Sunday, March 21, 2010
Personal autonomy, where libs and cons differ
I'm gonna break this down in porn terms but apply it to the abortion debate. Philosophically where do you come down on this issue of personal autonomy? Take a young woman who decides to become a porn star. That in and of itself shows a totally autonomous decision, a decision many of us are not even capable of. What it says is I don't care what my mother and father think, if I embarrass them, what my family and friends think, what my pastor thinks, what my neighborhood thinks, what society-at-large thinks. I would go so far as to say it's not the right decision, a very poor decision but a totally autonomous decision. On some level you have to admire if that's the right word the sheer audacity of the decision. So here's the issue: is it more important for a decision to be the right one or a totally autonomous one? For a decision to be the right one you have to take into consideration other factors besides your own personal autonomy, for instance how will this affect my family, my standing in the community, my career and a myriad of other factors. The totally autonomous decision-maker says I'm gonna do what's right for me. So for a liberal or perhaps the better word is libertarian the totally autonomous decision is also the right decision, the two are interchangeable by the sheer fact of it being autonomously made. For the conservative, the socially conservative ones anyway, the right decision and the totally autonomous decision are not one and the same thing, indeed the latter smacks of moral relativism because YOU are the sole arbiter of Right and Wrong. As applied to abortion the fact of someone practicing total autonomy is the attractive feature here, it's very Randian, but to not consider other factors would seem to show the lack of a complete decision. So where do YOU come down on this issue of personal autonomy? it's not so much the wrongness of the decision that is of importance here but the fact that you can make it freely without undue societal and religious pressures, that's the libertarian position anyway. I can kind of guess soapie's position on the matter but maybe some things are deeper than any one philosophy can offer. I'm in a philosophical frame of mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
THESE SOCIALIST DEMOCRAPS are pushing for INCREASING the MURDER OF UNBORN BABIES - showing their true colors for the UNHOLY VERMIN they are - the Dems and liberals have made the case that abortion is about choice, it is not a choice, ABORTION IS THE MURDER OF UNBORN BABIES!!!!!
ReplyDeleteI WONDER HOW THESE DISGUSTING DEMS WOULD FEEL ABOUT THEM BEING DISMEMBERED AND HAVING THEIR BRAINS SUCKED OUT IN THE WOMB!!!!! BUT THEY DON'T FEEL, THEY ARE SELFISH SOCIOPATHS!!!!
Perhaps Dark Wolf will post his address so that women who were denied autonomy over their own bodies can bring the resultant children to his house. I'm sure he'll be more than willing to take them in, feed, clothe, shelter, educate, and provide for their health and other needs.
ReplyDeletePut your money where your mouth is.. open your doors for these children if you're going to refuse women the right to control their own bodies.
A democratic vote will never come from my family...EVER! NEVER!
ReplyDeletePS Satyavati devi dasi if you hate this country so much why don't you get the hell out?
I'll even pay your fare on a Banana boat.
I didn't spend 4 years in the service fighting for our freedoms so that you could sit all over them!
I have a couple of questions here, MRV...
ReplyDelete1. What about my asking Dark Wolf to open his home to newborns in order to give women an option besides abortion makes me hate America?
2. Why SHOULDN'T Dark Wolf open his home to newborns in order to give women an option besides abortion, since he is so against abortion?
3. Which freedom am I 'sitting on' that you fought for somewhere in the world? The freedom of other people to legislate what I can do with my body? Is THAT what our military is about? I thought you were about liberating oppressed peoples and spreading democracy.
Now, if you can answer these rationally and like a grownup, maybe we can move towards dialogue.
And here's another thought for you:
ReplyDeleteWhat would you do if a member of your family wanted to vote Democratic?
Beat them down? Force them into changing their views?
That'd be, uh, a bit totalitarian-dictatorship, wouldn't it?
Kinda be sitting on their freedom, don'tcha think?
That freedom you went and fought for?
Just something for you to consider.
Satyavati devi dasi said..."Now, if you can answer these rationally and like a grownup, maybe we can move towards dialogue."
ReplyDeleteThis is as rational as I get..
I plan to keep fighting--donating my time and money (what's left) and energy to defeating Democrats and Liberals and to overturning this power grab from the powerful.
I hope Obama pays a horrible price for what he has done. Pelosi and Reid get those same wishes from me. Long may they pay the price for what they have done.
People are downright angry with the content of this bill and common sense dictates that we are being lied to about cost and benefits.
And perhaps Satyavati devi dasi would post address so that I could contribute to the fund that My Right View has so rightly suggested. In fact, I'd pay the whole fare, if it's a one way ticket.
So somehow suggesting that someone who doesn't believe in abortion should personally do something to take care of all the resultant children... means that I hate America?
ReplyDeleteIf someone is so passionately attached to the idea that no woman should ever have an abortion, then I think those people should stand up, put their money where their mouths are, and offer to take the children themselves.
Otherwise, that person's just theoretical.
I can't see how this makes me hate America.
Everyone who's against healthcare reform is screaming that they don't want government choosing what doctor they can see and what procedure they can have.
But these same people want to tell women they can't have the procedure called abortion.
This is a lot of making the same rules you don't want applied to you.. apply to someone else.
Pointing it out doesn't make me hate America.
It does, however, make me hate the hypocrisy of many people who call themselves Americans.
Satyavati devi dasi said...
ReplyDeleteSo somehow suggesting that someone who doesn't believe in abortion should personally do something to take care of all the resultant children... means that I hate America?
No, but I and others like me have read your posts before and we realize the distorted type of America that you are in favor of. And frankly it sickens me.
Can I be more frank that that?
And you also said..
"It does, however, make me hate the hypocrisy of many people who call themselves Americans."
Well I say to that To Freaken Bad!
"And frankly it sickens me."
ReplyDeleteAh, well, you know, people said this same thing about emancipation, and letting women vote, and the public school system, and taking developmentally disabled people out of institutions that resembled a little slice of hell, and poor folks who lived in tenements, and gay folks, and the repeal of miscegenation laws, and the civil rights amendments, and the equal rights amendments, and the integration of schools, and allowing women to obtain contraception (which was illegal for married women right through the 1960's) and the fact that immigrants still come to America.
They said it about Medicare, they said it about Medicaid, they said it about the Civilian Conservation Corps. They said it about the National Park System, which was seen as a huge blow to businesses who wouldn't be allowed to go in and exploit these tracts of land. (They're still saying that about the ANWR.)
And now they say it about this.
It's all the same thing. Any time any real step is made forward to extend equality in practice instead of on paper, there's a whole segment of the population that flips out and talks about the destruction of our country and how it's a sign of the impending Apocalypse and shit.
These are theoretical patriots. These are the same folks who wrote that all men were created equal, except for the black ones, who were only 3/5 of a real person. The same people who touted religious freedom, except for the Jews, who got run out of town and ended up in Providence because no one else would take them. And the same people who want to ban abortions for all reasons, but don't want to make any provisions for the babies that result.
It all looks good on paper and gives you lots to fluff your self-righteousness and conscience over, but when the rubber meets the road, it comes clean for what it really is: a lot of words that don't translate into practice.
Another typical slavish liberal who worships at the altar of Our Dear Leader Her Führer Obama..
ReplyDeleteObama has just condemned this nation to a crushing financial burden for the foreseeable future.
People like Satyavati (whatever the hell that means)are the enemies of true freedom. They are poisoned by their delusional ideology.
Obama is a hard line socialist-Marxist. Just like his buddy Chavez. And this is what Satyavati devi dasi (whats her name) wants us to follow? No way Jose! Not over my dead body I won't.
When fascism comes to America, it will be presented as Hope and Change.
People like Satyavati (whatever the hell that means)
ReplyDeleteSatyavati is a Sanskrit word that means the place of truth. Satya means truth, vati means the place. It's my name, not some pseudonym or thing I made up.
Obama is a hard line socialist-Marxist.
We have so been over this elsewhere. Nothing, not anything whatsoever, that Obama and his administration have done are either Socialist or Marxist.
Socialists and Marxists will tell you he's a right-winger. He in no way is reflecting Socialist or Marxist goals for this country.
And Frankly, Satyavati devi dasi YOU sicken me... ..We will remember in November. All the libs like you won't be quite so gleeful on Nov 05.
ReplyDeleteThe Karl Marx, Lennin, followers of this fake president we have just sealed their fates. I along with the rest of America will watch closely how many "special" deals were given to buy these votes in the house. I will also guarantee that ANY Dem who voted for this shitty bill, I will support with my money and time to defeat. This includes Pelosi, Reid and Obama. They have just taken over 20 percent of my money out of my pocket. I will work out a way to spend that money on defeating these Un-American liars. It will be a major change in Washington come November. But I will also warn the Republicans. You had better learned from last time. We will not put up with your poor leadership again.
And as for people like Satyavati devi dasi, who are Fascist and Marxist and Socialist lovers, please, please do me one big favor and GET OUT OF MY FACE. I can't stand you.
WOW!!! I'll have to get back to this. Gotta post something about what happened last night.
ReplyDeleteI glanced through the comments again and will read them more in depth tomorrow. The two schools of thought on this: the pro-choice school which somehow feels there really is no right or wrong decision a woman can make regarding feticide, the fact that she makes a totally autonomous decision on her part somehow confers moral virtue on whatever she chooses. The social conservative school, many of us will say we understand the philosophical elements of personal autonomy but geez wouldn't it be nice if people made the right decision more often so we're more interested in people making the right moral decisions because somehow that also adds to the stability of the social fabric. The Church also teaches this, that everyone in the end must follow their conscience but it must be a correctly formed conscience and personal autonomy pretty much says we can do whatever the hell we want. This is why conservatives most often follow freedom with with freedom comes responsibility but to the moral relativist this ruins the party. Tomorrow then.
ReplyDeleteOK Dark Wolf feels abortion is hideous so the question arises either abortion is hideous or it's not and if it's hideous why are we defending it? That's a question for Saty. If abortion were like any other medical procedure it wouldn't be so controversial. As the late Charlton Heston says in the intro to the pro-life film Eclipse of Reason "people don't take to the streets to protest open-heart surgery." Saty's point that we should all open our doors and help raise all these children that would otherwise have been aborted, well no we don't that's what the FATHER is for and anyway whether we are consistent or not has nothing at all to do with the moral nature of abortion. Take it away.
ReplyDeleteSaty says "Put your money where your mouth is.. open your doors for these children if you're going to refuse women the right to control their own bodies."
ReplyDeleteWhy then instead of the health care bill didn't you put your money where your mouth is and do your job as a nurse for free to help those uninsured people?
Why then instead of the health care bill didn't you put your money where your mouth is and do your job as a nurse for free to help those uninsured people?
ReplyDeleteWell, first of all, Beth, for the first ten years I was fighting for socialized medicine I wasn't a nurse.
Second of all, I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying I should have refused my paycheck at whatever job I had, or are you saying something like I should just have gone out and been doing things for people?
Nurses, by law, have to be following a doctor's orders. Have I volunteered my time in free clinics and so forth? I sure have. But I can't just go out and be doing things on my own. They call that practicing medicine without a license, and if I did that, I'd be working in Family Dollar if not sitting in jail.
This doesn't explain why it's not a great idea for pro-life people to offer to take in the babies that otherwise would have been aborted.
either abortion is hideous or it's not and if it's hideous why are we defending it? That's a question for Saty.
ReplyDeleteThis hasn't really got so much to do with abortion for me as it has for someone to have the right to do with their body as they wish. Regardless of my personal feelings about abortion I cannot support legislating what someone can and can't do with their body. Apart from this, criminalizing abortion isn't going to stop abortion, it's just going to push it underground.
Saty's point that we should all open our doors and help raise all these children that would otherwise have been aborted, well no we don't that's what the FATHER is for
I assume you mean your heavenly father. What I'm visualizing here is someone who's been raped, incestualized, so on, and abortion is criminal, so now we're going to punish this girl by forcing her to live every day with the tangible reminder of the rape and abuse she suffered, and ask 'the father' to stand up?
Are you kidding me? Where do you live, man? Plenty of babies made consensually don't have daddies either. And don't get any child support, thus relegating them to poverty and living within the government system people are trying to dismantle because it takes away from 'personal responsibility and initiative'.
So let's get the picture straight. Woman gets pregnant, no daddy stepping up, so we're going to force her to have this baby and live in poverty, pushing her to live off the system because she can't get a job with daycare or afford daycare, and the only job she can get is minimum wage at the local dime discount, and then at night she's either hooking or stripping or doing something to make a buck to pull it together.
But it's her fault, right?
This is so much bigger of a problem than a simple sentence can solve.
I am not surprised that you missed my point. You seem to think being pro-whatever means you have to put your money where your mouth is, right? So I was asking why if you are pro-free healthcare why you yourself didn't donate your time as a medical personnel and help those who need it? And if there are doctors who also are pro-free healthcare, they too can do so. And then there are those of us not in the medical field who could give money towards such a thing as healthcare for those without because we think it is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteBut oh wait, before the health care bill you or I or any doctor COULD do all those things, and actually DID do all those things.
Hmmm, so why did we need the government to step in as a middleman in this outpouring of charity?
I still don't get your point Saty. Man and woman have sex, if she doesn't abort then the dad has to step up to the plate. I myself have worked with a couple of young guys who got their girlfriends pregnant and while it wasn't an ideal situation of course they decided to be fathers to their children and are still involved. WHY should I raise someone else's kid(s)??? my sperm wasn't involved. Abortion undermines social responsibility, accepting the consequences for your actions. Here's a finer point -- the fetus is not part of the woman's body. I think what you and other pro-choicers mean is that the whole process takes place within a woman's body. It's part of a process to be sure but it's still a body within a body.
ReplyDeleteRape & incest. The REAL issue is abortion-on-demand of course but since you brought it up I really doubt that a doctor who performed an abortion on a woman who was raped would be prosecuted in a post-Roe world. I could be wrong but prosecutors exercise discretion all the time and some things are just not worth pursuing. Why do pro-choicers bring up rape and incest so much if not to throw everyone off the game?
ReplyDeleteif she doesn't abort then the dad has to step up to the plate.
ReplyDeleteYou make that sound real easy. How bout you check with the courts to see how many deadbeat non child support paying daddies there are? My Woogie has one of those. Daddy didn't even show up at the hospital when the doctors called a family conference to decide what to do if the baby decided to die.
This might be a place where you want to reorient yourself with reality. They don't all 'step up'.
So I was asking why if you are pro-free healthcare why you yourself didn't donate your time as a medical personnel and help those who need it?
Do you read, Beth?
Have I volunteered my time in free clinics and so forth? I sure have. I do them every year. If I were an OR nurse, I'd be doing the free surgery clinics, but that's not my area.
I'm also on a disaster call list and signed up on a biological warfare call list to go in and work with people who have diseases caused by biological weapons. That's all volunteer and free of charge.
So what are YOU doing to help women who don't have abortions and end up with babies they don't want and can't afford to take care of?
Why do pro-choicers bring up rape and incest so much if not to throw everyone off the game?
ReplyDeleteMaybe because so many of us have been raped and/or abused, and know what it's all about on a personal versus theoretical level.
Saty those deadbeat dads you speak of are hauled into court all the time. In my neck of the woods the prosecutors get on their case and they even have their faces published in the local newspapers, some even go to jail. But anyway there are so many crisis pregnancy centers to speak of who do exactly as you suggest but what happens? well sometimes the pro-abortion groups come after them and try to shut them down for practicing exactly what you preach. How 'bout them apples?
ReplyDeleteStatistically how many abortions result from rape and incest? The last time I used to read this stuff the figure was around 1 percent so you can correct me if I'm wrong. Incidentally I also recall reading somewhere that male rape in prison can be as common as rape of women in everyday life but you hardly ever hear of that being an issue. If anything it's fodder for crude humor.
ReplyDeletethose deadbeat dads you speak of are hauled into court all the time.
ReplyDeleteYou're right. And lots of em go to jail, like the Woog's daddy. How much child support you think he can pay while he sits in there?
But anyway there are so many crisis pregnancy centers to speak of who do exactly as you suggest but what happens?
There are crisis pregnancy centers who force women to watch abortion videos, and who make them look at sonograms that say HI MOMMY. They intimidate, coerce and flat out lie to women. Many of them put up shop right next to abortion clinics and use similar looking signs to confuse women. This is all documented.
But we're talking on an individual level now. Beth wanted to know do I step up and put my money where my mouth is about free healthcare, do I go and do things for free since I support free healthcare? You're damn right I do.
And my question for her is what is SHE doing for these women since she supports outlawing abortion?
It's about individual commitment and responsibility, isn't it? I believe that all people should have equal access to healthcare. I volunteer my time in clinics every year to do my part.
What part are YOU doing, Beth, to support these women that you so desperately want to have these babies they don't want and can't afford?
male rape in prison can be as common as rape of women in everyday life but you hardly ever hear of that being an issue.
ReplyDeleteUh... if they were making babies it would be.
It really doesn't matter how many pregnancies and/or abortions result from rape and/or incest. One is too many.
When I was in the seventh grade a girl in the class before me got pregnant by her daddy. Her family made her have that baby. I mean, just imagine going around every day knowing that everyone and their brother knows that your daddy molested you and you're carrying his baby. Just imagine being that girl. Was it her fault? Was it?
Everyone has shit in their closet. What I'm saying is that unless you've really been there and done that you can't know what it is, and you can't judge it honestly because you don't have any kind of frame of reference. You just don't, and you can't possibly make any kind of a judgement on it.
Abortions will never stop, regardless of whether they're made illegal or not. They'll just go underground, and kill more women. There are people who would be perfectly okay with that. But like the 11 year old girl who got raped and made pregnant by her stepfather, or the 9 year old who got raped by a stranger and got pregnant.. there's just never a blanket statement that can be made.
Saty those crisis pregnancy centers, some do that of course but many don't. Personally for me it's a free speech issue anyway but it's also been documented that pro-abortion clinics lie as see Joe Scheidler's movie Meet the Abortion Providers. In this video he has gathered many former abortionists together who admitted they lied to sell abortion, straight from the horse's mouth as they say. That's the nature of their business to sell abortion, they got rent and mortgages to pay too ya know so if you wanna talk about the CPC's then let's talk about them too. BTW men can have their salaries garnisheed to pay things like child support, happens all the time.
ReplyDeleteBTW who's judging these women? Here's a question for you: let's say we conceded your point that women who got pregnant through rape or incest should be allowed to abort would you then agree that abortion-on-demand for whatever reason should be banned? let's say we give you that as it's an important issue for you.
ReplyDeleteA real-life case of what I'm talking about happened many many years ago in Dobbs Ferry-on-the Hudson here in Westchester County New York. A major abortion clinic (now defunct) on Ashford Ave. was run by a Dr. Steven Kaali (now retired as word has it) and one day a young Spanish woman by the name of Dawn Mendoza underwent a later-term procedure, complications developed and instead of taking her to the Community Hospital literally right next door they got a private car to take her away to someplace else and she died. She was married with kids and is buried in the Gate of Heaven here in Valhalla.
ReplyDeleteThe local news media ccvered it up. Gannett Westchester newspapers, as pro-abortion as they get, covered it up. The village of Dobbs Ferry covered it up. Dr. Steven Kaali when protestors were protesting his clinic one day drove past in a car with a friend and hauled a bucket of animal excrement on a protestor. The pro-abortion movement, it doesn't get any uglier than this. You wanna criticize and take to task the pro-life movement, that's your prerogative and nobody should be immune from criticism but criticize the pro-abortion movement too!!
would you then agree that abortion-on-demand for whatever reason should be banned? let's say we give you that as it's an important issue for you.
ReplyDeleteI can never agree to this for two reasons.
One, there should never be a law telling me or any woman or any man for that matter what they can and cannot do with their bodies.
Two, making abortion illegal isn't going to stop abortion. It's just going to make it more dangerous.
See, what I personally think and feel about abortion doesn't enter into this process for me. I can't legislate my beliefs onto other people. I can't expect you to acknowledge that every living creature down to the amoeba in the sewage plant has a soul that needs to be respected, and in the same way, I can't expect other people to acknowledge my beliefs about abortion.
What I can do, though, is give people the choice and the opportunity to make their own decision, and then to live with the consequences of that decision, whatever it is. And I can make sure that the procedure, for anyone who makes the choice to have it done, is as safe as possible.
I help a few pregnancy crisis centers, and also support making adoptions for those women who may decide not to abort but to give their baby to someone who cannot. In addition, I support efforts to teach abstinence so that pregnancies don't occur in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you could read you would have seen that I recognized the charity work you do, as well as others, but I also asked why we need the government to force us to do charity, can you answer that?
instead of taking her to the Community Hospital literally right next door they got a private car to take her away to someplace else and she died. She was married with kids and is buried in the Gate of Heaven here in Valhalla.
ReplyDeleteWell, this is evil and negligent and I hope that doctor went to jail for it.
My grama is buried in Gate of Heaven.
I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro-choice. There's a difference.
I wouldn't encourage someone to have an abortion. But I want them to be able to make that decision on their own. They'll have to live with the consequences of whatever choice they make, and they should at least be able to have a safe procedure.
And this example you cited is heinous. Clinics should be, if they aren't, held to the same standards as any outpatient surgery clinic, and that doctor and probably half his staff should have been charged with negligence and probably manslaughter.
I also asked why we need the government to force us to do charity, can you answer that?
ReplyDeleteNobody forces me. And nobody forces you.
There's no charity in this healthcare plan.
And maybe, just maybe, you might want to check with the Shriners, who were about to shut down six hospitals because people couldn't afford to donate. They stayed open because the staff voted to take pay cuts.
Saty then all the more reason you should take to task those pro-abortion clinics and outfits who mislead women in order to sell abortions. If a person is really pro-choice then they should support informed-consent legislation so women can make a truly informed decision.
ReplyDeleteLegislating morality, ah we're stuck on this one again. Former NY Governor Mario Cuomo made practically the same arguments as you about not imposing one's personal beliefs but time and again he vetoed the death penalty in New York State because he's personally against it. Beth and I are against it too but this is inconsistent to say the least and just goes to show all law is ultimately about the imposition of some moral code in the end. In fact there's no escaping that.
For the record that abortionist never even went to prison. Hey you know shit happens but just the same shouldn't it have been the exact same feminist groups demanding safe procedures who should have been protesting at his clinic along with the pro-lifers?
ReplyDeleteInterestingly enough when Dr. Bernard Nathanson was director of the National Association to Repeal Abortion Laws (now NARAL) he admitted they inflated the statistics of women who died from illegal abortions. They did happen of course but he said the true figure was maybe 37 in a year and not the hundreds and thousands they touted. It's all in his first book Aborting America with Richard Ostling (Doubleday - 1979) but good luck finding it in a library near you!
Did I not say it was heinous and that they should be held to the same standards as outpatient clinics?
ReplyDeleteI believe in informed consent. I believe that every person who has ANY procedure, abortion or otherwise, needs to know what the procedure is, what it's intended for and what the risks and benefits of the procedure are.
That's the law. That's informed consent.
Now, you can believe that every woman who steps into an abortion clinic knows that she could put her baby up for adoption, or drop him on the doorstep of the local hospital during his first week of life and walk away. She knows those things.
The time to be offering options is BEFORE PREGNANCY. This is when you educate on birth control, when you teach people that nothing's 100% except abstinence but that condoms can protect you from HIV and HBV (but not HPV), and that birth control pills won't.. it's the time to teach women about options for preventing pregnancy. If you can prevent a pregnancy, abortion never comes into the discussion.
That ought to be the real goal. Make birth control accessible, available, cheap. Teach people about it, teach them how to use it properly, teach them what it can (and can't) do for them.
The best way to prevent abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancy.
Well your views about informed-consent are commendable but they're definitely in the minority within the pro-choice community. Informed-consent laws don't seem to apply to this procedure called abortion however and are necessary because many women are quite ignorant about fetal development. Now to me in this age of NOVA and PBS and encyclopedias that just shows lack of education imo but it does happen.
ReplyDeleteAs regards birth control the real issue is with so many methods out there what's going on where we have literally over a million abortions a year? You can't blame everything on pro-life and religious groups. Nobody's literally forcing people to not buy or use birth control. You know what I think? since abortion became legal it became A method of birth control for many people and that's sad.
I'm sorry I have to get a hamburger and an evil cup of soda. Continue this with Beth...
ReplyDeleteInformed-consent laws don't seem to apply to this procedure called abortion however and are necessary because many women are quite ignorant about fetal development.
ReplyDeleteInformed consent doesn't mean you have to give a class on fetal development.
It means exactly what I said it means. The patient has to know what the procedure is for, what is going to be done, and what the risks and benefits of the procedure are.
Period.
That's the legal definition of informed consent.
It means the patient has to know that general anasthesia can kill you, that any surgery carries risks of bleeding, infection, postop blood clots, and that these things can be fatal. That kind of thing.
It doesn't mean that the provider is required to tell them that this fetal system begins to function at X weeks of age or that they need to show them a sonogram of the fetus or make them watch some video of an abortion.
It means exactly what it says. Informed consent for a procedure. It's exactly the same thing regardless of what procedure it is, whether it's a broken bone, a coronary artery bypass, excision of a brain tumor or transplanting a kidney.
Ok, I'd better jump in here with a little personal experience and some sanity (and before the phrase man-ass sex gets dragged up in relation to prison rape).
ReplyDeleteI have been directly involved in deciding on whether or not to abort a baby. And I realized that it was really a toss-up question, and that ultimately, I had little say in what would happen to my child. In the end, I did the stepping up thing, and he will turn 6 this year. No further comment on his mother (succubus).
The point is there HAS to be a middle ground in this insanity. The idea that sucking a baby into a sink should be as clean (emotionally) and clinical as having a hemorrhoid cut from your ass is ludicrous, because at some point, it's certainly a life that is being wiped out. And we're not to kindly about murder.
But the idea that doctor and woman should be jailed, or that a woman must be compelled to carry what was conceived against her will is equally intrusive and cruel, and smacks of the government compelling people to do things against their will (which the government is getting really good at anyway).
Or perhaps this argument can't be solved when both sides are absolute in protecting the rights of their individual, and to the detriment of the other. But I'll assume anyone who believes the other side is driven by evil designs deserves to be hit in the head with a brick. Hard.
I'd go a little farther than you Saty regarding informed-consent. No you don't have to give a class on fetal development but the woman should have some knowledge of what she's aborting so I'm all for showing the sonogram. After all you're allowed to see sonograms of other things you get tested for so why should this be any different (OMG abortion is different from other medical procedures! what d'ya know?) Getting back to your idea about your personal vs. your political views on abortion I hear that alot but can you really compartmentalize that much, really separate the two?? seems to me to require being superhuman, to be that abstract and emotionless. As we saw Mario Cuomo had trouble with this re the death penalty in New York. Many people feel this way about smoking, soda whatever. Martin Luther King's religious views as a pastor affected his view on civil rights of course, it'd be ludicrous to deny the two. I understand your position, I understand where you're coming from but again I don't feel there's a living human alive who totally compartmentalizes their personal moral views and their political views. Many may do it more than others and move more in this direction but it becomes an effort after awhile when it's really something you care about. In Cuomo's case it was the death penalty and to this day I've never heard him address this apparent contradiction in his thinking, that he couldn't legislate his views regarding abortion but it was ok to legislate his views regarding capital punishment.
ReplyDeleteman-ass sex.
ReplyDeleteOK let me get my helmut ready because in my view there's a part of the pro-abortion movement that definitely pushes abortion. There have been many cases where clinics have misled women in order to sell abortions. Again it's a business much like a car mechanic. My point is this, in this debate the pro-life movement gets criticized heavily, almost exclusively and the pro-choice movement generally comes across as being on the side of the angels so why can't we have some much overdue equal-opportunity criticism?? Yes Virginia there is a pro-abortion movement but on your other note Pat in all the surveys I've seen you'd be hard-pressed to find any pro-life advocate or group who says women should be jailed or even punished in any way for getting an abortion. It's even kind of a contradiction since so many of them use the term murder. From the pro-life lit I've seen even the proposed penalties against doctors are remarkably light considering the nature of the act and seems a popular view is the doctor should simply have his medical license revoked. Village Voice, you know that man-ass sex paper, the Village Voice's Nat Hentoff who's pro-life says that even doctors who perform abortions shouldn't be punished in any way since it'll only have the effect of making them martyrs. In fact Hentoff's position is kind of pro-choicy if you ask me, kind of like maybe we all have the same views after all but just don't know it yet.
I'd go a little farther than you Saty regarding informed-consent.
ReplyDeleteThat's because I'm working off the actual, legal definition of informed consent for a medical procedure, and you're not.
I've witnessed hundreds of informed consents. The law is very specific about what it entails.
Now, I'm not knocking what you're saying. What I'm saying, though, is that when you use the words 'informed consent', you're speaking of something very specific in legal terms.
Getting back to your idea about your personal vs. your political views on abortion I hear that alot but can you really compartmentalize that much, really separate the two??
Yup. And here's the reason why. Because I have to think of other people. I can't expect other people to abide by my religious beliefs... what right have I to try to impose what I believe on them? I can't do that. It'd be nice, sure. But now we're talking law, and I have no right to legislate according to my religious viewpoint, because believe me, not very many people in this country hold that viewpoint.
So yeah, in fact, I don't see any other way to deal with this kind of situation. Be assured that people will have consequences of any and all of their actions. Their choices dictate the consequences. But I'm not getting in the way of that.
Maybe I learned this being a nurse. You get asked all the time about big ethical decisions people have to make, like, should we make mama a DNR, or, do you think I should have this surgery? We can't give opinions, or answers to these questions. What we can give is information, and let the patient make their own decision, and then support them in whatever decision they make. That's called self-empowerment and self-determination. I'm not here to make your decision for you.
So I approach this too in that way. I think women deserve information, they deserve to know what their options are, they deserve access to birth control, and if they should get pregnant, under whatever circumstances, then they have a decision to make. They have the right to know the risks and benefits of their decision, and at that point, whatever decision they make is theirs alone, along with the consequences thereof. I'll support them either way, regardless of what choice they make.
So maybe this compartmentalization thing is a job skill.
I've seen you'd be hard-pressed to find any pro-life advocate or group who says women should be jailed or even punished in any way for getting an abortion.
You can do a little research on the Christian Dominionists, who believe that abortion should carry the death penalty for both the mother and the doctor (and presumably the nurse, the aide, and the janitor in the building, though I'm not sure on all that).
And in case you're like my husband and think the Dominionists are just a bunch of young earth lunatics, do a little more research and see how well-connected they are politically, and who they're affiliated with, and how in Texas they've taken Thomas Jefferson (THOMAS JEFFERSON!!!) out of textbooks and replaced him with Phyllis Schlafly.
If you're not scared of those people, you will be eventually, but it'll probably be too late by then.
"You can do a little research on the Christian Dominionists..."
ReplyDeletethe who?
"...who believe that abortion should carry the death penalty."
Fringe group stuff, BB and I have discussed these things before. You can find a fringe for anything these days, it makes for interesting reading but the real question is how are they related to Alex Jones?
You see the point I'm making with the sonogram is this: if so many pro-choicers act like abortion is no more than like removing a 'roid to use Pat M's image then why should the sonogram be so controversial? It should be neither here nor there but the point is there's something about abortion that makes it different. Now what could that be?
To your other point about compartmentalization would you say Martin Luther King Jr. was wrong if he let his spiritual views on racial justice influence in any way his political stand on civil rights? It's not as clear-cut as you make it, most things aren't. For instance I'm against animal abuse, cruelty to animals for two reasons: (a) it's simply wrong and offensive to me as a human being and (b) because God made a beautiful creature in a dog or a cat or a bird. Now true compartmentalization would say (a) is the right choice but (b) is somehow wrong.
ReplyDeleteChristian Dominionists.
ReplyDeleteD. James Kennedy. James Dobson. The Family Research Council and all their affiliates.
These people openly state that their goal is to overtake American culture and society and run the country on Biblical legislation and according to Christian principles.
This sounds peachy, maybe, if you're a Christian, until you get to the part where legislation's coming out of Deuteronomy and Leviticus (verbatim) and where only Christian males get to hold office, and where only Christians even get citizenship.
Ain't nothing fringe about the Family Research Council. They've got collectively between all these folks something like 2000 radio stations and 600 television stations. They're huge. They pressure congresspeople to vote according to their wishes and keep a scorecard on their website where you can see whether your local government guy toed the line or not. They're well funded, they're well connected, they're all over Washington and they're dangerous.
And if you don't have issues with Thomas Jefferson being taken out of American History books, then I just don't know what to say.
For instance I'm against animal abuse, cruelty to animals for two reasons: (a) it's simply wrong and offensive to me as a human being and (b) because God made a beautiful creature in a dog or a cat or a bird. Now true compartmentalization would say (a) is the right choice but (b) is somehow wrong.
ReplyDeleteBut you eat them, right? So you're okay with factory farming and all of that. So how compartmentalized are you?
You asked me how I can seperate the two things. I told you. For me it's not a problem. I'm not here to make other people's decisions. I'm here to give them information and let them decide on their own. They'll face the consequences of their choices. All I can do is give them the information to make the decision intelligently.
So what you're saying is James Dobson and Gary Bauer want to take women who've had abortions, strap 'em down and give 'em the old lethal IV. Geez and Gary Bauer looks so innocent like he belongs on a Rice Krispie box. This bears checking out but time being of the essence I'll have to get my staff cracking. If Beth's busy we'll give it to Mal.
ReplyDeleteI already KNOW I'm a fucking hypocrite on God's critters alright? I'll risk a heart attack just to have a Wendy's triple cheeseburger but the question was in my example above can (b) be used at all in forming public policy? You have to consider the totality of our beings. In MLK's case spirituality was at his core, his essence along with his political views and all the rest so what I'm saying is real true rigid comparmentalization would mean rejecting part of the totality of yourself when forming your political views. Most people aren't this clear cut, it's murky just like the difference between love and lust (I believe they are intertwined btw but that's another z-blog) so if you're able to set aside your most deeply held beliefs about say abortion all I can say is hat's off but it ain't me. Just being honest.
BTW my library's closing in about 15 minutes. Budget cuts left and right in New York State so I'll think I'll go have a salad and get back to it tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI already KNOW I'm a fucking hypocrite on God's critters alright?
ReplyDeleteSincere kudos and much respect on having the spine to admit it.
Nicely done.
but the point still stands. Is it a or b?
ReplyDeletewhy should the sonogram be so controversial
ReplyDeleteWell, this really comes down to an insurance question, doesn't it?
It becomes a 'medically necessary' question.
In a normal pregnancy, if I'm not mistaken, one sonogram is covered at a certain time in the pregnancy and for specific diagnostic reasons.
Now, if you'd like, you can try to convince the insurance company that a sonogram prior to an abortion is medically necessary, or you can just bill the mom for it outright, cause it won't be covered.. and see how she reacts to that. Or maybe you can do them for free.
From a medical standpoint, a sonogram prior to an abortion is a waste of technology, time, and money. It has no bearing on the procedure and has no medical necessity.
So that's at least part of the controversy.
But on the other hand, would you want to have to watch a slaughterhouse video every time you wanted to eat a triple cheeseburger?
It's not so much different in essence, really.
That's a b
mmmm, slaughterhouse video.
ReplyDeleteNow my mouth is watering. Where's my bloody prime rib?
but the point still stands. Is it a or b?
ReplyDeleteYou can't legislate your religious beliefs onto anyone else, Z.
If we could do that I'd make your triple cheeseburger a capital offense.
But you can't do that. You cannot legislate religious beliefs.
You're so compartmentalized Saty and nobody's talking about legislating religious beliefs just what makes you you, the whole package, the totality of your being. Saty do you have any spiritual views, even religious views on health-care reform? I'm assuming you do have some and that they would in some way lead you to certain political positions on the subject. You have everything boxed off so neatly, this over here, that over there but there are many people who would base their views on health-care reform on Biblical principles. In point of fact many liberals will say the teachings of Christ compel them to support the welfare state not that I agree with that but human beings are more complex and there are so many factors and influences that go into the formation of people's political beliefs and stands. What you're saying is that you're different, you have precise mathematical formulae for everything from abortion to zoos.
ReplyDeleteSaty: "From a medical standpoint a sonogram prior to an abortion is a waste of technology, time and money. It has no bearing on the procedure and has no medical necessity."
ReplyDeleteAlthough it's interesting that more and more abortionists have used it both prior and during the procedures to make them more safe. I would imagine the abortionist wants to ascertain just how far along are we and certainly during later-term abortions how large is the head before they crush it if that's their technique. It's clear you haven't any criticisms at all of the pro-choice movement or I haven't heard any.
Getting back to rape and incest again I don't know the most current statistics but let's just say for the sake of argument 2% of abortions at most are done for rape and incest victims and the rest are simply abortion-on-demand. It is so fascinatingly curious to me that pro-choicers would spend so much debating time fixated and obsessed over that 2% rather than the other 98% who are getting them for any reason whatsoever. Care to comment?
Saty do you have any spiritual views, even religious views on health-care reform?
ReplyDeleteNot particularly. It's kinda like my views on evolution: I don't need to invoke my religious beliefs to find problems with it.
Similarly, I never needed to find justification in my religious beliefs for universal health care. It's always seemed to me to be a blindingly obvious fact that we need universal health care... I never really had to think hard to find a reason why to support it.
It's clear you haven't any criticisms at all of the pro-choice movement or I haven't heard any.
There's a big difference between being pro-choice and being pro-abortion. I believe a woman should have a choice. Whatever, whichever choice she decides to make, I'm good with that. It's her choice. I wouldn't promote abortion vs adoption or adoption vs abortion. Either way, I'm good. It's her decision. And that's what I'm supporting here: her right to make her own, autonomous, individually self-determined and individually responsible decision. Pro-choice is not pro-abortion, it's pro-choice.
You're so compartmentalized Saty and nobody's talking about legislating religious beliefs just what makes you you, the whole package, the totality of your being.
ReplyDeleteIt's like this. In my professional life, taking care of people, patients ask me to advise them all the time on serious ethical decisions they have to make. And as a responsible professional, I can't do that. It's not about me, or what I believe, it's about them. It's about empowering them to make their own decision.. giving them the best, most complete, accurate information, making sure they have all the tools to make the best decision for them. And whatever decision they make, I support them in it.
So like I said, maybe part of this compartmentalization thing is just being a nurse.
But on the other hand, I have always been very, very serious about keeping my religious views and my political views entirely seperate in terms of what types of legislation I will and won't support. I'm real serious about that. Like for example, no matter how anti-meat eating I am, there's no way I could honestly support making it illegal to eat meat. It'd be nice. I know places in the world where it IS illegal to eat meat. But you just can't legislate on the basis of religious beliefs. Not even my own. It's not fair. And it goes against the Constitution.
So equally, I don't believe anyone can legislate their religious beliefs onto people who may not hold those beliefs. It just can't be done.
And so that's why these things are very seperate in my mind. I have to think of other people, and remember that not everyone believes the same things I do, and that my views can't take any kind of legal primacy over anyone else's.
IMO the majority of those who call themselves pro-choice are actually pro-abortion. It's simple logic: you're either for or against the act of abortion. If you're not against it you're for it and flipside if you're not for it you're against it. Your position seems morally neutral to me and here's another thought. ALL law as I've said is the imposition of some type of moral code even laws that allow abortion. Laws that allow abortion, the moral code that is behind it is the view that the fetus has the same moral value and status as Hamburger Helper. There's no escaping it, even Roe vs. Wade is the imposition of somebody's moral view the only question is whose moral views are to prevail? In a democracy it tends to be the voice of the people with caveats of course. Also I'm surprised being such a spiritual person as yourself your views on health-care reform have no spiritual dimensions but I accept your statement.
ReplyDeleteAgain it's not legislating religious beliefs but simply the fact that there are so many influences and factors that go into our political thinking, our political belief system I'm sure Martin Luther King's spiritual views on racism affected his political views but to date I don't hear any liberals say he was wrong for failing to compartmentalize. Again I'm having trouble with how a person if they find abortion to be personally repugnant can have such a blase political position as since we used the example already Mario Cuomo when he was governor of New York State. That's the basic problem with pro-choice arguments (besides logic), they seem so abstract and emotionless.
ReplyDeleteI'll leave you with this thought: in order for abortion to be legal shouldn't you have to prove the fetus is not human? and we'll pick it up there tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteSee, I don't have any issue with MLK. But I don't need to invoke my religious beliefs to know that we need equal civil rights. Again, kinda that blindingly obvious type thing.
ReplyDeleteAnd emotionless.. well, maybe I'd make a really good judge, do you think? I don't think that a lot of this requires all kinds of religious invocation and all of that. I mean, it all seems pretty obvious to me.
Sure, I *COULD* argue these things on religious grounds. I could argue on either side of the ticket (I can switch sides in the middle of the argument if you like just to prove I can, lol). But I don't have to. I don't need my religious beliefs to tell me that all people need to be equal in practice as well as in theory.
So maybe I would be your ideal judge. Because for me, really, REALLY, it isn't about me and what I believe, it's about you and supporting whatever decision you make, that you're gonna have to live the rest of your life with.
And believe me, people have made decisions that I personally have thought were insane, cruel, idiotic, heartless, ridiculous or just plain dumbassed. But it doesn't matter, does it... we have to support them either way. It's their decision.
This is encouraging personal autonomy when the rubber meets the road :)
in order for abortion to be legal shouldn't you have to prove the fetus is not human?
ReplyDeleteWhy? Obviously it's human. You can't prove it's not human. Are you trying to say it's A human, ie, a seperate human?
"People have made decisions that I personally have thought were insane, cruel, idiotic, heartless, ridiculous or just plain dumbassed. But it doesn't matter does it...we have to support them either way."
ReplyDeleteWHO THE HELL SAYS I HAVE TO SUPPORT TIGER WOODS???
LOL..
ReplyDeleteI'm still stuck in ethical-decisions-at-work-I'm-a-nurse-mode.
It is so fascinatingly curious to me that pro-choicers would spend so much debating time fixated and obsessed over that 2%
ReplyDeleteAgain, I think this is because so many people who support choice have personal experience with rape and abuse and know whereof they speak. As far as I'm concerned, even if there's only one person who became pregnant by rape/abuse, this is enough to keep the law as it is.
ALL law as I've said is the imposition of some type of moral code even laws that allow abortion.
Now this is an interesting thought and I had to chew on it a little bit. Here's what I came up with:
Laws that allow abortion still permit people who are morally opposed to abortion to not have one. These folks have the freedom to go on, have the baby, keep it, put it up for adoption, drop it on the state, give it to grama, whatever. You really haven't taken anything away from these people, because nothing in the law is imposing on their freedom.
But when you make abortion illegal, then regardless of your personal moral stance, regardless of the fact that its your body, someone else's moral code is being imposed on you.
Let me restate this because it's confusing.
Making abortion legal doesn't impose a morality on anyone, because someone who doesn't want an abortion doesn't have to have one. No freedom has been lost.
But making abortion illegal does impose a morality.
Unfortunately my time is extremely limited today. The work state has intruded on my blogging once again and I will get back to this hopefully tomorrow. As Beth once said "when can I get back to my regularly scheduled life?" I'm also getting a few holes in my undies and I have to go out and shop. It's almost like you're forced to call out sick to do the things you have to do.
ReplyDeleteI also have to check the Larry Mendte blog to see if he responded to me yet. Gosh so many things to do but I can't resist. Laws that allow abortion are not based on a nonview of the matter. Instead they are based on the very real view that the fetus simply doesn't matter you could say. Laws that allow abortion have to be based on some view or moral code and the views you just stated Saty are themselves views and moral codes so...I gotta admit this is fun stuff.
ReplyDeleteI gotta admit this is fun stuff.
ReplyDeleteGo on, say it.. you love me :P
LOLOL
I'm also getting a few holes in my undies
ReplyDeleteooh, visual.
I'm gonna break her down into two comments again. First up, Rape & Incest.
ReplyDeleteI accept your statement about why you bring up rape and incest but imo many choicers bring it up for two reasons and two reasons only:
(1) To paint pro-lifers in a harsh light &
(2) To serve as a distraction from the real issues.
Now your cavedweller might be forgiven given the amount of time the choicers bring this topic up if he thought that the two sides basically agree on abortion except for the two exceptions constantly under discussion. Are you with me? It's as if the 2% is somehow more important than the 98%, must be the New Math.
OK, so here's why ultimately so many folks are really pro-abortion:
ReplyDeleteYou're not for abortion but you're not against abortion either so what are you? (I'm speaking in general here) Your typical choicer (can we drop the "pros" already?) will say we support whatever decision the woman makes. Now if you support the decision when abortion is chosen then you cannot see it as a moral evil otherwise you wouldn't have supported that decision so in a very sneaky way that makes you pro-abortion. Now if on the other hand if you say you personally hate abortion but will hold your nose when women choose this "procedure" you're not supporting her decision at all but merely feel the procedure should not be criminalized, that's bare-bones pro-choice. You have to be very careful what language you choose here and how you frame your own POV because
the Z-man is gonna get you in the end.