It isn't a complex issue for you, but it is for me. We don't have to agree. Both sides of this issue are looking at the same facts and coming to completely opposing views about what those facts mean. One takeaway from rockmom's post was that even though there is hostile disagreement over the issue there are underlying factors that we should all be able to agree upon to help prevent abortion in the first place. What is the process that leads a person to be in a position where abortion is the best option and how can that process be curtailed? I think that is extremely fair and going to accomplish a lot more than one side screaming that abortion is murder and the other side screaming that women's bodies are being subjugated because that is a rift that will not ever be bridged.

Excellent post and totally agree on RM. I'm often guilty of getting into those "shouting matches". RM, is an excellent example of a much better way to look at a problem...

Those of you who are better educated on this issue, how did the line get drawn at the first trimester? I assume that is what was decided by the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade. But why the first trimester? Is viability of the fetus part of their decision on drawing the line there? What is the youngest newborn to ever survive? Did that factor in?

 

The youngest premature birth ever to survive was 21 weeks, 6 days. That's about 5 1/2 months gestation, or late second trimester. She was born in 2006 and is currently a very healthy 4 1/2 years old. Her story played no role in Roe v. Wade.

 

In Roe v. Wade, one of the important factors was in deciding when life begins. Most Christian churches (that I know of) teach that life begins at conception. Although the Catholic Church further stipulates that to mean life begins at fertilization and prior to the embryo's implantation in the uterus - thus it's position against the birth control pill, which prevents implantation of the already-fertilized-embryo. However, scientists often question "what constitutes life". Does a nervous system? Does the ability to move on your own? Does the ability to feel pain? Do hair, eyes, fingernails, or developed digestive system constitute life? Ultimately the US Supreme Court, citing an overwhelming presence of evidence to support all arguments, decided that life began when the fetus is separated from its mothers body - citing the precedent that the unborn have "never been recognized...as persons in the whole sense". ...ironic that now, you can be convicted of murder if you punch a pregnant woman and kill her unborn child. After all, that unborn child, according to the US Supreme Court was never recognized as a person in the whole sense.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/index.html

 

Bunch of info on here to dig through. Just a couple of stats I saw. All numbers are from 2005.

 

22.6% of pregnancies in the US were aborted.

 

The highest abortion rate was in D.C. 49.9%

The lowest abortion rate was Wyoming 1.0%

Kentucky came in at second lowest 6.4%

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/index.html

 

Bunch of info on here to dig through. Just a couple of stats I saw. All numbers are from 2005.

 

22.6% of pregnancies in the US were aborted.

 

The highest abortion rate was in D.C. 49.9%

The lowest abortion rate was Wyoming 1.0%

Kentucky came in at second lowest 6.4%

Didn't Rick Pitino teach us that you have to drive to Cincy to get an abortion?

It isn't a complex issue for you, but it is for me. We don't have to agree. Both sides of this issue are looking at the same facts and coming to completely opposing views about what those facts mean. One takeaway from rockmom's post was that even though there is hostile disagreement over the issue there are underlying factors that we should all be able to agree upon to help prevent abortion in the first place. What is the process that leads a person to be in a position where abortion is the best option and how can that process be curtailed? I think that is extremely fair and going to accomplish a lot more than one side screaming that abortion is murder and the other side screaming that women's bodies are being subjugated because that is a rift that will not ever be bridged.

 

 

I guess I'm not denying some underlying complexities as to the rationale one has for choosing to have an abortion.

 

What I don't see as complex is the overlying issue of child vs. fetus. I do not understand how individuals come to the conclusion that abortion is not the taking of an innocent life. I've mentioned this already, but for all the scientific data and research information that is available on this subject, the most telling evidence is two-fold:

 

#1- A man hits a pregnant woman & she loses the child she intended to carry to full-term and bring into this world. In such cases (the Scott & Lacy Peterson one comes to mind quickly), that man can be charged with two murders. Yet the same law that allows for a murder charge does not allow for the same charge in the case of abortion. So in the one instance, it is life. In the other instance, it is not. Right there, the legal system completely breaks down because it says life here but not over here. The legal system acknowledges it is life, but the woman alone gets to decide whether that life continues or is destroyed.

 

#2- Testimonials given by women who have had an abortion, some of the most gripping & heart-wrenching words I've ever heard and read, reveal very clearly that the child in the womb is reacting in the most negative of fashions to what is happening when a doctor injects the fluids that lead to the termination of life.

That seems like a fairy tale view of a complex issue. In your mind, it's nice to believe that if something is illegal there will be less of that, but in actuality it is often the other way. When something becomes illegal, then a black market arises, one that isn't regulated at all and often more easily obtained.

 

And this view is the general view held by the Christian right that if THEY view something as wrong, then the entire nation should consider it wrong. Furthermore, the best way to address that wrong is to make it illegal then turn a blind eye to what happens in the black market. IF that problem gets to large then we will make it social evil #1 and throw a ton of money at it, without once stopping to consider where the REAL problem is. That's the easiest way to sleep well at night, right?

 

 

So if something is illegal....it actually increases the usage....got it.

Senl. Kyl from AZ claimed on the floor that abortions count for "over 90%" of PP's services. Good to see we've got educated people making decisions.

 

When called he said his remark was not intended to be a factual statement.

 

Beautiful.

Tons of idiots making decisions for us Clyde... Starting with Obama... Then you got Obama official Rajiv Shah saying that 70,000 children will die if GOP budget plan is passed... Then you got Dem.Peter Defazio saying thousands more will die if budget passes.. Dem. Barbara Lee said thousands of women would get cancer and die because of budget cuts.... Yes the idiots abound in both parties....

I guess I'm not denying some underlying complexities as to the rationale one has for choosing to have an abortion.

 

What I don't see as complex is the overlying issue of child vs. fetus. I do not understand how individuals come to the conclusion that abortion is not the taking of an innocent life. I've mentioned this already, but for all the scientific data and research information that is available on this subject, the most telling evidence is two-fold:

 

#1- A man hits a pregnant woman & she loses the child she intended to carry to full-term and bring into this world. In such cases (the Scott & Lacy Peterson one comes to mind quickly), that man can be charged with two murders. Yet the same law that allows for a murder charge does not allow for the same charge in the case of abortion. So in the one instance, it is life. In the other instance, it is not. Right there, the legal system completely breaks down because it says life here but not over here. The legal system acknowledges it is life, but the woman alone gets to decide whether that life continues or is destroyed.

 

#2- Testimonials given by women who have had an abortion, some of the most gripping & heart-wrenching words I've ever heard and read, reveal very clearly that the child in the womb is reacting in the most negative of fashions to what is happening when a doctor injects the fluids that lead to the termination of life.

 

Those laws (#1) were passed after Roe v Wade was "ruled?", to begin to erode the right to choose. See even now you are using it in your argument, so it is achieving exactly what it intended.

So Ace you don't think a man that punches a women and kills her baby should be accused of murder... After all that's not a human life she's carrying around according to most on here...

Those laws (#1) were passed after Roe v Wade was "ruled?", to begin to erode the right to choose. See even now you are using it in your argument, so it is achieving exactly what it intended.

 

Please clarify. I'm not understanding your statement here.

Senl. Kyl from AZ claimed on the floor that abortions count for "over 90%" of PP's services. Good to see we've got educated people making decisions.

 

When called he said his remark was not intended to be a factual statement.

 

Beautiful.

 

Stephen Colbert has been having a field day with that. His twitter has been keeping me entertained all day:

 

Jon Kyl let a game-winning ground ball roll through his legs in Game 6 of the '86 World Series. #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement

 

Jon Kyl sponsored S.410, which would ban happiness. #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement

Trust me, I don't follow "Big Right TV" or whomever it was that produced the video, but I certainly thought this was interesting...[video=youtube;umI-gLEC6C8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umI-gLEC6C8&NR=1

You don't have to look very hard to find out what PP stands for... It's an abortion factory.. Nothing more, nothing less...