US Politics Thread

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
do you make the distinction in your support for abortions? I would like to understand your view about the statistical data which shows that the majority of the abortions are being done by women who have multiple abortions. Let's stipulate that we, here, all agree that there's no argument about medically necessary abortions, or those due to rape or incest. What's your thinking about the vast number of abortions which are used by a sub set of women which the data suggests are multiple time consumers of the service?

I have already stated that I think the right should be given to the woman. But please answer my question. What is your view....
I'd like to see a statistic, when you quote it, but I'm not sure why you extract "multiple" abortions as a distinction. I'm not sure why I should feel differently about that, in particular. Are you saying that women who get pregnant and don't want to be should have "learned their lesson" after one abortion, and stop having sex? Perhaps a scarlet "A" on her chest would help that problem.

I can answer your question, though. I believe in abortion on demand within the first trimester. I don't need to know why the woman needs one, nor how many she's had.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,552
Reactions
5,627
Points
113
We are 93.92% in agreement here. But there are two points I'd like to make.

Even regarding rape, there is a time window here. People keep forgetting that... Can a woman, seven and a half months pregnant, even in this case, simply interrupt the pregnancy? In this particular example it is obvious that a living human being would literally pay for the sins of the father...

By the way, put this together with the modern tendency of people saying that someone can afterwards decide what it is rape and what is not, and "buuum", you have a butcher's dream. And please, please, please, I hope no one offends my intelligence with replies like "nobody would do that".

Regarding the second part in bold, I guess that you are solely referring to the cases you described above, which, given the caveat of the time window, makes us in a practical agreement. But I would surely word it differently. The whole misconception for me starts when we use the word "rights" in these cases (even "choice" in general is a bad choice). People mention Roe vs Wade a lot, but the vast majority never cared reading the decision itself. And one thing that vote does very brightly is bring to the fore that there might be two people to consider. And when there are two, it simply makes no sense to talk (solely) about the "rights" of just one of them.

So, even in the cases where I would practically agree that abortion is a viable option, I would never phrase it with the word "right". I would detail precisely the case, and state that the final "decision" in this case belongs to the (particular) woman, but she does not have a "right". She is compelled by the facts to make a choice (and are only the facts of the matter that give her that choice).

I agree that in practical terms we get to the same place, but in principle, those are two completely different positions.
can you just answer my question please
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,552
Reactions
5,627
Points
113
I'll repeat it... I don't believe that there's much disagreement amongst reasonable people where rape and incest have occurred. But the fact is those are the minority of abortion decisions. The vast majority are fairly basic elective decisions. And the data shows that of that subset, there are many women who have multiple abortions. I'm talking about them. What's your view on that. Given the vast array of birth control options these women have. What's your view on the fact that abortion is the option they choose?
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,172
Reactions
2,999
Points
113
lol! Please explain?
You original question about statistics was replying to Moxie, not to me (mrzz). I replied your post to her, given that we do this a lot here, but sorry about that anyway.

I still think you want her to reply on that, given the context of the conversation .
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,552
Reactions
5,627
Points
113
You original question about statistics was replying to Moxie, not to me (mrzz). I replied your post to her, given that we do this a lot here, but sorry about that anyway.

I still think you want her to reply on that, given the context of the conversation .
oh good lord! You're right. My bad. For some weird reason I thought that was her response:face-with-tears-of-joy:
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,552
Reactions
5,627
Points
113
I'd like to see a statistic, when you quote it, but I'm not sure why you extract "multiple" abortions as a distinction. I'm not sure why I should feel differently about that, in particular. Are you saying that women who get pregnant and don't want to be should have "learned their lesson" after one abortion, and stop having sex? Perhaps a scarlet "A" on her chest would help that problem.

I can answer your question, though. I believe in abortion on demand within the first trimester. I don't need to know why the woman needs one, nor how many she's had.
apologies for not responding directly. I actually missed this before. So basically you're comfortable with women using abortion as just another form of birth control? I think it's appalling to be honest. I loved Bill Clinton's response on the issue. Abortion should be safe legal and rare
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
can you just answer my question please
Clearly this was meant for me. I did answer your question. You didn't supply the statistic you site, which I asked for. And now you've made the conclusion that 'these women' are using abortion as a form of birth control? I've absolutely never known a woman who did that, or took an abortion lightly enough to do that. Plus, it costs money, you know. So, tell me where you get the statistic that women use abortion as a form of birth control? You do know, right, that there's no 100% reliable birth control except for abstinence. When women and men have sex, pregnancy is always a chance. My sweet and religious mother used to say, "Name a form of birth control, and I'll tell you which baby I had on it."

And what about her partner? No responsibility to help the cause by wearing a condom or having a vasectomy? They're reversible.
 

tented

Administrator
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
21,690
Reactions
10,551
Points
113
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
I think everyone would want the goal to be the elimination (as close as possible) of the need for abortions. The question is how to get there?

Rape and incest — while both awful — are also both rare: less than 2% of total abortions is the estimate. Anyone who thinks they shouldn’t be allowed to have abortions is a callous monster. What woman wants to carry her rapist’s baby? Or her sister/daughter? And let’s face it, we’re really talking about very young women, if not girls, raped by their fathers/stepfathers/uncles, etc. (Remember “Chinatown”?)

When discussing abortion, what we’re really talking about, to a significant degree, is birth control.

In the US, 60% are already mothers, and half of them already have two or more children, according to stats gathered by the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. That would suggest women with the “that’s enough children” mentality, who had no intention of getting pregnant. They forgot to use contraception, perhaps, or the contraception failed, so now they’re pregnant and need an abortion. This is the category, I suspect, Federberg is referring to as using abortion as contraception.

Most abortions (92%) occur in the first 13 weeks/the first trimester; only 4% are beyond 16 weeks.

Poor women factor in here: 49% are below the poverty line (based on stats from the groups mentioned above), and don’t have adequate access to effective, inexpensive birth control. 46% are single, and have never been married. That’s a large percentage.

The good news is the abortion rate for women aged 15 through 44 has dropped by half over the past 30 years. If this trend continues we‘re heading towards the goal of rarely even needing them.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,015
Reactions
7,288
Points
113
I think everyone would want the goal to be the elimination (as close as possible) of the need for abortions. The question is how to get there?

Rape and incest — while both awful — are also both rare: less than 2% of total abortions is the estimate. Anyone who thinks they shouldn’t be allowed to have abortions is a callous monster. What woman wants to carry her rapist’s baby? Or her sister/daughter? And let’s face it, we’re really talking about very young women, if not girls, raped by their fathers/stepfathers/uncles, etc. (Remember “Chinatown”?)

When discussing abortion, what we’re really talking about, to a significant degree, is birth control.

In the US, 60% are already mothers, and half of them already have two or more children, according to stats gathered by the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. That would suggest women with the “that’s enough children” mentality, who had no intention of getting pregnant. They forgot to use contraception, perhaps, or the contraception failed, so now they’re pregnant and need an abortion. This is the category, I suspect, Federberg is referring to as using abortion as contraception.

Most abortions (92%) occur in the first 13 weeks/the first trimester; only 4% are beyond 16 weeks.

Poor women factor in here: 49% are below the poverty line (based on stats from the groups mentioned above), and don’t have adequate access to effective, inexpensive birth control. 46% are single, and have never been married. That’s a large percentage.

The good news is the abortion rate for women aged 15 through 44 has dropped by half over the past 30 years. If this trend continues we‘re heading towards the goal of rarely even needing them.
Good post, brother - and good news too, that it’s declining. I think most of us who are anti-abortion in most circumstances would concede the hard cases if it meant the abortions that are essentially post-factum forms of contraception were made more difficult. I know @Moxie isn’t saying they don’t exist, she’s just looking for statistics. Actually the stats are there in plain view: most women who get an abortion for economic reasons are using it as a form of contraception-after-the-fact. If their own attempts at contraception failed and they feel that economically they’ll be in trouble with a baby, then essentially they’re using abortion as a contraception.

And we all know of celebrities and others who put their career first.

60m+ in America alone since Roe v Wade is a shameful statistic, and that was @britbox main point. That we have nothing to be proud of. I hope the trend continues downward. Liberal societies are not perfect - we have created fake concepts of compassion - and have become too liberal as well, which hasn’t been a plus…
 
  • Like
Reactions: tented and shawnbm

shawnbm

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,573
Reactions
1,257
Points
113
I did like what tented and brother Kieran noted. The young women still protesting and demanding birth control on demand even beyond viability are practically really only speaking of snuffing out the life within not because of rape or incest but as a means of after-the-fact birth control. Aborting the life within has historically--across all cultures and religious backdrops--been considered vile and abhorrent. To this day, I do believe, if you kill a pregnant woman you are tried for two murders if the fetus is viable. It is as it should be. So many lives snuffed out who could have done so much, or perhaps so little, but they could have lived.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
Bill Clinton said that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare." I think most people can get behind this idea.

I also understand that for people who are against abortion, believing that it's always fetal "murder," it's difficult to cede any ground on the issue. However, most people who have a moral objection to abortion do so on the basis of religious belief, and we live in a civil society, which, on paper, at least, separates the laws of religion from the laws of state.

I can understand some above using the wording of abortion as birth control, in the sense that, yes, when a woman becomes pregnant, and for whatever her reasons, or hers and her partner's reasons, they decide they cannot have a baby at this time, then, yes, it is a form of birth control. I would say, though, it's a last resort for most.

An unintended (most likely) consequence of the anti-abortion movement in the US has been the limiting of access to birth control, particularly for students and low-income women, due to the closing of family planning/women's health care clinics in this country, because one of the many things they provided were abortions. (Which also endangers women's health due to lack of access to regular PAP smears, pelvic exams and mammograms at low-cost.) But, obviously, if women have a harder time accessing birth control, they're more likely to find themselves pregnant when they don't want to/can't afford to be. This hinders the slogan above in the "rare" category.

And this is why I bristle a bit at the notion that women use abortion as birth control. Several of you have said it. As I said just above, I can accept a narrow definition of that, if that's what you mean, but it sounds to me a bit like moralizing. (Don't get after me @Federberg for reading in. I'm trying to get at what people mean.) Is anyone suggesting that women are being careless with birth control and relying on abortion as a backstop? Surely that happens, but I wouldn't call it rampant. No woman who doesn't want to be pregnant wants to get pregnant in the first place, and THEN have to deal with it, even if it might not fuss them morally to have an abortion. Even the most cavalier person would consider that it's expensive and painful to have an abortion.

As to the choices made, even if they are "economic," @shawnbm said this: "So many lives snuffed out who could have done so much, or perhaps so little, but they could have lived." What about the life of the woman who actually IS alive and will have her dreams and otherwise potential hampered by a child she is not ready for? This is why it is a "wimmins" issue, as @britbox rather disdainfully writes. Because women's academic and economic progress is directly tied to when and how they decide to have children. Poor women who have children young tend to stay in poverty. Especially if they have them alone, which they often do. (I'll get to the abdication of the responsibility of men in this at the end.)

@shawnbm snuck this one in: "The young women still protesting and demanding birth control on demand even beyond viability...." "Beyond viability" implies late-term abortions. This is such a bugaboo that the right uses to freak people out. Late-term abortions are rare (statistics below,) but why NOT birth control on demand? And why not protest for it? Men and women have sex ALL.THE.TIME and pregnancies are an outcome of it. If you don't want a population explosion, (which is bad for the planet, and those who already live in it,) and if you don't want to see more abortions, give women easy access to birth control. That seems obvious to me. Not you?

As to late-term abortions, I have a stat that says in 2020, 93% of abortions in the US were performed in the first trimester, i.e., prior to viability. And we know that most late-term abortions are about an inviable fetus and saving the life of the mother. Late-term abortions are very sad things, and usually happen to people that wanted the baby. Stop buying the propaganda, please.

This is a very interesting article from the Pew Research Center on abortion in the US, which includes the data above, as promised:


This article also speaks to this from @Federberg: "I would like to understand your view about the statistical data which shows that the majority of the abortions are being done by women who have multiple abortions."

He hasn't provided his own statistical data, but this from that article:



Screen Shot 2023-10-23 at 6.38.10 PM.png
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
Sorry that was long. And I had to post it because I was afraid I'd lose it.

What I also wanted to say was that it takes two to tango. Women get pregnant, but they are impregnated by men. Why does all the responsibility, for birth control, for example, fall on women? As I mentioned to @Federberg above, at the very least, men could help by wearing a condom. (For many reasons.) But why so much moralization of women's choices, when men contribute to the choice, in many cases. They also can coerce the choice...you know that's true. I'm sure you know that these are choices that couples make together, as well. Since you're all men, in this conversation, but for me, where is the man's responsibility in this?

Also a question: are you all just voicing your opinions, or are you suggesting legislation?
 
Last edited:

shawnbm

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
3,573
Reactions
1,257
Points
113
When it comes to a choice between death and life, we should choose life. That should be the default setting. And yes, I do believe the man who is part of the life inchoate should have a say in whether the life should be ended or allowed to live. The life is half him as well. Just because women are biologically designed in a way men are not is something that can't be changed--it just is. But, this topic could go on and on. I understand your position Moxie.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
When it comes to a choice between death and life, we should choose life.
And some women choose life. Their own. IMO, that's a fair choice.
And yes, I do believe the man who is part of the life inchoate should have a say in whether the life should be ended or allowed to live. The life is half him as well. Just because women are biologically designed in a way men are not is something that can't be changed--it just is. But, this topic could go on and on.
I feel that you missed part of my point here, which is an important one: the responsibility of men. It's not just "having a say," once the woman gets pregnant. That's far from what I'm most interested in knowing your opinion about. What about responsibility when they have sex? And, beyond just "having a say" when a women gets pregnant, what should the man do? Marry her? Pay for the abortion? Agree to take the child, care for it and pay for it if she can't, rather than have her abort it? If we're going to talk about a whole child, we kind of need to get into the weeds about what this father is going to do, beyond, "having a say."

Clearly, at this point, we are in agreement that no men who are anti-abortion ever have/have ever had sex with women they don't intend to raise a child with. Because that wouldn't square with any of the opinions above. Right?
I understand your position Moxie.
Thanks.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
mrzz World Affairs 2450
T World Affairs 13
britbox World Affairs 82
britbox World Affairs 1004
britbox World Affairs 46