Abortion for 'medical reasons' 'legalised' in Tasmania

[the 4th survivor]

What would be worse?

A woman who gets pregnant by accident and doesnt want a baby, so has an abortion a few weeks after she finds out, or a woman who gets pregnant by accident, isnt allowed an abortion so has the baby but abuses him and reminds it every day how much she hates him, wishes she had an abortion and says getting pregnant ruined her life?

Just cause someone cant abort, doesnt mean she will instantly fall in love with her baby, want to keep it and magically gain the resources needed to give it an awesome life.

Adoption doesnt always work out either, as theres less people adopting than there are babies being put up for adoption, and not all adoptive parents are loving and good.

I realize the adoption process isn't flawless or anything close to it but I'd rather take my chances with that than be aborted. Besides, if all babies put up for adoption were the result of an accidental pregnancy (meaning you used protection but it failed) there would probably be more than enough adoptive parents to go around.

[samurai_sarah]

I realize the adoption process isn't flawless or anything close to it but I'd rather take my chances with that than be aborted. Besides, if all babies put up for adoption were the result of an accidental pregnancy (meaning you used protection but it failed) there would probably be more than enough adoptive parents to go around.

Huh? That doesn't even make sense. More babies = more adoptive parents? Then how come there are orphanages across the world? Clearly, there are children already, waiting, but people aren't exactly queueing. So how would adding even more children to the system increase the number of adoptive parents? Please explain.

[the 4th survivor]

Sorry if I didn't word that well enough. What I'm saying is that most babies put up for adoption are not the result of accidental pregnancies because using protection prevents the overwhelming majority of them. So if everybody used protection when they didn't want a kid, there would be far fewer unwanted children and so there wouldn't be such a shortage of parents ready to adopt.

[Spider Burps]

:clap: Perfect response.

I'm sorry, now we're telling people to die because we disagree with their ignorant beliefs???? Remembering the shit storm that "DIAF" and "ESAD" started a mere couple of months ago, I'm amazed that we're now cheering on such an immature and reprehensible response. Where's the "kinder, gentler FJ" everyone's been going on about? :think:

[the 4th survivor]

I'm sorry, now we're telling people to die because we disagree with their ignorant beliefs???? Remembering the shit storm that "DIAF" and "ESAD" started a mere couple of months ago, I'm amazed that we're now cheering on such an immature and reprehensible response. Where's the "kinder, gentler FJ" everyone's been going on about? :think:

Hey, "grownups are talking" okay? We must listen to them :lol:

Oh and thanks but my beliefs are not ignorant. I just happen to hold my life and the lives of others in high regard. Yes that even includes you Free Jingerers.

[formergothardite]

If you hold lives of others in such high regard, why would you force women against their will into something that could kill them or ruin their lives?

[the 4th survivor]

I wouldn't. If a woman's life is in danger then that's a different story. "I don't want a baby" isn't a good enough excuse though. If you don't want a baby or can't afford one then just put them up for adoption. Like I said I realize adoption's not perfect but I'd rather take my chances with that, wouldn't you?

[formergothardite]

Women die in pregnancy or because of pregnancy even with medical care. When they were doing a study on the long term effects of being denied an abortion(it screws up the lives of women, but I doubt you care) one of the women died when she would have lived if she had been allowed an abortion. I wish the anti-choice crowd would own up that they are okay with forcing women to do something that can kill them and most likely ruin their life.

The anti-choice crowd always throws out that they would allow an abortion in case of the mother's life being in danger, but they seem to forget that by the time the mother's life is in danger, it can be too late to save her.

[micatite]

Because it's all for 'convenience' if it's not absolute life or death, right?

Incapacitated with all-day sickness or gestational diabetes or out of control blood pressure couldn't possibly be a real thing; because being forced to drop out of school or losing my job' never happens and ruins anyone's life or puts them in the poorhouse; nobody's ever forced to go on bedrest; because delivery's always sunshine and roses and utterly painless and not 72 hours of agony or perinial tears and fistulas or getting slabbed via C-section open because of sudden onset fetal distress.

Yeah, that's all looking real attractive for someone who DOES NOT WANT A BABY.

/sarc

If somebody choses to go through the rigors of pregnancy and childbirth and then choses to adopt out the child of their own free, uncoerced will then, FINE. Bully for them and lucky for the adoptive parent(s). However, making an unwilling woman to go through forced pregnancy and childbirth is, IMO, a form of slavery and possibly torture.

[formergothardite]

Because it's all for 'convenience' if it's not absolute life or death, right?

Incapacitated with all-day sickness or gestational diabetes or out of control blood pressure couldn't possibly be a real thing; because being forced to drop out of school or losing my job' never happens and ruins anyone's life or puts them in the poorhouse; nobody's ever forced to go on bedrest; because delivery's always sunshine and roses and utterly painless and not 72 hours of agony or perinial tears and fistulas or getting slabbed via C-section open because of sudden onset fetal distress.

Yeah, that's all looking real attractive for someone who DOES NOT WANT A BABY.

/sarc

If somebody choses to go through the rigors of pregnancy and childbirth and then choses to adopt out the child of their own free, uncoerced will then, FINE. Bully for them and lucky for the adoptive parent(s). However, making an unwilling woman to go through forced pregnancy and childbirth is, IMO, a form of slavery and possibly torture.

It is like anti-choicers live in this magical world where pregnancy is this wonderful thing where women just gain a few pounds, have a lovely "pregnancy glow" about them and so women can just pop out that baby and give it up for adoption. Like the one fundie poster here said, giving birth is no different than having sex so women have no exuse for not wanting to give birth. :roll:

The actual baby that is produced at the end isn't always the problem, there are nine months that can be horrific and then the short term and long term problems that can come with pregnancy. But with the anti-choice crowd, the lives of women are never valued enough for any of this to matter. They can die, they can suffer for months, their lives can be left in ruins but all that matters is the fetus.

[micatite]

Adoption only deals with the 'don't want to/can't be a parent' problem, not the 'don't want to/can't be pregnant' problem.

[duplessis3]

I can't get past the possible world where one would ask one's mother "would you have aborted me?" With abortion legal, I don't know why one would even think of that question. And even supposing the mother had contempated it, wouldn't the conversation following say "but I didn't because..." (I decided I wanted a child is the best possible ending. The worst would be because sky daddy didn't want me to, with a close second being ' I thought it would be the most unselfish thing I could ever do, raising a child I don't want and can't afford. Hugs!)

And 4th Survivor you really need to read Mary Ann Warren's classic essay on abortion. http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ ... ortion.htm

Fetuses aren't people. They haven't achieved personhood. Granted, Singer takes this even farther but he misunderstands newborns, and the abilities of newborns.

[Anxious Girl]

the 4th survivor, do you know what overpopulation actually is? It's when there aren't enough animals to feed people because there are more people than animals. So yes; it is being selfish to bring a child into a world where overpopulation is becoming common and when conservatives think that the 1 percent deserve food because they have "worked" for it instead of the world's children who can't afford it who are already out of their mother's uteruses. Since you believe that life begins at conception, you don't have a birthday, you have a conception day. How would you count the "unborn babies" into the population census? How would you punish the people who've had and perfomed abortions?

If they belong in jail, how would your ilk address the issue of the overflowing of jails, and when there aren't enough rooms in them because because baby-killers are in there who wouldn't harm the already born, but killers who can't be put in there because of the overflow would be free to commit more crimes? Why do you want me tolerate your opinions if you want your opinions to become law? For example; "In my opinion, I don't like abortion and vote against it" overrides somebody's else's opinion that abortion is a-ok. You scream for tolerance, but won't tolerate others. Why should I tolerate your forced intolerance on others through voting?

Just deal that not everybody wants to obey your opinions that you want to make law. You're the emotional 1; calling me emotional. :lol:

[Widget]

I'm sorry, now we're telling people to die because we disagree with their ignorant beliefs???? Remembering the shit storm that "DIAF" and "ESAD" started a mere couple of months ago, I'm amazed that we're now cheering on such an immature and reprehensible response. Where's the "kinder, gentler FJ" everyone's been going on about? :think:

I have a troll exception. Sockpuppets aren't people and this person is clearly not looking for real responses.

[Spider Burps]

I have a troll exception. Sockpuppets aren't people and this person is clearly not looking for real responses.

If you believe someone is a sock, tell one of the admins.

This poster is still a person, no matter how disagreeable their opinions may be, and no person deserves to be told to die just because you dislike them. IME, the people who tell others to die for expressing their own (albeit hateful) opinions are, how do I say this delicately? childish assholes.

Signed,

the woman who has heard "____ deserves to be shot/killed/maimed/raped/tortured" one time too many

[DistantStar]

I would be surprised if my mom didn't think about it with me. I was quite unexpected. Selfish my ass; it'd have been a reasonable decision.

[Widget]

If you believe someone is a sock, tell one of the admins.

This poster is still a person, no matter how disagreeable their opinions may be, and no person deserves to be told to die just because you dislike them. IME, the people who tell others to die for expressing their own (albeit hateful) opinions are, how do I say this delicately? childish assholes.

Signed,

the woman who has heard "____ deserves to be shot/killed/maimed/raped/tortured" one time too many

I don't know it's a sock because I don't have access to IP address data. It's pretty conclusive from their post history they are a troll though. They don't have a single post that isn't at best thinly veiled flame bait.

Anyway... clarification: When I say "fuck off and die troll" I am referring to their trollsona only.

[tardis]

I lived in Tassie in my teenage years. Never knew what the abortion law was like, although this possibly explains why many of the girls I went to high school with now have 2/3 kids at the age of 24. I never really questioned why until now but it makes me both sad and angry all at once to think how little choice these girls have.

I lived in a very low socio-economic area, many of the kids at school had grown up in the local state housing ghetto (famous for shootings, public suicides) and live there now with their own children. It makes me sad that many of these girls probably didn't have the choice to terminate their pregnancy if they had wanted to. Flights to Melbourne and accommodation just wouldn't have been an option. Now their children are going to have many of the same experiences they did. The kids I went to school with had sex young without properly knowing the consequences, started binge drinking from a young age, finished school at year 10 without a job pathway, got sent to the local welfare by their parents for youth allowance as soon as they were eligible (nothing wrong with that but they never got the opportunity to know any other way) and went without every week because Mum and Dad spent all the money boozing. Some of them have had the kids taken away, others waste the food money on catching taxis everywhere or boozing every weekend. I don't hate these girls, I just feel really sad for them because they never got a chance to learn anything else and their children probably won't either. Teachers in these places are wading against the tide when it comes to sex education (and education in general), the kids aren't listening.

Just recently, an old classmate of mine passed away after a battle with cervical cancer, leaving behind a six year old daughter. She can't have known that was in her future but I wonder if she ever had doubts about that pregnancy and I wonder what will happen to her poor daughter now. :(

[formergothardite]

I have noticed that in every single thread where an anti-choice person says that they value the lives of women, they leave the thread or just ignore all the posts that point out how denying women abortions can kill them and will most likely fuck up their lives forever. Even Jericho, who wants to put most of us in jail, had a hard time acknowledging that part of not allowing women to have abortions.

[Effie]

Huh? That doesn't even make sense. More babies = more adoptive parents? Then how come there are orphanages across the world? Clearly, there are children already, waiting, but peple aren't exactly queueing. So how would adding even more children to the system increase the number of adoptive parents? Please explain.

While you're at it, survivor (please don't tell me your name is a reference to the "abortion holocaust"...), could you please enlighten me how we are going to fix this "issue" in Sweden, where we have no system of adoption. Let's encourage each other to not abort, but to bring some more unwanted pups in to the foster care system! Because that's the most selfless and godly thing to do - duuh. No, there's a reason we have the lowest poverty rate in Europe. We take care of our people - the people who are born. You don't do that.

[Effie]

Hey, "grownups are talking" okay? We must listen to them :lol:

Oh and thanks but my beliefs are not ignorant. I just happen to hold my life and the lives of others in high regard. Yes that even includes you Free Jingerers.

Naah, I wouldn't say your beliefs are ignorant. To me they come across as irrational, but that word "irrational" doesn't mean much, does it? That would imply you could just think harder and study more to come to the conclusions I have come to. I'm not so sure about that. That doesn't mean you are irrational. It just means you were not so lucky in the circumstances of your upbringing, since you lack something very essential: the ability to sympathize with people in very difficult circumstances. It shouldn't have to be required of you to actually be put in the shoes of a suicidal teen who has been impregnated by her step-brother, or a severely abused and disabled 6-year-old who has been brought up in the foster care system. You should be able to sympathize with them, even if you haven't experienced something similar. You should be able to imagine yourself in their situation. Otherwise you are morally deprived, and no knowledge is going to fix that. Oh, and saying you are willing to take a chance when it comes to putting a child up for adoption, while knowing you are subjecting this child to the flaws of the adoption system, doesn't make you stand on some kind of moral high ground. I would never take a chance when it comes to the well-being of a child. The upbringing of a child is not a fucking hazard-game.

Considering you don't seem to care much about the quality of the living (the chance-thing again), what do you have to offer a potential human being? What kind of life do you have to offer her/him? A life of survival? Anything better than "death", right? A life where you get constantly abused and mistreated? A life in poverty and starvation? What do you have to tell all the abused kids in the foster-care-system? "Hey kiddo, you are alive - aren't you lucky." Lucky, right?

[Anxious Girl]

the 4th survivor, why is it bad to be emotional? How come it's ok to be emotional about abortions, but not about abortions being denied? Or do pro-birthers' like your emotions mean more than mine? You're not being misread here. If you don't want people to think of you as an entitled asshole, then don't type like 1. It's as simple as that.

[Minerva]

That's just codeword for killing your unborn child.

So you do believe in fetal rights. Let's see you back that opinion up, then. At which stage of gestation do you believe embryos/fetuses should have rights and why?

While it's true that they are different stages of development, the changes happen gradually, not all at once. There's very little difference between a baby a week before being born and a week after. What makes it okay in your mind to kill one but not the other? You go through separate and distinct stages of development after you are born as well. You go from infant to child to teenager to adult to elderly and killing a child would net you the same murder charge as killing an adult would. What's your point?

I don't think you'll find very many pro-choicers who argue that it's morally ok to kill a 39-week fetus. That said, you seem to be arguing that the change between something completely unconscious, unfeeling and non-viable to a baby ready to be born is gradual, therefore we must bestow the same rights on the unfeeling fetus as we would on the baby about to be born. Because the change is gradual. That's ridiculous. A more rational way to approach a gradual change like that would be to pinpoint where the grey area on the fetal development spectrum starts for you and decide that that's when you start being against them. Bonus rational points if you realize that how anyone feels about a fetus does not change the pregnant person's right to decide whether they want to let is use their organs for months on end and if you therefore respect their decision either way.

If you were aborted you wouldn't be alive right now. If you were strangled 5 minutes after being born, you wouldn't be alive right now. I'm not really seeing a major difference between the two.

If my mom had an abortion instead of having me, I would have never existed. Point blank. The cerebral cortex that contains the conscious being that is Minerva would never begun to contain Minerva. It would have had had the same effect on me as if she had said "no" to my dad that night, or as if she had been using birth control, or as if they had used a condom. Now if I had been strangled 5 minutes after birth, I would have existed and then had that existence snatched away from me. Not only that, but I would have suffered. That's the difference, and an adult shouldn't have to have it explained to them.

How is that selfish? I would say raising and taking care of a child that you were not really ready for is one of the most selfless things you can do. Your mom thought about aborting you but chose not to so why would you be bothered? Hopefully she realized how terrible it was and that's why she reconsidered.

Bringing an unwanted child into the world could be called selfish because when you're staring at the pee stick, the only person in the equation is you (and maybe your partner). You're making the decision to carry the pregnancy to term for yourself. Having an abortion is most definitely selfish, too, because you're doing it for yourself. That said, it's ok to be selfish as long as no one else is affected. No one but you (and maybe your partner) is affected when you have an abortion. The potential kid doesn't exist, so it can't be affected. The kid is affected by being born into less than ideal circumstances. People still have the right to make that choice free from judgement, though.

Why is having an abortion terrible?

[formergothardite]

Bumping this up for 4th survivor so she/he can admit that, yes, she does want to force women to do something that can kill them, cause life long health problems and most likely fuck up their life forever.

[August]

I have noticed that in every single thread where an anti-choice person says that they value the lives of women, they leave the thread or just ignore all the posts that point out how denying women abortions can kill them and will most likely fuck up their lives forever. Even Jericho, who wants to put most of us in jail, had a hard time acknowledging that part of not allowing women to have abortions.

That's why it's not worthwhile bothering write long, reasoned arguments to them. I'll put the time in to convince someone who is going to listen. Someone who threadjacks with Fetal Holocaust! Killing da Baybeez! needs a succinct expression of intense disregard.