Women share their abortion experiences

Seems like all too many women today think they should be able to have lots of sex with whomever they want, different people, without the slightest bit of risk from pregnancy. There is a reason sex is better kept in committed relationships.

It's hard to have much sympathy. The vast majority of these women who find themselves pregnant never even bothered to use a condom. They knew that their sexual partner would probably not stay in a committed relationship if they got pregnant. On top of all this, there are other forms of sex besides vaginal.

Except in extremely rare cases, it's not as if the pregnancy is going to kill the woman. It is not as if the woman has to keep the baby at the end of the pregnancy.

If a women is still going to engage in risky sexual activity, the very least she should do is have routine ultrasound screenings every 3 weeks to immediately terminate any pregnancy before an embryo has the chance to form. Most women wait much longer than this, even after they have realized they might be pregnant.


Abortion - Bad for Women, Bad for Babies

[video=youtube;H3_Q8Jl1tQ0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3_Q8Jl1tQ0&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

People shouldn't "fornicate".??..LOL! Well, they ignored that advice since humans were HUMAN!!!
So whether they should or not is beside the point....

The fact is NORMAL humans do "fornicate" and have sex and love every minute and regret nothing...afterwards NORMAL people feel good! It's the greatest sensual pleasure and spreads that lovin' feeling all over the place ....and the more the better!!!!


Having sex makes people think a child should be murdered???? That's rather a weird idea......I know people who have had LOTS of sex and never murdered anyone because of it....

Sentences start with capital letters...people SHOULD remember that...but they don't.

.

 

Reported for personal attack.

 

Well from your posts so far I don't see any difference from the majority of pro-lifers here.

I have no problem what so ever in anything you say or do, and please quote where I say you have no right to campaign against abortion, otherwise withdraw the statement.

 

and as I have already replied I do not campaign against anything I, because of my personal stance, realize is wrong .. I do not try to force my personal opinion onto others by trying to change laws, which, unless you can show otherwise, is exactly what the pro-life campaign is all about.

 

so yet again we see the misogynist comments of our local euthanasia zealot, why does this only apply to women are men somehow exempt when it comes to "think[ing] they should be able to have lots of sex with whomever they want, different people, without the slightest bit of risk [of creating a] pregnancy" .. careful your woman hating is showing again.

Fail .. 50% of woman having an abortion used some form of contraception, another lie you keep repeating.

Fail .. Do you now claim to know the thoughts of others. I would interested to see your evidence to support this claim, otherwise is is just pure hyperbole.

True .. what are your suggesting instead?

Again this has been debated on numerous occasions here on this forum and your assertions have been pulled to pieces, not just by personal opinion but by evidence and facts.

Fail .. The vast majority of pregnancies are terminated/aborted (61.8%) before 9 weeks, and you fail to factor in many other factors that could result in a woman not booking an abortion until later than 9 weeks.

 

so do you want to force rape victims to have their rapists baby too? I do not think we can force a women to risk her life having an abortion or giving birth, only she can choose to do so

in post 322, didn't you just say you choose to have an abortion, I have never made that choice, but I supported your right to choose, as I support the rights of others, you seem to want to deny other the choice you so freely made

I have no issue with people being able to claim a tax write off for what they pay in if they choose to home school, but not paying a family $10,000.00 a year for 12 years (per child) to home school as some republicans want

nope, I wanted a public option, conservatives wanted and got a individual mandate
.

 

And that is entirely up to you whether you do so or not as it is entirely up to me whether I do so or not. So I'll rephrase the question since you haven't personally done so (or so you say, which I find incredibly hard to to believe since you are on a political forum posting)...what give ANYONE the right to campaign for or against something?

 

and the irony of this statement is lost on pro-lifers, they bemoan the so called people being forced by their government into doing things they do not agree with, yet they champion this very thing by wanting government by law to force women to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term .. double standards at its best.

 

Strictly speaking they don't, and if this is leading where I think it is then I would suggest you check out some of my other comments in other threads, you will see that for the majority of the time I never "campaign" for or against something, I state my opinion based on research and refute opposing arguments also with research, this is after all a debating forum and I have no wish to change any persons opinion on the subject, that is not why I am here.

 

Really?

Please show me where I did any of that.

I will withdraw that you did not say it explicitly. I will not withdraw that you implied it with your question. Why else would you ask "why is it okay for me to do so" if not to imply the the opposite, ergo that I had no right to do it?

Your question:

 

You have misrepresented a number of my comments (possibly by accident) for example

this is projecting an assumption on to me for which you have no evidence, you have asserted that I am saying you have no right to campaign against abortion, something I have not done.

Purely to see your response in order for the debate to continue, you are a new poster to me I would like to discover a little about your method of debating and the structure of your responses. The question was not intended to imply anything .. problem with the typed word is you cannot always convey meaning. The question was an attempt to view your conclusions on why you feel it is ok to stop others doing as you did, you may have perfectly good reasons to do so and this was an attempt to find that out.

With me, if you debate honestly without hyperbole and with respect you will get the same in return. I am happy to debate the issue on any grounds be it scientific, ethical or moral etc, but I will fight fire with fire.

 

And usually screamed in caps by the biggest hypocrite of all....

 

I meant to apologize (I apologize) and explain. I meant to make that in more general terms of what I have come across in debating a number of pro-abortionists and not about you specifically.

Fair enough. We also bring with us all the garbage in all the other debates we have had and this goes along with us just like our experiences. And I do have perfectly good reasons (as I think I've stated elsewhere) although I'm sure you won't agree.

As will I and I try to do the same. I've been on some boards where with all the name calling and insults, you can't even see the subject being debated.

 

Actually I want the FEDS to reverse their decision because it was done illegally and allow the states (ie the people) to decide. This is the way our constitution was set up and this is the way it should have been done rather than 9 men in black robes deciding.

 

Who are you to decide what life changing event affects people???


Have you talked to your Representative yet to see if you can have a law passed that gives you the right to shove sandpaper up women's vagina as YOU recommended, yet, Mr. love and kindness???

 

But, criminalizing abortion doesn't reduce the rate of them, according to numerous studies and empirical evidence. It DOES increase the rate of maternal deaths, however. You want laws that cause more harm than good.

 

"""It DOES increase the rate of maternal deaths""""

Yes, but that makes the Anti-Choice crowd dance in delight...

 

One, this is an emotional appeal and really has nothing to do with what I said about the legal ins and outs of how it was decided.

Two, I suppose you are okay with laws being made up out of whole cloth and the constitution not being followed as to how these things are decided. I would imagine that only goes for the ones you agree with.

Three, you have no way of knowing it would "increase" the rate of maternal deaths because it's never been made illegal since abortion was legalized. Comparing it to times past, when all kinds of things factored into it (such as penicillin not being widely used until 1945), is really no comparison at all. Also, if you are going to show an "increase," you will need to show what they currently are and what they will be.

Four, if you are going to make the "back alley" abortion argument, please back it up with statistics from a reliable source other than a pro-abortion website. My sources (CDC) say there were 39 maternal deaths recorded due to abortion in 1972, the year before abortion was legalized. (And I'm speaking to the US only because we are speaking of our laws only) In a perfect world, no mothers would ever die of abortion (or childbirth), but they do, even with abortion legalized.

Five, I didn't say a word about reducing the rate of abortion. That wasn't the point of what I said.

Six, a good case could be made about the harm it does this country to not follow the constitution.

Seven, it always harms the baby. It does not come out of an abortion alive.

Eight, there is then the issue of the mental harm it does to women who have abortions (See New Zealand study by pro-abortion doctor, Dr. David Ferguson who was looking to prove the opposite).

And lastly, abortion itself isn't done in a vacuum and isn't this harmless procedure that you guys want to make it out to be.

 

Oh please...I thought you weren't about hyperbole?

 

I couldn't edit my other post for some reason. I apologize, it wasn't you who said you weren't about hyperbole.

But I will still say... OH PLEASE!

 

No, it is fact as proven by studies and empirical evidence.

If it is such a bad decision, how has it stood for 40 years?

There is a direct correlation of increased maternal deaths in every country with illegal abortion. There is no question about the evidence.

"Governments around the world are obligated to protect, respect and guarantee women’s rights to life, health
and integrity. To do so they must ensure the availability of, access to and the quality of health care required by
women. Abortion is one such service given that, in certain circumstances, pregnancy can endanger a woman’s
well-being. The correlation between illegal abortion and maternal mortality has been recognized and condemned
as a violation of women’s rights. It is unacceptable that women continue to die, especially considering that unsafe
abortion is the only cause of maternal mortality that is preventable" (IPAS).

How reliable are abortion statistics in the years before legal abortion?

Why else would one want to criminalize abortion?

I agree. How can the regulation of a woman's uterus be constitutional?

It never harms a baby. Most abortions are performed at the embryonic stage.

It is many times safer than childbirth.

Ferguson acknowledges that his study has enough shortcomings to warrant caution in reading too much into the findings.
Specifically, the study does not take into account certain preexisting health problems (e.g., mental health problems or exposure to unreported sexual abuse) among the women who had an abortion that may be much more relevant to the women's subsequent mental health conditions than the abortion itself. Furthermore, he and his coauthors estimate that about one-fifth of the women in the study who had abortions failed to report them, which could skew the findings if women experiencing mental health problems later in life are more likely to report a prior abortion than are women not experiencing such problems. Perhaps most significantly, Ferguson and his colleagues did not separate out for analysis purposes women whose pregnancies were unintended and women whose pregnancies were wanted, as did the Royal Colleges' researchers. The authors themselves admit that this is a significant failing.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/09/3/gpr090308.html

 

Good, because it wasn't hyperbole.....Anti-Choicers want abortion made illegal.. They WANT that, making abortion illegal will make them happy.....illegal WILL result in some women dying through unsafe abortions.
You add that to the FACT that Anti-Choicers are all about punishing women and YES, they would dance in delight if a woman died during an abortion....they have proven over and over again that punishing women if their REAL agenda.......did ya miss all their posts? Especially the poster who advocates shoving sandpaper up a women's vagina ?????

 

I strongly suspect that more women die from elective abortions today than the number of women who would die from unsafe abortions if abortion was banned. (which by the way was never a very big number, despite all the grossly exaggerated claims many pro-abortion organizations love to spew out)

 

So YOU "strongly suspect"? LOL! And that has what to do with facts???

Let's look at history...do you really think that when abortins were outlawed no women died from all the different ways they tried to abort thier pregnancy??

Do you think anyone like YOU who advocates shoving sandpaper up women's vaginas CARES if women die or not ? NO, they don't.