Mike Adams Says it way better than I ever could

[Guest nicemac]

As this subject can be controversial, I am not looking for a debate, or even comments. I just wanted to state my viewpoint last week and feel I did not do it very well. Mike Adams states what I was trying to say very well. Read it, read both parts. Who knows, it may change your mind.

Part 1:

Killing Six Birds with One Stone - Mike Adams - Townhall Conservative

Part 2:

Poverty, Rape and Abortion - Mike Adams - Townhall Conservative

[Guest bkelm18]

IBTL

[hardknox00001]

IBTL

+1

[MacGyver]

You know...I thought I was pretty clear on Friday about threads like this.

I'll leave this thread open for now. If you guys can discuss it intelligently, great.

But, if and when it devolves, there will be reprocussions.

[Defender]

Double Post

Edited July 18, 2011 by barewoolf

[Defender]

At one point in my young adulthood, I considered myself somewhat of a liberal, and I was in favor of abortion. As I aged and matured, I saw that I was very conservative, and somewhat of a libertarian. but not quite. My current views are generally against it as I think life generally takes precedence over a 'womans control of her own body.' But I read a very good book a while back, "Freakanomics," which, amongst other things, put forth a novel idea that Roe V. Wade and the onslaught of abortions it brought on, was responsible for or had a direct correlation with a lack of growth in violent crime or even a reduction of crime in the years since that case. This hasnt changed my stance, Im still pro life, but the facts they present are sure hard to argue with.

Edited July 18, 2011 by barewoolf

[ls3_kid]

As I stated in the other thread, what if it comes down to the baby dying or the wife/girlfriend dying? What do you do? Errr... more politically correct what is the right thing to do?

[Guest nicemac]

As I stated in the other thread, what if it comes down to the baby dying or the wife/girlfriend dying? What do you do? Errr... more politically correct what is the right thing to do?

Great responses:

Abortion to ‘save’ mother’s life almost never necessary

http://realchoice.blogspot.com/2008/10/search-abortion-for-life-of-mother.html

To answer your question; I think this situation is extremely rare but I would not blame a a husband/ father for approving a surgery to save his wife that would/could mean losing his child.

Edited July 18, 2011 by nicemac
added link

[mav]

But I read a very good book a while back, "Freakanomics," which, amongst other things, put forth a novel idea that Roe V. Wade and the onslaught of abortions it brought on, was responsible for or had a direct correlation with a lack of growth in violent crime or even a reduction of crime in the years since that case. This hasnt changed my stance, Im still pro life, but the facts they present are sure hard to argue with.

I read that book as well. I thought his argument to the anti-gun crowd was great. He showed statistically that more kids have been killed in swimming pools in comparison to number killed by playing around with their parent's firearms, yet nobody is out screaming that swimming pools should be banned.

I also liked his argument on minimum wage vs. drug dealing.

[Defender]

His arguments sure make you think.

[wipfel]

As I stated in the other thread, what if it comes down to the baby dying or the wife/girlfriend dying? What do you do? Errr... more politically correct what is the right thing to do?

My wife and I had that same conversation, and she was adamant that the baby comes first. I know I'd choose her first and the baby second. Whether that's right or wrong I don't know, but that's what I'd do.

[ls3_kid]

Great responses:

Abortion to ‘save’ mother’s life almost never necessary

RealChoice: Search: Abortion for the life of the mother

To answer your question; I think this situation is extremely rare but I would not blame a a husband/ father for approving a surgery to save his wife that would/could mean losing his child.

I know it's rare, I don't believe in abortion but I believe that there are certain circumstances that it may be the "lesser of the two evils". However your websites do give some good views. I have always been for abortion in a rape scenario but now my opinion is definitely in the grey area. Only way for me to know how I would feel what I want is to be put into each situation. Hopefully my life will be perfect in this area and there is gold at the end of a rainbow.

[bigwakes]

I was trying to express his argument for #3 when I almost met an untimely demise to Vacation status. These arguments are very well thought out and I could not put it better myself. Thanks for sharing.

[JAB]

To me, the bottom line is that no one has the right to tell the woman that she has to keep anything in her body that she doesn't want there. Come up with an artificial womb and things might be different. Until then, no rhetorical convolutions change the fact that if the fetus cannot survive autonomously outside of the woman's body then it is not an autonomous 'life' and, therefore, the mother's right to determine whether or not she continues to carry it inside her body holds sway regardless of whatever 'but it has it's own DNA' arguments Mr. Adams might want to make.

Edited July 18, 2011 by JAB

[Guest DELETED]

I agree with JAB.

[canadienmike]

To me, the bottom line is that no one has the right to tell the woman that she has to keep anything in her body that she doesn't want there. Come up with an artificial womb and things might be different. Until then, no rhetorical convolutions change the fact that if the fetus cannot survive autonomously outside of the woman's body then it is not an autonomous 'life' and, therefore, the mother's right to determine whether or not she continues to carry it inside her body holds sway regardless of whatever 'but it has it's own DNA' arguments Mr. Adams might want to make.

So you'd be ok with banning late term abortions, since the fetus can survive outside the womb at that point and would then be considered a life?

[Good_Steward]

In response to the autonomous statement: find me a three month old that can survive autonomously. They need to be fed and sheltered by someone, or they will die. Is it ok to crack this child's head open and pull it's brains out?

I look at it this way, if the woman didn't want a baby in her body, she shouldn't have put the baby maker in her body. There are repercussions to our actions, and the majority of this board, as well as I, preach personal responsibility. If the pregnant woman chooses adoption, she at least made one right decision.

Let's not forget the "Rape" and "Or the Mother will die" abortions are next to zero when compared to convenience abortions.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Good_Steward

[bigwakes]

To me, the bottom line is that no one has the right to tell the woman that she has to keep anything in her body that she doesn't want there. Come up with an artificial womb and things might be different. Until then, no rhetorical convolutions change the fact that if the fetus cannot survive autonomously outside of the woman's body then it is not an autonomous 'life' and, therefore, the mother's right to determine whether or not she continues to carry it inside her body holds sway regardless of whatever 'but it has it's own DNA' arguments Mr. Adams might want to make.

So 22 weeks is the "magic number" then? Earliest surviving preemie to stay in hospital - Health - Kids and parenting - msnbc.com

[Ebow1]

I am unfamiliar with this concept of intelligent discussion.

[Mr. Brooks]

In response to the autonomous statement: find me a three month old that can survive autonomously. They need to be fed and sheltered by someone, or they will die. Is it ok to crack this child's head open and pull it's brains out?

And herrrre we go!

Ibtl

[R_Bert]

So 22 weeks is the "magic number" then? Earliest surviving preemie to stay in hospital - Health - Kids and parenting - msnbc.com

I myself was 12 weeks early in 1961 and after my mom rejected her doctor's earlier advice to terminate. After I was born, I was not expected to survive. I spent a number of months in critical care, but 50+ years later am quite glad no one listened to conventional wisdom.

My personal thoughts (and experience) are that if it will, without interference, result in a baby, then, it is life.

B.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

To me, the bottom line is that no one has the right to tell the woman that she has to keep anything in her body that she doesn't want there. Come up with an artificial womb and things might be different. Until then, no rhetorical convolutions change the fact that if the fetus cannot survive autonomously outside of the woman's body then it is not an autonomous 'life' and, therefore, the mother's right to determine whether or not she continues to carry it inside her body holds sway regardless of whatever 'but it has it's own DNA' arguments Mr. Adams might want to make.

People can also choose to not have that sex until they are mature and willing to be responsible parents. The rest of this"Woman's Rights" stuff is just rehashed Barbara Streisand for those of you politically correct ones.

Say human nature all you want, and I'm glad I didn't see the other thread for what ever reason, but allowing your kids to grow up without understanding right and wrong and not teaching them the responsibility of parenthood is whose fault? Don't give me that society crap.

So if it is entirely up to your wife to decide the fate of an organism growing in her body, whether it lives or dies, you have lost your argument, because you have become part of the problem, since you had something to do with it being there.

[BigK]

Great responses:

Abortion to ‘save’ mother’s life almost never necessary

RealChoice: Search: Abortion for the life of the mother

To answer your question; I think this situation is extremely rare but I would not blame a a husband/ father for approving a surgery to save his wife that would/could mean losing his child.

Although I acknowledge that it is rare to "need" an abortion to save the mother's life, I found myself in the exact situation you've described.

In late 1994 my wife was pregnant with our second child. Within 6 or 8 weeks we found out she had advanced lymphoma. We struggled for all of a day at the most with the decision of whether she had an abortion, surgery to remove tumors, and chemotherapy or died from cancer within months +/- of giving birth (as estimated by her oncologist).

Our oldest, a son, is shipping out to the Marines exactly one week from today. He did not deserve to grow up without his mother and would not be the man he is today without her influence. Our youngest, a daughter, was born in late 1996. I cannot imagine life without her and owe her existence to our decision.

As I see it ALL life is precious, whether it's an unborn living child or the mother carrying that child. While I consider myself strongly Pro-Life today, I'd obviously NEVER ask a woman to risk her life if an abortion could save her. Otherwise, whether it's been born a week ago, conceived a week ago, or somewhere in between I believe the rest of the abortion debate has always and will always hinge upon when the law decides a child is too old to kill.

[Guest nicemac]

So 22 weeks is the "magic number" then? Earliest surviving preemie to stay in hospital - Health - Kids and parenting - msnbc.com

No, there is no magic number because the number at which babies survive delivery keeps changing. 25 years ago a child born before 30 weeks was doomed. Now, 21-22.

Question: How many one year olds could survive on their own? None

So when is a person viable without intervention? At five? Eight? 13? When can someone truly survive on their own?

[wipfel]

Although I acknowledge that it is rare to "need" an abortion to save the mother's life, I found myself in the exact situation you've described.

In late 1994 my wife was pregnant with our second child. Within 6 or 8 weeks we found out she had advanced lymphoma. We struggled for all of a day at the most with the decision of whether she had an abortion, surgery to remove tumors, and chemotherapy or died from cancer within months +/- of giving birth (as estimated by her oncologist).

Our oldest, a son, is shipping out to the Marines exactly one week from today. He did not deserve to grow up without his mother and would not be the man he is today without her influence. Our youngest, a daughter, was born in late 1996. I cannot imagine life without her and owe her existence to our decision.

As I see it ALL life is precious, whether it's an unborn living child or the mother carrying that child. While I consider myself strongly Pro-Life today, I'd obviously NEVER ask a woman to risk her life if an abortion could save her. Otherwise, whether it's been born a week ago, conceived a week ago, or somewhere in between I believe the rest of the abortion debate has always and will always hinge upon when the law decides a child is too old to kill.

Forgive me if I'm getting too nosy, but what did you guys decide to do? Sounds like it all worked out well for everyone if I read that correctly?