The Abortion Debate...there is NOTHING like it!

Are there any Anti-Choicers who aren't obsessed with the sex lives of other people?

 

"Legal murder" as you erroneously call it has other legal definitions that are correct, the only reason you use the word murder at all is because it projects an emotionally charged image which you hope will invoke feelings of guilt in others, after all few if any people want to be associated with murder, by far this type of argument is the prime tool of pro-lifers and is nothing but an appeal to emotions - http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-emotion.html and as such a complete fail.

Now if you have any logical evidence to support your murder claim please provide it.

 

It is true.

Less than 2% say they became pregnant as a result of rape or incest.
Source: The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Perspective on Sexual & Reproductive Health, Sept. 2005

Rape, incest and danger to mother's life account for about 2% of abortions; the rest are performed as birth control.

 

Ah I see the usual opinion without evidence, just because you think anything other than danger to the females ( she is not a mother until she has given birth ) life, rape and incest is birth control doesn't make it reality, please use a dictionary, preferably a medical one and educate yourself on what birth control is. Here this might help - http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/mobileart.asp?articlekey=53351

 

You left out the word 'unlawful' or 'illegal'.

Please keep your fantasies out of the debate.

 

Yet another anti-rightist who lacks the fundamental honesty and integrity to admit when they are proven wrong by factual data.

 

If you had bothered to read up the rest of the data on your source you would have discovered that over 50% of all women obtaining abortions were using contraceptives when they became pregnant so your deflection to rape or incest is disingenuous at best.

 

There are over 8 million species of animal in the world and because one obscure ape's dependence on sexual activity to resolve conflict and avoid aggression supposedly equates with human sexual behavior....that makes man just an animal, justifies abortion and somehow "proves" I'm dishonest. Quite a stretch.

 

When you resolve birth control failure with abortion it's birth control.

 

Birth control is supposed to prevent pregnancy, but abortion has been used as a form of birth control for some time. It's probably time to update the dictionary to define abortion as back-up birth control.

 

Since you seem to recognize that there's an emotional element to chopping up a healthy, living, developing human fetus and suctioning it from the womb....maybe there's hope for you after all.

 

Yes it is. What exactly is wrong with that?

 

The emotion depends entirely on the person concerned. Nobody else has any right to allow their emotions to affect another person's decision if it doesn't in way any affect them or the well being of another person.

 

Thousands of animal species engage in homosexual behaviors. Birds that were believed to be "monogamous" are screwing around with other mates.

Ignorance of the scientific facts is rampant amongst the anti-rightists who make these fallacious allegations to support their religious anti-abortion positions. So yes, it is dishonest to make those claims when the data demonstrates that they are completely and utterly untrue.

 

You are quibbling about semantics.

All means to prevent/terminate pregnancies can be classified as birth control, including abstinence.

Contraception means what it says it means, the prevention of conception.

Post facto pills that block the implantation of the fertilized zygote into the uterine wall are used to prevent pregnancy.

Miscarriages terminate pregnancies and are another form of birth control.

Induced abortions are terminations of pregnancies and yes, they are birth control.

So what point were you attempting to make?

 

It is a complete and utter fallacy of the anti-rightists to believe that they have exclusive ownership of emotions.

Women who have to make the difficult choice of terminating a pregnancy do have to deal with the emotional aspect too. To disparage the emotional element is disingenuous of theists. What makes it even more mean spirited is when they fallaciously call these women "murderers".

 

Birth control is all about preventing pregnancy, hence why abortion is not birth control, abortion terminates an already existing pregnancy, birth control stops the pregnancy from happening in the first place, and no matter how much you think differently the reality is there for all to see.

Prevention of pregnancy = birth control
termination of pregnancy = abortion

You do know BTW that a study was conducted that showed that when a female is offered any form of contraceptive free at source, most choose IUD's or hormonal implants, this lead to a 62 percent to 78 percent reduction in abortion among the women who took part in the study.

Between 2006 and 2008, 49 percent of all pregnancies in America were unplanned, according to the CDC's National Survey of Family Growth. About 43 percent of these unintended pregnancies ended in abortion. Meanwhile, a 2011 study in the journal Contraception estimated that unintended births cost U.S. taxpayers about $11 billion a year.

To see if access to free contraception could budge those numbers, Peipert and his colleagues recruited 9,256 women ages 14 to 45 living in the St. Louis area through flyers, doctors and word-of-mouth. They also recruited patients from the city's two abortion clinics. Participants were given the option of using any reversible birth control method, from the birth control pill to a hormonal birth control patch to a long-lasting IUD or hormonal implant.

More than half of the women chose IUDs, 17 percent picked hormonal implants (tiny rods placed under the skin that release hormones), and the rest chose pills, patches and other hormonal methods. As a result, the researchers found, both teen births and overall abortion rates plummeted.

Among women in the free contraceptive program, the teen birth rate was 6.3 per 1,000 women, a huge difference from the national teen birth rate of 34.3 per 1,000 women.

Likewise, the abortion rate among women in the program was 4.4 to 7.5 per 1,000 between 2008 and 2010. Nationally, there are 19.6 abortions per every thousand women, a 62 percent to 78 percent difference. In the St. Louis area, the overall abortion rate in that time frame was between 13.4 and 17 abortions per 1,000 women. - http://www.livescience.com/23726-birth-control-abortion-rate.html

couple this in with comprehensive sex education and abortion and teen birth rates could be reduced massively, it is no surprise that 6 of the top 10 states with the highest teenage birth rates are all states with predominately abstinence only sex education, which is and has been an unmitigated failure.

 

Of course there is an emotional element, it however has no relevance in the legality of abortion.

 

Birth control includes both abortion and contraception.

 

My only point on this would be that contraception is about preventing pregnancy ever taking place, where as abortion is about terminating an already existing pregnancy, in my mind and in my opinion that difference is enough to separate the two .. that is however only my opinion.

my argument against the poster who insists that over 90% of abortions are for birth control is that they have no provided any semblance of evidence to support that statement.

 

Ya, but isn't abortion "controlling birth" ? ...and contraception preventing pregnancy?

Is the other poster saying that women are using only abortion for birth control and NOT using contraceptives? And somehow that's bad?

I am confused because abortion does "control birth" and that is what it is meant to do.....

 

Abortion is a legal form of birth control and only happens in the case of unwanted pregnancies.

Per the previously cited data from Fugazi if all women had their choice of the most effective forms of contraception irrespective of cost the number of abortions would drop by around 50%, possibly even more.

What makes no sense to me is that the same anti-abortionists are also anti-Obamacare providing contraception which would reduce abortions. Common ground of that nature could be used to bring an end to this debate.

I suspect that some of the anti-Obamacare opposition is purely partisan in order to continue to have a reason to drive a segment of the population into voting for otherwise unelectable candidates.

 

Some wanted pregnancies are terminated, as in the case of the woman's health/life or severe fetal anomalies. Those are 'controlling birth', too.

I agree, it makes no sense. As a conservative, I'd much rather pay the smaller cost of contraception than pay for the consequences of it not being used.

I suspect you are bang on. Some wouldn't agree with Obama if he said water is wet.

 

I suppose it boils down to perspective, I personally don't see abortion as birth control not in the traditional sense anyway.

Birth control's primary function is to prevent pregnancy ever ocurring and that is the main reason for it's usage, abortion on the other hand, primary function is to terminate an already existing pregnancy and has many reasons for it's usage. I suppose the final outcome is the same that being that there is no birth .... so in retrospect birth control would be a term that applies to contraception and abortion and as such I would be wrong to say abortion is not a form of birth control.

 

I do feel outrage and disgust among other things because over a million human beings are slaughtered annually just here in the U.S. and don't tell me how to feel.