What's with Mississippi!?

[Elderberry]

They are trying to pass a law stating that a fertilized egg is a person from the moment of conception. this would mean that some forms of birth control would be considered murder. I guess a spontaneous abortion would be manslaughter? And so it goes without saying any abortion for any reason would be illegal, performed at the risk of the death penalty. I'm totally fed up with all this religious/republican pios, ignorant bull shit!

[Eric]

The Mississippi law could also potentially make a woman liable to be charged for a crime in case of a miscarriage. Wheee.

[ygmir]

could they just be trying to draw a line, or, get a debate started?
It seems so vague, "when is it a person".........To me, technically, it's at fertilization.
But, also, to me, it's totally part of the woman, until the umbilical is cut. And, she has every right, to do with her body, and all it's parts, as she wishes.
I'm sort of draconian, even, in that I say, if born totally screwed up, the mother has the right to "abort" it even in the few weeks after birth..........It's between her, and her thoughts/maker......no one else.

But, is there a "definition" of "human life"? and, if so, when?

I could see, drawing that law, to get it challenged, and finally, come to a clear cut ruling.

And, why, lump all religious (I suppose you mean xtian), in with republicans?........

[wh..sh]

[BBadger]

That's just one of those goofy laws some clown tries to submit fully knowing that they won't be accepted or get thrown out quickly like those laws trying to curb Fred Phelps' free speech rights. They're like a sort of gesture to please their supporters.

[Elderberry]

The Mississippi law could also potentially make a woman liable to be charged for a crime in case of a miscarriage. Wheee.

Yes, that's what I meant by spontaneous abortion being charged with manslaughter. Don't know why I chose that terminology.

Oh, and I love that graphic!

[Elderberry]

I'm sort of draconian, even, in that I say, if born totally screwed up, the mother has the right to "abort" it even in the few weeks after birth..........It's between her, and her thoughts/maker......no one else.

But, is there a "definition" of "human life"? and, if so, when?

I could see, drawing that law, to get it challenged, and finally, come to a clear cut ruling.

And, why, lump all religious (I suppose you mean xtian), in with republicans?........

Oh my, that is draconian, but I agree completely. However, today's medicine allows for most birth defects to be determined long before birth, where the choice to abort is much easier to make.

And science pretty much has determined when life begins, it just the religious nuts that won't accept the definition. But that's not surprising, they have the same trouble with evolution and global warming, and even the age of the world. It still boggles my mind that the have come to accept that the earth is round.

[ygmir]

I'm sort of draconian, even, in that I say, if born totally screwed up, the mother has the right to "abort" it even in the few weeks after birth..........It's between her, and her thoughts/maker......no one else.

But, is there a "definition" of "human life"? and, if so, when?

I could see, drawing that law, to get it challenged, and finally, come to a clear cut ruling.

And, why, lump all religious (I suppose you mean xtian), in with republicans?........

Oh my, that is draconian, but I agree completely. However, today's medicine allows for most birth defects to be determined long before birth, where the choice to abort is much easier to make.

And science pretty much has determined when life begins, it just the religious nuts that won't accept the definition. But that's not surprising, they have the same trouble with evolution and global warming, and even the age of the world. It still boggles my mind that the have come to accept that the earth is round.

so, when does science say life begins?

[Ugly Dougly]

Alabama is really giving them some competition for stupidest state in the country.

[youtube][/youtube]

[maryanimal]

could they just be trying to draw a line, or, get a debate started?
It seems so vague, "when is it a person".........To me, technically, it's at fertilization.
But, also, to me, it's totally part of the woman, until the umbilical is cut. And, she has every right, to do with her body, and all it's parts, as she wishes. I'm sort of draconian, even, in that I say, if born totally screwed up, the mother has the right to "abort" it even in the few weeks after birth..........It's between her, and her thoughts/maker......no one else.

But, is there a "definition" of "human life"? and, if so, when?

I could see, drawing that law, to get it challenged, and finally, come to a clear cut ruling.

And, why, lump all religious (I suppose you mean xtian), in with republicans?........

I have to say that I agree the woman is the vessel for incubation, but i feel the father has every right to want to keep the child even if the egg donor doesn't want the child. After all, he's as much a part of the child as she is. If there was an issue of lack of contraceptive, shame on both of them. Why should the child die because he/she felt it was a mistake? So, there's my two cents. This is a tough issue.

[theCryptofishist]

In Mother Nature Sarah Blaffer Hrdy makes a pretty good case for the idea that the species' natural way of keeping the population from growing too fast. (In a completely different book by some utterly different people they estimated the number of infants allowed to live in small hunter/gatherer societies was three out of ten.) If you take that seriously, then abortion is an improvement, and birth control is even better than that.

I just hate living in a culture where the dumbest, most regressive power grabs are free to completely distort the discussion on such matters.

[ygmir]

MA:
the disagreement I'd have with you, there, is that it's "her" body......father can't and shouldn't be able to "compel" her to carry.........I see it as the ultimate sovereignty, over one's "self".
Yup, they guy, is "out of luck" if she doesn't want it, and he does, "in utero" that is.
ultimately, life is not fair. Yup, the mother, holds all the cards. child and father, take second place.
That's just the way it is.

I say this all, and, freely admit, if a woman were carrying my child, (and didn't want it, or me ) I'd do my best to convince her to give birth, and, I'd raise it, and proudly. I say this, knowing, I can't compel her to do so.

[ygmir]

In Mother Nature Sarah Blaffer Hrdy makes a pretty good case for the idea that the species' natural way of keeping the population from growing too fast. (In a completely different book by some utterly different people they estimated the number of infants allowed to live in small hunter/gatherer societies was three out of ten.) If you take that seriously, then abortion is an improvement, and birth control is even better than that.

I just hate living in a culture where the dumbest, most regressive power grabs are free to completely distort the discussion on such matters.

yeah, but abortion is a more technical procedure, than throwing the baby in a stream, no?
They both achieve the same outcome/goal. One, is less personal, seems the only difference.
And again, I'm not against it.

[maryanimal]

MA:
the disagreement I'd have with you, there, is that it's "her" body......father can't and shouldn't be able to "compel" her to carry.........I see it as the ultimate sovereignty, over one's "self".
Yup, they guy, is "out of luck" if she doesn't want it, and he does, "in utero" that is.
ultimately, life is not fair. Yup, the mother, holds all the cards. child and father, take second place.
That's just the way it is.

I say this all, and, freely admit, if a woman were carrying my child, (and didn't want it, or me ) I'd do my best to convince her to give birth, and, I'd raise it, and proudly. I say this, knowing, I can't compel her to do so.

Yg, reading back at my post it sounds like I said a woman has no choice, I should've been a bit more clear. I do agree that it is the womans body and the father of the child is SOL if she doesn't want to carry the baby. I'm pro-life however, but I think what she does with her body is her own business. If she decides that abortion is the answer, well, she's the one who has to live with the decision she makes.
And I have to add this, I've never been able to have children of my own...I've never been pregnant. I wanted to have children all my life, but my higher source gave me 4 great "sons" That I love as my own. <3

[Dr. Pyro]

I just read the article on at www.clutchmagonline.con and Jkisha, as usual, has his head up his ass. He blames, and I quote, "...Republican pios (sic) ignorant bullshit..." When in fact the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, which happens to be Johnny DuPree, the state's first black major-party candidate, is endorsing the bill. So who's the ignorant one now? All you do is disparage Republicans or anybody who is middle of the road or right leaning. If you're not pro-gay anti-conservative pro-union and pro-choice, you're simply bullshit. What a dick you can be, I swear to God.

[forty_eight]

It actually makes sense that this is supported by both parties in Mississippi. It's classic wedge politics in a notoriously conservative state, and by candidates wrapping themselves in the righteousness that is "protecting uborn children" it takes away either parties' ability to carve out voters that might be compelled to vote based on the notion of protecting these embryonic masses of cells.

Maybe we should give cancer 'personhood'? It's a very intentioned mass of cells with DNA that should be given its right to self determination!

[A Jester]

I just read the article on at http://www.clutchmagonline.con and Jkisha, as usual, has his head up his ass. He blames, and I quote, "...Republican pios (sic) ignorant bullshit..." When in fact the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, which happens to be Johnny DuPree, the state's first black major-party candidate, is endorsing the bill. So who's the ignorant one now? All you do is disparage Republicans or anybody who is middle of the road or right leaning. If you're not pro-gay anti-conservative pro-union and pro-choice, you're simply bullshit. What a dick you can be, I swear to God.

So does Eplaya have a Thunderdome?

[Roberto Dobbisano]

no...but we might end up having two different meet n greets...

[Ugly Dougly]

so, when does science say life begins?

Sorry, Ygmir, I didn't address this.

You know, science doesn't really know what life is, or where it came from.

You are alive. If you cut off your finger, you have killed millions of cells. Are you facing manslaughter charges?

You sperm is alive. If you "spill your seed unto the ground" are you killing children that you might have procreated with that seed? I suppose you should then surrender yourself to the authorities!

And your sperm will start dying within a few minutes of being separated from your body, and so would a fetus.

I don't know, I will still be scratching my head over this, all my days on earth.

The battle is joined when we start telling living people what to think about this, and taking away their rights to decide.

[Eric]

so, when does science say life begins?

Sorry, Ygmir, I didn't address this.

You know, science doesn't really know what life is, or where it came from.

You are alive. If you cut off your finger, you have killed millions of cells. Are you facing manslaughter charges?

You sperm is alive. If you "spill your seed unto the ground" are you killing children that you might have procreated with that seed? I suppose you should then surrender yourself to the authorities!

And your sperm will start dying within a few minutes of being separated from your body, and so would a fetus.

I don't know, I will still be scratching my head over this, all my days on earth.

The battle is joined when we start telling living people what to think about this, and taking away their rights to decide.

Damn UD, that's one of the best ways of stating this little conundrum I've seen.

[Elderberry]

Why thank you! I try my best; and it's always good to know its appreciated. And it's especially appreciated when it comes from someone I don't really care for all that much.

I just read the article on at http://www.clutchmagonline.con and Jkisha, as usual, has his head up his ass. He blames, and I quote, "...Republican pios (sic) ignorant bullshit..." When in fact the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, which happens to be Johnny DuPree, the state's first black major-party candidate, is endorsing the bill. So who's the ignorant one now? All you do is disparage Republicans or anybody who is middle of the road or right leaning. If you're not pro-gay anti-conservative pro-union and pro-choice, you're simply bullshit. What a dick you can be, I swear to God.

[BBadger]

MA:
the disagreement I'd have with you, there, is that it's "her" body......father can't and shouldn't be able to "compel" her to carry.........I see it as the ultimate sovereignty, over one's "self".
Yup, they guy, is "out of luck" if she doesn't want it, and he does, "in utero" that is.
ultimately, life is not fair. Yup, the mother, holds all the cards. child and father, take second place.
That's just the way it is.

I say this all, and, freely admit, if a woman were carrying my child, (and didn't want it, or me ) I'd do my best to convince her to give birth, and, I'd raise it, and proudly. I say this, knowing, I can't compel her to do so.

right_to_choose.jpg

(Image taken from LesiureTown)

If it is wholly her choice because it's her body then should the father be forced to pay child support for some child that he has no legal control over? Half the responsibility, but none of the rights?

Note: this not taking a side on this question. This is purely a question of views on a touchy subject.

[Elderberry]

If it is wholly her choice because it's her body then should the father be forced to pay child support for some child that he has no legal control over? Half the responsibility, but none of the rights?

Note: this not taking a side on this question. This is purely a question of views on a touchy subject.

That used to bother me too, however, the sperm is his and it makes sense for him to be careful where he decides to leave it, especially when the consequences are known in advance. And should he want the baby, I don't think he has much, if any, say should the woman decide to abort it either.

[MyDearFriend]

[rant] Here's the thing, the big ugly secret that nobody mentions:

Pregnancy can be fatal.

More women die, in this country, more women die every year trying to give birth than firefighters and policemen combined. Yet every other person who risks his/her life for someone else, EVERY OTHER PERSON WHO DOES THAT, is a volunteer. Every other person who accepts that risk of death is hailed as a hero and warned in advance of the dangers.

And do not try to tell me that women know, or that anti-abortion laws allow for intervention to save the life of the mother, because in about half of all cases of maternal death, the cause is unknown or could not have been prevented. I see about one case each month (me personally) where the mom is white, financially secure, covered by insurance, got gold-standard prenatal care and did everything right, and still we are sending a helicopter to bring her in, at the point of death, to try and save her. Nobody saw it coming and sometimes there is nothing we can do about it.

So, if we have any kind of ethical sense within us at all, we need to agree that accepting a pregnancy is on par with other types of altruistic and risky endeavors, and let it be strictly voluntary.

And yes it is sad that the fetus will die without use of the mother's body. But people die every day waiting for organ transplants; should we require people to hand over their organs? I don't think so. [/rant]

[theCryptofishist]

In Mother Nature Sarah Blaffer Hrdy makes a pretty good case for the idea that the species' natural way of keeping the population from growing too fast. (In a completely different book by some utterly different people they estimated the number of infants allowed to live in small hunter/gatherer societies was three out of ten.) If you take that seriously, then abortion is an improvement, and birth control is even better than that.

I just hate living in a culture where the dumbest, most regressive power grabs are free to completely distort the discussion on such matters.

yeah, but abortion is a more technical procedure, than throwing the baby in a stream, no?
They both achieve the same outcome/goal. One, is less personal, seems the only difference.
And again, I'm not against it.

My feeling is that less energy and less waste is involved the earlier the death occurs, or if it never occurs because of effective contraception. (I suppose we could try comparing the calories save to the electric energy consumed to find out if "less energy" is actually consumed...)
But I think where I was going with this is that we're all descended from baby killers, and I mean baby killers, not just abortionists, and maybe we shouldn't be so stuck up about our basic biology.

[Elderberry]

Spontaneous abortion, also known as miscarriage, is the unintentional expulsion of an embryo or fetus before the 20th to 22nd week of gestation.[note 2] A pregnancy that ends before 37 weeks of gestation resulting in a live-born infant is known as a "premature birth" or a "preterm birth".[11] When a fetus dies in utero after viability, or during delivery, it is usually termed "stillborn".[12] Premature births and stillbirths are generally not considered to be miscarriages although usage of these terms can sometimes overlap.[citation needed]
Only 30 to 50% of conceptions progress past the first trimester.[13] The vast majority of those that do not progress are lost before the woman is aware of the conception,[10] and many pregnancies are lost before medical practitioners have the ability to detect the presence of an embryo.[14] Between 15% and 30% of known pregnancies end in clinically apparent miscarriage, depending upon the age and health of the pregnant woman.[15]
The most common cause of spontaneous abortion during the first trimester is chromosomal abnormalities of the embryo/fetus,[10][16] accounting for at least 50% of sampled early pregnancy losses.[17] Other causes include vascular disease (such as lupus), diabetes, other hormonal problems, infection, and abnormalities of the uterus.[16] Advancing maternal age and a patient history of previous spontaneous abortions are the two leading factors associated with a greater risk of spontaneous abortion.[17] A spontaneous abortion can also be caused by accidental trauma; intentional trauma or stress to cause miscarriage is considered induced abortion or feticide.[18]

Up to half of those "people fetuses" die before the mother even knows she was pregnant.

[ygmir]

In Mother Nature Sarah Blaffer Hrdy makes a pretty good case for the idea that the species' natural way of keeping the population from growing too fast. (In a completely different book by some utterly different people they estimated the number of infants allowed to live in small hunter/gatherer societies was three out of ten.) If you take that seriously, then abortion is an improvement, and birth control is even better than that.

I just hate living in a culture where the dumbest, most regressive power grabs are free to completely distort the discussion on such matters.

yeah, but abortion is a more technical procedure, than throwing the baby in a stream, no?
They both achieve the same outcome/goal. One, is less personal, seems the only difference.
And again, I'm not against it.

My feeling is that less energy and less waste is involved the earlier the death occurs, or if it never occurs because of effective contraception. (I suppose we could try comparing the calories save to the electric energy consumed to find out if "less energy" is actually consumed...)
But I think where I was going with this is that we're all descended from baby killers, and I mean baby killers, not just abortionists, and maybe we shouldn't be so stuck up about our basic biology.

*high five*



yeah, I know, a mammal.......but, it was the best pic I could come up with.......

[BBadger]

My feeling is that less energy and less waste is involved the earlier the death occurs, or if it never occurs because of effective contraception.

I follow that line of thought as well. Though it is interesting how children dying in conflicts, attacks, etc. is considered--or at least portrayed as--a greater loss than the adults. In the greater scheme of things, more has been invested in the adult. It probably has to do with some sort of "innocence" factor for children, but I don't know if that really qualifies as valuable.

[theCryptofishist]

Only 30 to 50% of conceptions progress past the first trimester.[13]

Up to half of those "people fetuses" die before the mother even knows she was pregnant.[/quote]
More than half. Or half or more, to be most precise. 30 to 50 is those who uervive, at least as I read it.

[gyre]

60% No so far, but early days.

Interestingly, there is an Eminent Domain Initiative running 70%+ so far.


The state has virtually no access to abortion due to terrorism already.