A Reason Abortion Isn't a Black & White Issue

[Magnetic Poles]

Potter's Syndrome babies - Type I occurs in 1 in 40,000 infants. Differences in opinion put Type II as 1 in 1,500-10,000. (http://www.potterssyndrome.org/pottersfaqs.html)

Ectopic pregnancies - about 1% of all pregnancies; of this 1%, 98% are in the fallopian tubes. Left untreated, 50% will resolve themselves (natural abortion) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectopic_pregnancy)

The 13-year old who is raped and becomes pregnant? Actually, it's 10-years old (http://www.kidk.com/news/18749314.html). I can't find statistics on how often this occurs; for the sake of argument, I'd put it down as about 1% as well.

Obviously, these arguments are the exception rather than the norm.

So, when it comes to the abortion, the Bible recognizes that the fetus is a living human being. End of discussion.

When it comes to the law, most proposed anti-abortion laws include a clause regarding the health of the mother; yet, the pro-abortion crowd does their best to shoot these down, because it's not the health of the mother they're actually concerned about; it's the free availability of abortions.

Do we make laws for the whole of society? Or do we make them based on the "exception to the norm"? Or do we compromise, and make them with clauses that recognize the exception to the norm?

And again, Don, I posit that if you are that 1%, it becomes very important to you. Legislators should not be making medical decisions for people. There are unintended consequences to anything.

 

[rbell]

Who is for abortion? Democrats. Think about it.

Well.....

Mostly true. But, unfortunately, the logical flip side to your statement (therefore, Republicans are against abortion) is no longer as true as it once was. Many Republicans pay lip service to it....but they're not serious about it ("it" being moving our country away from abortion's scourge).

I'm afraid that a larger and larger number of politicians are against abortion....just as long as it'll get them votes in their district.

Sad.

If this is off-topic, forgive me: I've seen several pro-life organizations that use, as part of their literature to make the pro-life case, that "a majority of Americans do not approve of abortion."

Am I just an oddball, or does that strategy bother anyone else? Why would I be interested in an issue of morality....based on whether or not "a majority" of folks approve? If something is wrong, does it really matter if 75%--or 5%--of the public is against it? Isn't wrong...well, wrong, no matter what the polling data says? I dunno if (a) that is too far off topic, or (b) if what I said made any sense to anyone...

 

[Analgesic]

Well.....

Mostly true. But, unfortunately, the logical flip side to your statement (therefore, Republicans are against abortion) is no longer as true as it once was.

*cough* Actually, it's not the logical flip side...

 

[Don]

And again, Don, I posit that if you are that 1%, it becomes very important to you. Legislators should not be making medical decisions for people. There are unintended consequences to anything.

Where I disagree with you is: we have way too many medical people who will make a decision for you, whether you actually need that decision or not.

For example, I took my 9-year old son to the eye doctor this morning; the eye doctor asked if it was okay to dilate his eyes. I couldn't for the life of me figure out why my 9-year old son, with perfect eyesight, needed to have his eyes dilated. I said no. My wife later informed me that this particular doctor, in the particular place where we receive our medical care, gets paid for each procedure.

Same for each Planned Parenthood abortion doctor: they get paid for each procedure.

Sad that there are so many doctors that make legislation of these procedures a necessity, isn't it?

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Sad that there are so many doctors that make legislation of these procedures a necessity, isn't it?

So who is in a better position to advise on medical decisions for you and your family? Your physician or your congressman?

 

[D28guy]

There indeed are issues that are not "black and white". There are at times grey areas.

Abortion is not one of them. Our country currently has legalized murder...but only if its a defenseless baby. It is legalised child extermination.

Child extermination centers nationally perform multiple thousands if not millions of child exterminations every year.

Mike

 

[Revmitchell]

So who is in a better position to advise on medical decisions for you and your family? Your physician or your congressman?

Which carries more weight the life of the child or the desire of the mother not to have to deliver?

 

[Magnetic Poles]

So we count you for big intrusive government. Thanks for voting.

 

[Revmitchell]

So we count you for big intrusive government. Thanks for voting.

First, you are for big government. Second we rightly use government to protect the innocent lives before and after birth.

 

[Don]

MP,
We have laws that say "don't kill people unless they're threatening you or your family, or in the defense of others."

Is it so much different to have a law that says "don't abort a baby, unless...."?

Or should we just rely on the existing murder laws, whose wording could be construed to apply to abortion situations?

 

[Alcott]

So who is in a better position to advise on medical decisions for you and your family? Your physician or your congressman?

If that were to come down to Dr. Kevorkian and Davey Crockett... ask your tax consultant.