Abortion discussion

Genevieve

There I was, guts splatted all over my titties...
Jul 17, 2019
45
47
18
The County Morgue
Again, for the sake of argument we just need a single organism, out of hundreds of millions, who does such a thing. An organism that needs it's host long enough for that same organism to fully grow and then seprate.
The only organism that I'm aware of that needs its host long enough to grow into a separate being would be a baby. Parasites merely use their host as a convenience and can (and do) exist outside of a host's body, but it's much easier to just live in one. Remember: us eating to feed a tapeworm as opposed to the tapeworm constantly on the lookout for food (with full capability) is like how we go to the grocery store even though we, too, have hunting and gathering skills. I can fish very well and know how to gut and fillet a fish, but it's usually just easier to go to the store and get a fish, pre-gutted and filleted. It's convenience.

Ok, consider the dice game I proposed.
The chances in that game are obviously in my favor. Why? Because it's much harder to get two things in a row, then just get it once. If you don't agree with this, then we can play that game for proof. And we can play it as many times as you want.
Except birth control vs day-after pills don't work like your dice game, they work more like my bag game, where what you draw from one bag does not affect the other bag. Note: the day after pill is not a form of birth control and is not to be used as one, and this is very commonly and clearly stated by manufacturers of day-after pills, such as Plan B itself.

THERE IS A REASON IT IS CALLED PLAN B!!!


Plan A is your actual forms of birth control; that's the first bag.

Plan A fails, that's when you take a plan B. REMEMBER THAT STATEMENT.
1566923262040.png

Screenshot taken straight from Plan B's website.

Play the game.
The events are completely dependent on each other. The woman will not take the day-after pill unless she gets raped and unless the birth contoll pills fail (apart from some other secutity measures I mentioned).
Play mine. They're independent. You will not know when the birth control PILL fails, and not every woman who gets raped has the $40+ to buy a day-after pill. That, and the stigma really doesn't help.

Well, then THAT woman should not be punished. We already went over this.
We assume that doctros DID make a RIGHT diagnosis and then, and only then, can they proceed with a punishment. This is how I think it should be. This is what I already said.
It's not easy for the doctors to know whether the woman was or was not at fault, especially if the fetus seemed fine one appointment ago, stopped growing right and died before the next (ideally, healthy women get two ultrasounds: one to figure the due date, one to find the sex. Women with health issues like diabetes or hypertension usually get more checks). I've already stated this. The only way they can catch a fetus's growth declining like that is if the mother has a health issue and has to get more frequent ultrasounds. I had to because I was GD.

I really do not believe in this.
Let's take the usual example of what would happen. Mother is under constant influence of alchocol and drugs. The child, if even born alive, sufferers from some major deficiencies that are clearly caused by mother lack of responsibility. Doctors, who do this for a living every single day, see this and make a diagnosis. She gets punished. The message is sent.
This law, just like any law, should be made so that it minimizes the possibilities of innocent women suffering from it.
Except that's not always the case.
A few months after my son was born, I went to Target with him and found a woman looking at baby girl clothes. I can't remember if she said her baby was already in the NICU or if she knew her baby would be in there, but she mentioned her baby had an issue where her organs grew outside of her body. She didn't do anything to influence it, she herself looked healthy and her little toddler son was very healthy and happy in the cart.
That law would ultimately end up punishing anyone whose baby has a defect or was miscarried/stillborn, even if they genuinely did not do it. Like I've said the past 50 times, if this law was to go into effect, women who were involved in the miscarriage/stillbirth would not admit to it because they know of the punishment, and the people who didn't have involvement would be the only ones telling the truth, but they won't know which is which.

I disagree with that. The cases you mentioned are all examples of what we would call 'failed mutations'. They were the result of unfortunate situations. Mutations going the wrong way.
Yep, and they happen quite frequently. Even in humans, we have those now. Some people have advantages, some have disadvantages, others have some pretty neutral mutations (examples of those include distichiasis and heterochromia, both normally aesthetic, although distichiasis can also be a disadvantage if the eyelashes grow in bad spots).

Saying that we do something just because it's in our nature, or because it's instinctual does not explain it WHY is that in our nature and why is it so instinctual. To which you might reply with "well, it's just something that helped us evolve", to which I would respond with "help evolve how and why?".
I could go all in, but here's a whole article.

For example, you probably heard some authorities saying that female clitoris is an useless organ. Thought my view, this can not be possible.
So as weird as it is, all babies start as female and the Y chromosome represents itself later. Up until the Y chromosome starts to work, the penis and clitoris are the same thing. At 12-17 weeks, there are minor differences. Around 18-22 weeks, you have clearly defined sex organs. So how I see it in fetal growth is "genitalia placeholder."

Sexually, clitoral stimulation means sexual stimulation in women, and sexual stimulation can lead to reproduction. It's not a direct role, but it's sort of a role.

There are, though, some evolutionary leftovers we have that aren't exactly useful to us anymore (example: wisdom teeth, which for most people are removed).

Very true. Add to that millions, if not billions, of dollars certain groups are making on both sides.
Truth.

And yet, that person is extremely needed.
Needed doesn't mean it's available, unfortunately.

I dunno. Many of the convicted pedophiles were making pedo jokes on their Twitter. I'm just saying that if I hear someone making this type of joke, more than once, I would be on alert.
I've also seen people make pedo jokes that weren't pedos, but just had a very sick sense of humor. Still, doesn't mean it's my cup of tea or yours.

But, if you ever do have to go to prison, I would advice not to take the suicide road. That's just my advice, not that you asked for it.
Not planning on going to jail but ok lol. I've actually got a pretty clean record on my hands. Not even a single detention in school.

So who do you think would win? Who would have lower chances of winning? And why?
In my example there, if we were to compare the methods of BC to the dice, I'd have a 1/36 chance of both failing and a 1/6 chance the day after pill fails. In real life, there's far more factors that play into this and the chances of all failing could be even greater. The numbers they give in High School are theoretical, and it's usually accounting for if conditions are perfect (he's not stealthing, she takes her pill same time every day, he's using condoms properly, they're a proper fit, they're standard heights and weights, etc).

I would have a lower chance of winning if I'm the BC. And yes, while that is how it is realistically (more BC is successful than failed), it does not mean I don't have a chance at winning, just a low one. And that low chance still counts for some possibility.

In real life, in my own personal view, that low chance doesn't mean we should just take women's choice away. I may never utilize it, I would never want to get one, I most likely will never get one (because it's not a choice I would make), but it doesn't mean the reasons for other people choosing to do so are invalid. If you think she was irresponsible then, what makes you believe she'd be responsible raising the child she has, or responsible enough to find a good couple to adopt the baby? And just saying, psychologically, biological children are usually favored over adopted children, by both parents and the remaining family, because they aren't of blood. That not of blood status makes the priority level drop (reason for this evolutionary trait is the whole idea centuries of ancestors held that they wanted their bloodline strong and successful!!).
 

Lorencio

Run
VIP
Sep 22, 2018
1,426
1,710
113
28
White House
The only organism that I'm aware of that needs its host long enough to grow into a separate being would be a baby.
I'm sure that out of 6.5 million different kids of organism, we would find at another one. I would go and say that there are probably thousands of them. That would be my guess.

Parasites merely use their host as a convenience and can (and do) exist outside of a host's body, but it's much easier to just live in one.
Then the whole point of being a parasite if lose, if by parasite we consider an organism that needs a host in order to survive. If they can feed of what they find looking around, then the meaning of parasites is lost.

Except birth control vs day-after pills don't work like your dice game, they work more like my bag game, where what you draw from one bag does not affect the other bag. Note: the day after pill is not a form of birth control and is not to be used as one, and this is very commonly and clearly stated by manufacturers of day-after pills, such as Plan B itself.

THERE IS A REASON IT IS CALLED PLAN B!!!
Yes. because plan B usually comes after the plan A fails.
They are dependent on each other. You don't do plan B before plan A. If you did, then plan B would be plan A.

I never did, or I intended to make them the same thing, which they are not. However, now that you mentioned they are made for the same intention of preventing pregnancies, aka birth control.
They differ in the ways of how they function and how people should use them, among other things.

Plan A is your actual forms of birth control; that's the first bag.

Plan A fails, that's when you take a plan B. REMEMBER THAT STATEMENT.
Which proves my point. Thank you.
We will remember this statement.

they work more like my bag game, where what you draw from one bag does not affect the other bag
You can't pull balls out of second bag unless you first pull from the first one.

Screenshot taken straight from Plan B's website.
Exactly. It's plan B (not plan A), first you do plan A, then you do plan B.
Also, it says that it's not a 'regular contraceptive', it doesn't say that it's not a contraceptive.

Play mine. They're independent.
I will. They're not. They're fully dependent when considered together.
Remember, the initial point was about the chances a woman has of getting pregnant, if she takes all (or as many, or little as she can) steps to prevent pregnancies from rape.

You will not know when the birth control PILL fails, and not every woman who gets raped has the $40+ to buy a day-after pill. That, and the stigma really doesn't help.
You don't have to know it. You take it anyway after you get raped and suspect pregnancy.
And if a woman does not have $40 in her savings, then... she has bigger problems.

It's not easy for the doctors to know whether the woman was or was not at fault, especially if the fetus seemed fine one appointment ago, stopped growing right and died before the next (ideally, healthy women get two ultrasounds: one to figure the due date, one to find the sex. Women with health issues like diabetes or hypertension usually get more checks). I've already stated this. The only way they can catch a fetus's growth declining like that is if the mother has a health issue and has to get more frequent ultrasounds. I had to because I was GD.
I never said that it was easy. But, you're making it sound like it's hard to diagnose it even when the cases are obvious. Like the one I already mentioned.

Except that's not always the case.
It doesn't have to always be the case.

A few months after my son was born
Congrats! :D

She didn't do anything to influence it, she herself looked healthy and her little toddler son was very healthy and happy in the cart.
That's hypocritical of you to say.
You don't know if she did something or not. You assumed that she did nothing wrong and that she's not lying to you, or telling you the full truth.
I'm not saying that she is lying, but I'm saying that you don't know it.
We should apply this uncertainty to you, just like you apply it to doctors.

That law would ultimately end up punishing anyone whose baby has a defect or was miscarried/stillborn, even if they genuinely did not do it. Like I've said the past 50 times, if this law was to go into effect, women who were involved in the miscarriage/stillbirth would not admit to it because they know of the punishment, and the people who didn't have involvement would be the only ones telling the truth, but they won't know which is which.
If the law is made correctly, then it wouldn't happen.
It's not necessary for a woman to admit to anything. It's only up to doctors to make a right diagnosis, and up to judges to make a right punishment.

I could go all in, but here's a whole article.
lol, cute
To which I respond with "Help involve how and why?".

Sexually, clitoral stimulation means sexual stimulation in women, and sexual stimulation can lead to reproduction. It's not a direct role, but it's sort of a role.
Having eye sight can also lead to sexual reproduction. In that case the eyes play "sort of a role" for reproduction. That doesn't mean that that's their only role. Just like clitoris. Both those two organs have their roles, not just "sort of roles".

There are, though, some evolutionary leftovers we have that aren't exactly useful to us anymore (example: wisdom teeth, which for most people are removed).
Interesting, I'm very suspicious about the way that should be done.

In my example there, if we were to compare the methods of BC to the dice, I'd have a 1/36 chance of both failing and a 1/6 chance the day after pill fails.
The day after pill fails in 5%, not in 16.6%.
For condoms it's between 14% and 3%, depending on the usage. We can take it for 7%.
Similar to condoms, oral contraceptives have an average failure rate of 7%.
And don't forget many other factors that I already mentioned as barriers from getting raped and impregnated.
Even if we exclude condoms, since the attacker may or may not use one, it's still a very low chance of a woman getting impregnated through rape.

Ok, let's make it simple.
Let's take just two factors. The ones we already used: birth control pills (oral contraceptives) and the day-after pill.
Failure chances are 7% and 5%.
Here's the question: If we have two women and both of them get raped and both of them take the day-after pill, however the first one was also on oral contraceptives, while the second was not. Which one of them has a lower chance of getting pregnant and why?
(note: don't forget the 'why' part)

I would have a lower chance of winning if I'm the BC. And yes, while that is how it is realistically (more BC is successful than failed), it does not mean I don't have a chance at winning, just a low one. And that low chance still counts for some possibility.
I never said that there was no possibility, but there is a big different between 25% and 0.000025%. Imagine if your husbands revenue increased by 25% and if it increased by 0.000025%.

In real life, in my own personal view, that low chance doesn't mean we should just take women's choice away.
Choice for what? For abortion?!?!
We were talking about pregnancies and rapes. So even when a woman has such a low chances of getting pregnant through rape, that should apply to all women who have regular pregnancies and want the same abortions?
Do you see the problem here?

In those situations there should be at least some discussion about letting a woman have an abortion. It should be possible, but not given freely.

If you think she was irresponsible then, what makes you believe she'd be responsible raising the child she has, or responsible enough to find a good couple to adopt the baby?
Nothing. But that doesn't mean she should be allowed to take the child's life.
Many parents are not good at parenting, but if she's goes and does some major harm to that child then we already have laws and institutions to deal with that.


 
Top