pardon me if im wrong but i havent seen any information anywhere regarding "ripping a baby to pieces and throwing it into the trash" as how any of this works??? you're wording there is very poor and doesn't help your argument much as that's not even what is done
fair enough. i was making a point that the life of the baby being destroyed is worse than the economic or social standing of the mother being destroyed
i believe so yes, since i believe abortion is murder
too late. some person who just decides they dont want a baby anymore still has a human life inside them. regardless of whether they want the baby or not, its alive, and to kill it would be wrong
↩ Telesphoreo The difference about stealing is that we’re talking about some item vs controlling an actual body
i dont think so. in both cases the government is restricting certain actions in order to protect something more importan
↩ Telesphoreo Getting raped is not their “free choice” (or their fault)
of course yea, but that only accounts for 0.5% of abortions. still, even in those rare cases, a baby born from rape is not any less human, and has the same value as any other baby
the massive majority are, only 0.5% of abortions are because of rape
↩ root this is absolutely what could be considered forcing in this case.
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/202…ion/7788415001/
(remember, this is coming from the “but think of the children!!!!!!” kind of people, but they clearly don’t actually care about the children when a literal child is also involved with and affected by this.)
if the mother’s life is in danger, id be fine with an abortion. however, if the mother would live past giving birth, then i would not support an abortion. while the situation you listed is truly evil, two wrongs dont make a right. the baby is still human and still has the same fundamental right to life. and the “think of the children!!!” people youre claiming are hypocrites have just made the same decision: if the mother would live, then the life of the baby trumps anything else. killing the baby would only be acceptable to me if the mothers life would be ended, but if the mother would live, then i dont see any other exemption that makes sense
i mean heres a literal abortion doctor explaining it: https://youtu.be/5THDmys8z30
and this is in the first trimester, too. the baby gets ripped to pieces, sucked through a tube, and thrown in the trash. my wording is fine
Source because if that's true then I must be really rare to know people in that 0.5% super minority?
The CDC has this to say:
Almost 3 million women in the U.S. experienced RRP during their lifetime
Three million people is three million people, and this isn't including people who chose to report they were raped or got an abortion for rape. And if you say "well just report being sexually assaulted lol", you have no idea what it's like to go through that.
Disagree here. Having control over our bodies is more important than some cheap toy manufacturered in China.
totally unrelated but is miscarriage also murder?
abortion still exists dumbass
...for now.
correction: a potential human life
you don't know if the baby is going suddenly die before fetal viability
Not to get involved too deeply, but...
Not if you consider the long term in which how the destruction of economic/social standing could have an impact on how the child is raised.
↩ Telesphoreo Source because if that’s true then I must be really rare to know people in that 0.5% super minority?
https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/
to say its extremely rare doesnt mean that it never happens. being born is a 1 in a million chance to win the sperm race but everyone here won the race (good jab yall). my point is that arguing for abortions because of rape isnt a good argument since the huge majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape
↩ Telesphoreo Disagree here. Having control over our bodies is more important than some cheap toy manufacturered in China.
youre completely missing the point. the point is that control and restrictions are sometimes necessary to protect certain things, such as life. banning stealing restricts the pursuit of happiness in order to protect property and liberty. banning abortions restricts liberty and the pursuit of happiness in order to protect life. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are in that order intentionally.
↩ enchy just because you dont want consequences to happen doesnt mean that they just wont happen. sex will always carry the risk of becoming pregnant no matter what you do. its like saying i want to get drunk to feel good, but i dont want the hangover. be ready for the risks that you take. and adoption is always an option for parents who cant take care of a child
But you can get drunk and not have a hangover... I do it most times I go drinking with friends, you know what the consequences could be, but you mitigate them and when the mitigation fails, you handle it (ie by drinking more water and an Aspirin), in your example you're forced to drink more and more and can't do anything to fix it.
On the same thought pattern here, if I came over and broke both your legs, would you go to a hospital and seek medical help? Because you always had the risk of someone breaking your legs but you choose to walk anyway, so why should you be allowed to get any medical care if I break your legs?
I appreciate it's a silly example, but I'm trying to understand where you're drawing the line between making use of modern day medical capabilities that are here to improve our quality of life as a species, and where you're saying we should ignore such medical advancements and go all primal here.
Abort73.com is part of Loxafamosity Ministries, Inc. (LMI), a non-profit 501(c)3 Christian education corporation. Abort73.com is an online resource designed to creatively and comprehensively educate people about the injustice of abortion, and provide them with simple tools to help pass that education along to others.
Biased source that was blocked on my network as "Misinformation". Seems legit. I'll add that you've already been called out for using this source earlier in the thread, so there's no point in me arguing your source when it's already been done above.
Yes it is, and yes it does. Whether you want to believe it or not, it's a very large number. And not everyone who gets an abortion is going to say it was because of rape, as I've said above. It's promoting a bad ideology that rapists can now choose who their mother is.
Take your head out of your rear and read his link instead of crying "biased!", and then you'd know that said "biased link" sources its numbers from Guttmacher and the CDC.
Any source will have agendas, but that shouldn't matter as long as their numbers aren't manipulated.
The 0.5 percentage of abortions with rape as the main factor comes from a survey of 1209 women performed by the Guttmacher institute. This is noted on the Abort73 page:
In 2004, the Guttmacher Institute anonymously surveyed 1,209 post-abortive women from nine different abortion clinics across the country. Of the women surveyed, 957 provided a main reason for having an abortion. This table lists each reason and the percentage of respondents who chose it.
They also provide another number from Florida only:
The state of Florida records a reason for every abortion that occurs within its borders each year. In 2020, there were 74,868 abortions in Florida. This table lists each reason and the percentage of abortions that occurred because of it. [0.15% of the woman were raped]
(https://ahca.myflorida.com/MCHQ/Central_S…Reason_2018.pdf
From a quick Google Search shows that similar numbers can also be found from a USA TODAY article:
Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Yet the battle over exceptions for both has garnered outsized attention in the national abortion debate.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nat…ion/1211175001/
Engage in honest conversation instead of merely tossing the entirety of the other party's argument aside because "Bad source!".
The reality is we don't know if the numbers are verified or not or what numbers came from where. As I said in my post looking into the source given they state they use those two other organisations for the source of their data if folks referended the source itself rather than a layer of bias there would be no issue... If someone wants to use the percentages claimed in this thread doing so from the CDC or Guttmacher would be a far more sensible and credible way to do so than a site where the entire purpose is pushing a religious view not a data driven view.
↩ @'Ryan' The reality is we don’t know if the numbers are verified or not or what numbers came from where.
The article literally links to the studies. Yes we know where the numbers come from. I already noted hypocrisy in claiming that Abort73 is "biased" because it has an agenda to ban abortion, when Guttmacher and other sources linked in this thread are literally the exact opposite agenda: pushing reproductive rights for women.
My bad missed that, when I initially looked at a glance I thought they just linked back to the home pages for CDC and Guttmacher.
I will say that I've never said the other sources were not biased, simply that this one was and I stand by that view, the commentary around the data is 100% biased. I don't really intend to get into the nitty gritty of what's trust worthy and what is not because that's not the point of this thread but I want to make clear I've at no point stated any other sources were unbiased.
↩ ClayCoconut late reply but enchy has actively stated there shouldn't be an exception for rape and has openly downplayed the trauma for the person carrying the rape baby multiple times in my presence- just to calrify
↩ enchy downplaying the trauma of a rape victim giving birth to a baby saying it's worse for the fetus in the womb with no fucking concept of the world is downplaying rape victims experiences making rape and rape pregnancies like nothing- it's apart of rape apologist culture, you might not realise this but its the rhetoric.
source: common sense, being a mental health worker myself, being a rape victim
being for banning abortions as a whole excludes mothers who are at risk, you should have made this clear in your wording.
You don't understand systems of oppression, the people in power. It's a deeper issue. Beyond statistics and further into learning about the stories of actual women. Anyway agree to disagree I guess, I just think it's a little bit fucked. It's all fucked. Glad I'm not in america as a female sex worker especially but heart goes out to american people with uteruses ig.
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' has openly downplayed the trauma for the person carrying the rape baby multiple times in my presence
yea no. again, quit bullshitting. im not downplaying any trauma, im holding a consistent belief that human life is valuable and should be protected.
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' downplaying the trauma of a rape victim giving birth to a baby saying it’s worse for the fetus in the womb with no fucking concept of the world is downplaying rape victims experiences making rape and rape pregnancies like nothing- it’s apart of rape apologist culture, you might not realise this but its the rhetoric.
rape apologist culture does not fucking exist. there are maybe 3 people who think rape is fine, and then everyone around them calls them retards. even if it does exist, i sure as hell am not spreading “rape apologist rhetoric.” convenient that you dont specify what the fuck that is, keeping it vague allows you to just brand anything as rape apologist rhetoric if you disagree with it. and i mean objectively being killed is worse than having trauma. im not downplaying trauma of rape victims, im just being objective. trauma can be mitigated, or worked through in therapy. even if that doesnt happen, youre still alive. if youre dead, thats it. no way to fix that.
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' source: common sense,
its not common sense if youre the only one who believes it. its actually common sense to not automatically assume someone you disagree with is a rape apologist
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' being for banning abortions as a whole excludes mothers who are at risk, you should have made this clear in your wording.
if you mean at risk as in life of the mother, i have literally said in like every post i am fine with abortions only in the cases where the mother would die. how more fucking clear do you want me to be
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' You don’t understand systems of oppression, the people in power. It’s a deeper issue
because they dont exist. there is no systematic oppression of women. the gender pay gap has been debunked hundreds of times since the 1980s. women have higher voter turnout than men. women have the exact same rights men do. if anything, women have more rights than men. women dont have to enter the draft. women are more likely to win child custody. women can make a false allegation against a man and ruin his life or reputation (amber heard vs johnny depp, brett kavanaugh). people literally say to believe all women no matter what. men commit suicide 4 times as much as women do. men make up 90% of workplace fatalities. where the fuck is the oppression of women?
↩ @'luca nyahoooo' Beyond statistics and further into learning about the stories of actual women.
you mean ignoring the actual facts of our society and instead using a couple anecdotes to construe all of society. this is how you come up with shitty ideas. but here is a story from an actual woman i know: she was 20 and got pregnant on accident. she didnt know what to do, so she went and got an abortion. it is one of her biggest regrets, getting that abortion. there are many stories of actual women like this.
Why is, objectively, being “killed” worse than having trauma?
what
not if the victim commits suicide
if therapy doesn’t work and the mother is suicidal would you support an abortion then? if so how would you prove it?
what
is this paragraph saying because of the way courts and shit work and suicide rates that MEN are oppressed?
neither is wrong. qualitative methods can be used the same way quantitative methods can. there is no single way to look at society.
↩ enchy couple anecdotes to construe all of society. this is how you come up with shitty ideas. b
↩ enchy but here is a story from an actual woman i know: she was 20 and got pregnant on accident. she didnt know what to do, so she went and got an abortion. it is one of her biggest regrets, getting that abortion. there are many stories of actual women like this.
how r u contradicting yourself in the same paragraph
