+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Discussions, Opinions & Debate (https://mockforums.net/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: ABORTION (/thread-4801.html)
RE: ABORTION - HairOfTheDog - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 04:05 PM)Maggot Wrote: If your issue is that women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies that's fine also I can respect that although I don't think that's right. There are 2 people that are in the scenario. One with the ability to choose and 1 with no voice. Hopefully that clarifies my argument.
I don't think there's any "if" in regards to my position on this issue. You don''t have to muddle through deflection and contradictions to "get it". It's directly stated, quite clearly, many times in the context of the thread flow.
Yes, I understand the arguments you posted today, and I understand that you may change your mind again and post different ones tomorrow. I get it.
Thanks for clarifying Maggot.
RE: ABORTION - BlueTiki - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 03:42 PM)username Wrote: I sincerely hope scientists are 100% certain that little thing doesn't feel pain.
Why?
Haven't scientists determined that it isn't a baby until it can live independently from the host?
Or "brought home from the hospital by the mother"?
Who are we to question such wisdom . . . and care that this non-human "parasite" feels anything?
C'mon! It's not like it's water-boarding!
RE: ABORTION - username - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 04:57 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:(08-19-2015, 03:42 PM)username Wrote: I sincerely hope scientists are 100% certain that little thing doesn't feel pain.
Why?
Haven't scientists determined that it isn't a baby until it can live independently from the host?
Or "brought home from the hospital by the mother"?
Who are we to question such wisdom . . . and care that this non-human "parasite" feels anything?
C'mon! It's not like it's water-boarding!
It depends on the scientist and their stance on abortion. If I understand the movement, those that believe that life begins at conception aren't really concerned about when it becomes a "baby" or capable of living outside of the womb...it's a life (potential life) at conception.
But true science (absent emotion)....I was wondering out loud if they (meaning "the objective scientists") are certain that an 8-12 week old fetus can't feel pain.
You're injecting emotion in to what was a legitimate question about the science involved, Tweeker.
RE: ABORTION - BlueTiki - 08-19-2015
Really, user?
I quote Pelosi and you think I'm serious?
Quit sniffing your cleaning chemicals and hire an American nigger (with kids) to clean your effin' floors.
Black kids feel the constant pain of our slave nation.
That's the pain I care about.
RE: ABORTION - Blindgreed1 - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 05:58 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Really, user?
I quote Pelosi and you think I'm serious?
Quit sniffing your cleaning chemicals and hire an American nigger (with kids) to clean your effin' floors.
Black kids feel the constant pain of our slave nation.
That's the pain I care about.
RE: ABORTION - HairOfTheDog - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 05:34 PM)username Wrote: But true science (absent emotion)....I was wondering out loud if they (meaning "the objective scientists") are certain that an 8-12 week old fetus can't feel pain.
^ The neural circuitry that culminates in pain perception begins to form long before 20 weeks, and most researchers believe that the signals conveyed by this circuitry aren’t perceived as pain until the brain develops that perceptive capacity well after 20 weeks.
Of course, you can get some doctors to go beyond even the most conservative scientific estimates, but they're disregarded and some State courts have blocked legislation that banned abortion at even 22 weeks on the premise of fetal pain capacity; the pain capacity could not be sufficiently substantiated that early.
Still, while the evidence against ability to feel pain at 20 weeks is stronger than the evidence for it, I'm not in opposition to that new cut-off in the proposed federal bill because I have no problem going with the most conservative credible estimate on something of this significance. Pro-abortionists would kick my ass for that compromise, and I understand why.
They believe that 20 weeks is just a politically convenient line drawn, for the time being, so that anti-abortionists can nudge Congress, the public, and the Supreme Court from the viability marker to the pain marker. They’ll keep pushing the line backward until abortion is completely illegal. Like Maggot, if the bill gets passed, the anti-abortionists won't consider it a fair solution, they'll consider it "a good start". I don't doubt for a minute that those fears by pro-choice/abortion activists are on-target, based on the Planned Parenthood bullshit and other anti-abortionist rhetoric that never ends.
I think some of the requirements you questioned upthread in the proposed Unborn Child Protection bill need to be clarified/amended, but I don't oppose it in concept. I think it affords women who don't fall into the "exceptions" categories a fair amount of time in almost all cases to decide/act, and it virtually eliminates the possibility of fetal pain. If the bill doesn't get passed, I'll be glad. Such a small percentage of abortions occur after 20 weeks anyway. If it does get passed, I won't be upset and will be prepared to voice strong dissent (not here, I promise!) against efforts to change the criteria or the cut-off again without very solid scientific basis supporting the change.
It's a decades old on-going fight. I understand both sides and think that honest committed debate and compromise results in the fairest balance when it comes to abortion. Unfortunately, there are a fuckload of dishonest, scheming, bullshitters in the political mix (on both sides).
RE: ABORTION - sally - 08-19-2015
If life doesn't begin at conception then when does it begin, when they're able to move out of your house and support themselves? Of course it starts at conception, to suggest anything else seems silly.
RE: ABORTION - HairOfTheDog - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 06:59 PM)sally Wrote: If life doesn't begin at conception then when does it begin, when they're able to move out of your house and support themselves? Of course it starts at conception, to suggest anything else seems silly.
Yeah, the question has been largely changed to "when does personhood begin?" in the context of abortion matters.
But, it's still depends a lot on scientists' varying opinions, and people's religious and moral and philosophical beliefs...
There isn't one answer to either question that's widely accepted as "right", in my observations and experiences.
For me, life begins when the embryo is safe within the womb. Personhood begins outside the womb.
RE: ABORTION - Maggot - 08-19-2015
Maybe if a needle is inserted into a 20 week old fetus and if it twitches it feels pain? Try a 19 week old, an 18 etc if it twitches it feels pain. Not sure how that works.
RE: ABORTION - sally - 08-19-2015
This little guy is 8 weeks old, but if you were to look for it in the womb it would be the size of a kidney bean and very hard to find.
There is scientific evidence that they don't feel pain just like there is scientific evidence that a crab or lobster doesn't feel pain despite desperately trying to escape the boiling water.
![[Image: pregnancy-week-8-brain-nerve-cells_squar...chqls3.jpg]](http://s1292.photobucket.com/user/sandy71/media/pregnancy-week-8-brain-nerve-cells_square_zpsijchqls3.jpg.html)
RE: ABORTION - HairOfTheDog - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 08:45 PM)Maggot Wrote: Maybe if a needle is inserted into a 20 week old fetus and if it twitches it feels pain? Try a 19 week old, an 18 etc if it twitches it feels pain. Not sure how that works.
Some of the research has been in the course of monitoring hospitalized premature babies.
If you get time and you're interested, this is an article from several years back about the doctor who first claimed "20 weeks" is possible for pain capacity and why.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all
P.s. You're a good person and I love you Mags, even when I don't agree with you and think you're full of it. To prove my affection, I'm keeping the hell out of your Beach Booby thread.
RE: ABORTION - username - 08-19-2015
(08-19-2015, 05:58 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Really, user?
I quote Pelosi and you think I'm serious?
Quit sniffing your cleaning chemicals and hire an American nigger (with kids) to clean your effin' floors.
Black kids feel the constant pain of our slave nation.
That's the pain I care about.
Then maybe you should get the fuck out of the abortion thread?? What exactly is your battle besides general bitching, freakie?
RE: ABORTION - BlueTiki - 08-19-2015
Honestly, if you knew that the life growing within a woman felt pain at the point of conception, would you be against abortion in general?
Is it truly the possibility that the developing life MIGHT feel pain that has you in a quandary?
Your referring to a developing fetus as a "thing" and now wanting absolute and positive scientific assurances about this "thing" not feeling pain seems contradictory to me.
"Thing" is not scientific.
Pain is a part of life.
If it's just a "thing", why do you care?
Are you now proposing a Pro-Thing platform to compete with the Life and Choice factions . . . ?
I'm already a twat . . . I'm not trying extra hard to be an insensitive one, now.
Seriously, what the fuck is bugging you?
RE: ABORTION - username - 08-20-2015
(08-19-2015, 10:22 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Honestly, if you knew that the life growing within a woman felt pain at the point of conception, would you be against abortion in general?
Is it truly the possibility that the developing life MIGHT feel pain that has you in a quandary?
Your referring to a developing fetus as a "thing" and now wanting absolute and positive scientific assurances about this "thing" not feeling pain seems contradictory to me.
"Thing" is not scientific.
Pain is a part of life.
If it's just a "thing", why do you care?
Are you now proposing a Pro-Thing platform to compete with the Life and Choice factions . . . ?
I'm already a twat . . . I'm not trying extra hard to be an insensitive one, now.
Seriously, what the fuck is bugging you?
What's bugging me is yeah, I've always been pro choice but back in the day when I was firmly pro choice, they didn't have pictures of 8-12 week fetuses like HotD posted. Now I'm questioning my whole belief system. That "thing" doesn't look like a clump of cells and I'm afraid that it may well feel pain. It looks like a little person...in my mind I thought at that stage they were still cell clumps. It's bothering me. Alot! (Intentional misspell). The only thing I'm certain of, right now, is again, free b/c, education etc. The fewer "accidental, unintentional" pregnancies and accompanying abortions the better.
RE: ABORTION - Duchess - 08-20-2015
(08-20-2015, 12:55 AM)username Wrote: free b/c, education etc.
They have been around for many, many years and have done nothing to prevent pregnancies among the dumb and some not so dumb because they don't utilize the services available to them. I'm not sure what is so difficult to understand that if you have sex there is a very good chance you can become pregnant.
There are parents out there who absolutely refuse to discuss anything related to making free birth control available to their kids because they think it's like pushing them into having sex. Stupid parents, stupid kids.
RE: ABORTION - HairOfTheDog - 08-20-2015
The pro-life movement has been using images depicting fetuses in their campaigns forever, user. I'm surprised you considered yourself firmly pro-choice and had an abortion without seeing similar fetus pictures. That's not a criticism, it just surprises me a little because I'm older than you and I've seen fetus pictures for as long as I can remember and I've never been pregnant.
In some cases, like sally noted, the anti-abortionists and pro-life movement uses highly magnified early stage photos. Sometimes the organization mislabels pics of living and dead fetuses, and sometimes they're accurate. In either case, advancement in sonogram technology makes fetal pictures clearer than ever before and I think the pictures continue to be effective in their campaign efforts.
Anyway, if the emotion they invoke spurs you or anybody else to think and learn more about the issue, including the scientific and medical aspects of it, I think that's a good thing -- whether it helps define your informed position or changes it altogether. If you research, you'll see there is no scientific possibility that fetuses feel pain in early stages. There's also no scientific possibility that the "thing" or "clump of cells" is developing into anything other than an innocent little baby, obviously.
I agree with you and Duchess when it comes to the importance of earlier and more effective sex education and ease of birth control accessibility. What Colorado was able to accomplish in terms of reducing unwanted pregnancies (down by 42%) through free birth control via their Public Health System is really impressive. The Affordable Health Care Act's coverage for contraception is a good thing too, in my opinion. Preventing unwanted pregnancies is certainly preferable to aborting them, at any stage.
Even though the teen pregnancy rate is too high and there's more we can do to reduce it, better sex education and birth control access over the last 20 years has had a significant positive effect. In 1990, the U.S. teen birth rate was 61.8 births for every 1,000 adolescent females, compared with 26.5 births for every 1,000 adolescent females in 2013. It's still one of the highest rates for developed countries, but there's been a lot of progress.
Abortions are also down by over 30% over the same period; fewer unwanted pregnancies, more restrictive abortion laws in some states, more free and low-cost birth control...
Aggressive and sincere commitment to reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies is, for me, something that both sides (and everyone in the middle) should embrace. I support women's right to choose, but would always rather she wasn't in a position to have to make that choice. Unfortunately, many in the anti-abortion camp are ironically also the loudest voices when it comes to opposing sex education in schools and free or low cost birth control (typically citing moral or religious or financial objection).
RE: ABORTION - BlueTiki - 08-20-2015
Thanks, user . . . for your response.
Now go research the founder of Planned Parenthood.
RE: ABORTION - username - 08-20-2015
When I had an abortion hell KNOWS what the technology was like back then (image wise). Even when I had my kids, the technology was still grainy and black and white.
While I knew the technology had improved, I haven't seen an ultrasound photo in years though (that I recall) and certainly not one in the context we were discussing.
I think Sally commented that at 8-12 weeks it's about the size of a kidney bean and the reassurances that it doesn't feel pain are helpful BUT that still looks like a little person to me which is painful to me. Like I said, a blackberry would have been easier to take.
Now I "get" why some anti abortion folks want to force women to view their ultrasounds. It's cruel in a way to the women but very well might change some minds. Maybe they're like me...picturing blackberries.
RE: ABORTION - aussiefriend - 08-20-2015
(08-18-2015, 09:42 AM)Maggot Wrote: aussie if you watched Mr. Mike in 3D you would get pregnant.
for the record Maggs, I just have a normal flatscreen.
RE: ABORTION - username - 08-21-2015
Sanger...I've only read a brief summary of her life/cause but from what little I've read, admirable woman and well ahead of the times. And STILL the right message all these decades later.