Lots of things are not considered natural. That doesn't stop us using those things - IVF, for one, and C sections. Not normal by any standard, but we use them every day. Abortion is simply one of those things.
I would suggest that IVF and C-Sections are an example of human adaptability. Specifically, cultural adaptation which allows humanity to cope with biological stresses. Adaptation is entirely natural.
It is a biological stress that women are naturally able to cope with. No special adaptation is required unless an abnormality arises. When such an abnormality arises, we can generally treat it, which is an example of cultural adaptation (e.g. a method to cope which is generated by humanity).
Women experience physical and emotional stress when they are pregnant, and we know that not every woman is able to cope with this.
A physical stress that a women is not able to cope with is an example of an abnormality, as is any psychological ailments, and treatment is available. Abortion is not a suitable treatment for most ailments. The only time one might consider abortion a natural, cultural adaption is if the health of the mother is in danger. The majority of pro-lifers are willingly to concede this point. I fail to see how elective abortion is natural.
The woman could be physical pain from the pregnancy, which would place stress on her. Drugs may not relieve that pain - I mean, imagine carry an extra 20 pounds or so around your middle. You'd get a sore back simply trying to stand upright. A woman must be physically strong to handle a pregnancy, it's a big deal. Abortion is an option for her if she is unable to cope with that stress.
Mak, you have to understand that being uncomfortable is not the same as having a physical or psychological abnormality. You're trying to equate a general feeling of restlessness with a psychological ailment (e.g. a mental illness). This is not grounded in science.
Uncomfortable is related to stress. If her body is too weak to handle a pregnancy, that puts stress on her, both physically and emotionally. Likewise, if she is ill, such as with severe morning sickness, and medicine doesn't help her, she may opt for abortion as a means of recovery.
How many times do I have to say it? What you are describing are stresses which the body NATURALLY COPES WITH! An abnormality which might require an abortion is completely different than common stress. You are attempting to justify all abortions by equating common, completely normal emotions and strains with serious medical problems. This the flaw in your argument.
It's interesting that you say that, Mak, if you don't mind me saying so. Because I really don't know who might be reading, I won't pursue it in detail. Suffice it to say, Sexual gratification can be had via 69, oral sex, mutual masturbation, anal sex and any combination of the same...and no doubt many other ways that have never crossed my radar. What are most people who have sex concerned about, Mak? Only pro-lifers are so careful? What does that say about the others? Only pro-lifers are so obsessive? As to vary and experiment with safer ways??? Tried and failed. Why should the only one who had nothing whatever to do with it, pay with their life? Whether they "(do) the right thing" will be shown not in using bc...but in how they respond to the consequences of their actions. Forced? As in chained up and someone else making her do this thing? Or accept the consequences of her actions? Give 9 months of her life to save another's? That is the question, Mak: Why should a woman accept the consequences of her actions in order to save the life of another human? Really? Well, not to put too fine a point on this, I know 50 yr old dykes who've never had a sperm laden penis inside of them in their entire lives....and yet...they claim a full and happy sex life. How is this so?
GD, Mak, the depth of such narcissism is beyond me! Do you now step forward to claim a backache is reason for taking a life?! And now morning sickness? Something that can be cured with a saltine....and lasts only a few weeks!!! Really Mak, you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel here!
Now you're an expert on morning sickness!! I suppose next you'll be claiming that morning sickness only affects a pregnant woman in the mornings. FYI, just so you know, many women are affected by morning sickness for their entire pregnancies and all day to boot. And it isn't necessarily cured by a saltine, in fact such pervasive morning sickness usually is not. Same old tricks as all anti-choicers, minimize the effects of pregnancy/childbirth on a woman.
"I'm so nauseous I'm going to kill someone today!" paleeze! Ya know the twinkie defense has been blown out of the water! And you know (*)(*)(*)(*)ed good and well that nausea is caused from the hormonal changes necessary to accommodate pregnancy, and are most often experienced in the first months. You demean women with this line of nonsense: women so fragile, so weak, that they cannot handle morning sickness or backaches! Get a grip, granny! You've made impassioned debates based from a feminist perspective...this pap is anything but!!! Why don't you just tell the truth of it - you're angry, you're jealous! Angry that women must do the heavy lifting. Jealous that men screw with abandon! Well, I'm sorry sister but that is the reality! Guess what that means? It means that women will have to better people than men are. Oh, it is so unfair! But by gawd, there is the truth of it! And anger and jealousy have made cannibals of the modern woman. Virtue (I said virtue -- not chastity) and humanity have been replaced by unadulterated narcissism.
Nowhere did I say women couldn't handle nausea from morning sickness. Nonetheless, it sometimes is a serious medical problem, and it is NOT just a few weeks and cured by a cracker. Try to be honest here, that means not minimizing the problems of pregnancy and also NOT overblowing and distorting other poster's statements.
You were supporting Mak's statement that abortion was an "option" for dealing with nausea - your post stands on its own. "it sometimes is a serious medical problem" - Actually, it is rarely a SERIOUS medical problem. Once the appropriate hormonal balance has been achieved, nausea generally subsides and is quickly replaced with a growing appetite. Nausea only becomes a SERIOUS medical problem when it leads to prolonged vomiting or loss of appetite. Which is exactly why raising this as a SERIOUS point of debate is LUDICROUS! Ditto, back pain, which unlike Mak's assertion that it's due to 20 lbs around the middle, occurs when the baby shifts and lowers in the final weeks before delivery. If you got to be a granny, you should know these things well enough without me "being an expert". btw - 20 lbs, funny, huh? My DIL put on 70...and was back in her size 5 jeans within 2 months!
The title of this thread makes about as much sense as asking "why do females have a rape opinion?" MLK - injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere. And the daily murder of innocent girl and boy babies is certainly a cause both men and women should rally behind.
Abortion is an option whenever the pregnant woman wants that option. And "sometimes" conflicts with "rarely"? Experts don't know why pregnant women have nausea, it MAY be hormones, or MAY be something else. Yes, it CAN become a serious medical problem. I'm well aware of most of the discomforts and real pains of pregnancy/childbirth.
Well, now we're back in Mak's bailiwick, legalities. But I'm not going there with you. What you have just stated is that a woman has the right to take another's life for any reason whatever, including nausea. Which brings us straight back to narcissistic cannibalism. The term black hearted comes to mind, a malignancy of the soul. Hormones have been the recognized, acknowledged and medically published cause of morning sickness (at least) since the early eighties when my little nippers starting arriving and I pored over every book that was handed to me.
Now we're advocating abortion because "morning sickness is a serious medical condition." I spent six years in a classroom, two of which in an actual medical school setting, and I have never heard that before. Morning sickness is not harmful. Hyperemesis Gravidarum, if left untreated, is. It is characterized by excessive nausea and vomiting, which can cause an electrolyte imbalance, which can cause a variety of issues including an arrhythmia. Even in the most severe of cases, however, it is completely treatable. It is distinctly different from simple Morning Sickness, which most women experience. For those who advocate for women's rights, you sure don't know much about women.
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_advice/facts/pregnantnausea.htm What causes nausea during pregnancy? The actual causes of nausea and vomiting are still not known. It is probably brought about by the hormonal changes taking place or by an imbalance in blood sugar.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/254751-treatment Surgical Care In some refractory severe cases of hyperemesis gravidarum, if maternal survival is threatened, or if hyperemesis gravidarum is causing severe physical and psychological burden, termination of the pregnancy should be considered.40
These cases are extraordinary rare and are the result of the condition being left untreated for an extended period of time. If the woman immediately seeks medical help, the condition would not become so severe as to require an abortion. If for some reason the extended stay in the hospital (in severe cases which require an IV treatment) reeks psychological havoc (which I've never seen or heard of), then one might consider an abortion, theoretically. Again, very rare. I love how you internet professionals think you can one-up someone who does this stuff for a living.
Right. and amen to that! Would maternal survival be anything like "life of the mother'? Not exactly an elective abortion, eh? Please, OKG, stop this line of debate. Having demeaned women in general, you're now merely embarrassing yourself.
