The Way it Was (Pre-Roe v Wade)

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Delia, Jan 22, 2013.

  1. Delia
    Offline

    Delia Truly, Madly, Deeply

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    712
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Phfft
    Ratings:
    +116
    The Way It Was | Mother Jones

    This is a very hard article to read, and will be for both sides of the discussion. I'm pro-choice, though that is not a choice I would ever make for myself. The first page is quite graphic, giving specifics of abortion. The rest is graphic as to what happens when it's not a legal option.

    It's a long article, but I believe it to be worth the time it takes to read it.

    I really wouldn't want to see Roe v Wade repealed.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Politico
    Offline

    Politico Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,855
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,491
    Then do something about it. :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2013
  3. Delia
    Offline

    Delia Truly, Madly, Deeply

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    712
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Phfft
    Ratings:
    +116
    Will you be addressing the article.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Politico
    Offline

    Politico Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,855
    Thanks Received:
    937
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,491
    I did. If you wanted more than that you shouldn't have posted this in the safe zone.
     
  5. Delia
    Offline

    Delia Truly, Madly, Deeply

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    712
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Phfft
    Ratings:
    +116
    No. You didn't. You addressed me, not the contents of the article.
     
  6. Newby
    Offline

    Newby Does it get any better? Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,094
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,703
    No offense, Delia, but I found the article just another endless excuse for why women should be allowed to murder their unborn children. Especially disgusting is that she's trying to rationalize partial birth abortions, we all know that if they weren't illegal, it wouldn't be '12 year olds raped by their uncle' that would be getting them. Just like it isn't '12 year olds raped by their uncles' that are responsible for the millions of babies killed every year in this country, and the millions of dollars in literal blood money the abortion industry makes off of these 'poor women who are just victims'. Just so tired of hearing it.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 5
  7. Underhill
    Offline

    Underhill Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    878
    Thanks Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Nowhere, WNY
    Ratings:
    +88
    Abortion sucks. And the article underlines this.

    It's a lousy procedure that nobody wants to endure and who's morality is questionable. The alternative, of making it illegal is just as fucked up for very similar reasons.

    There is no easy answer. And in the absence of easy answers I think Roe v. Wade had the right idea.

    As for late term abortions, I think making them generally illegal is the right thing to do.

    Saying that, I think the author makes an excellent point about our responsibilities to women. We should be educating young people, making birth control available and giving out the day after pill to anyone who wants it.

    What I really don't understand are those who are against abortion yet at the same time are against these measures which could actually reduce them. And to make matters worse, these are all too often the same people who think we should gut social services and any form of government healthcare.

    One third of high school teens are having sex. And this hasn't changed in decades even with abstinence programs. So it's time people face the facts and move beyond the fairy tail of abstinence as a working alternative to real education and action.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  8. Newby
    Offline

    Newby Does it get any better? Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,094
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,703
    We are already doing that and have been doing it for years, yet abortions go up every year. Plain and simple, it's used for birth control, which is unacceptable. When there are no consequences to deter behavior, the behavior will continue, not only continue but expand and flourish. The further this country moves to the left, the more consequences are taken away. It's not a good thing, and we will pay for it down the road.
     
  9. MHunterB
    Offline

    MHunterB Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    7,209
    Thanks Received:
    1,767
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,775
    Newby: The PROPER INDICATION for what you are calling 'a partial birth abortion' does exist: the 'dilation and intact extraction' is the method least harmful to a woman whose life and future childbearing is threatened by a fetus having extreme hydrocephalus - which is always and absolutely fatal to that baby.t

    The outlawing of a medical procedure which is the best way to minimize the tragedy of mother and baby dying in childbirth is an outrage: no evidence was ever presented to even suggest that diagnoses of 'extreme hydrocephalus' were being faked or that this procedure was being over-used or mis-used.

    As a result of that "law", sometime or other a woman who might otherwise have been able to give birth to a child after suffering the ordeal of miscarriage and surgery and death of a baby, is going to be denied that joy. Because the 'alternative' methods are fraught with peril for her fecundity, if not her very life - and some idiots who don't comprehend the certainty of 'death due to no brain matter in the skull' have made her best option illegal.

    Before you so blithely condemn something, it's best to learn what that something (ie, 'partial birth abortion') actually entails.

    MANY medications - including such 'simple' ones as aspirin and penicillin - can injure or even kill a person. We have safeguards in place already to prevent such mistakes in diagnosis and treatment.

    Outlawing 'dilation and intact extraction' as a procedure has saved NOBODY's life. Enforcing the already-extant laws against 'unnecesary' surgeries and false diagnoses and such would have been enough. The ban was simply grandstanding, a cynical ploy on the part of extremist legislators pandering to the extremists of their political base.

    I say this as a mother whose first pregnancy ended in a miscarriage. IF the goal is to ensure that every viable fertilized egg becomes a neonate, then that ban actually caused the very harm it claimed to prevent - by forcing more women to endure a hysterectomy along with the miscarriage.

    I would be happier with a requirement that every pregnant woman get free ultrasounds regularly: that is how the extreme hydrocephalus could be diagnosed earlier than the end of the second trimester when some less drastic procedure might be used. It would also alert medical staff to expect certain problems, spina bifida, etc. which can be diagnosed fairly reliably with ultrasound.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. MHunterB
    Offline

    MHunterB Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    7,209
    Thanks Received:
    1,767
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,775
    I have no problem with abstinence: it worked for me.

    IMHO, at birth a DNA sample should be taken from male infants and the results recorded in a nationwide bank. Then whenever a girl or woman is pregnant, we should be able to ID the 'sperm donor' and take appropriate action .....
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page