Obama reverses abortion policy

[martha]

I said if a woman wants an abortion because of rape, she should should also need to go to court. Obviosuly people didn't read my post in its entirety, because I said she doens't have to wait for the case to end to get the abortion.



According to my idea, the girl who was raped could get an abortion, and would then prove to court she was raped. The promiscuous woman could get an abortion if she cried rape, but I doubt afterwards her case would stand up in court. and then she would have to live with that.

You didn't even look on Wiki for any statistics, did you?

I most certainly am not. I was raised around women, I grew up with my mom and grandma without a father, and my mom has like 8 sisters. I hold great respect for women.

No, you don't. Go run your "good ideas" by your aunties. See what they say.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

you know, even promiscuous women get raped.

yes, rarely, but yes. She still can get the abortion, even if her case failed..just the idea is to discourage those from making up they were raped to get an abortion

 

[AliEnvy]

The promiscuous woman could get an abortion if she cried rape, but I doubt afterwards her case would stand up in court. and then she would have to live with that.

Andrea, the 17 year old with a boyfriend and using condoms is promiscuous? That's the respect you have for women?

 

[yolland]

yes, rarely, but yes.

 

[VintagePunk]

The promiscuous woman

Warn me if you have to, but this guy is an idiot. There's no point in reasoning with him. That statement right there shows where he's coming from.

In any case, I'm done with him.

 

[namkcuR]

I said if a woman wants an abortion because of rape, she should should also need to go to court. Obviosuly people didn't read my post in its entirety, because I said she doens't have to wait for the case to end to get the abortion.

Your scenario effectively turns the decision of abortion into a game of poker with lives at stake instead of chips. There are women who would be desperate enough to go ahead and press the charges even if they were false, knowing that pressing the charges is what counts, and not the verdict. All you'd end up with is a bunch of innocent men being wrongly charged with rape(and the charges being rape, their female accusers would be given the benefit of the doubt in court anyway), and a giant waste of government money on unnecessary hearings. Oh, and let's not forget that the a law like this would invariably make law enforcement officials(i.e. cops and lawyers) more skeptical when actual rape victims are trying to get justice. To sum up, this idea would ruin a bunch of innocent mens' lives for at least a few months or much more than that if convicted and make it harder for real rape victims to get justice, and the financial support of these undesirable results would be a waste of government money(read: taxes).

According to my idea, the girl who was raped could get an abortion, and would then prove to court she was raped. The promiscuous woman could get an abortion if she cried rape, but I doubt afterwards her case would stand up in court. and then she would have to live with that.

Wait, so you're saying the woman whose birth control didn't work could get away with abortion anyway but that her punishment would be living with it? In the middle of an argument about legal limitations to abortion, your answer to a question you're asked is that she would suffer karmic/moral/ethical punishment in the form of living with it?

I most certainly am not. I was raised around women, I grew up with my mom and grandma without a father, and my mom has like 8 sisters. I hold great respect for women.

I don't think you're being dishonest in that, I really don't. I just don't think you understand how the things you're saying are contrary to that. I have an honest question for you: If, hypothetically speaking, men were the gender capable of carrying babies, if men got pregnant, would you be as comfortable in suggesting ideas/practices/laws that invade their privacy and impose your morals on them?

 

[phillyfan26]

All I needed to hear was the one allusion to promiscuous women to know the true motive here.

 

[martha]

Warn me if you have to, but this guy is an idiot. There's no point in reasoning with him. That statement right there shows where he's coming from.

In any case, I'm done with him.

I have to follow your excellent example and go as well. I've already pointed out that there's no way to intelligently discuss anything with him.

I'll wait for the other anti-choice men to contribute to the thread. But I notice that once the hard questions get asked, they bail.

 

[BVS]

yes, rarely, but yes.

I was willing to come to bat for you that you didn't have women issues you were just extremely underresearched, but then you said this, and I have to agree, you are anti-woman.

 

[pgv]

At the end of the day the pro-life people can come in here with their shameless chauvinism and/or ignorance... but it doesn't change things, Obama reversed the policy, and we pro-choicers should continue to celebrate that

 

[yolland]

I think it may be time to give the tangent of the last few pages a rest for awhile. Clearly multiple people are getting pretty agitated and starting to talk like it.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

Andrea, the 17 year old with a boyfriend and using condoms is promiscuous? That's the respect you have for women?

Warn me if you have to, but this guy is an idiot. There's no point in reasoning with him. That statement right there shows where he's coming from.
In any case, I'm done with him.

All I needed to hear was the one allusion to promiscuous women to know the true motive here.

Sorry. That was missinterpretted, I was referring to the story I think Martha told, and I believe she was later referred to as "slut." I don't use words like that. Sorry for pissing some of you guys off I didn't mean it to come out the way it did.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

I was willing to come to bat for you that you didn't have women issues you were just extremely underresearched, but then you said this, and I have to agree, you are anti-woman.

yeah, what I said I realized I hadn't thought before I spoke. Once again, I will say I am not anti-woman, that just wouldn't make sense with my background. But I didn't think that one through. Apologies to those who were offended.

Your scenario effectively turns the decision of abortion into a game of poker with lives at stake instead of chips. There are women who would be desperate enough to go ahead and press the charges even if they were false, knowing that pressing the charges is what counts, and not the verdict. All you'd end up with is a bunch of innocent men being wrongly charged with rape(and the charges being rape, their female accusers would be given the benefit of the doubt in court anyway), and a giant waste of government money on unnecessary hearings. Oh, and let's not forget that the a law like this would invariably make law enforcement officials(i.e. cops and lawyers) more skeptical when actual rape victims are trying to get justice. To sum up, this idea would ruin a bunch of innocent mens' lives for at least a few months or much more than that if convicted and make it harder for real rape victims to get justice, and the financial support of these undesirable results would be a waste of government money(read: taxes).

Yeah. That's a point I didn't think of, I was just brainstorming.

Wait, so you're saying the woman whose birth control didn't work could get away with abortion anyway but that her punishment would be living with it? In the middle of an argument about legal limitations to abortion, your answer to a question you're asked is that she would suffer karmic/moral/ethical punishment in the form of living with it?

another good point, although it seems better than nothing.

I don't think you're being dishonest in that, I really don't. I just don't think you understand how the things you're saying are contrary to that. I have an honest question for you: If, hypothetically speaking, men were the gender capable of carrying babies, if men got pregnant, would you be as comfortable in suggesting ideas/practices/laws that invade their privacy and impose your morals on them?

I probably would be less comfortable, yes, but I hope I would stick by my beliefs.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

Oh btw I reread Martha's story and I get it now, I read the first part wrong. I didn't mean to call the first girl promiscuous.

 

[BonosSaint]

I probably would be less comfortable, yes, but I hope I would stick by my beliefs.

I usually stay out of abortion threads, but why would you be more comfortable imposing the consequences of your moral beliefs on women than men? I understand you were answering a specific question and I appreciate your honesty and your attempt to rethink what your position would be if it directly affected you and your sex, but your admission that you would be more comfortable since this is a woman thing than you would be if it were a man thing makes me a little uncomfortable--because the goal would be exactly the same. Would you clarify please? Why would it be more uncomfortable for you to stick with your beliefs?

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

I usually stay out of abortion threads, but why would you be more comfortable imposing the consequences of your moral beliefs on women than men? I understand you were answering a specific question and I appreciate your honesty and your attempt to rethink what your position would be if it directly affected you and your sex, but your admission that you would be more comfortable since this is a woman thing than you would be if it were a man thing makes me a little uncomfortable--because the goal would be exactly the same. Would you clarify please? Why would it be more uncomfortable for you to stick with your beliefs?

Thanks. Hmm..because I think most don't totally like being told what they can and can't do (I know I can't! ), so I definetly see where the women are coming from. If I were a woman, being told by a man what I can and can't do would feel kind of annoying. (I'm not trying to be sexist, I hope no one accuses me of that)

 

[indra]

I usually stay out of abortion threads, but why would you be more comfortable imposing the consequences of your moral beliefs on women than men? I understand you were answering a specific question and I appreciate your honesty and your attempt to rethink what your position would be if it directly affected you and your sex, but your admission that you would be more comfortable since this is a woman thing than you would be if it were a man thing makes me a little uncomfortable--because the goal would be exactly the same. Would you clarify please? Why would it be more uncomfortable for you to stick with your beliefs?

Because it then could possibly directly affect him, perhaps?

 

[financeguy]

I think the debate, at least in the last three pages or so, is gravitating in a direction which very much suits the abortion on demand lobby.

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

Because it then could possibly directly affect him, perhaps?

I said probably, too, btw, and I said even if I felt a little less comfortable I explained why and said I wouldn't change my mind. Or maybe I would hey who knows.

 

[martha]

I think the debate, at least in the last three pages or so, is gravitating in a direction which very much suits the abortion on demand lobby.

I have a question for those who think forcing women to have children is such a barn-burner of an idea. Most of you will make an exception for those women who have been raped. How do you legally differentiate those circumstances? How does it work? How does the law separate the sluts form the victims?

For example:

Andrea is seventeen, and having sex regularly with her boyfriend. They use condoms, but one time the condom breaks and she ends up pregnant. She was a willing participant in the sex, so is unqualified to have her pregnancy terminated. Her plans to attend college for a decade and become a physician are terminated instead.

Betty is seventeen and a virgin, until the night her creepy uncle holds her down and rapes her while she cries and begs him to stop. She becomes pregnant as a result of his actions.

How do those of you who support abortion access in Betty's case differentiate between the slut and the victim? How does it work? How do you make sure that Andrea bears the child of her shame and Betty doesn't? What must Betty prove to you so you allow her access to abortion?

You're certainly welcome to chime any time to clarify your positions.

 

[namkcuR]

I think the debate, at least in the last three pages or so, is gravitating in a direction which very much suits the abortion on demand lobby.

Please elaborate on what you mean by "abortion on demand lobby".

 

[dazzlingamy]

i still don't get the high interest in this. Why do people seem to care SO MUCH about an unborn feutus who in reality is a blob of cells that could not survive outside the womb, but as soon as the baby is born, seem to not give a shit? Where are the support for the young mothers, the monitoring and help with parents who are not coping, a fail safe welfare system, a bloody good foster care system, good health support, good school support, etc etc

your economy is in the toilet, hundreds and thousands of children are physically and emotionally abused, there are big problems in society, there are shitloads of bloody mental people out there and we get stuck on this tiny tiny issue of whether a blob of cells is a person.

You know what shits me, when we keep worrying and working on things that take our attention and effort off things that REALLY matter. When you've fixed illness, the homeless, the economy, human rights, war, and everything else, lets talk about abortion.

 

[pgv]

i still don't get the high interest in this. Why do people seem to care SO MUCH about an unborn feutus who in reality is a blob of cells that could not survive outside the womb, but as soon as the baby is born, seem to not give a shit? Where are the support for the young mothers, the monitoring and help with parents who are not coping, a fail safe welfare system, a bloody good foster care system, good health support, good school support, etc etc

your economy is in the toilet, hundreds and thousands of children are physically and emotionally abused, there are big problems in society, there are shitloads of bloody mental people out there and we get stuck on this tiny tiny issue of whether a blob of cells is a person.

You know what shits me, when we keep worrying and working on things that take our attention and effort off things that REALLY matter. When you've fixed illness, the homeless, the economy, human rights, war, and everything else, lets talk about abortion.

I couldn't agree more over this. But as I've said a few times in the thread, I think it's so significant that it's mostly men (with a few exceptions, mostly those with religious backgrounds) who feel so vehemently against it. If, like it's already been said, this was a Male issue we wouldn't be having this debate at all. It is only a cluster of cells, only propoganda and more extreme examples would tell you otherwise.

And I find it amazing how pro-lifers always seem to assume abortion would 'be abused' and used as birth control. Yes, by a few, but the decision to have an abortion has probably got to be the hardest decision a woman will ever make. Yet here people are, thinking we're all just clamouring to have one for the hell of it!

 

[Galeongirl]

Go research how many rape cases actually:
1. are reported
2. are prosecuted
3. have the rapist convicted
4. get settle with in the first trimester of a pregnancy

I could make a guess on that. Something around 0 perhaps?

 

[Galeongirl]

This question still stands for anyone else to attempt to answer.

I'd allow them both an abortion. In the first case, yes, it was an accident. But shit happens, and the girl shouldn't have her future fucked up(yea pun I know) because of a broken condom.

 

[Galeongirl]

Warn me if you have to, but this guy is an idiot. There's no point in reasoning with him. That statement right there shows where he's coming from.

In any case, I'm done with him.

I don't think anyone here will ever agree with him. I don't want to bicker or have words with him but I simply do not understand why he posts things like this. So bluntly against females and then claiming he's very much pro women? Bullshit. Direct contradictions.

 

[Galeongirl]

I'll wait for the other anti-choice men to contribute to the thread. But I notice that once the hard questions get asked, they bail.

This just struck me as interesting.


How come all of the anti-choice people here are men?

 

[AliEnvy]

It is only a cluster of cells,

Is this what you need to believe to make it acceptable?

the decision to have an abortion has probably got to be the hardest decision a woman will ever make.

If it's only a cluster of cells, why would the decision be the hardest decision a woman will ever have to make?

 

[Irvine511]

How come all of the anti-choice people here are men?

because they don't have a womb?

 

[AliEnvy]

How come all of the anti-choice people here are men?

Don't kid yourself - there are almost as many women who are anti-women as there are men who are anti-women.