Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

About abortion, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice


markdohle

Recommended Posts

 

About abortion, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice
(Those who disagree can come from a place of compassion as well.)

A good friend of mine, who is not a Christian, but a thoughtful man, actually like a brother, wrote me and disagreed with my post on the 'Down Trodden".  He is a man who does care for others, we just start from a different place.  He did mention in his note to me that if Universal Contraception was available it would take care of a good deal of the problem.  His name is Marco and if anyone met him would like him for his passion and depth of insight into many of the problems that we are dealing with at this time.  We both know and understand that the women who get abortions go through a horrendous process and many never get over it.  Hence a central problem if not the main one for the abortions issue.  I am not pointing fingers at anyone, for I have friends and family who have procured abortions….life is messy and chaotic.  I understand that....yet we all must speak what we think is important and true.

I know that many will disagree, I understand and again, I know that I can't change anyone minds on anything.

Marco,

"I think there is universal access to contraception.  I believe that is another question.  However, when the sexual act is reduced to 'play' without regard for consequences is a problem.  Marco, one reason you are interested in the rights of animals is that they are not objects to you, nor are they commodities, they are real living creatures.  I don't always agree with everything you say about animal rights, yet people need to stop looking upon animals as things' and in that I applaud you.

The same goes for the 'fetus'.  Funny, when a woman wants to have an abortion, it is a fetus.  When she wants to keep it, it is a child developing.  We use words to protect us from understanding the evil in what we are doing.  Cruelty to animals for instance.  We can call it sport, or scientific experimentation etc.  That way we don't have to face the suffering we cause other animals.  We label them.  We also label the life in the womb as a 'fetus' or 'mere tissue''.   Or the 'Woman's right to choose ', mind-numbing repetitions to cover over the conscience.  I can't believe that during the democratic convention a woman got up and bragged about getting an abortion, how it helped her in her career.....so the life in her womb was a commodity, mere tissue, if she wanted the child, I doubt she would think in those terms.  Abortion is murder, which is legal, just as mercy killing in this country will soon be.  When something becomes a law, it matures, grows and can get out of control.  Like in the Netherlands… doctors are starting to choose on their own who is to live or not.  That was not the intention of 'mercy killing', yet when doctors overstep they are not persecuted.  Roe and Wade was introduced with the intent of allowing abortions for women in danger and those on the poverty level......now it is a right for all woman to get an abortion for any reason.  

However, the issue goes beyond my thoughts on the issue, or yours.  It is here to stay; like I said… for it to lessen significantly or to even go away, cultures would have to change in ways that are impossible.  So all anyone can do who is pro-life is to stay calm, loving and compassionate.  Life is very, very, very, messy.  Becoming violent, insulting and physically aggressive only makes things worse for everyone.

My post was not directed at people who are pro-choice but towards those who understand the sacredness of life in the womb so that they will not despair, or get angry or violent.  I do not underestimate our potential for violence, in  me, you, or the gentle old lady who lives in her apartment."  Those who disagree can come from a place of compassion as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could never understand how people have become so indifferent to the slaughter of now several hundred million people world wide. Nor could I understand how people think it should be expected of the tax payer to pay for it. I guess there is very little I understand about any of it. Even if it is somehow now a necessary evil, because of social de-evolution, how could people celebrate it? Like they finally got access to public water fountains.

I don't even understand it politically, especially among my libertarian friends. Seems like the right to life is the foundation of freedom.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I could never understand how people have become so indifferent to the slaughter of now several hundred million people world wide. Nor could I understand how people think it should be expected of the tax payer to pay for it

the way things happen reality, it would be cheaper to pay for abortion, than pay welfare.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well abortion is at an all time low due to the wide availability of affordable birth control. But if planned parenthood's funding is removed a large number of people will lose access to affordable birth control. Increasing unwanted pregnancy and abortions, either blackmarket or Doctor performed.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thanato said:

Well abortion is at an all time low due to the wide availability of affordable birth control. But if planned parenthood's funding is removed a large number of people will lose access to affordable birth control. Increasing unwanted pregnancy and abortions, either blackmarket or Doctor performed.

No they won't. The money will just go to a health clinic that doesn't perform abortions 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

No they won't. The money will just go to a health clinic that doesn't perform abortions 

But why take money away from an institution already doing the clinical stuff?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Thanato said:

But why take money away from an institution already doing the clinical stuff?

Exactly, 88% to 97% of planned parenthood services involve screening for and treating sexually transmitted diseases, infections, and other heath issues, as well as providing contraception. Plus, is there not a law saying that government funding can't go to abortions?

Edited by Odin11
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MamaMia1981

For myself, I'm pro life.

As a medical professional, I'm pro choice.

However....I think that federal government money funding any organization that performs abortions is questionable.  An abortion should be a last option.  I know I have seen many patients, who, either chose not to use birth control, or just plain used abortion as a means of birth control, regret their decision later in life.  Why?  Because many people don't know that abortions, especially when repeated, cause uterine scarring, and can lead to infertility.  (Not to mention there are other associated complications, like retained products, need for further procedures to remove products, infections, blood clots, etc.)

I feel that women are undereducated about it's long term effects, and it's ready availability have lured women into this false sense of security in getting abortions.

With that being said, I don't think it can disappear into the realm of illegality, because women will return to back alley abortions.  I have no idea what the answer is, but I know having taxpayer dollars (via Medicaid reimbursements) get funneled back to planned parenthood makes me uneasy.

I know Trump believes birth control should be OTC.  Perhaps that will come to fruition.  Also, many DOH provide the same screenings and health services.

It's a tricky situation.  

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/15/health/trump-contraceptives-without-prescription/

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/01/24/liveaction-investigation-planned-parenthood-pre-natal-care-virtually-non-existent/

http://afterabortion.org/2012/abortion-risks-abortion-complications-abortion-dangers-abortion-side-effects/

Edited by MamaMia1981
I added a link, fixed crappy wording
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pro-choice, but really, it's a tricky thing with me. I do see the seriousness and understanding in life of the unborn. I think it's tricky on the first stages of pregnancy. It seems to me, so many have a hard time deciding when life does begin in the womb. Keep in mind, I have had two full pregnancies. And despite the understanding of the necessity of it, relating to situations that MamaMia said, believe it or not, when my first pregnancy appeared that there maybe something wrong with the fetus, my husband and I discussed it, and I was full blown ready to take it to full term and he wasn't. In the end, it turned out a test I took was mixed up with someone else's and after another test, everything was normal. ( that fetus became a Vet Tech assistant, speaking of animals. ;) ) 

Anyways, I do agree, there will always be situations, where one has no choice or no other way to turn to. I do wish there was more education on birth control and more availability of it for both women and men. And the responsibility that goes with relationships and such. ( and harsher laws on rape, and better equip courts and law to see the difference between rape and not. ) And speaking of rape, how does one look at a pregnancy from rape? 

I do feel, there are some who take for granted that abortion seems to be their birth control to them, ( in which I also am against ), but I think those who feel that way in the low numbers. I have known some, who were in dire need in abortions. These situations were such, that the other party member were non-existent. 

Yeah, I can really understand the care of the unborn, but sometimes I think the understanding of the situations around the conception and realizing it's not all that black and white simple to think that no put in any thought into act. I think there are a lot of situations going on, that is too complicated to simplify. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it is all about the stages of pregnancy.   Of course there are exceptions, but you cannot make rules based on the exceptions.   

Without having a qualified exception (life threatening), I don't think an abortion should be allowed after 4 months. 

 

Here's some decent pics of the human fetus at various stages.   It's not from a pro life site.

http://www.webmd.com/baby/ss/slideshow-fetal-development

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pro life personally, but don't force my view on others... does that mean I'm pro choice?

A very interesting interview with a former director of Planned Parenthood that was with them for 8 years and a rabid supporter, before she had a change of heart.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alaric said:

I'm pro life personally, but don't force my view on others... does that mean I'm pro choice?

I wouldn't think so. You are confidence of your point of view. That's it. 

1 hour ago, Alaric said:

A very interesting interview with a former director of Planned Parenthood that was with them for 8 years and a rabid supporter, before she had a change of heart.

 

Here's the thing, I did some searching on the net and came up with some things about her. Other than what I have read from some sites that talk about her job at PP and their story compared to her's on her employment, the big thing here is that particular abortion she says she assisted didn't occur. According to these sites.

And the fact, that I'm finding that PP is still non-profit all the way. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

I wouldn't think so. You are confidence of your point of view. That's it. 

Here's the thing, I did some searching on the net and came up with some things about her. Other than what I have read from some sites that talk about her job at PP and their story compared to her's on her employment, the big thing here is that particular abortion she says she assisted didn't occur. According to these sites.

And the fact, that I'm finding that PP is still non-profit all the way. 

"Unless you make the same choice as I do... you are not pro choice." seems like a very anti choice argument. If I make up my own mind and support other's right to make up their own minds... that means I'm pro choice. The fact that I made a different choice than you is irrelevant.

It's a myth that nonprofits cannot make a profit... you can look that up yourself. Ergo there's nothing preventing them from making a profit on abortions.

As for the Slate article... it just ooozes bias and character assasination. In the 1st sentence it uses the word "**** material" to describe her actions. You can believe this is a valid source if you like... me, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 5:45 PM, Thanato said:

But why take money away from an institution already doing the clinical stuff?

Because they use tax payers money to murder children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 11:20 PM, Odin11 said:

Exactly, 88% to 97% of planned parenthood services involve screening for and treating sexually transmitted diseases, infections, and other heath issues, as well as providing contraception. Plus, is there not a law saying that government funding can't go to abortions?

Lots of companies provide those services.

There is no way to prevent tax payers from paying for abortions, its just done indirectly, but the results are the same as though it was paid directly. PP was created to exterminate black people, and they have given a noble effort on that front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2017 at 1:45 PM, Thanato said:

Well abortion is at an all time low due to the wide availability of affordable birth control. But if planned parenthood's funding is removed a large number of people will lose access to affordable birth control. Increasing unwanted pregnancy and abortions, either blackmarket or Doctor performed.

That's what Planned Parenthood would have us believe and yet

100 Condoms cost $15.45, free shipping on orders over $35

https://www.amazon.com/Okamoto-BEYOND-SEVEN-Condoms-condoms/dp/B007S02L9I/ref=sr_1_1_a_it?ie=UTF8&qid=1487849688&sr=8-1&keywords=beyond%2Bseven%2Bcondoms&th=1

Calendar Method/Temperature Method/Mucus Method/Abstinence:   $0.00, no shipping required.

Factor in the health problems caused by birth control drugs that programs like PP practice including offering no protection against STD, and the "crunchy" methods of obtaining human specimens to experiment on, and the moral dilemma of federally funding abortions at all, and it's not exactly clear what the lesser cost to society really is.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Alaric said:

"Unless you make the same choice as I do... you are not pro choice." seems like a very anti choice argument. If I make up my own mind and support other's right to make up their own minds... that means I'm pro choice. The fact that I made a different choice than you is irrelevant.

I'm going off you putting the last part of you being pro-choice into a question. I apologize if I thought this was to be a question for further reflection. I thought you were questioning yourself. I was putting my reflection on it. *shrugs* 

8 hours ago, Alaric said:

It's a myth that nonprofits cannot make a profit... you can look that up yourself. Ergo there's nothing preventing them from making a profit on abortions.

As for the Slate article... it just ooozes bias and character assasination. In the 1st sentence it uses the word "**** material" to describe her actions. You can believe this is a valid source if you like... me, not so much.

I know, there is more to non-profits than what it really is labeled as. I think I have been observing PBS stations having to be more commercialize, despite still receiving donations. I'm centering on the thing about the ex-planned parenthood employee who is saying she 'witnessed' being told to make more profit on abortions, and that she changed her views because of one abortion she assisted. In which, I thought it was a bit fishy for me, so yeah I did do research on it. And I can understand your point of view of the sites I found, since I also found sites that report it in a light of backing it. I wonder though, how you saw the second site I also linked as credible. 

I was just a bit :hmm: considering the bit about PP being videotaped about a year ago, seemed to me to be staged and it was found that is was. I still observe PP as a lot more than abortions and that there is no profit gained for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yamato said:

That's what Planned Parenthood would have us believe and yet

100 Condoms cost $15.45, free shipping on orders over $35

https://www.amazon.com/Okamoto-BEYOND-SEVEN-Condoms-condoms/dp/B007S02L9I/ref=sr_1_1_a_it?ie=UTF8&qid=1487849688&sr=8-1&keywords=beyond%2Bseven%2Bcondoms&th=1

Calendar Method/Temperature Method/Mucus Method/Abstinence:   $0.00, no shipping required.

Factor in the health problems caused by birth control drugs that programs like PP practice including offering no protection against STD, and the "crunchy" methods of obtaining human specimens to experiment on, and the moral dilemma of federally funding abortions at all, and it's not exactly clear what the lesser cost to society really is.

Is Planned Parenthood tied into that Amazon link or Amazon at all? I ask, because one particular bookstore chain I worked for did that. The thing is, the Amazon link is just that, it's just Amazon advertising it and how to get it. Plus, it seems there is more of giving advise of where to get them and how it could be free at PP. 

Plus, the  Calendar Method/Temperature Method/Mucus Method/Abstinence:   is not as effective as other forms like condoms. And yeah, well, yes there are always problems, side effects, to everything. That's why I always feel and say, there should always be the responsibility taught in everything. I do firmly believe one needs to be adult for sex and relationships, and if they are not ready, they are not ready. 

As I have said, I really wish there was also more responsibility and awareness of all situations of pregnancy taught everywhere. This is, to me, not an easy black or white thing to take lightly. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Yamato said:

 

Calendar Method/Temperature Method/Mucus Method/Abstinence:   $0.00, no shipping required.

 

Are you really preaching Abstinence? Yes it will prevent 99.99% of pregnancy (allways that one.... looking at you jesus, ha). However you cant expect people to remain abstinent. Its a primal requirement to procreate, and even if you do your best you will allways be overcome by the primal need to have sex. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

Is Planned Parenthood tied into that Amazon link or Amazon at all? I ask, because one particular bookstore chain I worked for did that. The thing is, the Amazon link is just that, it's just Amazon advertising it and how to get it. Plus, it seems there is more of giving advise of where to get them and how it could be free at PP. 

Plus, the  Calendar Method/Temperature Method/Mucus Method/Abstinence:   is not as effective as other forms like condoms. And yeah, well, yes there are always problems, side effects, to everything. That's why I always feel and say, there should always be the responsibility taught in everything. I do firmly believe one needs to be adult for sex and relationships, and if they are not ready, they are not ready. 

As I have said, I really wish there was also more responsibility and awareness of all situations of pregnancy taught everywhere. This is, to me, not an easy black or white thing to take lightly. 

Agreed with one caveat.  If someone doesn't know how to get a condom they must live under a rock.  Something that costs $1 and available everywhere isn't a matter of affordability or access.   It's a matter of responsibility.   If someone can't find or afford a condom they aren't ready to have sex either whatever their age.   They also can't afford to drive to the PP to get the free one if they could even find it because there's infinitely more condoms than PP locations.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thanato said:

Are you really preaching Abstinence? Yes it will prevent 99.99% of pregnancy (allways that one.... looking at you jesus, ha). However you cant expect people to remain abstinent. Its a primal requirement to procreate, and even if you do your best you will allways be overcome by the primal need to have sex. 

I believe that as well. But, I think, that everyone's biology is different. Plus, ;)  ;);) there are 'other ways' to take care of it as well. In which, the stigma to that, should decrease I think. :D

;)  ;)  ;) 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yamato said:

Agreed with one caveat.  If someone doesn't know how to get a condom they must live under a rock.  Something that costs $1 and available everywhere isn't a matter of affordability or access.   It's a matter of responsibility.   If someone can't find or afford a condom they aren't ready to have sex either whatever their age.   They also can't afford to drive to the PP to get the free one if they could even find it because there's infinitely more condoms than PP locations.

As you probably have seen, I have been posting about responsibility. In which, there should be more in teaching about responsibility about sex in the various areas, the home, the school, I think PP does that, and such. Like I think I have said, I think one should be mature and responsible enough to have sex. And considering also how personal it is, it should still be up to them to have it,  marriage or not, when they feel they are ready. Or not, if they are not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a dark side of abortion many haven't thought of: religious or cultural abortions.

For example, in Canada many Indian parents who immigrated are routinely having abortions to get the son the want and get rid of the daughter they don't. Who wants to be burdened by a daughter for 20+ years?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/abortions-indian-boy-girl-birth-ratio-1.3530278

Quote

But women who immigrated from India who already had two children gave birth to 138 boys for every 100 girls. If they already had three children, they give birth to 166 males for every 100 females.

That ratio rises to 326 boys per 100 girls for Indian-born mothers with two daughters who had an abortion preceding her third birth.

It was 409 boys for every 100 girls if the mother had more than one abortion.

I think many people are "pro-choice" as it seems like the sensible thing to do. But like free speech, once you open that door you open it to everyone regardless of motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.