Abortion

[Max_Tab]

Originally posted by Galadriel

Many of you say that the "father" has no choice in making the decision in most cases. Why use the term "father"?

Because whether they are married or not, the man is still the father of that child, just not husband to mother.

Originally posted by Galadriel

A husband and wife shouldn't get abortions anyway -- they're married and traditionally its the intention to start a family when one marries.

But what if it interferes with their career, social life, financial situation?

Originally posted by Galadriel

Think of all the single people out there that have sex?! There are a lot of men out there (at least that's what they're supposed to be) that have no intention of being a father. You've all met those kinds of men (and women for that matter). Yes, its the responsibility of both parties to protect themselves from contraception, but lets face it, not everyone is going to have a condom at hand, nor will they always make the effort to get one. All of a sudden, women are left in a predicament -- raising a child with no father, and possibly no prospective father (some women think that they'll be less attactive to the opposite sex if they have kids from a previous relationship). If the woman is young, its quite possible that she may just be starting a career or education -- which in turn could be put on halt while raising a child, thus not being able to provide for the child (diapers, baby food, and medicine is very expensive).

Two words, Responsibility, and Adoption. They don't have to keep the baby, but should they be allowed to kill the baby, because it's a giant inconenience. What if there father or mother became terminally ill and they had to take care of them. Should they be allowed to "dispatch" them because it doesn't fit into there schedule?

Originally posted by Galadriel

There are numerous women out there that have had several abortions. This in my opinion is wrong.

I'm not sure I understand this. Why is this wrong, and having just one is ok? Is it the number's? 1 is ok, but 3 is bad? How about 2 times?

I respect your opinions, I just don't agree with them. When do you think life is created? Does life just suddenly happen in the third trimester?

Here is another question. Lets say a man kicks a pregnant woman in the stomach and she is in the second trimester. Because of the kick she looses the baby. Should that man be charged with assault, or manslaughter/murder?

[Roguish Lawyer]

The best part of the abortion debate, by far in my opinion, was when a 20-year-old kid (or maybe 17 if this was a while ago) sued the state he lived in, arguing that he should be able to drink legally because his life started at conception, not birth.

[myclearcreek]

Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
The best part of the abortion debate, by far in my opinion, was when a 20-year-old kid (or maybe 17 if this was a while ago) sued the state he lived in, arguing that he should be able to drink legally because his life started at conception, not birth.

I may be remembering or have been told incorrectly, but do the Chinese begin counting age one at birth? I remember the discussion of the dichotomy between that practice and the routine abortions for limited household size and gender requirements. This conversation happened over a decade ago, so...

[Galadriel]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Max_Tab
[B]Because whether they are married or not, the man is still the father of that child, just not husband to mother.

--What I meant by this was; some men are just sperm donors, they have no intention of fathering a child (ie, are unconcerned with thier upbringing). If the guy wants nothing to do with the child, he should have no say in anything regarding it.


But what if it interferes with their career, social life, financial situation?

--I see the point you are making here. Marriage is an institution and it stands for something -- family. Yes, its the new millenium, views have changed, but aborting a child within a marriage goes against what marriage stands for. This is where getting your tubes tied comes into play if you don't want to have kids. If you can plan a wedding, you can plan surgery too.

Two words, Responsibility, and Adoption. They don't have to keep the baby, but should they be allowed to kill the baby, because it's a giant inconenience. What if there father or mother became terminally ill and they had to take care of them. Should they be allowed to "dispatch" them because it doesn't fit into there schedule?

--I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if I became terminally ill, personally I would want someone to help me die (if I wasn't capable of doing it myself). Adoption? Yes, I think its an amazing option, and I give a lot of appreciation to women who have done this. Put yourself in our shoes for a minute though -- think of yourself as a young person, you got pregnant from a one night stand. You're teachers see that your belly is growing, so you tell everyone that you're pregnant. OH THE SHAME AND STIGMA. Lets face it. Its a man's world. All of a sudden your marked as a whore and your parents didn't bring you up right. Then you give the child up for adoption. Everyone asks about the child, you tell them. OH THE SHAME, you couldn't raise the child. You're weak. So women face all of this trauma. The Scarlet Letter. Yes, we are sexually liberated, but not much. As women we are still marked in so many ways. Its difficult for men to see these issues because they've never been on the recieving end, NEVER! Riddle me this? A man has 20 sex partners and a woman has 20 sex partners. The man is labeled as a stud and the woman a slut. Why?

I'm not sure I understand this. Why is this wrong, and having just one is ok? Is it the number's? 1 is ok, but 3 is bad? How about 2 times?

--Let me explain... Remember youth and all its feelings of immortality and indestructability? You always thought -- it would never happen to me.... Think of all the times you've driven drunk (or one of your friends if you indeed had your head screwed on tight). Once you get that DWI, you're going to say "shit! I would do anything to take that back". You need one time to learn your lesson the hard way. After that, you're an idiot for making the mistake more than once.

I respect your opinions, I just don't agree with them. When do you think life is created? Does life just suddenly happen in the third trimester?

--No, God chooses who lives, who dies, and what will be. Sometimes we just intervene. Personally, I've never had an abortion. If I were to get pregnant now, with no one to act as father, I would most likely have it. No, I'm not financially cut out to provide everything I would want to give the child, but I've experienced enough death to want to give life. But that is me. Right now, I'd be okay with sacrifice and obligation. If I were to get pregnant 10 years ago, almost with certainty I would have had an abortion (that is if I actually had sex 10 years ago). I have had friends who've had abortions, and I have had friends who had children at extremely young ages and out of wedlock. I have a huge amount of respect for those women who decide to have the child and raise it on thier own. It is an enormous amount of responsibility and sacrifice. But if you know you aren't willing to be responsible, then you shouldn't have kids.

Here is another question. Lets say a man kicks a pregnant woman in the stomach and she is in the second trimester. Because of the kick she looses the baby. Should that man be charged with assault, or manslaughter/murder?

--I'm not savvy on law. Personally I think he should have his nuts removed and shoved down his throat, but that's me. Murder in the 3rd or attempted manslaughter I guess, but I'm talking out of my ass. I would really have to know more about law to even answer this question.

[Galadriel]

Just wanted to add to the latter part of the discussion...
The man should be punished according to the potential life of the now dead child. 2nd trimester? Is the mother intending to have the child? There's also the possibility that if the mother intended to have the child, it could be still-born, or she could miscarry naturally. God decides whether the child is born and lives in this situation. Therefore, we can't say that he outright killed someone. Hence attempted manslaughter.

All in all, what sets us apart from man and beast is choice and reason. Yes, there are other matters, ethics, and morals that surround choice, but the bottom line is that our lives are always based on our own choices and God's will.

[Max_Tab]

Originally posted by Galadriel
Just wanted to add to the latter part of the discussion...
The man should be punished according to the potential life of the now dead child. 2nd trimester? Is the mother intending to have the child? There's also the possibility that if the mother intended to have the child, it could be still-born, or she could miscarry naturally. God decides whether the child is born and lives in this situation. Therefore, we can't say that he outright killed someone. Hence attempted manslaughter.

I'm not sure I understand? Why the question on whether the mother intends to keep it? What does that have to do with whether it is a crime or not? If the mother wants to abort it then it would be ok? But if she wanted to keep it, it would be bad? In theory it should be black or white, no matter what the mother wanted. manslaughter or assault (on the mother, not the child).

AL could you help us out on the legality of all this, I'm curious about what someone smarter than me has to say about this.

[myclearcreek]

There have been situations where a married/engaged woman decides to have an abortion, in spite of her husband/fiancee's objections. Usually, it is done without his knowledge, then the apology or explanation. "It's done, so there is nothing you can do about it." Besides taking issue with abortion in general, I have a very difficult time with this and have wondered if there was legislation protecting the father's rights to the unborn child...i.e., intention to raise/provide for, etc.

[Razor]

Since I can't pass up an opportunity to stir the pot here in a 'when does life begin' discussion, what are folks' feelings on embryonic stem cell research?

[Max_Tab]

I don't know a whole lot about it

[myclearcreek]

Originally posted by Razor
Since I can't pass up an opportunity to stir the pot here in a 'when does life begin' discussion, what are folks' feelings on embryonic stem cell research?

Using umbilical cord fluid for medical research/disease treatment does not bother me as far as the source goes. Not authoritative sites, but here is some quick fuel for the debate:

Pro:
http://www.cordblood.com/index.asp

Con:
http://www.cord-blood.org/id4.htm

Looking forward to reading the learned opinions of Doc T and others.

[pulque]

Originally posted by Razor
Since I can't pass up an opportunity to stir the pot here in a 'when does life begin' discussion, what are folks' feelings on embryonic stem cell research?

I have never worked with any stem-cells (embryonic or human), but I do not personally believe in pure genetic determinism in development. A few medical breakthroughs seem promising as of recently, including rat research with human stem cells to treat Parkinson's or other neurodegeneratives. Research in adult stem-cell is much behind the technologies developed in the 20 years of embryonic stem cell work. There are very few pluripotent cells in adults, and we dont really know where to look for them, or how long they can be cultured for.

The only three full-time biomedical research scientists on President Bush's bioethics committee were replaced. But anyways, science also exists in the private sector, and scientists often spend their own money to do their work. For example tthere are scientists who are still producing new lines of embryonic stem cells, and there are researchers still studying them, and they of course receive NO federal funding.

[Pandora]

The only three full-time biomedical research scientists on President Bush's bioethics committee were replaced.

Elaborate if you will? Is this a good ting or a bad thing? How do the new appointees differ from the previous psoition holders? I am stunned there would only be threee fulltime researchers.

I believe in stem cell research for medical cures, but not for cloning for physical/mental attributes.

(anyone else read Oryx & Crake? Topical and timely to discussion)

[pulque]

Originally posted by Pandora
Elaborate if you will? Is this a good ting or a bad thing? How do the new appointees differ from the previous psoition holders? I am stunned there would only be threee fulltime researchers.

The chairman of the Bioethics Committee sez: “[T]his change reflects the changing focus of the council's work, as we move away from issues of reproduction and genetics to focus on issues of neuroscience, brain and behavior.”

Blackburn and May were dimissed. Carter left. I should mention that I only found out that three of the members were full-time biomedical researchers by reading a New England Journal of Medicine article by Blackburn. I'm going to guess here that the other D.Sci (Rowley) is the other full-time biomedical researcher, and it looks like she is still in.

The appointed replacements were:
*Benjamin S. Carson, the director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at John Hopkins
*Peter A. Lawler, head of the Government and International Studies Department at Berry College in Georgia
*Diana J. Schaub, head of the Political Science Department at Loyola College in Maryland.

-----------------

Here was the old list:

*Elizabeth Blackburn, PhD, Professor, Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University California, San Francisco
*Stephen Carter, JD, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Yale Law School
*Rebecca Dresser, JD, MS, Daniel Noyes Kirby Professor of Law, Washington University School of Law
*Daniel Foster, MD, Donald W. Seldin Distinguished Chair in Internal Medicine and Chairman of the Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School
*Francis Fukuyama, PhD, Bernard Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University
*Michael Gazzaniga, PhD, Director, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Dartmouth College
*Robert P. George, JD, D Phil, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University, and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions
*Alfonso Gomez-Lobo, PhD, Ryan Family Professor of Metaphysics and Moral Philosophy, Georgetown University
*Mary Ann Glendon, JD, LLM, Learned Hand Professor of Law, Harvard University
*William B. Hurlbut, MD, Consulting Professor in Human Biology, Stanford University
*Charles Krauthammer, MD, National Columnist, The Washington Post
*William F. May, PhD, Cary M. Maguire Professor of Ethics Emeritus, Southern Methodist University
*Paul McHugh, MD, Henry Phipps Professor of Psychiatry and Director of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and Psychiatrist-in-chief of the Johns Hopkins Hospital
*Gilbert Meilaender, PhD, Richard & Phyllis Duesenberg Professor of Christian Ethics at Valparaiso University
*Janet D. Rowley, MD, DSc, Blum-Riese Distinguished Service Professor of Medicine, Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, and Human Genetics, Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago
*Michael J. Sandel, PhD, Professor of Government, Harvard University
*James Q. Wilson, PhD, The James A. Collins Professor of Management and Public Policy Emeritus at the University of California, Los Angeles

[Airbornelawyer]

At your on-line neighborhood Yahoo! store: http://store.yahoo.com/ppfastore/ihadabt.html

They have finally arrived!

Planned Parenthood is proud to offer yet another t-shirt in our new social fashion line: "I Had an Abortion" fitted T-shirts are now available. These soft and comfortable fitted tees assert a powerful message in support of women's rights.

Order yours for $15 each.

[The Reaper]

Originally posted by Airbornelawyer
At your on-line neighborhood Yahoo! store: http://store.yahoo.com/ppfastore/ihadabt.html

One of the first rules that we learn is to know your target audience, and tailor the message to the audience.

That shirt says several things to me, I seriously doubt that any of them are the message that they intended.

TR