Abortion: Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

[Luminesa]

Well, they sort of exist, that is the abortion fails to kill the fetus. That is there are those fetuses who survive the abortion and go on to be birthed.

And there are abortions where the foetus is meant to live... Strictly speaking, a cesarean section is an abortion )at least if it is performed prior to the due date)...

I've never heard of it phrased that way...hmmm...

But yeah, I've heard of abortions failing. It can fail like any other surgical procedure. And, of course, you have sickos like Kermit Gosnell who prefer to kill infants out-of-womb, anyway.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

And there are abortions where the foetus is meant to live... Strictly speaking, a cesarean section is an abortion )at least if it is performed prior to the due date)...

I've never heard of it phrased that way...hmmm...

But yeah, I've heard of abortions failing. It can fail like any other surgical procedure. And, of course, you have sickos like Kermit Gosnell who prefer to kill infants out-of-womb, anyway.

This isn't about Gosnell. He is a moot point, stop bringing him up.

Page 420, blaze it

[Godular]

I've never heard of it phrased that way...hmmm...

But yeah, I've heard of abortions failing. It can fail like any other surgical procedure. And, of course, you have sickos like Kermit Gosnell who prefer to kill infants out-of-womb, anyway.

This isn't about Gosnell. He is a moot point, stop bringing him up.

Page 420, blaze it

I've got a big damn post ready for when this'n hits 500

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

This isn't about Gosnell. He is a moot point, stop bringing him up.

Page 420, blaze it

I've got a big damn post ready for when this'n hits 500

We have 80 pages for someone to fuck it up.

[Godular]

I've got a big damn post ready for when this'n hits 500

We have 80 pages for someone to fuck it up.

I mean as an OP. So I'm kinda hovering like a vulture.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

We have 80 pages for someone to fuck it up.

I mean as an OP. So I'm kinda hovering like a vulture.

OoOOOoOOooOOOoh.

[Wallenburg]

Why are there so many men in the pro-choice movement? Care to tell?

Because I take no pleasure in denying people their fundamental rights.

[BK117B2]

Neither does an abortion. The rights of the fetus end when they transgress on the woman's.

Yet her rights infringe those of a future human. People honestly need to learn other methods of sex and how to harness contrceptives properly.

'Potential future humans' have rights once the description finally shortens itself to just 'human'. Until that time, they have 'potential future rights' which mean about as much as 'potential future contract' or 'potential future law' in the context of the current world

[Fremont Forest]

It's not just an inconvenience, it's a nine-month roller coaster of pain and discomfort.

It is still an inconvenience. The word inconvenience means, "trouble or difficulty caused to one's personal requirements or comfort." Given that pregnancy causes pain and discomfort to women, it could be called an "inconvenience."

By that definition getting shot is an "inconvenience"

[Dyakovo]

And there are abortions where the foetus is meant to live... Strictly speaking, a cesarean section is an abortion )at least if it is performed prior to the due date)...

I've never heard of it phrased that way...hmmm...

A medical abortion is a medical procedure meant to terminate a pregnancy early... A cesarean section performed prior to the due date is a medical procedure meant to terminate the pregnancy early...
*shrugs*
It fits even if you'll probably never hear a doctor describe a C-section as an abortion...

[Geilinor]

If you valued us as people you wouldn't strip our rights to our own organs. But you don't value us as people. The second we become pregnant, we becoming nothing more than cattle to you. Our rights, our wants, our lives, our very being mean nothing to you and you only give a fuck about the zygote invading our body.

Then why are there so many women within the pro-life movement? One of Right to Life's senators is female.

That doesn't make it not a women's rights issue. Some women are against choices for other women.

[MERIZoC]

Then why are there so many women within the pro-life movement? One of Right to Life's senators is female.

That doesn't make it not a women's rights issue. Some women are against choices for other women.

Yup. Phyllis Schlafely was one of the most outspoken advocates against ERA.

[Northern Europia]

Personally, I'm against abortion, but I don't think it's my or the governments responsibility to tell others what they can or cannot do in their personal lives.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

I dunno, care to tell?

Some women understand that the unborn have the right to life too.

And why are there so many women in the pro-choice movement?

Why are there so many men in the pro-choice movement? Care to tell?

And what's the deal with airline food?

How is this even vaguely related to this discussion?

IIRC there are 77% of pro choices that are men.

[Confederate Ramenia]

In terms of morality, I believe abortion is wrong in the vast majority of cases. But I think it should be legal in the US, not necessarily other countries.

[Godular]

In terms of morality, I believe abortion is wrong in the vast majority of cases. But I think it should be legal in the US, not necessarily other countries.

Why the US but not others?

[Rock Lobsters]

Abortions for ALLLLLL! In all honesty, this shouldn't be such a major political issue since its the women's right to do whatever see wants with her body good or bad. But if it's bad, consequences follow according to the nation's laws.

[Nazi Flower Power]

It is still an inconvenience. The word inconvenience means, "trouble or difficulty caused to one's personal requirements or comfort." Given that pregnancy causes pain and discomfort to women, it could be called an "inconvenience."

By that definition getting shot is an "inconvenience"

Getting shot is very inconvenient, yes.

[Nature-Spirits]

In terms of morality, I believe abortion is wrong in the vast majority of cases. But I think it should be legal in the US, not necessarily other countries.

What? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What makes the US so special? Why should someone be able to get an abortion in the US but not in Canada, or the UK, or in China, or Brazil, or Germany, or South Africa?

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

In terms of morality, I believe abortion is wrong in the vast majority of cases. But I think it should be legal in the US, not necessarily other countries.

What? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What makes the US so special? Why should someone be able to get an abortion in the US but not in Canada, or the UK, or in China, or Brazil, or Germany, or South Africa?

Only American women are worthy of freedom. /s

[Redsection]

Well abortion does cause an increase in cancer.


( Thanks Conservapedia. )

This past August in Minneapolis, Patrick Carroll, director of the Pension and Population Research Institute of London, presented a paper to the largest gathering of statisticians in North America. He showed that abortion was the best predictor of breast cancer in Britain. Breast cancer is the only cancer in Britain which has its highest incidence and mortality rate among the upper rather than lower social classes. Abortion before a full term pregnancy and late pregnancy were the best explanations for this incidence. He also found that there had been a 70% increase risk of breast cancer between 1971 and 2002 and that for women between 50 and 54 years of age incidence was highly correlated with abortion.
Demographic evidence of abortion causing breast cancer includes the following. Breast cancer rates are far lower in Western countries that prohibited abortion than in those that promoted it. Ireland, which virtually bans abortion, reportedly has a lifetime rate of breast cancer of only 1 in 13, nearly half the rate of 1 in 7.5 in the United States.[51] The rate of breast cancer increases steadily as one travels from Ireland, where abortion is illegal, to Northern Ireland, where abortion is legal but rare, to England, where abortion is common. [52]

In Romania, abortion was illegal under two decades of rule by the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, and the country enjoyed one of the lowest breast cancer rates in the entire world during that time, far lower than comparable Western countries. Romania's breast cancer rate was an astounding one-sixth the rate of the United States.[53] But after the execution of Ceausescu on Christmas Day, 1989, Romania has taken the opposite approach, embracing abortion to the point that Romania now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world.[54] One Romanian observer decried, "The liberalization of abortions in Romania in 1990, the significant increase of the number of abortions at relatively short intervals, determined a rise in the incidence of breast and uterine cervix cancer in my country."[55]

Studies on rats, which are an accepted method for identifying causes of cancer in humans, further confirm that abortion does indeed increase the risk of breast cancer. As Dr. Joel Brind observed, "Researchers also widely admit to the biological plausibility of abortion as an independent cause of breast cancer, through the estrogen-mediated stimulation of breast growth in the absence of differentiation. This was demonstrated experimentally in rats in the landmark experiments of Russo and Russo."[56] Additional scientific information on the abortion-breast cancer link is available at BCPInstitute.org.

An expert (Dr. Lynn Rosenberg) hired to defend abortion felt compelled to admit, under cross-examination, that a woman increases her risk for breast cancer by having an abortion compared to carrying her pregnancy to childbirth:[57]

Question by the attorney: 'So in other words, a woman who finds herself pregnant at age 15 will have a higher breast cancer risk if she chooses to abort that pregnancy, than if she carries the pregnancy to term, [is that] correct?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'Probably, yes.'
Question: 'Looking at that another way, let's compare two women. Let's say both got pregnant at age 15-- one terminates the pregnancy, but the other carries the pregnancy to term. And both women go on to get married and have two kids, say, at age 30 and age 35. Is the risk of breast cancer higher for the woman who had an abortion at age 15 or the woman who had a baby at age 15, all other things being equal?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'It's probably higher for the one who had an abortion at age 15.'

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Well abortion does cause an increase in cancer.


( Thanks Conservapedia. )

This past August in Minneapolis, Patrick Carroll, director of the Pension and Population Research Institute of London, presented a paper to the largest gathering of statisticians in North America. He showed that abortion was the best predictor of breast cancer in Britain. Breast cancer is the only cancer in Britain which has its highest incidence and mortality rate among the upper rather than lower social classes. Abortion before a full term pregnancy and late pregnancy were the best explanations for this incidence. He also found that there had been a 70% increase risk of breast cancer between 1971 and 2002 and that for women between 50 and 54 years of age incidence was highly correlated with abortion.
Demographic evidence of abortion causing breast cancer includes the following. Breast cancer rates are far lower in Western countries that prohibited abortion than in those that promoted it. Ireland, which virtually bans abortion, reportedly has a lifetime rate of breast cancer of only 1 in 13, nearly half the rate of 1 in 7.5 in the United States.[51] The rate of breast cancer increases steadily as one travels from Ireland, where abortion is illegal, to Northern Ireland, where abortion is legal but rare, to England, where abortion is common. [52]

In Romania, abortion was illegal under two decades of rule by the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, and the country enjoyed one of the lowest breast cancer rates in the entire world during that time, far lower than comparable Western countries. Romania's breast cancer rate was an astounding one-sixth the rate of the United States.[53] But after the execution of Ceausescu on Christmas Day, 1989, Romania has taken the opposite approach, embracing abortion to the point that Romania now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world.[54] One Romanian observer decried, "The liberalization of abortions in Romania in 1990, the significant increase of the number of abortions at relatively short intervals, determined a rise in the incidence of breast and uterine cervix cancer in my country."[55]

Studies on rats, which are an accepted method for identifying causes of cancer in humans, further confirm that abortion does indeed increase the risk of breast cancer. As Dr. Joel Brind observed, "Researchers also widely admit to the biological plausibility of abortion as an independent cause of breast cancer, through the estrogen-mediated stimulation of breast growth in the absence of differentiation. This was demonstrated experimentally in rats in the landmark experiments of Russo and Russo."[56] Additional scientific information on the abortion-breast cancer link is available at BCPInstitute.org.

An expert (Dr. Lynn Rosenberg) hired to defend abortion felt compelled to admit, under cross-examination, that a woman increases her risk for breast cancer by having an abortion compared to carrying her pregnancy to childbirth:[57]

Question by the attorney: 'So in other words, a woman who finds herself pregnant at age 15 will have a higher breast cancer risk if she chooses to abort that pregnancy, than if she carries the pregnancy to term, [is that] correct?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'Probably, yes.'
Question: 'Looking at that another way, let's compare two women. Let's say both got pregnant at age 15-- one terminates the pregnancy, but the other carries the pregnancy to term. And both women go on to get married and have two kids, say, at age 30 and age 35. Is the risk of breast cancer higher for the woman who had an abortion at age 15 or the woman who had a baby at age 15, all other things being equal?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'It's probably higher for the one who had an abortion at age 15.'

Abortion has absolutely no link to cancer of any sort. Conservapedia isn't a source.

[Redsection]

Well abortion does cause an increase in cancer.


( Thanks Conservapedia. )

This past August in Minneapolis, Patrick Carroll, director of the Pension and Population Research Institute of London, presented a paper to the largest gathering of statisticians in North America. He showed that abortion was the best predictor of breast cancer in Britain. Breast cancer is the only cancer in Britain which has its highest incidence and mortality rate among the upper rather than lower social classes. Abortion before a full term pregnancy and late pregnancy were the best explanations for this incidence. He also found that there had been a 70% increase risk of breast cancer between 1971 and 2002 and that for women between 50 and 54 years of age incidence was highly correlated with abortion.
Demographic evidence of abortion causing breast cancer includes the following. Breast cancer rates are far lower in Western countries that prohibited abortion than in those that promoted it. Ireland, which virtually bans abortion, reportedly has a lifetime rate of breast cancer of only 1 in 13, nearly half the rate of 1 in 7.5 in the United States.[51] The rate of breast cancer increases steadily as one travels from Ireland, where abortion is illegal, to Northern Ireland, where abortion is legal but rare, to England, where abortion is common. [52]

In Romania, abortion was illegal under two decades of rule by the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, and the country enjoyed one of the lowest breast cancer rates in the entire world during that time, far lower than comparable Western countries. Romania's breast cancer rate was an astounding one-sixth the rate of the United States.[53] But after the execution of Ceausescu on Christmas Day, 1989, Romania has taken the opposite approach, embracing abortion to the point that Romania now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world.[54] One Romanian observer decried, "The liberalization of abortions in Romania in 1990, the significant increase of the number of abortions at relatively short intervals, determined a rise in the incidence of breast and uterine cervix cancer in my country."[55]

Studies on rats, which are an accepted method for identifying causes of cancer in humans, further confirm that abortion does indeed increase the risk of breast cancer. As Dr. Joel Brind observed, "Researchers also widely admit to the biological plausibility of abortion as an independent cause of breast cancer, through the estrogen-mediated stimulation of breast growth in the absence of differentiation. This was demonstrated experimentally in rats in the landmark experiments of Russo and Russo."[56] Additional scientific information on the abortion-breast cancer link is available at BCPInstitute.org.

An expert (Dr. Lynn Rosenberg) hired to defend abortion felt compelled to admit, under cross-examination, that a woman increases her risk for breast cancer by having an abortion compared to carrying her pregnancy to childbirth:[57]

Question by the attorney: 'So in other words, a woman who finds herself pregnant at age 15 will have a higher breast cancer risk if she chooses to abort that pregnancy, than if she carries the pregnancy to term, [is that] correct?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'Probably, yes.'
Question: 'Looking at that another way, let's compare two women. Let's say both got pregnant at age 15-- one terminates the pregnancy, but the other carries the pregnancy to term. And both women go on to get married and have two kids, say, at age 30 and age 35. Is the risk of breast cancer higher for the woman who had an abortion at age 15 or the woman who had a baby at age 15, all other things being equal?'
Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'It's probably higher for the one who had an abortion at age 15.'

Abortion has absolutely no link to cancer of any sort. Conservapedia isn't a source.

and its not a source how. Also how are you on every thread

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Abortion has absolutely no link to cancer of any sort. Conservapedia isn't a source.

and its not a source how. Also how are you on every thread

It's not a source because it has very clear bias and no medical facts

[Mefpan]

-Conservapedia-

I must call in doubt the validity of Conservapedia as a source for anything other than inanity-induced headaches.