Jump to content

Abortion


Assume Nothing

Recommended Posts

Sources for all claims, please.

 

Cigarette smoking also increases the risk of cancer for the woman, premature birth, etc. If that's a reason for abortion to be disallowed, why not cigarettes as well?

 

http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1171.asp

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 645
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Some scientists inclined to believe that a causal relationship between induced abortion and an increased risk of developing breast cancer exists

 

Yes, that sounds very conclusive. And without any links to an actual study or scientist with that opinion.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some scientists inclined to believe that a causal relationship between induced abortion and an increased risk of developing breast cancer exists

 

Yes, that sounds very conclusive. And without any links to an actual study or scientist with that opinion.

 

It's not true, although it is a common talking point amongst Randall Terry types:

 

The relationship between induced and spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk has been the subject of extensive research beginning in the late 1950s. Until the mid-1990s, the evidence was inconsistent. Findings from some studies suggested there was no increase in risk of breast cancer among women who had had an abortion, while findings from other studies suggested there was an increased risk. Most of these studies, however, were flawed in a number of ways that can lead to unreliable results. Only a small number of women were included in many of these studies, and for most, the data were collected only after breast cancer had been diagnosed, and women’s histories of miscarriage and abortion were based on their “self-report” rather than on their medical records. Since then, better-designed studies have been conducted. These newer studies examined large numbers of women, collected data before breast cancer was found, and gathered medical history information from medical records rather than simply from self-reports, thereby generating more reliable findings. The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.

Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer Risk

 

Pro-lifers lying? Who'dathunk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shrug. Perhaps sees_all has better sources.

 

Although, that really just debunked the "breast cancer" thing. I didn't see any evidence about miscarriages.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When 60-odd-percent of pregnancies end anyway, due to natural causes (see my previous post) I don't see how a tiny change is all that significant. Especially when activities like smoking, drinking, drugs, etc are so much more damaging.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you're going to find a better source than the National Cancer Institute, but be my guest.

 

The miscarriage link is inconclusive, just as the breast cancer link used to be inconclusive. However, it's only inconclusive with a surgical abortion. For your average medical abortion, there is no increased risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you're going to find a better source than the National Cancer Institute, but be my guest.

 

The miscarriage link is inconclusive, just as the breast cancer link used to be inconclusive. However, it's only inconclusive with a surgical abortion. For your average medical abortion, there is no increased risk.

Ok, then find me a source that says that.

 

Edit: I meant better sources then mine, not yours, seeing as he's the one who posted in the first place.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shrug. Perhaps sees_all has better sources.

 

Although, that really just debunked the "breast cancer" thing. I didn't see any evidence about miscarriages.

Its a study, and its subject to biases like everything else. I listened to Joel Brind himself speak about it, and the slides he showed about breast development made sense.

Statistically speaking, the only way to "prove" anything is with an experiment, you know, with a control group and randomization to lessen any biases. Since pro-life people believe abortion is immoral, and since pro-choice people have nothing to gain from doing the experiment (and should also think that forcing pregnancy and abortion on individuals is immoral), it'll never be done with humans.

 

Another facet of this debate is birth control. You know, taking hormones every month to trick your body into believing its permanently pregnant. Because elevated estrogen levels don't cause cancer...

 

An article published in the March issue of a leading American medical journal reports that a large study has found a 50% increased risk of ectopic (or tubal) pregnancy among women who have undergone abortion' date=' with an even greater risk among women who have had more than one previous abortion. Publishing in the American Journal of Public Health, a team of French doctors and researchers reported the results of a multicenter study involving 1,955 women conducted in two regions of France between 1988 and 1991.

[/quote']

There are lots of studies on this subject. It doesn't matter though, because people will still chose what they want to believe, and ignore anything that contradicts them.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, so are you against birth control, too?

 

How's that working out for America:

 

In the United States, sex is generally kept secret from parents.

 

In a 2004 study, [Dutch-American sociologist Dr. Amy Schalet ] asked parents: "Would you permit your son or daughter to spend the night with a girlfriend or boyfriend in his or her room at home?" Not surprisingly, nine out of 10 American parents said, no, often adding, "Not under my roof!" ... According to Schalet, Dutch parents struggle with their teens' emerging sexuality, but they deal with it by bringing the issue out into the open and into the home, where they can supervise. Nine out of 10 Dutch parents told Schalet they have allowed or would allow a romantic sleepover under the right circumstances: With a child who was 16 or older and in a loving committed relationship that the parents observed develop gradually. It is common for Dutch teens to sit down together with each set of parents to discuss why they think they're ready to have sex, and to seek permission.

 

The first time they had sex, 64 percent of Dutch teens used birth control, compared with only 26 percent of American teens. Most of the time, the Dutch teens used pills. Think about it for a minute: The majority of Dutch teens are making an appointment, going to a clinic, getting a prescription filled and starting birth control before they have sex.

 

n both Europe and America "the age at which most people start having sex is 17," but that teen pregnancy "rates in the United States are three to six times higher than in Western European countries" and that "gonorrhea and chlamydia rates are 20 to 30 times higher here than in the Netherlands"

The European approach to teens, sex, and love, in pictures

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The united states ultra conservative culture is to blame. Is it really surprising that Europe after 100's of years od religious wars and 2 world wars has given up on conservative values?

 

The united states started with the religious extremest from Europe going there to escape.

Have you ever opened a history book?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The united states ultra conservative culture is to blame. Is it really surprising that Europe after 100's of years od religious wars and 2 world wars has given up on conservative values?

 

The united states started with the religious extremest from Europe going there to escape.

Have you ever opened a history book?

 

Ah yes I love history, tell me what I said that would be considered ill informed?

 

LOL -- I think you pretty much hit the nail right on the head ... :lol:

nyuseg.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, so are you against birth control, too?

 

Here's a dilemma for you magekillr:

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/environment/Feb-08/Sex-Altering-Pollutants-Could-Devastate-Fish.html

Sewage pollutes many waterways with the female hormone. Even tiny amounts could hurt wildlife and change the sex of some fish.

 

Scientist Karen Kidd added synthetic estrogen to an artificial lake in Ontario' date=' Canada, for three summers to track its impact on wildlife.

 

The pollution killed many fish and disrupted reproduction in others. The sperm count of male minnows fell, with some even beginning to produce eggs in their testes.

 

Weve known for some time that estrogen can adversely affect the reproductive health of fish, but ours was the first study to show the long-term impact, Kidd said. [b']What we demonstrated is that estrogen can wipe out entire populations of small fish. [/b]

 

The presence of hormonal pollutants in the countrys waterways is not new. According to Environmental Science and Technology magazine, scientists have been studying the impact of these chemicals on wildlife since the 1990s.

 

Intersex fish have been found in the St. Lawrence River, the Mississippi and the Great Lakes, Science Daily reports.

 

Wastewater, the source of the pollution, contains hormones because women excrete traces of estrogen, and many birth control drugs and household products contain compounds that chemically resemble hormonescalled hormone mimics.

 

Still undetermined is what effect, if any, exposure to environmental hormones has on human health.

 

Scientists are studying whether hormonal pollutants interact with the same receptor molecules inside the body that estrogen can, Scientific American writes. If they do, the pollutants might subtly overdose living things with excesses of hormone-like signals.

 

Thankfully, the magazine reports that a number of studies into whether the pollutants contribute to breast cancer and other human health issues have provided insufficient evidence, at least at the present, for such effects of exposure to an environmental estrogen.

(emphasis mine)

 

 

Yes, I am against birth control. In case you didn't know these issues on life, sexuality, relationships, marriage, and morality in general are all linked. You can't just pick and chose positions from each without contradicting yourself, or weakening your argument.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I am against birth control. In case you didn't know these issues on life, sexuality, relationships, marriage, and morality in general are all linked. You can't just pick and chose positions from each without contradicting yourself, or weakening your argument.

 

Which means, what, exactly? That your definition of morality is right because female hormones kill fish?

:unsure:

nyuseg.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sees all, it seems to me you're just pulling facts out of your ass to rationalize an idea you already had in your head. Hormones are not the only form of birth control. And wouldn't the problem be that we are polluting the rivers, not that we are using the hormones? Plus, there are much worse causes of pollution which I don't see you getting your feathers all fluffed up about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which means, what, exactly? That your definition of morality is right because female hormones kill fish?

:unsure:

Its hard to be against abortion but for birth control.

Or its hard to be for masturbation but against pre-marital sex. Or for pre-marital sex but against gay marriage.

Most of these arguments can be made on the basis of logic and reasoning, but from a morality standpoint defending all of them at once is easier than defending one individually, or excluding others.

 

The article posted was just showing how birth control is adversely affecting fish populations, and I know how important the environment is to liberals.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which means, what, exactly? That your definition of morality is right because female hormones kill fish?

:unsure:

Its hard to be against abortion but for birth control.

Or its hard to be for masturbation but against pre-marital sex. Or for pre-marital sex but against gay marriage.

Most of these arguments can be made on the basis of logic and reasoning, but from a morality standpoint defending all of them at once is easier than defending one individually, or excluding others.

 

The article posted was just showing how birth control is adversely affecting fish populations, and I know how important the environment is to liberals.

 

Well - for the sake of argument - there are hundreds of other mitigating factors involved that may affect the environment around this so-called "artificial lake".

 

Where is the comparative study? Are fish in other lakes not similarly affected?

 

Smells like [cabbage] to me. :unsure:

nyuseg.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are over-complicating this. It's really a matter of personal beliefs, and trying to debate it with rational arguments only entrenches everyone further in their own ideas.

 

I'm pro-choice because I believe a woman should be able to make important decisions involving her own body. Since it's a personal matter, making the mother's choice for her would be silly.

 

I also believe a fetus is not a person, or at least is an inconsequential death. It's the past that makes the person, and a fetus has no past.

An argument that places a fetus as not a person based upon scientific backing is acceptable to me, but a past makes a person? What manner of determining a person is that? Every second past conception is the past.

 

And since when is death inconsequential? Just because you can kill someone without anyone challenging it or finding out doesn't mean it isn't wrong. Being a moral person is doing the right thing regardless of convenience.

kaisershami.png

He who wears his morality but as his best garment were better naked... Your daily life is your temple and your religion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to state my opinion, but a few months ago i found out that Lil Kim was impregnated by biggie smalls but aborted the baby. think about that one.

[size="5"][font="Georgia"][b]Staking:[/b][/font][font="Palatino Linotype"][color="#FF0000"][/color][color="#FFFF00"][/color][color="#00FF00"] 4+ mil[/color][/font]
[font="Georgia"][b]Current Status:[/b][/font][font="Palatino Linotype"][color="#FF0000"][/color][color="#0000FF"] Training defense [/color][/font][/size]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think my post has to be relevant to any debate as long as it is relevant to the subject line, which it clearly is. My mistake for your lack of knowledge on 90's pop culture. It's on biggie small's wiki page and has been the same since i last checked about 5 months ago meaning it is most likely true. The point of my post was to perhaps encourage a discussion considering that one of the best rappers who ever lived, never lived, because of abortion. i see that was simply wishful thinking on my part. continue with your important discussion and frivolous shutting down of legitimate posts. your lack of knowledge and open mindedness is appreciated by all.

[size="5"][font="Georgia"][b]Staking:[/b][/font][font="Palatino Linotype"][color="#FF0000"][/color][color="#FFFF00"][/color][color="#00FF00"] 4+ mil[/color][/font]
[font="Georgia"][b]Current Status:[/b][/font][font="Palatino Linotype"][color="#FF0000"][/color][color="#0000FF"] Training defense [/color][/font][/size]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think my post has to be relevant to any debate as long as it is relevant to the subject line, which it clearly is. My mistake for your lack of knowledge on 90's pop culture. It's on biggie small's wiki page and has been the same since i last checked about 5 months ago meaning it is most likely true. The point of my post was to perhaps encourage a discussion considering that one of the best rappers who ever lived, never lived, because of abortion. i see that was simply wishful thinking on my part. continue with your important discussion and frivolous shutting down of legitimate posts. your lack of knowledge and open mindedness is appreciated by all.

 

Your assumption that a child inherits their parents skills is grossly distorted: I would not go so far as to say that there is no link, but consider the fact that children of great musical acts are not all great musicians themselves, the same with writers, artists, etc.

 

I do understand that you find that fascinating piece of information (can you detect my disdain of a celebrity-obsessed culture?) relevant to the topic, but I still consider it irritating to find a perfectly on-topic, flowing debate interrupted by a post that seems to have no purpose other than interrupting.

 

My lack of pop-culture knowledge does seem to be a considerable handicap: what chances at discovery, moments of wondrous contemplation to be had in concerning myself with the pseudo-religious worship and endless interest in the rise and nearly inevitable fall of those whom we raise above us on merit of their... celebrity.

 

I feel quite open-minded: I have considered your "culture" evaluated it, and then decided that it is not for me, and is likely not in the best interests of humanity. Will I deny you the opportunity to continue with it? Never, and would support your right to do so as vehemently as my own right to abstain from it.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah.

 

The irony: my inability to distinguish between the regularly encountered form of idiocy and the particularly irritating brand of idiocy that trolls employ results in me contributing idiocy of my own.

 

 

More or less on topic, I do find it interesting that the Glen Beck & Misinterpreted Adam Smith crowd demands smaller government, less taxes, governmental involvement, etc., at which point they promptly switch to proclaiming their right to decide whether or not a woman must carry a child, no matter how accidental or ill-advised the pregnancy is.

 

And I know for a fact that there is a particularly impressive brand of idiot that supports the Catholic Church in denying abortions in response to incestuous, under-age rape.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony: my inability to distinguish between the regularly encountered form of idiocy and the particularly irritating brand of idiocy that trolls employ results in me contributing idiocy of my own.

Don't worry, your elitist [cabbage] isn't wasted on us simpletons. We get more irritated with you than we let on.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.