Abortion

[Your Vest Friend]

He was definitely taking advantage of the fact they were less educated; one of the women interviewed didn't even know what morning sickness was, I wouldn't say that it's not a big stretch to assume that she wasn't aware of her birth control options either. 

[KittyNakajima]

He was definitely taking advantage of the fact they were less educated; one of the women interviewed didn't even know what morning sickness was, I wouldn't say that it's not a big stretch to assume that she wasn't aware of her birth control options either. 

 

Damn straight. My jaw dropped when that one girl in silhouette said that. Then went on to reveal that she had a total of about eight or nine abortions at this same clinic because she was coached by a female employee that it was perfectly normal in Brazil, where women there have twenty one abortions on average.

 

Twenty one.

 

Let that number simmer for a moment.

 

....

 

Rationally speaking... WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING THAT YOU END UP NEEDING TWENTY ONE ABORTIONS?

 

That upset me more than the other woman featured who had a last minute, but too late change of heart in the mist of being put under for the procedure. The latter apparently having been rendered infertile from the one time she apparently did it, but this lass had the luck and fortune to go through it eight times?

 

No. Fuck that. I'm sorry, I can't with that one. There was plenty of opportunity to learn from that experience and possibly safeguard against a future unwanted pregnancy via a birth control plan or method. Careless is what it is too. The pill, (morning after and regular BC), the patch, shot, Mirena, etc are just a few of the choices that were out there. But no, whoops! Let's mosey on down to 3801 Lancaster for a quick snip snip. D:

 

Just had to vent about that. I'm upset because there was just so much naivete in what she believed at the time, as well as the fact that she apparently fared better than some of the other patients if she was fertile enough to need this procedure done eight separate times. Like it was a walk in the park. A walk to the nearest Planned Parenthood would have set her ass straight.

Edited April 14, 2013 by KittyNakajima

[Badnik Zero]

As for this being used as an argument against legal abortion, I don't think that's the case. This man was clearly not a suitable doctor for anything let alone a procedure like abortion. The holes in the current system would only widen and worsen conditions for women who are seeking abortions, with shady clinics like this being the only options available. Right now a doctor will recommend you to a clean and trustworthy office where the procedures are done. There's an air of regret in them naturally, but it's not a butchery like this fucking guy. It's hard to believe this place actually existed and I hope he gets maximum time for it. There is a movie called Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days about a girl looking for an abortion in Romania during communist years. It contains real experiences and involves a shady freelancer, a hotel room, even sexual abuse and all kinds of unfair dealings for the girl. Because these things are possible if we don't offer safe alternatives, it's an argument for licensed abortion clinics. This disgusting place doesn't need to be the only option for anyone, regardless of moral character or situation. I think this opinion is agreeable.

Edited April 14, 2013 by American Ristar

[TheNicollette30]

My opinion on abortion:

 

IF YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T KEEP THE BABY DON'T BE A SLUT AND TRY TO MAKE A BABY MARIO

 

On a serious note, when you become an adult you are given many responsibilities. One of the most beautiful ones is the ability to make your own gift of life. Killing a baby who could possibly become the creature to the cure of cancer, or anything just seems 100% wrong in my view. It's plain simple though, people use sex more as an activity as an enjoyment, instead of the serious responsibility that you are actually given; which is fathering/mothering a child since the very beginning.

 

Obviously there are many different opinions on this topic, but that just happens to be mine. 

[Tani Coyote]

Killing a baby who could possibly become the creature to the cure of cancer, or anything just seems 100% wrong in my view. 

 

Really that's the part that's always iffed me. I'm pro-choice not because I believe in the process, so much as I think there's other things to focus on at the moment (never mind people will do it anyway if it's illegal). It will eventually develop into a life, and that's where I find myself very conflicted morally.

 

But yes, I think a lot of the problem is how sex has become viewed as something solely for fun. It's why you end up with all those teen mothers; the two involved simply don't grasp the concept of responsibility. At all. While I'm not one of those folks who believe sex exists solely for procreation, I do encourage that it be practiced carefully... I can understand accidents, but there is ZERO excuse for not using birth control or protection, especially now that many places give them out for free.

 

Heck, this goes for homosexual relationships as well. There's still the risk of STDs, and all the more reason to be cautious with such behavior.

 

Plus let's just be honest. Birth control is a lot less depressing than abortion. Sperm cells and egg cells will not develop into children no matter how you slice it, and will die anyway. But an actual zygote, now that's not as clear cut.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice

[Diogenes]

Killing a baby who could possibly become the creature to the cure of cancer,

Or it could become the next Hitler. Or worse. This is a terrible argument.

 

I can understand accidents, but there is ZERO excuse for not using birth control or protection, especially now that many places give them out for free.

I think the main excuse is that a lot of people still don't have easy, cheap access to contraceptives, and quite a lot don't have a proper education of what exactly goes on with regards to sex and pregnancy. 

Plus let's just be honest. Birth control is a lot less depressing than abortion. Sperm cells and egg cells will not develop into children no matter how you slice it, and will die anyway. But an actual zygote, now that's not as clear cut.

Honestly I don't see a whole hell of a lot of difference between a sperm and egg one minute before joining and the fertilized egg one minute after.

[Tani Coyote]

I think the main excuse is that a lot of people still don't have easy, cheap access to contraceptives, and quite a lot don't have a proper education of what exactly goes on with regards to sex and pregnancy. 

Honestly I don't see a whole hell of a lot of difference between a sperm and egg one minute before joining and the fertilized egg one minute after.

 

I don't think it's rocket science to know that sex tends to lead to pregnancy barring fertility issues. I am not going to give those folks the benefit of the doubt. As for access to contraceptives, that's definitely something I approve of funding, and I'd appreciate if the reactionaries got their noses out of that. I can see the perspective on abortion, but the opinion against contraceptives is just ridiculous.

 

A sperm and an egg, left to their own, eventually are broken down and processed by the body. A zygote will, assuming the mother doesn't have some sort of biological issue, begin to develop into a child over the course of nine months. There's no reason to oppose contraception since the sperm and egg will die anyway. Abortion's not as clear cut.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Ogilvie Maurice

[Nepenthe]

Some contraceptives prevent a fertilized egg from implanting and thus developing into an embryo. Hardcore pro-lifers generally state that life begins at fertilization, not implantation. Hence, contraceptives are believed to facilitate in the premeditated killing of a human life, thus using one is tantamount to murder. To avoid murder under this basis, you'd have to interrupt the fertilization process before that could happen. However, successful fertilization can happen within 24 hours after conceiving. You now see the fucking problem with the hardcore pro-life stance. There's no room for compromise because the line is drawn so close in the sand that it facilitates impossible standards for what is and isn't killing, and thus at this point, it basically amounts to little more than a way to punish women for having sex.

[TheNicollette30]

Or it could become the next Hitler. Or worse. This is a terrible argument.

I never said it was an argument. I was stating that we don't know who the child is growing up to be, whether a good or bad influence. 

 

The child is alive since the beginning, it is nothing less than Murder...Case closed.

 

(Don't rage at me, there are no facts in this subject, only opinions)

[Nepenthe]

The child is alive since the beginning, it is nothing less than Murder...Case closed.

 

(Don't rage at me, there are no facts in this subject, only opinions)

 

You can't say the "case is closed" and then hide behind the "this is only my opinion" to prevent criticism (especially without actual evidence backing your assertions in the first place). Stand by your convictions with some backbone.

By the way, you're wrong. A "child" is not alive at "the beginning." Hell, the necessary organs for survival don't develop until five weeks after conceiving.

[Diogenes]

I don't think it's rocket science to know that sex tends to lead to pregnancy barring fertility issues. I am not going to give those folks the benefit of the doubt.

It's not as simple as that, though. There's tons of stupid rumors about how you can't get pregnant if it's your first time, or if he pulls out it's fine, or if you douche with this or that you're safe, and so on. People legit believe this kind of stuff, often because no one tells them otherwise.

A sperm and an egg, left to their own, eventually are broken down and processed by the body. A zygote will, assuming the mother doesn't have some sort of biological issue, begin to develop into a child over the course of nine months.

A zygote left on its own will also die, because it needs to be inside of a person to survive. And isn't it something like 50% (or some surprisingly large number, I don't remember exactly) of pregnancies end in miscarriage very early on? Neither god nor nature seem to think a recently fertilized egg is all that valuable.

 

I never said it was an argument. I was stating that we don't know who the child is growing up to be, whether a good or bad influence.

Then why even bring it up?

The child is alive since the beginning, it is nothing less than Murder...Case closed.

In the beginning it's alive in the same sense your skin cells are, but you wouldn't mourn the thousands(? probably more) of them that you shed daily. And it's not a "child" in any relevant sense that I can think of.

(Don't rage at me, there are no facts in this subject, only opinions)

Now this just the stupidest damn thing I've ever heard.

[Tani Coyote]

Some contraceptives prevent a fertilized egg from implanting and thus developing into an embryo. Hardcore pro-lifers generally state that life begins at fertilization, not implantation. Hence, contraceptives are believed to facilitate in the premeditated killing of a human life, thus using one is tantamount to murder. To avoid murder under this basis, you'd have to interrupt the fertilization process before that could happen. However, successful fertilization can happen within 24 hours after conceiving.

 

To be honest, on that front I'm actually kind of iffy. One can do what they will pre-fertilisation because that genetic material is just going to die anyway. However, since you said "some," I'm presuming there are contraceptives that prevent fertilisation, which would be perfectly fine by me.

 

Overall, though, the pre-fertilisation contraceptives being immoral just flies in the face of basic science. Sperm and eggs are completely and utterly useless on their own and will do nothing but sit around and then die after a few weeks.

[Komodin]

The child is alive since the beginning, it is nothing less than Murder...Case closed.

 

... Since the beginning? When it's just a cluster of cells? Dude, by that weird logic, we're basically committing murder every time we treat cancer.

[Tani Coyote]

... Since the beginning? When it's just a cluster of cells? Dude, by that weird logic, we're basically committing murder every time we treat cancer.

 

To be fair, the baby's cluster of cells will develop into a child. Cancer just kills you.

 

I've always disliked comparing the cells to anything else, because nothing else grows into something alive. Cancer kills you. Skin cells are dead and flake off. Assuming your body doesn't have problems, that lump of cells is going to become a baby given time.

 

It's not as simple as that, though. There's tons of stupid rumors about how you can't get pregnant if it's your first time, or if he pulls out it's fine, or if you douche with this or that you're safe, and so on. People legit believe this kind of stuff, often because no one tells them otherwise.

A zygote left on its own will also die, because it needs to be inside of a person to survive. And isn't it something like 50% (or some surprisingly large number, I don't remember exactly) of pregnancies end in miscarriage very early on? Neither god nor nature seem to think a recently fertilized egg is all that valuable.

 

Since my breaking up post option isn't working I'm just going to have to lump this.

 

As for point 1: Okay point conceded there. Just highlights the need for more widespread contraception.

 

As for point 2: this is irrelevant because my argument's based on the fact that sperm and eggs die anyway inside their owner's bodies. So, their dying inherently has no problem, I think. I consider a zygote just a wee bit different since it will attach to the wall and develop barring the mother's biological issues.

 

I'm wary of contraception against the zygote itself, but by all means, kill all the eggs and sperm. It's not like there's a shortage of the things.

[KittyNakajima]

To be honest, on that front I'm actually kind of iffy. One can do what they will pre-fertilisation because that genetic material is just going to die anyway. However, since you said "some," I'm presuming there are contraceptives that prevent fertilisation, which would be perfectly fine by me.

 

Overall, though, the pre-fertilisation contraceptives being immoral just flies in the face of basic science. Sperm and eggs are completely and utterly useless on their own and will do nothing but sit around and then die after a few weeks.

 

 

Basically. Women have something between 6-7 million eggs in their ovaries when they're developing in the womb. That drops to about 1 million at birth. By the time puberty hits, that number has again been slashed to approx. 400,000 eggs , of which 300-400 will be approximately released during the course of her menstrual cycle until menopause.

 

That's a lot of goddamned eggs broken, especially considering that the average family size right now is about 1-3 kids. Given that many still left after puberty hits and the age old equation one egg + one sperm = baby, I'd say it couldn't possibly hurt to use some form of contraception. We all got plenty eggs or sperm to spare.

[Tani Coyote]

That's a lot of goddamned eggs broken, especially considering that the average family size right now is about 1-3 kids. Given that many still left after puberty hits and the age old equation one egg + one sperm = baby, I'd say it couldn't possibly hurt to use some form of contraception. We all got plenty eggs or sperm to spare.

 

Precisely my thoughts on it really. Unless you procrastinate really badly, you're going to have plenty of time to have a kid in the future. Preventing fertilisation is probably for the good of whatever child you have eventually, too; if you're fresh out of high school chances are extremely high you don't have a lot of money to provide a good life for a kid.

 

Let's not forget that even if you do create a child, millions of sperm are dying anyway. The value placed on the egg and sperm themselves is completely arbitrary.

[TheNicollette30]

You can't say the "case is closed" and then hide behind the "this is only my opinion" to prevent criticism (especially without actual evidence backing your assertions in the first place). Stand by your convictions with some backbone.

 

I ment, "Case Closed", as I am very stubborn in this topic, and nothing will change my opinion.

[Nepenthe]

So being blatantly wrong about some scientific aspects of the debate will not change your opinion? Alright then. All I can say is, I hope you don't proceed to go about dictating policy that is going to have a negative impact on my and other women's health.

[Badnik Zero]

I think the main excuse is that a lot of people still don't have easy, cheap access to contraceptives...

 

While people do say this, it shouldn't be an excuse. My friend bought 102 condoms online for $20 the other day.

[Diogenes]

While people do say this, it shouldn't be an excuse. My friend bought 102 condoms online for $20 the other day.

Not everyone has a penis.

Also, not everyone has the internet.

[Badnik Zero]

But girls can carry condoms too. Where baby prevention is concerned at least one party tends to have the penis. Anyways by now in the US/UK not everyone has the internet, but I'm pretty sure everyone has a friend with the internet. There's so much free wifi bouncing around the place it's ridiculous. Public libraries also have internet for free. If people kept condoms like they make sure they have toothpaste let's say, protected sex would be easier.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Why are you guys talking like condoms are 100% safe? They are not. If the condom tears even a little bit or slips out, you are at high risk of getting the girl pregnant.

[Badnik Zero]

Still... It's better than nothing? And a hell of a lot cheaper than a pill you pay for monthly?

Edited April 19, 2013 by American Ristar

[Nepenthe]

You mean that pill, patch, or device that sexually active women who do not want children should consistently be on as further responsible protection against broken condoms? That pill that many women take for hormonal and other medical issues outside of sexual activity? :/

[Badnik Zero]

We were talking about cheap contraceptives. Being on a pill is like having a second phone bill, isn't it that expensive?