Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 9:31 am

AirWorthy99 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

The future of earth’s civilization is looking into Asia and Africa. Countries that have a higher reproductive rate than 2, whats needed to keep the human race alive and not exctinct.

Unfortunately for the rest of the world, we need to have excellent and amazing conditions to even consider the continuation of our civilization.

Thats whats coming.

Ask your cousin what would happen when there arent enough people to actually populate the earth if all of the sudden the bar is constantly being raised and as a result we are to have less children and thus not enough people to keep this going.

Yeah sounds crazy but look at the birth rates in the west.

Elon Musk does have a point and the guy is smart.


Your comments are wholesale divorced from reality. World population today is 7.9 billion and counting. When I was born it was 4.5 billion.

My cousin practices medicine in a supposedly developed country, and those are the standards mothers and patients are facing up to, not somewhere else. Higher economic performance has always depressed birthrates, that’s just human nature.


Right

https://ourworldindata.org/exports/chil ... 50x600.svg

That can show you that even in countries which have all of those benefits you mention the fertility rates are low, yes looking at you EUROPE.

Its because our overly educated and egoistical society of me, me and I dont want the responsabiluty and the inconvenience.

Well there you have it, very soon the population will age out. Africa will lead the world. Yes despite them being worse off in abject poverty.


So societal benefits trump the freedoms of an individual?

Fred
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 10:21 am

AirWorthy99 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

The future of earth’s civilization is looking into Asia and Africa. Countries that have a higher reproductive rate than 2, whats needed to keep the human race alive and not exctinct.

Unfortunately for the rest of the world, we need to have excellent and amazing conditions to even consider the continuation of our civilization.

Thats whats coming.

Ask your cousin what would happen when there arent enough people to actually populate the earth if all of the sudden the bar is constantly being raised and as a result we are to have less children and thus not enough people to keep this going.

Yeah sounds crazy but look at the birth rates in the west.

Elon Musk does have a point and the guy is smart.


Your comments are wholesale divorced from reality. World population today is 7.9 billion and counting. When I was born it was 4.5 billion.

My cousin practices medicine in a supposedly developed country, and those are the standards mothers and patients are facing up to, not somewhere else. Higher economic performance has always depressed birthrates, that’s just human nature.


Right

https://ourworldindata.org/exports/chil ... 50x600.svg

That can show you that even in countries which have all of those benefits you mention the fertility rates are low, yes looking at you EUROPE.

Its because our overly educated and egoistical society of me, me and I dont want the responsabiluty and the inconvenience.

Well there you have it, very soon the population will age out. Africa will lead the world. Yes despite them being worse off in abject poverty.


So we should ban abortion because the West isn't having enough kids? Should the government force people to procreate too? If the situation is so dire, why not make it easier for Africans and Asians to immigrate to the West?
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 10:40 am

emperortk wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

And the implication was that because animals don't perform intentional abortions, humans doing so is somehow aberrant behavior. Lack of abortion in the animal kingdom was used as an argument against human abortion. Now that it's been pointed out that animals do eat or kill their offspring at times, which amounts to the same thing as an abortion--thereby undermining the previous contention, suddenly this line of argument is irrelevant.


The killing of their young is irrelevant, that was put out there by another poster not me. I did not start the whole line of reasoning, I did partake in it, but not start it. I just pointed out that no animals chose to have apportions. I didn't bring it up though.


The original sequence of posts is below for reference. I think your response of "And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions" in context makes your implication and intent pretty clear.

Since you mentioned that no other living species chooses to have abortions, you must have thought it relevant to the discussion. Otherwise, why mention it? Animals generally don't have the option to choose an abortion (so it's a bit of meaningless statement anyway... like saying animals don't choose to become commercial airline pilots), but the next closest thing available is killing their offspring. If the fact that they kill their offspring is not relevant, according to you, then the fact that animals don't have abortions, if true, is even less relevant. So again, why mention it, if not to bolster your argument against abortion?

Ultimately none of this matters anyway. You avoided my previous question, and I still haven't seen a compelling reason why a woman relinquishes her right to control her body as a consequence of procreation at the point of conception.

bpatus297 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
This is laughable. "Given"? Every living thing on earth (and anywhere else) has been given this same exact "responsibility" to make life. And don't care.

Very simply put, life does not care. Only sentient beings, human's add "caring" to the equation. And we can, and most of the time choose to no care about life. I suspect you also do very little to prevent loss of life everywhere in the world.

The only thing we care about is OUR OWN circle of life. Family, friends, community maybe. beyond that we pass laws to address it and that must meet a different standard as it is not personal.

Tugg


And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions. You can suspect about me all you want, but would 100% be incorrect. I am not going into my personal life details on the internet, so go ahead and flame on, I don't care. As far as "OUR OWN circle of life.". the fetus you create become part of that circle whether you like it or not.


Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 10:45 am

MaverickM11 wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
MaverickM11 wrote:
Another way you know conservatives don't give a toss about "life" is that we already know what is required to bring down abortion rates, whether it's access to contraception, sex education, quality healthcare, family planning services, and domestic abuse prevention.

All things the GOP stridently opposes.


Please show me how any American today cant get access to contraception, sex education, domestic abuse prevention, or planned parenthood? Any links you can find would be helpful. I am not saying we are prefect, but a quick internet search brings up a lot of sites for free to low cost birth control:


All in spite of conservatives--show me anywhere where conservatives are expanding and/or improving access? You can't. Instead they're gunning to ban contraception in LA--and other states are sure to follow--and including ectopic pregnancies in the scenarios of prohibited abortions.

Do you understand how batsh!t insane it is to punish women for ectopic pregnancies? Merely contemplating it should be license for a lifetime sentence in a padded cell.


So you cant show where conservatives are doing anything you are claiming. As far ectopic pregnancies, that would be a medically necessary abortion. The fetus cannot survive there, we are not talking about medically necessary abortions. Red herring much?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6482
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 10:46 am

Aesma wrote:
There is no need to replace the population. With our technology and civilizational level, we could survive with 10 million people on the planet instead of 10 billion. And of course we would all have a much better life, and all other species too. The only downside would be a slower tech advancement as there would be much less scientific research because of less scientists overall.

Problems Japan is facing reflect numerous problem of this. Among other things, a society lacking young members mean it would be much harder for young voice to enter the mainstream and cause refresh and renewal of opinion in the society. The lack of a large youth group in society compares to the babyboomer generation, also have political consequence in many other countries.

But then I won't say abortion is the right issue to argue over this. It would almost be like cheating people into having babies amd that would not lead to healthy family.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 10:58 am

bpatus297 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:

The killing of their young is irrelevant, that was put out there by another poster not me. I did not start the whole line of reasoning, I did partake in it, but not start it. I just pointed out that no animals chose to have apportions. I didn't bring it up though.


The original sequence of posts is below for reference. I think your response of "And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions" in context makes your implication and intent pretty clear.

Since you mentioned that no other living species chooses to have abortions, you must have thought it relevant to the discussion. Otherwise, why mention it? Animals generally don't have the option to choose an abortion (so it's a bit of meaningless statement anyway... like saying animals don't choose to become commercial airline pilots), but the next closest thing available is killing their offspring. If the fact that they kill their offspring is not relevant, according to you, then the fact that animals don't have abortions, if true, is even less relevant. So again, why mention it, if not to bolster your argument against abortion?

Ultimately none of this matters anyway. You avoided my previous question, and I still haven't seen a compelling reason why a woman relinquishes her right to control her body as a consequence of procreation at the point of conception.

bpatus297 wrote:
And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions. You can suspect about me all you want, but would 100% be incorrect. I am not going into my personal life details on the internet, so go ahead and flame on, I don't care. As far as "OUR OWN circle of life.". the fetus you create become part of that circle whether you like it or not.


Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:12 am

flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

The original sequence of posts is below for reference. I think your response of "And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions" in context makes your implication and intent pretty clear.

Since you mentioned that no other living species chooses to have abortions, you must have thought it relevant to the discussion. Otherwise, why mention it? Animals generally don't have the option to choose an abortion (so it's a bit of meaningless statement anyway... like saying animals don't choose to become commercial airline pilots), but the next closest thing available is killing their offspring. If the fact that they kill their offspring is not relevant, according to you, then the fact that animals don't have abortions, if true, is even less relevant. So again, why mention it, if not to bolster your argument against abortion?

Ultimately none of this matters anyway. You avoided my previous question, and I still haven't seen a compelling reason why a woman relinquishes her right to control her body as a consequence of procreation at the point of conception.



Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom


Your post is towering above the din of emotional invective with resolutely sound logic and reason.
Last edited by Aaron747 on Fri May 06, 2022 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6482
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:12 am

flipdewaf wrote:
By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom

The "property' argument is such a poor argument, because
1.) Women's body isn't a "property". The body is one's self.
2.) If you kick an infant out of your own house as a parent, it would be criminal in most cases. But this doesn't apply to abortion because kicking a fetus out of a women's body isn't just kicking it out of a property.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:12 am

flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

The original sequence of posts is below for reference. I think your response of "And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions" in context makes your implication and intent pretty clear.

Since you mentioned that no other living species chooses to have abortions, you must have thought it relevant to the discussion. Otherwise, why mention it? Animals generally don't have the option to choose an abortion (so it's a bit of meaningless statement anyway... like saying animals don't choose to become commercial airline pilots), but the next closest thing available is killing their offspring. If the fact that they kill their offspring is not relevant, according to you, then the fact that animals don't have abortions, if true, is even less relevant. So again, why mention it, if not to bolster your argument against abortion?

Ultimately none of this matters anyway. You avoided my previous question, and I still haven't seen a compelling reason why a woman relinquishes her right to control her body as a consequence of procreation at the point of conception.



Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom


All are Red Herrings. A man and women created the fetus and their situation, they did not create any of the situations you are trying to deflect to. Life is 100% relevant. I guess that's part of the problem, pro-choicer's are not recognizing that, they keep going back to it being about control. For most, it is not, it's about protecting an innocent life, but please tell me how I am wrong. Since the abortion debate is pretty equally split (47/49 according to Statistica, I would say it is not what "society deems acceptable". I agree that we need to have personal freedom, but for the pro lifers, its personal freedom of the innocent fetus that they are protecting. Since science can't even agree on whether the fetus is a live human, neither can you or I. We can have our opinions, but that's it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/225 ... 96936d93b8
Last edited by bpatus297 on Fri May 06, 2022 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:14 am

bpatus297 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:

Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom


All are Red Herrings. A man and women created the fetus and their situation, they did not create and of the situations you are trying to deflect to. Life is 100% relevant. I guess that's part of the problem, pro-choicer's are not recognizing that, they keep going back to it being about control. For most, it is not, it's about protecting an innocent life, but please tell me how I am wrong. Since the abortion debate is pretty equally split (47/49 according to Statistica, I would say it is not what "society deems acceptable". I agree that we need to have personal freedom, but for the pro lifers, its personal freedom of the innocent fetus that they are protecting. Since science can't even agree on whether the fetus is a live human, neither can you or I. We can have our opinions, but that's it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/225 ... 96936d93b8


In that case my MD cousin’s comment about society not actually giving a damn about babies or mothers’ lives outside of the fetal period holds true. And that’s why women invariably see it as a matter of the proverbial boot. The burdens are mostly on them yet they are the ones all these laws seek to penalize.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:24 am

bpatus297 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:

Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom


All are Red Herrings. A man and women created the fetus and their situation, they did not create any of the situations you are trying to deflect to.
Why is that relevant to what a female chooses to do with her body?
bpatus297 wrote:
Life is 100% relevant.
It might be useful for an emotional plea but simply stating that its relevant doesn't make it so.
bpatus297 wrote:
I guess that's part of the problem, pro-choicer's are not recognizing that, they keep going back to it being about control.

Then it should be up to the anti-personal-freedom crowd to show why its relevant rather than just saying its so, its not god squad, you cant just say something and claim that its a given because of "morals"
bpatus297 wrote:
For most, it is not, it's about protecting an innocent life,
Absolutely, protec5ting innocent females choice to do as they please wit their bodies.
bpatus297 wrote:
but please tell me how I am wrong. Since the abortion debate is pretty equally split (47/49 according to Statistica,
Cool, we should be able to vote on which other people have to give blood too?
bpatus297 wrote:

I would say it is not what "society deems acceptable". I agree that we need to have personal freedom, but for the pro lifers, its personal freedom of the innocent fetus that they are protecting.
Same as the innocent life of a person bleeding to death, like I say enforced removal of blood and organs.
bpatus297 wrote:
Since science can't even agree on whether the fetus is a live human, neither can you or I. We can have our opinions, but that's it.
Again why does it being alive matter, a worm is alive.
bpatus297 wrote:


I don't care what the statistics say, if 51% of people wanted people with red hair to be cooked and eaten would that make it acceptable?

Fred
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:43 am

bpatus297 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:

The killing of their young is irrelevant, that was put out there by another poster not me. I did not start the whole line of reasoning, I did partake in it, but not start it. I just pointed out that no animals chose to have apportions. I didn't bring it up though.


The original sequence of posts is below for reference. I think your response of "And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions" in context makes your implication and intent pretty clear.

Since you mentioned that no other living species chooses to have abortions, you must have thought it relevant to the discussion. Otherwise, why mention it? Animals generally don't have the option to choose an abortion (so it's a bit of meaningless statement anyway... like saying animals don't choose to become commercial airline pilots), but the next closest thing available is killing their offspring. If the fact that they kill their offspring is not relevant, according to you, then the fact that animals don't have abortions, if true, is even less relevant. So again, why mention it, if not to bolster your argument against abortion?

Ultimately none of this matters anyway. You avoided my previous question, and I still haven't seen a compelling reason why a woman relinquishes her right to control her body as a consequence of procreation at the point of conception.

bpatus297 wrote:

And no other species living on this planet preforms intentional abortions. You can suspect about me all you want, but would 100% be incorrect. I am not going into my personal life details on the internet, so go ahead and flame on, I don't care. As far as "OUR OWN circle of life.". the fetus you create become part of that circle whether you like it or not.


Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.


You haven't answered my question. You've answered the question of when life begins, that's not what I asked. The question I asked is: when do the rights of a fetus supersede the rights of the mother? Maybe in an oblique way you're saying that that happens at conception. If that's the case, it's not clear to me.

I've not seen any reasonable person argue the point that abortion ends a potential life, so I'm actually not sure what "other side of the argument" you're trying to make.
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 11:46 am

bpatus297 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:

Your quote shows that it was Tugger that brought up animals in response to me saying humans have been given the responsibility to create life. So again, I was just continuing Tuggers line of reasoning about every living thing on earth. I agree it doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, but it was just an off shoot from his comments. Sometimes conversations do that.

I have answered your question several times, if life begins at conception, abortion kills a living human. Its not about controlling what a women does with her body, rather protecting an innocent human. I will say it again, even thought i have said it several times, I am on the fence about this. I don't know for sure when life begins, and there is no scientific consensus on that either, so neither side can claim when life begins with any credibility. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument.

By not giving blood to someone who needs a transfusion you are killing that person.
By Not feeding a starving person you are killing that person
By Not paying for medical intervention for an ill person who cannot afford it you are killing that person
By Not giving shelter to a homeless person are you killing that person

even if a fetus is 'alive' that does not directly mean that its human, and even if it is human why is it entitled to anyone elses property.
Life or not is an irrelevant argument to drag the discussion off course by the anti personal-freedom advocates.

I'm pro choice, the anti personal-freedom stance seems to be at odds with what society deems acceptable on just about everything.

Fred

Edit: Anti personal-freedom = anti other-persons-personal-freedom


All are Red Herrings. A man and women created the fetus and their situation, they did not create any of the situations you are trying to deflect to. Life is 100% relevant. I guess that's part of the problem, pro-choicer's are not recognizing that, they keep going back to it being about control. For most, it is not, it's about protecting an innocent life, but please tell me how I am wrong. Since the abortion debate is pretty equally split (47/49 according to Statistica, I would say it is not what "society deems acceptable". I agree that we need to have personal freedom, but for the pro lifers, its personal freedom of the innocent fetus that they are protecting. Since science can't even agree on whether the fetus is a live human, neither can you or I. We can have our opinions, but that's it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/225 ... 96936d93b8


Should the government force a mother or father to donate a kidney to their child who would otherwise die without it? They created the child, so they have the responsibility to protect that innocent life, don't they?
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:21 pm

c933103 wrote:
So you think the solution to the population pyramid, is to reduce "overly educated" education, and somehow make people less "egoistical", that people don't want to bear responsibility and inconvenience of having babies?
How do you propose to make people having babies even if doing so would degrade the quality of life of them?



That's a straw man, never mentioned to 'reduce' anything. Just that interestingly enough the majority of the overly educated are the ones not having children, despite having many economic advantages, and despite living in advanced developed countries. They prefer a cat to a child. That's fine, its individual choice. Long term its unsustainable. Extinction of the human race is in the horizon if this trend continues. Yes even China is taking note, and ending the one child policy. They can see it too. Just that here in the West we are going to react very late.

I have 4 kids, I don't have quality of life problems, yes I make over 6 figures, but I know people who are in the lower income group and have same amount of children, they are happy, they are united, for them kids aren't a problem nor an inconvenience. We call it a blessing.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:23 pm

emperortk wrote:

Should the government force a mother or father to donate a kidney to their child who would otherwise die without it? They created the child, so they have the responsibility to protect that innocent life, don't they?


No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:38 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Should the government force a mother or father to donate a kidney to their child who would otherwise die without it? They created the child, so they have the responsibility to protect that innocent life, don't they?


No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.


That's a worse deflection than you'd see from harry McGuire!

You shouldn't be forced to donate (Pro personal freedom)
But they'd be prosecuted if they let their child die (by not donating, the premise of the question) (Anti personal freedom)
They have to do everything in their possibilities to find a solution (it is possible to donate, the premise of the question) ( Anti-personal freedom)

As clear as covfefe!

Fred
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:45 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Should the government force a mother or father to donate a kidney to their child who would otherwise die without it? They created the child, so they have the responsibility to protect that innocent life, don't they?


No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.


We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:51 pm

emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Should the government force a mother or father to donate a kidney to their child who would otherwise die without it? They created the child, so they have the responsibility to protect that innocent life, don't they?


No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.


We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 12:57 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.


We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.


Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:03 pm

emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.


Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:04 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

No, parents shouldn't be forced to donate. However, if they let their child die, they will be prosecuted. They will have to do everything within their possibilities to find a solution. Not let him die in their home, without no care.

Same applies to abortion. No one is forced to raise a child, if they can't just give it up for adoption.


We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same,

It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
AirWorthy99 wrote:
They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:05 pm

Delete
Last edited by Aaron747 on Fri May 06, 2022 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:07 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.


Another comment divorced from reality, and an example of why non-MD men talking authoritatively on these topics is silly. Guess in your world things like PPD don't exist.

AirWorthy99 wrote:
People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.


Well then let's close medical schools and a hundred-billion dollar medical device industry....just because. Oh well. Breathtaking logic.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:10 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.


Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

Cancer is natural, should we stop avoiding that?
Heart disease is natural, should we stop avoiding that too?
Falling and breaking legs is natural, should we all just keep away from the edges of cliffs (hint: you can CHOOSE all those options)
AirWorthy99 wrote:

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/

and the level of risk being deemed acceptable should be decided by those to whom the hazard affects. Unless of course you can determine the level of risk by having your blood forcibly removed (lower than pregnancy id wager).

Fred
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:10 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.


Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


I love how this keeps coming back to medically necessary abortions and rapes. Those account for about 4% of abortions (links provided earlier) and are mostly agreed upon by both sides.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:11 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same,

It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
AirWorthy99 wrote:
They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


Well, I gave my opinion based on a handful of experiences. I am sure there are millions of other situations.

Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.


Another comment divorced from reality, and an example of why non-MD men talking authoritatively on these topics is silly. Guess in your world things like PPD don't exist.


Not divorced from reality, I have witnessed 36 months of pregnancy in my home, seeing my wife.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to his opinion, if you think there aren't any risks for almost anything we do, that's also a very divorced from reality kind of view.
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:12 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.

Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth. They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.


Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


You're missing the point. If the government can force a woman to go through medical condition that carries a risk of death (i.e. pregnancy) for the sake of a fetus, why can't the government force a parent to donate a kidney for the sake the child?

You claimed that pregnancy doesn't impact a woman's health severely. Since some women die during childbirth, that is clearly not true. Therefore, your reason for claiming that these two situations are not analogous is not valid.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:13 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


I love how this keeps coming back to medically necessary abortions and rapes. Those account for about 4% of abortions (links provided earlier) and are mostly agreed upon by both sides.


4% I recently saw a 1% figure https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 211175001/
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:14 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

We're not talking about forcing anyone to raise a child. We're talking about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will. Surely if the government can force a woman to do that for the sake of protecting innocent life, then the government can force a parent to donate a kidney to their own child to save its life. What's the difference?


There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same,

It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
AirWorthy99 wrote:
They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


I can't believe we are continuing to engage someone who calls a fetus a parasite. I understand the definition of parasite, but you are saying that in a derogatory fashion. BTW, it is generally accepted that a parasite has to be of another species than the host. But i guess that doesn't matter to you. My kids can't survive without my recourses, does that make them parasites?
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:16 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


I love how this keeps coming back to medically necessary abortions and rapes. Those account for about 4% of abortions (links provided earlier) and are mostly agreed upon by both sides.


This is not about medically necessary abortions. Women with low-risk pregnancies die during childbirth too.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:16 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same,

It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
AirWorthy99 wrote:
They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


Well, I gave my opinion based on a handful of experiences. I am sure there are millions of other situations.

Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.


Another comment divorced from reality, and an example of why non-MD men talking authoritatively on these topics is silly. Guess in your world things like PPD don't exist.


Not divorced from reality, I have witnessed 36 months of pregnancy in my home, seeing my wife.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to his opinion, if you think there aren't any risks for almost anything we do, that's also a very divorced from reality kind of view.


Nobody said that, I literally manage risk for a living. Anecdotal reference is a logical fallacy - 'because my wife was fine bearing 4 children, ALL women are fine bearing children.' Abject nonsense.

Pop quiz: does PPD exist? How many women suffer from it? What are its detrimental health effects?
 
luckyone
Posts: 4391
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:17 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same, won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.


Another comment divorced from reality, and an example of why non-MD men talking authoritatively on these topics is silly. Guess in your world things like PPD don't exist.

This number would assuredly go up. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/public ... -countries
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:18 pm

emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

Some women die in childbirth. I'd say that's a pretty severe effect.


Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
Nearly 90% of countries worldwide allow abortion, at a minimum, when the woman’s life is at risk. The vast majority of countries allowing abortion when the woman’s life is at risk also allow abortion on other grounds, such as when pregnancy poses a risk to the woman’s health and in cases of rape or incest.

https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


You're missing the point. If the government can force a woman to go through medical condition that carries a risk of death (i.e. pregnancy) for the sake of a fetus, why can't the government force a parent to donate a kidney for the sake the child?

You claimed that pregnancy doesn't impact a woman's health severely. Since some women die during childbirth, that is clearly not true. Therefore, your reason for claiming that these two situations are not analogous is not valid.


Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:19 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

There is a mandate from government to take care of a child, I think I mentioned it above in this thread. Its child neglect laws. Once they are born its our duty and responsibility to take care of them, if not we are to be prosecuted if we just let them rot and die.
Equating donating an organ to a woman having a child in the womb is not the same,

It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
won't be the same, a woman's health isn't severely affected after giving birth.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
AirWorthy99 wrote:
They won't be less of a woman or human. Can tell you by experience my wife had 4 and they were very difficult pregnancies. My wife is healthy, my mother too, my sister is, and my aunts too. They aren't missing any organs or anything as a result of a pregnancy.
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


I can't believe we are continuing to engage someone who calls a fetus a parasite. I understand the definition of parasite, but you are saying that in a derogatory fashion. My kids can't survive without my recourses, does that make them parasites?


According to the CDC:
A parasite is an organism that lives on or in a host and gets its food from or at the expense of its host.


Unless your kids live in or you then no. Also your kids could survive with the resources of something/someone else.

Fred
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:19 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


I love how this keeps coming back to medically necessary abortions and rapes. Those account for about 4% of abortions (links provided earlier) and are mostly agreed upon by both sides.


4% I recently saw a 1% figure https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 211175001/


I found a lot of different figures when I looked it up. 4% was the highest, so I went with that for the crowd that that would argue the numbers to deflect.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:21 pm

emperortk wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


I love how this keeps coming back to medically necessary abortions and rapes. Those account for about 4% of abortions (links provided earlier) and are mostly agreed upon by both sides.


This is not about medically necessary abortions. Women with low-risk pregnancies die during childbirth too.


Really? Ectopic and various other reasons have been mentioned, several by you. Those are medically necessary. .
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:22 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


You're missing the point. If the government can force a woman to go through medical condition that carries a risk of death (i.e. pregnancy) for the sake of a fetus, why can't the government force a parent to donate a kidney for the sake the child?

You claimed that pregnancy doesn't impact a woman's health severely. Since some women die during childbirth, that is clearly not true. Therefore, your reason for claiming that these two situations are not analogous is not valid.


Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.


Why does someone else get to decide acceptable levels of risk and not the female who the hazards apply to.

You are not being forced to drive a car.
You are not being forced to play sports.
You can opt out of having an operation.

Fred
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:22 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


Well, I gave my opinion based on a handful of experiences. I am sure there are millions of other situations.

Aaron747 wrote:

Another comment divorced from reality, and an example of why non-MD men talking authoritatively on these topics is silly. Guess in your world things like PPD don't exist.


Not divorced from reality, I have witnessed 36 months of pregnancy in my home, seeing my wife.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to his opinion, if you think there aren't any risks for almost anything we do, that's also a very divorced from reality kind of view.


Nobody said that, I literally manage risk for a living. Anecdotal reference is a logical fallacy - 'because my wife was fine bearing 4 children, ALL women are fine bearing children.' Abject nonsense.

Pop quiz: does PPD exist? How many women suffer from it? What are its detrimental health effects?


So the statements from your MD cousin are anecdotal as well?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6482
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:24 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
c933103 wrote:
So you think the solution to the population pyramid, is to reduce "overly educated" education, and somehow make people less "egoistical", that people don't want to bear responsibility and inconvenience of having babies?
How do you propose to make people having babies even if doing so would degrade the quality of life of them?



That's a straw man, never mentioned to 'reduce' anything. Just that interestingly enough the majority of the overly educated are the ones not having children, despite having many economic advantages, and despite living in advanced developed countries. They prefer a cat to a child. That's fine, its individual choice. Long term its unsustainable. Extinction of the human race is in the horizon if this trend continues. Yes even China is taking note, and ending the one child policy. They can see it too. Just that here in the West we are going to react very late.

I have 4 kids, I don't have quality of life problems, yes I make over 6 figures, but I know people who are in the lower income group and have same amount of children, they are happy, they are united, for them kids aren't a problem nor an inconvenience. We call it a blessing.

So how do you define "overly" educated?
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:26 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, I gave my opinion based on a handful of experiences. I am sure there are millions of other situations.



Not divorced from reality, I have witnessed 36 months of pregnancy in my home, seeing my wife.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to his opinion, if you think there aren't any risks for almost anything we do, that's also a very divorced from reality kind of view.


Nobody said that, I literally manage risk for a living. Anecdotal reference is a logical fallacy - 'because my wife was fine bearing 4 children, ALL women are fine bearing children.' Abject nonsense.

Pop quiz: does PPD exist? How many women suffer from it? What are its detrimental health effects?


So the statements from your MD cousin are anecdotal as well?


Actually no, all factual. I'll just repost her comment here:

Excellent comment from my cousin, who is an OB-GYN (and her mother is a retired pediatrician as well):

“If this was really about babies, we would live in a completely different country with amenities that would make abortion unpalatable to almost any woman.

Simple things like universal coverage for pre and post-natal care, with or without complications. Simple things like universal coverage for pre-K and adequate capacity for daycare for working mothers. Simple things like universal health coverage until age 18. Simple things like guaranteed parental leave regardless of industry.

But we don’t live in that country”


Unless I know absolutely nothing about benefits and insurance and such after 20 years in my industry, her summation is spot-on.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:27 pm

c933103 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
c933103 wrote:
So you think the solution to the population pyramid, is to reduce "overly educated" education, and somehow make people less "egoistical", that people don't want to bear responsibility and inconvenience of having babies?
How do you propose to make people having babies even if doing so would degrade the quality of life of them?



That's a straw man, never mentioned to 'reduce' anything. Just that interestingly enough the majority of the overly educated are the ones not having children, despite having many economic advantages, and despite living in advanced developed countries. They prefer a cat to a child. That's fine, its individual choice. Long term its unsustainable. Extinction of the human race is in the horizon if this trend continues. Yes even China is taking note, and ending the one child policy. They can see it too. Just that here in the West we are going to react very late.

I have 4 kids, I don't have quality of life problems, yes I make over 6 figures, but I know people who are in the lower income group and have same amount of children, they are happy, they are united, for them kids aren't a problem nor an inconvenience. We call it a blessing.

So how do you define "overly" educated?


Anyone who went to college in a blue county. People who read 'Elements of Style' and know where commas should be used...
Last edited by Aaron747 on Fri May 06, 2022 1:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:27 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:

You're missing the point. If the government can force a woman to go through medical condition that carries a risk of death (i.e. pregnancy) for the sake of a fetus, why can't the government force a parent to donate a kidney for the sake the child?

You claimed that pregnancy doesn't impact a woman's health severely. Since some women die during childbirth, that is clearly not true. Therefore, your reason for claiming that these two situations are not analogous is not valid.


Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.


Why does someone else get to decide acceptable levels of risk and not the female who the hazards apply to.

You are not being forced to drive a car.
You are not being forced to play sports.
You can opt out of having an operation.

Fred


Question, do you think you can prevent death? have you found the first individual who hasn't died and is living eternally?

All of us, will die some day, out of something eventually. Maybe not now, but later. Are we going to hide somewhere to avoid death?
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:28 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.


Why does someone else get to decide acceptable levels of risk and not the female who the hazards apply to.

You are not being forced to drive a car.
You are not being forced to play sports.
You can opt out of having an operation.

Fred


Question, do you think you can prevent death? have you found the first individual who hasn't died and is living eternally?

All of us, will die some day, out of something eventually. Maybe not now, but later. Are we going to hide somewhere to avoid death?


Missing the point, again. Blink....blink....still waiting to hear whether PPD exists or not.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:30 pm

c933103 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
c933103 wrote:
So you think the solution to the population pyramid, is to reduce "overly educated" education, and somehow make people less "egoistical", that people don't want to bear responsibility and inconvenience of having babies?
How do you propose to make people having babies even if doing so would degrade the quality of life of them?



That's a straw man, never mentioned to 'reduce' anything. Just that interestingly enough the majority of the overly educated are the ones not having children, despite having many economic advantages, and despite living in advanced developed countries. They prefer a cat to a child. That's fine, its individual choice. Long term its unsustainable. Extinction of the human race is in the horizon if this trend continues. Yes even China is taking note, and ending the one child policy. They can see it too. Just that here in the West we are going to react very late.

I have 4 kids, I don't have quality of life problems, yes I make over 6 figures, but I know people who are in the lower income group and have same amount of children, they are happy, they are united, for them kids aren't a problem nor an inconvenience. We call it a blessing.

So how do you define "overly" educated?


Why only speak about this and not the rest. I don't criticize anyone for getting an education, I got one too, my wife too. Just saying, that the population who doesn't seem to care about money or quality of life, those who are less educated are having more kids. I kind of think we should look more to them despite not having those so important credentials, because they are doing it right.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17915
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:34 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
c933103 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:


That's a straw man, never mentioned to 'reduce' anything. Just that interestingly enough the majority of the overly educated are the ones not having children, despite having many economic advantages, and despite living in advanced developed countries. They prefer a cat to a child. That's fine, its individual choice. Long term its unsustainable. Extinction of the human race is in the horizon if this trend continues. Yes even China is taking note, and ending the one child policy. They can see it too. Just that here in the West we are going to react very late.

I have 4 kids, I don't have quality of life problems, yes I make over 6 figures, but I know people who are in the lower income group and have same amount of children, they are happy, they are united, for them kids aren't a problem nor an inconvenience. We call it a blessing.

So how do you define "overly" educated?


Why only speak about this and not the rest. I don't criticize anyone for getting an education, I got one too, my wife too. Just saying, that the population who doesn't seem to care about money or quality of life, those who are less educated are having more kids. I kind of think we should look more to them despite not having those so important credentials, because they are doing it right.


We live in capitalist countries. Nobody cares who's 'doing it right' - our value is in what we can produce for others, no? Throughout the last 200 years of human history, as soon as populations have become more wealthy, in any culture, they have more life options and therefore fewer children than those 'beneath' them. Just human nature, like I said.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4518
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:35 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.


Why does someone else get to decide acceptable levels of risk and not the female who the hazards apply to.

You are not being forced to drive a car.
You are not being forced to play sports.
You can opt out of having an operation.

Fred


Question, do you think you can prevent death?

I neither know nor care.
AirWorthy99 wrote:
have you found the first individual who hasn't died and is living eternally?

A logical impossibility to know the answer.
AirWorthy99 wrote:

All of us, will die some day, out of something eventually. Maybe not now, but later. Are we going to hide somewhere to avoid death?


Well if none of us can avoid death whats the problem with abortion, its gotta happen at some point right?
Image

Fred
Last edited by flipdewaf on Fri May 06, 2022 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 15325
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:35 pm

seb146 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
And here comes Louisiana in their quest to abuse women.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 656102002/


— A Louisiana legislative committee on Wednesday advanced a bill to make abortion a crime of homicide in which the mother or those assisting her in terminating the pregnancy can be charged.


Preventing murder by murdering. I have no words...



There are words, but none of them sound good. These folks are working to commit atrocities against the people that they will not offer assistance too in order to save a child that they will not care for and that the mother may not care for.
 
emperortk
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:36 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
emperortk wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Right, some people die sleeping too. Are we going to be afraid of sleeping? People die, its our natural way of life, we won't be here for ever. No way to avoid it.

If a woman is at risk of dying during pregnancy, I think in most places, an abortion is permitted and allowed.
https://reproductiverights.org/maps/wor ... xceptions/


You're missing the point. If the government can force a woman to go through medical condition that carries a risk of death (i.e. pregnancy) for the sake of a fetus, why can't the government force a parent to donate a kidney for the sake the child?

You claimed that pregnancy doesn't impact a woman's health severely. Since some women die during childbirth, that is clearly not true. Therefore, your reason for claiming that these two situations are not analogous is not valid.


Again, there are risks in everything we do. Pregnancy is one, driving a car, playing sports, doing a minor operation. I am sure most of those deaths are preventable, if .

However, 600 or 800 deaths from 3 to 4 million pregnancies per year. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr012-508.pdf That's a very low number to even consider pregnancy a life or death preposition.


So what if the risk of death during childbirth is small? The risk for a kidney donor is also small. I'm still not understanding why the government can force a pregnancy to term against a mother's will and yet can't force a kidney donation against the donor's will if the recipient is the donor's child? Both are for the purpose of protecting life. Both have small risks to health. Both will leave a mother's body altered for life. Again, what's the difference? If we can disregard bodily autonomy for one, why not the other as well?

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/departments/transplant/programs/kidney/living-kidney-donation#faq-tab

Is the donor operation dangerous?

Kidney donor surgery is a very safe operation. As with any surgery, there is a risk of bleeding and infection. The most advanced surgical technique, laparoscopic nephrectomy, has reduced the hospital stay to one or two days, resulted in less pain and scarring, and has reduced full recovery time from eight to 12 weeks down to two to four weeks.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:37 pm

One important issue in the discussion of access to legal abortion is why a woman has or had one.I have linked a detailed study but basically it is rarely due to rape, incest, save the life of the mother or failure of birth control but for elective reasons..Usually the decision is for one or more reasons broadly, 'Not Financially prepared', 'Not right time to have a baby', 'Partner related reasons'. as well a health issues.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3729671/
https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/defaul ... 711005.pdf
In the USA, the lack of affordable health care in general, high price of birth control drugs, lack of government financial support for women who have children are part of the financial factors.Federal laws generally ban the use of Federal funds for abortion.
The rate of abortions in the USA has gone down from a decade ago but has slightly risen in more recent ones.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ ... tm#T1_down
 
bpatus297
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Supreme Court is preparing to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

Fri May 06, 2022 1:37 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
It is the removal of freedom over ones body for the sake of another.

What a huge steaming pile of horsemanure! Spoken like a true savior of women's health right there! My wife was basically paralysed down her left side for nearly 3 years AS A DIRECT RESULT OF GIVING BIRTH!
And I know people who have given blood and they are totally healthy now too, same with my friend who gave a kidney.

The equivalence still stands. If you can force someone to keep a parasite they don't want to live off their resources then you can force someone to give blood without consent.

I like personal freedom.

Fred


I can't believe we are continuing to engage someone who calls a fetus a parasite. I understand the definition of parasite, but you are saying that in a derogatory fashion. My kids can't survive without my recourses, does that make them parasites?


According to the CDC:
A parasite is an organism that lives on or in a host and gets its food from or at the expense of its host.


Unless your kids live in or you then no. Also your kids could survive with the resources of something/someone else.

Fred



https://byjus.com/biology/parasite-defi ... df257a8444

"A parasite is a plant or an animal that lives on, or with, or inside a larger species extracting nutrients."

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... 2d638cc3e4

"an animal or plant that lives on or in another animal or plant of a different type and feeds from it:"

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/parasite

"an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, casinterest, IceCream, tmu101, TriJets, vikkyvik and 41 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos