South Dakota abortion ban. Thoughts?

Starrfall on 23/2/2006 at 18:53

Quote Posted by Strontium Dog

ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS STUPID

</></>

paloalto on 23/2/2006 at 18:55

Its an easy intellectual arguement to support abortion,but I wonder if you performed them day in and day out whether you might have a different opinion.Whether you could remove their limbs one by one and then take each part out to count it making sure you didn't miss anything.One of the biggest supporters of abortion is now its biggest foe,not on religious grounds but because of the modern equipment brought into the medical community that to him showed the "fetus" as a living breathing human being, and reportedly when these machines were introduced they had quite a bit of turnover in the abortion clinics personnel.

Chimpy Chompy on 23/2/2006 at 18:56

Quote Posted by Strontium Dog

Okay. So you think we should appreciate the perspective of people who, for example, believe that we should build skyscrapers out of jello and custard?

Of course not. And you know why we shouldn't? Because those people are idiots. That's what we got going on here. QED.

Skyscrapers of custard has problems with basic physics. I was thinking more issues of ethics, society etc.

Sorry if that wasn't clear, but you're still being a great big knob so far. There aren't really any easy absolutes here, just a thorny issue. As long as you're shouting NO I'M RIGHT NO I'M RIGHT over and over you're basically just spewing toxic waste and fagging up the forum.

SubJeff on 23/2/2006 at 18:56

Surely it depends on the extremity of the pro-life stance Stronts? I think that this statement "No suprise to anyone here that I'm pro-life - have been before I had any type of 'spiritual' convictions about the issue or had read anything about conception and the medical side of the whole thing." is pretty revealing though so I'm loath to defend fett when he is being such an unbelievable dumbo.

What I want to know is what "virtually all cases" means. There are a bunch of medical (including psychological/psychiatric) reasons for carrying out abortions here in the UK. I wonder how they differ in the US.

Starrfall on 23/2/2006 at 18:58

It means they don't make allowances for rape or incest or serious health issues.

(all of which Fett DID do, so I don't get the level of vitriol)

fett on 23/2/2006 at 19:06

Quote:

pretty revealing though so I'm loath to defend fett when he is being such an unbelievable dumbo.

I'm not sure what you're implying that it reveals, but I'm speaking in the sense that when I first became aware of abortion at the age of 13 or so, I had no religous/spiritual framework to speak of and I just had an inate aprehension about it, and was ignorant of the variety of issues surrounding the debate. Can I safely assume that all of us have formed opinions about certain issues without all the facts at various times, only to have those opinions confirmed or changed by the evidence at a later date? Sorry I wasn't born smart like you. ;)

I'm much more educated now and have medical/ethical reasons for my position, not the least of which is having counseled with several young women who've had abortions. Regardless of anyone's position on the issue, I think we'd all generally agree that when a pregnancy is terminated, it can potentially cause a lot of emotional turmoil to the mother and family (not to say that unwanted kids running around doesn't).

ATTENTION: MOST IMPORTANT SENTENCE IN THE POST: Either way, none of that is the issue. I'm trying to cull information from some of the minds here that understand the legalities.

Quote:

Pro-Life is an interesting way to describe this sort of behaviour.

It's safe to say that this is not the typical or majority pro-life stance. I'm kind of curious as to why those conditions were voted down as well, since historically, the pro-life movement has made concessions for such things.

SubJeff on 23/2/2006 at 19:07

They don't make allowances for serious health issues? Are you sure? I find this very hard to believe, but it's not impossible knowing how dumb people can be...

As to what that reveals fett - you didn't expand on your 13 year old mind makeuping until now so it just looked like "This is my stance - I decided on this before I knew anything about it, look how stubborn I am. And smug too!" And why should it be no surprise to us? Anyway, you've expanded on it so ignore what I said.

fett on 23/2/2006 at 19:07

Quote:

all of which Fett DID do, so I don't get the level of vitriol

That's easy. I support a conservative position and am a member of TTLG. Even though I'm not currently arguing my position. ;)

SD on 23/2/2006 at 19:10

Quote Posted by fett

At least they're being consistent in voting down those conditions. How can someone be utterly opposed to the very concept of abortion, but still allow it in a certain few cases? Are they saying that the babies of rape victims or incest aren't worth as much as the babies of a stable relationship, so it's okay to abort them? It's utterly fucking bananas and doesn't make ANY sense.

jprobs on 23/2/2006 at 19:12

Quote Posted by Strontium Dog

I personally can't think of a better word to describe the imminent return to the days of dangerous backstreet abortions and treatment of women as second-class citizens.

What is so dangerous about a "backstreet abortion"?? Someone might die? Hmm...

I am not pro-life, nor am I pro-choice... Being a conservative, I have a terrible time with this issue. I usually cover my ears and walk away, just because I am a male and it aint none of my business.

But to say banning abortion is a step backwards is only correct from the pro-choice perspective. Pro-lifers would say it's a step forward.