Rape, Abortion, and "Personhood"

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Tiassa, Nov 1, 2012.

?

Do I support this proposition?

Poll closed Nov 1, 2013.
  1. Anti-abortion: Yes

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Anti-abortion: No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Pro-choice: Yes

    61.5%
  4. Pro-choice: No

    15.4%
  5. Other (Please explain below)

    23.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,174
    Although very little data seems to be available as to the reasons for late term abortions i was able to dig up the following summary:
    I have no idea if this data is valid or how reliable the source is. I'm so confused at this point that I'm not even sure which side of the debate it supports, if either. Most of it looks to be political in nature with a "Right to Life" spin but the Kansas data is purportedly from an independent origin. Maybe someone wants to delve further into the citations listed here?

    Bolded emphasis mine.

    Johnston's Archive link
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,111
    Actually, yes it does.

    Granting personhood means that the foetus (while it is alive) has equal consideration to the mother in regards to its life and, as all laws states, it is against the law to end the life of a person.

    Do you see how it would affect even triage situations?

    Medical professionals who, in such a situation where the mother was dying, decided to end the life of the "person" she was carrying to save her, they could very well find themselves charged with murder. As per the OP, if a woman could be charged with a homicide for a miscarriage if she has done anything that may have contributed to it, what do you think would happen to medical professionals who actively seek to "end the life of the person" in utero?

    People who are completely against abortion view it as a life from the moment the female egg is fertilised. To them, from that point, it is a person and they believe it should enjoy all the same protections that a "person" enjoys at law..

    [HR][/HR]

    You do not even understand the topic.

    This is the topic..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    [HR][/HR]

    His site and what he uses as sources on the site itself is all about right to life, I tried to access the link regarding the Kansas Health Department, which applies to what you had highlighted and the link itself did not work and was not found.

    So I did some further digging and found a report for 2005 for Kansas (reported in 2006), where they discuss terminations after the 22nd week of gestation. From page 9, the surveys of medical practioners who provide abortion services in Kansas and of the 235 who felt the foetus was viable, if you scroll down, you will find that they also found that it would impede on the mother's health if she were forced to continue with the pregnancy.

    To arrive at this point, the patient is interviewed and the referring physician also provides a report and the attending physician then makes the determination after examining the patient:

    * These are from page 9 of the report.


    Page 3 of the report also advises:


    This year's election cycle saw something very worrying from Kansas, however:

    You can also read more about it here: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/04/478174/kansas-anti-abortion-bill-would-force-doctors-to-warn-women-of-false-cancer-risk/

    And here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/kansas-abortion-bill_n_1478706.html
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,174
    This bill's wording is extremely unsettling. I was only eleven or twelve at the time of Roe v Wade but I remember a great fuss being made over the issue. If bills like this actually pass it would seem to be setting back women's rights half a century or so. I reviewed the actual bill to some extent but my patience didn't hold out for seventy pages. Seventy? For real? Anyway, the disclosure requirements alone would probably serve to impede access or at least frighten many pregnant women, especially the very young or uneducated. Which I'm sure was the intent in the first place. Luckily, it appears to have died on June 1st, 2012. (This link to the Kansas Legislature site also gives access to pdf files of the actual bill both as introduced and as amended) Wow.

    This is an interesting excerpt:
    Just wow.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Mod Hat

    For the sake of general sanity and as an appeal to human dignity... can we quit with all the personal attacks? I don't care who introduced what into the thread or who thinks someone did something wrong at this point... all personal references should cease. Attacks against a person or persons for items in their personal life are no longer to be considered valid points of argument.

    Neverfly, Seagypsy... seriously? You two are tearing into not only a very private and very personal matter of Bells, but also one that anyone reading this thread could tell is of great personal pain and discomfort. Enough is enough - if you two REALLY feel you are "in the right" here, then be big enough to walk away instead of trying to tear open scars.

    This subject... it is one that is a hot topic for many people for many reasons, some personal, some professional, some religious, and some reasons beyond that which many can even understand. Let's stick to the facts and keep this a debate, okay? I am asking, not just as a moderator but as a member of this forum and as a human being... let's have a little dignity here, okay?
     
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
  9. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    I haven't posted since page 18, so I have walked away. The only reason I am posting now is because an official mod action has been directed at me. see my post here. on page 18.

    I would appreciate if you acknowledge that Neverfly and I are separate people. He is responsible for his actions and words, and I am responsible for mine. I attacked no one's personal life. Bells just can't tell us apart.
     
  10. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    As I stated in my reply to your PM - I read the entire thread in one sitting without regard for timestamps, and as such I failed to note when last posts were made and if/when people left the thread. As for your link - I am curious... what "official mod action" was taken against you? As far as I am aware, no moderation action has been taken, and you have no infraction points either... as I stated in my reply to your PM, I will once more state that for someone professing total innocence, you are awfully jumpy and defensive.

    As for you and Neverfly being separate people, that is all well and good - however, a tandem attack on someone is quite a simple feat given today's interconnected society... admittedly given what has transpired here, it is not hard to come to the conclusion that the two of you were striving to drive Bells, quite literally, mad.

    EDIT @ Gustav - heh, perhaps... then again, sometimes the best way to put out a fire is by quite literally burning it out...
     
  11. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    The fact that two people share a pov does not mean that they are in tandem to drive someone mad. If that is the case Tiassa and Bells can be assumed to be working in tandem to drive Neverfly and I insane. Which in my opinion is ridiculous. They push similar points but their methods are different and they do not always agree exactly, even if they do not openly point out where they differ. Neverfly and I have both stated differences in our view points. The fact that neither of us have pointed fingers at each other and declared them wrong or gone after each other's throats does not mean we are part of a conscious collective with identical thoughts or motives.

    All I am asking is that you hold me accountable for ONLY my own words and I have not attacked Bells' personal life. That attack came from Asguard. She also attacked his personal life. I am not sure who attacked first. But either way, it was a personal argument that should not have been allowed to take place in the thread. But Tiassa enjoyed the drama and so allowed it.

    When Neverfly brought up her personal life, he expressed remorse in doing so even as he did it. I think that shows that no intent to attack was present. If she perceived it as an attack that is her prerogative. But I never mentioned the incident that he brought up. The only time I mentioned details of her life were when hypothicals were presented in light of personal information that SHE WILLFULLY put on display as evidence for her claims. Any evidence presented, even if it is personal life details, is subject to scrutiny. She criticized me the times I used my personal experiences to back up my opinions. I did not accuse her of attacking me then. She should not have the right to present anything as evidence that cannot be refuted or criticized. I don't care what that evidence may be.
     
  12. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Oh, I never said I felt that your intention was to drive her mad... just that from an outside perspective with out prior knowledge as to what was going on (which is precisely how I entered this thread) one could reasonably reach that conclusion.

    My honest opinion on all this is that this is a hot-button topic that anyone partaking in the discussion of should be ready to bear incredible scrutiny and some personal attacks. However, I also feel that the attacks in general have gone too far, all around. A return to simple fact-based debating is the outcome I desire.
     
  13. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    And protecting Bells' feelings. Because, quite obviously, hers are the only ones that matter. She can call people trolls and get every bit as personal as she likes, but when someone even thinks about saying something personal about her, it's a national goddamn tragedy.
     
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,111
    The bill is a terrifying prospect.

    What they want is to deny women access to abortion, regardless of the reason. Because the premise behind such bills is to state that even from the point of where the sperm enters the egg, then that fertilised egg has gained equal and full legal rights and protection that everyone is granted.. Except if you are a woman of course..
     
  15. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    I haven't been following this thread closely, but knowing you, I'm going to go ahead and assume none of that happened.

    Point is that even if they're breaking the rules, you are too. They'll be held accountable, and you won't. That's just how it goes around here.
     
  16. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    This will be my only response to you Bells, considering that where you quoted me, I was talking to Kittamaru, not you.

    For those who want to focus on the topic of the thread, ignore the spoilers.(something that has been being used out of respect for the OP.)

    I didn't say he preferred one over the other. Quote me where I did or be shown to be dishonest.

    define "abused"

    I suggested it ONCE, not over and over again. I also clarified that i wasn't accusing YOU. I felt the OTHER MODS were allowing you to behave badly out of pity for you. You just kept bringing it up even after I admitted that it was inappropriate on my part. That you cannot let it go is your problem.

    Just a side note about me: If I felt at any time I was getting special treatment as a result of pity, I would be livid. Shedding pity on someone and excusing their behavior as a result of it implies that the ones making the excuses believe the person is mentally incompetent as a result of their experiences and is not capable of behaving appropriately.

    None of my business, yep I agree. But you shared your business with us anyway. Why? Why do you tell us the details of your life? I for one do not care about you or your life anymore than you care about mine.

    I did not ignore you. I refrained until you brought your personal information up as evidence to support a claim, when you present it as evidence you cannot expect no one to challenge it. Maybe you just need a thicker skin. Or better yet, if you don't want people to know your personal business, keep it to yourself.

    Your opinion and interpretations of what you BELIEVE my goals to be are irrelevant. It has been established on this forum of science that belief in an idea does make it true.

    And this language is not abuse?

    Are you claiming that we are NOT separate individuals here?
    clear only to the ones who want to believe it is true.

    [quoteBells;3009822]]They aren't protecting my feelings. If they were, those two would have been banned long ago for their first attempt to troll this thread and abuse and swear at people. [/quote]

    yeah we swore a bit, but who was the first to tell someone to "FUCK OFF"- oh sorry my bad, that wasn't you it was your uterus.

    Have a nice day, Bells.
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,111
    You tell me.. This is probably one of the worst of it:

    This is after I and another person queried Asguard's assertions that he would pressure his girlfriend if she wanted to get an abortion so that she would do what he wanted her to do, after he brought up the issues around the fact that he had in the past, on several occasions, stated that he has threatened to leave his other half if she did not comply to his wishes as they try to conceive or the fact that he thinks if the father changes his mind, then he should not be made to pay child support. So I asked Asguard if he still controlled all that his girlfriend ingested, as he had advised on previous occasions that he did. This is an issue that Asguard and I have argued about for quite a bit over the years/months. This is between he and I and it was clearly so and advised by others to seagypsy and her husband.. seagypsy decided to enter into that conversation with the above, commenting on my marriage and asking me if I had decided to divorce him because he had decided to put his penis in an apparently more welcoming vagina than mine.. Because apparently my husband's penis and my vagina is something worth commenting on in such a fashion outside of any context of this thread? And then she later went on to mock my personal life.. She is, without a doubt, a gem..

    And this is after her repeated accusation that I had used my hard life in this thread, when I had told her to stop and when initially challenged on the first time she made that accusation, she tried to deny it was aimed at me and that it was apparently a PM and then in the last few times she has gone after my supposed "hard life" and again accused me of using it in this thread to get away with whatever it is I am getting away with (I believe this was after Trippy and I caught her trying to lie about the studies she was posting and trying to pass them off as for third trimester abortions when they were actually studies for abortions after 16 weeks I believe).. So she instantly attacked my personal life again, repeatedly, and ignored all requests that she stop and without any proof whatsoever, again and repeatedly accused me of using my "hard life" in this thread to get away with what ever. Because heaven forbid she actually answer the charges made against her that she misrepresented studies in this thread and tried to pass them off as something they clearly were not.

    Then amazingly enough, she tried to deny ever doing it. I shouldn't be surprised at someone who lied about the studies she was trying to pass through in this debate and who for the first 7 pages, abused me and others, compared one to a serial killer, raised the specter of child abuse in comparisons, because she didn't know what "personhood" meant in the context of this thread. So she can slander, insult, abuse, claim that women in the third trimester should not follow doctor's advice if they advise to abort because of the mother's health because hey, she got lucky and did not die when she did it (thereby opening herself and this site to possible legal action in the future), attack people's health and marriage and make comments on people's supposedly welcoming and less than welcoming vagina's because of why again? Oh yes, you just don't believe it happened because you haven't been following this thread and instead, prefer to just assume because of your personal feelings for me. How.. original of you Balerion.

    But hey, god forbid you actually check before you just assume 'none of that happened'. Everyone else who was unfortunate enough to participate in this thread and read her vulgar displays are all wrong and you are right..

    So she can try and portray herself as whatever. Her posts here, as well as her husband's and mine speak for themselves. And now she is trying to make sure her husband is excused for not only supporting her, but also for his trying to pass off those studies in this thread and his lies.

    But hey, none of this happened because you, Balerion, says so..
     
  18. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    the only one disregarding reason is you.

    Several posters have stated time and time and yet time again that, in the case where there are pending medical issues for both the mother and the child, there is no essential requirement for the mother's rights to automatically be vetoed. The fact that we already have triage procedures in place and functioning quite nicely, prove this. IOW if an unborn child is granted the legal status of personhood, then it can quite easily be accommodated by existing triage proceedures and/or similar network of regulation laws that already surround potentially dubious acts like liquor sales, gambling or prostitution. Instead you insist that the only viable option is to make abortion less regulatory than the sale of chicken eggs or cow's milk.

    Despite repeated attempts to make you address this simple straight forward fact you merely cite radical interpretations that operate outside of such triage procedures. If citing radical interpretations of law or precept were sufficient to abandon all measures of regulation and authority, we would practically have no laws.

    :shrug:
     
  19. seagypsy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,153
    Ironically, I don't believe that Bells is certain she has proven her case. If she really believed that what she is accusing me of, she could, as she often says, let the posts speak for themselves. But she can't. She MUST INSIST retelling the story as she wants people to believe it played out. She can't run the risk of them checking the thread and deciding for themselves. She simply can not.
     
  20. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,111
    Seagypsy

    I am not going to bother wasting any more oxygen in responding to your lies point per point, because frankly, you are not worth my time on this planet.

    You have slandered me, slandered another person when you accused him of being like a serial killer, I think at one point you accused me of supporting killing children? Or was that your husband? You accused and blatantly lied repeatedly, from your initial claim that your first false and slanderous accusation you lobbed at me was actually a PM you were writing to someone else, to when you later admitted that it was aimed at me when you again slandered and lied about me by your repeated claims that I used my personal and what you deemed my "hard life" in this thread. And this is after I repeatedly asked you to stop, you not only failed to stop, but you kept on going and going, all without proof or evidence of your claims, even after I asked you to back it up. You also lied repeatedly in this thread in trying to pass off studies as being for third trimester when they were in fact for 2nd trimester abortions. When you were caught doing this, instead of addressing the fairly grievous charge of deliberately providing false information in a thread, you launched another flurry of personal attacks against me, my health and my marriage and again, without any evidence, accused me of apparently using it in this thread. And then when you were again caught out doing this, you withdrew from this thread while your husband went out of his way to, it seem, excuse your behaviour for whatever reason.

    Now, I can assure you, I do not view you and your husband as being the same person. However, since the both of you went out of your way to deliberately misrepresent facts and studies in this thread, repeatedly, if you face moderation, it will be for your individual behaviour in how you have both done this. You see, when you act in tandem as you have in lying about studies and deliberately trying to mislead studies and facts, both of you will be looked at as individuals. Not just the first or the second. So you will be looked at equally, if you are moderated. I am not going to moderate you. I could, and I am well within my rights to do so after the lies you tried to pass off and how you tried to misrepresent studies in this thread, but I will not because I am one of you accusers. And I am not alone in commenting and having noticed just how deliberately dishonest you and your husband have been in this thread, nor have I been alone in noticing how you went out of your way to then attack my personal life (even after repeated requests that you stop) after you were caught out.

    In your posts, you also openly claimed that women who are in their third trimester and suffering from health concerns that their doctors advise to abort, you claimed, without proof or reason, that these women should just have the baby and ignore their doctor's advice, because you did it and you did not die. In doing so, you not only opened yourself to possible legal action but also this site. So as a member of staff here, you will excuse me if I do not thank you for your repeated unsolicited and frankly, ignorant medical advice.

    So you can lie as much as you want and misrepresent everything as much as you want. Don't worry, I am not involved in whatever decisions may be made against you and your husband in this thread.

    However as a moderator, I am also within my rights to apply the standard you applied to me here and apply that to you.. For example, like when you posted links to your blogs and someone posted your photo from your links and commented on your appearance. If I were to follow your standards, I would not have acted against that individual and instead told you to suck it up because you posted the links to your blog and photos anyway. Thankfully for you, I do have empathy and I would never lower myself down to your pathetic levels..
     
  21. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,111
    And as has been shown to you repeatedly, the mother's rights are being repeatedly veteod while pending medical issues for both the mother and child arise.
     
  22. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Ooh, I've missed these threads.
     
  23. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    sure, ....... by irrelevant examples of radical interpretations that stand outside already existing standard models of triage ... much like I can also show you similarly irrelevant radical interpretations of liquor licensing, prostitution, gambling, punitive punishment for crimes (and even the sale of eggs and milk) that in no way provide anything remotely substantial for the case of disbanding already existing regulatory bodies that govern these operations.

    Just to make it clear, the real question which you don't address is the application of already existing models of triage to the situation of pregnancy.

    The irony is that even the so called radical institutions address this point, while you fail to do so.

    :shrug:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page