Abortion/ The Politics of Abortion

[Kirby]

Males are incapable of conceiving and thus aborting. I acknowledge that abortion affects males, but in a completely different way than it does females. My point with this was that I wished more females would weigh in on this issue here on this board.

A couple of years ago, I had kidney stones. It was the most excruciating pain I had ever felt. The pharmacist who filled my percocet prescription said that kidney stones were worse pain than a woman in labor. When I told this story to my female friends, almost all of them said, "I'll bet the pharmacist that said that was male!"

The point is that with labor or abortion or menstruation or anything that biologically only women can truly experience, only women can give a unique experiential opinion on. All of those things may have an effect on males, but in a much different way. Men do not have to deal (physically) with a monthly visitor, or experience 9+ months of pregnancy, the physical pain of labor, or the emotional and physical potential scars of abortion. Only women can have that unique perspective.

[Josh]

True enough.

I wonder why most of the women are staying away from this thread

[krhagan19]

Abortion is murder. Murder is the premeditated taking of a human life, especially one that has committed no evil against you. A fetus is incapable of committing any crime against natural law or human law, it therefore follows that a fetus is innocent. The taking of that innocent life through the complex economical transaction of abortion must therefore amount to nothing less than the murder of said fetus.

[Josh]

kirbstomp,

I actually do hold the position that infants are innocent.

[Kirby]

I do too. My whole point in this is that I don't want the government making moral decisions for me, as I am capable of doing that on my own. The proper approach, IMO, is through extensive investment in education, not just prohibition.

[krhagan19]

I agree that extensive education is appropriate. However, since the fetus is inocent, and it is a life. I believe that its rights must be protected. Banning abortion is not about telling a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. That is a by product. Banning Abortion is about protecting a living human being that has God given rights. As for not legislating morality. We do it all of the time. For example, two consenting adults cannot on the greens in front of the waterfront Marriott Hotel express their love physically to each other in a carnal fashion in broad day light. We have a prohibition on that. Even though the harms caused by that are substantially less troublesome than the taking of a human life. In addition, it is illegal to masterbate in in a public place, including many adult theaters where the very organs that give offense are displayed on 40 foot screens for all to see. Our Society legislates morality all of the time and it is generally accepted by the vast majority of citizens. Why then, in a case, where a life, that we both agree is innocent, that is in danger of slaughter without legislative protection be denied legislative protection on the grounds that it is legislating morality?

[Josh]

good points, though I'm in need of an image eraser now

Yeah, the whole "you can't legislate morality" thing is often misunderstood. I think original point of such a phrase is really that legislation of morality is not the most effective way to change the attitudes of the heart. But it does often work to change behavior. Case in point- prohibition, which didn't really affect personal attitudes (in fact, it may have had the opposite effect intended), but it did lower the total consumption and sale of alcohol.

[robin]

Sorry that I'm so late in responding. I was away for the weekend enjoying the company of friends and family at the coast.

I wrote:

Getting rid of an unborn child is like getting rid of you.

In response you wrote:

No, I have lived for 35 years, built relationships and invested in my community. My absence would affect a lot of lives. A baby being unborn may cause grief, and affect the immediate family, but not society, unless you want to get into alternate future mumbo-jumbo (i.e. what if Hitler had never been born?)

So if I follow your logic, you would say that the value of a life depends on how many relationships have been struck, and the quality of those relationships? I would also take it that you would have no problem with the dispatching of unwanted orphans, abused children (some mentally retarded), and lonely elderly people who have no living friends or relatives that would be effected if they were to disappear? How about a lonely hermit, or homeless person? If they won't be missed by anyone perhaps we should stop allowing them to consume vital recourses, and intrude upon our comfortable lives?

In my opinion your view of life, and more importantly love, is a bit off. Every life, regardless of it's present condition, has the ability to love and be loved. At one point you were unborn, and yet look at where you are now. I'm certain that you love others, and in turn they love you back. This love enriches the world, and if your life were snuffed out before your birth, look at what the world would have missed out on. How much is our world missing out on simply because we allow the weakest among us to be killed because we see no present value?

I disagree. First of all, if you are Christian, can I assume that you believe there is no such thing as the innocent (Romans 3:23)? And that man is not responsible for judging (Luke 6:37 and 39)

No, I (like Josh) do hold the biblical view that children are born innocent.

Certainly there must be some order in society if we are to live peacefully together, but that that mean imposing morality on me? No. If anything, we need to see the impact abortion has on individuals and in turn, society and educate others on that, and leave the choice to them.

Well we know for certain that an abortion will kill at least one individual involved, and likely go a long way in destroying the life of others as well. All too often abortion is sold as just another form of birth control, where in fact it is far more devastating than taking a pill, or wearing a condom. I've heard many stories of women who have gone through an abortion, and immediately felt as if they had killed them selves in the process, or at least a significant part of themselves. You don't hear these devastating stories about other forms of birth control.

And so, I am not suggesting society "turn its head", but it is an abuse of my freedom to make abortion illegal on moral grounds.

I have yet to hear you make a compelling argument to back up this statement. I guess I should ask you what your understanding of governments roll in society should be? Do you advocate for Anarchy?

Most white middle classers have only the understanding of the "theory" of poverty, not it's real life effects. I just don't think you can have a valid discussion without more views represented. I realize I am making a generalization, but the point is, in this discussion about abortion, that males only have an indirect experience with it, and women have direct experience. I was only saying that a well rounded intellectual discussion on this topic would include women with and with out that tragic experience.

This is not a closed forum, and everyone is welcome to participate. If anyone finds something objectionable they should speak up and be heard. You should know that our community includes people from many walks of life (rich, poor, male, female, single, married, with, and without children).

As far as your Orwell quote, I agree with what you say. Why is it that minorities, women, homosexuals are often left out of deciding policy? This is why I want to be moe inclusive in discussion. Rich White males tend to hog conversation (like I am participating in now)

I would say that most policies that are made today are made with these groups in mind. The problem is that when decisions are made, regardless of who is making them, these groups that you speak of are simply used to advance the personal political agenda's of those in power.

By the way, did you know that we now have a black President, and a female Speaker of the House? The old argument that white men are running the world is quickly losing credibility.

Robin

[Kirby]

Robin wrote:

So if I follow your logic, you would say that the value of a life depends on how many relationships have been struck, and the quality of those relationships? I would also take it that you would have no problem with the dispatching of unwanted orphans, abused children (some mentally retarded), and lonely elderly people who have no living friends or relatives that would be effected if they were to disappear? How about a lonely hermit, or homeless person? If they won't be missed by anyone perhaps we should stop allowing them to consume vital recourses, and intrude upon our comfortable lives?

You originally asked about ME, although I agree the argument I made is a weak one. I got off track.

Well we know for certain that an abortion will kill at least one individual involved, and likely go a long way in destroying the life of others as well. All too often abortion is sold as just another form of birth control, where in fact it is far more devastating than taking a pill, or wearing a condom. I've heard many stories of women who have gone through an abortion, and immediately felt as if they had killed them selves in the process, or at least a significant part of themselves. You don't hear these devastating stories about other forms of birth control.

True. Which is why I agree abortion is reprehensible, but the key to reducing abortions is through education: birth control (not just abstinence-only!), consequences of abortion and adoption, consequences of having a child, etc. The ultimate decision should still be left to me, and not dictated by policy.

Do you advocate for Anarchy?

Maybe, but it wouldn't realistically work. Just like socialism. Currently I guess I would advocate for Libertarian Socialism...that is, allowing communities to govern for themselves (at the neighborhood level) and the feds to provide support for infrastructure and education. It still wouldn't work.

Overall, I still hold that the answer to the abortion problem lies in proper education, and despite the fact that

we now have a black President, and a female Speaker of the House

the minority poor simply do not recieve the same opportunities that middle and upper class whites do, in this country and beyond.

In my opinion your view of life, and more importantly love, is a bit off. Every life, regardless of it's present condition, has the ability to love and be loved. At one point you were unborn, and yet look at where you are now. I'm certain that you love others, and in turn they love you back. This love enriches the world, and if your life were snuffed out before your birth, look at what the world would have missed out on. How much is our world missing out on simply because we allow the weakest among us to be killed because we see no present value?

Good point. Ouch. The truth hurts. Thanks again for making me think.

[krhagan19]

Except in the rarest of cases abortion is primarily about economics and responsibility. Perhaps we should take this one step further. How about we provide a free trip to Hawaii for all senior citizens that have become a burden on their family and or do not have family to support them. We wine them, We dine them. Then, we give them an even greater gift, a continuing flight on a Airbus A380 (no point on wasting a perfectly good Boeing) to Fiji! Then we fill the plane to the brim with Americas unwanted elderly, and CRASH THEM INTO THE LAKE OF LAVA ON THE BIG ISLAND, Think of it, lava melts metal (no cleanup costs) and Lava instantly cremates human remains (The average cremation costs over a thousand dollars) This could be the most economical way of dealing with the inconvienent elderly (hopefully you can tell I am being sarcastic, much like Jonathan Swift when he suggested in a Modest Proposal that the Irish poor feed their babies to wealthy Britains.

[robin]

the minority poor simply do not recieve the same opportunities that middle and upper class whites do, in this country and beyond.

I'm not even sure that the middle class receives their due representation. It seems that the middle class is just one more political football that is used by those in power.

Case in point. Currently we, as a nation, are debating health care and the possible take over of our health care delivery system. These proposals are put forward with the argument that the middle class is being ruined by the raising cost of health care. Where in fact, if Obama and the democrats get their way the group that will be most adversely effected will the the middle class. Here is how I see it. The Wealth and powerful will always be able to afford the best care in the world. Consider Sen. Kennedy, and his brain cancer. Does anyone actually believe that any middle class person or poor person in their 80's would receive the same top notch care from Duke University under the "public option"? Of course not. As for the very poor, they will be given new access to a health care system that has been reserved for those who can pay for insurance. What happens to those of us in the middle? Rationed care due to increased utilization, and sky rocketing costs down the road when the private market can no longer compete with the US Government, and it's ability to tax more to cover their losses. So what is done in the name of preserving the middle class will indeed go a long way in furthering it's demise.

This is off topic, but it does go to prove the point that even the middle class is under represented, and taken advantage of when it come to politics.

[Kirby]

even the middle class is under represented

Agreed. Let's eliminate classes all together! I know, unrealistic, and not going to happen, but a boy can dream.

With education, though, middle classers still have more opportunities. Certainly the middle class is shrinking, so maybe it is a moot point, but most in the middle class know where to seek help in going for college, what resources are available, etc. According to Dr. Ruby Payne, author of "A Framework for Understanding Poverty" each class has "hidden" rules for survival. Investigating educational options (especially options for healthcare issues such as birth control and abortion) are not a part of that. I highly recommend Payne's book to at least get an understanding of where I'm coming from for this. It's a very quick read.

[Josh]

Haven't read Payne's book, but I did attend an inservice on his theories once.

Made a lot of sense to me.

[krhagan19]

While we are living in fantasy land. Oh, Oh, I know how to eliminate all abortions. Lets just magically make it so only married economically stable couples who want to have kids have sex. Thats it, NO ONE ELSE ALLOWED. I AM LOOKING AT YOU POOR COUPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD KIDS AND DOESN'T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TO PAY FOR DELIVERY!

[krhagan19]

Another possibility would be to increase tolerance for gay and lesbian couples in our society by supporting gay marriage and gay rights. I have it on good knowledge that gay couples have very very very very very few abortions.

[robin]

I anyone has not seen this video, please take the time and watch it. Keep in mind, planned parenthood receives millions of tax payer dollars thanks to liberal politicians.

[Josh]

Sickening. Planned Parenthood is an evil organization.