The Death Penalty, for it or against it

[-tronski-]

For the death penalty

 Tronsky

[Toad]

Originally posted by oboe
what women should or shouldn't be able to do with their pregnancies.

What they SHOULD be able to do is prevent them from ever occuring.

But that's not as easy as just aborting a human being.

I mean they'd have to take a pill or wear a patch or even keep their pants on fer cripes sake.

Coward coin? How about "Dumber than a rock" coin or maybe "too lazy to care coin"?

[Sandman]

Ahem...

In this area, I go with Matthew 7:1-2:

[oboe]

I think the COWARD coin and its flipside were intended as labels for people on the periphery, not the woman herself.

But your contention that women who find themselves with unwanted/unintended pregnancies are dumb and/or lazy, and that having an abortion is easier than using contraception reminds me of why I generally keep my opinion on the issue to myself, and why I feel sort of ashamed/embarrassed  when I hear or see most men arguing back and forth about it.

So I'm going to excuse myself from this discussion now.

[ASTAC]

Originally posted by oboe
I haven't seen any studies either, but your experience just being on board makes me think its reasonable.   How would you like be to be a sea creature with sensitive sensory organs and be in the water just in front the ship when its pinging away?   You're on board an you say its enough to "want to make you kill yourself."
Somewhere I heard sonar pings were powerful enough to kill or disable a diver in the water.  Is that true?

Interesting though.

 

It is our proceedure that if there is a suspected swimmer attack against the ship, even while sitting in port, we will energize the active sonar. For someone submerged it would be very painful. However you are talking about someone very close to the ship. The whales that beached themselves were miles away from the operating area. Sonar sound loses strength very quickly. Hence the relatively short ranges of active sonar.

[lazs2]

ok.. rape..  rape is different than playing birth control roulette with your partner... if you don't want babies get your tubes tied..  if you are not married and don't want babies... don't have sex or get your tubes tied or take your chances and then give the baby away.   I can't imagine a healthy white baby not being adopted by eager couples.

the rape thing?  I don't know.. it would seem that the next day the woman could take a so called "abortion pill" and be pretty blameless.

Maybe you should get one abortion allowed in your first trimester... you would also be sterilized at that point so that you wouldn't have any possibility of killing another or, that someone like that would actually raise a child.

lazs

[Toad]

Originally posted by oboe

But your contention that women who find themselves with unwanted/unintended pregnancies are dumb and/or lazy,

[/b]

Before you run away, since you're so ashamed of such an opinion, please explain it to embarassing old me.

You agree that the vast majority of abortions are not a result of rape or some health threat to the mother right?

Most are just "unwanted pregnancies".

OK....  what then is so bloody difficult about using contraception or keeping your pants on?

Is there some great mystery about avoiding an "unwanted" pregnancy that the modern women of today just can't fathom?

There is no secret as to how babies are made, particularly in this day and age.

So how do alll these women have unwanted pregnancies in a country where contraception is so very easily obtained?

[Toad]

Originally posted by Sandman
Ahem...

Ahem.

I don't think the Matthew means you can't make any judgements.

For example I'm sure we can judge that 2+2=4 without fear of hellfire. We can probably judge that one person is smarter than the other and thus hire the smarter one for a job.

I think the Bible talks of judging on the moral plane, for example, the decision of a woman to kill a human embryo. I surely wouldn't judge that decision; I'd leave it to God.

Now, on whether a person, man or woman, is dumber than a rock.... that's not a moral judgement.

[lazs2]

If you don't want babies then don't screw or get your tubes tied.

lazs

[oboe]

Toad,

I think probably ashamed/embarrassed isn't exactly the right word to use, but I can't think of the word that describes it - its kind of along the lines of "put up or shut up" or "you have to be able to walk the walk if you're going to talk the talk" philosophy.  It just seems to me most men have no business making rules about what a woman can or can't do in her pregnancy.   To me it just feels like none of our business.

I am not ashamed of anyone's opinion, we have a right to them.   Your pro-choice/anti-abortion stance seems very reasonable to me.   But maybe "disgust" is the right word when I think of a young fanatical man blocking the way or harrassing a woman trying to get into health clinic.   He doesn't even know why she's there.  Maybe she has serious life threatening complications, who knows?

Honestly I don't know why the majority of abortions occur, or how many occur, etc.

I think I've just reached my limit in the discussion though - I said originally I don't feel comfortable spouting off my opinion on the issue, and if I continue its going to damage my credibility.   Nothing against you, Laz, bustr, etc.   I admire you guys and enjoy discussing things with you.    But I'm going to bow out, now.
No hard feelings here or anything.   OK?

[Toad]

From CDC data:

Total abortions
1996 1,222,000
1997 900,000
1998 884,000
1999 862,000
2000 857,000

It'd be fair to say it's nearly a million reported in most years.

OBOE: He doesn't even know why she's there. Maybe she has serious life threatening complications, who knows?

[/b]


But WE know why she's there, don't we? The research is available.

Reasons Women Choose Abortion (U.S.)


Wants to postpone childbearing:  25.5%

Wants no (more) children:  7.9%

Cannot afford a baby:  21.3%

Having a child will disrupt education or job: 10.8%

Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy: 14.1%

Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy: 12.2%

Risk to maternal health: 2.8%

Risk to fetal health: 3.3%

Other: 2.1%

Source:Bankole, Akinrinola; Singh, Susheela; Haas, Taylor.  Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries.  International Family Planning  Perspectives, 1998, 24(3):117–127 & 152 As reported by:The Alan Guttmacher Institute Online:

The AGI is Alan Guttmacher Institute, which is basically Planned Parenthood.  So I don't think you can consider this study as biase by "anti-abortion" fanatics.

Now, let's look at those reasons:

Wants to postpone childbearing:  25.5%

Easily done; contraception works, so does plain old abstinence in cases of "last resort". This indicates a failure of personal responsiblity to me. It is quite possible... because no one KNOWS for sure, that this failure will result in the early termination of a human being.  

Wants no (more) children:  7.9%

Tie yer TUBES fer pete's sake! or, see the above commentary for the first reason.

Cannot afford a baby:  21.3%

See the two previous commentaries!

Having a child will disrupt education or job: 10.8%

See the THREE previous commentaries.

Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy: 14.1%

Do I really need to repeat myself yet again?

Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy: 12.2%

See above. Anyone detecting a "lack of personal responsibility" trend yet?

Risk to maternal health: 2.8%

AT LAST!! A valid reason.

Risk to fetal health: 3.3%

Another valid reason.

Other: 2.1%

Who knows? Count these as valid, just for argument's sake.

So, what do we have? We have nearly a million abortions a year. Of those, 8.2% can be justified for valid reasons, if you take this study as reliable and representative.

The other 91.8% can be classed as a failure to act responsibly. In other words, most likely AVOIDABLE if one were to practice a bit of common sense.

You want to talk disgusting? THAT is disgusting.

[Sandman]

Do you really want the government to decide what reasons are valid or not?

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by lazs2
oboe... isn't an infant dependant on it's parents for all it needs to live?

lazs

No.

Originally posted by Toad
So when does this embryo achieve full rights and protections in your view?

After exiting the birth canal? 5 months? 8 months? 2 months?

Where do we draw this line?

Where do we draw the line at when conception actually occures?  It's just as arbitrary, unless you have microscope watching what's happening in the fallopian tubes.

Is the morning after pill than a form of abortion?  I guess it depends on the timing.

For what it's worth I'm against late term abortion except when the health of the mother is at risk.  But I imagine with the morning after pill possibly being sold over the counter up here, and the male birth control pill, the number of abortions in Canada will drop.


...oh yeah, against capital punishment.  I don't want 1 innocent man to die at the hands of the state.  Because hey, it just might be me.

[bustr]

Thrawn said:  ...oh yeah, against capital punishment. I don't want 1 innocent man to die at the hands of the state. Because hey, it just might be me.

That is the most honest statement on capitol punishment Ive ever heard....  

When people want to ban things, guns, capitol punishment, drugs, wookies..whatever. Very rairely do they tell the truth. "It might hurt me, or I might commit that crime, or I might get unjustly accused, so I want a law to give me the best and most chance of survival........and I don't care what it will cost!

[Raider179]

Contraception is not 100% full proof. There are still accidental pregnancies even when full precautions are taken.