Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 54

Thread: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

  1. #26
    Featured Member Muyaha's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    1,431
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    I think someone already brought this up, but I'll resay it since it is most likely what will happen if abortion becomes completely illegal. By completely outlawing abortion would not push girls to run to the border to get abortions, unless these minors are reasonable close to the border, it is forcing those who should not be practicing medicine to start offering abortions in storage units, backyard sheds, etc. This cause an increase of infection 100 fold and complications from lack of techinque and sterilization. Now I'm all for parental consent for minors wanting to proceed with an abortion, just like with any medical procedure done, parents or guardians need to be consented. Some one has to take care of that person that just went thru that procedure. Abortions are not easy (either medical or surgical) these are procedures that recovery last more than a couple of days.

    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them.

  2. #27
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muyaha
    I think someone already brought this up, but I'll resay it since it is most likely what will happen if abortion becomes completely illegal. By completely outlawing abortion would not push girls to run to the border to get abortions, unless these minors are reasonable close to the border, it is forcing those who should not be practicing medicine to start offering abortions in storage units, backyard sheds, etc. This cause an increase of infection 100 fold and complications from lack of techinque and sterilization. Now I'm all for parental consent for minors wanting to proceed with an abortion, just like with any medical procedure done, parents or guardians need to be consented. Some one has to take care of that person that just went thru that procedure. Abortions are not easy (either medical or surgical) these are procedures that recovery last more than a couple of days.
    Naw - I think it will make the RU drugs more valuable to drug dealers.

    "Don't worry, I'm looking out for you babe. We can be friends after all this is done right?"

    That is just about the thinking of this country's leadership - push people away from professionals into the arms of criminals and then be surprised when people start hanging out with criminals and take their value system to heart.

  3. #28
    Featured Member Muyaha's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    1,431
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Well medical abortions are a little different than surgical. So the idea that drug dealers will push RU-486 is somewhat funny. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it would be difficult to make sure that it is completely successful. It would just cause the same types of problems as with back alley surgical abortions such as; infections, hemorrage, partial abortion, shock etc.
    First medical abortions are done up to 64 or 65 days from LMP,so around 10 weeks, which is calculated based on ultrasound measurement. After this period of time 10 weeks, surgical abortion via D+C or vacuum aspiration is a better bet.
    Second is that before RU-486 Mifepristone and Methotrexate, which stops embryo growth, is taken 24 hrs. before given Misoprostol, which causes expulsion to begin causing extreme cramping, which usually the woman is given a script for some type of pain killer vicodin or whatever. After a couple of days the woman goes back into the doc's office has an ultrasound to make sure that there are no bleeding issues, un passed material, etc. If a D+C or need a vacuum aspiration needs to be done then it will have to, if the woman is still pregnant.
    Just the way the medical abortion works, and to make sure it is sucessful would be very difficult for a woman especially farther along like 9 1/2 weeks just to take a pill and hope that it does.

    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them.

  4. #29
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    If the Pro-Choice crowd is afraid abortion will be made illegal, the answer is simple. Pass an amendment to the constitution guaranteeing the right to an abortion. That would settle the issue once and for all.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  5. #30
    Banned Katrine's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    13,855
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    If the Pro-Choice crowd is afraid abortion will be made illegal, the answer is simple. Pass an amendment to the constitution guaranteeing the right to an abortion. That would settle the issue once and for all.
    Thst would take a grass-roots effort by citizens that are both Democrat and Republican to work together for a state vote to create the amendment. And as well all know, partision politics rule these days.

    So are all of the Repubs on her automatically anti-choice because it is your party line? Living in Texas, most of the people I know ARE Republicans who do not want to see abortion become illegal........

    "Have you ever been to American wedding? Where is the vodka, where's marinated herring?" - GB
    "And do the cats give a shit? No, they do not. Why? Because they're cats."-from The Onion

    Quote Originally Posted by Mia M
    If a cupcake was tossed at me... well, I'd only be upset if it missed my mouth

  6. #31
    Banned Katrine's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    13,855
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    .....and the BEST contradiction I'm seeing on these boards is the conservative posters who want to punish the muslim world for treating their women like second class citizens, yet want to do the same to women in this country by advocating that our choice be taken away......

    "Have you ever been to American wedding? Where is the vodka, where's marinated herring?" - GB
    "And do the cats give a shit? No, they do not. Why? Because they're cats."-from The Onion

    Quote Originally Posted by Mia M
    If a cupcake was tossed at me... well, I'd only be upset if it missed my mouth

  7. #32
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Katrine
    Thst would take a grass-roots effort by citizens that are both Democrat and Republican to work together for a state vote to create the amendment. And as well all know, partision politics rule these days.

    So are all of the Repubs on her automatically anti-choice because it is your party line? Living in Texas, most of the people I know ARE Republicans who do not want to see abortion become illegal........
    I constantly hear the Pro-Choice crowd chanting that the vast majority of Americans, "support a woman's right to choose." Do they believe their own rhetoric or not?

    I don't consider myself a Republican, preferring to call myself a, keep-the-government-out-of-my-life-conservative. I could care less what either party's position is. Despite the rhetoric on both sides, most Americans, like me, have very complex feelings on the issue. Do I think the government should force a 14 year old girl who's first boyfriend got her pregnant to become a mother? No, I don't. Do I think a couple that just found out their second child is a girl and now want to abort her because they already have a girl and were really hoping for a boy should be allowed to do so? No, I don't.

    The real issue, and the issue the Supreme Court attempted to address in Roe v. Wade is this. When does society's duty to the unborn child supercede the woman's right to do what she pleases with her own body? The Pro-Life crowd insists that moment comes at conception. That "life" begins there. While that makes for a good slogan, its not true. Not every fertilized egg will implant itself in a woman's uterus and become a child. Futhermore, when first implanted, the embryo shows the same signs of "life" as an amoeba. So scientifically, that is incorrect. The Pro-Choice crowd insists that until the baby is born, society has no right to protect it. As a mother, I simply cannot go along with that. Subtle differences in kid's behavior can be detected, even in the womb. Doctors are discovering that the unborn are much more aware of their surroundings than previously thought. Medical breakthroughs are pushing back the point of, "viability" in a pregnancy. Yet everyday, there are hundreds of late-term abortions, I can't go along with that either.

    As I said in my first post, I rarely post on the abortion issue. But since I have, I'll throw in my solution. The Supreme Court should set aside Roe v. Wade and send the issue back to the states. There, the people's elected reprensentatives could decide the issue. As I said before, despite the rhetoric, most American's feelings are very complex, and I don't think they fall easily into either camp. Most state legislatures would probably steer towards the middle ground on the issue, which both sides would denounce. But isn't that the very definition of a good compromise? One that is equally despised by both sides? Then we as a society couuld move on. The Pro-Life crowd could devote themselves to helping support the mothers and any children born as a result of the compromise. The Pro-Choice crowd could spend their time educating kids on birth control to help lessen the cases that would come under the compromise law.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  8. #33
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Katrine
    .....and the BEST contradiction I'm seeing on these boards is the conservative posters who want to punish the muslim world for treating their women like second class citizens, yet want to do the same to women in this country by advocating that our choice be taken away......
    I'll assume that was directed at me and respond.

    I never said anyone should "punish" the muslim world. Hello-Kitty stated that Muslim values were consistent with American values. That is not correct and I pointed out why. Secondly, only DiscreteDancer addressed my post about a parent's right to be either consulted or informed when a medical procedure (abortion) is being performed on their child. As a mom, i consider that a dangerous precedent. If you consider my concern about that issue to be, "advocating that our choice be taken away", then I guess I am.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  9. #34
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    The real issue, and the issue the Supreme Court attempted to address in Roe v. Wade is this. When does society's duty to the unborn child supercede the woman's right to do what she pleases with her own body?
    Not exactly, but close.

    The Supreme Court should set aside Roe v. Wade and send the issue back to the states.
    The issue is clearly consitutional. At what point does the "equal protection" clause protect a "potential" life, and how far does the "liberty" and "due process" clause protect the privacy rights of the mother. (under Griswold).

    Read Sandy O'Connor's opinion in Casey:

    "Today a majority reaffirms that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment establishes "a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter,""
    http://laws.findlaw.com/us/505/833.html

    preferring to call myself a, keep-the-government-out-of-my-life-conservative.
    Exactly. Privacy and liberty. 14th amd.

  10. #35
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    "Today a majority reaffirms that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment establishes "a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter,""
    I certainly wish that the Supreme Court would be consistent in applying this legal principle !

    Also, a majority of judges agreeing on a given day does not mean the precedent is unbreakable. I'd offer up the Dred Scott one black person = 3/5ths of a white person decision as evidence (along with dozens of other possible examples) that Supreme Court decisions are open to being readily overturned by later Supreme Courts.

  11. #36
    Veteran Member Hello~Kitty's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    345
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Katrine
    .....and the BEST contradiction I'm seeing on these boards is the conservative posters who want to punish the muslim world for treating their women like second class citizens, yet want to do the same to women in this country by advocating that our choice be taken away......
    Bingo !

    It is as if it is not really about being "moral" or anything related..... for many of todays conservatives, it is seems (imo) to be more about their desire to control and exert power over others.
    Example of discrimination (Imho):

    the only prudent way to treat Islamics in the US and western europe today is along the same vein as Russians and Eastern Europeans were treated during the 'cold war' days - with some degree of suspicion warranted until proven otherwise !

    http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44590




  12. #37
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by stant
    The issue is clearly consitutional. At what point does the "equal protection" clause protect a "potential" life, and how far does the "liberty" and "due process" clause protect the privacy rights of the mother. (under Griswold).
    You obviously know a lot more about the law than I do, so I know you know that the, "right to privacy" does not appear in the 14th Amendment. Personally, that's my big problem with Roe v. Wade. It's not that I'm a bomb-throwing Pro-Lifer, I just have a problem with the Supreme Court "discovering" new rights in the constitution. I don't have time to look it up, but I know the constitution also states something like, "all rights not enumerated herein are reserved to the states, or to the people". That's one reason I say it should be a state matter. The second reason I say the issue should be handled by the states is that they could do a better job. Roe v. Wade dealt with "viability" of the fetus. Well, its been 30 years since that decision, obviously there have been tremendous advancements in care of prematurely born children. Yet because its a Supreme Court decision, nothing has changed. Lastly, I think the reason the issue remains such a divisive one to this day is the fact the the decision essentially cut off all meaniful debate. Had the supreme court sent it back to the states, I think some type of compromise would have been resolved by now.

    Read Sandy O'Connor's opinion in Casey:
    Have to fix supper. Will read it later.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  13. #38
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    You obviously know a lot more about the law than I do, so I know you know that the, "right to privacy" does not appear in the 14th Amendment.
    You're right, it isn't in the fourteenth amendment, it is in the fourth amendment.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    See that sentence The right of the people to be secure in their persons - that means "stay the fuck out of my uterus" among other things.

    What some want to do is seize control of your uterus, so you have no say over what happens in there. People can have their cars siezed, etc. and that is pretty bad - but when the government seizes your body parts - that is something we really need to debate about.

    Personally, that's my big problem with Roe v. Wade. It's not that I'm a bomb-throwing Pro-Lifer, I just have a problem with the Supreme Court "discovering" new rights in the constitution. I don't have time to look it up, but I know the constitution also states something like, "all rights not enumerated herein are reserved to the states, or to the people". That's one reason I say it should be a state matter.
    I say it should be defaulted to the people. That's the whole idea you know. The state should be limited as much as possible.

    The second reason I say the issue should be handled by the states is that they could do a better job. Roe v. Wade dealt with "viability" of the fetus. Well, its been 30 years since that decision, obviously there have been tremendous advancements in care of prematurely born children. Yet because its a Supreme Court decision, nothing has changed. Lastly, I think the reason the issue remains such a divisive one to this day is the fact the the decision essentially cut off all meaniful debate. Had the supreme court sent it back to the states, I think some type of compromise would have been resolved by now.

    Have to fix supper. Will read it later.
    Have a good meal!

  14. #39
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Deogol
    You're right, it isn't in the fourteenth amendment, it is in the fourth amendment.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    See that sentence The right of the people to be secure in their persons - that means "stay the fuck out of my uterus" among other things.
    So, in your view, do the protection of the 4th amendment ever extend to the unborn or must the fetus wait until birth to have those rights?
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  15. #40
    Featured Member Muyaha's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    1,431
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    If you really want to know... an embryo doesn't become a fetus till week 13/14 from LMP the second trimester. The majority of induced abortions take place before the second trimester (before 13th week) very rarely are second trimiester induced abortions done. So the question is do zygotes and embryos have protection of the 4th amendment?

    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them.

  16. #41
    Veteran Member Hello~Kitty's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    345
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muyaha
    If you really want to know... an embryo doesn't become a fetus till week 13/14 from LMP the second trimester. The majority of induced abortions take place before the second trimester (before 13th week) very rarely are second trimiester
    Problem is most ProLifers don't want to know, they don't care. When told the facts they basicaly cover their ears and start humming the Jesus Loves Me as loud as they can .... out of key ofcourse !

    IME ~ it's all about their desire to control other adults lives...right down to their reproductive rights. Same thing with gay marriage but let us save that discussion for another thread.
    Example of discrimination (Imho):

    the only prudent way to treat Islamics in the US and western europe today is along the same vein as Russians and Eastern Europeans were treated during the 'cold war' days - with some degree of suspicion warranted until proven otherwise !

    http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44590




  17. #42
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muyaha
    If you really want to know... an embryo doesn't become a fetus till week 13/14 from LMP the second trimester. The majority of induced abortions take place before the second trimester (before 13th week) very rarely are second trimiester induced abortions done. So the question is do zygotes and embryos have protection of the 4th amendment?
    I'm sure your correct, thanks for pointing out that I used the wrong term. As I said in another post, an embryo exhibits about the same evidence of "life" as an amoeba. Personally, it's the late term abortions that trouble me. I've never understood the whole, "viability" standard. Anyone that has ever had a child knows that a newborn baby is not, "viable" on its own.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  18. #43
    Veteran Member toxicgirl's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    559
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    i hope they dont outlaw abortion. i had a book that showed photos of what people did when they didnt want children back in the 30 & 40s. pretty sick stuff.
    "RIP THE SYSTEM"

  19. #44
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Deogol
    You're right, it isn't in the fourteenth amendment, it is in the fourth amendment.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    See that sentence The right of the people to be secure in their persons - that means "stay the fuck out of my uterus" among other things.

    What some want to do is seize control of your uterus, so you have no say over what happens in there. People can have their cars siezed, etc. and that is pretty bad - but when the government seizes your body parts - that is something we really need to debate about.
    Certainly a reasonable interpretation of the 4th amd., but not the origin of the privacy rights under Roe, Webster and Casey. The 14th amd. "due process" clause is the source. Searching a person, or seizing property is not the same connotation of privacy attributed to such personal and intimate matters such as contraception choices. The Griswold decision striking down the bizarre blue laws in Connecticut, which came before Roe, established that the 14th amd. "due process" clause extends personal privacy protections to matters such as whether to have a child or not, specifically the use of contraceptives. Griswold, not Roe, is the key Supreme decision.

    "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" 14th Amd.

    This is the origin of the right to make personal, intimate choices. See Griswold.
    http://laws.findlaw.com/us/381/479.html

    Quote Originally Posted by muyaha
    If you really want to know... an embryo doesn't become a fetus till week 13/14 from LMP the second trimester. The majority of induced abortions take place before the second trimester (before 13th week) very rarely are second trimiester induced abortions done. So the question is do zygotes and embryos have protection of the 4th amendment?


    Casey struck down the strange trimester rules of Roe. See my link above. 4th amendment protections are not relevant to the rights of the unborn. The "equal protection" clause is. (14th):

    "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"

    Everybody gets equal protection under the law. The question is....when does this equal protection start. Having different interpretations of this fundamental clause state by state is innapposite to the very notion of having a constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mel
    Also, a majority of judges agreeing on a given day does not mean the precedent is unbreakable. I'd offer up the Dred Scott one black person = 3/5ths of a white person decision as evidence (along with dozens of other possible examples) that Supreme Court decisions are open to being readily overturned by later Supreme Courts.

    Absolutely correct. Stare Decisis only applies loosely to the Supremes. It is by no means a controlling doctrine for them. The Casey decision pays close attention to this doctrine, and after significant analysis applies it to maintaining Griswold-Roe privacy and liberty rights. Rhenquist and Scalia are on the record for abandoning this interpretation of the 14th, and thereby repealling the rights under the 14th established by Griswold and Roe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    I don't have time to look it up, but I know the constitution also states something like, "all rights not enumerated herein are reserved to the states, or to the people".

    Wow. Very good. 10th Amd: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "

    But don't forget the all important 9th amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    This is key. This was intentionally added so that the meaning of human rights for all Americans guarenteed under the Constitution are not restricted to an eighteenth century understanding of the specific language contained in the document. Simply because the document does not use the specific word "privacy" does not mean that the 14th amendment "due process" protection does not imply such a right when applied to personal matters such as whether to conceive or beget a child. Under an application of BOTH the 9th and 10th amendments, this right of privacy extended under the 9th amendment interpretation of the 14th "due process" clause IS Federal, and infringment of it is "prohibited by it to the States".
    Last edited by stant; 05-05-2005 at 04:46 AM.

  20. #45
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    ^^^ Well written!

  21. #46
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by stant
    Everybody gets equal protection under the law. The question is....when does this equal protection start. Having different interpretations of this fundamental clause state by state is innapposite to the very notion of having a constitution.
    Not sure I can go along with that. Different states have different standards on a lot of things. Driving and marriage come to mind. Do those different restrictions violate the equal protection clause?

    Will have to wait until later to read the link.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  22. #47
    Featured Member Muyaha's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    los angeles, ca
    Posts
    1,431
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    I've never understood the whole, "viability" standard. Anyone that has ever had a child knows that a newborn baby is not, "viable" on its own.
    The viability standard pretty much does not exist and is based completely on the physicians findings thru testing. But it literally means that the fetus has the potential to live/survive outside of the uterus. Many physicians also put emphasis on poor prenatal dignosis like sketal dysplasia, turner's syndrome, anencephaly, etc... to see if the prenancy is even viable and will go to or close to full term.
    Last edited by Muyaha; 05-05-2005 at 01:16 PM.

    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them.

  23. #48
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny
    Not sure I can go along with that. Different states have different standards on a lot of things. Driving and marriage come to mind. Do those different restrictions violate the equal protection clause?

    Will have to wait until later to read the link.
    The 14th amd. was enacted after the Civil War to finally extend the "all men are created equal" idea into body of the Constitution.

    If your state passes a law that says only white people can get driver's licenses, then equal protection bars it. Same goes for laws against mixed marraiges.

    The body of law that flowed from these two words could fill a small library.

  24. #49
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muyaha
    ...But it literally means that the fetus has the potential to live/survive outside of the uterus...
    I know, that's my point, if a woman gave birth and didn't do anything for the baby, it would die (and she'd to to jail). A newborn baby cannot survive outside the uterus on its own. So technically speaking, a newborn is not "viable".

    I wonder if maybe society should look at fetal brain development and adopt some sort of standard for when "life" begins. We're all familar with the term, "brain dead" as a definition for when life ends. Why not adopt something similar as a definition of when life begins? Just a thought.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

  25. #50
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: They can't make abortion illegal! Or can they?

    Quote Originally Posted by Muyaha
    The viability standard pretty much does not exist and is based completely on the physicians findings thru testing. But it literally means that the fetus has the potential to live/survive outside of the uterus. ....
    Quote Originally Posted by Destined
    ...A newborn baby cannot survive outside the uterus on its own. So technically speaking, a newborn is not "viable".
    Technicallly.....a zygote is a potential human being and can potentially survive extra-uterine after 20 more weeks of intra-uterine development. A developing fetus (under the current legal standard I believe) becomes capable of surviving extra-uterine after 20 weeks and > 50g.

    Potential includes future possibilities. Capable has an immediate connotation. Viable means capable of surviving extra-uterine, in this context.

    I may potentially be able to run a marathon in less the 3 hours (given quite a bit of time spent training for it), but at the moment, absolutely I am not capable of such a feat.

    "On its own" is meaningfull in the context of a legal standard for abortion only as it pertains to extra-uterine, or physically separated.

    The constitution asserts the equal protection rights of "persons". If the fetus cannot possibly be physically separated from the mother and survive, under the current standard, the fetus does not qualify for equal protection as a person. Up to that point, although the zygote, embryo, or fetus may be considered a potential life, it remains inseperable physically from the mother until 20 weeks. Dead or necrotic human flesh is certainly not worthy of the same rights as living humans, and prior to 20 weeks that's what you'd have if the fetus was removed, regardless of any extra-uterine life saving efforts.

    Someday an artificial womb may be developed and even a 1 nanosecond old zygote will be capable of surviving outside the mother's uterus. Under current law, that day will mark the day that all abortions become illegal. It's a ways off.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Abortion
    By NaomiLee in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-29-2021, 10:27 PM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-28-2011, 05:40 PM
  3. Bill to make annonymous internet posting illegal
    By AmazingKat in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 06:05 PM
  4. Abortion
    By Madcap in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: 03-15-2005, 10:35 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •