Radical Abortion Laws

[Dr. Shane]

Nicaragua poised to outlaw all abortions

Quote:

"The current law allows a small door in which abortions can be performed, and we are trying to close that door," said Dr. Rafael Cabrera, an obstetrician and leader of the Yes to Life Movement. "We don't believe a child should be destroyed under the pretext that a woman might die."

Quote:

Since the late 1980s, two other Latin American countries have adopted similar measures — El Salvador and Chile. At least 34 countries, mostly in Africa and the Middle East, prohibit all abortions, without exception, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, a U.S.-based nonprofit advocacy group.

The new law would establish prison sentences of six to 30 years for women who abort their pregnancies and the doctors who perform the procedure.

Quote:

Ipas estimates that 32,000 illegal abortions are performed in Nicaragua each year, many under unsafe conditions. Only 24 abortions authorized by law have been performed in the country in the last three years.

In 2003, a 9-year-old rape victim received an abortion under the current law's provisions.

Nearly all Latin American countries outlaw abortion, but most, including Nicaragua, allow the procedure in cases of rape and to preserve the life of a pregnant woman. Many countries, including Mexico, are working to make abortion more accessible to women who qualify for such exceptions.

[Dr. Shane]

32,000 abortions with a population of 5.5 million that comes out to be over 5 abortions per 1,000 people per year. I believe the Netherlands is just below a 4:1000 ratio and the US currently is around a 4.5:1000 raio but we have been above 5:1000 in the past. Important to note my figures are per population including men, women and children. Some ratios are number of abortions to female population or number of abortions to number of live births. Both of those may be better indicators than what I am using.

My point is, in the interest of decreasing the number of abortions, allowing it to be legal with policies in place to discourage it may well result in less abortions than completely banning it and allowing butchers to create a black market.

[Nan]

My concern would be that there will be a return to the dreadful days of backyard abortions and women who die or who become unable to have more children due to bad practice and infection.

What is the availability of contraception in these countries?

[Dr. Shane]

Well it isn't about returning to the dreadful days. These countries have never left those days. If banning abortion caused the number or abortions to redically drop and thus more babies were saved, I would support such a ban, as I have in the past. However I haven't seen any evidence of that.

What we have seen evidence of is areas where abortions are legal but have a lot of restrictions placed on them also tend to have a lower abortion rate than areas where abortion is illegal.

I don't know about all these countries but in Mexico, governmetn clinics give out free contraceptions. Minor girls that get pregnant have an IUD put in them after the baby is born that must remain until they are 18. Vesectamies and tying a woman's tubes are free operations but not allowed until they are 30.

[Naomi]

You have expressed a very real, very valid concern. The difference in theory and pratice is often wide.

[Dr. Shane]

I have heard facts and figures on the radio and Christian TV but I have also done Google searches and found the very same facts. The Netherlands and Arkansaw are both areas that have legal abortion but restrictions on it and low abortion rates.

I am looking at the issue on a global basis. In the world we have some countries that ban abortion and others that permit it. I know of only a couple that permit but restrict it. We don't know for sure how many abortions are performed in nations where abortion is illegal but we have a good idea due to the number of botched abortions that require additional medical attention. It appears that the number of abortions in nations that permit it without restrictions is more or less about the same as the nations that ban it. Which means when a nation outlaws abortion, it doesn't impact the abortion rate significantly.

However restricting abortion may get us closer to our goal of reducing the number of abortions. That would mean parental notification laws, mandatory waiting periods, mandatory counseling, no abortions after the first trimester except for medical reasons, not allowing abortion clinics to advertise or have access to our public schools, etc. And the good news in the US is that the Supreme Court here seems to be leaning in the direction of letting the people pass such restrictions.

Too often when we discuss abortion we don't realize it is a global issue and is illegal in some of the most populated nations in the world.

[Naomi]

Quote:

Too often when we discuss abortion we don't realize it is a global issue and is illegal in some of the most populated nations in the world.

Yes, I do realize that it is a global issue ...

I realize that for whatever reason a woman becomes pregnant if she doesn't want the child, for whatever reason, she will do everything possible (Legal & illegal) to end the pregnancy.

I am in no way saying I agree with abortion ... I am saying that as in other discussions we(Shane & I) have had, you cannot pass enough laws, build enough jails, or impose whatever form of punishment in the the country of origin, to stop a woman from ending a pregancy if she desires to do so ... even if she looses her own life!

[Dr. Shane]

Further study would be needed, however, it seems that in nations where abortion is legal, there is no blackmarket for abortions. OK, do we follow that?

Therefore when abortion is restricted by certain laws, in order to discourage it, women either have to follow the law with its restrictions or not have an abortion because there is no blackmarket abortions available.

Now on top of that, the government should also try to prevent abortions through education which teaches that abortions are wrong. The government has done exactly that with tobacco. While tobacco is still legal, the government has passed laws to restrict it and teach kids not to use it. The same tactics can be used with abortion.

[Neil D]

You have moved in your position on abortion, from no abortions allowed in the country to allowing them with restrictions.

What piece of evidence changed your mind?

And I know that you would hate to admit it, but isn't that what Clinton did?

[Naomi]

You have moved in your position on abortion, from no abortions allowed in the country to allowing them with restrictions.

What piece of evidence changed your mind?

And I know that you would hate to admit it, but isn't that what Clinton did?

Thanks Neil for putting my thoughts on-line.

Shane, we're not double teaming you ...so, speaking for myself. What did change your mind? LOL I won't even mention Clinton......

OTOH, this subject is really too hot to handle.

[Dr. Shane]

I am not an idealouge so I am not locked into any idealogy. However my mind hasn't really changed as much as it seems.

I have never believed the US Constitiontion provides a woman the right to an abortion. I still do not believe it does. The issue of abortion should be decided by the people, not judges. I do not believe there is a Constitutional right to abortion.

I have always believed that life begins at conception and that the innocent life of the unborn should be protected. I still believe that.

The issue becomes how to best decrease the number of abortions. That is the goal. The goal is not to give women some right that doesn't exist. If making abortion illegal only serves to create a black market for it and not significantly reduce the number of abortions then that is perhaps not the best way to deal with the issue. A better tactic may be handling it like we handle tobacco. Keep it legal, so no black market forms, and pass laws that discourage it.

Quote:

What piece of evidence changed your mind?

Statistics from nations like Nicaragua indicate that banning abortion doesn't signifficantly reduce the number of abortions performed.

[Aliensanctuary]

I am not pro-abortion, but sometimes I think it's more of an act of mercy to prevent a little baby from being raised by mothers or parents who don't want it and can't give the love and proper care that it needs.

Quote:

Go ahead lady

Get rid of that baby.

Sure it's alive

but it's gonna die.

One less mouth to feed

One less kid to beat.

One less prison cell

One less...place in Hell.

from a rap song by Aliensanctuary

I don't believe Jesus would be pro-abortion. Many unwanted pregnancies come from wrong relationships, not limited to rape.

Babies can be shared, they don't have to be terminated, adding the guilt of murder to incest, adultery, and rape. Nine y/o rape victims, now that's a tough one. Maybe an embryonic transplant would work, if there is such a thing.

What if a young woman's vagina were surgically nearly sewn shut, leaving enough space for menstrual flow or a tube to allow menstrual flow. Or, maybe a surgical implant to block intercourse. At least that would reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and eliminate the possibility of rape, from that part of the anatomy, anyway.

[Dr. Shane]

Murdering babies so they are later not neglected, inprisoned or hungry doesn't sound like a good solution. I think we simply have to consider the best way to reduce the number of abortions by approaching it with an open mind with all options on the table.

[Nan]

Quote:

What if a young woman's vagina were surgically nearly sewn shut, leaving enough space for menstrual flow or a tube to allow menstrual flow.

That is called genital mutilation and it is already practised to some degree in various parts of the world.

[Barbara]

Thank you for metion that Nan. It is a pratice I don't think we need to take up. However We could always bring back the Chastity belt.

[Dr. Shane]

I am not in favor of genital mutilation but for underage girls that get pregnant and either give birth or choose abortion, I think we need to consider mandatory IUD until age 18.

[Nan]

Mandatory IUCDs could come perilously close to assault in the technical sense.

Insertion is not without risks and use not without side effects.

[Gregory Matthews]

Many pro-life people are very opposed to ICUDs. They consider them to be a form of abortation.

[Nan]

The theory used to be that IUCDs prevented the fertilised embryo (fertilisation occurs in the Fallopian tube) from implanting in the uterus.

I believe more recent work indicates that the IUCD disables the spermatozoa so that fertilisation does not occur. That would be the older copper containing devices, the newer hormone containing IUCDs have additional means of preventing pregnancy.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Many pro-life people are very opposed to ICUDs.

I realize that. There are a lot of things many pro-life people are opposed to. I think I mentioned already that Mexico puts IUDs in underage girls that get pregnant and the girl cannot have it removed until she is 18. We did Bible studies with a girl that had that done to her. IUDs also increase the risk of girls getting certain diseases. However there are also hormone implants that would accomplish the same thing.

Again, if we want to reduce abortions, these things should be part of the discussion. Other governments are using them so they shouldn't be beyond consideration.

[gina i]

I look at it this way - their body, their life, their choice. Not the government, which means MAN telling some woman/child what to do.

It is not up to them to decide who lives & who dies. This is something each individual needs to take up with God. Not Man. Not a Government.

[Dr. Shane]

Yes I certainly don't look at it like that. The DNA of the fetus is distinctly different than that of the woman carrying it. I can't see how someone could claim it to be the same body or the same life.

Now if we want to talk about choice and our children than the entire issue of child abuse goes on the table. In many nations. children are not protected and in the US they were not protected for many years. If a woman has the right to murder her child becuase of some right of privacy, then it would reason that after the child is born her right to privacy would allow her to beat the child as a form of disapline. I don't go there. Way too many inconsistancies in that "pro-choice" rhetoric.

Now in the United States the government is not "MAN" but is the people. In October 1787 "Cato II" wrote, "In democratic republics the people collectively are considered as the sovereign - all legislative, judicial, and executiuve power, is inherent in and derived from them." Since women actually make up 51.1% of the US population it is quite inaccurate to claim the "MAN" is telling anyone what can and cannot be done.

Many women find abortion objectionable and many men do not object to it whatsoever. It is not a man vs. woman issue. According to studies done by pro-choice groups, 52% of women are prochoice whil 42% are prolife. Men are 44% prochoice to 48% prolife. Although a 2003 Washington Times story claimed "Fifty-one percent of women surveyed by the Center for the Advancement of Women said the government should prohibit abortion or limit it to extreme cases, such as rape, incest, or life-threatening complications." and "Only 30 percent support making it generally available". Although only 12 of the 61 women in Congress are prolife.

[gina i]

People = Man.

So essentially the same thing.

I'm not saying I'm for abortion, but I do think that it should be a women's choice.

[Naomi]

People = Man.

So essentially the same thing.

I'm not saying I'm for abortion, but I do think that it should be a women's choice.

Agreed!

[Dr. Shane]

So what about child abuse? If a woman should have the choice whether or not to murder her child, should she later have the choice whether or not to slap it around, lock it in a closet, leave it alone in a car while she is in a bar drinking? Why would she have the right to kill it but not do these other things? And why does only the mother have the right to kill it? It takes two to tangle. Why doesn't the father have the right to kill it too?

Instead of just shooting off pro-choice rhetoric let's be consistant and back it up with logic.