Strict Abortion Measures Enacted in Oklahoma

[pauldun170]

Its not about choice, its about privacy.

That and federal regulation of the female reproductive system.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by KSGregman

/offtopic

Not to sound antagonistic...but...wouldn't the freedom to "choose" also apply before or during the act that leads to an unwanted pregnancy? (Excluding cases of rape and incest, obviously.)

Seriously...why is it only a "choice" once pregnant? Wouldn't it make more sense to make that choice PRIOR to the act that leads to pregnancy?

This argument always makes me think about standing around arguing about the cows getting out instead of just closing the gate. *shrug*

/ontopic

Having said that, I don't understand the purpose of this law. It seems like a fairly heavy handed attempt by the Southern Baptist style bible thumpers in OK to brow beat vulnerable girls. *shrug*

< onofftopic >

Yes, that would make perfect sense. They call that "abstinence" and it is supported by much the same people who support measures like the one outlined in the story. It also works quite well, at least when people actually are abstinent, which it seems is not as often as its proponents would like. In fact it seems to be even less the case in their own back yards.

< offofftopic >

[Adeptus_Minor]

Originally Posted by karl_1052

I think post partum abortions should be allowed. I think we could start with left lane hogs.

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I've long been an advocate of retroactive abortions, for those teenagers who prove they don't deserve to live.

This... or, rather, these...
I am pro-choice (or as I call it, pro-death) but I don't believe that choice should be made lightly or used as an alternative to responsibility. It's not a bad thing for a young woman to understand the choice she's making and that it isn't just a reset button. However, I don't like the idea of re-traumatizing a rape or incest victim either.
Unless they require a patient to disclose if it is a rape or incest case, I guess there's no way to differentiate and therefore they either have to subject everyone or no one.

[Kaneman]

I'm not just pro-choice, I'm pro-abortion. I think every woman who thinks about having an abortion while pregnant should go get one immediately.

Fewer people in the world FTW.

[z06boy]

Pro-choice here too. The only limits I agree with as far as choosing is how far along in the pregnancy it should be allowed.

[KSGregman]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

< onofftopic >

Yes, that would make perfect sense. They call that "abstinence" and it is supported by much the same people who support measures like the one outlined in the story. It also works quite well, at least when people actually are abstinent, which it seems is not as often as its proponents would like. In fact it seems to be even less the case in their own back yards.

< offofftopic >

Abstinence is the ONLY choice available to prevent an unwanted pregnancy?

Really?

That is certainly an interesting view point...one not based in reality...but interesting.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by KSGregman

Abstinence is the ONLY choice available to prevent an unwanted pregnancy?

Really?

That is certainly an interesting view point...one not based in reality...but interesting.

RIF. Please reread my post.

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by KSGregman

/offtopic

Not to sound antagonistic...but...wouldn't the freedom to "choose" also apply before or during the act that leads to an unwanted pregnancy? (Excluding cases of rape and incest, obviously.)

Seriously...why is it only a "choice" once pregnant? Wouldn't it make more sense to make that choice PRIOR to the act that leads to pregnancy?

This argument always makes me think about standing around arguing about the cows getting out instead of just closing the gate. *shrug*

/ontopic

Having said that, I don't understand the purpose of this law. It seems like a fairly heavy handed attempt by the Southern Baptist style bible thumpers in OK to brow beat vulnerable girls. *shrug*

Um, you can only have an abortion once you ARE pregnant. Though, if you knew how many times I wanted to get an abortion after walking through a picket line to get to my doctor's office for a regular annual appointment...

Originally Posted by The Chi

In regards to your off topic part- you're right, they should take measures and being stupid is no reason to have an abortion. Using Plan B or abortion is not birth control, its ridiculous and irresponsible.

But being stupid and getting pregnant at 12 or 13? Should they be forced to have a child that could pose a danger (childbirth) to them because they are themselves children?

Or what about birth control failure?

There are reasons someone could need an abortion that dont fall under their own stupidity.

Im surprised its Oklahoma thats doing it tho, I cant recall them being hard edged like this growing up in and around the area.

This. I'm right there with you.

I'm walking away from this thread...

[KSGregman]

Originally Posted by azoomm

Um, you can only have an abortion once you ARE pregnant.

Agreed....the only point I was trying to make was that there are A LOT of opportunities to make choices PRIOR to pregnancy too.

[Kaneman]

Who gives a flying fuck why the woman got pregnant, whether it was her fault or not? It does not benefit society to have unwanted babies that will in turn produce more unwanted babies.