View Poll Results: Poll on where you stand on abortion in relation to women

Voters
62. You may not vote on this poll
  • I favor forcing women to have children against her wishes.

    12 19.35%
  • I oppose forcing women to have children against her wishes.

    43 69.35%
  • IDK/Other

    7 11.29%
Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 219

Thread: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

  1. #111
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    Paperwork? You mean the medical records which are protected under the privacy clause of the 4th Amendment? Brazil doesn't have a Bill of Rights, nor are they a developed country. I'm not looking to emulate other countries in this debate.





    There's a thing called a slash and it is used in the English language as a substitute for "or."



    Wow. No offense, but under your proposal one of two things will have to happen. Either we can maintain lax investigative procedures such as the one which faced your wife (and in which case, there will definitely be a sudden increase in the number of "miscarriages" across the country), or we can impose more intrusive investigative procedures that look at more than just paperwork. How would you like it if your wife was subjected to a cavity search in order to rule out a self-induced abortion?
    Regulations always give reason for people to not use doctors, including women should not use doctors for pre-natal care. This also is a reason why in most states people should NEVER go to psychologists or psychiatrists. In most states, ANYTHING you tell them actually CAN be used in criminal cases against you.

  2. #112
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    Well, scientifically, we know that when sperm meets egg, the zygote is created. According to science, the human has a beginning. Sort of like how the oak has a beginning. The zygote is the very beginning of the developing human, as the seed is the very beginning of the oak. The zygote is not a human being, but the very beginning. The same is true for the seed and the oak. Science shows that the zygote is the initial state of human development, so I don't see why some argue that scientific fact.
    That's just drivel, not science. Its just a word game.
    Last edited by joko104; 02-06-12 at 05:46 PM.

  3. #113
    Gone

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-16-16 @ 03:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    8,585

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    Well, scientifically, we know that when sperm meets egg, the zygote is created. According to science, the human has a beginning. Sort of like how the oak has a beginning. The zygote is the very beginning of the developing human, as the seed is the very beginning of the oak. The zygote is not a human being, but the very beginning. The same is true for the seed and the oak. Science shows that the zygote is the initial state of human development, so I don't see why some argue that scientific fact.

    I don't think anyone is arguing this fact. Seems to me the debate revolves around when said Zygote/fetus/embryo has developed
    enough to be classified as a human being. Life is somewhat irrelevant in this, as every cell we have, and every creature we eat is alive. yet we either shed millions, or slaughter them when needed. The criteria is obviously Humanity...which requires a human brain...we get those around month 5-6.

  4. #114
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by tecoyah View Post
    I think this whole debate revolves around "Individual Reality", as we are all individual with brains. What your sister thinks is not what you do...obviously. What your Dad considers true, might not be true to you...this a real, and pertinent.

    Some people will see a Zygote as a living human being...others as a grouping of cells in a state of multiplication. Both can be correct in individual reality.

    Thus, logically this debate becomes very personalized. How do you communicate constructively in this situation?
    At some point there is little point on the question of whether or not it is ethical to abortion a ZEF. That is a moral belief, never decided by facts or science. Its just what you believe. It is, essentially a religious argument, though that may be secular or non-secular.

    The next level then is (for some) whether primarily male politicians may and should use laws, courts, cops, doctors, trials, judges, forced physical examines, prisons, interrogations, subpoenas and possibly executions to enforce prohibited ideologies or to TRY to enforce ideologies dictated upon females of our species.

  5. #115
    Gone

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-16-16 @ 03:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    8,585

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    At some point there is little point on the question of whether or not it is ethical to abortion a ZEF. That is a moral belief, never decided by facts or science. Its just what you believe. It is, essentially a religious argument, though that may be secular or non-secular.

    The next level then is (for some) whether primarily male politicians may and should use laws, courts, cops, doctors, trials, judges, forced physical examines, prisons, interrogations, subpoenas and possibly executions to enforce prohibited ideologies or to TRY to enforce ideologies dictated upon females of our species.
    I personally, do not think myself capable or worthy of telling the other millions what to do. Instead I have come to accept my place in this republic, and abide by what laws we have. I will say however, that if someone decided to force my wife into a situation that compromised her happiness...I would react appropriately, and likely regret it eventually.

  6. #116
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    To claim that known consequences of an action are irrelevant to the value or ethics of the action is nonsensical.
    You may very well believe that, but a very large number of people-- possibly the majority of people-- don't. This is one of the most fundamental questions in all of moral philosophy and one which is unwise to dismiss entirely. Some people believe that doing the right thing is more important than getting the right results, because doing the right thing is the only way to get the right results consistently over the long term. What you are arguing here is pure utilitarianism, the critiques of which in modern scholarship are endless.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    I don't believe terminating an early term pregnancy is wrong in any way
    Neither do I, but most people-- including most adamantly pro-choice people-- do. They believe that people have a moral, if not legal, duty of care to unborn children and that killing them is morally wrong, and it doesn't matter what positive consequences arise (or negative consequences are avoided) from abortion because abortion is wrong.

    It isn't an unreasonable statement. It's the same process of moral reasoning that protects our civil liberties and our Constitutional rights-- "it doesn't matter what the consequences are, violating human rights is wrong"-- and the same process of moral reasoning that must, if it is to function at all, apply to all of the law.

  7. #117
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    Paperwork? You mean the medical records which are protected under the privacy clause of the 4th Amendment? Brazil doesn't have a Bill of Rights, nor are they a developed country. I'm not looking to emulate other countries in this debate.





    There's a thing called a slash and it is used in the English language as a substitute for "or."



    Wow. No offense, but under your proposal one of two things will have to happen. Either we can maintain lax investigative procedures such as the one which faced your wife (and in which case, there will definitely be a sudden increase in the number of "miscarriages" across the country), or we can impose more intrusive investigative procedures that look at more than just paperwork. How would you like it if your wife was subjected to a cavity search in order to rule out a self-induced abortion?
    In most states medical records are not protected in relation to criminal investigations.

    The more jeopardy placed on doctors, they less they will risk and the less people should risk going to a doctor. There are certain types of miscarriages (late term) for which determining if it was an abortion or miscarriage would be exactly impossible. The government and AMA DO set regulations doctors just will not cross - denying patients and doctors both decision process. Same for midwives.

    A woman went into sudden early labor (close to due date) using a midwife. However, it was a frank breach. The midwife told she had to immediately go to the emergency room because she could not, by law, deliver the child. She could in skill, but it was illegal for her to try and she'd lose her license. At the hospital, they informed her they HAD to do a C-section and their regs also would not allow them to attempt a natural childbirth. The woman absolutely refused to allow them to cut her open. She was at one of the highest volume birthing hospitals in the USA, which also doubled as a training hospital for doctors and nurses in that exact area. As she did her breathing with each growing contraction, they tried to convince her to agree to a C-section.

    She absolutely refused. What to do? Nothing would stop the growing contractions and she had dialated to 8. 10 is the "launch number," like it or not. That baby was coming out - and if something not done would kill both mother and child - unless the father pulled the extremely difficult procedure again. The odds are considered very low for a lay person. The pay person can save the mother, but usually lacks time to save the baby, which instead suffocates during the extended removal process. But they had already done it once - had no choice being alone that time. But now the same situation they are in one of the top birthing hospitals in the USA.

    Forcibly drug her down and slit her open against her will to 'save the child?" What authority did they have to do that?

    It was complicated by the fact that the husband had done an emergency exact same situation birth with her on no-notice with the two of them alone at home with her uninjured and the child just fine. Now the greatest doctors in the world were declaring they couldn't even try to do what she and her husband had done out of necessity alone. Since within a minute they could do a C-section if the natural birth was actually failing, there was no real risk. Only required government directed medical protocol stood in their way.

    Nor did the father agree with her. He had been through it, he had to do CPR and mouth-to-mouth to save the one he did with her. He did NOT want to try it again. BUT he did not see himself as having authority to order her, nor would she have let him.

    Fortunately, the section chief MD on duty finally said to hell with this, realizing there was nothing they could do to stop her again going into natural frank breach birth with only her husband attending (and in that case "attending" is as absolute must. That baby CAN NOT come out on its own and the birthing would kill it and tear the mother apart if no one assisting the to baby come out. The mother unable to hold off going birthing by breathing anymore, the husband had final said ok, he'll do his best. And she began praying, "Dear heavenly father, please save my baby..." Calmly. Confidently. An entire medical staff just watching, paralized by regulations!

    With that, the Chief said exactly "Oh to hell with this bull****! EVERYONE IN HERE, NOW! WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS!!" Guided by the midwife they manually and with extreme force turned the baby while inside her - strictly rules prohibited but a practice of midwives for centuries. And then she gave birth to a perfectly healthy son, her totally uninjured and they both out of there literally before the end of that day.

    During it all she never let out so much as a peep in pain, calm the entire time. many times they commented on her endurance of pain as "impossible." No drugs. They declared her the greatest mother they ever had there.

    The government NEEDS TO STAY OUT OF MEDICAL CARE IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL CARE IN MANY REGARDS (I'm not referring to insurance, rather what doctors may and may not do). If not, people need to stay away from doctors.
    Last edited by joko104; 02-06-12 at 06:22 PM.

  8. #118
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    In most states medical records are not protected in relation to criminal investigations.

    The more jeopardy placed on doctors, they less they will risk and the less people should risk going to a doctor. There are certain types of miscarriages (late term) for which determining if it was an abortion or miscarriage would be exactly impossible. The government and AMA DO set regulations doctors just will not cross - denying patients and doctors both decision process. Same for midwives.

    A woman went into sudden early labor (close to due date) using a midwife. However, it was a frank breach. The midwife told she had to immediately go to the emergency room because she could not, by law, deliver the child. She could in skill, but it was illegal for her to try and she'd lose her license. At the hospital, they informed her they HAD to do a C-section and their regs also would not allow them to attempt a natural childbirth. The woman absolutely refused to allow them to cut her open. She was at one of the highest volume birthing hospitals in the USA, which also doubled as a training hospital for doctors and nurses in that exact area. As she did her breathing with each growing contraction, they tried to convince her to agree to a C-section.
    She absolutely refused. What to do? Drug her down to 'save the child?" What authority did they have to do that? It was complicated by the fact that the husband had done an emergency exact same situation birth with her on no-notice with the two of them alone at home with her uninjured and the child just fine. Now the greatest doctors in the world were declaring they couldn't even try to do what she and her husband had done out of necessity alone. Since within a minute they could do a C-section if the natural birth was actually failing, there was no real risk. Only required government directed medical protocol stood in their way.

    Fortunately, the section chief MD on duty finally said to hell with this, realizing there was nothing they could do to stop her again going into natural frank breach birth with only her husband attending (and in that case "attending" is as absolute must. That baby CAN NOT come out on its own and the birthing would kill it and tear the mother apart. So the Chief said "EVERYONE IN HERE, NOW! WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS!!" Guided by the midwife they manually and with extreme force turned the baby while inside her - strictly rules prohibited but a practice of midwives for centuries. And then she gave birth to a perfectly healthy son, her totally uninjured and they both out of there literally before the end of that day.

    The government NEEDS TO STAY OUT OF MEDICAL CARE IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL CARE (I'm not referring to insurance, rather what doctors may and may not do). If not, people need to stay away from doctors.
    The key issue, IMO, is that even a nice wordy piece of bureaucratic legislation simply cannot cover all situations - and that a statement "at the discretion of (insert professional person in charge of procedure/whatever here)" is counter to the very nature of such.

    Or something…
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  9. #119
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    That's just drivel, not science. Its just a word game.
    Science agrees with me. What agrees with you?

  10. #120
    Gone

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-16-16 @ 03:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    8,585

    Re: Where you stand on abortion in relation to women?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    The key issue, IMO, is that even a nice wordy piece of bureaucratic legislation simply cannot cover all situations - and that a statement "at the discretion of (insert professional person in charge of procedure/whatever here)" is counter to the very nature of such.

    Or something…
    In other words...you think we should deny better in search of perfection {in your mind)...this mindset prevents advancement, and always has. Granted, current laws are not perfect, and in fact cannot possibly be to everyone, but if we want society we must accept compromise, that is simply our reality.

Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •