The Coming Civil War Over Abortion

[Andrew]

The trouble with trying to correlate politics with education is that there are so many contaminating factors. People who live in cities tend to favor more liberal politics while those who live in rural areas tend to favor conservative politics. This could be down to little more than cities being ideal candidates for things like public services, which have to be paid for through taxes. City dwellers are more likely to support funding public services through taxation whereas those in more rural areas are less likely to support it, simply because it offers little to no benefit. Why would a country dweller want to pay more in tax to support better fire services in the city, only to then have to pay again to support their local volunteer fire service? And of course cities tend to draw the more educated because that's where jobs tend to be created.

We are certainly getting more polarised. I think social media is largely to blame for this, with the growth in "discussion by meme" and trying to reduce complex issues to memes and soundbites. Abortion is a classic example here - much as I instinctively dislike the thought of medically terminating a pregnancy I can see situations in which it becomes more acceptable. If the mother's life is in danger (as in real medical danger, not simply a claim of being unable to cope with a child right now) then it makes sense. I can understand making it more readily available if a woman is raped. Using it as little more than a last line of contraception creates all sorts of moral problems, not least because the issue of exactly when that thing in the womb counts as a human is a honking great can of worms.

Put simply if life begins at conception then logically an IUD must be considered a murder weapon. If life begins at birth then abortion is morally equivalent to having one's tonsils removed. If life begins some time before birth then abortion after that time must be considered to be homicide. Once abortion is classed as homicide then some pretty strong reasons are required to justify it, just like you need some pretty solid justification to use deadly force against any human.

I agree about the meme trend, it's the new form of picketing and just as there are confrontations during picketing, the same goes for social media.
The left are pros at this, the 2 seconds it takes to share a meme they believe it gets a point across, I try not to get involved but if I were to pass by a protest it's hard to try and look away. I don't know how many times a day I see a "my body my choice" meme posted over and over again... bleh

 

[Josiah]

I don't have enough time to develop this, but quickly......


Until the 1960's, there was SOME sense sexual intercourse had some responsibilities (and potential consequences) associated with it. It was understood as related to reproduction; reproductive organs were being employed. Yes, often this 'responsbility' was placed solely on the female (which I decry) and thus the whole social "good girl" "bad boy" concepts. But people had SOME concept that this had responsibilities ... and consequences.


Before my time, but then came the 1960's. Three things happen in tandom and they were symbonic. 1) Women's Liberation (woman and men can/should act/feel the same, etc.), 2) "Free love" (sex removed from marriage, dating or even relationships; need not know their name), 3) "The pill" (which made sex void of responsibility and the consequence of a baby something that could be avoided). They all worked together. Abortion came to be accepted and legal in many US States - THE most liberal abortion laws in the world - my state in 1966 (signed by Ronald Reagan, a point a lot of Republicans don't know), this was made national in 1973.


When I was post-puberty (I turned 13 in 2001), sex was something ASSUMED for all who consdered themselves "Old enough." That was the rule, one had to be "old enough." Now, I never met a male at the time over the age of 12 who did not consider himself "old enough.' Even conservatives bought this (the squeekly clean "Home Improvement" has an ep when the oldest boy - in high school - mentions his "sex life" and while the mom's mouth drops open, NOTHING is said, she acknowledges he is "old enough."). BUT, if one CHOSE to not have sex, that was generally respected (at least for girls, boys might be considered guy).


But I'm 31 now. I know LOTS of unmarried guys and girls in their 20's and 30's. And all that has changed. Sex with NO STINGS, no responsbilities, no connection to reproduction is not only assumed and considered "normal" but promoted as necessary. Why date someone a second time if they are no good in bed? It's considered STUPID to propose to someone you have not lived with and had lots of sex with. It's the culture. It's moved a lot in my lifetime, and light years in my father's lifetime.


And while all accept that RESPONSBILE use of birth control empowers all this..... and there's the morning after pill for those "I didn't plan to do this" moments (free at any school clinic even at elementary schools in California, at at any hospital for free) ... still, sometimes someone is too irresponsbile for any of this. And so there is the fallback plan: Abortion.


THAT"S what keeps abortion going. And the alliance of the abortion industry and a lot of Women's Liber'ers from the 1960's now running the Democrat Party, is why we have the most radical, liberal abortion laws in the world (well, along with North Korea). One Democrat even said that Abortion should be legal AFTER the child is born. We want to protect those 3 "revolutions" of the 1960's, keep the hippy movement going. Yeah, it MIGHT be true guys have a bigger vested interest in eliminating all connections between sex and responsibility but I'm not too sure about that. Irresponsibility is what drives empowering irresponsibility - even if the action is 9 or 10 months later. After all, killing someone to avoid being responsible is a constitutional right?

As my Dad once said, "People want to PLAY like adults but avoid BEING adults." The older I get, the wiser he gets.



.

 

[hedrick]

I have issues with many of the same things you do. But prohibiting abortion is unlikely to fix it.

 

[hedrick]

I don't have enough time to develop this, but quickly......


Until the 1960's, there was SOME sense sexual intercourse had some responsibilities (and potential consequences) associated with it. It was understood as related to reproduction; reproductive organs were being employed. Yes, often this 'responsbility' was placed solely on the female (which I decry) and thus the whole social "good girl" "bad boy" concepts. But people had SOME concept that this had responsibilities ... and consequences.
.

I saw an interesting study on sexual attitudes today and in colonial times. It was long enough ago that I've lost the citation. Their conclusion was that contraception caused the change. In the old days there was just as much pre-marital intercourse, but if you had a child, the father had to take responsibility. With birth control they conjecture that guys think the baby is the mother's problem.

For better or worse, it's nearly impossible to just go back. Outlawing technology is very unlikely to work. Similarly, I think outlawing abortion is unlikely to fix this. (Indeed it will probably make the situation worse, as there will be more children without proper parents.) People do need to take responsibility for children. I think, however, that legislating a return to the 18th Cent is going to fail.

Probably a good place to start is things that really do reduce unwanted births, such as sex education, and support for single mothers, so that having a kid doesn't ruin her life. I don't think that's the only thing. I just don't have good proposals right now.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It is possible to let individuals decide for themselves if they want to have a baby or not - which is effectively how things are now. Laws prohibiting abortions will probably mean women who can afford it will go to a neighbouring state or country to receive an abortion. Poor women will be the ones who have the unwanted child and be unable to take care of the child and possibly give it up to others to care for. That was how things went in the 1940s and 1950s and probably for many decades before too.

 

[Andrew]

Is the issue that they are reprobates?
We are told in the bible that if one continues to sin let them, we are also told that the body is the temple, so this whole argument "my body my choice" is obvious that they don't understand because they are reprobates... maybe we should wash our hands of this whole mess, are we to be libertarians then? hmmmm...

 

[Arsenios]

There are no more powerful abortifacients in the world than poverty and ignorance.

The poor and the ignorant are the most prolific...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

We need to become a Christian culture...

A spouse is not a living and handy sex toy...

A child in its mother's womb is not its mother's body...

Men and women are about marriage and children...

The abortion ideological fight is being won by the pro-Life folks...

Those womb pictures are winning it for them...

As they should...

Abortion is the blood sacrifice of the altar of pleasure...


Arsenios

 

[Albion]

We need to become a Christian culture...

A spouse is not a living and handy sex toy...

A child in its mother's womb is not its mother's body...

Men and women are about marriage and children...

The abortion ideological fight is being won by the pro-Life folks...

Those womb pictures are winning it for them...

As they should...

Abortion is the blood sacrifice of the altar of pleasure...


Arsenios

Not pleasure only.

Remember what Karl Marx said was necessary for his system to triumph: destroy personal rights, religion, AND THE FAMILY.

 

[Josiah]

It is possible to let individuals decide for themselves if they want to have a baby or not - which is effectively how things are now.

Interesting to see you going so strongly against the infallible Catholic Church which cannot err in matters of faith and morals, Catholics are mandated to profess and agree.


I would argue that ANYONE by the very act of consentual sex, IS by that very consensus, agreeing to have and be responsible for a child.

prohibiting abortions will probably mean women who can afford it will go to a neighbouring state or country to receive an abortion.

... which is why I stated that simply changing the law won't change the situation much, why I said this is a MORAL issue more than a legal/political one.

Of course, prohibiting wife beating doesn't mean that ergo one who can do it simply won't. Does that mean that therefore wife beating is good and acceptable and should be legal?





.

 

[tango]

I saw an interesting study on sexual attitudes today and in colonial times. It was long enough ago that I've lost the citation. Their conclusion was that contraception caused the change. In the old days there was just as much pre-marital intercourse, but if you had a child, the father had to take responsibility. With birth control they conjecture that guys think the baby is the mother's problem.

For better or worse, it's nearly impossible to just go back. Outlawing technology is very unlikely to work. Similarly, I think outlawing abortion is unlikely to fix this. (Indeed it will probably make the situation worse, as there will be more children without proper parents.) People do need to take responsibility for children. I think, however, that legislating a return to the 18th Cent is going to fail.

Probably a good place to start is things that really do reduce unwanted births, such as sex education, and support for single mothers, so that having a kid doesn't ruin her life. I don't think that's the only thing. I just don't have good proposals right now.

The thing is, biologically speaking the man can just walk away. One might argue that purely from the perspective of perpetuating the species nature doesn't need him any more. The mother is the one who carries the pregnancy, and therefore the mother is the one who needs to decide whether she believes the man will stay around to help raise any children that might result from their dalliance. Abortion does little to help with this, if it's regarded as little more than the last line of contraception. If a guy gets a girl pregnant all he has to do is say sorry and pay for the abortion. Maybe even go to the clinic with her. Simples.

A system that does nothing other than promote abstinence is unlikely to be successful given the combined sex drives of a generation of teenagers. But there is a lot to be said for the simple strategy of keeping your pants on - it's a remarkably effective form of birth control.

From what I recall a number of young mothers think that having a baby will validate them in some way. I gather there are robotic babies that teenage girls are encouraged to take home - it works pretty much like a real baby except for the fact it isn't an actual living thing. It cries, it needs feeding, it needs to be changed and so on. They seem to be quite effective at teaching teenage girls that having a baby is actually a really big commitment, far beyond a simple fashion accessory that people will coo over.

 

[tango]

I agree about the meme trend, it's the new form of picketing and just as there are confrontations during picketing, the same goes for social media.
The left are pros at this, the 2 seconds it takes to share a meme they believe it gets a point across, I try not to get involved but if I were to pass by a protest it's hard to try and look away. I don't know how many times a day I see a "my body my choice" meme posted over and over again... bleh

"My body my choice" is all well and good, except for the fact that a baby's body is also involved in the process.

I think a lot of social media posturing is little more than virtue signalling. You know, why do anything useful when you can just post on Facebook to let everybody know that you're on the correct side of an issue.

 

[Arsenios]

It is possible to let individuals decide for themselves if they want to have a baby or not - which is effectively how things are now. Laws prohibiting abortions will probably mean women who can afford it will go to a neighbouring state or country to receive an abortion. Poor women will be the ones who have the unwanted child and be unable to take care of the child and possibly give it up to others to care for. That was how things went in the 1940s and 1950s and probably for many decades before too.

We need to make adoptions not cost $25,000, and support women going to term with an unwanted child and getting it good home...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Not pleasure only.

Remember what Karl Marx said was necessary for his system to triumph: destroy personal rights, religion, AND THE FAMILY.

Yup...

Arsenios

 

[Josiah]

I saw an interesting study on sexual attitudes today and in colonial times. It was long enough ago that I've lost the citation. Their conclusion was that contraception caused the change. In the old days there was just as much pre-marital intercourse, but if you had a child, the father had to take responsibility. With birth control they conjecture that guys think the baby is the mother's problem.

For better or worse, it's nearly impossible to just go back. Outlawing technology is very unlikely to work. Similarly, I think outlawing abortion is unlikely to fix this. (Indeed it will probably make the situation worse, as there will be more children without proper parents.) People do need to take responsibility for children. I think, however, that legislating a return to the 18th Cent is going to fail.

Probably a good place to start is things that really do reduce unwanted births, such as sex education, and support for single mothers, so that having a kid doesn't ruin her life. I don't think that's the only thing. I just don't have good proposals right now.

AGAIN, I agree that ONLY changing a law will solve little. I'm in favor of changing the law (for the same reasons I approve of ending the laws permitting racial segregation) but laws don't change hearts and have limited impact on behavior.

What I DO think eliminating abortion as a fallback plan WILL do is make people think more about birth control measures. In my state, they are available - FREE - at every public elementary, middle and high school, at every college (in the health clinic at my college, there was a big box of condoms outside the main door and guys would told to take a hand full). The "morning after"pill is available free at every college and every hospital for those who didn't PLAN on having sex but well, being rabbits.... So why abortion? Because it takes some responsibility to use birth control.... or to get that free morning after pill.... and hey, maybe she doesn't get around to doing anything until the 8th month. THAT'S what abortion is for. But if that option ISN"T so easy and free, maybe the guy might consider one of those 'covers' and not insist on refusing that? MAYBE? I know, it's a LOT - too much maybe - to ask adults to be ... well... adults as they do an adult thing? Yeah. Probably. THERE'S the problem. Answer: Government do all it can to empower, legalize and pay to make irresponsibility possible.

I wonder if those libs would support the same philosophy with guns? After all, there are 100 times more killings via abortion than guns. Why not empower irresponsibility with guns? Why not legalize and pay for guns since irresponsible people will use a gun anyway and it would do no good to tell people they should be responsible with guns?



.

 

[tango]

We need to make adoptions not cost $25,000, and support women going to term with an unwanted child and getting it good home...

Arsenios

Very true. I have friends who are desperate to adopt. They moved into a house that's easily big enough for them and a child but apparently the bathroom isn't quite good enough. Of course if they were able to have a child naturally this wouldn't be a concern but apparently it's better for a child to spend more time in the system than to be placed with adoptive parents whose love is inadequate because their bathroom is marginally below par.

 

[tango]

AGAIN, I agree that ONLY changing a law will solve little. I'm in favor of changing the law (for the same reasons I approve of ending the laws permitting racial segregation) but laws don't change hearts and have limited impact on behavior.

What I DO think eliminating abortion as a fallback plan WILL do is make people think more about birth control measures. In my state, they are available - FREE - at every public elementary, middle and high school, at every college (in the health clinic at my college, there was a big box of condoms outside the main door and guys would told to take a hand full). The "morning after"pill is available free at every college and every hospital for those who didn't PLAN on having sex but well, being rabbits.... So why abortion? Because it takes some responsibility to use birth control.... or to get that free morning after pill.... and hey, maybe she doesn't get around to doing anything until the 8th month. THAT'S what abortion is for. But if that option ISN"T so easy and free, maybe the guy might consider one of those 'covers' and not insist on refusing that? MAYBE? I know, it's a LOT - too much maybe - to ask adults to be ... well... adults as they do an adult thing? Yeah. Probably. THERE'S the problem. Answer: Government do all it can to empower, legalize and pay to make irresponsibility possible.

I wonder if those libs would support the same philosophy with guns? After all, FAR fewer are killed with guns than with abortion.

.

Indeed, it seems women are so empowered they are little more than the horndogs who are incapable of saying no. Granted, there are times when they are overpowered or drugged and don't consent to being violated - but those cases are a minority.

Ultimately it seems to be about not wanting to take responsibility, and decrying attempts to expect people to take responsibility as "victim blaming". You know, you went out and drank yourself into a stupor and ended up in bed next to a stranger. Answer - don't drink so much. Take responsibility. It seems that if somebody does something irresponsible and the outcome relates to sex then nobody is allowed to "victim blame" but you can be sure that the person who leaves the keys in their Corvette while they go shopping and comes back to find they no longer have a 'vette can be safely criticised for making it easy for the thief, and the person who draws $5,000 in cash from the bank and walks down the street counting it will be described with variations of "foolish" if someone snatches it and runs.

 

[Josiah]

When I was a teen, I worked for a "abortion alternative center". My parents supported this ministry financial (I did too at times, with money I earned mowing lawns). I wanted to volunteer there.

It was a non-profit run entirely by volunteers (mostly Catholics and LDS). Some were trained to be counselors to those who came in. Some to be speakers at churches, etc. Some of us (well, the guys) were hidden in the back, working the store room, doing office work, etc. I often worked with a man delivering furnature, refrigerators, etc. And lots of envelope stuffing. They did not want a teen BOY to be seen or to in any way interfere with the women (some no older than me) they were trying to help.

Because as the name suggested, these were mothers who didn't WANT an abortion. Typically, they were being PRESSURED - HARD - by their parents, the boyfriend/father/husband, sometimes they had an appointment for an abortion ... and showed up at our office instead, crying. Almost always, they were alone. Occasionally, a (girl) friend came with them. We existed for them. Sometimes, a counselor would need to drive them home and be with them as they pleaded with their parents or the father. Occasionally, this meeting had to be arranged at the police station. We saw these moms often. We existed for them.

There are actually a LOT of resourses available. Yes, the uber-liberal People's Republic of California has abortion as a Sacrament and believes that people are rabbits and this is to be encouraged, BUT it's also a welfare state. LOTS of resources exists. AND we supplied them with whatever the State would not: furnature, help with rents, jobs..... we even has a big storeroom full of diapers, clothing, baby formula, LOTS of it (I sometimes worked the storeroom).

Yes, we could connect them to adoption agencies. There are many. And YES, adoption has been made VERY difficult and VERY expensive. It's absurd. The State seems to be at war with the idea. This is a huge problem and it needs to be addressed.

I was young. I was impressionable. Usually, the office was empty.... and I spent a lot of time talking (TOO FRANKLY) with those counselors. Told the stories. Told about RESPONSIBILITY. Told about sex.... and vulnerablity.... and self esteem... and OTHER consequences. I was 14, 15, 16.... And I had a dad who taught me what it means to be a MAN. And he modeled it. And that too was powerful - very powerful. Together.... that's how I became passionate about these things.




.

 

[Arsenios]

What I DO think eliminating abortion as a fallback plan WILL do is make people think more about birth control measures. In my state, they are available - FREE - at every public elementary, middle and high school, at every college (in the health clinic at my college, there was a big box of condoms outside the main door and guys would told to take a hand full). The "morning after"pill is available free at every college and every hospital for those who didn't PLAN on having sex but well, being rabbits.... So why abortion? Because it takes some responsibility to use birth control.... or to get that free morning after pill.... and hey, maybe she doesn't get around to doing anything until the 8th month. THAT'S what abortion is for. But if that option ISN"T so easy and free, maybe the guy might consider one of those 'covers' and not insist on refusing that? MAYBE? I know, it's a LOT - too much maybe - to ask adults to be ... well... adults as they do an adult thing? Yeah. Probably. THERE'S the problem. Answer: Government do all it can to empower, legalize and pay to make irresponsibility possible.
.

The hearts and minds matters need God...

Opting for sexual encounters without responsibility is a real error...

We need to learn to see each other as parents, not sex toys...

As to the latter, I saw the concert, bought the t-shirt, and have burned it...

At great cost...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

"My body my choice" is all well and good, except for the fact that a baby's body is also involved in the process.

I think a lot of social media posturing is little more than virtue signalling. You know, why do anything useful when you can just post on Facebook to let everybody know that you're on the correct side of an issue.

Her unborn child is not her body...

That person is IN her body...

Killing that person is disastrous for the well being its mother...


Arsenios