I was reading over my boylove post and it I became curious about bandsters and abortion.

I am PRO abortion

but

I don't like abortion .

I would never have (I don't think) an abortion.

I feel like the person who has one, has to live with it FOREVER, so they should be able to decide for themselves.

just my opinion

edie

MSNBC Video

Mom and baby both had a team of doctors -- hmmm -- says to me there were TWO patients there. Look at that precious unborn baby's hand, teeny-tiny fingers. This is no blob of tissue, no mass of unidentifiable cells. Instead of performing surgery on this tiny patient, the doctors could have instead been legally snuffing his life out through "safe and legal" abortion. Of course, it's only "safe" for the mother.

Let me start by saying I have had 2 abortions, something I am not proud of but can not change so I have used my experience as a chance to grow and change. I think it is always used as birth control because it serves the same purpose as all formes of birth control which is to prevent the birth of a baby.I am not trying to tell anyone what to do because it is a personal decision that each woman must make iIjust think that it is important to be honest about what we are doing.

Let me start by saying I have had 2 abortions, something I am not proud of but can not change so I have used my experience as a chance to grow and change. I think it is always used as birth control because it serves the same purpose as all formes of birth control which is to prevent the birth of a baby.I am not trying to tell anyone what to do because it is a personal decision that each woman must make iIjust think that it is important to be honest about what we are doing.

I think when people talk about using abortion as a form of birth control what they mean is, to consciously decide, in advance of getting pregnant, to use abortion as the only form of birth control. If a woman uses other forms of birth control and they don't work for whatever reason and she has an abortion, you could say that she is using abortion as a "form of birth control," but it is a decision made after the fact. That is quite different from using abortion as your only form of birth control. Whatever your position on abortion, I still think that this is a distinction that makes a difference. I think very, very few women, even those who are pro choice, would recommend deciding in advance of getting pregnant to rely on abortion as your only form of birth control

(I know, someone will post an article about how three liberal feminists recommended relying on abortion, but that is obviously not what I'm talking about. Relying on abortion as the only form of birth control is out of the mainstream, and recommended by very few people, whether they are pro-choice or not.)

Abortion is generally used as a last resort for women who have found themselves pregnant.

Generally, greater than than 50% of women who choose abortion report not having used any birth control in the month they got pregnant.

Generally, greater than than 50% of women who choose abortion report not having used any birth control in the month they got pregnant.

Two comments on this: one, your info, Gadget, is usually culled from Right to Life sites and thus will show a certain bias; two, it is the less sexually sophisticated individual who is more likely to be trapped in an unwanted and potentially disasterous pregnancy.

I have always been under the understanding that it is those women who are inclined to feel a certain degree of guilt about recognising that they are choosing to be sexually active who are most likely to be careless about taking care of birth control business. The notion of these grrls seems to be that if they simply allow themselves to be carried away by the passion of the moment then they cannot be considered to fall into the category of sluts. Of course they are playing a game of sexual Russian roulette.

All of this makes sense if you have been taught that sex is taboo and yet you find yourself, by virtue of your hard-wiring feeling, feeling kinda lusty. To ensure that you are protected from pregnancy is to acknowledge that you are indeed a dirty grrl and that you plan to involve yourself in forbidden activities. Individuals who are not prepared to acknowledge that they are have sexual desires figure that by avoiding taking responsibility for themselves with respect for birth control they will not appear to be complicit in this dirty act - either to themselves or to their sexual partners. This is a game of self-delusion and it is born out of guilt.

Two comments on this: one, your info, Gadget, is usually culled from Right to Life sites and thus will show a certain bias; two, it is the less sexually sophisticated individual who is more likely to be trapped in an unwanted and potentially disasterous pregnancy.

I have always been under the understanding that it is those women who are inclined to feel a certain degree of guilt about recognising that they are choosing to be sexually active who are most likely to be careless about taking care of birth control business. The notion of these grrls seems to be that if they simply allow themselves to be carried away by the passion of the moment then they cannot be considered to fall into the category of sluts. Of course they are playing a game of sexual Russian roulette.

All of this makes sense if you have been taught that sex is taboo and yet you find yourself, by virtue of your hard-wiring feeling, feeling kinda lusty. To ensure that you are protected from pregnancy is to acknowledge that you are indeed a dirty grrl and that you plan to involve yourself in forbidden activities. Individuals who are not prepared to acknowledge that they are have sexual desires figure that by avoiding taking responsibility for themselves with respect for birth control they will not appear to be complicit in this dirty act - either to themselves or to their sexual partners. This is a game of self-delusion and it is born out of guilt.

Some very good points there.

your info, Gadget, is usually culled from Right to Life sites and thus will show a certain bias

Oh NOOOOO!!!!!! It's a vast, right-wing conspiracy!!!!

Actually, this information is from the Alan Guttmacher institute, the statistics arm of Planned Parenthood (not-Right-to-Life).

Because statistics are easily manipulated and I wouldn't want anyone to just read the headline, I've highlighted the more salient parts from this webpage (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html). Don't be fooled by the first sentance:

CONTRACEPTIVE USE

Fifty-four percent of women having abortions used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users reported using their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users reported correct use.[/url]

Forty-six percent of women having abortions did not use a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. Of these women, 33% perceived themselves to be at low risk, 32% had concerns about contraceptive methods, 26% had unexpected sex and 1% were forced to have sex.

Eight percent of women having abortions have never used a method of birth control; nonuse is greatest among those who are young, poor, black, Hispanic or less educated.

About half of unintended pregnancies occur among the 11% of women at risk of unintended pregnancy who did not use contraceptives in the month they became pregnant. Most of these women had practiced contraception in the past.

So it seems that even abortionists agree -- contraception is not used properly, if at all, among the majority of women who opt to abort. Of those poor girls who could possibly fit into the category of being carried away by passion, the number is 26% -- and only a percentage of those would be ones who opted not to use birth control because of the self-delusion you muse over.

I still fail to see the point which you are attempting to make. Why should these women who have ended up with unintended pregnancies be forced to follow through with them instead of having the option of an early abortion?

I still fail to see the point which you are attempting to make. Why should these women who have ended up with unintended pregnancies be forced to follow through with them instead of having the option of an early abortion?

Because once a woman is pregnant, there are two people involved. While I am not unsympathetic to a woman who is pregnant and doesn't want to be, I don't believe it is OK for her to kill someone to solve her problem.

Well, I feel that the rights of the individual who is already alive and fully sentient trump those of the "pre-born" as you folks like to say.

I believe all human beings, regardless of age, place of residence, development, intelligence, or cognition have the same rights, and no one person's rights, most especially the right to not be killed, trump another's.

Gadgetlady, you may believe that, but that isn't the way things are. It has been proven time and time again that all humans don't have the same rights. Would it be wonderful if everyone had the same rights? Of course, but the fact is, we limit the rights of people, depending on their intelligence, their age, and their level of cognition all the time. Do we allow mentally handicapped people to sign legal papers that they don't understand? No. Is a will legally binding if the person signing it wasn't mentally competent? No. Are family members allowed to remove their loved ones from life support if their family member had not signed any legal papers to the contrary? Yes. Do high school students have the right to free speech or the right to privacy? Not necessarily. Do we remove civil rights from people that we think are "terrorists," even if they are US citizens? You better bet we do.

Not all people have equal rights.

Gadgetlady, you may believe that, but that isn't the way things are. It has been proven time and time again that all humans don't have the same rights. Would it be wonderful if everyone had the same rights? Of course, but the fact is, we limit the rights of people, depending on their intelligence, their age, and their level of cognition all the time. Do we allow mentally handicapped people to sign legal papers that they don't understand? No. Is a will legally binding if the person signing it wasn't mentally competent? No. Are family members allowed to remove their loved ones from life support if their family member had not signed any legal papers to the contrary? Yes. Do high school students have the right to free speech or the right to privacy? Not necessarily. Do we remove civil rights from people that we think are "terrorists," even if they are US citizens? You better bet we do.

Not all people have equal rights.

Ahhh, yes, but all of these groups have one right in common. The have the right to live, to not be killed at the whim of another.

Ahhh, yes, but all of these groups have one right in common. The have the right to live, to not be killed at the whim of another.

Not really. If you are on life support, your husband has the right to have it removed. Technically, you are still living, and he then has the right to kill you. There may still be a chance that you could live, but he still has that right. It is the same with a fetus, just removing its life support. More violently, admittedly, but that's how I view it. Until it has the ability to make its heart beat on its own or has the ability to draw in a breath of air, it doesn't have the same rights as the other members of the human race.