  |
Lilmznicoleta
Newbie
Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 20
Location: New York
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:43 am Post subject: Anti-abortionists are being unethical. |
 |
|
|
...or so says Rhonda Arias, a woman who became suicidal after having two abortions herself and has dedicated the past fifteen years of her life to counseling women in prisons who have also had abortions. Ms. Arias is one of the anti-abortionists who has decided, very unscientifically, that abortion leads to severe psychological problems and that focusing the debate around this fallacy will help reach out to those who are pro-choice being that they are also focusing on the women, not the fetus as most traditional pro-lifers tend to.
The article points out how some leaders of this cause have manipulated their so called evidence. For example, the study that showed that a very high number of women became suicidal and addicted to drugs post-abortion. However, they only studied women who already admitted to regretting their abortion before the study while all other science shows that those who feel such deep regret over abortion are a minority of the general population of those who have had one (or more). While groups like Planned Parenthood admit that emotional distress and regret do occur at times, they are definitely not the norm.
Furthermore, it ignores two vital facts. The first being that pregnancy puts a huge emotional and physical strain on women in general, regardless of whether or not it ends up in abortion or birth.
Pregnancy radically shifts hormonal balances in women's bodies.<br />
Post-martum depression is a common problem that has recieved more attention lately. Many mothers suffer from it, sometimes taking years to return back to normal. The second major fact the anti-abortionists seem to ignore in these studies is that, most of the women who seem to become severely depressed after their abortions had, or were prone to, psychological issues beforehand.<br />
<br />
There are two main programs Rhonda Arias runs. One was a televised broadcast called "Faces of Abortion" that has women who have regrettably had abortions come on the air and tell their stories. The other is Oil of Joy, where the women in the Texas prison she counsels come together to repent and ask their children for forgiveness.<blockquote>They fill out an "emotion time line" to chart their lives. They explore the circumstances of their abortions. They're encouraged to think about whether they were pressured into ending their pregnancies and to connect this with other experiences of feeling powerless. Often, Arias says, they are victims of physical or sexual abuse. They fill "bitterness bags" with rocks, one for each offense they want to forgive, often including those they committed themselves. They pick out a pair of baby shoes -- choices include satin christening slippers, work boots, sneakers and Dora the Explorer flip-flops -- attach a card with the name they have chosen for the baby they didn't have and give them to Arias for a traveling memorial that she has taken to Washington, D.C. </blockquote> <br />
<br />
She then explains to the women that their babies and God will forgive them if they are truley sorry, explains to them using pseudo-psychology how their abortion is the underlying cause of all their problems, and then encourages them to help discourage other women from making the same mistake(s) they did.<br />
<br />
But it gets worse.<br />
<br />
There is currently a lawsuit being filed by a woman in New Jersey, encouraged by anti-abortionist groups, against the doctor who performed her abortion for not performing his duty to her by not telling her beforehand that, the embryo "was a complete, separate, unique and irreplaceable human being."<br />
<br />
Anti-abortionists want to make it a law for doctors to warn women before having an abortion of the possible psychological effects, but many doctors disagree because they say much of the information they want them to give is misleading and inconclusive.<br />
<br />
There are counseling services for both pre and post abortion patients in some clinics, but since most lack the adequate funding to run them, they often must resort to recommending these women to other groups that are mostly run and funded by churches. There are also questionares to be filled out by the women but some feel like the wording of the questions will often lead women to feel ashamed and guilty about their choice.<br />
<br />
Normally I am touched by stories of people who turn their own personal travails into a way to help others, but in a case such as Rhonda's, it seems like she would be better of on the recieving end of the counseling chair. <br />
<br />
These anti-abortionists are not only manipulating facts to prove their case, they're also manipulating people's emotions. <br />
<br />
One woman claimed that these counseling sessions help many women face other traumatic events in their lives because it opens up the gate by connecting their abortions to them. Many of the women had been abused in many ways or have had drug problems, among other issues. Instead of dealing with these issues in their own right, as any ethical counselor would, they are working hard to use their abortions, which generally came after the other events in their lives, as the scapegoat for all their problems. <br />
<br />
It is not only dishonest and immoral, it is also dangerous and condescending to assume that their personal beliefs are shared by all women considering having an abortion.<br />
<br />
While they tried to shape the argument around the women to appeal to prolifers, they completely missed the point. They also completely <br />
circumvented issues that could have a real, and positive, impact on the rates of abortions: policies that make birth control affordable and readily available, as well as ones that would make it more feasible for women in tough situations to consider raising a child.<br />
<br />
Rhonda is also still adamently for teaching abstinence only education, not just after having two abortions that have affected her so deeply, but also after her teenage daughter just became pregnant by a boy she met in Church because as she stated, "abstinence is the only thing that works".
Here for the full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01.....9&_r=1[/url][/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cornopean
Forum Elder
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:05 pm Post subject: Re: Anti-abortionists are being unethical. |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | ...or so says Rhonda Arias, a woman who became suicidal after having two abortions herself and has dedicated the past fifteen years of her life to counseling women in prisons who have also had abortions. Ms. Arias is one of the anti-abortionists who has decided, very unscientifically, that abortion leads to severe psychological problems... |
let's see.......they just took the life of their unborn child. yeah....I could see where that might lead to severe psychological pain. I really don't need a study to tell me that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CustomFordGirl
Known Associate
Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 446
Location: Greensburg, PA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
^_______^ Agreed.
It's not that anti-abortionists don't care about the woman/mother.. it's more that they are responding to pro-abortionists, who only seem to care whether or not the woman is inconvenienced by her unexpected pregnancy/impending motherhood. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeaceLoveandRockNRoll
Known Associate
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 300
Location: Richmond, IN
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| The debate here won't be solved by agrument between the two sides. From the standpoint that a fetus of any age is a human being, allowing it to be killed can never be accepted. And from the standpoint that it is not a human being, it makes sense to allow the mother control over what is, under those assumptions, her own body. I personally believe the latter, but I don't believe I can know for sure unless I were to actually become pregnant and know what it felt like. Possibly not even then. But I really can't see a way to mediate between two opposing viewpoints, this doesn't even appear to be a question that will ever be answered by conclusive science. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CustomFordGirl
Known Associate
Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 446
Location: Greensburg, PA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PeaceLoveandRockNRoll wrote: | | The debate here won't be solved by agrument between the two sides. From the standpoint that a fetus of any age is a human being, allowing it to be killed can never be accepted. And from the standpoint that it is not a human being, it makes sense to allow the mother control over what is, under those assumptions, her own body. I personally believe the latter, but I don't believe I can know for sure unless I were to actually become pregnant and know what it felt like. Possibly not even then. But I really can't see a way to mediate between two opposing viewpoints, this doesn't even appear to be a question that will ever be answered by conclusive science. |
I'm not trying to start another raging abortion debate, I'm just going to disagree with you on a couple of points and I hope they are taken for what they are.
1) I do not agree that it's a woman's choice to have an abortion. This is something that should be come to on a consensus: father, family, and doctor.
2) Science HAS given a conclusive answer.. but nobody is listening, perhaps because it isn't the answer people want to hear. In the hospital, two things determine if a person is alive: brain waves, and a heart beat. Is it not sound advice to declare life with the same criteria doctors use to declare death?
With that in mind, the fetal heart beats at around 4-5 weeks, and brain waves can be detected between 13 and 16 weeks.
Now it has been proven that a heart can beat in a "vegetable's" body, so (scientifically speaking) the heart beat means little.. it's the brain waves that are important. My scientific conclusion: abortion after 4 months is willfully ending a being that has regular brain activity.. a.k.a. murder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CustomFordGirl wrote: |
1) I do not agree that it's a woman's choice to have an abortion. This is something that should be come to on a consensus: father, family, and doctor. |
Why would the father be involved in the discussion?
| Quote: |
2) Science HAS given a conclusive answer.. but nobody is listening, perhaps because it isn't the answer people want to hear. In the hospital, two things determine if a person is alive: brain waves, and a heart beat. Is it not sound advice to declare life with the same criteria doctors use to declare death? |
Not really, no.
Declarations of death are an entirely different matter from determining when a fetus is "alive." If you want to speak scientifically, then there's actually no point at which the fetus is not alive. It's always alive, by definition.
It's not really even "life" that is at issue at all. It's "personhood". It's not wrong to kill in general - it's wrong to kill people.
| Quote: |
With that in mind, the fetal heart beats at around 4-5 weeks, and brain waves can be detected between 13 and 16 weeks.
Now it has been proven that a heart can beat in a "vegetable's" body, so (scientifically speaking) the heart beat means little.. it's the brain waves that are important. My scientific conclusion: abortion after 4 months is willfully ending a being that has regular brain activity.. a.k.a. murder. |
That's not a scientific conclusion at all.
I mean, you can certainly say that it's alive, and you can also say that the neurons constituting its brain are doing something.
But where's the connection between that and murder? The same things can be said of cows, after all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Amin
Not a Newbie
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 85
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
"Why would the father be involved in the discussion? "
because his sperm helps make it?
fill me in if im missing something here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
If you help a guy build a shed on his lawn, do you then get a share in the shed?
Not really. I mean, it would be nice of the guy to consult you before tearing it down, but there's nothing obligatory about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Docsmitter
Known Associate
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 311
Location: CA LE FOR NYE YAY
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I am pro abortionist on circumstance. Severe mental problems from killing an unborn? Or servere general and possible mental problems for the mother and child for having a mother who is 2 young. I think you should be allowed to have abortions if your under a certain age, or your going to destroy 2 lifes, not just 1 who is unclear apparently if its life or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Docsmitter wrote: | | Severe mental problems from killing an unborn? |
The idea that psychological issues are prevelent amongst those who undergo abortion procedures is a myth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cornopean
Forum Elder
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| PeaceLoveandRockNRoll wrote: | | I personally believe the latter, but I don't believe I can know for sure unless I were to actually become pregnant and know what it felt like. Possibly not even then. But I really can't see a way to mediate between two opposing viewpoints, this doesn't even appear to be a question that will ever be answered by conclusive science. |
Well the funny(or sad) thing is that both John Kerry and my govr (Granholm-MI) believe that life begins at conception AND yet they still support keeping abortion legal. they say they dont want to force their beliefs on others.
but if I said that personally I believe slavery to be wrong, but b/c I am unwilling to force my beliefs on others, I will still vote for laws that permit slavery. haha! how stupid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| cornopean wrote: |
Well the funny(or sad) thing is that both John Kerry and my govr (Granholm-MI) believe that life begins at conception AND yet they still support keeping abortion legal. they say they dont want to force their beliefs on others. |
By "life" i assume you mean "personhood", because "life" is of no intrinsic value.
What that means is that they're lying about one thing or the other.
My guess is they're lying about the conception thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CustomFordGirl
Known Associate
Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 446
Location: Greensburg, PA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | CustomFordGirl wrote: |
1) I do not agree that it's a woman's choice to have an abortion. This is something that should be come to on a consensus: father, family, and doctor. |
Why would the father be involved in the discussion?
|
Because, apparently the mother had some emotional connection to the father, (i.e. - a bf/gf or husband/wife relationship) or else they wouldn't have gotten together. Now, I understand if it's a one-night stand.. but in such instances I believe certain precautions should be taken; not just for pregnancy's sake, but for health reasons.
And I value the father's opinion.. it's his child too. After all, if the mother wanted to keep the baby, he'd either help her raise it or pay child support, right? So why shouldn't he be consulted?
| CustomFordGirl wrote: | | 2) Science HAS given a conclusive answer.. but nobody is listening, perhaps because it isn't the answer people want to hear. In the hospital, two things determine if a person is alive: brain waves, and a heart beat. Is it not sound advice to declare life with the same criteria doctors use to declare death? |
| exton wrote: | Not really, no.
Declarations of death are an entirely different matter from determining when a fetus is "alive." If you want to speak scientifically, then there's actually no point at which the fetus is not alive. It's always alive, by definition.
It's not really even "life" that is at issue at all. It's "personhood". It's not wrong to kill in general - it's wrong to kill people. |
Isn't it ironic, that the term "personhood" is used today for the sole purpose of defending abortion? You don't seem to see it in use anywhere else. You want to draw a philosophical/spiritual line in when a medical procedure can or should be done? I was trying to be objective here, and using medical evidence as back-up. I could just as easily gone on my faith and said that abortion is wrong at any point, for any reason save the health of the mother.
I was also -if you notice above- trying to avoid another lengthy debate on abortion.
| Quote: |
With that in mind, the fetal heart beats at around 4-5 weeks, and brain waves can be detected between 13 and 16 weeks.
Now it has been proven that a heart can beat in a "vegetable's" body, so (scientifically speaking) the heart beat means little.. it's the brain waves that are important. My scientific conclusion: abortion after 4 months is willfully ending a being that has regular brain activity.. a.k.a. murder. |
| exton wrote: | That's not a scientific conclusion at all.
I mean, you can certainly say that it's alive, and you can also say that the neurons constituting its brain are doing something.
But where's the connection between that and murder? The same things can be said of cows, after all. |
In prison, when an inmate is executed, the doctor writes "homicide" as the cause of death.
Perhaps I should have written "..willfully ending a human existence.."
Do you deny that a fetus is human in nature?
You cheapen motherhood by comparing a child to a cow.. why is this?
One definition of murder is to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously. Have you ever heard accounts of nurses in abortion clinics who take garbage cans full of little body parts to the dumpster? Can you imagine what is going on, what is happening to the fetus when it's body parts are all that are left? Don't think for one minute that abortions are all about sticking a little tube up there and sucking out undeveloped matter. In the second and third trimester, it's about pulling baby body parts out. Don't ever cheapen that.. it's barbaric and inhumane.
Sorry if I've gotten up in arms again over this issue. But I have a two-year old daughter, and the thought of anybody cheapening the experience of motherhood by comparing abortion to building a shed or slaughtering cows is truly offensive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lester
Forum Elder
Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The guy didn't wrap his tool, he's a fool, he already made his decision when he had sex with her, his decision is over, her decision is just beginning.
'Personhood' is also used in pulling the plug arguments, and against animal rights activists, and in the death penalty debate(some believe you give up personhood when you commit murder) I think it's very important to decide personhood, potential personhood is a ridiculous thing to worry over, unless you plan to have every teenage boy fill up a cup 3-10 times a week.
A fetus is human in nature the same way an arm is human in nature, if you were to cut off your arm to save the rest of your body would you think that an acceptable sacrifice? Cheapen motherhood? through analogy?? ha! he just said they both have neurons< thats truth!
whats happening to the fetus? well i think i can imagine< because you just told us it is being shoved into a garbage bin big deal it doent know that!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringwormbettie
Not a Newbie
Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 65
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Abortion is a choice women make. If you want to make that choice and you realize "oops, that was uh-oh" later, that’s your deal. Lots of women don't regret abortions and just because some do doesn't mean all women should have their right to reproductive/sexual freedom taken away. My question is, if you get a tattoo and regret it, should tattoos be illegal? No. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
|
|
