Wisconsin passes abortion ban

[Blubbartron]

If it's just a bag of cells, why is there a guilt trip? I'm just playing devil's advocate here. It's totally manipulative, which I can see is wrong... but what you're showing someone is the truth. Nothing more.

I'll bite on the devil's advocate bit - granted, I'm making an assumption here: you know how you eat meat and don't give a shit about the formerly-living animal you're chowing down on? The reason you don't give a shit is because society has told you that you don't need to give a shit. Some people started giving shits about it, and they're trying to spread their shit-giving to other people.

Guilt, shame, etc are all societally-defined concepts. What we do and do not feel guilty/shameful about doing has nothing to do with rational thought. It's all the conventions of the society you were born into and grew up in.

[archibaldcrane]

Well you know, if you actually read the article they're forcing women to get ultrasounds, they're not taking away their right to choose to get an abortion. So it's not really like they're yoinking the choice, they're just showing you pictures of what you're having removed from your body. If it's just a bag of cells, and the women are the ones who get the right to choose, then there shouldn't be a problem with this at all.

Except for the completely unnecessary expense and forcing additional time to pass before the abortion.

Anyone in the "if you're going to abort, do it as soon as possible" camp should be appalled by this move.

Also the bullshit "hospital admissions within 30 miles" requirement is closing 20% of the clinics in the state, further making it more difficult.

[Tagus]

I honestly don't agree with that. I feel that it is manipulative specifically because it's a baby, a life form with a beating heart, that will be destroyed. I had a non-cancerous tumor pulled out of my neck last year... they showed me an ultrasound of it before hand, and even showed it to me after removing it. It was a gross bag of cells, to be certain, but at no point did I consider not having it removed. Why then, if not specifically because it's a baby with a beating heart and all that shit, would an ultrasound of a pregnant woman be manipulative?

[ronin sparthos]

If it's just a bag of cells, why is there a guilt trip? I'm just playing devil's advocate here. It's totally manipulative, which I can see is wrong... but what you're showing someone is the truth. Nothing more.

Do you realize how stupid this logic plays out beyond this abortion debate? It's a guilt trip because society stigmatizes abortions as morally wrong (usually fueled by religion) and socially a matter of last resort (we associate fetuses with innocent babies). Even rape victims who understand they were forced into an abortion still have the specters of a child lingering in their head and the social fallout of having undergone the procedure.

If it's 'just the truth' lets dial up the stupidity to 11 and show people who suffer from any condition why they probably could have avoided their fate or just how advanced the disease has gone. Do you want to start with showing cancer patients a video of how they could have avoided cancer or should we be more insensitive and scold old people when they get diseases like arthritis? Hell, lets take all the diabetics and guilt them with videos about how eating right and exercising could have avoided getting a daily dose of insulin.

That'd be relevant to lots of Americans.

[ringthree]

Well you know, if you actually read the article they're forcing women to get ultrasounds, they're not taking away their right to choose to get an abortion. So it's not really like they're yoinking the choice, they're just showing you pictures of what you're having removed from your body. If it's just a bag of cells, and the women are the ones who get the right to choose, then there shouldn't be a problem with this at all.

The real question is in what world is this seen as a ok practice?

[ringthree]

I honestly don't agree with that. I feel that it is manipulative specifically because it's a baby, a life form with a beating heart, that will be destroyed. I had a non-cancerous tumor pulled out of my neck last year... they showed me an ultrasound of it before hand, and even showed it to me after removing it. It was a gross bag of cells, to be certain, but at no point did I consider not having it removed. Why then, if not specifically because it's a baby with a beating heart and all that shit, would an ultrasound of a pregnant woman be manipulative?

Were you forced to look at the tumor against your own wishes? Were you forced to listen to a doctor explain that it was life and then describe it's beating heat, brain function and other non-medical facts and facts that don't even agree with developmental science?

[kuronosan]

I honestly don't agree with that. I feel that it is manipulative specifically because it's a baby, a life form with a beating heart, that will be destroyed. I had a non-cancerous tumor pulled out of my neck last year... they showed me an ultrasound of it before hand, and even showed it to me after removing it. It was a gross bag of cells, to be certain, but at no point did I consider not having it removed. Why then, if not specifically because it's a baby with a beating heart and all that shit, would an ultrasound of a pregnant woman be manipulative?

There is not one person on the planet who, if they developed a cancer and did not want to die, would decline having it removed just because they saw a picture of it.

To answer your question, a cancerous tumor is not a bag of cells. It is a bag of mutated cells that do not die and, if allowed to profilerate, will eventually kill the host. A baby/fetus is not the same thing. A developing baby's "bag of cells" consist of three differing layers of stem cells that differentiate and eventually stop growing once they reach maturity. A tumor's "bag of cells" consist of one type of cell that simply will not die and continues to undergo mitosis, giving rise to more mutated cells that will never stop growing.

Stop comparing shit if you have no clue what you're comparing, please.

[Tagus]

The real question is in what world is this seen as a ok practice?

It's actually a somewhat elegant solution. The woman still has the choice, she is just presented with all of the information first. In the case of rape, you'd think that the woman would be more inclined to go ahead with the abortion... in the case of "he left his dick in too long", she'd probably be less inclined. After all of the years I've spent here, ignorance is probably the most inexcusable of "crimes" on BG. Doesn't it make sense for the woman to know what she is having removed from her body, as opposed to remaining blissfully ignorant?

[Tagus]

And Kurosan, I'm comparing one set of biological cells to another. The only difference is their purpose, and what they grow into. Positive and negative, right and wrong, cancerous and non-cancerous... it's all black and white. Humans give it emotional context. You should know that more than anyone, if you're a med student.

[ringthree]

If it's just a bag of cells, why is there a guilt trip? I'm just playing devil's advocate here. It's totally manipulative, which I can see is wrong... but what you're showing someone is the truth. Nothing more.

Why is it so hard to understand the concept of autonomy? Free will? Choice?

[Tagus]

Why is it so hard to understand the concept of autonomy? Free will? Choice?

Because they're not taking the free will away. They're educating what your choice entails.

[ringthree]

It's actually a somewhat elegant solution. The woman still has the choice, she is just presented with all of the information first. In the case of rape, you'd think that the woman would be more inclined to go ahead with the abortion... in the case of "he left his dick in too long", she'd probably be less inclined. After all of the years I've spent here, ignorance is probably the most inexcusable of "crimes" on BG. Doesn't it make sense for the woman to know what she is having removed from her body, as opposed to remaining blissfully ignorant?

It's completely elegant if you reject all notions of self-determination and accept utilitarianism and pragmatism as true values. But if you did that then we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place, would we?

[Niiro]

It's a disgusting tactic that attempts to imbue a fetus with elements of personhood in order to cause as much guilt and emotional distress as possible.

The vital signs of a fetus are a complete non-issue to a woman who has already decided to have an abortion.

Before the operation is performed should the doctors perform DNA tests and make sure the woman knows the gender? the father? what color it's eyes and hair would have been?

I mean, it is inside of them after all, it's important information.

[ringthree]

Because they're not taking the free will away. They're educating what your choice entails.

Forced education? An education you can't say no to? An education you MUST receive if you want to exert your rights?

You aren't much of an advocate for Satan.

[kuronosan]

And Kurosan, I'm comparing one set of biological cells to another. The only difference is their purpose, and what they grow into. Positive and negative, right and wrong, cancerous and non-cancerous... it's all black and white. Humans give it emotional context. You should know that more than anyone, if you're a med student.

You see, that is where you're wrong. When it comes to biology and function you can assign it black and white for certain - you cannot assign emotional context without shades of grey. In fact, your very problem is that you see this in black and white. Cancer cells are not the same thing as fetal stem cells and, as such, would NOT elicit the same emotional response. Pregnancy and Cancer are also not the same condition and, as such, do NOT elicit the same emotional response.

If you don't know what I mean, go to any woman you see on the street that is pregnant and tell them "Ah yea, I had cancer. I know how you feel."

See what kind of response you get.

[Tagus]

idk, it doesn't really disgust me at all. What really disgusts me, is the pro-lifers who think it's cool to hang out outside of planned parenthood and hold pictures of aborted fetuses towards cars coming in the door. The intent of those assholes is to disgust people... the intent of forcing a woman to see an ultrasound is to show her what, specifically, will be taken out of her body. If she was raped, for example, what she will see in that ultrasound wouldn't be as likely to dissuade her from going through with it as, say, a woman who's boyfriend didn't pull out in time. It might be the closest thing to pragmatism that a "hot button" issue like this one is capable of.

Edit: Heh... realized I'm repeating myself a little bit here. You get the gist.

[Bluefrostie]

you'd think that the woman would be more inclined to go ahead with the abortion... in the case of "he left his dick in too long", she'd probably be less inclined.

Sorry; I know it's been said before but I need to reiterate: If a woman really wants an abortion, she is going to get it, legally or illegally.

And by the way, why would you think it's anyone's business why a woman would want one?

[Helm]

The intent of forcing a woman to see an ultrasound is to show her what, specifically, will be taken out of her body.

You're all class. Also as if they weren't already aware. `- . ) hurr hurr

[Tagus]

You're all class. Also as if they weren't already aware. `- . ) hurr hurr

Well, for some reason it apparently has significance that they see it again, not only to people who agree with it but people who disagree as well. Otherwise, you guys wouldn't care.

[Day]

I ain't readin all this shit. The doctor told my lady to skip the sugar pills in her BC because of the horrible, horrible migraines she was getting during that time of the month. Shit has me all freaked out lol, anyone have experience with this? I mean I ain't trying to have a baby. Seems weird to me, skipping the cycle or whatever... but I also have a penis and don't know these things.