PDA

View Full Version : About this pro-life platform......



Lanie
08-22-2012, 03:39 PM
Has anybody found anything suggesting that exceptions should or will be made for the life of the mother? I've been looking for a while.

linda22003
08-22-2012, 03:52 PM
"As Republicans across the country call on fellow Republican Todd Akin to withdraw from the Missouri Senate race over controversial comments he made on rape and abortion, the Republican Party on Tuesday quietly approved a platform that calls for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, and which does not provide exceptions for victims of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.

The language, which is the same as in the party's 2004 and 2008 platform, was passed on Tuesday without discussion."


http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/article/269607/81/GOP-approves-platform-with-strict-anti-abortion-language

txradioguy
08-22-2012, 04:07 PM
Not that you really care...


"The Republican Party plank endorsing a Human Life Amendment does not take a position on which version of a Human Life Amendment should eventually be adopted," James Bopp, the co-chairman of the party platform's Subcommittee on Restoring Constitutional Government, emailed to The Hill. "We leave that decision to Congress and the people of the United States at that time. Thus, we do not take a position on which exceptions should be included in a Human Life Amendment."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/244759-top-republican-gop-platform-doesnt-bar-rape-incest-exemptions-on-abortion-

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 04:12 PM
I have not heard any pro-life people that would be against an abortion where the mother would die without it, I'm sure in a country of 300 million people you could find someone, but I don't know anyone with that much time to waste looking.

Apache
08-22-2012, 04:27 PM
Has anybody found anything suggesting that exceptions should or will be made for the life of the mother? I've been looking for a while.

Where is this coming from? Don't tell me you're buying into this "war on women" BS... Very few abortions, in the overall number performed, are to save the life of the mother.

Lanie
08-22-2012, 04:50 PM
Where is this coming from? Don't tell me you're buying into this "war on women" BS... Very few abortions, in the overall number performed, are to save the life of the mother.

The GOP saying they'd leave that "up to congress" when congress is mostly GOP doesn't make me feel better. I won't feel better until congress themselves write in the exception for the life of the mother. I'm guessing rape and incest will be included, but I'm not as worried about that.

It would be nice if some people who have "known" me for a long ass time considered giving me some credit, even if they don't think I deserve it.

Hawkgirl
08-22-2012, 07:05 PM
Oh here we go...An abortion is the act of INTENTIONALLY killing a fetus. If a fetus dies or is hurt while trying to save the life of the mother, it is not an abortion. It is tragic, but not intentional.

Abortion is intentional killing of an unborn baby. Differentiate.

Apache
08-22-2012, 07:24 PM
The GOP saying they'd leave that "up to congress" when congress is mostly GOP doesn't make me feel better. I won't feel better until congress themselves write in the exception for the life of the mother. I'm guessing rape and incest will be included, but I'm not as worried about that.

It would be nice if some people who have "known" me for a long ass time considered giving me some credit, even if they don't think I deserve it.

Hold on Lanie... I wasn't attacking you, I wanted to know where you were coming from on this. You still really haven't cleared that up either. I don't know of ANYBODY who would sacrifice two lives in order to make a point on abortion. Like Rock said, they are out there but you really have to look...

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 07:32 PM
"As Republicans across the country call on fellow Republican Todd Akin to withdraw from the Missouri Senate race over controversial comments he made on rape and abortion, the Republican Party on Tuesday quietly approved a platform that calls for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, and which does not provide exceptions for victims of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.

The language, which is the same as in the party's 2004 and 2008 platform, was passed on Tuesday without discussion."


http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/article/269607/81/GOP-approves-platform-with-strict-anti-abortion-language

Sometimes I honestly think the thought of an abortion gives you some sort of pleasure or satisfaction.

Hawkgirl
08-22-2012, 07:36 PM
Sometimes I honestly think the thought of an abortion gives you some sort of pleasure or satisfaction.

She wants a group of grumpy old men(aka Congress) give her the OK if she was ever placed in a situation where the baby HAS TO DIE.

Working in the medical field, I have seen a dozen or so of young women who have died after childbirth (yes, it still does happen, although not often) because they made the decision to save their child. Imagine that!!!!!

linda22003
08-22-2012, 08:53 PM
Sometimes I honestly think the thought of an abortion gives you some sort of pleasure or satisfaction.

I quoted a news story to answer a question. Somehow providing a fact was an outrageous thing to do, to you.

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 09:04 PM
You know I am not referring to just this single post.

Sent from my Dell Streak 7 using Tapatalk 2

Lanie
08-22-2012, 10:04 PM
Sometimes I honestly think the thought of an abortion gives you some sort of pleasure or satisfaction.

Really, Rock? Seriously?


She wants a group of grumpy old men(aka Congress) give her the OK if she was ever placed in a situation where the baby HAS TO DIE.

Working in the medical field, I have seen a dozen or so of young women who have died after childbirth (yes, it still does happen, although not often) because they made the decision to save their child. Imagine that!!!!!

Then you probably also know that some of these women were probably for choice for other women. I could never have an abortion once I was so far along in pregnancy, but I don't want to sentence other women to that.

If a doctor tells a woman that the pregnancy will kill her, and she's in the first trimester, then why force her to try to have the baby? We all know the baby won't make it anyway. :blue:

Hawkgirl
08-22-2012, 10:25 PM
Really, Rock? Seriously?

If a doctor tells a woman that the pregnancy will kill her, and she's in the first trimester, then why force her to try to have the baby? We all know the baby won't make it anyway. :blue:

That's not usually how it happens. The doctor or patient usually don't know there are complications until the childbirth/contractions happen. The cases I know about specifically were due to the fact that the mother threw an embolism(blood clot) or they couldn't stop the bleeding after a C-section. In all cases, the baby lived, even the preemies.

Lanie, there are women who would give up their own lives for their offspring. I know you find it hard believe, but it happens.

As for your first trimester example, if the infant isn't viable, it will spontaneously abort(miscarriage) such as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, it is life threatening for the mother- a tube may rupture and result in a fatal hemorrhage, intervention is a sad reality, but it must be done to preserve the chance at future fertility. But point is that the unborn baby isn't viable.

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 10:26 PM
Really, Rock? Seriously?





Yes, she relishes abortion threads, she answers abortion threads way after her normal posting times.

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 10:30 PM
Even before Roe vs Wade woman weren't forced to have a baby if it would kill them, libs are building a hideous straw man here.

Hawkgirl
08-22-2012, 10:33 PM
Even before Roe vs Wade woman weren't forced to have a baby if it would kill them, libs are building a hideous straw man here.

Correct, that has never been propagated by the Pro-Life platform.

NJCardFan
08-22-2012, 10:42 PM
OK Lainie, I'll play along. Can you show me the % of women who need abortions in order to save their lives and compare that to women who want abortions just because it's a matter of convenience? I'll politely wait.

Lanie
08-23-2012, 12:06 AM
Lanie, there are women who would give up their own lives for their offspring. I know you find it hard believe, but it happens.



I guess you didn't read where I said I'd never be able to have an abortion so late in the pregnancy. I said it to you. Not sure why you didn't read it.


Even before Roe vs Wade woman weren't forced to have a baby if it would kill them, libs are building a hideous straw man here.

Two things.

First, a lot of the activists are Catholic. Most Catholics are reasonable. They would favor abortion in cases of life endangerment. Not these people. These people tend to be traditional Catholics who believe that abortion is NEVER justified. Never. I'm pretty sure the Catechism backs me up on this.

Second, I can see the argument now. If pro-choicers had not pushed for abortion so much, we wouldn't have had to push back by making abortion completely illegal. Isn't this the argument about gays? I can totally see it happening here.


OK Lainie, I'll play along. Can you show me the % of women who need abortions in order to save their lives and compare that to women who want abortions just because it's a matter of convenience? I'll politely wait.

I don't care to look it up. I acknowledge that they, rape victims, and incest victims are the minority. I just want protection for those whose lives are in danger.

Wibbins
08-23-2012, 01:00 AM
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/0-006-of-abortions-to-save-moms-life/


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldhansrd/text/120719w0001.htm#12071972000444


The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): Between 1968 and 2011 (the latest year for which figures are available) there have been 6.4 million abortions performed on residents of England and Wales. Of these, 143 (0.006%) were performed under Section 1(4), ie where the termination is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman or to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman.

A further 23,778 (0.37%) abortions were performed under Section 1(1)(c), ie that the continuance of pregnancy would involve the risk to the life of the woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated.



Also, they could just do emergency cesareans

Adam Wood
08-23-2012, 07:34 AM
The GOP saying they'd leave that "up to congress" when congress is mostly GOP doesn't make me feel better. I won't feel better until congress themselves write in the exception for the life of the mother. I'm guessing rape and incest will be included, but I'm not as worried about that.

It would be nice if some people who have "known" me for a long ass time considered giving me some credit, even if they don't think I deserve it.Have you ever looked at a party platform plank and compared it to the associated legislation (assuming it comes to pass)? And I'm talking both R and D here. Platform planks are very, VERY broad statements of intent, usually only a sentence or two. All those other details (or indeed any detail at all) are always worked out in the legislation long after the fact.

The DNC platform in 2008 said something to the effect of "provide affordable health care for all citizens," and we got a 3,000-page document that Nancy Pelosi told us we had to pass in order to read.



Sweating details about exclusions that are a minuscule sliver of the platform plank is ludicrous. Even the very highly pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute admits that abortions because someone got pregnant from a rape represent 0.05% of abortions performed in the US, and those that are performed "to save the life of the mother" are even fewer than that. 99.9% of abortions in the United States are performed solely for the convenience of the mother. That's a simple, undeniable fact. To attempt to shape one's entire platform plank around such a minuscule sliver of the problem is absurd.

linda22003
08-23-2012, 07:47 AM
Yes, she relishes abortion threads, she answers abortion threads way after her normal posting times.

I'm sorry - I didn't realize I was limited to certain hours. Please tell me what those are and I will stay within them, even if I can use a tablet to get through a boring movie. While you're at it, please let me know the approved topics on which I can post, to avoid my irritating you in the slightest.

Rockntractor
08-23-2012, 09:20 AM
I'm sorry - I didn't realize I was limited to certain hours. Please tell me what those are and I will stay within them, even if I can use a tablet to get through a boring movie. While you're at it, please let me know the approved topics on which I can post, to avoid my irritating you in the slightest.

Children are evil, they spell things wrong and crap in their pants, we should eliminate all of them!

linda22003
08-23-2012, 09:37 AM
Children are evil, they spell things wrong and crap in their pants, we should eliminate all of them!

I'm sorry you feel that way. Do you feel all right today?? Have you caught brucellosis from the goats?

Rockntractor
08-23-2012, 10:14 AM
I'm sorry you feel that way. Do you feel all right today?? Have you caught brucellosis the goat?

I haven't caught him yet, we call him Bruce, brucellosis is too hard to say.

Starbuck
08-23-2012, 10:57 AM
Run, Bruce, RUN!:biggrin-new:

FlaGator
08-23-2012, 11:12 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQAV7JvQxxI

m00
08-23-2012, 11:20 AM
Has anybody found anything suggesting that exceptions should or will be made for the life of the mother? I've been looking for a while.

If one considers a fetus to be a person/child/life... on par with every other human being on the planet, why would there be? If it's between the life of the mother and the fetus, and if you believe in the full-fledged personhood of a fetus, seems a bit unfair to the fetus to let the mother decide who lives and who dies.

Rockntractor
08-23-2012, 07:05 PM
Okay Linda, if you have the supper dishes done and the house clean you may post in this thread again.:smile-new:

Lanie
08-23-2012, 10:51 PM
Have you ever looked at a party platform plank and compared it to the associated legislation (assuming it comes to pass)? And I'm talking both R and D here. Platform planks are very, VERY broad statements of intent, usually only a sentence or two. All those other details (or indeed any detail at all) are always worked out in the legislation long after the fact.

The DNC platform in 2008 said something to the effect of "provide affordable health care for all citizens," and we got a 3,000-page document that Nancy Pelosi told us we had to pass in order to read.



Sweating details about exclusions that are a minuscule sliver of the platform plank is ludicrous. Even the very highly pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute admits that abortions because someone got pregnant from a rape represent 0.05% of abortions performed in the US, and those that are performed "to save the life of the mother" are even fewer than that. 99.9% of abortions in the United States are performed solely for the convenience of the mother. That's a simple, undeniable fact. To attempt to shape one's entire platform plank around such a minuscule sliver of the problem is absurd.

I suppose I might be over-reacting about the platform. However, I won't let the fact that life endangerment being the small minority of abortions deter me from expressing this concern. You wouldn't think the concept was absurd if it was your sister, your daughter, or another woman that you loved or cared about. It matters.

Lanie
08-23-2012, 10:56 PM
If one considers a fetus to be a person/child/life... on par with every other human being on the planet, why would there be? If it's between the life of the mother and the fetus, and if you believe in the full-fledged personhood of a fetus, seems a bit unfair to the fetus to let the mother decide who lives and who dies.

Coming from one who never has to worry about pregnancy. :blue:

Suppose one day, you work up and I was beside you. You tried to get away from me just to find out that I was physically connected to you. I was now reliant on your body to survive.

Now, suppose you got the news that in order to keep me alive, you'd have to eventually die. Does it even make sense to let me keep living through your body? If you die, so do I. Unless it's third trimester, the baby is going to die if the mother does. It doesn't make sense for two people to die.

Hawkgirl
08-23-2012, 11:41 PM
Coming from one who never has to worry about pregnancy. :blue:

Suppose one day, you work up and I was beside you. You tried to get away from me just to find out that I was physically connected to you. I was now reliant on your body to survive.



The ol' fetus is a parasite argument.

RobJohnson
08-24-2012, 01:54 AM
I didn't think abortion was a big election year issue.

Are there plans to change the laws?

Is President Obama going to change the law by executive order?

m00
08-24-2012, 02:51 AM
Suppose one day, you work up and I was beside you. You tried to get away from me just to find out that I was physically connected to you. I was now reliant on your body to survive.

I never heard of anyone waking up magically pregnant. There are sooooooooo many birth control options these days. There is even the morning after pill, which is basically an extra strong dose of the same stuff in oral contraceptive. People have a responsibility for lives they create. Especially in the modern world. Rape is extremely tragic and the situation needs to be handled with a lot of sympathy (I would even support free no-questions-asked morning after pills that don't shame the rape victim). But if the result of that rape is a fetus, it's not fetus's fault the mother is raped.

I probably deviate from the majority of people on this board when I say I have no problem with casual sex between two consenting adults. It's your body, do what you want... this is personal freedom. But as soon as you bring another life into the picture it's not just about your freedom. Condoms break, yes... but this has to be rare because in my sexually active adult life I have never had it happen personally. And you have to know how to use a condom, but there are instructions printed right on the damn box. There are even pictures in case you are illiterate! Oral contraception rarely rarely fails. If you are a serious swinger get a vasectomy which are even reversible these days. And actual pregnancy from a 1 time "oops" is also rare (I think pregnancy from a single ejaculation with NO protection is like 9%).

But there is something really sick with our society. I'll give you an example that's slightly related. In Montreal, where I live there is a huge stray cat problem. People adopt kittens and then abandon them when they become grown and less cute/convenient. Or when they move, just leave the cat in the empty apartment with an open window and let it starve or escape. This is wrong, and I would even call it sociopathic and criminal behavior. I hope you agree with this. And if pets are not disposable entities then fetuses damn sure aren't.

Yeah raising a child is expensive and quite honestly not for everyone. But even after birth there are options like adoption, if you do not feel equipped to take care of a child for whatever reason. We're not living in ancient Greece here where times are tough, there is a high infant mortality rate, there is no such thing as birth control, and sometimes you have to leave a newborn to the wolves (literally) because bringing it into your house would mean less food for the 12 other kids you have. We don't have to make these sorts of tough moral choices. We live in the 1st world. We're basically a socialist country with a massive welfare program from the government, a completely parallel welfare system from private charities, and an abundance of food and resources. You can't have it both ways... the whole purpose of having a socialist system is so you aren't forced into these tough moral choices because bringing another kid into the household means the others might starve. I break from other small-government types here and support free contraception from planned parenthood for low income individuals (as an exception to my small government vision), because it gives even LESS of an excuse to have an abortion.

If you consider yourself a moral and ethical individual, and believe that those that need the most protection in our society are the ones that cannot stand up for themselves, then there is no other logical position than some variant of pro-life. You cannot kill human beings because it is inconvenient that they exist!

And by the way, this argument has nothing to do with God, or religion, or a war against women, or any of that. It has to do with being a decent person, and having empathy for other living beings. And also I should state I don't like children, I don't want children (right now at least), and I take great pains that my girlfriend doesn't get pregnant while maintaining an active sex life. But on the off-chance she does (it's improbable but not statistically impossible), I hope when we sit down and discuss the situation that we both have the moral fortitude and human decency not to place our own selfish desires above the life of another.

Bailey
08-24-2012, 04:53 AM
Children are evil, they spell things wrong and crap in their pants, we should eliminate all of them!

For a second Rock I thought Lindanumbers hacked your account and wrong that :D

Unreconstructed Reb
08-24-2012, 07:35 AM
The GOP saying they'd leave that "up to congress" when congress is mostly GOP doesn't make me feel better. I won't feel better until congress themselves write in the exception for the life of the mother. I'm guessing rape and incest will be included, but I'm not as worried about that.

It would be nice if some people who have "known" me for a long ass time considered giving me some credit, even if they don't think I deserve it.

I agree on those two points as long as it's a legitimate rape or incest. Oh, I'm sorry. Does that piss you off?

Akin's language was unfortunate but correct. If abortion is banned then exceptions to the ban would have to be legitimate in order for the procedure to be performed. What would be the point in having a ban if, for instance, a woman becoming pregnant as a result of consensual sex could just state that the pregnancy was the result of a rape, wink-wink, nod-nod, and get an abortion.

Unreconstructed Reb
08-24-2012, 07:42 AM
But there is something really sick with our society.

Since the legalization of abortion in 1973, there have been approximately 50 million abortions performed in the United States.

There were 1.21 million abortions performed in the United States in 2008; 3,322 abortions per day.

Yep, that's sick.

http://prolifeaction.org/faq/abortion.php

linda22003
08-24-2012, 08:35 AM
I didn't think abortion was a big election year issue.

Are there plans to change the laws?

Is President Obama going to change the law by executive order?

There's no reason why it should have been, until Mr. Akin opened mouth and inserted foot. "Misspoke" in politics means "accidentally said out loud what I really thought".
They ALWAYS have plans to change the laws, and are always trying to figure out ways to do it.

linda22003
08-24-2012, 08:37 AM
For a second Rock I thought Lindanumbers hacked your account and wrong that :D

And "wrong" that? That post was definitely written by you; no one hacked your account. :biggrin-new: