Support NeoGAF

[ClassyPenguin]

So? I'm still not seeing the problem here...

They are putting women in danger for fear of harming an unborn child.How is that not a problem?

 

[Devolution]

There mere act of uncrossing the ankles usually does it, I'm told.

Aspirin between your knees honey.

 

[FyreWulff]

Not false. I didn't say you wouldn't be given a giant bill. I just said you wouldn't be turned away if your water broke.

Birthing a child is much more than just getting them out of the body though.

 

[Particle Physicist]

So I'm confused. If the woman's right to choose to have an abortion is tied to the fact that it's the woman's body. Then at what point does the fetus's body stop being the woman's body? When it's no longer attached at the umbilical cord? That can't be right because if a woman were to willfully kill a baby they just gave birth to while the baby was still attached to the woman, they'd be going to jail.

Is it at a certain stage in development? Is it a certain arbitrary day? When does the baby become it's own legal entity?

How about we let physicians make those decisions instead of politicians?

You guys act as if a woman can get an abortion whenever she wants, all willy nilly. You do realize that there is a physician involved that evaluates each patients situation, right?

 

[Pollux]

They are putting women in danger for fear of harming an unborn child.How is that not a problem?

We're talking about different things. I'm talking about the excommunication.

 

[Slavik81]

Words like child and baby are used specifically to make people who get abortions seem like murderers.

Is this some sort of subversive pro-life message?

Facebook Wants Your Unborn Child:

Sometime in the past week, Facebook flipped the switch on allowing you to add your unborn baby to your list of family members via the “Expected: Child” option on Facebook profiles. Apparently too many parents were creating “illegal” fake profiles for their yet unhatched offspring — setting their fake babies’ ages to 13 instead of negative whatever, the minimum Facebook allows.

 

[H.Protagonist]

Yeah I'm talking about the cost to the patient though. With insurance, the out of pocket cost of giving birth is I'm guessing under $1,000.

My boss' first kid was about $8,000 out of pocket with bangin' insurance. I've heard way worse, though, and now I'm hearing 25k for C-sections. :/

 

[Jackson]

Birthing a child is much more than just getting them out of the body though.

Yes I know, I have a daughter.

How about we let physicians make those decisions instead of politicians?

You guys act as if a woman can get an abortion whenever she wants, all willy nilly. You do realize that there is a physician involved that evaluates each patients situation, right?

I dunno. I think we should determine what the legal point is actually. And yes I know how the abortion process works my gf had one many years ago.

 

[Devolution]

How about we let physicians make those decisions instead of politicians?

You guys act as if a woman can get an abortion whenever she wants, all willy nilly. You do realize that there is a physician involved that evaluates each patients situation, right?

They think we can just go get one like a manicure. Off to the abortionist today gals!

Is this some sort of subversive pro-life message?

Facebook Wants Your Unborn Child:

It's almost like you're ignoring the context of this discussion. Oh wait you are. People specifically using "baby" and "child" are doing so to paint pro-choicers in a specific light.

 

[Duffyside]

Okay, I'll tell you a story here. My child survived, but it was a close thing, and was very nearly something like a late term abortion.

Serious complications throughout the entire pregnancy. My entire uteruii (Yeah I had two, long story) detached and flipped over. This was two and a half months before she was due to be born. Way too early. Because of this I went into labor, and the force of the contractions were concentrated on the wrong place. I was in the hospital for two weeks, trying to eek out more time for her to develop, but when I was seconds from bleeding to death, they had to take her. One emergency c-section later, and I had a very premature baby.

Some of these laws would prevent even stuff like that, because it would risk the child. Seriously. My daughter lived, but if it had happened a month earlier, it would have likely had a very different outcome.

WOW. I'm very happy to know you both survived!

Please understand that I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing that abortion should be outlawed even in the case where the baby will die no matter what, but the mother could live. Pro-choice people in this thread like to continue to point out that some people out there in the world think that, but I haven't seen anyone on GAF argue that point. Nor a religious argument either, which you'll also somehow hear a lot of.

Edit: Also, as chubigans said, thanks for sharing. Really brave and personal. I wouldn't even like sharing that I have two balls.

Spoiler

I TOTALLY DO!

 

[NullPointer]

There mere act of [redacted] usually does it, I'm told.

You just had to bring obscenity into this, didn't you?

Is this some sort of subversive pro-life message?

Facebook Wants Your Unborn Child:

Jesus. This will not end well.

 

[ronito]

Ronito, you're scaring me. How do you financially recover from that? Any assistance, insurance, tax breaks, etc., or is it all straight out of savings?

Well, that 24k was the insurance billment. Our share was around 5-6k when all was said and done.

My sister in law just went to a birthing center and paid $1,500 cash for birthing in a birthing center. But the baby was birthed by students and she had to be out after 3 hours after the baby was born.

 

[SteveWinwood]

I told you guys that children were just like tumors.

Spoiler

(It's called DNA, dude).

I really am curious if you think cysts don't have dna.

 

[RDreamer]

It's only meaningful if the argument is an emotional appeal, rather than a substantial argument. And, if it's an emotional appeal, it's inherently flawed anyways.

But using the term "unborn child" is indeed an emotional appeal, whether the speaker specifically wants it to be or not.

 

[commedieu]

How about we let physicians make those decisions instead of politicians?

You guys act as if a woman can get an abortion whenever she wants, all willy nilly. You do realize that there is a physician involved that evaluates each patients situation, right?

Again, science and any other sorcery has no place here.

 

[Slavik81]

But using the term "unborn child" is indeed an emotional appeal, whether the speaker specifically wants it to be or not.

I don't think so. As I pointed out, fetuses are commonly referred to in that matter in entirely neutral situations.

You're reading far too much into those words. Yes, they can be used to make an emotional appeal but you're throwing out a lot of reasoned opinions along with the dumb ones if that's a live-or-die metric.

 

[Devolution]

WOW. I'm very happy to know you both survived!

Please understand that I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing that abortion should be outlawed even in the case where the baby will die no matter what, but the mother could live. Pro-choice people in this thread like to continue to point out that some people out there in the world think that, but I haven't seen anyone on GAF argue that point. Nor a religious argument either, which you'll also somehow hear a lot of.

Edit: Also, as chubigans said, thanks for sharing. Really brave and personal. I wouldn't even like sharing that I have two balls.

Spoiler

I TOTALLY DO!

I've argued in other abortion topics how late term is necessary for the health of the mother and there all kinds of laws preventing just anyone from getting one. "Pro-lifers" generally ignore it.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I dunno. I think we should determine what the legal point is actually. And yes I know how the abortion process works my gf had one many years ago.

Sure, but leaving physicians and science out of the discussion is horribly misguided.

 

[Dany]

Ignoring that sperms and eggs (and all other cells) can all be attributed to one person, I'm more curious... did you really mean the 14th DAY? And how did you come to that conclusion?

Around the 14th day is when stem cells are no longer retrieved because they are no longer viable and around the same time is when the the fetus or group of cells no longer can twin. Esentally after the 14th day it is no longer viable for twins to emerge. If that makes sense.

 

[speculawyer]

What a splendid idea. I propose this design.

owww my stomach hurts from laughing at that. Although I feel bad about it.

 

[RDreamer]

I don't think so. As I pointed out, fetuses are commonly referred to in that matter in entirely neutral situations.

You're reading far too much into those words.

You can unknowingly use a term that has a charged meaning. This is what's happening. The term "unborn child" is, I think, clearly not a scientific or medical term. It is a term created by people who want to appeal to emotions by referring to something that isn't a child as a child, and then putting the semi-disclaimer at the beginning. The word "child" in and of itself has a lot of connotations and baggage in every single person alive that I don't think really belongs in a debate about a fetus and what should happen to it. So, yes, people may use the term like that in neutral situations, but they've just fallen victim to both propaganda and to people who are careless about their own word choices in matters of importance.

 

[Jackson]

Sure, but leaving physicians and science out of the discussion is horribly misguided.

Totally agree.

 

[TacticalFox88]

As disgusting as this is, I think what pisses me off the most is that I have genuinely good people I know that STRICTLY OUTSIDE of politics they are good people, but when it comes to politics everything turns and they vote strictly Republican.

I barely talk to them now, considering I live in Europe, but fuck if I wish I could dive into their head as to WHY they still vote for this piece of shit party, despite the godawful things it's done.

 

[SouthernDragon]

There's no way this is true.

What isn't true?

 

[Freshmaker]

But there's No War on Women.

Why are they so interested in being the American Taliban?

 

[H.Protagonist]

You just had to bring obscenity into this, didn't you?


Jesus. This will not end well.

I skirt a fine line, but occasionally I can sneak filth like that by the mods and get away with it.

Well, that 24k was the insurance billment. Our share was around 5-6k when all was said and done.

My sister in law just went to a birthing center and paid $1,500 cash for birthing in a birthing center. But the baby was birthed by students and she had to be out after 3 hours after the baby was born.

Well, that seems more reasonable. Still quite a bit, but more reasonable. The birthing center went well, then?

A lot of my daughters costs were covered by like, March of Dimes and the like, so if there is an emergency, there are groups that will help out. :/

I'm not worried about being able to cover it. I have savings and insurance and will have more savings + help when I get to that point, but it seems insanely expensive. I also do appreciate that there are groups out there that help, but I wouldn't feel comfortable taking their assistance when I know there are other women who could use it far more than me. Maybe I'll just drop my future child in a country with decent healthcare. ^_^

 

[Jackson]

You can unknowingly use a term that has a charged meaning. This is what's happening. The term "unborn child" is, I think, clearly not a scientific or medical term. It is a term created by people who want to appeal to emotions by referring to something that isn't a child as a child, and then putting the semi-disclaimer at the beginning. The word "child" in and of itself has a lot of connotations and baggage in every single person alive that I don't think really belongs in a debate about a fetus and what should happen to it. So, yes, people may use the term like that in neutral situations, but they've just fallen victim to both propaganda and to people who are careless about their own word choices in matters of importance.

So, scientifically speaking, when does it go from fetus to child/baby?

 

[Yaboosh]

So, scientifically, when does it go from fetus to child/baby?

Viability.


Edit: It is kind of sad that this debate will never be ended. There will always be a portion of the population that believe the rights of the fetus should overrule the rights of the woman because of various perspectives, opinions, religious beliefs or whatever.

Makes participating in these discussions/debates even more pointless than most hot topic issues. Nobody's mind is ever ever changed.

 

[Devolution]

So, scientifically speaking, when does it go from fetus to child/baby?

When it's born.

 

[Jackson]

Viability.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the word? But a newborn will die in a matter of hours if left to itself. It doesn't have viability.

When it's born.

Science! lol. So the earliest surviving preemie recorded was born 22 weeks. So that means "potentially" all fetuses become babies at 22 weeks because they could be born then? Thus late-term abortions should be illegal?

 

[Air]

Don't understand the need to outlaw abortions. I don't generally agree with it, but if you can make life easier for people (better sex ed, and what not) than I think the rate of abortions will go down. The fact some people want to take away from sex-education, and other alternatives(abortion) and expect everything to be ok is... not smart. Educate people and you won't have to worry about them taking that specific road.

When it's born.

Just curious, but what about a day before birth? An hour? Birth seems kind of specific (I can understand why you would draw the line there though). I do like viability as an answer though because a fetus can be viable before its planned birthdate or whatever.

 

[ronito]

Well, that seems more reasonable. Still quite a bit, but more reasonable. The birthing center went well, then?

Sad that 5-6k out of pocket seems reasonable. What a country.

Anyway, no I'd not say the birthing center was ideal. Like I said the person helping birth the baby was a student (that's what you get at the 1.5k rate) and thankfully nothing went wrong because if it did she'd end up having to go to the hospital and still pay the birthing center.

After she had the baby the gave her 3 whole hours to recover and then sent her packing.

It worked for her I guess, but it seems like no way to have a baby.

 

[ameratsu]

As an outsider to American politics, the polemics between parties seems to supersede actual issues. I mean, it's entertaining, but people are trapped within the confines of the two-party system. Someone is right but the whole conversation feels tainted.

 

[Duffyside]

Around the 14th day is when stem cells are no longer retrieved because they are no longer viable and around the same time is when the the fetus or group of cells no longer can twin. Esentally after the 14th day it is no longer viable for twins to emerge. If that makes sense.

... Kinda? But you do realize women usually don't realize they're pregnant until after this, right? So you're just a morning after pill sorta guy? And I don't understand why the twin thing matters to you, but I do appreciate your thoughts. Any more explanation you could give would be appreciated. There was another poster on GAF a long time ago, when I was just a lurker, who argued against abortion better than I ever could, but believed in its right to life at implantation, not fertilization. I wish I could ask him why he came to that conclusion.

Hey Duffyside, are you going to give a response to Fyrewulf other than some vague remark about "DNA"? Or are you going to go on with the thread and pretend his post didn't happen?

I was actually going to ignore it because it all seemed so obvious. You have your own DNA, the mother has her own, and the fetus its own. It's clearly a distinct human being.

 

[H.Protagonist]

Don't understand the need to outlaw abortions. I don't generally agree with me, but if you can make life easier for people (better sex ed, and what not) than I think the rate of abortions will go down. The fact some people want to take away from sex-education, and other alternatives(abortion) and expect everything to be ok is... not smart. Educate people and you won't have to worry about them taking that specific road.

@ the bold

But seriously, yes, you are right. If they really wanted to target reducing abortions they would care about proper sex-ed, access to contraceptives and clinics, etc. But alas...

 

[commedieu]

Don't understand the need to outlaw abortions. I don't generally agree with me, but if you can make life easier for people (better sex ed, and what not) than I think the rate of abortions will go down. The fact some people want to take away from sex-education, and other alternatives(abortion) and expect everything to be ok is... not smart. Educate people and you won't have to worry about them taking that specific road.

Unfortunately Baby savers don't want to educate their precious innocent children about sex, or birth control. That alone will prevent little Tommy and Charlize from having premarital sex..

Its retarded.

 

[CLEEK]

Oh wow, that is a crazy story. Thanks for sharing; we don't really get that kind of perspective on GAF.

What, a woman's perspective? Says more about you than about GAF.

That just reiterates Obama's comments: "these comments do underscore is why we shouldn't have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making health care decisions on behalf of women"

It's all to easy to be pro-life if you haven't been through pregnancies with complications. Or been raped. Or.. you get the idea.

 

[Jackson]

Viability.


Edit: It is kind of sad that this debate will never be ended. There will always be a portion of the population that believe the rights of the fetus should overrule the rights of the woman because of various perspectives, opinions, religious beliefs or whatever.

Makes participating in these discussions/debates even more pointless than most hot topic issues. Nobody's mind is ever ever changed.

We're talking about science fact vs them dumb GOPers and I can't get a straight scientific answer of when a fetus become a baby? What? I'm not even trying to troll. I'm curious what is considered correct.

 

[Devolution]

Unfortunately Baby savers don't want to educate their precious innocent children about sex, or birth control. That alone will prevent little Tommy and Charlize from having premarital sex..

Its retarded.

They also don't want other people's kids educated about it either. Let's be honest. They also don't want more access to clinics, better pre-natal care, social programs for those born, and widely available contraception and birth control.

We're talking about science fact vs them dumb GOPers and I can't get a straight answer of when a fetus become a baby? What?

The fetus is a baby once it's born. The rules and regulations for decision time have to do with ethics about when it's "life" not science.

 

[Yaboosh]

Jackson, do you support social programs that assist mothers and their children using government funds to make sure that poor families get plenty of assistance so that the babies that are born that otherwise would have been aborted live a happy, healthy life?

Or should that all be on her to support herself and her baby?

 

[Dany]

When it's born.

This debate goes everywhere. From breathing, heart beating, brain functioning, organs working, conception, fetus feeling.

 

[Duffyside]

They also don't want other people's kids educated about it either. Let's be honest. They also don't want more access to clinics, better pre-natal care, social programs for those born, and widely available contraception and birth control.

I love (hate) how this always turns into an argument about social programs. The only "question" that is relevant is "what is the nature of the fetus?" or "are you killing a human being?"

 

[TacticalFox88]

I find abstinence only programs to be hilarious. A drive for sex is built into our species from an evolutionary perspective!

It's going to happen regardless of what your religion teaches you, hence why most common teen pregnancies are in the Bible Belt, for irony.

 

[Air]

@ the bold

But seriously, yes, you are right. If they really wanted to target reducing abortions they would care about proper sex-ed, access to contraceptives and clinics, etc. But alas...

Autocorrect! But thanks I changed it lol. Yeah, you can't just get rid of options and expect everything to be ok.

Unfortunately Baby savers don't want to educate their precious innocent children about sex, or birth control. That alone will prevent little Tommy and Charlize from having premarital sex..

Its retarded.

Honestly in my experience, teaching kids sex Ed usually puts them off from doing it for a while. Get them early enough and it grosses kids out

 

[Devolution]

This debate goes everywhere. From breathing, heart beating, brain functioning, organs working, conception, fetus feeling.

No it doesn't. A baby is a born child outside of the womb. The weeks granted for decision making time don't change this. They decide when a fetus cannot be aborted/terminated.

 

[Freezie KO]

We're talking about science fact vs them dumb GOPers and I can't get a straight scientific answer of when a fetus become a baby? What? I'm not even trying to troll. I'm curious what is considered correct.

The truth is that science cannot answer a semantic question of when something becomes a baby.

You could argue "biological independence" as a substitute for "viability". This means that the baby could exist outside the mother's body, rather than using it parasitically.

Still, the most intellectually honest answer is pragmatism. Women are going to get unwanted pregnancies, and if you don't allow abortion legally, they'll get them illegally and dangerously.

 

[Divvy]

I love (hate) how this always turns into an argument about social programs. The only "question" that is relevant is "what is the nature of the fetus?" or "are you killing a human being?"

No it's not. The only relevant question is whether restrictions on abortion law would actually have any effect on the number of abortions or the safety of abortions.

 

[Jackson]

The fetus is a baby once it's born. The rules and regulations for decision time have to do with ethics about when it's "life" not science.

Shouldn't we use science instead? That seems so very arbitrary and convoluted. I get the whole "an embryo is scientifically not human". I understand that. But I find it strange that the fetus to baby line is so murky.

 

[Dany]

No it doesn't. A baby is a born child outside of the womb. The weeks granted for decision making time don't change this. They decide when a fetus cannot be aborted/terminated.

who decides?

The fetus to baby line is murky. A fetus 34 weeks in development is what?

 

[ronito]

I love (hate) how this always turns into an argument about social programs. The only "question" that is relevant is "what is the nature of the fetus?" or "are you killing a human being?"

Yeah,no.

You wanna end abortion? That answer is dirt simple.

- Give everyone in depth sex ed.
- Make contraception free and easy to attain for both sexes
- Make reproductive health free

Done and done. This would do more to end abortion than any questions about what the nature of a fetus is.