Burnt Orange Report

I would argue that abortions, open-heart surgeries, and masectomies should be rare, seeing as though each is employed when there is, in the case of abortions, a social problem, and in the case of the other two, a serious health problem. I don't think that there are many people who would be anxious to campaign openly for abortions because they're a great thing for all parties involved, but I challenge you to find a more fair solution. I don't claim to know the exact moment when a fetus becomes a baby, but I do know that in an abortion ban, rich white women can still get safe abortions while lower-income minorities and whites are left to their own devices, which could mean an unsafe abortion or unwanted children. Andrew, I urge you to get involved with an organization such as CASA if you want to find out what happens to the fore-mentioned unwanted children.

I've heard all the arguments from both sides, but nothing has shaped my opinion more than actually knowing someone who chose to have an abortion. All of that talk and rhetoric just falls by the wayside when you are faced with a decision that will drastically change not only your life, but the life of a potential child, forever. She believes to this day that she made the right decision. The point is, it was HER decision to make. It wasn't made for her by some impersonal government body who didn't know the first thing about her or her circumstances.

Basically, my philsophy comes down to this: if you don't believe in abortion, then don't have one. That is where your jurisdiction ends.

I think that there has been a lot of great discussion from both sides on this topic.

I have to say that I agree with both Calitex and Emily. Banning abortions would disproportionately affect lower income women and couples who could not afford the trip across the border to Canada or over to Europe to have the procedure done. It would also increase the number of underground and unsafe abortions. In keeping the practice in the open and regulated by the various governing medical boards, the practice will remain safe for the mother.

I think that there should be services available to pregnant women that support any decision a woman makes, whether she chooses to carry the baby to term and keep it, put it up for adoption, or to have an abortion. Women should never have to feel that there is only one option, whether it is keeping the baby, putting it up for adoption, or having an abortion. There should be support in the form of governmental services regardless of what the woman chooses both for the mother, and for the child should she choose to keep it or put it up for adoption. I also believe that Emily has a very good suggestion about looking into children’s social services and seeing what happens to kids that are brought into this world when their parents don’t want them.

I think that the current legislation that limits abortions to the first two trimesters is sufficient and that any other moral debate is up to the mother and father. The debate about when life begins is far too devisive and I doubt that any of us will live to see a day when everyone can agree on the exact point in time a life begins. Therefore, it is my opinion that the law must rely on science, which it has done in drawing the line around the same time that a fetus develops a recognizable human brain pattern, and any further moral questions should be between the parents and their beliefs, not the law.

Andrew, should we understand your assertion that the embryo at implantation "has all of the genetic material that makes it a human" makes implantation to be "the" beginning point for being "human"? Doesn't the embryo have the exact same genetic material at fertilization?

Indeed it does, but a significant number of embryos- the vast majority even- never implant, and so I think that it is less an indication of when life begins than implantation, which is shortly thereafter.

Andrew, are you a Mormon?

Just wondering, because your point mirrors their theology.

They do not believe an embryo has a soul until implantation, hence they have no objection to embryonic stem cell research, because it's not a soul posessing human when it is in a petri dish.

Can't say that I am. I know a bunch of Mormons from my hometown (Allen, TX has a very large Mormon population), but I was raised Baptist.

Just a way of looking at it I suppose.

I've considered converting to mormonism; unfortunately, none of the missionaries are interested when I tell them I want to skip over the whole Temple-going faithful part and go from an unobservant Presbyterian to being an unobservant jackmormon.

Still...

"People will argue that it is a traumatic event, but so is open heart surgery or masectomies. Should these be "rare" as well?..."

You bet they should be. The key is prevention. Prevention is always better than medical intervention.

In the case of abortion, family planning and education is the best prevention against unwanted pregnancy. Teens should not only be taught to deal with sexual energy in ways that do not involve a partner (get your minds out of the gutter--I'm talking about team sports!) but proper use of birth control, as well. Children should be brought into the world when they're planned for and wanted.

As for intact dialation and extraction (what the right-wingers call "partial birth")--what do people think, that women just decide halfway into their pregnancy that they don't want a baby after all and they decide to get rid of it? Hardly. It's a rare procedure used to save the mother's life; it's a complicated medical procedure that should be left up to the family and the physician.

Jim-

Mormon girls are totally hot. I used to ask all of the Mormon girls I knew what the church thought about guys converting for the chicks. They said it wasn't kosher, and they wait until marriage (usually) anyways. Oh well...

-AD

"Life and humanity aren't things that can be considered without the influence of religion and theology."

Sorry, but I have to call bullshit on this. In my opinion, life and humanity should ideally be considered without the influence of religion and theology. They certainly can be considered in religious contexts, but I believe it is far better to not allow superstition to influence our definitions of real humanity and real personhood.

Andrew, I have to laugh (although I know i shouldn't - you are truly conflicted) Another young male deciding what a female who is charged with carrying a child and then raising it afterward, has come leaning to a conclusion on the side of "life". How about quality of life? I am amazed at all the so called Christians in this discussion on abortion and on having a person able to end their life when they are no longer going to have a quality life with some dignity. First let me say, the very worst thing to do to anyone is to bring them into this world unloved and to force them to live with that experience everyday. Some will just be ignored others will be subject to unbelievable cruelty. The best thing for that person was the opportunity to go directly to heaven without having to pass go and pay the $200 or $2 million in pain. Why are those who are religious so afraid of death? Don't they believe they will be going on to some place much better? Do they not believe their own dogma? Doesn't a fetus who is doomed to a life of suffering deserve this heaven? I can't think of anything better than going directly to the womb of God without having to spend time in this hellhole called earth with no one who loves me.
The real argument on the Right isn't about abortion, they use that as an emotional hot button, it is about the control women have over their reproductive rights. Once the woman cannot choose when she has children she will once again be subjugated to the will of males. Abortion is a smoke screen. Look at Frank Corte's Bill HB16. he's decided a pharmacist doesn't have to fill birth control pills or emergency contraceptives (which PREVENT pregnancy but DONOT terminate pregnancy - there is a difference).
I have had two children and I can tell you, pregnant women do not just enter into these decisions lightly. If they do, maybe they shouldn't be moms anyway. The descision of abortion is between a woman, her doctor, her family and her God, no one else should have damn thing to say about it.
I am PRO-LIFE - PRO QUALITY of LIFE. I am not about making another human being suffer unloved in this world.
If the RIGHT really cared about this issue, they'd be supporting pregnancy prevention big time, they are just into control.