ChatterBank1 min ago
US - Abortion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5096 894.stm
Not strictly the newest of stories, but it has been about in the last couple of weeks. A law has been proposed to outlaw abortion, even in rape and incest cases, unless it specifically endangers the mother's life. If this happened in the middle east we'd be talking about the subjugation of women well into the night, but this seemed to slip under the radar a bit. Thankfully campaigners have managed to get it put on hold for the moment. Does anyone else think that this would be an appalling law to pass, or can anyone justify it?
Not strictly the newest of stories, but it has been about in the last couple of weeks. A law has been proposed to outlaw abortion, even in rape and incest cases, unless it specifically endangers the mother's life. If this happened in the middle east we'd be talking about the subjugation of women well into the night, but this seemed to slip under the radar a bit. Thankfully campaigners have managed to get it put on hold for the moment. Does anyone else think that this would be an appalling law to pass, or can anyone justify it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Supernick. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Like the recent furor over illegal immigration, the Bush administration is trying to distract the national electorate from the main issues: Iraq, rising inflation and other Economic Issues, while pushing forward (inch by inch) pet issues of Bush's traditional Republican allies. Anti-abortionists and anti-immigrant groups are just taking advantage of this opportunity to forward these ludricous and completely anti-American proposals while they have the chance.
...and also, Bush doesn't need to win. In fact, in some respects, he wins more if he loses as he can go to the rightwing Christian backers of such policies and say, 'See? I'm on your side, I support your agenda, but these evil, Satan-lovers have refused to pass the law. If only we had more money to campaign against them...'
Supernick's quite right to say there's a double standard on display though. It's ironic that some Americans are intent on taking their country back into the stone age, given the charges levelled against some of their enemies.
Supernick's quite right to say there's a double standard on display though. It's ironic that some Americans are intent on taking their country back into the stone age, given the charges levelled against some of their enemies.
This law has actually been passed by a number of states (the most recent being Louisiana I think) but cannot actually be enacted unless the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade (1974(?)) which legalised abortion. That is more likely now than in recent years since Bush has been able to appoint new judges to the Bench, inevitably right-wing conservatists. Although having said that one of his recent attempts to appoint a very right-wing one was not confirmed by Congress and he had to go with a slightly more moderate candidate.
I am also amazed that this has not received more coverage that it has. Civil liberties are gradually being chipped away in the US (and here some could argue) but the American christian right does seem to have a particular penchant for attacking women's rights.
Totally agree with Waldo and the ABED, he doesn't need to win to gain political capital from it. He may not be able to stand for election again but signs are already emerging that his brother Jeb is getting ready to. God help us all!!
I am also amazed that this has not received more coverage that it has. Civil liberties are gradually being chipped away in the US (and here some could argue) but the American christian right does seem to have a particular penchant for attacking women's rights.
Totally agree with Waldo and the ABED, he doesn't need to win to gain political capital from it. He may not be able to stand for election again but signs are already emerging that his brother Jeb is getting ready to. God help us all!!
Hi jno. When it comes to American politics these days not much would surprise me! Having said that I can't imagine the democrats being quite that crass! As you say probably unproveable.
Am I right in thinking you're American? - if so I'd be interested to hear whether you think Jeb Bush running in 2008 is a real likelihood and if so what do think his chances are, or for that matter, whoever the Republican candidate is?
Am I right in thinking you're American? - if so I'd be interested to hear whether you think Jeb Bush running in 2008 is a real likelihood and if so what do think his chances are, or for that matter, whoever the Republican candidate is?
SexyRussian, why not try and think of all the mothers and children who would be condemned to a life of hell if such a law was passed:
Why not try and work out how many mothers would take their own lives rather than give birth to a rapist's child?
Why not try and work out the increased likelihood of congentital birth defects if mothers are forced to give birth to children from incestuous relationships?
Why not try and imagine how many children will grow up being despised by their mothers because the state forced her to have an unwanted child?
Why not try and imagine how many children will grow up in poverty because the state forced their mother to have an unwanted child despite a lack of ability to care for that child?
Why not try being slightly less frighteningly trite?
Why not try and work out how many mothers would take their own lives rather than give birth to a rapist's child?
Why not try and work out the increased likelihood of congentital birth defects if mothers are forced to give birth to children from incestuous relationships?
Why not try and imagine how many children will grow up being despised by their mothers because the state forced her to have an unwanted child?
Why not try and imagine how many children will grow up in poverty because the state forced their mother to have an unwanted child despite a lack of ability to care for that child?
Why not try being slightly less frighteningly trite?
well on the issue of abortion it is my belief that abortion should only be undertaken in the following cases.
-if it is highly probable that the mother will die.
-if the pregnancy has occured through violent means i.e rape or incest etc.
abortion because the mother just doesn't want the child should under no circumnstances be allowed.
-if it is highly probable that the mother will die.
-if the pregnancy has occured through violent means i.e rape or incest etc.
abortion because the mother just doesn't want the child should under no circumnstances be allowed.
lightoftruth
So if a woman is not ready to be a mother yet and has made a mistake, even if she is told she will not be able to give birth again, she should be forced to go through with a pregnancy?
Does this mean that you would rather a child be born to a mother who does not want it? Surely the chances of that child being abused are far higher?
All this type of legislation will do is force abortion into the back streets where hygeine is second place with no counciling for mothers.
So if a woman is not ready to be a mother yet and has made a mistake, even if she is told she will not be able to give birth again, she should be forced to go through with a pregnancy?
Does this mean that you would rather a child be born to a mother who does not want it? Surely the chances of that child being abused are far higher?
All this type of legislation will do is force abortion into the back streets where hygeine is second place with no counciling for mothers.
Well said Oneeyedvic. I suppose what it really means is that women are not allowed to make mistakes..whilst if a man makes the mistake of impregnating a woman then he can walk away without facing the reality.
It happens all the time. Women have to deal with having the baby, or the abortion. Both are very hard things to contemplate.
It happens all the time. Women have to deal with having the baby, or the abortion. Both are very hard things to contemplate.
In an ideal world there would be no abortions and the thought of them really breaks my heart. However I would never compromise a woman's right to choose what to do with her body as a return to back street abortions and women being the victims of men can never be allowed in a civilised society. The hard right religious nutters of the US are a menace to freedom everywhere and an embarassment to all of the decent free thinking American people that I have had the pleasure of meeting. It's such a shame that the US govt gives it's people such a bad PR job all over the world when most Americans are full of common sense and empathy. I hope this law is never passed and roll on Bush leaving office and someone less criminally insane replacing him the sooner the better.
hi annavc... no, not American, though a lover of America (which doesn't include the current president, I'm afraid)... My guess is the next president will be John McCain, who seems an honest and principled man. Intriguing as it would be to see a second President Clinton, I don't believe Americans are yet ready to vote for a woman; and I don't think there's any rush for a third President Bush, either. I also suspect the high tide of the religious right has come and gone, so I don't think there will be a widespread rolling back of abortion rights. But there's a year or two to go yet, and anything could happen, so please don't hold it against me when I turn out to be 100% wrong on all counts.
Personally, and this is based on both my own opinion (worthless to most) and more and more convincingly scientific study (perhaps worth more), I believe that abortion beyond very early stages in pregnancy is nothing more than murder.
This is an extremely difficult issue, made especially murky by the religious fools in America, however - surely one cannot condone terminations/abortions/murder simply as a result of personal negligence? I suppose the dividing line is where the rights of the mother and an independant being intersect - for some this is post conception, for others at the stage of foetus self-sufficiency, for others only at natural birth. I wish there were an easy answer in which noone had to suffer pain, but that is not real life. However, in a similar vein to the anthropomorphism issues raised in a previous question, I do query whether those who support abortion as a women's right refuse to project human characteristics onto a foetus simply because it is unseen.
This is an extremely difficult issue, made especially murky by the religious fools in America, however - surely one cannot condone terminations/abortions/murder simply as a result of personal negligence? I suppose the dividing line is where the rights of the mother and an independant being intersect - for some this is post conception, for others at the stage of foetus self-sufficiency, for others only at natural birth. I wish there were an easy answer in which noone had to suffer pain, but that is not real life. However, in a similar vein to the anthropomorphism issues raised in a previous question, I do query whether those who support abortion as a women's right refuse to project human characteristics onto a foetus simply because it is unseen.
"surely one cannot condone terminations/abortions/murder simply as a result of personal negligence?"
Firstly, stike murder from that list, since obviously those who support a woman's right to abortions do not accept the emotive term murder is a legitimate description and it doesn't move the argument on to introduce it. Secondly, one certainly may not approve of abortions being used as a form of contraception (I certainly don't) but just because someone has got pregnant through negligence, it hardly means that they're otherwise inherantly capable of providing the necessary loving home and upbringing a child deserves.
"However, in a similar vein to the anthropomorphism issues raised in a previous question, I do query whether those who support abortion as a women's right refuse to project human characteristics onto a foetus simply because it is unseen. "
My wife is currently 13 weeks pregnant with a very much wanted child and I have imagined every stage in its development and know exactly what is developing at any given time, but I am nevertheless absolutely in favour of women having the right to an abortion should they find it necessary to do so.
Wouldn't you agree it's rather facile to imply that those who support the right to abortion are unfeeling, lacking empathy or otherwise inhuman, and rarely adds much to the debate.
To end on a high note; as Bill Hicks said, if you're so pro-life, why don't you lock arms and picket the cemetarys?
Firstly, stike murder from that list, since obviously those who support a woman's right to abortions do not accept the emotive term murder is a legitimate description and it doesn't move the argument on to introduce it. Secondly, one certainly may not approve of abortions being used as a form of contraception (I certainly don't) but just because someone has got pregnant through negligence, it hardly means that they're otherwise inherantly capable of providing the necessary loving home and upbringing a child deserves.
"However, in a similar vein to the anthropomorphism issues raised in a previous question, I do query whether those who support abortion as a women's right refuse to project human characteristics onto a foetus simply because it is unseen. "
My wife is currently 13 weeks pregnant with a very much wanted child and I have imagined every stage in its development and know exactly what is developing at any given time, but I am nevertheless absolutely in favour of women having the right to an abortion should they find it necessary to do so.
Wouldn't you agree it's rather facile to imply that those who support the right to abortion are unfeeling, lacking empathy or otherwise inhuman, and rarely adds much to the debate.
To end on a high note; as Bill Hicks said, if you're so pro-life, why don't you lock arms and picket the cemetarys?
Waldo is quite right, it's offensive to tar those of us who respect a woman's rights over her own body with a brush that says " I don't view or empathise with the foetus as a potential human being". I have a huge family by modern standards and like Waldo have been very aware throughout my wife's pregnancies ( hence I said I consider abortion to be a heartbreaking thing) but that doesn't mean I walk around with my eyes closed to the dreadful personal and social damage that would be done were we to outlaw abortion. Perhaps it's because we actually empathise more that we hold the views we do, not less.
I am often shocking people with my attitude regarding abortion. ''You are a mum ~ how on earth can you condone abortion?''.
The answer is simple ~ I do hold human life in high regard. This includes the person who is struggling with the idea of having a child (no matter what the circumstances).
Yes, in an ideal world there would be no need for abortion. There would also be no need for war, poverty, prisons or the existence of charities.
It would be wonderful if all babies were created out of love and were much wanted. Unfortunately this isn't the case and I would much rather have the prospect of abortion in my world than the continued existence of children born into hate and/or abuse. And to parents who had no other choice.
The answer is simple ~ I do hold human life in high regard. This includes the person who is struggling with the idea of having a child (no matter what the circumstances).
Yes, in an ideal world there would be no need for abortion. There would also be no need for war, poverty, prisons or the existence of charities.
It would be wonderful if all babies were created out of love and were much wanted. Unfortunately this isn't the case and I would much rather have the prospect of abortion in my world than the continued existence of children born into hate and/or abuse. And to parents who had no other choice.
Latest Posts
So Lets Shaft Our Farmers.....
News6 mins ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Film, Media & TV18 mins ago
Jobs & Education20 mins ago
ChatterBank35 mins ago
