CDZ What is the Compromise to Roe v Wade?

[flan327]

I highly doubt every late-term abortion is done to save the life of the mother. In fact, I'd say the reverse is more likely: most late-term abortions are NOT done to save the life of the mother. And in my view that ain't triage, that should be considered a murder.

We fought too hard to EVER back down

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Do you consider yourself to be a defender of basic human rights?

I don't know what I consider myself. I just hope that my morality comports with a rational and non-hypocritical position. I am pro-choice NOT because I like abortion. I would love it if another abortion would never happen. But the key is that it isn't MY BODY. If a woman carrying a pregnancy to term was going to somehow impact the health of those around her then maybe I'd have an opinion of what she should do. But given that it is 100% her body I have no rights to give my opinion.

My goal in my politics is to vote to ensure that the commonweal of our society is met. We can do better with regards to those in need. We are a strange country indeed in that we don't seem to actually care about others unless they are useful to us as pawns in our politics. Most of the time we couldn't care less about anyone else. And I don't like that in myself so I vote to improve the social safety net and make this country one which I am proud to be a member of.

(NOTE: Before you try to respond to this, please read it closely and note the details. Thanks).

 

[2aguy]

I highly doubt every late-term abortion is done to save the life of the mother. In fact, I'd say the reverse is more likely: most late-term abortions are NOT done to save the life of the mother. And in my view that ain't triage, that should be considered a murder.

I heard an actual Doctor, who used to be
an abortionist point out that giving birth is medically safer than an abortion….since you have to induce the woman into labor to get the body parts out….

 

[2aguy]

I don't know what I consider myself. I just hope that my morality comports with a rational and non-hypocritical position. I am pro-choice NOT because I like abortion. I would love it if another abortion would never happen. But the key is that it isn't MY BODY. If a woman carrying a pregnancy to term was going to somehow impact the health of those around her then maybe I'd have an opinion of what she should do. But given that it is 100% her body I have no rights to give my opinion.

My goal in my politics is to vote to ensure that the commonweal of our society is met. We can do better with regards to those in need. We are a strange country indeed in that we don't seem to actually care about others unless they are useful to us as pawns in our politics. Most of the time we couldn't care less about anyone else. And I don't like that in myself so I vote to improve the social safety net and make this country one which I am proud to be a member of.

(NOTE: Before you try to respond to this, please read it closely and note the details. Thanks).

See, according to your viewpoint, I am against murder, but….it isnt my body so I have no say in it…

Got it…

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

See, according to your viewpoint, I am against murder, but….it isnt my body so I have no say in it…

Got it…

That's why I cautioned to read with an eye toward detail. Now it's time to show you how insipid your point is.

Murder is taking an action AGAINST someone. Look up there in my post.

"If a woman carrying a pregnancy to term was going to somehow impact the health of those around her then maybe I'd have an opinion of what she should do. But given that it is 100% her body I have no rights to give my opinion."

I understand that you have limited education and so don't really read closely or understand much of what is said to you, but my caveat there kind of rules out your murder scenario.

Now, try making the point that the fetus is being "murdered". I can understand that point but, again, the key is that that fetus cannot exist without the woman's body and as such it is completely up to her whether her body is to be used to develop and sustain the fetus.

 

[flan327]

I heard an actual Doctor, who used to be
an abortionist point out that giving birth is medically safer than an abortion….since you have to induce the woman into labor to get the body parts out….

Giving birth is safer than an abortion

That’s like comparing apples to Volkswagens

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Giving birth is safer than an abortion

That’s like comparing apples to Volkswagens

Apparently the science doesn't really support the claim. I suspect it may be related to the stage at which the abortion happens, but in general here's the finding from a 2012 study

Results: The pregnancy-associated mortality rate among women who delivered live neonates was 8.8 deaths per 100,000 live births. The mortality rate related to induced abortion was 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions. In the one recent comparative study of pregnancy morbidity in the United States, pregnancy-related complications were more common with childbirth than with abortion.

Conclusion: Legal induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth. The risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion. Similarly, the overall morbidity associated with childbirth exceeds that with abortion.

(SOURCE)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is there a compromise? Should Congress step in? Who is able to lead us to a solution?

So, 15 weeks? Allow late term abortions? Keep federal money out of abortions? Require classes before deciding, show all aspects of an abortion, the good and bad, physically, mentally and spiritually?

I am not sure what my answer is but we are going to get a solution whether we like one or not.

It’s not a ‘compromise’ but at least acknowledgement from those hostile to privacy rights that ‘banning’ abortion has a serious, detrimental impact on women’s health.

Laws should be more sophisticated and compassionate concerning the reproductive health of women.

At a minimum allow women to consult a physician, have health risks identified, and allowed to have an abortion if determined to be medically necessary and beneficial to a woman’s health.

Research Points to Negative Health Outcomes for Women and Families as More States Restrict Abortions

A renewed push by several states to restrict access to abortions could have negative consequences for the health and well-being of women, as well as their children, research has shown.

www.ucsf.edu

 

[Coyote]

Easy……the only abortions allowed are
Those for the life of the mother….then it is triage, not murder

So it’s a-ok for rapists then. And you have no problem if tbe pregnancy puts her health at risk.

 

[Sunsettommy]

So it’s a-ok for rapists then. And you have no problem if tbe pregnancy puts her health at risk.

Does the female victim needs to wait five months to abort when she could do it as soon as she is pregnant due to rape in say the first month?

 

[Coyote]

Does the female victim needs to wait five months to abort when she could do it as soon as she is pregnant due to rape in say the first month?

Sometimes she doesn’t have much choice.

A lot of women don’t know they are pregnant in tbe first month, some women may not know they are pregnant until pretty far along. It might be a difficult decision given all that has happened to her. She may also live in an area with significant barriers to abortion.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Personally, why can't we do a compromise where Abortion up to 16 weeks is 100% legal and the rest of the time illegal since 93% of ALL abortions are done in the first 16 weeks.

The exceptions can be made for rape if the women don't know if it was the rapist's baby of her husband/boyfriend's baby for a while but have to decide, and deformed fetus.

Later 2-3rd trimester abortions for women can be bad to her emotional state due to the loss of a something she became emotionally attached to which is why I advocate doing them within the first 16 weeks.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Sometimes she doesn’t have much choice.

A lot of women don’t know they are pregnant in tbe first month, some women may not know they are pregnant until pretty far along. It might be a difficult decision given all that has happened to her. She may also live in an area with significant barriers to abortion.

I am talking about women who KNOW she is pregnant which women normally does by 4 months (16 weeks)

First Trimester is 13 weeks long.

 

[Coyote]

Personally, why can't we do a compromise where Abortion up to 16 weeks is 100% legal and the rest of the time illegal since 93% of ALL abortions are done in the first 16 weeks.

That is the compromise I suggested earlier in the thread, few took me up on it.

The exceptions can be made for rape if the women don't know if it was the rapist's baby of her husband/boyfriend's baby for a while but have to decide, and deformed fetus.

Later 2-3rd trimester abortions for women can be bad to her emotional state due to the loss of a something she became emotionally attached to which is why I advocate doing them within the first 16 weeks.

Agree with exceptions listed but also add for her health. There should be no barriers for a legal abortion that could force her to wait.

 

[Sunsettommy]

That is the compromise I suggested earlier in the thread, few took me up on it.

Agree with exceptions listed but also add for her health. There should be no barriers for a legal abortion that could force her to wait.

It really saddens me about how few consider the compromise we have been proposing here and in 10 other threads I have posted in.

I really don't agree with the Mandatory Motherhood group as their life of the zygote to fetus is so "precious" argument is overblown as the world is already overpopulated for starters (Republicans)

I think the Democrats are being foolish since hardly anyone including democrat women goes past 16 weeks to get her abortion which is why it is a good starting point for the compromise which means for democrats there is actually very little change to what they already do in abortion decisions now.

 

[Chuz Life]

I don't know what I consider myself. I just hope that my morality comports with a rational and non-hypocritical position. I am pro-choice NOT because I like abortion. I would love it if another abortion would never happen. But the key is that it isn't MY BODY. If a woman carrying a pregnancy to term was going to somehow impact the health of those around her then maybe I'd have an opinion of what she should do. But given that it is 100% her body I have no rights to give my opinion.

My goal in my politics is to vote to ensure that the commonweal of our society is met. We can do better with regards to those in need. We are a strange country indeed in that we don't seem to actually care about others unless they are useful to us as pawns in our politics. Most of the time we couldn't care less about anyone else. And I don't like that in myself so I vote to improve the social safety net and make this country one which I am proud to be a member of.

(NOTE: Before you try to respond to this, please read it closely and note the details. Thanks).

Ok.
Is it acceptable to you to deny or deprive the rights and personhood of some human beings/people to insure the "commonwealth" of the rest of their society?

 

[Rogue AI]

We should let the baby decide. Granted, a life and death decision is a bit much to ask of a baby. Best to give time to mature before the final decision is made. 18 years should do it.

 

[JoeB131]

Ok.
Is it acceptable to you to deny or deprive the rights and personhood of some human beings/people to insure the "commonwealth" of the rest of their society?

Fetuses aren't people.

We just had a census in 2020. Not one fetus was counted.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Personally, why can't we do a compromise where Abortion up to 16 weeks is 100% legal and the rest of the time illegal since 93% of ALL abortions are done in the first 16 weeks.

The exceptions can be made for rape if the women don't know if it was the rapist's baby of her husband/boyfriend's baby for a while but have to decide, and deformed fetus.

Later 2-3rd trimester abortions for women can be bad to her emotional state due to the loss of a something she became emotionally attached to which is why I advocate doing them within the first 16 weeks.

Oh please. If women really became emotionally attached to her unborn child those children when born, full term, would not end up in the dumpster.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Oh please. If women really became emotionally attached to her unborn child those children when born, full term, would not end up in the dumpster.

There is no reason to wait so long to get an abortion and since most women do it in the first 16 weeks (93% rate) the emotional impact is much smaller.

If the fanatics of the left and the right refuse to compromise, then it will never end, and America just gets weaker and weaker because of their irrational behavior.