Abortion

[lostone]

In Catholic doctrine, I believe that any sec not intended to produce more children is ( or was) considered irresponsible. By that definition, whatever sex you are currently engaging in is certainly irresponsible.

That's a good point.
The proscription is against sex as a pleasure source. At least that's what I've gotten from the Catholic people I've known... not that I ever asked a priest.

Religions of the world, in general, deny that there is any value of pleasure of any sort, and also, in general, view the pursuit of pleasure as a moral failure. Life is supposed to be painful, living is supposed to hurt, and only your faith and sacrifices can give it any value, from their POV. A POV that would leave the most rabid anti-natalist satisfied. Life is supposed to be a curse, and the only thing worth living for the glorious afterlife, and if life ever becomes pleasant, for even a few people, a stop must be put to that, and those people must be condemned for their immorality.

 

[Elixir]

In Catholic doctrine, I believe that any sec not intended to produce more children is ( or was) considered irresponsible. By that definition, whatever sex you are currently engaging in is certainly irresponsible.

That's a good point.
The proscription is against sex as a pleasure source. At least that's what I've gotten from the Catholic people I've known... not that I ever asked a priest.

Religions of the world, in general, deny that there is any value of pleasure of any sort, and also, in general, view the pursuit of pleasure as a moral failure. Life is supposed to be painful, living is supposed to hurt, and only your faith and sacrifices can give it any value, from their POV. A POV that would leave the most rabid anti-natalist satisfied. Life is supposed to be a curse, and the only thing worth living for the glorious afterlife, and if life ever becomes pleasant, for even a few people, a stop must be put to that, and those people must be condemned for their immorality.

AMEN, Brother!

Seriously, that’s quite on point.

 

[Toni]

Link to article in the NYT concerning the grave medical peril faced by children who become pregnant and the long lasting effects on their physical wellbeing:

What Pregnancy and Childbirth Do to the Bodies of Young Girls

An Ohio 10-year-old’s recent abortion has generated fierce debate. Doctors in countries where pregnancy is common in adolescents say the toll of childbirth on young bodies is brutal.

www.nytimes.com

After the account of a 10-year-old Ohio girl crossing state lines to get an abortion drew national attention last week, some prominent abortion opponents suggested the child should have carried her pregnancy to term.

But midwives and doctors who work in countries where pregnancy is common in young adolescent girls say those pushing for very young girls to carry pregnancies to term may not understand the brutal toll of pregnancy and delivery on the body of a child.

“Their bodies are not ready for childbirth and it’s very traumatic,” said Marie Bass Gomez, a midwife and the senior nursing officer at the reproductive and child health clinic at Bundung Maternal and Child Health Hospital in Gambia.

The critical issue is that the pelvis of a child is too small to allow passage of even a small fetus, said Dr. Ashok Dyalchand, who has worked with pregnant adolescent girls in low-income communities in India for more than 40 years.

“They have long labor, obstructed labor, the fetus bears down on the bladder and on the urethra,” sometimes causing pelvic inflammatory disease and the rupture of tissue between the vagina and the bladder and rectum, said Dr. Dyalchand, who heads an organization called the Institute of Health Management Pachod, a public health organization serving marginalized communities in central India.
“It is a pathetic state particularly for girls who are less than 15 years of age,” he added. “The complications, the morbidity and the mortality are much higher in girls under 15 than girls 16 to 19 although 16 to 19 has a mortality twice as high as women 20 and above.”
The phenomenon of young girls having babies is relatively rare in the United States. In 2017, the last year for which data was available, there were 4,460 pregnancies among girls under 15, with just under half ending in abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights and surveys clinics regularly.
But globally, complications relating to pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death for girls aged 15-19, according to the World Health Organization.

 

[Oleg]

Link to article in the NYT concerning the grave medical peril faced by children who become pregnant and the long lasting effects on their physical wellbeing:

What Pregnancy and Childbirth Do to the Bodies of Young Girls

An Ohio 10-year-old’s recent abortion has generated fierce debate. Doctors in countries where pregnancy is common in adolescents say the toll of childbirth on young bodies is brutal.

www.nytimes.com

After the account of a 10-year-old Ohio girl crossing state lines to get an abortion drew national attention last week, some prominent abortion opponents suggested the child should have carried her pregnancy to term.

But midwives and doctors who work in countries where pregnancy is common in young adolescent girls say those pushing for very young girls to carry pregnancies to term may not understand the brutal toll of pregnancy and delivery on the body of a child.

“Their bodies are not ready for childbirth and it’s very traumatic,” said Marie Bass Gomez, a midwife and the senior nursing officer at the reproductive and child health clinic at Bundung Maternal and Child Health Hospital in Gambia.

The critical issue is that the pelvis of a child is too small to allow passage of even a small fetus, said Dr. Ashok Dyalchand, who has worked with pregnant adolescent girls in low-income communities in India for more than 40 years.

“They have long labor, obstructed labor, the fetus bears down on the bladder and on the urethra,” sometimes causing pelvic inflammatory disease and the rupture of tissue between the vagina and the bladder and rectum, said Dr. Dyalchand, who heads an organization called the Institute of Health Management Pachod, a public health organization serving marginalized communities in central India.
“It is a pathetic state particularly for girls who are less than 15 years of age,” he added. “The complications, the morbidity and the mortality are much higher in girls under 15 than girls 16 to 19 although 16 to 19 has a mortality twice as high as women 20 and above.”
The phenomenon of young girls having babies is relatively rare in the United States. In 2017, the last year for which data was available, there were 4,460 pregnancies among girls under 15, with just under half ending in abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights and surveys clinics regularly.
But globally, complications relating to pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death for girls aged 15-19, according to the World Health Organization.

Lady Margaret Beaufort.

 

[TLK Valentine]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Link to article in the NYT concerning the grave medical peril faced by children who become pregnant and the long lasting effects on their physical wellbeing:

What Pregnancy and Childbirth Do to the Bodies of Young Girls

An Ohio 10-year-old’s recent abortion has generated fierce debate. Doctors in countries where pregnancy is common in adolescents say the toll of childbirth on young bodies is brutal.

www.nytimes.com

After the account of a 10-year-old Ohio girl crossing state lines to get an abortion drew national attention last week, some prominent abortion opponents suggested the child should have carried her pregnancy to term.

But midwives and doctors who work in countries where pregnancy is common in young adolescent girls say those pushing for very young girls to carry pregnancies to term may not understand the brutal toll of pregnancy and delivery on the body of a child.

“Their bodies are not ready for childbirth and it’s very traumatic,” said Marie Bass Gomez, a midwife and the senior nursing officer at the reproductive and child health clinic at Bundung Maternal and Child Health Hospital in Gambia.

The critical issue is that the pelvis of a child is too small to allow passage of even a small fetus, said Dr. Ashok Dyalchand, who has worked with pregnant adolescent girls in low-income communities in India for more than 40 years.

“They have long labor, obstructed labor, the fetus bears down on the bladder and on the urethra,” sometimes causing pelvic inflammatory disease and the rupture of tissue between the vagina and the bladder and rectum, said Dr. Dyalchand, who heads an organization called the Institute of Health Management Pachod, a public health organization serving marginalized communities in central India.
“It is a pathetic state particularly for girls who are less than 15 years of age,” he added. “The complications, the morbidity and the mortality are much higher in girls under 15 than girls 16 to 19 although 16 to 19 has a mortality twice as high as women 20 and above.”
The phenomenon of young girls having babies is relatively rare in the United States. In 2017, the last year for which data was available, there were 4,460 pregnancies among girls under 15, with just under half ending in abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights and surveys clinics regularly.
But globally, complications relating to pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death for girls aged 15-19, according to the World Health Organization.

It makes me think of a twist on "Two wrongs don't make a right." With the response being, I agree, so why are you forcing her to give birth?

 

[SIB]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

 

[bilby]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

That depends on the jurisdiction and the basis for the request. Certainly there have been cases in which amputations of healthy limbs have been undertaken for people with Body Integrity Identity Disorder or (more controversially) Body Dysmorphic Disorder.

Typically the reasons given for not providing this surgery on request test on the belief that the patient is insane, and not able to give informed consent for the procedure.

It would be a brave person who seriously suggested that the desire for an abortion was an unequivocal indication of insanity, or of an inability to understand what is being requested.

 

[TLK Valentine]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

Who are "they" in your scenario?

I doubt she'd chop off her own finger or leg any more than she'd give herself a tattoo... far more likely that she'd find a professional to do it for her.

Certainly it would be legal... but most surgeons would probably pass on it due to their medical ethics... But that just means finding one who wouldn't. It might take time.

Health care barely pays for necessary surgeries; I doubt it would pay for an elective one.

 

[bilby]

Health care barely pays for necessary surgeries; I doubt it would pay for an elective one.

*Comment valid in USA. May not be true in the civilised world; Check local providers for details.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

Is she barfing? Is she the one suffering from back pain? Is she the one losing sleep? She going to endure pain during birth? Is she going to have temporary and permanent bladder issues? Is she having post partum depression?

Yeah... it is her body.

 

[SIB]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

Is she barfing? Is she the one suffering from back pain? Is she the one losing sleep? She going to endure pain during birth? Is she going to have temporary and permanent bladder issues? Is she having post partum depression?

Yeah... it is her body.

No it is not. Lmao, barfing decides ... thats funny ...

 

[Elixir]

it is her body.

No it is not. ...

This is an irreconcilable difference of opinion.
I think it should be put to a vote.

 

[SIB]

When is it human. That's the focus for me. 30 weeks may be a little to long. 8 week is too short. But in all honesty, I would have to go learn more about it.

And until you do, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that while a fetus may or may not be a human at 8 weeks, 30 weeks, 45 minutes, 9 months, or whenever, the pregnant woman is beyond a doubt a human.

In terms of ethics, morality, and legality, I tend to side with the humans over the "may be" humans... so let her decide what to do...

If they approached it from "the parents right to choose" vs "Her body her choice". Its not really her body. She can chop of her finger off if she wants. BTW, would they let a women cut her leg off if it is healthy? Hmmm ... would health care pay for it?

Who are "they" in your scenario?

I doubt she'd chop off her own finger or leg any more than she'd give herself a tattoo... far more likely that she'd find a professional to do it for her.

Certainly it would be legal... but most surgeons would probably pass on it due to their medical ethics... But that just means finding one who wouldn't. It might take time.

Health care barely pays for necessary surgeries; I doubt it would pay for an elective one.

The pro choices. More generally rational people. I am pro choice. But the "My body my choice" is as shallow as "'cause god said so" to me. I would gladly march with them if they approached it from parental choice. But I am not marching to "my body my choice." just because we have the end game. I kind of am on the side of - lets use the best information we have to make the best choice we can with the limited resources we have - kind of guy.

The last points are exactly my point. If they can pay for it, they can have it. If they can't, maybe they live the choice they made. There is no reason to force ones beliefs (its my body my choice) on the rest of us. They can pay for it they can have it.

Now, if they approach it from a more logical standpoint like "I do not want to bring a child in to my way of life/life style because my life style will end up abusing it." I would be happy to help.

Just a little honesty is all we ask.

 

[SIB]

You can stick with your "a human" and I will just use my statement without the "a" in "We circler back to the original argument of when is it human"

You can stick to your “one clump of human cells is human and another lump of human cells is not human”.
But trust me - it’s not a good look, and does not lend to rational discussion.

yup ... to some groups its not a good look ... its those groups that force us to have to have the ability to defend ourselves. I wish it was different ... but its not.

 

[SIB]

it is her body.

No it is not. ...

This is an irreconcilable difference of opinion.
I think it should be put to a vote.

lol ... yeah ... that worked.

list the traits that defines a human. That's when the "well, I believe this-that-or-the other". That way we can ignore actually defining the object objectively.

Then list how moms body would kill "the baby" if it wasn't insulted. But I guess the average Wawa attendant, account, house wife, and mechanic, understands the processes involved enough to force their opinion on the rest of us.

 

[Elixir]

Defining “life” is for communication purposes, as only examples of life exist and life itself has no objective existence except as a characteristic of those examples.
Same goes for humanity.
I choose to exempt embryos, blastocysts et al from my references to “humans”.