Baseball bat abortion

[BVS]

If she were the same age at an abortion clinic you'd respect her opinion, yet you don't accept her choice of a baseball bat?

At least she would be safe that's my point and has been since the beginning sorry you haven't caught on by now.

And yes, I am only trying to point out the ignorance, hyypocrisy and lack of holding water of the whole fucking 'choice' argument! (did you miss my /extreme sarcasm/ comment?) See, you people are always going on about how an abortion is a choice, and while you may not agree with it, it is not your decision to make, it's the girl/woman in question. So here this girl has made her choice, and you are against it? Gasp! So you only call it a choice if it's a choice you agree with?

And I'm the ignorant and hypocritical one? Wow, you don't even bother reading peoples posts anymore you just jump head in with your condescending tone and crap theories.

What part of her choice not being legal did you not understand?

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

As long as no one posts the stupid, ridiculous, hypocritical term 'anti choice' I can hold my temper. But once that shows up, I explode. It's one of my life's goals to point out the ignorance of justifying abortion with the word 'choice' and to get people to fess up and call it what it really is. But you don't have to worry about me anymore, I have some serious personal business the rest of the day and will not be able to get to the computer! Hopefully someone else will flare up and the thread will be closed before I get back

Inherent in the term "pro-choice" is the recognition that abortion is one of the choices being advocated, in that respect it doesn't cover anything up. Pro-abortion isn't an appropriate description as it implies that anyone who isn't absolutely opposed to abortion at all times is automatically in favour of abortion in any circumstance.

People who oppose abortion are welcome to describe themselves in whatever terms they choose, whether that's pro-life, anti-abortion or any other description that pleases them. Why not extend the same courtesy to those of us who believe abortion should be available as one of several choices open to women?

To get back on topic...

How can anyone deny that there is a vast difference between a woman making a conscious decision to have an abortion - a medical procedure carried out by trained healthcare professionals in a safe environment - and a frightened young woman allowing someone to beat her with a baseball bat in order to cause a miscarriage? Will you all be advocating the legalisation of hard drugs on the basis that it's legal for a doctor to prescribe diamorphine to a patient so it should be legal for a person to buy heroin (diamorphine by another name) from a dealer?

 

[Macfistowannabe]

I would really like to get in a discussion that deals with this specific case. Since most of us would agree that using a baseball bat is an awful method for an abortion, I have a few questions and would like to receive some replies, and get different perspectives.

1. What should this couple have done differently? Should they have used birth control, practiced abstinence, received better sex education, or did they do everything right?

2. Do you agree with the young man being charged and not the young woman? Why or why not?

3. Has the term "women's rights" been put to good use, or do you think it has been abused?

 

[thacraic]

Why am I being called out on this, I think there's been condescention on both sides. Please don't drag me into your other discussions, thank you.

The reason I am pointing you and dread out is because I was accused on another thread by both you and him of being condescending.

 

[Angela Harlem]

For macphisto's perusal:

1. What should this couple have done differently? Should they have used birth control, practiced abstinence, received better sex education, or did they do everything right?

The method of abortion for starters should have been done differently. I dont think anyone in here so far would disagree. Yes they should have used birth control as should ANYONE engaging in sex who doesn't want a resultant pregnancy. As for whether they received the appropriate sex ed is unknown as many know about it, yet still fall into unwanted pregnancies. Abstinance is a choice not often seen as viable, and doesn't really need to be when there are a plethora of safe sex options available. Did they do everything right? Too hard to say. Easy to say no, and certainly the bat was not doing anything right by anyone's standards (except theirs) surely.

2. Do you agree with the young man being charged and not the young woman? Why or why not?

No. Emphatically no. Both were participants. Both need to wear that.

3. Has the term "women's rights" been put to good use, or do you think it has been abused?

Tricky. Women should always have rights. Always. The thorn of the fetus's rights is always going to rise up. Unfortunately in the debate of abortion, both can never be met in a mutually beneficial arrangement. One side will always put either the right of the fetus or the woman above the other. In terms of those who think the fetus's rights (which are life) need to go beyond the mother's, then it is placing secondary (and logical to that side's camp) to the "woman's rights". Which has to be viewed as fair in some way, yes? It is life after all we are talking about.

Unfortunately, one has to be put above the other as either the woman is going to suffer the immense emotional trauma of having a child she doesn't want, or a fetus will be killed. Both sides lose so much. One loses a life, and one loses life as she knows it. Which she still does anyway as anyone who has suffered the pain of an abortion will know.

No one wins.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

1. What should this couple have done differently? Should they have used birth control, practiced abstinence, received better sex education, or did they do everything right?

Birth control as a last resort, because obviously teaching abstinence didn't do it for these kids. I would also say better sex education as well.

2. Do you agree with the young man being charged and not the young woman? Why or why not?

Technically, women often want men to guide the relationship, so in that principle, it's tempting to agree with it. I do think the young female should receive counseling at least, but the legal system is not going to enforce that. This young boy should be taught tough love so he doesn't repeat his extreme patterns in his behavior. Very much of this hideous crime was done on his part, therefore it is his responsibility. When a man (or in this case, a kid) allows his relationship to be governed with a baseball bat to replace any form of decency, it is wrong, and this kid allowed that pathetic line of thinking to get him in trouble.

3. Has the term "women's rights" been put to good use, or do you think it has been abused?

Both.

The female suffrage movement allowed women to vote and earn more respectable positions in our society. New Zealand beat us to that movement, but countries such as Switzerland didn't grant it until 1972. Now there is talk of spreading this freedom to the Middle East, which in my opinion, REAL WOMEN'S RIGHTS should be the focus. Rights to speak their mind, protect themselves, and have the same opportunities in their lives as men do.

It has been abused in the US for sure, in ways that I find outrageous. We use it as a scapegoat to disguise the true meaning of a major political issue to make the word sound comfortable and appealing. Same thing is happening with the word "choice." Nobody is "anti-choice." I think we all believe a choice is to be made, we just can't agree on when the time should occur.

In doing this, we are actually demeaning human rights. I think it's a perversion to compare a woman's right to vote to the fact that almost every third baby conceived in America is killed by abortion. (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_17.asp) Thanks for making "women's rights" a partisan term.

 

[dandy]

Technically, women often want men to guide the relationship

i stopped reading right here. give me a freaking break.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Birth control as a last resort,

?

 

[Macfistowannabe]

i stopped reading right here. give me a freaking break.

Really? You think women should be the ones to propose to us?

 

[Angela Harlem]

How many of the world's 3 billion odd women have you asked this question to, to take this from a gross generalisation to a worthwhile or valid point?

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Since the post was vague and didn't answer any of my questions, thankfully only one of them.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Are you talking about your post which I quoted, where you answered your questions? I confuse easily lol.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Well, I think I got confused by that as well when you remembered the question mark, but you forgot to ask the question.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Haha now I'm really confused.
The question mark post was my shorthand way of asking what you meant by birth control as a last resort.

Then the next post was me really being a smartarse by saying you can't say 'women want [insert example]' unless you really know by research etc that as a rule women DO want [your example].

I dont think this has become any clearer It's 4am here...

 

[Irvine511]

Oh sooooooo sorry I chose not to be subtle and vague in my namecalling. Actually saying you are condescending is not namecalling, it is stating a fact. Pointing out that you are being condescending does not weaken my argument. (Note to BVS and Dread, what Irivine said IS CONDESCENDING, but I really DOUBT either of you two will have ANYTHING to say about it.) HOW does it weaken my argument. I think I need to get something straight here. In this forum it is ok to call people bigots or homophobes because of their belief system (which is twisted to "prove" the lame ass accusations) but saying someone is condescending is out. But no wait, even then its not, it is only when people with certain views say it that it is not acceptable. Gotcha!

I used the quotes BECAUSE science says the life cycle begins at conception yet ironically science also says life begins after the 1st trimester. That is why i referred to it as "scientific fact", because one view is in complete contrast to the other. You do not need to be a scientist to KNOW that. All you need is the ability to read the written word.

Oh an just some words of advice to everyone, if you are not a musician do not attempt to analyze Edge's guitar solos. If you are not a politician do not talk politics. If you are not a pastor do not speak about theology etc. etc. Thank you Irvine for pointing out that if we are not professionals in the area of which we speak, we really shouldn't have an opinion on things.

well, i suppose this explains a tremendous amount.

the fact that you bring up other threads and drag them into this one is evidence of just how personally you're taking these discussions. i've never called you a homophobe, dear, but i will absolutely call a *belief* homophobic -- Biblically based or not. i know the anger feels good, but your coherence erodes every time you work yourself up into a righteous frenzy.

i don't think it's name calling but stating a fact that you really need to grow up.

i'm totally done with this post.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

Well, it seems as though our standards have been set to use abortion as a last resort. I'm sure most people don't exactly like abortions, but quite a few believe they should be done anyhow. I have that feeling about young teens having sex. I wish they would at least wait a while longer, but there's no sense in preaching abstinance, so my standards are limited to using birth control. In summary, I don't like the idea that so many teens are using birth control, but it's better than having more unwanted pregnancies. Hope that helps.

 

[stammer476]

Unfortunately, one has to be put above the other as either the woman is going to suffer the immense emotional trauma of having a child she doesn't want, or a fetus will be killed. Both sides lose so much. One loses a life, and one loses life as she knows it. Which she still does anyway as anyone who has suffered the pain of an abortion will know.

No one wins.

That's one of the best summarizations of this topic I've ever encountered. I like your style, Angela.

Such a mess . . .

 

[Macfistowannabe]

I second that, it was well-said.

Imagine if this kid experienced any feelings of regret later in life for the baseball bat abortion.

 

[pax]

Pax with all due respect, this topic will never be debated without absolute passion from both sides. And it never should be. It's a serious as fuck issue. Why don't you guys let everyone have the debate they want, if people didn't want it they'd not bother responding.

Anyone who gets out of hand can take a temporary hike from here. Sicy or Elvis wouldn't mind, surely.

These threads need to see themselves through to conclusion, or until it becomes useless. And that's a long ways off.

This isn't kindergarden. Newbs will realise that before long, and anyone older here already knows that.

Don't be in a rush to close it, people have a right and need here. Lets NOT silence this issue anymore. Please.

Ange, this issue has never been silenced. And you know that my job as a mod--for better or worse--is to try to keep things under control. It is NOT good for me, or any mod, to allow people to conduct discussions in this manner.

It seems that some people would like Interference to be run differently--that is, with less input from mods and more of a "free rein" mentality. Unfortunately, that is not how Interference is run, and I'm glad of that, too. Surely it would make my job, and all our jobs as mods, easier, but I'd like to think that I have a hand in encouraging and upholding standards of civil discourse--instead of merely presiding over a free-for-all.

This is a moot point right now because the thread seems to be going well and I don't plan to close it. But I won't apologize for how this forum, or any other at Interference, is moderated. No one is being "silenced." This is not a tyranny. We all know that these threads re-surface again and again anyway, and we allow them to run their courses as best we can until people start to take it personally and can't stop.

It is what it is.

 

[indra]

Uh, duh, of course I know that's what you mean, that's why I said it was a 'comfy term to cover up what abortion really is.' If you really support abortion, have the fucking balls to call yourself PRO ABORTION and stop hiding behind the 'choice' bullshit!

U2kitten, please use your brain here. I'm NOT pro-abortion, I'm "pro-the choice to decide whether or not to continue the pregnancy or to abort the pregnancy" but that being pretty damned long to type out, it is shortened to pro-choice. I don't use it to be more "comfy," I use it to be more clear about what I believe. If you choose not to believe that, that's your right, but I'm very particular about words and their meanings, and your choice of words for what you think I mean actually obscures what I actually mean.

And I don't have balls, and I suspect you don't either (unless your one very odd woman -- and if you are, well, you could probably make decent money in porn ).


*edited to add:

Note to Pax: My resolve to keep out of this didn't last very long, did it? Sorry. But, I can't help it, I'm opinionated! )

 

[BVS]

The reason I am pointing you and dread out is because I was accused on another thread by both you and him of being condescending.

Exactly, another thread.

 

[Do Miss America]

1. What should this couple have done differently? Should they have used birth control, practiced abstinence, received better sex education, or did they do everything right?

Use protection, we don't know of their education, but I'd guess it was weak since they got pregnant, but you never know.

2. Do you agree with the young man being charged and not the young woman? Why or why not?

I think like someone already mentioned that it would be next to impossible to prove her role in the incident.

3. Has the term "women's rights" been put to good use, or do you think it has been abused?

Well in many ways we're still not equal so I would say it hasn't been abused yet.

 

[Do Miss America]

Really? You think women should be the ones to propose to us?

I know of girls that have proposed.

 

[thacraic]

well, i suppose this explains a tremendous amount.

the fact that you bring up other threads and drag them into this one is evidence of just how personally you're taking these discussions. i've never called you a homophobe, dear, but i will absolutely call a *belief* homophobic -- Biblically based or not. i know the anger feels good, but your coherence erodes every time you work yourself up into a righteous frenzy.

i don't think it's name calling but stating a fact that you really need to grow up.

i'm totally done with this post.

Irvine you were done before you started. You have yet again failed to even reply to the initial question. All you can do is pick apart a comment I made about this fourm in general. My making a comment on how I see certain people responding to threads in this forum explains what? That I notice a pattern of behavoir with certain people and in each thread, the same thing occurs and I point it out. I point out that my saying your being condescending is not name calling and I furthermore give examples of what name calling is, and that means I need to grow up? I am sorry but I fail to see coherence in that.

Anger feels good? Not really. It annoys me more than it angers me. "It" being when people will not address a question and just skirt it. I suppose it is because they do not have an answer. And yeh, it will be taken personally if, instead of answering a question, the only thing a person does is try in vain to insult me and my intelligence. Not just me either, if I see it happening to anyone I find it incredibly rude and ignorant. And yeh I will point it out. Sorry for being CHILDISH in calling a spade a spade.

 

[Do Miss America]

I think it's a perversion to compare a woman's right to vote to the fact that almost every third baby conceived in America is killed by abortion. (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_17.asp)

I don't buy it. I don't have time to look for the numbers but 1 out of 3? Please. Out of all the women I've know in my life either very personally or have worked with through my days of working with youth, I've known 2 women who have had abortions. I couldn't count how many have had children. And I didn't grow up in an affluent neighborhood. I question the numbers but who knows I'll get back to you on this.

 

[thacraic]

Exactly, another thread.

But it is in the same forum with the same people. Evidentally what is ok for some is not ok for others. I guess it depends on who is being condescending and what the subject matter is and what views that person has on it. Got it....

 

[indra]

But it is in the same forum with the same people. Evidentally what is ok for some is not ok for others. I guess it depends on who is being condescending and what the subject matter is and what views that person has on it. Got it....

But bringing grudges from other threads is a no no here. This thread is for this discussion, not for others even in this forum.

And you can be a condescending as anyone here, hell, we all can be (and are at times), so let's not get so worked up about who's allowed what here, and discuss the topic.

 

[BVS]

But it is in the same forum with the same people. Evidentally what is ok for some is not ok for others. I guess it depends on who is being condescending and what the subject matter is and what views that person has on it. Got it....

First of all bringing in past threads is frown upon by the mods(anyone please correct me if this is wrong but this is how I understood it.) Secondly, yes it was in the past I'm no longer going to have THAT argument. Third as I mentioned before both of you have been condescending to each other so please don't involve me in this.

 

[pax]

Look, things were starting to go well...

Can we please admit that decent, reasonable, ethical people can disagree on this issue, and that likely neither side will have the final word?

(That's right, neither side will have the final word--because at the rate this thread has started to go again, I, or another mod, will have the final word before putting the ol' lock to it.)

Here are some suggestions:

--Acknowledge that the mere fact that someone is personally strongly opposed to abortion does not make him or her a bigoted, reactionary asshole; OR
--Acknowledge that the mere fact that someone feels personally that abortion should remain legal and in the hands of medical professionals does not make him or her a baby-killing, bloodthirsty nihilist; AND
--Leave your sarcasm, your petty put-downs, your condescensions, and your TEMPER at the door.

I mean it. I'm tired of this happening over and over again with this subject. My weekend starts tonight and I'd have no problem putting this to bed so I don't have to worry about it for the next two days.

Neither I nor any other mod will let people act like children in here.

That is all.

 

[indra]

I would really like to get in a discussion that deals with this specific case. Since most of us would agree that using a baseball bat is an awful method for an abortion, I have a few questions and would like to receive some replies, and get different perspectives.

1. What should this couple have done differently? Should they have used birth control, practiced abstinence, received better sex education, or did they do everything right?

2. Do you agree with the young man being charged and not the young woman? Why or why not?

3. Has the term "women's rights" been put to good use, or do you think it has been abused?

I'd rather answer these questions from what we as a society should do, more than what I think this couple should have done, as I don't really know what they did or knew prior to this incidnt. besides, I think the goal should be to prevent this type of thing from happening more.

1) I think sex education must be actively promoted, and I think it needs to be blunt, graphic, and very, very thorough. I've heard many people aghast at students being taught how to apply a condom (or tasting flavored ones...that was the topic of a thread here not so long ago), but I think we need to get over our squeamishness and actually teach kids about sexual activity honestly and openly. We need to get over our idea that sex is dirty and wicked and all that. And that sex education needs to begin at a young age and be continuous -- not just one class in the seventh grade.

Reproductive medical care needs to be accessable, and if needed, free (all medical care should be, but that's another thread) for all. And contraceptives also need to be widely available and at reasonable or no cost, and their use very strongly encouraged. RU 486 and the morning after pills should be widely available (I prefer over the counter) and their use encouraged, in fact I think all women/girls should have at least one dose at home at all times. And I believe abortion must remain safe, legal, and accessible.

2) To be honest I don't really care. I would prefer that neither was charged, but both receive a thorough sex ed course (as outlined above).

3) I'm not quite sure what this is in reference to, but I will say that womens rights have a very long way to go.