The Realities Of Abortion That Need To Be Discussed More Often

Updated on August 25, 2018

Morality Of Abortions

Before I make any points, I need everyone to understand that I am working under the premise that nothing about morality, ethics, emotions, and religion is objective. I will concede that most western societies believe that everyone has a right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. These unalienable rights are still somewhat subjective, but they are certainly a little bit less subjective than other moral principles.

The last unalienable right is definitely the most controversial because it is hard to define what constitutes as pursuit of happiness. Additionally, one individual’s pursuit of happiness can curtail another individual’s pursuit of happiness. Therefore, the harm or nonaggression principle has to come into play. This principle states that individuals can do whatever they want in order to pursue happiness as long as it does not hurt anybody else.

When it comes to abortions, the harm principle might encounter some muddy waters. On the one hand, abortion hurts a fetus by taking away its potential to become a child. On the other hand, forcing someone into an unwanted pregnancies hurt pregnant people and their families because they cannot make the best decisions about parenthood. The question of whether the fetus or the or the pregnant individual takes precedence is obviously one that faces a lot of controversy. As someone who is pro-choice, I would argue that the pregnant individual takes precedence over the fetus. After all, even if the fetus is arguably alive, the individual whose womb is supporting the fetus is definitely more human than the fetus is.

However, I do recognize that, on the other side of the debate, people believe that the harm imposed on an aborted fetus is more severe than the harm imposed on an individual who has to carry the pregnancy to term. While I can list all the reasons why forcing pregnancy on people is a terrible fate for both the parent and the child, I cannot prove that any of these reasons are important enough to ignore the fact that abortions do snuff out the potential for life. I would not call it murder the way that pro-lifers might, but the decision to end a pregnancy is not a decision that should be taken lightly. I may trust people to make their own decision, but I know that there are people who do not think there should even be a choice.

From a philosophical perspective, the abortion debate is not truly a debate about whether or not we should trust people to make their own decisions about parenthood, pregnancy, birth control, and abortions. When it comes down to western moral philosophy, the question of abortion can be condensed into a single debate. We must determine the extent to which the harm principle applies to fetuses. Of course, other moral principles might be at play, but I am willing to bet that someone’s answer to this question on the harm principle will almost always reveal where that person falls on the spectrum between pro-life and pro-choice.

Additionally, this question is closely tied to the question of whether a fetus is considered a human life or not. If you believe life begins at conception, then you likely think the harm principle would fully apply to a fetus, embryo, and zygote, so you would be against abortion entirely. If you believe life begins at birth, then you likely think the harm principle does not apply to a fetus at all, so you would be pro-choice. If you believe life begins when a fetus could theoretically survive outside the womb, then you likely think the harm principle only applies to certain fetuses, so you would have a relatively moderate opinion on abortion that would probably fall closer to the pro-choice side of the spectrum. If you believe life begins when someone’s body produces eggs or sperm, then you are probably pro-choice, but you are also reducing this whole debate to the absurd and you need to be careful about logical fallacies when you may not know the whole premise of an argument.

Personally, I believe that a pregnant individual gets to decide how strongly the harm principle applies to the fetus. We have to trust people to make their own choices about what is and is not right when it comes to issues that have a certain amount of moral ambiguity. However, I recognize that many pro-lifers are so strong in their convictions that nothing is going to convince them to allow pregnant people to make this choice. If you fully believe that abortion is tantamount to murder, then it is no surprise that you are protesting outside Planned Parenthoods. I wish you understood that you have been manipulated by a society that just wants to control women. I wish you opened up your eyes and saw all the good that abortions can do. I wish you did your research and learned that Planned Parenthoods do so much more than simply provide abortions. Alas, I have run out of ways to make pro-lifers change their minds.

However, I know that it is possible to convince people to accept abortions. In fact, I was not always pro-choice. Back when I was growing up in a pro-life community, I did not take the time to fully consider the abortion issue. I simply equated abortion to murder and assumed that this equivalency was obvious. However, I changed my mind after some feminist family members explained to me what happens to people who did not have access to safe abortions.

The truth is that, whether you like it or not, abortions are going to happen. Unless you can adequately monitor every sexually active individual, you are not going to stop abortions. All you can do is limit someone’s access to a legal abortion. This reality is one of the major factors that influenced by stance on abortions. However, for some reason, the rhetoric around abortion never seems to discuss this issue anymore. Pro-lifers scream about how women are Godless sexual monsters that seduce men, get themselves pregnant, and then murder babies. Pro-choicers retaliate with sarcastic comments about how evangelical male demagogues and politicians need to stop trying to regulate a woman’s body.

No one is listening anymore. No one is sharing substantive thoughts anymore. I get that pro-choicers are getting frustrated. I too am tired of explaining super basic facts about reproductive rights to white men, but I still recognize that this debate is not pointless. While it should not have to be a debate, it definitely is, so I should not reduce it to meaningless screaming matches. Nobody in these screaming matches are talking about back-alley wire hanger abortions anymore. Nobody is talking about women who have literally died because legal abortions were unavailable. I used to hear about it all the time, but it has been a long time since I last heard someone bring it up.

I have no idea what made the issue of illegal abortions fade into the background. Perhaps political rhetoric has simply become less nuanced in recent years. Perhaps people are forgetting what the days before Roe vs Wade were like. The truth is that there could be a million reasons why people have decided that it is more important to argue about whether it is okay to shame a woman who got an abortion than it is to prevent her from doing something that could seriously hurt her body. Some of these reasons could be perfectly valid. I just think it is important to emphasize that a huge benefit of legalizing abortion is that there will be a significant decrease in instances of botched and unsafe abortions. I think that, according to the harm principle, since illegal abortions pose a serious risk, the pregnant individual’s life should take precedence over the life of a fetus, especially one who has a high chance of growing up unwanted.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      I apologize. I accidentally marked your comments as spam.

      You didn't challenge me to come up with a good SCOTUS decision that wasn't unanimous. You challenged me to come up with a good SCOTUS decision "of any vote". I simply assumed you would be more favorable towards decisions that were decided unanimously.

      When I talk about sex without fear of pregnancy, I should have said "penetrative vaginal sex". Again, men can. Women can too thanks you contraception. Whether it is, as you say, fun "sexual intercourse" or should not make a difference if you are a woman.

      I don't remember you proving pregnancy discrimination is fake. I remember you saying that the shame does not exist in some communities where high schoolers are getting pregnant. I didn't think that point proved anything and I didn't even think it was particularly compelling evidence.

    • profile image

      BradmasterOCcal 

      2 months ago

      I don't see my last two comments.

      I don't think that it is fair to just ignore all my effort in these comments.

      This will be my final comment in light of that.

      "Again, you are confusing an unwanted pregnancy with unwanted parenthood. While men can be responsible for the child after the child is born, men cannot be responsible during the 40 weeks of pregnancy. How do we achieve equality during those 40 weeks? It may seem like a short time, but it can make a huge difference in some women's lives in terms of wages, hiring, promotions, education, and more. How do we hold men accountable for the pregnancy itself? They may face consequences once the child is born, but I am not addressing that issue. It takes two people to get pregnant, but only one of those two people have to carry the child.

      Apparently, you think choosing to have sex for fun is an act of stupidity. Let me know if I am misunderstanding your point, but I would really love to know what about sex is immature and stupid. I don't think it is, but men need to be held accountable for unprotected sex just as much as women do if we want equality. Being responsible for the child is not the same as being responsible during the 40 week pregnancy. Maybe the man can make up for the 5% of wages lost due to pregnancy, but this kind of system would only address one of the many things that a pregnant individual would experience. It's definitely difficult to measure what exactly men must do in order to achieve equality and, yes, equality is a value that I pursue. I am super westernized and the west loves egalitarian values, so I want women to have sex without fear of pregnancy since men can have sex without fear of pregnancy. If equality is not something that you pursue, then we are clearly on different wavelengths.

      Then again, we are definitely on different wavelengths since you seem to dislike American democracy. You don't seem to like the job that SCOTUS has. I think Brown vs Board of Education was a good SCOTUS decision. I think Loving vs Virginia was a good decision. I think Gideon vs Wainwright was a good decision.

      B:

      With these three citations you made my point about 5-4 SCOTUS decisions.

      You cited 3 cases that all were by unanimous decision!

      ----------------------------------------------

      B:

      Did I really confuse unwanted pregnancy that ends in abortion, with unplanned parenthood? You are trying to hard to make a point where none exists.

      ------------------------------------

      "While men can be responsible for the child after the child is born, men cannot be responsible during the 40 weeks of pregnancy. How do we achieve equality during those 40 weeks? It may seem like a short time, but it can make a huge difference in some women's lives in terms of wages, hiring, promotions, education, and more. How do we hold men accountable for the pregnancy itself? They may face consequences once the child is born, but I am not addressing that issue. It takes two people to get pregnant, but only one of those two people have to carry the child."

      B:

      And that one person is the reason that it happens, end of story.

      --------------------------------------

      "Apparently, you think choosing to have sex for fun is an act of stupidity. Let me know if I am misunderstanding your point, but I would really love to know what about sex is immature and stupid. I don't think it is, but men need to be held accountable for unprotected sex just as much as women do if we want equality.

      B:

      Women have the choice to have sex for sex or have sex for procreation. If there is an unwanted pregnancy then they made the wrong choice.

      ------------------------------

      Being responsible for the child is not the same as being responsible during the 40 week pregnancy.

      B:

      It is all the same. Along with power comes responsibility. You can't blame the guy for something that you choose to do, have sex.

      -----------------------------------

      Maybe the man can make up for the 5% of wages lost due to pregnancy, but this kind of system would only address one of the many things that a pregnant individual would experience. It's definitely difficult to measure what exactly men must do in order to achieve equality and, yes, equality is a value that I pursue

      B:

      There is no real equality, I already proved that many comments ago.

      And even the courts confuse Equality with an Equal opportunity, and there is a big difference.

      -----------------------

      . I am super westernized and the west loves egalitarian values, so I want women to have sex without fear of pregnancy since men can have sex without fear of pregnancy. If equality is not something that you pursue, then we are clearly on different wavelengths."

      B:

      I already answered that .

      You can have a lot of sex without the possibility of pregnancy, but not if the sex is one of sexual intercourse. Homosexuals can have all the sex they want without fearing pregnancy.

      Bye!

      You also don't seem to like what congress does for this country. Do you like anything about American democracy?"

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      Again, you are confusing an unwanted pregnancy with unwanted parenthood. While men can be responsible for the child after the child is born, men cannot be responsible during the 40 weeks of pregnancy. How do we achieve equality during those 40 weeks? It may seem like a short time, but it can make a huge difference in some women's lives in terms of wages, hiring, promotions, education, and more. How do we hold men accountable for the pregnancy itself? They may face consequences once the child is born, but I am not addressing that issue. It takes two people to get pregnant, but only one of those two people have to carry the child.

      Apparently, you think choosing to have sex for fun is an act of stupidity. Let me know if I am misunderstanding your point, but I would really love to know what about sex is immature and stupid. I don't think it is, but men need to be held accountable for unprotected sex just as much as women do if we want equality. Being responsible for the child is not the same as being responsible during the 40 week pregnancy. Maybe the man can make up for the 5% of wages lost due to pregnancy, but this kind of system would only address one of the many things that a pregnant individual would experience. It's definitely difficult to measure what exactly men must do in order to achieve equality and, yes, equality is a value that I pursue. I am super westernized and the west loves egalitarian values, so I want women to have sex without fear of pregnancy since men can have sex without fear of pregnancy. If equality is not something that you pursue, then we are clearly on different wavelengths.

      Then again, we are definitely on different wavelengths since you seem to dislike American democracy. You don't seem to like the job that SCOTUS has. I think Brown vs Board of Education was a good SCOTUS decision. I think Loving vs Virginia was a good decision. I think Gideon vs Wainwright was a good decision. You also don't seem to like what congress does for this country. Do you like anything about American democracy?

    • profile image

      BradMasterOCcal 

      2 months ago

      Part 1

      • We are going in circles. The law of the land is that we follow the majority of opinion. Obviously, you don't like how the courts work. I'm sorry about that. You probably want to overturn Roe vs Wade. I have a feeling this option is within site and I have a feeling it will overturned by a 5-4 decision. I'm not going to defend the notion that we support the majority, even if it is a 5-4 majority. If Roe vs Wade is a bad decision on the grounds that it represented a poor interpretation of the constitutional right to privacy, then do what you can to overturn it. If you think it's a bad decision on the grounds that it is so controversial, then I think you need to reevaluate what a bad decision is. The court's job is to interpret the constitution and decide if laws do or do not fit within the constitution. The rest of the country can disagree about how the constitution should be understood, but the rest of the country doesn't get to made SCOTUS decision. They just get to vote for a president who will appoint justices that they like. It is one of many integral parts of our democracy. If you don't like this system, then a constitutional amendment is really the only thing you can do about it.

      B:

      I have made my point clear. Roe v Wade is and continues to be a bad decision because it has been a major point in every presidential election. Notwithstanding the power of the SCOTUS to make this decision it was not an effective solution to the problem of Abortion versus Pro Life. That is a fact!

      BTW, do you know of any SCOTUS decisions of any vote that actually solved anything?

      The founders created the judicial branch, but unfortunately they left it up to the congress to implement it. Do you know anything that the congress has done that has been beneficial to the country and the people?

      --------------------------------------

      Let's talk about rape. Yes, I agree with you about how rape laws suck, but that is outside the scope of this discussion. I am so glad you want better rape laws.

      B:

      You missed my point, I have said we should have rape laws at all.

      ------------------------------------------

      We can decide what those laws should be another time. You seem to suggest that there would have to be an investigation into every claim to ensure that it can be verified, which puts a burden on the actual rape victims just because some women did a disservice by lying about it. You seem to think the fact that it is illegal to lie about it would keep false claims low, but it has not kept actual rape rates low. However, I am willing to agree that law in a deterrent. If you are happy with paying for whatever abortions come out of it, then I'm honestly fine with that. You won't have to pay for any other abortions unless it is incest/medical emergency or unless you live in a state that funds them.

      B:

      My point is simple, reporting a false crime is a crime.

      -------------------------------

      I have no idea why you think male partners never get a say. It is difficult for the law to determine what kind of relationships are healthy enough for a woman to consult her partner, but evidence shows that happily married women almost always consult their partner before getting an abortion. These women tend to already have kids and both parties agree that, for whatever reason, they cannot have another . Women in unhealthy relationships should not be forced to consult their partners. Some have proposed that married women must consult their husbands, but marriages are not always functional and, if she is a victim of some sort of abuse, then she should not be forced to get approval from her husband before getting an abortion. If you have an idea for a system of ensuring that women in functional relationships get approval for their partner, while ensuring that women in dysfunctional relationships are not forced to get approval, then I would love to hear what system you have in mind.

      B:

      It takes two to do it, it should take two to undo it.

      ------------------------------------

      The sexual revolution essentially started in the 60s with the development and normalization of female contraception. There were a few other causes, but female contraception was a big cause of the sexual revolution and sexual liberation because it allowed women to have sex without worrying about unintended pregnancies. Men were always able to, in theory, avoid consequences of pregnancy unless they chose to, somehow, experience pregnancy with their partner. Women could not avoid the consequences of a pregnancy unless she chose wire hanger abortions. Starting in the 70s, she could also choose safe abortions, but contraception definitely seems like a slightly more responsible option. Abortion should be more of a last resort, but it was an option along with birth control in order to ensure that men and women could equally look at sex as a fun activity that did not require any concern about pregnancy. To me, the option for everyone to have sex without a concern about pregnancy is equality.

      B:

      That is not equality, it is an act of stupidity, irresponsibility, and immaturity.

      Every thing people do has consequences.

      ---------------------------

    • profile image

      BradMasterOCcal 

      2 months ago

      part 2

      It is true that some people start out with disadvantages, but this reality does not make it right and I think it is everyone's responsibilities to try to rectify inequalities.

      B:

      Why?

      ------

      Again, contraception would be the best choice for women. I don't know why you think birth control doesn't work. Condoms have a 98% per year of use success rate of preventing pregnancies as long as used correctly.

      B:

      You answered your own question!

      ---------------------------------------

      I don't know their success rate with preventing STIs, but I know it's also really high. Using condoms in addition to some other form of protection such as contraception or IUDs will probably reduce your chances of an unintended pregnancy to about 0%. Hopefully, with proper sexual education about birth control and proper access to it, abortions will no longer even be a necessity except in extreme cases. Again, report after report has shown that comprehensive sexual education is the best way to decrease the abortion rate. Until we get to a point where women know about birth control and can access it, abortions have to be a way for women to avoid unintended pregnancies if they want to have sex.

      B:

      The fact is that when there is an unwanted pregnancy, something failed.

      ---------------------------------

      You mentioned how men would still have to face the consequences of parenthood, but there is no way to force him to face the consequences of pregnancy.

      B:

      That is a decision that must be made by the women, and if she failed to make the right one whose fault is it? The point is that the law makes the man equally responsible for the child. Child Support is not a myth.

      ---------------------------------------

      If you don't believe in the existence of the discrimination and shame that women face for getting pregnant, then I urge you to provide the evidence.

      B:

      The only thing necessary is that the pregnancy are the consequence of her act.

      -----------------------------------------

      Studies show that pregnancy will chop off about 5% of wages for women in spite of laws against pregnancy discrimination, which is a consequence that no man has to think about when having sex (unless he is married and relying on the wages that his wife provides).

      B:

      It is like becoming homeless because you gambled the rent money and lost.

      ---------------------------------------

      Lastly, you keep mentioning theoretical programs similar to AA that could help women learn to be more responsible. I feel as though having every woman who gets an abortion to learn about safe sex would be a good idea. I am happy to put these women through certain types of additional counseling as well. I am not opposed to compelling Planned Parenthood to implement these programs.

      B:

      Why is abortion because rape and complications in pregnancy different than other abortions? The difference is that it is not an act controlled by the women. All others are within the control of the women. It is being mature, being responsible and willing to accept the risk of unwanted pregnancy.

      Finally once again, I think that not aborting many of these unwanted pregnancies is probably good for the child that will never happen because there is not real support for them other than family. It is doubtful that the child will grow up with two parents.

      The end!

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      We are going in circles. The law of the land is that we follow the majority of opinion. Obviously, you don't like how the courts work. I'm sorry about that. You probably want to overturn Roe vs Wade. I have a feeling this option is within site and I have a feeling it will overturned by a 5-4 decision. I'm not going to defend the notion that we support the majority, even if it is a 5-4 majority. If Roe vs Wade is a bad decision on the grounds that it represented a poor interpretation of the constitutional right to privacy, then do what you can to overturn it. If you think it's a bad decision on the grounds that it is so controversial, then I think you need to reevaluate what a bad decision is. The court's job is to interpret the constitution and decide if laws do or do not fit within the constitution. The rest of the country can disagree about how the constitution should be understood, but the rest of the country doesn't get to made SCOTUS decision. They just get to vote for a president who will appoint justices that they like. It is one of many integral parts of our democracy. If you don't like this system, then a constitutional amendment is really the only thing you can do about it.

      Let's talk about rape. Yes, I agree with you about how rape laws suck, but that is outside the scope of this discussion. I am so glad you want better rape laws. We can decide what those laws should be another time. You seem to suggest that there would have to be an investigation into every claim to ensure that it can be verified, which puts a burden on the actual rape victims just because some women did a disservice by lying about it. You seem to think the fact that it is illegal to lie about it would keep false claims low, but it has not kept actual rape rates low. However, I am willing to agree that law in a deterrent. If you are happy with paying for whatever abortions come out of it, then I'm honestly fine with that. You won't have to pay for any other abortions unless it is incest/medical emergency or unless you live in a state that funds them.

      I have no idea why you think male partners never get a say. It is difficult for the law to determine what kind of relationships are healthy enough for a woman to consult her partner, but evidence shows that happily married women almost always consult their partner before getting an abortion. These women tend to already have kids and both parties agree that, for whatever reason, they cannot have another . Women in unhealthy relationships should not be forced to consult their partners. Some have proposed that married women must consult their husbands, but marriages are not always functional and, if she is a victim of some sort of abuse, then she should not be forced to get approval from her husband before getting an abortion. If you have an idea for a system of ensuring that women in functional relationships get approval for their partner, while ensuring that women in dysfunctional relationships are not forced to get approval, then I would love to hear what system you have in mind.

      The sexual revolution essentially started in the 60s with the development and normalization of female contraception. There were a few other causes, but female contraception was a big cause of the sexual revolution and sexual liberation because it allowed women to have sex without worrying about unintended pregnancies. Men were always able to, in theory, avoid consequences of pregnancy unless they chose to, somehow, experience pregnancy with their partner. Women could not avoid the consequences of a pregnancy unless she chose wire hanger abortions. Starting in the 70s, she could also choose safe abortions, but contraception definitely seems like a slightly more responsible option. Abortion should be more of a last resort, but it was an option along with birth control in order to ensure that men and women could equally look at sex as a fun activity that did not require any concern about pregnancy. To me, the option for everyone to have sex without a concern about pregnancy is equality. It is true that some people start out with disadvantages, but this reality does not make it right and I think it is everyone's responsibilities to try to rectify inequalities.

      Again, contraception would be the best choice for women. I don't know why you think birth control doesn't work. Condoms have a 98% per year of use success rate of preventing pregnancies as long as used correctly. I don't know their success rate with preventing STIs, but I know it's also really high. Using condoms in addition to some other form of protection such as contraception or IUDs will probably reduce your chances of an unintended pregnancy to about 0%. Hopefully, with proper sexual education about birth control and proper access to it, abortions will no longer even be a necessity except in extreme cases. Again, report after report has shown that comprehensive sexual education is the best way to decrease the abortion rate. Until we get to a point where women know about birth control and can access it, abortions have to be a way for women to avoid unintended pregnancies if they want to have sex. You mentioned how men would still have to face the consequences of parenthood, but there is no way to force him to face the consequences of pregnancy. If you don't believe in the existence of the discrimination and shame that women face for getting pregnant, then I urge you to provide the evidence. Studies show that pregnancy will chop off about 5% of wages for women in spite of laws against pregnancy discrimination, which is a consequence that no man has to think about when having sex (unless he is married and relying on the wages that his wife provides).

      Lastly, you keep mentioning theoretical programs similar to AA that could help women learn to be more responsible. I feel as though having every woman who gets an abortion to learn about safe sex would be a good idea. I am happy to put these women through certain types of additional counseling as well. I am not opposed to compelling Planned Parenthood to implement these programs.

    • profile image

      BradMasterOCcal 

      2 months ago

      part 1

      I think it is okay to throw out the opinion of four justices because the constitution and centuries of precedent state that we follow the majority opinion and not the dissenting opinion.

      B:

      Where is your proof that this tradition has resulted in good decisions? Again, if Roe v Wade was a good decision, it wouldn’t still be the center of every presidential election, would it?

      ------------------------------

      It works this way for Trump's controversial travel ban, where the ban is considered legal because only four justices were against the ban.

      B:

      What it does show is that the SCOTUS has been moving away from the constitution and becoming more political. Ginsberg is the poster child for politics influencing the SCOTUS.

      It was only the resistance of the left, and their minions in the federal court system that made this an issue in the first place. It was not a Muslim ban, it was a 90 day period that would develop vetting from the immigrants of 7 Middle Eastern Countries that because of the wars there didn’t have the necessary information to do a good job of vetting. The goal was to ensure that we weren’t fast tracking terrorists from the countries.

      The left wants anyone to get into the country, and how is that a good policy. Considering that it only took 19 Muslim Terrorists to successfully outwit the entire national defense of the US. How many terrorists are you willing to fast track into the US?

      The left couldn’t wait 90 days?

      There are 47 Muslim countries in the world, had it been a Muslim ban why weren’t all the Muslim countries in it?

      -------------------------------------

      It works this way for the 2000 election Florida recount case, where there was no recount because only four justices wanted one. It works this way for Miranda vs Arizona, where police must tell people they have a right to remain silent because only four justices did not think police had to tell criminals their rights.

      B:

      Your knowledge of the law is primitive. The Miranda vs Arizona was one of four cases that yielded the decision. And it has been looked at and changed many times over the years by SCOTUS. This reinforces my opinion on 5-4 decisions as bad decisions because they don’t resolve the issue.

      It should have been a 9-0 decision because it is the 5th amendment. Yet, the SCOTUS allows it to be violated by forcing people to sign their tax returns under penalty of perjury, and it creates criminal liability if you don’t provide the government with your income from any source criminal or legal. So where is your right to remain silent?

      ---------------------------------------

      It works this way for Roe vs Wade, where the government must stay out of someone's decision to have an abortion because only four justices were against making abortions a constitutional right. It works this way for a whole host of SCOTUS decisions.

      B:

      You don’t really understand this decision. It is based on trimesters. And as we going into the second and final trimester the state can get more involved and make decisions beyond those of the women.

      ---------------------------------

      Essentially, it is okay to dismiss the dissenting opinion because that is the current law of the land.

      B:

      Seriously, all decisions of SCOTUS become the law of the land, that doesn’t make it a good decision. It just makes it a decision that must be followed.

      -----------------------------------

      You are correct in saying that I am focused on the abortion aspect of the rape question. The whole reason I posed the question to you about what constitutes as rape was to bring it back to abortions. I am simply trying to tell you that more women would be claiming to have been raped if that were the only way for them to get a federally or state funded abortion, which means your tax dollars could be going to abortions that are performed under the assumption that a woman was raped, even though she was not actually raped. I was simply wondering if you were okay with this situation or if you would want to find a way to ensure that your tax dollars (especially your state tax dollars) did not go to those types of abortions.

      B:

      The problem I see is that women not only want the absolute right to an abortion, but they want us to pay for it. As for rape, you keep ignoring my comment on how rape laws have let so many rapists go free to rape again. I would think that would be a major concern rather than the abortion. The abortion helps one woman, while allowing the rape laws to free the rapist to commit rape on other women is the result.

      It would be up to the courts to ensure the veracity of the claim of rape, as it does in every criminal case. There is no reason to have rape laws, the underlying crimes of assault, and aggravated assault have the same criminal consequences.

      If you were mugged, or you were raped the criminal consequences should be the same. If weapons were used in the commission of the crime the criminal sanctions increase appropriately. Rape however has additional elements that defense attorney have successfully used as loopholes to get their clients free.

      -------------------------------

    • profile image

      BradMasterOCcal 

      2 months ago

      part 2

      I agree that there are better ways to handle rape cases, but it is mostly irrelevant to the question that I am posing to you. I also agree that clinics perform plenty of abortions that have nothing to do with rape, but my question is about the 32,000 women who are impregnated against their will and about what you would think if that number wrongfully rose as a result of more severe abortion restrictions.

      B:

      Again, that is up to the courts and the justice system to ferret out. Making claims of rape where none exist is itself a crime. And that is how the number of false claims can be kept low.

      -------------------------------------

      I understand that all the other abortions are somewhat more controversial, especially since, as you say, the woman alone is responsible. I think that both men and women should be responsible for ensuring that they are using protection, but I guess you think the woman alone is responsible.

      B:

      Along with the absolute right given to women to abort, it should be solely on the women to decide risk versus benefit. And when the risk results in the foreseeable pregnancy than it was her fault alone.

      ---------------------------------

      I say that a woman should not be punished with an unwanted pregnancy just because her partner was negligent with proper condom use, but you say that a woman alone should be punished, while a partner should still probably get some sort of say in what her decision is with regard to terminating the pregnancy.

      B:

      But they don’t, do they?

      ------------------------------

      While some women are admittedly engaging in irresponsible behaviors, others are not. In fact, the majority of women who get an abortion have not had a prior abortion, but I am not going to discount the 45% of abortions that are performed on women who have already had a previous abortion. I agree that society would benefit if these people were more responsible. According to pure statistics, a good way to decrease the number of unintended pregnancies is to stop teaching that abstinence is the only option. People are going to have sex. Teach them about birth control. Give them access to birth control and condoms.

      B:

      Aren’t the one that said there is no such thing as safe sex because none of them are a hundred percentage effective.

      Condoms are good for stopping the spread of disease.

      ----------------------------

      The sexual revolution certainly did have consequences. Women can now have sex just like men can without worrying about pregnancy. Let's keep it that way.

      B:

      Why is that true?

      --------------------

      After all, for some women, pregnancy comes with a lot of shame. For others, it might not come with shame. As you mentioned, there are plenty of pregnant high school students. However, for any woman who feels the shame or discrimination of being pregnant, avoiding pregnancy should be an option for her.

      B:

      Would you apply that reasoning to drinking and driving, or using a gun to shoot people? These two events have consequences, and yet people still do them. Why should sex and pregnancy not be treated in the same way. Someone can die in all of these situations?

      ------------------------------------

      It is preferable that she use proper protection because proper protection is why the whole sexual revolution even started in the first place, but she is going to need an emergency plan just in case.

      B:

      What you are telling me that females haven’t learned during the decades when I was having sex. I have three children during marriage, and none outside of marriage.

      Your view of the sexual revolution is mixed with the drugs, and sex.

      You want gun owners to be responsible, but you don’t trust them so you want to limit their access to guns. You think that all gun owners have the will to kill, but you are ok with giving that power to women and abortion. What is a third trimester abortion?

      Again, I will say it again, these abortions are probably saving the country from creating more alcohol, drug abusers and orphans, or at least neglected children. And these babies won’t have any equal opportunity, or equal rights.

      BTW

      The Declaration of Independence was a PR document meant for the Bristish.

      Because, even the constitution didn’t believe it.

      “All Men are Created Equal”

      First, Men doesn’t mean mankind which would have included women, or blacks.

      Second, it is obvious that this is not a true statement, as there is no equality when people are born. Some are sick, some are in good homes, some are in poor or homeless, etc.

      Thanks

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      I think it is okay to throw out the opinion of four justices because the constitution and centuries of precedent state that we follow the majority opinion and not the dissenting opinion. It works this way for Trump's controversial travel ban, where the ban is considered legal because only four justices were against the ban. It works this way for the 2000 election Florida recount case, where there was no recount because only four justices wanted one. It works this way for Miranda vs Arizona, where police must tell people they have a right to remain silent because only four justices did not think police had to tell criminals their rights. It works this way for Roe vs Wade, where the government must stay out of someone's decision to have an abortion because only four justices were against making abortions a constitutional right. It works this way for a whole host of SCOTUS decisions. Essentially, it is okay to dismiss the dissenting opinion because that is the current law of the land.

      You are correct in saying that I am focused on the abortion aspect of the rape question. The whole reason I posed the question to you about what constitutes as rape was to bring it back to abortions. I am simply trying to tell you that more women would be claiming to have been raped if that were the only way for them to get a federally or state funded abortion, which means your tax dollars could be going to abortions that are performed under the assumption that a woman was raped, even though she was not actually raped. I was simply wondering if you were okay with this situation or if you would want to find a way to ensure that your tax dollars (especially your state tax dollars) did not go to those types of abortions. I agree that there are better ways to handle rape cases, but it is mostly irrelevant to the question that I am posing to you. I also agree that clinics perform plenty of abortions that have nothing to do with rape, but my question is about the 32,000 women who are impregnated against their will and about what you would think if that number wrongfully rose as a result of more severe abortion restrictions.

      I understand that all the other abortions are somewhat more controversial, especially since, as you say, the woman alone is responsible. I think that both men and women should be responsible for ensuring that they are using protection, but I guess you think the woman alone is responsible. I say that a woman should not be punished with an unwanted pregnancy just because her partner was negligent with proper condom use, but you say that a woman alone should be punished, while a partner should still probably get some sort of say in what her decision is with regard to terminating the pregnancy. While some women are admittedly engaging in irresponsible behaviors, others are not. In fact, the majority of women who get an abortion have not had a prior abortion, but I am not going to discount the 45% of abortions that are performed on women who have already had a previous abortion. I agree that society would benefit if these people were more responsible. According to pure statistics, a good way to decrease the number of unintended pregnancies is to stop teaching that abstinence is the only option. People are going to have sex. Teach them about birth control. Give them access to birth control and condoms. The sexual revolution certainly did have consequences. Women can now have sex just like men can without worrying about pregnancy. Let's keep it that way. After all, for some women, pregnancy comes with a lot of shame. For others, it might not come with shame. As you mentioned, there are plenty of pregnant high school students. However, for any woman who feels the shame or discrimination of being pregnant, avoiding pregnancy should be an option for her. It is preferable that she use proper protection because proper protection is why the whole sexual revolution even started in the first place, but she is going to need an emergency plan just in case.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      Brad Masters 

      2 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      That is not how the courts work. Brown vs Board of Education was also controversial, but I do think that desegregating public schools is both unconstitutional and generally a bad idea. Miranda vs Arizona was a 5-4 ruling, where the courts decided that criminals must be informed of their right to remain silent before interrogations. However, it is now generally accepted today that it is unconstitutional for police to use self-incriminating evidence if criminals were unaware of their rights. Likewise, Roe vs Wade is controversial and it is a 5-4 decision. Since the decision, support for Roe vs Wade has gone up. According to the most recent polls, only about 30% of people disagree with it and I am willing to bet that most of those people disagree with it on religious grounds, which is not a constitutional reason to disagree with it.

      B:

      The fact is that today, Roe v Wade is very controversial and why would you think that it is ok to throw away the opinion of 4 or the 9 jurists. Especially when you are deciding what will be the law of the land. The SC job is to really now make decisions because that is like making law, and that is why we have congress.

      It would be better to have no SCOTUS decision than a bad one.

      --------------------------------

      Most medical tests around rape require relatively immediate action, but it takes around two weeks to find out if you are pregnant. By this time, it is usually too late for extensive medical evaluations to determine rape, especially if all minor wounds have healed. Additionally, lacerations are not always present, especially in cases of emotional coercion. I know that it may only make up 1% of cases, but if rape became one of the only instances where abortions were allowed, then many more people might be making claims about rape and I just don't think there is an easy way of verifying these claims. We both already know that the system around rape is a bit of a mess.

      B:

      You don't seem to understand what I said about Rape as a crime. You are focused on abortion, but the real problem is the Rape. If Rape was replaced by aggravated assault there would not be the loop holds and stigma of the criminal trial.

      .....

      ------Number of women in the US impregnated against their will each year in the U.S. as a result of rape: 32,000

      ------Number of states in which rapists can sue for custody and visitation: 31

      Estimated number of unintended pregnancies averted by Planned Parenthood

      contraceptive services each year:

      515,000

      Estimated number of abortions averted by Planned Parenthood contraceptive services each year:

      216,000

      What about these 515,000 abortions. That is the issue, not Rape for abortions?

      ----------------

      A man may not be able to walk away from supporting the child, but he can walk away from the nine months of pregnancy. As I said, the pregnancy itself can be extremely difficult, especially if you are carrying a child that you do not want.

      B:

      And those abortions not resulting from rape or pregnancy complications is a problem solely for which the women is responsible.

      It is negligence of the women. And especially on the ones that have it done multiple times. Oops is not a good reason for that.

      Again, we the people are lucky that these women aborted, but that is not the issue here.

      -------------------------

      No man ever has to experience it, but women do. I am differentiating between unwanted pregnancies and unwanted parenthood. They are albeit related, but they are too separate situations and abortions are the only way to solve an unwanted to pregnancy

      B:

      Same answer

      ------------------

      . I am aware that parenthood requires more time and responsibility than pregnancy, but pregnancy also requires time and responsibility. Again, it also requires women to face discrimination and even shame if they are younger. This experience is something that men do not go through.

      B:

      This isn't the 20th century, there is no real shame today. There are many pregnant high school students even going to their prom.

      The responsibility that was important is the responsibility of having sex and the problem is pregnancy for failing that responsibility.

      -------------------------------------

      You are right in saying that unwanted children are generally not the most productive members of society. According to Freakonomics, they have a higher chance of being murderers. I am not sure if that is true or not, but I am willing to acknowledge that they place burdens are lower income families who cannot adequately raise them, especially if these families are struggling to support already existing children. However, you seem to harbor the notion that women who get abortions are somehow irresponsible because they had unprotected sex. I am sure you know that protection sometimes fails. Condoms have a 98% success rate per year of use, which means that ten years of sexual activity would give you a 20% chance of an unexpected pregnancy. To be sure, anyone who is sexually active for ten years should probably consider IUDs and other forms of birth control to eliminate any risks, but my point is that a perfectly responsible adult can still end up with an unexpected pregnancy. The chances are low, but there are millions of sexually active people.

      B:

      Yes, and those people having sexually active people. It wasn't society that failed them, they failed themselves. The sexual revolution has consequences, and unwanted pregnancy is at the top of that list.

      ----------------------------------------

      Only a very small percentage of those people will be impacted by birth control failure, but a small percentage is still relatively large quantity of people who will need an emergency plan. Obviously, repeatedly getting abortions may be a sign that of irresponsible behavior, which is why getting an adequate sexual education is probably a good solution. Luckily, the federal government funds Planned Parenthood's comprehensive sexual education program, which has decreased the abortion rate in regions that have utilized this program. Similar sexual education plans have resulted in similar results.

      B:

      Once again, there are many 5 time graduates of the Betty Ford Clinic, and there are too many that can't stop repeating the same mistake. That is why we have AA and other organizations to try and deal with the temptation on a daily basis.

      My point is not based on religion, it is based on the cry of constitutional right. And the 14th amendments has been misused to get all sorts of pseudo rights blessed by SCOTUS, and the Abortion is one of them.

      Pregnancy should be treated like DUI and when someone gets killed in a DUI the law imputes intent, and charges that person with a homicide. They didn't have any intention of hurting anyone, and they didn't even have to have the intention to get drunk. Nevertheless, they are treated by the law as if they had.

      Why is unwanted pregnancy any different?

    • promisem profile image

      Scott S Bateman 

      2 months ago

      I believe too many debates in this country are either / or arguments that insist on a single winning faction. Real life is not that simple.

      In the case of abortion, morality and utility are both considerations in law and social policy.

      Morality presents a strong case for making third-term abortions illegal because the fetus is viable. Utility and personal choice (aborting for poverty, health reasons or an unwanted pregnancy) present a strong case for making first-term abortions legal.

      The resulting social policy, which we mostly have now, accommodates both factors. The end result is a moderate policy rather than a conservative or liberal one.

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      That is not how the courts work. Brown vs Board of Education was also controversial, but I do think that desegregating public schools is both unconstitutional and generally a bad idea. Miranda vs Arizona was a 5-4 ruling, where the courts decided that criminals must be informed of their right to remain silent before interrogations. However, it is now generally accepted today that it is unconstitutional for police to use self-incriminating evidence if criminals were unaware of their rights. Likewise, Roe vs Wade is controversial and it is a 5-4 decision. Since the decision, support for Roe vs Wade has gone up. According to the most recent polls, only about 30% of people disagree with it and I am willing to bet that most of those people disagree with it on religious grounds, which is not a constitutional reason to disagree with it.

      Most medical tests around rape require relatively immediate action, but it takes around two weeks to find out if you are pregnant. By this time, it is usually too late for extensive medical evaluations to determine rape, especially if all minor wounds have healed. Additionally, lacerations are not always present, especially in cases of emotional coercion. I know that it may only make up 1% of cases, but if rape became one of the only instances where abortions were allowed, then many more people might be making claims about rape and I just don't think there is an easy way of verifying these claims. We both already know that the system around rape is a bit of a mess.

      A man may not be able to walk away from supporting the child, but he can walk away from the nine months of pregnancy. As I said, the pregnancy itself can be extremely difficult, especially if you are carrying a child that you do not want. No man ever has to experience it, but women do. I am differentiating between unwanted pregnancies and unwanted parenthood. They are albeit related, but they are too separate situations and abortions are the only way to solve an unwanted to pregnancy. I am aware that parenthood requires more time and responsibility than pregnancy, but pregnancy also requires time and responsibility. Again, it also requires women to face discrimination and even shame if they are younger. This experience is something that men do not go through.

      You are right in saying that unwanted children are generally not the most productive members of society. According to Freakonomics, they have a higher chance of being murderers. I am not sure if that is true or not, but I am willing to acknowledge that they place burdens are lower income families who cannot adequately raise them, especially if these families are struggling to support already existing children. However, you seem to harbor the notion that women who get abortions are somehow irresponsible because they had unprotected sex. I am sure you know that protection sometimes fails. Condoms have a 98% success rate per year of use, which means that ten years of sexual activity would give you a 20% chance of an unexpected pregnancy. To be sure, anyone who is sexually active for ten years should probably consider IUDs and other forms of birth control to eliminate any risks, but my point is that a perfectly responsible adult can still end up with an unexpected pregnancy. The chances are low, but there are millions of sexually active people. Only a very small percentage of those people will be impacted by birth control failure, but a small percentage is still relatively large quantity of people who will need an emergency plan. Obviously, repeatedly getting abortions may be a sign that of irresponsible behavior, which is why getting an adequate sexual education is probably a good solution. Luckily, the federal government funds Planned Parenthood's comprehensive sexual education program, which has decreased the abortion rate in regions that have utilized this program. Similar sexual education plans have resulted in similar results.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      Brad Masters 

      2 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      If Roe v Wade was a good decision then why would it be controversial. A good decision puts to rest the issue, and traditionally 5 to 4 decisions are not good ones, for the simple reason that 4 jurists disagreed. It is a decision that becomes the law of the land, but still a bad decision.

      There are tests that can conclude rape, I didn't mention them because there can be rape without them. You ignored my legal challenge that Rape laws are the reasons that people don't testify in court, and why so many rapists defense lawyers can get them off.

      My point about the statistic is that rape, and pregnancy complications are only less than 1% of the abortions. We are talking about the other 99% and you have no justification for those rapes.

      Not a compelling argument for having the women alone abort.

      A man can walk away from the child but the law can still hold him liable and accountable for supporting that child. You really can't force people to stay together. But outside of rape and pregnancy complications, the women is the gate keeper and failing that job why should she unilaterally abort?

      Once again, I said that abortion is doing the world a favor because these children would not get an equal chance, even though you keep talking about equality.

      And like the five time graduates of the Betty Ford Clinic, when women keep aborting just erase their bad judgement then they are the ones with a problem, And maybe the answer is some program like AA.

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      Nobody is denying that Planned Parenthood receives federal funding and I'm not sure who is being deceived by which Planned Parenthood talking points. I just think that supporting a clinic that offers very affordable care to women is a good idea, whether that care does or does not include family planning services. Those family planning services are, as I said, an economically sound service. I personally think that it is also a decision that people should be able to make for themselves without government interference, but I recognize that all the people who think abortion is murder will disagree. For now, it is a constitutional right. For whatever reason, you think SCOTUS made a bad decision with Roe vs Wade. I'm not sure why the fact that this is a controversial issue makes it a bad decision. The Supreme Court interpreted the constitution as they saw fit. If you think their interpretation was invalid, I would love hear why.

      You answered my rape question with a statistic and I agree that it is difficult to figure out who is and who is not a rape victim because of various realities around sexual assault. I was hoping you could tell me exactly how a doctor can decide when it is or is not legal to give a patient a federally funded abortion on the grounds that the patient was raped. If rape should be an exception, then there should be a comprehensive way of figuring out when this exception applies.The reality is that there is no way of figuring it out. I was just curious if you had any suggestions because I certainly do not.

      Lastly, a woman alone has the right to abort because she is the one who is pregnant. She is the one who has to deal with the pregnancy. A man can walk out of the relationship and never have to deal with the pregnancy. A woman should be able to back out of the pregnancy as well. The most morally sound choice would be for both parties to stay involved. However, if we want equality, then we need to a find a way to ensure that both parties have have the choice to back out. Alternatively, you can implement a law that says men cannot ditch their pregnant partners, but no such law currently exists. If she is in a functioning relationship, then she would presumably discuss abortion with her partner before it occurs. However, if she is not in a healthy relationship, then she should be able to figure out what to do about being pregnant by herself.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      Brad Masters 

      2 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      None of your federal tax dollars pay for abortion services. According to the Hyde Amendment, federal funding cannot be used for abortions. That being said, federal taxes can still indirectly fund abortions because the federal government can still give money to clinics that perform abortion services as long as the money is not used for those abortions (unless the mother is in danger or if rape/incest was involved). Therefore, Planned Parenthood can still receive federal tax dollars; they just cannot use that money for abortions. Instead, they use private donations to fund abortions. In certain states, they can also rely on state funding. However, on a national scale, your federal tax dollars cannot legally go to abortion services. When the money goes to Planned Parenthood and similar healthcare providers, it is used to pay for things like mammograms, pap smears, STI screenings, and birth control.

      B:

      That is the issue you took out of my comment as your number 1 response?

      "

      The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has published shocking information dispelling Planned Parenthood’s deceptive talking points that federal taxpayers are not funding abortions. This information is critical, because if the American taxpayers understood what their money really goes to, they would oppose federal funding of the nation’s largest abortion provider, whose abortion market share is almost 35 percent nationally."

      -----------------

      The cy of "it's my body and I control it" simply means that women want abortions to remain legal (or even remain a constitutional right if we are talking about Roe vs Wade). As long as abortions are legal, federally funded clinics can provide family planning services in any state.

      B:

      Roe v Wade is a bad SCOTUS decision that created a constitutional right. If it was a good decision, it wouldn't be the focus of every presidential election.

      ---------------------------

      You mentioned how rape victims should be counted as an exception. The federal government already counts them as an exception since the Hyde Amendment does not apply to cases of rape. However, I am just curious about what you think counts as rape. Does the victim need to have filed charges? Does some sort of entity need to evaluate these charges to ensure that the charges should be taken seriously? Does a rape victim need to wait for an investigation to occur before receiving an abortion? What happens to rape victims who cannot come forward for various reasons? Do they not get federally funded abortions?

      B:

      The crime of rape has allowed my criminals to go free because the elements needed to convict on the crime of rape can be manipulated by good defense attorney.

      There would many more criminals in jails and prisons today if we didn't have rape laws. Assaulted, Aggravated Assault and other related crimes would have taken the stigma of rape and replaced it with being a victim as any other victim of crime. But rape brings in stigma, and an unwillingness to go to trial, whereas going to trial on an assault case wouldn't be.

      As for the rape question.

      "''The 1 percent number from the 1987 survey is really the best we have on abortions because of rape or incest,'' said Susan Tew, a spokeswoman for the institute. ''And there is no good hard data on how many pregnancies, over all, result from rape or incest.'' #1.6 Million Abortions a Year Douglas Johnson legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said that while estimates vary, ''I don't think there is any evidence for a number higher than 1 percent.''

      -------------------------

      I also want to touch on the issue of encouraging adoption. As of now, the system is wildly problematic. Children end up back in the system after being legally adopted. Before adoptions occur, there is often serious negligence. Foster care is usually terrible. Women do not take care of their bodies during a pregnancy when they know they are not keeping the baby, which means children are often born with certain health conditions. A child with these health conditions often will not end up being adopted. Additionally, I would like to note that many people who use family planning services are people of color. Unfortunately, there are many parents willing to adopt from America who actually want a white child, which is definitely a separate issue, but people of color cannot always trust an adoption agency to find a home for their child. We could put more money into resources related to adoption in order to encourage adoption, but it is actually cheaper to just fund abortions.

      B:

      Your argument here shows how pathetic the current system is and I haven't checked how many of the women are of color. I know many people that have adopted babies from China, and it is not cheap or easy and yet they have done it because the regulations and availability in the US is low. Yet, while we are at making problems like unwanted babies go away by killing them, why not kill old people, instead of hospitalizing them. It is easier and cheaper. We could kill lots of people to make things cheaper and easier. What a solution!

      ---------------------------------------

      However, I do recognize that a good adoption service could be a reasonable option for many people. I just think many younger women would still not go through with the pregnancy. After all, a pregnant teenage girl probably should not be carrying to term, especially if she values getting an education without being shamed for getting pregnant at such a young age. Additionally, even though it is technically illegal, pregnant women still face discrimination in the workplace. They are less likely to be hired and they are less likely to be given a raise. Until we can seriously crack down on all the problems associated with pregnancy discrimination, only a few women will choose adoption over abortion.

      B:

      As I said in my previous comment. abortion is probably preferable than having these babies. How many of these mothers are really healthy, not on drugs or alcohol. or actually taking care of their bodies, and using safe sex.

      Why is it that so many of the women, apparently that is the case according to you, need these abortions. Are they college candidates, and what are they going to do with the future by aborting their child.

      You also avoided commenting on why the woman alone has the right to abort. Did she do this all by herself, or did it it take two. Throughout recent history the family courts have usually given women the upper hand, but again it took two to conceive. The LGBTQ... didn't change that, maybe science may someday, but not yet.

      Equality is either absolute or it isn't equality.

      ------------------

    • Bored Student profile imageAUTHOR

      BackOfTheClassThoughts 

      2 months ago from Massachusettes

      None of your federal tax dollars pay for abortion services. According to the Hyde Amendment, federal funding cannot be used for abortions. That being said, federal taxes can still indirectly fund abortions because the federal government can still give money to clinics that perform abortion services as long as the money is not used for those abortions (unless the mother is in danger or if rape/incest was involved). Therefore, Planned Parenthood can still receive federal tax dollars; they just cannot use that money for abortions. Instead, they use private donations to fund abortions. In certain states, they can also rely on state funding. However, on a national scale, your federal tax dollars cannot legally go to abortion services. When the money goes to Planned Parenthood and similar healthcare providers, it is used to pay for things like mammograms, pap smears, STI screenings, and birth control. The cy of "it's my body and I control it" simply means that women want abortions to remain legal (or even remain a constitutional right if we are talking about Roe vs Wade). As long as abortions are legal, federally funded clinics can provide family planning services in any state.

      You mentioned how rape victims should be counted as an exception. The federal government already counts them as an exception since the Hyde Amendment does not apply to cases of rape. However, I am just curious about what you think counts as rape. Does the victim need to have filed charges? Does some sort of entity need to evaluate these charges to ensure that the charges should be taken seriously? Does a rape victim need to wait for an investigation to occur before receiving an abortion? What happens to rape victims who cannot come forward for various reasons? Do they not get federally funded abortions?

      I also want to touch on the issue of encouraging adoption. As of now, the system is wildly problematic. Children end up back in the system after being legally adopted. Before adoptions occur, there is often serious negligence. Foster care is usually terrible. Women do not take care of their bodies during a pregnancy when they know they are not keeping the baby, which means children are often born with certain health conditions. A child with these health conditions often will not end up being adopted. Additionally, I would like to note that many people who use family planning services are people of color. Unfortunately, there are many parents willing to adopt from America who actually want a white child, which is definitely a separate issue, but people of color cannot always trust an adoption agency to find a home for their child. We could put more money into resources related to adoption in order to encourage adoption, but it is actually cheaper to just fund abortions.

      However, I do recognize that a good adoption service could be a reasonable option for many people. I just think many younger women would still not go through with the pregnancy. After all, a pregnant teenage girl probably should not be carrying to term, especially if she values getting an education without being shamed for getting pregnant at such a young age. Additionally, even though it is technically illegal, pregnant women still face discrimination in the workplace. They are less likely to be hired and they are less likely to be given a raise. Until we can seriously crack down on all the problems associated with pregnancy discrimination, only a few women will choose adoption over abortion.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      Brad Masters 

      2 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      I personally think that these women that are having abortions are doing the world a favor by not cloning themselves. I don't mean the women that need the abortions because of circumstances like rape or medical emergencies. But the ones that use it instead of having protected sex.

      Secondly, why should the taxpayers have to pay for their abortions? The cry of its my body and I control it, doesn't mean that strangers have to pay for it. Nor did they do a good job of controlling their bodies.

      It is a pathetic excuse to support abortion just because the alternative is bad abortions will happen.

      With the exception of rape victims, and medical complications, why can't women put up their unwanted child for adoption. They may even get money out of it.

      Like drunk drivers that are forced by the court to go to a counseling program, this same thing could be forced upon these women, especially the one having multiple abortions. The object would be to prevent needless pregnancies. Abortions have been used as the morning after solution, but that is not a valid reason to do it.

      Forget about pro or con life, this is about responsibility. We require it when driving a car, why shouldn't we do it when creating life.

      Again, I am exempting rape victims, or medical conditions from these solutions.

      Roe v Wade tried to solve the issue, but it failed because every election the issue comes up. One of the reason for this is the failure of the SCOTUS to make the beginning of life become judicial notice.

      Another solution would be to have abortions not go beyond 4 weeks, and after that Roe v Wade would apply. Also, incentivizing adoptions would also be a good move. Today, so many of the adoptions are coming from around the world,why?

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, soapboxie.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://soapboxie.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)