Absolutely and an abortion is a very high cost, even if a minority of repeat patients don't know it themselves.
Alabama outlaws abortion
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yes, I believe that it is also true that an abortion will have some way of affecting the women, in effect a cost also.
To be fair, we had a user in this thread say that they had a friend who decided to keep a pregnancy and give the child up for adoption who then died in childbirth.
They do indeed. In case of an unwanted pregnancy that is either coming to terms with the change in your life that you did not want or if that seems unbearable for whatever reason then it is having to have an abortion. You keep describing abortions like some casual fun activity that anyone would prefer to using a condom or any other contraceptives. It is expensive, time consuming and for the vast majority of women a mentally extremely stressful situation. Almost nobody would claim that an abortion is an "easy" way out. It just might be the better choice for the potential mother.
No, you are putting words inmy mouth, I never said or intimated that the procedure is fun. Take your lecture back and use it on some other poster please.
Yes we did. We don't know all outcomes will be as sad.
As there is in this case as well.
I'm virtually certain that there must be a stick to beat me with somewhere in my belief that in this day and age that there can be little to no reason for unwanted pregnancies beyond coercion, rape or the very occasional and minute chance of contraception failing and that you are very probably the person to find that stick however I don't believe you have yet.
I agree that in most first world countries, a responsible adult should be able to not get pregnant if she doesn't want to. However, I think having the choice is not meant for the normal responsible adult. I won't go into too much detail, but my sister is severely bi-polar and when manic is prone to the sexual aggressiveness which is a symptom of this. She had 2 abortions while being in a locked closed psychiatric institution after having intercourse with another patient. It's cases like these, where I find it so very important that the option to abort should be there.
As Penna stated, I'm that some women are flippant about having an abortion and see it as an alternative to birth control and that's definitely not something we want to aspire to as a society, but I think these women are the exception and that's not a common outlook on abortion. We should try to educate these people to see an abortion for what it is. An extreme measure in an extreme situation, yet a measure that should be allowed in these extreme cases.
It's the polarization in this debate that makes it so hard to discuss and thus legislate in a satisfactory manner, since it usually results in people shouting Baby killer and Woman hater in an equally loud voice.
I'm genuinely sorry to hear about your sister and obviously we should only have compassion and sympathise with this situation but I would say that it falls into the little to no reason category. As always the exception proves the rule.
I think we've been lucky with this debate that it has been allowed to mature but maybe at the expense early on of insult and ridicule but all's good for the moment hopefully.
Honestly I don't know if there is a stick and I'm certainly not someone who is "pro-abortion". However unwanted preganancies happen and majority of the time it seems to be from demographics with higher poverty and lower education and that generally leads to a higher crime rate.
The bit I think people need to reconcile is if you genuinely believe life begins at conception then you can't make any exception for abortions beyond harming the mother. Once you make exceptions for rape or coercion then that belief is has exceptions e.g. you believe the potential child of a drunken one night stand has larger rights than the potential child of a rape victim.
Now I'm sure there are women who see abortion as a contraception, however I see that argument a bit similar to claiming that there are women who make false allegations about sexual misconduct. I'm sure it happens but I find the argument quite demeaning as it is probably quite insignificant.
Well you can beat me as much as you like for my religious beliefs although they are a bit hybrid.
There are people who've already commented in this thread who are far more qualified than I who have their own opinion on what 'life' constitutes and they have said that until the brain starts to do it's thing it can't be called a life. However I can say with certainty that there are scientists outside of this argument who classify life as something much simpler but hugely exciting if we find it and NASA would be over the moon to find it so there is some disparity in the scientific community. They'd shout at me with something like 'Semantics!' and I'd reply something like 'Cake and eat it'. If the cells growing inside a woman aren't human, well, they ain't alien are they?
Just because the Church shouldn't get involved in Law Making or directly influencing the debate and certainly not the Aftercare that doesn't mean we shouldn't be part of the debate here. Martin Luther King Jr said “Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals.”
We're not against common sense together.
Not really sure the point of that post unless it was a general one. I didn't even mention religion. What your belief is when a life is formed doesn't have to be based around religion, you can easily be strongly pro-life and not be religiously motivated.
Personally I have no idea what really constitutes life. I just realise that if I believe something is a life but it's not when there is rape or coercion involved, it sort of denigrates the argument.
Last edited:
For all their orthodoxy, they couldn't have read much Marx & Engels then...
I'm trying to help you out on finding your stick but genuinely arguing over when life begins is never going to really satisfy non-religious people with a religious argument purely because it brings their defences up immediately. However I don't think we all agree yet when life starts which was part of your post.
As for whether women use abortion as a form of contraception or just an easy answer to a sticky problem and how many of them there are you need to rely on someone involved and @Penna has already given us the benefit of her insight so I'm happy to take her word and not your opinion for the present. No offence.
Not sure what this stick is that you're after as I just said I don't think there is one. I just said that if you believe that there is exceptions to be made on abortion then your belief on when life begins is a bit conflated. That has nothing to do with religion or MLK.
As for what @Penna said, happy to take her word that it's not the majority of women and I am glad women are comfortable to appear calm in what was generally a traumatic situation.
I thought the stick was something you wanted to use to beat me up with for my opinion but ok, you don't want it. So why keep disagreeing that in this day and age there should be little to no reason for unwanted pregnancies outside of the categories already mentioned because what you are coming back with all the time ain't that? It's a bit boring tbh.
What's conflated about when Life begins? I don't understand how it isn't part of the debate when you are the one who brought it up? Never mind.
Let's try again. I don't believe in telling women what to do with their pregnant bodies. I don't believe the Church has any place in Law Making. Tick. Certainly not in Aftercare. Present.
Personally I believe that All Life is sacred, not just the innocent but the guilty too. Why should a large proportion of people who believe these things be happy with the status quo and not take part in the debate? No reason at all to my mind.
Nah I think your opinion is generally valid. I never even considered the aspect of the Church being a motivation for you as believe all life is sacred makes sense.
I just have a slight issue that if you believe all life is sacred but are fine with the abortions in the case of rape or coercion, then you clearly don't believe ALL life is sacred. I'm not saying that is your personal belief but I've seen that being thrown around in this thread.
I just don't think that we could be so cruel as to force anyone to carry an unwanted child. Not even those who have been careless or to some degree 'casual' in their use of contraceptives but I don't have to be happy about it.
People often use Science against Religion whereas I have always been of the convenient belief that we were given the chance of understanding the science behind the curtain so to speak. That instead of the two being opposed, they are in partnership. People argue that Creation is in Opposition to Science and Evolution but I've never seen it as impossible that the Bible couldn't be inaccurate in its assembly over the centuries. That instead of fighting Science as some Popes in History have, equally some Popes sponsored and encouraged it.
Science in a way has given us contraception and it should be a responsibility to use it because yes, whilst it is part of our belief that life is sacred, secular folk also don't want unwanted pregnancies and the baggage that comes with abortion. Anyway we have plenty in common if not the belief, then the aim.
It is just as much a man's responsibility as it is a woman's, more so in this day and age against disease but maybe when the male pill arrives we could think around the philosophy debate of men, or women being placed on the pill as soon as they are of an age and only taken off the 'pill' when they make an actual decision to have a family?
No, you are putting words inmy mouth, I never said or intimated that the procedure is fun. Take your lecture back and use it on some other poster please.
No you were exactly the person I meant to be addressing
You did not claim the procedure was fun (which I may have implied in an exaggeration, I hope you understand the point I was trying to make) but you make it sound like it meant having no consequences from the mistake that was made. All I am saying is that it is neither a casual mistake nor a casual response and I believe that this classification would be quite insulting to women that actually had to make the decision and endure the procedure. So unless I am misunderstanding or misinterpreting what you wrote there I am going to repeat my lecture: nobody in their right mind would prefer having an abortion to actual contraception. And anybody who has ended up in the situation to have an abortion without the intent to do it will be punished enough in my opinion.Just to touch on the topic of "what are common reasons for abortions": I believe women being careless and using it as an alternative to contraception on one end and rape/incest victims on the other hand are all just a small percentage. I think the most common reason is lack of experience and idiocracy. People just arent very bright sometimes. And I would see failed contraception somewhere mixed in there. Maybe you wanted to use a condom but broke it because you never used one before? Maybe you thought pulling it out would mean you can't get pregnant? Maybe she just forgot to swallow that one pill. In a lot of cases it is probably really stupid. And in those cases I think it was neither a casual mistake nor will the consequence be casual in any way.
In the US there’s virtually no sex ed, and all emphasis is on abstinence. Is that a good tool to help hormonal teenagers not get pregnant?
What about the fact that the frontal lobe of boys doesn’t quite ripen until the age of 25(ish)? You reckon that might make someone make a stupid decision? Even after that age people feck up.
What about the states where pharmacists can refuse to fill prescriptions (for birth control for example) if it goes against his or her religious beliefs? First you have to find a doctor who’ll write it as well.
The poorer you are, the more these issues press on you, so it’s also exacerbated by class. If you’re poor as feck you can’t afford to drive for hours to get it taken care of.
That is of course also neverminding things like rape.
And for the people who say «carry it to term and give it away». Look up the effects of pregnancy and birth on the female body. It’s probably worse than you think. Not sure I’d risk, for example, incontinence for the rest of my life in order to save a foetus. And that’s a minor example.
So you're really pro-Choice but abortion isn't something you are happy really happens. Perfectly valid opinion and an viewpoint I am quite close to.
Maybe Casual is the wrong word entirely but tbh I don't think it matters if it is so insulting that it brings the debate on. I think it has anyway.No you were exactly the person I meant to be addressing
Just to touch on the topic of "what are common reasons for abortions": I believe women being careless and using it as an alternative to contraception on one end and rape/incest victims on the other hand are all just a small percentage. I think the most common reason is lack of experience and idiocracy. People just arent very bright sometimes. And I would see failed contraception somewhere mixed in there. Maybe you wanted to use a condom but broke it because you never used one before? Maybe you thought pulling it out would mean you can't get pregnant? Maybe she just forgot to swallow that one pill. In a lot of cases it is probably really stupid. And in those cases I think it was neither a casual mistake nor will the consequence be casual in any way.
I think I said so when I entered the debate
Okay, this makes me feel like we are actually arguing for the same thing
But that must surely mean you do actually oppose a ban on abortion?I may not see the world like you do but I can entirely respect that approach. And I hope that last sentence is meant as an option and not a forced pill-taking
Honestly, do you really expect me to tell you how to fix this or are you of the opinion that it is my responsibility. Fix it.
If you read through the thread im not in support of this law. But i also dont think comparing a death sentence to abortion is the same
I may not see the world like you do but I can entirely respect that approach. And I hope that last sentence is meant as an option and not a forced pill-taking
I'm prepared to be serious about it if we can't rely on people to be responsible at some point in the future. Why shouldn't we be? Make having a family a positive choice, not an accident.
I can see hos argument. Have it that everyone is on birth control, men and women, until they decide to have children.Okay, this makes me feel like we are actually arguing for the same thing
I may not see the world like you do but I can entirely respect that approach. And I hope that last sentence is meant as an option and not a forced pill-taking
Bit extreme, but i can see the point he's making.
I think I said so when I entered the debate
You did indeed and I have to be honest I did lose track of that a bit as well. I think our goals and intentions are similar and maybe there is an issue you are worried about that I personally do not believe is very prevalent (basically women who are not afraid of getting pregnant because they know they can just have an abortion and be done with it)
I guess in a way you wouldn't have to force anyone that does not want to found a family anyways. You should remember though that these pills can have quite severe side effects and not all women (or men at some point) can take them. I guess the most sensible solution would be to subsidize the pills so everyone can get them for free. That would indeed give couples that don't want children yet an easy and affordable way out. It will of course not prevent unwanted pregnancies entirely but would definitely be a sensible policy.
I just believe that aside of the financial aspect at least in the US there would be some people strongly opposed to that and I am afraid religion might be strongly connected to that (NOT a dig at you at all).
Doctors, Society etc wouldn't have to make being on the pill enforceable, just that if you don't take it then you must be making a decision to conceive or start a family. Then the onus is on the person, not a mistake. I've never been a supporter of Big Brother or the Nanny State even but it turns the whole thing on its head as a choice the other way.
As I said, it could be something we took seriously if things don't change. Why are we all responsible for education, care etc when it is a personal choice?
So you will just redefine a mistake made as a choice and everybody is happy?
Sorry I missed this part.
Surely there would be a cost saving/benefit in not using Abortion Clinics to the same extent but as far a Religious Groups it's true that no one will ever satisfy us all.
You can't make all of us happy all of the time.
I think it will need a lot of thinking about but it is refining the decision making not redefining mistakes.
Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying then. I understand it as: You have the means, if you get pregnant you obviously wanted it because otherwise you would have used them. That may refine the decision making but basically through intimidation. And mistakes will still happen but by saying it must have been a choice you are essentially doing the same thing that prohibiting abortion does.
Pretty sure there are not enough abortions on this day to even remotely come close to the cost of supplying every woman of childbearing age with contraceptive pills (let alone all men as well).Sorry I missed this part.
Surely there would be a cost saving/benefit in not using Abortion Clinics to the same extent but as far a Religious Groups it's true that no one will ever satisfy us all.
I don't know but we have the means now to prevent whatever percentage of unwanted pregnancies being carried to birth so what do we have to do to make people avoid going through what must be at the very least a deeply unsettling and unpleasant procedure?
Would it be as simple as the Family GP having their first adolescent appointment with a child, either male or female or whatever and saying 'Okay, so you are fertile/efficacious or something now/from this point on, which contraceptive would you like/be suitable to use? Tick. Now you realise that for whatever reason if you stop using/taking that contraceptive you are choosing to start trying to conceive/start a family and we can talk about the help you'll need, things to put in place/support structure etc etc or that if you hadn't meant to then any Abortion procedure isn't necessarily a simple choice.
Wordy blah blah but what if Abortion then became something to be undesired to a new level?
Good post. Yeah I could be overestimating the power of the main heads of the GOP and underestimating their ideological beliefs.
Anyway, I've chatted enough shite during this thread but do any of you ever feel like I do that we need less laws not more?
I think we're living during a period of intense wrong doing by law makers and we need not only less laws but less lawmakers altogether so how do we go about getting rid of people that no longer serve us but have instead satisfied themselves by having us serving their aims?
Currently I think most of us choose a soft option of booking out of mainstream society but instead we need to bring these sleazes to account.
I think we're living during a period of intense wrong doing by law makers and we need not only less laws but less lawmakers altogether so how do we go about getting rid of people that no longer serve us but have instead satisfied themselves by having us serving their aims?
Currently I think most of us choose a soft option of booking out of mainstream society but instead we need to bring these sleazes to account.
So basically what you are advocating is giving people contraceptives and information. That sounds pretty spot on to me, I am all for it. Maybe with less of a raised finger and more attempting to make young adults understand that they really don't want that and how to protect themselves. Teach them sex ed.
If we apply this to the US it might be where a lot of the frustration stems from. To someone who has spent only a limited time looking at the state legislature it seems like there is a link between mostly republican funded legislature that tries to limit access to abortion and legislature that prevents access to contraceptives and sex education being taught in schools. I stress that I am not saying any given republican is a hypocrite but in the bigger picture it does seem hard to understand.
Lastly I believe abortion is already undesirable to a considerable level. I really don't believe anybody is being incentivized to having one. In 2015 roughly 1 in 250 women had an abortion. I would not say that is rampant in any way and I am glad these women had the option. Abortion numbers have been dropping in the US for decades by the way though it is of course hard to distinguish whether it is due to stricter laws or better information and care for young mothers.
Last edited: