Hey prolifers, who's to be damned for the loss this fetus?

To me it is fascinating. I think it is the only industry where women make more money than men, yet it is traditionally viewed as degrading to women, and often abusive of women.

 

Do women make more than the men? That would make sense to me, but I could have sworn I saw an article that claimed otherwise.

 

I read that women make more per scene than men in male/female scenes, but lez scenes pay less than male gay scenes (and men in male/male scenes are not necessarily gay in their private lives, some are "gay for pay"). It is funny to me that a thread about the war in Iraq that was titled to be a call-out of the pro-life movement has evolved into a discussion of the adult film industry.

 

[rant]

Not to ask an actual question, but given that the general idea implied herein that a fetus is no different in moral terms from a fully developed human being, does the fetus go to hell for not having been baptized? Should the fetus be given a name and given a spot in the family burial plot?

I read a statistic that sited that a percentage greater than half of all fetuses are miscarried before the woman even knows she is pregnant. Do all these count as full fledged deaths and should they account accordingly?

The way this discussion always shakes out reminds me quite a bit of the discussion around Napster. The recording industry is so strict in declaring that downloading music is the equal of breaking and entering, that you only have "pure, concentrated EVIL!" (name the movie) or it's the exact opposite.

If I reject that a fetus is 100% the equal of a human life, something that has been evident for me from the first time I thought on the issue, I have to be 100% "pro-choice" in all ways. You have people making threads like this, trying to point out what (to me) seem like exceptionally logical places where a fetus is not treated to be the 100% equal of a human being. Failure to recognize where these differences occur results in what (from my perspective) appears to be an argument in which one side avoids basic logic when it sits right in front of them.

I don't accept that by downloading from Napster is the same as stealing the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, but I can still accept that downloading from Napster is wrong in it's own right. Listening to the recording industry hacks argue otherwise makes it very difficult for me to think of the argument in terms other than the black and white terms that they submit. By "betting the farm" on the jackpot, they make it nearly impossible for themselves to win.

I honestly believe that if some pro-life person would say something like "well obviously it's not 100% the moral equal of a independent baby, but it's 90% or 50% or 70% of the way there and therefore deserves some consideration" then there might be some more logical discussion of the problem.

Of course, this can result in logic that accepts abortion when various levels of danger to the mother's life are present. If you believe that mother's should die in childbirth rather than consider abortion then I guess there is a bit more logic to your argument, but I don't believe that most people actually believe that there is no place where an abortion is a legitimate consideration, any more than the concept of triage in an ER is unacceptable.

And, though I already here the response about "NOW pro-abortion Feminazi's", I submit that you really have to dig deep to find the particular intractability on the issue that one sees on the average from the pro-life people. Some of them exist; they're just a much smaller fringe. Conversely, all of the pro-choice people I know, when pressed, will admit that there are at least some occasions when an abortion is inappropriate, "third trimester abortion" being the most discussed. They just refuse to accept the initial assertion that the fetus and a fully developed child are the same thing, and so gravitate towards the arguments from the others side.

[/rant]

 

I would think that, at least until the Viagra era, it would have made more sense to pay larger sums to men, as there are more men who would be disqualified for reasons of "poor acting". I would think this would more than offset the argument about ingrained cultural attitudes towards sex which would suggest a bias towards women’s salaries.

 

But to the extent that abortion is a political issue the views and actions of pro-life politicians do matter to assessing the pro-life side no more than a Democrat could ignore Howard Dean's latest rants.

As for whether pro-life politicians are heartless bastards or not I'm sure they don't believe they are but I think there dedications to reducing the need for abortions by making it easier to raise children should be questioned.

 

Interesting take but there are several situations where the right of one human cannot be imposed over the rights of another even if that results in death of the first.

I usually cite that in regard to saying even if we regard fetuses as human that still might not end abortion but it could go the other way that if we regard fetuses as human it could be the obligation of the women to bring the fetus to term even if it results in injury or death to her.

 

Talk to andymoon. His position is that the child in utero is 0% human... until such time as s/he can survive outside of the womb. And the pro-Lifers are called the extremists?

 

Moral is a good word- Webster's Dictionary defines it as 'relating to principles of right and wrong behavior'

I just would like to say that most health professionals favor that right behavior is to protect the developing baby by doing the right things during pregnancy that will not result in the death of the baby. Mothers and doctors have always seen a moral duty to protect a pregnancy, even at conception. Here is one website's list of right and wrong principles to protect the unborn baby:

"The key is taking good care of your own health. It will help ensure a healthy pregnancy — from embryo, to fetus, to the birth of your child. The healthier you are, the stronger both of you are likely to be.

Here's our best advice for making good lifestyle choices to prepare for having a healthy baby:


Get plenty of exercise.

Get plenty of rest. Learn how to cut back on stress. Enjoy yourself.

Be aware of dangers on the job.

Avoid alcohol and other drugs.

Avoid infections.

Don't smoke.

There are very dangerous chemicals in tobacco smoke. Carbon monoxide, nicotine, and cyanide cut off oxygen to the fetus. They cause


low birth weight

miscarriage

stillbirth

life-threatening complications

infant death"

Link

 

A lot of issues here. Since I believe that humans have a soul, I'm obviously pro-life - but trying to bring a miscarriage into a pro-life discussion is just flame bait.

I don't have much pity for the soldier. I think that conscientious objector status is more of a relic from the days when we had a draft. He CHOSE to join the army. If he wanted to serve the country without killing people maybe he should have chosen the coast guard or something. Or maybe he could have chosen to have student loans like the rest of us.

It looks to me that he saw CO status as an easy way out, and now he's upset that it isn't going as smoothly as he thought it would. I agree that the army needs to process these things as there regulations state - but if you've dealt with the government at all, you know things never go smoothly or quickly.