abortion

[musicalmomma 1]

Well, I'm in the minority on this particular thread. I am pro-life. I believe in the sanctity of life from the moment of conception.

Now, with that said, I personally don't believe that conception actually happens until the zygote implants firmly to the uterine wall. So, I personally have no problem with the morning after pill. I know a lot of militant pro-lifers really fought the morning after pill...I saw it as a good option to actual abortion. I DO feel it needs to be closely monitored and not made available over the counter. I feel a doctor should see the patient a few days after, just to make sure she's OK...because some girls have had complications with it.

I have four daughters and if one of them came to me and told me they had unprotected sex, or was raped, I would call the doc that second, get her examined and get her the morning after pill! NOW, if my daughter does not share my belief and feels it would be morally wrong to take that pill, I wouldn't force her to take it, but for me, it's not a viable pregnancy if the zygote never attaches. Heck, we pass zygotes out many times in our lives as women and don't ever even know it!

As for people that bomb abortion clinics...well, I can not for the life of me understand their reasoning...how can you justify fighting for life by TAKING life?? It doesn't make sense to me!

So, anywhoo...that's where I stand on the matter.

[green 6]

Any woman who persists in using abortion as a birth control device has got to be either stupid or crazy. Should stupid/crazy people be having babies in the first place? Is it good for the gene pool?

And as for men giving their opinions on the abortion issue, I feel that their opinions are not wanted. Pregnancy changes a woman's body forever; it does not return to its pre-pregnancy state. Muscles are stretched, the pelvic floor drops and the bladder is shifted. Some of the consequences of this are only suffered after menopause. A woman can begin to have trouble with bladder control. She may need an operation to tighten up the pelvic floor. Certainly most women will be left with stretch marks and possibly a caesarian scar. Their breasts will change, too. For the first trimester she will suffer from nausea and during her last she will have to pee every 15 minutes. These are changes which are part of having a baby and when a woman wants to have this baby these are all part and parcel of her pregnancy. For those who absolutely don't want a baby all of this constitutes an on-going horror show.

Another reason why men's opinions don't count is that sometimes men don't stick around to look after the damage that their sperm contribution has caused. There are so many, many single parent families, so many missing fathers, and so many dead-beat dads. Single parent families tend to be among the working poor and those on welfare. The lives that those families lead are far less stable and far less dignified. The level of education achieved is usually much lower. Why punish a woman who finds herself pregnant while the man gets off scot-free?

[marjon9 6]

Well, I'm in the minority on this particular thread. I am pro-life. I believe in the sanctity of life from the moment of conception.

Now, with that said, I personally don't believe that conception actually happens until the zygote implants firmly to the uterine wall. So, I personally have no problem with the morning after pill. I know a lot of militant pro-lifers really fought the morning after pill...I saw it as a good option to actual abortion. I DO feel it needs to be closely monitored and not made available over the counter. I feel a doctor should see the patient a few days after, just to make sure she's OK...because some girls have had complications with it.

I have four daughters and if one of them came to me and told me they had unprotected sex, or was raped, I would call the doc that second, get her examined and get her the morning after pill! NOW, if my daughter does not share my belief and feels it would be morally wrong to take that pill, I wouldn't force her to take it, but for me, it's not a viable pregnancy if the zygote never attaches. Heck, we pass zygotes out many times in our lives as women and don't ever even know it!

As for people that bomb abortion clinics...well, I can not for the life of me understand their reasoning...how can you justify fighting for life by TAKING life?? It doesn't make sense to me!

So, anywhoo...that's where I stand on the matter.

I respect your views completely, but your post does bring something up for me. You say that for you, life does not begin until the zygote attaches. Other pro-life people feel that life begins before that point. Yet many pro-life individuals feel like they have a right to make rules that everyone must follow, limiting the choices available to everyone, even if the others don't believe the same way. So, which "pro-life" point of view gets to be the one to set the rules for everyone else? Would it be OK with you if the "morning after" pill were denied to you or your daughters because the pro-life faction with the political power decided that life begins before the zygote attaches?

I don't mean this as a personal attack at all. You have not said that you, personally, seek to make the rules for anyone but yourself. But in general, one of the standard positions for the majority of pro-life people is that abortion should be illegal, meaning that no one should have the choice to go that route no matter what they believe. That's the part that is so intolerable to me. I just don't think anyone has the right to make this decision for anyone else. And I'm just wondering if you would feel like I do if the morning-after pill were denied to you or your daughter, and you or your daughters were thus forced to go through with a pregnancy you did not want, because some other pro-life individuals thought that you should not have the choice to get the morning after pill?

[musicalmomma 1]

I respect your views completely, but your post does bring something up for me. You say that for you, life does not begin until the zygote attaches. Other pro-life people feel that life begins before that point. Yet many pro-life individuals feel like they have a right to make rules that everyone must follow, limiting the choices available to everyone, even if the others don't believe the same way. So, which "pro-life" point of view gets to be the one to set the rules for everyone else? Would it be OK with you if the "morning after" pill were denied to you or your daughters because the pro-life faction with the political power decided that life begins before the zygote attaches?

I don't mean this as a personal attack at all. You have not said that you, personally, seek to make the rules for anyone but yourself. But in general, one of the standard positions for the majority of pro-life people is that abortion should be illegal, meaning that no one should have the choice to go that route no matter what they believe. That's the part that is so intolerable to me. I just don't think anyone has the right to make this decision for anyone else. And I'm just wondering if you would feel like I do if the morning-after pill were denied to you or your daughter, and you or your daughters were thus forced to go through with a pregnancy you did not want, because some other pro-life individuals thought that you should not have the choice to get the morning after pill?

I didn't take it as a personal attack. Those are ligitimate questions and I wish I could answer them all. I can only speak for my own personal convictions and am glad I don't have the responsibility of making descisions for others.

I never said that life begins after the zygote attaches. I feel that conception is once the zygote attaches. It's not a conceived pregnancy if it never attaches to the uterine wall. There can be no viability if it doesn't attach to the uterine wall. If that were the case then all tubal pregnancies are abortions. I don't believe that and I sure hope no one see's ending a tubal pregnancy as abortion, because to me, that would be ludicrous. That's how I draw my personal conclusion on the morning after pill.

Would I support a law that would remove a woman's choice to have an abortion, other than to save the mother's life? Yes, I probably would. I know that answering this question will probably open me up to public ridicule and scarastic attacks, but it's an honest answer and I don't expect to change anyone's opion on the matter. I was just answering the original question on where I stand on the abortion issue. However, I don't judge women that make this choice, because it's not my place to put judgement on them.

[marjon9 6]

Would I support a law that would remove a woman's choice to have an abortion, other than to save the mother's life? Yes, I probably would. . . . . However, I don't judge women that make this choice, because it's not my place to put judgement on them.

I have a really hard time reconciling these two statements. It seems to me that creating laws that take away choice on this most personal, fundamental issue is really very much like "putting judgment on them."

You say you don't judge women who make that choice, but yet you would legislate to take away that choice. So, once the choice is taken away through legislation, what difference does it make whether or not you might hypothetically "judge" someone for doing something that they are no longer able to do anyway?

To me it is just a very tangled web when one set of adult Americans tries to impose its own morality on another set of adult Americans, through the use of legislation.

[musicalmomma 1]

I have a really hard time reconciling these two statements. It seems to me that creating laws that take away choice on this most personal, fundamental issue is really very much like "putting judgment on them."

You say you don't judge women who make that choice, but yet you would legislate to take away that choice. So, once the choice is taken away through legislation, what difference does it make whether or not you might hypothetically "judge" someone for doing something that they are no longer able to do anyway?

To me it is just a very tangled web when one set of adult Americans tries to impose its own morality on another set of adult Americans, through the use of legislation.

Just try to remember that this "imposed morality" wasn't even a consideration until the 1960's. Yes, there were a few back alley abortions prior to that time and some women died. But far MORE women have died since making it legal, because we're aborting babies at mind boggling rates. Before the 60's it wasn't an issue, you got pregnant, you had a baby. So, to say that in 50 years I'm pushing a moral issue, when we've had 200 years of no abortion is a bit of a stretch to me. If you feel I'm weaving a tangled web, well that's OK. I'm solid in my beliefs and again, like I said, I don't expect to change anyone's opinion on the subject, was simply answering the original question. You won't change my opinion, I won't change yours. So bantering back and forth will not be productive for either of us

[marjon9 6]

Just try to remember that this "imposed morality" wasn't even a consideration until the 1960's. Yes, there were a few back alley abortions prior to that time and some women died. But far MORE women have died since making it legal, because we're aborting babies at mind boggling rates. Before the 60's it wasn't an issue, you got pregnant, you had a baby. So, to say that in 50 years I'm pushing a moral issue, when we've had 200 years of no abortion is a bit of a stretch to me. If you feel I'm weaving a tangled web, well that's OK. I'm solid in my beliefs and again, like I said, I don't expect to change anyone's opinion on the subject, was simply answering the original question. You won't change my opinion, I won't change yours. So bantering back and forth will not be productive for either of us

OK, if you'd rather not banter back and forth I won't comment further. It surprises me, though. I thought that bantering back and forth was the whole idea here.

[musicalmomma 1]

Ah, Mark I don't wanna ruin your fun. I'm just saying that we won't change each other's opinions. You can banter away hehe :scales:

[anonemouse 1]

Musicalmomma, I definitely respect your position, mainly because you respect ours. So many pro-life folks are so militant that you can't have a civil discussion about abortion. We may not agree, but at least we can remain civil.

[wavydaby 1]

Maybe thats what is the problem with the abortion debate. People confuse terminology of biology with what happens and use that to form opinions.

Conception: When egg and sperm meet(fertilization)

Implantation: When the fertilized egg imbeds itself in to the uterine wall.

It is one thing to say that you think that abortion is "ok" until implantation has occurred, another to say that its not ok at conception.

And again, the IUD works to prevent implantation, after fertilization has already occured.

[cmacinga 0]

I'm new to this site and had hoped it was developed to be directed to Lap-Band pre and post op support. How did abortion get thrown into this Lap-Band Chat site? Isn't this site monitored for content by someone? Wouldn't it be best to talk about these things some other place?

Thank you.

[marjon9 6]

I'm new to this site and had hoped it was developed to be directed to Lap-Band pre and post op support. How did abortion get thrown into this Lap-Band Chat site? Isn't this site monitored for content by someone? Wouldn't it be best to talk about these things some other place?

Thank you.

There is one small section of this forum called "rants and raves" where politics, sex, and religion are discussed. People have fun debating these things and so they made room for it in this community. 95% of the forum is directed to issues relating directly to the Lap Band. You will find all the information you need on that topic. Many people do not like talking about these controversial topics and thus they stay away from reading the "rants and raves" discussion. Many people who are not interested in these topics just don't read the threads. That is probably a good approach for you, too because, like many others, you appear to be interested only the Lap Band part of this forum.

And yes, there are moderators in this forum. You'll find them posting frequently in "rants and raves."

[cmacinga 0]

Thank you for the clarification. It's not that I'm not interested in the topic. I'm new to the site, and didn't realize there were other sections to be visited. I simply saw the headline "abortion" and wanted to know what was going on. I actually am involved in weekend retreats twice a year to help those men and women who have had abortions or whose lives have been touched by abortions to heal and find forgiveness for themselves. I don't want to get into a discussion with anyone here about what I do as I am simply here to imporve my health through getting banded on May 29. Anyway, thank you again for your response. God Bless all of you!

[ousooner 1]

I respect your views completely, but your post does bring something up for me. You say that for you, life does not begin until the zygote attaches. Other pro-life people feel that life begins before that point. Yet many pro-life individuals feel like they have a right to make rules that everyone must follow, limiting the choices available to everyone, even if the others don't believe the same way. So, which "pro-life" point of view gets to be the one to set the rules for everyone else? Would it be OK with you if the "morning after" pill were denied to you or your daughters because the pro-life faction with the political power decided that life begins before the zygote attaches?

I don't mean this as a personal attack at all. You have not said that you, personally, seek to make the rules for anyone but yourself. But in general, one of the standard positions for the majority of pro-life people is that abortion should be illegal, meaning that no one should have the choice to go that route no matter what they believe. That's the part that is so intolerable to me. I just don't think anyone has the right to make this decision for anyone else. And I'm just wondering if you would feel like I do if the morning-after pill were denied to you or your daughter, and you or your daughters were thus forced to go through with a pregnancy you did not want, because some other pro-life individuals thought that you should not have the choice to get the morning after pill?

Sorry, Mark. According to the others, mine and your opinions are not wanted or needed because we are men.

[marjon9 6]

Sorry, Mark. According to the others, mine and your opinions are not wanted or needed because we are men.

I, too, was a little surprised at that unfortunate turn of reasoning in this thread. Sad to see closed-mindedness in whatever form. I certainly understand and agree that men can never fully understand the woman's perspective on abortion. But ultimately I believe that no one can fully understand anyone else's position on abortion, because it is so personal. And ultimately, I believe that no one has the right to decide such issues for anyone else, man or woman. We just don't have the right to force others to live by a moral code they don't choose or agree with.

But as for men having no valid opinions here, obviously I don't agree.