The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Abortion a key factor in deciding this year's US election. > Comments

Abortion a key factor in deciding this year's US election. : Comments

By Rose Espinola, published 2/11/2012

Women's issues, particularly in healthcare and mainly abortion, are pivotal for this election, and matter more than ever.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
America seems to be going through one of its periodic bouts of religious fervour. The last one resulted in prohibition.

I have a feeling the current one is at or near its peak. Hopefully the Republican party will now recover from its madness and we shall see the emergence of a genuinely conservative party in the US able to tackle the real problems facing the country.

And hopefully the Liberals here will echo that change and reverse their drift towards Republican style in(s)anity.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Friday, 2 November 2012 11:01:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When does life begin? With conception? Conception can and sometimes does, simply lead to a stillborn baby?
So it's an argument, which like so much archaic, flat earth, belief based doctrine, simply has no scientific; or indeed, no truth based foundation?
For mine, life actually begins with a beating heart!
The quite deliberate stilling of a beating heart outside the womb, is murder!?
Why is it not also murder, to still a beating heart inside the womb?
Sure, without a shadow of doubt, a women does have an absolute right to decide issues relating to her body!
But, with pregnancy, the body inside her is not only not her body, it belongs to a completely different individual, as does the beating heart.
However, there are still times where stilling another beating heart, is not only okay, but sometimes necessary/compulsory!
If the pregnancy was the product of rape, then no fair-minded person on the planet would, could or should compel the mother, to go full term!
Rape includes all forms of uninformed, and or, non-consential sex!
For mine the morning after pill would be mandatory, and available on demand across the counter, rather than an option.
Moreover, there are a number of cogent medical reasons, where the mother's health would be placed in real jeopardy, if forced to go full term!
If lion Ryan were forced to "pass" a bowling ball, placed inside his abdominal cavity, without his informed consent; he would be the very first to reverse his absurd, asinine, abhorrent absolutism?
Lion Ryan's ill-advised comment, could conceivably cost the Romney the presidency?
Even Sarah Palen would have not been quite that vacuous, and engaged brain, before putting mouth into gear!?
That said, and given another person's beating heart could be stilled!?
Abortion on demand can never ever be considered as a convenient substitute for easily and widely available contraception.
I mean, besides "the pill", there are condoms and the morning after pill, if a possible pregnancy is unwanted?
[The rhythm method is hopefully, occasionally, successful, as is abstinence!]
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Friday, 2 November 2012 11:22:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhrosty wrote:

>>For mine, life actually begins with a beating heart!>>

That's in about the sixth week of pregnancy - say around half way through the first trimester.

So, cases of rape or medical reasons excepted, you would allow abortion up to around the 6th or 7th week?

http://www.babycenter.com.au/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment/06weeks/

>>The embryo is the size of a lentil this week [week 6]

[...]

You can't hear it yet, but the heart (which has divided into the right and left chambers) is beating at about 150 beats a minute -- twice the rate of yours.>>
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Friday, 2 November 2012 11:53:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The article was not about when 'life begins' but rather about how important Abortion is in the election, and the different approaches to it within American politics.
Posted by Rose Anon, Friday, 2 November 2012 2:12:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem here is not so much Romney, but the baggage that he
carries with him. That includes Ryan, the religious right, the tea
party and all the other fruit loops and fanatics.

Lets hope that the women of America don't vote for them.
Posted by Yabby, Friday, 2 November 2012 3:07:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhosty says "If the pregnancy was the product of rape, then no fair-minded person on the planet would, could or should compel the mother, to go full term!"
I fail to see how rape is a reasonable ground for killing an unborn child. If you believe that the unborn child is a genuine human being then the fact that their father is a rapist should not mean that they are punished by death for his crime. As much as rape is a terrible thing, the baby is innocent of this crime.
If the mothers life is at risk that is another point altogether. All humans have the right to self defence and accordingly if the pregnancy is threatening the life of the mother she has every moral right to abort it.
Rhosty says "If lion Ryan were forced to "pass" a bowling ball, placed inside his abdominal cavity, without his informed consent; he would be the very first to reverse his absurd, asinine, abhorrent absolutism."
But we're not talking about a bowling ball are we?
Abortion is not only a religious issue. I myself am an atheist yet can't help feeling we have gone astray as a society when we kill unborn babies for the sake of convenience
Posted by Rhys Jones, Friday, 2 November 2012 3:23:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I believe that this archaic push to try to force women to carry on with pregnancies they don't want, by some politicians in America, will only serve to lose them the election.

I have often asked on this forum exactly how people like these pro-life politicians would 'force' women to carry unwanted pregnancies?

Or maybe they would be happy to lose untold numbers of women to backyard abortionists, like back in the good ol' days
Posted by Suseonline, Saturday, 3 November 2012 12:58:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are only two valid positions in the abortion debate. Pro choice or pro life, no in between. If you believe the unborn has the rights of an individual then the means of their conception are irrelevant, the disgusting act of rape that results in a conception is of no relevance to the unborn. You can't have a valid stance that is pro life with conditions. I happen to be pro choice and find it pathetic that men, politicians or not, would try to control what a female does with her uterus. The unborn child is not an individual, it has never attained the status of an individual, it is in effect (up until a viable survival development stage, say 20 weeks) a parasite
Posted by mightor, Saturday, 3 November 2012 6:16:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
stevenlmeyer, with all due respect mate, I would prefer to avoid an abortion altogether.
[Simply put, it's nigh on impossible to ban abortion, or indeed, enforce any other entirely unenforceable law!]
My first option would be the morning after pill, which positively prevents ovulation, for the time any sperm are viable! And must be given, within a few short hours of the EVENT!
I would also want to monitor the rape victim for some months; for HIV and other life threatening STD's!
That said, there is always considerable trauma attached to rape, and sometimes the mother is pulled in just too many directions; especially by the religious right, or by the "opinionated", and may need time to come to a fully informed and entirely personal decision!?
Besides, at the end of the day, the timing of any clinical procedure, is not down to you or I, but the "incubator".
Having an unwanted baby, [becoming a slave mother,] can and or almost always does have whole of life ultra-negative consequences; and not just for the Mother!
As indeed, is being robbed by the system; and or, custom and convention, of a wanted one!
Just listen to some of those heart wrenching stories emanating from poor women, who were compelled by "circumstance", to give up their babies at birth!
Some say a baby is just a parasite for the first twenty weeks?
Well, that argument could be just as valid for, or extended to a suckling infant?
Or indeed, a wilful teenager, ARMED WITH RIGHTS and pester power, demanding this, that and the other, from parents, who may fully support the youngster, right through to a uni degree and "beyond"?
Cheers, Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Saturday, 3 November 2012 9:21:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhrosty says "Some say a baby is just a parasite for the first twenty weeks?
Well, that argument could be just as valid for, or extended to a suckling infant?".....Well actually no, the argument is invalid for a suckling infant. The distinction here is the suckling infant is an individual that has breathed its first breath and most importantly it is viable away from it's nursing mother, another female can provide milk (wet nurses are / were known in many countries) Or any one over the age of about 12 could provide baby formula to sustain the infant. The unborn is just not viable if removed from the womb at around 20 weeks or less.
Back on topic: The candidate Paul Ryan supported a bill that defines life as the point of sperm penetrating the egg wall. The implications of this extreme position are huge. So if the Nut bag Ryan had his way, any woman who feared pregnancy and then took an overdose of the contraceptive pill (effectively the morning after pill) would be guilty of murder, how would they police this? Urine tests for all females of child bearing age? Insanity! Or how about the "mass murder" carried out in the IVF process when some fertilised eggs are discarded? Interestingly Mr Romney is a Grandfather of IVF children! So once again the extreme right elites are liars & Hypocrites!
Posted by mightor, Saturday, 3 November 2012 5:41:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Even something as benign as vitamin C can and does render the pill ineffective? And the strength varies!
So by implication, relying on a possibly underdone overdose to prevent ovulation, is fraught with parasitical pregnancy possibilities?
I would prefer the surety of an over the counter morning after pill, to be sure that ovulation couldn't proceed, while any sperm remained viable!
Why did Paddy always wear three condoms?
Ah to be sure, to be sure, to be sure!
Simply put, and Paddy would say, ah to be sure, to be sure, one simply cannot abort or murder a child one has never ever conceived!
As for wet nursing?
Sure, sometimes there's no other choice!
And or, the stone-hearted can pass the parcel, and simply treat a human being as an object or inconvenient nuisance?
Why, it is even possible for a surrogate mother to carry the "parasite" to full term.
And indeed, take extreme umbrage with the, ostensibly offensive term, parasite?
As for lion Ryan, who along with other republicans in the congress, never ever consistently blocked or rigidly stone-walled President Obama's policy proposals?
And then never ever had the unmitigated hide to blame him for their non carriage?
And could conceivably be, the fastest Marathon runner on the planet, [an hour quicker,] in his weight for age group?
Is Ryan a Lion?
All levity aside, if men could become pregnant, Lion Ryan would, to be sure, to be sure, arrive at a completely different view!?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Sunday, 4 November 2012 8:24:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
this subject has been discussed extensively here and elsewhere...

what Im going to say is extremely controversial...but needs to be said...

Abortions now world wide, whether unofficial or officially conducted...or to see how its done with public money with no questions asked while completely hidden from the public...then please come to Victoria...

bottom line is this;

http://allpsych.com/disorders/dsm.html

its the official diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders...

now look at the definition and markers for sociopath then psychopath...

so you will realize that there is a official standard for human civil behaviour and when its no longer within this normal spectrum...

essentially, all our acts in each and every moment of our lives requires emotion as a component...normal emotional spectrum is integral in being human, or when diminished or absent then "subhuman"...

now killing an unborn baby, excluding the 'subhuman' application of law that has empowered abortions, will place all involved in abortions, particularly the woman demanding an abortion will come within the definition of a sociopath...and its a fine line to psychopath...sobbing into a white handkerchief doesnt diminish the abomination being demanded...

and the woman, and all those and things that are made to empower this, and allow the abortion to be completed...are then psychopaths...killing of innocent...

lets not fool ourselves to otherwise...

it will stop...just need the power to shift from the subhumans to normal humans...and I hope soon as possible...

sam
Posted by Sam said, Sunday, 4 November 2012 9:23:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*essentially, all our acts in each and every moment of our lives requires emotion as a component*

Yup. The question then becomes, as Goleman put it so well in his
"Emotional Intelligence", are you emotionally engulfed or emotionally
aware? Being a slave to your emotions is hardly smart thinking.
Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 4 November 2012 9:35:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I suppose that there are two options:

A. Women are recognised as having the right to make choices over their own bodies. If they choose to terminate a pregnancy, then that is their right. Men don't have to be involved, or identified.

or

B. Abortion should be illegal and rigorously policed, and for women who express an unwillingness to proceed with their pregnancies, once the woman has identified the father of her soon-to-be-born child, he is to be apprehended and vasectomied. After all, he has done his bit for procreation, so that's the Church satisfied.

So: either a sensible and humanistic solution, or a medieval and barbaric solution. Perhaps it's all a bit academic these days, but we do need to resolve this issue.

If course, a third option is that women are provided with on-going contraception, which they can terminate as and when they choose. But we're all human, and it may not always work out that way, especially for younger women, first-timers. As the wonderful Bertram Wainer pointed out, 'it's not nice' that abortions have to occur, but we all make mistakes, and some of us pay more than others, and for nine months and more longer, so why not even up the playing field ? If no abortion, then vasectomy ?

Either that, or men forever hold their counsel.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 4 November 2012 10:25:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth thinks that men who create unwanted pregnancies should be vasectomised against their will. Why? Perhaps that unborn child is in fact wanted by the father. The father has no say in the matter. Should the mother also be sterilized?
Loudmouth seems to think that men should be excluded from this debate. But each one of those babies being aborted have a father and over half of them are boys. Men have a huge interest in the protection of their potential off spring and in generally having a voice in deciding the moral path that society should take on these questions. Women perhaps have a larger stake given they actually have to carry the baby, but their stake is not exclusive.
I don't necessarily believe that the criminal law is answer but that doesn't mean we should just say that "abortion is fine and every woman has a right to decide what she does with her own body." There are others that have a stake in this including the unborn and its potential father and everyone else who doesn't wish to live in a society where we routinely kill the most vulnerable for the sake of convenience. As a society we should be doing everything we can to reduce the abortion rate, including ensuring everyone has access to contraception and the knowledge of when and how to use it. We should be celebrating the conception and birth of every baby, regardless of how inconvenient its arrival may be to the parents
Posted by Rhys Jones, Monday, 5 November 2012 2:42:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sam said! You have drawn the longest bow possible. You assume every one involved in an abortion is a sociopath and tending to psychopath, actually a post so far to the extreme that it is probably worthless debating your position.

Rhys said" We should be celebrating the conception and birth of every baby, regardless of how inconvenient its arrival may be to the parents" Well as the father of two girls and the husband of a lady, if any of the three females in my life were raped and fell pregnant as a result, I certainly would not be celebrating the event and would regard this deplorable act as more than an inconvenience. This comment is right up there with those made by Indiana Senate candidate Mourdock where he called pregnancies resulting from rape as a gift from God.

When will men realise that this is a woman's health issue.

Oh and Sam, not every female who has a termination crumbles into a crying mess, they make a decision and are comfortable with it. I know a couple of ladies who have made this decision and contrary to what you may believe they don't live their lives in silent shame & regret and they are not sociopaths or psychopaths, they are great mothers and live "normal" suburban successful lives.
Posted by mightor, Monday, 5 November 2012 7:11:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*We should be celebrating the conception and birth of every baby, regardless of how inconvenient its arrival may be to the parents*

Go and tell that to the people living on the Manilla rubbish tip,
who after 8 kids plead to have their tubes tied and are denied
that option by the Catholic Church.

Given that its not you going hungry, it is so easy to pontificate
from the comfort of your cushy lifestyle.

In their lifetime, most women have around 400 chances to have a baby
and reality prevails, you can't keep them all. Only a woman can
decide that matter and as the load falls on her shoulders, it
should also be her right to make that decision. Interfering busybodys
are free to rush off to the third world and save some of the starving
babies, if they really want to put their money where their mouth is.
Posted by Yabby, Monday, 5 November 2012 7:37:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting isn't it. "all concern for the fetus, no care for the child"

i wonder how many of these "every conception is sacred" deeply concerned individuals actually go and do charity work for the poor children in third world countries. I do, I love the pickaninny children i've helped, however I'm sensible enough to realise abortion is a woman's health choice. According to some that makes me a borderline psychopath.

Oh BTW pickaninny is not an offensive term as the adults themselves refer to the children as such, it's only offensive to, "do good do nothing" white people sitting in the comfort of their heated homes enjoying their full bellies.
Posted by mightor, Monday, 5 November 2012 9:02:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well Rhys, until men start carrying foetuses - and I don't think that is all that improbable in the near future (it might cahnge the dynamics of same-sex marriage) - whether or not to terminate is a woman's business. Period. It's her body, not yours or mine.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 5 November 2012 9:11:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe,
If the unborn child is no business of the man who fathered it then why is the born child his business? It appears to be double standard when men are expected to support eh children they father yet have no say in whether or not the mother can kill those children prior to birth.

Yabby refers to the people scrounging a living on the manila rubbish tips. Perhaps abortion is justified for them but I don't see a lot of Australians scrounging on rubbish tips. We are a wealthy country with a birth rate less than that required to replace our numbers. Every child should be valued in Australia. That is not necessarily the case in other less fortunate countries who have real problems with population growth and poverty.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Tuesday, 6 November 2012 4:58:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mightior says "as the father of two girls and the husband of a lady, if any of the three females in my life were raped and fell pregnant as a result, I certainly would not be celebrating the event and would regard this deplorable act as more than an inconvenience."
Only a very tiny percentage of abortions occur due to a pregnancy caused by a rape. The vast majority, in Australia at least, are aborted for convenience.
However, as a father of a young woman myself, I too would be highly distraught if my daughter was raped. That doesn't mean I would wish to kill the unborn child which was innocent of any wrong doing. It is the rapist who should pay the price.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Tuesday, 6 November 2012 5:04:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhys, you remain confused. If it hasn't been born, it's not a child.
It becomes a child at birth.

So what is it before it has a human brain, which is around week 22?
It's not a person either. It's a fetus.

It is really up to the mother to decide if she wants to have a baby
or not. The circumstances of every woman are different and you
simply can't walk in their shoes, so have no right to be so judgemental.

Most abortions in Australia take place in the first trimester, a long
way before a functioning human brain has formed.

If people had children that were wanted and loved, we would have
a lot less misery and suffering in our community.

Why on earth you'd want to force unwanted children on people, makes
not a scrap of sense.
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 6 November 2012 6:48:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhys, you just don't seem to be able to see the decision from the woman's point of view. When you say " However, as a father of a young woman myself, I too would be highly distraught if my daughter was raped. That doesn't mean I would wish to kill the unborn child which was innocent of any wrong doing. It is the rapist who should pay the price" you are implying the decision would be yours, it would not be yours it would be your daughters.

However your view point is one of the two valid viewpoints in this debate, you either stand against abortions regardless of the circumstances because every fertilised egg is a child, a view i totally reject, or you accept that the fetus is not a child, it is an extension of the females body and has no viability if removed from the females body before approximately 22 weeks. Therefore the decision to terminate before this period of the pregnancy is not killing an unborn child, because it's not a child.

And thank God Australia has matured beyond the USA and we no longer need to fall back generations and revisit these social issues that were decided by sensible representatives many years ago. Like the debate on Gay marriage, this to will sensibly be resolved in time when the community leaders realise that the community has matured to the inevitable position.

I just hope that today in the USA, many millions of woman stand up for their rights and vote for Obama, as the cult member Romney with his born into wealth buddy, the liar Ryan, will wind back woman's rights many decades. Hell one stupid Tea Party female was calling for men to make all decisions, hey why not remove females right to vote because they are so victim to their emotions! - When will they grow up?
Posted by mightor, Tuesday, 6 November 2012 8:00:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Guys remeber the church's position is that not only should the raped women not have an abortion she should marry the rapist least she be an adultress!
Posted by Kenny, Thursday, 8 November 2012 2:01:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well the women's vote went to Obama. The republican white male
archaic view on this subject, would have been enough to cost them
the election. Good on women for sticking up for their rights on
this one! Perhaps the Vatican should clean up the sexual habits
of its clergy, before trying to preach to the masses on this topic.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 8 November 2012 2:18:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy