NationStates Jolt Archive

Yeah he was a real let down playing into their hands

I didn't get that from it, more along the lines of they shouted down what they didn't want to hear, and shouted up when they wanted to drive a point home with him.

I didn't get that from it, more along the lines of they shouted down what they didn't want to hear, and shouted up when they wanted to drive a point home with him.

He seemed to copy their techniques though.

Especially the bit where he decided to be an evangelical himself with the kids and repeatedly asking the guy if he was an illegitimate child.

He seemed to copy their techniques though.

Especially the bit where he decided to be an evangelical himself with the kids and repeatedly asking the guy if he was an illegitimate child.

Heh yeah that was funny, 'specily when the mother jumped in and didn't let him answer. Calling him the child, shit he must have been 30!

Heh yeah that was funny, 'specily when the mother jumped in and didn't let him answer. Calling him the child, shit he must have been 30!

I'd say any mother would do the same in that kind of situation

That's foul, disgusting and pointless. It's bad enough that they're trying to place a good memory with Paul Hill, but re-enacting the murders? There's very little more disgusting than that.

No no, I never compared menstruation to miscarriages - that is a misinterpretation. I compared a fertilized egg being ejected by simply failing to adhere to the uterine walls (also known as a spontaneous abortion) to a miscarriage. And after consulting Wikipedia to check my definition, it appears that "miscarriage" is indeed the correct term for such an event.

I just have to correct this. According to Wikipedia, a miscarriage is "the natural or spontaneous end of a pregnancy at a stage where the embryo or the fetus is incapable of surviving, generally defined in humans at a gestation of prior to 20 weeks."

Pregnancy does not even begin until an embryo implants in the uterine wall. Thus, it is not correct to refer to a lack of implantation as a "miscarriage." This is why devices like IUDs (or measures such as Plan B) are classified as contraceptives, rather than abortificants.

Pregnancy does not even begin until an embryo implants in the uterine wall. Thus, it is not correct to refer to a lack of implantation as a "miscarriage." This is why devices like IUDs (or measures such as Plan B) are classified as contraceptives, rather than abortificants.
As LG said earlier, it increases the odds rom 1 in 4 to 0 in 4 of the egg NOT implanting itself in the uterine wall. ;) (just playing on his statements).

First and foremost, all of you consistently labeling me as "anti-choice" is a poor debating tactic because the sense in which you are using it is as prejudicial language (which incidentally is a logical fallacy, but that's beside the point). I am only "anti-choice" insofar as I am against choosing abortion; I am completely pro-choice in that I support a woman's right to give the baby up for adoption as well as keep it.

The term anti-choice is neither insulting nor prejudicial. In the context of this particular topic, it is an accurate description of the position of those who would make abortion illegal. It doesn't matter how much you support other choices, you are opposed to (ie. anti) the ability to make this choice.

"Pro-life" is not an adequate descriptor because it is not opposed to pro-choice position. It is perfectly possible to be both pro-life (ie. in favor of allowing the embryo/fetus to develop and live) and pro-choice. Many of us are opposed to abortion and also opposed to making the option illegal.

You don't differ from those who are pro-choice (at least not all who are pro-choice) in your personal views about abortion. You differ from them in your wish to remove a legal medical choice from women. That makes you, quite simply put, anti-choice on this particular issue.

Either way, I do not disparage you every time I talk about you by calling you "anti-life," so at least have the courtesy not to purposely disparage me by calling me "anti-choice."

Of course you don't use the term "anti-life." It would be completely inappropriate as being pro-choice has nothing to do with being opposed to life.

Careful where you go with that definition - you can make the argument that the mentally handicapped don't have "senses" in the commonly understood sense, as could the fact that many kinds of these disorders are caused by brains that are not "normal human" brains. So unless you're prepared to authorize post-natal abortions for these people, I'm not sure that that definition can hold.

Actually, since we consider anyone with brain function equal to that at the time of legal abortions, I'm cool with that. If you have no forebrain function you are considered legally and medically to be dead. The embryo and fetus do not have forebrain function until the third trimester when abortions are no longer generally available as elective procedures.

Seems like you believe we should make such a comparison. Good. Then your argument is lost, of course. If only you'd bother to actually get as educated about the process as you claim to be. That certainly would have helped you here.

Meanwhile, why is your line at conception? You keep saying that potential to become something is so important. I mean "just because you're only an egg and not yet an embryo doesn't mean you shouldn't have rights."

*snip*

I may come back to other parts of your long fillibuster later, but for now I am only addressing 2 points.

Come now, if you are as well-read as you pass yourself off to be, surely you are aware that there are studies (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1431) that go both ways. I personally have talked with gynecologists who have assured me that in their experience, women do indeed suffer psychologically after having an abortion and that the rate of suicide for those having had abortions is higher than those who have not. Forgive me, but I trust their opinions rather more than those of a "random internet person" (to use the phrase someone coined earlier in the thread to describe me).

However, being the reasonable person that I am, this does not mean that I am going to completely discard your evidence. Rather, I am willing to agree that in the absence of a definitive conclusion, we can simply say that the matter is indeterminable and stop going around in circles when we obviously are not going to convince each other of our own position's correctness.

Meh. I'm not going to fall for your false equivalence. There is not equal evidence from each side. There is enough evidence for a definitive conclusion that abortion is safe.

You cite one study and some unverifiable anecdotes. And that study is inconclusive as to any increased risk from pregnancy versus abortion. If you've read it, you should know that. The abstract is misleading. They found an association between pregnancy and suicide, not induced abortion and suicide. Without a comparison of pregnancies ending in induced versus spontaneous abortion or induced abortion versus delivery, an association between induced abortion and suicide remains conjectural.

On the other hand, here are some of the studies indicating that abortion is not a mental health risk:

Psychological implications of abortion — highly charged and rife with misleading research (http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/168/10/1257)
Wellbeing and mental growth-long-term effects of legal abortion. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15081205)
The Psychological Effects of First Trimester Abortion (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research4.asp)
The psychological sequelae of therapeutic abortion--denied and completed (http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/148/5/578)
The effects of induced abortion on emotional experiences and relationships: a critical review of the literature. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14624822) Post Abortion Stress Syndrome (http://www.msmagazine.com/aug01/pas.html)
Therapeutic abortion and its psychological implications: the Canadian experience (http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/abstract/113/8/754)
The Psychological Effects of Abortion for Adolescents (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research3.asp)
The Relationship of Abortion to Well-Being. Do Race and Religion Make a Difference? (http://www.nlsbibliography.org/qauthor.php3?xxx=RUSSO,+NANCY+FELIPE)
Abortion (http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic5.htm)
Abortion and its Health Effects (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research1.asp)
Abortion perils debated (http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/169/2/101-c?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=Abortion+and+Psychiatric+Illness+&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1112588833053_5636&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1&journalcode=cmaj)
When urban adolescents choose abortion: effects on education, psychological status and subsequent pregnancy. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=2620716&dopt=Abstract)
Termination of pregnancy and psychiatric morbidity (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/167/2/243)
Abortion, Reproductive History and Substance Abuse (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research2.asp)
Unwanted childbearing, health, and mother-child relationships. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10513146&dopt=Abstract)Adolescents and adjustment to abortion: are minors at greater risk? (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12953681)
The Public Health Impact of Legal Abortion: 30 Years Later (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3502503.html)
Abortion, Childbearing, and Women's Well-Being (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_research5.asp)
Testimony of Nada L. Stotland, MD, MPH to the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space (http://www.prch.org/advocacy_policy/stotland.shtml)
Psychological responses of women after first-trimester abortion. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10920466&dopt=Abstract)
Psychological responses after abortion. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=2181664&dopt=Abstract)
Study Challenges Abortion Trauma (http://www.libchrist.com/other/abortion/trauma.html)
Psychological factors in abortion. A review. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1443858&dopt=Abstract)
The Context for the Development of 'Post-Abortion Syndrome' (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_coun9.asp)
Is abortion a health risk? There is no evidence that abortion poses a risk either to women's mental or physical health. (http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000054E4.htm)
The myth of the abortion trauma syndrome. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1404747&dopt=Abstract)
Emotional response to abortion: a critical review of the literature. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12316615&dopt=Abstract)
Abortion Psychological Sequelae: the debate and the research (http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/psy_coun3.asp)
Psychiatric sequelae to term birth and induced early and late abortion: a longitudinal study. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=4156672&dopt=Abstract)
Pregnancy decision making: predictors of early stress and adjustment (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=12345377&dopt=Abstract)
Psychological Responses of Women After First-Trimester Abortion (http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/8/777)
Psychological alterations following induced abortion (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6789186&dopt=Abstract)
Mental health consequences of abortion and refused abortion (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6989474&dopt=Abstract)
Abortion and the Null Hypothesis (http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/57/8/785)
Psychosocial consequences of therapeutic abortion (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/128/1/74?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=abortion&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1112592868160_5389&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=10&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1)
The psychological complications of therapeutic abortion (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/160/6/742?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=abortion&searchid=1112592976946_695&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance)
The psychiatric consequences of spontaneous abortion (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/155/6/810?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=abortion&searchid=1112592976946_695&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance)
The Emotional Effects of Induced Abortion (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/fact-010600-emoteff.xml)

Your assertions that abortion is harmful and risky to women are patently false. Simply concede the point.

Um, have you ever read Mill, or are you just trying to sound smart? Allow me to quote from page nine of the 1978 Hackett edition of "On Liberty" (the quote is rather lengthy, but bear with me):


(Emphasis is mine.)

So you see, Mill does provide for a situation in which one's liberty may be rightfully intruded upon, and it applies perfectly to this debate. The mother going through with an abortion is certainly "harm to others," the other in this case being the unborn child.

And yes, I am also willing to apply this principle to the question of abortion's effect on women. I would certainly remonstrate and entreat women not to go through with a procedure that can harm them, but if it were only their body that they were affecting, I would ultimately surrender to their liberty to make their own choices. Again, the problem arises in that they are not just submitting themselves to the procedure, they are willfully killing another person.

And before you start on about a baby infringing on a mother's health, see below where I address this.

You citing Mill is like the Devil quoting scripture.

In trying to insult my alleged ignorance, you avoid the question: Can you give a situation where Mill's liberty principle results in my loss of control over my own body?

You appear to put Mill on his head by concluding that Mill endorses coercion anytime harm to another can be imagined. But that is a necessary prerequisite for coercion, not a sufficient grounds for any coercion.

And, yes, your argument even further falls apart when we consider that the unborn child infringes upon and harms the mother. You have to switch your argument to a vague notion of consent on the part of the mother. (Note that you nonetheless don't make an exception in the case of rape.)

What part of Mill's liberty principle would justify forcing a raped woman to carry a pregnancy to childbirth even when that pregnancy would cause severe bodily harm to the woman?

Zarakon - Well, OK. If you aren't mature enough to at least have some common courtesy and respect as I have striven to do (not to mention giving sarcastic, one-line responses to partial snippings of my arguments), then I won't waste my time on you any more. I suppose it was silly of me to hope for better on NSG, anyway. Good day, sir.

You do not deserve a better argument. Frankly, you have insulted NSG's intelligence by constantly using terms like "innocent child" and "baby" to describe a fetus.

And yes, you did compare menstruation to miscarriage. This is what you said in response to people saying that by the logic of the anti-choicers menstruation is murder:

Without the intent to murder, a fertilized egg being flushed from the body is a natural occurrence that doesn't fall into the realm of abortion or murder. I would consider it akin to a miscarriage.