# Abortion - the times may be a changin...



## Alligatorob (Dec 1, 2021)

This could set off a firestorm... either way I guess

Supreme Court: Top US judges signal support for abortion limits​https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59495210


----------



## Bellbird (Dec 1, 2021)

I abhor abortions when they are performed as a means of birth control, not once but on some numerous occasions, once it was legalised it was the 'done thing' . I hope some of them in their later years may live to regret it.


----------



## Ruthanne (Dec 1, 2021)

When I was in my fertile years I could not have agreed to an abortion.  That's just not me.  I had wanted children badly most of those years.

I also believe that it's a woman's choice and only her and the man's business.  Who am I to say what someone else does with their body?
I am not the supreme judge after all.


----------



## dseag2 (Dec 1, 2021)

Only my opinion, but there are women who become pregnant that are not capable of taking care of a baby.  Best case scenario, we as taxpayers fund it.  Worst case scenario, the babies are neglected and grow up in poverty.


----------



## jerry old (Dec 2, 2021)

Murder is murder, killing those without a voice, or without an appeal, without defense is horrific.


----------



## Shalimar (Dec 2, 2021)

*I was assaulted, pregnant at thirteen. Fortunate to find someone who agreed to help me.*


----------



## Capt Lightning (Dec 2, 2021)

Part of the UK was still living in the dark ages regarding abortion until it was dragged into the 21st. century.  I believe that while it is in some cases a poor substitute for contraception, it is an individual choice and within reasonable limits, should be available and legal.


----------



## Murrmurr (Dec 2, 2021)

Capt Lightning said:


> Part of the UK was still living in the dark ages regarding abortion until it was dragged into the 21st. century.  I believe that while it is in some cases a poor substitute for contraception, it is an individual choice and within reasonable limits, should be available and legal.


It's extremely likely medical scientists can find a method for doing guaranteed reversible (temporary) surgical sterilization. But I suppose no one wants to fund the necessary studies.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Dec 2, 2021)

IMO abortion should be an available option.


----------



## Devi (Dec 2, 2021)

And ... are there not birth control pills? (It's been a million years since I looked into it.)

But that's a different issue than the abortion issue in this thread.


----------



## oldpop (Dec 2, 2021)

Abortion? I do not condone it. I would not have one but then again I am a man. In some circumstances it is needed and should be allowed. Bottom line is I have no right to dictate to anyone what they should do with their body. We each have to deal with the consequences of our own individual decisions.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Dec 2, 2021)

_"Polls: Most Americans support the right to abortion, but many are also OK  with 15-week limit    _​_
New opinion polls show that while Americans remain divided over abortion, most do not entirely agree with either side in a case heading to the Supreme Court next month.

The justices are preparing to hear a case from Mississippi, whose officials are defending its 15-week limit on abortions and urging the repeal of Roe vs. Wade.

Abortion rights advocates argue that if the 15-week limit is upheld, the court will have overturned the landmark 1973 ruling. Under that precedent, abortions have been legal through about 24 weeks of a pregnancy, the point when a fetus can live outside the womb.

A Marquette University Law School poll released Wednesday found respondents by a 2-1 ratio said Roe vs. Wade should not be overturned.

But when survey respondents were asked if they would favor or oppose a ruling to “uphold a state law that (except in cases of medical emergencies or fetal abnormalities) bans abortions after the 15th week of a pregnancy,” 37% said they favored upholding it, while 32% said they would oppose such a ruling.

It is a result that pollsters have long observed if respondents are asked several questions about their views on abortion.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Tuesday also found strong support for Roe vs. Wade. Asked if this ruling should be upheld or overturned, the respondents said it should be upheld by  60% to 27%.

Marquette has been doing regular polling on the court, and in September, 40% said they favored upholding a 15-week limit while 32% opposed it.


“This is in line with much national polling on abortion over the years, which consistently finds support for maintaining Roe and a right to an abortion, but accepts a variety of restrictions including on the timing of abortions, as in this case,” Marquette’s pollsters said.

The court will hear arguments in the case Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on Dec. 1.

The threat to Roe has arisen not from changes in public opinion but in the makeup of the court.

Before 2017, the court had three veteran conservatives — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — who were skeptical of abortion rights.

In his first year as a justice, Thomas voted to overturn the abortion right in the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey.

The three veterans have been joined by three appointees of President Trump — Justices Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — who supporters believe will vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade if presented the opportunity.

That prospect arose last year with the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September. Three months before, Mississippi’s Atty. Gen. Lynn Fitch had filed an appeal petition asking the court to revisit the “strict viability” rule and uphold its proposed 15-week limit on abortions. Doing so would “not require the court to overturn Roe,” she wrote.

But Barrett had replaced Ginsburg when the court met behind closed doors to consider the appeal. After months of delay and uncertainty, the court announced in May it would hear the Dobbs case and decide the question raised by Mississippi: “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”

However, Mississippi’s top attorney then raised the stakes. “Roe and Casey are egregiously wrong,” she told the justices in July, and they should be overturned at once.

Meanwhile, abortion rights advocates also argue that the court has no option but to uphold or strike down the right to abortion.

“If the court upholds the ban, it is overruling Roe and Casey, even if it doesn’t use those words,” said Julie Rikelman, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, who will represent the Jackson women’s clinic.

She said the viability rule set in Roe was clear and workable. “Without that clear line, states could ban abortions at any point in a pregnancy,” she said."_

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-11-17/americans-support-the-right-to-abortion


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

(((@Shalimar)))


----------



## jerry old (Dec 2, 2021)

Again, murder is murder
Let me wander: that kid Ritterhouse that murdered two people-had the corpses been brought into the courtroom. laying in state
throughout the trial, would that have assisted the jury in reaching a decision.
(for that matter any murder trial)

Would having a fetus laying on the table assist the Supreme Court in their decision making? 
Lawyers are not a friend of justice, they are to twist and turn, send people wandering down rabbit trails.

All the words following murder that the lawyers spout do not change the facts that a living fetus is no more; would handling a
fetus change your mind?


----------



## StarSong (Dec 2, 2021)

Nearly all with the power to decide the legality of abortion have been those who aren't in the position of needing or wanting one, i.e., men (or women past menopause).

Until this country fully supports poor families and abused children there should be no conversations about making abortions illegal.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

People have not learned that to maintain freedom one must have eternal vigilance.  I have watched all these decades as people take these things for granted.  Now it will be up to the new generations to decide if they have the guts & gumption to organize and to fight and to not let go.  I will say the minority in this issue have done just that for many, many years with little to no opposition.  It's time to get off one's derriere, and not assume.

Of course, this is not an issue for those who can afford to fly for their procedures.  Nothing real is ever an issue for them.  Reality is for other people, those with the moxie to stay with it and not let it lapse.  Ever.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Of course, this is not an issue for those who can afford to fly for their procedures. Nothing real is ever an issue for them. Reality is for other people, those with the moxie to stay with it and not let it lapse. Ever.


Very true.  I've long said that if outlawed here, access to safe, legal abortions will shift from a matter of health care to one of economics.  Those with the means will continue to have access.  

While I'm not wealthy, if my daughter or GD needed an abortion and it was illegal in my state or country, I'd make a priority of getting her to a place where it was both safe and legal. 

Making abortions illegal will merely force them underground. Frank Sinatra's mother was an abortionist 100 years ago. There's nothing new about women choosing to not bring pregnancy to term.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

My beloved grandma Rose was a nurse in the 1920's.  She did home care for women dying of botched abortions.  She told me of all the other children the women had, watching Momma die.  One hundred years ago, dying mothers with too many mouths to feed.  She was one of a very few nurses who was able to accept these types of assignments.  My Rose was a very strong woman.  The day in 1973 when Roe became law we were walking together.  She said it was the second best day ever.


----------



## raybar (Dec 2, 2021)

Read yesterday's oral arguments here: 
https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2021/19-1392_p86a.pdf


----------



## StarSong (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> My beloved grandma Rose was a nurse in the 1920's.  She did home care for women dying of botched abortions.  She told me of all the other children the women had, watching Momma die.  One hundred years ago, dying mothers with too many mouths to feed.  She was one of a very few nurses who was able to accept these types of assignments.  My Rose was a very strong woman.  The day in 1973 when Roe became law we were walking together.  *She said it was the second best day ever.*


What was the first?


----------



## Sassycakes (Dec 2, 2021)

*Fortunately, I was never put in a position to need an abortion. However, a friend of mine had a child who had a condition where she could never talk or walk, etc. So my friend and her husband decided not to have more children. 7 years later Sadly her husband was a fireman and was killed fighting a fire. They had to examine my friend before they could pronounce him dead. I remember it like it was yesterday. They found out she was pregnant and while she was waiting to find out if her second child would be born with the same problem we cried for hours. Fortunately, the baby would not have the same condition. I would not have blamed her if she had an abortion. Why make another child go through the same problems as her first child. I still cry thinking her husband never heard a child call him Daddy.*


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Dec 2, 2021)

I'm torn on this issue. I don't really see how you can prevent abortions. If a woman wants one bad enough, they have to resort to back alley quacks, and that doesn't help anyone. Yet, you are destroying what could be a life. I doubt most women view abortions as something you do on the way to McDonalds. For most, it is a traumatic event. I think anti-abortion people seem to forget that. And again, it is the cessation of a human life. Like i said I'm torn.


----------



## Remy (Dec 2, 2021)

jerry old said:


> Murder is murder, killing those without a voice, or without an appeal, without defense is horrific.


You could change the words murder and killing to abuse, keep the rest and that's the childhood of some kids.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

How many couples wish to carry to term a child who will be born with severe health issues and a very low probability of an independent, purposeful life?  Let's get real.  A cat is a better mother.  Our litter; our choice.


----------



## Tish (Dec 2, 2021)

As much as I am against it, I believe it's a woman's body women choice.


----------



## Irwin (Dec 2, 2021)

It doesn't seem like a good idea to force poor women to have children they can't afford or are unable to take care of.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 2, 2021)

Irwin said:


> It doesn't seem like a good idea to force poor women to have children they can't afford or are unable to take care of.


Or to force any women to have children they don't want.  

Most on SF, whether parents or not, understand it takes oceans of time and patience, plus a strong support system, to raise a child well. Not everyone is up for the challenge.


----------



## helenbacque (Dec 2, 2021)

There is little that is sadder than the life of an unwanted child.  

If politics wins and a bad decision by these nine people (our very unbalanced/bias Supreme Court) will put us back in the world of kitchen table abortions for poor women and the frightened teen.


----------



## Smiley Holly (Dec 2, 2021)

Abortion, I feel is a very personal decision for a women. Whether they decide that is to keep the baby or have the baby and put it up for adoption or have an abortion it is still a very personal decision that needs to be weighed heavily by the women involved and not by any outside parties.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

Smiley Holly said:


> Abortion, I feel is a very personal decision for a women. Whether they decide that is to keep the baby or have the baby and put it up for adoption or have an abortion* it is still a very personal decision that needs to be weighed heavily by the women involved and not by any outside parties.*


What if it's not weighed heavily?  What if it is casual, or a means of birth control.  It is still no one's business but her own.  We can't expect or desire every woman should go through the required hell before she is able to abort.  It's truly MYOB time.


----------



## Smiley Holly (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> What if it's not weighed heavily?  What if it is casual, or a means of birth control.  It is still no one's business but her own.  We can't expect or desire every woman should go through the required hell before she is able to abort.  It's truly MYOB time.


I understand where you are coming from, but ultimately the decision comes down to the women who is dealing with the situation.


----------



## Alligatorob (Dec 2, 2021)

jerry old said:


> Again, murder is murder


That is the crux of the problem.  Many people, somewhere around half in the US do not believe abortion is murder, the other half (more or less) do.

Very different from killing a breathing baby or older, 99.99% would agree that would be murder.


jerry old said:


> would handling a
> fetus change your mind?


No


----------



## Alligatorob (Dec 2, 2021)

Smiley Holly said:


> ultimately the decision comes down to the women who is dealing with the situation


I agree, none of the government's business.  Or mine for that matter...


----------



## mrstime (Dec 2, 2021)

jerry old said:


> Again, murder is murder
> Let me wander: that kid Ritterhouse that murdered two people-had the corpses been brought into the courtroom. laying in state
> throughout the trial, would that have assisted the jury in reaching a decision.
> (for that matter any murder trial)
> ...


Because a 4 month fetus is considered a late term abortion, if they laid out the fetus's people might not even recognize what they were.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

No one can mistake 4 month fetus as anything other than a tiny human.  It is 4.5 inches long.





This elevates the decision to abort to high drama level, IMO.  BUT, a decision, in my view, that is still in mother's right to be the ultimate one.  Can't shy away from facts despite my opinion.


----------



## Irwin (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> No one can mistake 4 month fetus as anything other than a tiny human.  It is 4.5 inches long.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A fetus is a potential life, but not at all sentient or a viable life until the final few months of pregnancy, so what makes it so special if it's unwanted?

The thing that gets me is, most of the anti-abortion crowd are also anti-vax and anti-mask — two simple things that can save lives. They supported the idiotic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which killed 100s of thousands of innocent civilians. They're pro-gun and anti-gun regulation. They don't support programs to feed the hungry or to provide healthcare to those who can't afford it. They're pro-death in almost all cases except for when it comes to the life of the fetus.

Who exactly will benefit from banning abortion?
Not the women who are forced to have children they can't or don't want to take care of.
Not the people who pass the laws, unless they benefit somehow politically.
The fetus would be allowed to grow into a person, but in many cases be born into a poor household fraught with drug use, neglect, and child abuse.

So banning abortion for the most part doesn't benefit anyone. According to historian Carlo M. Cipolla's basic laws of stupidity, when people do things that cause losses to themselves and to others, that is the definition of stupidity.


----------



## Marie5656 (Dec 2, 2021)

*Had a college professor tell me once that I was not really pro choice because I, personally, would not choose abortion..but to put the child up for adoption rather than abort.  But, CHOICE..right?*


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

Your professor was wrong.


----------



## mrstime (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> No one can mistake 4 month fetus as anything other than a tiny human.  It is 4.5 inches long.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


at 4 and a half inches I might smack it with a fly swatter. Think about what 4 and 1/2 inches really looks like.


----------



## Alligatorob (Dec 2, 2021)

mrstime said:


> Think about what 4 and 1/2 inches really looks like.


Why should what it looks like matter?


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

mrstime said:


> at 4 and a half inches I might smack it with a fly swatter. Think about what 4 and 1/2 inches really looks like.


I used to work in a Bio Lab.  I saw fetuses of all stages of development.


----------



## mellowyellow (Dec 2, 2021)

In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have abortion, but women have been mutilating themselves throughout history to end their unwanted pregnancy but it’s now safe.  For those who want to change it back to the 'good old days' they are not old enough to remember the carnage of backyard abortionists - women with no medical experience.


----------



## mrstime (Dec 2, 2021)

mellowyellow said:


> In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have abortion, but women have been mutilating themselves throughout history to end their unwanted pregnancy but it’s now safe.  For those who want to change it back to the 'good old days' they are not old enough to remember the carnage of backyard abortionists - women with no medical experience.


I was anti abortion, Mainly because in those days young women were being butchered by street abortions, until the Sherrie Finkbine story hit the news.


*
1962: Abortion mother returns home*
An American mother-of-four is on her way home amid a storm of controversy after being given a legal abortion in Sweden.
Sherri Finkbine, a TV presenter from Phoenix in Arizona, was denied an abortion in her home state following intense negative publicity surrounding her case.
The 30-year-old mother decided to terminate her fifth pregnancy after discovering that tranquilizers she had taken in the first few weeks of her pregnancy contained the drug Thalidomide.
In recent months there has been increasing evidence suggesting Thalidomide causes severe foetal deformities including missing limbs, deafness and blindness.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/26/newsid_3039000/3039322.stm


----------



## Pepper (Dec 2, 2021)

Thank you so much for remembering Sherri Finkbine @mrstime!  I was 12 and this was such a meaningful story for me, and encouraged a lot of discussion in my home and everywhere else.


----------



## old medic (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> No one can mistake 4 month fetus as anything other than a tiny human.  It is 4.5 inches long.


I had the "joy" of taking care of one a few weeks back.... held in one hand doing CPR with my thumb... She was trying to breath....
Her life was about 30 minutes long...
My opinion.... there are situations that a medical abortion is a viable answer...
BUT... If someone ( Male or Female) wants to use abortion as a form of birth control then they forfeit their right to ever have children again.


----------



## mellowyellow (Dec 2, 2021)

I wish men would stay out of this argument, they have absolutely no idea.


----------



## WheatenLover (Dec 2, 2021)

old medic said:


> BUT... If someone ( Male or Female) wants to use abortion as a form of birth control then they forfeit their right to ever have children again.


I know that some women use abortion as a form of birth control, because I have met one. But forfeiting their rights to have children? How would that work? No one would know the real reason and they would simply use different abortion providers so that no one would find out.

I have met plenty of men who wanted their girlfriends to get an abortion when they became pregnant. These men also refused to help support the child financially, and none wanted any contact with the child, if it were born, and none wanted to marry the women. The women either got an abortion because they could not afford to support a child and didn't want to have it adopted, or they had the child and were vilified for having a "welfare baby".

I have *never* met a man who agreed to pay child support and/or have contact with the child in a parental role, or who would marry the woman and try to form a family together. These women, btw, were girlfriends, not just one night stands.


----------



## Warrigal (Dec 2, 2021)

Irwin said:


> A fetus is a potential life, but not at all sentient or a viable life until the final few months of pregnancy, so what makes it so special if it's unwanted?
> 
> The thing that gets me is, most of the anti-abortion crowd are also anti-vax and anti-mask — two simple things that can save lives. They supported the idiotic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which killed 100s of thousands of innocent civilians. They're pro-gun and anti-gun regulation. They don't support programs to feed the hungry or to provide healthcare to those who can't afford it. They're pro-death in almost all cases except for when it comes to the life of the fetus.
> 
> ...


I am for legalised abortion because the alternative, unregulated backstreet abortions, is much worse. I also agree that it is a woman's right to decide for herself whether she wants to continue with a pregnancy, or not.

However, as a woman, I feel that even a potential life has value. Great value.

My daughter has four children. She fell pregnant early in her marriage and it was not intentional. She and her husband were not in a good place financially and when the doctor confirmed the pregnancy, she was shocked. The doctor told her to make up her mind quickly whether she wanted to continue with the pregnancy. That shocked her even more.

Fortunately Hubby and I were in a position to assure her that we would support them in every way, which we have done. We are still supporting this child, now a mature woman, because she has a genetic variation that has affected her cognitive abilities. This was not diagnosed until she was about 10 years old. It has been a difficult ride but she is part of our family and much loved.

When the fourth pregnancy occurred, my daughter was again shocked at the news. This was very much a surprise just as the financial situation was beginning to improve. Another baby was definitely not part of the plan.

Again, the doctor offered the termination option and this time it was seriously considered, but again it was rejected. My daughter later told me, "Mum, this one is the icing on the cake", and so she is. You can see her in my thread about Music Therapy. Her embryonic potential has been wonderfully fulfilled.

These decisions are hard either way and every woman's circumstances and supports are different. That is why it should be a decision for the pregnant woman to make. It is society's responsibility to ensure that mothers have adequate support to raise and educate the babies that they carry to full term.


----------



## WheatenLover (Dec 2, 2021)

When I was pregnant with our triplets, my doctor offered us a partial abortion (1 or 2 fetuses). We refused, and both of us were horrified at the suggestion. Our fetuses were very much wanted. He said he had to tell us about it (hospital policy).

It's too late now to put money where my mouth is, but I would get an abortion if there were no other viable options. And viable options don't just have to do with a severely sick fetus. I can think of more, but they would have to occur simultaneously.

At any rate, I think abortion is the woman's choice, and that she also has the choice of giving someone else a say in the decision. I also think late term abortions that are not for medical reasons are something I don't agree with. My babies were born at 27 weeks, and all of them are still alive. At the point when they become viable fetuses, I draw the line, except for medical reasons. But that is just my opinion and I would not foist it upon anyone else.


----------



## Ruthanne (Dec 2, 2021)

After reading all the replies I am understanding more about reasons for terminating that people have.  I'm sorry for those that had to make the decision.  It certainly must have been painful.


----------



## mrstime (Dec 2, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Thank you so much for remembering Sherri Finkbine @mrstime!  I was 12 and this was such a meaningful story for me, and encouraged a lot of discussion in my home and everywhere else.


We were married in 1957, and at the time the Finkbine story broke we had 3 stair steps and I was pregnant yet again.


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 3, 2021)

Irwin said:


> A fetus is a potential life, but not at all sentient or a viable life until the final few months of pregnancy, so what makes it so special if it's unwanted?
> 
> The thing that gets me is, most of the anti-abortion crowd are also anti-vax and anti-mask — two simple things that can save lives. They supported the idiotic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which killed 100s of thousands of innocent civilians. They're pro-gun and anti-gun regulation. They don't support programs to feed the hungry or to provide healthcare to those who can't afford it. They're pro-death in almost all cases except for when it comes to the life of the fetus.
> 
> ...


YES!!  Most of the anti-abortion people are the same people who immediately lose interest in the fetus once it is born, being unwilling to offer poor women any support in raising the child, as in financial benefits or medical benefits.  

It is also interesting to me that many of those who oppose vaccination because "nobody has the right to tell me what to do with my body" are sooo very interested in telling women what they must do with their own bodies.   To me, this is hypocrisy in its purest form.

Do we see any of the anti-abortionists trying to do anything to try to identify fathers and enforce child support payments against fathers of the unwanted children they want to force women to bear??   A big fat NO!  The responsibility isn't all the woman's, after all.  The father can just walk away.  The woman can't.

Or do we see any of them trying to enact legislation that would subsidize medical care for disabled children women would be forced to bear?  Another bag fat NO!!


----------



## Irwin (Dec 3, 2021)

The Constitutionality of Mississippi's restrictive abortion laws will be determined by the SCOTUS decision.

Guess where Mississippi is ranked when it comes to education?
Answer: Dead last
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/most-educated-states

Wouldn't it be better if the best and the brightest made decisions in our country instead of the worst and the...


----------



## Jackie23 (Dec 3, 2021)

Butterfly said:


> YES!!  Most of the anti-abortion people are the same people who immediately lose interest in the fetus once it is born, being unwilling to offer poor women any support in raising the child, as in financial benefits or medical benefits.
> 
> It is also interesting to me that many of those who oppose vaccination because "nobody has the right to tell me what to do with my body" are sooo very interested in telling women what they must do with their own bodies.   To me, this is hypocrisy in its purest form.
> 
> ...


How VERY true!!!


----------



## Remy (Dec 3, 2021)

Marie5656 said:


> *Had a college professor tell me once that I was not really pro choice because I, personally, would not choose abortion..but to put the child up for adoption rather than abort.  But, CHOICE..right?*


Your college professor was an uniformed moron. This would probably have been my choice if I had ever been faced with the dilemma.


----------



## oldpop (Dec 3, 2021)

Smiley Holly said:


> Abortion, I feel is a very personal decision for a women. Whether they decide that is to keep the baby or have the baby and put it up for adoption or have an abortion it is still a very personal decision that needs to be weighed heavily by the women involved and not by any outside parties.


Just curious. Are you saying the father should not have a say in the matter?


----------



## Smiley Holly (Dec 3, 2021)

oldpop said:


> Just curious. Are you saying the father should not have a say in the matter?


I feel they should be in the discussion process of course, but the ultimate bottom line decision to have one or not should be of the women.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 3, 2021)

Remy said:


> Your college professor was an uniformed moron. This would probably have been my choice if I had ever been faced with the dilemma.


Back when most here were in HS, college or just starting jobs (mid 1970s and earlier), an "unwed" mother was often a social pariah and an embarrassment to her family.  Medical coverage often didn't extend to maternity or delivery if a woman wasn't married.

One of my cousins got pregnant in HS during the late 60s and I only learned of it a few years ago.  Her parents felt deeply shamed and kept her home - she couldn't even attend family functions.  The explanation was that she wasn't feeling well...  The baby was adopted by someone from their church.  Another cousin got pregnant in college around the same time and there was a hurry-up wedding which resulted in a disastrous marriage.  My cousin and that child have a very frosty relationship, I'm sorry to say.

I remember girls in my HS going to "visit aunts" in far away places for six months or more.  There were a few whispers, but generally the thought of it being a HS pregnancy was so horrifying and scandalous that most chose to accept the storylines at face value.

There is no comparison between today's acceptance of unmarried pregnant women with the prevailing attitudes of 40-50 years ago - and earlier.
Access to safe, legal abortions have been a game changer for both men and women.  That's not because abortions are a substitute for birth control, but because having a baby is a life changing experience on every possible front.


----------



## oldpop (Dec 3, 2021)

Smiley Holly said:


> I feel they should be in the discussion process of course, but the ultimate bottom line decision to have one or not should be of the women.


That's interesting.


----------



## Remy (Dec 3, 2021)

@StarSong I worked with a younger woman who also had a shot gun wedding. They ended up divorced. I think she was a good mother but it probably would have been better had they never got married but according to her both sets of their parents really pushed it. 

I think we had one, maybe two pregnancies when I was in high school. I graduated late 70's. Now I hear on the radio when they discuss covid vaccine for high school kids and waivers for pregnant students. I can only imagine how many there may be. 

BTW my mother was not married to my GI bio dad when she got pregnant with my oldest brother. She didn't know I knew this but figured it out through some paper work (birth certificate? can't remember) when I was relatively young. My oldest brother knew and he said when he asked our mother about it, she flipped on him. Of coarse, true borderline.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 6, 2021)

I came across this very powerful piece from an Alabama minister.    

It was posted on Facebook by a Methodist pastor named David Barnhart on the double standards of pro-lifers. 

_“”The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. 

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.“ David Barnhart_

It's easy to find with a web search.  
Here's one source: https://franklycurious.com/wp/2020/12/09/the-unborn/


----------



## Aunt Bea (Dec 6, 2021)

I believe that abortion should be an option.

IMO legalized abortion is only one part of what should be a comprehensive list of things including age appropriate sex education, free access to reproductive health screening, access to contraceptives for both men and women, easy access to the morning after pill, etc...

If serious efforts were made to increase education,  awareness, and access to all of the choices available we should be able to make abortion an unnecessary option for most women.


----------



## Nathan (Dec 6, 2021)

StarSong said:


> I came across this very powerful piece from an Alabama minister.
> 
> It was posted on Facebook by a Methodist pastor named David Barnhart on the double standards of pro-lifers.
> 
> ...


Point well taken.    Many "pro-life" individuals pay lip service to the sanctity of life, then go on to support politician's and policies that ignore the _Prisoners, Immigrants,The sick,The poor, Widows, Orphans.   _ Oh and yes, same individuals profess their absolute faith and love for Jesus, but hate what he actually stands for.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 6, 2021)

Bellbird said:


> I abhor abortions when they are performed as a means of birth control, not once but on some numerous occasions, once it was legalised it was the 'done thing' . I hope some of them in their later years may live to regret it.





I'm an abortion survivor. You may read about forced sterilizations in Puerto Rico (my birthplace) here:  (1) forced abortions in puerto rico 1950s - Bing

While I oppose abortions on what some call "moral" grounds, I do recognize its legality.  It was legal under the Anglo Saxon common law. See      *Blackstones's*  Legal Dictionary and check for "quickening".  If the USSC decides to overrule _Roe v Wade_ it would run counter to centuries of precedent but it would also revert authority over the issue to the states.  This means that if some is from Florida and cannot get an abortion there, she may go to California and get it done there. Because of that the federal government would not be able to stop the procedure.


----------



## Alligatorob (Dec 6, 2021)

oldiebutgoody said:


> It was legal under the Anglo Saxon common law. See *Blackstones's* Legal Dictionary and check for "quickening".


That is interesting.  Can you post a link to something that explains it?  I tried searching but was unsuccessful.  I think it is an important point.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 6, 2021)

https://thelawdictionary.org/quickening/
https://www.bionity.com/en/encyclopedia/Quickening.html


----------



## Irwin (Dec 6, 2021)

StarSong said:


> I came across this very powerful piece from an Alabama minister.
> 
> It was posted on Facebook by a Methodist pastor named David Barnhart on the double standards of pro-lifers.
> 
> ...


That's the perfect response!

In addition to what the pastor wrote, the heart of the anti-abortion argument is based on belief in Jesus, and the 1st Amendment to our Constitution provides us with protection from religious beliefs being forced upon us. There is no anti-abortion argument based on science, or not real science, anyway. Pseudoscience claims that the fetus can feel pain during early stages of development while actual science says that the fetus can't feel pain until the final two or three months, which makes sense since it wouldn't benefit at all from being able to feel pain before that time. If it could, that would have a negative effect on its development in the form of unnecessary stress, and stress is harmful to neurological development of the fetus.

Stress is extremely harmful to children in early stages of development. If we force women to have children they can't properly care for, the result is often a stressful and abusive environment, which is why there's so much violence in poor neighborhoods in the U.S. While that enriches the prison industrial complex, it's not good for society.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 6, 2021)

Irwin said:


> If we force women to have children they can't properly care for, the result is often a stressful and abusive environment, which is why there's so much violence in poor neighborhoods in the U.S. While that enriches the prison industrial complex, it's not good for society.


Amen.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 6, 2021)

Irwin said:


> Stress is extremely harmful to children in early stages of development. If we force women to have children they can't properly care for, the result is often a stressful and abusive environment, which is why there's so much violence in poor neighborhoods in the U.S. While that enriches the prison industrial complex, it's not good for society.


There are thousands of children born every year to mothers who don't want them, or fathers who refuse to support them.  In far too many cases, I suspect that the primary reason some of these kids are born is to increase the welfare payments.  

In addition to allowing abortion, I would like to see mandatory Vasectomies for men who "impregnate" women with No intention of taking care of their "spawn".


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 6, 2021)

Alligatorob said:


> That is interesting.  Can you post a link to something that explains it?  I tried searching but was unsuccessful.  I think it is an important point.





Pepper said:


> https://thelawdictionary.org/quickening/
> https://www.bionity.com/en/encyclopedia/Quickening.html




Thanks both  for the question and the subsequent link.

Over the years people from the pro life side have said our Founding Fathers did not ever consider reproductive rights or even know what is was.  That is totally incorrect as most were fully immersed in the law, the so called *common law*:


common law defined:

com·mon law
/ˈkämən ˈˌlô/


the part of English law that is derived from custom and judicial precedent rather than statutes. Often contrasted with _statutory law_.

the body of English law as adopted and modified separately by the different states of the US and by the federal government.

modifier noun: *common-law


source: Google

*

------------------------------------






As shown in the reply above abortion was LEGAL under the Anglo Saxon common law as proven by Blackstone. This in contrast to the beliefs of the pro lifers. The common law in entrenched in the 7th Amendment to the USA Constitution:




Constitution of United States of America 1789

In *Suits at common law,* where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the *common law*.

Therefore, all protections people had under the common law during the time of our Founding Fathers are to be preserved today. This includes reproductive rights. This is why if Roe vs Wade (a federal ruling) was overturned, the states retain their right to legislate as they see fit on the subject. Some states may abolish, others preserve it so that if one cannot get the procedure done in, say, Florida, they can move to another state such as Oregon and get it done there.


----------



## Nathan (Dec 6, 2021)

Don M. said:


> In addition to allowing abortion, I would like to see mandatory Vasectomies for men who "impregnate" women with No intention of taking care of their "spawn".


I have long thought of a future time when babies where "fixed" at birth.   Later on as an adult, they could petition to have the procedure reversed, provided that they can demonstrate sincere desire to become a parent, and some (at least) rudimentary skills and means.


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 6, 2021)

Smiley Holly said:


> I feel they should be in the discussion process of course, but the ultimate bottom line decision to have one or not should be of the women.


I agree, because as a practical matter the unwanted pregnancy has such a more powerful impact on the woman, both as to her health and to her whole future.  Unless the man is willing and able and committed to being an equal partner in child rearing and care (which I don't think I've really ever seen, even in a marriage) the burden is always going to be more heavy for the woman.  Even if the man is paying a reasonable amount of child support, it is still the woman's everyday responsibility to care for the child, stay home when the child is sick, etc.  The man can just pay his money and go on as if the child isn't even there, while the mother is stuck.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Dec 6, 2021)




----------



## dseag2 (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Back when most here were in HS, college or just starting jobs (mid 1970s and earlier), an "unwed" mother was often a social pariah and an embarrassment to her family.  Medical coverage often didn't extend to maternity or delivery if a woman wasn't married.
> 
> One of my cousins got pregnant in HS during the late 60s and I only learned of it a few years ago.  Her parents felt deeply shamed and kept her home - she couldn't even attend family functions.  The explanation was that she wasn't feeling well...  The baby was adopted by someone from their church.  Another cousin got pregnant in college around the same time and there was a hurry-up wedding which resulted in a disastrous marriage.  My cousin and that child have a very frosty relationship, I'm sorry to say.
> 
> ...


So true.  I remember a fellow student from my 1976 graduating class being denied graduation because she was pregnant.  And yes, she was a "pariah" as you've described.  So tragic.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Dec 7, 2021)

Let's make it safe because women ARE going to keep having abortions.


----------



## Patch (Dec 7, 2021)

Reading through this thread, I saw little reference to rape/incest.  In the recently passed Texas law, a 12-year old raped by her stepdad, brother, neighbor has to carry to term.  During the pregnancy, she may be murdered in a school shooting because the same folks who write laws preventing her from ending the pregnancy won't address gun laws.  
If forced to give birth, she can't afford rent or groceries or health care for her or her child.  Is the child stripped from her screaming hands in the birth room and put in foster care?  
Should she keep the child, she's not old enough to go to work to earn a living wage.  Heck... if she can't continue her education, she may never be able to earn a living wage.  
I am NOT a proponent of abortion as "birth control".  The discussion must be much more involved than that.  And, the current political system where people of wealth with campaigns paid for by evangelical "goody two-shoes" don't want to have that deeper discussion.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 7, 2021)

Patch said:


> Reading through this thread, I saw little reference to rape/incest.  In the recently passed Texas law, a 12-year old raped by her stepdad, brother, neighbor has to carry to term.  During the pregnancy, she may be murdered in a school shooting because the same folks who write laws preventing her from ending the pregnancy won't address gun laws.
> If forced to give birth, she can't afford rent or groceries or health care for her or her child.  Is the child stripped from her screaming hands in the birth room and put in foster care?
> Should she keep the child, she's not old enough to go to work to earn a living wage.  Heck... if she can't continue her education, she may never be able to earn a living wage.
> I am NOT a proponent of abortion as "birth control".  The discussion must be much more involved than that.  And, the current political system where people of wealth with campaigns paid for by evangelical "goody two-shoes" don't want to have that deeper discussion.


To take this one more step, even if this child's child was adopted out into a loving family, DNA testing is as simple as spitting in a tube and getting to a post office.    

Imagine the horror of that child when the light dawned that all close relatives were also related to each other.  Or that Dad is a serial rapist.  

Don't even want to know how THAT kind of information would affect someone's self-perception. 

Lets be clear: Abortion laws are meant to control women. If they were truly focused on protecting "precious children" those at-risk children would be treated as precious by so-called pro lifers after they were born. 

If PLs want a cause to rally around, how about our horrific foster care system? Talk about broken. And p.s. "precious children" in foster care are already here!


----------



## Pepper (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Lets be clear: Abortion laws are meant to control women.


You got that right.  It's all about ownership & control, and not by one's female self.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Lets be clear: Abortion laws are meant to control women.




difficult to argue with that: https://www.google.com/search?q=abo...IAawDkgEDMi4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz


just like military draft laws were meant to control men



Ironically, many of a certain political persuasion say government has no right to dictate to them how to conduct their lives. But that same government has the right to restrict their reproductive rights and to conscript others for needless (but profitable) wars.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

I am against legalized abortion because it sets a precident in law that it is ok to kill innocent human life, and I disagree with killing humans.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> To take this one more step, even if this child's child was adopted out into a loving family, DNA testing is as simple as spitting in a tube and getting to a post office.
> 
> Imagine the horror of that child when the light dawned that all close relatives were also related to each other.  Or that Dad is a serial rapist.
> 
> ...


It's not the kid's fault how it was conceived, still the little guy should be given a chance of breath, fresh air and sunshine.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

Patch said:


> Reading through this thread, I saw little reference to rape/incest.  In the recently passed Texas law, a 12-year old raped by her stepdad, brother, neighbor has to carry to term.  During the pregnancy, she may be murdered in a school shooting because the same folks who write laws preventing her from ending the pregnancy won't address gun laws.
> If forced to give birth, she can't afford rent or groceries or health care for her or her child.  Is the child stripped from her screaming hands in the birth room and put in foster care?
> Should she keep the child, she's not old enough to go to work to earn a living wage.  Heck... if she can't continue her education, she may never be able to earn a living wage.
> I am NOT a proponent of abortion as "birth control".  The discussion must be much more involved than that.  And, the current political system where people of wealth with campaigns paid for by evangelical "goody two-shoes" don't want to have that deeper discussion.


Well maybe we should be thinking of ways of support to these people then? Poor people shouldn't have to kill their children just because they are poor imo. Sounds so inhuman to do that. I'm not a 'lefty' but even I can see that finances and killing little babies should not be comparative.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 7, 2021)

Here's a prime example of why Abortion should be allowed.






These kids have 2 strikes against them the second they are born.


----------



## Pepper (Dec 7, 2021)

Alice November said:


> I am against legalized abortion because it sets a precident in law that it is ok to kill innocent human life, and I disagree with killing humans.


Your beliefs are fine except don't impose your thoughts on others.  I won't argue your points (which I disagree with) I just want, as a matter of law, that folks like you can't inflict and restrict others--the majority--who don't see it your way.


----------



## Lara (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Lets be clear: Abortion laws are meant to control women.


My question would be, what about the silent "little women" in the womb that abortion laws are meant to protect? I would personally choose to be the one to die by that surgical knife if I had to in order for my girls to live because they have more life ahead of them and every right to live.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Your beliefs are fine except don't impose your thoughts on others.  I won't argue your points (which I disagree with) I just want, as a matter of law, that folks like you can't inflict and restrict others--the majority--who don't see it your way.


I'm not imposing my thoughts on others any more than you are. 
The law should apply to the unborn child as a potential human, who left to survive in its mothers womb inmost cases becomes a human child. 
Its not me inflicting anything on anyone, you need to rethink your criticism of me personally I believe. Sorry Peppe if it seems directed at you , it is just I am using logic, not personal infliction.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

Lara said:


> My question would be, what about the silent "little women" in the womb that abortion laws are meant to protect? I would personally choose to be the one to die by that surgical knife if I had to in order for my girls to live because they have more life ahead of them and every right to live.


But you can't really speak for each and every little girl waiting to be born from the womb. If only we could hear them speak about whether they desire death or to live life out. That would be better imo, if we could hear it from them before they are killed.


----------



## spectratg (Dec 7, 2021)

mellowyellow said:


> I wish men would stay out of this argument, they have absolutely no idea.


I agree wholeheartedly as a man (and father of four beautiful adult daughters).  Unless you have a uterus, then you are not qualified to have an opinion on abortion!


----------



## Lara (Dec 7, 2021)

Don M. said:


> Here's a prime example of why Abortion should be allowed.


I think you mean birth control, education, and adoption, Don. Not abortion. There are other options available.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

spectratg said:


> I agree wholeheartedly as a man (and father of four beautiful adult daughters).  Unless you have a uterus, then you are not qualified to have an opinion on abortion!


Many fathers who's children were aborted feel very diferently than you do.

 So, as a granddad, it would be perfectly ok for your daughter and mate to nix your grandson's life before it started?


----------



## Pepper (Dec 7, 2021)

If you're using the law against a woman's right to choose abortion, I'm sorry @Alice November,  but I am against that.

However!  My own dearest, best friend for 50 years and I disagree on most social issues.  We love each other anyway.  

So, while I can't applaud your view I'm glad you're here to talk with!


----------



## Pepper (Dec 7, 2021)

Alice November said:


> Many fathers who's children were aborted feel very diferently than you do.
> 
> So, as a* granddad*, it would be perfectly ok for your daughter and mate to nix your grandson's life before it started?


Grandparents have no say in their adult child's decisions, like it or not.  They're beyond our control, as is natural.


----------



## Devi (Dec 7, 2021)

Don M. said:


> Here's a prime example of why Abortion should be allowed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Check the lack of responsibility. She says "somebody needs to pay" ... yet she's the one who had all those children.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Grandparents have no say in their adult child's decisions, like it or not.  They're beyond our control, as is natural.


Doesn't mean we have to agree or condescend though. Honestly I don't think controling others is the issue here. I think I asked if grandparents would feel something sad if their own daughters killed their grandchildren. I would.


----------



## garyt1957 (Dec 7, 2021)

Shalimar said:


> *I was assaulted, pregnant at thirteen. Fortunate to find someone who agreed to help me.*


I don't think many people are against abortion in that instance, although I know there are some.


----------



## Alice November (Dec 7, 2021)

Devi said:


> Check the lack of responsibility. She says "somebody needs to pay" ... yet she's the one who had all those children.


But those little children didn't do anything wrong to be illiminated from having a life!


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 7, 2021)

Alice November said:


> I am against legalized abortion because it sets a precident in law that it is ok to kill innocent human life, and I disagree with killing humans.




War is a legal way to kill innocents as well.  A great many of those victims have been children.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 7, 2021)

oldiebutgoody said:


> difficult to argue with that: https://www.google.com/search?q=abortion+laws+were+meant+to+to+control+women&rlz=1CAKSOU_enUS772US772&sxsrf=AOaemvIWIXc_PX0ZJeqRtgBVA1XHwRvkSA:1638891491691&ei=43-vYeOvKcqjptQP3OKfyAY&ved=0ahUKEwijrb_JgtL0AhXKkYkEHVzxB2kQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=abortion+laws+were+meant+to+to+control+women&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BwgjELACECdKBAhBGABQigVYpiJg0ihoAXABeACAAX-IAawDkgEDMi4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz
> 
> 
> just like military draft laws were meant to control men
> ...




Off topic:

While a change in the abortion laws will be used to control women, there is at least one bit of good news for women - they will remain exempt from the  military draft laws used to enslave men:

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/06/ndaa-women-draft-dropped-523829


----------



## StarSong (Dec 7, 2021)

Alice November said:


> I'm not imposing my thoughts on others any more than you are.
> The law should apply to the *unborn child as a potential human, *who left to survive in its mothers womb inmost cases becomes a human child.
> Its not me inflicting anything on anyone, you need to rethink your criticism of me personally I believe. Sorry Peppe if it seems directed at you , it is just I am using logic, not personal infliction.


Every ovulation and ejaculation represents potential humans.  IUDs are essentially little abortion machines.  Should morning-after pills be made illegal?      

With nearly 8 billion on the planet already, at what point will enough be enough?   20 billion?  30?  

As for comparing abortion laws to the US military draft, please note that the draft ended in 1973. 
Interestingly enough, the military learned that unwilling (draftees) generally made a less effective fighting force than a volunteer army. Why do our nation's leaders refuse to apply that same wisdom to the quality of parenthood by those who choose and plan it versus those who are traumatized by the life change it represents?


----------



## spectratg (Dec 7, 2021)

Alice November said:


> Many fathers who's children were aborted feel very diferently than you do.
> 
> So, as a granddad, it would be perfectly ok for your daughter and mate to nix your grandson's life before it started?


Being pro-life should be more than just being anti-abortion, about being concerned about the rights of the unborn child but not the long-term needs of the born child. (Mostly male) legislatures that pass abortion restrictions should pass concurrent laws that provide long-term assistance to the mother and her child. Not to do so is being hypocritical.

The pro-life movement and the pro-choice movement should be able to find common ground in providing universal, effective contraception.

There are local pregnancy centers that provide emotional, financial, and other assistance to the mother and her child, both before and after birth. If a person is concerned about the sanctity of life, then provide your time (as my late, beloved wife did) and money (as I do, in honor of my wife) to these centers.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> As for comparing abortion laws to the US military draft, please note that the draft ended in 1973.
> Interestingly enough, the military learned that unwilling (draftees) generally made a less effective fighting force than a volunteer army. Why do our nation's leaders refuse to apply that same wisdom to the quality of parenthood by those who choose and plan it versus those who are traumatized by the life change it represents?




There is much talk in online discussions that the draft (male only) will be resurrected due to all fears of China invading Taiwan and Russia invading Ukraine.  The majority of pols and population favor female inclusion but this will not be likely happen.  

But you do make a valid point - those who volunteer are likelier to be better soldiers. Same wisdom applies to parents.


----------



## Irwin (Dec 7, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Every ovulation and ejaculation represents potential humans.  IUDs are essentially little abortion machines.  Should morning-after pills be made illegal?
> 
> With nearly 8 billion on the planet already, at what point will enough be enough?   20 billion?  30?
> 
> ...


I'm not so sure that's true. Maybe you could point me to a study or something.

Just look at all the abuse in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq by our military against the people of those countries, plus the willingness to commit atrocities. With a volunteer military, you get a lot of people who can't make it in society. With a draft, you get a better quality soldier. On the other hand, narcissists make the best soldiers since they can be ruthless, and that's what you want in traditional warfare, but not so much with a war fought with modern technology — where you can bomb a community or gathering with just a press of a button on a computer. In that case, you want someone with a fully developed conscience.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 7, 2021)

> *unwilling (draftees) generally made a less effective fighting force than a volunteer army*
> 
> 
> Irwin said:
> ...





> source:





> (1) unwilling (draftees) generally made a less effective fighting force than a volunteer army - Bing



This is generally well known.  I distinctly remember the army calling for an end to the draft in the early 1970s. When I tried to enlist back then, there were signs all over Fort Hamilton Station in Brooklyn, NY which read "Help Support A Volunteer Army" or words to that effect.

A draft would generate resentment especially from the poorer classes as lower class people like me would be the ones drafted as privileged upper class types would be exempt  while b1tching and moaning about how unlucky life is for them.


----------



## palides2021 (Dec 7, 2021)

---


----------



## palides2021 (Dec 7, 2021)

Ooops. Deleted.


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 8, 2021)

StarSong said:


> To take this one more step, even if this child's child was adopted out into a loving family, DNA testing is as simple as spitting in a tube and getting to a post office.
> 
> Imagine the horror of that child when the light dawned that all close relatives were also related to each other.  Or that Dad is a serial rapist.
> 
> ...


Well said, and so very true!!!


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 8, 2021)

oldiebutgoody said:


> difficult to argue with that: https://www.google.com/search?q=abortion+laws+were+meant+to+to+control+women&rlz=1CAKSOU_enUS772US772&sxsrf=AOaemvIWIXc_PX0ZJeqRtgBVA1XHwRvkSA:1638891491691&ei=43-vYeOvKcqjptQP3OKfyAY&ved=0ahUKEwijrb_JgtL0AhXKkYkEHVzxB2kQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=abortion+laws+were+meant+to+to+control+women&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BwgjELACECdKBAhBGABQigVYpiJg0ihoAXABeACAAX-IAawDkgEDMi4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz
> 
> 
> just like military draft laws were meant to control men
> ...



Absolutely!  I do not see how the same people can say they can't get a vaccine because they have the absolute right to control their own bodies and at the same time feel they have the right to control women's bodies regarding abortion and/or contraception.  The two beliefs seem mutually exclusive to me.


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 8, 2021)

Alice November said:


> I am against legalized abortion because it sets a precident in law that it is ok to kill innocent human life, and I disagree with killing humans.



I do not agree that it sets such a precedent.


----------



## ohioboy (Dec 8, 2021)

Alice November said:


> I am against legalized abortion because it sets a precident in law that it is ok to kill innocent human life, and I disagree with killing humans.


Precedential law can be overturned, as has been done by the SC over 200 times since it's 1789 inception.


----------



## Patch (Dec 8, 2021)

oldiebutgoody said:


> This is generally well known.  I distinctly remember the army calling for an end to the draft in the early 1970s. When I tried to enlist back then, there were signs all over Fort Hamilton Station in Brooklyn, NY which read "Help Support A Volunteer Army" or words to that effect.
> 
> A draft would generate resentment especially from the poorer classes as lower class people like me would be the ones drafted as privileged upper class types would be exempt  while b1tching and moaning about how unlucky life is for them.


Yes, our son would greatly disagree with the suggestion draftees are "better soldiers" than those who volunteer to serve.  He would also disagree that today's soldiers are not the brightest or the bravest.  He has been in 16 years and has seen a change in the military is that time.  That there will be a draft reinstituted re Russia or China aggression is, probably, a far-fetched assumption.  Today's wars will be fought with computer guided missiles, smart bombs, etc.  The time that infantry battalions line up and begin shooting at each other is behind us.  To operate the weapons of today requires far more than just a trigger finger.


----------



## Sunny (Dec 8, 2021)

The women who can afford to travel to another state will do that, and have their abortion as usual, with maybe a little more inconvenience than if it were in their own location. But the women who can't afford to get away, who can't miss even a day or two of work, have no one to leave their kids with, etc. will go back to the "good old days" of butchered abortions, self-abortions, secrecy, disgrace, maiming and deaths. Or having children who are unwanted and abused.

Sometimes I feel like instead of moving forward, this country is falling backward as fast as it can.


----------



## StarSong (Dec 8, 2021)

Sunny said:


> Sometimes I feel like instead of moving forward, this country is falling backward as fast as it can.


I often feel that way, too.


----------



## oldiebutgoody (Dec 8, 2021)

StarSong said:


> I often feel that way, too.



it sure as hell is


----------



## ohioboy (Dec 8, 2021)

Alligatorob said:


> That is interesting.  Can you post a link to something that explains it?  I tried searching but was unsuccessful.  I think it is an important point.


This is one case my law dictionary cites under Quickening.

https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/181-p-609-kan-612964319


----------



## Butterfly (Dec 10, 2021)

Sunny said:


> The women who can afford to travel to another state will do that, and have their abortion as usual, with maybe a little more inconvenience than if it were in their own location. But the women who can't afford to get away, who can't miss even a day or two of work, have no one to leave their kids with, etc. will go back to the "good old days" of butchered abortions, self-abortions, secrecy, disgrace, maiming and deaths. Or having children who are unwanted and abused.
> 
> Sometimes I feel like instead of moving forward, this country is falling backward as fast as it can.




I feel that way a lot nowdays.  It makes me both sad and very angry.


----------

