Abortion: Putting A Face On The Issue

Jake, laws are not really anything but attempts to codify and enforce morality.

Let me explain something to you. The mother provides the egg, which has 23 chromosomes, the father provides the other 23 chromosomes. The fetus ends up with neither the mother's nor the father's DNA, but rather a mix of the two.

yes, but if you read what i posted, cells from the futus can persist in the mother up to 27 years, therefore cells with different dna become part of the mothers body.....
ive never seen anyone more capable of missing a point in my entire life Kevn.
Do you have abn entry for it in the Guinness Book of Records, by chance?

More right wing doubletalk. Late term abortions are legal in the US if the life or health of the mother is in danger. So, yes, they are legal under certain circumstances. Late term abortions are not banned on a federal level, but every state in the union has laws severely restricting them.

I'm sure we want Congress making laws based on a few right wing medical experts' ideas of what does and does not qualify as a danger to a woman's health. After all Senator Frist did such a great job diagnosing that poor woman in Florida. Let's let him decide the medical questions for other people he's never met. What a good idea.

Why is it that the right wingers tell us they're for smaller government and states' rights, but the minute something they don't like happens, wham! let's get the federal government involved? Is it basic moral dishonesty or just an inability to separate personal opinions from principles?

The fact the child's DNA persists doesn't make it the woman's DNA.

I tried to clarify my point. I don't care if the fetus' DNA remains within the woman's body. It has no bearing on my point. Why are you being so obtuse? Do you want to actually debate the point that the child has different DNA from the mother's DNA because the father's DNA is part of the mix, or do you want to play word games to side step the issue. Do you think changing the topic (that the child's DNA is its own DNA different from the mother's DNA) supports your argument?

It's not a child.

She's a human being at the earliest stages of development.

It's not a human being.

I know that 20+ pages into a flame fest isn't a good place to share personal stories, but I've been extremely busy with work and haven't had time to really put my input into this.

This is not putting positions forward, this is all strictly my opinions. You can take it or leave it as you wish.

I grew up in a strongly religious community. I grew up seeing abortion as one of the most horrible acts imaginable, and I still do. What has changed, though is my view of people who have abortions. Much like many who are arguing for the outlawing abortion here I was taught to believe that people who have abortions are evil and deserve to be punished severely. Then I found out the truth: people who have abortions are people. Ordinary people who end up having to make an extremely difficult decision. In a way, I'm probably lucky that this is a decision I will never have to face. I also realized that every person is different. Some have chosen abortion after careful consideration and find that it really is the best choice for them at that time. I respect them for that and I know that such a decision is not easy for them; this choice came about not because they are evil. There are also those who choose it without consideration. These people are the ones that need better information. I don't see them as evil either, although I do want them to know the true consequences of what they have chosen. I do not, however want to see them punished and forced to suffer; I want to see them helped and brought to understand.

I think adoption is a good alternative, but I also realize that this is by no means a painless transaction. Too often I see arguments that make it sound like putting your baby up for adoption is as easy as donating your used car. There are those who say that they know that adoption causes less harm than abortion. I tend to agree, but it is certainly a subjective choice and I sure as hell don't want the government making it for me or anyone else.

Luckily I do have some tangential experience with adoption, including a step-sister, a cousin (adopted as a 6 year old btw ), and a niece. All these children are loved very much, but to say that their adoptions have not resulted in pain as well would be dishonest. In fact, at times it was heartbreaking. (ok, sorry.. not ready to talk about that here) However, in all those cases I am very glad that their mothers chose adoption over abortion. I would like it better, though, if our society was more commited to helping mothers who want to keep their children instead of seeing them forced into adoption.

I also know something about viability of premature babies. First a sad story about my cousin's wife who had two miscarriages. Her third pregnancy resulted in their child being born extremely premature. Despite herculean efforts, she did not live for very long. I suppose genetic problems must run in my family. My brother, my mother's first child was born with a malformed heart. The doctors were able to keep him alive for three days before he died. Luckily my mother was able to have more children. One of my nieces was also born nearly 12 weeks premature. Yes, she was smaller than many of the aborted fetuses in the original post. As her mother described it, her toes were the size of a tic-tacs (hence, she had tic-tac toes). We watched and waited every day for updates on her condition. Rising with hope when she showed improvement and becoming filled with fear when she took turns for the worse. Happily she did live. She is a charismatic first grader now, although she does have slight cerebral palsy. Yes, babies and children are wanted, espeically by people who can't have their own.

I suppose the points I'm trying to make are:
-People can be swayed to change their mind on the issue of abortion. It happened with me.
-Just because you support legal abortion, doesn't mean you think they should be used trivially.

Who knows, maybe I can be swayed to thinking that abortion should be made illegal again. However, I am not seeing any arguments swaying me to that.

I personally think that the best course of action is to attack the root causes of abortion in a practical way. In this sense, I agree with Kiamat's prescription of education for children, availability of birth control and support (including financial) for women who want to carry to full term, but don't feel they can't do it without help.

anyway, that probably didn't make much sense in this thread, but there it is.

Let's agree then, that before any abortion the mother be fully informed as to the development of her fetus, with a sonogram to see with her own eyes.

Also, the mother should be at least old enough to drink beer to make such a life and death choice.

There should be a week waiting period after receiving this information, to allow cool-down period. Let her think it out and discuss it with others she trusts.

Lastly, if the father is to be required to pay child support, he should have a say in the matter.

And there you go again, trying to make laws that are intrusive and un-necessary!



It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! And it's not the business of the government either.

Are you against informing the mother before the point of no return?

bump

That's not the point Kevn. The point is there should be NO LAWS requiring it.

MAN! Don't you people work!? I go off to work for a few hours and this thread explodes!

Kevn,

I appreciate your support, but if you're going to resort to the same sort of unproductive name calling that got that other thread locked, I'd appreciate your silent support instead.

Kendra,

You've repeatedly said it's not a baby, it's not a human, etc. I'm curious-at what point does it become a human? Once the cord is snipped? Once it breathes for the first time? At what point is it no longer ok to vaccum it out, inject it with saline, or suck it's brains out?

And why? Why advocate for the death of a child that would otherwise be viable? Why not remove the child instead?

-Kiamat Dusk

So, Kevn... Are you saying that if all of the above terms are met, and the woman still chooses to terminate her pregnancy, she may do so, unhampered by threats, protests, judgements, she may do so?

OMG, I sense a softening to your hardline! Bravo!

why doesn't someone just build an abortion clinic in SL? and folks could come and yell and picket women, and blow up doctors, that'd be fun, eh?

ps.
prim babies are freaky, suck them out before they become adult prims...

;p

Firstly, I have not resorted to name calling, if I had I would expect a reprimand from LL. If you can re-post any such personal attack, I'll reconsider your request.

Secondly, I tried to clarify what I thought you said, I never tried to support your opinions. My opinions are mine.

Lastly, none of my posted were considered in the closing of a thread, because I don't resort to name calling etc. In fact, I ignore personal attacks aimed at me often.

When the mother says so, or when God almighty has breathed the breath of life into it's nostrils. Whichever comes first.

I'm on it.

Soooo....you're saying you made the choice over your individual reproductive rights but then your mom came in and forced her will on you? But it was ok to negate your freedom of choice and interfere with your reproductive rights?

Intriguing.

Maybe years from now after abortion has been outlawed again, women will look back at the people who fought to make it so and say, in hindsight, it was the best decision.

-Kiamat Dusk

and maybe, yes maybe -- pigs will fly out of my ass.

Thanks for that, now how about a real answer? Or did you mean "when it starts breathing air" when you said "when God almighty has breathed the breath of life into its nostrils"?

there have been several points in this thread where it could have been closed, had there been a moderator around looking through it at the time; however, it seems it has turned back around is again acheiving a productive tone. i encourage everyone to continue along this discourse and avoid any personal attacks so that you may all discuss this topic as long as you wish.


Edit: in hindsight, i'm not closing this thread, but it is being sunmitted for review.

I think we're more likely to see a ban on abortion during Bush's current term than pigs flying out of your ass, Kendra. But keep us informed.