 |
| |
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
Doc: What's your take on this thread and the suggestions in it? |
In the first post we were directed not to debate the morality of abortion, so I won't. I'm merely pointing out the flaw in the basic premise of the thread, that both pro-lifers and pro-choicers abhor abortion. Particularily in the 1970s many pro-choicers considered abortion to be the preferred method of birth control because the pill, and IUDs were considered to be dangerous, and diaphragms, condoms, and rhythm had notoriously high failure rates. I'm willing to bet that if you press many of the women in today's femininist movement, particularily those who were actively involved in the movement in the 1970s their opinions haven't changed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
How is it that it took you so long to realize this?
Just curious...I've known it since I decided I was pro-choice... |
who are you speaking to?
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by loinburger
Doc: I was under the impression that abortions were moderately dangerous, that repeated abortions can really screw up a woman's physiology. |
Yes, that's true, but in the early 1970s the side effects of the pill were just getting to be known, and the early pills had higher doses of hormones and hence higher rates of venous thrombosis. Eventually it was shown that if you used abortion as your primary form of birth control, using calculations of the expected rate of conception and the expected rate of mortality from abortion procedures and compared that with the expected death rate from pulmonary emboli resulting from use of the pill that the mortality rate from use of the pill in young women would be lower. The risk of emboli among women over 35 who use the pill and who smoke is much higher
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam Smith
|
 |
Maryland, USA
Jan 1970
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Really? Where did you get this "understanding" from? Source? |
Consider the various abortion rights organizations. Given their involvement in birth control, Planned Parenthood's policies probably fall into the "safe, legal, and rare" category. NOW pretty clearly falls into the "on demand and without apology" group. One could make a pretty good case that NARAL falls into this group too, given their opposition to informed consent and other issues.
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Considering the majority of the population is pro-choice to some degree or other, which includes a large amount of middle-class moderate Americans. .... Maybe a majority of ultra-feminists think that, but certainly not the majority of pro-choicers, who fall into group 1. |
Source? 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I'd think you're speaking out of your rear end here. |
Lets see....
I clearly indicated that this was my understanding, not a specific fact I have in hand
I provided, upon request, some information on which I based my understanding
You provided no source for your assertion
Don't you think it is just a little bit unwarranted to claim that I am talking out of my rear end?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Smith
Consider the various abortion rights organizations. Given their involvement in birth control, Planned Parenthood's policies probably fall into the "safe, legal, and rare" category. NOW pretty clearly falls into the "on demand and without apology" group. One could make a pretty good case that NARAL falls into this group too, given their opposition to informed consent and other issues. |
NOW's position:
"NOW affirms that these are issues of life and death for women, not mere matters of choice. NOW supports access to safe and legal abortion, to effective birth control, to reproductive health and education. We oppose attempts to restrict these rights through legislation, regulation (like the gag rule) or Constitutional amendment.
NOW supports the right of women to have children, including appropriate pre-natal care and quality child care. We oppose government efforts to limit or discourage childbearing, such as family caps and involuntary sterilization."
I don't think their position is as extreme as you say.
quote:
Source? |
Gallup survey last year:
Public Attitudes Toward Abortion
May 2001
Actual Views of Americans
Legal in All
26%
Legal Only Under Certain
58 %
Illegal in All
15 %
quote:
Lets see....
I clearly indicated that this was my understanding, not a specific fact I have in hand
I provided, upon request, some information on which I based my understanding
You provided no source for your assertion
Don't you think it is just a little bit unwarranted to claim that I am talking out of my rear end? |
 Now you have 2 sources from me, and you still have none, so my claim stands.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
I'm not sure if everyone will agree with me on this, but the goals of the overwhelming majority of Pro-Choicers and Pro-Lifers are the same. No abortions. |
Actually, no. The goals of most of the pro-life organizations is to abolish the freedom of women. These organizations are not only opposed to abortion, they are also opposed to: contraception, sex education, women working outside the home (except for right-wing political causes), pre-marital sex, etc. All you have to do is look at the organizations that run them.
Many pro-choice people don't like the idea of abortion, but don't feel it's their place to tell someone what they can or can't do with their bodies. Others, like me, don't think there's anything wrong with abotion, since it's just having an unthinking lump of flesh removed from your body.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam Smith
|
|
Maryland, USA
Jan 1970
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The goals of most of the pro-life organizations is to abolish the freedom of women. These organizations are not only opposed to abortion, they are also opposed to: contraception, sex education, women working outside the home (except for right-wing political causes), pre-marital sex, etc. |
Jeez, Chegitz, this does not apply to any of the (Catholic) pro-life people I know. They use contraception, don't terribly mind sex education, women work outside the home (often in social service or social justice concerns), and have had pre-marital sex.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sceptor107
|
|
abortion is stupid. Its hijacking the future. In 2050 the native population of Europe will be 25% smaller. Everybodies having abortions now.
Atleast in America we make fun of the whores who have abortions and stuff. There its no questions asked. And when there are 4 old men for every 1 teenager in Germany and france. And the lazy asses cant get there retirement checks cause the system is recycling enough money. aha..they will regret it.
Or they can always avoid the population problems abortions cause and try really hard to bring in Immigrants. Which there doing but at a big price.
oh ya. Anybody denies the effects of Abortion go look at China's population chart. In there case its good. They've sewed the seeds for a future, much smaller population around 700 million. But in countries that only have 100 million in the first place...its dangerous. Soon we will pay the price.
btw Im pro-choice in most cases. Under 21 and still living at home, Rape, health, etc. But casual abortions at 5 months because a woman gets alot of anxiety (which is natural) is just wrong and hurts the future
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sceptor107
Atleast in America we make fun of the whores who have abortions and stuff. |
No, actually, we make fun of little judgmental jackasses such as yourself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sceptor107
|
|
MING CAN EAT MY ****! BAN ME. GO AHEAD! ILL BE BACK AS SCEPTOR 108,109. ETC
This forum aint **** to me. To some losers its there lives
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
Makes him feel all big and tough. Early adolescent males often act super-macho to cover for their lingering doubts about their sexuality and masculinity. Many don't grow out of it, leading to such abominations as SUVs and Howard Stern.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-08-2002 04:58
|