[Abortion Thread] (POLL 4) A compromising position...

[San Lumen]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 4.html?amp

Nebraska governor says rape and incest victims should be forced to carry a fetus to term stating they are babies too.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

If there were no opposition to abortion from society whatsoever, it is obvious to me that plenty of women would go for abortions past 13 weeks. The only thing that compels them to get an abortion sooner, is the fact that pregnancy inherently has plenty of side effects deemed undesirable or unpleasant.

.

I was going to write a long post, but I can summarize it as this:
- People who don’t want children would continue to have abortions soon after they learn of the pregnancy. There is no reason they would decide to have then later.
- People who decide not to have children would still have abortions whenever they decide that they don’t want children.
- People whose pregnancies have gone wrong would still have abortions whenever something went wrong.
None of these groups have an incentive to have abortions later.

[Neutraligon]

If there were no opposition to abortion from society whatsoever, it is obvious to me that plenty of women would go for abortions past 13 weeks. The only thing that compels them to get an abortion sooner, is the fact that pregnancy inherently has plenty of side effects deemed undesirable or unpleasant.

.

I was going to write a long post, but I can summarize it as this:
- People who don’t want children would continue to have abortions soon after they learn of the pregnancy. There is no reason they would decide to have then later.
- People who decide not to have children would still have abortions whenever they decide that they don’t want children.
- People whose pregnancies have gone wrong would still have abortions whenever something went wrong.
None of these groups have an incentive to have abortions later.

That and...pregnancy tends to be ...uncomfortable. Why wait while that burden just increases?

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

.

I was going to write a long post, but I can summarize it as this:
- People who don’t want children would continue to have abortions soon after they learn of the pregnancy. There is no reason they would decide to have then later.
- People who decide not to have children would still have abortions whenever they decide that they don’t want children.
- People whose pregnancies have gone wrong would still have abortions whenever something went wrong.
None of these groups have an incentive to have abortions later.

That and...pregnancy tends to be ...uncomfortable. Why wait while that burden just increases?

that was basically my point. people would have no reason to be having abortions later.

[Godular]

I'm just going to call it like it is. Sex with the opposite sex is consent to a pregnancy possibly happening, if neither of you are sterile and if neither took any precautions beforehand like contraceptives. And it wasn't a rape. Like how people who drive a car, consent to taking on the risk that they'll be in a car crash.

What else did you really expect would happen? You can't reasonably complain if you still did it at the end of the day.

A person can acknowledge the risks inherent to an action, but that does not mean that they should be automatically be precluded from remedy if those risks are borne through. This line of logic is one of the worst that you could employ. It's very similar to saying that a woman wearing form-fitting pants is consenting to being groped, if not worse. Hopefully this will offer some explanation as to why we find such an argument to be utterly repulsive.

[Mutualist Chaos]

I'm just going to call it like it is. Sex with the opposite sex is consent to a pregnancy possibly happening, if neither of you are sterile and if neither took any precautions beforehand like contraceptives. And it wasn't a rape. Like how people who drive a car, consent to taking on the risk that they'll be in a car crash.

Congratulations, you've proved the exact opposite of what you set out to. Automobile insurance is one of the ways society mitigates the risks of car crashes, by funding a mechanism to pay for repairs, vehicle replacement, and medical bills for those who have been in a crash. Virtually everyone who can afford car insurance has it, and many states even require it as a condition of driving. In the analogy you're making, abortion is car insurance, and by prohibiting it you're actively trying to destroy people's lives in the event they get in a crash.

(Edit: insurance is risk mitigation. Risk reduction constitutes things like maintenance and inspection, safety features, clean windshields and functional headlights, etc. That is, contraception in this analogy)

[Godular]

I'm just going to call it like it is. Sex with the opposite sex is consent to a pregnancy possibly happening, if neither of you are sterile and if neither took any precautions beforehand like contraceptives. And it wasn't a rape. Like how people who drive a car, consent to taking on the risk that they'll be in a car crash.

Congratulations, you've proved the exact opposite of what you set out to. Automobile insurance is one of the ways society mitigates the risks of car crashes, by funding a mechanism to pay for repairs, vehicle replacement, and medical bills for those who have been in a crash. Virtually everyone who can afford car insurance has it, and many states even require it as a condition of driving. In the analogy you're making, abortion is car insurance, and by prohibiting it you're actively trying to destroy people's lives in the event they get in a crash.

(Edit: insurance is risk mitigation. Risk reduction constitutes things like maintenance and inspection, safety features, clean windshields and functional headlights, etc. That is, contraception in this analogy)

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

[Old Hope]

Congratulations, you've proved the exact opposite of what you set out to. Automobile insurance is one of the ways society mitigates the risks of car crashes, by funding a mechanism to pay for repairs, vehicle replacement, and medical bills for those who have been in a crash. Virtually everyone who can afford car insurance has it, and many states even require it as a condition of driving. In the analogy you're making, abortion is car insurance, and by prohibiting it you're actively trying to destroy people's lives in the event they get in a crash.

(Edit: insurance is risk mitigation. Risk reduction constitutes things like maintenance and inspection, safety features, clean windshields and functional headlights, etc. That is, contraception in this analogy)

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

...but that would be true.

[Godular]

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

...but that would be true.

I'm sure the car manufacturers would have concerns with that approach.

[Spirit of Hope]

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

...but that would be true.

Strictly speaking that is true, but that isn't useful advice. Why? Because people will drive, to work, for work, for fun, the reason doesn't mater.

If all you do is tell people to not drive, and don't teach them how to drive or safety features to use while driving, then all you are going to do is get more people killed as they drive in unsafe manners without using proper safety measures.

The best way to teach people about the dangers of driving is to point out that driving has risks, how to drive safely, and what safety equipment to use while driving.

The same goes for sex. People will have sex. It is better to teach people how to have safe sex than to try and stop people having sex by keeping them ignorant. Ignorant people will still have sex, they just won't do it in a safe manner, leading to the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

...but that would be true.

if you don’t want allergies, just don’t breathe!

[Godular]

...but that would be true.

if you don’t want allergies, just don’t breathe!

If you don't want to die, don't be born! DUH!

[Saiwania]

I've finished my research on the matter, and I've determined that I should move to be in favor of abortion broadly speaking, because it helps more than hurts White America, which is what I'm born into and have a personal stake in. Sort of like how Sweet Johnson is loyal to Grove Street because that is what he was born into and grew up in in that fictional universe.

The Roe v Wade ruling the pro-life camp clutches their pearls over, isn't even that extreme in terms of allowing abortion. It stated that third trimester pregnancy abortions could be banned by states that chose to but that states couldn't do anything about first trimester abortions which is when an abortion should be done anyways, if there is going to be one.

[Neutraligon]

I've finished my research on the matter, and I've determined that I should move to be in favor of abortion broadly speaking, because it helps more than hurts White America, which is what I'm born into and have a personal stake in. Sort of like how Sweet Johnson is loyal to Grove Street because that is what he was born into and grew up in in that fictional universe.

The Roe v Wade ruling the pro-life camp clutches their pearls over, isn't even that extreme in terms of allowing abortion. It stated that third trimester pregnancy abortions could be banned by states that chose to but that states couldn't do anything about first trimester abortions which is when an abortion should be done anyways, if there is going to be one.

Why do you think women have third-trimester abortions?

[Katganistan]

They sure as hell are going to get their second Civil War if they keep this up, because women will not stand for being treated like chattel today.

Women are not going to be treated like chattel if Roe is overturn… and there isn’t going to be a civil war over it.

No?
Does the government control MALE reproduction?

Women and girls should have abortion as an unalienable human right. Imagine a law saying a man wasn't allowed to ejaculate unless for procreation. Thats the same kind of nonsensical law anti-abortion is. Anti-abortion laws are a misogyny law and they are a religion law, meant to push puritanical and religious views on to women.

No, it's not quite the same. Through the entire process, a man doesn't have any developing lifeform where as the woman does. Even under Roe v Wade, most people don't want unlimited abortion for the entire 9 months. It initially set up a trimester standard where in first trimester, states can't ban or interfere with abortion. Second trimester, states could have health standards or regulation but couldn't ban it entirely. Whilst with third trimester, states could ban abortion if they so choose.

It's objective fact that late enough into a pregnancy, a child has sufficiently developed as to physically exist in the womb and plenty of people have a problem with going about killing it in that case.

And?
It's not like most people who want freedom of choice don't agree that post 28 weeks, abortions should be only to save the mother's life or because the fetus is not viable.

I'm just going to call it like it is. Sex with the opposite sex is consent to a pregnancy possibly happening, if neither of you are sterile and if neither took any precautions beforehand like contraceptives. And it wasn't a rape. Like how people who drive a car, consent to taking on the risk that they'll be in a car crash.

What else did you really expect would happen? You can't reasonably complain if you still did it at the end of the day.

And rape victims? Incest victims?
I see plenty of men complaining that they should not be held accountable with child support for a child they didn't want or plan on -- why should a woman be forced to have a child she doesn't want or plan on?

[New haven america]

Women are not going to be treated like chattel if Roe is overturn… and there isn’t going to be a civil war over it.

No?
Does the government control MALE reproduction?

Alito's trying to ban male birth control and vasectomies. He had plans for it in the draft.

So yes. Also, before the birth control ruling, men needed a prescription to buy condoms.

[Katganistan]

.

I was going to write a long post, but I can summarize it as this:
- People who don’t want children would continue to have abortions soon after they learn of the pregnancy. There is no reason they would decide to have then later.
- People who decide not to have children would still have abortions whenever they decide that they don’t want children.
- People whose pregnancies have gone wrong would still have abortions whenever something went wrong.
None of these groups have an incentive to have abortions later.

That and...pregnancy tends to be ...uncomfortable. Why wait while that burden just increases?

Not just uncomfortable. Dangerous.

I am all for supporting women who decide they wish to take the health risks/financial stresses/career derailing.
I am also all for supporting those who decide they'd rather not risk death/damaging their health/finances/career.

[Katganistan]

No?
Does the government control MALE reproduction?

Alito's trying to ban male birth control and vasectomies. He had plans for it in the draft.

So yes. Also, before the birth control ruling, men needed a prescription to buy condoms.

What 'birth control ruling'? When did they need a prescription for condoms? Source?

[New haven america]

Alito's trying to ban male birth control and vasectomies. He had plans for it in the draft.

So yes. Also, before the birth control ruling, men needed a prescription to buy condoms.

1. What 'birth control ruling'? 2. When did they need a prescription for condoms? 3. Source?

1. Griswold v. Connecticut legalized open access to non-prescribed and non-government restricted birth control for men and women. It's also the ruling that led to the invention of Constitutional Privacy, of which Roe, Loving, and Obgerfell were all ruled on because of.
2. 1873-1964
3. Comstock Act

You don't understand the full scope of what SCOTUS and the GOP are trying to do. (They're also going after gay marriage, Alito had plans in the draft for that too)

[Saiwania]

The rape and incest arguments when it comes to abortion, is perhaps asinine. It doesn't look like that logistically speaking, that there is such a thing or way it can be implemented. We have to recognize that abortion is an all or nothing issue that people have to choose between.

What does getting an abortion mean if the exception is for rape or incest? It means proving to your local magistrate or court that you being raped occurred. This means a long process of accusation, investigation, trial, and settlement and so on to play out. Legal system and processes are glacially slow to play out and can easily be dragged out for 9 months or longer.

Seeking justice from the court for this accomplishes nothing whilst in the meantime, you're getting stuck with a rape baby or pregnancy. And certain people who want an abortion no matter what, will fake or falsify evidence to say they were raped just to get an abortion if that is what it takes.

[San Lumen]

The rape and incest arguments when it comes to abortion, is perhaps asinine. It doesn't look like that logistically speaking, that there is such a thing or way it can be implemented. We have to recognize that abortion is an all or nothing issue that people have to choose between.

What does getting an abortion mean if the exception is for rape or incest? It means proving to your local magistrate or court that you being raped occurred. This means a long process of accusation, investigation, trial, and settlement and so on to play out. Legal system and processes are glacially slow to play out and can easily be dragged out for 9 months or longer.

Seeking justice from the court for this accomplishes nothing whilst in the meantime, you're getting stuck with a rape baby or pregnancy. And certain people who want an abortion no matter what, will fake or falsify evidence to say they were raped just to get an abortion if that is what it takes.

How is it possible you always have the absolute worst thing to say? Why should a rape or incest victim have to carry a child to term they dont want?

[Saiwania]

How is it possible you always have the absolute worst thing to say? Why should a rape or incest victim have to carry a child to term they dont want?

If you haven't been keeping track, I'm now more in favor of abortion being available to women, because without it, all indications are that the non-white minority groups in the US will expand even faster than now, and that it is a worse state of affairs overall, for the White population in the US for abortion to be illegal.

But I also acknowledge or recognize where the "no exceptions" crowd is coming from on the pro life side of the debate. They're not nutcases as is popularly believed. They figured out that the exceptions aren't logistically practical enough to be worth including. People will wind up wasting too much time navigating court processes if abortion is restricted too much but are trying to prove that they're eligible for a narrow exception carved out.

Abortion is probably all or nothing. If abortion is allowed at any point during pregnancy. Allowing it early favors allowing it for all trimesters of pregnancy. Like how restricting it favors no exceptions, else the restrictions fall apart.

[Space Squid]

How is it possible you always have the absolute worst thing to say? Why should a rape or incest victim have to carry a child to term they dont want?

If you haven't been keeping track, I'm now more in favor of abortion being available to women, because without it, all indications are that the non-white minority groups in the US will expand even faster than now, and that it is a worse state of affairs overall, for the White population in the US for abortion to be illegal.

But I also acknowledge or recognize where the "no exceptions" crowd is coming from on the pro life side of the debate. They're not nutcases as is popularly believed. They figured out that the exceptions aren't logistically practical enough to be worth including. People will wind up wasting too much time navigating court processes if abortion is restricted too much but are trying to prove that they're eligible for a narrow exception carved out.

Abortion is probably all or nothing. If abortion is allowed at any point during pregnancy. Allowing it early favors allowing it for all trimesters of pregnancy. Like how restricting it favors no exceptions, else the restrictions fall apart.

Well. When a Nazi confidently describes someone as "not nutcases" it must be true.

[Thepeopl]

And comprehensive sex education. Amusingly, if we were to tie abstinence-only sex education to this analogy, it would be functionally equivalent to telling people that the best way to avoid a car accident is to not drive at all.

...but that would be true.

No.
Many car accidents involve other traffic participants like pedestrians, bicycles or buildings with ppl in it.

https://youtu.be/Ra_0DgnJ1uQ

It might be analogous for rape and incest

[Concejos Unidos]

What does getting an abortion mean if the exception is for rape or incest? It means proving to your local magistrate or court that you being raped occurred. This means a long process of accusation, investigation, trial, and settlement and so on to play out. Legal system and processes are glacially slow to play out and can easily be dragged out for 9 months or longer.

Seeking justice from the court for this accomplishes nothing whilst in the meantime, you're getting stuck with a rape baby or pregnancy. And certain people who want an abortion no matter what, will fake or falsify evidence to say they were raped just to get an abortion if that is what it takes.

there's a big difference between convicting a specific person of rape and simply proving that a rape occurred. One is far more simple.