Planned Parenthood Shooter

[Cleopatra7]

*Raises hand

I attended a tiny Catholic girls' high school pre-Roe v. Wade, and I knew half a dozen young women who had abortions. I also knew that in most cases family doctors of these middle class students would perform abortions quietly under the guise of some other procedure. Naturally, the names of the physicians weren't bandied about, but they would be available upon request.

Poorer students in other environments had fewer options, of course.

Laws will not stop abortions. As many have stated, the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to provide affordable, reliable contraceptives and good sex education. Advocates I've worked with wanted abortion to be available and safe, but also rare.

ETA: This also makes interesting reading: "The only moral abortion is my abortion." It's an attitude I've encountered, although not to the extreme of some of the stories in this article.

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml

It's not hard to figure out why anti-abortion people would suddenly choose having an abortion if they or one of their daughters had to face an unexpected pregnancy. It's all about saving face. One of the main reasons why women had abortions in the pre-Roe v. Wade days was because having a baby out of wedlock was shameful, probably the worst thing a single female could do. Even in current conservative discourse, single mothers are depicted as a social problem, sexually irresponsible, and the source of most of society's problems. If having a clandestine abortion will help you and your family maintain a respectable facade, even an ostensibly staunch anti-abortion activist will choose it. The problem is that many conservatives want to have it both ways; either abortion is so awful that it's worth having more single mothers or unwed mothers are such a burden on society that it's better to have more abortions than be subjected to the phenomenon of children without fathers. 

[Mercer]

And Cleopatra is right, if someone really believes a fetus is equal to a baby that is already born, then they need to actually start treating them that way, but it is rare to find a "pro-life" person who does that. 

Something I've always wondered about: It's estimated that 30-50% of pregnancies spontaneously abort. This often happens so early in pregnancy that the woman didn't even know she was pregnant or had miscarried.

If people really believed that life began at conception, wouldn't there be massive angst over the fact that half of all people are dying like that? People in their communities, in their families? Or wouldn't people be haunted by the possibility that they have lost multiple children to death even if they were not aware of a pregnancy occurring?

Wouldn't it lead to a constant state of mourning? No one would be left untouched by this absolutely unpreventable tragedy...

But I don't recall ever hearing so much as concern over it from anti-choice groups. If life begins at conception, shouldn't that be the case even if human intent never intervenes?

[IronicallyMaeve]

Ted Cruz  has an opinion of course. And unsurprisingly, he sounds like an idiot.

[formergothardite]

Ted Cruz  has an opinion of course. And unsurprisingly, he sounds like an idiot.

He was really grasping at straws there, wasn't he? The shooter's ex-wife says that he is a conservative, religious, anti-abortion sort of guy. 

[OkToBeTakei]

He was really grasping at straws there, wasn't he? The shooter's ex-wife says that he is a conservative, religious, anti-abortion sort of guy. 

Hey FG!!!

Is CnD the North V South debacle, now anti-abortion? I'm asking for context purposes.

[Whoosh]

 

Hey FG!!!

Is CnD the North V South debacle, now anti-abortion? I'm asking for context purposes.

 

 

I'm clearly not FG and may not fully understand your question, but unless CnD is not anti-baby murder, I'm gonna have to say that, yes, he is anti-abortion based on this statement.  Including both a snipped version and a full version of the post for clarity, then context of post.  I need to read back through this whole thread to see if I can fully understand the overall point of this post.

 

<snip>

for those of us that do believe that abortion is murder. Of course those of us who believe that abortion is actually baby murder, and exercise our freedom of speech to say so

<snip>

The irony is thick... I in no way condone his actions or his acts of murder / violence / terrorist behavior, but the pots are calling the kettle black in this case for those of us that do believe that abortion is murder. Of course those of us who believe that abortion is actually baby murder, and exercise our freedom of speech to say so, are now going to be all lumped into association with a "terrorist" and implications will be made that we encouraged his behavior which has legal implications in this era of law, so it's a good strategic / PR move on the part of PP to label him that. Wickedness.

 

 

[Mercer]

And I never once said ALL Muslims followed the same thought. it's easy to form a bias against groups when around 2K people lost their lives in 9/11, when a deranged shooter attacks a Planned Parenthood,and when a shooter of 5 service members in Tennessee was raised conservative Muslim.

Did you feel that way about white American males after the Oklahoma City bombing? Just curious.

[CyborgKin]

(b) Making it illegal will only cause more death? More death than what, the thousands of babies? Ok, that's silly logic for me. If abortion is outlawed, literally tens or hundreds of thousands of babies won't be dying. If it becomes illegal, I can't see more than 2-300 women dying per year in botched illegal abortions. I'm not for women dying in botched illegal abortions, but the "numbers" aren't going to win me on that argument. Besides, in that case, it's the woman's choice to undergo the procedure, something the babies currently getting killed don't have - any choice whatsoever.
 

Not aborting doesn't result in less death.  100% of non-aborted humans will die.  (Debatable.  Only ~93% of humans born so far have died.  But the odds don't look good.)

I imagine that on average unwanted children have a lower life expectancy and lower quality of life than wanted children.  (Where can I find those stats?)  Are you really in favour of consigning hundreds of thousands of innocents to being born to parent(s) who don't want them or/and cannot support them?  What's going to happen to them?  Neglect, abandonment, abuse, starvation?  Please, think of the children!

In a vacuum, outlawing aborting will raise the net human suffering in the world, and probably the per-capital suffering too.  There's a whole raft of other social issues that need to be considered before reducing the abortion rate.

 

Of course, all this would be a non-issue if we had mandatory universal birth control and required prospective parents to give proof of ability and intent to provide a safe and stable environment for the raising of children.  We don't let just anyone be a teacher or work in child-care.  Why should the standards be lower for people who are entrusted with teaching children how to talk, walk, think, and relate?  Think of the abuse that could be eradicated!  There could be a simple screening test with questions like "Is nineteen kids enough?" and "Does the term 'blanket training' horrify you?" and "Will you use names starting with more than one letter of the alphabet?" and "Does it seem strange to you to use 'purposed' as a verb?" and "If you had a daughter over thirty who wrote children's books, would you allow her to read the Amazon reviews?"  And... okay, it probably wouldn't work, not in the West at least.  But China, for instance, could probably pull it off.  And it would be nicer than their (alleged) forced abortions and sterilisations.

Eh, the whole idea seemes kinda unsavoury.  I suppose it all comes down to a question of what's more important: giving people personal freedom vs. protecting children.  (While strangely the abortion debate seems to be personal freedom vs. harming children by forcing them to be born to people don't want them.  Weird how that turned out.)

[Toothfairy]

You know the numbers actually surprised me when I found out that abortion was just about the same after and before wade. Women didn't just put their child up for adoption. Back then if sally got pregnant she either aborted secretly or was forced to give birth and have the child taken from her. Can't have single unwed mom's raising kids. The same goes for today.  We all know the Republicans could care less about abortion and if one of their daughters got pregnant it's off to get an abortion. The only reason why they spew this abortion bs is to get votes. They know abortion will always be a hot topic. I notice they don't even mention gay marriage anymore. 

Women who want to abort will abort. A fetus isn't a person. The government has no right controlling women's bodies.  Which is why roe vs wade passed. Women in Ireland and Latin America still abort. There's a whole underground market with people willing to do abortions. Or the woman gets an abortion in another country where it's legal and sometimes free. The whole prolife movement is a joke and was only created to punish women for having sex. Remember when birth control came out and it was only available to married women?  Also adoption isn't the answer to an unplanned pregnancy. It's two different things.  Women aren't incubators.  Another couples infertility isn't a fertile women's problem.  If a couple can't wait to get chosen by a birth mom or feels that fertile women owe them something, then they shouldn't adopt or if they really want a kid adopt from foster care. 

[Catey]

So Dear Robert is now charged with 1st degree murder in a state that does have the death penalty, though one performed since 97 they do have 3 people sitting on death row, I would think that shooting a cop would make him a good target for the death penalty just based on what I have seen in other cases.

 

So presuming that he shot up the PP as a statement,  a Pro Life statement that would mean that he went to the place that he saw as killing babies only to go ahead and kill people a crime for which he now could be killed for??

[Jingerbread]

Im aware not all Muslims are terrorists, but their culture is vastly different, which is why need more education on different religions. Peaceful or not they loathe free societies much like some Christians. Women can get stoned for being raped. The Chattanooga shooter grew up in a conservative Muslim/Islam household. A fellow writer on a writer's forum has seen it first hand. She saw a woman with 13 kids and guess how old she was? 31.

You are saying all Muslims are bad people.  You aren't differentiating between the Muslims who loathe free societies like some Christians.  You just lump them all in together.  Not all Muslims loathe free societies.  Not all Muslims support stoning rape victims.  Most don't.  MOST. DON'T.  

Guess which religion can claim the most murders over the last century.  Hint: It begins with a C, and ends in HRISTIANITY.  We don't say all Christians loathe anything based on the Holocaust.  We see the murders of millions as the work of one nutcase and his tens of thousands of followers, which is a higher number than ISIS in terms of both victims and participants.  Should we start saying Christian culture is different than Jewish culture, and, peaceful or not, Christians loathe this and that?  

Most Muslims LOVE free societies, and are here in the US because they enjoy is.  They are here because they don't want to live where the Muslim version of Hitler has won.  40 years ago, they were like America in the mideast.  Then Mustler won.  Imagine Hitler winning, and all Germans, even though against him but too scared to do anything, being called anti-Semites because of the Hitlerian government and underground Nazis continuing to bomb Jews around the world.

Saying Muslims loathe free societies is an extreme insult to those Muslim military soldiers who have given their lives fighting to protect free societies.

TERRORISTS are bad people.  TERRORISTS want to resort to violence.  Blaming all of a religion is bigotry and a way to make another religion sound superior.  

The education needs to start with yourself.  Then maybe you'll stop applying the extremist view to all Muslims.

[Iamhispurity]

I simply do not get how you can call yourself pro-life and be against a safe abortion. I personally would probably not  have an abortion if not for medical reasons, but who am I to force my choice upon others? If we deny women the access to a safe and legal abortion, then women are going to die. And there are going to be about as many abortions as there are when abortion is legal.

I think there are certainly ways to lower abortions rates, but I simply don´t get why it is such a big issue in the US. Never heard anyone care about the issue that much in Germany and we do have some pretty strict rules: No abortion after 12 weeks unless for medical/criminal reasons, 3 day waiting period, mandatory counseling. BUT: Germany has a pretty good sex education, abortion is primarily performed by obstretricians or normal hospitals or private clinics, we have easily accessible birth control (even though you need to pay for the pill yourself), a good maternity leave and a social security net.

And still people abort. Condoms and the pill fail, you are in an abusive relationship or simple not ready or able to care for the child. And that´s why it is needed. I am pro-life and that means trying to do what is best for ALL life involved. And that means: helping women not to get pregnant if they don´t want to and helping them to do what is right for them when they are pregnant.

Just because I could not abort (luckily I never had to make that choice and I definitely do not know what I would do, even though I do not think I could) does NOT mean that I should be able to force MY choice upon others. it is as simple as that.

Society should care about what is best for everyone, not propagate the views of some while risking a lot of life. Even if "just 2,000-3,000 women" die, it would be 2,000 or 3,000 too many.

 

Rant end. Sorry these people just make me really effing angry.

[roddma]

IMO it isnt a case of who causes more terrorism. It doesn'ts minimize 9/11 or acts by other backgrounds. Again, I never once said all Muslims are terrorists or believe the same way. My apologies if i worded it wrong. .Just like all other faiths, there are moderates and extremists. It just seems an oxymoron for an agnostic person like myself, or atheist to defend any religion or make excuses for any of the behaviors associated with it. Im not going to say A group does less or more than B group. I had the impression most of us here feel the world would be better off without belief in an imaginary friend, or at least the extreme parts.

[formergothardite]

 

I'm clearly not FG and may not fully understand your question, but unless CnD is not anti-baby murder, I'm gonna have to say that, yes, he is anti-abortion based on this statement.  Including both a snipped version and a full version of the post for clarity, then context of post.  I need to read back through this whole thread to see if I can fully understand the overall point of this post.

I"m not sure I understand the question either.  But I think she might be talking about how CnD and I have a history of debating slavery/Confederacy. I did bring it up a bit earlier in the thread because his remarks about women dying reminded me of when he really, truly thought that the South would have just voluntarily gotten rid of slavery in ten years. It showed a total lack of understanding of the Confederacy, and I think his remarks about illegal abortions show that same lack of understanding when it comes to this subject. For for all the claims of valuing women, making abortion illegal shows that the lives of women, especially their quality of life, isn't valued. 

[PregnantPornStar]

I am not bashing PP here. I want to be very clear about that.  That being said, I do think one problem is that PP and other women's clinics are "easy targets" (especially PP, because it does provide most abortions in the US) 

TRAP laws are limiting the number of abortion providers in the US, which is obviously a problem when talking about access, but also is limiting choice (maybe a woman would not want to use PP, for whatever reason, that is her own, but why shouldnt she be able to go to her normal OBGYN)

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/what-is-choice/abortion/trap-laws.html

I know in Germany, while there are waiting periods and such, there are also plenty of providers, who are are "normal" OBGYNs, who perform abortions. This seems to be true in much of Europe. 

Also, anti-abortion violence is not nearly as common outside of the US.

http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?page=3&search=Abortion&count=100&expanded=no&charttype=line&chart=overtime&ob=CountryText&od=asc#results-table

So, I am not suggesting we get rid of PP, not at all, but what if access was spread across the board and more providers were able to perform abortions (or willing)? Would this make it safer for patients and providers because it would be even more "discreet"?  Would this "normalize" reproductive rights as another normal part of women's health care? 

So, I am basically wondering if really restrictive laws are actually increasing abortion related crimes in more than one way. 

 

[Alicja]

I am not bashing PP here. I want to be very clear about that.  That being said, I do think one problem is that PP and other women's clinics are "easy targets" (especially PP, because it does provide most abortions in the US) 

TRAP laws are limiting the number of abortion providers in the US, which is obviously a problem when talking about access, but also is limiting choice (maybe a woman would not want to use PP, for whatever reason, that is her own, but why shouldnt she be able to go to her normal OBGYN)

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/what-is-choice/abortion/trap-laws.html

I know in Germany, while there are waiting periods and such, there are also plenty of providers, who are are "normal" OBGYNs, who perform abortions. This seems to be true in much of Europe. 

Also, anti-abortion violence is not nearly as common outside of the US.

http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?page=3&search=Abortion&count=100&expanded=no&charttype=line&chart=overtime&ob=CountryText&od=asc#results-table

So, I am not suggesting we get rid of PP, not at all, but what if access was spread across the board and more providers were able to perform abortions (or willing)? Would this make it safer for patients and providers because it would be even more "discreet"?  Would this "normalize" reproductive rights as another normal part of women's health care? 

So, I am basically wondering if really restrictive laws are actually increasing abortion related crimes in more than one way. 

 

You bring up really good points. I don't think hospitals or OB/GYNs perform abortions here outside of medical necessity because abortion is very political and could ruin the careers of said doctors.

I feel like if OBs did abortions along with clinics such as PP, it would greatly normalize abortion. I don't think it would become something as nonchalant as seeking treatment of a bacterial infection, for example, but it wouldn't be as stigmatized.

[AlysonRR]

On 12/3/2015, 12:28:00, Iamhispurity said:

I simply do not get how you can call yourself pro-life and be against a safe abortion. I personally would probably not  have an abortion if not for medical reasons, but who am I to force my choice upon others? If we deny women the access to a safe and legal abortion, then women are going to die. And there are going to be about as many abortions as there are when abortion is legal.

I completely agree. I would add, in addition to medical reasons, that I would probably have an abortion if I became pregnant due to rape, because it's more important to me to be there as a mother to my children than to bear the child of a rapist.

That said, the bolded above is the most important aspect of the conflict between the pro-choice and anti-abortion movements. (I refuse to use pro-life in this context because of what you posted above: If we eliminate safe and legal abortions, unsafe and illegal abortions will happen, and women will die. What's pro-life about that? The more restrictions on abortion a country/area has, the higher the rate of illegal abortions and deaths of women due to complications from illegal abortion and/or pregnancy.  

[CloakNDagger]

On 12/5/2015 at 3:15 PM, AlysonRR said:

That said, the bolded above is the most important aspect of the conflict between the pro-choice and anti-abortion movements. (I refuse to use pro-life in this context because of what you posted above: If we eliminate safe and legal abortions, unsafe and illegal abortions will happen, and women will die. What's pro-life about that? The more restrictions on abortion a country/area has, the higher the rate of illegal abortions and deaths of women due to complications from illegal abortion and/or pregnancy.  

That's like saying if you make selling guns illegal you will be responsible for gang members killing people when they use illegal guns. Not buying it. If one believes it is truly murder, it is the only logical thing to punish the moral crime.

[samurai_sarah]

2 minutes ago, CloakNDagger said:

That's like saying if you make selling guns illegal you will be responsible for gang members killing people when they use illegal guns. Not buying it. If one believes it is truly murder, it is the only logical thing to punish the moral crime.

It's called being an accessory, and that is punishable in most countries.

[CloakNDagger]

1 minute ago, samurai_sarah said:

It's called being an accessory, and that is punishable in most countries.

No, you failed to understand what I said. If I was a legislator and banned something - let's say a hammer, I'm not responsible for murder if someone steals someone ELSE's hammer and commits murder.

[samurai_sarah]

4 minutes ago, CloakNDagger said:

No, you failed to understand what I said. If I was a legislator and banned something - let's say a hammer, I'm not responsible for murder if someone steals someone ELSE's hammer and commits murder.

You said "selling", not stealing.

ETA: Selling implies a contractual relationship. If you steal from someone, the people you stole from are not culpable.

[CloakNDagger]

40 minutes ago, samurai_sarah said:

You said "selling", not stealing.

ETA: Selling implies a contractual relationship. If you steal from someone, the people you stole from are not culpable.

Yeah, I missed that, but it's still not an accessory situation for the person who banned selling an item to then be accused of making the crime worse. The argument is still valid.