This graph makes me nauseous (1 Viewer)

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

The distinction is whether and when a fetus constitutes a human life.

I wouldn't characterize it that way. Of course it's "human" in biological sense, it isn't some other species.

 

[jomar]

If God didn't want abortions, I'm sure he could stop them. maybe its all just a part of his grand plan. leave it up to the Lord, I say.

 

[CBusAlex]

The distinction is whether and when a fetus constitutes a human life.

I wouldn't characterize it that way. Of course it's "human" in biological sense, it isn't some other species.

It's all semantics anyway, but I don't think that simply being biologically human and biologically alive is sufficient to constitute what most people would consider a "human life". A tissue sample could meet those conditions.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

The distinction is whether and when a fetus constitutes a human life.

I wouldn't characterize it that way. Of course it's "human" in biological sense, it isn't some other species.

It's all semantics anyway, but I don't think that simply being biologically human and biologically alive is sufficient to constitute what most people would consider a "human life". A tissue sample could meet those conditions.

I'm on the same side as you (and Tobias) here. I've just been in too many of these discussions here and know the reaction a post like his will get.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The distinction is whether and when a fetus constitutes a human life.

I wouldn't characterize it that way. Of course it's "human" in biological sense, it isn't some other species.

It's all semantics anyway, but I don't think that simply being biologically human and biologically alive is sufficient to constitute what most people would consider a "human life". A tissue sample could meet those conditions.

I'm on the same side as you (and Tobias) here. I've just been in too many of these discussions here and know the reaction a post like his will get.

Fair point, I don't really know how to draw the distinction semantically.

 

[AAABatteries]

Am I wrong in thinking that in an ideal world we would have 0 abortions but it was still legal? Sometimes I think that wouldn't be good enough for the anti-choice side. On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions. So frustrating.

 

[Jayrod]

Odd. I was just thinking to myself that what this country needs is another 50ish million unwanted children

So unwanted by the parents = not worth living? Awesome criteria there. If this is the logic, then why do we prosecute parents who kill their own children?

 

[Jayrod]

On the bright side, violent crime is way down.

Correlation is not causation.

 

[Jayrod]

If you are alarmed at that, I strongly advise that you should also be in favor of free access to birth control and a universal and honest "here is how you prevent pregnancy when you have sex" sex education program. Not the BS "abstinence only" sex "education" that seems to be all the rage with those who are "religious." Those are the programs that should make you nauseous.

Here's the basic fact: People like to ####. And people are going to ####. You can wave a Bible around and preach waiting all you want, but in the end, people are going to do the one thing that they were put on this Earth to do. They are going to ####. And they are going to want to #### when they are teens because their libidos are through the roof. Want to drop the abortion rate? Start with education and birth control.

I am.

 

[Lehigh98]

I'm Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.

I don't understand people who are Anti-Life or Anti-Choice.

 

[Jayrod]

This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.

if you are against abortion, don't have one. pretty ####### simple.

I wonder if any of those potential humans were against abortion? Wish we could ask them.

 

[Abraham]

If all the women you knew were honest...you'd be awestruck at how many of them have had abortions.

 

[Jayrod]

Not deaths. Whole premise of the chart is wrong.

Its clearly stated. Its just comparing counts and doesn't claim they are "deaths".

Kind of unsettling if it were though, huh?

 

[tonydead]

Odd. I was just thinking to myself that what this country needs is another 50ish million unwanted children

So unwanted by the parents = not worth living? Awesome criteria there. If this is the logic, then why do we prosecute parents who kill their own children?

Because murder is against the law.

If all these people stopped having abortions and left their babies on your doorstep instead you'd change your mind pretty quickly.

 

[sbonomo]

If you are alarmed at that, I strongly advise that you should also be in favor of free access to birth control and a universal and honest "here is how you prevent pregnancy when you have sex" sex education program. Not the BS "abstinence only" sex "education" that seems to be all the rage with those who are "religious." Those are the programs that should make you nauseous.

Here's the basic fact: People like to ####. And people are going to ####. You can wave a Bible around and preach waiting all you want, but in the end, people are going to do the one thing that they were put on this Earth to do. They are going to ####. And they are going to want to #### when they are teens because their libidos are through the roof. Want to drop the abortion rate? Start with education and birth control.

Came to post exactly this. Very well said sir!

ETA: I am going to run out of likes in this thread I can see already.

 

[Jayrod]

Odd. I was just thinking to myself that what this country needs is another 50ish million unwanted children

So unwanted by the parents = not worth living? Awesome criteria there. If this is the logic, then why do we prosecute parents who kill their own children?

Because murder is against the law.

If all these people stopped having abortions and left their babies on your doorstep instead you'd change your mind pretty quickly.

Thank you, Captain Obvious. The point being that unwanted is a poor criteria for who lives and who doesn't.

And yes, I would struggle to care for 57 million children by myself, but I don't think it would come to that.

 

[Arizona Ron]

If those kids owned guns they could have prevented getting aborted.

 

[Workhorse]

plain old convenience-driven abortions.

Oh, good lord. What an absolutely disgusting turn of phrase.

Sorry, but it's entirely accurate. Most abortions are driven by some variant of "Now isn't a good time for me to have a child" i.e. it's inconvenient. If you find that troubling, I do as well and I'm sure the OP does too.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest because I'm pro-choice, not "pro-choice, but only if I agree with the reasons behind the choice."

 

[TobiasFunke]

This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.

if you are against abortion, don't have one. pretty ####### simple.

I wonder if any of those potential humans were against abortion? Wish we could ask them.

My guess is that most of them wouldn't be able to answer because they don't have tongues, or lungs, or the capacity to understand language. But why not give it a try? Next time you rub one out ask all the potential humans in the tissue what they think about abortion and let us know how it goes.

 

[Peyton Marino]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

 

[tonydead]

Not deaths. Whole premise of the chart is wrong.

Its clearly stated. Its just comparing counts and doesn't claim they are "deaths".

Kind of unsettling if it were though, huh?

The charts title is United States DEATHS, captain obvious.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions.

Abortion is still legal, but access to abortion services has been diminishing steadily. It doesn't do much good for a woman if abortion is legal but she can't actually get one because she doesn't have any way to travel the 5 hours (sometimes twice in 48 hours) it would take to get to the nearest clinic. Pro-choice organizations have to continue to exert energy on this stuff, sorry.

 

[Mors Venit]

This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.

Is it worse than all those children being born who dont want them and/or take care of them.

Seems like neccessary evil to me

 

[Maik Jeaunz]

If you are alarmed at that, I strongly advise that you should also be in favor of free access to birth control and a universal and honest "here is how you prevent pregnancy when you have sex" sex education program. Not the BS "abstinence only" sex "education" that seems to be all the rage with those who are "religious." Those are the programs that should make you nauseous.

Here's the basic fact: People like to ####. And people are going to ####. You can wave a Bible around and preach waiting all you want, but in the end, people are going to do the one thing that they were put on this Earth to do. They are going to ####. And they are going to want to #### when they are teens because their libidos are through the roof. Want to drop the abortion rate? Start with education and birth control.

just reading this post makes me want to ####.

 

[sbonomo]

Am I wrong in thinking that in an ideal world we would have 0 abortions but it was still legal? Sometimes I think that wouldn't be good enough for the anti-choice side. On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions. So frustrating.

Yes. Your ideal world would have rape victims carrying to full term unwanted children? How about extremely high risk pregnancies such as fallopina tube pregnancy? Where do you draw the line.

 

[sbonomo]

Odd. I was just thinking to myself that what this country needs is another 50ish million unwanted children

So unwanted by the parents = not worth living? Awesome criteria there. If this is the logic, then why do we prosecute parents who kill their own children?

Or people that think it is okay to leave dogs outside tied to a tree.

 

[AAABatteries]

On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions.

Abortion is still legal, but access to abortion services has been diminishing steadily. It doesn't do much good for a woman if abortion is legal but she can't actually get one because she doesn't have any way to travel the 5 hours (sometimes twice in 48 hours) it would take to get to the nearest clinic. Pro-choice organizations have to continue to exert energy on this stuff, sorry.

Thanks for answering - no need to be sorry. I completely stand behind my idea that in an ideal world it would be legal and we'd have 0 - can you point me to more details on what you are talking about? I still maintain that there's not enough emphasis on prevention and I'm full behind increasing our efforts on that front.

 

[tonydead]

Odd. I was just thinking to myself that what this country needs is another 50ish million unwanted children

So unwanted by the parents = not worth living? Awesome criteria there. If this is the logic, then why do we prosecute parents who kill their own children?

Because murder is against the law.

If all these people stopped having abortions and left their babies on your doorstep instead you'd change your mind pretty quickly.

Thank you, Captain Obvious. The point being that unwanted is a poor criteria for who lives and who doesn't.

And yes, I would struggle to care for 57 million children by myself, but I don't think it would come to that.

But they aren't counted as living or counted as deaths, by law. They aren't considered a "who".

And yes, I know that's what bothers you and that's what your whole point is. Unfortunately for you we all have to live by the laws of the land and none of us have to live by your religious moral beliefs if we don't want to. God bless America.

 

[Jayrod]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

Honestly wasn't, but came back in here after lunch and about 5-6 posts really pissed me off. I toned down my initial responses.

I'm just disgusted by the justifications used for the practice in here.

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

 

[AAABatteries]

Am I wrong in thinking that in an ideal world we would have 0 abortions but it was still legal? Sometimes I think that wouldn't be good enough for the anti-choice side. On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions. So frustrating.

Yes. Your ideal world would have rape victims carrying to full term unwanted children? How about extremely high risk pregnancies such as fallopina tube pregnancy? Where do you draw the line.

In my ideal world there's no rape - HTH. I'm not sure why I need to argue that. As for ones for health reasons - I have no issues with those and get your point. If we lump all those together then I would agree with you. To be clear I'm excluding those in my comment and should have stated that. I think most reasonable people agree that your two scenarios are not controversial.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

Agreed. Not letting a women choose what happens to her body is immoral.

 

[RUSF18]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

Honestly wasn't, but came back in here after lunch and about 5-6 posts really pissed me off. I toned down my initial responses.

I'm just disgusted by the justifications used for the practice in here.

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

What justifications wouldn't disgust you?

 

[joffer]

abortion might be legal in Texas right now, but it is in no way "accessible".

 

[AAABatteries]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

Honestly wasn't, but came back in here after lunch and about 5-6 posts really pissed me off. I toned down my initial responses.

I'm just disgusted by the justifications used for the practice in here.

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

You say that but it's kind of hard to believe. You make comments about leaving and then jump back in with a thread like this. It's only going to be perceived as looking for a fight.

 

[JuniorNB]

The latest statistics from the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) data for FY 2014 (link is external).

415,129 children were in foster care on September 30th, 2014, a 4% increase from 2012

264,746 children entered care - that translates to a child entering care every two minutes in the United States

238,230 children existed foster care

107,918 children waiting to be adopted on September 30th, 2014

60,898 children waiting to be adopted whose parental rights (for all living parents) were terminated

50,644 children adopted with public child welfare agency involvement

So.....let's outlaw abortions and increase these numbers? Talk about disgusting. Stop crying about abortion and do something relevant to actually help the unwanted kids that are here now.

Pro-lifers hate talking about this.

 

[tonydead]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

Honestly wasn't, but came back in here after lunch and about 5-6 posts really pissed me off. I toned down my initial responses.

I'm just disgusted by the justifications used for the practice in here.

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

Justification - the act of showing something is right or reasonable. I think the supreme court already ruled on that for us.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

Agreed. Not letting a women choose what happens to her body is immoral.

If only we could figure out what caused these unwanted pregnancies in the first place....hmmmm...maybe someday science will figure out how to start those darn storks from just showing up.

Yep. If only people were as perfect as you and never made mistakes.

 

[Jayrod]

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight

lol ok

Honestly wasn't, but came back in here after lunch and about 5-6 posts really pissed me off. I toned down my initial responses.

I'm just disgusted by the justifications used for the practice in here.

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

You say that but it's kind of hard to believe. You make comments about leaving and then jump back in with a thread like this. It's only going to be perceived as looking for a fight.

Fair point.

 

[Bucky86]

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

Agreed. Not letting a women choose what happens to her body is immoral.

If only we could figure out what caused these unwanted pregnancies in the first place....hmmmm...maybe someday science will figure out how to start those darn storks from just showing up.

Yep. If only people were as perfect as you and never made mistakes.

Yeah and also If women would just stop getting raped.

 

[bakes]

If those kids owned guns they could have prevented getting aborted.

Yeah, but the collateral damage to the mom when that sucker goes off.. Plus it would blow a hole in the placenta, which would kind of negate the purpose.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions.

Abortion is still legal, but access to abortion services has been diminishing steadily. It doesn't do much good for a woman if abortion is legal but she can't actually get one because she doesn't have any way to travel the 5 hours (sometimes twice in 48 hours) it would take to get to the nearest clinic. Pro-choice organizations have to continue to exert energy on this stuff, sorry.

Thanks for answering - no need to be sorry. I completely stand behind my idea that in an ideal world it would be legal and we'd have 0 - can you point me to more details on what you are talking about? I still maintain that there's not enough emphasis on prevention and I'm full behind increasing our efforts on that front.

I'd just google "access to abortion" and you can read tons of stuff about it. Here's a NY Times article from 2014 that came up -- http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/04/us/women-losing-access-to-abortion-as-opponents-gain-ground-in-state-legislatures.html. I think there are some states now where there's only one place to get an abortion in the entire state. The Supreme Court case being heard this term involves the Texas law that threatens to shut down one third of their abortion facilities.

 

[AAABatteries]

I'll step back now as there are fundamental differences in morality here that likely cannot be breached through an online discussion.

Agreed. Not letting a women choose what happens to her body is immoral.

If only we could figure out what caused these unwanted pregnancies in the first place....hmmmm...maybe someday science will figure out how to start those darn storks from just showing up.

Yep. If only people were as perfect as you and never made mistakes.

Yeah and also If women would just stop getting raped.

Only nutcases are opposed to that. Sbonomo makes a good point with rape/health issues. I'm not proposing that we find a new word for it but I see them as fundamentally different. Back to my whole complaint about both sides - that they ignore the damage to the women. In rape/health cases that is almost the sole focus - the women in these situations (as it should be). I think other abortions get all mixed up in these endless debates and back and forth and meanwhile you have poor women who aren't getting the care they need after the fact and you have woman not being educated (enough) on how to prevent it or what they may go through if they do get one.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

what they may go through if they do get one.

The vast majority of women that get abortions report that their primary emotion afterwards is relief. Yes, there are some women that regret getting abortions but that is not the norm.

 

[sublimeone]

Am I wrong in thinking that in an ideal world we would have 0 abortions but it was still legal? Sometimes I think that wouldn't be good enough for the anti-choice side. On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions. So frustrating.

 

[tonydead]

New definition for wacko- religious dude starting a thread about abortion and expects no argument or perceived disturbing argument from the opposite side.

 

[General Malaise]

if you are against abortion, don't have one. pretty ####### simple.

I typically don't jump in to abortion conversations because people lose their mind and it's funny here especially because we are 99% men. I am disturbed by the numbers though - and I outlined it somewhat earlier. I think abortions can be physically (and especially) mentally harmful to women and we've made it very passé to get one. I'm not saying that women don't take the decision lightly, what I'm saying is I don't think there's as much seriousness given before getting pregnant. I don't think they understand the impact an abortion will have on them.

Guarantee you it beats the impact of screaming, yelling, pooping, vomiting, crying blobs of molecules that soak you for life financially, emotionally, mentally and physically. Trust me, I have 5 of these lifeforms.

 

[Jayrod]

New definition for wacko- religious dude starting a thread about abortion and expects no argument or perceived disturbing argument from the opposite side.

Yup, stupid idea.

 

[General Malaise]

This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.

if you are against abortion, don't have one. pretty ####### simple.

I wonder if any of those potential humans were against abortion? Wish we could ask them.

Why don't you go and ask one of the many kids out there without any parents how they're doing? And then do something about it. Stop crying on a message board about something you can't control. Go out there and make a difference in the lives of the thousands of kids who need love and hope.

 

[AAABatteries]

On the flip side it seems like the pro-choice side wants to spend more time arguing something that is now legal instead of focusing their energy on reducing the number of abortions.

Abortion is still legal, but access to abortion services has been diminishing steadily. It doesn't do much good for a woman if abortion is legal but she can't actually get one because she doesn't have any way to travel the 5 hours (sometimes twice in 48 hours) it would take to get to the nearest clinic. Pro-choice organizations have to continue to exert energy on this stuff, sorry.

Thanks for answering - no need to be sorry. I completely stand behind my idea that in an ideal world it would be legal and we'd have 0 - can you point me to more details on what you are talking about? I still maintain that there's not enough emphasis on prevention and I'm full behind increasing our efforts on that front.

I'd just google "access to abortion" and you can read tons of stuff about it. Here's a NY Times article from 2014 that came up -- http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/04/us/women-losing-access-to-abortion-as-opponents-gain-ground-in-state-legislatures.html. I think there are some states now where there's only one place to get an abortion in the entire state. The Supreme Court case being heard this term involves the Texas law that threatens to shut down one third of their abortion facilities.

Thanks for posting that - it's a sad article to read IMO. It just reinforces my opinion that people are focused on the wrong things. Both sides but more-so the pro-life side in this case. This is potentially dangerous to women who will seek other means.

 

[AAABatteries]

I find it ironic that a lot of pro-life people are Christians who believe that aborted babies go to heaven but on the flip side I'm sure there's a lot of pro-choice people who would believe that all there is to life is our time here. It would almost seem like it should be the opposite.