Abortion Again

July 26, 2006

Well, it is in the news again...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

A bill that would make it a crime to take a pregnant girl across state lines for an abortion without her parents' knowledge passed the Senate Tuesday, but vast differences with the House version stood between the measure and President Bush's desk.

|

The 65-34 vote gave the Senate's approval to the bill, which would make taking a pregnant girl to another state for the purposes of evading parental notification laws punishable by fines and up to a year in jail.

|

The girl and her parents would be exempt from prosecution, and the bill contains an exception for abortions performed in this manner when the pregnancy posed a threat to the mother's life.

The official Adventist position, while not all that clear, is summed up in these words...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned by the Church. Women, at times however, may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman's life, serious jeopardy to her health, severe congenital defects carefully diagnosed in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman after appropriate consultation.

<hr /></blockquote> (Guidelines on Abortion)

Politically there are basically six positions.

Extreame Conservative: All abortions should be illegal except to save the mother's life.

Conservative: Abortion should be illegal except in cases to save the mother's life, rape or incest.

Moderate Conservative: Abortion should be illegal except in cases to save the mother's life, rape, incest, known birth-defects, psychiatric or developmental problems with the mother, etc.

Moderate Liberal: Keep abortion legal but restrict it.

No government assistance to pay for abortion except to save mother's life, rape or incest.
Mandatory counseling before abortion
Mandatory 24 hour waiting period
Parental consent for minors (exception with judge's waiver)
Abortion providers not allowed to provide counseling or family planning services
No abortions provided in a hospital except to save mother's life
Abortions clinics not allowed in residential areas
Government paid PSAs on TV and radio to discourage abortion
Government subsidized pregnancy homes for women that will give child up for adoption
Tax incentives to encourage adoption

Liberal: Keep abortion legal with no restriction during the first trimester of pregnancy

Ultra Liberal: Keep abortion legal with no restriction throughout the entire pregnancy.

July 26, 2006

I use to be in the moderate conservative camp but the more I learn about some of the problems law enforcement has in some of the countries where abortion is illegal, the more I lean toward the moderate liberal camp. I have no doubt that many lives would be saved if abortion was illegal. The conflict for me is what it would mean for law enforcement and the judical system. Something would have to give. Law enforcement would have to spend less time enforcing some laws in order to enforce others.

So I am a bit torn between the moderate conservative and moderate liberal positions. However neither of the two would have any problem with the bill the Senate just passed. So I am 100% behind that bill. Hopefully they can work out the differences in a conference committee and the President can sign a good bill.

July 26, 2006

If my wife or daughter or grand-daughter were impregnated by rape or incest, I would have no qualms aborting it. In either case, the seed forced its way in, akin to a break-in or burglary. I believe one has the right to defend one's self in such a case.

Gerry

July 26, 2006

The most devasting problem with abortion is that it kills two hearts.

gcw

July 26, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

WOULD incest and /or rape fall into the group

of saving the mother?????

The extreame conservatives do not want to allow abortion even in cases of incest and rape. I am not sure how countries like Mexico, which ban abortion, handle that issue. Mainstream conservatives, including most pro-life groups, want to allow abortions for cases that involve rape and incest.

July 26, 2006

I am not sharing my position - I did do one the other day for a fetus that would have been still born if left, and had no qualms whatsoever - generally I do not perform abortions.

One question I ask ladies who come for such a procedure - and I see very few - is to think how they will feel about having had an abortion, 5 years down the track. There are a few kids alive today because the mother thought a little more about things.

July 26, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The most devasting problem with abortion is that it kills two hearts.

The best method of birth control for a married couple not wanting more kids is simple - sterilization of one of them. We chose the male - me - because it is a simpler op. It didn't work - we had another kid, and so I had the op redone. We could afford to raise another, so no big deal (in fact, she is just like part of the family :-)).

If the married couple is simply trying to defer the family a bit longer, then the other methods may not be reliable enough. The IN PRACTICE failure rate of all of the other methods is approximately 1%.

Is an abortion wrong in these cases?

My wife and I had two miscarriages before our first live birth. Was it a little painful at the time? Yes. Did it ruin our lives? No.

Would it have made a difference if we had done it on purpose instead of out-of-our-control? No. There is no logical difference between having a vasectomy to avoid a conception, and having a morning-after pill to prevent the development of the embryo.

As the fetus develops, is there a point where abortion is intrinsically bad? How can people who support the death penalty, and who support shooting missiles into wedding parties because there might be a terrorist in their midst condemn even a third trimester abortion?

To support the death penalty, Bush's "war" on terror, and be anti-abortion is illogical. Then again, no-one ever accused the anti-abortion lobby of being logical.

/Bevin

July 27, 2006

A lot of rants going on in this post.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Would it have made a difference if we had done it on purpose instead of out-of-our-control? No.

Any family counselor worth their weight in salt would disagree. The emotional impact on a person that has a miscarage is quite different than the emotional impact on a person that has choosen abortion. No counselor would use the same treatment for both people.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

There is no logical difference between having a vasectomy to avoid a conception, and having a morning-after pill to prevent the development of the embryo.

From what I understand, the morning-after pill deals with the zygote which isn't quite an embryo. It prevents ovulation, fertilisation or implantation of the zygote. Since these work before implantation, I believe they are considered a form of birth control in the US, and not abortion.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

There is no logical difference between having a vasectomy to avoid a conception, and having a morning-after pill to prevent the development of the embryo.

I tend to agree with that but it is nonetheless an opinion and not a statement of fact. Many disagree and in a democracy the people should have the right to regulate use of such methods. The right to abortion or birth-control is not listed in the Bill of Rights.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

How can people who support the death penalty, and who support shooting missiles into wedding parties because there might be a terrorist in their midst condemn even a third trimester abortion?

Killing innocent and defenseless lives is bad. We should do all we can to stop and prevent it. In the issue of abortion that means either banning it or restricting it. In the issue of war, that means using smart bombs and other such tactics to reduce civilian casualties.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

To support the death penalty, Bush's "war" on terror, and be anti-abortion is illogical.

This statement demonstrates an inability to grasp the issues. The death penalty is given to convicted criminals - not innocent babies. War is evil and only justified when it is the lesser of other evils.

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gerry Cabalo said:

If my wife or daughter or grand-daughter were impregnated by rape or incest, I would have no qualms aborting it. In either case, the seed forced its way in, akin to a break-in or burglary. I believe one has the right to defend one's self in such a case.

Gerry

Okay, I hear what you are saying, but...how does God look at this issue? Is it right to take it out on an innocent life...as in any eye for an eye? What about mercy?

Rob

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said: How can people who support the death penalty, and who support shooting missiles into wedding parties because there might be a terrorist in their midst condemn even a third trimester abortion?

Good question!

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said: How can people who support the death penalty, and who support shooting missiles into wedding parties because there might be a terrorist in their midst condemn even a third trimester abortion?

Because we can distinguish the moral difference between a murderer and a helpless innocent, on the one hand,

and because we can distinguish the moral difference between an accident or a mistake and the intentional taking of a life.

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Any family counselor worth their weight in salt would disagree. The emotional impact on a person that has a miscarage is quite different than the emotional impact on a person that has choosen abortion. No counselor would use the same treatment for both people.

Careful in your reply here, Shane... You are replying to one who has had a miscarrage. And I don't think that you know what "any family councilor worth his weight in salt" would do in any situation. Each councilor is different as each family is different...How either one approaches or is approached by the problem is unique....

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I tend to agree with that but it is nonetheless an opinion and not a statement of fact. Many disagree and in a democracy the people should have the right to regulate use of such methods. The right to abortion or birth-control is not listed in the Bill of Rights.

I tend to disagree with the last statement....Consider the Declaration of Independance-[:"green"]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, .... [/]

I think it logical the "Declaration of Independance" is the goal of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.... After all, you can not have a society of happiness with chaos among society members nor can a society of happiness be achieved with cookie cutter people....People are not robots...they think and they grow... And to achieve that goal, one has to have the ability to learn and grow...even with mistakes....And to correct those mistakes if they degrade you into something less than human....

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I tend to agree with that but it is nonetheless an opinion and not a statement of fact. Many disagree and in a democracy the people should have the right to regulate use of such methods. The right to abortion or birth-control is not listed in the Bill of Rights.

"The people should have the right to regulate the use of" vasectomys or abortions? Whatever happened to self determination? What is the difference between a goverment who tells you what to do with your body and a monarchy who does the same? You forget another part of the declaration of independance-

[:"green"] That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to [/] [:"red"] effect their Safety and Happiness. [/]

What you are advocating is that people don't know what they are doing....That they have no understanding about themselves.... And while that may be true of yourself, it may only be true of yourself...I am sure it is not true of anyother person on this board.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Killing innocent and defenseless lives is bad. We should do all we can to stop and prevent it.[:"blue"] This I tend to agree with..in principle [/] In the issue of abortion that means either banning it or restricting it. [:"blue"] Not necessarily true. Clinton's administration showed that by producing economic choices, that abortion actually decreased. "Making abortion available, safe and rare" was the principle. By focusing on the restriction of it, women feel oppressed and they will react accordingly. [/] In the issue of war, that means using smart bombs and other such tactics to reduce civilian casualties.

As evidenced by Isreal in destroying a UN outpost in Lebanon...Um, there are other tactics to reduce casulitys to prevent war.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

This statement demonstrates an inability to grasp the issues. The death penalty is given to convicted criminals - not innocent babies. War is evil and only justified when it is the lesser of other evils.

And this statement is a reaction to not seeing that there were other options other than using our military as a polictial response to a country already contained...

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Robert said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gerry Cabalo said:

If my wife or daughter or grand-daughter were impregnated by rape or incest, I would have no qualms aborting it. In either case, the seed forced its way in, akin to a break-in or burglary. I believe one has the right to defend one's self in such a case.

Gerry

Okay, I hear what you are saying, but...how does God look at this issue? Is it right to take it out on an innocent life...as in any eye for an eye? What about mercy?

Rob

[:"blue"]Mercy to whom? The victim or invader? [/]

Gerry

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Any family counselor worth their weight in salt would disagree. The emotional impact on a person that has a miscarage is quite different than the emotional impact on a person that has choosen abortion. No counselor would use the same treatment for both people.

Why would I want to go to a family counselor in either situation - miscarriage OR abortion?

A miscarriage is a natural event - no more catastrophic than (for instance) having ones house broken into, or having a car accident.

An voluntary abortion to cope with failed birth control is a rational choice, even less traumatic than the miscarriage, because it is something one does on purpose and is a continuation of an existing decision not to have more children.

zygote/fetus/infant/../adult/corpse - it is just a continuum.

/Bevin

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gerry Cabalo said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Robert said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gerry Cabalo said:

If my wife or daughter or grand-daughter were impregnated by rape or incest, I would have no qualms aborting it. In either case, the seed forced its way in, akin to a break-in or burglary. I believe one has the right to defend one's self in such a case.

Gerry

Okay, I hear what you are saying, but...how does God look at this issue? Is it right to take it out on an innocent life...as in any eye for an eye? What about mercy?

Rob

[:"blue"]Mercy to whom? The victim or invader? [/]

Gerry

The infant about to be aborted....

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I think it logical the "Declaration of Independance" is the goal of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights....

That is the SPIN the Religious Right always use. It is faulty in its logic. The Articles of Confederation was the written form of government that followed the Declaration of Independance. It proved to be a failure and was replaced by the Constitution. When our "happiness" depends on the government, we are in a very sad state.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

"The people should have the right to regulate the use of" vasectomys or abortions?

From a human rights prespective the answer is yes. If, for example, a nation like Mexico were to make vasectomies and abortions illegal (abortion already is) that would not place them on the list of nations that violate human rights. However if the forced people to have abortions and vasectomies it would place them on such a list.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Clinton's administration showed that by producing economic choices, that abortion actually decreased.

A lot of SPIN there. We need to be careful with out cause and effect arguements.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

As evidenced by Isreal in destroying a UN outpost in Lebanon...Um, there are other tactics to reduce casulitys to prevent war.

A good tactic would be not to set up rocket launching pads nest to the UN headquarters.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

there were other options other than using our military as a polictial response to a country already contained...

In regard to the Iraq war, we (and most of the world) didn't know Iraq was contained. Since they were bribing Security Council members, they were not going to remain contained for long. The US and its allies did the responsible thing with the knowledge they had. The intelligence was bad and Saddam played a big role to contributing to that. The Iraq is a terrible evil - no doubt. But I lay that at the feet of Saddam not anyone else.

July 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Why would I want to go to a family counselor in either situation - miscarriage OR abortion?

That is a very scary question. I have had friends in AA that have dealt with both situations. I have given them my shoulder to cry on and embrace. Counseling is quite helpful. However many have attached a negative stigma to counseling. A lot of people that should seek counseling do not because they are afraid of what others will think of them. Most crisis pregnancy centers provide post-abortion and post-miscarriage counseling services.

July 28, 2006

I have no doubt that there ARE dysfunctional individuals who would find counseling useful under such a situation.

However the existence of some dysfunctional individuals does not mean that everyone who has an abortion needs counselling.

It is a mistake to generalize from SOME to ALL.

/Bevin

July 28, 2006

Too many people attach a negetive stigma to counseling. They actually believe that only dysfunctional people seek counseling. Thus many that need counseling, do not seek counseling, because others will think they are dysfunctional.

It simply is not true. A person doesn't need to be dysfunctional in order to need counseling.

July 28, 2006

"Any family counselor worth their weight in salt would disagree. The emotional impact on a person that has a miscarage is quite different than the emotional impact on a person that has choosen abortion. No counselor would use the same treatment for both people."

This is a very true statement. I could give a whole series of references. A woman who has had an abortion often has a VERY difficult time forgiving herself, and often feels that God cannot forgive her. Abortion will lock the heart of the person who chooses it, and almost always leads to an unexplained depression. This is true for the guy as well, and he will often shut his heart down completely to deal with the shame and kill his compassion.

He gets married. He looks good on the outside, but he brings a secret into his marriage and after the honeymoon wears off, barriers begin to go up.

I am amazed how sin binds & destroys our lives.

I am amazed how repentance & cleansing frees a person.

I am amazed how accurate the Bible is to provide answers for the things that we struggle with.

There is no comparison whatsoever between spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) and the killing of the unborn. The only way to be frre from our conscience is to kill it.

It's time for the Movement to move with Him.

warm regards,

olger

July 28, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

They actually believe that only dysfunctional people seek counseling

Sigh - in other words you think EVERYBODY needs counselling - whether or not they have aborted a baby.

Well, everybody can benefit from good advice - but the advice of professional counsellors is not cheap, and the money can be put to better uses.

/Bevin

July 28, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I think it logical the "Declaration of Independance" is the goal of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights....

That is the SPIN the Religious Right always use. It is faulty in its logic. The Articles of Confederation was the written form of government that followed the Declaration of Independance. It proved to be a failure and was replaced by the Constitution. When our "happiness" depends on the government, we are in a very sad state.

Um, spin? of the Religious Right??? [shakes head]

Where is Lyndell ??

The Declaration of Independance is just that....A declaration of the colonies of England to free itself from the rule of King George. It gives the reasons for that separation from King George, and it lists the greivances the colonies has. It was a declaration of self determination...It was not a contract with the citizens of the US...

Yes, the Articles of Confederation followed, and the Constitution were contracts with it's citizens.They were attempts to form goverment. And yes, the articles of confederation proved unworkable as defining goverment, but necessary during the separation with Britian.

Having said all that, "Life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not necessarily a religious right arguement for abortion. In fact, this arguement is more for keeping options open for an "open society", and not restricting those options. It is an arguement of progressives.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Clinton's administration showed that by producing economic choices, that abortion actually decreased.

A lot of SPIN there. We need to be careful with out cause and effect arguements.

No spin, Shane. It's fact. Stats showed that abortion rates declined during the Clintons administration and have gone back up during the current adminstration.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

In regard to the Iraq war, we (and most of the world) didn't know Iraq was contained.

Um, excuse me, but we had 10 years of a running record where we blew the heck out of anything that remotely theatened anything of the US and the administration slanted information to the public to cause a war. We had UN inspectors telling us that they were not finding ANYTHING romotely containing WMD and they were pleading with the US [whose leaders kept insisting that " We KNOW where the WMDs are!"] to share that information with them so that they could find WMDs or anything that could be construed to make a WMD....We didn't provide information 'cause we didn't know....The Downing STreet Memo shows that our own leaders construed information to the US public to manipulate the public response....To me, the intent of those leaders was to betray the goals of the US. To me, that is treasonous.

But this arguement digresses from the thread.

Any goverment that interfers with it's citizen's private decisions to form or extend familys, is not a goverment that I would care to live under. When a goverment decides to regulate a woman's body, then that goveremnt preforms rape of it's citizens...

July 28, 2006

Now let's tie the decline in abortion during the 1990s to the booming economy drivrn by the dot.com sector.

Sign In

Abortion Again

Recommended Posts

Dr. Shane

Dr. Shane

Gerr

olger

Dr. Shane

Nan

bevin

Dr. Shane

Robert

Robert

there buster

Neil D

Gerr

bevin

Robert

Dr. Shane

Dr. Shane

bevin

Dr. Shane

olger

bevin

Neil D

Dr. Shane

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity