Abortion

[Alexi]

I wonder how many anti-abortionists would still be doing what they do if they were raped and made pregnant because of it, or if they had an unplanned pregnancy? The decisions that humans make, however rash, must be redeemable, and one should not have one's freedom shackled by something that isn't necessarily difficult to deal with.

I'm not sure if it was in this thread or another, but someone linked to a bunch of stories talking about people who stand outside abortion clinics to protest it, come in one day to have an abortion, and are back out there after the surgery is done. That really pisses me off.

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

This one.

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

I'm not sure if it was in this thread or another, but someone linked to a bunch of stories talking about people who stand outside abortion clinics to protest it, come in one day to have an abortion, and are back out there after the surgery is done. That really pisses me off.

I posted that on the last page, and I'd still like for people to read it if they haven't because it's a good look inside those peoples' weird heads. EDIT: durr Snorlax posted it just now, thanks man c:

I'm not saying I support abortion, I'm saying that sometimes there is no other option. The bad reasons get more publicity though. In ghost stories, there is practically an entire category for abortion-related incidents, and I have yet to find one where the abortion was performed with a reason that makes sense.

To summarize it: abortion should only be done when there is no other choice (or when the other options include suicide or something else death-related). Plus, some people die while the abortion's being performed, so you're risking your own life by having one. At least if you have good reason your death won't be for completely nothing other than just not wanting the baby. Besides, you could always put the baby up for adoption if you don't want it.

No one's 'pro-abortion' ffs, we're pro-choice. Of course abortions aren't good things but ultimately it's about women's rights, and I think women should be allowed to control their lives and bodies. My mother had an abortion after I was born, and it was because she didn't want the child. That's it. Does she deserve to be crucified for it? I don't think so, and I respect her decision as a woman.

And yeah, okay, because having to lug around a foetus for nine months and having to take time off work and delivering the child is totally worth it to not have some sort of bullshit guilt.

 

[Lorem Ipsum]

I'm not sure if it was in this thread or another, but someone linked to a bunch of stories talking about people who stand outside abortion clinics to protest it, come in one day to have an abortion, and are back out there after the surgery is done. That really pisses me off.

Yeah - talk about hypocritical.

Another thing, if you think about it, is that anti-abortionists are anti-freedom. If a woman can't make a decision to abort her unborn child, then surely she can't be allowed to... work in a difficult job, like being a barrister or doctor; or maybe, because that's a 'big' issue also, she can't decide whether to have surgery if she needs it.

Anti-abortionists are effectively saying 'take the big decisions away from women, because it isn't their right to make it'. And that just takes the biscuit.

 

[opaltiger]

My favourite argument against the pro-life stance remains:

If abortion is murder, how do you think we should fund the need for largely expanded prison capacities across the country?

Because, seriously, ask any person who says abortion is murder, "so should these women be sentenced to long, perhaps even life sentences?" and nine times out of ten they will say "oh, um, no...".

Tell me: what is more immoral, having an abortion or letting someone you see as a murderer walk free?

 

[spaekle]

Because, seriously, ask any person who says abortion is murder, "so should these women be sentenced to long, perhaps even life sentences?" and nine times out of ten they will say "oh, um, no...".

I have a video to illustrate this point!

 

[see ya]

I know I've posted in this thread a long time ago, but I'll sum up my beliefs again, because they were badly-worded last time..

I'm pro-choice, almost viciously so. Why? Because I've seen the kind of havoc that not having one can wreak on someone's life. I see it every day at my job at Wal-Mart, so many young women with miserable faces and a baby carriage. All the times I've asked someone if they were going to college and they answered with "Well, I was, but then I got pregnant..." All because there's a huge social pressure here that being a young mommy makes you a martyr for the child. Never mind that you've handily ruined two lives for the price of one, you're doing the most important job in the world! Hell, I even have a personal example.

My stepmom was knocked up at a party. She barely knew the guy and was drunk at the time. She wanted an abortion, but was terrified of what everyone would think of her. So she had the baby. She hated the kid, Oh, sure, she told everybody and their grandmas about how much she loved her little darling, but it was bullshit. She didn't so much raise the kid as shove her off on other people constantly, and when she was forced to watch the kid she usually just shoved a bottle in her mouth and ignored her. I watched that kid almost DIE due to her mom's neglect twice. Why didn't she adopt the kid out, then? She admitted to my dad that she never felt the kid was hers, and that she had a very strong revulsion to her daughter, but just couldn't give her up because she was scared of giving up her "Mommy" image even though she was a godawful mother (Oh, did I mention that she had the baby when she was 19, and that almost all her same-age friends also had kids? Yeah, Southern Illinois teen pregnancy rate is stupidly high). Even now, Jayden (the kid's name) lives here and we're straightening out her emotional problems, and her mom still largely ignores her.

The point is that because of one accident, this person who's barely grown up was forced into a life she hated. If she actually got an abortion, none of this would have happened. And what scares me the most about this is that I know she's not alone. Like I said, Southern Illinois has a stupidly, stupidly high teen pregnancy rate because of the pressure of the churches in our area.

 

[Zuu]

Because, seriously, ask any person who says abortion is murder, "so should these women be sentenced to long, perhaps even life sentences?" and nine times out of ten they will say "oh, um, no...".

i've used this.

they said that they deserved life sentences.

 

[Dannichu]

I've been reading articles today written by people who think they deserve death.

Incredibly relevant.

 

[Esque]

I personally am against it, for the most part. For rape, date rape, and wherever the mother's life would be threatened by having the child, it's alright. In any case, condoms aren't all that effective. They break easily, are made of cheap plastic (I know someone who is allergic to condoms. The plastic is cheap.), and just don't work. I believe the statistic was that it works 75% of the time when it isn't broken or damaged, which it often is.

The problem is that there isn't much of an alternative to raising the child yourself. Foster care and adoption are despicably corrupted systems (at least around here) and I have only seen one situation where it worked out well. This leaves me incredibly indecisive. I believe abortion is wrong, but there is no good option left in the situation.

 

[see ya]

In any case, condoms aren't all that effective. They break easily, are made of cheap plastic (I know someone who is allergic to condoms. The plastic is cheap.), and just don't work. I believe the statistic was that it works 75% of the time when it isn't broken or damaged, which it often is.

Even the cheapest, crappiest condom is still thousands of times better than nothing. Here's what the CDC has to say about condoms. There's nothing else that protects against STDs, especially the big one, HIV, and their effectiveness against pregnancy is still considerable, even though it's not 100%. Remember, that low statistic is because of typical use, which usually has more to do with the failure of the user rather than a failure of the condom. With perfect use, the rate is actually about 95%. And real latex allergies are actually very rare, and even if someone does have a legitimate allergy, there are alternate products on the market made of hypoallergenic polyurethane.

I get what you're trying to say with this, but the truth is that condoms do work and they're not all as cheaply-made and ineffective as you say. Their statistics may not be the massive numbers you see with things like The Pill, but it's still much, much better than no protection at all, and oftentimes, especially with teenagers, it's the only affordable and accessible method of birth control they have. It's misinformation like this that scares people out of using them, because it puts them in the mindset of "lol, it doesn't make a different so we'll just go bareback", so it's really a harmful belief.

 

[Tailsy]

Condoms are made of rubber, which is likely what your friend (or whoever) is allergic to, not plastic. Also, studies have shown that they're actually 85% effective. I've never seen a condom that had been damaged before opening - or after opening, for that matter. They're not flimsy - they can stretch pretty damn far before breaking*. Before jumping into an argument, you should probably get those things right first.

*Source: using them as water balloons for lols

 

[Tailsy]

Condoms are made of rubber, which is likely what your friend (or whoever) is allergic to, not plastic. Also, studies have shown that they're actually 85% effective. I've never seen a condom that had been damaged before opening - or after opening, for that matter. They're not flimsy - they can stretch pretty damn far before breaking*. Before jumping into an argument, you should probably get those things right first.

*Source: using them as water balloons for lols

 

[opaltiger]

I've been reading articles today written by people who think they deserve death.

Incredibly relevant.

It's telling that Stupak received death threats. I mean, he was the most adamant anti-choicer in the whole debate but as soon as he compromises, on the hit list he goes.

Also, condoms can stretch to nearly two metres in length. I know.

 

[Butterfree]

I personally am against it, for the most part. For rape, date rape, and wherever the mother's life would be threatened by having the child, it's alright. In any case, condoms aren't all that effective. They break easily, are made of cheap plastic (I know someone who is allergic to condoms. The plastic is cheap.), and just don't work. I believe the statistic was that it works 75% of the time when it isn't broken or damaged, which it often is.

...what? How in the world would that even work? It's a solid barrier. If it's not broken or damaged at all, relatively big (on a molecular scale) things like sperm cells aren't just going to magically go pouring through anyway. There is a chance, mostly with cheaper brands of condoms, that they'll have holes that big or rip even with careful handling, but even then all you need to do is notice that it's leaking afterwards (which is pretty noticeable) in order to be able to go out and get a morning-after pill, as opposed to those rare cases something like the pill fails, in which case you won't notice anything until, hey, you missed a period.

And as said before, it's latex, and some people are allergic to latex (in which case there are non-latex condoms available as well); it has nothing to do with being "cheap".

Speaking from plenty of experience with condoms over three years here, by the way, so I actually know what I'm talking about.

 

[Dannichu]

I personally am against it, for the most part. For rape, date rape, and wherever the mother's life would be threatened by having the child, it's alright.

First off, date rape is rape. Second, and this genuinely confuses me, so if anyone could give me an answer, it'd be good. Lots of people (and the law in some countries - I'm looking at you, Ireland) say that abortion is only permissible in the context of rape or incest (or when the mother's life is at risk). I'm wondering how, exactly, a woman who is allowed an abortion on the grounds of rape proves that it's rape (which she, or someone on her behalf presumeably has to do). While I'd love to believe her testimony is enough, I find myself doubting it.
But if "proving" rape in relation to having an abortion is anything like "proving" rape in an actual rape case (where the prosecution rate is about 5-10% depending on the country), then women in these places, or surrounded by people with these attitudes, are in a terrible position. When people talk about rape, most people think of a girl getting attacked on a poorly-lit road by a stranger, but the vast majority of rapes are commited by someone the victim knows, often a woman's husband or boyfriend, and proving a rape case against someone a person has previously had consensual sex with is nigh-on impossible.

Basically, laws/attitudes saying "only in the case of rape" are, I think, ridiculous just on principle because limiting access to abortions to women who can prove rape (meaning that something like 90% of women who get pregnant by their rapist will be required by law to have the resulting baby), and allowing women to have abortions only if they say "I've been raped" will, I assume, result in women who want/need an abortion telling doctors they've been raped, whether they have or not (see: women telling their pharmacist that a condom split in order to get the morning-after pill, in order to avoid facing an unessesary and patronising speech and/or denial of the pill itself) because it's the only way they can get one, which is, among other things, shockingly insensitive to actual rape victims.

Their statistics may not be the massive numbers you see with things like The Pill, but it's still much, much better than no protection at all, and oftentimes, especially with teenagers, it's the only affordable and accessible method of birth control they have.

Can I ask: in the US, what would an individual have to do in order to have access to the pill, and how much would it cost?

It's free here, and available to anyone - you can go on the pill even under the age of consent (16) and not need parental consent. You have to talk to a doctor about, it no matter your age, every time you get a repeat prescription, though, which is incredibly annoying.

 

[ultraviolet]

I personally am against it, for the most part. For rape, date rape, and wherever the mother's life would be threatened by having the child, it's alright. In any case, condoms aren't all that effective. They break easily, are made of cheap plastic (I know someone who is allergic to condoms. The plastic is cheap.), and just don't work. I believe the statistic was that it works 75% of the time when it isn't broken or damaged, which it often is.

okay. what? have you ever used a condom?

In any case, condoms aren't all that effective.

I believe the statistic was that it works 75% of the time when it isn't broken or damaged, which it often is.

Condoms are around 85-90% effective with perfect use (that is: they're used by someone who knows how to put one on, they're used properly, they're well in the use-by date and they're used with lubricant) and with 'usual use', which takes into consideration people who don't know how to use them, if they're damaged before you open them (which is rare) and if they're out of the use-by date, etc, is around 75-85% effectiveness.

Even at 75% effective, I don't know how you can say they're 'not all that effective'. That's more than 50%, at the very least. I guess in comparison to other methods like the pill, or... abstinence, they're not as effective. But they're far, far better than nothing.

...rape, date rape,

...are essentially the same thing, but anyway.

They break easily, are made of cheap plastic (I know someone who is allergic to condoms. The plastic is cheap.)

Condoms are usually made of a latex blend, which is rubber, not plastic. They are incredibly stretchy (you can fit them over your entire arm fairly easily) and they aren't made from cheap plastic. They're also tested with special machines that create friction to test how easily they break and all kinds of stuff.

Your friend is likely allergic to latex, which isn't all that uncommon, and you can buy latex-free condoms anyway. It has nothing to do with the 'quality of the plastic', because they aren't made from plastic.

and just don't work.

er. How informative. Condoms do work, actually, if you use them properly. And they protect people from STDs like HIV, too. I can tell you from experience that they do work, they work well, and you should actually do some research before coming into a thread and saying things which are quite obviously false.

And in any case, why wouldn't a woman who got pregnant accidentally be deserving of an abortion? You haven't even stated why you think abortion is wrong other than that you think it is, which is inherently selfish; why shouldn't women be allowed to get abortions other than because you don't think it's right? You seem to have at least some knowledge of why abortions are neccesary sometimes, because often the alternatives are horrible. Nobody thinks abortion is fantastic; it's a horribly emotionally damaging process that's really hard to go through. There aren't people who look forward to getting abortions or performing abortions. People like the idea because it's easier to abort a baby than it is to raise one or give it away; something really liberating for women in general, because they get to choose, rather than getting grounded with a child that they don't want or can't look after.

 

[see ya]

Can I ask: in the US, what would an individual have to do in order to have access to the pill, and how much would it cost?

It's free here, and available to anyone - you can go on the pill even under the age of consent (16) and not need parental consent. You have to talk to a doctor about, it no matter your age, every time you get a repeat prescription, though, which is incredibly annoying.

Y'see, we in America don't get things for free, especially if it's things we actually need like medicine, because we like to pull ourselves up by our BOOTSTRAPS and okay I'll stop spewing bullshit. (Though this is finally, FINALLY showing signs of changing. Yay Obama), so for the uninsured it's between $20-$50 a month, depending on the clinic/pharmacist/whatever. Even with insurance the cost can be as high as $15 a month. It's not much for an adult, but for a teenager without a job, it's kind of hard. Not to mention that there are some (though not many) places that require parental consent, though they all allow minors.

Long story short: It's not impossible, but for a teen, it could be kind of a hassle. And given that teens are teens and our health education loves to shove into their heads that a failure rate of 0.1% is the same as a failure rate of 90%, most don't even bother.

see: women telling their pharmacist that a condom split in order to get the morning-after pill, in order to avoid facing an unessesary and patronising speech and/or denial of the pill itself

Happily, this rarely happens anymore. The morning-after pill is now over-the-counter (though you still have to go up to the counter to get it) and most states forbid by law denial of the pill to anyone, and company policy is to keep their mouths shut about it.

Also, on your question: You answered it yourself. You can't have abortion "only in cases of rape", because trying to prove rape is a crapshoot. Not only that, but if the woman lies and says she was raped when she wasn't so she could have access to an abortion and authorities take action and decide to pursue the case, you risk a completely innocent person being accused of something they didn't do. Sure, this wouldn't be a very common occurrence, but it's yet another reason that the motivations for getting an abortion just aren't worth tracking just to get rid of "convenience abortions". People are going to abuse the system, yes, but it's not worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak, and taking the rights away from people who really do need it.