Planned Parenthood-is this common?

[SKL]

It's not an emotional scare tactic.  It's history.  A particularly dark and horrific part of our history that I, for one, would rather not see happen in my lifetime.  

 

Case in point.  "Particularly dark and horrific."  Another, less emotional, way to state it is that injury and infection sometimes occurred when abortion was done in secret.  (And still does occur despite current law - some say, more than before.)  And it is also a fact that when you get down to it, abortions are a bit ugly.  Not sure why it is so important to sanitize it.

 

I can understand why those who feel strongly about it want to make sure people know what an abortion really is.  Because there is this disingenuous "it's just tissue" argument on the other side.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think the piece of the puzzle that many are missing is that *many* pro-life activists believe that birth control is always wrong and/or that all hormonal birth control is the same as an abortion. That might clear up *some* of the confusion about why PP clinics are targets, even the ones that don't provide abortions.

 

I had a friend who had to go to PP for a D&C after her baby died in utero. Her experience going through picketers on the worst day of her life made her one of the staunchest pro-choice advocates that you'll see.

 

Do pap smears, MRIs and other detection tools sometime result in unnecessary biopsies? Absolutely. I had two biopsies a few months ago that turned out to be fibroadenomas. Would I rather have an unnecessary biopsy than end up dead because cancer isn't discovered until it has advanced into my bones and I leave my kids behind? Absolutely. Insisting that women shouldn't have routine medical care because modern medicine has allowed rates to go down is pretty insane. It's like insisting we don't need the military anymore because we haven't sustained a terrorist attack in several years now.

[SKL]

Chiming in as person #3 who has never once heard anyone say anything like this.  Never once. I am skeptical, to be honest, about the "many" people who talk about abortion that way.

 

Well, I too am skeptical, because I don't live in a strange place nor hang around with strange people.  And I can recall many times I've heard this from people I actually respect (overall), as well as people I don't respect and people I don't personally know.

 

I am skeptical in that I wonder if some people just aren't remembering hearing this kind of comment because it isn't as hurtful to some people when it is heard.  To me it is very upsetting to think that people are taking human life so lightly, and often disregarding the feelings of the person actually carrying the child.  I have clear recollections of hearing friends and relatives say these things about their own family members, among others.  Some of which ended in abortion, some of which did not.  My grandmother actually told my mother she should abort, for one example.

[Mergath]

Case in point.  "Particularly dark and horrific."  Another, less emotional, way to state it is that injury and infection sometimes occurred when abortion was done in secret.  (And still does occur despite current law - some say, more than before.)  And it is also a fact that when you get down to it, abortions are a bit ugly.  Not sure why it is so important to sanitize it.

 

I can understand why those who feel strongly about it want to make sure people know what an abortion really is.  Because there is this disingenuous "it's just tissue" argument on the other side.

 

Not wanting young women to die in agony is "sanitizing" abortion?  I don't think you've done much research about this era.  Or you think that these women deserve a horrible death, in which case we're obviously not going to agree on any of this.

[LucyStoner]

I can see why they would choose a spot like that.

 

Photos like that would absolutely have the attention of all those impressionable teenagers going into a school that likely teaches liberal values... They would see themselves as presenting an alternative point of view.

Yes, but all they did was make prolifers look like extremists. No one wanted to align themselvesu with that viewpoint given their tactics and rhetoric. Honestly I think they helped push more students to a pro-choice view or a stronger pro-choice view with their hijinks. I was coming from a pro-life, religious home and I was more turned off than anything by that approach.

[unsinkable]

I know I've heard people say abortion is the best and/or only choice when a pregnancy happens when a woman is raped.

[Moxie]

I think the piece of the puzzle that many are missing is that *many* pro-life activists believe that birth control is always wrong and/or that all hormonal birth control is the same as an abortion. That might clear up *some* of the confusion about why PP clinics are targets, even the ones that don't provide abortions.

 

I had a friend who had to go to PP for a D&C after her baby died in utero. Her experience going through picketers on the worst day of her life made her one of the staunchest pro-choice advocates that you'll see.

 

Do pap smears, MRIs and other detection tools sometime result in unnecessary biopsies? Absolutely. I had two biopsies a few months ago that turned out to be fibroadenomas. Would I rather have an unnecessary biopsy than end up dead because cancer isn't discovered until it has advanced into my bones and I leave my kids behind? Absolutely. Insisting that women shouldn't have routine medical care because modern medicine has allowed rates to go down is pretty insane. It's like insisting we don't need the military anymore because we haven't sustained a terrorist attack in several years now.

I call shenanigans. I'm Catholic. My Church is 100% against birth control and is 100% pro-life. But 98% of Catholics use birth control. Where are these "many" people who are opposed to birth control??

[SKL]

Not wanting young women to die in agony is "sanitizing" abortion?  I don't think you've done much research about this era.  Or you think that these women deserve a horrible death, in which case we're obviously not going to agree on any of this.

 

No, I'm saying that the "back-alley abortion" rhetoric is no less sensational than the photos of aborted babies.  Try not to put words in people's mouths - it tends to cause threads to deteriorate.

[Mrs Mungo]

I call shenanigans. I'm Catholic. My Church is 100% against birth control and is 100% pro-life. But 98% of Catholics use birth control. Where are these "many" people who are opposed to birth control??

Catholics? Where I'm from most people think Catholics are going to hell because they aren't saved. I don't think your point proves a THING about the groups of people I'm talking about.

 

eta: I'm talking about pro-life activist groups like this: http://www.aaplog.org/position-and-papers/oral-contraceptive-controversy/birth-control-pill-abortifacient-and-contraceptive/

 

http://www.coloradorighttolife.org/birthcontrol

Here's a quote:

 

Lies: Women have been lied to by not telling them that some birth control actually kills their child.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/right-to-life-of-michigan-files-lawsuit-against-hhs-birth-control-mandate

 

I find it more useful to talk about the agendas of specific *groups* than individuals. The agenda of many (if not most) of these groups is to make hormonal birth control illegal. I think that supports the point that many of the heads of these groups are directly involved in attempts to subjugate women.

[Moxie]

The portion of the PP budget that comes from comes from the government mostly represents fee for service contracts and reimbursements for women who use their government insurance at the clinic. No federal dollars go to abortion services.

Hogwash. If I pay my bills with DH paycheck and use my paycheck to buy crack, can I say my DH's money is not used to support my crack habit? Of course not.

[SKL]

I agree that there are people who don't believe in birth control, but I don't think they could garner enough of a following to terrorize the industry with their protests, absent the abortion aspect.  I mean, you can get birth control at just about any doctor's office / pharmacy, right?  I would be both surprised and amused to see picketers down at Discount Drug over their BC offerings....

[Moxie]

Catholics? Where I'm from most people think Catholics are going to hell because they aren't saved. I don't think your point proves a THING about the groups of people I'm talking about.

I'm just confused as to who you are talking about. Where are these many anti-birth control people?? I don't see it. I think PP is targeted by people because they are the largest abortion provider in the US.

[Elfknitter.#]

Well I dunno whether it ever swayed a pregnant teenager or not.  I'm guessing it has the desired effect on some, not all who see it.

 

Personally I am hurt by signs that promote abortion "rights."  To me they essentially say "kill it," "it doesn't deserve to live," "me now at all costs," etc.  Pro-choice rallies can be venomous too, but they have the right.  So, to each his own.

 

ETA:  I also think that the "back-alley abortion" argument used by pro-choicers is also an emotional scare tactic.

 

And this is where the thread turns and a lockdown comes.

 

There's more I could comment on but I'm sure it would get deleted anyway.

[Mrs Mungo]

I'm just confused as to who you are talking about. Where are these many anti-birth control people?? I don't see it. I think PP is targeted by people because they are the largest abortion provider in the US.

I edited my earlier post to add links. I can provide many, many more. There are tons of these groups.

 

PP is by far the largest provider of health care of all kinds for low income women. The stats that say they are the largest abortion provider include removal of babies that are already dead, you do realize that? We're military. Because no federal dollars can pay for abortions (and abortion in legal and medical terms include a lot of things that most people don't think of when they hear the word), I know many women who have used PP to do D&Cs or otherwise remove a baby that was already dead.

[SeaConquest]

Case in point.  "Particularly dark and horrific."  Another, less emotional, way to state it is that injury and infection sometimes occurred when abortion was done in secret.  (And still does occur despite current law - some say, more than before.)  And it is also a fact that when you get down to it, abortions are a bit ugly.  Not sure why it is so important to sanitize it.

 

I can understand why those who feel strongly about it want to make sure people know what an abortion really is.  Because there is this disingenuous "it's just tissue" argument on the other side.

 

To my knowledge, I'm the only person who has actually worked at PP on this thread, and I specifically said that "abortion is infanticide." Anyone who has ever been pregnant, and saw/heard a heartbeat at 5w on ultrasound would have a tough time arguing "it's just tissue" (especially given that abortions aren't even generally conducted until at least 6w). 

 

But, to quibble with the "dark and horrific" characterization or deny the historical accuracy of what women suffered, this I cannot understand. 

[SKL]

To my knowledge, I'm the only person who has actually worked at PP on this thread, and I specifically said that "abortion is infanticide." Anyone who has ever been pregnant, and saw/heard a heartbeat at 5w on ultrasound would have a tough time arguing "it's just tissue" (especially given that abortions aren't even generally conducted until at least 6w). 

 

But, to quibble with the "dark and horrific" characterization or deny the historical accuracy of what women suffered, this I cannot understand. 

 

Who is denying the fact that illegal medical procedures sometimes led to injury, infection, and death?

 

The use of emotional language doesn't work for me.  Dark and horrific could also be used to describe forced unwanted abortions, complicated childbirth, and other things that happened (and continue to happen) far more often.  Would it be helpful to this discussion if I described the unborn's experience during an abortion as "dark and horrific"?  It might be apt, but I won't do it because it would only serve to polarize the discussion.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I went into a planned parenthood this week to take a client to get birth control. This particular one is located in a very affluent neighborhood. The building had numerous cameras all around the outside. We were allowed into the locked entry way one at a time, where we were wanded (metal detector), ids taken, and we weren't allowed to have cell phones. Inside the office, more security cams and a large glass window separated us from the office workers. It was bizarre and unexpected.

Is this common?

 

I'm very much against abortion...extremely so. But if this is what PP has to do just to allow its patients to feel safe...well we have a problem in this country.

 

 

Our local PP regularly has demonstrators with signs standing around in front of the building.  I haven't seen PP's security measures from the outside, but I hope they have them.  I never know whether to honk in disgust as I drive by because honking could be misinterpreted as 'Yea!".  Cars really need two horns -- one that's cheery and another that's sort of a raspberry.

[HRAAB]

Catholics? Where I'm from most people think Catholics are going to hell because they aren't saved. I don't think your point proves a THING about the groups of people I'm talking about.

 

eta: I'm talking about pro-life activist groups like this: http://www.aaplog.org/position-and-papers/oral-contraceptive-controversy/birth-control-pill-abortifacient-and-contraceptive/

 

http://www.coloradorighttolife.org/birthcontrol

Here's a quote:

 

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/right-to-life-of-michigan-files-lawsuit-against-hhs-birth-control-mandate

 

I find it more useful to talk about the agendas of specific *groups* than individuals. The agenda of many (if not most) of these groups is to make hormonal birth control illegal. I think that supports the point that many of the heads of these groups are directly involved in attempts to subjugate women.

 

Over the last few years I have noticed more and more anti-birth control signs - along with the pro-life signs - at the yearly pro-life march in our city.  I have no idea what group they represent, but there are people who connect contraception with abortion.

[LucyStoner]

Hogwash. If I pay my bills with DH paycheck and use my paycheck to buy crack, can I say my DH's money is not used to support my crack habit? Of course not.

Really, what are you even saying here?

 

If I buy tylenol from a store which also sells Viagra, has my money been spent on Viagra? No. I paid them for my tylenol. Federal money pays Planned Parenthood for non-abortion services.

 

You can review PP audited financials for detailed accounting of government vs. private dollars. Federal law has prevented federal dollars from going to abortion services since the Hyde Amendment passed in 1977. This has been renewed in various ways many times. If PP breaks that law, they compromise funding for all of their services. Which they have demonstrated again and again they will not do.

[Aelwydd]

Hey guys, can we maybe hit a reset button? I do understand the strong feelings regarding abortion, I have them myself.

 

I think the reality is this issue is far more complex than either extreme view will credit.

 

To share some of my random thoughts:

 

What if I was raped and made pregnant? Could I abort? Would I want to? I think I might choose to continue. But how would this affect my marriage?

 

What if I had a daughter who was 11, and pregnant? Would I insist she carry that pregnancy? Would I insist she abort?

 

What would I do in a situation where I'm miscarrying and there's still a heartbeat at the hospital?

 

I don't know. I just know it would be awful to have to make such a decision in the midst of a polemical sh!tstorm.

[SeaConquest]

I don't know anyone cavalier about it. Use of the word infanticide isn't helpful in keeping this thread civil.

 

When you use that word you call fellow board members baby killers. Same kind of b/s women have to deal with outside clinics. While that may be your professional opinion, I can't see what good comes of your insistence in expressing this on this thread.

I apologize if you felt I was being uncivil. That was certainly not my intent, nor was my use of the term meant to be a value judgment. It's a terrible decision to have to make, and I fully appreciate that.

[SKL]

hypothetical unborn

 

I don't have an agenda.  I think people on both sides are entitled to their opinions.  Both go to the excess all to quickly.

 

I have a friend who was forced to abort 4 children whom she wanted to keep.  She continues to mourn them decades later.  So there is emotion on both sides.

 

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

To my knowledge, I'm the only person who has actually worked at PP on this thread, and I specifically said that "abortion is infanticide." 

 

Except that it's not defined as infanticide by law, because infanticide can only be committed on a "wholly born" child.

 

From the Free Legal Dictionary:

 

NFANTICIDE, med. juris. The murder of a new born infant, Dalloz, Dict. Homicide, Sec. 4; Code Penal, 300. There is a difference between this offence and those known by the name of prolicide, (q.v.) and foeticide. (q.v.) 

     2. To commit infanticide the child must be wholly born; it is not. Sufficient that it was born so far as the head and breathed, if it died before it was wholly born. 5 Carr. & Payn. 329; 24 Eng. C. L. Rep. 344; S. C. 6 Carr: & Payn. 349; S. C. 25 Eng. C. L. Rep. 433. 

     3. When this crime is to be proved from circumstances, it is proper to consider whether the child had attained that size and maturity by which it would have been enabled to maintain an independent existence; whether it was born alive; and, if born alive, by what means it came to its death. 1 Beck's Med. Jur. 331 to 428, where these several questions are learnedly considered. See also 1 Briand, Med Leg. prem. part. c. 8 Cooper's Med. Jur. h.t. Vide Ryan's Med. Jur. 137; Med. Jur. 145, 194; Dr. Cummin's Proof of Infanticide considered Lecieux, Considerations Medico-legales sur l'Infanticide; Duvergie, Medicine Legale, art. Infanticide.

 

Now, this is not to say that every voter has the right to organize, to petition, to lobby to change the law on the state or federal level.  If that happens, then you can rightfully change the definition.

[SKL]

What excess ? Is it excessive that women can expect to be safe going about lawful, medical business ?

 

 

 

Nope, I don't believe anyone said that and I don't think any comments here implied that.

[poppy]

I don't have an agenda.  I think people on both sides are entitled to their opinions.  Both go to the excess all to quickly.

 

I have a friend who was forced to abort 4 children whom she wanted to keep.  She continues to mourn them decades later.  So there is emotion on both sides.

 

 

I don't know how someone can be forced to have an abortion. But if that happened, it is tragic. The pregnant woman should have the right to make this decision, and no one else.

[NicAnn]

My, that escalated quickly.

[Aelwydd]

Well you just did, SKL.

 

I'm this close to requesting the thread be locked, except that I respect the language and point NicAnn made in her original post and don't want to undermine it.

 

If you are the type of person who cares more for a hypothetical unborn than the people you are actually speaking to, please do continue to derail this thread with your agenda.

I don't think SKL has an agenda. I think she sometimes feels compelled to play devil's advocate. Really, I don't believe anyone here has an agenda, beyond trying to impress on others how they feel.

 

Maybe I'm wrong. Sorry if I'm overstepping. I just don't see this as a pro-life vs pro-choice half as much as I see it as a false dichotomy between the two sides.

 

Both sides are against devaluation of human life. Both sides agree that suffering is something to be avoided whenever possible. Both sides want human dignity to be protected.

 

Can't speak for extremists though on either side. I don't think anyone here qualifies as such.

[albeto.]

To my knowledge, I'm the only person who has actually worked at PP on this thread, and I specifically said that "abortion is infanticide." Anyone who has ever been pregnant, and saw/heard a heartbeat at 5w on ultrasound would have a tough time arguing "it's just tissue" (especially given that abortions aren't even generally conducted until at least 6w). 

 

But, to quibble with the "dark and horrific" characterization or deny the historical accuracy of what women suffered, this I cannot understand. 

 

Respectfully, I disagree. I have been pregnant and have seen heartbeats on the monitor. I have no issues with terminating a pregnancy, and cannot compare it with infanticide simply because a fetus is, by definition, not an infant. It is, biologically speaking, "just tissue," but then, so are we all. If you want to impose the idea of a "soul" or "spirit" into the conversation, the burden of proof would be on you to provide evidence of such a thing, as we know it is not a thing found in nature. Therefore, all we have left is tissue, mostly living (dead skin cells and blood cells notwithstanding). So there has to be more to the conversation than the organic matter. I suggest a spiritual or religious component is not helpful simply because this is an issue that must be taken on faith, and everyone does not share that faith, so this appeal will be fruitless. At the very least, both parties at the table need to use the same vocabulary. Philosophical and practical issues are probably the best ways to proceed in this kind of discussion. To suggest a woman who has been pregnant, felt the movement of a fetus, or lost a pregnancy she looked forward to continuing would have a tough time arguing for terminating pregnancy, is to miss what she is actually arguing for, and assume she lacks empathy. I find that not only inaccurate, but, well, not nice. 

 

For the record, I have been pregnant four times (all on purpose), and have given birth three (one pregnancy ended in a miscarriage). I have felt the movement of my children when they were still in my body. I can still recall the emotional pains of loosing something I dearly looked forward to. If I were to get pregnant today, I would not continue the pregnancy. If my daughter were to get pregnant, I would have no issue with her terminating the pregnancy. 

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

So I just looked up my local PP's website, and found I was wholly ignorant of the breadth of their services:

 

Abortion Services, Birth Control, General Health Care, HIV Testing, LGBT Services, Men's Health Care, Morning-After Pill, Pregnancy Testing & Services, STD Testing,Treatment & Vaccines, Women's Health Care.

 

So yeah, a lot to click on, but hey, did you know I could get testicular and prostate cancer screening there?  Neither did I!  Women's Health Care has an even bigger list - HRT, UTI's, it goes on and on for many sub-menus.

 

Maybe I should stage a counter-protest, seeing as how PP provides men's care too, but I am not the demographic affected if this center were to shut down.  I am a college educated middle aged white guy with excellent health insurance, just like most elected officials.

[brehon]

<snip>

 

I'm this close to requesting the thread be locked, except that I respect the language and point NicAnn made in her original post and don't want to undermine it.

 

<snip>

Or, if this thread bothers you that much, you could just not read it instead of running to a moderator.

 

I don't think anyone so far has really engaged in thread-locking worthy behavior. All I see are passionate people on both sides of the debate.

[SeaConquest]

Use of the word infanticide is extreme. I'm sorry to see its use going almost unchallenged. Thanks Tom.

 

Tom's definition was not the one I was using:

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infanticide

 

Again, I apologize if you perceived that I was being uncivil. I have no desire to change the law, nor to judge.

[LucyStoner]

My, that escalated quickly.

"Well, that escalated quickly" is somehow the first auto fill on my google. Ahead even of "well trained mind". It cracks me up.

[Catherine]

I always wonder why some other organization doesn't set up to provide the services other than abortions.  To provide a real alternative.  I mean, how can they blame people for going to PP when the other alternatives are out of reach?

You make an excellent observation. Why don't they? One can only assume that there is no other organization that is interested in truly offering birth control services and cancer screenings to women. Why do you suppose that is?

[albeto.]

So I just looked up my local PP's website, and found I was wholly ignorant of the breadth of their services:

 

Abortion Services, Birth Control, General Health Care, HIV Testing, LGBT Services, Men's Health Care, Morning-After Pill, Pregnancy Testing & Services, STD Testing,Treatment & Vaccines, Women's Health Care.

 

So yeah, a lot to click on, but hey, did you know I could get testicular and prostate cancer screening there?  Neither did I!  Women's Health Care has an even bigger list - HRT, UTI's, it goes on and on for many sub-menus.

 

Maybe I should stage a counter-protest, seeing as how PP provides men's care too, but I am not the demographic affected if this center were to shut down.  I am a college educated middle aged white guy with excellent health insurance, just like most elected officials.

 

As I understand it, these are reasons places like PP are targeted - they're identified as supporting what some consider to be the problem with America today - lax morals. It's not just about abortion, it's about providing a safe environment for these "immoral" behaviors to be addressed and treated rather than "corrected." 

[Aelwydd]

People use such words because they have been introduced into the national conversation and thereby legitimized by swift adoption on more local levels. Extremists apparently get to define terms this way, and in doing so, makes it so the very language we use alienates us from the other side.

 

Here's my take: abortion often causes harm, sometimes more severe in some cases than others.

 

Pregnancy and childbirth and parenthood is also fraught with many risks. Women the world over die everyday from pregnancy related illnesses and injuries.

 

Who gets to make that choice regarding risk? I don't think it's good to ignore the truth that girls and women are denied that choice, both ways. We could say that denying abortion causes increased maternal mortality. We are making women into incubators. We are killing women.

 

We could say that by allowing abortion we are denying the genetic destiny of a developing human being. We are aborting that predetermined process. If left long enough, we're coming appallingly close to killing a baby.

 

These are emotional statements. It is difficult not to escalate when polemical language is used. Does that make us extremist?

 

I think extremism comes into play when neither side can even hear the other.

[SeaConquest]

Oh, not remotely uncivil to insist women murder infants when they terminate a pregnancy.

 

No. Murder is a legal term that has a specific legal definition. I never used such a term and I'm sorry that you cannot understand that distinction.  

[Wheres Toto]

 

 

ETA:  I also think that the "back-alley abortion" argument used by pro-choicers is also an emotional scare tactic.

 

My mother worked at a youth home for troubled girls during the time when abortion was illegal.  No, they aren't scare tactics.  They are talking about things that actually happened when girls felt desperate and did what they could, sometimes damaging themselves for life.

[SKL]

You make an excellent observation. Why don't they? One can only assume that there is no other organization that is interested in truly offering birth control services and cancer screenings to women. Why do you suppose that is?

 

I really don't know.  I mean, we have thousands of charities targeting low-income health issues.  Maybe they do exist but for some reason aren't getting the word out very well.  Or maybe PP is too much competition for them. Maybe the insurance / legal aspects are too daunting.  Or maybe, when folks sit down at the drawing board, they come to the conclusion that Medicaid or other existing resources cover things reasonably well, and direct their money toward more pressing needs.

 

For the record, I think it's wrong to block access to a women's health clinic or to intimidate people going in there.  I do not think it's wrong to stage a protest on more neutral ground, just like every other opinionated group does.

[unsinkable]

My mother worked at a youth home for troubled girls during the time when abortion was illegal. No, they aren't scare tactics. They are talking about things that actually happened when girls felt desperate and did what they could, sometimes damaging themselves for life.

But it still happens with abortions today. Desperate girls lose their ability to conceive even with legal abortions today. To say nothing of the horror show monsters like Gosnell.

[unsinkable]

I really don't know. I mean, we have thousands of charities targeting low-income health issues. Maybe they do exist but for some reason aren't getting the word out very well. Or maybe PP is too much competition for them. Maybe the insurance / legal aspects are too daunting. Or maybe, when folks sit down at the drawing board, they come to the conclusion that Medicaid or other existing resources cover things reasonably well, and direct their money toward more pressing needs.

 

For the record, I think it's wrong to block access to a women's health clinic or to intimidate people going in there. I do not think it's wrong to stage a protest on more neutral ground, just like every other opinionated group does.

People who literally block acces are breaking the law. Clinics know the laws and are quick (as they should be) to call the police.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Tom's definition was not the one I was using:

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infanticide

 

Again, I apologize if you perceived that I was being uncivil. I have no desire to change the law, nor to judge.

 

Click on"infant"in that webster citing, and you get the definition "a child in the very first stage of life."  Slippery slope, that one, as it shoots straight back to the argument of when life begins.  That's why I chose a legal dictionary, as "infanticide" is a legal term IF it is to be used in discussion about legal services provided by PP.

 

Law..................Emotion

 

 

Pick one.

 

We usually don't, which is the beauty and terror of the democratic system.

[SeaConquest]

To suggest a woman who has been pregnant, felt the movement of a fetus, or lost a pregnancy she looked forward to continuing would have a tough time arguing for terminating pregnancy, is to miss what she is actually arguing for, and assume she lacks empathy. I find that not only inaccurate, but, well, not nice. 

 

 

I never said any such thing and frankly, find the above characterization similarly inaccurate and, well, not nice.

 

While I do believe that all living things are more than "just tissue," I also believe that my particular religious or spiritual views should have no bearing on public policy vis a vis abortion.

 

I'm going to bow out now because I feel that my views are being misconstrued by people, and I am not entirely sure why. I have no agenda here, and have tried to be forthcoming about my views and experiences, having had the privilege of an enriching experience while working at PP. But, perhaps, I am not communicating as effectively as is required on this difficult topic. Mom of a teething baby/sleep deprivation = not conducive to difficult conversations, methinks.

[albeto.]

I never said any such thing and frankly, find the above characterization similarly inaccurate and, well, not nice.

 

While I do believe that all living things are more than "just tissue," I also believe that my particular religious or spiritual views should have no bearing on public policy vis a vis abortion.

 

I'm going to bow out now because I feel that my views are being misconstrued by people, and I am not entirely sure why. I have no agenda here, and have tried to be forthcoming about my views and experiences, having had the privilege of an enriching experience while working at PP. But, perhaps, I am not communicating as effectively as is required on this difficult topic. Mom of a teething baby/sleep deprivation = not conducive to difficult conversations, methinks.

 

 

Oh, I didn't mean to misconstrue your words or misrepresent you. I was responding to the comment, "Anyone who has ever been pregnant, and saw/heard a heartbeat at 5w on ultrasound would have a tough time arguing 'it's just tissue.'" I don't have a hard time with that argument. That's what I meant. 

[Guest inoubliable]

Oh, not remotely uncivil to insist women murder infants when they terminate a pregnancy.

 

The insistence that an abortion is infanticide is something I can't wrap my mind around.

 

http://www.thisismyabortion.com

 

It's cruel, really, to insist that it is. Most women making the decision to abort aren't doing it so they can please their pimp or run back out to the next bus party and hook up again. 

[Wheres Toto]

But it still happens with abortions today. Desperate girls lose their ability to conceive even with legal abortions today. To say nothing of the horror show monsters like Gosnell.

 

Sure, medical malpractice or just things going wrong happens in all kinds of healthcare.  There's a risk to any medical procedure.  But it's a lot less likely when a girl isn't trying to do her own by douching with drain cleaner or going to an unsanitary facility.

 

ETA:  Unfortunately the girls my mother knew were correct in their fear that their fathers would kill them/kick them out/beat the crap out of them if they found out they were pregnant.   There was a LOT of fear behind the stories most of these girls had.

[SKL]

Choice of language, not opinion, is the problem I have with your posts. If you choose to use moral language instead of legal you have the unfortunate and perhaps deliberate effect of shaming other women.

 

That may be acceptable here on these forums. Don't expect it to not cause a ruckus by those of us who don't think it's acceptable.

 

But words that you have used, such as "perhaps deliberate ... shaming" in this post (for example), are also emotionally charged.  It works both ways.

 

I didn't feel that she intended her words to be scathing.  I felt she was honestly sharing what she saw, knowing most of us have never been so up close and personal with abortion the way she was.  Our individual experiences can cause us to be sensitive to words that are not meant to hurt.  It is not possible for each of us to know what words will be well-received or ill-received by everyone else here, especially since we are all from very different backgrounds.  If all of our words had to be pre-approved by everyone in the community, there wouldn't be much discussion here.

 

She doesn't have a pattern of picking at people as far as I know.  I think giving her the benefit of the doubt is appropriate.

[SKL]

Actually she was not calling the women killers.  I'm pretty sure she was talking about the procedure, which was performed by doctors or whatever professional did them.

 

FTR I do not consider it infanticide either in most cases.

[SKL]

With due respect, just because someone has made a choice does not mean nobody else has a right to their opinion about that choice.

 

Not long ago, there was an anti-adoption thread that got a bit insensitive toward adoptive parents as well.

[kiwik]

I hope I never have an abortion but I want to be the one making the decision, not you, not the government and not the church. I was always careful to use contraception though and I have had regular PAP smears with STD screens since I was 16 in case. When I wanted to have kids at 37 it was easy - partly genetics and luck but partly care in earlier years.

 

While there may be pro abortion people I don't thing anyone is pro in the sense of being pro education (everyone should be educated) or pro free speech (everyone should have it) and I don't see anyone having an abortion for fun. I have met a few nut jobs who thought an abortion was less unnatural than birth control (yeah OK) and a couple of druggies who had several abortions because they were incapable of managing contraception. I think a lot of them may be given 3 year stuff now so that may help. The few other people I know who have had abortions did the best they could in bad circumstances. I might have done it differently but then it wasn't me in the situation.

 

One caveat. I think over there you can have much later abortions. Here I think the limit is 12 weeks unless there are strong medical reasons (and I think considerable double checking and counselling would be required). I am uneasy about the concept of aborting a fetus that while not legally alive (here a death certificate is required after 32 weeks gestation) could in fact survive with medical assistance. It seems wrong that one 23 week fetus should have all medical science thrown at its survival and another be left to die then disposed of as medical waste. I do think with increased survival of micro micro premise that needs to be looked at more closely and perhaps some amendments be made.

 

Eta. I would want the kind of security over there. Here it is not the norm. We have a completely different medical system and I assume abortions are just carried out in the local state hospital gynocological department.

[QuirkyKapers]

Hopefully, I won't get flamed for sharing my thoughts here.  :ph34r:

 

SeaConquest, I appreciate your sharing your experience and the impact seeing choices played out in your life.  Not that you want the choice to have an abortion taken away, but that it had an emotional impact on you having been part of seeing that choice played out day after day. I am not sure how would respond or feel if I had been working in that postition.  I am not sure being in an ER would be a great place to be either considering that people's choices have an impact on their life in unexpected ways as well.  I am sure that how people experience these types of situations is different, which is why I won't ever be a doctor. 

 

Thanks for apologizing in regards to using a word that impacted others in a negative way.  For me, I didn't take that use of the word as a judgement against women having an abortion and that they were baby killers.  I took it in the vein of the emotional impact was so strong, this is the word that described the depth of that for yourself.  I actually read it as you were surprised that you had the depth of emotion considering you have been a strong proponet for women having the choice to have an abortion. 

 

Sadie,  :grouphug:  :grouphug:  I am sorry that you thought the conversation took a bad turn because of that comment.  Like I said, I didn't take use of that term as applying to women and accusing those who have aborted as being babykillers.  I could see after your thoughts about it, how others might have felt that way.  Certainly, I don't think women who have chosen to abort have done so lightly or even value life less.  Life throws curve balls at people and there are many difficult decisions and choices that have to be made.  Having been in a situation where having been raped by my brother, if I had gotten pregnant, I know I would have aborted.  Fortunately, I never had to make that choice.  I think that if the choice gets taken away, than people resort to tactics that are harmful and have horrific results.  Of course, this can happen in medical situations as well, but I would think it would be less than people taking matters into their own hands. 

 

I hope what I have said hasn't been more hurtful than helpful.