Redux: Rape, Abortion, and "Personhood"

Oh here we go again. The irresponsible argument. Is this you not being misogynistic again?

And now expecting women to pee on a stick every 28 days to make sure she isn't pregnant before she has her period. Firstly, pregnancy tests will do what exactly? As explained, the greater majority of "pregnancies" end before the woman even knows she is pregnant. In other words, more fertilised eggs end up in the sanitary pad than not. So your argument of how dare women be inconvenienced with being forced by society to pee on a stick a few days after she ovulates will do what exactly? Cause severe undue stress on women when the tests come back positive and then they get their period. Which for many, will cause unnecessary grief and stress.

Secondly, expecting women to pee on a stick every month to check if she is pregnant so she can plan and decide for an abortion before then.. Some tests can tell you if you are pregnant within a few days after 'conception', before it even implants in the uterus even. So by your reckoning, you expect women to pee on a stick every 28 days, even earlier than that, to check if they are pregnant so they can check to see if they are pregnant so they can start booking their abortions before the week 8 mark. Many women are unable to decide in that time frame. It gives them a matter of days to decide, to discuss it with their spouse, partner or the baby's father, to decide if they will be able to work or go to school.. Since you know, it's a pretty big fucking decision.

I think it would be distinctly irresponsible to give anyone such little time to make such a big decision.

I get it, I really do get it, you're the type of guy who doesn't think women are smart and responsible enough to know and understand their own bodies, so you think your standards of what women should do is better. Trust me, we all get what kind of guy you are. And as I said, you can pee on a stick every month if you want to make sure you aren't pregnant and give yourself 2 weeks to decide if you are going to have an abortion or not. That is your choice and your body. Don't foist your misogynistic views on others.

Which by your own standards, religious women who have sex with their husbands without contraception are distinctly irresponsible. But by your stupid standards, these women do not believe in abortions, so it's all okay. Yay more women who allow men with your views and beliefs and men like you to control their wombs!

You know what? You are absolutely correct. Brain activity does start at around the 40 day mark. I was under the belief that it started much earlier than that when the brain and nervous system formed. My apologies.

Hmm...

Interesting..

Tell me, do you believe in keeping brain dead people on life support because you believe they are alive?

Since you believe that women should not be allowed to have abortions after 40 days, before most would even know they are even pregnant, forcing women to pee on sticks every months aside, the brain waves at 8 weeks is neural activity that is present in even brain dead people and is just primitive neural activity, less than that of a shrimp's... Nothing conscious. So do you support in keeping brain dead people on life support because they also have neural activity that can be measured like that of a foetus?

 

An so onto Rush Limbaugh..

What a shame you don't apply this standard to your religious lackeys.

Access to birth control is not always easy or even possible.

• Funding for the U.S. government's Title X program, which funds low-cost, confidential family planning services, is 61% lower today in constant dollars than it was in 1980.
• Some state governments have enacted refusal clauses (or so-called "conscience clauses") that permit pharmacists and healthcare providers to refuse to dispense medication, including contraception, when the use of it conflicts with the provider's religious or moral beliefs.
• The U.S. government has placed obstacles in the path of minors and immigrants seeking emergency contraception ("EC"), despite the scientific evidence supporting the safety and benefits of easy access.
• Some employers that provide otherwise comprehensive health insurance benefits have refused to provide benefits for certain contraception and related services.

[Source]

​

In fact, amongst women who live in poverty, that becomes even harder:

Even though the number of unintended pregnancies in the United States has remained relatively constant, they are becoming increasingly concentrated among low-income women, according to a new report from the Guttmacher Institute.

Between 1994 and 2006, the number of unintended pregnancies among women whose incomes fall below the national poverty line rose by 50 percent. At the same time, however, unintended pregnancies dropped among more economically privileged women.​

What is the difference between women who are 'economically privileged' and those who live on or below the poverty line?

Guttmacher’s most recent data, the unintended pregnancy rate for women living below the poverty level is more than five times as high than the rate for the women in the highest income level. In addition to tracking with wealth, higher rates of unintended pregnancy also correlate with lower levels of education.

It’s also clearly a matter of lacking access to or information about effective forms of birth control. Of all of the women in the U.S. who are at risk for an unintended pregnancy, 35 percent say they either inconsistently use contraception or don’t use any form of contraception at all. And that group accounts for 95 percent of all unintended pregnancies each year.

Guttmacher notes that publicly-funded family planning services, like the Planned Parenthood clinics that often partner with states’ Medicaid programs, go a long way toward helping low-income women avoid pregnancy. The large proportion of poorer women who experience unintended pregnancy means that about two-thirds of unintended births are paid for by Medicaid, an estimated $11.1 billion cost in 2006. But without those family planning services, Guttmacher projects that figure would balloon by 60 percent to an estimated $18 billion expense.

Despite the essential role that family planning clinics play, they’re under attack in states across the country. States are slashing their family planning budgets and working hard to defund Planned Parenthood — while simultaneously cutting off low-income women’s abortion access by driving up the cost of the procedure and preventing public insurance programs from paying for it. Most recently, conservatives are even attacking the fact that public insurance programs provide maternity care for single mothers who unintentionally become pregnant outside of marriage, suggesting Medicaid dollars shouldn’t go toward that expense.

Studies have repeatedly shown that, even though easily accessible contraception is essential for helping women manage their reproductive health and stay out of poverty, many women still face barriers to getting it. About 30 percent of U.S. women who don’t currently use a reliable form of birth control say they would start if the pill were available over the counter. ​

Oh gee, what a surprise.

Right to lifer's are also denying women the ability to access birth control, especially in the more at risk group of women who are poor and unable to access proper education about birth control.

Some at home pregnancy tests are able to detect even the most minute traces of hCG a couple of days after conception. Even before implantation. Implantation is usually within a week or so and sometimes later... So.. what does that tell you?

"Could", not, does. Not every woman is the same. Not every woman has the same menstrual cycle. Some are shorter and some are longer.

Some home pregnancy tests are more sensitive than others. The more sensitive tests may be able to detect low levels of hCG as early as four days before your period is due, or seven days after conception.

[HR][/HR]

A test may be negative for several reasons. You may not be pregnant. Or, you may have ovulated later than you thought, and not be as far along in pregnancy as you thought.

One in 10 women can have very low levels of hCG levels at the time of a missed period. If you have a negative result, but still don’t get your period, test again three days later. If you are pregnant, the levels of hormone may build up enough by then to be picked up by the test.

A blood test can also detect hCG. Blood tests are more sensitive than urine tests and can detect pregnancy from about six to eight days after ovulation. However you will not be offered a blood test for pregnancy until after your period is due, and even then only if there is a medical need.

[Source]
​

Not every woman is the same.

Demanding women pee on a stick every month is impractical and frankly, stupid and stressful.

As I said, expecting anyone to live on edge each time they have sex and each time their period is due just in case, so they can fit into your criteria of when you think women can access an abortion based solely on what you deem to be brain activity, since it was pointed out to you that most women find out they are pregnant well after 8 weeks (which is the criteria you applied) instead of allowing women to do what is right for them...

As I pointed out earlier, you are the one who has issues with women making decisions for themselves as they see fit. Not I. Applying your standard to me and trying to lie and say this is what I am saying is not going to fly here. If women choose to live as you demand they do and have pregnancy tests every month once they have figured out their ovulation cycle and keep a chart to monitor when they ovulate so they know exactly when to take pregnancy tests if they have sex during that time, then that is their choice. You are free do take your temperature for months on end to determine your ovulation cycle, that is your choice. Not every woman wishes to live that way. Most women have better things to do with their time and in the event they do get pregnant and find they are unable to have a child for whatever reason, then it is their choice to get an abortion.

And again, not every woman's menstrual cycle is the same and not every woman will have the exact same menstrual cycle every month. Many things affect a woman's menstrual cycle, from stress, illness, travel, or nothing at all. Demanding that women, as you put it, pee on a stick every month, is impractical and frankly stupid. Not every woman even has access to those "sticks", let alone birth control due to where they live and also their financial and economic circumstances.

Yes Syne, women decide if they are going to have an abortion each time they have sex in the event of falling pregnant from that sexual activity.

Do you even know any women?

Many women know when they want to start a family and in the event of finding themselves pregnant before then, some opt for an abortion. Most women, as was pointed out earlier, find out they are pregnant after the 8 week mark and many of those then spend some time deciding what they are going to do. Some, especially women with irregular periods for whatever reasons, do not find out until much later. Demanding every single woman pees on a stick every month, which as even you pointed out, is not always accurate, will cause undue stress (emotional and financial) because you personally have issues with women being allowed to have any control over their own bodies.

Many women do make the decision of when they want to have a baby you lying and dishonest dolt.

But as has been pointed out, many do not find out until well past your 'brain activity' margin. Women have the right to decide for themselves. Full stop. Nothing more and nothing less. You have no rights or say in the matter. Is that clear enough for you?

Let me remind you Syne, that you are not the first, nor the last misogynist who has tried to use this ridiculous way of debate on this site.

The only person who has been demanding that women are simply incapable of being responsible enough with decisions about their reproductive rights has been you and your lackeys in this thread. No one else has. Do you think you are smart enough to trip me up because I disagree with your ridiculous proposition that women be made to "pee on a stick" every month? Really?

Is there no end to your desire to control women's reproductive cycles, so much so that you want to force them to decide early on when to get an abortion?

Pro-choice is about allowing women to make the choice as they see fit. Not to fit into your misogynistic views of women's rights.

And some women's circumstances change later on, after your arbitrary 8 week period, and decide to get an abortion. That is their choice. Not yours.

Demanding women pee on a stick and forcing women to make such decisions to fit into your timeline is misogynistic and shows just how ridiculous your proposition is, because you do not think women can be responsible enough to make such a decision afterwards. How about this, how about you tell your female other half that she has to pee on a stick every month because you want to make sure that if she aborts your offspring, she does it before 8 weeks, because you aren't comfortable with her aborting it when there are brain waves, and see if you ever get sex from her again.

Understand how this is yet another attempt for misogynists to control the reproductive organs and even the reproductive cycle of women? What of women who refuse to pee on the stick every month? Deny them the right to access abortions because it doesn't fit into your ideal of what women are meant to be doing?

Just as the "baby" surviving the 40 weeks is not guaranteed...

Primitive reflexes and the types of neural activity that exists "when there are brainwaves" (which is your criteria for life) also exists in people in a persistent vegetative state. The article I linked above used the term "clinically brain dead".

I get that you deliberately chose to ignore that point for your own reasons, but I'd suggest you stop dodging and weaving actually face up to the arguments you are trying to make here.

The 8 week period or the 'brain waves' period you have destined as being the cut off point is not a foetus or embryo having conscious thoughts. But it's just the neurons firing.

As I asked earlier, and you did not answer, how do you feel about keeping people on life support because there is brain activity? What about people in permanent vegetative state, as also pointed out by ElectricFetus?

 

Rushhhhhh

I did support my claims Syne. With links.

I suppose if I said that my soul said it was acceptable, then I would not need to provide any proof at all, eh Syne? After all, as you said, one cannot prove that...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And when you are king of the world, you can do that.

Alas..

You want me to call you a misogynist again because you think women are incapable of making responsible decisions when it comes to their own bodies and sex life and sexual and reproductive organs without being told what to do by the likes of you? Not every woman is able to or even remembers to use their contraceptive pill and sometimes it fails and sometimes they are on other medications which affects the pill and sometimes they can't access it and sometimes the condom breaks, etc..

You know what my opinion of your views of women are.

As I said, you are free to tell whomever will sleep with you to pee on a stick every month. Good luck with that though.

Listen to yourself.

You expect women to take pregnancy tests every month to abide by this arbitrary timeline you have for abortions.

You cannot be serious? You're willing to go this far to force women to obey to what you want them to adhere to?

Someone pointed out to me in the last week that your position is one that is so ridiculous that it borders on hilarious. They aren't wrong.

So in your mind, she is irresponsible if she isn't on birth control and she is equally irresponsible if she doesn't pee on a stick every month. Peeing on a stick won't always give a correct result, it is obscenely expensive and it would entail women having to pee on sticks for days on end to double check, because a woman's menstrual cycle often changes for a variety of reasons. And why? Because you believe that she should be making the decision to abort when the brain waves start and because you believe it is more ethical to abort a child before it develops less brain function than a shrimp.

You make it nearly impossible to take you even remotely seriously.

What other "life"?

When "life" begins does appear to be a personal prerogative. Your "brain wave" test is your own. I am sure many would disagree that life begins when the neurons start firing and it has less cognitive consciousness than a shrimp. Yet that is your time stamp on this.. 8 weeks.. Before most women even know they are pregnant..

Some believe life begins at the moment of conception and others believe that contraception is wrong and immoral because their ethics dictate that it is the destruction and prohibition of potential life.

What makes your ethical standards better than anyone else's?

You don't know many women, do you?

Not every woman's cycle is even monthly. Some are less than that and some are more. Some are all over the place and get their periods anywhere from between around 20 days to 35 days or more or less depending on a variety of things at different times in their lives. Mine has been as short as 20 days (at least a few times, it was less than that) and as long as 38+ days at various times. Dictating that women can simply pee on a stick once a month clearly shows that you have little understanding or knowledge of a woman's reproductive cycle and how much it often fluctuates that simply peeing on a stick once a month is ineffective and down right stupid.

Whose ethical considerations?

Yours? How about those who believe life begins at conception? What about others who believe it starts at birth?

Which one is right?

And oh no! Personal liberty! What an evil evil concept that women should have personal liberty and personal liberty over their own reproductive organs! The horror. Oh the humanity! And you wonder why I and others think you are a misogynist?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And when you are king of the world, you can do that. Until then, you can only be king of your own womb.

Oh my fucking god!

Again, is this you not being a misogynist?

Yep, and they are free to their opinions. How about you tell those women that you demand they pee on a stick every month. See how you go.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I dare you.

Whose ethics?

Here we go again, your dishonesty comes to the fore..

My argument has always been that it is up to women to make the choices and decisions about her sexual and reproductive organs.

Make up as much stuff as you want, you aren't really fooling anyone.

And my man hating.. Because I believe that women should be the ones to decide and make choices about their sexual and reproductive organs. Only a misogynist could deem that as being "man hating".

Keep trying though.

Fuck my life, I don't know whether to laugh at you and let you dig your own hole any bigger or to point out the stupidity of your misogyny.

You advocate that choice because you do not think women are capable of being responsible enough without the choices you present.

As I said, when you have a womb, then you can make the choices you want regarding it. Until such a time, fuck off out of women's reproductive organs. Clear enough for you?

Do you tell them they need to pee on sticks every month?

And when are you going to learn that you don't get to determine whose ethics are the correct one and that many apply life differently, some earlier and others later and others yet even later. So your expectation that women pee on sticks to fit into your views of when life starts, thereby exerting even more control over the actions of women and further limiting their choice is also an ethical issue because you deny women their rights over their own fucking bodies.

Who the fuck do you think you are? What gives you the rights to force your beliefs and your personal ethics of when life starts on others?

Learn to read links and corrections.