Political Crossfire Forums

[Sailor Moon]

I am not complaining, I am telling the truth. The truth is always easy to avoid, and hard to face. Both of you have shown this to be true.

[Enoch]

Sailor Moon wrote: I am not complaining, I am telling the truth. The truth is always easy to avoid, and hard to face. Both of you have shown this to be true.

Okay, so you have switched from hasty generalizations to ad hominum attacks.

[Sailor Moon]

See? Now I am attacking you????

Wow.

[Enoch]

Sailor Moon wrote: See? Now I am attacking you????

Wow.

Claiming that someone is intentionally avoiding the truth is an attack on that person's intelligence or character. You decide which.

[Sailor Moon]

Why is a claim, which is clearly factual, in my opinion, an attack?

You refuse to call an abortion clinic.

You refuse to go volunteer at one.

You and Prole seem to think I am "complaining" just because you dont want to face the truth.

You and Prole seem to agree that people who used to be pro choice and used to administer abortions, no matter what their stories are, or where they come from, are "spun" somehow, and of course must come from a site that "spins" everything into something that is misrepresenting of the abortion industry.

And yet... my claim that you refuse to learn the truth, or accept the truth, is an "attack"...

My goodness.

[Enoch]

Sailor Moon wrote: Why is a claim, which is clearly factual, in my opinion, an attack?

There is a difference between fact an opinion. One can not claim something to be fact unless it can be proven, conclusively, to be so. You have stated opinions and anecdotes (since I joined the discussion), nothing more.

Quote: You refuse to call an abortion clinic.
Because it would offer me nothing more than isolated, anecdotal, evidence which is no basis for forming a generalization

Quote: You refuse to go volunteer at one.
See above.

Quote: You and Prole seem to think I am "complaining" just because you dont want to face the truth.
Prole said you were complaining, I did not.
Furthermore, the concept of "the truth" is something that has to be based on fact. Which, if you will notice my aforementioned response to fact, you will see that you have yet to provide me.

Quote: You and Prole seem to agree that people who used to be pro choice and used to administer abortions, no matter what their stories are, or where they come from, are "spun" somehow, and of course must come from a site that "spins" everything into something that is misrepresenting of the abortion industry.
Again, a faulty assumption. I have said nothing about the content of the sites, nor whether or not the stories provided on said sites are of importance. I stated that using a Pro Life site as evidence to support a Pro Life argument is inappropriate as it increases the likliness, and perception, of source bias. The exact same thing could be said of using a Pro Choice site as evidence to support a Pro Choice argument.

Quote: And yet... my claim that you refuse to learn the truth, or accept the truth, is an "attack"...

My goodness.
Again, see the aforementioned on truth and fact.

The reason that it qualifies as an ad hominum attack is that you are suggesting that Prole and I, either through intellectual or character traits, do not have an ability to understand "the truth." Saying such is an attack on either our intelligence or character. Doing that qualifies as an ad hominum attack.

Thank you.

[Sailor Moon]

UrielsFyre wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: Why is a claim, which is clearly factual, in my opinion, an attack?

There is a difference between fact an opinion. One can not claim something to be fact unless it can be proven, conclusively, to be so. You have stated opinions and anecdotes (since I joined the discussion), nothing more.

I have asked you to prove these facts as non facts, for yourself, which you refused to do. I have listed abortionists testimony to all this. You want to claim theyre "spun" rhetoric, rather than just accept the facts as what they are. I do not wish to bicker and argue about it.

Quote: Quote: You refuse to call an abortion clinic.
Because it would offer me nothing more than isolated, anecdotal, evidence which is no basis for forming a generalization

Do you have some personal experience of your own to share? I thought not. Therefore, my own anecdotal evidence is proof enough for me, and should be considered as a factor. Not to mention all those links in the sticky in the very top of this forum, to prove this to you.

Quote: Quote: You refuse to go volunteer at one.
See above.

You still refuse.

Quote: Quote: You and Prole seem to think I am "complaining" just because you dont want to face the truth.
Prole said you were complaining, I did not.
Furthermore, the concept of "the truth" is something that has to be based on fact. Which, if you will notice my aforementioned response to fact, you will see that you have yet to provide me.

Like I said, just because you will not accept any other argument besides that from the pro choice spectrum of the debate, does not mean that I have not provided facts. It means you have not accepted facts as what they are. Facts.

Quote: Quote: You and Prole seem to agree that people who used to be pro choice and used to administer abortions, no matter what their stories are, or where they come from, are "spun" somehow, and of course must come from a site that "spins" everything into something that is misrepresenting of the abortion industry.
Again, a faulty assumption. I have said nothing about the content of the sites, nor whether or not the stories provided on said sites are of importance. I stated that using a Pro Life site as evidence to support a Pro Life argument is inappropriate as it increases the likliness, and perception, of source bias. The exact same thing could be said of using a Pro Choice site as evidence to support a Pro Choice argument.

And yet, anybody who is pro life, you will inevitably deem as "spinning" the truth into lies. What a crock.

Quote: Quote: And yet... my claim that you refuse to learn the truth, or accept the truth, is an "attack"...

My goodness.
Again, see the aforementioned on truth and fact.

The reason that it qualifies as an ad hominum attack is that you are suggesting that Prole and I, either through intellectual or character traits, do not have an ability to understand "the truth." Saying such is an attack on either our intelligence or character. Doing that qualifies as an ad hominum attack.

Thank you.

No I said you refuse to accept the truth. Nothing was ever said about your ability to, or else I wouldnt still be discussing it with you. I wouldnt have ever tried to produce facts to you, if I thought you were incapable of seeing the truth. Being capable and unwilling is a very different attitude than being incapable and unable.

[Enoch]

Sailor,

My response to your arguments, for lack of a better word, can be summed up with two contentions:

1. Contrary to your belief, you have not offered proof. You have offered NOTHING but anecdotal evidence to me. I am not obliged to search out the evidence you have provided in other threads. It is not my obligation to search through all of your support in order to find something that is appropriate to your argument. That obligation is yours, whether you wish to believe so or not. That is how debate and persuasion works.

2. You are correct that the bickering is getting too much. I ask for proof, you don't offer it. I refute your evidence as biased or based on hasty generalizations, you say I am ignoring the truth. Until such time as you are able to conduct yourself properly in a debate, I am through discussing things with you.

(Now, since you brought up your abortion as proof of your stance, I will *as much as I dislike doing this* bring up my credentials as evidence of my knowledge in the arguments provided in my contentions. I have a BA in Interpersonal and Organizational Communication, an MA in Public Relations and Journalism, have been involved in competative public speaking for over a decade, as a competitor, judge, and coach, and teach public speaking at a university. Trust me when I say that, as much as you don't want to believe me, proof of evidence and support is on the person providing it if there is any question as to its authenticity, bias, or relevance. In addition, anecdotal evidence is not considered proof of anything beyond, perhaps, an isolated experience. Drawing conclusions based on such is fallacious. You can claim I am on an ego trip all you like, that is fine with me. Just remember, you are the one who brought up life history as evidence to support their argument, not me.)

[Sailor Moon]

K, you want proof that abortion clinics lie, from a non biased source?

See Planned Parenthoods website. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/pub-abortion-q-and-a.xml

Does my partner or a parent need to know?

Many women go to the clinic with their partners. However, you don't have to tell your partner. Either way, the clinic ensures complete privacy. If there are complications during the procedure, however, parents of minors may be notified.

Most teens have a parent involved in their decision to have an abortion. But telling a parent is only required in states with mandatory parental involvement laws. Such laws force a woman under 18 to tell a parent or get permission before having an abortion. In most of these states, if she can't talk with her parents — or chooses not to — she can appear before a judge. The judge will consider whether she's mature enough to decide on her own. If not, the judge will decide whether an abortion is in her best interests.

If you have questions about parental notification in your state, call your nearest Planned Parenthood health center at 1-800-230-PLAN. Our staff will be able to provide you with further information and answer any questions you may have.

And then we get to the pro choice site:

http://www.childpredators.com/

Who profits financially in cases of child sex abuse?
The dirty little secret is that Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation know they will sell more abortions, more birth control products and more treatments for sexually transmitted diseases when they turn a blind eye to child rape. Men involved with minors need to conceal these sexual relationships, so they take their underage victims to clinics that offer minors confidential abortion services and birth control. When Planned Parenthood and other family planning service providers ignore child abuse reporting laws, they help these men to continue their ongoing sexual abuse of children.

It's illegal for an adult man to seduce an underage girl into a sexual relationship. Every state has statutory rape laws that prohibit sex between adults and children. But Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, family planning service providers, and all other clinics that profit from selling products and services to sexually active underage girls, have a financial incentive to ignore the laws that were designed to protect children from sexual abuse. And now there’s proof that 91% of these businesses don’t comply with child abuse reporting laws. On the contrary, they actually help conceal child rape from law enforcement!




Does it hurt???

Does getting an abortion hurt?

Some kind of painkiller is used in all abortions. Most women feel cramps. You may have cramps during and after a vacuum aspiration. You will feel strong cramps with medication abortion — which is done with medicine instead of instruments.


Also, they say its so "Safe" yet by their own numbers, and YOU can do the math, I did it in another thread- you see how many women, by their own rates, are injured annually from abortion. See these first, and then I will give you another link to this:

What about future pregnancies?

Will an early abortion affect my ability to have a child in the future?
No. Safe, uncomplicated, legal abortion should not affect fertility.

(which is a half truth- go back to this site to see all the other half truths and outright lies)

http://www.gargaro.com/healthproblems.html (sources are medical health journals)

Does an early abortion make miscarriage more likely in the future?
No.

(lie)

Does an early abortion make ectopic, or tubal, pregnancy more likely in the future?
No. Not unless a serious infection occurs. Infection occurs in only one out of 300 first-trimester abortions and only rarely does it affect future pregnancies.

(half truth, obvious one, and by this very factor, with one million abortions a year, that means that approximately 33,000 women who abort annually have future tubal pregnancies, a VERY hazardous condition)

Does an early abortion cause premature birth or low infant birth weight in future pregnancies?
No.

(onbiously with the tubal pregnancy issue, it does cause problems for the fetus in the future pregnancies)

Does an early abortion cause birth defects in future pregnancies?
No.

(just death)

Does an early abortion increase the chance of infant death in the future?
No.

(yeah right)

Does having several abortions affect future pregnancies?
No. Abortions do not make it harder to carry a pregnancy to term.

(my ass)


Now for the risks they cite to having abortions:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/pub-abortion-first-trimester.xml


What are the possible risks of abortion?

First trimester abortion is much safer than giving birth.

Medication Abortion — Possible risks include


incomplete abortion — your clinician will help you decide whether to

wait two-to-six weeks and check again

take more misoprostol

have a vacuum aspiration
allergic reaction

infection

very heavy bleeding

undetected ectopic pregnancy, which can be fatal if left untreated

in extremely rare cases death is possible from very serious complications — fewer than one in 200,000 cases

Vacuum Aspiration — Possible risks include


allergic reactions to the anesthetics

incomplete abortion — in fewer than one out of 100 D&C abortions

infection

very heavy bleeding

a cut or torn cervix — in fewer than one out of 100 first trimester abortions

organ injury — in about five of 1,000 first trimester abortions. Surgery, or very rarely, hysterectomy, may be needed.

undetected ectopic pregnancy, which can be fatal if left untreated

in extremely rare cases death is possible from very serious complications — approximately one in 200,000 cases

So, with surgical abortions, the only thing they cite any (probably half truths) risks and stats on:

one in 200 has organ injury. (5 in a thousand, whatever, same thing .005) Lets just look at that for one minute. 5,000 injured women every year from organ injury, out of a million.

Cut or torn cervix. they say one in 100.

EVEN if it was only .5 out of 100, since they say fewer than one, and this I doubt because they would clearly say 1 in 200, right, so the number has to be higher than .5 in 100, logically.. then 5,000 a year (at .005, giving the benefit of the doubt) having a torn or cut cervix, and requiring additional surgery. I am more inclined to think its closer to 7,500 annually, through logic.

And that leads us to the dreaded "back alley" botched abortions, which occur in "less than" one in a hundred. Obviously this isnt one in 200, so we will assume between .05 and .075, and again will be at between 5,000 and 7500 injuries annually.

They also claim that one in every 200,000 cases dies. Thats 5 a year, contrary to the reports given to the CDC, and, knowing the half truths, probably more like 7 or 8 annually, and only as a direct assault, forget the tubal pregnancy deaths.

We are talking about 15,000 injured women a year from legal abortion. Straight from planned parenthood, and my estimates are conservative. My logical guess would be closer to 25,000 injuries annually.

So.

Now do you believe me?

[Selfish_Meme]

Back to the topic though,

It seems to me if abortion was illegal because of the rights to life of the unborn then:

the unborn babies rights to life is greater than Womans rights to bodily autonomy

then

the unborn babies rights to health greater than Womens rights to harmful behaviour.

Any takers?

[Gilbert1908]

Selfish_Meme wrote: Back to the topic though,

It seems to me if abortion was illegal because of the rights to life of the unborn then:

the unborn babies rights to life is greater than Womans rights to bodily autonomy

If the abortion laws were based on bodily autonomy, why then is abortion legal only through the 2nd trimester?

Selfish_Meme wrote: then

the unborn babies rights to health greater than Womens rights to harmful behaviour.

Any takers?

Even the most stauch prolife supporters make the exception the life of the mother. So your second point is moot.

[Selfish_Meme]

Gilbert1908 wrote: Selfish_Meme wrote: Back to the topic though,

It seems to me if abortion was illegal because of the rights to life of the unborn then:

the unborn babies rights to life is greater than Womans rights to bodily autonomy

If the abortion laws were based on bodily autonomy, why then is abortion legal only through the 2nd trimester?

Selfish_Meme wrote: then

the unborn babies rights to health greater than Womens rights to harmful behaviour.

Any takers?

Even the most stauch prolife supporters make the exception the life of the mother. So your second point is moot.

Sorry, this is my fault, i only reposted part of my original post to get the discussion running again.

According to the start of the thread you had to imagine that Wade vs Roe was overturned and that abortion was illegal at all stages due to the right to life of the unborn child.

[Enoch]

Sailor Moon wrote: K, you want proof that abortion clinics lie, from a non biased source?

See Planned Parenthoods website. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/pub-abortion-q-and-a.xml

Does my partner or a parent need to know?

Many women go to the clinic with their partners. However, you don't have to tell your partner. Either way, the clinic ensures complete privacy. If there are complications during the procedure, however, parents of minors may be notified.

Most teens have a parent involved in their decision to have an abortion. But telling a parent is only required in states with mandatory parental involvement laws. Such laws force a woman under 18 to tell a parent or get permission before having an abortion. In most of these states, if she can't talk with her parents — or chooses not to — she can appear before a judge. The judge will consider whether she's mature enough to decide on her own. If not, the judge will decide whether an abortion is in her best interests.

If you have questions about parental notification in your state, call your nearest Planned Parenthood health center at 1-800-230-PLAN. Our staff will be able to provide you with further information and answer any questions you may have.

And then we get to the pro choice site:

http://www.childpredators.com/

Who profits financially in cases of child sex abuse?
The dirty little secret is that Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation know they will sell more abortions, more birth control products and more treatments for sexually transmitted diseases when they turn a blind eye to child rape. Men involved with minors need to conceal these sexual relationships, so they take their underage victims to clinics that offer minors confidential abortion services and birth control. When Planned Parenthood and other family planning service providers ignore child abuse reporting laws, they help these men to continue their ongoing sexual abuse of children.

It's illegal for an adult man to seduce an underage girl into a sexual relationship. Every state has statutory rape laws that prohibit sex between adults and children. But Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, family planning service providers, and all other clinics that profit from selling products and services to sexually active underage girls, have a financial incentive to ignore the laws that were designed to protect children from sexual abuse. And now there’s proof that 91% of these businesses don’t comply with child abuse reporting laws. On the contrary, they actually help conceal child rape from law enforcement!




Does it hurt???

Does getting an abortion hurt?

Some kind of painkiller is used in all abortions. Most women feel cramps. You may have cramps during and after a vacuum aspiration. You will feel strong cramps with medication abortion — which is done with medicine instead of instruments.


Also, they say its so "Safe" yet by their own numbers, and YOU can do the math, I did it in another thread- you see how many women, by their own rates, are injured annually from abortion. See these first, and then I will give you another link to this:

What about future pregnancies?

Will an early abortion affect my ability to have a child in the future?
No. Safe, uncomplicated, legal abortion should not affect fertility.

(which is a half truth- go back to this site to see all the other half truths and outright lies)

http://www.gargaro.com/healthproblems.html (sources are medical health journals)

Does an early abortion make miscarriage more likely in the future?
No.

(lie)

Does an early abortion make ectopic, or tubal, pregnancy more likely in the future?
No. Not unless a serious infection occurs. Infection occurs in only one out of 300 first-trimester abortions and only rarely does it affect future pregnancies.

(half truth, obvious one, and by this very factor, with one million abortions a year, that means that approximately 33,000 women who abort annually have future tubal pregnancies, a VERY hazardous condition)

Does an early abortion cause premature birth or low infant birth weight in future pregnancies?
No.

(onbiously with the tubal pregnancy issue, it does cause problems for the fetus in the future pregnancies)

Does an early abortion cause birth defects in future pregnancies?
No.

(just death)

Does an early abortion increase the chance of infant death in the future?
No.

(yeah right)

Does having several abortions affect future pregnancies?
No. Abortions do not make it harder to carry a pregnancy to term.

(my ass)


Now for the risks they cite to having abortions:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/pub-abortion-first-trimester.xml


What are the possible risks of abortion?

First trimester abortion is much safer than giving birth.

Medication Abortion — Possible risks include


incomplete abortion — your clinician will help you decide whether to

wait two-to-six weeks and check again

take more misoprostol

have a vacuum aspiration
allergic reaction

infection

very heavy bleeding

undetected ectopic pregnancy, which can be fatal if left untreated

in extremely rare cases death is possible from very serious complications — fewer than one in 200,000 cases

Vacuum Aspiration — Possible risks include


allergic reactions to the anesthetics

incomplete abortion — in fewer than one out of 100 D&C abortions

infection

very heavy bleeding

a cut or torn cervix — in fewer than one out of 100 first trimester abortions

organ injury — in about five of 1,000 first trimester abortions. Surgery, or very rarely, hysterectomy, may be needed.

undetected ectopic pregnancy, which can be fatal if left untreated

in extremely rare cases death is possible from very serious complications — approximately one in 200,000 cases

So, with surgical abortions, the only thing they cite any (probably half truths) risks and stats on:

one in 200 has organ injury. (5 in a thousand, whatever, same thing .005) Lets just look at that for one minute. 5,000 injured women every year from organ injury, out of a million.

Cut or torn cervix. they say one in 100.

EVEN if it was only .5 out of 100, since they say fewer than one, and this I doubt because they would clearly say 1 in 200, right, so the number has to be higher than .5 in 100, logically.. then 5,000 a year (at .005, giving the benefit of the doubt) having a torn or cut cervix, and requiring additional surgery. I am more inclined to think its closer to 7,500 annually, through logic.

And that leads us to the dreaded "back alley" botched abortions, which occur in "less than" one in a hundred. Obviously this isnt one in 200, so we will assume between .05 and .075, and again will be at between 5,000 and 7500 injuries annually.

They also claim that one in every 200,000 cases dies. Thats 5 a year, contrary to the reports given to the CDC, and, knowing the half truths, probably more like 7 or 8 annually, and only as a direct assault, forget the tubal pregnancy deaths.

We are talking about 15,000 injured women a year from legal abortion. Straight from planned parenthood, and my estimates are conservative. My logical guess would be closer to 25,000 injuries annually.

So.

Now do you believe me?

Sailor,

Thank you for responding to my request for less biased sources. Although I never said that I felt you were not telling the truth, I did question the source bias and the generalizations. No contention was ever made as to the accuracy of the information, other than to question said generalizations.

After looking through the information, I do not doubt that there are risks (some minor, some severe) associated with abortion. I also do not doubt that some abortion providers are inclined to lie to their patients.

However, there are two things that have not changed. First, I do not believe that ALL abortion providers lie. It would be inappropriate to generalize.

Second, I still stand by my postion. I am morally, and ethically, against abortion. Nonetheless, I still feel it should be legal and up to the woman to decide. Part of responsible decision making is understanding the risks associated with any procedure. I feel that it is up to the doctors AND the patient to make sure these risks are known. The woman must play some part in the responsibility of this decision.

While I am sure that you disagree, that is an area in which neither of us will ever convince the other.

Thank you for your reasoned response to my last post.

[Selfish_Meme]

UrielsFyre,

That was a bit of a waste of time, she has been suspended.

[Enoch]

Selfish_Meme wrote: UrielsFyre,

That was a bit of a waste of time, she has been suspended.

I noticed after the post. Still, if and when she returns, she may wish to see it.