nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

robindch

...continuing on from previous threads on abortion (abortion part 1, part 2 and part 3).

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

nozzferrahhtoo

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If I have failed to answer any question I'd be happy to if you let me know what I may have missed. Im pretty sure I have answered all questions put to me at this stage though

You ignored my entire post 638, nearly all of post 650, and now the near majority of post 866. Basically.

Kidchameleon

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You ignored my entire post 638, nearly all of post 650, and now the near majority of post 866. Basically.

Ok ill look over them and get back to you asap

volchitsa

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I was asking specifically about abortion. Ill ask you again, if a rape victim decided to abort at 24 weeks would you deny their request?

I agree that it is a rare scenario but it is very possible.

You seem to imagine that the 25% or whatever it is of 24-week babies who survive were simply born sufficiently mature to live, much like a full term baby only smaller. That's not the case. A baby that is born at 24 weeks and just put in a cot or given to its mother will die. It can't feed, can't control its body temperature, often can't breathe by itself etc etc. If the mother hasn't been given steroid injections in the days before birth its lungs won't be mature enough even with oxygen.

The babies who do survive only do so thanks to a massive amount of high tech medicine and many of the procedures can be very painful. So painful that in some cases of very premature birth of very much wanted babies, parents are nevertheless advised not to insist on resuscitation in the first place, because the results are so unsure and it is felt to be putting the baby basically through torture only to end up with it probably either dying anyway or being severely disabled for its whole life.

This was the case even with the 8th amendment by the way, because once the baby is born, the legal situation changed and it had no further "right to life". Just like the rest of us actually.

Igotadose

volchitsa wrote: »

You seem to imagine that the 25% or whatever it is of 24-week babies who survive were simply born sufficiently mature to live, much like a full term baby only smaller. That's not the case

The babies who do survive only do so thanks to a massive amount of high tech medicine and many of the procedures can be very painful. So painful that in some cases of very premature birth of very much wanted babies, parents are nevertheless advised not to insist on resuscitation in the first place, because the results are so unsure and it is felt to be putting the baby basically through torture only to end up with it probably either dying anyway or being severely disabled for its whole life.

This was the case even with the 8th amendment by the way, because once the baby is born, the legal situation changed and it had no further "right to life". Just like the rest of us actually.

And the resulting children typically have lots of life-long limitations due to such an early birth.

volchitsa

Igotadose wrote: »

And the resulting children typically have lots of life-long limitations due to such an early birth.

I often wonder what happened that poor baby that was born to that poor asylum seeker Ms Y. I read a year or so afterwards that someone who was a social worker involved with his case had said that he was blind and possibly deaf as a result of his traumatically early birth but I don't think I've seen anything since.

The whole thing was just so awful. That they preferred to traumatise her by refusing a termination at 8 or 10 weeks when she made her feelings clear, and ended up bringing an unwanted and severely disabled baby into the world to be brought up in the Irish "care" system, further traumatising her and probably the baby.

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

That might have copped a Ginsburg as easily as a Scalia.

Term limits should apply to all

Of course Twitler will try and recruit 40-somethings into any vacancies which arise, these eminent citizens will be still trying to shoehorn conservative christianity into the US Constitution decades after 45's toast.

Igotadose

volchitsa wrote: »

The whole thing was just so awful. That they preferred to traumatise her by refusing a termination at 8 or 10 weeks when she made her feelings clear, and ended up bringing an unwanted and severely disabled baby into the world to be brought up in the Irish "care" system, further traumatising her and probably the baby.

It's NEVER about the fetus, though, once born. It's about forcing the birth.

AOC had a good tweet about the Alabama law (which was signed by the Governor there yesterday, so it's in effect for now):
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1128890390982123522?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Hotblack Desiato

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Ill ask you again, if a rape victim decided to abort at 24 weeks would you deny their request?

Why are anti-choicers so obsessed with late abortion?

These make up a vanishingly tiny proportion of abortions, and almost always have a compelling medical reason, but they'll pretend they're common and occur on a whim.

Kidchameleon

volchitsa wrote: »

....

Yes I understand all of that...

Third and last time, would you deny her the abortion?

Charles Ingles

Igotadose wrote: »

It's NEVER about the fetus, though, once born. It's about forcing the birth.

AOC had a good tweet about the Alabama law (which was signed by the Governor there yesterday, so it's in effect for now):
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1128890390982123522?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Oh my god you are quoting AOC and I get mocked for supporting Gemma o Doherty.
AOC is off the charts crazy

robindch

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Why are anti-choicers so obsessed with late abortion?

Because it's emotive.

Sure, didn't #45 say recently that some places were carrying out abortions after birth?

volchitsa

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yes I understand all of that...

Third and last time, would you deny her the abortion?

I don't have an issue with someone else having an abortion when the foetus is not viable. So at 24 weeks, that's okay by me.

(I didn't answer before because your question wasn't directed at me and I don't actually see your scenario as something that happens IRL. So it seemed pointless. You don't seriously imagine that a rape victim would sit around for 23 weeks wondering whether they want to create a lifelong link with their rapist by having their baby, do you?)

.......

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yes I understand all of that...

Third and last time, would you deny her the abortion?

Do you have any evidence to show that rape victims who are 24 weeks pregnant are seeking abortions?

Cabaal

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Oh my god you are quoting AOC and I get mocked for supporting Gemma o Doherty.
AOC is off the charts crazy

Amusing but false
Nobody wins at crazy bingo like Gemma does,

Gemma wins
- Anti-vax
- Lizard People
- World Governments
- Gay Unicorn Agenda.
- Flat Earth
- Believes Climate Change is fake

Gemma is in a whole other world...and apparently its flat

aloyisious

This is probably "old hat" to some/most here as something that's been done over here in the aged past. Checking up on the word abortion currently used in this debate, I came up with some US [state] laws in abortion. It seems one state [Pennysylvania] recognize a fertilized human egg as an unborn child but others don't [Alaska -the egg has to be in the womb] while others see the presence of a foetal heartbeat as a sign the feotus is an unborn child, Mississippi heartbeat law defines an unborn individual as “an individual organism of the species homo sapiens from fertilization until live birth". How can a fertilized human egg which has just come into existence have a heartbeat at 5 weeks and 23 hours+ short of 6 weeks?

Arizona law has something similarly worded but uses the term human embryo alongside “a living organism of the species homo sapiens through the first fifty-six days of its development.

The state laws there are a hodgepodge mess and really not much use outside the individual state they are enacted in as a quotable definition of what exists in law to be aborted. I should point out that I have not gone into the present situation to see if the laws I mentioned are still in legal force in the states that enacted them or if they've been overturned in law on appeal/reference on their validity under the US constitution. Ditto on the ACOG position below.

Another quote to give some explanation as to what a fertilized human egg is: According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “[c]onception is a lay term that has no scientific validity and is not generally used in the medical literature because of its variable definition and connotation.” Researchers instead use the word “fertilization” to refer to “the union of sperm and ovum.” Such distinctions makes a difference when determining the legal status of preborn human reproductive cells.

Edit: 07/05/2019. Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia signed one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation. The law effectively bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, the time when a fetal heartbeat is usually detected. Kentucky state house voted in a similar law in March earlier this year, using the 6 week heartbeat detection position.

Pherekydes

Cabaal wrote: »

Amusing but false
Nobody wins at crazy bingo like Gemma does,

Gemma wins
- Anti-vax
- Lizard People
- World Governments
- Gay Unicorn Agenda.
- Flat Earth
- Believes Climate Change is fake

Gemma is in a whole other world...and apparently its flat

You forgot intensive chemtrailing. :pac:

Bannasidhe

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Nowhere in my post did I rule out the possibility of delivery. If the victim wanted to deliver then that would be a great solution imho.

I was asking specifically about abortion. Ill ask you again, if a rape victim decided to abort at 24 weeks would you deny their request?

I agree that it is a rare scenario but it is very possible.

And I said delivery of a viable fetus is aborting the pregnancy.

You seem to be missing the point that the desired end result is that the woman in question is no longer pregnant. That does not necessarily mean terminating the fetus. It absolutely means terminating the pregnancy.

Apart from that it isn't my place to deny or approve. That is between the woman and her medical team. I do not know what this 'trauma' is that delayed her decision. Is it physical or mental or both? Is she in danger of committing suicide? Is continuing the pregnancy a danger to her health or life?

There are nuances in real life that render your 'but if a rape victim is so traumatised that she doesn't want an abortion until 5 1/2 months into the pregnancy' a fairly pointless 'what if...' example of an (imho unlikely) extreme case.

Igotadose

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Oh my god you are quoting AOC and I get mocked for supporting Gemma o Doherty.
AOC is off the charts crazy

AOC is one of the sanest politicians in decades. She had the nerve to say that maybe having kids isn't such a good idea: "There’s scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: Is it OK to still have children?”

https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-climate-change-have-kids-children-1342853

She winds up the right-wingers which is another plus in my book.

Kidchameleon

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You ignored my entire post 638, nearly all of post 650, and now the near majority of post 866. Basically.

Response to post #638

You were discussing something with another poster in this post, it had nothing to do with me so I have not ignored you. I am not sure why you have highlighted that post for me.

Response to post #650

There is not really a question in that post so I have not really ignored you. The closest thing to a question that I can respond to was you pondering what discussing vegetative patients has to do with abortion. Well in my opinion, people who are in a vegetative state can be a useful analogy to explore the topic of abortion. Said comparison has been used for years leading up to the referendum by many people. I guess if you read perhaps posts 620-650 or there about, you will see the context of why the analogy was made.

Response to post #866

Firstly I do not speak for Ben Shapiro, I do not follow his work, I have seen a few videos of him debating and that about it. I find his voice a little annoying actually. I posted a video showing Ben talking about abortion and he did not seem to bring his faith into it. It was in response to another poster saying his opinions on abortion are because of his Jewish faith. I agree that he was very emotional, misrepresented the actress he referred to and used loaded words in the video.

You also said in this post that there is no current evidence to say a 24 week old fetus is sentient. That is just factually incorrect. If a child is born at 24 weeks, he or she is most certainly sentient.

Lastly, I never said every abortion was the result of an unplanned pregnancy.

Kidchameleon

....... wrote: »

Do you have any evidence to show that rape victims who are 24 weeks pregnant are seeking abortions?

No, no evidence but is certainly a possible scenario. Probably very very rare, but possible.

.......

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No, no evidence but is certainly a possible scenario. Probably very very rare, but possible.

So its an imaginary scenario then?

Charles Ingles

Pherekydes wrote: »

You forgot intensive chemtrailing. :pac:

A friend of mine is convinced the earth is flat, won't go for a pint with him anymore he bores me to death.at first I thought he was joking but he is convinced for some reason it's flat.
Where did the flat earth thing start?

Charles Ingles

Igotadose wrote: »

AOC is one of the sanest politicians in decades. She had the nerve to say that maybe having kids isn't such a good idea: "There’s scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: Is it OK to still have children?”

https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-climate-change-have-kids-children-1342853

She winds up the right-wingers which is another plus in my book.

Well according to AOC the world will end in 12 year's, so it doesn't matter what conspiracy theories Gemma spouts.
AOC is bat **** crazy

Timberrrrrrrr

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Well according to AOC the world will end in 12 year's, so it doesn't matter what conspiracy theories Gemma spouts.
AOC is bat **** crazy

According to many republicans the earth is less than 10,000 years old, a man spoke to a burning bush, a virgin gave birth and a 900 year old man parted the sea.

Now thats batshyte crazy!

Kidchameleon

....... wrote: »

So its an imaginary scenario then?

I think whatever way I put it, people will avoid answering. It has happened on thread already.

*edit* a quick Google reveals many situations like this occur. I am compiling links now...

Charles Ingles

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

According to many republicans the earth is less than 10,000 years old, a man spoke to a burning bush, a virgin gave borth and a 900 year old man parted the sea.

Now thats batshyte crazy!

You are mixing up the old testament and the new testament.
And Our lady did give birth to out saviour Jesus Christ.
You may not believe but have a bit of respect for people of faith

Timberrrrrrrr

Charles Ingles wrote: »

You are mixing up the old testament and the new testament.
And Our lady did give birth to out saviour Jesus Christ.
You may not believe but have a bit of respect for people of faith

Ah the auld effectiveness of throwing away the OT when it contradicts the new :rolleyes:

She allegedly gave birth, there is no evidence that she did.

I don't have to respect anyones faith, that's the joys of free will

.......

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I think whatever way I put it, people will avoid answering. It has happened on thread already.

*edit* a quick Google reveals many situations like this occur. I am compiling links now...

In Ireland please?

Im not really sure what point you are trying to score here?

Is it so you can say HAHA you are NOT really pro choice! if someone says a girl has to stay pregnant after a certain point?

I think its reasonable for *most* pro choice people to have a cut off point and that cut off is generally determined by the possibility of the fetus surviving outside the womb and the presence of brain activity. We dont have an "exact" date for that so it seems safe to say lets have a law that cuts off around 20 weeks or so, because we do know for sure that there is no brain activity or the ability to survive outside the womb. So there might be the odd edge case where a 20 week old fetus survives, but the probability is that they wont.

Does that mean that victims of rape who are 24 weeks pregnant may be refused an abortion? Maybe - but is that relevant? Probably not because although possible its a rare occurence and hard cases make bad laws. You dont legislate on the extreme cases - it would be silly to do so.

I feel like you are just pushing extreme hypotheticals to create a reaction as opposed to have a discussion?

Or you are trying to push an extreme position that YOU call pro choice but that is not representative of most pro choice people and therefore say "I think this extreme thing is ok and I am pro choice hence pro choice means this extreme thing".

Kidchameleon

volchitsa wrote: »

I don't have an issue with someone else having an abortion when the foetus is not viable. So at 24 weeks, that's okay by me.

At 24 weeks a fetus is viable in a small number of cases. How can we tell which ones are not viable?

amcalester

Charles Ingles wrote: »

You are mixing up the old testament and the new testament.
And Our lady did give birth to out saviour Jesus Christ.
You may not believe but have a bit of respect for people of faith

Does that respect flow both ways?