South Dakota bans abortions

[SweetDoc]

Originally Posted by PYroMaNiaC

Sorry Sweetdoc. I get where you are coming from but I just can't agree. A 15 year old is not responsible enough to raise a child, and by your point, to be having sex. But it happens anyway. Her life should not be shattered because of a wrong choice. If a 5 year old chooses to find out what "hot" is, even after you've told them repeatedly they can hurt themselves, should they be punished further? Or is the pain of a burnt finger enough? The child has probably figured it out. For a 15 year old, sex is the same. You can tell them what the consequences will be, but sometimes they've got to learn it for themselves. Should they spend the next 18 years being punished now? And why would you want a child being raised in a home full of resentment or resignation anyway? That's not the kind of life and love a child deserves.

I'm a huge proponent of adoption but I can also see where fear can be the overriding sense. And it's not a perfect solution by any means. I've an Aunt and an Uncle that were adopted by my Grandfather. They had all the love the world could ever have provided for them. It should be also noted, however, that both of them have issues regarding their birth parents and they carry that with them everywhere in everything they do.

Are you telling me they would rather have been aborted over adopted? I doubt it. I'm sure almost all people who have been adopted would rather be alive than not at all. And burning a finger is nothing like getting pregnant. Having your finger burned is the consequence of touching the hot stove. Having a tough life you didn't plan is the consequence of getting pregnant. I'm done with this thread anyway. It's hard enough losing a child, nevermind knowing people will abort theirs on purpose because it is inconvenient or because it will make them have a hard life. There will never be a good enough excuse to me. There is no extent of hardship I would live through to have a child in my life, and I really mean no extent. If people aren't willing to sacrifice to let a child have life, then they are acting selfishly and that's just not good enough.

[SweetDoc]

Originally Posted by jonesy

Why does travelling down a fallopian tube make you a human?
A baby in the womb has measurable brain activity, responds to their mother's voice, kicks and moves around. How is that not a person?

As for the first breath, how is that applicable? It is getting oxygen into its blood stream to keep its heart pumping, just through a different temporary route.
Think about it, the baby has a heart, and lungs, a brain, nerves, balls (approx 50% of them anyways), in short, everything we have.
I hope my gran' pappy on oxygen is still a human

I like this post. Makes a ton of sense to me. Even if I weren't arguing on this topic.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by jonesy

Why does travelling down a fallopian tube make you a human?
A baby in the womb has measurable brain activity, responds to their mother's voice, kicks and moves around. How is that not a person?

As for the first breath, how is that applicable? It is getting oxygen into its blood stream to keep its heart pumping, just through a different temporary route.
Think about it, the baby has a heart, and lungs, a brain, nerves, balls (approx 50% of them anyways), in short, everything we have.
I hope my gran' pappy on oxygen is still a human

In my understanding, the first thing we do is inhale and the last thing we'll do is exhale and everything in between is grace. The heart, the brain and all other organs and functions are dependent on our breath.The fetus is connected to the mother and so is a part of her.
Your gran'pappy is stlll breathing and I wish him the best.

[Cube Inmate]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

The story is pretty insignificant anyway. As I said, the law will be declared unconstitutional before long. It's nothing more than a challenge of Roe V. Wade and it will fail.

You're pretty confident of that...perhaps over-confident considering the latest Bush appointments. I'm not saying they'll agree to completely ban abortion, but don't you think there's a chance they'll choose to adjust the interpretation to be more restrictive than it was 30 years ago?

Comparing Canadian and American freedoms is pretty pointless though, I'll give you that. It's impossible to live freely in a modern civilization...it's just a matter of degrees.

[LGA]

Originally Posted by Azure

I sure as hell hope that no one is accepting it on the grounds that it is population control. What next? Kill a couple hundred million other people because we need population control?

Heh, population control, reminds me of the stories my mom brought back from Asia (mind you she's originally from Asia too). Basically they were very pro-smoking in China, and almost all their food dishes had a massive layer of grease on top...Can you sense the hardly hidden population control people? Can you!?



Personally I'm pro-whatever-the-crow-will-shut-your-trap. I know, it's a mouthful to say to people, but it's worth it. The strict anti-abortion under basically any circumstance is bull, they really need to at least think of all the situations and not just hastily decide "Nope, no exceptions."

Of course, then again they may continue to regress until they accept Maddox and his saying of "I'm against choice, but for killing babies" but for killing babies.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by LGA

Heh, population control, reminds me of the stories my mom brought back from Asia (mind you she's originally from Asia too). Basically they were very pro-smoking in China, and almost all their food dishes had a massive layer of grease on top...Can you sense the hardly hidden population control people? Can you!?




Personally I'm pro-whatever-the-crow-will-shut-your-trap. I know, it's a mouthful to say to people, but it's worth it. The strict anti-abortion under basically any circumstance is bull, they really need to at least think of all the situations and not just hastily decide "Nope, no exceptions."

Of course, then again they may continue to regress until they accept Maddox and his saying of "I'm against choice, but for killing babies" but for killing babies.

I guess China doesn't worry about paying for government healthcare as Canada is now encouraging healthy lifestyles to ease costs.

If we want to be thoroughly cold blooded about govt. wanting legalized induced abortions, wasn't there a study finding crime has decreased since abortions were made legal. Lots of results both pro and con on Google. It even gets racist with suggestions of favoring black abortions. This can be turned into one ugly debate.

[mbrown]

I think that there should be some restrictions on it. I think it should be for health reasons or as a result of incest or rape, in either case, the woman had no control over the act of sex. If they have control over having sex, then they should be encouraged to haev it barring previously mentioned health reasons. Currently, Canada has NO Abortion law at all. The only country in the first world that is like this. Our lack of abortion laws would even make the socialist utopias of Sweden and Norway blush.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by mbrown

I think that there should be some restrictions on it. I think it should be for health reasons or as a result of incest or rape, in either case, the woman had no control over the act of sex. If they have control over having sex, then they should be encouraged to haev it barring previously mentioned health reasons. Currently, Canada has NO Abortion law at all. The only country in the first world that is like this. Our lack of abortion laws would even make the socialist utopias of Sweden and Norway blush.

Oh, we have abortion laws, they just aren't properly upheld.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

If we want to be thoroughly cold blooded about govt. wanting legalized induced abortions, wasn't there a study finding crime has decreased since abortions were made legal. Lots of results both pro and con on Google. It even gets racist with suggestions of favoring black abortions. This can be turned into one ugly debate.

This wasn't really a study, and it can be found in the book Freakonomics
Basically, the book was looking at crime rates, and attempting to use statistical analysis to try and attribute what factors had what affect on crime rates. One of the things they found was that a number of years after Roe v Wade, the crime rate started dropping (I can't recall if it was 15 years after, or exactly how many). The idea was that a significant percentage of the criminals were from poor children from poor parents. When the option of having an abortion became available, that option was taken rather than giving birth to an unwanted child. Fewer unwanted children = less future crime.

The book makes a point to say it is not promoting abortion, it only used available statistics to try and track cause/effect. It does NOT "gets racist with suggestions of favoring black abortions." but I'm sure some racists would want to suggest that.

[mbrown]

No, there is absolutely no abortion legislation in this country.

[FireFly]

Oh, pardon me. I thought the law was just declared unenforcable. Shows how much I study abortion law....

On a side note, the fact that there is no law at all in Canada disgusts me. Abortion has become a form of birth control. The fact that the Supreme Court has decided that a fetus isn't a human until after birth bothers the heck out of me. A person could abort a baby at 8 months and face no charges for it, even though that baby is at that point large enough to survive outside the womb.

[Bobblehead]

Abortion Law in Canada
So there used to be a law, but it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1982.

"Forcing a woman," wrote the Chief Justice, Brian Dickson, "by threat of criminal sanction to carry a foetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations, is a profound interference with a woman's body and this a violation of her security of the person."

Foetal rights has only once made it to the Supreme Court, but

The Court sidestepped the question of foetal rights under the Charter by deciding that the foetus was not a "person" under Quebec's Civil Code.

[jonesy]

Regardless of the 'law of the land', and 'human rights' issues, I can't see how a fetus isn't a human.

From a strictly scientific point of view, if a scientist studied an aborted baby, he would find something that has a human brain, heart, lungs, nervous system, every single attribute of a human, even complete human DNA, I mean what else could it be? A radish?

In fact it must be human since some people harvest aborted babies for stem cell research.

I don't think it makes sense to say it isn't human because it couldn't survive without oxygen from its mother (ie: not through lungs)

The fact is, once you have a baby, if you don't feed it every 2 hours or so, it will die. It is just as helpless as when in the womb. Human babies are completely 'useless' and unable to survive on their own.

[mbrown]

you can have an abortion in Canada up to and including the time the woman is in labour. And it is done that late too.

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by mbrown

you can have an abortion in Canada up to and including the time the woman is in labour. And it is done that late too.

How is that humane? That is a fully developed baby. It makes me cry to imagine that. Snuffing out our weakest and most defenceless.

[mbrown]

yep.

they had the same thing in the states until Bush passed 'late term' abortion restrictions. The put a spike through the Infants head to do it in the last trimester.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by mbrown

you can have an abortion in Canada up to and including the time the woman is in labour. And it is done that late too.

Care to quote any sources for that info?

[Phaneuf3]

I support this move 110%. Its sad how people condone murder because they don't want to take responsibility for their actions. You didn't want to have a kid? Too bad, you shoulda kept your knees together! Or at best practiced safe sex

I also hate how its currently completely up to the woman. The father has no say in the matter? Everyone is worried about the impact on the mother's life if she takes the baby to term. What if the father wants the kid but the mother wants to kill it? Too bad. What if the father wants it killed but the mother wants too keep it? Sorry buddy, you're on the hook for child support for the next 18 years. Toss out your dreams for college, a nice life, etc and get your ass down to mcdonalds and get yourself a job!

First choice: no abortions. Second choice: equal rights between the parents for abortion NOT women's rights. It took two people to make that kid, its gonna affect them both if you decide to kill it or not.

[Flashpoint]

I wholeheartedly support abortions. I think they should have extended late term abortions. Like abortions in the 1000th week for those carrying Oiler fans.

In all seriousness, the issue is pretty clear to me. Abortion bans are bad for society. There are more children than there are parents. Unwanted children will grow up with a greater propensity towards crime. Abstinence programs don't work. Young adults are not known for their self control. When young girls have children, it usually destroys 2 or 3 lives. Hell, considering what college and university is like these days (if you've been, you know what I am talking about), the term "young girl in trouble", can equally apply to some people in 3rd year.

I love stories of 12 and 13 year old girls "sticking it out" and raising "wonderful families". Usually anecdotal, and lacking in concrete evidence, I typically respond by wondering what would have happened if the child had not been burdened with raising a family when they themselves were merely a child. Perhaps they would have done great things. Perhaps we would have a cure for aids by now.

Freakanomics had a fantastic section on the correlation between the drop in violent crime, and the Roe vs Wade decision.


Is it wrong to take a human life? Absolutely not. We do it all the time. It is an unfortunate and inevitable outcome of our western society. If you own an SUV and are gassing it up you are doing it. If you shop at Walmart, you are doing it. You think those prices are low because executives are taking a pay cut? Try Chinese slave labour. Worried about oil prices? Imagine if the US hadn't invaded 2 countries.

It is ok to kill innocents to fight "terror"? Bombs miss their targets all the time. But it is not ok to kill an innocent to allow 2 people to stay in college and finish their degrees? Or to prevent an unwanted child from entering the world, taxing our social programs, and possibly winding up being a violent criminal? Again, not that all unwanted kids end up this way, just a greater number than normal?

With the developments surrounding the morning after pill (pretty soon we will probably have the "week after pill", "month after pill", etc), this debate is probably on the cusp of losing steam anyway.

Knowledge is power. Power is choice.
__________________

[mbrown]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

I wholeheartedly support abortions. I think they should have extended late term abortions. Like abortions in the 1000th week for those carrying Oiler fans.

In all seriousness, the issue is pretty clear to me. Abortion bans are bad for society. There are more children than there are parents. Unwanted children will grow up with a greater propensity towards crime. Abstinence programs don't work. Young adults are not known for their self control. When young girls have children, it usually destroys 2 or 3 lives. Hell, considering what college and university is like these days (if you've been, you know what I am talking about), the term "young girl in trouble", can equally apply to some people in 3rd year.

I love stories of 12 and 13 year old girls "sticking it out" and raising "wonderful families". Usually anecdotal, and lacking in concrete evidence, I typically respond by wondering what would have happened if the child had not been burdened with raising a family when they themselves were merely a child. Perhaps they would have done great things. Perhaps we would have a cure for aids by now.

Freakanomics had a fantastic section on the correlation between the drop in violent crime, and the Roe vs Wade decision.


Is it wrong to take a human life? Absolutely not. We do it all the time. It is an unfortunate and inevitable outcome of our western society. If you own an SUV and are gassing it up you are doing it. If you shop at Walmart, you are doing it. You think those prices are low because executives are taking a pay cut? Try Chinese slave labour. Worried about oil prices? Imagine if the US hadn't invaded 2 countries.

It is ok to kill innocents to fight "terror"? Bombs miss their targets all the time. But it is not ok to kill an innocent to allow 2 people to stay in college and finish their degrees? Or to prevent an unwanted child from entering the world, taxing our social programs, and possibly winding up being a violent criminal? Again, not that all unwanted kids end up this way, just a greater number than normal?

With the developments surrounding the morning after pill (pretty soon we will probably have the "week after pill", "month after pill", etc), this debate is probably on the cusp of losing steam anyway.

Knowledge is power. Power is choice.
__________________

Well that's a new low on the moral equivelancy scale...

shopping at Walmart and abortions. nice.