No exceptions

said_aouita said:
www.pewresearch.org

What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

The U.S. abortion rate has generally declined since the 1980s, but there have been slight upticks in the late 2010s and early 2020s.
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

"Almost a quarter (24%) of women who had abortions in 2021 had one previous live birth, 20% had two previous live births, 10% had three, and 7% had four or more previous live births."

Hope this helps
Click to expand...
Cool. Still a matter of convenience to the mothers. After the fact contraception.
 
psycho_dad said:
Many reasons. One thing is for sure. I have no idea what it takes to carry a baby and give birth. The majority of women that choose abortions have already had children, so they know much more than me. Doctors know much more than me.

Teen pregnancies are WAY down. Abortions have been steadily declining. Seems like we are on the right path. I'm not forcing something on a woman that is abused or has been raped. The subject is NO EXCEPTIONS. That's just counterproductive and unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Abortions are up since the Dobbs decision.
 
Irving Mainway said:
Abortions are up since the Dobbs decision.
Click to expand...
YES THEY ARE!!! Once again showing the GOP way is counterproductive. Number of clinics like Planned Parenthood in some states were closed which cut down on birth control and counseling and led to a rise in abortions. Abortion clinics prevent abortions too. They don't just perform them.
 
psycho_dad said:
YES THEY ARE!!! Once again showing the GOP way is counterproductive. Number of clinics like Planned Parenthood in some states were closed which cut down on birth control and counseling and led to a rise in abortions. Abortion clinics prevent abortions too. They don't just perform them.
Click to expand...
If that were true why is planned abortion funded with government money pregnancy resource centers aren't
 
Irving Mainway said:
If that were true why is planned abortion funded with government money pregnancy resource centers aren't
Click to expand...
Planned Parenthood gets grants and is reimbursed with federal money because they conform to federal guidelines. Abortion services are not Federally funded. They provide cancer screenings and many other healthcare services as well as birth control and counseling services that include adoption referrals etc.... They follow rules.

Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Get government money. Shouldn't, but do. They have an agenda and do not conform to regulations. Don't follow HIPAA. Push only antiabortion. So, they delay necessary medical treatment and pressure people and misrepresent what they are. There are like 3 times the number of these places as there are regulated health centers for women.

The fact is that Minnesota and PA are the only states that have stopped funding these frauds. So, they absolutely get government funding. You should know that before you post something.
 
psycho_dad said:
Planned Parenthood gets grants and is reimbursed with federal money because they conform to federal guidelines. Abortion services are not Federally funded. They provide cancer screenings and many other healthcare services as well as birth control and counseling services that include adoption referrals etc.... They follow rules.

Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Get government money. Shouldn't, but do. They have an agenda and do not conform to regulations. Don't follow HIPAA. Push only antiabortion. So, they delay necessary medical treatment and pressure people and misrepresent what they are. There are like 3 times the number of these places as there are regulated health centers for women.

The fact is that Minnesota and PA are the only states that have stopped funding these frauds. So, they absolutely get government funding. You should know that before you post something.
Click to expand...
Planned Parenthood doesn't have an agenda? Of course they have an agenda.They think abortion is wrong whereas it's the lefts sacred cow.
 
Irving Mainway said:
Planned Parenthood doesn't have an agenda? Of course they have an agenda.They think abortion is wrong whereas it's the lefts sacred cow.
Click to expand...
Planned parenthoods agenda is to provide health care. Adoption referral rates for PP and "Pro-Life" centers is exactly the same. But I'm sure you already knew that.

www.christianitytoday.com

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Clinics Have the Same Adoption Referral Rate: 1% - Christianity Today

Why adoption has become a less popular option.
www.christianitytoday.com www.christianitytoday.com



Why Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Legal but Unethical

Crisis pregnancy centers violate ethical principles by providing misleading information and causing delays and inequities in access to abortion.
journalofethics.ama-assn.org journalofethics.ama-assn.org
 
psycho_dad said:
Planned parenthoods agenda is to provide health care. Adoption referral rates for PP and "Pro-Life" centers is exactly the same. But I'm sure you already knew that.

www.christianitytoday.com

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Clinics Have the Same Adoption Referral Rate: 1% - Christianity Today

Why adoption has become a less popular option.
www.christianitytoday.com www.christianitytoday.com



Why Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Legal but Unethical

Crisis pregnancy centers violate ethical principles by providing misleading information and causing delays and inequities in access to abortion.
journalofethics.ama-assn.org journalofethics.ama-assn.org
Click to expand...
Preventing abortions is now unethical. Love how the left hijacks morality.It's now more moral to kill a baby.
 
psycho_dad said:
Planned parenthoods agenda is to provide health care. Adoption referral rates for PP and "Pro-Life" centers is exactly the same. But I'm sure you already knew that.

www.christianitytoday.com

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Clinics Have the Same Adoption Referral Rate: 1% - Christianity Today

Why adoption has become a less popular option.
www.christianitytoday.com www.christianitytoday.com



Why Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Legal but Unethical

Crisis pregnancy centers violate ethical principles by providing misleading information and causing delays and inequities in access to abortion.
journalofethics.ama-assn.org journalofethics.ama-assn.org
Click to expand...
Calling crisis pregnancy centers “unethical” because you would rather have a monopoly on dispensing other care than see unborn lives be saved is really freaking sick. I’m kind of surprised that God hasn’t struck Elizabeth Warren dead yet with a lightning bolt or something. He has grace for even Lying Lizzie the fake Indian baby killer
 
Irving Mainway said:
Preventing abortions is now unethical. Love how the left hijacks morality.It's now more moral to kill a baby. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN MY POST COMES CLOSE TO THIS CONCLUSION.
Click to expand...
It's unethical to promote and advertise yourself as one thing when you are not. It is unethical to only give one option when there are many. Prevent abortions honestly, is not too much of an ask.

That's what Planned Parenthood does. Much more effectively than the dishonest Crisis Pregnancy Centers that have to pretend they are something they are not. They do little to nothing about preventing pregnancy. In fact, they don't promote birth control and push religion and are neglectful in giving people accurate information if there is an actual problem with a pregnancy.

Preventing pregnancies is preventing abortions. PP also does much more than just offer abortion as an option.

Again, adoption referrals are on par with the Crisis Pregnancy Centers. You have lost big time here. Time for you to give up and actually do some research. Learn something. PP prevents abortions.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
Calling crisis pregnancy centers “unethical” because you would rather have a monopoly on dispensing other care than see unborn lives be saved is really freaking sick. I’m kind of surprised that God hasn’t struck Elizabeth Warren dead yet with a lightning bolt or something. He has grace for even Lying Lizzie the fake Indian baby killer
Click to expand...
Unethical to lie and give false and/or misleading information. They misrepresent what they do. Pure and simple. Very easy for them to just tell the truth.

I want to see as many unborn saved as possible. Who would not want there to be zero abortions? Lying is unethical and that is what Crisis pregnancy centers does.

"According to the data, 71% of CPCs use deceptive means such as spreading thoroughly debunked misinformation and 38% do not clearly state on their home page that they do not provide abortion care.viii These methods make it harder for people to get reliable information about an important decision that will affect their health and their lives. By using deception, delay tactics, and disinformation, CPC staffs undermine the tenets of informed consent and patient autonomy and impede access to comprehensive, ethical care."

What Misleading Practices Do CPC Staffs Use?​

Abortion is a safe medical intervention backed by decades of robust data. Despite this fact, many CPC staffs use false and misleading information, emotional manipulation, and delays to divert pregnant people from accessing comprehensive and timely care from patient-centered, appropriately trained, and licensed medical professionals. These tactics may include …

  • Asserting false risks of abortion, such as stating that there are links between abortion and breast cancer, infertility, mental illness, and preterm birth
  • Falsely suggesting a high complication rate associated with abortion
  • Intentionally overestimating a person’s gestational age and suggesting that they are beyond local legal limits for accessing abortion
  • Using disturbing visuals or performing ultrasounds to emotionally manipulate and shame pregnant people under the guise of informing or diagnosing them
  • Downplaying the impact of pregnancy and childbirth on people’s lives and health
  • Advertising online using keywords such as “abortion clinic” and manipulating web search data to appear in searches for abortion clinics despite not providing abortion care
  • Falsely representing the facility as a legitimate health care clinic that offers comprehensive and unbiased reproductive health care by selecting names similar to those of legitimate clinics, setting up near reproductive health clinics, and misrepresenting nonmedical staff and volunteers as clinicians by having them wear lab coats and perform ultrasounds
CPCs—particularly those that are not staffed by medical professionals—are not bound by federal privacy laws, such as HIPAA, and therefore are not legally bound to protect their patients’ information or confidentiality. They also lack the regulatory oversight that governs legitimate medical clinics.
 
psycho_dad said:
Unethical to lie and give false and/or misleading information. They misrepresent what they do. Pure and simple. Very easy for them to just tell the truth.

I want to see as many unborn saved as possible. Who would not want there to be zero abortions? Lying is unethical and that is what Crisis pregnancy centers does.

"According to the data, 71% of CPCs use deceptive means such as spreading thoroughly debunked misinformation and 38% do not clearly state on their home page that they do not provide abortion care.viii These methods make it harder for people to get reliable information about an important decision that will affect their health and their lives. By using deception, delay tactics, and disinformation, CPC staffs undermine the tenets of informed consent and patient autonomy and impede access to comprehensive, ethical care."

What Misleading Practices Do CPC Staffs Use?​

Abortion is a safe medical intervention backed by decades of robust data. Despite this fact, many CPC staffs use false and misleading information, emotional manipulation, and delays to divert pregnant people from accessing comprehensive and timely care from patient-centered, appropriately trained, and licensed medical professionals. These tactics may include …

  • Asserting false risks of abortion, such as stating that there are links between abortion and breast cancer, infertility, mental illness, and preterm birth
  • Falsely suggesting a high complication rate associated with abortion
  • Intentionally overestimating a person’s gestational age and suggesting that they are beyond local legal limits for accessing abortion
  • Using disturbing visuals or performing ultrasounds to emotionally manipulate and shame pregnant people under the guise of informing or diagnosing them
  • Downplaying the impact of pregnancy and childbirth on people’s lives and health
  • Advertising online using keywords such as “abortion clinic” and manipulating web search data to appear in searches for abortion clinics despite not providing abortion care
  • Falsely representing the facility as a legitimate health care clinic that offers comprehensive and unbiased reproductive health care by selecting names similar to those of legitimate clinics, setting up near reproductive health clinics, and misrepresenting nonmedical staff and volunteers as clinicians by having them wear lab coats and perform ultrasounds
CPCs—particularly those that are not staffed by medical professionals—are not bound by federal privacy laws, such as HIPAA, and therefore are not legally bound to protect their patients’ information or confidentiality. They also lack the regulatory oversight that governs legitimate medical clinics.
Click to expand...
You are a clown, and "the data" used is crap. Now, an evil, lying clown.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, the only link you have there (you missed deleting it?), when "hovered", revealed "...advocacy/abortion is essential/...", _dud.

🤡
 
winbypin said:
Is 1 guy a majority?
Click to expand...
Letting States decide, like Trump said. Bernies decision is what matters.
IVCguy said:
Hmmm. I didn't say anything about mothers being forced to raise unhealthy babies. There are alternatives - unless the child is murdered.

IMO the term "government assistance" in the context of federal and state government is almost always an oxymoron. The government does not know you, doesnt know your family, and doesnt care about you, therefore, they cant care for you well. In most cases, the more they try to care for you, the more they keep you away from people and orgs who can care for you well, and, in many cases, their "assistance" is an active harm. So, no. I am not for causing additional harm to a woman that has already suffered something traumatic.

That said, federal and state govt does a short list of things well in terms of helping citizens. For example, the federal govt can offer help in cases like natural disasters where the scope overwhelms local organizations. But the best help is found with people who know you and you are in some kind of familial, social, spiritual, or direct governmental accountability relationship.

But it is interesting how the left side of the aisle looks at every problem through the lens that it requires the govt to regulate, pass laws, and pay for the fallout of the problem - when the govt has a miserable record of addressing individual crises with those tools.

What you are suggesting is that if I oppose the abortion exceptions, then I must necessarily support big govt assistance, but that is specious and a false conflation. I would support rings of assistance that begins with the family and progresses to friends, neighbors, church, and charitable organizations that have a much better record of effective care. The next ring is local then state govt, and if all else fails, the federal govt may have to be involved - but hopefully not.
Click to expand...
So you support forcing mothers to carry out pregnancies (health risk or not) then additionally adding much more money to our adoption foster parent government handout families.
I understand, some support suffering.
 
said_aouita said:
Letting States decide, like Trump said. Bernies decision is what matters.
Click to expand...
Bernie would be a US Senator voting on national legislation like a potential national ban. He would not be in the majority in the US Senate on that topic. You can quit clutching your pearls.

The great state of Ohio has already spoken at the state level. If the state legislation tried to do something Bernie wouldn't be a part of it.

You're welcome.
 
said_aouita said:
Letting States decide, like Trump said. Bernies decision is what matters.

So you support forcing mothers to carry out pregnancies (health risk or not) then additionally adding much more money to our adoption foster parent government handout families.
I understand, some support suffering.
Click to expand...
OK, well, I was reasoning and explaining my thought process, and you went into sophistry. So, we are at a dead end.

But I do understand that if someone believes that killing an unborn child is a moral good in order to serve the interests of a mother, there is no argument that can penetrate that. Similarly, no one can move me off the truth that killing an unborn child is an act of barbarity and evil. Murder is the intentional killing of an innocent person, and they do not come more innocent and without agency than the unborn child. If that reality doesn't penetrate the conscience of a person, then there is no amount of reason or organization of words that can stir that conscience.
 
said_aouita said:
If gop gets the majority in both houses, you don't think they will go for a no exceptions nation wide abortion ban?
Click to expand...
Hell no. Some insular House (R)eps might bring something up, but it won't see the House floor. The Speaker would be dooming a great deal of his supporters in the House. Most Senators, with a statewide electorate, they won't touch a federal abortion ban with a 10 foot pole, stupid.

You really don't understand how this America thing works, at all, do you ?
 
IVCguy said:
Almost every national GOP politician, including Trump, say consistently that they support the exceptions. This seems to be the most politically practical position to take.

I do not support the exceptions and will share why.

In the case of rape and incest, there is a victim of a crime (the pregnant girl or woman), a completely innocent person who had no agency and took no action to create the situation (the unborn child), and a disgusting male who is 100% guilty and responsible for the situation - and the one of those 3 that gets the death penalty is the one with no agency.

Life of the mother is a misrepresentation of the practical reality. As an OB, you have two patients - mother and the unborn child. The goal is to have two living patients at the end of the pregnancy. If there are complications with the viable or unviable child that are threatening the life of the mother, you deliver the child and do what you can or is medically possible for the child. You are not God. You do what is necessary to preserve both lives and leave the rest to God. What you don't do is intentionally kill the child because that is immoral.

"Delivery" vs "intentionally killing the child" may sound like semantics when the end result will often be a dead child, but it makes all the moral difference in the world and creates the difference between a barbaric society and one that honors and values life.
Click to expand...
"God" should have no place in this conversation.

Your position forces an unimaginable burden and psychological trauma on a real person for the theoretical benefit of a mass of cells with the potential of becoming a child. This is the mistaken thought process that the anti-abortion folks get stuck in. They look at a fully developed human and think "what if we aborted that person?" as if the moral quandary is about going back in time to kill them before they are born.

The only thing that matters is the objective and physical reality in the moment; anything else is imagination and story telling. In this moment there is a rape victim with the product of her rapist's baby growing in her body. That product has no thoughts, has no experience, has no sense of self or anything else. It is not sufficiently thinking or feeling to even logically be empathized with. If you remove this biological mass, that victim is saved the psychological and physical trauma of childbirth, the burden of the life plans they had being completely shifted, and the reliving of the circumstance that led to it.

You've got to be absolutely demented to bring your imagination to bear on inventing a story of a future in which that biological mass is a person that must be protected by you now; as if you've gone back in time to stop them from being destroyed. Anti-abortion people are, in their own minds, time traveling heroes, sent back from a future they've invented in their own delusions, to save actual, fully developed humans from destruction.
 
oxat622 said:
"God" should have no place in this conversation.

Your position forces an unimaginable burden and psychological trauma on a real person for the theoretical benefit of a mass of cells with the potential of becoming a child. This is the mistaken thought process that the anti-abortion folks get stuck in. They look at a fully developed human and think "what if we aborted that person?" as if the moral quandary is about going back in time to kill them before they are born.

The only thing that matters is the objective and physical reality in the moment; anything else is imagination and story telling. In this moment there is a rape victim with the product of her rapist's baby growing in her body. That product has no thoughts, has no experience, has no sense of self or anything else. It is not sufficiently thinking or feeling to even logically be empathized with. If you remove this biological mass, that victim is saved the psychological and physical trauma of childbirth, the burden of the life plans they had being completely shifted, and the reliving of the circumstance that led to it.

You've got to be absolutely demented to bring your imagination to bear on inventing a story of a future in which that biological mass is a person that must be protected by you now; as if you've gone back in time to stop them from being destroyed. Anti-abortion people are, in their own minds, time traveling heroes, sent back from a future they've invented in their own delusions, to save actual, fully developed humans from destruction.
Click to expand...
You make me chuckle at how you always try to set the baseline conditions for every argument and then beg the question (ie, first, let's agree to not call it a baby; God should have no place in this argument). I understand that your thousands of feckless Yappi posts has resulted in you having zero gravitas here... but our largesse for tolerating your silliness only extends so far.
 
oxat622 said:
"God" should have no place in this conversation.

Your position forces an unimaginable burden and psychological trauma on a real person for the theoretical benefit of a mass of cells with the potential of becoming a child. This is the mistaken thought process that the anti-abortion folks get stuck in. They look at a fully developed human and think "what if we aborted that person?" as if the moral quandary is about going back in time to kill them before they are born.

The only thing that matters is the objective and physical reality in the moment; anything else is imagination and story telling. In this moment there is a rape victim with the product of her rapist's baby growing in her body. That product has no thoughts, has no experience, has no sense of self or anything else. It is not sufficiently thinking or feeling to even logically be empathized with. If you remove this biological mass, that victim is saved the psychological and physical trauma of childbirth, the burden of the life plans they had being completely shifted, and the reliving of the circumstance that led to it.

You've got to be absolutely demented to bring your imagination to bear on inventing a story of a future in which that biological mass is a person that must be protected by you now; as if you've gone back in time to stop them from being destroyed. Anti-abortion people are, in their own minds, time traveling heroes, sent back from a future they've invented in their own delusions, to save actual, fully developed humans from destruction.
Click to expand...
Well, that's a take. An amoral and immoral one, but one that is within your rights to hold. Thanks for sharing.
 
ZfishInMason said:
You make me chuckle at how you always try to set the baseline conditions for every argument and then beg the question (ie, first, let's agree to not call it a baby
Click to expand...
I did not do any of this. I did not implore anyone to agree with my definition of baby.
ZfishInMason said:
God should have no place in this argument).
Click to expand...
It shouldn't. That's my opinion. This is the debate forum. We share opinions. You don't have to agree with them.
ZfishInMason said:
I understand that your thousands of feckless Yappi posts has resulted in you having zero gravitas here... but our largesse for tolerating your silliness only extends so far.
Click to expand...
Oh no, an old guy on the internet has had it up to HERE with me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top