The End of Abortion in America is Coming Soon

200,000 to 1.2 million is indeed a wide range which makes you claims all the more meaningless. You don't know and neither do the experts as their estimates very 600%.

1940 to 1954 was the beginning of the baby boom. I'm not sure those figures are people who had incomplete abortions or natural abortions (miscarriages). Miscarriages happen in a certain percentage of pregnancies even today.

 

Hey that's funny. Do another Bill Cosby impression.

 

The number of abandoned children up for foster care tells how many regret having a child.

500,000 women in the world die from pregnancy and 5,000,000 are permanently crippled. Each year. For a known medical condition pregnancy definitely endangers my wife's life and family, friends and her doctors urge her not to. Beggingly. She does anyway. Has had miscarriages and on occasion hospitalized from the result. 3 children born.

She's as intensely pro-choice as she is intensely wanting children. That a woman has the right to decide the parentage of her children, the right to decide whether or not to try to get pregnant regardless of risks to her and regardless of everyone else's opinion, and the right to end any pregnancy she decides to end or continue any pregnancy she decides to continue. She has the absolute view that these are all exactly her decisions - and exactly not yours. Obviously I have a say over whether I will make her pregnant, though on the bottomline that does not mean could prevent it otherwise, does it?

I wouldn't refuse as I see those as her decisions whether I like it or not. One person did say in front of her that I should get a vacetomy to prevent it. She immediately said that would not stop her from trying to have more children, though it definitely would sadden her having to find an alternative for this task. Wouldn't divorce me though, even that I would be more than welcome to participate and/or watch her selected alternative volunteer to do the deed. LOL. She was teasing - and she was serious too.

Why would any woman tell you she didn't want her kid? Why would any woman tell you she had an abortion? Especially you. Why would any woman tell you just about anything that personal about herself? Are you a priest?

 

I deny that all pregnancies have all these adverse effects. Most pregnancies do not have any long term effects. Many pregnancies have some of those symptoms which are natural side effects of pregnancy.

Yes, occasionally women die from pregnancy.

Yes, occasionally women die from abortion.

Always, children die from an abortion.

 

Those are real scary facts that are questionable and in no way justify ending the life of the unborn.

Neither does the touching story of your wife's admirable courage.

 

Abortion does not hurt the unborn. I think it has been explained to you that a fetus does not experience pain until quite late in gestation, well past the time abortions by choice occur. If you are assuming that abortion is depriving the fetus of a life, you must remember that the fetus never had a life of its own. When the fetus only has the life that the pregnant woman gives it, it is not being "hurt" if she refuses to give more.

Women do not have control over their bodies throughout pregnancy. Pregnancy/childbirth is a medical event these days, there is very little "natural" about it, and IAC, it IS harmful, women suffer damage to their bodies from the pregnancy/childbirth that remains for the rest of their lives, and many times requires corrective surgery.

 

"I think future generations will look back at this history of our country and call us barbarians for murdering millions of babies who we never gave them a chance to live." - Marco Rubio


It's coming. Just wait.

 

You missed the comprehensive sex education and access to all forms of birth control and will add for free or virtually nothing so one can splay their legs and not get pregnant. I'm not a religious nut abortion should be made not an option in most cases due to wide use of birth control not making pregnancy unwanted. But if your a child incestuously abused, you were raped and file a police report and if your life is in danger then those rare cases its fine and if your on birth control then rape shouldn't make a unwanted baby in most cases.

 

No, abortion is not a major operation, the process is not difficult to learn and coat hangars and knitting needles are easily obtained. Everyday housewives learned to perform abortions for the Jane Collective pre-Roe v Wade.

Abortions in ancient times were more commonly herbal, mid-wives knew the plants. One plant, Silphion, was such a popular abortifacient that it became extinct.http://www.sisterzeus.com/Silphio.htm

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Jane-American-womens-collective
Jane, Chicago-based women’s collective that provided more than 11,000 safe albeit illegal abortions between 1969 and 1973. The underground clinic, a small branch of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union, strove to strengthen the pro-choice movement and abolish expensive, unsafe, and callously performed abortion services. They did so by providing medically sound, low-cost abortions at $100 or less, which was significantly cheaper than the standard costs, then ranging from $400 to $1,000.

Jane originated as the Abortion Counseling Service, a counseling and referral group that arranged discreet abortions. The organization eventually took full control of the process by hiring its own in-house doctor. After discovering that this person had falsely claimed to be a certified physician, the members decided to learn and perform the procedures themselves. The abortions that members performed—during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy—resulted in a favourable safety record, comparable to that of medical professionals of the day in California and New York (states where abortions were then legal). The collective disbanded upon the national legalization of abortion in 1973

 

No, I agree to the extent I don't think "justify" applies to the abortion issue as it asserts a wrong.

Whether abortion is immoral or not are both a belief system. The question is whether there is basis to force your or my belief on someone else.

A moral argument could be made that it is morally wrong for my wife to try to have more children as that would leave the children we have without a mother, me a widower, and her parents childless as she is an only child. Those would be real loses and very real harms. But should the government force her to be sterilized to save her life, to protect her children, for the good of all and the good of society? She knows my view, but may I force it on her? Should I moralize down at her? Or simply acknowledge ultimately this is her decision and do all good things I can with this for her and everyone?

I question if you see how women think as I do. It is my experience the more you try to force a woman to do something she doesn't want to do, the more likely she will do it - just to prove you wrong if for no other reason. Maybe I'm around stronger women than you. All the efforts to convince her not to take the risk again only seems to dig in her militancy that other people are not going to tell her what to do when it comes to the topic of babies. They are trying to circumvent her fundamental womanhood. Does that make any sense to you?

In terms of knowing young teens of unwanted pregnancies, it is our experience the more she is demanded to have the child it seems the more she is going to prove she is in control instead. "God says..." only works with a small percentage now too.

If calmly told it is her choice and what are real life effects of having the child and of not having the child the more likely she won't terminate the pregnancy. In many countries women can be forced by men because in many countries women have no rights and can be beaten at will. American woman aren't like that, they really aren't. Not by my experience anyway.

Thank you for the compliment of my wife. I've never known any woman to be as crazy about and as good with children as her. She is a successful business owner, but if asked her what her job is she will boast that she's a "homemaker, a mother and wife," never even mentioning the business.

One time I mentioned her business was taking a lot of her time. She closed it down. Economics, as a final decision, the husband's in how she wants her nuclear world to be. When I explained that wasn't what I meant, but rather it was burdening her she partially opened it back up. She is anything but a feminist. But babies are in entirely in the domain of the woman to her. On that she is the absolute final and unquestioned authority. Why? Because she's a woman, that's why.

That is curious, huh? She is VP of the local Republican's women's club. At one time, the Republican Party vehemently opposed government having any say in this personal of private matters as babies, abortion, beliefs and so forth. Read Barry Goldwater sometime and his intense opposition to any religious values being integrated into government or law.

So in a curious way you thinking men can tell women what to do about babies is a contradiction to the traditional role of a woman in a family. Women have the babies. The woman make the decisions about the babies. All things about babies are for the women, not the men. If man has agreed to make a woman pregnant/have unprotected sex with her? If she can seduce him to this or whatever? He is submitting to her baby-authority in doing so, just as she is submitting to the power reality that he might just walk away and leave every chore and burden of the child up to her alone. Thus, she should pick well and the best way to keep the man around is to make it worth his while to do so by being desirable to stay with. Treat him like a king and he'll stay and treat her and their children well. That she and I do respectively.

In a sense, she is more traditional than you.

Have you ever known a woman like her? She has always struck me as quite rare. So much giving me authority it was intimidating, basically over everything - except baby-topics. I suppose the kitchen too. Babies topics are all her's and her's alone. She can me seduce to bed or not. If I refused? Or refuse unless wearing a condom? If her husband refuses his part in her getting pregnant? Ultimately she'd have to try to seduce some other guy - and if you saw her you'd realize how easy that would be. Then it would be up to her to decide what, if any, relationship I have to the child and what, if any, relationship I was willing to have with that child.

Because your and my core beliefs are opposite on what a fetus is ethically and in relation to the woman - and disagree whether woman or other people have the final say, there is no factual nor final ethical proof for either. Slogans and word definitions don't prove anything at all. So I really don't dig in posting angry messages (maybe a little sneering) as there is no point to it.

If one says "abortion is killing a child" and the other says "no it's not," anything past that is just word bandy.

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=A... illegal abortion a year in the 1960s&f=false

The evidence suggests the numbers on the higher end of the estimates. Experts admitted that legislation had failed to control abortion, and there is no reason to think that legislation would be any more effective today.

 

Good God man! Regain your sanity!
The country is veering far left.
We do not have the luxury to save every single fertilized democrat egg in the country!
We'd be lucky to get them to stop experimenting on unborn babies.

Why can't we have a reasonable policy outlawing all abortion after 1st trimester, when the fetus is still in the "frog" stage?

 

No it is not coming to an end, a person does not exist at conception. Clue: eve when abortion was banned it still existed and would even if you got your wish. By the way, your argument is an old rehashed argument and has failed every time.

 

Your pro lie site is not credible. From Gallup itself:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

Only 19% want it illegal in all circumstances. 29% want it legal in all. Not that public opinion should get to deny people their rights anyway. If the majority wanted slavery reinstated, should it be?

- - - Updated - - -

Just wondering if you are aware that over half of women who abort already have a child?

 

Nobody should like first trimester abortions. The issue is the means (laws against women) not the desired end (fewer abortions).

As to your specific limit, one's health must be one's right. And, health problems do not take a holiday for the second two trimesters.

Also, rape and incest are traumatic. Demanding that they be recognized by the victim and resolved in the first trimester isn't good enough.

Rather than perpetuating this legal battle, how about addressing the issues that lead to the problem in the first place?

When we prevent unwanted pregnancy, we reduce abortion. When we make healthcare, food and housing more of a sure thing, the choice to keep the baby becomes easier. When we remove elements of serious impact to the lives of women who carry babies to term, we make it more likely they will do so. When we make counciling more readily available, victims have a better chance of acting early, and all can become more aware of alternatives such as available health care, adoption services, etc.

Is it a rational decision to be an unwed mother in America? If not, you know the alternatives.

 

The US Constitution/Bill Of Rights is clear: Citizenship rights begin at birth, not conception.

I have yet to read any prolifer declare that citizenship should be based upon whether a child was conceived in the USA or that such a fetus should have full citizenship, civil and legal rights equal to everyone.

Do any of you? That the fetus of any woman who can prove she got pregnant while traveling in the USA has full rights including citizenship as any child born in the USA?

 

OMG ....have you ever heard of how a sentence is formed?
I'll try to sort out that mess...


Because BC is widely used abortion should be illegal? Why?


WHY should abortion be illegal ?


What you're ( YOU ARE= YOU'RE ) saying is exactly what I said, you want to punish women for having sex by forcing them to give birth. It isn't , and can't be, that you care about the fetus, that's obvious...OR you wouldn't want abortion allowed in the case of rape or incest .

 

This is a good example of what happens if you read nothing but propaganda sites and videos all day.

 

So, how are you going to frame the legislation that would enact a 'ban' on abortion??

This is the legislation in Queensland

http://www.childrenbychoice.org.au/info-a-resources/facts-and-figures/queensland-abortion-law

And it is not worth the paper it is printed on

Our rates of abortion equal yours

 

What amazes me is how many would love to see 'an end to abortion' but are unwilling in the extreme to support those interventions that are actually and scientifically proven to reduce abortion

 

The same folks who want to force millions of unwanted children on society every year are often the same ones that oppose taxes to pay for them.

 

I'll see your logical fallacy and raise you some facts.

 

Because they only read what supports their own POV.

 

I would imagine such legislation would look a lot like gun ban legislation might. Just have government make them illegal, and they will just magically go away, right?

Right. Banners never learn. Be it guns, or abortion, or prostitution, or marijuana, or alcohol....etc etc ad nausium. In a free market economy, we cannot hope to simply prohibit goods or services for which there is robust demand, and have any meaningful effect. Where there is sufficient demand, there will ALWAYS rise a willing supplier. Prohibition laws are really just government deciding for you who the suppliers will be. And the side effects of prohibition are predictably more destructive than the prohibited item would have been. Black markets, gangs, cartels, etc...