Do you care about the number of abortions?

[PistolSteve]

I just heard Reid comment about reducing the number of abortions, so I decided to pose a question...

Do you care about the number of abortions in the US?

[soothsayer]

1. Higher under * than Clinton, isn't that right?

[PistolSteve]

2. I see that as a good thing honestly....

People didn't increase their sex, so more abortions isn't bad in my opinion.

[goddess40]

5. There was better access to birth control and the economy was better

Bush made getting birth control more difficult and some abortions are related to if the person can afford to raise the child.

It also is due to a change in sex-ed teaching - abstinence only is bullshit and it has NEVER worked. To pretend it does increases abortions - when those that engage in sex don't have the necessary information - pregnancy happens.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

253. I like something like what a number of folks have said: Abortions should be

available, legal, safe, and rare.

And I recall someone saying that the number of abortions had been cut under Clinton's administration basically with the above philosophy.

And working on the process from a different angle.

I myself am strongly pro choice, but I probably wouldn't have had one myself had I ever faced the situation. Actually I did face it mentally a few times (while waiting to find out if I was with child), and that is how I know I would have found it very hard to have had one.

[Eurobabe]

3. Pro-choice here, but not a method of B/C

I have a real problem with that. There ARE other options.

[yurbud]

8. those who use abortion as birth control are the people we should most want NOT to be parents

Pro-choice people don't say that often enough.

[PistolSteve]

10. exactly! That's the main reason I am not against them

[Eurobabe]

30. Oh that's a stupid answer

So Susie and Johnny DimWit should have a gazillion abortions because we think they are too dumb to be parents?

How about a little family planning edumucation? Sheesh.

[novalib]

40. Education is Good!!!

But if someone has education and still CHOSES A MEDICAL PROCEDURE THAT SHE WANTS TO HAVE -----

it is NO BUSINESS OF YOURS TO CONDEMN HER FOR THAT CHOICE!!!!!

[yurbud]

60. it's not either/or. I would rather they pay attention in their sex ed class too, but if they don't,

better that they aren't parents.

[Megahurtz]

160. It's none of your business. n/t

[uppityperson]

163. not necessarily.

I have a friend who had several over several yrs, now is a very good parent.

[yurbud]

194. what was her reason for getting abortions instead of using preventive forms of birth control?

[uppityperson]

197. Spur of the moment sex rather than planing ahead and using condoms and

BCPs were medically unhealthy for her, IUDs were not being used much due to past problems, poor understanding of fertility cycles, young and sexually active. I think the main reason for no condoms was spur of the moment coupled with male not wanting to use them and lack of assertion on her part. "taking shower in raincoat" + "oops, didn't think I was fertile, again"

Glad she grew up as good as she did.

[yurbud]

205. That is understandable, but I'd think there'd be some emotional trauma associated with it

apart from any moral judgment.

Part of the problem is the time begin puberty starting and when a lot of us get married is getting longer and longer. Biology and our culture aren't on the same page.

[uppityperson]

213. not from the abortions, financial trouble, but not emotional

No emotional trauma for her, more the financial aspect and the problem that she couldn't have sex for 6 weeks after an abortion.

Biology and culture, societal evolution and technological evolution, lots of stuff not evened out which is a pain.

[yurbud]

295. I've gone without for more than six weeks WITHOUT having an abortion

[uppityperson]

299. huh?

I said "the problem that she couldn't have sex for 6 weeks after an abortion." Talking about no sex after an abortion, not sure how long you have gone without having an abortion follows.

[yurbud]

300. I meant without sex, and meant without being the consequence of abortion

[uppityperson]

301. yeah, me too.

She was one of those cases that made a bunch of us think and have good conversations.

[novalib]

39. A "Real Problem"?????

Just what might that "real problem" be???!!!

That a woman has CHOSEN a MEDICAL PROCEDURE that she feels is necessary???!!!

[yurbud]

195. just ignoring the nature of what is removed during the procedure may work for you, but it aint a

persuasive argument.

It's just petulant.

[WindRavenX]

79. it's overblown how many people use surgical or chemical abortions as...

...their primary method of birth control.

[etherealtruth]

85. I hear you ...

I realize my experience is merely anecdotal, but in almost 45 years of living I have only encountered one woman that used abortion as birth control. In her case it is important to note that she was a substance abuser and not a very bright young woman.

I worked in health care through out my 20's and early 30's so I have had contact with a larger # of women (where honesty r/t health matters was important) than "the average bear"

[WindRavenX]

87. I think substance abuse is a huge factor in this

I've heard several stories like that too, and it's usually meth :(

[uppityperson]

165. I have a friend who did this, no drugs involved

and now is a parent and doing a good job at it, contributing member of society. She was early 20's, no drugs, just using it for birth control.

[Left Is Write]

91. It's a method of "birth control" whether a person has one or ten.

[radwriter0555]

224. but it is a safe and effective form of birth control. What's the difference if the outcome is the

same and if the side effects are non-existent and it works? Ultimately, the outcome, a prevented unwanted pregnancy is achieved. What difference does it make if it's done through the removal of the uwanted cells or in the actual prevention of the conception or the medical termination of the fertilized egg?

The outcome is the same.

Abortion has been long proven to be safe, effective and with virtually no side effects, especially compared to the other lame forms of BC available. It's convenient and easy to get as well.

The stigma of abortion has gone way overboard and is terribly over-sentimentalized... It's about time to bring it back down to reality for what it is. A safe and effective form of birth control. End of story.

Remove the fetal sentimentality about it, remove the 'cells have a soul' crap, remove the 'punish the woman for having sex' themes and it's really no big deal at all.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I absolutely care.

Your first option is very disingenuous - the reason I care about the number of abortions is not the ethics behind the abortion.

It's the underlying circumstances around which women feel like they have to have an abortion.

It's the fact that there are very few support options for single mothers.

It's the fact that deadbeat dads exist.

It's the fact that health care in this country is atrocious.

It's the fact that a woman's health/life is at risk.

It's the fact that girls are raped.

Eliminate any of those factors and you will reduce the number of abortions. How can anyone claim they don't care about that?

[PistolSteve]

9. Bad argument - I care about elimintating those factors...

...just because those factors reduce abortions doesn't mean I don't care!

you act like I am pro-abortion?! I don't care if people do or don't have them. Period. I don't care if they are used as a method of birth control, as long as their safe.

By the way... Health care in this country is the best in the world. No questions asked - almost everyone would agree. The cost of health care in this country is so ridiculous it's scary.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

15. I highly doubt almost everyone would agree.

Ask the 44 million Americans without insurance whether or not we've got the best system in the world. Maybe we're the most advanced, but that doesn't mean jack shit if we can get access to it.

Perhaps it's not disingenuous for your answer, but it's disingenuous for everyone else that might feel otherwise. It's a different reason altogether. I don't care if someone has 5 abortions either, is the point I'm trying to make. Just because I care about the number of abortions we have in this country, doesn't mean I feel it's unethical to have multiple abortions.

[PistolSteve]

48. You are right - so am I

The United States has the BEST health care in the world... if you have the money. But the fact remains that we are by FAR the best.

Our social system is set up so terribly that only the upper class get this care, but it is nonetheless the best.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

55. You are WAY off base here

Read this report:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-healthcare.htm

(all sources cited at the bottom)

[PistolSteve]

63. Wow - do you even read my posts?

We have the best health care in the world - 100% true, absolutely, no doubt, people from around the world depend on the US and our great health care. In order to get the best, it costs more... MUCH more than other places. But don't kid yourself - the US has BY FAR the highest quality of care.

We do have a terrible health care SYSTEM! No one here has disputed that. The poor can't get what they need. Almost everyone agrees with that.

So what are you talking about?

[Greyhound]

18. BTW, you're wrong about our system being the best in the world,

it hasn't been for quite some time now. Both Europe and Japan have surpassed us in quality of care, as well as availability. Just thought you should know.

[PistolSteve]

47. Europe has better health care than the US? Are you crazy!?!?!

They have MUCH better health care coverage than the US - absolutely! But ask yourself where nearly ALL the advances are made in medicine and where the best possible health care/education is (without respect to price)... the US.

[Greyhound]

61. Sorry Steve, you are living in the past.

We are no longer the top tier of medical research. Our Universities have had their sources of funding stripped by the re:puke:s and corporatists, unless they're willing to produce the "right" results for the company paying bill. Religious nuttery has all but eliminated research in the most promising fields of life sciences, and the rest of the world knows it.

Look at every major field of research today, and then look at where the recent breakthroughs have been made in those fields;

Stem Cells - Japan
Alternative energy - Europe & South Africa
Biology - Europe, Japan, & South Korea (especially cloning:scared:):eyes:
Manufacturing Technology - Europe & Taiwan
Botany - South America
Communications - Australia

I think most amerikans are simply unaware of just how far we have fallen.

[PistolSteve]

64. Actually... you are wrong.

Some breakthroughs happen in other countries... but where do students in those countries go for an education? The US.

Stem Cell breakthrough in Japan?!?!? I am originally from Madison, WI and that would be a shock to people there - especially since they own nearly every stem cell patent there is.

We aren't talking about other sciences - we are talking about medicine. The US is BY FAR the top country in the world as far as quality is concerned (although the system is horrible).

[Greyhound]

73. What can I say, you will believe what you believe. One thing's for sure

we'll see the reality take shape over the next few years.:shrug:

[PistolSteve]

74. It isn't what I believe... it's what is true

Other countries agree and depend on the US for advances in medicine. It's just true.

[bleedingheart]

107. well I am looking at the Nobel Prizes in Medicine web site

and hmmmm...it seems a lot of countries have great doctors and researchers.

Swiss, French, German, English...and US...

There is a great deal of research done outside the US and many innovations in medicine come from all around the world.

A friend of mine had one of her children in France and said her care was phenomenal.

[GoneOffShore]

154. And because the rest of the world is more open

when it comes to medicine, they are willing to try things that are perhaps a little bit out of the mainstream of Western medicine.

[radwriter0555]

225. People come from all over europe to France for the health care, especially for cancer

and child birth.

Got a FACE TRANSPLANT anyone?

[lukasahero]

14. To me those are the ethical reasons.

I didn't vote for the health consequence option because of all the other things you mention here. These ARE the ethical reasons that led me to vote for the first option.

I think you are assuming that the use of the word ethical only referred to the "killing 'babies' is bad" mindset. We should be careful about falling into the RW trap of what constitutes ethics.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

19. The poll choices themselves are a logic trap

"you can't call one abortion ethical and five not"

I agree with that statement on its face, but I still care about the number of abortions that occur. No one should celebrate the fact that an abortion occurred - it's not a fun thing, no matter how you feel about it. And you're right - everything I mentioned was an ethical concern. I think we are on the same page here, except that the options given provide the trap to which you're referring more so than the right wingers.

[lukasahero]

22. We are on the same page

I should have made that clearer. I agree with you but I do worry that as soon as we say the word "ethics" or "values" that people conjur up the "killing babies is bad" mentality. We seem to have relinquished our claim to the words.

I think I see where you believe the poll choices are the trap. I see our response to the choices as a way to defeat getting stuck in the trap. Make sense?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

24. It makes sense.

And I agree -- the right wingers have laid that "ethics" trap for us. And looking at our responses, I think it's worked. We don't sound, at first, like we're on the same page, even though we are, simply because we're both concerned about said trap.

[PistolSteve]

49. But your logic is bad...

If correcting something wrong reduces abortions as a consequence, you can be in favor of both abortions whenever someone wants one and correcting the wrong.

The argument above is trying to say that they want to reduce abortions because abortions are a consequence of something that is wrong in this country... that is HORRIBLE logic - it doesn't even make sense.

[angel823]

37. thanks Vash

I didn't know how to put it into words, but you nailed it.

Angel

[sandnsea]

43. Abortion is the result of societal failures

That's the reason to be concerned about the number of abortions. Abortion is a medical procedure and should always be taken seriously for that reason alone. The emotional impact, due to the religious stigma attached to it, is also a reality for women to deal with, even if it isn't rational or fair. So I agree that the issues you bring up are what we should have been talking about all along.

Except women who can't support their children aren't called deadbeats, they're called welfare recipients. Male parents, who don't have any better economic opportunity than women these days, shouldn't be labeled any differently than female parents. Male parents have to keep homes to have their children come to. They have to buy food and power and water and all the rest, for those children to have a decent place for "visitation" too.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

54. There is, unfortunately, one key difference.

Men can get a woman pregnant and completely disappear before it's even known who the father is. Women have no such luxury. There is little opportunity for a woman to be a deadbeat in such a manner, although it does happen post-birth. You're right though - in those cases, there should be an emphasis on deadbeat moms, but I don't think it garnerers enough attention because it's too rare.

Of course, this is exactly why I've argued that women have a need for greater sexual responsibility and that they should be demanding that men be more responsible sexually (as opposed to the current "Madonna/Spears" trend of women being as sexually reckless as men because, as the logic follows, "Men can do it, why can't we?").

[sandnsea]

62. Adoption is a choice

Women most certainly do have the ability to choose not to raise children if they don't have the economic means to support them. It's just that we no longer force that choice the way it was done years ago (and we shouldn't).

In addition, women are less likely to be required to pay child support and less likely to pay it when it is awarded. You don't hear about it because financial stability is one of the key arguments men use in gaining custody. You can't hardly use that argument and make a fit about child support at the same time.

http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/statbriefs/chldsupp.html

Mind you, I agree that men make the choice of parenthood when they have sex, that's just the way it is biologically. I just don't think we've given their parenting problems a fair hearing. I've known a lot of low-income men who wanted to be good fathers and money was always more important than the physical act of parenting.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

69. I don't disagree.

I also feel like it's far too automatic for women to gain custody of children. I've known more than my fair share of fathers denied custody despite being able to prove the mother was a financially unstable drug addict with severe emotional disorders. It's ridiculous.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

315. I had to pay child support to the father for years

We got married. I got pregnant about 6 months later. He immediately demanded that I have an abortion. I REFUSED, and I'm PRO CHOICE. Pro choice works BOTH ways.

We were married, both had jobs, and both had insurance. The only reason not to have the child was just his attitude. I guess if we'd been low class trash he would have gotten violent to get rid of the child.

He even said I "trapped him" into marriage. :wtf:

We separated when the child was a toddler and I got quite ill for several years due to the stress.

To punish me for not doing what he wanted me to do, he got primary custody and made me pay child support for years. I was mentally stable but had some health problems. I have never had a drug or drinking or abuse problem or a rap sheet.

I also had to pay thousands of dollars to send her to private school for a long time. He was the one with the steady job, the insurance bennies, and all that. I had more education but I did NOT have a steady job with bennies, even though I worked hard. He would have had another hissy fit had I insisted that I stay home and raise the kid. He only saw kids as an expensive liability.

He also sued my parents during the divorce and they had a trust fund set up for our child's college. My folks had to hire a lawyer and destroy that trust fund. He was warned by their lawyer that he was jeopardizing his child's future college education if they had to use that money to defend themselves against his peripheral legal action, and he did it anyway. My parents were elderly and he attempted to get my father's law license revoked. He had relatives of mine feeding him lies and he thought he could bleed us all dry.

He spent thousands of dollars going after me for the crime of having a beautiful, healthy, bright child. The kind of child thousands of couples would give everything they have to get--and I told him how fortunate we were. What family values.....:sarcasm:

I live in a community property state. That means equal rights for women but it also means that both parents can be considered to be fit to raise the child, and no woman is automatically favored over the father.

So if you think women never pay child support, you are wrong. This was just sheer revenge on his part.

[Az]

70. Not the point

Yes, adoption is certainly and option. But that is not free of problems of its own. There is still that 9 month period of carrying the child that some women simply do not look forward to. There is the social burden that circumstances can create. And there can simply be a matter of personal choice that they don't want something growing in them (and personal choice is what control of our bodies is all about).

And then there is the fact that giving a child up for adoption is not always an easy thing to do. Women are kind of prewired to bond with their child when it is born. The emotional trama of giving away a real living and breathing being that was recently part of you is not exactly and easy thing to do. For some people preempting the creation of a living breathing entity is simply the easier and psychologically sounder path.

[Az]

66. Focusing on the reason for the question

The point of the poll as I see it is to gain insight into whether people think abortions are moral or not. That is are they an unfortunate lesser of evils or are they simply a medical procedure that is safe, effective, and the right choice to make in many situations?

Yes, we would all love to see fewer bad things happen to more people. But sometimes an abortion is just a choice. Sometimes someone just doesn't feel like making a human being. I hear tell that making a human being can be a bit troublesome sometimes.

And as to health risks women still die giving birth you know. It used to be one of the biggest killers of women. Medical technology has cut down on the death rate but there still is a death rate of women dying during child birth.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

71. Sometimes, abortion IS just a choice.

And I unequivocally support that choice.

Still, as a country, we should strive such that abortion is ALWAYS just a choice, and a choice not based upon factors such as economics, rape, or access to healthcare.

I still feel the question's options are disingenuous. I can both defend a woman's right to choose unequivocally and still be concerned with the number of women choosing such a procedure because I damn well know that a large percentage of those abortions aren't just a pure choice.

[Az]

75. Of course you can be concerned

Heck you can even think abortion is wrong. Free country et al. As to pure choice... well don't get me started... I frequently debate on the issue of freewill and how the mind makes choices.... I sometimes argue that there is no such thing as choice... only realization.

But in simple unclouded terms it would be marvelous if everyone's lives could be based on issues untainted by matters of economics, personal violations, and access to resources necissary to live... unfortunately that will not be the world we live in for a very very long time if ever... till then we have to work within the construct we do have.

That being said it troubles me (not claiming this is being done here) when abortion is cast as a lesser of two evils. If the same arguments were used against other medical procedures I would not be as troubled. But no one raises arguments that it would be better if a person did not have to undergo an appendectomy. Instead they are just happy that we can perform such an operation.

See by raising the social/moral concern about abortion in general it raises the pressure against the women considering such a choice. Its not as if there were advocates for abortion out there in the media. Its actually quite depressing that in the many pop culture media presentations that there is no representation of someone dealing with the choice of choosing an abortion. The subject is almost never broached.

One of the premises of Stephen Colbert's show is unfortunate but true. Most people don't want the truth, they want the truthiness. That thing that feels true. And the abortion issue is rife with this. Its an emtional issue any way you cut it. People feel their positions about it. Strongly. Reason seldom wins against emotion. To quite Dr McCoy (showing my inner geek) "I've found that good seldom triumphs over evil unless good is very very good." Just being right isn't enough. And that is the problem in the abortion issue.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

77. I don't necessarily agree with your tactics.

I think just giving a flat argument like yours doesn't resonate for very long with people. Without anything to really back it up, you just wind up with a virtual stalement, in addition to probably having the conversation devolve into an ugly namecalling event, in which no one wins.

"Because we can" or "because we have the right to" just don't hold up over time as valid arguments. When people attack your values and say that you're flat out unethical, you can't just sit there and continue to say "but it's our right!" That will not get you very far. We have to show that pro-choice IS the ONLY valid ethical argument, and that goes far beyond whether or not you have the right to do it, because quite frankly, that right is only an amendment change or Supreme Court decision away from being taken away.

[Az]

81. Tactics

Careful what you assume my tactics are. I agree that just offering a flat "I'm right" argument will never carry the day. One can appeal with reason or with emotions. Real artists can blend both. I was merely trying to assert the reasoned positions in what I hope is an open arena. We can then take the reasoning and attempt to apply art to it and create the emotional appeal for those who are less open to the issue.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

103. Damn well put.

I agree 100%.

The way I see it, we should STRIVE FOR a country where there is no longer a need for abortion. Equal rights, education, health care, pre- and post-natal care, child support--all of those issues are human rights issues that need to be addressed.

[Orsino]

Very much.

Education and contraception are to be preferred to invasive medical procedures or chemical abortifacients.

Undo the ignorance and shame, against the wishes of the ruling class, and the number of abortions will drop. Our goal should be zero unplanned and unwanted pregnancies.

[Megahurtz]

171. And you might add

it's the fact that sometimes a girl or woman
does NOT want to have a baby for whatever reason
and does not want to and will not be forced to have one!

The answer is simple, people!!!:think:

[kdmorris]

6. The number of abortions in America

would be drastically reduced if we taught our teenagers about real birth control and sexuality (that being respect for your body and your partner's body, not this freak show of sexuality where everything is a joke or some sort of status symbol). In addition, if insurance companies were REQUIRED to cover birth control, there wouldn't be as much of a need for abortions. Thinking that telling someone that the best birth control is not doing it is retarded. Humans will have sex, even without birth control.

Abortions per year seem to go down in other countries that teach real sex education (see places like Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, etc).

[peace13]

13. I agree! n/t

[moc]

44. Ding! Ding! Ding!

:toast:

[uppityperson]

168. excellent answer

sorry to keep bringing up my friend that had several abortions over several yrs, using as birth control method, but again. I think if the situation were as you describe, she would have had much fewer.

[bloom]

7. Other

I think that abortions should be reduced by improved access to birth control - because who the hell wants an abortion if they could have had a far less invasive solution.

For instance - we have pharmacists who won't give out morning after pills, etc.

I think the pills should be as accessible as condoms. Why is it up to some idiotic pharmacist anyway? (the idiotic ones being the ones who don't want to give it out to single women and other nonsense.)

[PistolSteve]

12. Good point.... nt

[me b zola]

231. That's the key, bloom...reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies

As long as we allow them to shape the debate by making it about the number of abortions rather than the number of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies we give them a lot of wiggle room for other ways in which to take away a woman's control over her own body such as their war on birth control.

[ThomWV]

11. I Paid For An Abortion Once, and I'm Damned Glad I Did

Back when I was in collage a young lady who was a friend of mine came up pregnant. I had nothing to do with the pregnancy. The guy was an asshole, the girl had no money and parents who would not be supportive of her. I had a bit of money at the time. So I gave her the money and she had the abortion.

Now, 30 years later, I see the now not so young lady from time to time. She finished her education and was then married to a nice enough guy for about 20 years. She had an an entire tribe of children who seem to be normal in every sense and she continues to be a friend to this day.

I would not want to guess how her life would have gone if I had not had that couple of hundred bucks all those years ago and given it to her. All I can say is that I'd dam sure do it again.

[Cerridwen]

16. Safe...... Legal...... THEN...... Rare......... in that order.

Remove abortion restrictions around the U.S. - get U.S. abortion policy out of the wombs of women around the world - insure contraception in all forms is safe, widely available and affordable - insure all children have a healthy understanding of sex and their reproductive life in preparation for their puberty and adulthood - insure healthy mothers who can afford and raise their children as they define a good life - provide family planning to any and all who need/want/request it, make it available and affordable - insure healthcare for everyone is available and affordable and best we can offer - insure everyone has food, shelter and clothing...

THEN, AND ONLY THEN...


Talk to me about making abortion "rare"






Of course, by that time, it will be a moot point because with all the other in place, abortion will become rare "organically".

[Ken Burch]

17. I chose option one, after wrestling with it, because I've come to realize

That if you are pro-choice, it isn't appropriate to stigmatize any abortions.

Doing so just gives aid and comfort to the other side.

We should do the things that would reduce the number of abortions, but not BECAUSE they would reduce the number of abortions. We should do them because they are simply part of the effort to create a just and decent society.

[Kelly Rupert]

20. Where's "more abortions?"

No, I'm serious. I would think that increasing abortion availability, as well as decreasing social pressures to not have abortions, might be a good thing. Now, I'm not totally sold on such a viewpoint, but I'm mildly surprised to not see it represented.

[peace13]

21. One thing that I think the anti- choice people miss

is the fact that if they had implemented options for pregnant women when abortion was legalized those facilities would be well established and thriving by now. Medical care, housing and education could have gone a long way to solving the unwanted pregnancy issue. We have to realize that there is a huge number of people that think the baby is the punishment for sexually active females. They don't care about the baby or the woman just the punishment. Kim

[Greyhound]

23. The only position of the government on abortion that I support is that the

government has no right to any position on this and any other issue that is such a private matter. There are no social consequences to abortion of such a magnitude that government interference is required.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

25. It really isn't my right to decide how often a person has an abortion

Having said that, I feel if we devoted proper resources to sexual education and were successful in lifting the social stigmas that many young (and some not so young) girls feel, abortions would become rare.

[Spangle]

26. Choices to vage

The poll choices are to vauge.

To say that I don't care about the number of abortions would be wrong. The numbers tell a story. The more abortions, the more lack of b/c. And to me, that is a problem. Also, the numbers show how well the abstience programs are.. aghm.. working. More stuff along those lines. So yes, the numbers are important to me. With decent b/c and real sex education, the numbers should go down. If they are not, then something is wrong. That story should be told.

Also, are you talking 'across the board' or per person? Those numbers matter as well. I don't like the idea of abortions being used as b/c. But I wouldn't prevent people from doing so. But I think a study should be done on the 'why?" of it. Nothing can be done about it, if it isn't understood. I know of one girl who is using it as b/c. Her idea is that eventualy her womb will be so scared, that she will be unable to have kids. That is a thought that needs to be explored. As it stands now, young people don't have the option to have the medical procedure done, to permently prevent children. With the procedure, if they change their minds, at least there is soemthing to work with. With a scared womb...

So I dont' know how to answer this poll. The numbers wouldn't be a reason I would restrict abortions. But I do think the numbers are important. Abortion prevention comes from preventing conception in the first place.

[BoneDaddy]

27. Abortion should

be safe and legal, but we also have the ethical responsibility of reducing them.

Ya see each extreme has a problem.
The extreme left totally ignores the "potentiality of life" issue and focuses solely on the woman's rights.

The right totally ignores the "reproductive freedom" issue and focuses solely on the "life" issue.

Whether you like it or not an abortion is the killing of something and I think we need to be a bit more aware of that fact. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I still think a woman's freedom of choice trumps that, but don't cheapen it by promoting multiple abortions.

Not to mention that abortion is surgery, and not without it's complications. To say it is ok to have multiple abortions as a form of birth control is not only sexual irresponsibility (if precautions were taken, a different matter) but it is dangerous to the health of the woman.

[FlaGranny]

28. Of course, reducing abortions

would be the best thing and the best way to accomplish it would be education about birth control, diseases, and even other options, but NOT by legislation. Abortion is a personal choice, but abortion is not without risk. Even abortions performed in hospitals can have life-threatening complications. I don't know why anyone would want surgery when birth control is available. Anyhow, yes, I would like to see fewer abortions - PREVENTION of pregnancy is the key.

[noonwitch]

29. It's a sad situation when a woman considers an abortion to be her only option

I am pro-choice, but I also think it is best whenever possible for a woman (or a couple) to avoid unwanted pregnancy, whether by abstinence or contraception.

I also think that our children need to be taught to have more respect for sexuality than they currently are. Between ads that reduce it to a commodity and television shows that make it look like an entitlement, the fact that it is an act to be shared by a committed adult couple is overlooked.

But abortion should always remain a legal and safe option. There are circumstances in which I would seek that remedy (rape, or finding out there were serious birth defects with the fetus). It's not for me to judge other women's reasons for seeking the same.

[BlooInBloo]

31. "It's not for me to judge" - after you judge other people's reasons frivolous...

... and your own, noble.

One small step (if not already there, and simply hiding it) from "Freedom for me, not for thee!".

[nashville_brook]

35. it's sad when an abortion IS the only option (considers? excuuuuse me!)

ugh.

if six years of W's anti-sex, anti-woman administration hasn't pushed "abstinance" and fear of sex enough for you...

yikes.

[novalib]

50. "SAD"??!!

Do you think that it is "SAD" when someone selects a medical procdure other than abortion??!!

Do you think it is sad when life-saving cancer surgery is the only option??!!

How about heart surgery -- do you think it is sad when someone chooses to have life-saving heart surgery???!!!

NOT ME!!! I think it is GREAT when someone CHOOSES a MEDICAL PROCEDURE that is in THEIR BEST INTERESTS!!!

Abortion -- cancer surgery -- heart surgery -- or ANY OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURE that is NECESSARY is a GOOD THING!!!

And it is not "SAD" at all when someone has a MEDICAL PROCEDURE that they NEED!!!!!

[gollygee]

32. It's more complicated than the poll allows

Do I care about the number of abortions? Not the number, per se, but I do care that women find themselves in crisis situations. I'm glad that abortion exists as an option for those women.

My opinion about what is ethical in any given situation isn't really relevant, unless I'm the one with a pregnancy I'm wondering what to do with.

[Greybnk48]

33. No. It's none of my business.

People's medical records and procedures are to be private. Period.

[Megahurtz]

182. Here! Here!

:applause:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

34. 100% Absolutely We Should Work To Reduce The Need For Abortions. That's A No-Brainer.

They should always be safe, legal and accessible, but the need for them should also be minimized to whatever level reasonable. I would think all of us would be in agreement that minimizing the need to even require an abortion to begin with would be a smart thing to do.

[novalib]

41. We NEED to REMOVE the SHAME!!!!!!!!

What we need to REDUCE is not the "need" for abortions!!!

Abortions are a MEDICAL PROCEDURE that some women CHOOSE to have!!!!!

By suggesting that we NEED to reduce the number of abortions, you are really suggesting that the choices that women make are somehow "WRONG".

Either that, or you think women should be ashamed of the medical choices they make.

The real "NO-BRAINER' here is to INCREASE access to NEEDED medical care -- whether it is contracption OR ABORTION -- FOR ALL WOMEN.

And the other "no-brainer" is to REDUCE THE SHAME that some women are made to feel because of the MEDICAL CHOICES they make regarding their own bodies!!!!

And, of course, there is a third "no-brainer" -- EVERYONE SHOULD BUTT OUT OF THE MEDICAL DECISIONS THAT WOMEN CHOOSE TO MAKE!!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

45. Please Relax And Stop Yelling. Reducting The Need For Abortions Is The Right Thing To Do,

and doing so does not in any way add shame to those who choose to have one. Equating the two is ridiculous.

[novalib]

46. WHY???!!!

Why is "reducing the need" for abortions the "right" thing to do????

Who are YOU (or anyone else) to say that it is right to reduce the need for abortions????

Do you know WHY women CHOOSE to have abortions???

ANY woman who WANTS an abortion should be able to have one -- whether YOU happen to think she "NEEDS' one or not!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

51. Still Yelling. Not Sure Why You Are So Angry And Continue To Feel The Need To.

You are acting as if implementing programs and other means of reducing the need for abortions is a bad thing, or that it in some way means women who need or choose to have one wouldn't be able to do so. I have no idea why you are connecting the two but it is completely illogical.

Any woman who is pregnant should have the safe and legal option of abortion. But creating economic conditions, support, education, and teaching more sexual responsibility is definitely the right thing to do. Abortion is still a medical procedure, ya know, and all medical procedures carry risks. There are also some severe emotional risks associated with abortions. Why would you be so angry about the concept of reducing that risk for women to begin with? Furthermore, wouldn't it be a better outcome if the need for abortion wasn't there to begin with? If the mother hadn't gotten pregnant to begin with and didn't have to wrestle with such a potentially heavy decision? If economic conditions were such to be more conducive to parents being able to support the child? If emotional programs were available to mothers who felt they were not capable of raising a child, even though they wish they were? If other social conditions for single mothers, deadbeat parents, etc were taken care of so that more women who felt their only choice was to have an abortion all of a sudden had other options? These things are something that make you feel rage why?

I'm completely perplexed by your anger and yelling. These are all responsible things that I believe to be no-brainers in addressing abortion. Create an environment where the need or desire for abortions is reduced as reasonably as possible, while taking away any stigmas, barriers, health care blocks or otherwise while providing complete accessibility to the procedure for women who choose to have them. There is nothing I see in that to justify such anger.

[novalib]

57. I Have NO IDEA WHY!!!!!

I have no idea why you feel such a need to CONTROL me!!

I have no idea why you feel the need to talk down to me!! ("Abortion is still a medical procedure, ya know, and all medical procedures carry risks." -- DUH!!!)

I have no idea why you feel the need to repeat anti-choice talking points ("There are also some severe emotional risks associated with abortions.") "Severe emotional risks"????!!!! REALLY!!!!

I have no idea why you feel the need to PRESUME to know why it is that women CHOOSE to have abortions ("If other social conditions for single mothers, deadbeat parents, etc were taken care of so that more women who felt their only choice was to have an abortion all of a sudden had other options?") NEWFLASH: WOMEN CHOOSE to have abortions EVEN WHEN they have "other choices" -- Women do NOT have abortions because it is the "ONLY option" -- to suggest such a thing is to suggest the women who choose abortions make meaningless choices!!!!

I am angry because I have to deal with such arguments and with the mindset they represent!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

58. When You Decide To Stop Yelling Maybe We Can Continue The Discussion.

People aren't going to listen when you yell at them.

[cynatnite]

76. Those 'anti-choice talking points' are common sense...

Teens need educated and provided with birth control. Poor women need access to not just birth control, but also more opportunities to get out of their situation so they won't feel that an abortion is the only choice they have. Doing more to support girls and women who find themselves pregnant rather than only abortion would help in reducing the numbers.

I believe abortion should be completely safe and legal everywhere. It should also be rare, IMO, but that's not how life works. More education, more economic support and more emotional help should be made available to women and girls who find themselves in a position to make a choice they never wanted to make in the first place. Perhaps when a woman who has an abortion is no longer stigmatized by society for it we'll start seeing the changes needed in order to protect her, her rights and offering her more options.

Just so you know there are members of DU who are against abortion. They don't believe in it, but they don't believe the government has a right to step in either. The choice lies with the woman if she feels she has to have one.

I had an abortion and I can tell you, there was no choice in the matter. We're all different and the choices we're faced with are all different. No one could walk in my shoes and it's not up to you or anyone else to determine whether my decision was meaningless or not.

It's been over twenty years and I have no idea if it meant anything or not even now. All I know, is that I had one and because society deems it immoral, no matter the legality of it, I still had to remain silent in the shame I was expected to feel. I decided not long ago I would NOT be ashamed of it nor am I proud. It's a fact of my life that belongs to me and no one else.

[novalib]

92. And Yet, You Choose To Share.......!!!???

You: "I decided not long ago I would NOT be ashamed of it nor am I proud. It's a fact of my life that belongs to me and no one else."

And yet, you choose to share a fact of your life that belongs to you and no one else here.

Sorry if I don't choose to buy into your argument that abortion leaves severe emotional scars.

Also sorry if I don't choose to buy into your argument that abortion is NOT about choice.

Also sorry that someone took away YOUR choice about whether to have an abortion or not. The abortion you had (the one that belongs to you and no one else) apparently was something you had no choice in (YOU: "I had an abortion and I can tell you, there was no choice in the matter")

[cynatnite]

104. I share because I want to...I'm not ashamed of having an abortion...

I share facts of my life just as many people do. I'm not sure I understand your issue with this. For many people it can leave severe emotional scars. I've known women who were traumatized by it. If you don't think any woman is ever emotionally upset over having an abortion, you're definitely into delusional land.

Abortion is choice, but it's not one most women want. I have never met a woman who wanted the choice. Let me explain it this way. I got pregnant and I HAD to make a choice I never wanted in the first place. I became pregnant over my own stupidity and this was a result. I was in circumstances where the options I had weren't good ones. I was forced to choose when I shouldn't have had to make a choice. If I hadn't had the abortion I would have been forced down a worse path so really, there was no choice for me.

No one took the choice from me. I HAD to make the choice and I didn't want to. The support I would have needed wasn't available and the repercussions on my life and those around me were unacceptable. If the environment at that time was more supportive and the help available I might never have had the abortion.

But the fact is, things were as they were. This is a fact of my life and I share it because women shouldn't be made to feel shameful of their choices. Society has put them in a position to limit their options and when women choose the one deemed more immoral by society, they are expected to be ashamed and sorry for a choice they never wanted to make in the first place. It's hypocritical and a rotten way to treat women, IMO.

We're damned either way.

[novalib]

109. CHOOSING BETWEEN

Choosing between two or three options is still CHOOSING!!

You say that after you became pregnant, you were in circumstances where the options you had weren't good ones.

I can understand why choosing NOT to have an abortion would have forced you path that would have been not good.

But, honestly, what is so BAD about having an abortion? Why do you say that ALL of the options you had when you became pregnant were bad???!!

One of the options you had was the one you chose -- abortion.

What was so bad about making that choice??

It seems to me that you chose the RIGHT choice. You CHOSE not to go down a path that would have been worse for you. YOU DID CHOOSE, and you CHOSE WISELY!

What was so bad about the choice you made???

[cynatnite]

112. Because for many women having an abortion isn't a good thing...

It was bad, because I didn't want an abortion, but my options were so limited that I felt I had no choice.

[novalib]

115. Here's a Thought About "BAD ABORTIONS"

Hey, here's a thought about those women for whom having an abortion is a "BAD THING":

If having an abortion isn't a good thing, THEN DON'T HAVE ONE!!!!!

I'm sorry that you found yourself in a situation where the ONLY options you had were options that you did not like.

BUT IF YOU DIDN'T WANT AN ABORTION, YOU DID NOT HAVE TO HAVE ONE!!!!!

You STILL CHOSE to have an abortion!!!!!

And it was a GOOD THING that you were able to AVOID those other, MORE TERRIBLE OPTIONS!

[cynatnite]

119. Geez, I'm getting a headache...

If that ain't the most ridiculous thing I've read in DU in ages, I don't know what is.

You totally missed the part where some women don't believe they have a choice in the matter. My choice was forced on me because of the circumstances I was living in. I didn't want the abortion, but it was either that or a worse road.

Walk a mile in my shoes. See if you want to continue to spew that crap afterwards.

[kdmorris]

122. Me, too! n/t

[novalib]

124. Tylenol MIGHT Help

Tylenol might help.

Or Aspirine.

Of course, aspirine might upset your stomach.

So here are your choices: put up with your headache, take some Tylenol, or take some aspirine.

It's a MEDICAL DECISION FOR YOU TO MAKE.

You may not LIKE the FACT that YOU GET TO MAKE A MEDICAL DECISION.

You may even say that your "choice was forced on me because of the circumstances I was living in", but YOU DO GET TO MAKE THE CHOICE.

Of course, you could have chosen not to read this thread today.

But you did.

And you got a headache.

So, now you get to make a medical choice.

I really don't care that YOU DON'T LIKE ANY OF THE CHOICES YOU HAVE.

I would much rather live in a country where people can make their own medical choices as many times as they want, based upon how they see their own circumstances.

[cynatnite]

128. I care about the choices women have...don't you?

Wouldn't it be better that women are offered more services before they become pregnant? What about more afterwards so they don't have to get an abortion if they don't want one? Many have abortions because of their economic conditions. Why not do more to help them so if they don't want an abortion they won't have to make that choice?

It seems to me all you care about is that the women have the choice, but don't support other ways of helping them.

[novalib]

134. READING COMPREHENSION 102

Go back through the posts here.

Then tell me just where it is that I say that women should not be helped before they become pregnant.

And, when you've finished doing that, tell me where I say that women should not be supported if they have no economic means.

YOU seem so eager to say that the number of abortions should be CONTROLLED and LIMITED -- which, in my view, is just another way of saying that women SHOULD NOT have abortions -- that you really have come to the point of suggesting that I am saying things I never said!!

[kdmorris]

137. See, that's the problem

No one said it should be limited or controlled. NO ONE. They said that it would be GOOD if there were other options for SOME women.

[novalib]

143. Look at the Poll Results

YOU SAY that NO ONE has said that abortion should be limited or controlled. NO ONE!!!!!

Excuse me, but you might want to take a look at the current poll results.

As I write this, 94 people -- nearly one half of the people who have voted in this poll -- have agreed with the following statement:

"Yes - I am pro-choice, but I think reducing the number of abortions is the ethical thing to do"

DO YOU HEAR THAT -- nearly half of the people responding to the poll on this thread say that "reducing the number of abortions is the ethical thing to do"!!!!!!!

Do you still say that non one -- NO ONE -- is saying that abortion should be limited or controlled???!!!!!

It sure seems to me as though there are a large number of people voting in this poll who are saying EXACTLY THAT!!!

[cynatnite]

148. That makes sense...since there are literally 1000's of DUer's...

who didn't vote at all :eyes:

The poll is in no way scientific.

[cynatnite]

142. You said you didn't care about my options...

If you don't care about my options, whose do you care about?

Not one person here has said they want to control the number of abortions a woman can get. Women should have access to legal and safe abortion.

Many here support a lower number of abortions because the huge amount this country has shows that not enough is being done to prevent unwanted pregnancies from happening in the first place.

Women should have access to birth control and should be supported more if they don't want to have an abortion. If they still choose to have one, fine. No one is saying otherwise.

As I said in another post...you're finding issues where none exists and jumping to conclusions in an overly irrational way. Stop, take a breath and think. Reread without letting your emotions get the better of you.

[novalib]

150. STOP TELLING ME WHAT TO DO!!!!!!

Look, why don't you stop saying things like, "Stop, take a breath and think. Reread without letting your emotions get the better of you."

DO YOU REALIZE HOW CONTROLLING THAT SOUNDS?!?!?!?!?

And, after you stop telling me what to do, you might want to take a look at the poll results.

You say: "Not one person here has said they want to control the number of abortions a woman can get".

But nearly 100 people responding to this poll say that the number of abortions should be limited FOR ETHICAL REASONS"

That sure sounds to me like a lot of people are saying that they want to control the number of abortions a woman can get -- or limit the number of women who can get abortions"!!!

[cynatnite]

159. It's advice because you are out of control and over the top...

with your reactions. Don't like it. Fine. Keep on making an ass of yourself.

It's not a scientific poll. It's a 100 people out of thousands of DU members. Most don't even vote on these things.

People want to lower the high RATE of abortions in this country. How much more plainly can anyone say it? They want it done by way of education, providing birth control and supporting those women who opt to not have an abortion.

Do I need to get a damn chalkboard out and draw pictures or something? :eyes: Sheesh!

[novalib]

167. Out of Control??!!

You have not ever seen me out of control!!!

I certainly am NOT OUT OF CONTROL HERE!!!!!

And, yes, I know, as you say, that "People want to lower the high RATE of abortions in this country."

What's YOUR basis for saying that the rate of abortions in this country is "HIGH"????!!!

I happen to know that there are lots of people in this country who want to lower the rate of abortions in this country to ZERO.

I am not one of them.

[cynatnite]

170. I think it's too high...

I think we can do more to lower them. I don't know why you have a problem with this. It's logical and reasonable. No one is advocating limits or outlawing abortion. There are better ways to handle it. That's all.

You're yelling because of using caps and the abundant use of exclamation points is also a sign of being emotionally out of control in cyberworld. If you don't want people to think you're out of control or overly emotional quit doing that.

[novalib]

175. Well, OF COURSE!

Of course there are things we can do to lower the number of abortions.

But WHY should we WANT to do that??

And HOW LOW would be low enough???

And, when we finally reduce abortions to a number that YOU happen to think is low enough, how will society view those women who CHOOSE to have abortions?

I think we need to rid ourselvs of the notion that there is something "wrong" about having an abortion -- and that is a large part of the premise behind the notion that we NEED to CAN do more to reduce abortions.

[Megahurtz]

198. Nobody can lower any rates of Abortion in this Country.

Get Real.
You can provide any and ALL forms of Birth Control at all times
but that still does not guarantee less Abortions because
people still have the choice to do what they want,
and you or anyone else should not expect it to be otherwise.

[kdmorris]

164. You should talk about telling people what to do.

It is ethical to teach our teenagers about birth control and make it available to them. It is ethical to allow poor families the choice to either bear a child or have an abortion (When I had the abortion back in 1994, it cost $350. I can just imagine how much it is now, but it's probably out of reach of your average welfare recipient or working poor) Abortion should be covered by insurance. Support for poor families (NOT JUST WOMEN) should be a given. PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A REAL CHOICE. That IS the ethical thing to do.

AND that will reduce the number of abortions. And that is a GOOD thing. AND you still have not answered my question.

Edited because I'm losing control and we aren't supposed to call people names.

[novalib]

169. I Guess So!

I'm not sure why you are asking ME if posting "insulting, half-nuts crap is fine".

I think you might want to ask those who are posting insulting, half-nuts crap if THEY thing it is fine.

Tell me, do YOU think posting insulting, half-nuts crap is fine.

I vote that you do think so. (But my poll on that matter is unscientific)

[kdmorris]

173. I edited it out

And no, I do not think it's fine. You are not listening to anyone, you are totally freaking out about things that are not true and you are twisting everyone's words to suit some plan of your own.

But, as you said, I have a choice. I choose to take a break. You can't be reasoned with and I have a headache. You are wrong about my choices to a headache. Because the other choice I have is just to ignore you so that I can AVOID A headache in the future.

Have a great day! (and you STILL didn't answer the question I asked):eyes:

[tkmorris]

132. You are headed for a heart attack

Seriously.

It seems to me as if people are trying to suggest to you that more choices would be a good thing. Do you disagree with that somehow? If so, why?

[novalib]

138. Not Really.

My life circumstance is such that I have a weak heart.

But, since I have one, I have made a medical choice to take aspirine.

I don't like to take aspirine -- it upsets my stomach.

But I still get to CHOOSE my own medical procdure.

Sure, I could moan and groan about how awful it is that I have to make a medical decision, and how I HATE having to take aspirine, but I think such moaning and groaning is really rather silly.

I just chose to take the aspirine, and support anyone else who finds themself in a situation where they have limited choice, but are still able to make the choice that is best for them.

[tkmorris]

144. Well, ok. That's great.

Again though, people seem to be suggesting to you that more choices would be a good idea. Nothing more or less than that. Do you disagree with the notion that more choices is a good idea? And if so, why?

[Mass]

125. Me too.

The poster is behaving as if we wanted to get rid of abortion rights.

There is nothing further from my mind. I am for a total right for women to make a choice, and I am against parental notification. But, in order to protect the right to chose, there needs to be a possibility of choice.

[nonconformist]

145. Agreed. This is beyond inane. The bad writing style ("yelling") certainly doesn't help either. nt

[Megahurtz]

193. Spew crap?

I didn't see any crap being spewed, only that an Abortion is the choice of the pregnant woman, not of some other nosy person.

Where the Hell is the Crap in that???

[kdmorris]

102. I'm going to have to disagree with you there

NEW FLASH: WOMEN CHOOSE to have abortions EVEN WHEN they have "other choices" -- Women do NOT have abortions because it is the "ONLY option" -- to suggest such a thing is to suggest the women who choose abortions make meaningless choices!!!!

He didn't say that they make meaningless choices, and yes, many women DO have abortions because they feel it is their ONLY option. Every woman that I've known who had one felt that there was no other way, usually because the father split and in a lot of cases, because they already have children to support. In one case, a woman had left her abusive husband and met another man. She had used the pill, but it didn't work. The new boyfriend already had one child and the woman had 3. This all happened before the divorce was final and the new boyfriend stated in no uncertain terms that he would leave the woman if she had the child. So... the woman was forced to choose between the embryo she carried and the possibility of losing the three children she already had to an abusive almost ex-husband who would have charged her with adultery when she showed up in court 7 months pregnant (that's how far along she would have been at the divorce hearing). Now, in hindsight, maybe there were other options, but she couldn't see any at the time. She couldn't take the chance that she might lose her three daughters. So, she had the abortion. But I can't say that she really wanted to. I'm equally sure that she doesn't regret it, but it would have been nice if there had been a different way out of that situation for her (lack of judgment against women who get pregnant outside of marriage. Maybe if there was a chance that the court wouldn't have branded her a whore she might have really had a choice).

I have no idea why you presume to know why all women have abortions. It is a complicated subject and it's a little hard to try to talk to people when they are refusing to listen. There is no one reason or situation that fits every abortion. THAT'S why I'm pro-choice, because it's too hard to figure out every situation and decide for every woman what's right for them. It's really none of our business, but yes, there should be alternatives, and support for women to TRULY have a choice and not just a choice to have an abortion.

[novalib]

105. You Have No Idea Why I PRESUME???!!!!!

You say that you have no idea why I presume to know why all women have abortions.

Excuse me. EXCUSE ME????!!!!!

I have NO idea why ALL women have abortions!!!

But I know this -- NO ALL WOMEN CHOOSE ABORTION AS "The Only Option".

Some women actually DO choose abortion. Some women (although, apparently, NOT any of the women you know) select abortion as ONE OF MANY OPTIONS.

Not all women are victims of circumstances. Some women are quite capable of assessing their OWN LIVES, and making a rational decision to have an abortion. Some women are really actually capable of making a GOOD decision to have an abortion -- without regret, shame, or recrimination.

[cynatnite]

108. But if those women were so capable, maybe they wouldn't...

have gotten pregnant in the first place...just a thought, you know. There might be a few women who wake up one morning and think, 'You know, I'm going to get an abortion today'...like they decided on chocolate ice cream rather than vanilla.

IMO, most women make the choice they feel they have to make.

[novalib]

113. EXCUSE ME????!!!

I can't believe what I'm reading here!!!!!!!

"But if those women were so capable, maybe they wouldn't...have gotten pregnant in the first place"

WTF?!?!?!?!?

You have such a high view of women!!:sarcasm:

[cynatnite]

116. Yeah, my view of women are really low because I am a woman...

:eyes:

Some women get dumb and irresponsible. I was one of them. If I had used the brain in my head I would never have gotten pregnent in the first place at that time.

I probably should have added that to my post.

[kdmorris]

120. Yes, exactly

I don't see how you can presume to know why ALL women have abortions (using your own words in the previous post), which was the statement you made. I'm perfectly aware that women can make their own decisions about their lives, since I AM a woman. And I never said that ALL women made the decision to have an abortion as their only option. You are twisting my words.

I simply refuted your statement that YOU know why ALL women have abortions, and that they NEVER do it because there is no other choice.

Why the hell are you freaking out so much? You aren't even listening to anyone whose opinions differ even slightly from your own. You see ONLY one way.. which as far as I can tell, everyone else supports, that abortion should be available no matter what. I think that everyone agrees abortion should remain legal, safe, and none of our business. However, you are too busy freaking out to even see that.

And by continuing to act like you are, you are actually leaving NO room for other points of view, like, for example, making the lives of people better so that there are not as many abortions. Why can't you see that there are also women who may (or may not) have chosen to have an abortion if there had REALLY been a choice? I'm not saying all women are victims of circumstance, or even that a majority of them are, but I am saying that there should be changes in sexual education for teenagers and birth control should be free to anyone who wants it. Women who have sex outside of marriage should not be branded as sluts when the male they had sex with is looked upon as a "stud" and support should be provided for women who choose to carry their children to term AFTER THE BABY IS BORN, not just during the pregnancy. And THEN, when we are at that point EVERY woman truly has a choice.

[novalib]

127. READING COMPREHENSION 101

Let me take this slowly here.

You: "I don't see how you can presume to know why ALL women have abortions (using your own words in the previous post), which was the statement you made."

Me (in post 105): "I have NO idea why ALL women have abortions!!!"

YOU: "I simply refuted your statement that YOU know why ALL women have abortions, and that they NEVER do it because there is no other choice"

ME: "But I know this -- NO ALL WOMEN CHOOSE ABORTION AS "The Only Option"."

[kdmorris]

133. READING COMPREHENSION 102

Let ME take this slowly here...

I originally posted to a statement that YOU made in Post #57:

NEW FLASH: WOMEN CHOOSE to have abortions EVEN WHEN they have "other choices" -- Women do NOT have abortions because it is the "ONLY option" -- to suggest such a thing is to suggest the women who choose abortions make meaningless choices!!!!

I will spare you actually bolding the statement this time. And to THIS little nugget of wisdom, I said I'm going to have to disagree with you. And I went on to state WHY I disagree with you. YOU originally stated that women have abortions even when they have other choices and I said "NOT ALL OF THEM. Some of them are actually forced by their circumstances to get one"

So, now, you want so be snarky instead of answering the question I asked you. Let me rephrase it for the slow: Why are you so against even discussing ways to give those women who were forced by circumstances to have an abortion an actual choice?

So, now we are engaging in rehashing the entire conversation instead of sticking to the issues. Instead of insulting my intelligence, can you just answer the question?

[Megahurtz]

192. I think that you have NO CLUE because you are an insensitive man.

Have you ever had a menstrual period? Have you ever given childbirth?
I would stop the "yelling" accusations to novalib because you are only
trying to divert attention off yourself that way.

And FYI there are severe emotional risks to bearing a child against your will,
and to giving up a child for Adoption.
You are reading too many fake reports from the "No Choice" side.

"There are also some severe emotional risks associated with abortions." LOL!:rofl: Who said?
Have you ever had one???

I'll tell ya, hearing you discuss that you think that there should be programs
to support a pregnant woman or girl into Forced Childbirth
makes me angry too.
Does that make any sense to you why this would irritate someone?:think:

[cynatnite]

204. Oh, boy...

:eyes:

We're talking about programs that help those women who choose to be pregnant. NO ONE is talking about forcing a woman to remain pregnant.

For many women, abortion is every emotional for a lot of reasons. One is because some still consider it the termination of a human life. That can be tramautizing for some. I knew a few so I can't speak for all. Another is how abortion can affect the raging hormone levels. They already are to begin with as a result of pregnancy. Same thing happens upon having an abortion.

Oh, and before you jump the gun...I've had a few menstrual cycles, have three kids and had to have an abortion.

[Megahurtz]

218. You have to realize that

a lot of women do not choose to be pregnant.
And also, Abortion may be emotional but it is a relief for many women that have one.

It sounds like you are interjecting too much of your own experience of having an Abortion.
It doesn't mean that yours will be be the same experience for eveyone.

My point is, have all options available
and don't influence or push women and girls to bear children against their will.

And no Religious-based guilt trips either!

The number of Abortions performed is simply no one's business.
Medical procedures and the personal reasons for performing them, to be private, period.

[cynatnite]

220. um...I think I've said that a lot of women choose not to be pregnant...

I also said I knew other women who've had abortions,. but didn't say I worked in the medical field both before and after I had mine. We dealt with women who had or were going to have an abortion more times than I care to count.

No one is denying any woman any options. We want women to have more options and more support whether she chooses to have or not have an abortion.

I have no idea where you got the religion bit...I'm agnostic. :rofl:

I don't care if a woman has had ten or twenty abortions. It is her business. My question would then be have we as a society failed in some regard for her to require them? I would also ask that if it were only one abortion. I'm a strong advocate of preventing unwanted pregnancies and I'm also totally pro-choice as well.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

216. Whoa. Wayyyyyyy Off In Left Field With That One.

And based on your response, it appears to be clear that you are having difficulty comprehending the context or premise of which we are speaking. Your post makes not an iota of sense within the context of our arguments.

I mean, forced abortions? What on earth are you even talking about? The concept of abortion being emotionally traumatic for many women is fall on the floor funny to you? And you call me insensitive? What a hoot! :rofl:

[Megahurtz]

229. Oh Give Me a Fucking Break.

"difficulty comphrehending"
Don't throw your condescending lack of intelligence/education innuendos at me.

And I said "Forced Childbirth", NOT "Forced Abortions".
So now WHO'S having a problem comprehending???:dunce: Good God, Dude!

"Reducing Abortions" implies control.
Now, providing ALL OPTIONS and FULL BIRTH CONTROL does not!

What's funny is that you fall for all the Freeper propaganda
that says that so many women feel that Abortion is emotionally traumatic.

Your problem is you need to look at the other side of the coin.

Carrying a baby to term and giving it up for Adoption can be equally,
if not worse of an emotional trauma than having an Abortion.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

233. Having Emotional Trauma From Abortion Is Freeper Propaganda? Oh, That's Too Rich.

:crazy:

[Megahurtz]

243. Dude, did you even listen to ANYTHING I said???

:wtf:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

245. Of Course. I'm Still Laughing At It. n/t

[Megahurtz]

279. Oooookay...whatever floats your boat Dude. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

284. Generally Water. Though Sometimes, When Fuuny Posts Put Me IN Tears Laughing So Hard,

and I wait long enough, my boat might float on those tears. But generally? Water. Just good old plain water... Maybe with a little muckey yuckey stuff thrown in too. But yeah, for sake of simplicity, Water.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

293. The Freeper propaganda is what causes the trauma

They plant the idea in some women's minds to regret abortions they previously didn't.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

302. Oh How Little You Guys Know About What Causes Women The Trauma Post-Abortion.

To say for a second that it is other's propaganda that caused it and absent of that, the woman would've been all hunky dory, is a huge warping of reality.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

304. When you have your abortion, let me know 'k?

I've had two myself and I'm not bothered a bit by them.

Disappointed?

[uppityperson]

309. sometimes it is. Happened to a friend of mine.

She was convinced that a 4 wk embryo had little hands and feet and sucked its thumb and she would be killing something that looked and acted like a newborn. Fine, she was stupid to believe them, but had a bunch of stuff going on, very emotional time. They misled her and gave her no support once she said she wouldn't have an abortion. Their job was done. Helping her? Nope. So, no 1st trimester abortion for her but a 2nd one. That was traumatic and she is still pissed, many many yrs later.

Things are different for different people. Other's propaganda may not cause trauma in some, in some cases it does.

[REP]

305. More Than Freeper Propaganda - It's Just Bullshit

Instead of posting cutesy-poo smilies, I'll post some peer-reviewed studies:

Abortion doesn't affect well-being, study says

New York Times (as printed in the San Jose Mercury 2/12/97)

Abortion does not trigger lasting emotional trauma in young women who
are psychologically healthy before they become pregnant, an eight-year
study of nearly 5,300 women has shown. Women who are in poor shape
emotionally after an abortion are likely to have been feeling bad about
their lives before terminating their pregnancies, the researchers said.

The findings, the researchers say, challenge the validity of laws
that have been proposed in many states, and passed in several, mandating
that women seeking abortions be informed of mental health risks.

The researchers, Dr. Nancy Felipe Russo, a psychologist at Arizona
State University in Tempe, and Dr. Amy Dabul Marin, a psychologist at
Phoenix College, examined the effects of race and religion on the
well-being of 773 women who reported on sealed questionnaires that
they had undergone abortions, and they compared the results with the
emotional status of women who did not report abortions.

The women, initially 14 to 24 years old, completed questionnaires and
were interviewed each year for eight years, starting in 1979. In 1980
and in 1987, the interview also included a standardized test that
measures overall well-being, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.

"Given the persistent assertion that abortion is associated with
negative outcomes, the lack of any results in the context of such a
large sample is noteworthy," the researchers wrote. The study took
into account many factors that can influence a woman's emotional
well-being, including education, employment, income, the presence of
a spouse and the number of children.

Higher self-esteem was associated with being employed, having a
higher income, having more years of education and bearing fewer children,
but having had an abortion "did not make a difference," the researchers
reported. And the women's religious affiliations and degree of involvement
with religion did not have an independent effect on their long-term
reaction to abortion. Rather, the women's psychological well-being before
having abortions accounted for their mental state in the years after the
abortion, the researchers said..

In considering the influence of race, the researchers again found
that the women's level of self-esteem before having abortions was the
strongest predictor of their well-being after an abortion.

"Although highly religious Catholic women were slightly more likely
to exhibit post-abortion psychological distress than other women, this
fact is explained by lower pre-existing self-esteem," the researchers
wrote in the current issue of Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, a journal of the American Psychological Association.

Overall, Catholic women who attended church one or more times a week,
even those who had not had abortions, had generally lower self-esteem
than other women, although within the normal range, so it was hardly
surprising that they also had lower self-esteem after abortions, the
researchers said in interviews.

Gail Quinn, executive director of anti-abortion activities for the
United States Catholic Conference, said the findings belied the
experience of post-abortion counselors. She said, "While many women
express `relief' following an abortion, the relief is transitory."
In the long term, the experience prompts "hurting people to seek the
help of post-abortion healing services," she said.

The president of the National Right to Life Committee, Dr. Wanda
Franz, who earned her doctorate in developmental psychology, challenged
the researchers' conclusions. She said their assessment of self-esteem
"does not measure if a woman is mentally healthy," adding, "This requires
a specialist who performs certain tests, not a self-assessment of how
the woman feels about herself."

The Relationship of Abortion to Well-being: Do Race and Religion Make a Difference?
Nancy Felipe Russo and Amy J. Dabul
Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 1997, Vol. 28, No , 23-31

Relationships of abortion and childbearing to well-being were examined for 1,189 Black and 3,147 White women. Education, income, and having a work role were positively and independently related to well-being for all women. Abortion did not have an independent relationship to well-being, regardless of race or religion, when well-being before becoming pregnant was controlled. These findings suggest professional psychologists should explore the origins of women's mental health problems in experiences predating their experience of abortion, and they can assist psychologists in working to ensure that mandated scripts from 'informed consent' legislation do not misrepresent scientific findings.


RUSSO, NANCY FELIPE
ZIERK, K.
Abortion, Childbearing, and Women's Well-Being
Professional Psychology, Research and Practice 23 (1992): 269-280. Also, http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research5.asp
Cohort(s): NLSY79
ID Number: 4029
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)

This study is based on a secondary analysis of NLSY interview data from 5,295 women who were interviewed annually from 1979 to 1987. Among this group 773 women were identified in 1987 as having at least one abortion, with 233 of them reporting repeat abortions. Well-being was assessed in 1980 and 1987 by the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. The researchers used analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple regression to examine the combined and separate contributions of preabortion self-esteem, contextual variables (education, employment, income, and marital status), childbearing (being a parent, numbers of wanted and unwanted children) and abortion (having one abortion, having repeat abortions, number of abortions, time since last abortion) to women's post abortion self-esteem




Most Women Do Not Feel Distress, Regret After Undergoing Abortion, Study Says



   The majority of women who choose to have legal abortions do not experience regret or long-term negative emotional effects from their decision to undergo the procedure, according to a study published in the June issue of the journal Social Science & Medicine, NewsRx.com/Mental Health Weekly Digest reports. Dr. A. Kero and colleagues in the Department of Clinical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology at University Hospital in Umea, Sweden, interviewed 58 women at periods of four months and 12 months after the women's abortions. The women also answered a questionnaire prior to their abortions that asked about their living conditions, decision-making processes and general attitudes toward the pregnancy and the abortion. According to the study, most women "did not experience any emotional distress post-abortion"; however, 12 of the women said they experienced severe distress immediately after the procedure. Almost all of the women said they felt little distress at the one-year follow-up interview. The women who said they experienced no post-abortion distress had indicated prior to the procedure that they opted not to give birth because they "prioritized work, studies, and/or existing children," according to the study. According to the researchers, "almost all" of the women said the abortion was a "relief or a form of taking responsibility," and more than half of the women said they experienced positive emotional experiences after the abortion such as "mental growth and maturity of the abortion process" (NewsRx.com/Mental Health Weekly Digest, 7/12).

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=24751

The psychological sequelae of therapeutic abortion--denied and completed

PK Dagg
Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ont., Canada.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the available literature on the psychological sequelae of therapeutic abortion, addressing both the issue of the effects of the abortion on the woman involved and the effects on the woman and on the child born when abortion is denied. METHOD: Papers reviewed were initially selected by using a Medline search. This procedure resulted in 225 papers being reviewed, which were further selected by limiting the papers to those reporting original research. Finally, studies were assessed as to whether or not they used control groups or objective, validated symptom measures. RESULTS: Adverse sequelae occur in a minority of women, and when such symptoms occur, they usually seem to be the continuation of symptoms that appeared before the abortion and are on the wane immediately after the abortion. Many women denied abortion show ongoing resentment that may last for years, while children born when the abortion is denied have numerous, broadly based difficulties in social, interpersonal, and occupational functions that last at least into early adulthood. CONCLUSIONS: With increasing pressure on access to abortion services in North America, nonpsychiatrist physicians and mental health professionals need to keep in mind the effects of both performing and denying therapeutic abortion. Increased research into these areas, focusing in particular on why some women are adversely affected by the procedure and clarifying the relationship issues involved, continues to be important.
Am J Psychiatry 1991; 148:578-585
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/148/5/578


Psychological sequelae of medical and surgical abortion at 10-13 weeks gestation.

Ashok PW, Hamoda H, Flett GM, Kidd A, Fitzmaurice A, Templeton A.

From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK.

Background. Although not much research comparing the emotional distress following medical and surgical abortion is available, few studies have compared psychological sequelae following both methods of abortion early in the first trimester of pregnancy. The aim of this review was to assess the psychological sequelae and emotional distress following medical and surgical abortion at 10-13 weeks gestation. Methods. Partially randomized patient preference trial in a Scottish Teaching Hospital was conducted. The hospital anxiety and depression scales were used to assess emotional distress. Anxiety levels were also assessed using visual analog scales while semantic differential rating scales were used to measure self-esteem. A total of 368 women were randomized, while 77 entered the preference cohort. Results. There were no significant differences in hospital anxiety and depression scales scores for anxiety or depression between the groups. Visual analog scales showed higher anxiety levels in women randomized to surgery prior to abortion (P < 0.0001), while women randomized to surgical treatment were less anxious after abortion (P < 0.0001). Semantic differential rating scores showed a fall in self-esteem in the randomized medical group compared to those undergoing surgery (P = 0.02). Conclusions. Medical abortion at 10-13 weeks is effective and does not increase psychological morbidity compared to surgical vacuum aspiration and hence should be made available to all women undergoing abortion at these gestations.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005 Aug;84(8):761-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16026402&dopt=Citation


Post abortion syndrome: myth or reality?

Koop CE.

What are the health effects upon a woman who has had an abortion? In his letter to President Reagan, dated January 9, 1989, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop wrote that in order to find an answer to this question the Public Health Service would need from 10 to 100 million dollars for a comprehensive study.

PIP: At a 1987 briefing for Right to Life leaders, the author--US Surgeon General C Everett Koop--was requested to prepare a comprehensive report on the health effects (mental and physical) of induced abortion. To prepare for this task, the author met with 27 groups with philosophical, social, medical, or other professional interests in the abortion issue; interviewed women who had undergone this procedure; and conducted a review of the more than 250 studies in the literature pertaining to the psychological impact of abortion. Every effort was made to eliminate the bias that surrounds this controversial issue. It was not possible, however, to reach any conclusions about the health effects of abortion. In general, the studies on the psychological sequelae of abortion indicate a low incidence of adverse mental health effects. On the other hand, the evidence tends to consist of case studies and the few nonanecdotal reports that exist contain serious methodological flaws. In terms of the physical effects, abortion has been associated with subsequent infertility, a damaged cervix, miscarriage, premature birth, and low birthweight. Again, there are methodological problems. 1st, these events are difficult to quantify since most abortions are performed in free-standing clinics where longterm outcome is not recorded. 2nd, it is impossible to casually link these adverse outcomes to the abortion per se. Resolution of this question requires a prospective study of a cohort of women of childbearing age in reference to the variable outcomes of mating--failure to conceive, miscarriage, abortion, and delivery. Ideally, such a study would be conducted over a 5-year period and would cost approximately US$100 million
Health Matrix. 1989 Summer;7(2):42-4.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10294679&query_hl=2

Psychological sequelae of induced abortion.

Romans-Clarkson SE.

Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin, New Zealand.

This article reviews the scientific literature on the psychological sequelae of induced abortion. The methodology and results of studies carried out over the last twenty-two years are examined critically. The unanimous consensus is that abortion does not cause deleterious psychological effects. Women most likely to show subsequent problems are those who were pressured into the operation against their own wishes, either by relatives or because their pregnancy had medical or foetal contraindications. Legislation which restricts abortion causes problems for women with unwanted pregnancies and their doctors. It is also unjust, as it adversely most affects lower socio-economic class women.

PIP: A review of empirical studies on the psychological sequelae of induced abortion published since 1965 revealed no evidence of adverse effects. On the other hand, this review identified widespread methodological problems--improper sampling, lack of data on women's previous psychiatric history, a scarcity of prospective study designs, a lack of specified follow-up times or evaluation procedures, and a failure to distinguish between legal, illegal, and spontaneous abortions--that need to be addressed by psychiatric epidemiologists. Despite these methodological weaknesses, all 34 studies found significant improvement rather than deterioration in mental status after induced abortion. There was also a high degree of congruity in terms of predictors of adverse reactions after abortion--ambivalence about the procedure, a history of psychosocial instability, poor or absent family ties, psychiatric illness at the time of the pregnancy termination, and negative attitudes toward abortion in the broader society. As expected, criminal abortion is more likely than legal abortion to be associated with guilt, and women who have been denied therapeutic abortions report significantly greater psychosocial difficulties than those who have been granted abortion on the grounds of their precarious mental health. Overall, the research clearly attests that abortion carried out at a woman's request has no deleterious psychiatric consequences. Problems arise only when the woman undergoes pregnancy termination as a result of pressure from others. Legislation that undermines the ability of the pregnant woman to assess herself the impact of an unwanted pregnancy on her future impedes mental health and should be opposed by the psychiatric profession.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1989 Dec;23(4):555-65
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2692552&query_hl=2

Psychological and social aspects of induced abortion.

Handy JA.

The literature concerning psychosocial aspects of induced abortion is reviewed. Key areas discussed are: the legal context of abortion in Britain, psychological characteristics of abortion-seekers, pre- and post-abortion contraceptive use, pre- and post-abortion counselling, the actual abortion and the effects of termination versus refused abortion. Women seeking termination are found to demonstrate more psychological disturbance than other women, however this is probably temporary and related to the short-term stresses of abortion. Inadequate contraception is frequent prior to abortion but improves afterwards. Few women find the decision to terminate easy and most welcome opportunities for non-judgemental counselling. Although some women experience adverse psychological sequelae after abortion the great majority do not. In contrast, refused abortion often results in psychological distress for the mother and an impoverished environment for the ensuing offspring.
Br J Clin Psychol. 1982 Feb;21 (Pt 1):29-41.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7126943&query_hl=2

[uppityperson]

310. Thanks for the studies. Most of the women I have been involved with that had abortions

did not suffer post-trauma from the abortion. There were different feelings afterwards, ranging all over the place, but that was due to the whole situation or other things going on.

Read my post #309 for the 1 I know that did.

Were the couple who wanted children, got pregnant, miscarried 1 twin and came in to get the other aborted rather than waiting for "nature to take its course" over the next week traumatized by the abortion? No. Very sad over the loss of 2 babies they wanted.

Was the 50 yr old perimenopausal woman traumatized by her abortion? No, very relieved to not bring another Downs syndrome baby into the world, one that she would not be able to take care of.

Was the 20ish repeater traumatized by her abortions? No. Relieved that she would not have to have a baby until she was ready for it 10 yrs later.

Was my sibling traumatized, or my friend, back in the yrs when the only places to get legal abortions (other than for the rich) were NY and CA? Nope.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

316. Thanks for that thorough selection

I don't have time to read through them yet, but just based on the abstacts, I can say that my impression that a woman's life and social situations have a lot more to do with how she deals with an abortion than just having the procedure itself.

For some reason, I'm imagining one of the Bush twins being secreted off to terminate an unwanted pregnancy in some posh clinic here or overseas. I personally would not judge the decision in any way, but I have a hard time believing there would be a lot of trauma over "taking care of the problem" on the part of Jenna and/or Barbara or their "pro-life" parents.

[cynatnite]

235. I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you...

When I think of reducing abortions I think of providing more options such as preventing unwanted pregnancies. Also supplying birth control and giving support to those women who don't want an abortion because of economic reasons.

A lot of women do find having an abortion emotionally and I know women who were traumatized. It's not an unheard of thing. Some women find it as well when giving it up for adoption and others do not. Women are different and will not react to any of this, even having and keeping it, the same way.

It seems like you're stating the obvious...what's been repeated in this thread several times.

[Mass]

83. Because women do not want to have surgical procedures if they can

avoid it.

The need for heart surgery must also be reduced and if we can do something for that, we should.

[cynatnite]

86. True...

too many abortions can harm a woman's fertility. That's my understanding.

[novalib]

94. Well, DUH!

Gee, I am SO glad to learn that women do not want to have surgical procedures if they can avoid it.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ENLIGHTENING POOR, STUPID ME!!!

:sarcasm:

Who WANTS to have surgery they don't NEED??!!

But ANYONE who NEEDS to have a surgical procedure -- should be able to have it.

And NO ONE can say whether another person NEEDS to have an abortion or not!!!!

If TEN MILLION WOMEN say that they NEED to have an abortion, then I'm perfectly comfortable with that.

If TEN MILLION MEN say that they NEED to have PROSTATE SURGERY, then I'm perfectly comfortable with that, TOO!!!

[Mass]

98. This is a silly discussion started on a wrong premise.

If you need 10 millions abortions a year, there should be done. But if we need 10 millions abortions a year, something is seriously wrong in this country and we should work on avoiding the situation where many of these 10 millions abortion are needed.

This is what I care. The rest is a given for me.

[Ilsa]

199. No one could pay me enough to go through another pregnancy.

I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't put my husband and kids through having another one in the house. Ain't gonna happen.

[novalib]

228. Your Point??

The fact that no one could pay you enough to go through another pregnancy is related to my post how?????

[Ilsa]

255. My point is that I already know about contraception, birth control

in various methods, etc. I'm a nurse who understands my options pretty well.

Still, "accidents" happen. And it isn't about the cost of raising another child. Having another baby, and going through a another pregnancy would be detrimental to the health and well-being of this family, especially since my oldest is disabled. HEck, I'd probably miscarry while trying to hold him down during one of his tantrums, climbing a fence to chase him, etc.

I can't see where my situation (and many others) would have anything to do with "reducing the need for abortion." It is more about keeping it a safe, legal, and available option.

Now, do you want to harass me with your excessive punctuation some more???????

On edit: Not everything has to do with "the shame".

[Megahurtz]

189. Not! "Reducing" Means Control!!!

Women and girls have the right, and should demand the right to choose
whatever they want to do with their own bodies regarding pregnancy.

That means any and ALL forms of Birth Control should be available at all times! RU486 included.

And then if they still get pregnant and decide to have an abortion
then it is STILL nobody else's business!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

191. No, Reducing Has Absosmurfly Nada To Do With Control.

No one is mandating anything on anybody. Why some keep illogically twisting this argument to make it appear that way is perplexing.

[Megahurtz]

201. Yes it is because you have NO GUARANTEE of reducing anything!

That is logical.
There are no guarantees.

Here's a solution. Provide all forms of Birth Control at all times, Sex Education in schools.

But other than that, it's nobody else's business if after that, women still have Abortions.

[cynatnite]

209. Your solution has been repeated by others in this thread several times...

Haven't you been reading? :eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

214. No One Said Anything About Needing A Guarantee. I Have No Idea What You're Talking About.

Who cares if there's no guarantee. Still better to try than not to, and it would appear logical to deduce that though no guarantee, if done correctly there would definitely be some reduction.

[cynatnite]

208. You're telling me...

This is just unbelievable to read. I'm flummoxed. LOL

[Name removed]

222. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cynatnite]

207. What about preventing unwanted pregnancies?

There is a need for that. Nobody is talking about controlling the rates of abortion for any woman or even nationwide.

Don't you support programs designed to prevent unwanted pregnancies?

[novalib]

234. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT????!!!!!

What do you want to talk about here?

You seem DETERMINED to talk about "support" for "programs" designed to prevent unplanned pregnancies.

The topic of this thread, however, is NOT THAT!!!

IF you want to talk about preventing unplanned pregnancies, fine -- but it is really of the subject here.

And you might want to consider why some of us do NOT wish to participate in your hi-jacking of the topic under discussion here.

[cynatnite]

238. There is no rule that says we have to stick with the subject of the OP

Considering the different directions this discussion has taken, I would think that would be obvious.

[novalib]

248. Well, DUH!

Honestly, you have such a profound insight into the OBVIOUS!!!

OF COURSE there is NO RULE that says that we have to stick with the original usbject of the OP!!!

There is also no rule that says we can't chat about the weather on this thread.

There's also no rule that says that anyone has to respond to silly questions that have little or nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And the topic at hand is whether people think that abortions should be reduced.

And I say that it is NOBODY's BUSINESS HOW MANY ABORTIONS THERE ARE -- AND THERE IS CERTAINLY NO JUSTIFICATION -- EVER!!! -- FOR SUGGESTING THAT ANY WOMAN HAS HAD "TOO MANY" ABORTIONS!!!

[cynatnite]

270. There are doctors who will disagree with you...

in their opinion they've had women as patients who have had too many abortions and say so for good reason. I think I'll take their expertise over yours.

[Mass]

82. Are you a woman? I doubt that.

This is not about letting medical decision to women.

It is about making sure THEY HAVE A CHOICE. It is about making sure a teenager knows that there are contraceptive methods available when she chooses to become sexually active and that these methods are available to her. It is about making sure that a woman who wants to keep her baby can AFFORD to do so.

If you think that most women arrives to this decision lightly, you are an idiot. At some point, something happens to make them make this choice.

So there are two issues there:
- if they are in a situation where they have to make this choice, it should certainly be open to them without any moral issue attached,

- but they should be offered all the possibilities before they are pregant NOT to have to make this decision, and this is far from being done, particularly in this country. My kids are teenagers (males, so they will never have to make this decision for their own body, but I can tell you THEY ARE NOT GETTING THE INFO THAT IS NEEDED, AT LEAST NOT FROM THE SCHOOL SYSTEM).

It is all that Reid meant. And only idiots do not get that.

[novalib]

97. It's NOT ABOUT LETTING WOMEN MAKE MEDICAL DECISIONS??!!!

So, this is not about letting medical decisions to women (whatever the hell that means)???!!!!!!

Just why is it that you think that women should NOT be in the position of having to make medical decisions about their own bodies??!!

Abortion is a medical procedure. Women are prefectly capable of making medical decisions.

Of course, if you happen to think that only "bad" women have sex that would cause them to be in a position where they would have to make a medical decision concerning abortion, then I can understand your ridiculous argument that women "should be offered all the possibilities before they are pregnant NOT to have to make this decision".

[cynatnite]

106. I think you're getting pissed for all the wrong reasons...

and jumping to conclusions rather easily.

Do you have a problem with doing more to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Offering more to educate and provide for those women and girls rather than them getting pregnant in the first place.

If you don't know it, too many abortions on a woman can have a lot of negative effects on her fertility. Preventing the pregnancies in the first place should be a priority in addition to access to legal and safe abortions.

I have no idea why you have a problem with this.

[Mass]

114. We are obviously living in two different worlds.

Your last paragraph is so much out of touch with the reality that it is amazing.

It is inane if you think that all girls and women have access to contraceptive measures that will allow them to have the sexual life they choose to have without risking to be pregnant (I am talking about information and affordability here).

We can at the same time preserve the right for women to make their own decision (whether it is an abortion or to keep the fetus) and work in order to reduce the need for an abortion. There is nothing contradictory. I am not sure why it is so difficult for you to see that.

[PistolSteve]

52. I think pregnacy prevention is wonderful, but...

I can care less about the number of abortions.

I am in favor of better education, better access and more government support on issues relating to contraception and as a consequence abortions will decrease. Great - but I don't directly care about people having abortions.

[Mass]

84. our premise is wrong. This is NOT what Reid was speaking about.

He was speaking about the global number of pregancies and how nothing was done to help women avoid unwanted pregnancies.

[zreosumgame]

36. you need a 5th choice

"In a perfect world abortion would not be needed except for health reasons, but would be available and the woman treated with respect if she did need to choose the procedure" This would need easy access to contraception and support from families and friends. For the father as well as the mother.

[novalib]

38. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE AS MANY AS POSSIBLE!!!!!!!

I think that there should be as many abortions as possible -- and as needed!!

It's no different than how I feel about heart surgery -- I think that EVERYONE who NEEDS one should HAVE ONE!!!

AS MANY AS POSSIBLE FOR THOSE WHO NEED THEM!!!!

And ONLY a WOMAN can truly determine if she needs an abortion!!!!

NO MAN -- certainly NOT Sen. Reid -- can EVER PRESUME to tell a woman that she does NOT NEED an abortion!!!!

If 3 MILLION ABORTIONS are NEEDED -- then that's how many there should be!!!!

If 4, 5, 6, 7 OR MORE MILLION are needed -- then that's how many there should be!!

And they should be PAID FOR by the government -- so that no one is denied one because of lack of money!!!!!

[cynatnite]

146. Well, a woman's fertility can be harmed by having too many n/t

[uppityperson]

183. not really, unless they are bad ones.

this is why safe legal ones must be kept safe and legal, to be able to avoid harming her.

[cynatnite]

217. In some cases multiple abortions...

can cause what's called an incompetent cervix. It's a cervix that starts dilating prematurely. Sometimes a stitch can keep it closed so a woman can carry to term. Multiple dilations and whatnot can harm a cervix over a period of time. It's not always the case and many women can have several abortions, but still be able to carry a baby to term. Doctors do recommend that women not undergo too many abortions. I've never heard any of them quote a number, though.

[uppityperson]

219. Makes sense, can see multiple births being more of a problem too

haven't heard #s and a quick search doesn't show. DES and multiple births can cause incompetent cervizx too. I wonder, just wondering, what numbers for multiple abortions vs multiple vag births would show for incomp cervix. Not comparing the 2, but wondering abut physiology.

[cynatnite]

221. Yep, multiple labors can do that as well...

I don't know the numbers. I worked in a family practice clinic and there were a surprising number of women with incompetent cervix though I don't know if that's a natural defect or was brought on by something else. It would be interesting to see the numbers, though.

[novalib]

237. This, OF COURSE....

This information, IF IT IS INDEED MEDICALLY CORRECT, should, OF COURSE, be provided to women by their doctors.

IT SHOULD NEVER BE USED AS A MEANS TO INTIMIDATE WOMEN INTO NOT HAVING ABORTIONS THEY NEED TO HAVE, however!!!!

But all competant doctors inform their patients about the risks of any medical procedure.

By the way, IF this information is medically correct, OB/GYN's should caution women against having too many births.

[cynatnite]

240. GIve me a fucking break!

Google it and find out! Incompetent cervix is a fact of life for a hell of a lot of women. Jesus, if you had a fucking clue...:grr:

I've seen women at the doctors' offices. The stitch wouldn't hold after they lost their baby in the fourth, fifth and six months. They were devestated. Why in the hell would I make that up?

Don't you dare fucking trivialize the suffering these women have gone through!

USE THE BRAIN YOU'VE GOT AND GOOGLE IT! (now that's yelling and I fucking meant it)

[novalib]

251. My name is NOT JESUS!!!

As in "Jesus, if you had a fucking clue"!!!

Here's a newflash for you: an incompetant cervix is a risk after each pregnancy, too!

[tkmorris]

264. Umm, no

An incompetent cervix can be caused by many things, but it is more likely to result from multiple abortions than multiple pregnancies. Apparently this is due to the fact that in a normal pregnancy, the female body secretes a hormone naturally (prostaglandin?) that causes the cervix to soften and dilate etc. As I understand it during the abortion procedure this is done artificially and quicker, thus making the potential for cervical damage greater. I'm not an expert on this but the basic facts seem pretty clear.

Of course, this is all just a trip down a side path to the original argument. It probably doesn't seem this way to you novalib, but I can see that you and I agree on a lot more here than we would disagree on, and I think that's true of many people on this thread that you have engaged with. The trouble seems to be that you keep assuming that people who want more choices available to women are somehow trying to control women's bodies, even when the poster in question is a female.

Then you start SHOUTING AT THEM LIKE THIS!!!!! It is impossible to have a civil discussion on any topic when one person in the room is screaming at everyone else. Not only that, but it actually detracts from your argument. People begin to associate the behavior with the position, and the dislike of the behavior becomes contempt for the position. If you wish to convince anyone you are very definitely going about it the wrong way.

I hope you have a pleasant (and calmer) evening.

[cynatnite]

268. I'm done with you

Logic and reason doesn't work with you. It's all about making sure you're right despite the ass you're making out of yourself.

I don't deal with people who trivialize the suffering of women in order to prove they are right to the 9th degree.

[novalib]

275. TA TA!!

TTFN!!!

C U LATER!

SO LONG!!!!!!!

A BIENTOT!

[Megahurtz]

206. HERE!HERE!

:bounce::applause::bounce:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

260. I Think You Meant 'Hear Hear', Unless Of Course You Were Calling The Poster Over To You As If A Pet

or something.

[Hosnon]

254. You do realize that you shift your argument, right?

I don't want to jump on you but I can't let this go by.

You begin by saying: "There should be as many abortions as possible."

Then you say: "There should be as many abortions as possible and as many abortions as needed."

So far so good...simply two statements joined together...but then you say:

"There should be as many abortions as possible when needed."

You initially only limit abortions to those that are possible. You end by limiting abortions to those that are needed and among those, as much as possible.

I disagree that there should be as many abortions as possible. I agree that there should be as many necessary abortions as possible.

[novalib]

256. If I Recall Correctly,

If I recall correctly, the post you are referring to was the first post I made to this thread.

I really can't explain my lapse in logic.

Thank you for your posts to this thread, especially those which encouraged people to READ what I had written!

[Hosnon]

258. Thanks for the vote of confidence, but...

I was referring solely to the post I responded to.

I don't know if that is what has happened overall...lucky strike by me if so.

Anyways...good luck. I'm surprised this thread is still open.

:)

[uppityperson]

257. "As many abortions as possible?"

"As many abortions as possible"!!! Do you really mean that you believe women should be getting pregnant all the time so they can have as many abortions as possible? Oh, and "only a woman can truly determine if she needs an abortion" so you are also telling women that they need to believe they should be getting pregnant and abortions? Wow. I am stunned. And paid for by the gvt, by our tax money. As many as possible. Wow.

[Hosnon]

259. S/he doesn't mean that...read that post and you'll see that the argument is

really:

"As many necessary abortions as possible."

I agree with this statement...not the one in the title.

[uppityperson]

281. Got it. thanks.

[novalib]

262. WOW!

YOU are stunned????!!!!

Imagine how I feel after reading your post!

"Stunned" would be an understatement!!!

[omega minimo]

42. BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT

And whats with all the GUN Names?

:evilfrown:

This poll is a set up-- misleading bullshit

[PistolSteve]

65. How?

And PistolSteve is a play off of Pistol Pete... get over it.

[omega minimo]

118. From start to finish.

PistolSteve (148 posts) Mon Dec-04-06 06:51 AM
Original message
Poll question: Do you care about the number of abortions?
I just heard Reid comment about reducing the number of abortions, so I decided to pose a question...

*** you misinterpreted the "number of abortions" comment

*** ...and made it your poll question, with more ill logic about what "number of abortions" means ("number of abortions in the US" and then "number of abortions" "someone" has)...

Do you care about the number of abortions in the US?
Poll result (191 votes)
No - as long as their safe, I could care less if someone has 3 or 4 - you can't call one abortion ethical and five not (93 votes, 49%) Vote
Yes - I am pro-choice, but I think reducing the number of abortions is the ethical thing to do (87 votes, 46%) Vote
Yes - I am pro-choice and think they should be reduced because of health consequences (7 votes, 4%) Vote
Yes - abortions, in a perfect world, would be banned (4 votes, 2%) Vote


****The choices are limited, incomplete and misleading. Especially:

"No - as long as their safe, I could care less if someone has 3 or 4 - you can't call one abortion ethical and five not"

:puke:


*****Until people can discuss this with at least a MINIMUM of respect for women (i.e. don't make a flippant statement like that bullshit and don't load a bogus poll with bogus choices) maybe they shouldn't discuss it AT ALL.

[Robeson]

276. Agreed. I noticed that, too.

[mondo joe]

53. Other: I care that access to birth control and family planning is inadequate,

resulting in more costly and more risky procedures (abortions).

[slackmaster]

59. I distinguish between medical needs and convenience

Contraception should be available free of charge to anyone who neesd it. So should abortions that are medically necessary.

I oppose unlimited taxpayer-funded elective abortions.

[cynatnite]

56. I care about them being safe and legal n/t

[tigereye]

67. if more folks used birth control effectively

there probably would be fewer abortions. It's not as if they are a fun entertainment. Most women would probably prefer not to have one unless they have little or no choice.... :shrug:


but again, it really shouldn't be anyone's business. It's a personal health care decision.

[cynatnite]

78. I think teens should have legal access to birth control w/out...

their parent's consent.

I speak on this with a tad bit of authority. As a randy teenager I asked my mother for birth control. She said no. It was giving permission. BF and I got condoms and had sex anyway. Wound up pregnant a few months later because I was stupidly naive to think BF wore a condom every time. What did I know? I was 17 and he was my first.

Teens will have sex if they want to badly enough.

[tigereye]

121. based on my experience working with teens, I do too

but a lot of parents don't feel the same way. When my son reaches that age, you can bet that condoms will be available from me, but I'm not sure I'd wanted them handed out at school without my knowledge (I'd certainly give permission, but I WOULD want to know.)It's kind of a quandary, eh? What would be the right age? 13? 14? 15? .....

I waited til I was in college, and I still remember getting the condom lecture from the med students I shared a house with. ;)

[cynatnite]

155. I've got a teenage girl at home and an older daughter w/ three kids..

also a seven year old son.

My opinion is this: If a teenager is going to have sex behind my back without my knowledge, I'd rather them to be able to get condoms or whatever to insure they had sex safely and responsibly even if I don't know about it.

This does boil down to trust between parent and kid. With a good relationship, they'll come to you...you hope. If they don't, let them know where to go and how to get it.

[uppityperson]

185. hang a bunch on christmas tree (if you have one)

or should that be holiday tree? We did this when we had teens around. You can get a bunch of colored ones from local health dept, put hangers on them (corners of package to not puncture package!) and hang them up.

[tigereye]

187. that's very funny!

I'll have to remember that one. Just had to make sure you didn't poke a hole in em with a hanger!

:rofl:

How did your teens react when you did that?

[uppityperson]

190. Got funny looks, jokes and giggles.

Didn't count how many were put up or taken down, but they all disappeared eventually. Some are still turning up here and there. Don't know who was sexually active, but wanted to let them know that they could be safer if they were. But then we use "medical" terms like penis in our household also, which provoked giggles amongst the friends (kids) when they were younger.

[cynatnite]

211. Excellent idea!

:rofl: If the local RWer's wouldn't go batshit exploding head crazy over it, I'd put it right in the middle of the school cafeteria.

[Warren DeMontague]

68. A) Explain to me why it's my business how many abortions someone else has.

B) If you talk about "reducing" "abortions" with absolutely no context, it could mean anything from increasing funding for contraception research (which I support) to, paradoxically enough, throwing women in prison for taking the birth control pill, which is the logical end result of the "pro-life" agenda and the HLA plank of the GOP platform. So you need to define terms.

Is "reducing" surgical abortions, in the abstract, a "good idea"? Well, seeing as it's pretty obvious no one WANTS an abortion or sets out looking to get pregnant so they can have one, yes, reducing the NEED for abortions is a worthy goal. The way to go about that is to make contraception more available, force health plans to cover it, increase (as above) r&d into better, safer, more effective forms.. Hell, make the Birth control pill available OTC. Have real, fact-based sex ed with contraceptive education AND availability in public schools. THAT is one way to reduce the need for surgical abortions.

Note how I said "surgical"? See, to the right wing, a fertilized egg is a "baby" the second sperm meets unfertilized egg- so they consider the use of RU-486, as well as the morning after pill and standard birth control pill (which some argue can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg) as well as IUDs to be equivalent to "abortion", too. So for your right-wing pro life jihadis, criminalizing "abortion" is just one step on the road to criminalizing these other contraceptive options, as well. Ten years from now, they may decide that unfertilized eggs and sperm are "babies", too, at which point one assumes they'll want to criminalize condoms, male masturbation, and menstruation.

Another way people who claim to be interested in "reducing" abortion can effect positive change? Support a SPHC system and a liveable minimum wage, so being a poor single mother in this country wouldn't be such a cruel joke.

But honestly? I'm a MAN. Why is it any of my BUSINESS to tell women if they're having "too many" abortions. The whole point of being pro-choice is that the CHOICE belongs to the woman WHOSE BODY IT IS.

[ComerPerro]

72. I really couldn't give a shit about the number of abortions. However,

what I am concerned about is the number of people who find themselves in a position where they are confronted with making that decision.

[Mass]

80. Given that no woman likes to have an abortion if she can do otherwise

yes, I care. It is not the statistic I care, it is the reality that is behind.

There is two ways to reduce abortions:

- by making it illegal,

- by giving women a real choice not to have an unwanted pregnancy (prevention) and not to feel obliged to have an abortion for economical reasons (healthcare and decent economical conditions). Just by acting on these two points would reduce the number of abortions while not restricting rights. (and it is not pure luck that abortions were less frequent under Clinton - conditions have become worse on both sides under Bush).

Also, you misinterpret what Reid meant. It is not the individual number of abortion a woman has he was talking about, it was the global number of abortions, and given the fact that most women would prefer not to be in a situation where they have to have an abortion, he is proposing to do something about it.

[Zhade]

88. Not really - not my business who gets them or why.

I am interested in bettering conditions so some can have more alternatives than just abortion, though.

[LynneSin]

89. No reason why this number should be increasing if we educate and provide family planning...

...wait, the Bush administration wants to teach abstinence only and make deeper cuts into family planning.

[AllieB]

90. It's none of my business

It's a decision between a woman and her doctor.

[Strawman]

93. Logically unfettered access to contraception to make them less necessary

and seems desirable to me. But utlimately, if a woman decides to terminate a preganacy at any time, it's just nobody else's goddamn business.

Still, I think in an environment where there was sex education and freely available contraception in all forms proven to be effective and medically safe, my prediction is that the number of abortions would decrease because they would be less necessary as a result of choice.

[in_cog_ni_to]

95. No I don't care and it's really none of our business TO CARE.

CHOICE. A woman MUST HAVE the choice to do what she needs to do. If that means have an abortion, so be it. That's her right. As long as she's not in some back alley using a coat hanger, I'm cool with whatever choice any woman makes and if those choices increase the abortion count...TOO BAD. Such is life in a Democracy where abortion is LEGAL.

[question everything]

96. Ouch! You do meant "they're safe" right? (nt)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

99. None of the above, although the second is close.

Having an abortion is often the least worst option available to a woman, but in many (not all) cases it's heavily traumatic, and I'd prefer it if fewer women found themselves in situations where that was the least worst option.

Better sex education in schools and more easily-available contraception would be very useful, I think.

[omega minimo]

110. When you integrate improving social and economic status of women, you'll be getting closer.

[TommyO]

100. Went with the first choice

Reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies through better birth control and more education will naturally bring down the number of abortions performed. That said, it's not my place to determine how many abortions a person is allowed.

[retread]

101. No. n/t

[Beacho]

111. You forgot "None Of My Damn Business"

Which I would heartily vote for.

[PistolSteve]

117. ???

Then you would answer the first option? No one says it is your business - the poll asks your OPINION.

[Renew Deal]

123. Those that answer no are savages.

Because if you are pro choice and have no interest in reducing the needs and causes of abortion, you should rethink your position.

[novalib]

129. JUDGMENTAL MUCH???

Gee, so those of us who think that it is NOBODY'S BUSINESS (other than the woman having them) how many abortions someone has are SAVAGES????!!!!!

And we SHOULD rethink our positions??!!!

Tell me, since I am just a mere savage, what else "should I do"??

I wish I were so judgmental!

[Renew Deal]

131. Not at all

Point A has nothing to do with Point B. I agree. It is nobody's business how many abortions someone has. That has nothing to do with the fact that fewer abortions would be better.

[novalib]

158. And "FEWER ABORTIONS' Would Be "BETTER"

And "fewer abortions" would be "BETTER" because.........?????

[PistolSteve]

166. No, better family planning access is BETTER - don't care how it affects abortions nt

[Renew Deal]

174. Fewer medical procedures

and hospital visits is always preferable.

[novalib]

179. REALLY?

Fewer medical procedures and hospital visits is always preferable???

Really?

Funny, I thought that if someone needed hospitalization on medical procedures, they should have as many of them as they need!

[Renew Deal]

181. Huh?

So what's the disagreement?

[uppityperson]

212. fewer women would be chosing to get them

fewer women would be pregnant while not wanting to be. Make it so no woman would get pregnant unless she wanted to, thus decreasing abortions because they wouldn't be needed.

How to get to that point is the problem.
Choices:
limit abortions by cost, accessability, legality.
provide better, less harmful contraception, more accessible, more useable
how?

[omega minimo]

135. The question, the poll, the choices, the assumptions, the omissions are all BOGUS

and making the NO answer associated with a flippant attitude to "3 or 4 or 5" is an insult to women and an insult to the intelligence of the people answering this bogus poll.

The bogus choice gives you the false impression:

"Because if you are pro choice and have no interest in reducing the needs and causes of abortion, you should rethink your position."

The way the poll is set up and designed can only damage discussion, not help.

:thumbsdown:

[PistolSteve]

139. "a flippant attitude to "3 or 4 or 5"

damn right I have a 'flippant' attitude. Abortion is not unethical, it is not murder, it is not a sin, it isn't wrong and I don't care or feel bad if someone has 50 abortions if they want.

This poll isn't about birth control, it's about abortions.

[omega minimo]

147. Well maybe other people arent' as flippant about abortion as you are

including women, Pro Choice people and people who respect women and Choice.

I answered your question about how screwed up the poll is above.



"....making the NO answer associated with a flippant attitude to "3 or 4 or 5" is an insult to women and an insult to the intelligence of the people answering this bogus poll."

[PistolSteve]

152. My point is that if you feel abortions are ethical...

it shouldn't matter how many you have. If you feel they're unethical - then you shouldn't be in favor of any - even in cases of rape.

[omega minimo]

157. Again, you need to include respect for women in your thinking next time

[PistolSteve]

162. How is this any disrespect to women? That I want better birth control but...

could care less if they have an abortion?

Seems like you're the one that needs to learn respect.

[omega minimo]

186. See #118 and #135

and consider this: is anything in your thinking or your poll from a woman's point of view or only the point of view of total strangers judging the rights of other?

[Name removed]

196. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PistolSteve]

136. TERRIBLE LOGIC

No one here (I am guessing) is against preventing abortions by better education/access to birth control. But lower abortion rates are a CONSEQUENCE of that.

I want people who want birth control to get it. For free. But those who don't want it, or get pregnant anyways... I can care less if they have an abortion.

[omega minimo]

151. TERRIBLE LOGIC describes your poll

and it created the inevitable ill-logical flamefest

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

178. I Find Myself In Agreement.

I'm a bit taken back by those who don't think reducing the circumstances that lead to abortion is a bad thing somehow. I don't know if it's knee jerk reaction, lack of understanding the premise or what. I'm just perplexed by it.

Abortions are not only a medical procedure that carries with it risks, but it also is something that is many times severely emotionally damaging to the woman who chooses to have one. What we're talking about here is looking for ways to responsibly reduce the need to have to consider an abortion in the first place, thereby reducing the physical and emotional risk to women. Not sure how or why that is considered something horrible by some here. Really perplexing.

[Renew Deal]

180. No has lost 2% since my post

Hopefully we're making people think.

[omega minimo]

184. IT'S A FALSE CHOICE.

Think about that

[Hosnon]

244. Seriously...all things being equal...who WANTS abortions? nt

[Catherine Vincent]

126. I'm like Clinton. Safe and rare. n/t

[PistolSteve]

176. I don't care about rare... nt

[donheld]

130. Yes I care about the number

I care about the number of unwanted pregnancies if there are fewer unwanted pregnancies there would be fewer abortions.

[Hippo_Tron]

140. Seems to me this is like reducing the number of open heart surgeries

You always want to avoid surgery if possible. Now if you're really asking even if you're pro-choice is there part of you that still thinks the fetus is a life, then that's a different matter entirely one that probably should be left up to the philosophers.

[Alexander]

141. Yes, and we can reduce them through distribution of birth control.

Seems like common sense to me.

[GoneOffShore]

149. You neglected to ask an important question:

Do you know how many pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage?

The figure I saw the other day (sorry no link) seems to be 20%.

Now, ask the question - what percentage of pregnancies end by induced abortions?

[LittleClarkie]

153. I think that Reid is thinking along the lines of Clinton

Safe, legal and rare. Stats show, I hear, that there were fewer abortions under Clinton than Bush. People were more hopeful then.

I don't think having that same procedure done is terribly healthy, and if education and birth control can be helpful, then I think those avenues should be pursued.

[Megahurtz]

156. NO.

It's no one else's business whatsoever if someone else has an abortion.
Don't like Abortion! Then DON'T HAVE ONE!:argh:

If it's not your body, then it's NOT your business!

[novalib]

161. EXACTLY!!!!

If someone wants to have one, two, three, or ten abortions -- IT IS NO ONE ELSE's BUSINESS!!!!

[Megahurtz]

177. YES!

And I could care less if they have an Abortion for Birth Control or not,
and I could care less about this stupid buzz word phrase "reducing the number of Abortions"
because that implies "control"!

We will not be controlled into Forced Birth! That's disgusting!

People need to keep their noses out of other people's crotches!

:rant:

I am surprized how many people on DU want to "reduce the number of Abortions" crap!
It's akin to a bunch of Freepers or something!

[Deja Q]

172. Nothing is one-sided.

In a perfect world, abortion wouldn't be a want... or a need.

[uppityperson]

188. Other, combination of 1&2

I don't care how many abortions anyone has, except for the possibility of harm to the woman. My problem with #2 is the "ethical" part. I would like to see less abortions IF the reason were more prevention, more accessible SAFE contraception.

And yes, I have worked in clinics working with contraception, choice, and doing abortions. Rarely would people repeat more than a couple times, but we had 1 person who got several abortions in several yrs, leading to talk amongst we clinicians about morality, choice, education, etc etc etc.

[yurbud]

200. Guttmacher Institute Poll on why women get abortions (just want to inject some FACTS) into the mix

[yurbud]

202. GUTTMACHER POLL: abortion & use of other contraceptives (46% weren't using other methods)

RESULTS: Forty-six percent of women had not used a contraceptive method in the month they conceived, mainly because of perceived low risk of pregnancy and concerns about contraception (cited by 33% and 32% of nonusers, respectively). The male condom was the most commonly reported method among all women (28%), followed by the pill (14%). Inconsistent method use was the main cause of pregnancy for 49% of condom users and 76% of pill users; 42% of condom users cited condom breakage or slippage as a reason for pregnancy. Substantial proportions of pill and condom users indicated perfect method use (13-14%). As many as 51,000 abortions were averted by use of emergency contraceptive pills in 2000.


http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.html

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

203. I chose No. It's none of my business. Period. eom

[krabigirl]

210. I answered no - it's absolutely none of my business.

[uppityperson]

215. The number of things I didn't reply, number of posts I didn't post

many

[tinfoil tiaras]

223. I would never (personally) get an abortion

I probably won't be in a situation that that option would ever occur to me--I'm pretty good (haha). And, I personally don't like abortions and I think that they should be safe, legal and as rare as possible. We need to get better sex ed in schools (no more absenence only bullshit--that "education" actually INCREASES abortions because the kids don't know how to use B/C) and more access to birth control to prevent abortions.

I don't think that abortion should be illegal though, because it's wrong to legislate one persons morals into law.

[Hosnon]

226. Yes I do... there should be as few as possible:

There are two interests involved in abortions:

1) Mother's (various reasons including privacy, health, autonomy, etc.)

2) Child's (life).

The scale favors the mother at conception and gradually shifts until it favors the child at birth. Allowing abortions does not remove the child's interest, it simply recognizes the supremacy of the mother's interest above that of the child.

I don't necessarily believe that conception equals life but I tentatively believe that the blob of cells "increases" in life-ness as the pregnancy progresses.

And reduction of loss of life is something I promote so long as there are no other interests that trump it (as there are regarding abortions). Assuming that all of those interests are accounted for, reduction of loss of life kicks in...hence: as few as possible.

[Odin2005]

227. Abortion is a necessary evil.

I don't partularily like it, but is is better then millions of unwanted and unloved kids who will live miserable lives.

PS: Novalib needs to take a chill pill, it's like she screams in every thread she posts in...

[Hosnon]

230. Ooh boy...you've done it now...

:hide:

Abortions are evil AND Novalib needs to chill?!?! Like I said:

:hide:

[Megahurtz]

236. That's a Good Explaination.

Some people who have never had a hard time just don't get it.

However, maybe you (and others) should hear what novalib is saying instead
of throwing up a wall by focusing on the CAPS.
I don't really like all of the "ganging up" on novalib on this thread.
What she says makes perfect sense if you take the time to listen.

[novalib]

239. A Necessary EVIL????!!!!!! WTF?????!!!!!!!!

Abortion is a necessary "EVIL"?????!!!!!

A NECESSARY EVIL????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

Here's a NEWFLASH FOR YOU:

ABORTION IS A MEDICAL PROCEDURE!!!

A NECESSARY MEDICAL PROCEDURE!!!!!!!

Do you think that heart surgery is a necessary EVIL??!!!

Or how about surgery to remove a cancer??!! Is that EVIL, too?!?!?!

I CAN ASSURE YOU OF THIS -- WOMEN WHO NEED TO HAVE ABORTIONS do NOT CONSIDER THEM "EVIL"!!!

And, if you REALLY think that abortion is a necessary "EVIL", then what is it, exactly, that you are saying about the women who have abortions?!?!?!?

THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I GET SOOOOO UPSET ABOUT THIS -- It is EXACTLY THIS ATTITUDE (abortion = evil) that leads people to saying that abortions should be reduced!!!!!!!

[Hosnon]

241. Zing...Man I'm good:) nt

[Odin2005]

242. Heart surgery doesn't kill anything...

[PistolSteve]

247. neither does an abortion... nt

[Hosnon]

249. Wow...try to be a little less obvious about your baiting. nt

[novalib]

250. And NEITHER DOES A SAFE ABORTION!!!

A safely-done abortion also does NOT kill anything!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

265. That's A Matter Of Your Opinion, Not Fact, Just To Be Clear.

Because there are many, many people who feel that it is killing a fetus and soon to be child.

Just making that clearer, since you seemed to declare your opinion as if it were fact, and not merely a personal perception.

[novalib]

271. "Killing" is SUCH a Charged Term......

Oh, my.

"Killing".

Such a charged term.

I'm sure you know that.

Tomorrow, I think I need to kill some fingernails.

And I need to see my dentist soon. I hope I don't have to kill one of my teeth.

Oh, and I think I might engage in a slaughter of some hair.

And I'll absolutely massacre some skin tomorrow when I exfoliate.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

277. Please See Post 277, And Replace The Word Cancer With Any Of Those Things Mentioned Above.

You are repeating illogical analogies the concepts of which have already been obliterated; by you, no less. You won your own argument.. errrrrr lost your own argument, errrr obliterated your own point, or something. So just replace the word cancer in post 277 with any of your concepts above, and then follow the same post trail to arrive at the conclusion for each.

Goodnight now. :hi:

[novalib]

285. WHAAAAAAAAT?!?!?!?!

OK.

I looked at post 277. It had to do with singing songs to malignant tumors that had been removed. And telling them that I love them. Or weirder yet, actually crying if I thought they were in pain!!!!!

(Some folks think I am the weird one here!!!)

And then I went to the post you referenced -- the one where I talk about killing fingernails, killing teeth, slaughtering hair, and massacring skin.

And I am supposed to do WHAT?

Sing to my fingernails???

Tell my teeth that I love them???!!!

Cry if I think my hair is in pain??

Sing to my skin???!!

Sorry, but that's just WAYYY TOO WEIRD for me!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

287. Exactly. So Maybe Comparing Them All As If Equal Wasn't The Brightest Idea Then?

:think:

Hey, You just won another one of your arguments! .....eeerrr rather Lost! another one of your arguments... errrr obliterated your own premise. errr, or somethin, I think :applause:

[Odin2005]

290. You are comparing a fetus to skin cells?

:eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

263. Quick Follow Up Question: If You Hadn't Removed The Cancer, What Is The Likelihood That

you would end up singing it to sleep at night, telling it how much you love it, or crying if it were in pain?

Just curious, cause you seem to be declaring fetuses to be the same as cancer. Personally, I see a big difference in the two but to each their own.

[novalib]

267. Are You SERIOUS???!!!!

Are you serious???

Who in their right mind would sing to a malignant tumor that had been removed?

Who in their right mind would tell a malignant tumor how much they loved it??!!!!

And who would even care if a malignant tumor felt that it was in pain (and I had NO IDEA that tumors cried)??!!!!!

And people say that I NEED TO TAKE A CHILL PILL!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

269. Exactly. So Maybe Comparing The Two As If Equal Wasn't The Brightest Idea Then?

:think:

[cynatnite]

272. And my day ends with a laugh. Thank you n/t

[novalib]

274. Excuse me, BUT

Excuse me, but I think you are a bit strange.

Would you really sing to an aborted fetus??

Or tell it how much you love it?

Is it only aborted fetuses that you would do that do?

How about miscarriages?

Sorry to be so gross here, but you DID say that I had equated removed cancer cells to something.

And WHAT I equated removed cancer cells to was to REMOVED fetuses.

[Hosnon]

278. Come on, Nova...you don't understand what he means? nt

[novalib]

280. OF COURSE!

Of course I understand what he means.

He means to say that abortion is murder.

And that people who have abortions are murderers.

He is trying to say that abortion is EVIL.

I've heard it all before.

[Hosnon]

282. Perhaps...but what is evident from the face of the statements is that he is pointing out

why a fetus-cancer analogy is not quite accurate.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

283. Pssst. Hey. Yeah You, Over Here: Look At The Big Words In My Post That Said "If You Hadn't Removed"

Them there's some purty important words in consideration of context methinks.

Hadn't removed. H a d n ' t R e m o v e d. Now you're left with a healthy cancer and a healthy fetus. If the choice to dispose of them is being portrayed as equal, than so too is their existence prior. So if the choice was not made to abort or remove the cancer, would you hug it and kiss it and sing to it at night, or cry when it felt pain?

If you open your mind up justttt a wee bit more, I'm hoping you can understand the concepts of why your analogizes are in fact so callous and ridiculous.

[novalib]

286. Ummmm.... IF I HADN'T REMOVED THE CANCER ---

Ummmm.......If I HADN'T REMOVED THE CANCER, I think I would be dead!!!

And I guarantee you, I don't think I would ever hug and kiss my cancerous tumor.

And the thought of kissing it ---- well, let's just say it leaves me cold.

And, as to crying if I thought my cancerous tumor was in pain -- well, I don't think I'd shed too many tears over a cancer cell that felt pain.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

288. So Now For Yet A THIRD Time: Maybe It Wasnt The Brightest Idea To Compare The Two Through Analogy.

:think:

You're just seeing the light all over the place, tearin into your own concepts and obliterations and the illogical premises like that. Good for you! Keep fighting against yourself and winning! (errr losing, or something). Maybe in due time the concepts will become clearer.

[Deja Q]

246. I must agree.

I don't like it either.

In a perfect world, there would be no need or want to abort.

People want to abort because of cost or convenience factors.

People need to abort because of cost or health factors.

Or people see what the future is turning into...

And your own points about unwanted and unloved kids, I agree.

In a better world it wouldn't be necessary or desired whatsoever.

Repugs can talk about marriage and everything else... but the cost of offshoring enough is enough to incite a divorce when you lose your job because of it... but then they say YOU are the problem because THEY offshored. Not very accurate in the gross majority of cases. Yet they still want people to make more babies. Why? To freely tease them? To live in a land of false promise?

The psychological damage to this country must be enormous by now.

[tinfoil tiaras]

273. I agree.

Safe, legal and as rare as possible. How do we make abortions rare? Better sex ed in schools and wider avalability of birth control.

[Odin2005]

289. Exactly.

[daveskilt]

232. Safe Legal and Rare - now can i get elected

:evilgrin:

[Irreverend IX]

252. Why isn't there a poll option for more abortions?

The more the better if you ask me, especially if they're late-term abortions, because those look cooler.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

266. Well, Since Late-Term Abortions Outside Of Medical Necessity Are Infanticides, I'm Not Sure We

would want to be condoning their use outside of medical emergency or infant inviability.

[Odin2005]

292. Also, as a person who was born 2 months premature I have huge qualms about...

...how ethical late-term abortions are. If a newborn born a 7 months is considered a person then a 7 month fetus should be one too.

[Odin2005]

291. WTF? That is one sick post.

[Irreverend IX]

297. Man, some people just can't take a joke... nt

[Odin2005]

303. DOH! I though you were serious there.

:spank:

[ecstatic]

261. I voted yes, due to health consequences of unwanted pregnancy

As you said in the first option, I have no reason to care about the morality of 0 versus 5 abortions; but the health risks involved in an unwanted pregnancy (regardless of whether the pregnancy is aborted or carried to term) are definitely a concern.

Please note that I'm not referring to the health risks of abortion versus giving birth (as giving birth is just as dangerous if not more than abortion). What I am referring to is the risk of having an abortion versus not getting pregnant in the first place.

It is my hope that one day women will never be faced with the prospect of an unwanted pregnancy because birth control access will be plentiful, affordable, and convenient.

[LisaL]

294. The number of abortions should be limited.

I knew several women whose reproductive systems got messed up with severe consequences because of abortion.

[uppityperson]

298. what type, when, etc?

early, mid, late trimester, legal or not, how long ago, what do you mean messed up?

[LisaL]

306. Messed up-not able to have children when they wanted them.

[uppityperson]

308. I understand that, was wondering about the abortions.

What decade (1950s, etc), were they legal or illegal ones, what trimester, any complications (perforated uterus, infections) as all of these vary and can impact the outcome for the woman and just "had abortion" doesn't give enough information.

[VelmaD]

296. how about everyone just minds their own fucking business

If you want to lower the number of abortions...then don't have one or don't get someone pregnant who doens't want to be. I'm sick and tired of people asking this question because it's so loaded with judgemental attitudes. If a woman wants to have an abortion it's none of my fucking business. And it's nobody else's either unless she chooses to bring them into the decision. Period. All this hand-wringing over the number of abortions just proves the extent to which we've let the right-wing nutjobs pick the ground for debate.

[Erika]

311. I agree 1000 percent

It is a personal and privacy issue. Things the GOP do not understand in their quest for big brother theocratic government.

[Erika]

312. So just tell us the punitve actions you will take

on women who want abortions? You will force them to deliver or what? They are chattel?
Please, tell us the punishment and restrictions on women who want abortions which you disagree with. 100 lashes, forced delivery? Consulting the Taliban?

[uppityperson]

313. Hi Erika, did you mean this towards the OP as it looks like you are asking yourself?

Bit of a confusing topic at times, going all sorts of which ways.

[madmusic]

307. 3 or 4 - you can't call one abortion ethical and five not

A serial abortioner?

[yurbud]

314. it is not ethical as much as it is something we pragmatically allow like smoking, gambling, and

country music.

It is not necessarily a good thing, but driving it underground makes it worse.

[Wonk]

317. Your other, now deleted, thread about rounding up all muslims into camps

because "they breed too much" puts this poll into a *cough* interesting *cough* light.

[Wonk]

318. Whoops, I suppose I should have looked first. We're talking to a tombstone.

Good.

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

319. I'm going to lock this

since the OP is no longer with us.

best,
wakemeupwhenitsover
DU Moderator