Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the fewest abortions...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the fewest abortions... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 1:34:35 PM   
JanahX


Posts: 3443
Joined: 8/21/2010
Status: offline 		Yes - and the catholic church has had great success with these practices - as can be seen from all the sex abuse cases the Catholic church has had to deal with lately. But then again - Priests fucking and sucking little boys wouldnt result in pregnancy would it.... hmmmmm

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Not ergo. Not even moeglich.  you dont think they speak about abstinance and rhythm method, and pulling out and every form of contraception under the sun?  Including the inneffecient ones?



_____________________________

The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club.

The second rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club.


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 3:00:45 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Yes, any contraceptive containing hormones are contraindicated for most forms of cancer and survivors. So, to determine if a woman can take any of those, these tests are performed.


Yet, not all the contraceptives offered by PP contain hormones, now do they?


The most effective ones do. Even an IUD is contraindicated in women with uterine cancer, and it has no hormones.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 3:48:03 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl
There is more to gynecological care than contraceptives.

No argument there. Never was, either. However, the title of the thread states that PP patients have the fewest abortions. In the OP, it is also stated that those patients have fewer unplanned pregnancies, thus reducing the number of abortions. This, then, it would seem, has to do with contraception/pregnancy prevention. Ergo, contraceptives.

there's more to preventing pregnancies than just contraception. Education is even more important but unfortunately, the Bible thumpers are against that as well.


That damn education is only gotten through them, eh? Well, I did say earlier that I wish schools would go over how to not get pregnant in Health Class.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 4:13:55 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Yes, any contraceptive containing hormones are contraindicated for most forms of cancer and survivors. So, to determine if a woman can take any of those, these tests are performed.

Yet, not all the contraceptives offered by PP contain hormones, now do they?

The most effective ones do. Even an IUD is contraindicated in women with uterine cancer, and it has no hormones.


So, you state that any contraceptives containing hormones are contraindicated for most forms of cancer or survivors. Now, it's not just contraceptives containing hormones.





_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 4:18:03 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Yes, any contraceptive containing hormones are contraindicated for most forms of cancer and survivors. So, to determine if a woman can take any of those, these tests are performed.

Yet, not all the contraceptives offered by PP contain hormones, now do they?

The most effective ones do. Even an IUD is contraindicated in women with uterine cancer, and it has no hormones.


So, you state that any contraceptives containing hormones are contraindicated for most forms of cancer or survivors. Now, it's not just contraceptives containing hormones.






Hormones are contraindicated for most problems... endometriosis being a quick example of one of the exceptions.

Are you bothered because its not all fitting into one little basket for you?



_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 4:35:43 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Hormones are contraindicated for most problems... endometriosis being a quick example of one of the exceptions.
Are you bothered because its not all fitting into one little basket for you?


Not bothered at all here, actually. I have no issues with PP's health and medical services provided. You know precisely what I don't like, and we've been through it over and over. So, there is no point in going over it again.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 4:49:50 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Hormones are contraindicated for most problems... endometriosis being a quick example of one of the exceptions.
Are you bothered because its not all fitting into one little basket for you?


Not bothered at all here, actually. I have no issues with PP's health and medical services provided. You know precisely what I don't like, and we've been through it over and over. So, there is no point in going over it again.




I dont think you know what PP provides or doesnt provide, outside the abortions.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 4:59:02 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Imagine that. When you get comprehensive reproductive healthcare, you don't have unplanned pregnancies requiring abortion in the first place.

Fucking republicans. Join us all in the 21st century. We have medicine and smartphones.


Actually, that's not entirely true.

I have the fewest abortions, and I'm not affiliated with any govt. or quasi govt institution.

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 5:00:22 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		And if a man ever had to have an abortion, this would NOT be an issue.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 5:12:05 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

As a member of the CCC I want to point out that there will be no responses to females who have dared to disagree

Yup. the sound of silence is deafening, and, most certainly in this instance, speaks louder than words

Another glaring silence in a discussion that rarely considers the underlying unqualified adult 'right' to reproduce as often as a person may see fit. It's possible that without the assumption of this right, there would be no debate around abortion.

Where there are no formal constraints on the right to reproduce, there are many constraints that come into play when this right is exercised by responsible couples. Physiological, biological, age, financial, emotional, the size of an existing family, career are some of the factors that act to constrain this right in practice. The only time there is public discussion of imposing constraints to this right is in the case of gay parents, who may be denied their right to reproduce as a punishment for bonking the wrong way.* (Odd, then that pedophiles and rapists don't have their right to reproduce qualified in any manner.) So there are in fact a number of moral and practical qualifications on the exercise of this right.

World population is such that the survival of the species is assured. In fact if anything unlimited reproduction is a threat to the survival of the species. The planet is thought to be unable to sustain a population of more than 10 billion. So, there is no logical imperative for this right. As many males and females choose not to exercise this right, it is difficult to argue there is a universal biological imperative.

Should the right to reproduce be unqualified? Does society have the right to limit the right to reproduce? If so, what are the qualifications that ought to be imposed? What would the abortion debate sound like if those qualifications were imposed?

* There is controversy surrounding the right to reproduce by severely-intellectually challenged women. Here in Australia, there must be a legal process and court order before they can be sterilized. This is an ethical and legal minefield that is really outside the area I would like any discussion to focus on.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 10/29/2012 5:20:16 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 6:06:03 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Hormones are contraindicated for most problems... endometriosis being a quick example of one of the exceptions.
Are you bothered because its not all fitting into one little basket for you?


Not bothered at all here, actually. I have no issues with PP's health and medical services provided. You know precisely what I don't like, and we've been through it over and over. So, there is no point in going over it again.




I dont think you know what PP provides or doesnt provide, outside the abortions.

Im sure PP would give him all the education he needs....

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 6:22:18 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Hormones are contraindicated for most problems... endometriosis being a quick example of one of the exceptions.
Are you bothered because its not all fitting into one little basket for you?

Not bothered at all here, actually. I have no issues with PP's health and medical services provided. You know precisely what I don't like, and we've been through it over and over. So, there is no point in going over it again.

I dont think you know what PP provides or doesnt provide, outside the abortions.


LMAO!!! Yeah, because I didn't respond to subspaceseven's post and quote his post to you. I have no idea. Riiiiight.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 6:37:20 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

LMAO!!! Yeah, because I didn't respond to subspaceseven's post and quote his post to you. I have no idea. Riiiiight.


I wasnt being snarky. I truly dont think you do.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 7:44:36 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

LMAO!!! Yeah, because I didn't respond to subspaceseven's post and quote his post to you. I have no idea. Riiiiight.

I wasnt being snarky. I truly dont think you do.


Oh. In that case... Riiiiight.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 8:03:36 PM   
ToyOfRhamnusia


Posts: 99
Joined: 8/4/2012
Status: offline 		BIRTH is the beginning of a human's life. This observable and easily verifiable event has been used for thousands of years, and it is the only event that truly separates the fetus from the mother. And this separation is mandatory before we can start to assign any rights to the fetus, as any rights assigned to the fetus will represent a violation of the mother's human rights.

I was not saying that the fetus' life shouldn't be taken into consideration. But it is up to the MOTHER to do that, as the fetus is using HER body as the base for its existence.

If the mother chooses to follow certain moral codes in this regard, then fine. But if she doesn't is is no one else's business!

However, for a surgeon to carry out the abortion, this person has some morals too, and he has all rights to refuse doing it, if he considers it unethical. This could very well be the case, if the fetus is past a certain age, as that could make the medical procedure unnecessarily risky. This can all be boiled down to some reasonably acceptable conditions, as they have been practiced for decades, about limiting the mother's "free choice" to a certain time frame. There is a blurred line between "abortion" and "early birth".

_____________________________

Toy of Rhamnusia

- Freedom includes the right to choose to enter into a contract that strips you of all rights...

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 8:09:29 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ToyOfRhamnusia

BIRTH is the beginning of a human's life. This observable and easily verifiable event has been used for thousands of years, and it is the only event that truly separates the fetus from the mother. And this separation is mandatory before we can start to assign any rights to the fetus, as any rights assigned to the fetus will represent a violation of the mother's human rights.

I was not saying that the fetus' life shouldn't be taken into consideration. But it is up to the MOTHER to do that, as the fetus is using HER body as the base for its existence.

If the mother chooses to follow certain moral codes in this regard, then fine. But if she doesn't is is no one else's business!

However, for a surgeon to carry out the abortion, this person has some morals too, and he has all rights to refuse doing it, if he considers it unethical. This could very well be the case, if the fetus is past a certain age, as that could make the medical procedure unnecessarily risky. This can all be boiled down to some reasonably acceptable conditions, as they have been practiced for decades, about limiting the mother's "free choice" to a certain time frame. There is a blurred line between "abortion" and "early birth".





_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to ToyOfRhamnusia)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 8:21:09 PM   
ToyOfRhamnusia


Posts: 99
Joined: 8/4/2012
Status: offline 		DaddySatur,

I agree that we talk about ending a human life or a potential human life. It might or might not be morally acceptable for everyone. Nature often does it, so we are not in seriously conflict with what is natural. Mothers in nature do NOT in general sacrifice themselves in order to save their offspring - it would be completely meaningless, as the offspring would die without the mother, but the mother can give birth to another youngsters later, when the danger is over.

But my point is exclusively based on a human rights issue: NO ONE has the rights to force a woman, a live thinking human being, to do anything or to abstain from anything, on the basis of THEIR OWN moral values, if those contradict the values the woman subscribes to herself.

Sure, I find it unacceptable for anyone to make such decisions without being duly informed about what the consequences are, and woman needs to know and comprehend that we talk about ending a POTENTIAL human life. But just the word "potential" is a tricky one do deal with, as it indeed implies uncertainty, and we can, in reality, stretch that to also include any one of a man's sperm cells...

The tricky issue here is that you CANNOT make compromises here without completely accepting that human rights are a peace of history. Sure, there is a price to pay for that protection of our rights, and that price is that we ACCEPT that no one but the woman herself has the final say in such a matter that involves HER body and no one else's body.

I certainly don't agree with abortion being a reasonable way of planning parenthood, but I do know that there are many situations where other means fail, despite all good intentions, and where a pregnancy constitutes a serious liability for the woman, maybe even a risk for her life.

And yes, then someone can be sloppy with the prevention and just misuse their rights and literally use abortion because they are ignorant or lazy. So be it - we cannot restrict another woman's rights because of someone being irresponsible. But we CAN make sure that the irresponsible party isn't encouraged to be irresponsible, by society (= the rest of us) accepting to pay the costs of her irresponsibility!

An irresponsible woman has no rights to expect anyone else to pay the costs of her choices...

_____________________________

Toy of Rhamnusia

- Freedom includes the right to choose to enter into a contract that strips you of all rights...

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 8:25:27 PM   
ToyOfRhamnusia


Posts: 99
Joined: 8/4/2012
Status: offline 		farglebargle - a person is a piece of legal fiction. It is not a live human being... you never BECOME a person, but you get a person assigned to with through your birth certificate - which is exactly a piece of legal fiction used to represent a live human being, although it truly is the live human being who acts as representative/manager for the person.

And human rights are NOT for persons. That's why government wants us to believe that we ARE that person we truly only represent. Damned smart way of avoiding confrontation with the human rights abuse that people this way are tricked into believing they HAVE to volunteer for...

_____________________________

Toy of Rhamnusia

- Freedom includes the right to choose to enter into a contract that strips you of all rights...

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/29/2012 9:37:00 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

BIRTH is the beginning of a human's life. This observable and easily verifiable event has been used for thousands of years, and it is the only event that truly separates the fetus from the mother. And this separation is mandatory before we can start to assign any rights to the fetus, as any rights assigned to the fetus will represent a violation of the mother's human rights.

There's a certain wonderful clarity to your position, and I sympathize with it. But I'm not sure the issue's always been that clear-cut, either historically or legally. In the majority opinion for Roe v. Wade, Justice Blackmun sketches out how societies have viewed abortion over time. He notes that the Hippocratic Oath required physicians to forswear doing abortions and that "quickening" (the baby's first movement in the womb) often served as the dividing line for whether to permit abortion. It's a fascinating read.

In laying down the law, the Court enacts different standards for each trimester. "For the stage subsequent to viability," the decision rules, "the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life [p165] may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to ToyOfRhamnusia)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the few... - 10/30/2012 1:13:33 AM   
ToyOfRhamnusia


Posts: 99
Joined: 8/4/2012
Status: offline 		The issue is what we are going to base our LAWS on. We can't base laws on morality - as we will never all agree to what is right and what is wrong. And we don't need to. Sure, people have screwed this up all the way through history by messing religion into law.

When we make laws, we CANNOT allow "room for individual judgment" when it comes to principles - it leads directly to anarchy, or worse. We need some principles that
1) are simple and understandable for everybody;
2) are self-consistent (= have no internal self-contradictions included in them);
3) are based on verifiable observations that are NOT restricted to a certain elite.

No matter how you try to include a fetus as "a human being with human rights", you are violating all three fundamental principles...

Ad 1) The discussion clearly shows that we do not all agree on WHEN exactly a fetus are to be assigned rights. That alone is enough of a problem to warrant that we cannot use this as basis for laws.

Ad 2) The assignment of rights to a fetus will violate the rights we want to assign to the woman - we can't accommodate both when there are conflicts between them.... and in the moment we start to reduce the rights of pregnant women, we also reduce the rights of women in general - and we are right into discrimination!

Ad 3) And layfolks cannot determine if a woman is pregnant or not, at least not in the early stages where it is most critical for this issue. Even the woman herself will not know!

So, when we deviate from the historical use of a separation of the two bodies as the determining criteria (that's why is it called an INDIVIDUAL - it means "cannot be divided into smaller fractions"). A woman is an individual. So is a pregnant woman! Accepting a pregnant woman as an individual negates all logic in trying to assign individual rights to the fetus. It simply becomes nonsense, philosophically - and hence unacceptable as base principle for laws.

Laws need to be based on what we can VERIFY. We can't verify if a woman is pregnant or not. But we can verify if she has given birth or not.

Laws cannot be based on conflicts of priorities. And there is no way any sane live human being should accept that a fetus is more important than the woman who carries it; it is contradictory to everything in Nature and not sustainable, as we cannot verify it with the required certainty.

Making laws that are subject to something we cannot verify is completely and utterly nonsense, as it inevitably will lead to judicial murder. We cannot accept a murder charge as valid if the murder, at the time of the murder, did not even know that she committed a murder and had no chance of knowing... That kind of legal practice is completely ridiculous. It would imply that women DAILY had to get tested for being pregnant, as they otherwise would not know if some activity of theirs that is known to possibly cause abortion would be an act of crime or not....

Give me a break, folks - the legal consequences of denying a woman all the rights to her body end up in some atrocious shit that will turn all of us into slaves and criminals, with no chance of ever knowing if we are doing anything wrong or not. Those who really want to live in that kind of society can build it on another planet. Thank you. Not here where I and other humans are to live.

_____________________________

Toy of Rhamnusia

- Freedom includes the right to choose to enter into a contract that strips you of all rights...

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Turns out, Planned Parenthood patients have the fewest abortions... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125