted decision...one SHE can/must live with. After all...it is HER life...NOT YOURS!

If she HAS to go back to the days of dark alleys and coat hangers...SHE WILL. No matter what you do with this law...a girl will do what a girl's gotta do!

P.S. That G.W.B. has had the opportunity to make another Supreme Court appointment makes me feel even more compelled to find the end of the planet so I can jump off!

jseal

01-22-2006, 06:28 PM

LixyChick,

Although the world would be a much poorer place without you, and I am sure that I am only one among many who would mourn such a precipitous (if you’ll pardon the word) decision, it is with a heavy heart, and only because I am a slave to duty, that I feel obligated – nay, impelled – to provide you with assistance in such a dreaded act. :eek:

Herewith, to provide you with the chance you request, I provide you with the dreaded link to The Flat Earth Society (http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm). There I can only presume you will find the awful, occult knowledge needed to pursue your desperate goal! But please, I beseech you; reflect upon this terrible decision for a little while longer. Don’t, ah, jump to any conclusions!

And at the end, if all other possible escape routes for you from this administration seem blocked, remember this – he can’t run again. :D

rabbit

01-22-2006, 09:28 PM

I can think of no workable solution in allowing the father an option when it comes to an abortion.

I also agree with WI's statement above, and take it a step further in that I would feel the same if I were aware or not.

What if the father wanted to take care of the baby? I think a father should have that right. Conversely, I do not think that a father should be able to force a woman to have an abortion if she wanted to take care of the baby.

Ditto WI's statement...I would be devastated.

BIBI

01-22-2006, 09:54 PM

What if the father wanted to take care of the baby? I think a father should have that right. Conversely, I do not think that a father should be able to force a woman to have an abortion if she wanted to take care of the baby.

Ditto WI's statement...I would be devastated.

If I am understanding your post correctly....

Are you saying that a man should be able to stop an abortion if he wants to take care the future child? How could he be forced to do this if he changed his mind? Should he be forced to be a father and if so how can he be?

My god that would mean that any man could control a woman's body if he saw fit. I think we quit being chattel a long time ago.

If the man doesn't want the woman to have the pregnancy go to term, does that mean he gives up his rights and responsibilities to that child?
In other words does he forfiet his responsibility to provide support whether it be monetary or otherwise because he didn't want it in the first place?

rabbit

01-22-2006, 10:15 PM

If I am understanding your post correctly....

Are you saying that a man should be able to stop an abortion if he wants to take care the future child? How could he be forced to do this if he changed his mind? Should he be forced to be a father and if so how can he be?

Yes, if the man wants to be a loving father to that baby. Yes indeed.

Change his mind? Do you mean that he says he wants it month 3 and then decides "no" in Month 8? Good question...whatever the answer, even if it is adoption, is better than murder.

If the man doesn't want the woman to have the pregnancy go to term, does that mean he gives up his rights and responsibilities to that child?
In other words does he forfiet his responsibility to provide support whether it be monetary or otherwise because he didn't want it in the first place?

I do not think a man has a right to force a woman into having an abortion. No way, no how.

osuche

01-22-2006, 10:22 PM

I imagine the worst-case situation, where a woman is raped. The biological father...a rapist...has a choice whether or not he wants her to have a baby. She wants to abort, but he wants a child. So she's forced to carry the child of a rapist to term, and then turn the kid over to him? Yikes.

Equally bad in cases of incest. Or how about a man who is abusive to his girlfriend/wife but still wants kids? Shouldn't that be the woman's choice to bring the child into the world (or not)?

I think most mature women -- under normal circumstances -- will talk it over with the man. While any guy I'd have sex with could have an opinion, in the end I feel it should be my decision whether to have the child or not.

rabbit

01-22-2006, 10:28 PM

I imagine the worst-case situation, where a woman is raped. The biological father...a rapist...has a choice whether or not he wants her to have a baby. She wants to abort, but he wants a child. So she's forced to carry the child of a rapist to term, and then turn the kid over to him? Yikes.

Equally bad in cases of incest.

There would clearly need to be an exception for cases such as these. I'm thinking more along the lines of a consensual circumstance. Now, she could lie and say he raped her...which would create a real legal mess. Solving in a timely fashion would be critical...obviously.

Or how about a man who is abusive to his girlfriend/wife but still wants kids? Shouldn't that be the woman's choice to bring the child into the world (or not)?

Good question...

osuche

01-22-2006, 10:34 PM

Such a complex situation! Personally (IM very humble opinion) I believe we should spend more time developing morals in our children, rather than trying to legislate them.

There are some really good parents out there (and I'm sure you and your wife are among them!), but those kids aren't the ones (generally) that need the laws. We're trying to legislate for the *rest* of society, rather than nipping the problem in the bud.

I can imagine a situation where I would need to have an abortion, and I don't want this right taken away from me. But it'd be a damn unusual situation, and would be a very hard decision for me to make.

BIBI

01-22-2006, 11:35 PM

Yes, if the man wants to be a loving father to that baby. Yes indeed.

Change his mind? Do you mean that he says he wants it month 3 and then decides "no" in Month 8? Good question...whatever the answer, even if it is adoption, is better than murder.

I do not think a man has a right to force a woman into having an abortion. No way, no how.

First off I never said that you thought a man had a right to force an abortion. What I said was does the man, if he does not want the child carried to full term, still have the responsibility to support said child?

It's unfortunate that you would force a woman,to carry a child she did not want in the first place,if you wanted the child upon birth. Yet you give men the right to decide if they if they don't want it after birth,to have it placed elsewhere. IMO that is a double standard at the very least, then I don't look at a theraputic abortion as murder and that is where the differences lie and will never come together.

See you may find it hard to believe from my posts, but personally I don't think I could have ever had an abortion when younger but now if I got pregnant I would be there in a minute. That is my personal choice and yet I would never ever inflict my belief system onto anyone else who was facing what must be one of the most difficult decisions of their life.

PantyFanatic

01-23-2006, 04:50 AM

Last edited by BIBI : Yesterday at 11:56 PM. Reason: typo
ROFLMFAOPMP :D :D :D
That’s all I have to say about THAT!

As for the rest, it’s been an interesting read ……… after a couple days of thinking about the original questions that Lixy posed, I do now have something to post.
My thoughts are real simple on this matter.

When men can carry a baby and give birth, only then should they have any say in the matter. A woman's body is just that...hers.......
Bibi said it ALL for me. I KNOW I do not, and NEVER will, have a right to even an opinion on something that I can NEVER know. I do not believe that any other man has that right either.

.... I was sympathic at the time of the ruling, but it concerns me that over 50 million new lives have been done away with and that we continue to lose over 3,000 new lives each day. ..... I read that the Center for Disease Control has said that the abortion death rate increases 40 to 60 percent per week for each week of delay after the eighth week. These never seem to get reported by the mainstream press. In a European study, almost 25% of the women who "interrupt their first pregnancy" have remained permanently childless..... …..
[(based on assumptions by the Alan Guttmacher Institute)]
Those numbers caught my attention right from the start. Just the initial post meant that there had to be an average of half a century of data. I know that you can find almost ANYTHIG you want on such a controversial subject, but, as Lil noted, those just jumped out as having as much ‘cause’ as ‘information’ involved with them………. Maybe more. ;)

...i see it everywhere: becasue of the assholes of the world, normal, decent people get stripped of their rights….. …...there isn't a workable solution. this is why i think it annoys me there need be any laws in the first place. whether it's legal or not, it's going to happen so let people work it out amongst themselves, for themselves and by themselves and govn't should stay the hell out of it...they should literally have no position.
i feel the same way about right to die….. …..or anything else that has to do with a person's body and no-one elses. drugs, seatbelts, right to die, etc.
Many of my BASIC feelings are expressed here. ‘Protecting OTHERS’ from someone seems to often turn into ‘protection from ourselves’ at any price. Law makers have neither the means nor the right to decide what is good for me.

....I don't think that anything should be made legal on the basis that people are going to do it anyway.
[see above statement and keep it in context]
I believe that making any law that the is completely unenforceable is a waste and makes fools out of the entire system.

..... I agree that S C nominations should be done differently, by a popular American vote (leave the electoral college out) perhaps? Thusly, the American public having more say in how their Constitution is upheld.
The problem with ‘electing’ a life long position that is perhaps more important and powerful than the Presidency, is that it would mean that power and money would be the driving force. Can you imagine the campaign bullshit that would cover EVER aspect of the person being put in THAT position by the professional liars and thieves that run the rest of our elections? No thanks! As Lilith said, (god, how it hurts to keep saying that :rolleyes: ) every wart on their ass should be scrutinized from the day they were born. Now if the congress that is going to bequeath these dictatorial powers, would be as sincere and representative of the people they are doing this ‘for’, instead of ‘party line’ oriented, we MAY have a chance of the constitution being related to the needs and wants of the population.

PantyFanatic

01-23-2006, 05:00 AM

PS

I would like to see the candidate for any high office be subjected to the same few days of public review rather than the two years of games and power-playing bull that we have now.

LixyChick

01-23-2006, 05:53 AM

Just a thought...

If a man wants to be a "loving father", I feel like he should find a mate who is as willing to provide him with a child.

In other words...in most cases where a woman wants to end a pregnancy, the pregnancy was an accident on both participant's parts. The only scenario I can think of where both parties would want to have a baby together and then after conception chose to abort, would be for a medical necessity of some sort. All in all, it's usually an accidental pregnancy.

That said, it seems to me that the "couple" (and I use the term lightly) should have discussed their views on the "what if's" well before such an incident occurs. Most often, this is NOT the case. Ergo the term "accident".

After such an "accident", why should it then be OK for the man to decide the fate of the woman and therefore the unborn child based solely on HIS feelings and morals? Is she just a vessel? Doesn't this unwanted/accidental pregnancy impact her life far more than it does his?

Just a thought...

P.S. ROFLMAO@jseal! Looks like I may have some new friends. Thanks for the link hun!

jseal

01-23-2006, 06:11 AM

Gentlefolk,

For any one who may be interested, here is the Row v. Wade ruling:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=410&invol=113

BIBI

01-23-2006, 09:25 AM

ROFLMFAOPMP :D :D :D
That’s all I have to say about THAT!

PantyFanatic................... :p

At least I fix my typos contrary to others whom I shall not mention :D

PantyFanatic

01-23-2006, 11:33 AM

Bibi...................... :)

What's a 'typo'? :confused:

ROFL :D

BIBI

01-23-2006, 12:39 PM

Bibi...................... :)

What's a 'typo'? :confused:

ROFL :D

Well, you certainly live a sheltered life, but I am more than willing to teach by example, so the next time I see you have made a typo, I shall be sure to point it out to you in order for you to have a full understanding..... :p

PantyFanatic

01-23-2006, 02:20 PM

Well, you certainly live a sheltered life, but I am more than willing to teach by example, so the next time I see you have made a typo, I shall be sure to point it out to you in order for you to have a full understanding..... :p
LMAO :D

fredchabotnick

01-23-2006, 10:24 PM

I believe we should spend more time developing morals in our children, rather than trying to legislate them.

I think this sums up my feeling perfectly. Thanks for putting it so succinctly.

Not to stir up the hornets nest, but let me ask this, today Bush said,
"You believe, as I do, that every human life has value, that the strong have a duty to protect the weak, and that the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence apply to everyone, not just to those considered healthy or wanted or convenient," to a group of abortion foes.
My question is simply, seeing how he has gotten us into two wars, not properly equipped our troops with needed armor, and is more than willing to torture and use capital punishment (I'll leave arguments about Medicare spending and medication for the poor to those who understand it better than I), is this statement completely hypocritical?
Is this just a anti-abortion double standard where it's ok to kill anyone who has already been born, but not a fetus, or is there truly some disconnect that he can't see that supporting one would imply support for the other?
I just don't understand. In my mind, abortion, whether or not you support it, is not the cause of problems, it's an effect. And you don't treat effects if you want to cure a problem. There's so much effort in trying to prevent abortion, but can we have decent sex ed in this country to prevent teens from getting accidentally pregnant? No, of course not. Can we distribute birth control or teach people how to use them? No. What about setting up serious programs to allow people to pay for and provide prenatal funding, care, and adoption services for pregnant women who are not able to pay for the expenses (actual and emotional) incurred during pregnancy? There may be groups out there that do that, but I'm not aware of any. Just once, instead of seeing a protester yell at a woman choosing to get an abortion, I'd like to see someone offer to take the woman in, pay all costs, adopt the child, and not preach to them. WWJD? I believe the answer is not accuse them. That's just my feeling on it.
Also, while I'm ranting, instead of spending a ton of money on IVF, spend that money on adoption. This is a little off topic, but it ticks me off to see people have multiple children due to IVF and then thank God. Maybe God didn't want you to have your own kids...maybe you were supposed to foster or adopt, but no, you had to take matters into your own hands.

Stepping off the soapbox now, sorry for the rant.

PantyFanatic

01-24-2006, 01:24 AM

'Rants' (your prospective on common issues) are exactly what gives us all something to think about. Your IVF thought is something new for me to mull around.

thanks ;)

LixyChick

01-24-2006, 05:58 AM

fred...

It seems to me that G.W.B. doesn't consider that his current topic could intertwine with any other issue that this country is up against. IMHO he's too sheltered and surrounded by Yes men and women. He's fed his words on paper to repeat, instead of his speeches coming from the heart, right off the top of his head. You'll see that look of surprise on his face and I've actually pictured the mice running on the wheel in his head, when a reporter asks him a question that should have a spontaneous answer in correlation to his topic. This is when he stumbles and bumbles the most.

Makes for great "Bushism's" though!

gekkogecko

01-24-2006, 08:53 AM

In order for Alito to actually be considered for the Supreme Court, he should have to beat Chyna in a nude jello wrestling contest.

Lilith

01-24-2006, 04:39 PM

She'd kill him :D Break his neck like a twig. Pop his head like a zit.

Aqua

01-24-2006, 05:02 PM

My question is simply, seeing how he has gotten us into two wars, not properly equipped our troops with needed armor, and is more than willing to torture and use capital punishment (I'll leave arguments about Medicare spending and medication for the poor to those who understand it better than I), is this statement completely hypocritical?
Is this just a anti-abortion double standard where it's ok to kill anyone who has already been born, but not a fetus, or is there truly some disconnect that he can't see that supporting one would imply support for the other?
I just don't understand. In my mind, abortion, whether or not you support it, is not the cause of problems, it's an effect. And you don't treat effects if you want to cure a problem. There's so much effort in trying to prevent abortion, but can we have decent sex ed in this country to prevent teens from getting accidentally pregnant? No, of course not. Can we distribute birth control or teach people how to use them? No. What about setting up serious programs to allow people to pay for and provide prenatal funding, care, and adoption services for pregnant women who are not able to pay for the expenses (actual and emotional) incurred during pregnancy? There may be groups out there that do that, but I'm not aware of any. Just once, instead of seeing a protester yell at a woman choosing to get an abortion, I'd like to see someone offer to take the woman in, pay all costs, adopt the child, and not preach to them. WWJD? I believe the answer is not accuse them. That's just my feeling on it.
Also, while I'm ranting, instead of spending a ton of money on IVF, spend that money on adoption. This is a little off topic, but it ticks me off to see people have multiple children due to IVF and then thank God. Maybe God didn't want you to have your own kids...maybe you were supposed to foster or adopt, but no, you had to take matters into your own hands.

Stepping off the soapbox now, sorry for the rant.
Damn Fred... I agree with so much of what you said there. You asked about groups that offer services to pregnant women in need... Catholic Community Services is a big one. They are all over the country and they offer most, if not all, of the services you described above.

I think it's a big double standard to claim you're pro-life and yet support the death penalty and I also believe we need a strong sex ed program coupled with a system for distributing birth control easily.

And your last comment about IVF is something I agree wholeheartedly with.

rabbit

01-24-2006, 08:22 PM

I think it's a big double standard to claim you're pro-life and yet support the death penalty.

This is something I have always wrestled with as I support the DP yet opposed abortion. Maybe it is because a baby is innocent but a criminal is not. I dunno...

Some HEAVY shit here...

rabbit

Matte

01-24-2006, 09:58 PM

personal opinion...the most that can happen is the court will say "abortion is not a constitutional issue". this wont make abortion illegal...it will simply put the issue in front of the states to be voted on...how it should be done. if you want "right to control your body" or "right to an abortion" in the constitution...then it needs an ammendment. but the constitution was written as loosely as it was because the country at the time wanted it that way...to avoid the federal government from having too much say in their personal lives. if its now a written right...then each state needs to handle the issue as they deem fit. while granted some further right states will probably vote against it...thats kinda what our country is about.

Matte

01-24-2006, 09:59 PM

n btw...i totally believe in a womans right to choose...but i also would never want a girl i date to have an abortion(medical problem aside).

fredchabotnick

01-24-2006, 10:03 PM

'Rants' (your prospective on common issues) are exactly what gives us all something to think about. Your IVF thought is something new for me to mull around.

thanks ;)

And thanks to all of you. Imagine, a rational discussion about a very highly emotionally charged issue. Have I mentioned recently how great you all are?

LixyChick

01-25-2006, 05:55 AM

And thanks to all of you. Imagine, a rational discussion about a very highly emotionally charged issue. Have I mentioned recently how great you all are?
I was getting a little scared at where this was headed...but I agree with you wholeheartedly...

We have a great buncho peeps here!

(((((EVERYONE)))))

lizzardbits

01-25-2006, 02:02 PM

I think that even though some, well, make that most of us, are firmly planted on where we stand on issues such as this, that we all REALIZE and RESPECT(that as much as we would like to change other peoples minds to think more towards our own personal beliefs), that every individual must decide for themselves what they believe is right. Not just only with abortion, but with all aspects of our lives.

I chose to put nude photos of myself here, other people think that nudity in all of it's forms is morally wrong. I personnally think not, but there are those that will put me down and argue with me until they are blue in the face and don't respect me. (i know that it is a whole other can-o-worms, but you see my analagy)

in this thread, to me it looks like we are stating our views but are choosing to agree to disagree.

WildIrish

01-25-2006, 03:40 PM

I'm keeping my mouth shut because it's obvious that we can't be discussing fathers here.

And by that, I mean "fathers", not sperm donors.

wyndhy

01-25-2006, 03:49 PM

(((wi)))
but i (and a few others) stood up for the dads. :(

Lilith

01-25-2006, 04:37 PM

I'm keeping my mouth shut because it's obvious that we can't be discussing fathers here.

And by that, I mean "fathers", not sperm donors.

You are correct, at least as far as I am concerned. There is a difference.

Scarecrow

01-25-2006, 07:19 PM

I'm afraid I don't see what all the who-ha is about with Alito, if the abortion question came up to day with the Supreme Court the vote would most likely be 6-3, when Alito gets confirmed then the vote will be 5-4 and will not change a thing in the long run. We have had 'bad' judges on the Court in the last 200 yrs and we will have more in the future and yet are country is still here. Poeple should fine something important to spend so much time on. How about Cancer for starters?

Lilith

01-25-2006, 07:38 PM

rabbit

01-25-2006, 08:11 PM

I'm keeping my mouth shut because it's obvious that we can't be discussing fathers here.

And by that, I mean "fathers", not sperm donors.

Amen, brother.

jseal

01-25-2006, 09:42 PM

Well considering that the Supreme Court will be the final say on stem cell research I think that stresses the importance of who we put on it.
That’s interesting. I was unaware of any Federal lawsuits involving stem cell research having been appealed to the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds.

Matte

01-26-2006, 03:33 AM

i hope none are. heck in my opinion abortion isnt a constitutional issue. nowhere in the constitution is it anywhere near covered. let the states(your immediate electorate) vote on it. same with stem cell research. the federal government should never have this much control over your personal lives.

Lilith

01-26-2006, 05:49 AM

That’s interesting. I was unaware of any Federal lawsuits involving stem cell research having been appealed to the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds.

I believe at some point it will be and since the justices' reign is for life it makes the appointment scouring a necessary evil.

LixyChick

01-26-2006, 08:13 AM

I'm keeping my mouth shut because it's obvious that we can't be discussing fathers here.

And by that, I mean "fathers", not sperm donors.
It's been argued as to when life begins...at conception, or in a further developmental stage?

I think the term "father" and "mother" are used here to say who got who pregnant. But if a person isn't of the belief that life begins at the moment of conception, and an abortion is performed at the extreme earliest awareness of conception...well, that's a whole other kettle of fish.

Sorry to throw fuel on the fire...but it had to be said! Sometimes it sucks being the devil's advocate...

WildIrish

01-26-2006, 11:48 AM

It's been argued as to when life begins...at conception, or in a further developmental stage?

I think the term "father" and "mother" are used here to say who got who pregnant. But if a person isn't of the belief that life begins at the moment of conception, and an abortion is performed at the extreme earliest awareness of conception...well, that's a whole other kettle of fish.

Sorry to throw fuel on the fire...but it had to be said! Sometimes it sucks being the devil's advocate...

I was referring to the psychological and behavioural distinction between fathers and sperm donors. Impregnating someone and reappearing only to lay claim to the egg my seed happens to fertilize, or to demand termination, is a foreign concept to me. I just don't see how anyone can have sex with someone and walk away and because I wasn't making that distinction...my feathers got ruffled.

To clarify my position: Fathers should have a say in the life of their unborn child.

Sperm donors should not.