Rape Victims Who Choose The Babies Life Over Politics

[elektra]

Post 237 most assuredly links to a study. The conclusion of which was posted in that post. You on the other hand haven't.

I been reading the study.
My first question is, does it bother you that the study used the data of another study.
Second question, the study used only 671 women, how can that possibly reflect the population.
Third question, dont we need to read the first study to really understand if any of this is valid.

 

[elektra]

Post 237 most assuredly links to a study. The conclusion of which was posted in that post. You on the other hand haven't.

More questions

The reasercher used Bivariate regression, that invalidates the study. Does this concern you.

 

[forkup]

My first question is, does it bother you that the study used the data of another study.

Not really, as long as this is indicated, so one can look at the validity of the other study. Studies cite eachother all the time.

Second question, the study used only 671 women, how can that possibly reflect the population.

The same way a poll reflects the population. You establish a margin of error. It's safe to say that error will be less than the 180 percent or something you're suggesting.

Third question, dont we need to read the first study to really understand if any of this is valid.

Not really, if you can find another peer reviewed study wildly at odds with the one I gave, you can start to figure out why there's a difference and maybe cast doubt. At the moment only one of us has given something that you can truly examine the validity of.

 

[forkup]

More questions

The reasercher used Bivariate regression, that invalidates the study. Does this concern you.

Maybe if you explain why it would invalidate the study, I could give a response.

 

[elektra]

Maybe if you explain why it would invalidate the study, I could give a response.

You dont understand what the term means. You dismissed it as urrelevant without knowing what it means and the critisism of it.

Did you understand what I stated, you said you have no problem that your study cites another study. Again it is clear you did not read your study. The study you found adter you formed an opinion, the study you found to confirm your opinion is a study using another study. The did not, cite a study, they used that studies data to come up with different conclusions then the original study.

 

[elektra]

Maybe if you explain why it would invalidate the study, I could give a response.

Your study states that all the women thought of the abortion often for three years after. They do not they thought positively about the abortion.

The study says the women tended, to cope well. Nice, that confirms the study I referenced. The women who had abortions had negative feelings that they coped with for three years. The study did not follow up after three years.

Your study also said women had poor, and poorer outcomes.

Your study says the women could use counseling.

Your study does not state women were happy aborting thier babies.

 

[irosie91]

Your study states that all the women thought of the abortion often for three years after. They do not they thought positively about the abortion.

The study says the women tended, to cope well. Nice, that confirms the study I referenced. The women who had abortions had negative feelings that they coped with for three years. The study did not follow up after three years.

Your study also said women had poor, and poorer outcomes.

Your study says the women could use counseling.

Your study does not state women were happy aborting thier babies.

that women are not happy about abortions is not only "psychological" fact but also a neurological fact. A pregnant brain is prepared to BE A MOTHER. It's bad enough for women "needing abortions" They should not have to pass picket lines

 

[elektra]

that women are not happy about abortions is not only "psychological" fact but also a neurological fact. A pregnant brain is prepared to BE A MOTHER. It's bad enough for women "needing abortions" They should not have to pass picket lines

True, but change is needed.

You think science will ever find out the cause of this health condition that abortion cures.

 

[irosie91]

True, but change is needed.

You think science will ever find out the cause of this health condition that abortion cures.

there are many known health conditions that abortion cures. Not a happy subject

 

[elektra]

there are many known health conditions that abortion cures. Not a happy subject

Only pregnancy. You think otherwise, name one.

 

[irosie91]

Only pregnancy. You think otherwise, name one.

here's one. A hydatiform mole pregnancy. I am
not sure I understand your question

 

[forkup]

You dont understand what the term means. You dismissed it as urrelevant without knowing what it means and the critisism of it.

I didn't dismiss it as irrelevant, and yes I had to look it up.

What I did is ask you to explain why it would invalidate the study.

See, what you did was commit the logical fallacy of begging the question. Instead of making an argument. ( The statistical device they used invalidates the study and this is why), you simply asserted it did and asked me to accept that argument as proven and comment.

Now you are making another fallacious argument, namely a strawman, by stating I dismissed the argument. I didn't. I simply asked you to make one, instead of begging the question.

Let me make an educated guess. You typed in the study and found some website doing a rebuttal. I'm not criticizing that by the way. If you did. It means you are engaged in trying to make the best counter-argument you can find.

One of the arguments they made was the use of that statistical method, something you didn't really understand but posed as an original idea to me.

Then, when you got called to explain, you couldn't, and instead of simply conceding or ignoring, you decided to attack me asking for more information.

If you really want to learn about this subject. And have a good faith conversation, and I have a feeling you do. Be honest. With me. But more importantly with yourself.

Again it is clear you did not read your study.

I already conceded that.

Your study does not state women were happy aborting thier babies.

I never claimed they would be. The question is if they regret making the decision. I'm not happy when I go to the dentist, that doesn't mean I regret going afterwards. Those are separate issues.

It's how you defined regret in the original post and how I responded.

I would appreciate you not changing how regret is meant in the context of the conversation.

 

[forkup]

The study you found adter you formed an opinion, the study you found to confirm your opinion is a study using another study. The did not, cite a study, they used that studies data to come up with different conclusions then the original study.

Yes, I looked up a study to confirm my suspicion that your 93 percent regret figure was WAY of kilter. That's what happens if you make extraordinary claims. It makes people suspicious.

As for the study. This again is begging the question. But if a study uses data collected by other studies and reinterprets the meaning, even that's acceptable and in bounds of the peer review process.

It would be helpful if you give what I suspect is a link to the rebuttal. It gives a source that I can check, just like I allowed you to check mine.

I don't mind doing the research.

 

[elektra]

Yes, I looked up a study to confirm my suspicion that your 93 percent regret figure was WAY of kilter. That's what happens if you make extraordinary claims. It makes people suspicious.

As for the study. This again is begging the question. But if a study uses data collected by other studies and reinterprets the meaning, even that's acceptable and in bounds of the peer review process.

It would be helpful if you give what I suspect is a link to the rebuttal. It gives a source that I can check, just like I allowed you to check mine.

I don't mind doing the research.

I like to say, fiction based on fact. It is big world. I dont stereotype. I know with so many people there are mant that will fall in numerous catagories.

Yes, I dont think the article written about the study that the vague conclusion says.

I am sure the conclusion is vague because they did not talk to people.

I would treat the study my article is based on for the same reasons. I just used my study to start a discusion. It did open my eyes though. A mother's natural instinct to mother her children is embedded in the vast majority of women.

My previous comments are not intended to stupidly dismiss your comments or anyone elses. I learn stuff about people, what they know, the type of person they are by how they respond.

We dont agree, may never, but I like your style. You are much more reasonable then just about everyone on your side of this issue.

I say I wont find my study, and I wont. I dont have the time. This week I am working 12.5 hours a day to get my 50 hr week in do I can take Friday off. I am working in ohio. I will drive 12 hours home after work friday. I have not seem my two boys and dog since july 6th so my two days at home will be with them. Drive back monday. The following week I will work extra hours per day cause the next weekend a company is flying me to los angeles for job interview on monday the 8th. I will have to make up that day so more hours. I have no time for searching and posting.

 

[forkup]

My previous comments are not intended to stupidly dismiss your comments or anyone elses. I learn stuff about people, what they know, the type of person they are by how they respond.

I didn't think that was your intention. People commit logical fallacies all the time. Me included, although it's a pet pieve of mine and one I try very consciously to avoid. Mainly because they are by definition bad arguments. The problem I have is that most people don't know how to recognize them let alone spend any effort on trying to avoid them. They are insidious because they sound logical on their face when they aren't, meaning they allow a person to convince themselves they are right even when they have no logical reason to believe so.

The reason I tell you is not to be condescending or berate. But simply to ask you to try to avoid them in the future in order have a good faith discussion

It did open my eyes though. A mother's natural instinct to mother her children is embedded in the vast majority of women.

The article didn't put regret in that context though. Which is one of those "fictions based in facts" that you were talking about I suspect.

We dont agree, may never, but I like your style. You are much more reasonable then just about everyone on your side of this issue.

Thank you. And we don't need to agree. The only thing I want is an actual discussion. Without tricks, without malice and in the understanding that even things that a person considers wholly immoral still can be discussed in a civil manner.

As for being more reasonable. I don't think I'm even close to unique. The problem is 3 fold.

First, this place is typically not conducive to good faith arguments. I can't compel you to respond or even be civil. So nobody is forced to react in the way 2 people would interact face to face.

Second, this debate even in the public realm is conducted in inherently dishonest ways.

Third, the debate is so loaded it's hard to actually look for compromise.

So those of good faith have a hard time breaking through all the noise.

I have no time for searching and posting.

Take your time. I'm not going anywhere.

 

[BlindBoo]

It should be the womans choice. Pro Choice doesn't demand the victim get an abortion.

 

[HeyNorm]

Nope. That's the "choice" bit of being pro-choice.

Nobody should be forced to have an abortion. In fact, not having abortions is preferable in most cases, in my opinion.

But it's an opinion I have, not to be mistaken by a willingness to force people to adhere to that opinion.

I don't pretend to know in any way how to tell a woman, let alone a rape victim, to act in a particular way towards an unwanted pregnancy.

And I think that anybody who does is wrong.

Rape should always be an exclusion under the law because of the lack of consent. That is as long as it is dealt with quickly and the female reports the crime and cooperates with authority.

Incest the same.

Life of mother should be an exclusion as the duress of the situation makes it self defense.

No other reason for abortion to be legal. In states that give more leeway, child support laws need repealed. No man should be compelled to become a father if a consenting female does not.

 

[HeyNorm]

It should be the womans choice. Pro Choice doesn't demand the victim get an abortion.

She made the choice.

 

[forkup]

Rape should always be an exclusion under the law because of the lack of consent. That is as long as it is dealt with quickly and the female reports the crime and cooperates with authority.

Incest the same.

Life of mother should be an exclusion as the duress of the situation makes it self defense.

No other reason for abortion to be legal. In states that give more leeway, child support laws need repealed. No man should be compelled to become a father if a consenting female does not.

Why is it, that you feel being able to abort after rape is only permissible under conditions that aren't always easy to meet?

Being a rape victim and reporting that rape implies choosing to confront what has happened before, explaining in graphic detail the particulars of a very traumatic event, at the very least to the police. NOT an easy thing to do. Let alone taking it to the adversarial conditions of a courtroom.

I can also come up with plenty of reasons why it would take a while for a rape victim to make the decision to abort.



As for your self-defense argument. Why does that only apply to direct threats to the mother and not for instance to simply having something like pre-eclampsia, swollen feet, morning sickness or the general discomfort always associated with pregnancy.

Can you imagine any circumstance besides pregnancy where you would feel it warranted to force somebody to be sick on the behest of someone else?



I always put it in this analogy. Just imagine a newborn baby having a kidney disease. Only one donor is available to stave off imminent death. The mother. This mother though does not want to donate. Would you be in favor of requiring this mother to give up one of her kidneys regardless of her own choice?

 

[HeyNorm]

Why is it, that you feel being able to abort after rape is only permissible under conditions that aren't always easy to meet?

Being a rape victim and reporting that rape implies choosing to confront what has happened before, explaining in graphic detail the particulars of a very traumatic event, at the very least to the police. NOT an easy thing to do. Let alone taking it to the adversarial conditions of a courtroom.

I can also come up with plenty of reasons why it would take a while for a rape victim to make the decision to abort.



As for your self-defense argument. Why does that only apply to direct threats to the mother and not for instance to simply having something like pre-eclampsia, swollen feet, morning sickness or the general discomfort always associated with pregnancy.

Can you imagine any circumstance besides pregnancy where you would feel it warranted to force somebody to be sick on the behest of someone else?



I always put it in this analogy. Just imagine a newborn baby having a kidney disease. Only one donor is available to stave off imminent death. The mother. This mother though does not want to donate. Would you be in favor of requiring this mother to give up one of her kidneys regardless of her own choice?

You sure make women sound:

1. Helpless
2. Dumb as rocks
3. Suicidal.