[W: 594] A great question for pro abortion types

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Paragraph 1 - sounds a bit like Heinrich Himmler. You have curious companions; don't you?

Paragraph 2 - Not just you.

Paragraph 3 - means what?

Paragraph 4 - is not substantiated and seems to be only you opinion. My own and other opposite views are different. Of course, your opposition causes no loss of life.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Your attempt at a personal attack is humorous and demonstrates you have no way to refute my comments.

Para 3 is merely showing you that I have no reason to question my conscience...as you accused.

But please! Tell me how I can substantiate para 4 for you! I am happy to! Is it true that you cant comprehend how women's rights would be violated by the investigation of every miscarriage? Of pregnant women travelling to states where abortion is legal wouldnt be restricted? Please...give me some specific questions and I'm happy to answer you since you seem to have a very limited understanding of what it would mean for women if abortion were illegal and the govt actively enforced that to protect unborn life. :roll:

Come on...what dont you understand? What do you need 'supported?'

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:

Your attempt at a personal attack is humorous and demonstrates you have no way to refute my comments.

Para 3 is merely showing you that I have no reason to question my conscience...as you accused.

But please! Tell me how I can substantiate para 4 for you! I am happy to! Is it true that you cant comprehend how women's rights would be violated by the investigation of every miscarriage? Of pregnant women travelling to states where abortion is legal wouldnt be restricted? Please...give me some specific questions and I'm happy to answer you since you seem to have a very limited understanding of what it would mean for women if abortion were illegal and the govt actively enforced that to protect unborn life. :roll:

Come on...what dont you understand? What do you need 'supported?'

Click to expand...

I don't think that a woman should be allowed to either possess or use a firearm because it might discharge and accidentally terminate her fetus.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

lurchadams said:

I don't think that a woman should be allowed to either possess or use a firearm because it might discharge and accidentally terminate her fetus.

Click to expand...

Perfect! See? Right there...violation of her 2A rights.

The inhalation of the lead alone, if she's firing at a range, for instance, could harm the unborn.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

year2late said:

I am curious, many elections are decided on politicians willing to vote for justices that would overturn R V W. Realistically speaking, do you think overturning R V W would drastically decrease the numbers of abortions?

I don't. I contend that they actually would be MORE available. (although less safe). Abortion would not be any behind the scenes "back alley" affair. Drug pushers that are prevalent even in small towns...high schools and such would gain access to abortion pills. If this happens....towns that did not have a Planned Parenthood (most towns in US) will have drug pushers ready willing and able to supply desperate women with pills. But we just need to have the demand for it to occur. How easy will it to be to fight? Think of our war on drugs. How successful has that been?

If people want to decrease numbers of abortions, RvW is not the path. It is either assuring women have the access to the most effective high quality contraception - the long term forms. But currently those MOST at risk for choosing abortion - too "rich" for Medicaid and too poor for self pay or insurance. cannot afford it. Makes no sense.

Click to expand...

concernedpuma said:

Point 1 - Yes. I believe it would reduce abortion.

Point 2 - I disagree and can't see why that would happen. More, but less safe? How do you see that result?

Point3 - Too poor? Birth Control means are free in many, no most, instances for the poor.

I appreciate your probative, but not demeaning, reply.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Here is a 2016 article that helps support Year2lates point 2 that you quoted:

The DIY pills are not only a lot cheaper and more available in Texas, they have become the abortion choice among many women.

From a 2016 article:

Women who want an abortion in deeply conservative Texas have slightly more choice these days than they had a few months ago. In March, the Food and Drug Administration simplified rules on abortion medication, allowing patients to take the standard regimen of abortion drugs later in a pregnancy.

However, the recent spike in the number of women choosing legal, non-surgical abortions in U.S. clinics has not slowed brisk sales of abortion drugs south of the border, in Mexican pharmacies. One of the two medications in the regimen — misoprostol — is easy to get without a prescription in Mexico and significantly less expensive there.

More and more young women from Texas are walking across the international bridge for risky, do-it-yourself medical abortions with misoprostol that lack the second drug, mifepristone, and also lack the guidance and supervision by a doctor that the women would get in the U.S.

A surgical abortion ends an undesired pregnancy by removing the fetus and placenta from the woman's uterus. A medical abortion in the U.S. is usually prescribed as a combination of mifepristone (Mifeprex) and misoprostol that, when taken in a two-step process over 48 hours or so, stops a pregnancy from developing and induces a miscarriage. (These drugs are not to be confused with the emergency contraception often called the morning-after pill or Plan B.)

Click to expand...

Legal Medical Abortions Are Up In Texas, But So Are DIY Pills From Mexico : Shots - Health News : NPR

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:

Perfect! See? Right there...violation of her 2A rights.

The inhalation of the lead alone, if she's firing at a range, for instance, could harm the unborn.

Click to expand...

Once again you embrace toadies. That you don't see the evil in your position speaks volumes about you. To obfuscate the second amendment with your position of the legality and worthiness of killing of the unborn is twisted in uncountable ways!
God help you!
Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Once again you embrace toadies. That you don't see the evil in your position speaks volumes about you. To obfuscate the second amendment with your position of the legality and worthiness of killing of the unborn is twisted in uncountable ways!
God help you!
Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Sanctimonious judgement after sanctimonious judgement :doh

And I've already dismissed it...I dont care at all what you believe...you seem to believe that actual infants are 'aborted.' (or that pro-choice people or myself support infants being killed?) :roll:

It would be very amusing tho if you could give even one example of how I 'twisted' the connection between the 2A and my "position of the legality and worthiness of killing of the unborn." It's a bizarre, extremist accusation, I'd love to see you articulate it. Please.

If you have something to discuss...please do.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:

Sanctimonious judgement after sanctimonious judgement :doh

And I've already dismissed it...I dont care at all what you believe...you seem to believe that actual infants are 'aborted.' (or that pro-choice people or myself support infants being killed?) :roll:

It would be very amusing tho if you could give even one example of how I 'twisted' the connection between the 2A and my "position of the legality and worthiness of killing of the unborn." It's a bizarre, extremist accusation, I'd love to see you articulate it. Please.

If you have something to discuss...please do.

Click to expand...

PARA 1 - You are the one who behaves in a sanctimonious way. WOMEN'S Rights is your single poise!! What a crock of pretention and, dare I say, sanctimony?

PARA 2 - I know you have dismissed that. Duh, that is the accusation, whether dismissed or embraced by you.

PARA 3 - Post 628 was the laughing meme that you had to address. By the way, it was a goofy thing to post, but loyalty to your toadies certainly mandated the smiley face from you!

If you genuinely feel that the rights of an existing woman are more than those of an unborn woman, you are quite provincial, aren't you?

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Point 1 - Yes. I believe it would reduce abortion.

Point 2 - I disagree and can't see why that would happen. More, but less safe? How do you see that result?

Point3 - Too poor? Birth Control means are free in many, no most, instances for the poor.

I appreciate your probative, but not demeaning, reply.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Part 3

You misread what Year2late actually said, she was talking about the most effective long term birth control ( implants or IUDs ) not condoms or birth control pills which have a higher failure rate than long term birth control.

If the woman does NOT have birth control coverage on her insurance policy, the long term birth control has ab$800 to $1,000 up front cost which is much more expensive than most
first trimester abortions at around $400.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

minnie616 said:

Part 3

You misread what Year2late actually said, she was talking about the most effective long term birth control ( implants or IUDs ) not condoms or birth control pills which have a higher failure rate than long term birth control.

If the woman does have birth control coverage on her insurance policy, the long term birth control costs $800 to $1,000 up from which is more expensive than most friest trimester abortions that usually cost around $400.

Click to expand...

I don't generally respond negatively to Y2L. That person is on my own respected list. If I came across as otherwise, I am surely sorry. Like you, I have benefitted from corresponding with Y2L. I must have misunderstood the post. I stand to be corrected in the area of cost of abortion.
My point was the prevention. In Fla. anyway, it is free, or virtually so, to those who will take the time to possess them.
Min, I believe I have made my stand clear. I don't, and ought not object to those abortions necessary for the reasons of Rape, incest, and even the chance of death to the Mother. I have tried so very often to raise objection only to al a carte' abortion.
The base truth is, if women don't feel that they will ever want children, get a sterilization procedure. If they accept the burden of being a mother, stop aborting the child you accept you might have. The one they choose to flush, might have been the best child.

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

I believe you have pointed out a real problem in the Constitution. The 14th is sort of a wild card, if liberally interpreted. It is my view that the 1-th holds more weight and can be more attributed to the framers.
Of course, men and women have basic rights un the united States. The right in question is that of an individual to give the unborn a death sentence. I know we don't allow cruel or unusual punishment, but I can't think of anything more cruel. The struggle is to keep it unusual.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Yes men and women do have basic rights in the United States and one of those is bodily autonomy.

The pregnant woman has the right to bodily autonomy, therefore she may choose to continue her pregnancy or choose to have an early abortion.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

I don't generally respond negatively to Y2L. That person is on my own respected list. If I came across as otherwise, I am surely sorry. Like you, I have benefitted from corresponding with Y2L. I must have misunderstood the post. I stand to be corrected in the area of cost of abortion.
My point was the prevention. In Fla. anyway, it is free, or virtually so, to those who will take the time to possess them.
Min, I believe I have made my stand clear. I don't, and ought not object to those abortions necessary for the reasons of Rape, incest, and even the chance of death to the Mother. I have tried so very often to raise objection only to al a carte' abortion.
The base truth is, if women don't feel that they will ever want children, get a sterilization procedure. If they accept the burden of being a mother, stop aborting the child you accept you might have. The one they choose to flush, might have been the best child.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Sterilization is also very expensive and if a women does not already have children many doctors will refuse to give her the surgery .

From HHS:

Because these methods cannot be undone, they are only recommended for women who are sure that they do not want to have any children in the future. Tubal ligation: In this procedure—also known as “having your tubes tied”—the fallopian tubes are cut, sealed, clipped, or tied.

Click to expand...

Female Sterilization | HHS.gov

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I understand this is a sensitive subject, but I find the amount of hostility and apparent hatred quite disturbing. Maybe explaining your faith/belief and the meaning of “a special place in hell” would help.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Point 1 - Yes. I believe it would reduce abortion.

Point 2 - I disagree and can't see why that would happen. More, but less safe? How do you see that result?

Point3 - Too poor? Birth Control means are free in many, no most, instances for the poor.

I appreciate your probative, but not demeaning, reply.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Point one - that remains to be seen, if black market abortion pills are easy to get - or someone is near enough to a boarder...that would be a decent way to go. When I think blak market - just think drug pushers.

Point two -If black market abortion pills are available...the abortion would possibly be less safe...but remember...that being pregnant is not a simple inconvenience no matter how much people may insist on it. Think of the increased risk with pregnancy if a woman has substandard access to medical care. If I had been relegated to a to a county clinic on Medicaid - it is very likely I would be on dialysis or dead. An overburdened county clinic would not have had the time to look at me that closely. I felt fine, my symptoms to my MD were subtle. My lab work told a very different story.:shock:WOmen who chose abortion are thinking what will happen to their born children if something goes wrong. People who chows abortion are frequently housing insecure. If you had a scheduled clinic visit, but felt fine....would you miss a days pay (which would mean rent may not be paid) and risk being evicted? These are what many term as "inconviences".

Point three is my favorite. The usual BC available with minimal or no cost have a failure rate...that can increase if they are not used exactly according to directions. So if one does not realize she missed a pill until two late...missing a pill can mean pregnancy. If one does not realize that another OTC med can inactivate the pill - that could mean pregnancy. Misapplied diaphragm....pregnant. One condom break at the wrong time...pregnant.

The methods that are THE most reliable...IUD.....implantables and such are financially out of reach for many if not most of the women who choose abortion.Too rich for Medicaid and too poor for self pay. Those forms which are THE most effective and lack the failure rates associate with simple error. Would you be surprised if you found the cost can be over twice the cost of an early abortion? I would love to see the cost of such forms be covered somehow for those women in that group (too rich for Medicaid too poor for insurance) I think that kind of pragmatic thinking can drastically reduce abortion rates. How do we get the most reliable contraception to the women most at risk for choosing abortion?

Hope that helps.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

October14 said:

I understand this is a sensitive subject, but I find the amount of hostility and apparent hatred quite disturbing. Maybe explaining your faith/belief and the meaning of “a special place in hell” would help.

Click to expand...

Hello, Oct 14, Valid point, though reading the entire thread might give some hint. For the purpose of clarity to my own position:
I believe in the concept that every viable Human life has a soul as sacred and worthy to live and roam the planet as I have.
There are others, following their own reasoning, who don't feel that way and take a different view. Therein lies the rub. It is your decision to make where you fall in the discussion. A good argument or some new fact you may present might help us all.
Welcome to a generally healthy thought transfer place.

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

year2late said:

Point one - that remains to be seen, if black market abortion pills are easy to get - or someone is near enough to a boarder...that would be a decent way to go. When I think blak market - just think drug pushers.

Point two -If black market abortion pills are available...the abortion would possibly be less safe...but remember...that being pregnant is not a simple inconvenience no matter how much people may insist on it. Think of the increased risk with pregnancy if a woman has substandard access to medical care. If I had been relegated to a to a county clinic on Medicaid - it is very likely I would be on dialysis or dead. An overburdened county clinic would not have had the time to look at me that closely. I felt fine, my symptoms to my MD were subtle. My lab work told a very different story.:shock:WOmen who chose abortion are thinking what will happen to their born children if something goes wrong. People who chows abortion are frequently housing insecure. If you had a scheduled clinic visit, but felt fine....would you miss a days pay (which would mean rent may not be paid) and risk being evicted? These are what many term as "inconviences".

Point three is my favorite. The usual BC available with minimal or no cost have a failure rate...that can increase if they are not used exactly according to directions. So if one does not realize she missed a pill until two late...missing a pill can mean pregnancy. If one does not realize that another OTC med can inactivate the pill - that could mean pregnancy. Misapplied diaphragm....pregnant. One condom break at the wrong time...pregnant.

The methods that are THE most reliable...IUD.....implantables and such are financially out of reach for many if not most of the women who choose abortion.Too rich for Medicaid and too poor for self pay. Those forms which are THE most effective and lack the failure rates associate with simple error. Would you be surprised if you found the cost can be over twice the cost of an early abortion? I would love to see the cost of such forms be covered somehow for those women in that group (too rich for Medicaid too poor for insurance) I think that kind of pragmatic thinking can drastically reduce abortion rates. How do we get the most reliable contraception to the women most at risk for choosing abortion?

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

I won't do the point 1,2,3 approach here. I surely know of your current conviction. I may never, and likely couldn't change that no matter what I write. That is an admission of my inability to change minds. I never really thought I could.

My appeal is to the grotesque idea that abortion is substantially a pass for misbehavior and slovenly unaccountability.
Millions get a flu shot, but are we to assume women don't have the ability to avoid becoming pregnant? It is my contention that women are as smart as men. I am a man and if placed if the situation where I could become pregnant, I would take the course to prevention. Surely, you would never concede that men are smarter than women.

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

I won't do the point 1,2,3 approach here. I surely know of your current conviction. I may never, and likely couldn't change that no matter what I write. That is an admission of my inability to change minds. I never really thought I could.

My appeal is to the grotesque idea that abortion is substantially a pass for misbehavior and slovenly unaccountability.
Millions get a flu shot, but are we to assume women don't have the ability to avoid becoming pregnant? It is my contention that women are as smart as men. I am a man and if placed if the situation where I could become pregnant, I would take the course to prevention. Surely, you would never concede that men are smarter than women.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

I think many women would like to avoid abortion. Many don't have the luxury to pay 800 to 1000 dollars for an IUD or other implantable.

I had reasonable means. After almost 6 months off due to a very difficult pregnancy and surgery (C-section) my "means" was a wiped out savings and a decent line of credit. I did not have to think twice about having an IUD placed when my OBGYN said it was ok. I just "put it on the card" - I knew eventually I would have the resources to pay it off. Most women who chose abortion do not have the luxury to flippantly say "put it on the card".

For them they do not consider such things like an IUD/implantable because it is financially out of reach if they are too "rich" for Medicaid and too poor for self pay.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

year2late said:

I think many women would like to avoid abortion. Many don't have the luxury to pay 800 to 1000 dollars for an IUD or other implantable.

I had reasonable means. After almost 6 months off due to a very difficult pregnancy and surgery (C-section) my "means" was a wiped out savings and a decent line of credit. I did not have to think twice about having an IUD placed when my OBGYN said it was ok. I just "put it on the card" - I knew eventually I would have the resources to pay it off. Most women who chose abortion do not have the luxury to flippantly say "put it on the card".

For them they do not consider such things like an IUD/implantable because it is financially out of reach if they are too "rich" for Medicaid and too poor for self pay.

Click to expand...

I see your point, to which I would reply, if there is any such a thing as HMO or prudent spending, an affordable IUD procedure makes sense. Both, socially and more bluntly, financially.
I'm afraid that wouldn't help you now, but I can see where it might help others. Goodness, maybe that goes a log way toward solving the problems between pro's of both sides.

Interesting idea, Thank you.

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

I see your point, to which I would reply, if there is any such a thing as HMO or prudent spending, an affordable IUD procedure makes sense. Both, socially and more bluntly, financially.
I'm afraid that wouldn't help you now, but I can see where it might help others. Goodness, maybe that goes a log way toward solving the problems between pro's of both sides.

Interesting idea, Thank you.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

I look for pragmatic solutions.

Somehow I think helping a woman afford long term contraception (who would likely abort if she lacks the means to remain pregnant, let alone raise a child)should be an acceptable middle ground.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

If you genuinely feel that the rights of an existing woman are more than those of an unborn woman, you are quite provincial, aren't you?

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

My position on this has not changed ever in the time that I've posted here: I value the unborn but I value all born people more.

I dont care if you like that or not, but the opposite by no means gives you the moral High Ground and in practical terms, legally, they cannot be treated equally. (If they can, please explain how?)

So if you choose to value the unborn more than born people...good for you. Again...nothing moral about that.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Hello, Oct 14, Valid point, though reading the entire thread might give some hint. For the purpose of clarity to my own position:
I believe in the concept that every viable Human life has a soul as sacred and worthy to live and roam the planet as I have.
There are others, following their own reasoning, who don't feel that way and take a different view. Therein lies the rub. It is your decision to make where you fall in the discussion. A good argument or some new fact you may present might help us all.
Welcome to a generally healthy thought transfer place.

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

It's why you believe you have the right to encourage the govt...against the Constitution...to force your beliefs on others that does boggle the mind. It's a sin in God's Eyes to use man's law to force us to comply with His Word...He chose to give us all free will...those that 'vote' to usurp His Authority will be in for an unpleasant surprise someday.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

year2late said:

I look for pragmatic solutions.

Somehow I think helping a woman afford long term contraception (who would likely abort if she lacks the means to remain pregnant, let alone raise a child)should be an acceptable middle ground.

Click to expand...

Thank you again Y2Lfor your considered reply.
I don't want children raised in an unhealthy environment. Further, I certainly don't expect issue from a crime, or incest. I guess a summarization of my opinion(could be considered liberal by some) is not against abortion as a clearly defined procedure. My care runs to those fetuses carried to viability. I know there are some well worn charts that show that rarely happens, but I don't care. I am against the death of a viable fetus at all!
Given that, I believe you and I have common understanding. I don't think you and I are too far apart at all. I'm afraid my rub is with the extremist's that see any regulation as unacceptable, for fear it demeans women's rights. I see women's rights as an inalienable right, but reject a pass for some slovenly behavior. And lastly, no man ought ever be excused from his shared responsibility for slovenly behavior.
Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:

My position on this has not changed ever in the time that I've posted here: I value the unborn but I value all born people more.

I dont care if you like that or not, but the opposite by no means gives you the moral High Ground and in practical terms, legally, they cannot be treated equally. (If they can, please explain how?)

So if you choose to value the unborn more than born people...good for you. Again...nothing moral about that.

Click to expand...

Point 1 = no argument. I'm not sure you can allow in a thought contrary to your mantra. I believe you wrote at some point that you had some psychology study; an inflexible mind set has a definition and you will then know what that is called.

Point 2 = I know you don't care what I think(q.v. point 1)

My counter point = That you care about only living people(as you have determined) clearly doesn't calculate those who died or were born just as you were writing. You know you are using a variable, right?

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:

It's why you believe you have the right to encourage the govt...against the Constitution...to force your beliefs on others that does boggle the mind. It's a sin in God's Eyes to use man's law to force us to comply with His Word...He chose to give us all free will...those that 'vote' to usurp His Authority will be in for an unpleasant surprise someday.

Click to expand...

How often must you be told that the Constitution was never intended to address abortion? Truthfully, excepting a generous interpretation, the Federally codified term abortion, as a medical procedure, still hasn't appeared, has it?

Regards,
CP

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

Thank you again Y2Lfor your considered reply.
I don't want children raised in an unhealthy environment. Further, I certainly don't expect issue from a crime, or incest. I guess a summarization of my opinion(could be considered liberal by some) is not against abortion as a clearly defined procedure. My care runs to those fetuses carried to viability. I know there are some well worn charts that show that rarely happens, but I don't care. I am against the death of a viable fetus at all!
Given that, I believe you and I have common understanding. I don't think you and I are too far apart at all. I'm afraid my rub is with the extremist's that see any regulation as unacceptable, for fear it demeans women's rights. I see women's rights as an inalienable right, but reject a pass for some slovenly behavior. And lastly, no man ought ever be excused from his shared responsibility for slovenly behavior.
Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

I think a stronger point is that it is not just about raising a child in an unhealthy environment...a woman of limited means in this society may be thrust into that unhealthy environment herself if the pregnancy puts her into a position of not being able to support herself. Many of the women who chose abortion are "working poor" taking whatever the shifts they can get to meet rent for that month. They get put into the unfortunate position of working or following the doctor's orders. If it was you and you "felt fine" but were facing eviction, would you work or not pay the rent? That is kind of how it can be. Then if her job gets eliminated...as an employer, would you hire a woman who was already showing - especially if the job was physical labor? And this is all forgetting te fact that she will likely get emergency Medicaid which well probably send her to overburdened county clinics for her frequent medical appts.

Now mind you....as a pragmatist...I would rather see a woman have the ability to get the contraception most apt to prevent pregnancy (long term implantables/IUD) and currently those that are too rich for Medicaid and too poor for insurance cannot come close to affording the price tag of 800 to 1000 dollars - which is about twice the cost of an early abortion.

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:

How often must you be told that the Constitution was never intended to address abortion? Truthfully, excepting a generous interpretation, the Federally codified term abortion, as a medical procedure, still hasn't appeared, has it?

Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

Although our founding fathers did speak to ending pregnancies on various occasions.

REVOLUTIONARY SPIRITS: Faith, Politics, Opinion: The Founding Fathers and Abortion in Colonial America