'This can't be happening in our country.'

Onkel Neal · 10-27-09, 04:19 PM

Quote:

"I have abortion on the front of this building, because I think abortion isn't a four-letter word. It's a part of life."

What?

The abortionist and his No. 1 foe

Discuss!

I have to say, it amazes me that someone can be so cavalier about late term abortions. The two sides will never agree, one side says it's choice, the other side says legalized murder. One thing's for sure, when an abortion occurs, a human life in production ceases to exist.

Quote:

The legal definition of late-term abortion varies from state to state. Medical professionals generally define it as an abortion performed at 24 weeks or beyond, a time in pregnancy when a fetus can survive outside the womb.

Of the 60,000 abortions he says he's performed, he says about 400 were beyond 24 weeks, so-called late-term abortions. In each case, he says, there was a medical reason for the procedure.

,,,wow.

Quote:

The latest abortion he's ever performed was at 36 weeks, he says, because the fetus had not developed a brain. His youngest patient was 10, a victim of incest.

In cases like that, I would tend to agree. But 60,000 cases of incest or malformed fetuses?

Schroeder · 10-27-09, 04:34 PM

I think abortion should only be legal if the the child is massively challenged. Or maybe during the first 2 weeks but not later.
Idon't count myself to the conservatives but abortion is something that is way to easy to do nowadays (I know a girl who already had two of them.

).

August · 10-27-09, 04:39 PM

I wish abortions didn't happen but with nearly 7 billion people on the planet and the number ever climbing I don't think we really have the luxury of standing on principle when it comes to unwanted pregnancies.

Shearwater · 10-27-09, 04:43 PM

Reminds me of a conversation I once had with a friend of mine. He was working together with an American woman, and somehow a chat with her turned onto that topic. He was really amazed (like myself and most of my friends) that abortion seems to be one of the major issues in the US (at least that was the impression that woman gave him). Not that I think it's not important - quite to the contrary. But it seems to be much more on the political agenda than over here.

Skybird · 10-27-09, 04:45 PM

I cannot define "human life in production" - what should that be, please? Either it is human life, or it is not. Two states of cellular developement, that cannot clearly be separated from each other by a precise point in the timeline, thus we need to find an agreement on the grey zone where that cellular mass that has nothing, really nothing in common with a human being, actually turns into a human being that shows a cellular order with a sufficiently advanced structure to see it as a human being. And not before then - you can eventually talk of "human life in production". Before that, it is just some cellular grease with genetic information to eventually become a human - but who would think of the genetic information in the hairs and skin cells he/she is loosing all day long as a "human life prevented from developement"? Our reactions to threats to our genetic code are instinct driven survival automatisms - where the survival of our species is meant, not necessarily our individual survival.

Knowing that we are free to leave this genetically enforced automatism behind, if we chose to do so, I see no wrong in doing that during the phase where that cellular grease is just that: cellular grease. no human gets killed there. No future gets prevented, for a future of something has as a precondition that this something already exists in the present. Potentials alone - are no future. They are just fate's hear-say about Whats and Ifs and Maybes. Philosophical finger excercises to please the ego and to saend the intellect on doing that one extra round. I could as well think about what my life would be if I would have had a sister or brother. It makes no sense, and means nothing, and I will never know wanything for sure, and if I could nevertheless, that knowledge would be useless for me in my life. Hirngespinste.

So, disucssion I only understand on the issue of until what time abortion is acceptable. And it could be possible that I fix that time much earlier than is usually the case, but I would need to educate myself much better on the timetable of embryonic developement phases. Before that time, I see abortion as morally perfectly legal, and all upstir about it as an instinct-driven venting of emotional overpressure that results from the genetically encoded law to survive - and like all automatisms, it does not work perfectly and in this case even is counterproductive.

for any further discussion of aboprtion I refer you to this most uncompromised realist I know, Dr. House.

Just try to imagine what he would reply to you!

Shearwater · 10-27-09, 04:58 PM

Well, I'll say that from the moment of conception, a human being starts to exist. But to me it's something different than a person, since that lump of cells, despite being human and with all the potential it has within itself, does not yet have what most people would call a personality, or an discernible individual identity. If it were otherwise, most people would probably have a much harder time deciding for abortion.
Personally, I think that it is the parents' responsibilty to decide in such a matter (although late abortions do concern me). I think, however, that it's absolutely mandatory to inform the parents thoroughly enough to ensure that the decision they are about to make is well-considered. After all, it's not only of their concern, and they should be made to consider the consequences.
I guess that position would make me pro-choice.

VipertheSniper · 10-27-09, 05:09 PM

He has done around 400 late term abortions for medical reasons.

If the other 59600 abortions were done for personal reasons (of the parents), I don't think that's anyones business but those of the (would be) parents.
I don't think anyone makes this decision light-hearted, because if it's not for medical reasons, you know your baby would live if you didn't abort. Given that, I still think it's better to have the choice of having an abortion done by a professional than having to either do it illegally by someone who probably isn't even a doctor or giving birth and then giving the child away (which is a choice that is available right now too).

I think the reason why the doctor can talk the way he does, is because if he had any doubts about what he is doing he'd probably not be in this business, or have to cope with severe stress.

Skybird · 10-27-09, 05:15 PM

What worries me is the showing of lacking education that is behind the high number of teenagers getting pregnant, and i think teenagers modern life and world is far too hyper-sexualised by the media and business.

I also would think to always leave a mother in despair the chance to legally give away her child if she wants, is the best option in such a situation. Growing numbers of couples cannot have children of their own nowadays. And a childhood in a family situation where the support is lacking, can be devastating both for the mother, and the child.

That holds the risk of even more irresponsible sexual behaviour - and there you are again at what I said before: lacking education and sexual over-stimulisation by modern culture and the media.

Just for your reminder, there are 7 billion people on Earth. Which is WAY TOO MUCH. Birth control already is one of the utmost priorities of any politics adressing our future. It's just that many people still do not understand that, and that our cultural heritage confronts headon with that statement.

Man will pay a high price for still not seeing that. We possibly already have lost our future over that.

Task Force · 10-27-09, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I think abortion should only be legal if the the child is massively challenged. Or maybe during the first 2 weeks but not later.
Idon't count myself to the conservatives but abortion is something that is way to easy to do nowadays (I know a girl who already had two of them.

).

I agree... I also think that if they choose to have an abortion they should be able to... And the woman also should have to not be able to have anouther child for afiew years afterwords...

In the end, the child may be better off depending on the parents...

10-27-09, 05:27 PM

Its the woman's choice nobody else.

GoldenRivet · 10-27-09, 06:19 PM

Abortion

If it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that the child will live a life of debilitating mental or physical handicap... meaning that the child will have no quality of life... i support abortion.

if it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that failure to terminate the pregnancy will result in the death of the mother, or the child, or both... i support abortion.

if the pregnancy was the result of rape... i support abortion if it is the desire of the mother to abort the pregnancy.

however...

i cannot support abortion just because the mother doesn't want to deal with the responsibility of her own sexual activities.

put the child up for adoption.

there are thousands of childless couples who cannot have children of their own who would love to have a child in their lives... and could raise the child and give it a happy home and a wonderful life.

why abort out of what amounts to pure spite???

disgraceful

AVGWarhawk · 10-27-09, 06:27 PM

Some subjects are best left covered up. However, my take is one life that did not ask to be here suffers the worst. This question is the hardest to answer for anyone. We will never come to common ground in your and my lifetime. Once any holds that new life in their hands it is a whole different ballgame. Specifically if it is your child. I think Neal would agree.

Oberon · 10-27-09, 06:35 PM

Damn, tricky subject. Definately the choice of the mother, but whether it qualifies as murder? Yes, it probably does, but then again there's plenty of that to go around, every single day hundreds of animals are murdered, some for food, some for 'fun' and at this stage of development a foetus is not much above an animal. However, as has been pointed out, the problem is not in the prevention of birth, but in the prevention of conception! Take a look at any British council estate, and you will see a teenage girl who is pregnant, at least one I dare say, gotten 'up the duff' due to a late night drunken ramble between the sheets with some bloke she picked up down the pub.
And how the heck do you prevent that?
The reduction of benefits might help, but then again it might just up the crime rate as they resort to different methods to fund the after effect of their unprotected sex.
Society places a lot of emphasis on sex, it always has done, it plays on hormones, but now it's far more prevailent than it has ever been, and thus, quelle surprise, the birth rates are up, and as people realise that they do not have the responsibility to support a child or do not want that responsibility, the rate of abortions will also rise.
It's a tricky one, that's for certain.

antikristuseke · 10-27-09, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Abortion

If it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that the child will live a life of debilitating mental or physical handicap... meaning that the child will have no quality of life... i support abortion.

if it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that failure to terminate the pregnancy will result in the death of the mother, or the child, or both... i support abortion.

if the pregnancy was the result of rape... i support abortion if it is the desire of the mother to abort the pregnancy.

however...

i cannot support abortion just because the mother doesn't want to deal with the responsibility of her own sexual activities.

put the child up for adoption.

there are thousands of childless couples who cannot have children of their own who would love to have a child in their lives... and could raise the child and give it a happy home and a wonderful life.

why abort out of what amounts to pure spite???

disgraceful

I agree with you up to the pint where you say however, because what comes after that amounts to BS in my opinion, and here is why. There are already thousands of children up for adoption, there is no shortage of kids to adopt. Also contraceptives are not failure proof, when contraceptives were used in order to avoid pregnancy and they failed, then what? Have the mother bring a child in to this world that is clearly unwanted just because you find abortion distasteful? Hell, I find it distasteful, that does not mean I have any right to forbid people from having one. Sure, you could just say that the woman should surely have abstained from sex, but be reasonable here, those who abstain until marriage are a very, very small minority, the rest of us enjoy sex. It is quite good. And to say abortion is nothing more than spite, now that really is some grade A bs right there.

AVGWarhawk · 10-27-09, 06:51 PM

To be fair Antikris:

Quote:

I blanked out the emotions after each of my SEVEN abortions

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...abortions.html

Abortion is some womens contraception.

10-27-09, 04:34 PM	#2
Schroeder Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Banana Republic of Germany Posts: 6,170 Downloads: 62 Uploads: 0	I think abortion should only be legal if the the child is massively challenged. Or maybe during the first 2 weeks but not later. Idon't count myself to the conservatives but abortion is something that is way to easy to do nowadays (I know a girl who already had two of them.). __________________ Putting Germ back into Germany.

10-27-09, 04:39 PM	#3
August Wayfaring Stranger Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 23,197 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I wish abortions didn't happen but with nearly 7 billion people on the planet and the number ever climbing I don't think we really have the luxury of standing on principle when it comes to unwanted pregnancies. __________________ Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.

10-27-09, 04:45 PM	#5
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I cannot define "human life in production" - what should that be, please? Either it is human life, or it is not. Two states of cellular developement, that cannot clearly be separated from each other by a precise point in the timeline, thus we need to find an agreement on the grey zone where that cellular mass that has nothing, really nothing in common with a human being, actually turns into a human being that shows a cellular order with a sufficiently advanced structure to see it as a human being. And not before then - you can eventually talk of "human life in production". Before that, it is just some cellular grease with genetic information to eventually become a human - but who would think of the genetic information in the hairs and skin cells he/she is loosing all day long as a "human life prevented from developement"? Our reactions to threats to our genetic code are instinct driven survival automatisms - where the survival of our species is meant, not necessarily our individual survival. Knowing that we are free to leave this genetically enforced automatism behind, if we chose to do so, I see no wrong in doing that during the phase where that cellular grease is just that: cellular grease. no human gets killed there. No future gets prevented, for a future of something has as a precondition that this something already exists in the present. Potentials alone - are no future. They are just fate's hear-say about Whats and Ifs and Maybes. Philosophical finger excercises to please the ego and to saend the intellect on doing that one extra round. I could as well think about what my life would be if I would have had a sister or brother. It makes no sense, and means nothing, and I will never know wanything for sure, and if I could nevertheless, that knowledge would be useless for me in my life. Hirngespinste. So, disucssion I only understand on the issue of until what time abortion is acceptable. And it could be possible that I fix that time much earlier than is usually the case, but I would need to educate myself much better on the timetable of embryonic developement phases. Before that time, I see abortion as morally perfectly legal, and all upstir about it as an instinct-driven venting of emotional overpressure that results from the genetically encoded law to survive - and like all automatisms, it does not work perfectly and in this case even is counterproductive. for any further discussion of aboprtion I refer you to this most uncompromised realist I know, Dr. House. Just try to imagine what he would reply to you! __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

10-27-09, 04:58 PM	#6
Shearwater Captain Join Date: May 2009 Location: SUBSIM Radio Room (kinda obvious, isn't it) Posts: 542 Downloads: 45 Uploads: 0	Well, I'll say that from the moment of conception, a human being starts to exist. But to me it's something different than a person, since that lump of cells, despite being human and with all the potential it has within itself, does not yet have what most people would call a personality, or an discernible individual identity. If it were otherwise, most people would probably have a much harder time deciding for abortion. Personally, I think that it is the parents' responsibilty to decide in such a matter (although late abortions do concern me). I think, however, that it's absolutely mandatory to inform the parents thoroughly enough to ensure that the decision they are about to make is well-considered. After all, it's not only of their concern, and they should be made to consider the consequences. I guess that position would make me pro-choice. Last edited by Shearwater; 10-27-09 at 06:27 PM.

10-27-09, 05:15 PM	#8
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	What worries me is the showing of lacking education that is behind the high number of teenagers getting pregnant, and i think teenagers modern life and world is far too hyper-sexualised by the media and business. I also would think to always leave a mother in despair the chance to legally give away her child if she wants, is the best option in such a situation. Growing numbers of couples cannot have children of their own nowadays. And a childhood in a family situation where the support is lacking, can be devastating both for the mother, and the child. That holds the risk of even more irresponsible sexual behaviour - and there you are again at what I said before: lacking education and sexual over-stimulisation by modern culture and the media. Just for your reminder, there are 7 billion people on Earth. Which is WAY TOO MUCH. Birth control already is one of the utmost priorities of any politics adressing our future. It's just that many people still do not understand that, and that our cultural heritage confronts headon with that statement. Man will pay a high price for still not seeing that. We possibly already have lost our future over that. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

10-27-09, 04:43 PM	#4
Shearwater Captain Join Date: May 2009 Location: SUBSIM Radio Room (kinda obvious, isn't it) Posts: 542 Downloads: 45 Uploads: 0	Reminds me of a conversation I once had with a friend of mine. He was working together with an American woman, and somehow a chat with her turned onto that topic. He was really amazed (like myself and most of my friends) that abortion seems to be one of the major issues in the US (at least that was the impression that woman gave him). Not that I think it's not important - quite to the contrary. But it seems to be much more on the political agenda than over here.

10-27-09, 05:09 PM	#7
VipertheSniper Ace of the Deep Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Austria Posts: 1,070 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	He has done around 400 late term abortions for medical reasons. If the other 59600 abortions were done for personal reasons (of the parents), I don't think that's anyones business but those of the (would be) parents. I don't think anyone makes this decision light-hearted, because if it's not for medical reasons, you know your baby would live if you didn't abort. Given that, I still think it's better to have the choice of having an abortion done by a professional than having to either do it illegally by someone who probably isn't even a doctor or giving birth and then giving the child away (which is a choice that is available right now too). I think the reason why the doctor can talk the way he does, is because if he had any doubts about what he is doing he'd probably not be in this business, or have to cope with severe stress.

10-27-09, 05:27 PM	#10
Rilder Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Its the woman's choice nobody else.

10-27-09, 06:19 PM	#11
GoldenRivet Subsim Aviator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 8,726 Downloads: 146 Uploads: 0	Abortion If it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that the child will live a life of debilitating mental or physical handicap... meaning that the child will have no quality of life... i support abortion. if it can be determined beyond the shadow of doubt that failure to terminate the pregnancy will result in the death of the mother, or the child, or both... i support abortion. if the pregnancy was the result of rape... i support abortion if it is the desire of the mother to abort the pregnancy. however... i cannot support abortion just because the mother doesn't want to deal with the responsibility of her own sexual activities. put the child up for adoption. there are thousands of childless couples who cannot have children of their own who would love to have a child in their lives... and could raise the child and give it a happy home and a wonderful life. why abort out of what amounts to pure spite??? disgraceful __________________

10-27-09, 06:27 PM	#12
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,253 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	Some subjects are best left covered up. However, my take is one life that did not ask to be here suffers the worst. This question is the hardest to answer for anyone. We will never come to common ground in your and my lifetime. Once any holds that new life in their hands it is a whole different ballgame. Specifically if it is your child. I think Neal would agree. __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

10-27-09, 06:35 PM	#13
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Damn, tricky subject. Definately the choice of the mother, but whether it qualifies as murder? Yes, it probably does, but then again there's plenty of that to go around, every single day hundreds of animals are murdered, some for food, some for 'fun' and at this stage of development a foetus is not much above an animal. However, as has been pointed out, the problem is not in the prevention of birth, but in the prevention of conception! Take a look at any British council estate, and you will see a teenage girl who is pregnant, at least one I dare say, gotten 'up the duff' due to a late night drunken ramble between the sheets with some bloke she picked up down the pub. And how the heck do you prevent that? The reduction of benefits might help, but then again it might just up the crime rate as they resort to different methods to fund the after effect of their unprotected sex. Society places a lot of emphasis on sex, it always has done, it plays on hormones, but now it's far more prevailent than it has ever been, and thus, quelle surprise, the birth rates are up, and as people realise that they do not have the responsibility to support a child or do not want that responsibility, the rate of abortions will also rise. It's a tricky one, that's for certain.