Why Do You Post In The Abortion Threads?

[NoC_T]

The reference, Einstein, wasn't to "identification"; but rather your continued insistence that there was required first hand experience of the system before one can be empathetic towards it. I was not debating "identification"; but rather your ultimate conclusion that first hand experience is necessary for empathy. It is not. In fact, that's the definition of empathy. It's intellectual identification or vicarious experiences. Neither of those require first hand experience.

Try to keep up, and stop lying so much. As demonstrated in your own post, you had already admitted I was talking of identification, this other rambling is just you making **** up so that you don't look like quite as large a fool; but that has backfired.

Since this seems to be beyond your ability, let me help you out and highlight the REAL contention of your post; not the one made up by you.

Hope that helps you out there guy.

Uhm, no. Actually, I just got finished saying that you were attempting to define empathy without identification, which was why I had to help you to understand what it means, and how it included the component of 'feelings/sensation', where it relates in the context of pregnancy. The very same reason I was kind enough to post a link to the dictionary definition (which you'd previously rejected, as shown above, I might add). Of course you agree now, since I've gone to such lengths to help you out, and it's slowly dawned on you that you've dropped the ball.

It's all ripcord tactics 101 for you, at this point. You're a fine dancer, Ikari, but I'm afraid you're busting moves the wrong tune, son. And I'm a demanding panelist.

What have you got next? Perhaps a couple more quotes taken out of sequence? lulz

[Ikari]

I at no point did that. My leading posts in fact directly referenced it as an identification.

Please stop lying. I have no problem debating people of alternative views; I have no tolerance for intellectual dishonesty. If you wish to continue, kindly stop. I have demonstrated to you quite clearly that through my posts AND yours, you had acknowledged my reference to empathy as an intellectual identification. The identification does not refer to the specific emotions and sensations of pregnancy; but rather to some larger term. You do not need to experience pregnancy to be empathetic with it. And that's where I have ALWAYS been taking issue with your misapplication of the definition. It is quite clear from everything I posted.

Call the "panel", you'll find yourself disappointed.

[NoC_T]

I at no point did that. My leading posts in fact directly referenced it as an identification.

Please stop lying. I have no problem debating people of alternative views; I have no tolerance for intellectual dishonesty. If you wish to continue, kindly stop. I have demonstrated to you quite clearly that through my posts AND yours, you had acknowledged my reference to empathy as an intellectual identification. The identification does not refer to the specific emotions and sensations of pregnancy; but rather to some larger term. You do not need to experience pregnancy to be empathetic with it. And that's where I have ALWAYS been taking issue with your misapplication of the definition. It is quite clear from everything I posted.

Call the "panel", you'll find yourself disappointed.

Oh, 'some larger' term?

As in, one that doesn't match a definition so widely acknowledged, that it found it's way into the dictionary?

And the term does indeed refer to feelings/sensations. Most especially because the context of pregnancy relies upon such.

Btw, the panel gives 10/0/0 for effort, content and scrupulous honesty, respectively.

[minnie616]

Why does a woman have a right to use lethal force if necessary to get a legally insane rapist off of and out of her body? Why does a woman have the right to use lethal force if necessary to end the connection of her body against her will to another's for life support that she has not legally agreed to provide? Why does she have the right to toss out of the car a legally insane kidnapper who has taken control of the car by physical force? If you did not get consent in the first place, you are not a passenger or a guest, and if the woman did not consent to pregnancy in the first place, the EF is not analogous to a passenger or a guest.

You keep assuming that the EF is innocent in some more fundamental sense than a legally insane person who is behaving in such a way as to forcibly assault. coerce, and violate the body of another person. The EF is a danger to the woman - every pregnancy involves significant health risks and every childbirth involves some actual tearing of a woman's flesh. If you do not have the right to tear her flesh, why should an EF? And moreover, why should other people have the right to claim that an EF has such a right which they do not have for themselves?

Well said , choiceone.

All women are at risk for pregnancy complications.

THE EFFECTS OF PREGNANCY

Normal, frequent or expectable temporary side effects of pregnancy:

<SNIP> ( most pregnant woman have mutiple tempory side effects of pregnancy so I will skip posting them but they can be found if you click on the link below.)
Normal, expectable, or frequent PERMANENT side effects of pregnancy:

stretch marks (worse in younger women)
loose skin
permanent weight gain or redistribution
abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life)
changes to breasts
varicose veins
scarring from episiotomy or c-section
other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)


Occasional complications and side effects:

spousal/partner abuse
hyperemesis gravidarum
temporary and permanent injury to back
severe scarring requiring later surgery (especially after additional pregnancies)
dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses -- 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele)
pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 - 10% of pregnancies)
eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
gestational diabetes
placenta previa
anemia (which can be life-threatening)
thrombocytopenic purpura
severe cramping
embolism (blood clots)
medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby)
diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
hormonal imbalance
ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
hemorrhage and
numerous other complications of delivery
refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions
(e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures)
severe post-partum depression and psychosis
research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including "egg harvesting" from infertile women and donors
research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease


Less common (but serious) complications:

peripartum cardiomyopathy
cardiopulmonary arrest
magnesium toxicity
severe hypoxemia/acidosis
massive embolism
increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction
molar pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease (like a pregnancy-induced cancer)
malignant arrhythmia
circulatory collapse
placental abruption
obstetric fistula

More permanent side effects:

future infertility

permanent disability

death.

THE EFFECTS OF PREGNANCY - complications of pregnancy

[AGENT J]

Which is completely absurd and crazy because prohibiting the killing of other humans does not make you the slave of those you're not allowed to kill.



Parasites by definition are members of one species preying upon members of another, different species...

you are free to that OPINION but websters disagree sahrug:

a ZEF can very well be considered a parasite

[AGENT J]

Bring this up again and I'll just keep saying that forcing a woman to continue a pregnancy puts her, not the ZEF, in a state of involuntary servitude. The ZEF is nothing like a slave of the woman because it does no work for her - it lives "like a parasite." In contrast, the woman and her body house, feed, and function as life-support for the ZEF - that is work for the ZEF. If the government forces a woman to do it, she is in involuntary servitude to the government.

yep the fact of the matter is the woman will be a slave to the ZEF for 9 month. Some people will deny this fact but offer nothing reality based or in a parallel fashion that is even logical to support thier false claim.

one could even argue that she is tortured for those 9 months

[AGENT J]

Fathers rights for abortion and child support

I was just reading earlier and IM not sure if it was int his thread or not but its something I wanted to responded to.

There was someone questioning or mentioning that they felt that most prochoice people also feel the father should be responsible in all cases one the child is born ie child support etc.

Well I dont know how true that is but Ill give my two cents on it.

I have NEVER felt that should be the case and the laws in this area are totally lopsided, bias and discriminatory.
At no time should a man be forced in to paying for a child he didnt want (abortion law time frame) or a child he didnt know about.

I think the laws need rewritten to basically reflect the same responsibilities/time line as abortion.

Now of course the man could never get totally equal rights because theres no way to force a women to have a baby nor should their ever be, thats way Im for abortion to remain legal so not to infringe on the rights liberties and freedom of women.

anyway heres a basic outline how it should work,

Notification:

1)At all times the father should be notified of said pregnancy, if no notification takes place then the father id free and clear of all of all responsibilities. Cant come after the dad once the child is born or 5 years later. And of course rules can be made about fathers purposely fleeing or out of state etc.

2.)If the man does find out its his kid the he has the choice to be involved in the childs life whether the mom wants that or not.

Mutual/non-mutual Agreements:

1.) Once notification takes place the woman and the man decided whether to have the baby, give it up for adoption or abort.

2.) If the woman wants to abort, sorry about the mans luck, it sucks but its her body and you cant force her to bare a child.

3.) If the man wants to abort but the woman doesnt than he has the same timeline as abortion laws to decided whether he wants to be involved with the child and it will be his option to make his parental rights null and void. Once this is down however it is permanent and can only be undone if the woman wishes it or the custody of the child becomes in jeopardy later in life.

4.)If the woman wants the born child but the man doesnt See 3.) above

5.) If the woman doesnt want the child but the man does and the women is WILLING to give birth to it she has the option to make her parental rights null and void. Once this is down however it is permanent and can only be undone if the man wishes it or the custody of the child becomes in jeopardy later in life. This time life can mirror current adoption/surrogate mother laws.

6.) If neither want the child and want to abort then current laws already cover this

7.) If they both want the child then current laws already cover this

8.) if neither want the child but the woman want to have it and give it up for adoption then current laws already cover this.


theres probably more but thats off the top of my head.

[iangb]

Which is completely absurd and crazy because prohibiting the killing of other humans does not make you the slave of those you're not allowed to kill.

If the government forces someone to look after a ZEF against their will, that's not necessarily enslavement to the ZEF, though you could probably term it as such; I'd say it would count as being enslaved by the government.

Parasites by definition are members of one species preying upon members of another, different species...

That's not always the case. Some definitions include the "other species" rider, many do not.

[nota bene]

Well said , choiceone.

All women are at risk for pregnancy complications.



THE EFFECTS OF PREGNANCY - complications of pregnancy

It's just a miracle that our species crawled out of the caves.

[Ikari]

Oh, 'some larger' term?

As in, one that doesn't match a definition so widely acknowledged, that it found it's way into the dictionary?

And the term does indeed refer to feelings/sensations. Most especially because the context of pregnancy relies upon such.

Btw, the panel gives 10/0/0 for effort, content and scrupulous honesty, respectively.

You making that panel up like you made up your arguments against me? Or is there some actual vote, I'd like to see it if so.

Regardless, the contentions were as I have stated very clearly for the majority of this pissing contest. Empathy does not require first hand experience of the exact system in order for one to be empathetic for another in that system. That's the very definition of empathy. It's intellectual identification and vicarious experience; which does not require first hand experience.