Stanek weekend Q: What should a “pro-choice display” include?
University of Texas-Arlington pro-abortion students have tried shutting down the Pro-Life Mavericks’ cross display with both petitions and vandalism, but to no avail.
They’ve now decided if they can’t beat ’em, they’ll join ’em. From The Shorthorn, March 21:
The Society for Social Justice for Women and Families will join in on the conversation about pro-choice versus pro-life on Monday, society President Prashant Hariharan said.
“We wanted to voice the pro-choice view through statistics,” Hariharan said….
Jenny Nguyen, president of Students for a Democratic Society, said she stood out in the rain with some members Friday to protest the display with a petition to ask the Pro-Life Mavericks to seize any future antiabortion displays.
“It’s not that we’re against people saying what’s on their mind, it’s just we think there’s a better way to for them to do so,” English junior Cody Needham said….
The [pro-abortion] display will include posters with infographics and links to online resources that students can easily view as they pass by.
I always love how crosses drive abortion supporters to madness. The irony is too rich.
The pro-choice students will be using “statistics” and “infographics” to gather support. Anything to take the attention off the baby.
But an honest abortion supporter would hold a photo of a victim of abortion with the caption, “Choose This!”
What else would honest abortion supporters include in their displays?
[Top photo via Pro-Life Mavericks; bottom photo via theshorthorn.com]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Hi! prozac
“It’s not that we’re against people saying what’s on their mind, it’s just we think there’s a better way to for them to do so,” English junior Cody Needham said….
I wonder what Cody would suggest? My guess is that it would be something placed so that no one would ever see or hear it.
For the pro-choice display, it’s hard to top the “Choose This” suggestion. It’s simple, direct and honest, which means it’s also least likely to be part of their actual display.
It saddens me how little regard some people have for free speech.
They say that the best educational displays are hands-on, interactive, and engage all the senses.
Somehow, I don’t think the pro-abortion types will go all that far. They might show a picture of a suction machine, but they’ll never let you hear the sound of its operation.
Too many memories.
If they really had the courage of their conviction, they’d emulate their “provider heroes” like Gosnell and have trophy displays.
For the older but still vulnerable victims that would be scalps.
“Hi! prozac”
Hi. How’s it going?
I’m sure they’ll have the standard hangers. Maybe they’ll have a dancing vagina to go along with their display.
But an honest abortion supporter would hold a photo of a victim of abortion with the caption, “Choose This!” – and an honest anti-choicer would hold a photo of someone such as Gerri Santoro with the caption “Choose This”.
Reality,
Do you have any clue what you’re talking about when it comes to Gerri Santoro? Is a woman aborting in fear of an abusive husband your idea of “choice”?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerri_Santoro
No, women being able to choose a procedure that is safe and legal is my idea of choice. How about you?
You’re the one who brought up Geri Santoro.
If this woman so desperately wanted an abortion, why did she wait 6-1/2 months?
So the problem isn’t the abusive husband, the problem is the lack of safe access for the woman forced to abort. Is that what you’re arguing Reality?
If abortion had been legal the photo wouldn’t exist.
Reality,
So you support women being forced to abort to protect themselves from abuse.
No.
Whatever Gerri’s reason for choosing an abortion, it was the illegality of abortion that caused her death.
No Reality,
It was the fear for her life that drove her to such a desperate act. Maybe you should be asking why the woman had to fear for her life? Wasn’t the law there to protect her?
Do you know for a fact she did not very much want this baby?
It was the fear for her life that drove her to such a desperate act. – was it? And how do you know that?
Do you know for a fact she did not very much want this baby? – no, do you? The fact is that she died because abortion was illegal.
The question is, why did she need to fear for her life because of her husbands impending visit?
Could it be because women were afforded about as much protection from domestic violence as they were in making their own reproductive choices.
No Reality–what we’d show is a picture of a LIVE, healthy Geri holding her newborn son and say “Choose this!!!”
I never want women to choose abortion–whether legal or illegal!
Well Reality–whatever their reasons for choosing abortion it was LEGAL abortion that caused the deaths of Tanya Reaves and Laura Hope Smith and Jennifer Morbelli and Holly Patterson. And there are many many more.
Reality,
Check the source. Her abusive husband was paying a visit. It says she feared for her life.
Well she waited 6 1/2 months to have this abortion. Why so long? If she was so desperate, why not induce earlier? Why did this abortion coincide with her husband’s visit? Maybe his visit was the reason for the abortion?
No Reality, she died committing a desperate act in fear of her life.
“The question is why did she need to fear for her life because of her husband’s impending visit?”
Bingo! So you acknowledge that it was lack of legal protection from her abusive husband that motivated her and that was the real issue here.
I never want women to choose abortion–whether legal or illegal! – they always have and they always will.
And there are many many more. – and yet abortion is still safer than live birth.
Check the source. Her abusive husband was paying a visit. It says she feared for her life. – it does indeed. And then, in a separate sentence, it says she chose to abort. The two sentences aren’t linked by the word ‘so’.
Well she waited 6 1/2 months to have this abortion. Why so long? If she was so desperate, why not induce earlier? – who knows. Maybe she didn’t consider the impacts until she was clearly showing.
Why did this abortion coincide with her husband’s visit? Maybe his visit was the reason for the abortion? – maybe, maybe not.
No Reality, she died committing a desperate act in fear of her life. – make up your mind. You don’t know.
Whatever her reason for choosing to abort, she died because it was illegal. That’s it.
Bingo! – you might want to check your numbers before making that call :-)
So you acknowledge that it was lack of legal protection from her abusive husband that motivated her and that was the real issue here. – no, I said nothing of the sort. The question is relevant unto itself, abortion or not.
About women choosing abortion Reality said “they always have and always will” um wrong! Some have and some will! Not all! You’re forgetting I’M pregnant and did NOT choose abortion. And I know a TON of women who did NOT choose abortion. In fact, there are some on this very blog besides myself. That generalization is extremely insulting, Reality.
Don’t get distraught MIT. I’m well aware that not all women would choose an abortion. But women, albeit not necessarily each and every one of them, have always sought access to abortion and always will. ‘Always’ was meant in historical context, not in each individual’s case.
What about the children, Reality?
Any honest remarks about abortion need to address the reality of the children.
“MY CHILD. MY CHOICE.” — might be an honest slogan. It is not her “body” or even her “vagina” that matters. It is the child who is aborted.
“I DON’T CARE. I WON’T CARE. NEITHER SHOULD YOU!” — The mother refuses to care for the life of her child. She is ashamed because others care for her child more than she does.
“I CHOOSE. YOU PAY.” — an honest slogan for those who demand taxpayer/insurance funding for their abortions.
Reality,
Face it Reality, you got caught on this one. She doesn’t fit the template of the woman desperate to abort because she didn’t want the child, she is instead forced to out of fear for her life. This is stated in the source and you can offer no source to the contrary.
Women can live in terror of violence and abuse, but as far as you’re concerned if abortion is legal then there is no problem.
Reality–that lie “abortion is safer than childbirth” has been proven false over and over. If you look at percentages abortion is fraught with more danger than childbirth.
Having my child emerge NATURALLY and alive from my body is way safer than having sharp instruments thrust blindly into my womb after my cervix has been forced open.
It is not her “body” or even her “vagina” that matters – and there we have it. Her body, her mind, her life, don’t matter when there’s a fetus involved, right?
She is ashamed because others care for her child more than she does. – no she isn’t.
an honest slogan for those who demand taxpayer/insurance funding for their abortions. – we all pay for things we don’t agree with. Shall we start a list?
Face it Mary, your desires don’t translate into reality. Whose template? Yours?
This is stated in the source and you can offer no source to the contrary. – not as clearly as you would like us to believe.
It was dreadful if fear of her husband was the reason she chose to abort. As I said previously, the question is, why did she need to fear for her life? Was it that the mindset which failed to protect women from domestic violence also prevented them being able to make their own reproductive choices?
Women can live in terror of violence and abuse, but as far as you’re concerned if abortion is legal then there is no problem. – again I need to inform you that you have drawn the wrong conclusion, I alluded to no such concept.
The real issue is that abortion was illegal. And because of that, she died. If she had decided to abort because she thought there’d be too much social opprobrium from being single and pregnant or she simply didn’t want another child or she couldn’t afford one, she would have died. If abortion had been legal, she wouldn’t have. Domestic violence might have been the reason she aborted, but it was the illegality of abortion that killed her.
Reality–that lie “abortion is safer than childbirth” has been proven false over and over. If you look at percentages abortion is fraught with more danger than childbirth. – where? When? Can you show me the data? All the data I’ve ever seen demonstrates that abortion is significantly safer than live birth. No one has produced valid data which demonstrates what you claim to any extent.
Having my child emerge NATURALLY and alive from my body is way safer than having sharp instruments thrust blindly into my womb after my cervix has been forced open. – and when childbirth doesn’t happen ‘naturally’? When even ‘natural’ childbirth causes tears, bleeding etc.? Risks with the pregnancy itself? Blindly?
Reality,
Better luck next time. Hopefully you can do better than exploit the personal tragedy of a woman who died over 50 years ago trying to save herself from an abusive husband.
Better luck next time. – thanks, it is still a struggle to assist you to comprehend things accurately and not substitute your own version of events. I’ll keep trying though.
Hopefully you can do better than exploit the personal tragedy of a woman who died over 50 years ago trying to save herself from an abusive husband. – see, you’ve done it again – two conceptual errors don’t make one correct concept Mary. The facts are that she died because abortion was illegal, end of story. And there was little protection from domestic violence available due to the same mindset that saw women denied their reproductive rights.
Reality,
Better luck next time.
I’ve already said thanks, what more do you want? I’m not going to accede to your inaccuracies just to appease you.
Sure Reality,
Anything you say. I understand that presenting a source with the facts on the situation only generates a lot of confusion for you.
I understand that presenting a source with the facts on the situation only generates a lot of confusion for you. – actually it seems that presenting a factual source generates confusion in you.
You provided a source, I used that. Is that not allowed? What did you glean from it, that Gerri didn’t die from an abortion? Or that it wasn’t illegal at that time? Which is it? You appear confused in what you are trying to claim.
Reality,
The very straightforward facts of this situation sure seem to be causing you a great deal of confusion.
That she died from an abortion? Because abortion was illegal? Again, I need to ask, do you not think that is what occurred? Why? What’s so confusing for you about it all?
Whatever you say Reality, whatever you say.
It’s not what I say Mary. It’s your inability – or unwillingness – to answer a straight forward question based on a source that you provided that says it all really.
Reality,
Goodness its only getting worse. We understand Reality, we really do. You are among friends.
In response to the question, maybe they can make some catchy slogans for the display, like “We don’t want to do the hard work of making our culture a place that values mothers and works hard to ensure that women don’t face social and economic punishments for choosing to raise their children, so we offer them abortion”. And maybe some comparison statistics of our parental leave laws to other developed countries (companies have to offer parental leave in the US, but none of it has to be paid, paid parental leave is correlated, along with other pro-parent policies, with low abortion rates and gender equity in the workforce). Round it off with comparisons of Ireland (abortion illegal, low maternal and infant mortality rate) to other countries where it is illegal with little to no social safety nets and workplace protections (high illegal abortion rates and high maternal and infant mortality). Get some snazzy graphs on there.
“It was dreadful if fear of her husband was the reason she chose to abort. As I said previously, the question is, why did she need to fear for her life? Was it that the mindset which failed to protect women from domestic violence also prevented them being able to make their own reproductive choices?”
Not just women, anyone in violent situations then faced little to no support or protection. Which is why I think it’s ridiculous to compare modern day to them. There are literally millions of women’s shelters, financial programs, childcare help, legal help, etc to help women in these situations. Compared to the sixties it’s like a completely different world. Not saying it’s perfect now, but it’s certainly much improved.
Goodness its only getting worse. – I’ve noticed. This is the second time you’ve tried to deny your own sources!
We understand Reality, we really do. – some may, evidently you don’t. It’s not a hard question at all. Why the struggle?
You are among friends. – you’ve conducted a survey to determine that have you? :-)
Hi DLPL,
Indeed it is a different. and in may ways better, world. Hopefully the PAs will have the decency to let that poor woman and her family be at peace.
Sadly the case of Rae Carruth, who had his pregnant girlfriend gunned down by his goons, after she refused to have an abortion, shows that some things never change.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rae_Carruth
http://lubbockonline.com/stories/112100/pro_112100068.shtml#.VRDGlvnF8ik
Reality,
Whatever you say.
You’re still having trouble. I’ve already said that it’s not what I say, it’s what you’ve said. It speaks for itself.
While domestic violence is still a scourge LDPL, things do seem somewhat better than it was when I was growing up in the late 50’s and 60’s. It wasn’t spoken of. Everyone knew who the perpetrators were but nothing was done. The general attitude was that it was a wife’s duty to be subservient to her husband. “She had it coming to her”. Women had almost no hope of protection let alone escape. In some of the cases I observed, our local priest would convince women to return to their husbands.
Reality 10:19PM
Yes Reality, if you say so.
I really think that violence against women is not the real problem that needs to be addressed. If abortion is legal, there’s no problem. If threatened with violence the woman can have an abortion. Problem solved.(sarcasm alert).
Hi DLPL,
I know from first hand experience the terror of domestic violence and the era Gerri lived in. There were no abuse shelters, legal protection was virtually nil. “Good” wives were not abused. It was the woman who should be ashamed. I remember my mother asking for help from the police and being told: “Lady, its his house”.
Not only did Gerri fear for her safety but that of her children. She also feared losing her daughters if her husband discovered she was pregnant by another man. A married one yet! Does anyone think, in that day and age, that Gerri would have generated much sympathy from anyone? Oh sure her husband had beaten her, but seeing the kind of woman she is its no surprise. If he killed her, well who could blame the guy? What “honorable” man wouldn’t do the same? Thank heaven he’s getting the kids too, even though Gerri’s sister reported he beat them as well. Imagine being raised by a woman like that!
Oh well Mary, I suppose I should be magnanimous enough to accept that as your admission.
Reality,
LOL. It would be more accurate to say that I am magnanimous enough to understand you are talking in incoherent circles.
Well Mary, I think that being unable to answer a simple question based on a source that you provided, where the incoherence lies is obvious.
Reality,
Do I not think she died of an illegal abortion? I think that’s obvious even for you. Do I think she resorted to this act of desperation out of fear for herself and her children? Yes. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
The point is no woman should ever be forced into an abortion under these circumstances. I’m sure you would agree.
Oh yes, but you would argue the problem is not the well founded fear of violence and the lack of legal protection for the woman, its the lack of legal abortion.
Do I not think she died of an illegal abortion? I think that’s obvious even for you. – given your reluctance to answer a simple question, nothing is obvious.
Do I think she resorted to this act of desperation out of fear for herself and her children? Yes. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? – do you have any evidence that she did? Whilst that may well be the case, there are myriad other reasons why she may have chosen abortion. And because it was illegal she died. If she was not under threat of violence and chose to abort because she simply didn’t want another child, she would have died because abortion was illegal. It doesn’t matter how valid or important the reason may or may not be, she died because abortion was illegal.
The point is no woman should ever be forced into an abortion under these circumstances. I’m sure you would agree. – what you have constantly chosen to ignore is that the same thinking which failed to protect women from domestic violence also railed against women have control of their own reproduction.
Oh yes, but you would argue the problem is not the well founded fear of violence and the lack of legal protection for the woman, its the lack of legal abortion. – the well founded fear of violence is a problem, as I have just spoken of. But it was abortion being illegal that caused her death.
Reality,
Do you see any evidence at all that Gerri did not want to be pregnant? Is any other reason presented other than fear of her husband? She was under threat of violence, that’s the whole point. Can you provide a source that says Gerri aborted for any other reason?
No it was the self induced late term abortion that caused her death. An act of fear and desperation.
Also in that era an abortion at 6 1/2 months was not going to happen, legally or illegally. Much too dangerous and a likely prison sentence.
Do you see any evidence at all that Gerri did not want to be pregnant? – do you see any evidence that she wanted to be?
Is any other reason presented other than fear of her husband? She was under threat of violence, that’s the whole point. Can you provide a source that says Gerri aborted for any other reason? – can you provide a source which says that was her only reason?
No it was the self induced late term abortion that caused her death. – absolutely. And that would not have happened if abortion had been legal.
An act of fear and desperation. – ‘fear and desperation’ was not the cause of death. The same thinking that failed to protect women from violence also failed to provide them with control of their own reproduction.
Also in that era an abortion at 6 1/2 months was not going to happen, legally or illegally. Much too dangerous and a likely prison sentence. – seriously? You’re going to try that on?
Reality,
OK, so you admit you have no evidence she did not want to be pregnant. Maybe she didn’t, but apparently she had made the decision to go ahead with the pregnancy. She was entering her third trimester.
No Reality, you question if that was her only reason. Start doing your research. Show us a source. I’ve checked several sources, all said the same thing.
Her act of desperation wouldn’t have occurred if she did not have to fear for her life and safety, and that of her children. I can find no source that says otherwise. If you can please post it. How tragic we didn’t have domestic violence shelters back then and women had so little legal protection, wouldn’t you agree Reality?
Fear and desperation is what drove her to an act that cost her life. Please provide a source to the contrary if you can.
Yes seriously. Think 6 1/2 months. I’ll give you some time to contemplate that and the great potential for complications…and a prison sentence. Also, aborting a woman at that point was done only in a life and death situation.
OK, so you admit you have no evidence she did not want to be pregnant. – and you admit you have no evidence that she did.
Maybe she didn’t, but apparently she had made the decision to go ahead with the pregnancy. – where’s the evidence for that?
No Reality, you question if that was her only reason. Start doing your research. – there is nothing which says it was her only reason.
Show us a source. I’ve checked several sources, all said the same thing. – which is not quite what you claim it is.
Her act of desperation wouldn’t have occurred if she did not have to fear for her life and safety, and that of her children. I can find no source that says otherwise. If you can please post it – there is no source which precludes it. If there is please post it.
How tragic we didn’t have domestic violence shelters back then and women had so little legal protection, wouldn’t you agree Reality? – absolutely. And as I have said, the same thinking that failed to protect women from violence also failed to provide them with control of their own reproduction.
Fear and desperation is what drove her to an act that cost her life. – perhaps. What if it wasn’t fear and desperation that drove her to abort? That’s right, she would be dead because abortion was illegal. It doesn’t matter how valid, desperate or important the reason she chose to abort may or may not be, she died because abortion was illegal.
Please provide a source to the contrary if you can. – please provide a source which says it is so, if you can.
Yes seriously. Think 6 1/2 months. I’ll give you some time to contemplate that and the great potential for complications…and a prison sentence. – that in no way guarantees that ‘it was not going to happen’.
Also, aborting a woman at that point was done only in a life and death situation. – your evidence?
Reality,
So she may have wanted to be pregnant, she may not. We really don’t know either way.
She was entering her third trimester. I would consider that pretty indicative of her decision, whatever her reason, to continue the pregnancy.
I see, so you have no source that points to a reason other than what was stated in the source.
OK, so show me a source that says otherwise.
Because the source states she acted in fear of her husband’s impending visit. Do you have a source that says otherwise?
Reality you forget this was 1964, over 50 years ago. It doesn’t guarantee it was not going to happen but the likelihood of any hospital aborting a late term woman for any reason other that a medically indicated one would have been a violation of state law.
States had tough laws, but they were easily circumvented with first trimester abortions, which were mostly done in doctor’s offices. Hospitals and doctors had ways to get around the law, a wink and a nod here and there. With a more advanced pregnancy this wouldn’t have been as easy.
So she may have wanted to be pregnant, she may not. We really don’t know either way. – a single woman pregnant to a married man, who knows.
She was entering her third trimester. I would consider that pretty indicative of her decision, whatever her reason, to continue the pregnancy. – indicative is fair enough. Not iron clad though.
I see, so you have no source that points to a reason other than what was stated in the source. – and you have no source which states otherwise.
OK, so show me a source that says otherwise. – no no, you don’t understand. The source you provided doesn’t quite claim what you say it does.
Because the source states she acted in fear of her husband’s impending visit. Do you have a source that says otherwise? – do you have a source which says that was her one and only concern?
Reality you forget this was 1964, over 50 years ago. It doesn’t guarantee it was not going to happen – thank you.
but the likelihood of any hospital aborting a late term woman for any reason other that a medically indicated one would have been a violation of state law. – she sought an illegal abortion, remember.
States had tough laws, but they were easily circumvented with first trimester abortions, which were mostly done in doctor’s offices. Hospitals and doctors had ways to get around the law, a wink and a nod here and there. With a more advanced pregnancy this wouldn’t have been as easy. – the fact that abortion was illegal didn’t make any of it ‘easy’.
Reality,
Well maybe she planned to place the child for adoption. Again we’ll never know.
Entering a third trimester, especially back in 1964 pretty much meant you were going to term, barring any unforeseen.
You have no source then. That’s settled.
Well if my source isn’t accurate you should have no problem disputing it.
Can you find any other reason for her having the abortion other than fear of her husband, which various sources say was the reason?
You’re welcome. You apparently need reminding.
She sought an illegal abortion. Your point?
But a first trimester pregnancy was a lot easier to slip by as “abnormal bleeding” or “suspected miscarriage”. Hospital boards might be more willing to look the other way, as in the thalidomide scare of the early 60s. Also they could more easily be done in a doctor’s office.
Well maybe she planned to place the child for adoption. Again we’ll never know. – I’m glad you can see that now.
Entering a third trimester, especially back in 1964 pretty much meant you were going to term, barring any unforeseen. – ‘pretty much’. Not iron clad.
You have no source then. That’s settled. – ditto.
Well if my source isn’t accurate you should have no problem disputing it. – the source you provided doesn’t quite say what you claim it does.
Can you find any other reason for her having the abortion other than fear of her husband, – I can’t find anything which says there weren’t other reasons.
which various sources say was the reason? – not quite.
You’re welcome. You apparently need reminding. – I don’t need reminding that you claimed “not going to happen, legally or illegally” then relented.
She sought an illegal abortion. Your point? – she didn’t attend a hospital. You talked about how a hospital would act. It was irrelevant.
But a first trimester pregnancy was a lot easier to slip by as “abnormal bleeding” or “suspected miscarriage”. Hospital boards might be more willing to look the other way, as in the thalidomide scare of the early 60s. Also they could more easily be done in a doctor’s office. – if the appropriate ‘flexible’ medico could be found. I doubt all of them would agree to help.
Reality,
Back in 1964, unless there was a medical indication or an unforeseen complication, a woman would be going to term.
We agree you have no counter sources. Good.
It doesn’t “quite” say. Like I said, then you should have no trouble disputing it.
A late term abortion for other than medical reasons was not going to happen legally. Illegally, by some doctor or illegal abortionist, would be asking for a prison sentence.
I was telling you the criteria for aborting a late term pregnancy in that era. It would either be a labor induction or emergency C-section. Efforts would be made to save the baby.
Exactly. Since 90% of illegal abortions were being done by licensed physicians years 13 years prior to Roe, apparently they were being found.
Back in 1964, unless there was a medical indication or an unforeseen complication, a woman would be going to term. – you simply do not and cannot know that.
We agree you have no counter sources. Good. – ditto.
It doesn’t “quite” say. Like I said, then you should have no trouble disputing it. – no trouble at all. Although it’s not actually what it says, it’s what you claim it says.
A late term abortion for other than medical reasons was not going to happen legally. Illegally, by some doctor or illegal abortionist, would be asking for a prison sentence. – only if they got caught.
I was telling you the criteria for aborting a late term pregnancy in that era. – within a hospital
It would either be a labor induction or emergency C-section. Efforts would be made to save the baby. – if it’s an abortion, why?
Exactly. Since 90% of illegal abortions were being done by licensed physicians years 13 years prior to Roe, apparently they were being found. – what a simplistic and less than evidential claim.
Reality,
OK, why else were they done?
It doesn’t “quite” say that. Well what does it say then?
Only if they got caught. Reality, you can’t be serious. You think no one would have questioned why the doctor was terminating the late pregnancy with no justification? There were state laws, hospital boards, remember?
Right, within a hospital. Inducing a late term pregnancy wasn’t done in a doctor’s office.
The reason is the pregnancy is being terminated, or aborted, to save the woman’s life, not with the express purpose of killing the baby. Hopefully the baby could be saved. Unfortunately that may not always be possible.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/12
OK, why else were they done? – ??? Because a woman wanted an abortion, even at six and a half months.
It doesn’t “quite” say that. Well what does it say then? – it’s your source, read it.
Only if they got caught. Reality, you can’t be serious. You think no one would have questioned why the doctor was terminating the late pregnancy with no justification? There were state laws, hospital boards, remember? – outside of hospitals, who would know? Who would ask questions? What hospital board would there be to answer to?
Right, within a hospital. Inducing a late term pregnancy wasn’t done in a doctor’s office. The reason is the pregnancy is being terminated, or aborted, to save the woman’s life, not with the express purpose of killing the baby. – and what of those which weren’t terminated to save the woman’s life?
Hopefully the baby could be saved. Unfortunately that may not always be possible. – that’s not the aim when women seek abortion though is it.
Reality,
What part of “there were state laws prohibiting this” do you not understand? There were hospital boards. There was hospital personnel.
I’ve read it and I think it states what happened very well. Considering you can’t find a source that counters it only further validates my source.
Outside of hospitals? Where? There weren’t outpatient surgical clinics and only a doctor who has a desire to spend some time in prison would do something that dangerous in his office.
They could only be justified if necessary to save the woman’s life.
Well since its being done to save her life her “aim” wasn’t an issue. If the baby could be saved, it would be.
What part of “there were state laws prohibiting this” do you not understand? There were hospital boards. There was hospital personnel. – oh I understand that ok. What part of “illegal abortions conducted outside of hospitals” do you not understand? Why have you tried to drag this from abortions to life-saving, late term deliveries in hospitals?
I’ve read it and I think it states what happened very well. – then you haven’t read it very well.
Considering you can’t find a source that counters it only further validates my source. – I don’t need to counter something which hasn’t been demonstrated.
Outside of hospitals? Where? There weren’t outpatient surgical clinics and only a doctor who has a desire to spend some time in prison would do something that dangerous in his office. – good grief, you’ve really lost the train haven’t you.
They could only be justified if necessary to save the woman’s life. – and again.
Well since its being done to save her life her “aim” wasn’t an issue. If the baby could be saved, it would be. – and again.
Reality,
You are again resorting to your usual tiresome tactic of perpetually going in circles while offering no sources to counter mine.
What you call “going in circles” is actually me trying to keep things on point.
Unlike yourself who, having seen you have lost the debate, attempt to change it.
Your source did not say what you claim it did. Therefore I do not need to provide a source to counter it.
Good night Reality.
Thanks Mary :-)
Sweet dreams.
So! I belong to SSJWF, the very small organization at UT Arlington which planned the display in question. This is some… interesting coverage that we didn’t expect.
I am sure not many people will be able to visit in person, so later today, when I have access to it, I will provide a PDF link to the full text of the display we produced. Please read it, and if you have any response to the content, we’d love to hear for you. Here’s the introduction.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwm0j7FNMjxxU0ZPS1AxUTN2akU/view?usp=sharing
Alexei, if abortion unjustly kills a human, why shouldn’t society condemn it?
Also, the 1 in 3 figure doesn’t hold water.
http://www.not1in3.com/
Alexei,
You may be interested to know the prior to Roe, most abortions were performed by licensed physicians in their offices. This is according to, of all people, Planned Parenthood.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/12
Navi, speaking for myself, I don’t consider a fetus to be a human being. Until what point? I do not have an opinion on that yet. And we’ll revise the ~1 in 3 statistic when we find better information.
Here is the full text of the display, as promised:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwm0j7FNMjxxdGc1bldoRnNmak0/view?usp=sharing
Alexei,
This is a completely serious response to you. I’m not trying to be sarcastic, snarky, patronizing, or condescending. I’m being completely and utterly 100 percent serious. I’m saying this for your benefit, other poster’s benefit, and so the moderators know I am NOT making fun or anything. I’m being completely serious.
Considering your stance that the fetus is not a human being, then the question that remains to be asked is: If the being who was conceived from a HUMAN egg and a HUMAN sperm is not a new human being than what is it? I’ve been pregnant more than once and never on the ultrasounds did the being inside me look anything BUT human. If I’m pregnant with an alien don’t you think my doc would’ve told me by now? I mean, he’s been in business for YEARS and never called the pre-born being inside me anything but a human–a baby. So if the doc is wrong, and I’m wrong, then what am I pregnant with? I think it’s a fair question for me to ask and I believe considering that I’ve given birth to a human and given this isn’t my first pregnancy and I haven’t seen anything BUT human on the ultrasounds, I should be set straight if I’m so wrong. And no, I’m NOT being sarcastic or anything. I believe that people who think like you owe people like me who have been pregnant and are pregnant deserve an answer. It’s only fair given we’re the ones carrying the being inside us to know what we’re dealing with. After all, shouldn’t women be informed?
Again I am NOT being sarcastic or snarky or anything like that. I’m being totally serious. Completely, 100 percent, bluntly serious. I’m waiting for your answer, please offer a viable, reasonable, serious answer to the question.