• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Zika Virus May Push South America to Loosen Abortion Bans

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
25,748
Reaction score
29,813
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
This is a very scary virus carried by Mosquitos that can threaten the fetus if the pregnant woman gets this virus.with no cure and no vaccination but it may loosen abortion bans in some mainly Catholic countries in South America

Zika Virus May Push South America to Loosen Abortion Bans

WITH NO VACCINE, no cure, and without even a reliable diagnosis, doctors are at a loss for how to protect their patients from the Zika virus. In the past year, the mosquito-borne disease has spread throughout Latin America, sparking panic because of a possible link to microcephaly—babies born with abnormally small brains. Without more information, medical advice so far has boiled down to this: Don’t get pregnant. So say official guidelines from Brazil, Colombia, and Honduras. El Salvador has gone so far as to recommend women do not get pregnant until 2018.

But most of these Latin American countries are also Catholic, so access to birth control is often poor and abortion is flat-out banned. “This kind of recommendation that women should avoid pregnancy is not realistic,” says Beatriz Galli, a Brazil-based policy advisor for the reproductive health organization Ipas. “How can they put all the burden of this situation on the women?”
....
Now throw Zika into that. Scientists still haven’t confirmed the link to microcephaly, but Brazilian researchers have confirmed the virus can jump through the placenta from mother to fetus. Circumstantially, the number of of microcephaly cases has gone up 20 fold since Zika first reached Brazil. In the face of fear and incomplete information, women will have to figure out how to protect themselves and their children.

Read more:

Zika Virus May Push South America to Loosen Abortion Bans | WIRED
 
Last edited:
This is a very scary virus carried by Mosquitos that can threaten the fetus if the pregnant woman gets this virus.with no cure and no vaccination but it may loosen abortion bans in some mainly Catholic countries in South America

Zika Virus May Push South America to Loosen Abortion Bans



Read more:

Zika Virus May Push South America to Loosen Abortion Bans | WIRED

I didn't believe the part where it said that contraceptives are restricted in certain countries, so I did my own search. Sure enough........they are.
 
What choice do they have?

The moral issue of abortion (or even contraceptives if one is so socially conservative) aside for a moment, there is a secondary moral issue of kids being born with a range of problems because of microcephaly. Everything from simple developmental delays to severe retardation, everything from hearing loss to development of basic motor skills problems is all a consideration.

It changes the conversation immediately as there is no treatment option for microcephaly. We have no way to repair the issue once the child is born, so it all becomes a conversation on therapy and downstream human development deficiency aids just to handle these life long consequences.
 
I didn't believe the part where it said that contraceptives are restricted in certain countries, so I did my own search. Sure enough........they are.

The reason is, of course, that traditional religions protect the reproductive process of societies. By Roman Catholic ethics the use of contraceptives is a relatively severe sin, if not as bad as abortion and infanticide. As South America is relatively religious, the population has stood by the Church and maintained the status quo.
 
This is a very scary virus carried by Mosquitos that can threaten the fetus if the pregnant woman gets this virus.

So abortion doctors are basically giant viruses?

But on a serious note, while microcephalic is awful, it's not as bad as death. And if one needs to avoid pregnancy without condemning oneself, then one can abstain or use natural family planning.
 
So abortion doctors are basically giant viruses?

But on a serious note, while microcephalic is awful, it's not as bad as death. And if one needs to avoid pregnancy without condemning oneself, then one can abstain or use natural family planning.

Because that is effective... especially in the region we are talking about... :roll:
 
Because that is effective... especially in the region we are talking about... :roll:

The effectiveness of abstinence is not dependent on where you are.
 
The effectiveness of abstinence is not dependent on where you are.

No, but it is extremely foolish to ignore the social climate, social influences, various social norms, and even social control laws in a given nation. The area of the world we are talking about has a strong lean to Roman Catholicism.

Take Brazil for example, who has over 65% of the nation as Roman Catholic. At present abortion is only legal in Brazil if the pregnancy puts the life of the woman in danger (not the kid) or is the result of rape. A call to change those standards to account for what Zika is doing to kids is worthwhile to discuss as simply saying "absence and natural family planning" will likely have little impact on what Brazil is already facing (not will face, they already are seeing the impact.) Just this past year or so Brazil changed their own regulations as a means to restrict, and place greater government influence on, various contraception methods. The whole idea being to limit access.

Brazil is going to have to make an adjustment or they will end up seeing more kids born with Zika complications, which are both non-treatable and come with lifelong consequences.
 
No, but it is extremely foolish to ignore the social climate, social influences, various social norms, and even social control laws in a given nation. The area of the world we are talking about has a strong lean to Roman Catholicism.

Take Brazil for example, who has over 65% of the nation as Roman Catholic. At present abortion is only legal in Brazil if the pregnancy puts the life of the woman in danger (not the kid) or is the result of rape. A call to change those standards to account for what Zika is doing to kids is worthwhile to discuss as simply saying "absence and natural family planning" will likely have little impact on what Brazil is already facing (not will face, they already are seeing the impact.) Just this past year or so Brazil changed their own regulations as a means to restrict, and place greater government influence on, various contraception methods. The whole idea being to limit access.

Brazil is going to have to make an adjustment or they will end up seeing more kids born with Zika complications, which are both non-treatable and come with lifelong consequences.

The fact that South America is Catholic would make them more resceptive to calls to abstinence and NFP.

And being stabbed to death is worse than getting microcephaly.
 
The fact that South America is Catholic would make them more resceptive to calls to abstinence and NFP.

And make them more likely to see more kids born with complications from Zika.

And being stabbed to death is worse than getting microcephaly.

So you say... :roll:

Emotional argument aside for a moment, there is real reason there are calls for reducing standards on abortion reason as well as access to various forms of contraception.
 
So abortion doctors are basically giant viruses?

But on a serious note, while microcephalic is awful, it's not as bad as death. And if one needs to avoid pregnancy without condemning oneself, then one can abstain or use natural family planning.

You have no idea what the **** you just wrote, do you? You're just blindly spewing some ignorant view without even knowing what you're talking about.
 
So you say... :roll:

Emotional argument aside for a moment, there is real reason there are calls for reducing standards on abortion reason as well as access to various forms of contraception.

The reason is that evil men are using this to try to legalize baby-murder.

And if you don't like have abortion called out for what it is, don't talk about it.
 
The reason is that evil men are using this to try to legalize baby-murder.

And if you don't like have abortion called out for what it is, don't talk about it.

No, that is not what is happening at all. Reasonable people are trying to have a discussion on dealing with the reality of Zika which is soon to become our reality, others want to derail the conversation into rhetoric about "evil."

It illustrates with perfection that you have no idea what in the hell you are talking about.
 
Stupid. The prevalence of a virus that (may) cause disabilities doesn't change anything.

If you don't think killing a disabled kid because they are disabled is moral after birth, then there is no reason for it to be moral before birth.

These countries are right to ban abortion as they do and more should do the same.

As far as the virus goes, exterminators will work to kill the vectors, researchers will be working on a vaccine.
 
What choice do they have?

The moral issue of abortion (or even contraceptives if one is so socially conservative) aside for a moment, there is a secondary moral issue of kids being born with a range of problems because of microcephaly. Everything from simple developmental delays to severe retardation, everything from hearing loss to development of basic motor skills problems is all a consideration.

It changes the conversation immediately as there is no treatment option for microcephaly. We have no way to repair the issue once the child is born, so it all becomes a conversation on therapy and downstream human development deficiency aids just to handle these life long consequences.

I'm glad Beethoven wasn't aborted because of his hearing loss.
Just saying.
 
I'm glad Beethoven wasn't aborted because of his hearing loss.
Just saying.

Beethoven did not look to be born with Zika either.
 
Beethoven did not look to be born with Zika either.

Killing someone for their disability is killing someone for their disability. :shrug:
 
Killing someone for their disability is killing someone for their disability. :shrug:

Do you have any idea what we are talking about here (with Zika specifically, not any one disability?)
 
Do you have any idea what we are talking about here (with Zika specifically, not any one disability?)

Yes, I have heard and read news on Zika.


It is sad, if predictable to see pro-aborts apply the typical leftist "never let a disaster go to waste" mantra.
 
Yes, I have heard and read news on Zika.

So why should any government be the decision maker on what happens here?

I am not saying anyone with a disability should be aborted, I am not even saying anyone diagnosed with effects from Zika should be aborted. I am saying however that the decision should be left with the family to make on their own.

It is their child, their responsibility to handle the realized consequences here. It should be on their conscious what happens, not some overbearing government dictating the outcome.

That is what Brazil and several other nations dealing with this are having to discuss.
 
I am saying however that the decision should be left with the family to make on their own.

It is their child, their responsibility to handle the realized consequences here. It should be on their conscious what happens, not some overbearing government dictating the outcome.

Of course, the logic you employ here is an argument in favor of just shooting a newborn or leaving them to die from exposure or starvation.

It's not overbearing to protect a human being from the aggressive acts of others.

It's not overbearing to prevent or punish neglect or abuse.
 
No, that is not what is happening at all. Reasonable people are trying to have a discussion on dealing with the reality of Zika which is soon to become our reality, others want to derail the conversation into rhetoric about "evil."

It illustrates with perfection that you have no idea what in the hell you are talking about.

People who want to murder children are by definition not reasonable. The only reason you don't see this is because you are one of them.
 
Of course, the logic you employ here is an argument in favor of just shooting a newborn or leaving them to die from exposure or starvation.

It's not overbearing to protect a human being from the aggressive acts of others.

It's not overbearing to prevent or punish neglect or abuse.

I am neither arguing for "shooting a newborn or leaving them to die from exposure of starvation," I am asking people to evaluate what Zika is capable of doing to kids in concert with governments that want to dictate the outcome.
 
People who want to murder children are by definition not reasonable. The only reason you don't see this is because you are one of them.

I do not want to murder kids, that is a fallacy in your argument. But a typical one.
 
Back
Top Bottom