Except that banning won't reduce the overall number of abortions at all.
However instead of professional abortions in hygienic clinics it'll be back alley jobs with a significant rise in infections that affect the health of the mothers.
As the previous poster said the answer is Sex-Ed, not talking-out-of-your-arse moralizing.

(May 28, 2014 at 10:10 am)alpha male Wrote:

(May 25, 2014 at 12:32 pm)Tea Earl Grey Hot Wrote: It's claimed that the pro-life movement really exists because pro-lifers don't want women to be equals with men. Being anti-abortion in other words is one major way they can bolster traditional patriarchy. If that's the case, then why are so many pro-lifers women? From my experience, the most vocal (and annoying) pro-lifers are women. Are these women wanting to limit their own freedom? Are they wanting to be subservient to men? Why?

Because most of them have been pregnant and had children and from their experience believe that an unborn child is a life with value.

I have three children and I am still pro-choice. I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have abortions already have at least one child also.

(May 29, 2014 at 2:47 pm)Losty Wrote: I have three children and I am still pro-choice.

Uh, OK.

Quote:I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have abortions already have at least one child also.

Yes, it's about 60%.

(May 29, 2014 at 2:52 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(May 29, 2014 at 2:47 pm)Losty Wrote: I have three children and I am still pro-choice.

Uh, OK.

Quote:I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have abortions already have at least one child also.

Yes, it's about 60%.

Uh OK

You are such an asshole just saying.

Anyways, I disagree with your statement that women who are pro life are pro life "Because most of them have been pregnant and had children and from their experience believe that an unborn child is a life with value."

I think most women who are pro-life are pro-life for the same reason that most men, because they think sex is bad and the think women deserve to be punished for having irresponsible sex.

---

(May 29, 2014 at 1:15 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:

(May 29, 2014 at 8:16 am)alpha male Wrote: For me, and I assume for many others, this is a matter of idealism v. practicality. I don't think it's morally correct to abort in the case of rape, but I'm "OK" with making that concession if it would reduce abortion overall.

You know what would reduce abortions overall?

Sex ed! Using fucking condoms, because you were told why you needed to use them!

Who have the most abortions? Fucking religious people!

Quote:Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

http://www.antiochian.org/node/16950

Religious people who are fucking, but not using condoms, because they think it's either "a sin," or you don't feel like educating your children on the basic biology, and prevent the school system from doing it as well.

You want to reduce abortions?

Educate your kids. It doesn't matter how you feel about it, they're going to have sex, and if they're women, they're going to have a lot of sex, roughly double the sex your average male child will have.

Stop being so fucking religious. That would lower abortions by 87%.

This exactly the most important step is to stop teaching children that sex is bad or shameful.

The second step is real sex education. When I was in 7th grade we had sex ed. It was a series of pictures of penises and vaginas with terrible deforming std's, followed by a stream of single teenage mothers with broken dreams, and finally the if you have sex you will get STDs and unwanted babies and your life will be ruined speech. This isn't what we need. We need real sex ed. We need to teach about responsible choices and how to have sex without getting STDs or pregnant.

The last step is making birth control (including the morning after pill) cheap and easy to access for everyone.

(May 29, 2014 at 2:56 pm)Losty Wrote: Uh OK

You are such an asshole just saying.

Anyways, I disagree with your statement that women who are pro life are pro life "Because most of them have been pregnant and had children and from their experience believe that an unborn child is a life with value."

I think most women who are pro-life are pro-life for the same reason and most men, because they think sex is bad and the think women deserve to be punished for having irresponsible sex.

I find this nonsensical. The women we're speaking of tend to see great value in motherhood. They don't see motherhood as punishment.

(May 29, 2014 at 3:07 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(May 29, 2014 at 2:56 pm)Losty Wrote: Uh OK

You are such an asshole just saying.

Anyways, I disagree with your statement that women who are pro life are pro life "Because most of them have been pregnant and had children and from their experience believe that an unborn child is a life with value."

I think most women who are pro-life are pro-life for the same reason and most men, because they think sex is bad and the think women deserve to be punished for having irresponsible sex.

I find this nonsensical. The women we're speaking of tend to see great value in motherhood. They don't see motherhood as punishment.

I don't see motherhood as a punishment. I see motherhood as a choice. A beautiful choice. The best choice I've ever made three times.

My opinion isn't nonsensical. I cannot count the number of times I've heard a Christian woman say something along the lines of, "abortion is wrong if she didn't want a baby she shouldn't have had sex it's as simple as that".

(May 29, 2014 at 3:13 pm)Losty Wrote: I don't see motherhood as a punishment. I see motherhood as a choice. A beautiful choice. The best choice I've ever made three times.

My opinion isn't nonsensical. I cannot count the number of times I've heard a Christian woman say something along the lines of, "abortion is wrong if she didn't want a baby she shouldn't have had sex it's as simple as that".

There's nothing in that statement that indicates that keeping the baby is punishment. You're reading that into the statement.

(May 29, 2014 at 3:07 pm)alpha male Wrote: I find this nonsensical. The women we're speaking of tend to see great value in motherhood. They don't see motherhood as punishment.

(May 29, 2014 at 3:18 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(May 29, 2014 at 3:13 pm)Losty Wrote: I don't see motherhood as a punishment. I see motherhood as a choice. A beautiful choice. The best choice I've ever made three times.

My opinion isn't nonsensical. I cannot count the number of times I've heard a Christian woman say something along the lines of, "abortion is wrong if she didn't want a baby she shouldn't have had sex it's as simple as that".

There's nothing in that statement that indicates that keeping the baby is punishment. You're reading that into the statement.

It's not even 2, and AlphaMale is already drunk posting.

OK, I understand your position better now but there are still a few issues:

(May 29, 2014 at 12:21 pm)alpha male Wrote: I never said that. I don't know that I'd classify a fetus as "thinking." I doubt that I'd classify an infant as "thinking" either.

Actually, infants do "think" as do animals. The thoughts may be simple (I'm tired, I'm hungry, I'm wet, etc.) but they are "thoughts".

There's no evidence that a fetus thinks prior to week 21. It's after week 21 when brain development begins. It's also after this point that the fetus shows signs of awareness, such as reactions to loud noises. After week 21, there is some question as to when thinking and self-awareness begins. I'll leave the specifics to biologists but I use week 21 as a conservative placement of a benchmark.

Getting to my take on the abortion issue, the anti-abortion crowd can talk about fingerprints and heartbeats all they like. Without the brain, as we say in Kentucky, "there's no there there". 91% of abortions happen during the 1st trimester, well before week 21. The laws we have on the book now make it next to impossible to get an abortion after week 21. The mother's life has to be in danger.

When I was "pro-life", I advocated getting religion, sex and gender out of the discussion as distractions and focus on the core issue of "person A's right to life vs. person B's right to choice". At the time, I concluded that person A's right to life trumps person B's right to choice. Since I have studied fetal development, I've discovered there is no "person A". Left only with person B's right to choice, which was never in dispute as far as I was concerned, I've been pro-choice ever since.

Quote:As noted, I'm not hiding anything.

A bit debatable. If you claim you are against abortion except in cases of rape but in reality your objective is to ban ALL abortions whether the fetus was conceived during rape or no, it's a bit dishonest.

Now, if you're saying that your objective is to ban all abortions even in cases of rape, then you'd be fully honest.

Quote:Speaking of dishonesty, what do you think of someone who spins a large reduction in deaths as being genocide?

Advocating for the execution of all children conceived in rape strikes me as genocidal.

Now, for me it's not a problem to "allow" abortion when the fetus is conceived in rape because abortion isn't murder. It's when you ascribe all the traits and rights of living beings to a fetus and then turn around and say you're OK with someone killing it if the father was a rapist that I get uncomfortable with your line of thinking.

However, you have said you don't believe in absolute morals, so I withdraw my charge that you're inconsistent. My apologies for assuming just because you're a Christian that you advocate for such a concept. I'm so used to that being part of the package.

Quote:Yes, if all women are liars, but I have more respect for them. Some might lie, but many won't, therefore reducing the number of abortions (which is a genocide in your thinking).

Rampant AI commented how sex education and birth control are the most effective ways of decreasing abortion. Do you advocate for these things?

(May 29, 2014 at 6:55 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Actually, infants do "think" as do animals. The thoughts may be simple (I'm tired, I'm hungry, I'm wet, etc.) but they are "thoughts".

There's no evidence that a fetus thinks prior to week 21. It's after week 21 when brain development begins. It's also after this point that the fetus shows signs of awareness, such as reactions to loud noises. After week 21, there is some question as to when thinking and self-awareness begins. I'll leave the specifics to biologists but I use week 21 as a conservative placement of a benchmark.

Getting to my take on the abortion issue, the anti-abortion crowd can talk about fingerprints and heartbeats all they like. Without the brain, as we say in Kentucky, "there's no there there". 91% of abortions happen during the 1st trimester, well before week 21. The laws we have on the book now make it next to impossible to get an abortion after week 21. The mother's life has to be in danger.

Your opinion that life begins with brain activity is noted. IMO, we consider DNA as an identifier of a person, and DNA is determined at conception. Without DNA, there's no there there either. Same with a heartbeat.

Quote:When I was "pro-life", I advocated getting religion, sex and gender out of the discussion as distractions and focus on the core issue of "person A's right to life vs. person B's right to choice". At the time, I concluded that person A's right to life trumps person B's right to choice. Since I have studied fetal development, I've discovered there is no "person A". Left only with person B's right to choice, which was never in dispute as far as I was concerned, I've been pro-choice ever since.

You act as if you made a discovery of an objective fact. You didn't. The factors that determine personhood are a matter of opinion.

Quote:A bit debatable. If you claim you are against abortion except in cases of rape but in reality your objective is to ban ALL abortions whether the fetus was conceived during rape or no, it's a bit dishonest.

I didn't claim I'm against abortion except in cases of rape. I clearly noted that the rape exception is for me a practical concession or compromise.

Quote:Now, if you're saying that your objective is to ban all abortions even in cases of rape, then you'd be fully honest.

No, that wouldn't be honest, as I don't have an objective. I have a moral position.

Quote:Advocating for the execution of all children conceived in rape strikes me as genocidal.

Maybe...but I haven't advocated the execution of all children conceived in rape.

Quote:Rampant AI commented how sex education and birth control are the most effective ways of decreasing abortion. Do you advocate for these things?

I have no problems with sex education and birth control.