Home - List All Discussions

My Ever Changing Stance on Abortion 2

How do I describe myself?

by: LiberalChiRo

I still consider myself pro-life.
I believe abortion should not be legal if the woman is mentally and physically healthy AND the unborn is also healthy.
I still feel abortion should be legal in all cases of medical necessity. This means even predicted danger to the mother. If a woman has a significant possibility of death, then she should be allowed to abort. If the unborn is ill, she should have the right to abort.
If she was raped, she should have the right to abort. If she is very young, she should have the right to abort.
So the ONLY case where a woman should not be able to abort in my opinion is if she is having a healthy pregnancy with no unusual ill effects on her body or mind. Pregnancy isn't all flowers and roses, but I should think women can withstand some discomfort as opposed to slaughtering their children.
Sex is a right. Sex can cause pregnancy, but women shouldn't be punished for having sex by being forced to give birth in all cases. Each woman's case should be investigated to determine if she really needs an abortion.
People can be refused for all kinds of procedures and it's not called an invasion of privacy. Why is abortion suddenly an invasion of privacy? It makes no sense. There are two patients, and while pro-choice tries to obscure the fetus, pro-life tries to obscure the woman. Their rights are nearly equal, but in cases of maternal danger, her life comes first especially if the unborn is not yet viable.
I think of it just like triaging patients in a disaster. Doctors will operate on not just the most severely injured, but those who have the highest chance of survival. In the case of a problem pregnancy, that's the woman.
I have a plan, as I'm sure many of us do. But my plan has steps, and I believe it is smart. I'd first like to see the limit for elective abortions lowered to 17 or even as low as 12 weeks. 6-12 is when most elective abortions take place anyway, so lowering the elective abortion to 12 weeks isn't going to change much of anything. In fact, most people wouldn't even notice.
Past 12 weeks, and up to 25 weeks, the limits would be stricter. It wouldn't be down to only medical emergencies. Rape, young age, incest, mental health, and cases where being pregnant and giving birth would severely and negatively impact the woman's life should be allowed an abortion. This is where the woman would have to go through a psychological evaluation if mental health is her claim, and a physical exam/history if predicted severe physical reactions to the pregnancy is the claim. Her life may not be in danger yet, but if she can prove that it will be, or that it has happened so in past pregnancies, then she should be allowed an abortion at this time.
Past 25 weeks, and up to 35 weeks, the woman will have to be in physical danger or suffering from clear mental distress. Rape cases will no longer be allowed. Her chances of mortality must be significantly higher than for a normal pregnancy and preventative measures should be taken if they would safely prolong gestation without causing undue stress to the mother.
After 35 weeks and up to birth the unborn should never been purposely killed unless it is absolutely and acutely necessary. I can't think of a single situation where removing it dead would be faster than removing it alive. C-section is identical in either case. Such a case would probably be due to an injury not caused by the pregnancy itself, and the woman needs operated on to save her life. Most doctors will fight to save her life first. Again, that's going to be incredibly rare.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No replies? I'm surprised.

reply from: lukesmom

No way would this work. I was told by a psycologist, I should terminate because I had a history of chronic depression. There are so many diagnosises that can be "made up" and unable to be verified.

reply from: galen

Once a child is viable abortion as an option makes no sense... deliver tha baby and adopt it out.. killing for killings sake, is just plain old wrong.

reply from: lukesmom

Grasshoppa, you are on a journey and you are questioning and that is good. I am going to give you some articles to read. See what you think.
Choosing Life
Miriam Luxenberg
This article appears with special permissoin of Ms. Luxenberg and www.aish.com.

"I'm sorry Mrs. Luxenberg, it looks like you're going to have to abort the baby. You don't really have a choice."
The doctor approached me with a slight look of disapproval on his face. Things had been proceeding disastrously until this point, and now they'd gotten even worse. An infected gall bladder had progressed into a life-threatening situation. Removal of the wayward gallstone that was causing all the problems had necessitated the use of a heavy dose of radiation, apparently putting the 6-week-old fetus hiding in my womb in mortal danger.
My head started to spin.
"Thank you, doctor. I'll have to speak with my husband before we do anything drastic."
"There's nothing to really think about, Mrs. Luxenberg. Do you want to give birth to a deformed baby?"
I groaned and turned my head away. He took the hint and left.
His words hurt and frightened me. We had invested so much hope in this baby. After losing our first to SIDS after an extensive coma, and our second having undergone a painful and prolonged stay in the neo-natal intensive-care ward, we had been so heartened when I found myself expecting again. All signs had been finally pointing to a normal pregnancy and birth. This baby was supposed to be our comfort, our ticket to normalcy. However, fate had seemed to just throw another curve ball our way, and this was a big one.
Abort? Abort our precious hope? How would my husband react? My parents?
I was in the midst of my reverie when my mind involuntarily rolled back to a conversation I had about a year before with a different set of doctors Same topic, different circumstances.
Our second child, now several months old, had been languishing in the intensive-care ward since birth. She had been diagnosed with a serious and incurable genetic disorder. One day her doctors called us in for an emergency conference. We arrived tense, and were confused to find them in an unusually relaxed and upbeat mood.
"I received the results of the skin biopsy." The doctor started talking before we even sat down. "Very unusual. Either your daughter's disease is more rare than we thought, or else it has disappeared entirely. You're all staying here until we get to the bottom of this."
The disease, thank God, had vanished. Unbeknownst to these experts, at least until now, there was actually a form of the genetic metabolic disease our baby daughter suffered from wherein the vital process of enzyme production existed, but was merely delayed. After about two weeks, it begins dutifully producing, and the body starts to function normally.
"You should know," our doctors told us as we all gathered for a celebratory parting, "that when we test for these diseases in-utero, we immediately and strongly recommend abortion when the results are positive, as we would have for you had we spotted it then. But from now on we will think twice. If there's even the slightest chance for these children to recover and a lead a normal life, perhaps we should give it to them. Even though you suffered so much, at least it will bring the chance of life to children who may have never been allowed to be born."
These words ran through my mind now, along with a picture of our beautiful and vibrant daughter, as I contemplated my current dilemma. What if her doctors had diagnosed her in-utero? And what if we had listened to their advice?
I tried to focus on the present. Was it really all so cut and dry? First of all, where was it written in stone that all fetuses exposed to radiation are born deformed? Second of all, does that automatically make it right for me to terminate his life?
Yet the image of the alternative, and the pain that it would bring to everyone involved, was totally overwhelming.
WHO ARE WE TO JUDGE?
When my husband walked into the hospital room, my heart shattered as I broke the news. He heaved a sigh and we quietly sat together for a while, absorbing the latest crisis, a position we had unfortunately found ourselves accustomed to.
"Should we? Are we even allowed to?" I asked between sobs. Since Benjy and I had become more committed to Jewish observance, we had discovered that the Torah has very definite and wise guidelines concerning every circumstance, from the seemingly trivial to the most profound.
My husband shook his head. "Miri, I just don't know," he confessed. "But remember what the rabbi told us about Joshua?" He was referring to our first baby, whose life had been painfully brief but extremely meaningful. "How every Jewish soul is precious and has a purpose in life, even if it's beyond our understanding. Perhaps the same applies here as well."
How well I remembered. The rabbi's clear-headed guidance, and warm support of the unconditional preciousness of life had been the anchor which got us through some very tough decisions during our first child's ordeal, until he passed away from his coma after five months.
My husband continued to speak, his voice choked with emotion. "Who are we to take away this baby's chance to fulfill his potential, whatever it may be? Who are we to judge?"
I nodded. In my heart I agreed with him. Yet the doctor seemed so sure...
I reminded Benjy about the conversation we had with the doctors concerning our daughter, our second child. "Who would have dreamed that there was a strain of beta-oxidase deficiency that corrected itself? How many other babies had that strain and never got the chance that Rachel did -- because their parents took their doctors' advice at face value?"
My husband nodded and sat quietly, his eyes focusing inward. "Miri, let's call the rabbi back and see what he has to say."
THE JEWISH VIEW
The rabbi confirmed our feelings. After patiently hearing us out and asking a number of pointed questions about the medical details, he responded gently but emphatically. "I know you're in a lot of pain, and I admit that it would be hard for me to remain strong in your shoes. But in the eyes of the Torah, there is absolutely no reason to abort this baby. There is no compelling evidence, neither medically nor in Jewish law, to support an abortion in this case."
He explained how the preciousness and importance of the human soul equally applies to the yet-unborn child. He told us that while Torah law did permit abortion in certain circumstances, these cases were rare, such as when the mother's life would be directly endangered by carrying the baby. He explained that the fetus did possess a soul, and was in many ways, both legally and mystically, a human being, worthy of as much consideration as any other human life.
"There is every reason to believe that you will give birth to a normal, healthy child," the rabbi assured us. "The doctors may feel that they are playing the odds, but with stakes so high, we must bet on the side of life. And..." he added softly, "even in the doctor's worst case scenario -- an abnormal child -- the ethical thing to do would be to allow him to come into the world, and try our best to help him live out whatever life that the Creator has planned for him."
I found his words sobering, yet encouraging. Indeed with my own eyes, I've seen babies struggle under the most adverse, depressing, hopeless circumstances. I've seen how their life force is so strong, so powerful, that they are able to overcome almost anything.
I hoped and prayed that the baby I was carrying would be able to overcome whatever was destined for him to endure.
I also prayed the same for us.
FROM WORRY TO JOY
A few days later, I lay in my hospital bed when a young intern came "to chat." My decision not to abort had circled the hospital ward and was met with disbelief bordering on disgust.
The woman looked at me with a pitying expression on her face. "I don't understand you," she began. "Why do you want to have a baby when there will definitely be something wrong with it? Is that fair to the baby and to you?"
I was walking on eggshells and tried to carefully explain our decision which was based on Judaism's point of view.
"I hear what you're saying," I began. "Yes it would be uncomfortable to have a baby that wasn't healthy. It seems like it wouldn't be fair, I know. But the baby is already here. His soul has already arrived in this world. I'm not allowed to send him back just because we'll all be uncomfortable. Please understand -- I've had 'unhealthy' babies before, in fact, only unhealthy ones, and from them I learned one thing. It was only their bodies that were weak. Their souls were strong and blazed like fire, and that's really the most important thing. Thank you for being concerned, but please, don't feel sorry for me, or for the baby. We're in good Hands."
She shook her head and walked away, confused and at a loss for words. This was clearly a departure from the worldview she had absorbed at medical school.
We packed up and left the hospital a few days later, minus one gallstone and plus one heavy burden, which we tried to carry as gracefully as possible despite our fears. We felt confident that our decision not to abort was not atypical despite the doubts of the medical staff. For any believing Jew who finds himself in a difficult situation, following the Torah's guidelines, no matter how unpleasant or uncomfortable, is a rational and wise response.
Seven tense yet exhilarating months later, I gave birth to a normal, healthy baby boy -- so perfect and so beautiful that people stopped me in the streets for many months afterward, commenting on his unusual beauty.
Benjy and I rejoiced. It seems as though all those doubts and worries had been transformed into prayers and blessings, which had then been abundantly answered.

reply from: lukesmom

Overcoming Rape
I became pregnant at age 18 through acquaintance rape by a neighbor. I didn't know that what he had done was considered criminal sexual assault and was against the law. I was so numb that I felt like I was dead, so I told no one about the rape. My mother died when I was 12, and my alcoholic father abused my six younger siblings and me on a daily basis. Shortly after I found out I was pregnant my father kicked me out of the house for good. I was literally homeless, jobless, motherless, penniless, pregnant, and alone. Everyone was encouraging and pressuring me to get an abortion saying things like, "You know what you have to do." I was even offered money to "get rid of it." I had no support and at times I felt like I was drowning in darkness. Yet I had one magnificent secret gift - the flourishing life of my unborn baby. This life gave me a thread of hope to begin to heal. After 29 hours of prolonged labor, I gave birth to a precious baby girl with blue eyes and dark hair, so tiny and so vulnerable. I named her Jennifer, and I knew she was a sacred gift to be loved and cherished. My daughter is wonderful and she has touched many lives including my own. I am so thankful for giving birth to her; I have no regrets.
If you have been raped, please realize the worst is over. I want to encourage you to reach out for help to start the healing process. My own painful experience is a reminder of what can happen when boundaries are crossed and sex is used as power and control. It is so important to wait until marriage! I claimed second virginity until I married a wonderful man who adopted my daughter. If you have been raped, please realize that virginity is not something that can be taken from you; it is a gift that you choose to give. You may not physically be a virgin, but you can decide in your heart to choose second virginity and save that gift for your husband on your wedding night. You'll never regret choosing to wait until marriage!
-Cindy
Jennifer (Cindy's daughter) writes:
Going through junior high and high school people would often say to me, "I'm against abortion except in the cases of rape and incest." You can imagine how I felt when they said that! They thought abortion was a bad thing - except in my case. That was pretty scary from my point of view. When I would tell someone that I was conceived during an acquaintance rape I would always see a transformation in their face. I could tell that they were realizing their double standard. They would finally recognize that I (the baby) didn't deserve to die just because of my father's crime.

reply from: lukesmom

Applause from Hell
April 2nd, 2007 by Fr. Frank Pavone
If we think of hell, we might imagine screams coming out of the flames, or the sinister laughter of the devil. But the sound I recently heard coming from there was that of applause.
What I heard was an audiotape of Dr. Martin Haskell giving a presentation at the 16th Annual Meeting of the National Abortion Federation Conference in 1992 in San Diego. It was a gathering of abortionists - men and women who make their living by killing babies. Haskell was describing to his audience how to do a partial-birth abortion. Listen to his words about how this procedure takes place:
"The surgeon then introduces large grasping forceps ... through the vaginal and cervical canal ... He moves the tip of the instrument carefully towards the fetal lower extremities - and pulls the extremity into the vagina ... The surgeon then uses his fingers to deliver the opposite lower extremity, then the torso, the shoulders, and the upper extremities. The skull lodges in the internal os. The fetus is oriented ... spine up ... The surgeon then takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. ... the surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull - spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening. The surgeon - surgeon then introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents."
Haskell, having described these brutal details, shows his audience a video of himself doing one of these procedures. And at the end of the video, after the sound of the suction machine taking the brains out of the baby's head, the audience applauds.
That, my friends, is applause from hell.
We often speak about "the fires of hell." It is also true, however, to say that hell is very cold. It is the absence of all conscience, of all pity, of all love. That kind of hell is reflected on earth when a group of human beings can sit around a video machine, watch someone deliberately kill a baby, and then applaud. That's the heart and soul of the abortion industry. That's the heart and soul of "pro-choice."
It's the same chilling attitude of which Dr. Bernard Nathanson repented. He writes about how he felt after he killed his own child by abortion. "I swear to you that I had no feelings aside from the sense of accomplishment, the pride of expertise. On inspecting the contents of the bag I felt only the satisfaction of knowing that I had done a thorough job" (The Hand of God, p.60).
I am convinced that the first and overall most effective way to fight abortion is to expose it. People need to hear descriptions of the procedure, see what it looks like, and get a glimpse into the utter corruption of the abortion industry. Saint Paul tells the Ephesians, "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them" (Eph. 5:11). Let's put Paul's words into practice and spread the information in this column!

reply from: carolemarie

LRC--you sound pretty middle of the road, which is reasonable while you work things out....
What I think about is when you look in your classroom this fall, 6 students will be missing. 6 who could have been there, but died by abortion. That is sad...six more faces who should have been in your class, but got tossed in a biohazard bag and didn't even get a name......
That is why abortion sucks. It is a mean thing to do to someone.

reply from: Hosea

Hey Lib,
You are really starting to think this through. Good for you. The more knowledge/truth you aquire the clearer the pro-life side will be to you. I am glad you are taking your time and thinking this through.
Hey Luke's Mom, Thanks for the posts . They were great. I was goiing to find and post the same article on rape and you did it first. Thanks for saving me the trouble.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No way would this work. I was told by a psycologist, I should terminate because I had a history of chronic depression. There are so many diagnosises that can be "made up" and unable to be verified.
"Made up" cases are far more rare than real cases. I would hate to see a woman become permanently psychologically scarred because she couldn't abort.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I agree; and NONE of the cases I listed post viability were "killing for killings sake".

reply from: galen

i disagree... the way i read it abortion past was for health of the mother, mental disease...if the child is healthy then killing it will not cure the mom's distress...there for even if the mother can not or will not care for this viable and healthy child then aborting it will solve nothing. The end result of a dead child cures nothing... its the delivery of the child that is warrented in such cases... not the killing of the child...
there fore might you say what you support in a diffrent manner?
ie.. abortion for an UNVIABLE baby post 25 weeks...and for the health of the mom.. etc.? Otherwise your statement makes less sense...as a healthy child can be delivered and adopted out.
I know i ramble on this but your original staement leaves me confused on your stance.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

The wierdest things is this. The district decided to cut my job two weeks ago, before the year even started. Just this Monday, the principal found out she had a Paraprofessional position free. I'm going to be working in a classroom with severely developmentally and physically disabled pre-K and 1st grade students of varying ages. We have 3 students so far.
I also see 6 women. I see three who thought they couldn't graduate college without aborting. I see one who would have died because the pregnancy was ectopic. I see a rape victim, and I see a twelve year old. I see 6 women who are here.
As far as some of LM's posts: I feel that in cases with non-lethal or unsure deformities, the child should be born IF it is safe for the mother. In cases of clearly diagnosed deformities that are lethal for the unborn, I feel abortion should still be an option, especially if the unborn seems to be in pain, and especially if it is endangering the mother's life.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

As for rape, I know it's not the baby's fault, but I can also completely empathise with women who feel like they have a demon growing inside of them from the violation of rape they went through. That's one of the cases where I absolutely feel it is not my business to dictate if she should abort or not.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Actually yes, it would, if the pregnancy and existence of the child itself is causing her distress. It would also be a cure if the pregnancy hormones were causing her distress. It is most likely that the pregnancy itself (not the child) is causing the mental instability, and in that case the ONLY cure is removal of the pregnancy. IF the pregnancy was viable, then its possible the baby could be removed alive, but many doctors wouldn't do that. I'm not sure why killing it is better than giving it a chance. Then again, there are a lot more developmental and other issues with preemies. Do we want a growing population of disabled children - is that fair to them? Reminds me of Gattica.
Again, a preemie doesn't often equal a healthy baby, they have lots of problems.
It's the ending of the pregnancy, whatever that entails.
Well of course; and I think I said that, too. The problem with young preemies is that they don't may healthy babies.
And still, even for mental health, that is not killing for killing's sake. An elective abortion is. Not a mental health issue.

reply from: galen

so if i don't like my rapist its OK for me to walk up to him and dismember him?
Every court in the land will call that murder.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

A rapist is not attached to a woman via an umbilical cord.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Luksmom, what do you think about women who smoke/drink during pregnancy and their child ends up with fetal alcohol syndrome? I consider it child abuse. I also think that the woman in your example did something similar... she purposely underwent a procedure that she knew could harm the unborn.
Then again the difference is that it was to save her life. But for some reason, "to save her life" isn't a good enough reason normally for people on this forum. So going with that, why is what she did not considered child abuse according to my theory - imagine if the baby had been deformed by the radiation.
(I don't think it was, obviously, this is just a hypothetical question.)

reply from: galen

Actually yes, it would, if the pregnancy and existence of the child itself is causing her distress. It would also be a cure if the pregnancy hormones were causing her distress. It is most likely that the pregnancy itself (not the child) is causing the mental instability, and in that case the ONLY cure is removal of the pregnancy. IF the pregnancy was viable, then its possible the baby could be removed alive, but many doctors wouldn't do that. I'm not sure why killing it is better than giving it a chance. Then again, there are a lot more developmental and other issues with preemies. Do we want a growing population of disabled children - is that fair to them? Reminds me of Gattica.
Again, a preemie doesn't often equal a healthy baby, they have lots of problems.
It's the ending of the pregnancy, whatever that entails.
Well of course; and I think I said that, too. The problem with young preemies is that they don't may healthy babies.
And still, even for mental health, that is not killing for killing's sake. An elective abortion is. Not a mental health issue.
________________________________________
i think you need to look at the health picture of preemies in the weeks you described... most to exceedingly well...
yes a preemie is more prone to risk and complications than a normal gest age newborn... but that is no reason to dismember it or pull it from the womb and leave it to die.
there is no judtifiable reason to kill a healthy viable infant.. ever. If mom can't handle the child there are plenty of people out there who can. i just don't see the justification... A mom w/ a psychiatric condition need never see or know anything about the child once its adopted out.
Any other reason for health of the mom..ie preexclampsia etc. does not require the child's death in order for mom to live . therefor abortion in those cases is not warrented... anyone who tells you the reason they aborted a helthy child is lying if they say that its because mom was sick, most likely they wanted the abortion anyway.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I don't know if it's "no reason". I don't know. I think I'd leave it up to a doctor to advise me on that, personally. If s/he felt the child would have a severely impaired quality of life, I would have to think VERY hard about it.
You still don't understand... the psychicatric condition isn't the child's doing, it is the pregnancy itself, the hormones produced by the pregnancy. The fetus produced hormones too but what I'm trying to say is it is not the knowledge of the existence of the child that is causing her condition, it is the physical effects of the pregnancy. So it has nothing to do with the woman not being able to handle the idea of having a child - the pregnancy could even have been wanted!! But the pregnancy is messing up her mind. Her condition will get worse the longer she remains pregnant.
Preeclampsia often occurs close to the due date to my knowledge anyway, 30+ weeks, though the warning signs can occur earlier. Discovery channel has women deliver early for preeclampsia all the time.
And I have more faith in mankind than you do, apparently, as I would believe a woman who told me she aborted to save her life.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, kinda like slavery was eliminated in "steps", right? I mean we couldn't just come out and say "slavery is wrong, all slaves must be set free", could we? No, we had to say "All slaves over 50 shall be free"...... oh wait, no we didn't..... we (A. Lincoln) said "All slaves are free NOW".... period.
Your position reminds me of the one taken by Stephen Douglas when he was running against Lincoln for the presidential nomination. During the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1857, Douglas said that, while he was personally opposed to slavery, he would not legislate against it because it was up to the people to vote it up or down. Lincoln countered with: "He cannot say that he would as soon see a wrong voted up as voted down. When Judge Douglas says that whoever, or whatever community, wants slaves, they have a right to them, he is perfectly logical if there is nothing wrong in the institution; but if you admit that it is wrong, he cannot logically say that anybody has a right to do a wrong."
And if you admit that elective abortion is WRONG, you cannot logically say that anybody has a right to electively kill a baby NOW or ANYTIME.
I hope that someday you do become prolife, I think you would make a good activist. But you're just not there yet.

reply from: BossMomma

No way would this work. I was told by a psycologist, I should terminate because I had a history of chronic depression. There are so many diagnosises that can be "made up" and unable to be verified.
Really? I suffer a bi-polar disorder and my OB/GYN gave my a prescription for Lexapro for my anxiety attacks. Somehow I don't believe that a psychologist is qualified to advise a patient to terminate. That is a decision discussed between woman and doctor.

reply from: BossMomma

You'll never regret choosing to wait until marriage!
-Cindy
What is the deal with pre-marital sex? I just have to ask, does marriage somehow make the sex better or the resulting child more holy? Marriage was hell for me, I got pressured to marry my six year old's father by my mom and her "good ol' christian values" and I was controlled to the point that I couldn't open my own mail or go to the store alone or even just have some me-time. My boyfriend and I live seperately and are expecting our second child, it's been great so what's the deal?

reply from: yoda

And you think a psychologist isn't qualified to advise a woman to electively kill her unborn baby, but a "doctor" is?
What makes a doctor an expert on morality? Any fool can say "Yeah, you might as well go ahead and kill the little pest". It doesn't take a medical school degree to say that.....

reply from: LiberalChiRo

The unborn is different from a born baby by more than just skin color. At certain ages it can't even BREATHE. I just cannot ignore the differences between a born child and a 6 week embryo. I think to do so is grossly unintelligent.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No way would this work. I was told by a psycologist, I should terminate because I had a history of chronic depression. There are so many diagnosises that can be "made up" and unable to be verified.
Really? I suffer a bi-polar disorder and my OB/GYN gave my a prescription for Lexapro for my anxiety attacks. Somehow I don't believe that a psychologist is qualified to advise a patient to terminate. That is a decision discussed between woman and doctor.
Aren't some of those anti psychotics harmful for the unborn child? THAT'S why doctors advise abortion. They also advise abortion when, if the woman were not pregnant, she would be sane and the only issue causing her problems is the existence of the pregnancy.
It's like, if your foot was in a bear trap, you could take painkillers, but that doesn't fix the actual problem.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I don't regret not waiting. My first time was wonderful (and the times afterwards). I don't mind having experience. I like it. I have no idea what the big deal is about premarital sex... if it's done safely there's no problem. Everything we do in life has a risk, and sometimes very deadly risks. You could choke to death while eating, something necessary for your survival!
I am however a big proponent OF marriage. I think people who are in love deserve the right to marry and should marry. Any gender, by the way.

reply from: galen

_____________________________________________________
i think maybe we are both misunderstanding each other but here goes....
if the pregnacy is viable, you can deliver a 25 weeker and adopt it out... there is NO NEED to kill the child... killing the child will not help the mom in any way shape or form that the early delivery won't also do....
So why kill the child? there simply is no viable reason... except mom wants a dead baby.
Now if the argument was 12 weeks then you would have a point, but my argument with your original statement was not the earlier dates but the later ones.
hopefully that cleared this up.

reply from: yoda

You're so right. And a newborn baby is different from a teenager by more than just size, age, and development. At certain ages it can't even WALK. I just cannot ignore the differences between a newborn and a teenager. I think to do so is grossly unintelligent.

reply from: galen

"The highest density of pain receptors per square inch of skin in human development occurs in utero from 20 to 30 weeks gestation. During this period, the epidermis is still very thin, leaving nerve fibers closer to the surface of the skin than in older neonates and adult...Thus, a fetus at 20-32 weeks of gestation would experience a much more intense pain than older infants or children or adults..."
[expert testimony provided to the Northern District of the US District Court in CA (15Apr04), Dr. Sunny Anand (Dir, Pain Neurobiology Lab, Arkansas Children's Hospital Research), emphasis added]

reply from: galen

some could say that due to his sister's rape he was under the influence of rage... its really not so diffrent when BM plays holier than thou with his past that he attack hers...
* shrug*

reply from: lukesmom

How do you know? Anyone can make up many symptoms and report them to their doctor. Many diagnosises are made by symptoms only especially mental health and pain related diagnosises. I have seen it over and over again in drug abuse cases, why would trying to end a pregnancy be any different. In my case, depression was NOT detramental to my health and can be easily treated but yet abortion was recommended by a mental health professional. If you make an excemption for health reasons you open up the possibility for major abuse of the law.

reply from: lukesmom

I agree this would be child abuse but while I can't check every household for abuse, I also can't test every pregnant mother for signs of alcohol and tobacco abuse. Sometime in the past, I think, 15 yrs there was a pregnant mom who was repeatedly taken to detox for alcohol abuse. The judge confined her to the hospitla for her child's safety. No one even considered killing the child because he/she POSSIBLY could have had fetal alcohol syndrome. Would you kill a born child because he/she was abused to save him/her possible future pain? Of course not. Same difference with the unborn.
The reason "to save her life" IS good enough IF that is the truth. The woman in the story was 6 weeks pregnant. When she had the radiation she may not have even known she was pg. But even if she did, when you order any kind or treatment you often have to do a juggling act. You ask "Does the benefits of the treatment out weight the risks?" If you have a pregnant mother who has been diagnosed with a potential terminal cancer (for example) that needed immediate treatment, the benefits of the treatment ie: life for the mother, outwts the risks ie: POSSIBLE deformities in her child. Less dramatic and more realistic, dealing with a mom with chronic depression or diabetes or thyroid disease. The benefits of medications she has to take outweights the POSSIBLE risk to her child.

reply from: lukesmom

you don't understand. Most doctors have never delivered or dealt with a child with many of the diagnosises given prenatally. They have NO IDEA what it is like to live with a child with these diagnoses. Only the parents who live with these children know. Doctors are not Gods.. They don't know everything and often are as biased and any "regular guy" walking down the street. You cannot make a life altering (for yourself and your child) judgement by what a doctor recommends.
Try reading the proabort boards where moms are looking for support and info about if and how to have an abortion. 1/2 of them are advised not to tell their SO, families, friends, etc. Or told to tell everyone they miscarried. I don't find it hard at all hard to believe some women lie or "gloss over the truth".

reply from: lukesmom

I went to a psychologist who knew my family, dealt with him when my son was diagnosed ADHD. I was worried how my kids would deal with their baby dying either at birth or before by abortion. This man was good intentioned and recommended I terminate because carrying to term would be too difficult emotionally since I have a diagnosis of chronic depression.
Decisions are not "discussed" per sae with a woman and her doctor. He/she gives the woman info about abortion and that's about it. I was lucky, my docter gave me all the info about "terminating" but didn't push or refuse to deliver my baby when I decided to ctt. Not all women are so lucky.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Lukesmom:
She DID know she was pregnant, that was a major part of the story... and doing radiation at that age is extremely risky because of the young age of the embryo. Key organs are forming at that time, so I can completely understand the doctor's trepidation. The radiation could even have cause her to miscarry.

reply from: galen

try this link.....
http://cerner.healthatoz.com/Atoz/dc/tp/tpxray.asp

reply from: LiberalChiRo

you don't understand. Most doctors have never delivered or dealt with a child with many of the diagnosises given prenatally. They have NO IDEA what it is like to live with a child with these diagnoses. Only the parents who live with these children know. Doctors are not Gods.. They don't know everything and often are as biased and any "regular guy" walking down the street. You cannot make a life altering (for yourself and your child) judgement by what a doctor recommends.
I would. The doctor may not have raised a child with that condition, but they have a vast wealth of knowledge on the subject that I do not have. I would probably do research myself and talk to parents who have raised these children. I think women should be given these resources.
A doctor may never have broken their bone, but if they tell me not to move it for a month, I'm going to listen.
Try reading the proabort
Pro-choice.
If their SO etc is trying to force them to give birth or otherwise impair the woman's rights, of course they're advised to be silent. It's regrettable because these other people would try to force the woman to do someting against her will. I want the woman to choose life, not to be forced into it.
I have many times advised women not to abort based off of their own insecurity with the procedure.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

How do you know? Anyone can make up many symptoms and report them to their doctor. Many diagnosises are made by symptoms only especially mental health and pain related diagnosises. I have seen it over and over again in drug abuse cases, why would trying to end a pregnancy be any different. In my case, depression was NOT detramental to my health and can be easily treated but yet abortion was recommended by a mental health professional. If you make an excemption for health reasons you open up the possibility for major abuse of the law.
It would still reduce the number of elective abortions.
Good for you, the depression wasn't detrimental. But that's not the case for EVERY woman.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

That's why I am not for elective abortions past the weeks of 12. A woman has to have an actual reason and need for the abortion.

reply from: galen

another link..
http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q105.html

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Thank you for illustrating my point so nicely. Incidentally, it was not just skin color on which some based their views on slavery. Blacks were considered to be inferior to whites, even subhuman, not persons at all.
I noticed you opened by comparing a born child to an unborn child, then stated, " I just cannot ignore the differences between a born child and a 6 week embryo." So, which is it that effects your position? The differences between the born and unborn, or the differences between a 6 week embryo and a born child? What are the significant differences in your view that make it acceptable to arbitrarily kill one and not the other? At what point are these differences no longer significant in that way?
The major physical differences that makes it completely incapable of survival outside of the womb? Yes, that's very important to me. When the fetus is statistically capable of survival is when it really starts having a right to life. Currently the youngest survivable birth was at 12 weeks 6 days, so that's the absolute lowest limit.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You're so right. And a newborn baby is different from a teenager by more than just size, age, and development. At certain ages it can't even WALK. I just cannot ignore the differences between a newborn and a teenager. I think to do so is grossly unintelligent.
Yes, but all of those people can live without being attached to another person and feeding/breathing/excreting via that other person's body.

reply from: galen

That's why I am not for elective abortions past the weeks of 12. A woman has to have an actual reason and need for the abortion.
_______________________________________________
however you are for killing a viable healthy child for reason's of the mothers health even if there is no medical reason ( there are not) for the child to die?
as i stated previously... if the child is healthy there is NO medical reason why you must kill the child in order to remove it from mom....so why kill it?
why not deliver said healthy baby and should it survive... after giving it a chance to do so... adopt it out... why tear or suck it apart...it provides no medical or mental benefit to the mom to do so...
* throws up hands*

reply from: LiberalChiRo

_____________________________________________________
i think maybe we are both misunderstanding each other but here goes....
if the pregnacy is viable, you can deliver a 25 weeker and adopt it out... there is NO NEED to kill the child... killing the child will not help the mom in any way shape or form that the early delivery won't also do....
This is where quality of life comes in to play, and that's not a decision I feel should be taken away from the woman.
That's not how it is and if you said that face to face to a woman who aborted for say, physical deformity issues or because she'd been raped and was suffering, or who aborted for most ANY reason, she'd slap you. If the pregnancy is that old, it was WANTED, which means these women do not want dead babies, they want live ones. But they also have mercy. I don't care if you don't think it's mercy, that's the emotion they feel.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Are we arguing the case for killing it to avoid the possibility that radiation therapy might prove detrimental? That would give new meaning to the old adage about "throwing the baby out with the bath water..."
That was the doctor's reasoning, yes. I don't know if I agree or not,

reply from: LiberalChiRo

That's why I am not for elective abortions past the weeks of 12. A woman has to have an actual reason and need for the abortion.
_______________________________________________
however you are for killing a viable healthy child for reason's of the mothers health even if there is no medical reason ( there are not) for the child to die?
The medical reason is the mother's health!!! If she's going to die I don't care how healthy the unborn is; if aborting it will save her life, it has to go. This is up until the 30th week; at that point, a c-section is just as fast as an abortion if not faster.
Because the mother is dying!!!
Because it might take too long. Maybe the mother needs to go under anesthetic NOW, or needs another kind of medication NOW (say, in the ER) and there's no time to have concern for the fetus because you have to save the mother's life. She is always the primary patient.
Because sometimes, as much as it sucks, there is no other option.

reply from: galen

_____________________________________________________
i think maybe we are both misunderstanding each other but here goes....
if the pregnacy is viable, you can deliver a 25 weeker and adopt it out... there is NO NEED to kill the child... killing the child will not help the mom in any way shape or form that the early delivery won't also do....
This is where quality of life comes in to play, and that's not a decision I feel should be taken away from the woman.
That's not how it is and if you said that face to face to a woman who aborted for say, physical deformity issues or because she'd been raped and was suffering, or who aborted for most ANY reason, she'd slap you. If the pregnancy is that old, it was WANTED, which means these women do not want dead babies, they want live ones. But they also have mercy. I don't care if you don't think it's mercy, that's the emotion they feel.
_______________________________________________
really?slapped? no i don't think so because i would not put it to her that way...
of course i would not offer abortion as an alternative after 18 weeks....and we were not discussing fetal deformity we were discussing mental health ( at least i was)...
And i would not speak of it to a woman who was raped... nor would i help her with an abortion ... i would know i was putting her a greater risk for depression and anguish in the long run... i would tell her that if she asked me... again we were not speaking of rape...
i don't get you today and last PM... you keep adding on conditions that would make it OK to abort...its not....its a horrible trajic descision for anyone forced into it... i have never HAD to recommend one in my entire carrer... that is how rare it is....so what gives?
Why are you trying to justify this so much lately?

reply from: galen

That's why I am not for elective abortions past the weeks of 12. A woman has to have an actual reason and need for the abortion.
_______________________________________________
however you are for killing a viable healthy child for reason's of the mothers health even if there is no medical reason ( there are not) for the child to die?
The medical reason is the mother's health!!! If she's going to die I don't care how healthy the unborn is; if aborting it will save her life, it has to go. This is up until the 30th week; at that point, a c-section is just as fast as an abortion if not faster.
Because the mother is dying!!!
Because it might take too long. Maybe the mother needs to go under anesthetic NOW, or needs another kind of medication NOW (say, in the ER) and there's no time to have concern for the fetus because you have to save the mother's life. She is always the primary patient.
Because sometimes, as much as it sucks, there is no other option.
______________________________________________
WRONG medically....
if you MUST put mom under you can do a cesarean in less time and with the same amount of recovery as an abortion.....
KILLING THE CHILD PROVIDES NO BENEFIT TO MOM IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.
medically mentally or otherwise...
you speak of hormones... but delivery is delivery and childA is dead and child B is alive and they BOTH gave the same result to mom... so why kill they child>?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Galen, the woman was not getting an x-ray done. She was having concentrated radiation therapy for her gall bladder. That doesn't mean the radiation she was going through was from an x-ray machine.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

So, if it will die if we terminate the pregnancy, then we can justifiably terminate the pregnancy? That is your logic? You are "prolife" only after the first 12 weeks?
It's more complcated than that. I'm not saying it makes an early term abortion "ok" for elective reasons, but it is an important FACT that cannot be forgotten.
Find out for yourself and re-read my first post. I wrote it for a reason.
That's the silliest distortion of reality I've ever read.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Oh I'm not suggesting anything be done to the child at all. The mom is put under and operated on, the child is ignored. Afterwards, though, there will be a negative result on the child because of that anesthesia. You thought I was talking about pre-anesthesia, and I was not.

reply from: galen

Sorry cookie... there is no radiation therapy for an infected gallbladder... what she had was more likely a series of IVP dye inhanced films ... yes a bit more rads than usual ... but still within the normal range for a fetus to be able to handle...
more than likely her docs had a 2 fold approach... she is REALLY sick and they felt the pregnacy would be taxing... and they were afraid of a suit.
my opinion, but backed up by many radiologists.

reply from: galen

Oh I'm not suggesting anything be done to the child at all. The mom is put under and operated on, the child is ignored. Afterwards, though, there will be a negative result on the child because of that anesthesia. You thought I was talking about pre-anesthesia, and I was not.
____________________________________
we were talking about abortion after 25 weeks for mental health reasons or medical reasons...

reply from: lukesmom

You talk as if it is a forgone conclusion that if the mom recieves life saving treatment, her child will be negatively affected. That is NOT the case. The actuality is the child MAY be affected so you support killing a child who also MAY NOT be affected.
My mom was told her last pregnancy would definantly kill her. She was told to abort for medical reasons. She was told if she didn't her other children (7, I'm the oldest) would be motherless. The doctors were WRONG. My sister is alive and well at 40yrs old and the mother of 5. My mom is in generally good health too, the health problems she has had were not caused by her pregnancies. My mom's and sister's story is in no way unique. Are you really willing to kill healthy and potentially unhealthy children off one person's recommendations?

reply from: lukesmom

Thanks CP, sorry liberal, missed that. Gotta go to bed, I guess.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Oh I'm not suggesting anything be done to the child at all. The mom is put under and operated on, the child is ignored. Afterwards, though, there will be a negative result on the child because of that anesthesia. You thought I was talking about pre-anesthesia, and I was not.
____________________________________
we were talking about abortion after 25 weeks for mental health reasons or medical reasons...
If it is for a medical reason, then that's too vague to say whether the life saving procedure has to be done before the baby is removed, or if there is time to remove it. If there is time to remove it, do so. If there's not, then you have to deal with the repricussions of what the procedure did the the unborn child.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

IVP? The dyes could have contained radioactive elements in them; this is often done to make x-rays clearer and I'm sure it's possible the same heavy elements could be used in IV form to deal with the gall bladder.
If the pregnancy was taxing, then it was endangering her life, thus, again, I feel the abortion was justified.

reply from: galen

then you would be wrong... as she delivered a HEALTHY baby...
had she had the abortion she would have been killing a child with no problems...

reply from: Cecilia

LiberalChiRo, it sounds like if you face an unwanted pregnancy then you should not choose abortion.
If your stance on abortion isn't solidified, how would you expect to tell pregnant women what they should do?
It sounds like at this point in your struggle that you should be propregnantchoice for others and antiabortionchoice for yourself.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I don't think I would these days. If the pregnancy is healthy then there is no sense to me killing it, because I would give it up for adoption.
I can tell you that removing women's choices and making them feel trapped WILL inspire them to abort. When I was in college, my mother told me that if I got pregnant, she wouldn't let me abort AND she would raise the child herself. Well, I certainly didn't want her raising my child; that's not her job. But I knew if I became pregnant she'd probably be able to guilt me into doing so; and I didn't want that for any child of mine. So I vowed that I'd abort in secret if I ever became pregnant. I never did thank God. But it was the reduction of my choices and the threats that actually inspired me to choose abortion!! I felt trapped, and like there was no other option available to me.
What are pro-pregnant-choice and pro-abortion-choice supposed to mean? I am pro-life. I used to be pro-choice. Is there something wrong with these titles?
I personally wouldn't tell a woman what to do at all. I would, however, share my opinions on abortion with her and discuss how I felt about it. I don't TELL people what to do unless they work for me.

reply from: Cecilia

I don't think I would these days. If the pregnancy is healthy then there is no sense to me killing it, because I would give it up for adoption.
I can tell you that removing women's choices and making them feel trapped WILL inspire them to abort. When I was in college, my mother told me that if I got pregnant, she wouldn't let me abort AND she would raise the child herself. Well, I certainly didn't want her raising my child; that's not her job. But I knew if I became pregnant she'd probably be able to guilt me into doing so; and I didn't want that for any child of mine. So I vowed that I'd abort in secret if I ever became pregnant. I never did thank God. But it was the reduction of my choices and the threats that actually inspired me to choose abortion!! I felt trapped, and like there was no other option available to me.
What are pro-pregnant-choice and pro-abortion-choice supposed to mean? I am pro-life. I used to be pro-choice. Is there something wrong with these titles?
I personally wouldn't tell a woman what to do at all. I would, however, share my opinions on abortion with her and discuss how I felt about it. I don't TELL people what to do unless they work for me.
I use those terms because I feel they are the most stripped down, the most accurate to describe the situation. I am not attempting to belittle or demean or anything other than be accurate.

reply from: BossMomma

And you think a psychologist isn't qualified to advise a woman to electively kill her unborn baby, but a "doctor" is?
What makes a doctor an expert on morality? Any fool can say "Yeah, you might as well go ahead and kill the little pest". It doesn't take a medical school degree to say that.....
An OB/GYN actually specializes in pregnancy and women's issues where as psychology is a poorly proven practice in mental issues. An OB/GYN would be the best person to advise abortion in extreme cases. As far as morality goes, morals are subjective. What is right or wrong for one is often different for others. For example, I feel imposing one's morals on another is wrong, you obviously feel it is right. Purely subjective.

reply from: BossMomma

No way would this work. I was told by a psycologist, I should terminate because I had a history of chronic depression. There are so many diagnosises that can be "made up" and unable to be verified.
Really? I suffer a bi-polar disorder and my OB/GYN gave my a prescription for Lexapro for my anxiety attacks. Somehow I don't believe that a psychologist is qualified to advise a patient to terminate. That is a decision discussed between woman and doctor.
Aren't some of those anti psychotics harmful for the unborn child? THAT'S why doctors advise abortion. They also advise abortion when, if the woman were not pregnant, she would be sane and the only issue causing her problems is the existence of the pregnancy.
It's like, if your foot was in a bear trap, you could take painkillers, but that doesn't fix the actual problem.
My OB/GYN prescribed an anti-anxiety medication that is safe for pregnancy, other people might have more severe issues requiring meds not safe for pregnancy. If a woman is insane without her drugs she is a danger to herself and others, that's why these women often avoid pregnancy in the first place.

reply from: BossMomma

Ah, so you attempted to discredit me based on a criminal act committed about 30 years ago, when you are yourself being medicated for a psychological disorder? Very interesting....
I'm surprised at this comment.
There is a big difference between a medical condition and a premeditated attack.
It's a cheap shot from a cheap individual, I have brief mood swings and anxiety however I can at least put my money where my mouth is in a debate. I'm not claiming a pro-life stance after serving time for nearly beating a guy to death.

reply from: BossMomma

I've never been known for violence, I'm calm enough to act rationally dispite my mental issues. CP is a hypocrit with a weakness for poorly planned mind games and manipulation of others words, a common trait in inmates. Yet somehow I'm pro-baby killer and pro-death and crap. I refused to be judged falsely for supporting violence by a violent criminal.

reply from: galen

I've never been known for violence, I'm calm enough to act rationally dispite my mental issues. CP is a hypocrit with a weakness for poorly planned mind games and manipulation of others words, a common trait in inmates. Yet somehow I'm pro-baby killer and pro-death and crap. I refused to be judged falsely for supporting violence by a violent criminal.
________________________________________________
i don't find him to be any of those things because of WHY he did what he did ( and he did not have to tell anyone about it) any more than i find you to be insane based on your meds( neither did you have to tell anyone).
However, i do disagree with your callous disregard to BOTH parties in the abortion issue... especially when you speak about abortion after rape. I feel that you allow your own disgust at the act of rape to be put upon an innocent creature , and i feel that while you may have to learn to detest and inmate in order to do your job, you are far from giving CP the credit he deserves in raising his children and saving one from a certain and painful death. I also feel that if most guards and corrections officers feel the way you do our society is in for a very long and difficult time as many 'criminals' deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt when they have turned thier lives around...any idea the rate of women in our shelter that have at least 1 felony against them....?
Its the people who refuse to see this earth as anything more than a game of animal instincts that will doom us all to fail as compassionate people in the long run.
Do you REALLY want your kids to grow up in such a place?

reply from: yoda

BossMamma seems to have overlooked this one:
So if some woman thinks it is OK to kill her whole family, who are you to question her morals? If some guy thinks it's acceptable to beat his wife, who are you to interfere? It is wrong make laws against these things, right? That is "imposing one's morals on another," which you have declared to be "wrong," isn't it?

reply from: yoda

Nah, not really. Most women are law abiding and shy away from doing illegal things. I've heard several counselors say that after interviewing hundreds of post abortive women, 100% of them say that if abortion had been illegal they would not have had one.

reply from: yoda

Not really you don't. You approve 100% of imposing the morals of all those who oppose killing born children on the rest of society, don't you?
You just discriminate against unborn children, for whatever reason.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Nah, not really. Most women are law abiding and shy away from doing illegal things. I've heard several counselors say that after interviewing hundreds of post abortive women, 100% of them say that if abortion had been illegal they would not have had one.
Oh? So my experience is completely wrong? Many women I've talked to and read about - EVEN ON HERE - only aborted because they thought it was the only option.

reply from: galen

Nah, not really. Most women are law abiding and shy away from doing illegal things. I've heard several counselors say that after interviewing hundreds of post abortive women, 100% of them say that if abortion had been illegal they would not have had one.
________________________________________
I too have heard this first hand from women i have counseled...

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Why would I be wrong? It's POSSIBLE that it could have been harmed; that's not a forgone conclusion. But I'm not going to jump off a plane without a parachute just because its POSSIBLE to survive.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

What if she wanted to kill her 3 year old? You wouldn't try to stop her? Do you think that should be her choice? Do you think the law should not interfere?
The 3 year old is not completely dependent on survival from the woman's body nor is it attached to her via an umbilical cord. Furthermore, it can survive outside of the womb perfectly fine.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I use those terms because I feel they are the most stripped down, the most accurate to describe the situation. I am not attempting to belittle or demean or anything other than be accurate.
They make no sense, sorry. Pro-choicers ARE pro-pregnancy.

reply from: galen

Why would I be wrong? It's POSSIBLE that it could have been harmed; that's not a forgone conclusion. But I'm not going to jump off a plane without a parachute just because its POSSIBLE to survive.
______________________________________________
so why kill a child when it is possible to survive....?
By your logic we should never have children because it is possible they will die, be abused, have the measeles etc...
life is NEVER a garanteed thing...all you can do is try to do the best you can with what nature gives you, so why kill something that nature gave you?
i wanted to ask you something else, but first i want to know if you have ever heard of a man named Lorenzo Odone?

reply from: Cecilia

Nah, not really. Most women are law abiding and shy away from doing illegal things. I've heard several counselors say that after interviewing hundreds of post abortive women, 100% of them say that if abortion had been illegal they would not have had one.
________________________________________
I too have heard this first hand from women i have counseled...
If you are counseling women after abortion, you are probably going to get women who regret their decision and/or would rather of had the law force their reproductive decisions than make up their own mind.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Why would I be wrong? It's POSSIBLE that it could have been harmed; that's not a forgone conclusion. But I'm not going to jump off a plane without a parachute just because its POSSIBLE to survive.
______________________________________________
so why kill a child when it is possible to survive....?
By your logic we should never have children because it is possible they will die, be abused, have the measeles etc...
life is NEVER a garanteed thing...all you can do is try to do the best you can with what nature gives you, so why kill something that nature gave you?
i wanted to ask you something else, but first i want to know if you have ever heard of a man named Lorenzo Odone?
Women abort when the survivability of the child is in question because they believable it is merciful. It's exactly like putting down a dying dog to end the suffering. It doesn't matter if you think that's a "good enough" reason or not. This is normally an acute condition and NOT a life-long prediction.
Possible abuse is actually one reason some women do abort. They don't believe in adoption for whatever reason, but know they cannot provide for the child.

reply from: galen

Nah, not really. Most women are law abiding and shy away from doing illegal things. I've heard several counselors say that after interviewing hundreds of post abortive women, 100% of them say that if abortion had been illegal they would not have had one.
________________________________________
I too have heard this first hand from women i have counseled...
If you are counseling women after abortion, you are probably going to get women who regret their decision and/or would rather of had the law force their reproductive decisions than make up their own mind.
_____________________________________
Your pretty new so i'll give you a heads up...
I run an abused women's shelter wich also has withing it a crisis pregnacy shelter/centre...
I get women who bring up abortion well after starting counseling for other resons.. such as rape, substance abuse etc. They do not have to specifically come to us for abortion counseling. I have yet to meet a woman, other than in a classroom ( i also teach at a medical school) who has said she flat out did not regret her abortion. The ones that have ... all 5 of them have each come back to me several years later , privately and said they were lying to themselves and to the class when they said that. They felt that because they had had an abortion that they must defend thier'right' to abortion without ever really knowing the facts of embryology and fetal development, and women's pregnacy issues...One of these women is now a grad student who is teaching 2 of my classes for me while i recover from illness... she said it was the least she could do to open other's student's eyes.

reply from: Cecilia

I wonder is there a correlation between abused women/coerced abortions? I would also believe that your shelter, which also maintains a crisis pregnancy center, is more likely to see clients who have had abortions and regret them, than a shelter without a crisis pregnancy center.
Crisis pregnancy centers in my city are quite interested in abolishing the idea of abortion from a woman's mind. Does your do this as well?
Have you had discussions or maintained relationships with women from different demographics who have had abortions? What, if any, do they say?

reply from: galen

First off we do not recommend abortion to anyone... ever.
We do this out of a sense of well being desired for these women. They need to become self sufficiant and whole in body and mind... killing something does not tend to foster that.
IF we had a woman who needed termination in the 1st 5-6 weeks due to health issues...then they would be told that by thier private physician...so far this has not happened at the shelter but it has happened to a few private patients over the last 15 years, at the medical school. BTW they will only preform abortions at the school for those reasons...
Yes i do keep track of many of the women we have helped....what specifically do you want to know?
Our shelter does not have any greater incidence of women that are coerced than any other shelter... in fact to be honest all the others in the area do not take pregnant women, or children into thier agencies... they get sent to us.
Coersion is an aweful thing to happen... i think though it is worse to see an irresponsible teenager who has several AB's before she is 21 just because she can. There is more premeditaion involved, which in my opinion is coldblooded and brutal, as compared to someone who has an AB because she is afraid her husband/ father/ so etc. will kill her other kids.

reply from: Cecilia

I am glad you do not "recommend" abortion, since I believe no one should "recommend" one thing over the other, but does that mean you recommend birth and/or adoption? I would not have a problem with this, but since yours is the only shelter in your area that accepts pregnant women I find it lacking in scope.
What does your shelter do if a pregnant woman wants an elective abortion not due to health issues?
Have you ever performed a review or study regarding abused women and if they were more likely to be coerced into abortions than nonabused women?
Yes, and it sounds like that youngster needs help, too.

reply from: galen

Women in this country can choose to abort... just as the shelter can choose not to fund it. We do not turn them away, however we will not pay for the procedure.
If a woman wants to keep her pregnancy she can do so with out fear that she will be kicked back to the curb. We also take in some teens and homeless pregnant women.
Lacking in scope...???how so?
yes and the studies are on the net...i am not able to tell you wich ones are ours( university's) because that would link you to my name and break annonimity wich is important to the shelter... However the basic answer is Yes because the definition of coersion is almost the definition of psychological abuse.
i also change other 'facts' about myself. so be forwarned.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Well I would offer abortion to the woman if she were dying, for sure. I'm sorry you would keep her in the dark about a procedure that could save her life.
That's if the pregnancy is healthy, and in that case, unless there were other external concerns, I too would not advise abortion as the solution.
Pro-choicers consider most pro-life advisement to be emotional coersion. The posters of late-term abortions, the protesting, the religious overtones...

reply from: galen

if a woman is in serious enough extremes with her health, so that abortion would be recommended she would not be in our shelter , she would be in a hospital.
there for we do not recommend abortion at the shelter... ever.
If i had a PATIENT outside of the shelter, who needed an abortion for a true medical emergency, i would recommend she been seen by a perinatologist and a high risk OB immediately.
These situations do unfortunately arrise, i am very lucky to work with a group of OB's who are not afraid to be sued and DO give a woman ALL the facts on her condition and the baby's condition, this way she can make a truely informed choice. The few times we have had a termination at hospital due to these circumstances every effort was made to save BOTH lives. we NEVER send anyone in those situations to an outside abortion clinic.
To say a woman needs to terminate her pregnancy and then not admit her due to that problem is the ultimate hypocrisy and i will not be party to such and will tell her and her family that in no uncertain terms. Sick enough to die, sick enough to be admitted. I only had this come up 1 time and it was the first year i was a nurse...i told the woman and the family what i thought... they found a second opinion and a high risk OB. They also had a healthy girl who had NONE of the problems that were predicted, mom was treated for her heart condition and this girl will soon be in her 2nd semester of college. mom is also still with us.

reply from: yoda

You use the term "emotional" as if it was a dirty word. Do you really disdain all emotions? How about love, compassion, and kindness?
And how do YOU consider "most pro-life advisement" by the way?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

What if she wanted to kill her 3 year old? You wouldn't try to stop her? Do you think that should be her choice? Do you think the law should not interfere?
The 3 year old is not completely dependent on survival from the woman's body nor is it attached to her via an umbilical cord. Furthermore, it can survive outside of the womb perfectly fine.
That's not what I asked, is it?
Is an unborn child past 12 weeks gestation " completely dependent on survival from the woman's body?" Is it "attached to her via an umbilical cord?" Can it "survive outside of the womb perfectly fine?"
Yes, BUT, something is different: It has a high possibility of being able to feel pain, unlike those below 12 weeks.
I again simply say the exact same thing I said before about born children vs unborn children. Secondly, a born child can feel pain so on top of everything else, it's wrong for that reason too.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You use the term "emotional" as if it was a dirty word. Do you really disdain all emotions? How about love, compassion, and kindness?
And how do YOU consider "most pro-life advisement" by the way?
Pro-choicers consider it a bad word because they feel emotional blackmail simply guilts women into making the wrong decision. I also consider most pro-life advisement to be emotional blackmail. You can't help yourselves, you start cooing about how it's a "poor innocent baby". I know you think you're just "telling the truth" but it's how you say it that matters. Why can't you just state the facts, instead of saying things like "You are going to murder your baby" and things like that? "A human being will die" means the exact same thing but doesn't make you sound condescending or hateful towards women.

reply from: Cecilia

Is the shelter publically or privately funded?

reply from: galen

Is the shelter publically or privately funded?
_________________________________
privately funded.... our particular state does not fund shelters they fund other victim programmes. We stopped recieveing federal monies some time ago... some women in the shelter are on welfare when they get here... but by the time they leave they are educated, have a full time job, daycare if needed, health insurance, transportation, and aid free housing. We are VERY proud of these women.

reply from: yoda

About your last comment first: NO, that would not be the same thing, since that could mean that a convicted serial killer was about to be executed, or a terrorist was about to blow himself up with his own bomb.
And what, pray tell, is wrong with guilt, if it is based on honest feelings? Is it not proper to feel guilty when you know you've done an immoral thing? Do you really want to eliminate the guilt emotion totally?
People cannot "coo" on the internet, that's just in YOUR HEAD. And an appeal to compassion for a tiny innocent baby is NOT a dishonest appeal to emotion, it is an appeal to common sense.
And saying "you are going to murder your baby" IS A FACT. Do you want me to quote you the appropriate dictionary definitions?
Really, you don't strike me as one who gives a red rat's patootie about the child that is killed in an abortion, am I wrong?

reply from: yoda

Not really, and that's an interesting point. The zygote floats free for a few days following fertilization, until it implants in the womb. So during that period of time it is not attached to anything, and only needs the proper temperature to survive.

reply from: yoda

Yes, that's a recent change made by apparently proabort medical authorities on the definition of medical terms.
But we both know that the life of each new human individual begins at fertilization, not at implantation.

reply from: BossMomma

I've never been known for violence, I'm calm enough to act rationally dispite my mental issues. CP is a hypocrit with a weakness for poorly planned mind games and manipulation of others words, a common trait in inmates. Yet somehow I'm pro-baby killer and pro-death and crap. I refused to be judged falsely for supporting violence by a violent criminal.
________________________________________________
i don't find him to be any of those things because of WHY he did what he did ( and he did not have to tell anyone about it) any more than i find you to be insane based on your meds( neither did you have to tell anyone).
However, i do disagree with your callous disregard to BOTH parties in the abortion issue... especially when you speak about abortion after rape. I feel that you allow your own disgust at the act of rape to be put upon an innocent creature , and i feel that while you may have to learn to detest and inmate in order to do your job, you are far from giving CP the credit he deserves in raising his children and saving one from a certain and painful death. I also feel that if most guards and corrections officers feel the way you do our society is in for a very long and difficult time as many 'criminals' deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt when they have turned thier lives around...any idea the rate of women in our shelter that have at least 1 felony against them....?
Its the people who refuse to see this earth as anything more than a game of animal instincts that will doom us all to fail as compassionate people in the long run.
Do you REALLY want your kids to grow up in such a place?
My views towards a raped woman and her pregnancy are full of empathy, I do not sway the woman in either direction but support her choice in what should be done. If she chooses to birth her child I'm behind her all the way, the same goes for the woman who chooses to terminate.
It is insulting to call me callous when you would take any ability to choose away from this woman and force her into the discomforts and possibly dangers of pregnancy when she didn't even concent to the sex.
I want my children to grow up knowing that they are free, they will know their choices and their rights and I refuse to let the mewling of any pro-fetal-lifer take that away from them.

reply from: BossMomma

So if some woman thinks it is OK to kill her whole family, who are you to question her morals? If some guy thinks it's acceptable to beat his wife, who are you to interfere? It is wrong make laws against these things, right? That is "imposing one's morals on another," which you have declared to be "wrong," isn't it?
That's why we have laws that must be followed to protect the rights of each individual. Abortion is a legal right available to women. As of now, the fetus is not recognized as a person with rights and is not afforded such legal protection.

reply from: BossMomma

Not really you don't. You approve 100% of imposing the morals of all those who oppose killing born children on the rest of society, don't you?
You just discriminate against unborn children, for whatever reason.
@@ It's not a matter of discrimination it's a matter of defending women's rights, as a woman I refuse to give up any form of control over my mind or body.

reply from: galen

The child of a rape is an innocent victim and blameless as the woman, what if i told you that to make up for my best friend's murder i was going to take your child ( inside you) and tear it out of your body... just in case it made me feel better...
Its inconcievable to me why someone would say' there there dear ... i KNOW that you'll be hurt by this but go ahead and chop off your little finger if that will make you feel better'
what you are advocating makes no rational sense....and it does no good for the woman who was raped... all it leaves is another violation and a dead baby... and belive me that dead child is something the woman will REALLY get to blame herself for, compaounding all her other issues...why make her road to recovery harder than it has to be.
I know that when people say they advocate abortion after rape they THINK they are being kinds and compassionate to the woman involved... but they are speaking without knowing the facts.
I'll say it again... in my own recovery and all the others i have witnessed, there was NEVER a woman who said in any therapy group or otherwise... hey i am gload i aborted my rapists baby...it has always been along the lines of OMG what have i done..?!?! and how could i have done that!!!!???
PROOVE to me its in a womans best intrest to abort the child concieved after rape and i will fight for it tooth and nail... but so far no one has ever attempted to do that, and i'll bet you won't either.

reply from: yoda

Let me guess.... now you are going to deny that a human embryo or fetus is not an individual? Are you really going there?
How many times are you going to repeat that abortion is legal? Did you think we didn't get it the first ten thousand times? This forum is about whether those laws need to be changed, we already know what the laws are.

reply from: yoda

Or over your baby's body, and it's life or death? You refuse to give up the right to kill your baby, right?
And that isn't discrimination..... no, of course not! Killing an innocent human being is the worst possible form of discrimination.

reply from: galen

So BM... i was wondering who threw up in your cornflakes this morning?

reply from: galen

funny how they seem to profess wanting to help women , but give them a 'choice' that is anything but helpfull... kinda like supplying an junkie w/ heroine....
here .. i know its going to f**** -up your life, but it'll make you feel good for a few hours before it does...

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Your friend's body is not your body. Your friend's body is not physically connected to yours in any way shape or form. The placenta violates this, growing into the uterine wall to feed off of the mother's blood and supply it to the unborn. This situation happens at no other time in a human being's life. In no other time are we as similar to a symbiotic being as we are in the womb. To ignore the uniqueness of this situation is folly; and to attempt to compare any other relationship to this one is also equally useless. There is no comparison for the pregnant woman and life in the womb.
Well if I were in a situation where someone's finger was trapped in a rock or it was gangrenous and there were no other options, then cutting off their finger certainly would make her feel better, and probably save her from death. People have cut their own limbs off to escape such situations.
Your comparisons make no sense.
These women sometimes feel like they have a demon inside of them, a disgusting monster eating away at them. Can you understand why they would want to kill it and remove it as soon as possible?
Current statistics show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.
Of course not; you don't get the women who are Ok with their abortions because they don't need therapy! That's like me being an orthopedic doctor who specializes in broken bones saying "I've never seen someone survive a fall without a broken bone!" Well now that's silly, isn't it? People survive falls all the time without breaking their bones, in fact most people don't break their bones when just slipping here or there. But I only see the people with broken bones, so I may assume that everyone who falls breaks their bones, because all of my clients are people who have fallen AND broken their ones.
It is 100% dependent on the woman herself. I could prove it by finding hundreds of stories of women who don't regret it, or show you statistics.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Because it's NOT an honest feeling. Guilting someone into doing something is underhanded and very nearly blackmail. "Oh, you didn't do this for me and I did all that for you... don't you think you owe me? I need so much help now, Poor me..." Come on, you never had a mother, or knew someone who acted like that? They're pitiful, getting people to do stuff for them by guilting them into it. It's dishonest. THAT'S why guilting women into giving birth is bad.
They haven't done anything yet, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Secondly, I don't believe all abortions are immoral. Thirdly... that's completely irrelevant.
You clearly can't interpret emotions in text very well... That must make reading fiction very boring, not being able to sense emotions from writing. Oh well.
Appealing for compassion is not the same as guilting someone.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Interesting question actually. The only things morally wrong with that in my opinion is A, the violation of that person's right to control their own body, and B, the violation of that person's right to live.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

This takes us right back to my original point. It is entirely possible to kill the child after 12 weeks without causing it any pain.
Is it? How? Since the child is not yet viable, I would certainly demand such steps be taken to remove its pain before it is aborted if abortion is necessary at that stage.
That is a major part of it at that stage, because the child's development is incompatible with life outside the womb.
Nope. Nix, wrong. You have forgotten much of my argument.
That the unborn are "attached," "dependent," etc?
Tis a fact.
I don't understand this sentence, I'm sorry. Rephrase it?
They absolutely do. They are the very foundation of my position.
You're kidding yourself here. Pain appears to be the basis of your position, the sole criteria
Absolutely not. You have clearly forgotten a major part of my argument.
No, it shows your lack of knowledge on my position.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Yes, that's a recent change made by apparently proabort medical authorities on the definition of medical terms.
But we both know that the life of each new human individual begins at fertilization, not at implantation.
It used to be believed that pregnancy didn't begin until "quickening", which is as early as 16 weeks. A new change? I think it's an accurate change. Pregnancy is (in my opinion) hosting the life of another being and supporting it inside of the womb. That doesn't happen until implantation. Furthermore, the woman feels absolutely NO effects of pregnancy until after implantation, when the embryo secretes HCG into the bloodstream. She's not pregnant.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Well actually, perhaps you should hear what the pro-choice argument is from someone who was pro-choice for several years, instead of making up wild assumptions? You're wrong, by the way.
The thrust of the pro-choice movement is thus: The woman has the right to control her body and anything inside of it, even if that is another human being. She has a right to not be pregnant, and can thus end the pregnancy at any time no matter what, because she has the right to 100% control over her body.
Everything else is fluff.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Heroin is far more harmful than an abortion, which has not been proven conclusively to cause infertility or breast cancer or anything else like that. Secondly, abortion is not physically addictive, unlike heroin. I won't say abortion isn't mentally addictive, because EVERYTHING is mentally addictive. Drinking water, gambling, playing World of Warcraft, and yes, quite possibly, abortion.
Unproven. Giving birth or being pregnant can also ***** up your life.
Again unproven. Statistics show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Interesting question actually. The only things morally wrong with that in my opinion is A, the violation of that person's right to control their own body, and B, the violation of that person's right to live.
Is that a no, or are you talking about legal rights? I'm asking if it would be "wrong" in your view, all matters of legality aside.
I think those things I mentioned are innate human rights. I have no desire to call them morals or laws.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Not when that human being is already violating the rights of another, which is pregnancy.

reply from: galen

Your friend's body is not your body. Your friend's body is not physically connected to yours in any way shape or form. The placenta violates this, growing into the uterine wall to feed off of the mother's blood and supply it to the unborn. This situation happens at no other time in a human being's life. In no other time are we as similar to a symbiotic being as we are in the womb. To ignore the uniqueness of this situation is folly; and to attempt to compare any other relationship to this one is also equally useless. There is no comparison for the pregnant woman and life in the womb.
Well if I were in a situation where someone's finger was trapped in a rock or it was gangrenous and there were no other options, then cutting off their finger certainly would make her feel better, and probably save her from death. People have cut their own limbs off to escape such situations.
Your comparisons make no sense.
These women sometimes feel like they have a demon inside of them, a disgusting monster eating away at them. Can you understand why they would want to kill it and remove it as soon as possible?
Current statistics show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.
Of course not; you don't get the women who are Ok with their abortions because they don't need therapy! That's like me being an orthopedic doctor who specializes in broken bones saying "I've never seen someone survive a fall without a broken bone!" Well now that's silly, isn't it? People survive falls all the time without breaking their bones, in fact most people don't break their bones when just slipping here or there. But I only see the people with broken bones, so I may assume that everyone who falls breaks their bones, because all of my clients are people who have fallen AND broken their ones.
It is 100% dependent on the woman herself. I could prove it by finding hundreds of stories of women who don't regret it, or show you statistics.
_________________________________________
the women who talk about not regretting thier abortions, are NOT raped women... i've never met one who publicly or on the net spoke about her abortion after rape, without betraying her self loathing attatched with the abortion... blatently betraying her emotions....
You seem to miss the part of the ^^ statement where i describe the circumstances i draw from....I attended a rape survivors group for years as my OWN therapy for my OWN rape...again... no one ever came forward and said they were glad they had done it... the ones who spoke more than a few words to acknowledge it did say they regretted thier 'choice' and it made them feel worse. true to the groups' dynamic, if there had been a woman there who felt better about it they would have been all over the ones who were not trying to reassure them... no one ever came forward...so if you ahev one of these compelling tales then please by all means post it here.
Also the current stats do not separate the rape victims from the women who were coerced or the women who just felt it was not the thing for them... etc.
Most women, who feel disgust feel it not from the pregnancy but from the rape... this tends to change once they see the child, or hear its heartbeat. The ones who have trouble the most are the ones who kept the rape a secret from everyone.
No one in my experience ever regretted having the child and placing it , or in rare instances keeping it. No one in my experience or the experience of others i have spoken with ( professional or personal) has ever had a woman who did not suffer MORE from the abortion and rape experience than they did from giving birth.
there for based on these facts i will continue to lay out these experiences for my clients...i would be remiss if i did not.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

So pregnancy is an invasion of the uterus perpetrated by the child?
Perpetrated is a bad word. For the next examples, I am NOT comparing the unborn to these things directly, but if you're intelligent, you'll get my point.
A bacterium does not intentionally make people sick, not in the same way I intend to bake cookies. A lion may intentionally kill a gazelle, but still not in the same way an adult human intentionally pours milk into their cereal. Our decisions in adulthood are completely intentional. An embryo/zygote doesn't implant with the same kind of intention that adult humans have. It does what it does on purpose, but the action is not conscious. Make sense?
Pregnancy IS an invasion of the uterus in some cases. IF pregnancy was unintended, then the invasion is unwanted and unexpected. If someone plugged into your veins without your permission, they would be violating your rights.
If pregnancy is wanted, it's not an invasion but a welcoming. It's all dependent on your perspective.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

In cases where someone invades your home and you shoot them in self defense, the pain they suffer is irrelevant, unless it can be shown that you acted with MORE than necessary force - such as perhaps hacking the invader into pieces with an axe. So the answer on the basest level with common sense is no, it does not matter if the aggressor feels pain during the defensive action.
Abortion such as curettage could certainly be considered "more than necessary force". Thus, once the unborn can feel pain or is suspected to feel pain (week 12), curettage should not be used without first administering an anesthetic to the unborn. And again, after 12 weeks abortion shouldn't be elective anyway.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Your friend's body is not your body. Your friend's body is not physically connected to yours in any way shape or form. The placenta violates this, growing into the uterine wall to feed off of the mother's blood and supply it to the unborn. This situation happens at no other time in a human being's life. In no other time are we as similar to a symbiotic being as we are in the womb. To ignore the uniqueness of this situation is folly; and to attempt to compare any other relationship to this one is also equally useless. There is no comparison for the pregnant woman and life in the womb.
Well if I were in a situation where someone's finger was trapped in a rock or it was gangrenous and there were no other options, then cutting off their finger certainly would make her feel better, and probably save her from death. People have cut their own limbs off to escape such situations.
Your comparisons make no sense.
These women sometimes feel like they have a demon inside of them, a disgusting monster eating away at them. Can you understand why they would want to kill it and remove it as soon as possible?
Current statistics show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.
Of course not; you don't get the women who are Ok with their abortions because they don't need therapy! That's like me being an orthopedic doctor who specializes in broken bones saying "I've never seen someone survive a fall without a broken bone!" Well now that's silly, isn't it? People survive falls all the time without breaking their bones, in fact most people don't break their bones when just slipping here or there. But I only see the people with broken bones, so I may assume that everyone who falls breaks their bones, because all of my clients are people who have fallen AND broken their ones.
It is 100% dependent on the woman herself. I could prove it by finding hundreds of stories of women who don't regret it, or show you statistics.
_________________________________________
the women who talk about not regretting thier abortions, are NOT raped women... i've never met one who publicly or on the net spoke about her abortion after rape, without betraying her self loathing attatched with the abortion... blatently betraying her emotions....
You seem to miss the part of the ^^ statement where i describe the circumstances i draw from....I attended a rape survivors group for years as my OWN therapy for my OWN rape...again... no one ever came forward and said they were glad they had done it... the ones who spoke more than a few words to acknowledge it did say they regretted thier 'choice' and it made them feel worse. true to the groups' dynamic, if there had been a woman there who felt better about it they would have been all over the ones who were not trying to reassure them... no one ever came forward...so if you ahev one of these compelling tales then please by all means post it here.
Also the current stats do not separate the rape victims from the women who were coerced or the women who just felt it was not the thing for them... etc.
Most women, who feel disgust feel it not from the pregnancy but from the rape... this tends to change once they see the child, or hear its heartbeat. The ones who have trouble the most are the ones who kept the rape a secret from everyone.
No one in my experience ever regretted having the child and placing it , or in rare instances keeping it. No one in my experience or the experience of others i have spoken with ( professional or personal) has ever had a woman who did not suffer MORE from the abortion and rape experience than they did from giving birth.
there for based on these facts i will continue to lay out these experiences for my clients...i would be remiss if i did not.
Well sorry to say, but I have met women who were raped and who do not regret aborting.

reply from: carolemarie

Women will say they were raped to justify the abortion, because of the hateful things people say to you. If you trot out the rape card, you are a vicitm and are entitled to do what you want. So if someone claims they had an abortion and were raped, I would not take that at face value. I always ask did you file a police report? Because hospitals offer you the morning after pill after the exam.
This is just an observation from years of doing post-abortion counseling and talking to women at the pregnancy help center and at the abortion clinic. Everyone tells me they were raped, and later, when they feel safer with me they admit they were not raped. But they see it as a justifiable excuse.
Rape pregnancies are very rare. But in rape you are forced to do something you don[t want to do, because you are weaker and unable to stop it. Abortion is uncomfortably a lot like that.
Every rape victim prays that she will live through the attack. If you do and wind up pregnant, you do have your life. Abortion is asking you to take more than what was taken from you.
I dont see it as helping at all. Usually the vicitm is pressured by family to have the abortion because it relieve their feelings and it makes it easier for the family to cope.

reply from: Banned Member

The very first abortion was evil. The very last abortion will be evil. Abortion that has ever been, has been evil. I have always believed that abortion is evil. I will forever believe that abortion is evil.

reply from: carolemarie

I think we all know somethings are evil. Some of the horrible things that are done by human beings by other human beings are so depraved that evil is the only word to describe it.

reply from: galen

i agree w/ CM on this one... there is evil in the world just as there is good.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

But there would be far fewer cases of abortion than there are now. Not every woman is willing to lie just to kill their child.
That's true, but the MAP fails. Secondly, most women do not go to the hospital after a rape, as much as 80%. These women also don't report the rape to police. So most rapes go by without any physical evidence or police intervention. These women try to hide from the reality of the rape and may end up not admitting to the pregnancy until it is obvious.
Because they need to justify wanting killing their own child. They think it's the best choice: for a few of them it may be, but for the majority it's not, and that's why they need counseling.
So why are we even arguing this?
Do the women you counsel view it that way, abortion that is? Do they view it as oppressing the weak?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Did you know Llamas spontaneously abort their fetuses?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

In cases where someone invades your home and you shoot them in self defense, the pain they suffer is irrelevant, unless it can be shown that you acted with MORE than necessary force - such as perhaps hacking the invader into pieces with an axe. So the answer on the basest level with common sense is no, it does not matter if the aggressor feels pain during the defensive action.
Abortion such as curettage could certainly be considered "more than necessary force". Thus, once the unborn can feel pain or is suspected to feel pain (week 12), curettage should not be used without first administering an anesthetic to the unborn. And again, after 12 weeks abortion shouldn't be elective anyway.
I don't think you have satisfactorily addressed the inconsistency I have pointed out in your position. You are still insisting that abortion should not be elective after 12 weeks, which directly contradicts the contention that the child is an invader that can be justifiably killed based on "being connected," being dependent," and violating the rights of the mother.
It does not violate the "dependent" clause at all, as it is still dependent. As for the "invasion" clause, I believe it is irrelevant at 12 weeks. It's like if the native americans suddenly decide to kick out americans for invading their country. A little late, don't you think? America is our home now.
That's what I said, isn't it? But I happen to know that necessary force is involved in self defense cases because of a case I witnessed personally.
I'm pretty sure if you chopped up the invader with an axe - dismemberment and all - you'd be put into jail for excessive force. My friend was almost put into jail for stabbing two people in a gang who were invading his home! Apparently because one of them died, the mother of the dead attacker thought that excessive force had been used.
So then to you it doesn't matter if the unborn feels pain, abortion is ok?
Seriously, why on earth are you trying to disprove the reasons I think abortion is WRONG? You're just going to convince me that pro-choice is ok again.

reply from: galen

**
Rape pregnancies are very rare.
So why are we even arguing this?
**
i am arguing it, because all sorts of people will say abortion must remain legal BECAUSE of rape and women's health...
the 2 things are not the same... one .. women's health, is an entirely diffrent set than rape... and together they make up less than 5% of all abortion preformed each year.
i am arguing this because abortion is not usually the best option for a woman who is raped.
i am completely on the side of a rape victim... i've been there myself, however i will never advocate a policy that is not in the woman's best intrest... no matter how PC it is to do so at the time.
people think rape victims should crawl away n the shadows and thier kids be flushed. I think its about time the stigma be taken away from reporting a rape and a child of rape, so that the true criminals are found and locked away forever where they can no longer do any harm.
I think women should be allowed to look at thier children ... alll of them... with dignity and grace... society does not allow this to happen now, because they are to horrified by what the sperm guy did.... its not the child's fault any more than the woman's. No one should have to die because someone was attacked.
Period.

reply from: galen

thanks... i'm gonna go cry now...

reply from: carolemarie

But there would be far fewer cases of abortion than there are now. Not every woman is willing to lie just to kill their child.
That's true, but the MAP fails. Secondly, most women do not go to the hospital after a rape, as much as 80%. These women also don't report the rape to police. So most rapes go by without any physical evidence or police intervention. These women try to hide from the reality of the rape and may end up not admitting to the pregnancy until it is obvious.
Because they need to justify wanting killing their own child. They think it's the best choice: for a few of them it may be, but for the majority it's not, and that's why they need counseling.
So why are we even arguing this?
Do the women you counsel view it that way, abortion that is? Do they view it as oppressing the weak?

reply from: carolemarie

Since I do post abortion counseling the women I see regret the abortion decision or they wouldn't come for help.
I did volunteer as a rape crisis counselor but all the programs I have started to work with insist that you support abortion in the case of rape....and i just don't feel comfortable with that. Enough violence has been done to the woman, without pushing abortion on her as a solution. Especially people who are not prochoice. They are terrible candidates for abortions in this instance.
There is a lot of anger after rape and a lot of pressure from the family, boyfriends and husbands to have all memories of that blotted out....but that isn't always what is best for the rape victim.
There are no easy answers when terrible horrible things happen to you. And it doesn't make it okay to do something horrible to someone else at that point. The person you want to hurt isn't available....the baby is just another victim of that man....

reply from: LiberalChiRo

And you wonder why pro-choicers become annoyed when YOU argue abortion should become illegal based off of images and "statistics" from late-term abortions. Late term abortions are also extremely rare, almost as rare as rape abortions - and even rarer, in some cases. So personally, I don't think either side should be arguing about either issue. We both know these events are rare. Shouldn't we be arguing about the 90% of abortions that occur, those before 12 weeks?
Mental health is part of women's health, and some women can benefit mentally from an abortion. I know your experience goes against this, but there are women who are raped and abort who do not regret it! I DO agree that more pre-counseling needs to be done to catch the women who WOULD regret it before they abort. If a woman is not going to regret it and if it is going to help her mentally and - likely - if it is going to be early-term, then I do not oppose it.
Yet you continue to ignore the fact that most women do not regret their abortions, and you also forget that you ONLY see the ones that do regret! You don't counsel the thousands of women who are relieved - because they don't need therapy. It may seem like you see a lot of distraught women, but compared to the big picture, it's small.
When you can find a person who thinks that entire statement is true, you let me know. I don't think their child SHOULD be "flushed", but IF that woman is counseled and feels abortion is the right choice, then I feel she should be allowed to do so. I definitely don't think raped women should crawl into the shadows, and I dare you to find someone who does! I don't know a single pro-choicer who feels that way! I think you're making that up just to be dramatic.
There isn't a stigma: ever pro-choicer I know heavily encourages women to report their rapes. Ever PERSON I know heavily encourages women to report their rapes! I just came from a college campus, and let me tell you, "report rape" was a message we heard every day. There is no stigma against reporting rape.
When I thought I was pregnant back in college, I was willing to give birth, but I wanted it adopted out and I never wanted to see it again. I couldn't have handled it.
That's your opinion. And I think you're wrong, on a lot of things.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Did you know Llamas spontaneously abort their fetuses?
And rabbits can absorb their babies (killing them) if food is in short supply.
I assume that's probably why the Llamas do it too.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Since I do post abortion counseling the women I see regret the abortion decision or they wouldn't come for help.
I did volunteer as a rape crisis counselor but all the programs I have started to work with insist that you support abortion in the case of rape....and i just don't feel comfortable with that. Enough violence has been done to the woman, without pushing abortion on her as a solution. Especially people who are not prochoice. They are terrible candidates for abortions in this instance.
I agree that pro-life people are terrible candidates for abortion; but just because you mention it as a choice doesn't mean they're going to go do it. Say an exchange went as such:
Counselor: "You could keep the baby, give it up for adoption, or abort it."
Victim: "Oh, I don't believe in abortion."
Counselor: "Okay, then let's discuss keeping it or adopting it."
That's perfectly fine... I don't see what's wrong with that exchange. Being pro-choice means supporting BIRTH too!! Being pro-choice means NOT forcing abortion on a woman if she doesn't want it. A true pro-choicer will NEVER tell a woman "well, I really think you should abort..." They will say "what do YOU want to do?"
I agree that blotting it out isn't good for the victim. I cannot agree or disagree with the outside influences you reference as I have never experienced a rape or known someone who was raped. I know that's not what would happen in MY family.
Supporting abortion and pushing abortion are two completely different things; I'm sorry you felt pressured to advise abortion. But supporting abortion as a choice is just that: supporting abortion IF the woman chooses to do it. You don't even have to mention it, but if the woman wants to abort, then support it. That's what being pro-choice is. Being pro-choice is NOT going around and telling every pregnant woman that she should abort.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

All your qualifications apply equally to unborn human beings both before and after 12 weeks.
EXCEPT for the fact that under 12 weeks there is no proof of pain.
No, they can't, so please don't even try. I've heard all of the "examples" and they all have huge gaping flaws.
Being inside the woman: she has a right to control her body, and that involves removing anything from inside of it that she doesn't want. That includes an unborn child.
Development of the child: if the child is at a stage where it is incapable of survival outside of the womb, then the woman's right to remove it is going to inadvertently kill it. But that does not get rid of her right to control her own body. You could remove the unborn without immediately killing it, but then it is still going to die on the counter or even in an incubator - although 1-3 inches of embryo is going to be hard to care for. It's impossible with current technology.
So, the death of the unborn is unfortunately guaranteed when there is an early abortion. Removing the unborn whole is much harder for the doctor and much more dangerous for the woman. Removing it in pieces with a suction abortion is much easier for the doctor and safer for the woman. Since the unborn is going to die anyway, this procedure is performed to minimize danger to the woman, to make the procedure as quick and painless as possible, and to lower the risk of complications.
Pain: If it can't feel pain, then it is not suffering. Suffering is one of the main pro-life arguments. They oppose abortion because they believe the unborn child is suffering. Well if it can't feel pain, it's not suffering.
Pain is irrelevant in my view. I don't think it's "OK" whether the victim feels pain or not. It is wrong to kill even if it is done painlessly. You have still robbed the victim of life.
Okay, so just to clarify a few things: do you think a person who defends themselves and accidentally kills the attacker is a murderer? Are you pro or anti-death-penalty?

reply from: lukesmom

Say it isn't so!!! Women lie to justify their abortion? That can't be the truth 'cause the "prochoicers" here previously said it ain't so. Could it be the prochoicers have been mislead? Nah, they know all because they haven't been told otherwise by other prochoicers and heaven knows prolifers have no idea what they are talking about, eventhough they have "been there and done that".

reply from: lukesmom

Dah, humans do too. It's called miscarriage.

reply from: lukesmom

APPLAUSE!!!!!!! Very well said Mary and I know how hard it was for you to say this. This is exactly why I fight for unborn children with poor or fatal prenatal diagnosises.
Thank you!

reply from: yoda

Interesting.... you claim to be prolife, and yet espouse perfectly the proabortion philosophy.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Interesting.... you claim to be prolife, and yet espouse perfectly the proabortion philosophy.
I personally do believe in that philosophy. A woman has the right to control her body. Nothing is going to change my opinion on that. I also feel the unborn has a right to life, and that the rights of the woman and the rights of the unborn conflict on a very basic level. Simply granting one person rights over the other does not solve this problem. So while elective abortion isn't the answer, neither is outlawing it.
Early in pregnancy, I wish the unborn could be removed alive and kept alive, but it currently can't. I also don't think it's fair to force the woman to stay pregnant until viability is reached.
A woman has the right to control her body and the things inside of it. Why does this right end when it comes to the unborn? Certainly the unborn does have its own body, but it is inside the body of another! And it may not be in there with permission. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Dah, humans do too. It's called miscarriage.
Yes, but Llamas purposely do it, which makes it different from an accidental miscarriage.

reply from: lukesmom

Dah, humans do too. It's called miscarriage.
Yes, but Llamas purposely do it, which makes it different from an accidental miscarriage.
In medical terms a spontaneouse abortion is a miscarriage and a nonspontaneouse abortion is an elective abortion, so medically, if a Llama aborts on purpose, it would be an elective abortion. Now what has that got to do with humans killing their unborn children?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Any reason you quoted me, Lukesmom?

reply from: lukesmom

Sorry, accident and fixed now.

reply from: Cecilia

Could you tell me where you think this right comes from?

reply from: lukesmom

Could you tell me where you think this right comes from?
Same place YOUR right to live comes from. Where does YOUR right to life come from?

reply from: BossMomma

Let me guess.... now you are going to deny that a human embryo or fetus is not an individual? Are you really going there?
How many times are you going to repeat that abortion is legal? Did you think we didn't get it the first ten thousand times? This forum is about whether those laws need to be changed, we already know what the laws are.
I repeat the legality of abortion to fight the erronious pro-fetal opinion that it is murder. A fetus has no rights that trump that of the woman.

reply from: BossMomma

Eh? No one, though I was kinda wondering how you intend to debate with adults while acting like a child.

reply from: galen

LCR... not all of my arguments are with/ about late term abortion... i argue and post for every possible phase... YOU ignore the ones that are early because you don't want to outlaw the early ones...this does not make you pro-life it makes you pro-choice.
When you have been around as many rape victims as i have then you get a pretty clear picture of what is and what is not healthy and safe for the majority of them Abortion is not. I've stated time and again that my experience is not only with women who came to me for couseling but women i have been in therapy with FOR MY OWN HEALTH... there is no one that I know of that is OK with thier rape... and none that i've ever encountered that did not suffer... even when they are silent.
By being so callous as to act like you know it all about this subject you have prooven only that you know very little.... i would pray that you were able to know more... but i won't pray for that type of disastr to hit anyone.
Just know that your above post was read in a group today... and most of them said you walked with blinders on... and hoped that you could keep them on for the rest of your life. The only way they feel you will ever see thier side of it would be to experience it.
At this point i am going to end my discussion with you...you seem wll able to stick you head in the sand about women's issues..and so i feel that possibly you and the sand deserve each other.
latter opinions used with permission of 15 therapy patients.

reply from: galen

Eh? No one, though I was kinda wondering how you intend to debate with adults while acting like a child.
________________________________________________
my response was to your unadultlike debate previous... glad to see you could understand it...

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Could you tell me where you think this right comes from?
Nature. Just like every living thing on this planet has a right to life.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Dah, humans do too. It's called miscarriage.
Yes, but Llamas purposely do it, which makes it different from an accidental miscarriage.
In medical terms a spontaneouse abortion is a miscarriage and a nonspontaneouse abortion is an elective abortion, so medically, if a Llama aborts on purpose, it would be an elective abortion. Now what has that got to do with humans killing their unborn children?
I meant that the Llamas purposely expel their fetuses. It is not an accident, it is a purposeful abortion. Humans do this too.

reply from: carolemarie

Say it isn't so!!! Women lie to justify their abortion? That can't be the truth 'cause the "prochoicers" here previously said it ain't so. Could it be the prochoicers have been mislead? Nah, they know all because they haven't been told otherwise by other prochoicers and heaven knows prolifers have no idea what they are talking about, eventhough they have "been there and done that".
If you talk to women who publiclly will state that they regret their abortions, almost all of them will say they were proudly prochoice for a period, some for years and years. They had to be or admit that they killed a child. That is intolerable.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I do not ignore the early ones, in fact I constantly urge you to discuss THEM, and not the late-term ones or ones done for rape or for maternal danger or fetal deformity... all of those cases together are less than 5% of all abortions. I feel they are irrelevant.
Again, you have not seen the majority of women who do not regret their abortion so your views are skewed. I'm sorry, but you're not a reliable source.
Again, if a woman doesn't regret her abortion she's not going to be in therapy, whether that is WITH you or as your client.
So your "friends" that are so "caring" want me to be raped and get pregnant and be forced to abort? Gee, they're nice!! Your credibility just falls down and down. YOU DO NOT SEE THE MAJORITY WHO DO NOT REGRET. I'm SORRY. I'm not LYING or fabricating this!!
At least I don't wish for other people to be raped just to get my point across.

reply from: lukesmom

I do not ignore the early ones, in fact I constantly urge you to discuss THEM, and not the late-term ones or ones done for rape or for maternal danger or fetal deformity... all of those cases together are less than 5% of all abortions. I feel they are irrelevant.
Again, you have not seen the majority of women who do not regret their abortion so your views are skewed. I'm sorry, but you're not a reliable source.
Again, if a woman doesn't regret her abortion she's not going to be in therapy, whether that is WITH you or as your client.
So your "friends" that are so "caring" want me to be raped and get pregnant and be forced to abort? Gee, they're nice!! Your credibility just falls down and down. YOU DO NOT SEE THE MAJORITY WHO DO NOT REGRET. I'm SORRY. I'm not LYING or fabricating this!!
At least I don't wish for other people to be raped just to get my point across.
I think you missed what they were saying, they HOPED you could keep your blinders on as in never having to deal with being raped. Please reread that section. Mary doesn't council or go to counciling for raped women who regret their abortions. Her counciling is with women who HAVE BEEN RAPED. As a result of that rape some of them became pregnant and of those some of them chose to abort their child and these women regret that choice. Now, how many women do you talk to personally who have been raped and became pregnant. Come on, please stop making yourself an expert when you haven't one ounce of experience with this. It makes you look foolish.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Please explain how more than 80% of women NEVER regret their abortions? I do not believe (and there are no real statistics to prove) that EVERY woman or even a MAJORITY of women who are pregnant due to rape AND get an abortion regret it. I know this because I have MET women who do not regret doing so.
Heresay, personal experiences, that is not proof. Those are not facts. So Galen can share as many sob stories as she wants: the FACTS contradict her.

reply from: lukesmom

And what are YOUR facts to prove her wrong, the sob stories you are told? Nope, she has more experience and actually, more crediability than you do. Show your statistics for RAPE victems, not overall abortions. Actually you haven't shown actual statistics for ANYTHING, only your opinions and the usual proabort regurgitation.

reply from: lukesmom

Oh yah, an apology is also in order to Galen for your comments about her wanting you to be raped.

reply from: lukesmom

I'm going to bed and allow you to extensively search for your FACTS. Good luck and happy hunting.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

And what are YOUR facts to prove her wrong, the sob stories you are told? Nope, she has more experience and actually, more crediability than you do. Show your statistics for RAPE victems, not overall abortions. Actually you haven't shown actual statistics for ANYTHING, only your opinions and the usual proabort regurgitation.
I didn't make these facts up. If you think about this logically, rape cases are less than 5% of all abortions. So even if every single rape victim regretted their abortion (unlikely) that would only be 5/100 women who regret their abortion... that is NO where near even half, OR a majority.
I obviously don't want women to keep aborting if they regret it. IF there were statistics showing how many rape victims abort and regret I would certainly look at them. Again, I obviously think the amount and quality of pre-abortion counseling in America right now needs TONS of improvement.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No. I think her "friends" need to apologize to me.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Guttmacher is an organization that has done a TON of correct, complete research on these issues but most pro-lifers refuse to look at their statistics.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/08/2/gr080207.html
Defining when life begins.
"The risk of death associated with abortion in the United States is less than 0.6 per 100,000 procedures, which is less than one-tenth as large as the risk associated with childbirth."
http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/safety.html

"A Message to the President: Abortion Can Be Safe, Legal and Still Rare"
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/04/1/gr040101.html

"U.S. Abortion Rate Continues Long-Term Decline, Falling To Lowest Level Since 1974; More Effort Still Needed To Reduce Unintended Pregnancy"
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2008/01/17/index.html

reply from: LiberalChiRo

"Characteristics of Women Having Abortions"
"Six in 10 U.S. women having abortions are already mothers. More than half intend to have (more) children in the future."
http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/characteristics.html

reply from: LiberalChiRo

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/2005/06/28/abortionoverview.html
">http://www.guttmacher.org/medi...onoverview.html
"A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:
* 56% of women having abortions are in their 20s;
* 61% have one or more children;
* 67% have never married;
* 57% are economically disadvantaged;
* 88% live in a metropolitan area; and
* 78% report a religious affiliation."
http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/providers.html
How late in pregnancy do providers offer abortions?
* Some 97% of providers offer abortions at eight weeks, and 86% do so at 12 weeks; but provision drops off steeply after that.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/newsrelease3201.html
">http://www.guttmacher.org/medi...elease3201.html
Delay laws increase incidence of 2nd term abortions.
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2004/02/19/index.html
Teen pregnancy rates still dropping.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/09/1/gpr090102.html
">http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs.../gpr090102.html
"Toward Making Abortion 'Rare': The Shifting Battleground over the Means to an End"
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2005/09/06/index.html
Many Women Believe That Their Existing Responsibilities Could Compromise Their Ability to Raise A(nother) Child

reply from: yoda

And they just "happen" to be a branch of Planned Parenthood...... now why do you suppose that would make prolifers suspicious of their data?

reply from: Cecilia

Why are you so quick to dismiss Galen's personal experiences as not proof but then tote your own personal experiences as facts?
"Sob" stories? About women who were raped, had abortions, and now live with that regret?!? That is a horrible thing to say about women who have been raped. I may not agree with Galen on abortion but I am not going to act like a child.
No. I think her "friends" need to apologize to me.
You have clearly misunderstood what they said. They hope you never have the experience they did because then you'd have to see it from their persepctive; something they would not wish on anyone.
"I hope no one is ever raped because I hope no one has to see it from my eyes because of how horrible it is."
Sob stories, my behind. There is a name for women like you.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

And they just "happen" to be a branch of Planned Parenthood...... now why do you suppose that would make prolifers suspicious of their data?
They are not a branch of Planned Parenthood. Even if they were, I don't care because I LIKE Planned Parenthood. I don't believe there is an abortion conspiracy in this country.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Well I figure if she can use personal experiences as "fact" then so can I!
No. I think her "friends" need to apologize to me.
You missed the part where they said the only way my eyes would be opened is if I was raped.

reply from: KaylieBee

Why are you so quick to dismiss Galen's personal experiences as not proof but then tote your own personal experiences as facts?
"Sob" stories? About women who were raped, had abortions, and now live with that regret?!? That is a horrible thing to say about women who have been raped. I may not agree with Galen on abortion but I am not going to act like a child.
I think she's just saying one person is not representative of the thousands and thousands of women pregnant from rape. He choice was right for her, but for other women it wasn't. There are people who were products of rape, who were beaten endlessly by their mothers because they couldn't stand the look of them.

reply from: yoda

According to their website, they are a "special affiliate"...... but I can understand why that wouldn't bother you... since you're not prolife.
From their website:
"The Center was originally constituted as a semiautonomous division of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). Its early development was nurtured by Alan F. Guttmacher, an eminent obstetrician-gynecologist, teacher and writer who was PPFA's president for more than a decade until his death in 1974."
Apparently, they prefer the term "special affiliate":
". AGI is an independent corporation for research, policy analysis, and public education on reproductive health issues and is a special affiliate of PPFA."
http://asteria.fivecolleges.edu/findaids/sophiasmith/mnsss148.html

reply from: lukesmom

Guttmacher is an organization that has done a TON of correct, complete research on these issues but most pro-lifers refuse to look at their statistics.
Actually I have looked at their stats and was sent there by another prolifer here so stop making statements you can't back up and know nothing about. Now you are throwing around numbers and opinions and quoting them as facts and statistics but so far you have not been able to give the ACTUAL statistics and instead threw out a bunch of links that have nothing to do with raped women not regreting their abortion. Until you can do that, you have absolutely no credability.
You also don't have much integrety either if you can't or won't admit your error and apologize for your remarks to Galen and her friends. AND your comments here show you are no prolifer.

reply from: lukesmom

Bumping for LCR's statistics. What say you LCR?

reply from: Cecilia

Well I figure if she can use personal experiences as "fact" then so can I!
No. I think her "friends" need to apologize to me.
You missed the part where they said the only way my eyes would be opened is if I was raped.
They are correct; they only way you would understand where they are coming from is to be in their situation, and they hope you never are. "Walk with blinders, and keep them on the rest of your life".
You missed the part where they did not wish that on you, you foolish child, and there is no excuse for talking about women who were raped as "sob stories".

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I consider that wishing rape upon me. I would never say something even SIMILAR to that to anyone else.
It is a sob story when the only purpose is to bend someone's will. There are no facts to support her claims that ALL rape victims regret their abortions. And since we're in the business of disregarding cases that are so small as to be irrelevant, these rape cases fit into that category.
90% of abortions are elective, not for rape.

reply from: yoda

Yes, but you take almost everything said here as a personal affront.

reply from: Cecilia

You consider someone hoping you never get raped as wishing rape upon you?
Sounds like insecurity issues.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

"The review articles largely concluded that the most frequently reported emotions felt by women immediately following an abortion are relief and/or happiness, experienced by about 75% of women (one article evaluated only negative effects). Feelings of regret, anxiety, guilt, depression, and other negative emotions are reported by about 5 to 30% of women. These feelings are usually mild and fade rapidly, within a few weeks. Months or years after an abortion, the majority of women do not regret their decision. In fact, for many women, abortion appears to be a positive experience that improves their self-esteem, provides inner strength, and motivates them to refocus their lives in a meaningful way."

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You consider someone hoping you never get raped as wishing rape upon you?
Galen said her friends said that the only way I will ever open my eyes would be to go through the same experience they went through. That's pretty frickin' obvious to me.

reply from: yoda

Thank you for repeating that proabort propaganda, there may have been someone who missed it the first time.

reply from: yoda

Hey, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!

reply from: Cecilia

You consider someone hoping you never get raped as wishing rape upon you?
Galen said her friends said that the only way I will ever open my eyes would be to go through the same experience they went through. That's pretty frickin' obvious to me.
Did they say they wish rape upon you? Did they?
No, they said the only way you would understand them (their "sob stories" as you so kindly and compassionately put it) is if it happened to you, and they hoped you could remain to have blinders on, which means in the real word which is not infested by your insecurities, that they wish you would not be raped.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Thank you for repeating that proabort propaganda, there may have been someone who missed it the first time.
You quoting a sentence fragment that wasn't even written by me is REALLY meaningful, Yoda. It's not a complete sentence, it wasn't written by me, it's completely out of context... for all anyone knows, the next words in that sentence could be "that the risk for breast cancer is increased by abortion."

reply from: yoda

No, not really.... most posters here are intelligent enough to look at the post to which I was replying..... assuming they hadn't already read it, of course.
In any event, my point was that you were broadcasting proabort propaganda, regardless of who wrote it.
Your loyalties are crystal clear.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No, not really.... most posters here are intelligent enough to look at the post to which I was replying..... assuming they hadn't already read it, of course.
In any event, my point was that you were broadcasting proabort propaganda, regardless of who wrote it.
Your loyalties are crystal clear.
I don't see how discussing the mother's reactions to abortion has anything to do with making it "ok" to kill the child. I just feel the lies need to stop on both ends. Yes, it's wrong to kill another human being. No, most women do not regret it.

reply from: yoda

You could start with the source of your article. That's a clue!
Whether it (abortion) is right or wrong is not subject to empirical proof, so it can't be a "lie" either way.
And according to all the counselors I've spoken with, not only do the majority of them regret it, 100% of those who post abortive and are in therapy say that they regret it.

reply from: yoda

I said "counselors", not prochoice counselors. But the answer to your question is "one".

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You could start with the source of your article. That's a clue!
The source you already know, Guttmacher. There is no abortion conspiracy. Their research is GOOD WORK, they're very careful and complete. No amount of research in the world will change the MORALITY of abortion, so even if every woman walked away from their abortion happy, your feelings on whether it is right or wrong would be unchanged - wouldn't they? The FACT is that most women are relieved after their abortion. That doesn't make abortion right or wrong. I just want the lies to stop. Abortion doesn't cause breast cancer. Or infertility. The most important factor for determining how a woman will react to abortion is her state of mental health BEFORE the abortion.
Whether it (abortion) is right or wrong is not subject to empirical proof, so it can't be a "lie" either way.
I didn't say that abortion being wrong was a lie. It IS a lie, however, that abortion is mentally harmful to most women. It is NOT mentally harmful if the woman is mentally stable before the abortion.
Uh, DUH, of course all of the women she sees regret their abortion, and of course 100% of the women she sees regret their abortion! They're the 30% who regretted it!!! She's not seeing the other 70%!!! That's like if I was a doctor who only saw male patients. I might assume ALL people in the world were male! If you only see part of the picture, your assumptions are going to be wrong.

reply from: galen

LCDR... there is a bucket of sand w/ your name on it somewhere* looks around*....

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Please take a look at the real statistics, and you will see I am not the one in the dark. I'm not denying the fact that some women regret their abortions. But not ALL of them do. Not even HALF do! Less than 30% regret, and that's a long-term study.

reply from: lukesmom

Please take a look at the real statistics, and you will see I am not the one in the dark. I'm not denying the fact that some women regret their abortions. But not ALL of them do. Not even HALF do! Less than 30% regret, and that's a long-term study.
No one here even remotely said ALL women regret their abortion, we are very aware there are very hard hearted cold women out there. What Galen said was every raped women who became pregnant and then aborted, that she has spoken to/dealt with, regreted her "choice". Maybe ALL these women are in your supposed 30%. Take your head out of the sand and breathe once in a while, good for the brain cells...

reply from: galen

I am well aware that MANY of the women who profess to not regrett thier abortions really do not regrett them. I am also aware that many women who have abortions will do or say anything to keep the public from knowing how they really feel.
LCR i think that you are way to trusting in the media for your facts and base your opinions on such...
it must be blissfull in your world... i hope you get to keep it that way.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

This isn't the media, this is research. If Fox news were telling me this, THEN I'd be suspicious!

reply from: lukesmom

Darlin, research can be scewed and biased too, especially if that research is funded by a specific interest group. So far I haven't seen you post or sight anything even remotely close to your assursion that most women who are raped and abort do not regret their action. Are you now willing to say that was your OPINION and not an actual fact?

reply from: yoda

And not "biased" at all, right? Yeah, sure.... funny how you complain about prolife bias, but can't see proabort bias when it's right in front of your face.
Fascinating..... you have no idea whom I'm talking about, and yet you're soooo sure that "she" is only seeing women who regret their abortion.... fascinating. The first source of that statistic came from a prochoice counselor who works as a psychotherapist in private practice..... but of course, who can tell you anything, right?

reply from: galen

Please take a look at the real statistics, and you will see I am not the one in the dark. I'm not denying the fact that some women regret their abortions. But not ALL of them do. Not even HALF do! Less than 30% regret, and that's a long-term study.
___________________________________________________-
i have never said ALL of them do.....
i was speaking about rape victims... and you are being an insulting brat about this....

reply from: galen

Your friend's body is not your body. Your friend's body is not physically connected to yours in any way shape or form. The placenta violates this, growing into the uterine wall to feed off of the mother's blood and supply it to the unborn. This situation happens at no other time in a human being's life. In no other time are we as similar to a symbiotic being as we are in the womb. To ignore the uniqueness of this situation is folly; and to attempt to compare any other relationship to this one is also equally useless. There is no comparison for the pregnant woman and life in the womb.
Well if I were in a situation where someone's finger was trapped in a rock or it was gangrenous and there were no other options, then cutting off their finger certainly would make her feel better, and probably save her from death. People have cut their own limbs off to escape such situations.
Your comparisons make no sense.
These women sometimes feel like they have a demon inside of them, a disgusting monster eating away at them. Can you understand why they would want to kill it and remove it as soon as possible?
Current statistics show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.
Of course not; you don't get the women who are Ok with their abortions because they don't need therapy! That's like me being an orthopedic doctor who specializes in broken bones saying "I've never seen someone survive a fall without a broken bone!" Well now that's silly, isn't it? People survive falls all the time without breaking their bones, in fact most people don't break their bones when just slipping here or there. But I only see the people with broken bones, so I may assume that everyone who falls breaks their bones, because all of my clients are people who have fallen AND broken their ones.
It is 100% dependent on the woman herself. I could prove it by finding hundreds of stories of women who don't regret it, or show you statistics.
_________________________________________
the women who talk about not regretting thier abortions, are NOT raped women... i've never met one who publicly or on the net spoke about her abortion after rape, without betraying her self loathing attatched with the abortion... blatently betraying her emotions....
You seem to miss the part of the ^^ statement where i describe the circumstances i draw from....I attended a rape survivors group for years as my OWN therapy for my OWN rape...again... no one ever came forward and said they were glad they had done it... the ones who spoke more than a few words to acknowledge it did say they regretted thier 'choice' and it made them feel worse. true to the groups' dynamic, if there had been a woman there who felt better about it they would have been all over the ones who were not trying to reassure them... no one ever came forward...so if you ahev one of these compelling tales then please by all means post it here.
Also the current stats do not separate the rape victims from the women who were coerced or the women who just felt it was not the thing for them... etc.
Most women, who feel disgust feel it not from the pregnancy but from the rape... this tends to change once they see the child, or hear its heartbeat. The ones who have trouble the most are the ones who kept the rape a secret from everyone.
No one in my experience ever regretted having the child and placing it , or in rare instances keeping it. No one in my experience or the experience of others i have spoken with ( professional or personal) has ever had a woman who did not suffer MORE from the abortion and rape experience than they did from giving birth.
there for based on these facts i will continue to lay out these experiences for my clients...i would be remiss if i did not.
_______________________________________________
just a refresher about what i DID say....

reply from: LiberalChiRo

"The only way they feel you will ever see thier side of it would be to experience it."
IT being rape. They want me to see their side of things, and they think the only way I will see their side of things is to experience a rape, get pregnant, and abort.
The thing is, YOU keep ignoring the fact that I am saying the following: I believe you that they regret. I'm not trying to lessen their experience, and I'm very sorry for the experience they went through. But that does not change the fact that they are the minority.

reply from: lukesmom

As you cannot substantiat that statement, it is NOT fact but your opinon.

reply from: lukesmom

For the last time, take a deep breath and READ the whole sentance and let the light bulb go on!
and most of them said you walked with blinders on... and hoped that you could keep them on for the rest of your life. The only way they feel you will ever see thier side of it would be to experience it.

reply from: galen

________________________________________________________
no one wishes thier experience on anyone... EVER... not even on Hitler or Osama et al.
And as long as people keep saying abortion SHOULD be kept 100% legal and they use things like rape as an excuse then i will keep fighting about this point.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I am NOT saying abortion should be kept 100% legal, and your friends DID say those words so I am in my rights to be offended by what most everyone would interpret as a wish for me to be raped.

reply from: galen

So far only you have come here and said that... no one else has...
head ... sand.....

reply from: galen

You always make the rape exception....i argued that and gave you several others opinions...YOU read and interpreted it as a personal attack....
How can you possibly teach others children when you view sympathetic disagreements as personal attacks on yourself...?
You are WAY to eager to play victim here.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

So either they hope I'm blind to their plight, which isn't good and is insulting, or they hope I get raped so the blinders come off, which is also insulting AND threatening! Thanks for illuminating me on the other insult I'd forgotten.
I don't wish ANYONE to stay in the dark. Then again I don't wish them to be raped, either.
Furthermore, I AM AWARE OF THEIR SIDE OF THINGS. I NEVER said they didn't exist or that their feelings weren't genuine: and let me say it again, I am very sorry they went through such a horrible experience. I will however maintain the FACT that they are the MINORITY. Their experience does not represent the whole. Some people are deathly allergic to peanuts. That doesn't mean it needs to be illegal for the rest of us.
I'm going to be offended by what they said no matter what, especially because what they said was a LIE.
Galen is right, there is no research examining how many women regret abortion after rape. I think there should be. It is quite possible that they are a demographic of people for whom abortion should not be encouraged. The biggest factor determining HOW a woman will respond to an abortion is her mental health BEFORE the abortion. If she is already depressed or prone to depression and things like that (mental instability), then she's probably a BAD candidate for abortion and has a high chance of regretting it after wards. There IS RESEARCH confirming this.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

It was an attack. An attack on my intelligence, at least. Opinions are not facts. I am giving you facts. I am also conceding (and have said so several times) that more research needs to be done about women who abort after rape. Why do you keep ignoring that?
It's not a "sympathetic disagreement", it's an outright insult to my intelligence. It's an attack on my own sympathies. Now perhaps it is YOUR fault for how you explained my words to them, but I NEVER said that THEY did not regret, nor did I say they were wrong, or blind, or anything like that. I did say YOU were blind for consistently ignoring the FACTS that the women you meet are in the minority. That doesn't lessen their pain any, but it is an important statistical fact to consider when discussing the effect of abortion on women.
You cannot push for outlawing aborting based on the experiences of 1% of all women who abort. And that's who you counsel. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. You yourself have even commented on how few women become pregnant from rape and then abort. Again, we cannot make peanuts illegal just because some people are deathly allergic to them.

reply from: galen

i have commented time and again that rape is not a good reason to keep abortion legal because it is a small group of us who actually become pregnant after rape... rape is NOT an excuse to be used lightly for the legality of anything except maybe life sentences...
I did not explain ANYTHING to the therapy group... i got out my laptop and they read your word for themselves... these are intellegent and literate women... no need for explanations.
the only time i have EVER seen you comment on rape and doing studies is when you did so in the thread just proceeding... if yoou've said it before then please repost those lines... i can't find them.
If you are going to continue to ' be insulted' by those comments i still feel sorry for you... you are way to paranoid in this... we never said anything but that we sincerely wished you would never have to see firsthand how bad our experience was.
And NO in this case unless you have been there you can not know. So don't try to get holier than thou about it... THAT makes you look ignorant.

reply from: galen

LCR:
Galen is right, there is no research examining how many women regret abortion after rape. I think there should be. It is quite possible that they are a demographic of people for whom abortion should not be encouraged. The biggest factor determining HOW a woman will respond to an abortion is her mental health BEFORE the abortion. If she is already depressed or prone to depression and things like that (mental instability), then she's probably a BAD candidate for abortion and has a high chance of regretting it after wards. There IS RESEARCH confirming this.
*******************************************************
you have been tripped by your own words...
the very nature of that research shows that women who are depressed etc do not need to have an abortion......
First in another thread you throw out that mental disease ( read depression) is a GOOD excuse for abortion, now here you say that your research shows they are BAD candidates for abortion....
if we go with this 'research' that you have here ( please post a link) then the fact that the woman underwent a horrible ordeal hardly makes her a candidate for good health... you previously stated in THIS thread that she might be more prone to depression if she did not abort... and you would sympathise with that...and say abortion should be an option for her ... because she wants it...
well like i said herione addicts want thier drug, and manics like thier mania , it does NOT mean we should give into them when we know what they will do will hurt them. And per your own words here thier depression will hurt them if they have an abortion... so why let them have it?
not to mention they are killing an innocent child who has done NOTHING to deserve this type of death... he/ she/ too is the rapists victim.

reply from: Cecilia

No one said they wished you were raped, and "most everyone" would not interpret it that way. Too much pride in between your ears for you to see this clearly.
Galen, while you feel that rape may not be a "good reason to keep abortion legal because it is a small group of us who actually become pregnant after rape", if it is one person who is suffering and wishes for an abortion, then that one person's choice is so important that they have to be considered.
Do antiabortion advocates not hold life up to the highest regard; then why would they dismiss one person's life in favor of the majority?
There surely must be better reasons to be antiabortion in rape cases other than the small percentage it effects.

reply from: yoda

I think there are better reasons than that. One, a baby of rape is half from the mother, and two, the baby has not harmed anyone, or committed any crime.
No one of us speaks for all prolifers.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Yes, that's what I said, that's what I agree with and that's what the research supports. Are you attempting to say that every raped woman is depressed and thus, she is a bad candidate for abortion? It's interesting that you draw this conclusion, but as I didn't, I did not trip myself up on my own words.
If the woman's depression is CAUSED by the pregnancy yes, because the only way to end her depression is to get rid of the pregnancy hormones. There is no other cure that is safe for her that would not also damage the unborn in the process and for some reason, doctors don't like purposely harming unborn children and then delivering them. They consider that cruel.
But in that other thread, depression was NOT the only mental illness I was discussing.
If the woman's depression is caused by something else (read: rape) then abortion probably isn't going to help her since the pregnancy itself is not the cause of her pain. That's like chopping off a toe because your arm hurts.
Also, in the discussion of women with mental diseases, the other example was that they had a condition before having sex and before becoming pregnant, and that the condition was being made worse because of the pregnancy, for several reasons. The hormones could worsen the condition, or the woman may have to go off of her medicines because they are harmful to the unborn. 9 months being off of therapy can do severe and irreversible damage to a woman's brain.
So that's what I actually meant. Women with pre-existing mental conditions are just as likely to suffer from post-partum depression as they are post-abortion depression. A woman who has been raped has additional stresses on her, and additional guilts. In the cases where there is a pre-existing mental condition, the woman should carefully be examined to determine if she will react well to the abortion. If it's early-term and she absolutely DEMANDS one, then let her suffer the consequences. Otherwise, she should be dissuaded from doing so for her own health.
I don't see how I've tripped up on any of my words here. I simply wasn't clear enough and you ran with it.
It's completely circumstantial.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Bump so people can see my old views.

reply from: yoda

Why would we want to?

reply from: KaylieBee

So we can see how much she's ~*changed~*~.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

That would be the point, since you personally complained you were confused.

reply from: yoda

They don't. That's your misinterpretation of one poster's words.
We hold EACH life in high regard, that's why we don't endorse the elective killing of babies conceived in rape.
Don't you think such a life has any moral value? Do you dismiss such a life entirely?


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics