What if Abortion were Outlawed?

[Fed Starving]

Less of this would happen:

Which Companies Are Using Aborted Human Fetuses in Their Food?

Last week, Oklahoma State Senator Ralph Shortey introduced a bill that would ban "the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses." But which foods or products use aborted human fetuses? Let's investigate.

gawker.com

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The man will have been more careful who he makes babies with ... or he deserves poverty

sadly, does not seem to work. most babies are born out of wedlock these days thanks to the liberal attack on love and family. Do you understand?

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

There is a case before the USSC currently that, if the Court rules with the State of Louisiana, will make getting an abortion in Louisiana somewhat more inconvenient for some women. They (some women whose home is distant) would have to drive a couple hours to an abortion clinic, rather than accessing one closer to home. Hence, we are warned that women's "reproductive freedom" is under attack.

Reproductive freedom? If a woman doesn't want to have a baby, she can decline to engage in reproductive behavior. It is free and completely safe to do so. Or if she is OK with having a baby, but doesn't want to have one with a particular man, she can shun that man, sexually. Or she can go on birth control pills, which are 99% effective when used as directed. Or she can use an IUD. Or she can insist that the man use a condom. Or she can get her "tubes tied." So, like Adam and Eve in the garden, there are a whole shitload of means she can take to exercise her "reproductive freedom" ; she just can't have an abortion, conveniently.

But what if abortion were off the table, excepting only cases where the LIFE (not the "health," which could mean anything at all) of the mother was in jeopardy, how would it impact the lives of fecund women?

Would they not seek to access one or more of the strategies mentioned above? And if such a law or decision were to come to fruition (prohibiting abortion), wouldn't it also make these strategies universally available - i.e., "free" birth control pills?

And dare we mention, abortion was a crime in almost every state prior to 1973, a crime in EVERY state a couple decades earlier, and the number of women who were severely harmed by "botched abortions" is grossly overrepresented in the current mythology. A couple woman a year in the whole country.

I submit that as much political angst as is current expended on the abortion issue is pathological. If it were completely outlawed (which would never happen - some states would approve it by law immediately after the feared USSC decision), it would not be such a big deal at all. Women would be a little more careful in their reproductive habits. That's it.

Or you could shut the **** up and not concern yourself with what any woman does with her body.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Or you could shut the **** up and not concern yourself with what any woman does with her body.

A baby in her body or in her house or in her country is not to be killed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm fine outlawing abortion ... but then we'll need to make the fathers financially responsible for the baby and mother ... or else have the tax-payers pay for all the medical care and support ... welfare all over again ...

It's easy to pick on teenage girls when they're "in trouble" ... even easier to ignore the paternity affidavits ... pro-life and anti-welfare is a paradox ... we'll need more prisons if we outlaw abortion ...

We're supposed to be making the fathers financially responsible for the baby, anyway. I disagree that he needs to be financially responsible for the mother, because I don't accept that becoming pregnant infantilizes the woman and makes her less of a full person.

I definitely disagree that I as a taxpayer am somehow responsible for the sexual activity choices of people I don't even know, simply because I'm not willing to accept them committing infanticide. This is akin to saying, "Well, if you want murder to be illegal, that makes you financially responsible for the potential victims for the rest of their lives!"

Please do not hand me this bullshit line about "Well, if you want to be pro-life, you HAVE to accept welfare too!" I am not under any obligation to "earn" my right to believe something by doing it strictly by someone else's vision of how it should be enacted.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Metal coat hangers make an immediate come-back ?

Fast trip to TJ ...

Depends on how we outlaw abortion ... if it becomes murder, then the women will have to spend many many years in prison ... welfare is cheaper than all the new women's prisons that will need to be built ...

God forbid we hold the father responsible in any way ... right? ...

We already hold the fathers responsible, to the extent that we can. States have no particular desire to hand out money they don't have to, so they do make an effort to pursue the fathers for child support. However, far too many women get impregnated by men they know very little about. If the woman can't tell you where and how to find the guy, or even for sure which guy it was, that kinda makes it hard to prosecute him.

I knew a girl who got pregnant, and had literally five different guys tested for paternity because it could conceivably have been any of them . . . but all five tests were negative. She never did figure out who the actual father was.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Have you children never heard Doc Daneeka's tale? ... from Joseph Heller's Catch-22 ...

Here he is with a decent general practice upstairs from a beauty salon making money hand-over-fist performing illegal abortions for the Middle Class housewives ... and then the goddam army drafts him and sends him into the war ... the bastards ...

Folks of means will get their abortions whether we outlaw it or not ... only the poor girls get kicked in the belly, Mountain Dew poured into their wombs or thrown off a cliff ...

Oh, what a load of horseshit. I hate to break it to your engrossing little melodrama, but prior to Roe v. Wade, states with putatively strict abortion laws STILL showed the vast majority of abortions performed by licensed doctors, due to the very elastic interpretations possible of "endangering the health of the mother". Kansas, for example, had nearly the same number of abortions performed by licensed physicians the year before Roe as California did.

Meanwhile, now in the glorious "safe" days of legal abortion, we have abortion supporters screeching like scalded chimps over any attempt whatsoever to ensure safe conditions for women getting abortions.

I'd very much like you or anyone else who likes to tell scary stories about "Mountain Dew in the coochie or thrown off cliffs", or coat hangers or what-the-****-ever, to show me one confirmed case of that actually happening prior to Roe because no other option was possible. I'll see your example, and raise you a Kermit Gosnell.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Outlawing abortions would overtax our childcare and welfare systems.

Unless we return to our former glory and make people responsible for their own children. That's the best birth control.

You assume, wrongly, that if abortion was outlawed, people would not change their behavior in light of that fact, and would continue ******* indiscriminately without birth control efforts. However, that is not and never has been in keeping with human nature.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As implied above, the number of women who were harmed in the course of botched abortions was microscopic, especially when compared to the number of babies who are killed through legal abortions.

Calling a fetus a "baby" is dishonest

Calling a baby a "fetus" is the ultimate dishonesty.

Depends on whether or not a person is doing it because they know the actual, medical definition for the word "fetus", or if they're a pig-stupid semi-illiterate who thinks "fetus" means "non-living formless mass of tissue I don't like".

 

[Cecilie1200]

There is a case before the USSC currently that, if the Court rules with the State of Louisiana, will make getting an abortion in Louisiana somewhat more inconvenient for some women. They (some women whose home is distant) would have to drive a couple hours to an abortion clinic, rather than accessing one closer to home. Hence, we are warned that women's "reproductive freedom" is under attack.

Reproductive freedom? If a woman doesn't want to have a baby, she can decline to engage in reproductive behavior. It is free and completely safe to do so. Or if she is OK with having a baby, but doesn't want to have one with a particular man, she can shun that man, sexually. Or she can go on birth control pills, which are 99% effective when used as directed. Or she can use an IUD. Or she can insist that the man use a condom. Or she can get her "tubes tied." So, like Adam and Eve in the garden, there are a whole shitload of means she can take to exercise her "reproductive freedom" ; she just can't have an abortion, conveniently.

But what if abortion were off the table, excepting only cases where the LIFE (not the "health," which could mean anything at all) of the mother was in jeopardy, how would it impact the lives of fecund women?

Would they not seek to access one or more of the strategies mentioned above? And if such a law or decision were to come to fruition (prohibiting abortion), wouldn't it also make these strategies universally available - i.e., "free" birth control pills?

And dare we mention, abortion was a crime in almost every state prior to 1973, a crime in EVERY state a couple decades earlier, and the number of women who were severely harmed by "botched abortions" is grossly overrepresented in the current mythology. A couple woman a year in the whole country.

I submit that as much political angst as is current expended on the abortion issue is pathological. If it were completely outlawed (which would never happen - some states would approve it by law immediately after the feared USSC decision), it would not be such a big deal at all. Women would be a little more careful in their reproductive habits. That's it.

Or you could shut the **** up and not concern yourself with what any woman does with her body.

Or YOU could shut the **** up and stop bothering us with this, "You have to accept my third-grade education as science!" line.

No one's talking about HER body here, and just because basic human reproduction is beyond your understanding does not obligate us to do anything except view you as a waste of skin.

 

[ReinyDays]

We already hold the fathers responsible, to the extent that we can ...

That's funny ... four ADAs each with two feet of case files ... these court rooms are open to the public, go sit through a session and then tell me this is an effective approach to collecting child support from deadbeat parents ...

Most cases are open-and-shut, sometimes just a phone call from the ADA will get the deadbeat parent paying ... about 1 out of 10 go the full distance, jury trial ... and then a one years prison sentence that doesn't pay child support either ... the tax-payers are out $150,000 just to collect $35,000 in back child support, with the very real and likely result of not collecting any ...

The only reason I got paid child support (after the kids were all 18 or over) was the other parent had another child ... the IRS sent me their EIC every year for 7 years ... (boy, was she pissed too, I spent the money at the local casinos ... ha ha ha ha ...)

 

[Cecilie1200]

We already hold the fathers responsible, to the extent that we can ...

That's funny ... four ADAs each with two feet of case files ... these court rooms are open to the public, go sit through a session and then tell me this is an effective approach to collecting child support from deadbeat parents ...

Most cases are open-and-shut, sometimes just a phone call from the ADA will get the deadbeat parent paying ... about 1 out of 10 go the full distance, jury trial ... and then a one years prison sentence that doesn't pay child support either ... the tax-payers are out $150,000 just to collect $35,000 in back child support, with the very real and likely result of not collecting any ...

The only reason I got paid child support (after the kids were all 18 or over) was the other parent had another child ... the IRS sent me their EIC every year for 7 years ... (boy, was she pissed too, I spent the money at the local casinos ... ha ha ha ha ...)

And your point would be what, precisely, other than spewing at me your personal bitterness about the courts?

 

[CHAZBUKOWSKI]

As implied above, the number of women who were harmed in the course of botched abortions was microscopic, especially when compared to the number of babies who are killed through legal abortions.

Calling a fetus a "baby" is dishonest

Calling a baby a "fetus" is just callous and non human. When people dont respect the sanctity of life in the womb then people dont respect life outside the womb and why we see murders in inner cities that are more than most wars.

I can honestly say, I have never once, in 50 years, heard anybody refer to a baby as a fetus. Now, if somebody had a basic modicum of intellectual honesty, he would refer to a fetus as a fetus and a baby as a baby. Not that hard, really. Fetus prebirth. Baby post-birth. Alas, this is a topic that does not present itself as intellectually honest.

 

[TNHarley]

As implied above, the number of women who were harmed in the course of botched abortions was microscopic, especially when compared to the number of babies who are killed through legal abortions.

Calling a fetus a "baby" is dishonest

Calling a baby a "fetus" is the ultimate dishonesty.

Depends on whether or not a person is doing it because they know the actual, medical definition for the word "fetus", or if they're a pig-stupid semi-illiterate who thinks "fetus" means "non-living formless mass of tissue I don't like".

A fetus is an unborn mammal.
Its quite simple.

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

There is a case before the USSC currently that, if the Court rules with the State of Louisiana, will make getting an abortion in Louisiana somewhat more inconvenient for some women. They (some women whose home is distant) would have to drive a couple hours to an abortion clinic, rather than accessing one closer to home. Hence, we are warned that women's "reproductive freedom" is under attack.

Reproductive freedom? If a woman doesn't want to have a baby, she can decline to engage in reproductive behavior. It is free and completely safe to do so. Or if she is OK with having a baby, but doesn't want to have one with a particular man, she can shun that man, sexually. Or she can go on birth control pills, which are 99% effective when used as directed. Or she can use an IUD. Or she can insist that the man use a condom. Or she can get her "tubes tied." So, like Adam and Eve in the garden, there are a whole shitload of means she can take to exercise her "reproductive freedom" ; she just can't have an abortion, conveniently.

But what if abortion were off the table, excepting only cases where the LIFE (not the "health," which could mean anything at all) of the mother was in jeopardy, how would it impact the lives of fecund women?

Would they not seek to access one or more of the strategies mentioned above? And if such a law or decision were to come to fruition (prohibiting abortion), wouldn't it also make these strategies universally available - i.e., "free" birth control pills?

And dare we mention, abortion was a crime in almost every state prior to 1973, a crime in EVERY state a couple decades earlier, and the number of women who were severely harmed by "botched abortions" is grossly overrepresented in the current mythology. A couple woman a year in the whole country.

I submit that as much political angst as is current expended on the abortion issue is pathological. If it were completely outlawed (which would never happen - some states would approve it by law immediately after the feared USSC decision), it would not be such a big deal at all. Women would be a little more careful in their reproductive habits. That's it.

Or you could shut the **** up and not concern yourself with what any woman does with her body.

Or YOU could shut the **** up and stop bothering us with this, "You have to accept my third-grade education as science!" line.

No one's talking about HER body here, and just because basic human reproduction is beyond your understanding does not obligate us to do anything except view you as a waste of skin.

Ok, trash

 

[Jarlaxle]

I'm fine outlawing abortion ... but then we'll need to make the fathers financially responsible for the baby and mother ... or else have the tax-payers pay for all the medical care and support ... welfare all over again ...

It's easy to pick on teenage girls when they're "in trouble" ... even easier to ignore the paternity affidavits ... pro-life and anti-welfare is a paradox ... we'll need more prisons if we outlaw abortion ...

Metal coat hangers make an immediate come-back ?

More likely, a jump in Mifepristone sales online.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sorry, DS. That train has left the station. If Roe is reversed, then the states decide, and several states will never outlaw abortion, which means that a woman can simply have it done in those states. Or, they can stay in Louisiana and have a D&C. Or, they can order new OTC drugs available by mail from Europe with which she can do it herself at home. but, if you want to keep tilting at windmills, be my guest. The law never had any impact anyway, other than to send a few doctors to prison.

It may not be as simple as that ... for example, if a woman travels from South Dakota to Minnesota to get an abortion ... can she return to South Dakota? ... there are precedents in law which disallow traveling for the purposes of committing a crime in a place where it's not a crime ... and murder is pretty serious of a crime ...

I might be behind the times, but D&C was the usual method of performing an abortion ... and using this procedure for the termination of pregnancy is what will be outlawed ... same with online drugs ... it's not hard crafting legislation to cover all these loop holes ...

Actually, it's more than hard...it's totally impossible. ANy woman can figure out how to self-abort if she's determined to do so. Short of investigating every miscarriage as a murder (I vaguely recall ~20-30% of pregnancies spontaneously abort in the first month), it cannot be done.

Mifepristone (RU-486) is not especially hard to get, widely available in Europe (and probably Asia).

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yes but instead of We the People having our taxes stolen for the killing of babies born or unborn, now those sluts can pay for it themselves....When they realize how expensive it is, maybe they can keep their legs crossed until they find the right guy.

An abortion pill is a couple hundred dollars.

 

[Jarlaxle]

We already hold the fathers responsible, to the extent that we can. States have no particular desire to hand out money they don't have to, so they do make an effort to pursue the fathers for child support. However, far too many women get impregnated by men they know very little about. If the woman can't tell you where and how to find the guy, or even for sure which guy it was, that kinda makes it hard to prosecute him.

I knew a girl who got pregnant, and had literally five different guys tested for paternity because it could conceivably have been any of them . . . but all five tests were negative. She never did figure out who the actual father was.

Or she DID, and told him to scram so he WOULDN'T have to pay.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As implied above, the number of women who were harmed in the course of botched abortions was microscopic, especially when compared to the number of babies who are killed through legal abortions.

Calling a fetus a "baby" is dishonest

Calling a baby a "fetus" is just callous and non human. When people dont respect the sanctity of life in the womb then people dont respect life outside the womb and why we see murders in inner cities that are more than most wars.

I can honestly say, I have never once, in 50 years, heard anybody refer to a baby as a fetus. Now, if somebody had a basic modicum of intellectual honesty, he would refer to a fetus as a fetus and a baby as a baby. Not that hard, really. Fetus prebirth. Baby post-birth. Alas, this is a topic that does not present itself as intellectually honest.

Um, actually, they're the same thing. You know who refers to unborn babies as "fetuses"? Medical personnel, and pro-abortionists. And only the medical personnel are using the word correctly.

"Fetus" is simply a specific word for "unborn child after 8 weeks of development."