ABORTION

[username]

I agree with Maggot in that many "pro-choice" advocates view ANY limitations on abortion as an attack on a woman's right to control her reproduction etc.

The same scare tactics used by some gun groups are similarly used with regards to abortion. Put in limitations and next thing you know, we lose ALL rights.
And I agree that a lot of right to lifers use the argument that "life begins at conception ergo, ALL abortions are immoral and should be illegal".
Those of us in the middle on most of these issues (I consider us the sane ones) are fucked.

[HairOfTheDog]

I agree with Maggot in that many "pro-choice" advocates view ANY limitations on abortion as an attack on a woman's right to control her reproduction etc.

Any limitations put on abortion are restricting a woman's right to control her reproduction though. That's a fact.

The same scare tactics used by some gun groups are similarly used with regards to abortion. Put in limitations and next thing you know, we lose ALL rights.
And I agree that a lot of right to lifers use the argument that "life begins at conception ergo, ALL abortions are immoral and should be illegal".

Those of us in the middle on most of these issues (I consider us the sane ones) are fucked.

That's a fair comparison. I agree that sometimes the loudest and most passionate voices (which often makes them the most influential ones) are on the extremes.

I support some national gun safety controls via federal legislation, and I wouldn't object to a national cut-off point for abortions (way past 8 weeks though), after which medical exception would be required.

A national late-term restriction would affect a very small percentage of women seeking abortions anyway. But, at present (as with gun restrictions), abortion restrictions are mostly left to the states.

What rubs me way wrong are the politicians who continue attempting to cut off (by any means possible) female health services to millions across the country because those politicians are morally/religiously opposed to all abortions. On that I agree with Duchess -- it's short-sighted, callous, illogical bullshit.

[username]

I agree with the last. PP is far from just an"abortion provider".

As premature infants are able to survive earlier and earlier...I get more saddened (for lack of a better term) the later the abortion. I'm not sure what an 8-10 week fetus looks like (where they are developmentally) but there's a difference between cell bundles and arms and legs and...ugh. Hard to talk about.

[username]

I can't believe I'm going to type this (I think I'm getting less understanding in my old age) but as far as reproductive "choice" goes...

A huge part of the reproductive choice occurs (or occurred) back when the woman and man had sex. GRANTED, B/C efforts sometimes fail, tubes come untied but I wonder how many women (and men) just took a stupid risk? And these days, if you KNOW you took a stupid risk there are options (the morning after pill etc.).

I can still give a pass to very young women (and the mentally retarded) who do stupid things in their lives all.the.time. But c'mon, at some age, you ought to have the sense to protect yourself from an unwanted pregnancy (or take advantage of the options available to you).

Yep, I'm becoming more intolerant as I age.

Back to one point I made earlier...seriously, why hasn't science figured out how to do some of the genetic testing they do now at 15-20 weeks earlier? You can choose the sex of your child but they can't test earlier for other abnormalities? It would save a lot of parents some significant heart ache if they were able to test for these issues much earlier in the pregnancy.

[Duchess]

I used PP in high school. I choose not to discuss it with my Mom or primary care physician. I wanted to have sex and I knew it was up to me to protect myself. I wasn't going to be one of those silly females who found herself "in trouble", I had plans that didn't involve a baby and a husband. I want other young women to have that option available to them too!

[Duchess]

I should have clarified by saying I used them for birth control, not an abortion. Oops.

[Maggot]

PP in that aspect does a great job. The problem I have is the late term abortions. Pro abortion politicians will not even discuss it for fear of sounding anti abortion. Its not a cut/dry situation. I'm sure there are certain medical reasons for a late term abortion but it should be a last resort when all else fails not an option for experimentation.

[username]

I should have clarified by saying I used them for birth control, not an abortion. Oops.

I didn't go to PP but I had an abortion in my teens. I had no idea, at the time, about children, parenting, what was inside me...I just went with the immediate thought "I'm not capable/ready to be a parent".

Sad. I can't imagine how my life might have turned out if I hadn't ended that pregnancy but I will always be haunted by that and...wish I'd had a mom who suggested I start taking b/c pills before I made such a stoopid decision.

I offer my daughter b/c pills almost daily. Cheerios, milk, birth control pills? She's not sexually active nor does she have acne but I offer them up anyway. Breakout? BIRTH CONTROL pills.

Poor kid, lol.

[Maggot]

With all the crap in food today I'm surprised anyone can get pregnant.

[HairOfTheDog]

PP in that aspect does a great job. The problem I have is the late term abortions. Pro abortion politicians will not even discuss it for fear of sounding anti abortion. Its not a cut/dry situation. I'm sure there are certain medical reasons for a late term abortion but it should be a last resort when all else fails not an option for experimentation.

Sounds like your objection is to state and federal laws not aligning with your personal feelings/views; not with Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is just one of the abortion service providers that follows those laws.

Even if the current proposed federal restrictions on late-term abortions pass Congress, you (based on what you've expressed here) will feel that women have too much choice when it comes to reproduction. The bill proposes a ban on abortions past the point at which some medical professionals believe a fetus is capable of feeling pain -- 20 weeks (0 weeks is point of fertilization, and 38 weeks is full term).

After the last iteration of the bill failed last year, the rape and incest exceptions were loosened. Another exception of the last bill iteration remained unchanged; abortions past 20 weeks would be allowed if the woman's life is medically-verified to be endangered without an abortion. However, the lawmakers pushing the current bill still propose that there be no exception for non life-threatening health problems to the woman as a result of continued pregnancy/birth, nor do they allow exceptions based on fetal abnormalities.

Roe vs. Wade gives women the right to choose abortion up to point that the fetus would likely be viable on its own outside the womb (22 - 24 weeks).

Almost every state in the country either restricts abortion using an 18-20 week cut-off based on the "fetal pain capacity" criteria, or a 22-24 week cut-off based on the "fetal viability outside the womb" criteria. Only seven states give women the right to choose abortion with no cut-off restrictions - New Hampshire being one of them.

Anyway, since the fetus can't feel pain at 18 weeks and it's not viable on its own outside of the womb at that point, I'm curious as to why you oppose abortions between 8 weeks and 18 weeks, and what you suggest be done with all of those unwanted babies should women be legally forced to give birth to them (and who should bear the costs)?

[Maggot]

Call them immigrants.

[HairOfTheDog]

I don't get the sense that you understand immigration or abortion facts and laws very well at all.

But, reading your opinions and rhetoric is sometimes fun, so I'm glad that you weren't aborted Maggot.

[Duchess]

Call them immigrants.

Funny fucker.

[Blindgreed1]

Carrying over from the Trivial Drivel thread.

Yep, everyday unethical business for them. Do you think they're donating the tissue out of the goodness of their hearts?

They're not trying to make millions off of it.

I don't believe it. You have that at your hands and you're not going to take up the opportunity to make millions off it? You're already performing late term abortions, I think your standards would be questionable.

It would be foolish for PP to break the law by looking to profit from selling stem cell tissue. They could be put out of business.

Despite what anti-abortion politicians and groups claim, there's nothing in the full unedited video that points in that direction.

In fact, the director says several times that money/profit isn't the issue; the participating clinics are just looking to cover their costs.

The prices discussed in the sting video, in an admittedly casual manner over lunch, are to cover the costs of transporting, handling, etc of the tissue; the tissue which some of their patients elect to donate to medical research. The same tissue that some doctors try to preserve while performing the abortions, which is also discussed in the videos. Unbiased sources have confirmed that the prices discussed are in line with average reimbursement costs for such donations. Source: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/unspinn...ood-video/

Just over 1% of abortions are late-term (after 21 weeks). The donation of fetal tissue for stem cell research is not a late-term abortion issue. By far, most fetal tissue is a by-product of early and mid term abortions. And, white women account for the highest racial percentage of the approximately 1 million abortions performed every year in the U.S. (not that it's relevant, just to correct a statement made upthread.) Source: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html



I don't like late-term abortions either, but I'd rather see the fetal tissue go to stem cell research than in a waste bin.

If PP, which is always under close scrutiny and threat by anti-abortionists, is making millions in illegal commerce-for-profit of stem cell tissue, I'll be very surprised.

Bingo, the only profit they would see from this is avoiding the cost of disposal. It should also be mentioned that they can't ask for the donation until AFTER the procedure.

[HairOfTheDog]

Yesterday the Senate quashed the attempt to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

Within minutes of Monday's Senate vote, abortion-rights groups were releasing TV ads attacking GOP supporters of the measure for stomping on women's health care needs. Conservatives were accusing Democrats of voting to protect taxpayer funds for an organization whose campaign contributions tilt lopsidedly to Democratic candidates.

And each party was bracing for the fight to be revisited when Congress returns next month from its recess.

The Republican drive was prompted by videos secretly recorded by anti-abortion activists that show Planned Parenthood officials coolly describing how they sometimes provide fetal tissue to medical researchers. Abortion opponents say the recordings caught Planned Parenthood illegally selling the organs for profit, and Planned Parenthood — while apologizing for their workers' businesslike words — say they've abided by laws that let them recoup the procedures' costs.

Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/more...8bedb5d6cd?

[Blindgreed1]

Yesterday the Senate quashed the attempt to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

Within minutes of Monday's Senate vote, abortion-rights groups were releasing TV ads attacking GOP supporters of the measure for stomping on women's health care needs. Conservatives were accusing Democrats of voting to protect taxpayer funds for an organization whose campaign contributions tilt lopsidedly to Democratic candidates.

And each party was bracing for the fight to be revisited when Congress returns next month from its recess.

The Republican drive was prompted by videos secretly recorded by anti-abortion activists that show Planned Parenthood officials coolly describing how they sometimes provide fetal tissue to medical researchers. Abortion opponents say the recordings caught Planned Parenthood illegally selling the organs for profit, and Planned Parenthood — while apologizing for their workers' businesslike words — say they've abided by laws that let them recoup the procedures' costs.

Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/more...8bedb5d6cd?

No laws were broken, yet in the first 10 seconds of the video, they claim it's illegal. Misinformation propaganda at it's best.

[HairOfTheDog]

No laws were broken, yet in the first 10 seconds of the video, they claim it's illegal. Misinformation propaganda at it's best.

It's insane and it's pissing me off.

This is why it's hard to be objective about the GOP on other issues and seriously consider voting for a Republican.

Planned Parenthood has been cleared of any illegal wrong-doing. No laws were broken. https://www.yahoo.com/health/state-probe...82837.html

And yet, Republicans and GOP presidential candidates continue to spring off of the false claims associated with the anti-abortionist sting videos to push their political agendas.

On the GOP debate stage, based on their own moral/religious beliefs and their party platform, candidates proudly proclaimed their desire to defund PP's women's health services because PP also happens to perform non-government funded abortions under the law (abortion accounts for 3% of their business, of which less than 2% is late term, FFS).

Some Republican governors have decided to springboard off the controversy and defund PP in their states, regardless of the fact that the organization broke no laws.

Off the debate stage, several GOP presidential candidates went further, including Trump, and confirmed their willingness to shutdown the government to shutdown PP.

The small tissue broker that was working with PP was getting so much backlash and so many inquiries -- which they didn't have the capacity to deal with and still conduct their business -- that they had to walk away from PP, one of their smallest partnerships.

The GOP is proud to deny millions of women high-quality female health and family planning services in order to protest legal abortions for a much smaller number of women. They consider it a victory to deny PP clients and PP itself the choice to legally contribute to stem cell research that will save millions of future lives. They don't care that the tissue will be tossed in a waste bin instead. It's so ignorant and misogynistic that it's difficult to believe, but there it is.

[HairOfTheDog]

Well, Huckabee's a good speaker and I think he has some interesting ideas, but he's not someone who should be running a developed modern country.

First he supports and makes excuses for the Duggar asshole who molested a bunch of his sisters and his babysitter; Huckabee's connected to that dipshit family religiously and politically. Now, he supports denying a 10-year-old victim of rape and incest an abortion.



GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee supports Paraguay's decision to deny an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim, he revealed in an interview Sunday.

In an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union," the former Arkansas governor argued that the Paraguayan government's refusal to allow an abortion for the now-11-year-old, who gave birth last week after being raped by her stepfather, prevented a second tragedy.

"Let nobody be misled, a 10-year-old girl being raped is horrible, but does it solve a problem by taking the life of an innocent child?" he asked. He added later, "When I think about one horror, I also think about the possibilities that exist and I just don't want to think that somehow we discounted a human life ... Let's not compound the tragedy by taking yet another life."

Paraguay law allows abortion only “in very rare cases when it’s deemed necessary to save a woman’s life,” ThinkProgress noted. (HOTD: Lotta people protested the forced birth in Paraguay and they're all over the rapist stepfather's shit -- good.)

Huckabee has taken a firm stance against abortion and suggested last month that he wouldn't rule out using federal troops to stop women from accessing the procedure. He also identifies with a small group of conservative legal scholars who believe the Constitution gives the president the power to outlaw abortion, despite the Supreme Court's many rulings on the matter.

Ref: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/huck...ostpopular

[Carsman]

Huckabee's entitled to his opinion no matter how wrong it is.

A 10 year old that has been raped is definitely entitled to an abortion. To force a baby to have a baby is just plain out absurd!

A woman should/must have the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, regardless if rape was involved or not. Pro lifer's have their opinion, however, it's not their body, it's not their choice, it's not their decision!

[Maggot]

I'm surprised more colored people don't attack PP. most of the abortions are performed on them. And it depends on who makes the chart.