IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags abortion

Reply
Old 4th August 2022, 07:28 PM   #1721
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,059
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The grand jury report.
Could you be more specific?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2022, 08:17 PM   #1722
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,643
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I tell you what.

We'll make it illegal to:

- Perform abortions using a Star Trek style transporter..
Stop right there.

That…would be cool.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2022, 08:30 PM   #1723
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Now, MOST doctors certainly don't do that. But you'd be a fool to believe Gosnell is the only doctor in the entire country who did. A competent doctor who performed the abortions he performed with a modicum of care for his patients would never have been discovered by authorities. Performing late term abortions is not a hard crime to get away with. Hell, it's not a crime at all in some states. And Gosnell wasn't even caught because of his abortions OR the women he murdered, it was because police raided his "clinic" over opioid prescriptions and stumbled upon his house of horrors.
Overturning Roe v Wade wouldn't stop someone like Gosnell anyway, they would just do so illegally on the q.t. for more money!
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2022, 09:54 PM   #1724
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 32,810
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I noticed that, too. Rather revealing, innit?
I noticed. I think the fact that he thought it made a difference is telling. Telling a lot.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 02:40 AM   #1725
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No, that's not the original claim. Pages and pages ago I said that there were activists who wanted such things legal, but the claim I made about what was actually done wasn't up until the moment of birth, but only in the third trimester.
Would you care to point out to me exactly where I said it was YOUR original claim?

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The original claim is about abortions being performed up to and including the moment of birth. Therefore, there needs to be a law against that. The only example given is that of Kermit Gosnell where the two latest terminations verified were at 28 and 30 weeks, but even at that late stage of development, neither is "up to and including the moment of birth". But that is the ONLY example anyone can give because doctors do NOT perform terminations on healthy, viable, third term fetuses whether a woman requests it or not. That is a stubborn fact.
I was referring to Trump's false claim and those who repeat it: “In the ninth month you can take the baby and rip the baby right out of the womb, just prior to the birth of the baby. You can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month, on the final day. And that's not acceptable." (Trump-Clinton 3rd debate)

Mike Pence: ""I'm pro-life, I don't apologize for it. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris support taxpayer funding of abortion all the way up to the moment of birth." (2020 Pence-Harris Debate)

I was also referring to Warp12 who has repeatedly demanded to know if we support a law that would forbid abortions at 8 1/2 weeks:

Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Cry me a river. We shouldn't be making policy based on the far outlier. If we can create good law to include them, great. If not, oh well. And this has nothing to do with stupid law...like permitting 8 1/2 month abortions without medical cause...like most libs here seem to be totally accepting towards.
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
What's it look like at 8 1/2 months, as is legal in some states?
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
We get it, you won't go on record as condemning law allowing for 8 1/2 month abortions without medical cause.


Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Actually, this is wrong. In Gosnell's case, he aborted fetuses AFTER birth by inducing early labor and delivery and then killing the baby.
1. How can a baby be aborted AFTER birth?

2. Try reading what I said again. I said "the two latest terminations verified were at 28 and 30 weeks". Did I say those two fetuses had not been delivered and then killed? No. I said they were 'terminated' and the latest verified.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Doctors don't do that, except the doctor who did that. Uh huh.
The fact that you and Warp can only identify ONE....ONE...doctor who did it is not evidence that "doctorS" do it.


Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Now, MOST doctors certainly don't do that. But you'd be a fool to believe Gosnell is the only doctor in the entire country who did. A competent doctor who performed the abortions he performed with a modicum of care for his patients would never have been discovered by authorities. Performing late term abortions is not a hard crime to get away with. Hell, it's not a crime at all in some states. .
Wow. You're making a lot of claims there based on what exactly?

Can you refer me to a single case in any of the five states that have no restrictions of a doctor performing an unnecessary third trimester abortion just because a woman wanted one? No. You can't. But don't let that stop you. No...wait....on second thought....

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And Gosnell wasn't even caught because of his abortions OR the women he murdered, it was because police raided his "clinic" over opioid prescriptions and stumbled upon his house of horrors
Only partially true. It was the suspicion of illegal drug dispensing that initiated the investigation of Gosnell, but that investigation revealed the death of the woman (not 'women') at the clinic, the unsanitary operations and conditions, the untrained staff, and lack of medical supervision of the drugs. When the clinic was raided, it wasn't just because of the drugs.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 05:11 AM   #1726
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Can someone explain the rape and incest people that make up so much of the electorate?

I understand the abortion is murder crowd....nothing about rape or incest would justify murdering a third party.

I understand the abortion is not murder crowd... just make abortions legal, problem solved.

But what goes into opposing abortion but thinking it should be legal for rape or incest? What is the philosophy behind that?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 05:13 AM   #1727
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Overturning Roe v Wade wouldn't stop someone like Gosnell anyway, they would just do so illegally on the q.t. for more money!
It's amazing how the "You can't stop shootings by outlawing guns" side doesn't get this.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 05:21 AM   #1728
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,643
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Can someone explain the rape and incest people that make up so much of the electorate?

I understand the abortion is murder crowd....nothing about rape or incest would justify murdering a third party.

I understand the abortion is not murder crowd... just make abortions legal, problem solved.

But what goes into opposing abortion but thinking it should be legal for rape or incest? What is the philosophy behind that?
Society has, by and large, deemed rape and incest such heinous acts perpetrated on a woman, to thereafter force her by punishment of law to carry a resultant pregnancy to term might be considered excessive injury upon excessive injury.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 05:30 AM   #1729
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Society has, by and large, deemed rape and incest such heinous acts perpetrated on a woman, to thereafter force her by punishment of law to carry a resultant pregnancy to term might be considered excessive injury upon excessive injury.
I think we need to back up for a sec and look at the principle underlying that...

That seems dependent on there being some position that isn't "abortion is murder" and "abortion is a medical decision." What is that position?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:05 AM   #1730
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,093
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think we need to back up for a sec and look at the principle underlying that...

That seems dependent on there being some position that isn't "abortion is murder" and "abortion is a medical decision." What is that position?
It does not have a name. Does it need to?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:10 AM   #1731
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
It does not have a name. Does it need to?
Does it have a description?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:17 AM   #1732
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,063
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Can someone explain the rape and incest people that make up so much of the electorate?

I understand the abortion is murder crowd....nothing about rape or incest would justify murdering a third party.

I understand the abortion is not murder crowd... just make abortions legal, problem solved.

But what goes into opposing abortion but thinking it should be legal for rape or incest? What is the philosophy behind that?
When someone's property has been damaged by circumstances beyond his control, it's reasonable to waive restrictions on corrective improvement.

/s, obviously. The real reason is it's there to punish women for being sluts, so the women they feel bad for punishing get exemptions. That's all there is to it. That's also why "the only moral abortion is my abortion" is such a common attitude among them.

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 5th August 2022 at 06:20 AM.
Beelzebuddy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:18 AM   #1733
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
Yes it's called "I'm against abortion except in cases of rape and incest."

Join us next week for another exciting episode of "Someone pretends they don't know how language works."
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:19 AM   #1734
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,980
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Of course they were going to Gosnell for elective abortions. They weren't being referred to him by other doctors. They weren't being diagnosed by him for conditions which required an abortion.
Where's your evidence for what they were and weren't being diagnosed by him for?
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
People didn't go to him because they had medically necessary abortions.
Where's your evidence for this?
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If you had a medical need for an abortion, you could go elsewhere. You WOULD go elsewhere, because whoever diagnosed you with whatever it was that medically required an abortion would send you elsewhere.
The community that made up Gosnell's clients were not like you, Zig. They couldn't afford to shop around for medical care. In many cases they were immigrants, with a limited use of English and virtually no understanding of our medical system. You're making assumptions of why people do things without the slightest knowledge of the situations those people were in.
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Pregnant women went to Gosnell specifically for abortions. They wanted an abortion before they stepped through the door, and not out of medical necessity.
Your evidence for this is the same assumptions you've made, right? Because we've already established that you're under the assumption that Gosnell's patients had access to medical services and insurance and money to pay for those things that we know they didn't have.
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You seem to have some fantasy that he was doing abortions as a side business to a legitimate women's health clinic. He wasn't.
No, I have no fantasy about Gosnell's business. I am just not operating from the framework you seem to be stuck in. I know that you're making a lot of assumptions about motivations, and ability to pay, and knowledge of the medical system in America, that aren't applicable to the people you're talking about, and using those assumptions to prove what you've already assumed.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:29 AM   #1735
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yes it's called "I'm against abortion except in cases of rape and incest."

Join us next week for another exciting episode of "Someone pretends they don't know how language works."
That is not comparable to the position I described...which was abortions are murder and abortions are a medical procedure.

For someone with the position you'd describe....what do they think of abortions? Why are abortions bad but not so bad that there is an exception?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:48 AM   #1736
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
That is not comparable to the position I described...which was abortions are murder and abortions are a medical procedure.

For someone with the position you'd describe....what do they think of abortions? Why are abortions bad but not so bad that there is an exception?
Nobody is taking your bait of "I'm an autistic alien robot, would you please explain all of human nature to me in a spreadsheet?"
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 06:56 AM   #1737
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
When someone's property has been damaged by circumstances beyond his control, it's reasonable to waive restrictions on corrective improvement.

/s, obviously. The real reason is it's there to punish women for being sluts, so the women they feel bad for punishing get exemptions. That's all there is to it. That's also why "the only moral abortion is my abortion" is such a common attitude among them.
I appreciate your spoiler tag. I can definitely see it. Does that have any moral implications to those on the pro choice allying with them and influencing them to shoot down abortion bans?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 07:21 AM   #1738
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 103,221
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Overturning Roe v Wade wouldn't stop someone like Gosnell anyway, they would just do so illegally on the q.t. for more money!
And probably less likely to be caught.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 07:48 AM   #1739
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,093
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Does it have a description?
Assuming you are asking in good faith I will describe as was described to me by a local NARAL organizer:

In the US you have about

Group A) 1/3 wanted free and unrestricted abortion rights
Group b) 1/3 want abortion banned

and

Group C) 1/3 want abortion available, but are either fine or indifferent with restrictions and conditions on abortions such as 24hr waiting, 12-15 week limits, parental notification, etc, etc.

(these numbers are not exact and are prone to change)

Group B initially went for full out attempts to ban, but this hit walls, so since the late 80's they have been using the tactic of legistlating restrictions on abortion. This was done with the effort of soothing group C that it really wasn't a big deal, scare tactics about "partial-birth abortions", claims that those slutty women are using abortion as birth control, and many other tactics. For the most part it was worked as Group C isn't as invested as Group A in fighting against 24 waiting periods.

However, Group C has a hard line and that is rape and incest. If a woman has sex and gets pregnant they can reason that she should have been better prepared, kept her legs shut, etc. But rape? What was she supposed to do? Ask their rapist to out on a condom? Ask them to wait while put in their diaphragm? That's a hard limit for even the skeeviest of Group C. So often Group B puts on the mask of "Oh! We would never restrict *those* abortions!" and so they usually add in some bit about allowing abortion in those cases as long as the patient files a full police report with 500 pages of documentation, etc. That mask sometimes convinces Group C sometimes does not.

The mask falls off a lot.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 07:51 AM   #1740
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
Also "Except in the case of rape" is largely a social compromise, it's not (all the time) a stance someone holds on a personal level.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:09 AM   #1741
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 18,954
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Quote:
But what goes into opposing abortion but thinking it should be legal for rape or incest? What is the philosophy behind that?
Society has, by and large, deemed rape and incest such heinous acts perpetrated on a woman, to thereafter force her by punishment of law to carry a resultant pregnancy to term might be considered excessive injury upon excessive injury.
Or, more likely: The forced-birthers want to end all abortions because they think women are chattel. But, they realize that they will have a harder time getting complete abortion bans in place, so they concede to allowing abortion in these limited circumstances.

Once you ban elective abortions, they can then go after the ones involving rape/incest.
- They can make the legal requirements so difficult that few abortions will qualify. (You want an abortion because you were raped? You need a sworn admission of guilt from the rapist, plus you have to wait until after the rapist has served their time.)
- Ending elective abortions will leave fewer clinics offering abortion services, and the doctors working at those clinics might be hesitant to perform the procedure in case they have to deal with an over-zealous prosecutor

Eventually we will be in a utopia where 10 year old rape victims will know the joy of being a mother before they become a teenager!
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:20 AM   #1742
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,206
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Could you be more specific?
I thought we learned years ago that Ziggy doesn't do the evidence thing for ridiculous claims he makes that we all know are false.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:22 AM   #1743
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,206
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Society has, by and large, deemed rape and incest such heinous acts perpetrated on a woman, to thereafter force her by punishment of law to carry a resultant pregnancy to term might be considered excessive injury upon excessive injury.
I agree with this assessment. Also, it also addresses the fact that the anti-abortion movement is about punishing women for having sex. This is further evidenced by the fact that the same movement is currently taking actions to ban contraception.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.

Last edited by thaiboxerken; 5th August 2022 at 08:25 AM.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:23 AM   #1744
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Assuming you are asking in good faith I will describe as was described to me by a local NARAL organizer:

In the US you have about

Group A) 1/3 wanted free and unrestricted abortion rights
Group b) 1/3 want abortion banned

and

Group C) 1/3 want abortion available, but are either fine or indifferent with restrictions and conditions on abortions such as 24hr waiting, 12-15 week limits, parental notification, etc, etc.

(these numbers are not exact and are prone to change)

Group B initially went for full out attempts to ban, but this hit walls, so since the late 80's they have been using the tactic of legistlating restrictions on abortion. This was done with the effort of soothing group C that it really wasn't a big deal, scare tactics about "partial-birth abortions", claims that those slutty women are using abortion as birth control, and many other tactics. For the most part it was worked as Group C isn't as invested as Group A in fighting against 24 waiting periods.

However, Group C has a hard line and that is rape and incest. If a woman has sex and gets pregnant they can reason that she should have been better prepared, kept her legs shut, etc. But rape? What was she supposed to do? Ask their rapist to out on a condom? Ask them to wait while put in their diaphragm? That's a hard limit for even the skeeviest of Group C. So often Group B puts on the mask of "Oh! We would never restrict *those* abortions!" and so they usually add in some bit about allowing abortion in those cases as long as the patient files a full police report with 500 pages of documentation, etc. That mask sometimes convinces Group C sometimes does not.

The mask falls off a lot.
Thank you for the reply

My question is along the lines of why does group C think that is appropriate. Group A thinks their position is correct because they view it as a woman's right and just a medical procedure, and it isn't murder. Group B thinks they are correct because they view it as murder.

Why does group C exist? What values do they hold? Is it a matter of this issue having low salience to them?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:43 AM   #1745
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,989
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Overturning Roe v Wade wouldn't stop someone like Gosnell anyway, they would just do so illegally on the q.t. for more money!
Overturning RvW does not in and of itself make abortion illegal, and only a few states have moved to do so. Most states will not. But yes, Gosnell wouldn't be stopped by abortion being illegal. Which has been used as one of the arguments in favor of legalizing abortion.

Are you under the mistaken impression that I'm arguing in favor of making abortion illegal? Because I'm not.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:49 AM   #1746
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,093
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Thank you for the reply

My question is along the lines of why does group C think that is appropriate. Group A thinks their position is correct because they view it as a woman's right and just a medical procedure, and it isn't murder. Group B thinks they are correct because they view it as murder.

Why does group C exist? What values do they hold? Is it a matter of this issue having low salience to them?
There's a host of reasons. Some think abortion shouldn't be easy and have no problem making it harder to obtain. Perhaps justifying it that we also limit some drugs to prescription only. Some, it just doesn't effect them directly so they don't care (until it does effect them). Some genuinely feel abortion is murder but forcing a woman to carry a child of rape is worse. You could find a million different reasonings among group C.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:52 AM   #1747
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,059
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
I thought we learned years ago that Ziggy doesn't do the evidence thing for ridiculous claims he makes that we all know are false.
Hitchens’ razor, then.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 08:58 AM   #1748
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 32,810
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
That is not comparable to the position I described...which was abortions are murder and abortions are a medical procedure.

For someone with the position you'd describe....what do they think of abortions? Why are abortions bad but not so bad that there is an exception?
Well, though I'm on the rights side here, I think I can imgine a position for the other side which translates more or less into "something is better than nothing." Persons who would like to ban all abortions might, in an actual real world, consider the possibility that allowing certain exceptions comes closer to achieving their goal than disallowing them and losing the whole fight. Besides, in the real world, it is not so uncommon to find that one's pet theories are alloyed with other ones, and two relatively incompatible ideas (e.g. the abhorrence of abortion and the abhorrence of rape) make purity impractical.

Lost causes can be noble, but the operative term here is "lost."

Pure theory is, of course, different, and it's quite right and reasonable to note the degree to which such exceptions violate it, but I think it is probably disingenuous to suggest that one cannot understand why actual people in an actual world might bend to the practical at the expense of the ideal.

I realize that your customary position would be to choose nothing over imperfection, but I believe that is a minority position in the real world.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 09:10 AM   #1749
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
Very few people share Bob's love of only embracing philosophies that are so pure they don't actually work.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 09:20 AM   #1750
BobTheCoward
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,512
Unhappy

Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Well, though I'm on the rights side here, I think I can imgine a position for the other side which translates more or less into "something is better than nothing." Persons who would like to ban all abortions might, in an actual real world, consider the possibility that allowing certain exceptions comes closer to achieving their goal than disallowing them and losing the whole fight.
In the case of the Kansas amendment, it would seem that those who oppose abortion wouldn't have to compromise. It seems there is some cores of people that favor restrictions on abortion, but want exceptions. It is those people I don't understand
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 09:30 AM   #1751
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,989
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Can you refer me to a single case in any of the five states that have no restrictions of a doctor performing an unnecessary third trimester abortion just because a woman wanted one? No. You can't. But don't let that stop you. No...wait....on second thought....
https://dupontclinic.com/services/ab...fter-26-weeks/
"If you are 26 weeks or later into your pregnancy, we can still see you, regardless of your medical history, background, or fetal indications. We do not require any particular “reason” to be seen here – if you would like to terminate your pregnancy, we support you in that decision."
They ADVERTISE this service (it's legal in DC, where they are located). Yet you want me to believe that nobody uses it? Why would nobody do it where it's legal, when we know people did it where it was illegal? Are you really that confused about how humans work?

But if you want an example of an actual specific person who got an elective third trimester abortion, I can provide that too:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1363/psrh.12190
This paper has several specific examples of people getting third trimester abortions. Some of them were medically necessary, but not all of them were. For example, several were pregnancies where the woman didn't know she was pregnant until after 24 weeks, but wanted an abortion for completely elective reasons. You may consider these cases justified. But justified or not, they are still absolutely third-trimester elective abortions.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 09:43 AM   #1752
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,989
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Where's your evidence for what they were and weren't being diagnosed by him for?
Read the god damn grand jury report. That wasn't his business, that wasn't what he did. People didn't go to him for other medical care. They went specifically for abortions. He didn't even have the equipment to diagnose anyone with anything.

Quote:
Your evidence for this is the same assumptions you've made, right? Because we've already established that you're under the assumption that Gosnell's patients had access to medical services and insurance and money to pay for those things that we know they didn't have.
Wait... are you under the impression that Gosnell was doing this for free? No. He was charging them, often quite a lot. They had money to get an abortion, or they couldn't have gotten one from Gosnell. What he did wasn't offer cheaper abortions (cheaper for the patients, that is), but abortions most doctors weren't willing to perform. And again, women were not going to Gosnell for other treatments. That wasn't what he did.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 10:26 AM   #1753
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,980
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Read the god damn grand jury report. That wasn't his business, that wasn't what he did. People didn't go to him for other medical care. They went specifically for abortions. He didn't even have the equipment to diagnose anyone with anything.
I did read it. It doesn't support your claims. That's why I'm asking you to do so.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Wait... are you under the impression that Gosnell was doing this for free? No. He was charging them, often quite a lot. They had money to get an abortion, or they couldn't have gotten one from Gosnell. What he did wasn't offer cheaper abortions (cheaper for the patients, that is), but abortions most doctors weren't willing to perform. And again, women were not going to Gosnell for other treatments. That wasn't what he did.
No, I am not under the impression that Gosnell was doing this for free. I know that he charged for abortions. The numbers I see quoted that he charged for abortions seem substantially lower than what insurance companies are charged, however. And because of the Hyde Amendment, Medicaid doesn't cover abortions at all no matter who you go to.

And in your zeal to claim all Gosnell did was elective late term abortions all the time, you seem to forget that it was his narcotic prescription business that caught the attention of authorites.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 10:50 AM   #1754
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,205
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
Facts are stubborn things.
Of course this "fact" is irrelevant to the various attempts by USAian Republicans to force a ten-year-old girl to risk her life by denying her access to date and legal termination.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 12:54 PM   #1755
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
https://dupontclinic.com/services/ab...fter-26-weeks/
"If you are 26 weeks or later into your pregnancy, we can still see you, regardless of your medical history, background, or fetal indications. We do not require any particular “reason” to be seen here – if you would like to terminate your pregnancy, we support you in that decision."
They ADVERTISE this service (it's legal in DC, where they are located). Yet you want me to believe that nobody uses it? Why would nobody do it where it's legal, when we know people did it where it was illegal? Are you really that confused about how humans work?
Week 28 (*see below) starts the third trimester, not week 26. Also they said no reason is necessary "to be seen"...to get an appointment..., not that they'll provide an abortion at any week of gestation regardless of the health and viability of the fetus.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
But if you want an example of an actual specific person who got an elective third trimester abortion, I can provide that too:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1363/psrh.12190
This paper has several specific examples of people getting third trimester abortions. Some of them were medically necessary, but not all of them were. For example, several were pregnancies where the woman didn't know she was pregnant until after 24 weeks, but wanted an abortion for completely elective reasons. You may consider these cases justified. But justified or not, they are still absolutely third-trimester elective abortions.
Actually, they are not "third-trimester elective abortions."
Why the article erroneously describes these as 'third trimester', I don't know.

*MOST sources cite the third trimester as weeks 28-40 while a few cite weeks 27-40. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists define it as "Third trimester (28 weeks and 0 days to 40 weeks and 6 days)". However, both the cases in the article of non-fetal abnormalities abortions were still late second trimester by either definition.

All cases profiled in the article were due to fetal abnormalities except the two following:

Autumn who only found out she was pregnant at 26 weeks and had an abortion. That is two weeks BEFORE the third trimester begins.

Veronica was 25 weeks pregnant, three weeks BEFORE the third trimester begins.

Therefore, your claim in not correct.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 12:55 PM   #1756
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 40,784
If I had goddamn genie I would wish that being wrong wore people out as much as arguing with them does.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 01:37 PM   #1757
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 33,059
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Read the god damn grand jury report. That wasn't his business, that wasn't what he did. People didn't go to him for other medical care. They went specifically for abortions. He didn't even have the equipment to diagnose anyone with anything.
He also forced people to have abortions who didn't want them, which speaks to his motives. In order to be an elective late-term abortion, you have to know their motives, regardless of whether Gosnell told them the truth about their condition at the time or not. Context wouldn't hurt, either.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 03:24 PM   #1758
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,101
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
In the case of the Kansas amendment, it would seem that those who oppose abortion wouldn't have to compromise. It seems there is some cores of people that favor restrictions on abortion, but want exceptions. It is those people I don't understand
Huh, makes perfect sense to me...I was raised pro-life but I am now firmly in camp 'A'

For me, my time in that camp was based basically on an innate understanding that there is a range of decisions and not all black and white. So the exceptions in case of rape or incest were pretty much the same as the exceptions for when life of woman was at risk--She has the superior right to life since she is already an adult. Forcing her to carry a child and give birth after rape effectively ends her life--destroys her psychologically (and in fact can lead to suicide). There is still a belief that the unborn's life is worth protecting, but an understanding that not all cases are equal and sometimes the mother takes priority as basically a right to self defense (another traditional conservative doctrine).
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 04:16 PM   #1759
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by stanfr View Post
Huh, makes perfect sense to me...I was raised pro-life but I am now firmly in camp 'A'

For me, my time in that camp was based basically on an innate understanding that there is a range of decisions and not all black and white. So the exceptions in case of rape or incest were pretty much the same as the exceptions for when life of woman was at risk--She has the superior right to life since she is already an adult. Forcing her to carry a child and give birth after rape effectively ends her life--destroys her psychologically (and in fact can lead to suicide). There is still a belief that the unborn's life is worth protecting, but an understanding that not all cases are equal and sometimes the mother takes priority as basically a right to self defense (another traditional conservative doctrine).
That seems like rationalizing to me. Why is the child of a rape any less a child deserving of life than one not conceived in rape? A woman can be just as destroyed psychologically by being forced to give birth and then have to give it up for adoption because she cannot care for it. She will have to live the rest of her life knowing she has a child somewhere and agonize over not knowing if it was adopted by a loving or abusive person or if it's even alive.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2022, 05:28 PM   #1760
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19,079
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
That seems like rationalizing to me. Why is the child of a rape any less a child deserving of life than one not conceived in rape? A woman can be just as destroyed psychologically by being forced to give birth and then have to give it up for adoption because she cannot care for it. She will have to live the rest of her life knowing she has a child somewhere and agonize over not knowing if it was adopted by a loving or abusive person or if it's even alive.
Yes whereas when she has an abortion she doesn't have to worry about that.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.