Can anyone explain why they support partial-birth abortions?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

It is

Uh, actually, no, there isn't.

Here's part of Ginsburg's dissent:

"Today's decision is alarming," Ginsburg wrote for the minority. "It tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists....And, for the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman's health."

She added: "Retreating from prior rulings that abortion restrictions cannot be imposed absent an exception safeguarding a woman's health, the Court upholds an Act that surely would not survive under the close scrutiny that previously attended state-decreed limitations on a woman's reproductive choices."

One wonders how long a line that saves no fetus will hold in the face of the Court's "moral concerns." . . . The Court's hostility to the right Casey and Roe secured is not concealed. Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists not by the title of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label "abortion doctors."

[motivez]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Nice sentiment, but EVERY pregnancy is a health risk. That means 100% late term abortions on demand!

If it's deemed necessary to save the life of the mother, yes. It's her choice to make to proceed with a risky pregnancy.. not yours or the GOP's or anyone else's.. and that's what is so disgusting about the right wing drive to remove a woman's right to reproductive autonomy.

Originally Posted by thomez

by DNA, sure

otherwise, not really

I really REALLY hate this part of the pro-choice argument. A fetus is 100% human.

This is my son at 19w6d gestational age. He was 8 inches long (crown to rump) and weighed 13 ounces, BUT there is no mistaking him for a human being. He may be unviable and potentially non-sentient (unsentient?), but he is human and always has been. I'm not carrying an alien or a puppy or anything short of a human being.


It irritates me that some can't be honest about what abortion is. It is the taking of a human life.

Still 100% pro-choice here.

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

It has shit all to do with the mother's body and more about the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of the baby

Should a mother be forced to risk her life, hold off on a necessary surgery (or what other situation you can come up with) during pregnancy simply to save an embryo or a fetus? Should pregnant women be prosecuted for doing things that are potentially hazardous to their embryo/fetus? Should everything a woman do during a pregnancy be for her fetus and nothing else? Maybe I should be taken to jail after drinking a Coke (too much caffeine can be hazerdous to a fetus/may cause miscarriage) and having a sandwich with :gasp: lunch meat that hadn't been warmed up to ensure there was no lysteria (which can also cause miscarriage and preterm birth). After all, we should be doing everything we can to protect the "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of the baby", right?

[thomez]

Originally Posted by 03 white zx3

I really REALLY hate this part of the pro-choice argument. A fetus is 100% human.

This is my son at 19w6d gestational age. He was 8 inches long (crown to rump) and weighed 13 ounces, BUT there is no mistaking him for a human being. He may be unviable and potentially non-sentient (unsentient?), but he is human and always has been. I'm not carrying an alien or a puppy or anything short of a human being.

It irritates me that some can't be honest about what abortion is. It is the taking of a human life.

Still 100% pro-choice here.

it is a human fetus, it does not confer the rights of a human that is already born and in this world independent of anyone else

biologically, sure it is human - the DNA is homo sapien of course

this does not however make you a legal human and does not give you the rights that you have after birth - you don't get a birth certificate, a name, or a Social Security number until you are an independent entity that is completely outside of the womb

protection by the state should start at full birth and no sooner

[lew]

Originally Posted by 7960

Yep, it's true...some people think they have the right to tell you what you can and can't do with your body. Welcome to the real world.

They won that round and now they're going to start the push again

New Push Likely for Restrictions Over Abortions - New York Times

But yet you're against people using heroin or injecting other substances into their bodies. I guess you only believe that people have a right to their bodies when they're aborting a human being from it.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by lew

But yet you're against people using heroin or injecting other substances into their bodies. I guess you only believe that people have a right to their bodies when they're aborting a human being from it.

don't you hold the opposite and equally inconsistent view?

[lew]

Originally Posted by thomez

don't you hold the opposite and equally inconsistent view?

I'll admit I don't agree with libertarians on abortion.


I feel abortion is directly killing another human being.


I don't see the logic in complaining about others controlling other peoples' bodies about abortion, but see nothing wrong with the government controlling people through the other thousand way, namely in the area of drugs.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by lew

I don't see the logic in complaining about others controlling other peoples' bodies about abortion, but see nothing wrong with the government controlling people through the other thousand way, namely in the area of drugs.

likewise, I do not see the logic of complaining about the restrictions of drug use without complaining of the restrictions on one's body when carrying a fetus around - why should the state protect a part of a woman's body against her will?

I cannot believe that a fetus, an extension of a woman's body, deserves its own legal protection. I can however say with certainty that a woman deserves the right to control anything that enters, exits, or inhabits her body - including drugs, penii, lollipops, or even a fetus.

Originally Posted by thomez

it is a human fetus, it does not confer the rights of a human that is already born and in this world independent of anyone else

biologically, sure it is human - the DNA is homo sapien of course

this does not however make you a legal human and does not give you the rights that you have after birth - you don't get a birth certificate, a name, or a Social Security number until you are an independent entity that is completely outside of the womb

protection by the state should start at full birth and no sooner

That I'm perfectly okay with. It is saying that it is not a human that bothers me.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by 03 white zx3

That I'm perfectly okay with. It is saying that it is not a human that bothers me.

well I was trying to say that biologically, absolutely it was... otherwise... as in rights/protections/etc .... not at all

maybe it originally didn't come out right

[7960]

Originally Posted by lew

But yet you're against people using heroin or injecting other substances into their bodies. I guess you only believe that people have a right to their bodies when they're aborting a human being from it.

I completely abhor abortion but I hate the alternative even more... the idea that a woman can say she needs to end her pregnancy and someone else has the right to tell her "no, you can't" is as close to rape as you can get without actually doing the act.

[Diamond Cross]

Did you know that Jews don't consider the fetus viable until it finishes medical school?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

Did you know that Jews don't consider the fetus viable until it finishes medical school?

Originally Posted by thomez

it is a human fetus, it does not confer the rights of a human that is already born and in this world independent of anyone else

biologically, sure it is human - the DNA is homo sapien of course

this does not however make you a legal human and does not give you the rights that you have after birth - you don't get a birth certificate, a name, or a Social Security number until you are an independent entity that is completely outside of the womb

protection by the state should start at full birth and no sooner

I've been thinking about this since you posted it. As I said, I'm 21 weeks pregnant. If I would deliver a live child right now, he would probably only live for a couple of hours, BUT he would be born alive (provided he had not died in utero), would be issued a birth certificate, we would name him and he would be issued a death certificate. We would be able to claim him on our tax returns next year.

YET, in some states my child would still be allowed to be aborted.

Where does the line get drawn, especially when the same fetus is literally only inches from being a legal person yet is still able to be aborted in some states?

[JaJae]

Just read this and got pretty sad...

Nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer was "pro-choice" when her agency assigned her to work at an Ohio abortion clinic in 1993. What she saw shocked her to the core.

"I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant," Shafer testified in 1995. "The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp."

The nurse concluded, "I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen."

[motivez]

I don't think anyone is saying having an abortion is a fun, happy time..

If that mothers life was at risk and her doctors weren't sure the baby would live though, I fail to see where the GOP gets off telling a woman it's not her decision to make about whether or not she will go through with the pregnancy.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by 03 white zx3

Where does the line get drawn, especially when the same fetus is literally only inches from being a legal person yet is still able to be aborted in some states?

those inches are obviously very important

[thomez]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Just read this and got pretty sad...

Nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer was "pro-choice" when her agency assigned her to work at an Ohio abortion clinic in 1993. What she saw shocked her to the core.

"I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant," Shafer testified in 1995. "The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp."

The nurse concluded, "I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen."

ploys to emotion have no place in determining the legality of actions