South Dakota set to Limit most Abortions
- Thread starter Graymalkin
- Start date
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
Never: that's why we need to limit their influence.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
You're lulling me into a false sense of security with all this agreement...
toggle
wobbly
not really.
Believing in the absolute right of a woman to have an abortion dosen't mean that I don't think people need education to avoid unwanted conception and disease. Without any moral point of view on abortion, I doubt the stress of repeated pregnancy and abortion is good for her or those arround her. That is a reason to want to look for measures to reduce the number of abortions, without reducing her rights.
The only reasonable way to do this is to look at sex education. Encouraging a responsible attitude towards contraception and disease prevention from both sexes. Encouraging teens to talk with each other about sex, whether they are going to ahve sex and what it means to them and what they think about societies attitude to sex.
I will say that i think I've managed to make sure my kids will be sorted. At least, the 14 year olds who were talking openly about attitudes towards women's sexuality and homosexuality and using most of the free condoms to make water balloons, seemed to give me the impression that the workshops run at the teen camps for the group my kids are members of, would give my kids a far better set of information that i was given at school.
You can talk about contraception from the front of the classroom, you can show birth vids, etc, but I don't think it's worth a lot if the teens still won't talk to each other about sex.
Believing in the absolute right of a woman to have an abortion dosen't mean that I don't think people need education to avoid unwanted conception and disease. Without any moral point of view on abortion, I doubt the stress of repeated pregnancy and abortion is good for her or those arround her. That is a reason to want to look for measures to reduce the number of abortions, without reducing her rights.
The only reasonable way to do this is to look at sex education. Encouraging a responsible attitude towards contraception and disease prevention from both sexes. Encouraging teens to talk with each other about sex, whether they are going to ahve sex and what it means to them and what they think about societies attitude to sex.
I will say that i think I've managed to make sure my kids will be sorted. At least, the 14 year olds who were talking openly about attitudes towards women's sexuality and homosexuality and using most of the free condoms to make water balloons, seemed to give me the impression that the workshops run at the teen camps for the group my kids are members of, would give my kids a far better set of information that i was given at school.
You can talk about contraception from the front of the classroom, you can show birth vids, etc, but I don't think it's worth a lot if the teens still won't talk to each other about sex.
JC2:
I just think that when a woman is already pregnant, presumably in the majority of cases because a man has had consensual sex with her knowing that there was a chance she could become pregnant, it's too late for him to be legally allowed to walk away and say to hell with her. The baby is already on the way. Too late. Should have worn a condom or had a wank instead of having sex.
Having an abortion is not something that should even be on the table unless the woman chooses to put it there. The ability to have an abortion is not a default position that anyone should assume that any woman can/should take. It's not like a waste disposal that she can flick on for her or anyone else's convenience. It's a *controversial surgical procedure that many, many women would NEVER even consider undergoing unless there was some life-threatening reason for doing so. I don't think that you can glibly say "well that's her choice, then". Not having an abortion is hardly a "choice" for someone who would be haunted to their grave if they ever did so (whether for religious, moral or ethical reasons).
I know you'll say that it's the woman's choice to raise the child without his financial support, but if she can't have an abortion, it's not a choice, is it? And I don't think it's overstating anything to say that an abortion is not a choice for many women.
I think you're overestimating the instances of women using pregnancy as a way of trapping a man into supporting a child they don't want as some kind of lifestyle choice. You know, in many cases of accidental pregnancy the single mothers didn't want to have a child either, it was a distaster for their life too, but it was the only thing they could do given that they were already pregnant and felt some responsibility to deal with it and make the best of it. In comparison to the impact that raising a child for 18 years has on the life of a single mother, I think the father is actually not doing too badly if he just has to help a little bit financially. I'd be all for him being involved as a father and having a say in decisions, for the child's sake, and he should have a legal right to do so, but he shouldn't be just allowed to say "oh, that was rotten luck for you, see ya" and walk away. No way.
The only exception to that I can imagine to that which would be fair would be if the couple made some kind of legally binding agreement before having sex that the man would not be responsible for a child resulting from an accidental pregnancy, but of course in practice that isn't gonna happen.
I agree with everyone who is emphasising sex education. It still amazes me that any adult has sex without knowing that even with contraception, the woman can become pregnant.
* when I say controversial, I mean that a vast number of women, including those who are pro-choice, find the idea of abortion utterly repugnant and would never be able to end a pregnancy by choice
I just think that when a woman is already pregnant, presumably in the majority of cases because a man has had consensual sex with her knowing that there was a chance she could become pregnant, it's too late for him to be legally allowed to walk away and say to hell with her. The baby is already on the way. Too late. Should have worn a condom or had a wank instead of having sex.
Having an abortion is not something that should even be on the table unless the woman chooses to put it there. The ability to have an abortion is not a default position that anyone should assume that any woman can/should take. It's not like a waste disposal that she can flick on for her or anyone else's convenience. It's a *controversial surgical procedure that many, many women would NEVER even consider undergoing unless there was some life-threatening reason for doing so. I don't think that you can glibly say "well that's her choice, then". Not having an abortion is hardly a "choice" for someone who would be haunted to their grave if they ever did so (whether for religious, moral or ethical reasons).
I know you'll say that it's the woman's choice to raise the child without his financial support, but if she can't have an abortion, it's not a choice, is it? And I don't think it's overstating anything to say that an abortion is not a choice for many women.
I think you're overestimating the instances of women using pregnancy as a way of trapping a man into supporting a child they don't want as some kind of lifestyle choice. You know, in many cases of accidental pregnancy the single mothers didn't want to have a child either, it was a distaster for their life too, but it was the only thing they could do given that they were already pregnant and felt some responsibility to deal with it and make the best of it. In comparison to the impact that raising a child for 18 years has on the life of a single mother, I think the father is actually not doing too badly if he just has to help a little bit financially. I'd be all for him being involved as a father and having a say in decisions, for the child's sake, and he should have a legal right to do so, but he shouldn't be just allowed to say "oh, that was rotten luck for you, see ya" and walk away. No way.
The only exception to that I can imagine to that which would be fair would be if the couple made some kind of legally binding agreement before having sex that the man would not be responsible for a child resulting from an accidental pregnancy, but of course in practice that isn't gonna happen.
I agree with everyone who is emphasising sex education. It still amazes me that any adult has sex without knowing that even with contraception, the woman can become pregnant.
* when I say controversial, I mean that a vast number of women, including those who are pro-choice, find the idea of abortion utterly repugnant and would never be able to end a pregnancy by choice
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
omlette said:
What about her?
He's not fucking a lifesize sex toy - it's a thinking woman who also knows about the risk of pregnancy. Same as him, she could have used contraception.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
omlette said:
Because only one gets to decide what the consequences will be.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
She doesn't have to. She can terminate the pregnancy. If she wants a baby, she can have one with someone who's willing to take on the responsibility.
My gawd these people are nearly as backward as the Freestaters, who still offshore their abortions to the heathen foetus murdering English. Not that things are much more enlightened in the 6C, the 67 abortion act never applied here.Graymalkin said:
As America is by nature a nation of self indulgent sex obsessed frat boys with a third world standard of sex education the abortion clinics in neighboring states will be planning for extra buisness.
The GOP will never overturn Roe V Wade they'd demobilize 15% of their vote, having ensured dirty Hussies lived lives of misery few would actually drag themselves into the voting booth even to spread the pain to Hommos.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
Johnny; just to nail this one, it is virtually impossible to have an abortion without experiencing significant trauma. ditto giving up for adoption. throughout here you seem to be ignoring the suffering factor. whatever the decision, it is nearly always the woman who lives with the worst consequences of it.Johnny Canuck2 said:
mentalchik
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit."
It always angers me that in any discussion about abortion that the emphasis is always on the unborn........
Those rabidly against abortion in any situation seem to lose their interest when the child is born and forget that pregnancy and childbirth are not without considerable risk and trauma.
I have a friend at work who is in this situation with her 18 yr old daughter. She was seeing a guy who turned out to be obsessive and violent. She quickly came to the conclusion that he had to go but in the mean time finds out she is pregnant ( At this point we can say all we like about contraception etc etc, we have to deal with the situation as it is, not what it should have been)She is 12 weeks and together with her mum has decided the best thing is to get a termination and get on with her life.
This is a girl with no steady work, her mum (my friend)already works in the mornings then comes to work for another 8 hours in the afternoon !
Personally i think they are doing the best in a bad situation !
The idea that if made illegal abortion would go away is ridiculous, the poor would suffer the consequences, the rich have always had ways of getting round it.
Yes contraception and sex education should be better and we should get rid of our double standards and squeamishness about this subject with regards to young people.....................but until that happens we have to deal with what happens right now !
Those rabidly against abortion in any situation seem to lose their interest when the child is born and forget that pregnancy and childbirth are not without considerable risk and trauma.
I have a friend at work who is in this situation with her 18 yr old daughter. She was seeing a guy who turned out to be obsessive and violent. She quickly came to the conclusion that he had to go but in the mean time finds out she is pregnant ( At this point we can say all we like about contraception etc etc, we have to deal with the situation as it is, not what it should have been)She is 12 weeks and together with her mum has decided the best thing is to get a termination and get on with her life.
This is a girl with no steady work, her mum (my friend)already works in the mornings then comes to work for another 8 hours in the afternoon !
Personally i think they are doing the best in a bad situation !
The idea that if made illegal abortion would go away is ridiculous, the poor would suffer the consequences, the rich have always had ways of getting round it.
Yes contraception and sex education should be better and we should get rid of our double standards and squeamishness about this subject with regards to young people.....................but until that happens we have to deal with what happens right now !
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
I know for a fact that there are emotional consequences, but to my knowledge, in the majority of cases, there are no lasting physical consequences to a termination.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Red Jezza said:
An unwanted pregnancy is a big mistake, and big mistakes have consequences. I'd suggest that to the extent that there are costs associated with an abortion, including counselling if that's necessary, or convalescent time off work, then the co conceivor should be responsible for half of it.
The man can't bear half of the actual suffering, because he isn't pregnant. However, none of these factors somehow make it fair that the woman should have sole discretion over the continuation or termination of the pregnancy in the face of the man's objection, PLUS be able to put him on a financial hook for twenty years.
You know it isn't fair.
toggle
wobbly
Johnny Canuck2 said:
So what.
there are physical consequences that she has to shoulder. You could call this as unfair as him not getting the final say in a decision over abortion. it is not an ideal situation, but I beleive her rights over her body have to be the most important thing here.
They will both be paying for the upkeep of the child for many years, that isn't a one sided thing, burdening him only. I also aggree with what other posters have said, that once the child has been born, arguements about rights of the parents have ended. What remains is the responsibility that they have to the child.
You may have noticed my opinion on the thread about stored embryos. In that case, I don't think her views should count more than his because in that position, no one's rights over their body were involved. Therefore it was right not to allow her to concieve a child without his consent.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
What?
I'm talking about who is legally responsible for the child, not who is buying him/her an icecream cone.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
She has the physical consequences because she is the woman. Are you saying it's unfair to be born a woman?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
What if he doesn't want to have a baby?
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
We're going in circles here.
I see it like this: if a woman wants abortions, fine by me. If she wants to have babies, fine by me.
But if she decides to have babies in the face of objections from the father, and abortion is readily available to her, then it's unfair to allow her to force him to finance her decision to have a baby.
You disagree; so be it.
I see it like this: if a woman wants abortions, fine by me. If she wants to have babies, fine by me.
But if she decides to have babies in the face of objections from the father, and abortion is readily available to her, then it's unfair to allow her to force him to finance her decision to have a baby.
You disagree; so be it.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
toggle said:
You're missing my point: she should choose not to carry through with the pregnancy if there's not going to be support from the father, even though she has the right to. The better course of action, imo, would be to abort, then conceive with someone who wants a baby too.
Similar threads
