U.S. Abortion Rate Falls to Lowest Level in Decades

Parent Cafe
61

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m with you on this! These religious fanatics are hurting the pro-life cause by trying to impose their beliefs on others…it goes way beyond saving a baby with a face and toes and fingernails and brain waves and a heartbeat…THAT is obvious. But to deny contraception??? No justification for that.</p>

<p>These religious fanatics seem to care more about imposing their agenda on others than they do about actually saving oppressed people (unborn babies) because if they really cared about the babies, they wouldn’t try to prohibit people from practicing birth control.</p>

<p>It’s crazy.</p>

62

<p>I have heard that one reason the anti-choice crowd is also against birth control pills is because the pill does not stop conception, it just stops the zygote from implanting itself in the uterus.</p>

63

<p>That’s not true about the pill. The pill affects the hormones which regulate ovulation. No ovulation=no conception.</p>

<p>Other forms of birth control can allow conception, like the IUD. The IUD is not as common as the pill, btw.</p>

<p>Sometimes the fertilized egg doesn’t implant for other, natural reasons.</p>

<p>(All I can say to that is that I hope those people never step on bugs, either.)</p>

<p>That’s why I propose using the existing definition of life (whether it’s the heartbeat or the brainwaves…btw, can they measure the brain waves of babies in utero?); otherwise it gets really crazy and there’s no way to get any sort of compromise with extremists. I’d speculate that most pro-life people who aren’t extremists would be happy with using the existing definition of life.</p>

64

<p>*
Only religious extremists are trying to discourage birth control and sex education. Rational pro-life people realize that sex education and easy access to contraception are integral to reducing abortions.
*</p>

<p>Possibly that is true- however in many areas pharmacists refuse to dispense birth control pills to unmarried women, antibiotics for women that they suspect had an abortion & Plan B pill for when a woman suspects her birth control failed or she was raped.</p>

<p>Since in some towns, there may be only one pharmacist, this is limiting access to health care. CUrrently a bill just cleared Senate committee to allow pharmacists to decide whether or not to dispense birth control pills without fear of reprisals from their employer.</p>

<p>Our state lost federal funding for abstinence based sex education, ( previously we received a $800,000 grant), because state law now requires sex education to be medically accurate about preventing unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.</p>

<p>Not all schools teach sex ed, but if they do, they have to have good info.</p>

<p>Are all the people involved with limiting health care religious “extremists”?</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>We need to get Bush out of office.</p>

66

<p>

</p>

<p>Ugh, what a mess. Hey, I don’t claim to have solutions for everything.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well we agree on that! I just hope our country can make it til then. Not just on this issue, but on many issues.</p>

67

<p>I think the abortion-adoption thing has produced about all it’s going to in this discussion.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Watch out, here comes Godwin’s law. ;)</p>

<p>My point was not that your philosophical disagreement with abortion is judgmental, but rather that your dismissal of the emotional difficulties these women went through was judgmental.</p>

<p>Personally, I disagree with your view on abortion as killing. However, that is not something I truly care about; your views about it are your own, and you are welcome to them. As long as the ability for each person to make such a determination for themselves is available, I don’t particularly care what any one person’s view is. On the other hand, if you’re advocating we stop allowing that choice, then I have a problem.</p>

68

<p>

</p>

<p>Wow, I am stunned. </p>

<p>I can only surmise that you are basing that statement on my assertion that abortion is still a selfish choice, since it’s putting the woman’s convenience over that of the baby’s wellbeing (since I doubt anyone would argue that a baby is better off aborted than adopted).</p>

<p>I stand by that statement. Nevertheless, I have repeatedly stated that I think abortion hurts WOMEN and that women should NOT be branded ‘cold, heartless murderers’ as many religious ‘pro-life’ people do.</p>

<p>I have intense compassion for women who’ve been in desperate situations in which they felt their only ‘choice’ (not really a choice if it’s your ONLY option) was to abort their baby.</p>

<p>If I failed to convey that to you, then I apologize for my inadequate communication.</p>

<p>I do not dismiss their emotional difficulties. As I said, most of my close friends have had abortions and I witnessed their pain. I simply contend that a person’s life should be championed; whether that person is black, poor, disabled, ■■■■■■■■…or unborn.</p>

<p>See, there will never be any understanding between us as long as you insist that there is no person being killed. If you really thought a person was killed, how could you justify it? Try substituting ‘1-year-old toddler’ in all the arguments (“Is it ok to kill the 1-year-old toddler to save the mother some emotional pain?”) and then tell me I am dismissing that woman’s emotional difficulties if I answer ‘No’ to that question.</p>

<p>PS Godwin’s Law takes into consideration that sometimes the Nazi analogy is appropriate. This is one such case.</p>

69

<p>Well we haven’t actually legitimately yet debated the issue of personhood, when life begins and why that is legitimate territory for an abortion debate, or any of the other deeper philosophical issues here. If you’d like, we can, but we should do it in a PM, to spare others having to read it. ;)</p>

<p>However, I don’t particularly care whether you agree with my views or not (sorry if this sounds harsh, that’s not how it’s intended) - all that I care about is that you and all other women are free to make their own moral determination with regards to abortion, and act accordingly.</p>

<p>As for Godwin’s law, the point it makes is that a Nazi analogy can almost always be used in a manner that is at least logically consistent, but that once used it significantly reduces the credibility of the person who uses it. ;)</p>

70

<p>

</p>

<p>from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Eh, I still think it was appropriate and so I used it.</p>

<hr>

<p>The issue of personhood is entirely relevant because, to use another cliche, a slaveowner should not have the ‘choice’ to have slaves, right? A woman should not have the ‘choice’ to kill her 1-yo baby, right?</p>

<p>The whole point is that, if the unborn is a person, then no one should have a ‘choice’ concerning whether he is a person; it’s a given that as a person he has inalienable rights.</p>

<p>How can you ask someone who believes it’s a person to quit trying to champion that person’s right to life?</p>

<p>And that’s why we go round and round…</p>

71

<p>Like I said, I don’t really want to go into the philosophical debate here. If you really want to, send me a PM and we can go at it there. ;)</p>

72

<p>Ok. Peace.</p>

73

<p>“The issue of personhood is entirely relevant because, to use another cliche, a slaveowner should not have the ‘choice’ to have slaves, right? A woman should not have the ‘choice’ to kill her 1-yo baby, right?”</p>

<p>That and the nazi example… please, you are bringing the most extreme and ridiculous analogies into your argument. Those are two different issues. If that analogy is at ALL functional and relevant, please elaborate. Also, I’m curious to know your stance on the death penalty. Additionally, if you think so strongly that every one of those unborn children/fetus’s should have the chance to live, then I hope you would be willing to adopt a hell lot of them that could end up in foster homes, etc. You can not deny the fact that MANY of the women trying to have abortions wouldn’t be able to care for their child very well and more children are getting pumped into foster homes. I would think many of those kids do not live up very successful or enjoyable lives so why create more of those problems just because you have the golden pedestal of life to uphold. I would like to think I have no less respect for life than any other person out there but EVERYTHING must be taken into the context of situations. Giving women the choice to have an abortion is in my opinion an essential freedom they should have. That being said (I’m quite naive about the actual stages of development), it should take place as early as possible. Obviously I would find the abortion of a third trimester unborn child horrible.</p>

74

<p>Extreme and ridiculous?</p>

<p>The analogy is simple: One person’s freedom ends where another’s begins.</p>

<p>It’s the basic principle of life and liberty. Each of us is free to do whatever we want, as long as we don’t impose on someone else’s life and liberty.</p>

<p>Killing another person is wrong because it’s the ultimate infringement on someone else’s right to life/liberty. Slavery is wrong for the same reason.</p>

<p>If an unborn baby is a person, then obviously killing it would be the ultimate infringement of his life/liberty.</p>

<p>When we witness someone taking someone else’s life, we report it, we try to stop it, we try to champion the victim. </p>

<p>If no one had championed the slaves or the Jews, their oppression might not have ever ended. It was obvious that they were being oppressed, abused, killed…so others took action to stop the atrocities.</p>

<p>Likewise, if the unborn baby is a person, then obviously our reaction should be the same - we champion the victim.</p>

<p>It’s a perfect analogy and illustration of why pro-lifers are willing to impose on the woman’s right to convenience and privacy - the right of the child to life trumps her rights to convenience and privacy, just as the rights of the aforementioned people trumped the rights of their oppressors.</p>

<p>It’s very simple, really. But understanding of it hinges upon a willingness to CONSIDER that the unborn baby is actually a PERSON. Unless you are willing to consider the opposing viewpoint, you cannot see the simple logic. (‘see the other viewpoint’ just means consider it - you don’t necessarily have to agree with it. But considering other sides to the argument is the 1st step towards reconciliation.)</p>

<p>Now, you are bringing up the same tired old arguments…Were Americans responsible for taking in all the Jews after WWII? Were the people who freed the slaves responsible for taking them all in, housing them, feeding them?</p>

<p>A lot of WANTED children end up abused, in foster homes, etc. Hell, I was one of them! Should we have been killed instead?</p>

<p>Ask anyone who’s had a hard life if they would rather to have not ever been born. Only the seriously depressed will say yes. (And there are depressed people in every socioeconomic group.)</p>

<p>BTW, if abortion solves the problem of children ending up in foster homes, and since abortion has been legal for quite some time, then WHY do we still have so many children being abused and ending up in foster homes?</p>

75

<p>Many women having abortions would be fine mothers, they just view the baby as coming at an inconvenient time. Really, they should have thought about that prior to getting pregnant. Birth control is very accessible and safe, and combined with condoms, many methods are 100% effective.</p>

<p>The vast majority of pharmacists fill prescriptions for birth control, especially as big box stores have become so prevalent, and drug store chains have expanded. Actually, the number of independent pharmacists has been shrinking, and at a large pharmacy there are always several pharmacists rotating through. </p>

<p>I see little excuse for unwanted pregnancies, and I think that a woman needs to choose before getting pregnant. If not, then go on with having the baby, get prenatal care, and consider the alternatives for the baby. Sure it’s not easy, and society and families need to help. However, many of the aborters are women who could stretch themselves and raise the baby without becoming child abusers.</p>

<p>I also do not see how the 14th amendment and the “right to privacy” covers a fetus’ right to die for her mother’s privacy. </p>

<p>I think that all women having abortions need to see the baby’s ultrasound before making a final decision. I think that a lot of women believe it is like a piece of Play-Doh and later, see other ultrasounds that show that they aborted a live, swimming being with a heartbeat. It is then that they often feel great remorse and regret.</p>

<p>Also some women think since they became pregnant that time, it will be easy to get pregnant again. When it’s not so easy later on, particularly after the uterus may have been scarred during abortion(s), then they realize the enormity of what they have done.</p>

<p>It is a grave procedure, and should not be taken lightly. Also the father’s rights need to be taken into consideration.</p>

<p>By the way, I personally used to support Roe v. Wade, until I saw how so many women were abusing the intent by making abortion a means of birth control. It is absolutely shameful that there are well over a million abortions a year in the US. How can all of these women be so irresponsible about prevention? Womankind should be ashamed.</p>

76

<p>Very well said!!!</p>

77

<p>I saw how so many women were abusing the intent by making abortion a means of birth control.</p>

<p>I agree that some people abuse it.
There are a lot of people who are irresponsible, but those are not the people I think should be raising children.</p>

78

<p>Emeraldkity4: I really don’t see how getting Bush out of office would have anything at all to do with the laws passed in South Dakota, or anywhere else. Really, I don’t think he’s jetting into Pierre and jamming his philosophical beliefs down the throats of Daschle’s friends there.</p>

<p>For the record, bugs don’t have souls, only people have souls.</p>

79

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s debatable. But, not provable, so I’ll refrain.</p>

<p>I mentioned the bugs only as a reference to the yogis who take a vow of non-violence and then have a hard time avoiding all living things, being that we breathe in micro-organisms and it’s impossible to avoid. Sorry that I didn’t really explain the reference.</p>

<p>The point about abortion being wrong because humans have souls doesn’t really hold up to those who don’t believe it. Not everyone even believes in a soul at all, and even among those who do, they don’t agree as to when the soul enters the body.</p>

<p>I contend that we don’t even need to get into the soul discussion. I contend that abortion is wrong, because it’s violent. Whether one believes in a soul or not, we can agree that violence towards an innocent being is wrong.</p>

<p>Some take this concept further and strive for nonviolence towards all living things (by not eating animals, etc.) which is taking it to a higher level. Even if you don’t agree with that, I think it would be nice if we could at least all agree about violence towards humans.</p>

<p>And around we go…since those who think abortion is ok don’t think the unborn baby is…what, human? is it not human? Well, it’s not a monkey or a cat, and it has human DNA, so it must be human. Ok, so is it…not alive? Wait, it’s growing, its cells are multiplying, so yes it is alive…</p>

<p>So, it’s human and it’s alive…what’s next? Is it sentient? Wait, we don’t kill senile old people or newborn babies…Is it independent? Again, newborn babies aren’t independent. Preemies can’t live without intervention, but we wouldn’t dream of killing them…</p>

<p>So the only distinguishing characteristic, really, is that its dwelling is another person’s body.</p>

<p>Which goes back to the argument: which take precedence, a human’s right to life or a human’s right to convenience?</p>

80

<p>Do you think that the reason why a woman has an abortion is just for the sake of timing?</p>

<p>I had an abortion when I was 19.
I had, had an IUD implanted- it was still intact. I was unstable- I was very depressed ( my father had killed himself just over a year before- my mother had just had both of the family dogs put to sleep because she was tired of taking care of them & blamed me, because I couldn’t take them where I lived) & in a relationship with someone who was an alcoholic and drug user. ( with a violent temper) I continued the relationship, because I couldn’t afford to pay for an apt myself & I believed that the relationship was the most I deserved.</p>

<p>I hadn’t finished high school, I was working at a drive in theatre- my boss, who owned the property, & lived upstairs with her 16 year old daughter, ( she was 30), counseled me to have an abortion- her reasons made sense to me.</p>

<p>I had been going to Planned Parenthood for medical care- they did not pressure me one way or the other, but tried to give me enough information so that I could make my own decision.</p>

<p>I knew enough not to try and bring a child into that relationship, even if I wasn’t worried about miscarrying 6th months into the pregnancy. ( which I was)
Yes it wasn’t convenient, but I also considered the situation carefully.</p>