• 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!

Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

Poll on where you stand on abortion in relation to women

  • I favor forcing women to have children against her wishes.

    Votes: 9 18.0%
  • I oppose forcing women to have children against her wishes.

    Votes: 34 68.0%
  • IDK/Other

    Votes: 7 14.0%

  • Total voters
    50
I vote in favor of being tired of hearing about abortions. There are so many more important issues facing our nation.

I have more trouble with the options listed.

I prefer we find ways to make abortion unneeded. No law, just win the debate and prevent unwanted pregnacies.
 
I have more trouble with the options listed.

I prefer we find ways to make abortion unneeded. No law, just win the debate and prevent unwanted pregnacies.

I posted a thread today that shows what teens are doing to reduce pregnancies and potential abortions...but it's been turned into a religious/anti-religious screaming match. BTW, it's called "Where's The Praise" under the Abortion section. The OP pretty much tells you what's going on...give it a shot.
 
This why most of the calmer pro-choice folk...never enter the debate. Honestly, it has come to the point that the first time Murder, Zygote, God. or Fetus is typed...it is no longer worth the time.
 
I can't, because you haven't fully addressed the issue. Obviously, you wish to stop abortions. And I would assume you wish to stop as many abortions as possible, even illegal ones. Therefore, you HAVE to confront the fact that the majority of miscarriages take place outside a hospital...

Miscarriage =/= abortion. One is spontaneous, the other is induced. There is always a medical reason for a spontaneous miscarriage.

THEREFORE, what is your solution to the matter of private in-home abortions done under the guise of a spontaneous miscarriage?

As I said, twice now, the solution is to improve their personal financial status; which does not mean how much money they have, but how they manage it. Personal finance can be given in an age appropriate format in all grades.

Women will do and/or sacrifice absolutely anything for the feeling of security. By empowering them economically they will feel more secure and turn away from abortion.
 
If you're a member of PETA, sure. But I don't see a carnivorous act of nature to be murder. And distinctions between murder and killing matter in this debate.

I find PETA's work to be low class, superficial and ultimately counter-productive.


m-m.jpg


ps. "A carnivorous act of nature"? haha
 
Miscarriage =/= abortion. One is spontaneous, the other is induced. There is always a medical reason for a spontaneous miscarriage.

You keep dodging the issue. A self-induced miscarriage is an abortion. And as I said, most miscarriages before 10 weeks don't even require medical attention. Do you see the loophole? Women who wish to avoid criminal punishment (and I imagine an abortion ban will entail criminal penalties for the woman, despite what you support) or who can't find the abortion doctor or who can't afford to pay black market price for the procedure will try to induce themselves. There are a number of reasons a pregnant ve woman might induce herself and then cover up her tracks by claiming it was a miscarriage. Obviously, you have no solution to confronting this scenario. But keep in mind that Roe v. Wade was passed largely because of deaths related to self-induced abortions. And many conservatives fought tooth and nail, because obviously they cared more about the ZEF than they did the pregnant woman.



As I said, twice now, the solution is to improve their personal financial status; which does not mean how much money they have, but how they manage it. Personal finance can be given in an age appropriate format in all grades.

I don't see how that would help, other than hinting at the fact that more money = more accessibility to black market doctors. Women don't always have an abortion because they can't afford it. Many do. But many also do it because they feel they're not mature enough to have the baby or maybe they're too old to have the baby (or a range of many other factors).

Women will do and/or sacrifice absolutely anything for the feeling of security. By empowering them economically they will feel more secure and turn away from abortion.

I disagree that you're actually confronting the issue at hand. You're almost going off on a tangent. If you wish to drive this point forward, you will need to be a hell of a lot more specific.
 
I haven't seen any statistics. But it is the views of the majority of posters I have read on this forum, and it is also a logical conclusion to the issue of punishing baby-killing murderers.

So anecdotal statement broadly condemning a giant segment of people based off no actual facts but your own reading on this forum, an observation surely others disagree with in terms of the scope of our posters that feel that way, and what YOU believe to be the logical conclusion due to your misguided notion that somehow your biased and prejudiced view of those that are pro-life allows you to accurately determine exactly how they must think on an issue.

Thanks, I figured that was the case but just wanted to be sure before I completely wrote off your worthless mass insults and attacks as the trash they appeared to be.
 
You keep dodging the issue.

If you mean I'm not cooperating with how you're trying to bend the truth, you're right.

A self-induced miscarriage is an abortion. And as I said, most miscarriages before 10 weeks don't even require medical attention.

Most abortions are not at-home self induced miscarriages.

Do you see the loophole?

90% of illegal abortions occurred at a doctor's office, not at home, as sourced.

Women who wish to avoid criminal punishment (and I imagine an abortion ban will entail criminal penalties for the woman, despite what you support) or who can't find the abortion doctor or who can't afford to pay black market price for the procedure will try to induce themselves.

These account for 2% of all illegal abortions.

There are a number of reasons a pregnant ve woman might induce herself and then cover up her tracks by claiming it was a miscarriage. Obviously, you have no solution to confronting this scenario.

That's correct, I can't save the world.

But keep in mind that Roe v. Wade was passed largely because of deaths related to self-induced abortions. And many conservatives fought tooth and nail, because obviously they cared more about the ZEF than they did the pregnant woman.

Norma Leah McCorvey, "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, never had an abortion, adopted the child out, and later converted to Christianity and was an active Pro-Life supporter in Operation Rescue.

McCorvey revealed herself to the press as being "Jane Roe" of the decision within days of its issuance and stated that she sought an abortion because she was unemployable and greatly depressed. In the 1980s, McCorvey asserted that she had been the "pawn" of two young and ambitious lawyers (Weddington and Coffee) who were looking for a plaintiff with whom they could challenge the Texas state law prohibiting abortion.

http://ravingatheist.com/2009/01/trivia-question-answer
^ CNN.com - Who is 'Jane Roe'?, Jun. 18, 2003

Your hero, is actually your villein. A Christian Pro-Lifer. The world is not how you think it is.

****
Roe herself, your model victim of man's oppression, wanted an abortion because 1. she was unemployable, 2 depressed, and 3. had an abused history; and you think I'm going to, for one second, doubt that empowering women is the best way to reduce abortion?

You have nothing of value to say on this topic, vagina or not.
 
Last edited:
So anecdotal statement broadly condemning a giant segment of people based off no actual facts but your own reading on this forum, an observation surely others disagree with in terms of the scope of our posters that feel that way, and what YOU believe to be the logical conclusion due to your misguided notion that somehow your biased and prejudiced view of those that are pro-life allows you to accurately determine exactly how they must think on an issue.

Thanks, I figured that was the case but just wanted to be sure before I completely wrote off your worthless mass insults and attacks as the trash they appeared to be.

So then, what is the logical conclusion to punishing those who pre-meditate the murder of innocent babies? Is it psychological/social treatment, as Jerry requested? Usually, the psych hospital is reserved for the perpetrators of violence who are not guilty by reason of insanity, and it is a conviction that is very rarely made against perpetrators (even more rare as states continue to close mental hospitals). Instead, when dealing with a pregnant woman who willfully, consciously pre-meditates an abortion (i.e. murder) of an "innocent baby," what is the appropriate response from prosecutors? What is YOUR appropriate response to baby-killing murderers?

PS According to Wikipedia (which cites a reputable scholarly article), before Roe v. Wade, women were punished along with the doctors and abortionists.
 
Last edited:
If you mean I'm not cooperating with how you're trying to bend the truth, you're right.

When did I ever bend the truth? You're using statistics from the U.S. that were seen prior to the legalization of abortion, whereas I'm envisioning the the hypothetical scenario of abortions being federally banned in the 21st century. Obviously, things will not completely replicate themselves as you might wish. But granted, I won't argue that the majority of post abortion ban procedures will occur in a clinic or by a licensed physician...UP TO a certain amount of time. But if history is a lesson at all, it will infer that doctors will be the first targets in the post-abortion ban United States. States and the federal government will do whatever it takes to punish doctors who perform abortions. I'm not exactly sure what the punishments were like prior to Roe v. Wade, but in the future, it will likely be 2nd degree murder charges and an immediate revocation of a physician's license. I don't think doctors will flock to the black market to perform abortions, so it would be a safe assumption to conclude the number of physicians willing to do illegal abortions will decrease as punishments increase. Also, as more physicians leave the black market, it will drive up the cost to perform illegal abortions. With less physicians and a higher cost, pregnant women will resort to other means. And again, given that it is fairly easy to self-induce a miscarriage and fairly safe in the early stages of pregnancies, I don't believe the pre-Roe figures can be used to effectively gauge the number of in-home abortions post-Roe.

Most abortions are not at-home self induced miscarriages.

You're using a dated figure from what year? You're also not considering the effects of punishment on doctors who perform illegal abortions (less willing doctors!) or the rise in cost (which inevitably leads to more dangerous avenues for abortion).

90% of illegal abortions occurred at a doctor's office, not at home, as sourced.

You can't use a figure from the 1950s or 60s to gauge what life will be like in the post-abortion ban 21st century.

These account for 2% of all illegal abortions.

Where are you getting your figures? And so far, 90% + 2% = 92%. Where's the other 8%?

That's correct, I can't save the world.

But as you may know, it only takes one or two heinous examples in the media for the public to demand action be taken. 10% might mean nothing to you, but if you have enough cases of women dying from their own abortions (or as I said, a suspicious rise in miscarriages), you will see a public backlash that will demand higher regulations and/or more severe punishment (if we're not going in the direction of legalizing abortion). Perhaps a second scenario is the public will demand the reversal of the overturned Roe v. Wade, leading to a second legalization of abortion. But if we go in the direction of the where the anti-abortion crowd wants to take us, the obvious solution is higher penalties. Oh, and more abstinence education. :)

Norma Leah McCorvey, "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, never had an abortion, adopted the child out, and later converted to Christianity and was an active Pro-Life supporter in Operation Rescue.

I was actually referring to Gerri Santoro. Gerri Santoro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I said, you only need a handful of heinous deaths and a willing media to get the ball rolling.

Roe herself, your model victim of man's oppression, wanted an abortion because 1. she was unemployable, 2 depressed, and 3. had an abused history; and you think I'm going to, for one second, doubt that empowering women is the best way to reduce abortion?

Given that 77% of legislators who will impose an abortion ban will be men and 100% of them will never get pregnant, I doubt that taking away a woman's right to choose is "empowering" them.

PS YOU HAVE YET TO RESPOND TO A MORE PERTINENT ISSUE. PREGNANT TEENS IN STATES WITH PARENTAL NOTIFICATION LAWS HAVE RESORTED TO PERFORMING THEIR OWN ABORTIONS WITH HORRIBLE CONSEQUENCES. This goes to show that teens are a vulnerable group among those who might perform their own abortions. We've seen these consequences in a country that has already legalized abortion. Imagine what might happen if we made abortions illegal for all women? And so far, you have nothing to say about it.
 
Last edited:
Where are you getting your figures? And so far, 90% + 2% = 92%. Where's the other 8%?
I see you aren't checking sources when they're provided. According to the links to guttmacher, the other 8% are abortions performed my Nurses, midwives, and other trained medical professionals other than doctors. A full 98% of all illegal abortions were performed under clean, safe medical conditions. Of the remaining 2%, most were induced with 'natural' remedies in very early pregnancy, not wire hangers later on.
 
I see you aren't checking sources when they're provided. According to the links to guttmacher, the other 8% are abortions performed my Nurses, midwives, and other trained medical professionals other than doctors. A full 98% of all illegal abortions were performed under clean, safe medical conditions. Of the remaining 2%, most were induced with 'natural' remedies in very early pregnancy, not wire hangers later on.

And what is the year of these statistics? And what proof do you have that such abortions took place under "clean, safe" medical conditions? If they're performed in a clean and sanitary, reputable, clinic, then maybe they are clean. But such reputable clinics don't last long when faced with heavy scrutiny from authorities, and they have a lot more to lose.

Instead, I imagine they'd most likely take place in a facility such as the one run by Kermit Gosnell. Also, without legalization, the black market encourages higher rates of partial birth abortions and other horrific abortions that otherwise would have been regulated and restricted in a legal setting. And without legalization, education regarding abortion options goes out the window.

Where's the rest of your response? Where's the response to teen abortions, or a response to the fact you're using dated statistics and applying them to a future, hypothetical setting?
 
Wouldn't you agree that killing an animal for food is a carnivorous act of nature?

No, because carnivorous means 'only eats meat'. A carnivorous act would be going on a meat-only diet, at least for some time. Whether it's "natural" for humans at this time in the developed world is debatable.
 
Last edited:
And what is the year of these statistics? And what proof do you have that such abortions took place under "clean, safe" medical conditions? If they're performed in a clean and sanitary, reputable, clinic, then maybe they are clean. But such reputable clinics don't last long when faced with heavy scrutiny from authorities, and they have a lot more to lose.

Instead, I imagine they'd most likely take place in a facility such as the one run by Kermit Gosnell. Also, without legalization, the black market encourages higher rates of partial birth abortions and other horrific abortions that otherwise would have been regulated and restricted in a legal setting. And without legalization, education regarding abortion options goes out the window.

Where's the rest of your response? Where's the response to teen abortions, or a response to the fact you're using dated statistics and applying them to a future, hypothetical setting?

I shall post my Standard Issue Response #23 for you again:

http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/2157/26/5 Myths About “Back Alley” Abortions

Myth #1. Illegal abortions were performed by unlicensed, unskilled hacks.


Prior to legalization, 90 percent of illegal abortions were done by physicians. Most of the remainder were done by nurses, midwives or others with at least some medical training.

The term “back alley” referred not to where abortions were performed, but to how women were instructed to enter the doctor’s office after hours, through the back alley, to avoid arousing neighbors’ suspicions.

An illegal abortion may be called a "back-alley", "backstreet", or "back-yard" abortion.

The wire coat hanger method was a popularly known illegal abortion procedure, although they were not the norm. In fact, Mary Calderone, former medical director of Planned Parenthood, said, in a 1960 printing of the American Journal of Public Health:

"Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physician. In 1957 there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind, second, and even more important, the conference [on abortion sponsored by Planned Parenthood] estimated that 90 percent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians. Whatever trouble arises usually arises from self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 percent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of non-medical abortionist. Abortion, whether therapeutic or illegal, is in the main no longer dangerous, because it is being done well by physicians."


Unsafe abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I shall post my Standard Issue Response #23 for you again:

And I will reiterate, for the hundredth time, A) you are not using a reputable source, B) your numbers are outdated and C) you are evading the rest of the post. All in all, it has been a proven waste of time debating with given the fact you are not actually committed to the debate nor are you putting in the same amount of effort as I am.
 
Back
Top Bottom