Abortion

[Mr_Adams]

yes, we have established that the whole debate is circular.

[Night Strike]

stopping murder trumps paying down debt.

Back to squre one:
And who gets to decide it IS murder?

THAT is the real question. Biology? YOUR religion? It's definitely not a matter of "common sense" unless you wish to discount everyone else's view except your. And, we have a paradigm in the US that accepts individual freedoms regarding matters of disputed morality.

Actually, it's completely common sense. Once the zygote is implanted on the uterine wall, a new human has been conceived. The zygote has its own unique DNA sequence and can grow once it's implanted. It's fine to stop the combining of the gametes as well as to prevent the implantation of the zygote, but voluntary choice to end that life should stop at that point.

[Nola_Lifer]

Wether it is murder or not abortion is necessary. There are too many people in this world and you'll find that since hunter/gather times humans we're forced to kill their own for survival purposes.

[PLAYER57832]

stopping murder trumps paying down debt.

Back to squre one:
And who gets to decide it IS murder?

THAT is the real question. Biology? YOUR religion? It's definitely not a matter of "common sense" unless you wish to discount everyone else's view except your. And, we have a paradigm in the US that accepts individual freedoms regarding matters of disputed morality.

Actually, it's completely common sense. Once the zygote is implanted on the uterine wall, a new human has been conceived.

You base this upon what imperical evidence?

Why that point and not individual eggs and sperm... or why at that point and not later, when a fetus begins to show true sensation, etc.

If it were truly "common sense", then you would not have millions of individual, all caring, thinking individuals disagreeing with you.

The zygote has its own unique DNA sequence and can grow once it's implanted. It's fine to stop the combining of the gametes as well as to prevent the implantation of the zygote, but voluntary choice to end that life should stop at that point.

This is your idea, but what gives you the right to decide for anyone else?

Further, even if it is killing, we have multiple instances in the law when even "killing" an adult is legal. Why is this not another exception, given that so many people take issue with your position... and please note, I already said I agree with you that a fetus is life, but at the same time, I know full well others disagree and am not so arrogant as to assume I have the moral right to decide for others.

[PLAYER57832]

Wether it is murder or not abortion is necessary. There are too many people in this world and you'll find that since hunter/gather times humans we're forced to kill their own for survival purposes.

Well, truthfully, up until the advances of medicine, microbes and injuries did a lot of that without any extra help. Though, of course adults have always been happy to engage in wars.

[Night Strike]

Why that point and not individual eggs and sperm... or why at that point and not later, when a fetus begins to show true sensation, etc.

Because gametes do not have the DNA makeup of a human. They only have half the DNA, so they are not human.

The zygote has its own unique DNA sequence and can grow once it's implanted. It's fine to stop the combining of the gametes as well as to prevent the implantation of the zygote, but voluntary choice to end that life should stop at that point.

This is your idea, but what gives you the right to decide for anyone else?

Simple biology. If I took a DNA sample of the zygote and compared it to the DNA sequences of the mother and the father, all 3 would be different. Therefore, it is clearly a unique person and the law states that people do not have the right to take the life of another person.

[natty dread]

Night Strike... what's your position on capital punishment?

[Mr_Adams]

what's your position on capital punishment?

I'll tell you mine. those people deserve what they are getting. Death as PUNISHMENT. what has an innocent child done to anybody to deserve death?

[natty dread]

what's your position on capital punishment?

I'll tell you mine. those people deserve what they are getting. Death as PUNISHMENT. what has an innocent child done to anybody to deserve death?

Ok, so basically, if the unborn child had commited a crime, then abortion would be ok?

[Mr_Adams]

what's your position on capital punishment?

I'll tell you mine. those people deserve what they are getting. Death as PUNISHMENT. what has an innocent child done to anybody to deserve death?

Ok, so basically, if the unborn child had commited a crime, then abortion would be ok?

A heinous crime, deserving of death, yes. The problem is that you and yours can will always find a way to rationalize your amorality... no, countermorality. So I don't see why I continue to try to argue with you.

[PLAYER57832]

what's your position on capital punishment?

I'll tell you mine. those people deserve what they are getting. Death as PUNISHMENT. what has an innocent child done to anybody to deserve death?

Ok, so basically, if the unborn child had commited a crime, then abortion would be ok?

A heinous crime, deserving of death, yes. The problem is that you and yours can will always find a way to rationalize your amorality... no, countermorality. So I don't see why I continue to try to argue with you.

"counter morality" is just it. Why do YOU have the right, above others to decide this?

And what makes your position so much greater than anyone else's that you get to dictate what they do?

[PLAYER57832]

yes, we have established that the whole debate is circular.

Not circular, no.
There is a clear difference of opinion.

Normally, within the US, when there is such a clear and wide disparity of views, tolerance/freedom trump. Here, some people feel they have the right not just to decide what they will do, but how others will act.

AND, as you have done, seem to think its OK to do that as if only the extremes exist... extremes of either " kill for no reason" .... or.... "keep every child, except possibly those that endanger the mother's life"

What is bad within this debate is not even so much that you feel you have the right to dictate other's morality, but you do that without even truly understanding anyone else's position. That is not thinking, not even faith. It is fanatacism.

I mean, I tell you, with absolute accuracy, that a good number of what what are listed as early term abortions are, in fact, miscarriages. You claim I am just "distorting the truth".

Well.. no, I am not. AND I have very good reason to harp on this point over and over and over. See, thanks to idiots like you, when I had to go to the hospital in one of the absolute worst times in my life, facing not just the death of my unborn child, but the likelihood I would never have a live genetic child, I was treated over and over as if I had had an abortion. Nurses actually flat out said that to me! They did not see the sonogram, did not care. I had a D & C and that was an abortion, PERIOD. I came in for a Rh vaccination and had not delivered.. so I "obviously" had an abortion. Only once, did I EVER get any sympathy from any of the nurses or staff. That after being forced to stand for 15 minutes (seemed like an hour), IV bag in hand, next to 2 very pregnant women, waiting just to be ushered into a room. I fully understood they were busy, but it would have taken seconds to get me out of their way. More than one nurse looked at me in disgust.

You can claim all you want that I am not telling the truth.. go ask someone you know. Only, chances are your sisters, aunts, adult female friends haven't even told you if they HAD a miscarriage. Chances are they won't.

WHY? Because its too "icky", too personnal. A miscarriage, a fully natural event is "too personal" to disguss, but you feel you have the right to dictate this matter on your own.

So, if you think you know.. you do not. And it would be nice if you actually CHECKED YOUR FACTS before claiming that you have some moral right to decide such a complex issue. And, if you think it is anything BUT complex, then you have not truly considered all the ramifications.

[Aradhus]

Nobody has a right to existence.

[HapSmo19]

Speak for yourself.

[Aradhus]

Speak for yourself.

Can I speak for micky moltisanti?

[Snorri1234]

1) Close all "clinics" whose primary means of income is abortions. Let's remove these abortion mills such as where doctors come for one day a week and do many abortions and have all procedures done in an actual hospital (you know, where actual surgeries take place).

Why?

2) Stop allowing minors to get abortions without a minimum of informing their parents and preferably having their consent. Parents have to give high schools permission to give their children Tylenol, yet some schools will bus their students off campus without consent to have abortions. That's just utterly wrong.

No it is not. If we accept that abortion is solely up to the one single person then it follows that they are also the only one who determines who knows and who doesn't.

Don't you see the gross inconsistency at play here? The child is not intellectually capable of making the decision to take a Tylenol, but that same child is intellectually capable of having an abortion? This makes sense to you?

2) Stop allowing minors to get abortions without a minimum of informing their parents and preferably having their consent. Parents have to give high schools permission to give their children Tylenol, yet some schools will bus their students off campus without consent to have abortions. That's just utterly wrong.

I absolutely agree regarding informing the parents - I also find it ludicrous that the parents are not required to be informed. By the same token, I disagree that it should be the parents' decision. Many parents would opt for the abortion rather than carrying to term.

Why should parents be informed?

It's the point of consistency. I think we can both agree that taking a Tylenol is far less risky health-wise than an abortion, right? But parental consent is required for the Tylenol and not the abortion. It makes no sense.

I think it's fucking bizarre that parental consent should be given for tylenol. (and I'm actually not convinced that consent is required for anyone over 12. )

But we're still talking about something entirely different. Talking about consistency is bollocks. You need to give a convincing reason as to why the parents need to know.

[Snorri1234]

stopping murder trumps paying down debt.

Back to squre one:
And who gets to decide it IS murder?

THAT is the real question. Biology? YOUR religion? It's definitely not a matter of "common sense" unless you wish to discount everyone else's view except your. And, we have a paradigm in the US that accepts individual freedoms regarding matters of disputed morality.

Actually, it's completely common sense. Once the zygote is implanted on the uterine wall, a new human has been conceived.

What is your definition of human?

[Ray Rider]

2) Stop allowing minors to get abortions without a minimum of informing their parents and preferably having their consent. Parents have to give high schools permission to give their children Tylenol, yet some schools will bus their students off campus without consent to have abortions. That's just utterly wrong.

Having their consent? So if an underaged gets pregnant, her parents can force her to have the child against her will? Man, you're a genius.

That is granting the unborn child a chance at life, which is the right of any human. If that means a girl continuing a pregnancy she did not desire, then so be it. It was her choice to allow herself to be impregnated (we're not discussing rape or incest here), therefore she must learn to live with the consequences of her choice.

Here, some data for you:
full link to article: http://www.emedicinehealth.com/abortion/article_em.htm

•Worldwide, some 20-30 million legal abortions are performed each year, with another 10-20 million abortions performed illegally. Illegal abortions are unsafe and account for 13% of all deaths of women because of serious complications. Death from abortion is almost unknown in the United States or in other countries where abortion is legally available

That is self-contradictory. Abortion always causes death, although rarely that of the mother.

ANYWAY, requiring consent of parents is not going to limit abortions significantly. What DOES reduce the number is education of teens. Its a parent's job to teach the mroality. It is the school's job to give facts, so that each teen can make better decisions within that moral framework.. even if its not a moral framework you or I might like. Truth is, NO ONE sane wants teens to be pregnant today. And NO ONE sane wants abortion to be the "solution". But cutting off that as an option doesn't make teens behave any better. The real issue is that teens are raised with varied values AND even those supposedly taught to "not get pregnant" won't often think through the consequences fully. They won't understand how easy it is to be pregnant, the emotions involved, etc. Information, education can help put a bit of a brake on that. Even when that doesn't work, letting them have prevention information at least keeps abortions down.

I agree with most of this.

A somewhat related point - Abortion is not legal because the fetus can or cannot take care of itself. Abortion is legal because a woman has the right to privacy with respect to her own body, free from government intervention. Therefore, although I agree with Mr. Adams' points, those are not the reasons why abortion is legal in the US (they may be arguments why it should be legal, however, which is why Mr. Adams' points are valid, in my humble opinion).

I don't see how a person's right to privacy could ever trump that of another person's human life. Yes, I realize we can push it really far with extreme scenarios, but I'm not talking about that; I'm talking about real life circumstances here.

As much as I hate to , I have to agree with Phattscotty here. I absolutely don't agree with Santorum, but I do understand why he says it is akin to slavery. That is, I have heard the argument, comprehend it, but dismiss it as not relevant. The basic thrust is that slavery and abortion are both allowed because we do not classify those individuals as fully human. I reject this because while a black (or any other racial/ethnic group) is absolutely human, there is biological/scientific reason to say a very early fetus does not yet qualify. Those who believe differently do so for faith/religious reasons. However, we should note that some even consider sperm and unfertilized eggs "human" as well. Religion and science have different measures of evidence.

I have never heard of anyone who considers sperm and unfertilized eggs to be human, besides from those who are trying to set up a straw man argument.

Well.. no, I am not. AND I have very good reason to harp on this point over and over and over. See, thanks to idiots like you, when I had to go to the hospital in one of the absolute worst times in my life, facing not just the death of my unborn child, but the likelihood I would never have a live genetic child, I was treated over and over as if I had had an abortion. Nurses actually flat out said that to me! They did not see the sonogram, did not care. I had a D & C and that was an abortion, PERIOD. I came in for a Rh vaccination and had not delivered.. so I "obviously" had an abortion. Only once, did I EVER get any sympathy from any of the nurses or staff. That after being forced to stand for 15 minutes (seemed like an hour), IV bag in hand, next to 2 very pregnant women, waiting just to be ushered into a room. I fully understood they were busy, but it would have taken seconds to get me out of their way. More than one nurse looked at me in disgust.

You can claim all you want that I am not telling the truth.. go ask someone you know. Only, chances are your sisters, aunts, adult female friends haven't even told you if they HAD a miscarriage. Chances are they won't.

WHY? Because its too "icky", too personnal. A miscarriage, a fully natural event is "too personal" to disguss, but you feel you have the right to dictate this matter on your own.

So, if you think you know.. you do not. And it would be nice if you actually CHECKED YOUR FACTS before claiming that you have some moral right to decide such a complex issue. And, if you think it is anything BUT complex, then you have not truly considered all the ramifications.

I am close friends with a few couples who have tried numerous times to have a baby, but had them end up in miscarriages. I wasn't related to any of them, but tried to support them as much as possible through the situation. The one I remember most clearly happened about five years ago when the couple invited me over to viewing service for their baby boy which passed away in the womb, many weeks premature (I'm a guy, so I don't remember the exact number of weeks). I'm not sure if they induced the mother or what in order to remove the baby, but they had him there at the house. What fascinated me was how that even though the he was so tiny (a bit bigger than my hand), we could already see little characteristics of his parents, such as his nose being the same as his dad's. The next day we had a burial service for him--someone had been kind enough to make a coffin that was about the size of a Kleenex box with satin lining inside and everything. Since then the couple gave up trying to have another child, and instead adopted their niece's son (she was a teenager at the time and not taking care of him). He's about four years old now, and doing very well. However my experience with my friend's miscarriages only strengthened my belief that it is never right to say that a baby is only human once it is born, or that it only has rights after a certain number of weeks.

Many "abortions" are actually surgical removeal of already dead infants.

Question. What is the root of ABORTion?

From the OED-

"Etymology: < classical Latin abortiōn-, abortiō (in post-classical Latin also avorsio (6th cent.)) procuring of miscarriage, miscarriage < abort-, past participial stem of aborīrī (see abort v.) + -iō-ion suffix1"

I'm not subscribed to the OED, but this is from the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Definition of ABORTION
1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage b : induced expulsion of a human fetus c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
Definition of MISCARRIAGE
2: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus before it is viable and especially between the 12th and 28th weeks of gestation

Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from that, the word "abortion" does include voluntary and involuntary terminations of pregnancy; but a miscarriage is only an involuntary termination of pregnancy.

Anyway, I agree with you that it is easy for there to be confusion between an abortion due to unintended complications in pregnancy and an abortion that was chosen by the parent(s), and that was not right for the doctors and nurses to treat you that way. I realize that is a very difficult time, although, being a guy, I have no idea what it is like.

yes, we have established that the whole debate is circular.

Not circular, no.
There is a clear difference of opinion.

Normally, within the US, when there is such a clear and wide disparity of views, tolerance/freedom trump. Here, some people feel they have the right not just to decide what they will do, but how others will act.

Human life is trump. Civilized nations which believe in and uphold the Universal Declaration of Human rights use it as a standard to condemn what various other nations and people do. In the same way, those who believe a human life begins at conception believe that termination of that life constitutes murder/killing/homicide/however you want to term it, and therefore should not be legal, but instead should be condemned by law.

Anyway, I would add more and try to refine my statements but I've been invited to play a game of Risk at a friend's house...

[Snorri1234]

That is granting the unborn child a chance at life, which is the right of any human.

You guys seriously need to actually provide reasons. Saying it's a right doesn't make it so.

If that means a girl continuing a pregnancy she did not desire, then so be it. It was her choice to allow herself to be impregnated (we're not discussing rape or incest here), therefore she must learn to live with the consequences of her choice.

So....you're actually only concerned with punishing girls for having sex? Because judging from your post-history you sure as f*ck don't care about what actually happens to the child and the mother afterwards.

That is self-contradictory. Abortion always causes death, although rarely that of the mother.

Death of what?

Taking antibiotics causes death. "causing" death is something that is an inevitable part of existence.

A somewhat related point - Abortion is not legal because the fetus can or cannot take care of itself. Abortion is legal because a woman has the right to privacy with respect to her own body, free from government intervention. Therefore, although I agree with Mr. Adams' points, those are not the reasons why abortion is legal in the US (they may be arguments why it should be legal, however, which is why Mr. Adams' points are valid, in my humble opinion).

I don't see how a person's right to privacy could ever trump that of another person's human life. Yes, I realize we can push it really far with extreme scenarios, but I'm not talking about that; I'm talking about real life circumstances here.

Right.

Give a good explanation as to why a fetus is a person. And please realise that vague definitions can get applied to rocks and bacteria.

I have never heard of anyone who considers sperm and unfertilized eggs to be human, besides from those who are trying to set up a straw man argument.

CATHOLICS!
Unrelated:

I am close friends with a few couples who have tried numerous times to have a baby, but had them end up in miscarriages.

This God-person sure seems to care a lot about this whole miscarriage-thing.

What fascinated me was how that even though the he was so tiny (a bit bigger than my hand), we could already see little characteristics of his parents, such as his nose being the same as his dad's.

Awwww, that sure is nice. You know what humans do? Change over time.

[Symmetry]

Many "abortions" are actually surgical removeal of already dead infants.

Question. What is the root of ABORTion?

From the OED-

"Etymology: < classical Latin abortiōn-, abortiō (in post-classical Latin also avorsio (6th cent.)) procuring of miscarriage, miscarriage < abort-, past participial stem of aborīrī (see abort v.) + -iō-ion suffix1"

I'm not subscribed to the OED, but this is from the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Definition of ABORTION
1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage b : induced expulsion of a human fetus c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
Definition of MISCARRIAGE
2: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus before it is viable and especially between the 12th and 28th weeks of gestation

Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from that, the word "abortion" does include voluntary and involuntary terminations of pregnancy; but a miscarriage is only an involuntary termination of pregnancy.

Anyway, I agree with you that it is easy for there to be confusion between an abortion due to unintended complications in pregnancy and an abortion that was chosen by the parent(s), and that was not right for the doctors and nurses to treat you that way. I realize that is a very difficult time, although, being a guy, I have no idea what it is like.

Isaiah asked for the root, not its definition. Isaiah and Nightstrike seemed to find it important, I think it's irrelevant. If you want I can post the OED definition of abortion, but I think any good dictionary will do there, and Mirriam Webster is fine. The OED is just very good on roots.

[Snorri1234]

Many "abortions" are actually surgical removeal of already dead infants.

Question. What is the root of ABORTion?

From the OED-

"Etymology: < classical Latin abortiōn-, abortiō (in post-classical Latin also avorsio (6th cent.)) procuring of miscarriage, miscarriage < abort-, past participial stem of aborīrī (see abort v.) + -iō-ion suffix1"

I'm not subscribed to the OED, but this is from the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Definition of ABORTION
1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage b : induced expulsion of a human fetus c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
Definition of MISCARRIAGE
2: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus before it is viable and especially between the 12th and 28th weeks of gestation

Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from that, the word "abortion" does include voluntary and involuntary terminations of pregnancy; but a miscarriage is only an involuntary termination of pregnancy.

Anyway, I agree with you that it is easy for there to be confusion between an abortion due to unintended complications in pregnancy and an abortion that was chosen by the parent(s), and that was not right for the doctors and nurses to treat you that way. I realize that is a very difficult time, although, being a guy, I have no idea what it is like.

Iliad asked for the root, not its definition. Iliad and Nightstrike seemed to find it important, I think it's irrelevant. If you want I can post the OED definition of abortion, but I think any good dictionary will do there, and Mirriam Webster is fine. The OED is just very good on roots.

hey man don't sully the good name of illiad by confusing him with isaiwhatshisface. Illiad is cool.

[Symmetry]

Good catch- it is now fixed.

[PLAYER57832]

2) Stop allowing minors to get abortions without a minimum of informing their parents and preferably having their consent. Parents have to give high schools permission to give their children Tylenol, yet some schools will bus their students off campus without consent to have abortions. That's just utterly wrong.

Having their consent? So if an underaged gets pregnant, her parents can force her to have the child against her will? Man, you're a genius.

That is granting the unborn child a chance at life, which is the right of any human. If that means a girl continuing a pregnancy she did not desire, then so be it. It was her choice to allow herself to be impregnated (we're not discussing rape or incest here), therefore she must learn to live with the consequences of her choice.

You have it backwards. The precedent actually stems from a time when many women were forced, against their will, to have abortions. This rule, that a pregnant mother is an adult, began partially for that reason.

Here, some data for you:
full link to article: http://www.emedicinehealth.com/abortion/article_em.htm

•Worldwide, some 20-30 million legal abortions are performed each year, with another 10-20 million abortions performed illegally. Illegal abortions are unsafe and account for 13% of all deaths of women because of serious complications. Death from abortion is almost unknown in the United States or in other countries where abortion is legally available

That is self-contradictory. Abortion always causes death, although rarely that of the mother.

And birth? Birth is hardly a gauranteed prospect even for a full term child, even today, in the US, with all our medical advances. Worldwide, many women do very much die in childbirth. But, even within the US, Conservative estimates place the survival rate of a first trimester pregnancy to be less than 50% even with great medical care. Other estimates are that the real miscarriage (spontaneous abortion) rate is more like 80%

Furthermore, when the mother dies, so do any and all future children.

In an abortion, a potential child dies.

Those are the equations. its not one or another.

ANYWAY, requiring consent of parents is not going to limit abortions significantly. What DOES reduce the number is education of teens. Its a parent's job to teach the mroality. It is the school's job to give facts, so that each teen can make better decisions within that moral framework.. even if its not a moral framework you or I might like. Truth is, NO ONE sane wants teens to be pregnant today. And NO ONE sane wants abortion to be the "solution". But cutting off that as an option doesn't make teens behave any better. The real issue is that teens are raised with varied values AND even those supposedly taught to "not get pregnant" won't often think through the consequences fully. They won't understand how easy it is to be pregnant, the emotions involved, etc. Information, education can help put a bit of a brake on that. Even when that doesn't work, letting them have prevention information at least keeps abortions down.

I agree with most of this.

A somewhat related point - Abortion is not legal because the fetus can or cannot take care of itself. Abortion is legal because a woman has the right to privacy with respect to her own body, free from government intervention. Therefore, although I agree with Mr. Adams' points, those are not the reasons why abortion is legal in the US (they may be arguments why it should be legal, however, which is why Mr. Adams' points are valid, in my humble opinion).

I don't see how a person's right to privacy could ever trump that of another person's human life. Yes, I realize we can push it really far with extreme scenarios, but I'm not talking about that; I'm talking about real life circumstances here.

Real life is that there is a good chance most women you know have had a miscarriage, but have neve discussed it with you. Why? because it is, in our society an EXTREMELY personnal matter.

Abortion is even more so.
the privacy bit is not opinion, it is what the Supreme Court ruled.

As much as I hate to , I have to agree with Phattscotty here. I absolutely don't agree with Santorum, but I do understand why he says it is akin to slavery. That is, I have heard the argument, comprehend it, but dismiss it as not relevant. The basic thrust is that slavery and abortion are both allowed because we do not classify those individuals as fully human. I reject this because while a black (or any other racial/ethnic group) is absolutely human, there is biological/scientific reason to say a very early fetus does not yet qualify. Those who believe differently do so for faith/religious reasons. However, we should note that some even consider sperm and unfertilized eggs "human" as well. Religion and science have different measures of evidence.

I have never heard of anyone who considers sperm and unfertilized eggs to be human, besides from those who are trying to set up a straw man argument.

Then you have apparently not met many conservative Christians. Typically it is the sperm mentioned in this context (women have no control over their losses). it is also mentioned in the context of egg donations and stemcell research.

Well.. no, I am not. AND I have very good reason to harp on this point over and over and over. See, thanks to idiots like you, when I had to go to the hospital in one of the absolute worst times in my life, facing not just the death of my unborn child, but the likelihood I would never have a live genetic child, I was treated over and over as if I had had an abortion. Nurses actually flat out said that to me! They did not see the sonogram, did not care. I had a D & C and that was an abortion, PERIOD. I came in for a Rh vaccination and had not delivered.. so I "obviously" had an abortion. Only once, did I EVER get any sympathy from any of the nurses or staff. That after being forced to stand for 15 minutes (seemed like an hour), IV bag in hand, next to 2 very pregnant women, waiting just to be ushered into a room. I fully understood they were busy, but it would have taken seconds to get me out of their way. More than one nurse looked at me in disgust.

You can claim all you want that I am not telling the truth.. go ask someone you know. Only, chances are your sisters, aunts, adult female friends haven't even told you if they HAD a miscarriage. Chances are they won't.

WHY? Because its too "icky", too personnal. A miscarriage, a fully natural event is "too personal" to disguss, but you feel you have the right to dictate this matter on your own.

So, if you think you know.. you do not. And it would be nice if you actually CHECKED YOUR FACTS before claiming that you have some moral right to decide such a complex issue. And, if you think it is anything BUT complex, then you have not truly considered all the ramifications.

I am close friends with a few couples who have tried numerous times to have a baby, but had them end up in miscarriages. I wasn't related to any of them, but tried to support them as much as possible through the situation. The one I remember most clearly happened about five years ago when the couple invited me over to viewing service for their baby boy which passed away in the womb, many weeks premature (I'm a guy, so I don't remember the exact number of weeks). I'm not sure if they induced the mother or what in order to remove the baby, but they had him there at the house. What fascinated me was how that even though the he was so tiny (a bit bigger than my hand), we could already see little characteristics of his parents, such as his nose being the same as his dad's. The next day we had a burial service for him--someone had been kind enough to make a coffin that was about the size of a Kleenex box with satin lining inside and everything. Since then the couple gave up trying to have another child, and instead adopted their niece's son (she was a teenager at the time and not taking care of him). He's about four years old now, and doing very well. However my experience with my friend's miscarriages only strengthened my belief that it is never right to say that a baby is only human once it is born, or that it only has rights after a certain number of weeks.

That baby was well past the first trimester. Within the first trimester, what exists is the size of a pea and barely resembles a human. None-the less, I could not have an abortion except in them most dire circumstances. (and even then, I don't truly know).

Question. What is the root of ABORTion?

From the OED-

"Etymology: < classical Latin abortiōn-, abortiō (in post-classical Latin also avorsio (6th cent.)) procuring of miscarriage, miscarriage < abort-, past participial stem of aborīrī (see abort v.) + -iō-ion suffix1"

I'm not subscribed to the OED, but this is from the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Definition of ABORTION
1: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage b : induced expulsion of a human fetus c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
Definition of MISCARRIAGE
2: spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus before it is viable and especially between the 12th and 28th weeks of gestation

Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from that, the word "abortion" does include voluntary and involuntary terminations of pregnancy; but a miscarriage is only an involuntary termination of pregnancy.

yes, but miscarriage is the newer term, basically a euphamism for a type of abortion.

Anyway, I agree with you that it is easy for there to be confusion between an abortion due to unintended complications in pregnancy and an abortion that was chosen by the parent(s), and that was not right for the doctors and nurses to treat you that way. I realize that is a very difficult time, although, being a guy, I have no idea what it is like.

Thank you for that.

People have different opinions. But it is important to understanad ALL the consequences and not just what seems easy.

yes, we have established that the whole debate is circular.

Not circular, no.
There is a clear difference of opinion.

Normally, within the US, when there is such a clear and wide disparity of views, tolerance/freedom trump. Here, some people feel they have the right not just to decide what they will do, but how others will act.

Human life is trump. Civilized nations which believe in and uphold the Universal Declaration of Human rights use it as a standard to condemn what various other nations and people do. In the same way, those who believe a human life begins at conception believe that termination of that life constitutes murder/killing/homicide/however you want to term it, and therefore should not be legal, but instead should be condemned by law.

I gotta go, too.

But, unlike other issues, this one has just too many people who disagree, and they actually have evidence on their side.

For me, I see abortion as one of the inevitable ends to an advanced medical system. When we so subvert death, keep so many alive that in past years would not only have had a chance at life, but who virtually everyone would have said was "better off dead".. For the most part, this is good. However, at some point we take upon ourself to decide the other side as well. It is arrogance to think that God only favors life. He did, after all allow death to be a part of humanity.

If you won't have humanity make these decisions, the live as a Christian scientist..and forego all but the most basic medical care.

[DangerBoy]

You guys seriously need to actually provide reasons. Saying it's a right doesn't make it so.

Could've fooled me. That's the same style of argument constantly made by people on this site in favor of homosexuals getting married. Saying it's their right doesn't make it so.

[Timminz]

...it's what's for dinner!