Jump to content

A Different Kind of Abortion Thread. I Promise. Let's Figure out What we agree on . . . and what can be done


HolyMoses
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's late.  I've been sick.  And I have not been sleeping well . . . So forgive my rambling thoughts here.

-Republicans want to prevent abortions.  But the Republican Party doesn't.  The Republican Party NEEDS to keep abortion as an issue so that pro lifers who have no economic incentive to vote for Republican candidates will continue to vote for Republican Candidates.

-Democrats don't hate babies.  In fact, Democrats think abortion is pretty awful, but the Democratic Party can't really talk about that because they can't for a moment appear to be soft on Abortion Rights.

-An appalling amount of money is spent on BOTH sides lobbying legislatures, funding campaigns and generally funding propaganda on both sides of this issue.  (Anyone want to look it up just how much?)

-Since Rowe v. Wade, despite the billions(?) of dollars spent on the politics of Pro Life . . . Abortion is still legal and the cost per life saved has been outrageous.

-What if there was a BIPARTISAN effort dedicated to achieve a few very common goals:

-First, and this might be a non starter.   Abortion should be legal and safe and available without health risks to the mother without damaging psychological coercion.  And as EARLY in the pregnancy as possible.

-Second.  The number of Abortions needs to be reduced.  DRASTICALLY reduced.  From 2000 to 2009, the number dropped by about six percent.  Set a meaningful goal.  Would Pro Lifers accept a 50 Percent reduction in five years? 

-Think about this.  Forty years of this fight has done almost nothing to save lives.  If you care about saving babies, doesn't it make sense to redirect resources to achieve a meaningful but achievable goal?

-Educate on Birth Control

-Make birth control AVAILABLE and subsidized.

-Yes, make abstinence PART of the program (even though it doesn't work so well, right Grandma Palin?)

-Without using coercion and horrific pictures etc . . . Make sure that women seeking abortions ARE advised of real options.  Adoption obviously, but also programs to assure real economic viability for raising children

-Assure that there ARE funds available for single moms so they can afford to raise their children.

My point is.  What if we refocused our resources to take politics and morality OUT of the abortion issue and really focused on safe, healthy and constructive ways to reduce fetus deaths. 

This seems so obvious, but I googled "Bipartisan Abortion Reduction" and there just isn't much out there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only do two things:

1. Again state I was in a position where abortion was an option (it's always an option, but the mother of my child and I were 18 and enrolled in a private Christian school where the penalty for pregnancy was being kicked out) and I thank God every day we did not take that option; and

2.  Wish that we could have a bi-partisan discussion such as the one presented here to reduce abortions to an absolute low as is possible as they remain legal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love where your heart is, but your underlying assumptions are going to be hugely problematic for pro lifers.  For example, you say "abortion should be safe and legal without health risks to the mother without damaging psychological coercion."  Well, this assumes a WHOLE lot.

1)  Abortion is without health risks to the mother;

2)  There is "damaging psychological coercion" occurring now (what coercion? How is it damaging?).

And beyond that, why should abortion remain legal if enough hearts and minds are convinced it should not be?  Are we conceding this for now, or forever?

I appreciate the desire for a truce, but I think part of the problem is the pro-choice side is so fundamentally dishonest on so many fronts.  When the CMP released the videos they made, I said the biggest value in them is they absolutely scraped the bark off of the lie that a "fetus" is not the same as a "baby."  NOBODY wanted to talk about that.  It preserves the abortion industry's biggest lie -- the "clump of cells, not a person, not human, not a human being," whatever line of thinking.  EVERYONE wanted to talk about the CMP and how the videos were supposedly deceptive.  When I brought up what was actually shown on the videos, no, "I'm not interested in discussing that."

So let's discuss it.  How about while we're compromising, you all admit that abortion is the ending of the life of a separate, whole and distinct human person. Let's start there.  Or at the very least, give us real, honest reasons why you think that is not true instead of saying "it's a clump of cells like a fingernail" nonsense.  If you're asking us to let it remain legal because…..I don't know why honestly, so you can win?…..then you all step up to the plate and give up something too.  Give up your false rhetoric and let's be honest about what we are discussing. Because I have to be honest with you, I don't see much compromise in what you write above.  I mean, read your own list, but view it with a pro lifer's eyes.

1)  Abortion remains legal and safe and without "coercion" (which we assume you all will define at some later date in a way we won't like);

2)  Set a "goal" to kill half as many babies as we do now, in some way that is not made clear;

3)  Educate on birth control and make provisions for same, and give lip service to abstinence, but you're going to insult us on the front end by letting us know you're throwing this in but you think we are all stupid;

4)  Talk about adoption and other options to abortion, but still not educate people on what abortion is and does;

5)  Throw in some funding for social programs liberals prefer.

What are you giving up?  Good grief, the rhetoric I mention above is right there in your bullet points -- no "coercion" or "horrific pictures," which we assume means not talking about what abortion is and does.  So give that up at the outset.  Let's have an HONEST discussion about what abortion is.  What abortion does.  You can start the process by telling us what you saw on the CMP videos and discussing what sort of non-personal, non-human clump of cells has eyes, a brain, lungs, liver, kidneys, arms, legs, etc., all capable of being donated for research purposes.  Tell us what we already know -- that you know abortion is the termination of a living, separate, distinct and whole human being.

Let's talk about that.  Because I've already conceded the social programs to help women with children long since.  I WANT us to pay for the children that will be born when we stop killing them.  Do you want to have an honest discussion about what abortion is and what it does?  Are you willing to do that even if you don't like it?

I know your heart is in the right place.  But you adopt too much of the abortion lobby's rhetoric here, I'd wager unthinkingly, and you ask us for compromise while giving up basically nothing.  I think this is naive on your part.  Pro lifers are not going to be convinced by the argument you make, mostly because it asks us to stop trying to end abortion while you throw us a few meager bones (telling us how stupid we are in the process) and refusing to talk about the central issue in the abortion debate -- what is the status of the unborn?  Put that discussion on the front burner and we can have a more reasonable discussion about how to work together.

Also, the abortion industry does not want to limit the number of abortions.  So you are going to have to tell them their position is unacceptable instead of defending them as champions of women's health when they are exposed for sorting baby parts in petri dishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like Trump reached the logical endpoint of the fetal personhood argument - the woman should be punished.

For those here who want to make abortion illegal, should the woman be charged with murder?

I've heard some state no because they're forced/desperate, but that's not an argument one would make about actual murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Billy Ocean said:

It seems like Trump reached the logical endpoint of the fetal personhood argument - the woman should be punished.

For those here who want to make abortion illegal, should the woman be charged with murder?

I've heard some state no because they're forced/desperate, but that's not an argument one would make about actual murder.

No, sorry, that's dumb.  Pro lifers have come out in droves condemning his remarks.  

The answer as to why involves mens rea.  It isn't about being forced or desperate, it's about their state of mind when they do it and whether they specifically intend to kill.  And having been lied to for the last 40+ years by the abortion lobby, many of them think they are not killing a human being.  And that's just from the legal side.  From the ethical side, pro lifers consider abortion to be a crime AGAINST women and their children, not a crime committed by a woman against her child.  We consider it a tragedy that women are in the situation where they feel this is a reasonable alternative, so we are not looking to punish women for having abortions, we are seeking to help them realize they don't have to take that step in order to be okay.

Of course, Donald Trump isn't a pro lifer, so he wouldn't know that.  I suppose that is why you and he think such a move makes sense -- neither of you understands the reasoning and motivations of the pro life movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've played around with idea in my head of taxing women who've had multiple abortions to be refunded/lifted on completion of an x number of hours birth control class but the idea cuts a little too close to what Trump wants to do and might just make things even more difficult on lower income women so I dunno.

Honestly I've just decided Abortion is one of those issues where there very well might be no right answers. :(

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, capologist said:

Make abortion completely illegal except in the case of endangering the mother's life  Make the morning after pill completely free and available without question at any pharmacy.  The end...

Holymoses, is this the type of compromise you had in mind?

(It won't work, for a lot of reasons, but it strikes me as something that would be morally more acceptable than the status quo).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JDaveG said:
3 hours ago, JDaveG said:

Holymoses, is this the type of compromise you had in mind?

(It won't work, for a lot of reasons, but it strikes me as something that would be morally more acceptable than the status quo).

I'm trying to wrap my head around it. But, at first blush, I think it is very much in the spirit of how I am thinking about things.I'm trying to wrap my head around it. But, at first blush, I think it is very much in the spirit of how I am thinking about things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make all birth controll amd contraceptives  accessible to everyone

Make the Morning after pill avaliable to everyone

Only allow for the procedure in safety circumstances. 

Seems reasonable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/1/2016 at 8:27 AM, JDaveG said:

No, sorry, that's dumb.  Pro lifers have come out in droves condemning his remarks.  

The answer as to why involves mens rea.  It isn't about being forced or desperate, it's about their state of mind when they do it and whether they specifically intend to kill.  And having been lied to for the last 40+ years by the abortion lobby, many of them think they are not killing a human being.  And that's just from the legal side.  From the ethical side, pro lifers consider abortion to be a crime AGAINST women and their children, not a crime committed by a woman against her child.  We consider it a tragedy that women are in the situation where they feel this is a reasonable alternative, so we are not looking to punish women for having abortions, we are seeking to help them realize they don't have to take that step in order to be okay.

Of course, Donald Trump isn't a pro lifer, so he wouldn't know that.  I suppose that is why you and he think such a move makes sense -- neither of you understands the reasoning and motivations of the pro life movement.

So when women exercise agency over only their own bodies, lives, and reproductive health by choosing to have an abortion they don't really know what they're doing and are in fact victims? Seems condescending.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Billy Ocean said:

So when women exercise agency over only their own bodies, lives, and reproductive health by choosing to have an abortion they don't really know what they're doing and are in fact victims? Seems condescending.

Well, you begged all the questions for sure.  Not to mention you conflated my two (separate) arguments to reach your conclusion.

So we're back to "no, sorry, that's dumb."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Billy Ocean said:

So when women exercise agency over only their own bodies, lives, and reproductive health by choosing to have an abortion they don't really know what they're doing and are in fact victims? Seems condescending.

 

Well if they wanted to abort themselves to end or prevent a pregnancy I think you may have an argument. If they cared about their reproductive health they could have abstained and then they would not have to force themselves to believe a bunch of wolves to feel better about doing something that is typically very unhealthy. When you dig a little deeper into the subject getting a abortion is far from the best thing for a woman's health.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Saturday, April 02, 2016 at 0:34 PM, Billy Ocean said:

So when women exercise agency over only their own bodies, lives, and reproductive health by choosing to have an abortion they don't really know what they're doing and are in fact victims? Seems condescending.

 

Well if they were only exercising agency over their own bodies that would be another matter.  They are also determining what happens to the babies body and life. Chiefly death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2016/03/trump-is-no-pro-lifer

"In fact, Mr. Trump seems to have stumbled onto the best possible way of signaling to true pro-lifers that he is not one of them.  He has inadvertently embraced an idea that is falsely attributed to pro-life citizens by their opponents to weaken the pro-life cause by tarring pro-lifers as punitive, vindictive people who would send women, many of whom are desperate and frightened, and some of whom are acting under pressure or even coercion in seeking abortions, to prison.

Mr. Trump evidently wants to show us how genuine his conversion is by depicting himself as severely pro-life.  But pro-lifers are compassionate, seeking the good of unborn children and their mothers, newer pitting them or their interests against each other.  We are interested in saving babies, not punishing mothers.  And we know that we don’t need to punish mothers to save babies.

What Mr. Trump has succeeded in showing pro-life Americans is that he is not one of us."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JDaveG said:

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2016/03/trump-is-no-pro-lifer

"In fact, Mr. Trump seems to have stumbled onto the best possible way of signaling to true pro-lifers that he is not one of them.  He has inadvertently embraced an idea that is falsely attributed to pro-life citizens by their opponents to weaken the pro-life cause by tarring pro-lifers as punitive, vindictive people who would send women, many of whom are desperate and frightened, and some of whom are acting under pressure or even coercion in seeking abortions, to prison.

Mr. Trump evidently wants to show us how genuine his conversion is by depicting himself as severely pro-life.  But pro-lifers are compassionate, seeking the good of unborn children and their mothers, newer pitting them or their interests against each other.  We are interested in saving babies, not punishing mothers.  And we know that we don’t need to punish mothers to save babies.

What Mr. Trump has succeeded in showing pro-life Americans is that he is not one of us."

 

What Mr. Trump has truly succeeded in is showing ALL of America that he is telling his target voters what he thinks they want to hear, but lacks any convictions whatsoever, and has been too preoccupied with Twitter to actually do his homework on these issues.  (See Nuclear Japan, prohibiting Muslim entry, etc etc . . . )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/04/04/woman-21-hangs-herself-weeks-after-having-an-abortion-leaves-collection-of-chilling-notes/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Firewire+Morning+Edition+Recurring+v2+2016-04-05&utm_term=Firewire_Morning_Test

On April 1, 2016 at 8:27 AM, JDaveG said:

From the ethical side, pro lifers consider abortion to be a crime AGAINST women and their children, not a crime committed by a woman against her child.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, holymoses said:

 

What Mr. Trump has truly succeeded in is showing ALL of America that he is telling his target voters what he thinks they want to hear, but lacks any convictions whatsoever, and has been too preoccupied with Twitter to actually do his homework on these issues.  (See Nuclear Japan, prohibiting Muslim entry, etc etc . . . )

I'm about 3/4 of the way through season 4 of House of Cards, and I'm assuming Trump is using the same techniques as Conway to mine for voter date.  Except he's apparently gleaning his data from Stormfront and Youtubes comments sections. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On April 1, 2016 at 7:09 AM, JDaveG said:

Tell us what we already know -- that you know abortion is the termination of a living, separate, distinct and whole human being.

Let's talk about that.  Because I've already conceded the social programs to help women with children long since.  I WANT us to pay for the children that will be born when we stop killing them.  Do you want to have an honest discussion about what abortion is and what it does?  Are you willing to do that even if you don't like it?

A feminist, Democrat take on the same issue:

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/07/camille_paglia_feminists_have_abortion_wrong_trump_and_hillary_miscues_highlight_a_frozen_national_debate/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...