Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 154

Thread: A Civil Abortion Discussion

  1. #61
    tWebber guacamole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,552
    Amen (Given)
    245
    Amen (Received)
    524
    Here's another thought: Some research, and thus the common perception on the other side, indicates that women who are denied an abortion face economic insecurity. One such study (I have not idea if it is good or not, but lets grant its finding for the sake of argument) finds that women who do not have access to abortion faces up to four years of economic insecurity following the birth of a child. Here is the abstract. I have not read the study.

    Outcomes of Women Who Receive and Women Who Are Denied Wanted Abortions in the United States

    Objectives. To determine the socioeconomic consequences of receipt versus denial of abortion.

    Methods. Women who presented for abortion just before or after the gestational age limit of 30 abortion facilities across the United States between 2008 and 2010 were recruited and followed for 5 years via semiannual telephone interviews. Using mixed effects models, we evaluated socioeconomic outcomes for 813 women by receipt or denial of abortion care.

    Results. In analyses that adjusted for the few baseline differences, women denied abortions who gave birth had higher odds of poverty 6 months after denial (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.77; P < .001) than did women who received abortions; women denied abortions were also more likely to be in poverty for 4 years after denial of abortion. Six months after denial of abortion, women were less likely to be employed full time (AOR = 0.37; P = .001) and were more likely to receive public assistance (AOR = 6.26; P < .001) than were women who obtained abortions, differences that remained significant for 4 years.

    Conclusions. Women denied an abortion were more likely than were women who received an abortion to experience economic hardship and insecurity lasting years. Laws that restrict access to abortion may result in worsened economic outcomes for women.


    So are what ways can we decouple pregnancy and economic insecurity in the United States? It might be that we can save lives if we fight against the "penalty" of pregnancy?
    "Down in the lowlands, where the water is deep,
    Hear my cry, hear my shout,
    Save me, save me"

  2. #62
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,968
    Amen (Given)
    5522
    Amen (Received)
    5514
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    Yes. Also a good catch. So the modified modified starting place is:

    1) The current debate/war is rooted in a disagreement on when a human person begins.
    2) There has been essentially zero progress to aligning the opposing views on when a human person begins for the last 50 years.
    3) There is no basis for believing those views will be aligned in the next 50 years

    I'm curious to know if you agree with these three observations? If not - which ones do you think are false?
    I wonder what other social issues you could apply this to? If we went back in time before the 1960s...

    1) The current debate/war is rooted in a disagreement on whether or not blacks are equal.
    2) There has been essentially zero progress to aligning the opposing views on black equality for the last 50 years.
    3) There is no basis for believing those views will be aligned in the next 50 years.

    Therefore, we should refrain from opposing racism and segregation and work towards short-lived band-aid "compromises" that don't actually address the problem.


    Or if we go back further...

    1) The current debate/war is rooted in a disagreement on whether or not women should have the right to vote.
    2) There has been essentially zero progress to aligning the opposing views on women's suffrage for the last 50 years.
    3) There is no basis for believing those views will be aligned in the next 50 years.

    Therefore, we should refrain from opposing denying women the right to vote and work towards short-lived band-aid "compromises" that don't actually address the problem.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  3. Amen Cow Poke, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  4. #63
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,968
    Amen (Given)
    5522
    Amen (Received)
    5514
    Quote Originally Posted by guacamole View Post
    ...exasperated by people who refuse to budge to consider anything else to be done?
    I'm all in favor of saving as many lives from abortion as possible. Unfortunately, until the real problem is addressed, any solution is going to be necessarily limited and short-lived.

    To put it another way, I disagree with the premise of this thread that the war is lost, and we should limit ourselves only to the ground that isn't occupied by the "enemy" (not to mention that we'll get no such concession from the other side). We can and should fight on multiple fronts.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  5. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  6. #64
    God, family, chicken! Bill the Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central VA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,275
    Amen (Given)
    7816
    Amen (Received)
    8045
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    I'm going to suggest that overturning Roe vs. Wade will not end the battle - it will only escalate it.
    But it will save lives in the short term and possibly modify reckless behaviors that lead to the problem.

    Women outnumber men in the U.S., and the vast majority of them have grown up under Roe v. Wade.
    But a growing number are pro-life.

    Source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/05/02/this_is_the_pro-life_generation_136947.html

    A recent Gallup poll found that “young adults were slightly more likely than all other age groups, including seniors, to say abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.” Gallup also said Americans ages 18-29 were “trending more anti-abortion.”

    A Marist poll released earlier this year found that among respondents ages 18-29, 47 percent said that abortion was more likely to do harm to a woman’s life than good, while just 39 percent said abortion was more likely to improve a woman’s life.

    © Copyright Original Source



    If that perceived "right" is overturned, there will be a massive outcry from that population, and all of the men that support them.
    And a massive celebration for those increasing number of young people who support overturning the "right".

    Liberalism is gaining ground in the U.S., and the statistics show that liberals/democrats are outnumbering conservatives/republicans by significant numbers, and in virtually every demographic.
    But pro-life liberals are also increasing. This isn't strictly a liberal/conservative issue.

    A polarizing issue like this will rally the left and very likely sweep them into power. Trump's role as president would just be the frosting on the cake. Then SCOTUS can be packed, and a new Roe v. Wade put in place.
    In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Justices Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy, and David Souter declined to overrule Roe v. Wade, claiming that such a move would undermine the public legitimacy of the Court by making it seem to bend to public pressure.

    I submit that this issue is not going to be resolved by laws.
    Unfortunately, that's the only way to get things challenged in court.

    It pits the right of a person to choose their own medical course
    And the course of their offspring

    against the right of the fetus to live. But the fetus is largely invisible and doesn't vote. The women are VERY visible and do.
    And they are increasingly pro-life.


    So it seems to follow - overturn or not overturn - the battle will rage on - without resolution.
    It's gone on throughout the history of man.

    If my three points are accurate, then continuing to frame this as "when does a human person begin" will never get us to "minimum abortions." Would you agree?

    No. I think that scientifically, that question is self-explanatory, but until science is the deciding factor, and not arbitrary philosophical ideas, we will not make any headway without forcing the issue to the courts again.


    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals --- Manya the Holy Szin --- The Quintara Marathon ---

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common --- Stephen R. Donaldson ---

  7. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  8. #65
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,847
    Amen (Given)
    16
    Amen (Received)
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    OK - I'm going to give this a shot - in a new thread with a clean start. My request, if you are going to join this discussion, is that it be kept civil and respectful. That means no name calling, no insults, and no taunting emojis. I'd also like to request that people leave the hyperbolic language that both sides tend to use about this topic "at the door." No "Big Abortion," no "abortion mills," no accusations of misogyny or religious fanaticism.

    I have a fairly simple premise: the existing "war" between the two sides of the abortion debate is unresolvable, so it is pointless to continue engaging in it. A different paradigm needs to be considered. That is based on the following:

    1) The current debate/war is rooted in a disagreement on when life begins.
    2) There has been essentially zero progress to aligning the opposing views on when life begins for the last 50 years.
    3) There is no basis for believing those views will be aligned in the next 50 years

    If those three statements are true, then continuing a battle in which the goal is to align those views so as to end abortions is doomed to fail.
    Ergo - if we cannot end abortions by aligning views on when life begins, we need to figure out another way to end abortions.

    Let's start there.
    I don’t think that’s where the problem is. My feeling is that the debatable issues are around value and who is allowed to determine value. A lot of contradictory nonsense is spoken about the value of human lives.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  9. #66
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    51,916
    Amen (Given)
    11257
    Amen (Received)
    24034
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    As I noted, CP, it is only "over" because it's a non-issue. So science has stopped wasting time trying to convince flat-earthers. Abortion is not.
    Actually, the reason that it's over is because science has revealed the truth. With regards to issues like Climate Change, it's "settled science". With regards to abortion, science is totally dismissed.

    (I'm going to resist trying to go point for point with all of your "points", and focus only on a few main thoughts per post. I think the former is often counterproductive. If you see a specific point I opted to skip, please consider reintroducing it as its own topic)

    CP - you continue to think on the micro-level: one person at a time. You are "plugging holes." That is an important and valuable task. It won't stop the ship from sinking.
    Ya know, you just reminded me that when the whole "Climate Change" thing was emerging (starting with global cooling, overpopulation, etc) the chant was "Think Globally, Act Locally".

    As to how I can say that, the statement is a logical conclusion of my three starting observations. If you don't agree with those, then you won't agree with the conclusion. So we need to back up and look at the three statements. Which do you disagree with?
    Lemme go back and address that independently.
    I have called you my friends.... Jesus
    Jn 15:15

  10. #67
    Professor KingsGambit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Triangle
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,829
    Amen (Given)
    1594
    Amen (Received)
    4261
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Right off the top of my head...

    Less pro-abortion "sex education" in our public schools, particularly at young ages.
    )
    How common is this actually, out of curiosity? When I was in school, they only devoted one day to it, and the teacher basically skipped over it, said that only abstinence was effective, and when somebody asked about birth control, he said he couldn't talk about it.
    For what was given to everyone for the use of all, you have taken for your exclusive use. The earth belongs not to the rich, but to everyone. - Ambrose, 4th century AD

    All cruelty springs from weakness. - Seneca the Younger

  11. #68
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    51,916
    Amen (Given)
    11257
    Amen (Received)
    24034
    Quote Originally Posted by firstfloor View Post
    I don’t think that’s where the problem is. My feeling is that the debatable issues are around value and who is allowed to determine value. A lot of contradictory nonsense is spoken about the value of human lives.
    Who are you and what did you do with firstfloor? It's just where I was going next.... (smiley face purposely omitted)

    From the American College of Pediatrics...

    When Human Life Begins

    American College of Pediatricians – March 2017

    ABSTRACT: The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins.


    So, I would disagree that the actual debate is over "when a human person begins", but whether one person has the constitutional right to terminate the life of another person. The "when a human person begins" is an attempt to justify that a person has the constitutional right to terminate the life of another person.
    I have called you my friends.... Jesus
    Jn 15:15

  12. #69
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    51,916
    Amen (Given)
    11257
    Amen (Received)
    24034
    Quote Originally Posted by KingsGambit View Post
    How common is this actually, out of curiosity? When I was in school, they only devoted one day to it, and the teacher basically skipped over it, said that only abstinence was effective, and when somebody asked about birth control, he said he couldn't talk about it.
    Excellent point. In the school district where I currently live, the Superintendent of Schools is a fellow Christian - I've actually had him "fill in" for me preaching when I'm on vacation. The "culture" in our school district is probably far more conservative than most, certainly the last several school districts I've been in. Our school district actually allows us to have, in effect, a "Vacation Bible School" in the public school during the summer, where one third of the day is most certainly Christian influence, along with tutoring in math, English and science.

    In a previous school district, I was actually prosecuted and arrested for our decision to home school our kids, based in part on that school district's very "progressive" agenda.

    Reminds me "way back when" when my Biology teacher, a Christian, told us "now, I realize many of you may be Christians, and don't believe in evolution, so all I'm asking you to do is read the material, and answer the test questions as I ask them". On the tests, he would say "According to Chapter 7 of the book, how do......"

    California, no doubt, has the most progressive/aggressive position in the country.


    ETA: Actually, they never got around to prosecuting - they kept making excuses why we couldn't go to trial, in direct violation of the "Speedy Trial Law" in Texas.
    Last edited by Cow Poke; 05-16-2019 at 11:29 AM.
    I have called you my friends.... Jesus
    Jn 15:15

  13. #70
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,968
    Amen (Given)
    5522
    Amen (Received)
    5514
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    CP - the kind of organization I am talking about cannot "exist on the choice side" or "exist on the life side." The whole idea is to consider how to bring about an organization that is NOT polarized to the "choice" or "life" sides, and instead respects the concerns of both and looks for solutions that can address the concerns of both.
    But they don't have the same concerns. Pro-abortionists want abortions to be freely available without restriction. Pro-lifers want abortion outlawed. That is the ultimate goal of each side. You might be able to find temporary middle ground, but as soon as either side sees the needle start to shift one way or the other, that "middle ground" will vanish, and you're right back to where you started.

    For example, new laws are enacted that make adoption faster and easier. Great! Everybody's happy! Next, some legislatures draft a law suggesting that abortion should only be allowed in cases where adoptive parents can not be found after a good-faith search. Oops! No more middle ground -- and you would probably even see some on the pro-abortion side start to condemn adoption services and decry them as a "backdoor ban" on abortion. Oh well, so much for that solution. What's next? Better sex education? Just as long as it doesn't include a frank and medically accurate description of the abortion process because that might discourage kids from embracing pro-abortion ideology.

    The point is that the pro-abortion side will happily accept any compromise that doesn't actually prevent or restrict abortion, meaning that all you're offering here is a false sense of victory for the pro-life side.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  14. Amen Cow Poke, Cerebrum123, NorrinRadd amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •