Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Ward of State Thwarted in Seeking an Abortion

Abortion Ward of the State

  • Please log in to reply
185 replies to this topic

#61 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 06:26 PM

We have laws that prevent the family of a murder victim from ripping apart the bodies of the still living murderer. They do not get to push the button that send the drugs into his system that will end his life. Note I keep an eye on those wanting to make abortion illegal just as I do those who want expand the rights without working to gain acceptance of the changes in the community.

It is why I have said that our current laws are  the best compromise both sides can get. I think that changes must be acceptable with community.

I agree that women should have access to abortion without permission of her husband.

I think that she should not have to go twice to the clinic to make her choice.

I draw the line at women under 18. I feel they need to consent of her parnets guardian or the ruling of a family court judge.

The reasons are parents are assumed to have the child's best interests in mind. The parents can be held accountable for the actions of the child. If there is a debt the child acquires the parents will be required to pay the bill. Now in case of rape or incest the family court judge can make the ruleing.


But the world does not work based on my ideas(Thank God). It works on what a majority of a community passes laws for.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#62 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 06:43 PM

waterpanther, on May 2 2005, 07:24 PM, said:

So if abortion is murder, then you are against it in all circumstances?  If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy, which will certainly kill her, then she cannot have an abortion because that would involve "taking an innocent life?"  Bear in mind that in equating abortion with murder, you have just set an absolute standard--unless the mother is also "innocent" in your view, then her right to life does not meet the standard you set for the fetus' competing right.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


We take no action to kill either. What happens is what happens, exactly. Hard perhaps but it's black and white that way.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#63 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 06:53 PM

Who's "we?"

Let's be clear here.  You would take no action.  When the woman dies, you--not "we"--are responsible for her death.  Where does that fit on your moral scale?
Posted Image

#64 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 06:58 PM

waterpanther, on May 2 2005, 07:53 PM, said:

Who's "we?"

Let's be clear here.  You would take no action.  When the woman dies, you--not "we"--are responsible for her death.  Where does that fit on your moral scale?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


No, no one is responsible for her death, The ectopic pregnancy is.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#65 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:00 PM

But you wouldn't lift a finger to help her?

That's cold, and very black and white. Thank you for illuminating so much of your character.

Edited by Steven_Q, 02 May 2005 - 07:00 PM.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#66 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:03 PM

So, if the pregnancy is responsible for her death, it's not "innocent," is it?
Posted Image

#67 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:07 PM

waterpanther, on May 2 2005, 08:03 PM, said:

So, if the pregnancy is responsible for her death, it's not "innocent," is it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Ah and therein lies the crux of the issue. Was it a problem with the fetus or the mother's body that causes the ectopic pregnancy? We don't know and therefore can take no action against either of them.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#68 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:09 PM

Spectacles, on May 2 2005, 11:59 AM, said:

Eloisel:
As for the links you provided regarding Planned Parenthood helping a thirteen-year-old cover for an abortion, that's disturbing if true. But did you notice that the thirteen-year-old turning fourteen in a month seems to reside in Connecticut and Alaska? The tapes reported in the second link (Connecticut) and third (Alaska) appear awfully similar, which leads me to wonder if they were faked. Some anti-choice groups employ less-than-truthful tactics themselves, you know.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The articles report that a pro-life group called a number of Planned Parenthood operations in Ohio, Alaska, Texas, and elsewhere.  The less-than-truthful tactic was a person acting on behalf of the pro-life group posed as a 13 year old with a 22 year old boyfriend looking for contraceptive advice and abortion info.  The telephone conversations were taped.

For the record, I'm not in favor of rolling back Roe v. Wade or making abortions illegal.  There are far too many liars out there who would claim they had been raped in order to get a legal abortion, probably causing some person who engaged in sex with her by consent to go to jail for rape.

I don't wish for this girl or anyone else to die in childbirth, nor do I want to put persons in charge of the life they wish to kill, and still I cannot agree killing humans at will is pro-choice.  All I will take from this is I am thankfull I made the decision to let my child be born 30 years ago this Friday.

Edited by eloisel, 02 May 2005 - 07:10 PM.


#69 eloisel

eloisel

    Non-sequitur

  • Islander
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:14 PM

Is an ectopic pregnancy even capable of a viable fetus?

Edited by eloisel, 02 May 2005 - 07:17 PM.


#70 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:18 PM

As Stephen of Ireland so eloquently put it in Braveheart, "Answer the fookin' question."  The question is not what causes the pregnancy to go wrong--still less, what wills the pregnancy to go wrong and therefore incurs guilt--but what causes the woman's death.  

The honest answer to that, if you won't give it yourself, is that the pregnancy is the proximate cause of her dath, but that refusal to take action on her behalf is the ultimate cause.  

Let's take another case by way of illustration.  Two patients come into the hospital at 3 AM in the middle of a white-out blizzard.  One is on the verge of death from pneumonia.  The other has a case which is not so far progressed, but is still life-threatening.  You have exactly enough medicine to save one patient and no way of getting more. A less than full dose will do no good.  Do you withhold medicine from both to avoid responsibility?  Or do you make a choice?  If you make a choice, what is your criterion?
Posted Image

#71 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:21 PM

Quote

Is an ectopic pregnancy even capable of a viable fetus?

No.  The fallopian tube will eventually rupture, and the woman will be faced with hell's own case of peritonitis and septicemia.
Posted Image

#72 Eskaminzim

Eskaminzim

    Head eggs and butt toast

  • Islander
  • 559 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:25 PM

There isn't really a choice here, regarding tubal pregnancies, since NONE of them progress to viable pregnancies.  So either the fetus is expelled via surgery, or BOTH die.  There's no middle ground here.  No real black and white, no and/or.  Either one dies, or both die.  As far as I'm concerned, black and white becomes black and blacker.

#73 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:28 PM

Quote

Eloisel: The articles report that a pro-life group called a number of Planned Parenthood operations in Ohio, Alaska, Texas, and elsewhere. The less-than-truthful tactic was a person acting on behalf of the pro-life group posed as a 13 year old with a 22 year old boyfriend looking for contraceptive advice and abortion info. The telephone conversations were taped.

Ah! My bad. That's what I get for reading too fast too early in the morning.  :blush:

Quote

still I cannot agree killing humans at will is pro-choice.

Yeah, the labels are slippery. I'll grant you that. But I think pro-choice works for me because I don't like abortion but I do think that legal abortion needs to remain an available choice for women whose circumstances are such that I can only imagine. Hence, I'm pro-choice. I'm also pro-contraception, pro-sex education, and, increasingly, anti-popular-culture messages that promote casual sex among kids and young adults. I'm a real old fogey in that regard. :)

Back to the label wars, just as some have a hard time with pro-choice, preferring the more inaccurate but nastier-sounding pro-abortion, I have a hard time framing an argument that a 13 year old girl should undergo a risky pregnancy or a woman should risk her life to bring a fetus to term as pro-life. So it goes both ways. The labels are often inadequate and sometimes misleading.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#74 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:29 PM

Quote

Eloisel: The articles report that a pro-life group called a number of Planned Parenthood operations in Ohio, Alaska, Texas, and elsewhere. The less-than-truthful tactic was a person acting on behalf of the pro-life group posed as a 13 year old with a 22 year old boyfriend looking for contraceptive advice and abortion info. The telephone conversations were taped.

Ah! My bad. That's what I get for reading too fast too early in the morning.  :blush:

Quote

still I cannot agree killing humans at will is pro-choice.

Yeah, the labels are slippery. I'll grant you that. But I think pro-choice works for me because I don't like abortion but I do think that legal abortion needs to remain an available choice for women whose circumstances are such that I can only imagine. Hence, I'm pro-choice. I'm also pro-contraception, pro-sex education, and, increasingly, anti-popular-culture messages that promote casual sex among kids and young adults. I'm a real old fogey in that regard. :)

Back to the label wars, just as some have a hard time with pro-choice, preferring the more inaccurate but nastier-sounding pro-abortion, I have a hard time framing an argument that a 13 year old girl should undergo a risky pregnancy or a woman should risk her life to bring a fetus to term as pro-life. So it goes both ways. The labels are often inadequate and sometimes misleading.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#75 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:42 PM

waterpanther, on May 2 2005, 08:18 PM, said:

As Stephen of Ireland so eloquently put it in Braveheart, "Answer the fookin' question."  The question is not what causes the pregnancy to go wrong--still less, what wills the pregnancy to go wrong and therefore incurs guilt--but what causes the woman's death.   

The honest answer to that, if you won't give it yourself, is that the pregnancy is the proximate cause of her dath, but that refusal to take action on her behalf is the ultimate cause. 

Let's take another case by way of illustration.  Two patients come into the hospital at 3 AM in the middle of a white-out blizzard.  One is on the verge of death from pneumonia.  The other has a case which is not so far progressed, but is still life-threatening.  You have exactly enough medicine to save one patient and no way of getting more. A less than full dose will do no good.  Do you withhold medicine from both to avoid responsibility?  Or do you make a choice?  If you make a choice, what is your criterion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If it was me I would give the medication to the person who was in better shape. They have a better chance of surviving. But I still have the ability to help one without taking any action against the other. So the situations really don't equate.

I briefly considered becoming a genetic counselor. But I knew at that time that I had an absolute opposition to abortion. Under those circumstances it would have been immoral for me to go into that field. So I'm not the one who's going to be denying anything to anyone who has an ectopic pregnancy. All I am saying is that if you do have an absolute oppostion to an abortion than the only position you can take is to not abort any pregnancy, even an ectopic one.

What I initially objected to here is someone saying the pro-life position was about denying someone the freedom of deciding what to do with their body. It's not. It's about not denying that there is another life involved in the equation.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#76 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:52 PM

Anastashia, on May 2 2005, 10:47 AM, said:

My problem with all this is we still have no one looking at the unborn child's right to life. To me that should still be the primary issue. In this case it's getting buried in a legal battle about the contradiction in FL law.

Why is the baby more important than the mother? When did we begin to devalue women to the extent that the right of an unborn fetus trumps the mom's rights every time? God help you if you ever need one, say for medical reasons, and the pro-lifers (but only the baby's life, naturally) have their way and you can't get one.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#77 Eskaminzim

Eskaminzim

    Head eggs and butt toast

  • Islander
  • 559 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:54 PM

Ah, but by refusing or neglecting to treat the other patient, you ARE taking action against him or her.

I see it this way:  Which is worse?  A mother who puts her newborn infant in a corner, refusing to feed it, refusing to clothe it or put it in a diaper, refusing to handle it or treat its needs at all, and who leaves it to die of starvation in a pile of its own urine, or a mother who drowns her infant in the bathtub?

Both are guilty of infanticide.  

The mother who neglected the care of her infant IS, in fact, taking action against it by her own INaction, morally, ethically, and legally.

So really, the situations ARE comparible.

#78 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 07:58 PM

Rhea, on May 2 2005, 08:52 PM, said:

Anastashia, on May 2 2005, 10:47 AM, said:

My problem with all this is we still have no one looking at the unborn child's right to life. To me that should still be the primary issue. In this case it's getting buried in a legal battle about the contradiction in FL law.

Why is the baby more important than the mother? When did we begin to devalue women to the extent that the right of an unborn fetus trumps the mom's rights every time? God help you if you ever need one, say for medical reasons, and the pro-lifers (but only the baby's life, naturally) have their way and you can't get one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I did not say the baby was more important than the mother ever. I said the baby has an equal right to the mother and therefor I can not take action against either one to the advantage of the other.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#79 Anastashia

Anastashia

    Tyrant Matriarch and Pegan Too!

  • Islander
  • 11,777 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 08:05 PM

Eskaminzim, on May 2 2005, 08:54 PM, said:

Ah, but by refusing or neglecting to treat the other patient, you ARE taking action against him or her.

I see it this way:  Which is worse?  A mother who puts her newborn infant in a corner, refusing to feed it, refusing to clothe it or put it in a diaper, refusing to handle it or treat its needs at all, and who leaves it to die of starvation in a pile of its own urine, or a mother who drowns her infant in the bathtub?

Both are guilty of infanticide. 

The mother who neglected the care of her infant IS, in fact, taking action against it by her own INaction, morally, ethically, and legally.

So really, the situations ARE comparible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Except that in the situation as it was described I have no option available that allows me to treat the other patient I can only treat one, therefor I am neither neglecrting or refusing to treat her.

I agree with you about the infanticide. The mother who denies her child care has the option of caring for it. In the ectopic pregnancy situation the only option I have still causes the death of one of the people involved. Once again the situation is NOT compatible.
The Science Fiction Examiner

In the quiet of Midden a young child grows.
Does the salvation of his people grow with him?
"Everything we do now is for the child"

"I made a mistake,
just follow along,
isn't that what tyranny is all about?"
Sheila M---my Praise Band Director

For as long as I shall live
I will testify to love
I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough
Testify to Love

Posted Image


#80 GiGi

GiGi

    Lipstick wearing PIG kisser!

  • Islander
  • 8,774 posts

Posted 02 May 2005 - 08:14 PM

Quote

Some might argue that certainly there is an excuse, *if* the mother doesn't want to carry to term, even w/ a couple willing to take the child for adoption. That kind of decision doesn't settle well w/ me and it isn't one I think I'd be willing to make, but is it my decision? And of course there is still the excuse, it is more dangerous for the mother, from a medical stand point, of carrying the child to term at 13, than aborting it.

It depends on when in the term it is done.  It within a month of conception it is not a big deal.  I watched one being performed on a friend of mine (she asked me to come along and hold her hand during the procedure).  At that stage it is simple, they suction out the uterus lining and it is nothing more than a heavy period (Or a miscarriage, like I have had).  I saw it.

As the baby forms it is a bigger deal, and is actually a new life.  I understand the concerns of those against abortion.  The longer into term, the bigger the fetus and then it is not just a miscarriage it is then to the point of killing a life.  I personally am for choice until that point.  I personally feel that within the 3 month period (which at least as far as I know is the cut off point in California for abortions to take place) a miscarriage can happen inspite of the mother to be's wishes to keep the child or not.  I feel that nature gives us that window to make a choice (and yes, miscarriages can be induced, about every tribal culture on the earth knows how to do this, and the methods are not 100% certain either).  After that I think the baby is now a life and if the mother cannot take care of it adoption is the right answer (unless of course the baby has no brain or some other horrific birth defect).

The problem is with modern culture is that everyone is in their own little box. In tribal cultures (and I know about this from my Romany [gypsy] friend) that the tribe takes care of all children.  No child is left behind and truly, not just metaphorically.  If we had more of a tribe, then there are always "aunties" to take care of a child.  I have in fact raised four other children as an "auntie" as I have no children of my own (not counting my pig, that is another story completely).

I just hope this all gets resolved for the best for everyone concerned, it is heartbreaking to think of the 13 year old girl, so alone and with everyone more concerned with their agenda than just giving her some love and understanding.

*edited to quote whose post I was referring to, dang you all are fast! *

Edited by GiGi, 02 May 2005 - 08:21 PM.

"Life is as dear to a mute creature as it is to man. Just as one wants happiness and fears pain, just as one wants to live and not die, so do all creatures." -- HH The Dalai Lama



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Abortion, Ward of the State

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users