Another Stupid Abortion Ploy

[Feathers in Hair]

I apologize for not noting something above, after a very kind PM from a friend. About a week later, my step-mom (a wonderful person) heard about what had happened, and has said she will 'force' my father to pay for medical help. (I imagine forcing won't be necessary, but it's still nice to know there's someone looking out for me.) I did not mean to worry anyone, and was simply trying to relate a story. My apologies for causing anyone concern!

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I've read TONS of information about ultrasounds before I ever had one.

I'll let the hyperbole slide, even though this is not a factual statement.

First off, showing a woman who is considering abortion exactly WHO she would be aborting is not "entertainment".

This is a perfect example of your use of biased language. A fetus is not a fully fledged human being, whether you want to hear it or not.

2nd. If a woman is going to have a problem with aborting someone who is obviously alive ...

Uncanny. Without having to go very far, I have found a second example of your use of biased language.

Planned Parenthood would prefer that the child remain a nameless, faceless "clump of cells."

Wow! It's like magic! I read the very next paragraph, and I have encountered the use of more biased language! I must be very good at discerning this type of thing, because it is really hard to find....

That is of course, until the woman sees his picture on the internet, and goes and drinks herself silly, or sometimest even kills herself for what she did!

Naturally, you'll be posting the statistics that show that 78% of all women that undergo an abortion end up committing suicide or, at the very least, alchoholic.

I do know for a fact that many abortionists are in it for the money...

Now this is beginning to sound eerie. I have yet a fourth example of you using biased language, and inflammatory argument. Just as a side question, how many abortionists have you sat down with and interviewed? I'm sure that you wouldn't make false claims about your knowledge base, so it is clear that you have done extensive research into the motivations of abortionists everywhere - or is this statement a lie?

Would you rather sentence women to the kind of life where they cannot even look themselves in ther mirror when they finally find out what they did??

No, I'll let the Pro-life side of the aisle condemn them to hell and harass them into a life of alchoholism and suicide. I'll just accept them as human beings that had to make an incredibly tough choice in their life and need some support.

When do the lies stop?

Certainly not in your posts...

Do you KNOW the stats on how many women commit suicide after an abortion?? I do!

And I'm certain that the statistics you quote will come from a reliable source such as the National Right to Life Office - not some bogus statistics compiled by a nonbiased source.

Obviously you guys are all die-hard abortion advocates.

I just can't believe my luck!! Your very next post, and the biased language continues!! I am not (nor are the overwhelming majority) an "abortion advocate". I am pro-choice, and you should not choose the labels for this debate - unless, of course you would like for us to label you as "Pro-slavery" for the sake of fairplay...

All I'm saying is that MOST women who go into a pregnancy center are not. They are just scared, poor, in bad circumstances, underprivelaged, or being used by a man.

God forbid that you should credit any woman that pursues an abortion to end an unwanted pregnancy as a stable, mature adult. Better that you paint them all as ignorant sluts being manipulated and exploited by that lowest of life forms - a male. (Side note - this is the sixth example of biased language).

or the woman who simply does not know that the child she is carrying is really a child with a heartbeat.

I feel like Sherlock Holmes - picking up the hidden clues to a case. Seven examples of the use of biased language in an attempt to debate a point. How do I do it? How do I find these examples? They are so rare, yet somehow, I find them. I must be gifted...

Period. End of story and yes I am done. Have fun arguing amongst yourselves.

Well I never expected this. Post something incredibly inflammatory, fire off a few baseless, unsubstantiated claims, then dissapear under the guise of "you guys are picking on me, and it's not fair". Someone please remind me why I thought this was going to be a hit and run posting...


With total contempt,
TVOR

 

[Tawn]

Perhaps someone could clarify.. is ultrasound what the name suggests? High frequency sound waves used to create a sort of 'radar' like image of something?
Im pretty sure im correct..

Anyway, Id just like to say that anything which bombards your body with particles or waves can theoretically do damage to your internals. Yes, even watching TV is bombarding you with electromagnetic waves... Oh, and dont have x-rays done unless you have to.. I think ultrasound is significantly less damaging than something like x-rays.. but even so, it will be doing something.. which is especially worrying in a growing child.

Oh and about the suicides following abortions.. how does the figure compare with numbers of abandoned chirldren? ..and suicides as a result of that?
(Thats not a challenge it is a genuine question)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Is the post-abortion suicide always (or typically) attributable to the abortion? Is the post-birth suicide always (or typically) attributable to the birth? It's a topic far too amenable to cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Is the post-abortion suicide always (or typically) attributable to the abortion? Is the post-birth suicide always (or typically) attributable to the birth? It's a topic far too amenable to cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

Don't be silly, Deut. Of course every woman that becomes an alchoholic or commits suicide after having undergone an abortion is doing so because of her remorse and shame. It has been proven as a direct cause and effect relationship, and I'm sure that J4L has some statistics to back up such a claim.

Surely you aren't trying to suggest that someone would knowingly post outrageous statements without being able to provide solid evidence to back up their claims?

I'm shocked at your skepticism.

TVOR

 

[Tawn]

Surely you aren't trying to suggest that someone would knowingly post outrageous statements without being able to provide solid evidence to back up their claims?

I am both shocked and appalled that Deut could suggest such a thing! :sarcastic

 

[Sunstone]

I am both shocked and appalled that Deut could suggest such a thing! :sarcastic

It's enough to drive a thinking man to drink!

 

[jewscout]

... cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

a what what?
man my latin is so rusty...

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Don't be silly, Deut. Of course every woman that becomes an alchoholic or commits suicide after having undergone an abortion is doing so because of her remorse and shame. It has been proven as a direct cause and effect relationship, and I'm sure that J4L has some statistics to back up such a claim.

After some thought, I believe that with a little research, the Pro-Slavery faction could produce some studies (complete with solid statistical evidence) that demonstrate that every woman that is either alchoholic or committed suicide has secretly had an abortion at some point prior in her lifetime. A good, God fearing woman wouldn't be caught dead having committed suicide or letting alchohol pass her lips...

TVOR

 

[The Voice of Reason]

a what what?

You're killing me... :jiggy:

TVOR

 

[Tawn]

that demonstrate that every woman that is either alchoholic or committed suicide has secretly had an abortion at some point prior in her lifetime.

Yes or at the very least has thought about it.. even if they have never been pregnant.. they imagined they would if they were to get pregnant.

In fact, did you know that satanic rites are spoken during abortions?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

In fact, did you know that satanic rites are spoken during abortions?

Well, you learn something new everyday. I always thought that they simply took the Lord's name in vain, browsed some kiddie porn on the internet, shot up with heroin, smoked some crack and then began the hedonistic exploitation of the victim.

I feel like such a rube...

TVOR

 

[Mr Spinkles]

These are the questions I'm not totally clear on:
1) Do women really tend to have abortions less if they have an ultrasound?
2) If pregnancy centers use medical professionals and only use ultrasound for a short period of time (as approved by the FDA), will this bill really affect pregnancy centers very much?
3) What does Planned Parenthood stand to gain/lose financially as a result of this bill passing/not passing?

 

[Sunstone]

a what what?
man my latin is so rusty...

My latin is rusty too, so I won't try to tell you what cum hoc ergo propter hoc translates to. But if it's any help, it refers to a fallacy of false cause. As you know, causes come before effects. But it is fallacious to assume that because something (A) comes before something else (B), that (A) causes (B). For instance, it is fallacious to assume that the four leaf clover you found this morning caused you to find the $100 you found this afternoon simply because the four leaf clover came before the $100.

 

[Prima]

On the subject of ultrasounds:

Like x-rays (props, Tawn) they are not 100% always safe. However, ultrasounds do not use radiation. There has been a lot of talk about how many ultrasounds are 'safe' for a child. There have been a few opposing studies, but the general idea now is that several ultrasounds are safe, but still not to go overboard. Check this out: http://my.webmd.com/content/article/97/104332?src=rss_cbsnews

Spinks, on the subject of ultrasounds/abortions, I would say that it's probably pretty close. I'll have to look into that more, but I suspect that one in every hundred women considering abortions are moved by seeing a fetus on a screen and therefore decide not to have an abortion. (Assuming you've never been to one, I'll tell you that those people administering ultrasounds usually pick out 'cute' things for the parents to see - the nose, toes, etc) So there is probably a tiny difference in numbers.

 

[Prima]

Oh, I forgot something else...I think j4l's original source might have mixed up a few bills. There's the one that Deut quoted, but there are also clearly anti-abortion laws, such as one that forces health care to tell the women what features (face, heartbeat) one can see/find when an ultrasound is done. That one was promoted ONLY for the fact (the Governor even said it himself) that it might convince women to not get abortions.

Also, this about this - most of the women will not want to see the ultrasounds, anyway. So how much difference would this really make, except that it would be one more law controlling clinics. It would cost them a lot of money, paperwork, and time.

The main problem I have with this is - the government should not be supporting laws with emotional bias. Unless there's a good, solid, factual reason for the bill to be supported, it shouldn't be passed. In my opinion, that is.

 

[Prima]

Hmm.

Well, I found some interesting things looking around. Here are the links:

On the use of ultrasounds to discourage abortions:
http://www.massnews.com/2002_editions/01_Jan/12302preg.htm *** Note: This site is biased, and has one noticable lie/mistake: abortion clinics do not generally prohibit the mother seeing the ultrasound, they merely do not encourage it. She may see it if she likes.
http://www.unborn.com/window/ultrasound.htm

On abortion:
http://www.nrlc.org/news/2003/NRL01/randy.html

Ultrasounds:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/movies/movies_ours.asp

General Abortion Stats:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/statistics/statistics.asp


The general idea, I think (numbers are biased, inaccurate, etc) is that out of the group of potential aborters that are young (teens and early 20's) and just feel overwhelmed and see it as an 'easy way out' appx. 90% choose not to have abortions after seeing an ultrasound. However, overall, out of every person in the clinic who has an ultrasound, appx. 50% decide not to. (note that this is not to say that it is BECAUSE of the ultrasound)

Again, that's just what I think. The data was presented a little confusingly...and almost of of the sites are extremely anti-abortion biased!

 

[The Voice of Reason]

The data was presented a little confusingly...and almost of of the sites are extremely anti-abortion biased!

I wonder why the data was presented in a confusing manner? Are you saying that you believe the statistics you found to be questionable, or do you think they are valid (relatively speaking)?

TVOR

 

[Prima]

I wonder why the data was presented in a confusing manner? Are you saying that you believe the statistics you found to be questionable, or do you think they are valid (relatively speaking)?

I find them questionable merely because of the lack of conclusive evidence. One survey does not a conclusion make There are so many other factors - where the clinic is located, what kind of information they provide, how many condoms are given out/used in that community, etc...

For example, if there are several high schools nearby, no one gives out free condoms, and they don't give out information about adoption, there's a much larger number of girls likely to change their mind after seeing an ultrasound.

So I guess I'm saying that I don't think the people are lying, therefore their data is valid. But it's not conclusive.

 

[Magurk]

Its basically a scam. Its a womans body and her creation, and lets hope the man isnt a conservative GW who beleives he has the roght-of-way. God banning abortion is almost as bad as making an ammendment to the US constitution banning Gay realtions. Please put blue in the white house in 08' i promise a smarter society