Most late-term abortions are performed for life of the mother or non-viability of the fetus. Perhaps a few are performed for other reasons but only a few. Is it worth making abortion illegal because of it? I say no.
I am not sure how to word this but here goes. I personally would MUCH rather a pregnancy be terminated than a child suffer through its childhood. The pro-life people in MY experience are not willing to take that child into their home to care and raise as a wanted child so why force someone who has made the decision to have a child. Further more the foster care system in place is not exactly a mecca for fantastic protection of children so I do not understand what the point is in forcing a pregnancy where the end result could be a child being harmed.
Is this actually happening, though? I mean are doctors actually performing these sort of procedures under these sort of circumstances? Or is there really this underground of illegal abortions going on once women find out the gender?
and if someone is willing to abort based on gender, should they really be allowed to raise a child anyway?
and if someone is willing to abort based on gender, should they really be allowed to raise a child anyway?
You don't need to apply to be a parent - right?
But if you're going to hate your child, why carry through with it. Maybe you should put out a CL ad for anyone wanting to abort due to gender and take those babies? It'll only be 1 by your example, so I'm sure you could find room in your heart for it.
Bitchiness aside, I get your point. I just don't agree and I'm sorry you couldn't find humor in the Comcast jokes et al... but I think we all essentially agree here. You're not saying you think abortion should be illegal, but if you keep going down this path you're going to have an 8 pager here...
MrsDL, I hope you take a look at the link I posted in response to your incorrect post on the 1st page of this thread about late-term abortions and their current legality. This is a really dangerous topic to spread misinformation around.
and if someone is willing to abort based on gender, should they really be allowed to raise a child anyway?
You don't need to apply to be a parent - right?
Perhaps the question is should they be forced to carry a child they don't want and probably won't treat well?
I dunno, I'm not trying beat you up here mrsDL. I do understand what you're saying. I'm just more comfortable than you are with the idea that some people are assholes, and other people have (what I deem) a legitimate need to terminate - and that the gov't has no business trying to seperate one from the other. Since you're pro-choice obviously you're still coming to the same conclusion, you're just less comfortable with it.
I am very confident that the assholes are vastly outnumbered, but even if they weren't, I'd still be pro-choice. so there's that.
1.5% is still a few babies - no? for somebody who is sensitive to the topic it's too many. Playing devil's advocate here - if childhood hunger is your issue, would even 1 child going hungry be OK? That's why I get the other side on this issue at this point in my life.
You get that most of those are abortions for medical reasons, right?
absolutely. Which is one of the reasons I remain pro-choice. However, I do recognize it's not 100%, so I do understand why there are people who are uncomfortable with "abortion on demand" and can relate to that discomfort or opposition.
Post by basilosaurus on Aug 28, 2012 21:37:19 GMT -5
I just don't think the majority of outspoken people who criticize abortion on demand think like you do, MrsDL. I really do think it's anti-choice code for any abortion that's not in their tiny approved list (ie pregnancy from forcible rape).
It's a shorthand way to criticize "convenience" abortions, regardless of gestation.
That is not the norm, but yes, that does happen. You have the undercover PP video stuff that does show ONE employee advising a woman on what to do if she had a girl she didn't want. Polls have shown that immigrants, in particular, will abort based on gender bias. Doctors that can and do perform "late-term" abortions are not obligated to ask why, or make a decision based on the reason. Maybe it's good, maybe not. I try not to think about. So - that term - does have some legitimacy. Some people who are pro-choice, don't agree with it. I can certainly see that. Like any other hot-botton issue - tis a slippery slope.
Slippery slope for what? More abortions? Do you really feel the need to have more people in the world, ESPECIALLY if their parents didn't want them solely based on their sex?
Maybe. Who knows. No - I don't feel the need to have more people in the world, particularly for people who do not want them. Again, I'm not saying I'm pro-choice. I am saying, though, I have a different understanding of that position than I did before I had a child. Things happen - medical issues, wrong timing, whatever. I do believe it should be an individual woman's choice to deal with a pregnancy in the way that is best for her, and her unborn child. That said, and this goes back to a pretty good debate we had a few years ago, I do not believe pregnancy is an "unintended" consequence of sex. I think ephid made the point well - the whole point of intercourse, per nature, is procreation. So, while efforts to avoid pregnancy don't always work and dealling with the natural consequence of sex and contraceptive failure happens, I will never buy-in to the, frankly, bullshit notion, that sex is natural, and pregnancy is just some unfortunate thing that might happen. There are ways to try and prevent pregnancy. If we want to throw stats around - the majority of pregnancies DO NOT occur from contraceptive failure. I'm quite capable of taking one position on an issue, but also appreciating the opposite perspective of others.
I see where you're coming fron MrsDL. It just seems to me that "abortion on demand" is a mostly meaningless term thrown around to stir up visions of women going out and getting abortions for the fun of it. Abortion is a medical procedure and nobody ever says "open heart surgery on demand" or "LASIK on demand."