Wisconsin passes abortion ban

[hey]

Well, an Adult is also a "bag of cells". It just so happens that an adult is able to take care of itself which a fetus/new born can not.

You can't just walk into a premature birth clinic and start slaying all the premature babies there. If a baby is aborted at 25 weeks, whats differance then killing a premature(25 weeks) baby in an incubator?

Here is the Likelihood of Survival statisics for premature births:
23 weeks 17%
24 weeks 39%
25 weeks 50%

If you want to go rambling about being "self-aware" , "self-sustaining" and "sapient" then you start to justify euthanasia. Now you gotta figure out to what degree a person is sapient before you can euthanize it. How about an IQ test? Everyone that scores below 80 gets euthanized. Shall we continue?

Coool, so it sounds like at around 23 weeks or so the chance of survival is high enough that giving birth right there could be preferable to abortion. So let's do that (except not, since who the fuck is going to pay for raising the unwanted kid?) instead after that, and just abort before. If it dies, well, no real loss.

[test123]

Oh man that's so helpful, my wife is on day 42 since her last period, she's gotta be pregnant eh?

Well, does she use birth control? If not, then she should take a pregnancy test. It is called personal responsibility.

[Ashmada]

Test, you seem to be confusing euthanasia, the deliberate termination of life to prevent suffering and eugenics, the deliberate and systemic selection of genetical characteristics judged desirable.

You also seem to be a dumb theocratic cunt, but that's something I cannot correct.

[Psion]

you...you realize that even with birth control there's a small chance of unwanted pregnancy right?

It's pretty small, about 0.1% of women get pregnant even with perfect use of the pills, or around 5% with typical use. (aka the pill failed to work correctly even when used properly, or the woman occasionally forgot a pill or the like.)

Seriously, read what ksandra told you. and in case you can't seem to find that post, look at your goddamn title, because you seriously need that reminder every chance you get.

[archibaldcrane]

Well, does she use birth control? If not, then she should take a pregnancy test. It is called personal responsibility.

So you're saying if she uses BC, then she shouldn't worry that she's pregnant, and it wouldn't be 'irresponsible' for her to not take a pregnancy test?

Thanks for proving my point.

[kuronosan]

I seriously think test has to be trolling. Nobody is that retarded.

[hey]

No, all women should just take a pregnancy test every day. It's called personal responsibility.

[AidenCarby]

Oh man that's so helpful, my wife is on day 42 since her last period, she's gotta be pregnant eh?

Name the baby Aaron

[test123]

So you're saying if she uses BC, then she shouldn't worry that she's pregnant, and it wouldn't be 'irresponsible' for her to not take a pregnancy test?

If she skips one period while on birth control it would be reasonable not to get tested. But all women should keep in mind what they want to do if it turns out they are pregnant so to be prepared. After skipping two periods it should be pretty obvious that a test should be taken. And if the test is positive and the woman wants to abort she has 1 month to do so. This is all within 3 months.

[kuronosan]

If she skips one period while on birth control it would be reasonable not to get tested. But all women should keep in mind what they want to do if it turns out they are pregnant so to be prepared. After skipping two periods it should be pretty obvious that a test should be taken. And if the test is positive and the woman wants to abort she has 1 month to do so. This is all within 3 months.

You're an idiot who knows nothing about the reproductive or endocrine systems. Good day.

[RKenshin]

There are ways to reduce abortions without banning them. Whats wrong with banning after 12 weeks?

lol?

Solution to reducing abortions without banning them: ban them.

[SamanosukeShiva]

GENIUS, why didn't I think of that.

[Plow]

Test, you seem to be confusing euthanasia, the deliberate termination of life to prevent suffering and eugenics, the deliberate and systemic selection of genetical characteristics judged desirable.

You also seem to be a dumb theocratic cunt, but that's something I cannot correct.

As to the first part, no, he's pointing out how the 2 can meld so easily. It's not a huge jump from eliminating retarded unborn babies to eliminating babies that get brain damage during birth complications, at which point you're not on your way to killing living, breathing retarded people, you're there.


As to the second part, sure, but there's a point he comes close to that people don't seem to realize:

People are arguing that abortion laws restrict a woman's freedom... to choose to have unprotected sex and/or not pay close attention to their health.

Humans didn't determine that disease or pregnancy are "consequences" to sex. It's just how it is. There are a lot more useful steps people can be taking than "just make sure we can kill em off and it's all good."

I'm not at all in favor of abortion bans, but it sure is fucking frustrating to see people argue as if any remotely significant amount of abortions are a result of that 0.0001% of the time birth control doesn't work, or arguing that their retarded ass friend didn't notice they were pregnant for 5+ months to support their argument that said person should be able to decide if a baby lives or dies.


Not to mention the claim that a fetus has more rights than a woman if that woman isn't allowed to decide to kill it off after a certain point.



In short, the argument in favor of allowing abortions would be a whole lot stronger if people were approaching it from a point of view based on full responsibility.

The same way most of the hardcore religious types could have a whole lot more credibility in the argument if they weren't also gun nuts in favor of death sentences for trespassing.

[Plow]

Yes, I'm aware birth control and condoms don't work a miniscule fraction of the time, and that stupid shit like "pulling out" or spermicides have way higher fail rates.

Yes, I'm aware that in extraordinarily rare situations, women's bodies might not change in any noticeable way, and that there may be no reason to test.


I'm also not a fucking idiot and I'm quite aware those are absolutely tiny fraction of abortions and that the vast, vast majority of abortions could have been prevented through personal responsibility.

[Helm]

Welp. ` -. )

[Bluefrostie]

If she skips one period while on birth control it would be reasonable not to get tested. But all women should keep in mind what they want to do if it turns out they are pregnant so to be prepared. After skipping two periods it should be pretty obvious that a test should be taken. And if the test is positive and the woman wants to abort she has 1 month to do so. This is all within 3 months.

Assuming she has the extra money laying around to get an abortion within that last month, right?

People are arguing that abortion laws restrict a woman's freedom... to choose to have unprotected sex and/or not pay close attention to their health.

With that logic, people with little or no health insurance deserve to die, because they aren't paying close enough attention to their health. Or people with a family history of a cancer or any other disease?

[Plow]

With that logic, people with little or no health insurance deserve to die, because they aren't paying close enough attention to their health. Or people with a family history of a cancer or any other disease?

This is why planned parenthood has to be protected, and women have to be convinced to actually use it.


edit: and not just women either, guys can get condoms and shit too

[test123]

Assuming she has the extra money laying around to get an abortion within that last month, right?

Having sex is not a right, it is privilege. If a woman wants to have sex and knows she wants to abort if she becomes pregnant, then she ought to have money saved up or get abortion insurance.

[archibaldcrane]

If she skips one period while on birth control it would be reasonable not to get tested. But all women should keep in mind what they want to do if it turns out they are pregnant so to be prepared. After skipping two periods it should be pretty obvious that a test should be taken. And if the test is positive and the woman wants to abort she has 1 month to do so. This is all within 3 months.

Yeah, cause this shit http://www.babymed.com/implantation-...bleeding-cycle isn't confusing at all.

[Bluefrostie]

Having sex is not a right, it is privilege. If a woman wants to have sex and knows she wants to abort if she becomes pregnant, then she ought to have money saved up or get abortion insurance.

Sex is part of our biology. It is not a right or a privilege. And shit happens. Maybe the woman never intended to have an abortion. There are plenty of reasons women have an abortion, and they don't fall into the category of "Oops, accidental pregnancy; abortion time!"