Let’s just stop this “sanctity of life” crap. We, as a country, have killed millions all around the world with military and economic actions. And continue to do so. I am not even judging the reasons we have done this, I just pointing out the fact that we have. Where was the “sanctity” in those actions? We, as a civilization, have always killed (murdered) for our own benefit, why is this form of legal killing any worse. And let’s not shy from the word “killing”. It is what it is. I have no problem with that. I, too, have and am willing do so again.

How about developing a better solution to the problem instead of just the shouting of “murderer”. In France they have real sex education, and an extremely low teen birth rate. They have family values that put Americans to total shame. They show sex in everything from billboards and magazines to dinner party discussions. Here we can show any kind of violence, but not sex. Showing sex would corrupt the children! How about the Catholic Church promoting birth control to relieve 3rd world poverty? How about making it a legal requirement to adopt American babies before foreign? Most parents adopting want white very young babies. Not sick, birth defects, non-white, etc., so adoption does not seem very viable for the majority of children available for adoption. And as always, please do not recommend a solution you are not willing to do yourself. Put your money (and political views) where your mouth is. Did you ever wonder why educated women with political and social freedom have low birthrates? Let women decide what is right for themselves and their bodies, they do not need men to decide for them; that is an injustice that has gone on for way too long!

RU486...

I've always thought just the name of this "drug" was pretty twisted. Some sick chemists in the background wringing their hands and giggling...

"Are You For 86ing a baby?"


KT

abortion laws exist so that women aren't doing it themselves with butcher knives and coat hangers....

that is a huge issue nobody has ever even discussed.

Somebody needs to find a dictionary and look up elective. It's not a political word. It's a real word with a fixed meaning.

As mentioned in my post, Neither you nor I know how many pregnancies result from rape. The absolutist view that there should be no elective abortions dictates that all pregnancies from rape or incest will be carried to term.

and to add to my last point...

it's just like teenage sex.. parents can try to prevent it all they want... point is, it's going to happen if they want it to happen... why not provide a (relatively) safe means of doing it for those who choose to follow that road, rather than leaving a young woman with her coat hangers?

Wrong again Tech.

We do know how many abortions result from rape, at least a ballpark figure. Try Google.

Ok, I'll help you. From the 4 sources I looked at (including CDC numbers and a study from Vanderbilt University) the number is somewhere less than 1%.

Elective abortions (i.e. not done for rape/incest, medical necessity or birth defect) account for 95% of the 1.3 million plus abortions done in the US annually.

Now I know you are a smart guy and can use a computer so I must assume you feign ignorance of this by choice because it blows your strawman argument about rape and abortion out of the water.

Got a calculator? Taking the "ballpark" numbers and percentages you provided, that indicates 65,000 pregnancies caused by rape or incest that are electively terminated.

The absolutist view (law) requires all 65,000 fetuses be carried to term, no matter what the consequences to mother and family -- in some cases, bonding rapist and victim together for 18+ years.

You really need to rethink all this.

Because that is an overblown lie perpetuated by the National Organization of Lesbian women and the big-business profiteers of baby murder.

prove it.

The CDC page I went to said 143,000 *in the US alone* out of thet 1.3 or whatever million....
that's over 10%.... and that's not even counting the females who use emergency contraceptive. But, by your definition, emergency contraceptive is also a form of abortion, so you have to count all those females who use the morning after pill too... which is innumerable... therefore your logic doesn't stand.

...and all that was in 1996. find a more recent study.

Ah, so now that your strawman is gone, you have to use the absolutist view to defend your position?

I'm sorry, were we talking about forcing rape victims to carry their babies to term here? I wasn't. See, that's the problem with stereotyping others Tech, you just never know when someone will come along that doesn't fit with in the box you have prepared for them.

We're talking about abortion.
Your view is that it should be illegal.
therefore you *are* saying that rape victims who end up pregnant should carry their babies to term...

Fascinating topic. It is so polarizing. The pro-choice folks think that if you would limit abortion in any way, you are a reproductive fascist.

Pro-life people believe that abortion is murder, even with a fetus carrying anomalies inconsistant with life after birth.

Clearly what's needed is a sensible middle ground. The question is; Where do we draw the line?

So you all have a more clear view of the issue at hand, here is a picture of a 24 week old fetus, that can be legally aborted electively.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1150133147.jpg

No fair...it is easier to rationalize the murder if you cannot see the child.

I consider myself pro-choice, but I do not believe in late term abortions. Or even second trimester is sketchy to me. I don't see it as black and white. This is ugly, painful stuff. But I bugs the crap out of me to see a bunch of *men* who have no idea (or seemingly empathy) serving as judge and jury for a woman, and telling her what is right and wrong concerning her body and her life. To me that is hugely egotistical.

I think it is incumbent upon you to prove your point. You claimed that the "coat hanger" theory was a serious problem...Do you have any hard facts for that theory?...Fact is it is just an emotional hook, what propagandists often do to sell their position.

Democrats do this type of thing all the time. For example, they want the terrorists to win, so when the terrorists use civilians as human shields, they say Americans killed women and children...Liberals do the same with their pitch for abortion, they lie, conflate and exaggerate...An honest man should get suspicious when these are the tactics they use to see their infanticide for $$$$$.

Eldorado if you are going to walk on the court, at least bring some game.

Where in the hell did you get that 143k number?

Here are some "more recent studies" for you:

From the RAINN (Rape Abuse and Incest National Network) website:

http://www.rainn.org/statistics/pregnancies.html?PHPSESSID=8007f73baf3523d60ebcd65 0343c24b0

"In 2002, according to the 2002 National Crime Victimization Study, 86,290 women were raped. According to medical reports, the incidence of pregnancy for one-time unprotected sexual intercourse is 5%. By applying the 5% pregnancy rate to 86,290 women, RAINN estimates that there were up to 4,315 pregnancies as a result of rape."

So to make the numbers work for your data, each pregancy due to rape would have to produce 30 fetuses, each of which is counted as a separate abortion...


Here are a few other studies for you:

1987 AGI study surveyed 1900 women who had abortions and found 1% had an abortion due to rape or incest.

2001 AGI study surveyed over 10,000 women and found .6% said they had an abortion because they were forced to have sex.

2005 AGI study surveyed 1200 women who had abortions and found .5% had their abortion due to rape or incest.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

You sure you didn't slip an extra zero into that CDC number?

And nice try for taking a page out of the Techweenie playbook and telling me what my stance on the legalization or illegalization of abortion is when I clearly stated earlier in the thread that I do not think it is my job to tell someone else they cannot have an abortion. Seriously, try reading the thread before spouting off next time.

What if the baby is a boy? We were all once at the whim of a woman do decide that we were just too much trouble and not good for her body and life. We are fighting for the survival of the male population here. :D

I suppose all of you "pro life" people have never smoked a cigarette around another person.. I trust you've never eaten meat.. or eggs.. or own a leather wallet, watch band, or shoes.. I trust your cars all exhaust water exclusively... you've never stepped on a bug... cut down a tree... went fishing.. fed your children mcdonalds twice in a week, or used an aerosol can..

point is... why stop at abortion? a lot of those things affect the life of animals... some mildly affect the life of other humans.. and others affect the lives of other humans drastically..

When pressed on the issue, the head of N.O.W. once stated that she would not deny the right to an abortion even to a full-term pregnant woman in labor.

Todd, I think you and I are pretty much on the same page. Abortion is tragic, but I'm not comfortable with completely eliminating the option. What about anencephaly? Trisomy 18? Trisomy 13? Rape or incest victims?

I think elective second trimester abortion cannot be supported by any but those most devoid of humanity.

I do stand corrected, the stat I read was dealing with second and third trimester abortions, not abortions due to rape.

Moses, I tend to agree with your stance... The longer the pregnancy, the harder it would be to abort it... barring any dramatic medical or physical anomolies.

a human is not considered a fetus until it's second month... before that it's an embryo... and chances are, as stated in my (incorrectly labelled) stats above.. about 10% take place in the second and in the third trimester, according to the CDC... before that, there's nothing "human" about it, it's just an embryo.