Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Results Of Abortion Poll Discussion  
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1504 times:

OK, counting up the results up to reply 80, here are the results:

Quote:
1. Do you believe that a woman should be able to have a 1st trimester with few or no restrictions.
YES: 28 (68%) NO: 13 (32%)

Quote:
2. Do you believe that a woman should be able to have a 2nd trimester with few or no restrictions. (Fetus has working heart, brain and other organs, but is not independently viable)

YES: 24 (58%) NO: 17 (42%)

Quote:
3. Do you believe that Late Term Abortion (3rd Trimester) should be allowed with few on no restrictions. (Fetus is generally viable - many children are born 2-3 months early and survive with a little care)

YES: 9 (22%) NO: 32 (78%)

Observations:

It appears that the abortion debate is more complex than the media would have you believe. Or even pro-life proponents. A large majority favor the right to abortion within the first months of pregnancy. A somewhat smaller majority favor allowing abortion in the 2nd trimester. But by far the biggest majority vote was against late-term abortions.

If the abortion debate in the courts and media were separated into these three categories, I think we would have a lot less to argue about. By a large majority, women would be able to have abortions. The problem comes with late-term abortions. These are so horrific in concept and practice that even most pro-choice people shy away from it. I think if the late-term abortion fans would back off from that demand, they will find it a whole lot easier to ensure that early and mid-term abortion remains legal. Extremism begets extremism.

On a personal note, check out this website. This is the website of a Kansas doctor who specializes in late-term abortions. He gets $5,000 per procedure. http://www.drtiller.com/elect.html

Some people in the poll thread mentioned that the late term abortion should only be after a bit of counseling. Well, it better not be from this doctor - If you were about to make $5,000 bucks on the procedure, would you be trying hard to talk her out of it?

This is the page that really struck me.

http://www.drtiller.com/remembrance.html

Quote:
Many patients request a remembrance of their baby to take home with them. The following lists items and services that some of our previous patients have found helpful in their emotional recovery. Everyone approaches this experience with their own unique emotional, spiritual, and cultural background. There is not right way or wrong way, just "your way". Once the process of healing has begun, you may want to consider a token of the precious time you and your baby had together. All of these features of our program will be discusssed with you while you are with us:

Viewing your baby after delivery
Holding your baby after delivery
Photographs of your baby
Baptism of your baby, with or without a certificate
Footprints and handprints of your baby
Certificate of premature miscarriage
Cremation
An urn for ashes
Arrangement of burial in either Wichita or your home state
Arrangement of amniocentesis/autopsy
Medical photographsand x-rays for your health care professional

Holy crap!!!

This isn't some operation to remove a bad spleen, apparently. When was the last time you did all the above for an extracted appendix? The women who go through this must go through some pretty awful remorse if Dr. Tiller offers these services.

It also shows how the baby would have been alive, independently viable, and who knows, maybe the next Einstein or Lennon. Except that someone decided to kill him/her. Sorry, but I see little difference between late-term abortion and the killing of a child. The argument that "it is part of a woman's body and thus her decision" is worthless IMHO, because that late in the pregnancy, if you cut the umbilical cord, the baby could live.

Discussion please...

[Edited 2006-11-06 13:12:45]

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3076 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1500 times:

Um you better change the tiele...I think you meant abortion and not adoption.  wink 

GS



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1498 times:

Quoting Greasespot (Reply 1):
Um you better change the tiele...I think you meant abortion and not adoption.

Done. Thanks for the spot - a little brain fart this early in the morning...


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1482 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Thread starter):
Sorry, but I see little difference between late-term abortion and the killing of a child.

Very much agreed.

I am pro-life.

I also don't like the terms of the public debate as framed by those who support abortion claiming that it's a matter of the mother's choice. (I do call them "pro choicers" out of courtesy, but it's purely out of courtesy, and nothing more.) It's not a choice. It's whether a living child is being killed.


User currently offlineGOTbound From Sweden, joined Oct 2006, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1467 times:

Quote:
Viewing your baby after delivery
Holding your baby after delivery
Photographs of your baby
Baptism of your baby, with or without a certificate
Footprints and handprints of your baby
Certificate of premature miscarriage
Cremation
An urn for ashes
Arrangement of burial in either Wichita or your home state
Arrangement of amniocentesis/autopsy
Medical photographsand x-rays for your health care professional .



This make me sick and angry!

EK


User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4264 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1465 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Thread starter):
Sorry, but I see little difference between late-term abortion and the killing of a child. The argument that "it is part of a woman's body and thus her decision" is worthless IMHO, because that late in the pregnancy, if you cut the umbilical cord, the baby could live.

Sounds like you agree with The Supreme Court holdings in the well known abortion cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineBlackbird07 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 77 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1457 times:

Late-term bothers me to no end...

By the time a baby is THAT far along, the mother should just give birth and give the child to someone who wants it. Unless the mother is dying, or the baby is dying or for sure will die, there is no reason to kill it.

Keeping remembrance of the child is just awful, unless it had to be taken because of some life or death battle. It's so sad  Sad



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward..."
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1436 times:

Quoting Texan (Reply 5):
Sounds like you agree with The Supreme Court holdings in the well known abortion cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

I'm not an expert on the details of those decisions. My feelings in a nutshell are:

a) I greatly dislike the concept of abortion, but understand that there are valid reasons (including poverty, youth of the mother) for having an abortion that outweigh the POTENTIAL human being at stake, particularly early in the pregnancy.

b) As the pregnancy progresses, that POTENTIAL human being passes gradually from being simply a potential human being to an actual human being. Thus, gradually, the welfare of the mother ceases to outweigh that of the baby morally speaking, until at birth, when the child is a full-fledged person with all the rights and everything else. I feel that the transition in reality is gradual, not instant. The legal system unfortunately cannot well deal with gradual transitions, and a threshhold must be drawn.

c) I think the 3rd trimester provides a pretty good threshhold of this type. Before then, the baby is incapable of living without the mother. But as of the 7th month, there is a general expectation that a 7-month old fetus born prematurely can survive, with only a little care. I believe at that point that the welfare of the child outweighs the whims or concerns of the mother. Once the child can indeed live and breath independently (even if nature says it should spend another couple of months in the oven), I don't think you can condemn it to death any more than you can kill a 1-year old child.

d) I also believe that, constitutionally, abortion is NOT within the domain of the Federal government, unless a constitutional amendment is passed. Until that is done, I think it is a state issue.


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1423 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Thread starter):
The women who go through this must go through some pretty awful remorse if Dr. Tiller offers these services.

Someone very close to me went through a partial birth abortion (it was after 5 or 6 months I think), because the foetus was badly malformed and had a 0% chance of survival beyond the first week of life. It was a hideously traumatic procedure, and a heartbreaking decision to have had to make, but the NHS did provide at least some of the procedures described, and it was a partial comfort at least that the foetus was buried decently and with some ceremony. It was awful, really really sad, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But there always has to be a choice.


User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1418 times:

Quote:
It appears that the abortion debate is more complex than the media would have you believe.

That's no problem, because this 'complex' debate was already resolved in South Dakota by following the Fundamentalist Evangelical Nicaraguan example. Mission accomplished.



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12038 posts, RR: 47
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1412 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 3):
I am pro-life.

Are you also in favour of the death penalty?



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlineNkops From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2634 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1409 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 7):
youth of the mother

I understand what you mean here, but if the mother is that young, she just shouldn't have sex if she can't handle the responsibilty and/or consequences.



next flights ACY-TPA-ACY on NK, ACY-ORD-DEN-IAH-ACY on UA
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1402 times:

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 8):
Someone very close to me went through a partial birth abortion (it was after 5 or 6 months I think), because the foetus was badly malformed and had a 0% chance of survival beyond the first week of life. It was a hideously traumatic procedure, and a heartbreaking decision to have had to make, but the NHS did provide at least some of the procedures described, and it was a partial comfort at least that the foetus was buried decently and with some ceremony. It was awful, really really sad, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But there always has to be a choice.

I think your example shows where Late term abortion might be legitimate. But unfortunately, it is not often the case.

In Kansas, the law says that Late term abortion is allowed for medical reasons which would endanger the long term health of the mother. But this article suggests that Tiller is giving them a diagnosis of temporary depression (which does not satisfy the law).

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/no...cs_seek_investigation_ag_fox_host/

(BTW, Tiller is upset that a reporter saw the records - I don't see any denial that the claims are true).

I think there needs to be some sort of peer review process, where the mother needs to have her case examined by one or more doctors who are in no way financially linked to the doctor who makes money from the procedure.

[Edited 2006-11-06 19:15:18]

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1393 times:

Quoting Nkops (Reply 11):
I understand what you mean here, but if the mother is that young, she just shouldn't have sex if she can't handle the responsibilty and/or consequences.

Ever heard of busted condoms? No contraceptive measure that I know is 100% effective.

You also have to consider that we live in a world and culture where sex is glamorized. Kids have sex younger and younger. What's the percentage of virgin marriages today? Not high. I could go on...

The fact of the matter is that kids are going to have sex, and the more you tell them they shouldn't, the more they are gonna do it.

It is also a fact that a kid who has a child at age, say, 15 or 16, basically has their life ruined. They are generally unable to stay in school and lead a normal teen life. They very frequently end up dirt poor.

If they were adults, you might have an argument that "you reap what you sow (literally)". But these are kids in the midst of raging hormones and hip-hop booty videos. I think a little consideration needs to be given for that.


User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4264 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1390 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 7):
I'm not an expert on the details of those decisions.

In a nutshell, Roe broke down the process into trimesters. The court held that

Quote:
(a) for the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.
(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

Basically, it says that the "right" to first trimester abortions cannot be infringed by the state. Second trimester abortions may be regulated by the state. For instance, the state can place a 24 hour (or potentially more) waiting period between the time a woman consults a physician about an abortion and the performance of the abortion, materials describing alternate options may be given to her, etc. The regulations are the main point, aside from upholding Roe, of the holding in Planned Parenthood. Third trimester abortions may be regulated or banned by states except where it is necessary for the preservation of life or health of the mother.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineGOTbound From Sweden, joined Oct 2006, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1380 times:

Quote:
Ever heard of busted condoms? No contraceptive measure that I know is 100% effective

There is such thing as the "day after" pill, basically pill for women that forgot... so the busted condom is not a excuse, but I don't encourage the use of "day after" pills, think of all consequences before you have sex. I only had intercourse with one person, and that it's the mrs GOTbound and the mother to my baby boy!

I still had other sexual (besides penetration sex) encounters with women in my not so distant "youth". But hjey, I judge no one, that was choises I made.

I see it like this way, who want to go with a used car?  Wink

EK


User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1376 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 3):
It's not a choice. It's whether a living child is being killed.

In case of the first two thirds it simply is NOT a "LIVING" child.


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1354 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 12):
(BTW, Tiller is upset that a reporter saw the records - I don't see any denial that the claims are true).

I think there needs to be some sort of peer review process, where the mother needs to have her case examined by one or more doctors who are in no way financially linked to the doctor who makes money from the procedure.

As an aside, and not to start a red herring, but this is where state-funded health-care perhaps has an advantage - it removes the aspect of financial interest from medical decisions (in theory). At least it removes the distraction of direct personal gain.


User currently offlineBushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1349 times:

I didnt get into the original abortion poll, but I am pro-choice. I would only support third tri-mester if the mothers life was in danger. I also would only support those under 18 getting one with thier parents permission, or court permission as the case my provide. I would also like to see the case being that a woman is allowed only one "elective" abortion in thier lives.

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 17):
As an aside, and not to start a red herring, but this is where state-funded health-care perhaps has an advantage - it removes the aspect of financial interest from medical decisions (in theory). At least it removes the distraction of direct personal gain.

In France, as I recall, which has state-paid medical care, doctors are paid a fee for each procedure by the state. Comes to the same problem.


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1338 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 19):
In France, as I recall, which has state-paid medical care, doctors are paid a fee for each procedure by the state. Comes to the same problem.

Yes, but they don't own the hospital - a fee is one thing, the whole kit and caboodle is another. Plus the state (recently) has been getting a bit stricter about what it pays for and when. They're not saying no, but they are quite strict on peer review etc.


User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3345 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1308 times:

I don't think a poll on abortion can really be accurate until you start getting into different circumstances. A lot of pro-life people I know (myself included) are against elective abortions, but okay with them if they are therapeutic or for rape.

How anyone can even think of an elective late term abortion is beyond me.

AAndrew


User currently offlineWalter747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1440 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1305 times:

haha this reminds me of a scene from Monster in Law where jane fonda was interviewing a britney spears type person and jane asked how do you feel about roe vs. wade and the girl responded "i dont support boxing, i think its to violent." Jane fonda then jumped across the table and strangled her. haha good stuff.


Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
User currently offlineUnoflygirl From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 140 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1294 times:

Obviously this topic is a very heated debate. As one of the few women on this website, I believe in a woman's right to choose. While I believe that life is important, I feel it's more important for the woman, and the man, involved be prepared to raise a child before they go ahead with the pregnancy. A child deserves a loving and nurturing home and if a couple isn't prepared to give that, then why have more and more children growing up in dysfunctional families or in foster care and adoption agencies.

Also, if a bright woman is on track for a great future, why should she have to give that up because of an accident/mistake? A couple could do all they can to prevent pregnancy, but it could still happen. I understand that the couple could still keep that future, but for some that's just not possible.

And another thing, why does it always seem to be the woman's fault?! Guys are just as much at fault as the woman, it's just not as big a deal because they wouldn't be the one's carrying around the baby for 9 months.

My apologies for going off on a tangent, but I just wanted to put in my two cents.



"I'm not anxious to die...just anxious to matter"
User currently offlineSpeedbird747BA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1289 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 10):
Are you also in favour of the death penalty?

This is nothing more than an argument for arguing. Flamebait.

Cheers,
Kyle


25 SATX : I agree 100%. Just keep in mind that if you think this website is somewhat unreceptive of your views, you should follow what's already going on in So
26 Dw9115 : Excuse me but maybe you should look at the great state of South Dakota and it's voters they are expected to repeal the law on Tuesday by a 68%. Also
27 N1120A : The courts have already established this in the US. Well, wasn't that pointless. If you wanted to say something about your anti-choice views, you sho
28 Post contains links SATX : Did they not also vote to place Mike Rounds, William Napoli & Company in office in the first place? Forgive me for not taking your state's back-track
29 CastleIsland : I suppose that I could quote a good number of statements in this thread to preface my point, but I'd rather make it on my own. I do support a woman's
30 Dw9115 : My Senator I think not my Senator is Frank Kloucek oh which by the way voted against the law. Governor Rounds Has publicly said he thinks the law had
31 CastleIsland : What language is this? Ohigetitit'ssomeformofenglish.gladtoseeyouareontheotherside.
32 TACAA320 : Mother Teresa of Calcutta confronted President Clinton on his pro-abortion stand in early February at the National Prayer Breakfast. Last week she too
33 SFOMEX : Every abortion is a tragedy. We allow ourselves to kill the weakest among us, the very same we are supposed to defend at any cost. I understand why ma
34 SATX : Well, unless you live in Iraq.
35 Post contains images JGPH1A : On behalf of the entire human race, allow me to say "Not us !".
36 Greasespot : Not pro abortion....Pro choice.....I do not know anyonw who like abortion......we just do not want to take choice away from where it belongs. With th
37 Beefstew25 : From the original post: I am anti-death penalty because I don't want to be seen as a hypocrite when it comes to abortion. But there is definately a d
38 Halls120 : I agree. I find it odd that so many abortion opponents are death penalty supporters.
39 CastleIsland : I was discussing the converse with DL021 on the way back from BHM on Sunday. Many people who are pro-choice are against the death penalty. I'm one (t
40 Beefstew25 : Kill the innocent and protect the guilty....I don't understand it...
41 Halls120 : I didn't mean to single out the abortion no/DP yes crowd from the abortion yes/DP no crowd. They are both widely populated groups. Personally, I pref
42 N1120A : Throwing someone in jail for life isn't "protecting" them and you can't kill something that isn't living. It is your opinion that it is consistent to
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Need Help To Rigging Results Of A Online Poll posted Sun Jun 8 2003 06:18:54 by L-188
Abortion Poll posted Sun Nov 5 2006 05:00:58 by Cfalk
The Results Of Studying Too Much. posted Fri Jan 27 2006 01:20:31 by Cadet57
Results Of LSU Levee Study In Nola posted Thu Dec 1 2005 23:56:59 by Slider
Results Of Your Surveys posted Thu Jul 26 2001 18:02:12 by SFOintern
Official Poll Results Discussion Thread posted Wed Nov 8 2006 00:02:23 by AerospaceFan
Scary Poll Of American Muslims posted Mon Oct 30 2006 07:04:48 by RJpieces
Out Of All The Times I Have A Good Chat Discussion posted Wed Aug 2 2006 05:52:50 by Touchdown777
Some Good News Coming Out Of Iraqi BBC Poll posted Mon Dec 12 2005 16:31:16 by WhiteHatter
"99% Of A.net" Myth - The Shocking Results! posted Thu Jun 30 2005 01:34:41 by Birdwatching