Just re-read Max's earlier post and it was on point as far as using the 'm' word (as I did). thought I should add, I am not for overturning Roe vs. Wade like dropping the A-Bomb. I am for beginning the movement towards getting back to loving and protecting all unborn babies as much as possible (and I don't mean a federal mandate), working to resolve the 'unwanted baby' issue and reducing abortions dramatically.
For the most part Roe v. Wade was overturned by Casey. The important precedents now are in Gonzalez v. Carhart, Casey, and Doe v. Bolton.
i'm really not trying to be argumentative here...but do you not see, even a little bit, how comparing a parasite to an unborn child COULD be offensive to people who see this issue differently than you do? i'm not asking for a biology class from wnes or a dictionary explanation from you. just giving you my reaction to the word.
The technicality makes fundamental difference. Other than the thread of dependency argument, Ottoman's analogy simply cannot hold up with his "two species" and "dissimilar organisms" nonsense. Simply put, no parasite gets 50% of its genetic material from the host.
Yeah I'm just trying to speak much more precisely about it now. Half the arguments made by the pro-choice crowd in here aren't really what the law is. (I'm not saying they aren't free to make those arguments) They have elements of the law, but the only real issue now is what are the health considerations? FOCA will make their language more relevant.
I think my point and yours are not incompatible, but apparently I suck at getting it across. In any case, I understand and appreciate your position and find it eminently reasonable.
What's your strategy here? I think it is good common ground. To me, though, I would include protection of born babies who are not receiving care as well. Anyway, my first angle would would be reducing unwanted pregnancies. There is data on how this is best achieved. I would follow it and further develop that field of understanding. How important is evidence-based social science to you when creating a strategy to meet the goal of reducing unwanted pregnancies? I think empiric measures of success should be part and parcel of any any any intervention. I would be very eager to learn more about strategies to reduce abortions other than making it illegal - I think the fight over the politics obscures the common ground people share, and that caring for children begins, actually, prior to conception, by making resources and knowledge and services available to potential parents. Preventing the problem is the most cost effective and least contentious place to start. rhester - your thoughts on how to accomplish the goal of reducing abortions?
Back in the day. A parent will often say to their kid until they are married. I gave you life. I can take it from you.
I wonder if you had a boy already... instead of 4 girls... if you would be looking to adopt.... as a expat...Living in the Philippines... a Catholic.. country even more so than the USA... there are people are not only more ignorant than your average southern American... but they actually have 7 or 8 kids on the off chance that 1 or 2 of them can support them in the future... ofcourse what you get is the rest...assigned to a life of poverty... its been shown birth control or education... can have a impact... but the Catholic Church wont allow that.. but then thats not as bad as some places in Africa... they have 7 or 8 kids... because half wont make it to adulthood... 29000 children die each day... due to lack of food, safe water, or medical attention... sure lets just lets these kids be born tourture them... due to lack of food, safe water, or medical attention... and then let them die... personally I would be against abortion... myself... but I think each person has the right to choose... your American GOP party does not... nor does it choose to teach... either...
It is not a political party's job to teach. The Democratic Party does not teach either unless you are counting on Planned Parenthood as an "arm" of the Democratic Party...
wow is it all Americans... or just you... is everthing black and white... up and down.. right or left... there is no inbetween... or reading between the lines is there...
My thoughts, I would propose a dialogue with local-state-fed govt., educators, doctors, parents, clergy, pro-life organization leaders, pro-choice organization leaders and other stakeholders--- The challenge is to balance the group- between the 2 sides, pretty tall task but you have to start to start. The purpose would be to reconcile the direction- I would suggest starting at fewer 'unwanted' pregnancies- without trying to solve anything- pure mission statement. Next, I would like to see a root cause analysis process to identify and define the issue. Third, I would like to see a general vision statement that's focused on the unwanted pregnancy issue. Fourth, I think each state should set up the same type group and review everything at this point. Any state should be able to input a rep to the group that represents the state's perspective. I know this sounds like a slow process but it needs to be in my opinion to get it going and get it right. There is way too much difference in this issue not to get things aligned before goals or actions are determined. Fifth, if at any time there is a sticking point on any of the above, they must work harder and try to resolve the issue. If they cannot come up with a common vision for reducing unwanted pregnancy then the process has to stop and time has to be taken to get going again- together. Once there is a vision for reducing unwanted pregnancy then another root cause analysis should be undertaken to begin to get at those core problems- education, home, school, economics, peer dependancy, parents, laws, character, support, abuse, drugs/alcohol etc Once root causes are carefully identified then recommendations can be made, goals set and then there could be some actions/implementations/programs. Once the issue of unwanted pregnancy is rolling properly I would recommend another appropriate large team begin to work on the issue of abortion. That will be an even greater challenge to reach consensus. Unfortunately to work on reducing abortion significantly the whole concept of the fetus/child issue at some point would have to be handled. That is when it will be difficult. If there is a way to get together still at this point then, The root causes of abortion are so strongly tied to the root causes of unwanted pregnancy that at this point it would be best to tie the vision and goals together. I think it would also be wise in addressing abortion to start with the groups most damaged by the issues- young teens. Start with the obvious and work toward the more complex. You will have many big issues to work through on a project this big- money, support, back ally abortion problems and other things that will need to be worked through. But it is definately worth all the time and work. I believe that it is a small % of women who have sex planning to have an abortion. (I know women consider the available option, but I still doubt that it is a planned event) I may be wrong, but it is with that belief that I have hope for solutions. OK- so much for vague thoughts, I certainly don't think abortions are going to be reduced without alot of work. I mean there are radical extreme groups on both sides. So it ain't easy, but it could happen.
So none of you wished that Hitler or Bin Laden would have been aborted? I see it as an issue God put in place to do his dirty work....... just kidding. But HOW MANY of you Pro-Lifers believe in the death penalty?
i'm a pro-lifer, though i'm not sure i care about the state of the law on the issue...at least not anymore. but i'd hate to be called anything other than pro-life, no matter my take on the legal/political division. and i'm opposed to the death penalty.
