The newest brand of abortion ban Is next-level cruelty

This is going to be argumentative, but I will print it anyway. It's just my opinion and I think we are still entitled to that, at least for the moment we are.

I think if the U.S. wouldn't be having such huge numbers of abortions,( I think the average is around 1,000,000 a year), people would be able to cope with women having an abortion. Here in the U.S. according to CDC numbers, we had about 1.5 million abortions in the years of 2000-2015. Since that time, numbers have decreased to under 1 million. With these high numbers, it is probably obvious that at least some women are using abortions as a means of birth control. Yes, no, maybe?
 
oldman said:
With these high numbers, it is probably obvious that at least some women are using abortions as a means of birth control. Yes, no, maybe?
Click to expand...
First of all, I am unsure of your numbers as you provided no links. Secondly, yes, I have known a few women throughout my adult life who did choose abortion as their means of birth control. Thirdly, that's none of my business, nor is it yours. That's what freedom of choice means. Not my choice, or your choice, but the individual's choice.
 
Whatever happened to sex ed in schools? Also how about when a girl gets to puberty start them on the pill so they can't get pregnant even if raped. Teach guys to carry & use rubbers if they are going for sex. That would stop 95%+ of the abortions.
 
Tom 86 said:
Whatever happened to sex ed in schools? Also how about when a girl gets to puberty start them on the pill so they can't get pregnant even if raped. Teach guys to carry & use rubbers if they are going for sex. That would stop 95%+ of the abortions.
Click to expand...
All good ideas.

But not good enough for the government to insert itself in a woman's right to choose. However I am all in favor of most anything that would make such a choice less often necessary.
 
In Texas yesterday


11073695_100221-ktrk-moriah-FULL-women-march-saturday-vid.jpg


Womens%20March%20ATX%20CP%20TT%2007.jpg
1002womensmarch.jpg


"Texas law sparks hundreds of U.S. protests against abortion restrictions"​

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ab...cross-us-protest-restrictive-laws-2021-10-02/
 
Tom 86 said:
Whatever happened to sex ed in schools? Also how about when a girl gets to puberty start them on the pill so they can't get pregnant even if raped. Teach guys to carry & use rubbers if they are going for sex. That would stop 95%+ of the abortions.
Click to expand...
One of my grand daughters has an intellectual disability. It is genetic. She would not be able to raise a child by herself. Her mother had much difficulty in convincing her GP to implant a contraceptive pellet under her skin.

She was raped after being drugged by a couple whom she trusted. They invited her to stay overnight at their house. The next morning she woke up naked in bed and was "sore down there".

Her mother is a nurse and took her to the local hospital because pregnancy is not the only possible consequence of rape. She was assessed for possible STDs and the police were called. They said that they believed that she had been raped but that nothing could be done about it because she could not remember what happened and she would also be a poor witness in court.

Why am I divulging this? It is because contraception may prevent unwanted pregnancy but it does nothing to deter rape. Rape is a lot more common than people realise because either the victim does not want to tell anyone about it out of embarrassment and/or shame and because very few rape complaints ever make it to court. Of those that do, few result in successful prosecutions.

Also, even when contraception is being used, pregnancy can still occur. There can be many different reasons why a woman may not want to carry to full term. Her reasons are her own and are private. If she decides on termination then it should be her right to have a safe medical procedure, not a back ally job. We should be very careful to ensure legislation surrounding legalised abortion does not drive desperate and poor women to risk their lives. It should never penalise the medical staff who provide safe terminations in clean, well equipped clinics.

The choice is clear - if you think that abortion is an evil act then don't have one. Your body, your choice. If men could become pregnant I surmise that they might have different views on this subject. Some would carry to term but many more would decide against it.
 
I have a cousin who recently told me of the abortion she had in 1967. She was about 16 and got pregnant by her boyfriend of about the same age. She went to her father, my uncle for help. That was really hard her father was extremely conservative, she had no idea what he would do. At the time abortion was illegal so he found someone in Mexico who would do it. It resulted in my cousin getting badly infected she almost died.

My uncle never spoke to anyone of it, and my cousin waited until he passed before telling us. She was quite lucky that she was able to get medical care and survived the whole thing. Many others did not survive similar experiences. I would not want anyone to have to go through what she did.
 
Alligatorob said:
You have a real challenge with your daughter, and I am very sorry this happened to her. It was awful.

I sure hope no one takes the abortion right away from you and your daughter, you don't need to have your options limited!
Click to expand...
Not my daughter, Alligatorrob, my eldest grand daughter who has the genetic anomaly XXX instead of XX. My daughter has three daughters and one son and when she was pregnant with the last one her doctor offered her a termination because she was in a state of emotional turmoil. However, she chose to continue to term and afterwards she said to me, "Mum, this one is the icing on the cake". And she is. Financially my daughter has had a tough time but that time is now in the past and she has always had her parents moral and financial support when needed. Sadly the same cannot be said of every pregnant woman.

Terminations are legal everywhere in Australia with sensible limitations and are available in public and private hospitals. There is funding under medicare, our national health system, that is available to everyone. We won't be going backwards unless the Taliban take over.
 
Pepper said:
First of all, I am unsure of your numbers as you provided no links. Secondly, yes, I have known a few women throughout my adult life who did choose abortion as their means of birth control. Thirdly, that's none of my business, nor is it yours. That's what freedom of choice means. Not my choice, or your choice, but the individual's choice.
Click to expand...
Absolutely!! It's not the government's business either.
 

Abortion bans are a result of the crumbling of church-state separation​

"The terrifying rash of state abortion bans spreading throughout the United States has captured the nation’s attention, but in order to stop this trend, those who are fighting back must also focus on its deeper cause: the ever-crumbling wall of separation between church and state.

The First Amendment prohibits the government from imposing one set of religious beliefs, or religion at all, on others, but that’s undeniably what these bans are doing.

“This legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians’ deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God,” said Gov. Kay Ivey after signing Alabama’s uncompromising abortion ban into law on May 15. Explaining the ban’s rationale, Alabama Sen. Clyde Chambliss asserted: “I believe that if we terminate the life of an unborn child, we are putting ourselves in God’s place.” In Missouri, Rep. Holly Rehder expressed her support for that state’s abortion ban, which, like Alabama’s, lacks a rape or incest exception: “To stand on this floor and say, ‘How can someone look at a child of rape or incest and care for them?’ I can say how we can do that. We can do that with the love of God.”


These abortion bans are but one piece of a larger Christian nationalist effort sweeping America now. Last year, more than 800 state legislators across the country received the 150-page playbook of Project Blitz, a national initiative to codify a far-right evangelical Christian America. Project Blitz’s strategy is to pass an increasingly ambitious set of state laws, starting with bills that require prominently displaying “In God We Trust” and establishing Bible classes in public schools, and escalating to laws that would permit religion to be used to justify discrimination, particularly against women, LGBTQ people and religious minorities. More than 50 Project Blitz bills have already been introduced in 2019, from Virginia to Alaska and many states in between."

3 minute read

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opin...s-separation-church-state-20190523-story.html
 
So if it’s not the government’s business what a woman does with her body (never mind the body of the unborn child) does that mean it’s not the government’s business whether or not she vaccinates that body? Asking for a friend. Kind of a conundrum there.
 
The lawsuit by the Biden administration aims to strike a blow against the law, which bans abortions from the time of a fetal heartbeat, effectively prohibiting the procedure for women who have been pregnant longer than six weeks.
 
CarolfromTX said:
So if it’s not the government’s business what a woman does with her body (never mind the body of the unborn child) does that mean it’s not the government’s business whether or not she vaccinates that body?
Click to expand...
You raise a legitimate question, and point out the oversimplification of the "none of the government's business" statement. I will give you my take:

On abortion I do not believe it is any of the government's business as it only effects the life of the mother and the fetus growing within her. I know some believe that fetus is a person with rights equal to or similar to the mother. However this is not something universally agreed upon, depending on how you ask the question the division is something along the lines of 50/50. Not like taking the life of a living breathing person where we have near 100% agreement. So I don't believe the government should get involved, it should be the mother's decision. I am sure some will think of the father, and I would sure hope that a woman in that situation would contact the father, but it should be her decision. In some cases, like rape, contacting the father would not make sense.

I am very uncomfortable with the government requiring vaccinations. However I do understand the argument that for some people who have lots of contact with the public it may be necessary for protection of others. I would sure want to see any such requirements very limited, and mostly avoided.
 
CarolfromTX said:
So if it’s not the government’s business what a woman does with her body (never mind the body of the unborn child) does that mean it’s not the government’s business whether or not she vaccinates that body? Asking for a friend. Kind of a conundrum there.
Click to expand...
Slightly false comparison. The government is not banning vaccinations. It is encouraging them but not forcing anyone to have the jab. The choice is up to the individual but choices always come with consequences.

In China during the one child policy years women had their second pregnancies terminated against their will. The same is not happening in US. The government is not forcing anyone to have an abortion but neither should it be making this choice impossible.

The issue is freedom of choice. Freedom to accept the consequences of that choice.
 
But in fact they are all but forcing people to get the jab. Teachers, border patrol, hospital nurses and doctors, and others, are all being threatened with loss of livelihood unless they are vaccinated. Whereas women asking for an abortion are being asked to decide within 6 weeks. Yeah, I know, not quite that simple. But seriously, in this day and age, there are many available ways NOT to get pregnant, so maybe just a little personal responsibility please. Note: My whole family is vaccinated. But it was our decision. I do not presume to make that decision for others. As for abortion, I just think it’s a damn shame It’s as common as it is.
 
CarolfromTX said:
But in fact they are all but forcing people to get the jab. Teachers, border patrol, hospital nurses and doctors, and others, are all being threatened with loss of livelihood unless they are vaccinated. Whereas women asking for an abortion are being asked to decide within 6 weeks. Yeah, I know, not quite that simple. But seriously, in this day and age, there are many available ways NOT to get pregnant, so maybe just a little personal responsibility please. Note: My whole family is vaccinated. But it was our decision. I do not presume to make that decision for others. As for abortion, I just think it’s a damn shame It’s as common as it is.
Click to expand...
Condition of employment, Carol. The choice is still up to the individual even both options are unpalatable.

I was a teacher and before I started I was required to have a chest X-ray to make sure I didn't have TB. That was back in 1963 so mandatory health requirements are nothing new for certain professions. I had been immunised against TB as a child but that didn't count. All of the final year students at the Teachers' College had to have an X-ray or no job.

It is a condition of employment for some people that they are drug and alcohol free while at work and they may have to submit to breath, urine or saliva tests. Hep C is a serious problem in hospitals so the health care workers are required to be vaccinated or find other employment. That is just how it is.

I agree with you about the number of terminations but do we really know why they are happening? Perhaps if someone was interested in finding the answer to this question we could help women to choose not to have one. I suspect that would cost money for child care or income support and this is why governments prefer punitive legislation.
 

Last edited:

Back
Top