ABORTION is not the problem. it's sexual irresponsibility.

[nostamj]

Note: I understand that a certain percentage of unwanted pregnancies occur from condom breakage, etc. And I certainly don't include cases of incest (unless it was consensual which is too Jerry Springer for this post), rape or medical threats to mother or child in these comments. This is about the majority of the cases.

=====
I've never, ever, heard of anyone being PRO-abortion. I've known women who've had them. I know how serious a thing it is. So... I believe that:

Abortion must remain a legal choice while genuine effort is made to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.

I don't see why both sides of the debate could agree that less irresponsible, unprotected heteroSEXual SEX is the problem that should be addressed.

Trying to criminalize the practice of abortion will be no more effective in eliminating sexual irresponsibility than criminalizing the sale of alcohol eliminated drinking.

The problem is not abortion. The problem is that heterosexuals have lots of irresponsible SEX and that results in unwanted pregnancies.

the reasons may be economic (and, abortions have increased along with the poverty rate under Bush) or, convenience. just not the 'right' time.

there's absolutely no doubt that a clamp-down on abortion services will impact only the poor. rich republicans will always be able to take care of their children's discretions (as they always have).

if these people are really serious about preventing ABORTION, they must prevent UNWANTED PREGNANCY.

why aren't heterosexuals demanding sterility pills for men who do not want to father children and morning-after pills for all fertile women who are not ready/able to raise children?

is that far-fetched? BILLIONS were spent to get those erections... nothing for responsibility?

[Liberal Veteran]

1. An analogy would be banning alcohol to stop DWI.

:)

[nostamj]

2. more like: outlawing biopsies to eliminate cancer.... n/t

[Doohickie]

64. No, an analogy would be NOT getting behind the wheel

after you've had too much to drink. Responsibility, plain and simple.

[Quill Pen]

88. Carried out, that analogy means...

If you get pregnant through an irresponsible sexual encounter, you must carry the pregnancy to term.

Punish the godless slatterns! Make them reap the rewards of their sin! Let their distending bellies be the signs of their depravity!

Tell me, do you favor stoning them after they give birth to the ill-gotten seed, or before?

[jdj]

92. maybe we can start a "friends don't let friends get pregant" campaign.

yeah, that should do it.

[Quill Pen]

107. Oh, the images...

Then: "OK, hand over the keys, I'm driving you home."

Now: "OK, hand me that penis..."

[Susang]

109. Careful, it's loaded

<self deleted> }(

[RandomKoolzip]

3. Remember C. Everrett Koop?

This is why they're pushing "abstinence" so hard. They get it. If they can guilt everyone into thinking all sex (hetero or otherwise) is bad, then they can do away with abortion without much of a fight, since "abortion rights" will be looked at as the last vestiges of a bygone, irresponsible "sexual revolution."


Guilt, guilt, guilt.

[Mz Pip]

4. If the RW really really really

wanted to prevent abortion it would be out there advocating free and non judgmental family planning information on a grand scale.

But do they do that? Not a chance. It's abstinence only with the attitude that information leads to sexual activity. However people have sex regardless of whether or not they have all the information necessary to prevent pregnancy. Withholding information just makes unplanned pregnancies more likely to occur.

Personally, I hold that crowd responsible for a lot of the unwanted pregnancies. They could be part of the solution but for insane dognmatic reasons they choose to remain in the dark ages.

MzPip
:dem:

[Liberal Veteran]

5. Hey, c'mon, without info, boys and girls (and other combinations)...

...would NEVER figure out that whole sex business. I mean, it's not like it's a built in instinct or anything, right?

[XemaSab]

36. Hear, hear

Heaven forfend they should teach pregnancy prevention to horny youngsters.

My school we got more sex ed than you could shake a cucumber at, free condoms, the works.

I think it made kids SCARED to have sex.

You can escape hellfire by being born again, but warts... those don't ever go away. Or herpes, or HIV.

[Doohickie]

65. Someone oughtta start a program that parallels

Planned Parenthood that does not include abortion as an option. Simply don't talk about it. If someone asks, simply say that they cannot get that kind of advice here.

But have all kinds of discussion of birth control and family planning, especially methods that do not involve abortants (the pill, etc.)

It could bridge the gap between the hyper-right don't-do-anything-sexual types and the free-sex-whenver-you-want-it types.

And I bet it would reduce abortions.


Call it Responsibility, Inc. or something like that. Note that I am not saying that Planned Parenthood should be banned, but that a more moderate alternative is possible.

[antigone382]

6. Right on, nostamj!

BILLIONS were spent to get those erections... nothing for responsibility?


New bumpersticker idea: FIGHT ABORTION: BAN VIAGRA!

Of course I don't think we should really ban viagra, but I'm sure you get the point.

[m berst]

7. great post

Good discussion, especially the comments about Koop.

You said "if these people are really serious about preventing ABORTION..."

Here is what I am discovering. They are not, and don't claim to me. One told me last week "we know we can't stop it and that it will go on. We want to take a stand on it as part of a desire to take a stand somewhere for morality and against the decline and collapse of society." Now it would be easy to merely see this as hypocrisy and inconsistency, but I think there is something there to work with. Several Bush voters said to me that had the Democratic party taken a strong and unambiguous stand against the war, that would have trumped ("trumped" being my word here) the issues of abortion and marriage for them.

So it may be that they are not taking specific moral stands on specific issues in opposition to specific stands being taken by the Democratic party, but rather they see the Democratic party as taking NO moral stands.

Voting for the candidate who says he is pro-life - even if it can be shown that he is not - is then more of a personal symbolic act then it is a statement of a comprehensive political ideology. They don't see it as a good choice necessarily, but the least odious in an array of bad choices, and a personal resistance to what they see as an enormous evil about which they can do very little. Much of the evil they see is the same evil that many of us see - war, for example.

I hope no one flames me over this. I am trying to understand where Bush supporters are coming from, so don't shoot the messenger!

[cally]

8. Somewhat agree...except birth control does fail

occasionally and too many don't use it properly. We need to inform and also have abortion as a back up. I would guess every one of us who is sexually active has faced the horror a broken condom, if you are heterosexual then you may have faced the worry of the realization that you forgot to take your pill, maybe you had the flu and threw up for many days and didn't realize the repercussions. I've known several who took the pill as prescribed and STILL became pregnant. That's why they don't say the pill is 100 percent effective.

[Ilsa]

11. Thanks Cally; Yes, many people are responsible

and pregnant anyway. Birth control isn't 100% effective. Even tubals have reconnected and women have gotten pregnant after sterilization. No sex, no rape, complete abstinence is the only way, but that's a pretty big commitment, even for single folk.

[jayctravis]

98. It's a big commitment for married folk!

I don't suppose they're advocating abstinence within marriage!

My female relatives have often talked about friends who despite efforts call themselves "explosively fertile"...and in this economy three kids is enough!

[420inTN]

132. I recently met a newlywed couple...

who explained that the mrs. got pregnant on the honeymoon.

I told them that it was a good thing that they waited until marriage before having sex.

for some reason there was a lot of laughter and dropped jaws.

(and yes, I was joking with them) ;-)

[nostamj]

19. maybe you missed the NOTE

at the top of my post. ?

[cally]

27. It's important to emphasize that all birth control fails

and pregnancy is not always because someone was irresponsible. I saw your note but I wanted to bring attention to bc failure.

[buckettgirl]

77. all birth control fails? I doubt that.. the depo shot hasn't failed me yet

I've been on depo since early 2001....works like a dream otherwise I would have several kids by now. lol :)

[jdj]

93. man, that's great

my mom was on birth control with all four of her kids...IUD, diaphragm, and pills.

she was an unstoppable fertile myrtle, I guess.

I wouldn't be here if it had worked, but the earth would still be a' spinnin...

[Djinn]

97. Depo has serious side effects making it impossible for

some women to use - and it can also fail even the manufacturers acknowledge that. Without the depo you may not have fallen pregnant either.

[buckettgirl]

122. All I know...

Is that when I researched birth control, depo was the only effective choice. It was the most reliable birth control when I looked into it, and I couldn't screw it up by forgetting to take it (I was horrible with all pills back then).
I do also that when most women go off depo, very few get pregnant within the first year, however the majority will conceive after 2 years off of it. This poses an issue that my husband I must deal with now. Don't want kids now, not till I graduate college, don't even know if we will start a family. But we do know that if we decide to have kids, it would be shortly after I graduate. So it seems like a good idea to go off depo now and switch to a regular pill in hopes of taking away the hassle. But then we're back to "what if it fails" or "what if I forget to take the pill" (not so likely now, but I do make mistakes.)
I have very fully experienced weight gain on depo. In fact, before I was on it, I could lose weight with very simple lifestyle changes. Now, it doesn't matter what I do, it seems to have become a huge obstacle to my weight loss (among other things).

In spite of all that, I do think that depo is extremely effective for long term birth control, especially since it is only 1 shot 4 times a year...no hassle, no worry.

[Djinn]

123. yes it's effective

but it's NOT foolproof, it's also a REALLY bad choice for anyone prone to depression or anxiety disorders. I was on it too for a while, mainly coz I was crap at remembering to take a pill every day but not everyone can take it, my sister spent three months puking when she tried it.

[Susang]

104. Yes, all birth control fails

Depo Provera included. With perfect use, Depo's failure rate is .3%. That means it is incredibly effective, but it can and has failed under perfect use situations. Unfortunately, if you get pregnant when you are using Depo, it can cause a premature birth and low birth weight if you carry the fetus to term.

Plus, not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to take Depo, due to it's effects on specific conditions and diseases, such as diabetes, liver problems, epilepsy and asthma. Bone density decreases while you are on Depo, though it appears to increase again after the shots are discontinued. 70% of the women who get Depo shots gain weight, averaging five to ten pounds after a year of use.

Also, if you happen to experience unpleasant or severe side effects from Depo, you are pretty much S.O.L. until the shot wears off, three months later. You have to suffer with whatever problems the hormone causes you until then.

[XemaSab]

37. Many people

Don't know how to put on a condom correctly.

Sad but true.

You have to leave a little extra room at the end.

[cally]

38. And you have to put it on before you have any

penis to vagina contact. Many don't know that.

[Spiffarino]

62. Hey! Skinner said "no sex threads!"

;)

[MichiganVote]

9. Legislating female reproduction is equal to asking a teen to clean their

room. They'll do it when they want to and not a moment before.

Our government should not be legislating any form of safe, legal or medical form of contraception or pregnancy termination.

Prochoice does not mean, no choice or less of a choice because of the emotional or moral reactions to abortion.

Government needs to get out of the bedroom and stay out.

[roseBudd]

10. are you a male?

because abortion hurts like really bad. Do you really think it's that many cases of WTF I'll take my chances.

Abortion is mostly due to BC failure. All methods have a failure rate.

[nostamj]

20. yes, I'm male (and gay for that matter)

but, i DO NOT believe that most unwanted pregnancies are the result of BC failure. and I CLEARLY state that I am NOT talking about BC failure in the NOTE that prefaces my post.

it is utterly naive to attribute *most* unwanted pregnancy to BC failure when it is the failure to practice BC that is the real cause...

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

29. Please post the studies that cite failure to practice vs. BC failure...

I have only anecdotal information, but I would take a guess of 50/50 based on that evidence, and incidental studies I have read. All types of birth control have limits, and I would really like to see definitive numbers to back up your statement. Thanks so much, this is fascinating and incredibly important information.MKJ

[nostamj]

32. i don't have number and won't do research tonight..

but, ancecdotally, I still do NOT believe that 50% are BC failure. maybe for 'adults' but not for teens... and where is the problem with unwanted pregnancy greatest? young and poor, without access/education about contraception.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

44. Perhaps there is more to it than used or didn't use birth control..

As an RN who worked in family practice ( a residency with a medically indigent population) and an OB/Gyn private practice, I can say that current methods of birth control, from the pill, to IUD's, to the now pretty much defunct Norplant, to diaphragms, to Depo Provera, to surgical sterilization fail on a regular basis.

I dealt with many, many adult women who had properly used birth control and still had an unplanned pregnancy.

Among teens, the birth control issues can become a little murky, since, sadly, many of those young and poor girls get pregnant on purpose, in a tragically misguided effort to fill an emotional void. Even if contraception education and devices or medications were readily available, these girls would not use them. That was why I was interested in clinical evidence you may have been aware of, because this a notoriously difficult area in which to come up with definitive numbers.

I would offer that the issues around birth control and pregnancy are much more complex than whether an individual properly used a particular birth control method, or not.

It is one of several factors involved, and sometimes even the definition of "unplanned" or "unwanted" pregnancy can change from patient to patient. MKJ

[jdj]

94. that's a demographic the corporateers want to mine for wage-slavery

and cannon fodder.

This is the real reason for their stance on abortion, to widen this demographic, and anyone who doesn't get that and thinks it's really a "moral" issue to them needs to wise up.

[phylny]

127. BRAVO!

You've stated it perfectly. We used some combination of condoms and diaphragm (mostly diaphragm) for birth control during the first ten years of our marriage. I never, ever had an unplanned pregnancy, and conceived QUICKLY whenever we wanted to have a baby by simply stop using it. In fact, each time I conceived in the first month of trying, so I am definitely a Fertile Myrtle. When we were finished having children, DH went in for snip-snip. It's been 13 years of fun with no worries since.

I was a fanatic about using birth control, and we never had one problem, never had one condom break, and trust me - we were/are a very active couple, if you catch my drift. :pals:

People are lax about using birth control, finding a million excuses why they had an "oops." I'm with you - failure does happen, but I'll bet the truth of the matter is that people who have an unplanned pregnancy just didn't use something, or used it incorrectly.

[Liberaltarian]

12. the people have voted for a two-tiered society...

the rich people get the perks,
everyone else gets more incentive to get rich- and fewer avenues to get there by.

aristocracy by any other name...

[sweetheart]

13. poverty

Having a child is a sure ticket to poverty. 1/3 of american children
live in poverty. It means that 1/3 of parents live in poverty,
and surely the contributing costs of child raising assist not one bit
in getting out of poverty.

Why "have" a child when it will be a burden to a life in poverty.
An abortion is a sensible response for people who are not ready, who
slipped up on their timing, or who's biological mechanisms overrode
the precautions.

Nobody is guilty. Just we must make a lifetime choice to pay for
another human being, when our society does nothing of the sort, and
is actually going the other direction.

And in the end, it is not about irresponsibility either. It is about
responsibility. An irresponsible person lets themself get knocked up
and in poverty. A responsible one finds a solution before its too
late. No matter the propaganda, having kids is a sure way to the
poor house. The republicans like that idea, so they want the fetters
off the kidmaking. They want poverty, and people who will work for
cheap wages. Honestly, after all these lies, i can't believe you
genuinely think they are sincere in this abortion issue. It is
a cynical ploy to repress women from hard-earned social equality...
and nothing more.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

14. RW not interested in sexual responsibility

otherwise they would be encourage complete sex education in school, not just "abstinence education".

[noiretextatique]

16. well...they think it's for "those other people"

those sexually irresponsible ones. they exempt themselves from that group, which explains why there are so many republican sex scandals.

[Karenina]

18. It's also about

WHITE babies being kept in the fold. ;-) :hi:

[mwdem]

15. It's all about education...

there will always be abortion, legal or not.

[goforit]

17. Vasectomies for all REPUGS!!!!!

Go get them gals!!!
LOL!!!!

[Bigmack]

21. U.S. is hopeless...

Modern european countries have abortion rates a fraction of ours. Those same countries have teen pregnancy rates a fraction of ours. Those same countries generally have "1st occurance of intercourse" later than ours. Those countries generally have lower STD rates.

Interestingly enough... their murder and rape rates are a lot lower than US rates, too.

The only thing we lead in... a huge lead, too... is in church attendance.

Face it.. this country is weird... generally weird... and especially weird about sex.

Below is part of a LTTE that I actually got published..
- - - -
According to a 1997 study by the University of Michigan,...
http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/Releases/1997/Dec97/r121097a.html
...more Americans attend church at least once a week (44%) than attend in any other modern industrial country in the world. We also have the highest violence and murder rates.

Britain (25% church attendance), France (21%), and Germany (14%) have much lower crime rates and microscopic violence and murder rates compared to us.

Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Sweden have international reputations as law-abiding and peaceful countries, yet their church attendance rates are around 5%.

I don’t know what these other countries have (or don’t have) that makes them less violent, but I’m uncomfortable that we have high church attendance…urging us to be good, and we have the highest incarceration rate in the world (2 million Americans in prison!)….urging us not to be bad, yet we still have the highest violence and murder rates in the developed world. Other countries seem to have developed some sense of morality in place of religion, or perhaps beyond religion. Perhaps we should look in that direction.

Those figures indicate that at the very least we don’t seem to relate our religious beliefs to our conduct. States in the "Bible Belt" have higher crime (and divorce) rates than average.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. I'm all for responsibility. Trying to legislate other adults' behavior is

a whole nother ball of wax.

How are you going to "address" the kinds of f*cking that you, personally, don't approve of?

I tend to get suspictious when people start to grind axes about other people's "irresponsible behavior".. The people you know who had abortions, were they "irresponsible"? Did you yell at them? Who among us is so perfect that we can spend all of our time second-guessing other people's choices and actions?

I think the real under-considered moral ground in the abortion debate is the fact that so-called "pro-lifers" have no interest, whatsoever, in pursuing social policies that would make it easier for single women, and poor couples, to have and raise kids if they wanted to. A single payer health care system. A liveable minimum wage.

I think increased R&D with regards to birth control (including, what you call "sterility pills", for men) as well as increased access, would go a long way towards reducing the rates of surgical abortion. By all means, make Morning After Pills and oral contraceptives available OTC.

But if you want to "force" people to use them, that in my mind is as bad as other efforts of the government to enter consenting adults' bedrooms and bodies.

And in my mind, if you really want to use the government to tell people when and how they can and can't screw, you're probably on the wrong team here.

[nostamj]

31. a nearly 100% mis-read of my post

but you get points for consistency!

I never suggested the government tell people what to do (that would be the RW who tell people they CAN'T have the choice of abortion.

as for MY friends, since you have the GALL to make a personal attack at ME... I didn't have to. they acknowleged making a mistake.

your points about 'people who want and can't afford kids' are equally off the mark. if they engage in irresponsible heterosexual SEX, then pregnancy is a possible result. it's a different flavor of irresponsibility to have a pregnancy when you know you can't support the child.

and no, my friend, I'm not suggesting that anyone can be FORCED to be responsible, only that anti-abortion hypocrits are addressing the WRONG problem.

as I said, nearly 100% misread and off-topic. better luck next time!

[Warren DeMontague]

40. If you read that as a personal attack...

You are guilty of mis-reading MY post.

You're frothing and railing against "irresponsible heteroSEXual SEX" (what's driving the caps, today, only you presumably know), you say it needs to be "addressed", and as far as I could tell, in your opening salvo you sounded like you were advocating mandatory birth control for the people you, personally, deem to be acting irresponsibly or f*cking out of turn.

If I misunderstood where you were coming from, I apologize, but it sounds like you're a big boy and you can take it.

Maybe you're the one who needs to be more clear about what, exactly, you're proposing, or trying to say. Just a suggestion.

The anti-abortion crowd spends quite a bit of time railing against sex, in case you hadn't noticed. (And I guess you didn't, because you seem to think they've missed that angle.) In fact, many of us suspect that's what really has their knickers in such a bunch... (I can tell you that the 200 or so pro-lifers who turned out to yell at us during the big pro-choice march in April didn't look like they'd had a satisfactory orgasm among the lot of them since about 1977)

I happen to think their hypocrisy most blatantly manifests itself not in any lack of puritan anti-sex rantings, of which they have plenty, but in the fact that they are totally uninterested in the welfare of post-fetal human beings... including the ones that they are insisting be brought into the world against their mothers' wishes.

[quaker bill]

23. I am sorry, but it is more than this

It is also that we do not value life very highly.

One line of proof for this is the very fact that some of us are prepared to place the entire burden of this concern on the back of a pregnant woman.

If we valued life, if we were actually pro-life rather than just anti-abortion and anti-promiscuity, then we would adopt policies that supported pregnant women to bear the children and raise them.

Instead of doing this, we heap stigma, moral condemnation, legal sanctions, and economic disempowerment on the most vulnerable. This policy does not "value" life, it goes out of it's way to degrade it.

That this sort of policy masquerades as "moral values" is simply obscene.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. Prevent Abortion: Enjoy Sodomy

That's my favorite one.

[jdj]

96. there a philosphy I can get behind

:hi:

[Randers]

25. It's those damn Heterosexuals, that's what the problem is...n/t

[nostamj]

33. well, few LGBT have problems with unwanted pregnancy

or need for abortion services.... right?

[Randers]

35. Damn straight - if we were all gay - we wouldn't have this "problem", eom

[420inTN]

134. we also wouldn't have population problems. ;-) n/t

[dddem]

26. I'm not sure if this is related or not

but I think it's funny (weird not ha ha) that conservatives and religious right wingers want to talk about abortion, but not about education. Not only are unwanted pregnancies a by-product of a lack of knowledge, but cases of STD's are on the rise, which leads me to conclude that HIV and AIDS are going to rear their ugly head in a big way sooner than you think. Why does this bother people less than abortion? If nothing else, it could be an economic disaster for this country if AIDS is allowed to run amok as it is in India, China and Africa. It's way past time to deal with this. I think you make a good point about being sexually responsible. It's up to the adults to let the kids know what's going on. "Just say no" won't work. It never has.

[radwriter0555]

28. oh please! what makes abortion so serious??? it's a simple procedure, no

big deal, and a very safe one, no less. AND it's a very effective form of birth control.

There is nothing wrong with abortion.

Nothing at all.

Get over it.

[Sleepless In NY]

30. Problems are...

1. Who is forcing anyone to have an abortion? Is this not a matter of choice?

2. If people are so concerned about abortions, why arent they concerned about health care, insurance and homeless children already born? Never see them marching for that, do you?

3. Highest rate of teen pregnancies & STD's are in the so called "moral" red states. Talk about "irresponsibilty"

4. This administration has cut funding for any methods of birth control both here and abroad.

5. There are many reasons for abortion.. financial, incest, rape, failed birth control. And how about emotional? Some women cannot handle pregnancy emotionally. Is it better to go the Andrea Yates route? So many of those religiously oppossed to abortion, wind up drowning, stoning and cutting the limbs off their children because they just can't cope. Alot of things to consider here.

6. Think the abortion issue is about one thing and one thing only, control. The ability to control women, period. Abortion is not mandatory, its not forced on anyone. Yet some people can't leave the issue alone, till it confirms to what they feel is "best".
Best for whom? They have no problem with seeing homeless children, uninsured children, or killing thousands of children in war. So it cant be living children they are concerned about. So it must be about control. And thats insulting to women.

9. With Bob Dole, kinky repuke that he is, whoring himself for viagra, not much repukes will have to say about that.

[nostamj]

34. oh! my mistake! forgive the silly fag!

I didn't know that abortion was the preferred form of 'effective birth control'

perish the thought that heteros would practice effective CONCEPTION control.... (like those nasty queers practived safer sex and drasticallly cut HIV infection rates in the late 80s.)

my bad!

[Warren DeMontague]

41. Right, because everyone who is pro-choice... is a homophobe..

I'm not sure exactly what's crossing your wires tonight, but uh, It sounds to me like you've got some issues to iron out over there.

[radwriter0555]

46. There is nothing WRONG with abortion per se, and it's not preferred, it's

the last ditch endeavor when all other attempts fail.

Abortion is considered evil... why? because it invokes the whole god thing argument about life, conception, morality, etc.

I say take the stigma OFF of the procedure. It's not that big a deal. The outcome for it is ultimately the same as using a pill, or condom.

It stops an unwanted child from coming onto this planet.

[Djinn]

100. yet

I presume you'd say that the people who condemned the gay community early on for their "irresponsibilty" were homophobes?

Sex isn't responsible or irresponsible - if I get preganant due to failed BC or because one night I let the moment get away with me and have an abortion how the fuck would it effect you or anyone else? how is it irresponsible?

[RebelYell]

39. Look at Russia's abortion rates

Twice as many abortions as live births!

http://www.mosnews.com/feature/2004/11/25/abortion.shtml

There may be no sex in Russia, so goes a Soviet urban legend. And somehow, with abortions outnumbering live births nearly 2 to 1, if you’re a Russian woman and never had one, you’re a statistical non-entity.

The women I spoke to — stoic, intelligent matrons obviously with other things on their minds besides talking their husbands into using condoms — took it for granted that they had friends who’d chide them with “I’ve had thirty abortions already, what’s the big deal?” when they had to make that trip to the clinic.

And, according to one gynecologist who has been practicing for 45 years, there was certainly no reason to blanche when a girl told you that “I’d rather just have abortions than not have satisfying sex.”

Western media — like the Washington Post — put Russia at number three for its abortion rate, just after Cuba and Romania. Conservative think tanks like the Rand Corporation are more blatant: Russia has the highest abortion rate in the world.

~~~~~~~~

[radwriter0555]

47. A far more realistic approach to the whole scenario and more so, the

direction the US is heading in, with pharmecists deciding who's moral and who's not.

[Blue_Roses]

42. well said and I totally agree

I worked as a counselor at an abortion clinic in the 80's and a alot of what you say is dead on. The best way to stop abortions is educate and prevent unplanned pregnancies. Most of that comes through personal responsibility, but when you have a child who has become pregnant by her uncle, then abortion takes on a whole new meaning. Also, there is no such thing as partial birth abortion.

[seabeyond]

43. absolutely, until the holier thans equally go after and persecute

the guys that are seeding these babies, they are hypocrits. stone the male along with the girl

[bleedingheart]

45. But that would mean being honest about Human Sexuality

and my oh my....the puritans amongst us can't handle that...

I agree...responsibility is the answer but first they must face the reality that sex is something we all find pleasurable and it does happen but it has consequences...pregnancy or disease...

[lawladyprof]

48. Abstinent until marriage = celibate until death for the never married.

That said, I think a tremendous amount of the problem is the commodification (real word? spelling?) of sex in this country (sex (because is it so powerful) used to sell everything from hamburgers to cars to soft drinks). This was not the message of the 60's. Sex was supposed to be life (of the people, for people) not profit (of corporations, for corporations) enhancing.

[MadHound]

49. Actually, the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country

Are slowly declining, as are the number of abortions. Yes, there has been a spike in the number of abortions since Bush became president, but the overall trend is downwards.

The opposition to abortion is simply the tip of the iceberg however. Birth control in general is opposed by a large, vocal minority in this country, especially birth control for teens. And this minority's power is in the ascendancy now with the "morals" president in power for a second term. These people think that all morning after pills, and all birth control pills are nothing but chemical abortificants(even though that idea flies in the face of medical science), and should be banned. Witness the increasing incidents of pharmacists nationwide denying women birth control pills. Rather hard for the woman to be responsible when she cannot even obtain the prescription needed to implement such family planning. Scary thing is that there is now a movement afoot to criminalize birth control pills again.

As far as male responsibility goes, well good luck. Through a convergence of law, societal norms and fine christian morals, male responsibility for family planning is a whitewash. While many intelligent, progressive men have been responsible for their own family planning, they are the exceptions that swim against the rule. It would take many generations of enlightenment for the emergence of both equal responsibility in family planning, and equality of the sexes in general. We are making progress, but it is in fits and starts, not a smooth transition. The counter culture movements of the sixties and seventies helped, as did, ironically, the emergence of AIDS. But it is going to require a complete reworking of our paternalistic society before we see the widespread equality that you and I desire.

Instead, the penis is still king in this country, and any systematic effort to require birth control for men is sporadic at best. Condoms are popular due to AIDS, but a birth control pill for men is so threatening to our paternalistic society that you and I probably won't see it in our lifetime, even though it is quite viable now. Instead, we're witnessing the opposite trend, keeping males potent and active for as long as possible, even though it could be life threatening(witness the heart attack deaths of men on Viagra). Hell, even condoms are frowned upon in much of this country, especially in the Bible Belt. I personally know of entire counties and regions where you cannot find a single condom anywhere. I have been seriously tempted to do a condom drop over the high school in a couple of these places, but refrained because such a stunt would get me shot.

So where does all of this leave us? In a sorry state, sad to say. Women are the ones who have most of the responsibility for family planning, and thanks to the RW fundies, their options are coming under ever increasing attack. For now, our short term goal should be to keep both abortion and all birth control safe and legal. Long term we have to work on changing the norms of our society from that of paternalism to true equality between the sexes. Only then will you see true equality in family planning. It is a long term fight, not one that can be won overnight. But we are winning, we are making progress. Sixty years ago you wouldn't have seen as many men taking responsibility for their family planning as you do today, wouldn't have seen the commonality of men having their tubes tied. We've come a long way on this issue, but we still have a long way to go.

[nostamj]

50. excellent post!

and far more measured than my freeper-inspired rant in the OP last night (referring to an exchange I had of-DU regarding an abortion BAN)

and you're totally right (uh, correct!) that the RWs are anti-responsibility other than total abstinence.

I picture these people spending their days putting toothpaste back into the tube and re-assembling smashed eggs so they can be hard-boiled.

[MadHound]

51. Thank you, and sorry, I missed your rant

That's a shame, for I actually find your rants not only informative, but amusing also, in a "I'm-there-with-you" sort of way. Being a ranter myself(to my wife's amusement), I always appreciate a good blowing of steam when I read it.

Sad to say, I think we're both going to be ranting a lot over the next few years. This administration is following the gameplan of the the RW fundie minority in this country, and trying to set up a theocratic, fascist state. And with the media compliant, and the population asleep, we will wake up one day with tanks in the streets and jackboots on our doors. And even sadder, I think that this is what is going to have to happen in order to wake up enough people to take our country back. Most people, RW, LW or no wing are simply sheeple, either by choice or by design. They either don't want to get involved in such matters, or they are simply to harrassed, harried and stressed out with two jobs, two kids, debt, and all the other acoutrements of life in our day to have the time or energy needed to find out what is really happening. And I think that is by design. Keep the people too busy to question matters, control the MSM that they rely on, and this nasty cabal can steal their country right out from under them. I witness this phenomenon every day. Mention the Orwellian horrors of the New Freedom Initiative, and people look at you like you're crazy. Never heard of it, WTF are you smokin' 'Hound. And then when the MSM finally reports on it two months later, they're just blown away.

Anyway, I'm starting to rant now, and I'll stop. I try not to hijack threads, or kill them, but somehow I have a talent. Anyway, thanks again for your compliment, I just type what is in my head. If I don't, it would probably explode.

[nostamj]

53. actually, my 'rant' was the original post (OP)

and a couple of later, late night, ill-considered replies.

but, by all means... RANT ON!

[MadHound]

55. D'oh! Sorry about that, I need to drink more coffee

Then I'll wake up and realize what the initials are referring to!

[Djinn]

102. self deleted dupe

[Garbo]

52. Risking my DU neck on this one.....

I partially agree. I wouldn't be here if I wasn't left of center, but abortion is something that I am completely against.

That being said, banning abortion does nothing to stop promiscuity, which is where I agree with you. Promiscuous sex IS a problem, IMHO, and we as a nation should take steps to curb it. Not by regulating people, but by education.

[MadHound]

54. A few questions for you friend, and I'm not trying to piss you off

It's more like I'm trying to understand a mindset, and you have offered an opportunity.

First off, to me, when you boil it all down, abortion is simply a medical procedure, a relatively simple one. It seems that where it gets complicated it when people start to say when life begins. Many people say life begins at conception, many say when the child actually pops out, there are even some people in this world who don't consider it a child, or a life, until a year after the birth(tribes in Africa and elsewhere child mortality is high). But all of these definitions of life are based on one's personal values, one's personal belief system, be it religious or otherwise. Why should, having a constitutional concept of seperation of church and state, allow one groups' belief system, religious convictions, determine matters for all of us?

[Garbo]

56. Thank you for asking....

I don't mean to sound snotty, but most people aren't as polite, so thank you for the question and the opportunity.

I have a religious perspective on the whole issue, but I also see it from a non-religious issue of rights. Since I consider life to begin at conception, I believe that the fetus has rights. Therefore, aborting the fetus is a violation of its right to live.

Some people think I am simply trying to deny a woman her rights, or control over her body, but that is truly not my motivation at all. I believe that once conception has occurred, then that woman has no right to terminate that life. In other words, its no longer just her body. I realize that this view angers a lot of people, but I have no desire for anyones life to be regulated by the government, unless it will affect another. Hence, abortion affects another life, so I do not believe it should be allowed.

Now, my definition of life beginning at conception is certainly heavily influenced by my religious beliefs, but I am also of the opinion that religious or not, there is more reason to classify life beginning at conception rather than at birth.

Thanks again for asking, hopefully this explanation helps.

[cally]

57. I'm curious also

I'm not trying to be antagonistic but I want to understand. My belief is that women will have abortions whether the 'state' allows it or not. I believe that banning abortion does nothing except make it more unsafe for women. I support efforts to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I respect your beliefs but why do you think the government should ban abortion?

[Garbo]

82. Primarily because.....

.....I see it as denying another human being the right to live. This is, of course, the part that gets me into trouble at DU, since few seem to agree that life begins at conception.

Although it is not the same, or a perfect comparison, I cannot support the death penalty for the same reason.

I agree that banning abortions will not entirely stop the practice, and I do not presume to have all the answers. However, I believe that we, meaning our society, can come up with solutions to almost anything. That being said, I agree that more needs to be done to stop unwanted pregnancies, and I feel that is best served by more education as to the responsibilities of parenthood and/or sexual activity.

[cally]

91. Thanks for making the effort to explain in a courteous manner

While I don't agree, I can respect your opinion.

[Garbo]

119. Hey, no sweat......

.....thanks to you as well!

[Djinn]

106. so if you had your druthers

and abortion was crimalised you would force a woman to give birth against her will? like a breeding cow?

Most anti-abortion people say "no" when you ask them this but the fact is if abortion is illegal you WOULD be forcing women to give birth against their will or seek unsafe terminations, there's no running away from that.

[Garbo]

121. You are right in that......

.....by outlawing abortion it would require a woman who was seeking abortion to give birth against her will. No running away from that indeed.

I truly do not hold my position because I want myself, the government, or anyone else to control the women of the world. That is not my cause or interest.

The way I see it, when one is pregnant, it is no longer just about that person or their wishes. The life within them has rights, and the most basic of which is to live. I do believe human life should just be "removed" in a procedure. That is why I am against abortion.

Thanks for reading, Djinn

[Djinn]

124. disagree with you 100% but

admire your logic in this - a lot of people shy from the fact that banning abortions would force women to give birth (or take their chances with whatever illegal service they could afford) I find that pretty repulsive but atleast it's consistent.

[Garbo]

136. I understand......

......your position. It may not make a difference, but I am against forcing anyone to do anything (physically) that does not involve another life. I think tattoos are ugly, but if someone wants to, its their body. I think people should be able to take all the drugs they want, unless there are kids at home they are responsible for......maybe that isn't the best analogy.

Suffice it to say that I do not want anyone telling someone else what to do with their body, but when another life is involved, it is (IMO) just their body, hence my position.

Thanks again. :toast:

[MadHound]

59. No problem, civility has to begin somewhere

So another question then. Since you admit that your definition of when life begins is heavily influenced by religion, don't you think that the seperation of church and state should come into play? This definition is one that very Christian in origin, yet we are(supposedly) a secular society. Why should we, as a secular country, allow any religion to influence matters of state? We wouldn't allow a Hindu's religious dietary restrictions put McDonalds out of business, why should we allow a Christian's definition of life dicate whether or not a medical procedure is legal?

[Garbo]

83. A very potent question....

....and I don't blame you if you don't buy my answer, but, I still see it as denying another human being the right to live. As I said a few posts up, I don't support the death penalty for the same reason. Religious or not, I still see the practice as denying another human a basic right.

Thanks again for the civil discussion. :toast:

[CitySky]

135. Thank You to you both

And to Nostamj for starting an important discussion.

As a DUer who also believes life begins at conception, I usually steer clear of the abortion threads altogether, not fond of flame. But we're going to HAVE to figure out a way to talk to each other civilly if we ever expect to talk to Them. Sincere thanks for adding to the thoughtful discourse.

Because I recognize that my views on abortion are rooted in a faith that many other people do not share, I'm not convinced that banning abortion -- eliminating the supply -- is the way to go. But I do think Dems on a national scale need to acknowledge that abortion IS troubling to most Americans and start dealing at least with the demand side of the equation head-on. "Share my belief that it's a simple medical procedure!" is not going to get us any further than "share my belief that it's a grievous sin!"

[dddem]

137. With all due respect,

I'd like to add my 2cents here. Although I'm sure there are many people who believe that the "when life begins" question is primarily a religious one, I know of many women who experienced that "bonding in the womb" thing during pregnancy. Personally, I have 2 beautiful daughters that I thank God for every day, but during the months prior to their births, I had a condition, not a miraculous intervention, if you know what I mean. My point is, although it was not something I personally experienced, many many women go through a change, which I don't believe is based on faith or religion (perhaps it's hormonal).

I just don't think any of us can know or make a determination of what's right for a woman one way or the other during her pregnancy. By the way, I'm pro choice. I've known women who have chosen to terminate a pregnancy, and it was neither an easy choice nor a careless decision.

For those of us who are pro-choice, please don't assume that everyone who is pro-life bases their decision on how any church or politician tells them they should think. And for those of us who are pro-life, don't assume that women who have chosen abortion are godless whores who have no regard for life. Neither is true.

[DerekG]

60. I understand, Garbo--even if I disagree

I too have an aversion to abortion, and it is similarly founded on religious principle. Yet I do support Roe v. Wade, and it is due--solely--to the concern for the health and well-being of women who will undergo the procedure whether it be legal or outlawed. The horror stories of life (pre-Roe) are legion; my heart breaks for those who suffered and died at the hands of butchers.

P.S. Unfortunately, you're probably going to be hit with several incensed responses; your opinion seems to be a DU cardinal sin, akin to defending Ralph Nader's run.

[Garbo]

84. Thanks.....

I guess it is a good thing I am not a Nader supporter. Think how ugly a anti-abortion, pro-Nader thread would get! :beer:

[greenohio]

66. All law is based on a belief that something is right or wrong.

First let me say that I stand by Roe v. Wade and have argued against any infringement on choice. I stand with you there.

I do want to point out though, that ALL LAW is based on a BELIEF that something is wrong and should be regulated or banned, or something is right and should be allowed or supported. We ban theft, because we think a world where people are stealing from each other just isn't right. We ban speeding because we think it is wrong to drive in a matter that endangers others. Even dueling was legal in this country not so long ago. We decided that was the wrong way to settle our differences.

All law is made by a group of people (called law makers) forcing their beliefs on everyone else. That is what law is.

[MadHound]

67. And your point is?

Sorry friend, not meaning to be flip here, but you are pointing out the obvious. Of course laws are based on beliefs and morality. However our country was founded on a principle of seperation of church and state, therefore having one single religion define what life is and when it begins vis-a-vis a simple medical procedure is, in fact, tearing down that wall that seperates church and state.

The concept of wrongness in regards to murder, or theft etc goes across all bounds of religion, and is even embraced by those who are non-religious. The concept of when life begins doesn't, it is a concept that varies from religion to religion, person to person. Why should we allow one religion to dictate the stance of a supposedly secular nation?

[greenohio]

74. It does sound obvious, but people say

"I don't want you forcing your beliefs on me." What they are saying is "I don't want any law." Because law is forcing the lawmaker's beliefs on someone else.

As for the separation of church and state, it doesn't mean that laws cannot be based on someone's beliefs, because that is what all law is. If someone's beliefs are the same as some organized religions' (even though they may not practice that religion), to say that laws cannot be based on those beliefs is a bunch a horse hockey. The fact that all laws on based on the BELIEF that we have rights and the BELIEF that all are created equal are perfect examples of the BELIEF foundation of law.

How arrogant and ignorant to say that murder, and theft cross all bounds of religion. As if they represent some basic fundamental tenants found in all religions. In some religions, murder is quite acceptable. There are many religions, even today, that still practice human sacrifice. To say anyone who believes in one of the current or ancient religions that practice this, don't have a religion, is wrong.

Check your facts, then talk.

[MadHound]

79. Tapdancing on the head of a semantical pin friend

Laws can be and most certainly are, based on some one's or some groups beliefs, yes that is true. However, since we DO have a principle(based on a belief) known as seperation of church and state, allowing a religious group(or sect, since not all Christians want to criminalize abortion) to dictate the legal definition of when life begins flies completely in the face of the Constitution itself. This is the battle that we face friend, against forces that want a theocratic fascism. Abortion is but one of many fronts, and quite frankly we can't afford to give ground on any of them.

And how much comparitive theology have you researched friend? It has been a subject of interest to me for years and decades now, and yes, murder and theft are pretty much universal no-nos. You bring up human sacrifice as an example, but really that is a non-example. In the cultures that practice/d human sacrifice, most of the victims were either willing, and/or accorded a special status. Within the cultural context, the sacrifice isn't considered murder. The only religions that truly condone murder and/or theft are really anti-religions, such a Satanic worship ala Alistair Crowley(ie a religion that has been formed as an opposition movement to an established religion)

There is no need to get snippy friend. Perhaps you are misreading me, being as that emotions etc. are easily misconstrued in a chat room. I am simply passing on knowledge that I have acquired through much education and experience.

[greenohio]

86. Point still stands

Google and 5 minutes will present examples of human sacrifice both modern and ancient (apparently ancient religions aren't real religions?).

Are you arguing that human sacrifice is not murder and should not be outlawed?

I believe the Satanist would disagree with your assessment that they aren't a legitimate religion.

The principle of Separation of Church and state does not prevent some lawmaker from espousing beliefs and making law on those beliefs, EVEN if they coincide with some religious organization.

The constitution does say that the government cannot infringe on the expression of religious faith. Thus the principle of separation of church and state.

As for whether this gives ground on abortion is nonsense. It was an argument doomed to fail. Either you believe womans rights triumph or you don't.

[sangh0]

69. Not entirely true

The lawe is based on a certain specific type of wrong, and not just wrongdoing of any type. Specifically, the law is based on the idea that it's wrong to infringe on someone's rights.

That's why fraud is criminal, but lying (without any material gain) is not.

[greenohio]

71. Still based on a belief.

Prove that anyone has any rights. The fact of the matter is you can't. It is still based on belief.

[sangh0]

72. Not quite

My point wasn't to divorce the law from our beliefs. As I clearly stated "the law is based on the idea that it's wrong to infringe on someone's rights".

I had assumed that it would be obvious that the idea was one that people actually believed.

My point was that it isn't just any old belief that supports the law.

[greenohio]

75. Quite.

Law is based on belief in right and wrong. I cannot follow your point, though I am sure that you had one.

[sangh0]

76. Please read

I am agreeing with you that it is based on belief, but not JUST on any belief. It's based on particular beliefs, particularly those beliefs that relate to our rights.

[greenohio]

78. Actually this is where the practical comes in...

there is NO rule of thumb as to which beliefs become law. If so slavery, jim crow, Prohibition etc would not have become law. Basically, the beliefs supported by the majority of the lawmakers and the president (need his sig) decide law at the fed level.

[Yupster]

114. It is a difficult issue when life begins

I sure don't know the answer.

Some answer must be agreed upon though.

You can't just let each person decide on their own.

If someone had killed my six month old kid and claimed it was no big deal because in his belief system life only begins on the first birthday, I don't think that should be shrugged off as a "cultural difference of opinion."

I would be willing to compromise at the point of viability. That seems reasonable.

My kid was born via Caesarian, and watching that process, no one is going to convince me that life begins at birth, because I saw my son on sonagram just before the doctor went in, and during the procedure, and as the doctor lifted him out, and I can guarantee that it was the exact same kid the minute before birth and the minute after birth.

So, I don't know when life should legally begin, but it can't be either extreme position. There must be some compromise most everyone can live with.

[Mandate My Ass]

116. "No one is going to convince me that...."

well that is the crux of the problem, isn't it?

My kid was born via Caesarian, and watching that process, no one is going to convince me that life begins at birth, because I saw my son on sonagram just before the doctor went in, and during the procedure, and as the doctor lifted him out, and I can guarantee that it was the exact same kid the minute before birth and the minute after birth.

Your story warmed the cockles of my heart, it really did. It just didn't convince me of jackshit that I haven't figured out on my own already. IOW, it didn't convince me.

[Mandate My Ass]

89. Do only promiscuous people become unintendedly pregnant?

Is forcing pregnancy on an unwilling woman, who may or may not share your views of when life begins, an appropriate consequence for having sex?

It's now the nation's job to curb sex you don't approve of? Who gets to decide which sexual relations are acceptable and which are "promiscuous?" What type of education would be provided to sexually active people? Would they have to pass a morals' test to be able to engage in sex?

Sounds like the DMV to me, only worse.

[jdj]

99. yes the "childbirth as punishment" drive, while simultaneously claiming

to want "what is best for the child" and a "culture of life" are so incompatible, yet unacknowleged by the folks who claim to hold both strains of belief at once, that is almost unfathomable to me.

[Djinn]

103. dupe

[Djinn]

105. why is it a problem

if other people have lots of consenting sex - why does it matter to you or the world in general if some people are getting lots?

why do you want to curb other people's sex life? why does it hurt you? why is screwing lots a bad thing.

The only reason I can see for this view point is a belief that sex is somehow holy and santified...that's fine if you beleive that don't sleep with lots of people, don't try and push your morality on to the rest of the population.

[readmoreoften]

126. Uh promiscuous sex is a problem?

Are most girls getting pregnant from sleeping with 50 guys one time? Or one guy fifty times? Ya know what? THE ODDS ARE THE SAME.

If sleeping with one guy 50 times is wrong, then I guess sleeping with one guy 25 times is wrong. How about two times?

How many times is promiscuous?

Oh, right... save it until marriage.

Well I'm a homo so I don't get to get married.

The problem is not 'promiscuous sex' and the government NEEDS NOT GET INVOLVED or have a policy based on ANYONE'S SEX LIFE.

Mind your own business.

[xerox]

58. You get the gold star!

Abortion is legalized killing. That is the truth.

Should we ban it? No. But I call it for what it is.

Should we take steps to avoid being in the situation to choose to abort a baby? I say yes.
Should we make birth control available to sexually active teens? yes.
Should we educate and incourage abstinance in our children? yes

Should we teach that abortion should be the very last alternative? Yes.

If you don't believe me that it is legalized killing then write me and I will show you a video to prove it. If you can handle decapitated aborted babies.

[Djinn]

110. no that's your opinion

Perhaps you'd like me to send you some photo's of weomen who've bled to death after an illegal abortion? or someone writhing in pani before dying of scepticima? Do you think you could handle it?

BTW - google the percentage of abortions that are late term (the only instance where your bullshit "decapitated babies" crap could come even close.
The vast majority of abortions look like jelly beans and blood.

[xerox]

120. Perhaps

you should carefully read what I wrote before popping off too quick. Nowhere did I say we should ban the practice. But you asked for the link so here it is. You need realplayer to play it. Hey send me the link to the pictures. I would like to see them. That is If you have pictures since legal abortion has been around about 30 years now.


Can you handle it? Jelly beans and blood huh?


http://www.assustador.com.br/videos10/mortes/20.ram

[Djinn]

125. Because photo's didn't exist 30 years ago???

Yes I can handle it - patronise much. Yes the vast majority of abortions look like blood and jelly beans.b Your link was fake as hell - you know that right - it was no "scarier" than any other B grade horror - I've seen all this crap the anti-choicers put out there and the only thing about that offends me is that you all seem rather obsessed with it.

Oh and abortion may have legal in the US for 30 years but that's not the case everywhere

As for links to pictures I'll give you one - a REAL person unlike your fake video - but as for the rest may I suggest you do your own research perhaps speak to some elderly women who had to have backyard abortions, quite possibly your own grandmother, I was pretty taken aback when my (late) grandmother described her experiences to me, it was horrible.

http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.org/drama/dr_smith_introduction.html

This is a real live not a fetus

[Susang]

61. My question

Who gets to decide what "irresponsible sex" is? You? Me? Them?

I'm sorry, but that wording sounds a too uncomfortably close to the morality police for my tastes. Isn't that what the right wing calls gay sex?

Women's groups have been working for what I'm assuming you feel is "responsible" sex for decades now, Planned Parenthood in particular. The fight for abortion rights extends to reproductive rights as well, considering the far right's plan is also to deny women access to safe contraception.

If you're curious as to why there's no safe and effective male contraception, why don't you ask your fellow men? They make up the majority of the medical researchers currently (and unfortunately), they would also be the ones who would have to demand the product, as women would not be the ones taking it.

[Spiffarino]

63. Call 'em on it

You make a great point. The Morality Police are all over this to stop "for-ni-ca-shun" in Amurka (well, for everyone but themselves any way).

What will resonate among thinking folks who like democracy but dislike abortion? How's this for a meme... "Gay people don't need abortion"

Now wouldn't that burn the fundies' asses?

[sangh0]

73. You don't know what "irresponsible sex" is?

How about "sex that has consequences the person(s) engaging in it are not ready to deal with?"

How about "non consensual" sex?

How about "exploitative" sex?

[Susang]

90. No, I guess I don't know what "irresponsible sex" is

Not the way you seem to define it. To me, irresponsible does not mean criminal. The OP's post is obviously not about rape or pornography. If you consider rape "irresponsible sex" than perhaps you need the lesson in what the term means, not me.

[sangh0]

128. I didn't say anything about "criminal" behavior

nor did I equate it with "irresponsible"

The OP's post is obviously not about rape or pornography.

And I said nothing about rape or pornography specifically.

If you consider rape "irresponsible sex" than perhaps you need the lesson in what the term means, not me.

So rape is "responsible"

I think not.

[Djinn]

111. non consensual sex is rape sangh0

not irresponsible. If I split your head open with an iron bar and steal your wallet it's not "irresponsible borrowing"

[sangh0]

129. they aren't mutually exclusive terms

it's both "rape" and "irresponsible"

I don't understand why you think they can't be both.

[Djinn]

130. try looking at the meaning of irresponsible

rapist ARE responsible for their actions, I think your confusing the words responsible and sensible

[Quill Pen]

81. Best post in the thread.

Since the OP has since "come out of the closet" in this thread, so to speak, I have to remind him, loath as I am to do it, that unfortunately, half the country believes his own sex life to be wholly irresponsible, regardless of his monogamy or length of commitment to a partner.

Women don't have abortions for fun. I can't personally imagine why the number of abortions in the U.S. would alarm anyone here, since the reproductive choices of others don't personally affect them and are none of their business.

[LunaticsOnPogosticks]

108. Actually, a contraceptive shot for men is in the works.

AND, a new type of vasectomy, where they put clips on the vas deferens instead of cutting them, is already available. The new procedure makes it much more likely that the vasectomy could be reversed at later point.:D

[buckettgirl]

68. You are 100% right, but...

the fundies/repukes only want to advocate abstinence...
Personally, I think abstinence is rather unnatural and unhuman. I do have the utmost respect for those who do manage to remain virgins until they are married or whatever reasons because it takes a very strong willed individual to go against nature.

They want to do abstinence only education in schools. What bull!
If kids only learn abstinence, then they won't know how to protect themselves when they do have sex.
I think young kids (old enough to understand) should learn about sex, babies, and std's. They should learn about abstinence and safe sex and taught it is better to be responsible. The more information they have, the better prepared they will be in understanding the consequences of being irresponsible.

Sex isn't immoral...it's natural, and if we were only supposed to make babies, then it wouldn't be so pleasurable and childbirth so painful! Maybe all the people who think otherwise just need to get laid! :P

[TexasBushwhacker]

87. Not to mention that many young women are only "technical" virgins

The emphasis on "abstinence" has caused a huge number of young women being pressured into performing oral sex on their boyfriends because that way they'll both still be "virgins". While that certainly cuts out the risk of getting pregnant, somehow I don't think that giving blowjobs rather than having intercourse was what the fundies had in mind.

[MISSDem]

70. Exactly, just like Bill Clinton taught us. Abortion should be

safe, legal and RARE.

[clover]

80. irresponsibility is culturally relative and a private concern(nt)

[Padraig18]

95. What a load of horseshit.

:eyes:

[TexasBushwhacker]

85. We have the morning after pill - it's called Plan B

Unfortunately, it works best if it is taken in the first 24 hours and currently, it is prescription only. Well, do the math. Unless you have a OB/GYN who will just call in a prescription, chances are you're going to have to wait a day or two or more to get an appointment to see the doctor.

The FDA will be making a decision about whether or not to give Plan B over-the-counter status. You can read more about it here, and send a letter of support:

http://capwiz.com/fmf1/issues/alert/?alertid=6664261&type=CU

Some good, straight numbers here (from the CDC):

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fact.htm

Despite the continued uproar from the pro-life faction, the fact is, the abortion rate (% of women having abortions per year) and ratio (# of legal abortions per 1000 live births) steadily decreased from from a peak around 1984. Considering that American women have fewer than 1 million of the 46 Million abortions that are performed worldwide every year, we're actually doing pretty good. Only 2% of women age 15 to 44 have an abortion in any given year, and that's abortions for ALL causes - failed BC, mother's health, fetal death or deformity, etc.

[jdj]

101. thanks Tbw.

The abortion debate should be called the "abortion distraction" because that is what it is.

[cally]

112. Amazingly enough, our HMO pharmacy has signs saying that women

should request a prescription now for emergency contraception in case it's needed. I was surprised.

[LWolf]

113. This topic always sets off a firestorm of responses,

doesn't it?

For the record, I am now, and have always been, and advocate of responsible choice.

I don't want to take choices away. I want to see people exercise their choices responsibly. I think the two need to go together, and I have no idea how to make that happen.

As at least one poster mentioned, teen pregnancies often happen on purpose, because teen girls are filling a "hole" in their self-esteem. And they aren't prepared to be parents. Bad news for the teens' future and for the babies born to them. Responsible choice would be to prevent pregnancy until you were fully prepared for, and aware of the consequences of, a lifetime of parenthood.

As a female, I can comment that many birth control methods are not just inefficient, but also not exactly healthy. I know we've made a lot of progress since I had a tubal ligation and left the whole mess behind in the 80s, but I can report anecdotal problems with every method out there.

As someone who deals all day everyday with the general population's children, I see way too many kids whose families don't have the financial, social, intellectual, or emotional resources/skills to provide a safe, healthy, nurturing life for their children. I see way too many abused and neglected kids, and kids whose purpose for existence is to fill their parents' needs. Because I see so much of that, I've often wished we had a way to just safely sterilize everyone at the onset of puberty, and reverse the procedure when the individual was fully adult, educated, and ready and able to provide everything a child needs and deserves in the way of time, attention, care, and respect. To me, responsible choice would be to choose to abstain from procreating until you had all of the above to offer a family.

Yes, I know all the problems and ramifications with that wish; I'm not suggesting we legislate it. But we could support responsible choice with education programs and incentives, perhaps.

[Yupster]

115. It's undoubtedly true

that there is too much irresponsible sex, and the results are very damaging to society in abortion, poverty and children growing up without fathers.

The question is what to do about it, and that's a much harder problem.

[readmoreoften]

117. I'm a dyke w/ no stake in the matter...

oh course unless the RW makes my body a breeding ground (but they better hurry up I'm in my mid thirties)

But I still say keep abortion save and alive for all my hetero female pals. They're women not cows.

[fishwax]

118. The problem isn't irresponsible sex, it is irresponsible social policy

Abortions go down when people have options. People need easy access to family planning education and information. People need to have financial options that come with a living wage and affordable health care. Abortions go down naturally in democratic administrations. Abortions go up when regressive social policies are imposed (attempting to control abortions artificially).

That's how I see it anyway. I don't think the problem is irresponsible sex. I think the problem is irresponsible attitudes towards responsible sex education and responsible social policy. Too many "pro-lifers" are overly concerned with making abortion criminal and under concerned with making abortion rare.

[Cuban_Liberal]

131. It's both. n/t

[420inTN]

133. I agree, but it takes two to tango, the (ir)responsibility falls to both..

people involved. And if the woman carries to term, the man should be responsible enough to provide for his child. There are too many deadbeat dads out there.