Only 0.006 Percent Of Abortions Are To Save The Life Of The Mother

[thesometimesaint]

I didn't claim they had a greater incidence of mental illness. I claimed that there are mental costs.

I have no problem with women choosing not to have an abortion. I don't know of anyone (except extremists) who are against women choosing not to have abortions.

I never brought religious beliefs into this discussion. I am not against abortions for religious beliefs. I am against abortions (except in rare circumstances) because it is the destruction of a human being beginning its life. In many cases, that life has already begun to think for itself.

The issue is for those who choose to have abortions out of convenience. The laws currently do not keep these to a rarity; but in fact they are the great majority (approximately 95%) of all abortions.

If "X" is of no greater/lesser value than "Y". Then "X" is independent of "Y". In the case of abortion, it is no greater a cause of mental illness than pregnancy itself.

I don't either, but that is not the discussion. It is the times where abortion is occurring.

Fine with me if we don't put religion into the discussion. However religious beliefs are central as to when human life begins. Few believe that an undifferentiated clump of cells is human life. Not even Mississippi went for the so called Personhood Amendments

I doubt that it is many. Even so 24 weeks is the minimum gestation time for conscientiousness. Well after the time(about 12 weeks) when the vast majority of abortions take place.

88-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, prior to the 13th week of gestation (AGI/CDC).

See http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

While I prefer that if a women doesn't want to become pregnant she take steps not to become pregnant. One woman's convenience is another woman's necessity. Further attempts at making all abortion illegal just puts in the underground. Thus placing women outside of proper medical care.

I'm all in favor of keeping it rare. The question is how do we enforce that rarity? Making it illegal doesn't work and just pushes women into dangerous to themselves, and their babies, behaviors. Abortion on demand shocks the sensibilities of most people regardless of religious beliefs. I certainly don't recommend it. So what are we reasonably left with but teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves. I have the sneaking suspicion that if women felt secure in the support from their male partners abortions would become that rarity.

[Zeta-Flux]

TSS,

I've tried to explain my position multiple times now and you don't seem to be getting it, so I'm going to stop on that front. However, you said something that is not entirely accurate:

I doubt that it is many. Even so 24 weeks is the minimum gestation time for conscientiousness. Well after the time(about 12 weeks) when the vast majority of abortions take place.

According to this webpage a fetus begins forming the first synapses in the fifth week. By the sixth week, the first fetal movements happen. The first signs of EEG movement occur in the 12th week.

[thesometimesaint]

Zeta-Flux:

Synaptic firings are not dependent upon conscientiousness. Rudimentary animals have synaptic firings though I doubt any would be called human.

[Zeta-Flux]

Synaptic firings are not dependent upon conscientiousness. Rudimentary animals have synaptic firings though I doubt any would be called human.

Even if true, what does that matter? Your position is that the law should allow for the termination of fetuses even if they have consciousness, to provide a safe environment wherein it is easy for a woman to obtain an abortion, is it not?

My position is that, except in serious circumstances, the law should not allow for the intentional killing of a being who has begun thinking and will ultimately become conscious.

You want to make it safe to kill. I want to make it illegal.

[thesometimesaint]

Zeta-Flux:

My position on the legality of abortion is nearly identical to the USSC decision in Roe v Wade. But I'm no lawyer. So it is just my personal opinion

My moral position is exactly the same as the Church.

If you make it unsafe for any. You of necessity make it unsafe even for those whom you agree should have the option of abortion.

I know you want to make it illegal. However women will continue to seek and find abortions. I want to make them rare by changing peoples minds. You tell me, which is more effective?

[Zeta-Flux]

If you make it unsafe for any. You of necessity make it unsafe even for those whom you agree should have the option of abortion.

I disagree.

I know you want to make it illegal. However women will continue to seek and find abortions. I want to make them rare by changing peoples minds. You tell me, which is more effective?

Both.

[thesometimesaint]

Both your statements are oxymoronic.

[Zeta-Flux]

Both your statements are oxymoronic.

I disagree. And I don't think you'll provide coherent evidence for your statement. *shrug*

[William Schryver]

I agree with the Church's position on abortion.

I have also known several women who, after having an elective abortion of convenience (which, as has been noted on this thread, constitutes the overwhelming majority of abortions), are severely damaged, both emotionally and spiritually, for the remainder of their lives. We would be doing all women a great favor by making it much more difficult to obtain abortions, and by encouraging adoption as the preferred solution to unwanted pregnancies.

[MorningStar]

So A LOT of the abortions are for married women who may have other children. When will society be in a position to allow those women to give a baby up for adoption? I guess in about, oh never.

And if the "you play you pay" is the attitude then a lot of people are not understanding the ins and outs of sexual relationships. It isn't just about fun. Not everyone is in a healthy loving relationship where sex is an expression of their love for one another or even because of desire. How many women on this board have had sex when they have zero desire to do so? If every woman didn't raise her hand she'd be lying. Women are often pressured to have sex and it happens for lots of different reasons good and bad.

When your married, mother of 4, next door neighbor gives her next baby up for adoption I bet everyone would be over congratulating her on not having an abortion. Ah, yeah, right.

My husband's biological mother had a child before him and gave him up for adoption when the father died. I would applaud her for not having an abortion.

[MorningStar]

A friend of mine spent tens of thousands of dollars on fertility treatments and was finally able to have a baby girl. When they tried for a second child, she had several miscarriages and then her fertilized egg implanted in her cervix. She was in horrible pain and in danger of bleeding to death. She was devastated when the doctor told her they needed to terminate the pregnancy. If she hadn't done so, she and the baby would have died and she wouldn't be here to take care of her daughter.

[BCSpace]

These were reported by the woman and therefore concerns for health would likely be much higher than if reported by a doctor.

Interesting how, under LDS doctrine and policy, most of those don't qualify as valid reasons for abortion.

[mtomm]

Interesting how, under LDS doctrine and policy, most of those don't qualify as valid reasons for abortion.

Of course not. Amazingly, not everyone is a member of our Church so I'm not sure why that would be a consideration when they are making the decision to have an abortion.

Abortion

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in the sanctity of human life. Therefore, the Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience, and counsels its members not to submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions.

The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:

• Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or
  
• A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or
  
• A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
  

The Church teaches its members that even these rare exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.

The Church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion.

http://www.mormonnew...issues/abortion

Bolding is mine. I think the wording of these statements is very, very carefully controlled and thoughtful. It's the official position.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

A 2004 study by the Guttmacher Institute reported that women listed the following amongst their reasons for choosing to have an abortion: ^[47]

• 74% Having a baby would dramatically change my life
  
• 73% Can’t afford a baby now
  
• 48% Don’t want to be a single mother or having relationship problems
  
• 38% Have completed my childbearing
  
• 32% Not ready for a(nother) child
  
• 25% Don’t want people to know I had sex or got pregnant
  
• 22% Don’t feel mature enough to raise a(nother) child
  
• 14% Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion
  
• 13% Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus
  
• 12% Concerns about my health
  
• 6% Parents want me to have an abortion
  
• 1% Was a victim of rape
  
• less than 0.5% Became pregnant as a result of incest
  

These were reported by the woman and therefore concerns for health would likely be much higher than if reported by a doctor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States

For an idealist like myself this is hard to bare.

[Somebodyz]

My husband's biological mother had a child before him and gave him up for adoption when the father died. I would applaud her for not having an abortion.

If you go on the (USA)

adoption sites for adoptees it's surprising how many bio parents were either in committed relationships or married. A poll was done on one of these sites recently and most of the parents were not young teens, but mid twenties to thirties.

I wouldn't applaud her at all. Adoption isn't something to be proud of.

[Zeta-Flux]

Adoption isn't something to be proud of.

It is when you cannot afford to take care of a child, through no fault of your own.

[Calm]

Proud in the sense that being in that situation is something to brag about, of course not; but I do think putting a child's needs before one's own---and that may include adoption---is something to be proud of in the sense that we need to understand that personal sacrifice is something we should be doing, are commanded to do when necessary.

https://itsaboutlove.../site/pregnant/

https://itsaboutlove.org/ial/ct/eng/site/pregnant/what-are-my-options/adoption/the-choice-i-made/

[MorningStar]

If you go on the (USA)

adoption sites for adoptees it's surprising how many bio parents were either in committed relationships or married. A poll was done on one of these sites recently and most of the parents were not young teens, but mid twenties to thirties.

I wouldn't applaud her at all. Adoption isn't something to be proud of.

I would gladly applaud her for giving my husband the option of living.

[Somebodyz]

I would gladly applaud her for giving my husband the option of living.

That's my point. A baby shouldn't have to be grateful, for not being murdered and instead given away. Ideally a baby should have a loving family. Ideally women should not be getting pregnant until they can offer this. I don't applaud women who give up their children. Please don't misunderstand, that doesn't mean I condemn them and I've been supportive of teens I've known who found themselves in this position.

[thesometimesaint]

Murder has a specific legal meaning and abortion doesn't meet that definition.

[Somebodyz]

Murder has a specific legal meaning and abortion doesn't meet that definition.

I'm sure the baby appreciates the difference.

[thesometimesaint]

Dead is dead regardless of cause. We still don't prosecute all deaths as murder.

[USU78]

Dead is dead regardless of cause. We still don't prosecute all deaths as murder.

98% of those babies dead because they are inconvenient makes those deaths supportable, in your view?

Or are we simply to genuflect to the vacuousness that is Harry Blackmun's obscenity in the U.S. Reporter? Or to the argument that, "Men are mean, so we must kill the babies they father."

[thesometimesaint]

USU78:

It is still not murder.

[USU78]

USU78:

It is still not murder.

The willful snuffing out of another genetically unique human organism without justification IS murder.

Everything else is pandering vacuity.