Does anyone else agree that many pro-life supporters are tend to be more pro-birth than pro-life? I'm personally very pro-life, but I don't believe that morality needs to equal law in all cases. Anyway, I live in a very pro-life area and the same year my state tried to make abortions illegal after a HB was detected, they denied funding milk for low-income students in elementary schools. I just find that interesting. To me... funding basic nourishment for children is should be lock step with any pro-life beliefs.
There is a study by two economists (Levitt and Donohue... any Freakonomics fans may recall this) that makes the connection between legalized abortions and the decrease in crime in the 1990s and beyond (including violent crime).
If abortion is murder, then why is it ok for women who have been raped? Do those babies matter less? Are you trying to save babies? Or are you trying to punish women who have irresponsible sex by forcing them to carry a baby to term?
THIS!!! The argument that abortion should be allowed in the case of rape, incest, or to save the mother's life but not allowed in other instances is completely illogical! If a pro-life advocate believes that abortion equates "murder," then it makes absolutely no sense why they wouldn't apply that standard universally to all pregnancies unless the purpose is, as @PYLWhammy said, to "punish women who have irresponsible sex by forcing them to carry a baby to term." While I can appreciate, but respectfully disagree with, a pro-life advocate's position if it applies universally, I cannot respect a person who supports forcing a woman to endure an unwanted pregnancy because they disagree with her personal decisions from a moral perspective.
Edited for a typo.
Stupid QBF
I am strongly pro-life. There's more to being pro-life than just not being okay with abortion. To me, pro-life means that you value and respect life in every sense of the word. I believe that life begins at conception, the moment a sperm fertilizes an egg then that is a life. I also believe that no one's life is valued more than another. I do not believe in the death penalty and I do not believe in abortion. I think that the act of taking a life in any way whatsoever is wrong. Therefore, I do not believe that there is ever a good reason for abortion. My life is not more important than the life of a growing fetus, no matter how that fetus came to be.
So the argument of abortion to me is not about a woman's right to choose, it is about the act of taking a life. I'm not saying that everyone who is "pro-life" believes the same things that I do, but I wanted to offer a (hopefully) different point of view.
Does anyone else agree that many pro-life supporters are tend to be more pro-birth than pro-life? I'm personally very pro-life, but I don't believe that morality needs to equal law in all cases. Anyway, I live in a very pro-life area and the same year my state tried to make abortions illegal after a HB was detected, they denied funding milk for low-income students in elementary schools. I just find that interesting. To me... funding basic nourishment for children is should be lock step with any pro-life beliefs.
There is a study by two economists (Levitt and Donohue... any Freakonomics fans may recall this) that makes the connection between legalized abortions and the decrease in crime in the 1990s and beyond (including violent crime).
Trailing on these coattails, I saw an article a while back comparing various beliefs of "pro lifers" that make absolutely no sense to me (and remember, ladies, before you hit me with the "that's not me!" or "not any pro lifers I know!" things, these are stats, so there is a variance): areas that are deeply pro-life are also deeply pro-death - in the case of the death penalty, anyway. They also tend to be areas where women die more often from childbirth - but there doesn't seem to be a push for safer procedures/funding/aid for at risk women. These areas also tend to be areas that suffer from higher rates of school drop outs, teenage pregnancies and child poverty - and again, there's very little push to have before/after school food programs, basic nutrition supplements or really anything that would really indicate an attitude of being pro life at all.
Basically, what I am saying is that a lot of the "pro life" movement is not so much life but being pro-birth, which also jives with punishing women for having sex without consequences.
Also, fun fact: A vast majority of pro-life leaders are men. Personally, though the argument can be made for abortion affecting men as well as women, since it disproportionately affects women I feel pretty confident in being extremely suspicious of this. Particularly when the consequences for women under pro-life mandates are severe (imprisonment, say) whereas they are near non-existent for men.
I wanted to make a comment on he whole abortion thing but now there are too many comments on it to read and I don't have the time. ^_^ You ladies all have good points though, for and against. I am pro-life. My mom had an abortion once, when she got pregnant for the first time and her and my dad weren't ready for kids. She told me she regrets it. I do have different views though, if someone is raped. If I were raped and got pregnant, I would not want to keep the child.
anyway, that's all I am going to say!
Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
I initially posted about being pro-choice in response to @kbrands7 post about being influenced at all times by the fact that she is a mother, and it occurred to me that my political views have intensified on this issue because of my experience of pregnancy.
Just wanted to note that I didn't say it just to stir up the pot or be cantankerous.
But there are a few things I want to add.
1. Folks who keep saying they are pro-life for themselves but pro-choice for other people: This means that you are pro-choice. Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion, it means that you respect women's autonomy when it comes to making this decision. Being pro-life for yourself alone means that you are a pro-choicer who chooses to carry her baby to term in every circumstance. It means you would never choose abortion for yourself, you would choose life. But you're ok with other people choosing to terminate. But please, don't be afraid to call yourself pro-choice!!!! It gives the false impression that pro-choicers are waiting in the wings to kill all the babies, and that is just not true.
2. Re: @nerdymama15's post, here are three reasons that abortion is not murder and is not and should not be prosecuted as such in any scenario:
First: Miscarriage is medically called "spontaneous abortion" because your body has rejected the birth. Many times this is because the embryo/fetus is defective and cannot survive or has already died, and many times it is because your body is not able to sustain that pregnancy. In no way is it a conscious decision; it is not murder, it's a biologically-ordained mercy-killing. And so, now that we have the technology to do this safely, we can control a bit more of this. Preventing a child from being born into an abusive home could be seen as a mercy-killing--the only difference is that we are consciously making that difficult ethical decision.
Second: We do not call killing in self-defense "murder" or even "manslaughter." So why, if we are saving ourselves from a pregnancy that will be traumatizing or dangerous to our health, is that not self-defense? It is.
Third: While I disagree strongly with the Castle doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws, they are enormously popular and justify killing another human being should you feel threatened by that person in any way, shape, or form. Nothing is more invasive than a child growing in your body. So if I'm allowed to protect my "castle" and shoot intruders without penalty, why is that not even more true for an unwanted pregnancy?
Note that these arguments all presume that the embryo/fetus/child is, in fact, human, and that when a woman makes the decision to terminate that there are still two lives at stake. Many more radical pro-choice folks (and many religious people who define life as beginning at birth or at the quickening and not before) will not concede to this point. But in the service of not doing what @LadySamLady despises and talking past one another, I am presuming that life begins at conception (even though my religious tradition, Judaism, does not actually subscribe to that--we believe that life begins when baby draws its first breath, just as Adam was not alive until God breathed life into him).
If you don't believe in an abortion, don't get one. You are not anyone else and have no way of knowing their life or what led to the pregnancy. No one ever truly can so banning it completely because you disagree is unreasonable and not what happens in secular democracies.
I kind of think Steve Avery from Making a Murderer is guilty.
OMG can we please talk about this? I agree with you. When I finished the documentary, I waffled back and forth. Since then I've read a few things about the case that the documentary left out and now I'm leaning towards guilty.
Same! After learning some new details (no spoilers ppl don't worry) it just seems so much more likely and obvious that of course he did it. I do think the investigation was shitty and they should have looked into other suspects, but I just really think he's probably guilty. All the petitions on FB annoy me because I feel like no one is actually thinking for themselves. They just take the documentarians perspective at face value with no thoughtful contemplation or analysis of their own. I think Adnan from serial is totally guilty too, no question about that one in my mind.
QBF
I'm actually on the fence after reading new details. Part of me feels like of course he did it, but the other part feels like a lot of evidence was dismissed that presents reasonable doubt. I think the most compelling thing to me is that he was presumed guilty instead of presumed innocent until proven guilty. Clearly both his trials and the local precinct are not sterling examples of the justice system, but some of the details that have come out present more doubt about his innocence than I would have thought initially. I'm sort of feeling like he might be guilty but he at least deserved a new trial with different prosecutors in a neutral location, which is obviously not possible now.
About gyms, true story - at my old gym I once watched a really built guy stack weights, pose for a selfie, and then re-rack to a weight he could actually press.
Eta: quote box fail
I completely agree with you that the trial was about proving him innocent when it should be the other way around. Like, I think he is probably guilty, but am I sure that he was actually PROVEN guilty during his trial? Not so sure about that.
I can't believe people are actually calling for Presidential pardons! I mean, call for a retrial, maybe, but a full on pardon? Come on people. To me, a far more upsetting failure of justice is the trial of Robert Durst (anyone seen The Jinx??)
I'm with you both about the unfairness of the trial. While I may think he is guilty, I don't think he was treated fairly by the courts. Same with Adnan from serial, his trial was BS. Of course I've seen The Jinx ... and I totally agree. It is really upsetting.
I hate super long quote boxes. Scrolling through posts that can't even be read anymore because the lines are only one letter long!
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
QBF
The same things are being said by the same people. The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
I wasn't saying anything rude or snarky. Just surprised that two days later we are still having the same conversation. Especially since the same points of view have been hashed out for 36 hours at that point.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
I wasn't saying anything rude or snarky. Just surprised that two days later we are still having the same conversation. Especially since the same points of view have been hashed out for 36 hours at that point.
I really don't think it is mean or uncalled for to comment about the length of a UO debate if it goes on for two days. I thought the question came across in a light hearted way, not judgey or mean at all.
I'm just glad we're not talking about the gym anymore.
Thanks for reminding me I promised DH I would go tomorrow with him. Urgggggggg. Sometimes I miss using the morning sickness/ 1st tri fatigue as an excuse to miss going.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
I wasn't saying anything rude or snarky. Just surprised that two days later we are still having the same conversation. Especially since the same points of view have been hashed out for 36 hours at that point.
I really don't think it is mean or uncalled for to comment about the length of a UO debate if it goes on for two days. I thought the question came across in a light hearted way, not judgey or mean at all.
Thanks grrrlllll. Really wasn't meant in a mean way. If that made anyone feel "uncool" my sincerest apologizes.
JessicaB0627 said: The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
Man, that's a pretty fatalistic view to take.
That's tantamount to saying "no one on this board is capable of assimilating new perspectives or considering new ideas." Sure, it's probably fair to say that some people have already considered every single point ever made by anyone else in a discussion (although who they are and how they're so omniscient would be worth knowing), and it's probably more fair to say that some people are not interested in learning from others' views, but I'd like to think that there are at least maybe one or two people in the world -- perhaps even on this board! -- capable of considering old ideas from new angles, and perhaps reconsidering previously limited views.
God knows if I never listened to any new ideas I'd still have all the same opinions I had when I was 14, and I had some real dumb opinions when I was 14.
JessicaB0627 said: The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
Man, that's a pretty fatalistic view to take.
That's tantamount to saying "no one on this board is capable of assimilating new perspectives or considering new ideas." Sure, it's probably fair to say that some people have already considered every single point ever made by anyone else in a discussion (although who they are and how they're so omniscient would be worth knowing), and it's probably more fair to say that some people are not interested in learning from others' views, but I'd like to think that there are at least maybe one or two people in the world -- perhaps even on this board! -- capable of considering old ideas from new angles, and perhaps reconsidering previously limited views.
God knows if I never listened to any new ideas I'd still have all the same opinions I had when I was 14, and I had some real dumb opinions when I was 14.
-------QBF------
Seriously? Obviously no one involved in this discussion is budging on their opinions. I think abortion is murder and @dshannah wants to write a 200 word response on why it's not. You take the opportunity to point out to everyone that you're rich and even if it was outlawed in the US, you could easily fly overseas and have it done. I'm saying that this discussion has been going on for 2 days and while everyone is throwing out their own opinions, opinions that we all seem to feel very strongly about, no one is doing any convincing. We're beating a dead horse by saying the same things over, and over, and over again.
Also, I was defending @yogahh's comment after being told it was "uncalled for".
Seriously? Obviously no one involved in this discussion is budging on their opinions.
Yes, seriously.
Something that I think about not that infrequently (although it usually comes up in the context of dog training, more specifically, when people like to argue that "you can't get X behavior reliably in Y circumstance without punishment") is the difference between "I can't/won't do something" and "something can't/won't be done by anyone."
It is always totally fair to say "I can't [or won't] do something." If you want to say "I have opinion X, and there is no information or argument or experience in all the world that will ever cause me to budge on opinion X," I would certainly have no argument with that. No one knows your own mind better than you do.
Where I get a little twitchy is when that broadens into the claim that "no one can/will do something." How do you know? That's a genuine question. How do you know the mind of everyone who might participate in a given discussion? How can any of us say there's not some lurker here today or tomorrow or five years from now who might read these words and change their thinking in some small way? How can any of us say that we won't be glad to have heard and considered these ideas when our future kids get old enough to ask us about these questions?
Seriously? Obviously no one involved in this discussion is budging on their opinions. I think abortion is murder and @dshannah wants to write a 200 word response on why it's not. You take the opportunity to point out to everyone that you're rich and even if it was outlawed in the US, you could easily fly overseas and have it done. I'm saying that this discussion has been going on for 2 days and while everyone is throwing out their own opinions, opinions that we all seem to feel very strongly about, no one is doing any convincing. We're beating a dead horse by saying the same things over, and over, and over again.
Also, I was defending @yogahh's comment after being told it was "uncalled for".
@nerdymama15 was the first person in this discussion to assert the legal ramifications of calling abortion murder (new point in the discussion!). And I moved aways from "it's a woman's choice!" to "even if it is killing a human being, it's not murder based on legal precedent (another new point in the discussion!). And I also introduced the idea (that you *never* hear in the mainstream public debate and I only know because I am Jewish and teach ethics) that Judaism does not believe that pre-birth fetuses are alive (another new point in the discussion!). That is three new points in the last few posts before @yogahh shut it down. And there were others, I'm just listing the ones I was involved in.
A discussion that's been going on for two days is only exhausted when people stop listening to one another, and if you look at the debate, people really were listening to one another and responding to the new points other posters were making. And, might I add, respectfully! Uncharacteristically so for the internet. Just because you and @yogahh stopped reading with interest doesn't mean that others of us weren't still reading and responding thoughtfully.
And perhaps no one will do a 180 degree turn, but that doesn't mean we can't get anything from listening--either the ability to nuance our own perspectives or a wider range of perspectives to consider when formulating our own arguments (to make our arguments stronger, perhaps), or (heaven help us!) we might even consider something we'd never seen before and begin an incremental move toward a different position.
So my comment to @yogahh still stands: even if it was light-hearted--why be so dismissive of folks who are still finding the discussion productive?
Seriously? Obviously no one involved in this discussion is budging on their opinions. I think abortion is murder and @dshannah wants to write a 200 word response on why it's not. You take the opportunity to point out to everyone that you're rich and even if it was outlawed in the US, you could easily fly overseas and have it done. I'm saying that this discussion has been going on for 2 days and while everyone is throwing out their own opinions, opinions that we all seem to feel very strongly about, no one is doing any convincing. We're beating a dead horse by saying the same things over, and over, and over again.
Also, I was defending @yogahh's comment after being told it was "uncalled for".
@nerdymama15 was the first person in this discussion to assert the legal ramifications of calling abortion murder (new point in the discussion!). And I moved aways from "it's a woman's choice!" to "even if it is killing a human being, it's not murder based on legal precedent (another new point in the discussion!). And I also introduced the idea (that you *never* hear in the mainstream public debate and I only know because I am Jewish and teach ethics) that Judaism does not believe that pre-birth fetuses are alive (another new point in the discussion!). That is three new points in the last few posts before @yogahh shut it down. And there were others, I'm just listing the ones I was involved in.
A discussion that's been going on for two days is only exhausted when people stop listening to one another, and if you look at the debate, people really were listening to one another and responding to the new points other posters were making. And, might I add, respectfully! Uncharacteristically so for the internet. Just because you and @yogahh stopped reading with interest doesn't mean that others of us weren't still reading and responding thoughtfully.
And perhaps no one will do a 180 degree turn, but that doesn't mean we can't get anything from listening--either the ability to nuance our own perspectives or a wider range of perspectives to consider when formulating our own arguments (to make our arguments stronger, perhaps), or (heaven help us!) we might even consider something we'd never seen before and begin an incremental move toward a different position.
So my comment to @yogahh still stands: even if it was light-hearted--why be so dismissive of folks who are still finding the discussion productive?
********
Wow if me saying "is this still going on" is enough to "shut down" a thread I have a lot more power than I ever thought.
At this point, I think you are being argumentative just to be argumentative with me (and @LadySamLady as you also singled her out in one of your replies for no reason) This all started because you said sometime crass (which you later clarified and I respected) that I disagreed with. I bet if I agreed with you this wouldn't be an issue. Why you are so offended by an off handed, light hearted comment is beyond me. I feel like you and I have had a good repoire so hate to see that severed due to such a silly comment. I could see if I said "shut up/ no one cares/ etc" but a joking comment..?!?! I'm over it. Enjoy your Sunday!
Wow if me saying "is this still going on" is enough to "shut down" a thread I have a lot more power than I ever thought.
At this point, I think you are being argumentative just to be argumentative with me (and @LadySamLady as you also singled her out in one of your replies for no reason) This all started because you said sometime crass that I disagreed with. I bet if I agreed with you this wouldn't be an issue. Why you are so offended by an off handed, light hearted comment is beyond me. I feel like you and I have had a good repoire so hate to see that severed due to such a silly comment. I could see if I said "shut up/ no one cares/ etc" but a joking comment..?!?! I'm over it. Enjoy your Sunday!
I am not picking fights, I'm responding to other people's comments. If that's argumentative, then, well, we're all guilty.
I responded to @LadySamLady because her point was the one I was responding to. Perhaps I should have quoted it, but as it was her last point I thought I didn't have to.
And I was arguing with @nerdymama15 because she said something I wanted to respond to, and I thought that my comments in response to hers would advance the debate.
And I argued/am arguing with you because your comment seemed to derail a discussion that I was (and I thought others were) invested in. Not because you disagree with me on that discussion (which, quite honestly, I'd forgotten, because when you and I disagreed about it, we were both civil and understanding and I acknowledged and appreciated your point, as you did mine).
Your last comment offended me because it was dismissive (humorously or no) of people who were taking things seriously. And no matter how light-hearted that dismissal is, it always signals superiority and makes the people who are talking feel like they shouldn't be. Can you imagine being at a party, walking away from a group of people who are having a heated debate which they feel is important and interesting, then, going back and finding that they are still talking about the same thing and saying: "I can't believe you guys are still talking about this!" before walking away again? You would never do that, even to be cute, because it's just rude. There's just no call for it.
To put this in personal terms: I wrote my long post when I did because I had an exceptionally busy day and had only 20 minutes at the end of it for bumping (which, sadly, is one of my primary ways to relax these days), and when I saw what other people were saying, I felt compelled to respond. They were things other people hadn't said, responding to posts which had not been responded to. I was looking forward to seeing what other people thought. Imagine my surprise when I come back to see that you, of all people, from whom I have come to expect a certain level of thoughtfulness and civility, had decided that my post was not worth anyone reading, not because of the content, but because of its timing.
You and I generally get along even when we disagree, but I thought that that remark was both uncalled for and out of character, and I considered figuring out how private messages work to tell you so. But by that point it was so far after the post that I thought it might be helpful for other people who felt dismissed by your post to see someone objecting to it.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
QBF
The same things are being said by the same people. The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
I don't feel like she was being rude or mean at all... She simply asked a question.
Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
I'm fine with letting discussions die a natural death. If nobody's interested, then nobody will contribute, and they'll die out, and that's how things go on any message board.
I think arbitrarily cutting off discussions is probably not a great idea. Setting aside any personal disagreements that might be going on in this thread (of which I'm largely and happily unaware, because as far as I've seen, everybody has been pretty respectful in their posts and I haven't really seen any personal attacks), just as a general matter, if there's a conversation going on and nobody's being personally threatened, bullied, or harassed, where's the harm in letting it continue?
Sometimes new ideas come to light and sometimes it's just fun (maybe not in this example, but it's not hard to imagine others where that could be the case). Sometimes people learn new things (I often do) and sometimes opinions do get moved a little. It wasn't all that long ago that cross-racial marriages were taboo and spaying or neutering family pets was considered ridiculous. But social norms change, culture changes, and that happens in no small part through reasonable discussion and the free exchange of different views.
Why shut that down when no harm's being done? Everyone has the option to just not click on a thread and effectively vote with their posts if they're not interested.
I never expected anyone to agree with what I said about calling it murder. That is just my viewpoint. Everyone else here has their viewpoints/opinions as well and I may or may not agree or disagree with those. It's all good we are all entitled to our own viewpoints and opinions. This is one of those topics where the debate could go on and on and on because everyone feels strongly about their own viewpoint. I simply agree to disagree and I leave it at that.
That's kind of uncalled for. If you are no longer interested in the topic, scroll past the title, but why say something mean when you don't care and other people are still having a thoughtful discussion? All this does is make people feel bad (or less cool) for still caring about something after you've exhausted your thoughts on it.
Actually it's not. This is UO Thursday. We are waaay passed Thursday now. Now, if you wan to make a different thread about abortion have at it.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
JessicaB0627 said: The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
Man, that's a pretty fatalistic view to take.
That's tantamount to saying "no one on this board is capable of assimilating new perspectives or considering new ideas." Sure, it's probably fair to say that some people have already considered every single point ever made by anyone else in a discussion (although who they are and how they're so omniscient would be worth knowing), and it's probably more fair to say that some people are not interested in learning from others' views, but I'd like to think that there are at least maybe one or two people in the world -- perhaps even on this board! -- capable of considering old ideas from new angles, and perhaps reconsidering previously limited views.
God knows if I never listened to any new ideas I'd still have all the same opinions I had when I was 14, and I had some real dumb opinions when I was 14.
It's actually a true statement. It's become circular at this point.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
I'm fine with letting discussions die a natural death. If nobody's interested, then nobody will contribute, and they'll die out, and that's how things go on any message board.
I think arbitrarily cutting off discussions is probably not a great idea. Setting aside any personal disagreements that might be going on in this thread (of which I'm largely and happily unaware, because as far as I've seen, everybody has been pretty respectful in their posts and I haven't really seen any personal attacks), just as a general matter, if there's a conversation going on and nobody's being personally threatened, bullied, or harassed, where's the harm in letting it continue?
Sometimes new ideas come to light and sometimes it's just fun (maybe not in this example, but it's not hard to imagine others where that could be the case). Sometimes people learn new things (I often do) and sometimes opinions do get moved a little. It wasn't all that long ago that cross-racial marriages were taboo and spaying or neutering family pets was considered ridiculous. But social norms change, culture changes, and that happens in no small part through reasonable discussion and the free exchange of different views.
Why shut that down when no harm's being done? Everyone has the option to just not click on a thread and effectively vote with their posts if they're not interested.
Who is shutting this discussion down?? You're doing a great job to keep it going except now we're not even talking about the issue you're fighting to keep going. Doesn't make sense to me.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
I have to say that I have actually really enjoyed this thread! Maybe that's my UO Thursday, being posted on a Sunday night... How devious. Also-- if people don't want to be part of the conversation anymore, can't they just not click on this thread anymore?
I honestly quit going to the gym because I felt I was constantly being judged by the people who have been there a while. Sometimes, it's awkward starting new things, and we all forget rules and make mistakes....I felt like if I wasn't running on a treadmill (I like to walk, so shoot me) or took a quick break on the stationary bike before getting back to it, then others were judging me. I'm a plus size girl, but I was trying, and people were just rude to me. That's why I quit and now just work out in the privacy of my own home.
I'm not going to quote anything, but even though I did not comment, I felt like I thought about the abortion issue in several ways I had never considered, both the Thursday posts and beyond. For that, I am very thankful of those who took the time, and even felt safe enough to share such personal experiences.
As far as keeping opinions to a single day post, that will be a little ridiculous if we start being the bump police and go ahead telling everyone who got a little busy on a particular day that their opinion is no longer valued or appreciated on that specific board. Especially if everyone agrees we are trying to keep the number of new posts relatively clean.
Also - I have been having trouble with The Bump since last Thursday so this was really the first chance I had an opportunity to go through and post. I hope I'm not kicked out for my tardiness.
Man this thread comes back to life more than Michael Myers!
This is DH and my FAVORITE FAVORITE FAVORITE MOVIE EVER!!!!
Any Steeler fans here? On Saturday nights game, the announcer called Big Ben the Micheal Meyers of Football, cause when he gets knocked down he gets right back up.
Re: UO Thursday 1/7
There is a study by two economists (Levitt and Donohue... any Freakonomics fans may recall this) that makes the connection between legalized abortions and the decrease in crime in the 1990s and beyond (including violent crime).
Edited for a typo.
Stupid QBF
I am strongly pro-life. There's more to being pro-life than just not being okay with abortion. To me, pro-life means that you value and respect life in every sense of the word. I believe that life begins at conception, the moment a sperm fertilizes an egg then that is a life. I also believe that no one's life is valued more than another. I do not believe in the death penalty and I do not believe in abortion. I think that the act of taking a life in any way whatsoever is wrong. Therefore, I do not believe that there is ever a good reason for abortion. My life is not more important than the life of a growing fetus, no matter how that fetus came to be.
So the argument of abortion to me is not about a woman's right to choose, it is about the act of taking a life. I'm not saying that everyone who is "pro-life" believes the same things that I do, but I wanted to offer a (hopefully) different point of view.
Basically, what I am saying is that a lot of the "pro life" movement is not so much life but being pro-birth, which also jives with punishing women for having sex without consequences.
Also, fun fact: A vast majority of pro-life leaders are men. Personally, though the argument can be made for abortion affecting men as well as women, since it disproportionately affects women I feel pretty confident in being extremely suspicious of this. Particularly when the consequences for women under pro-life mandates are severe (imprisonment, say) whereas they are near non-existent for men.
anyway, that's all I am going to say!
Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
Menopur 75ml (upped to 112.5ml), Ovidrel, & IUI IUI #1 8/31/2015
9/15/2015: BFP HCG - 400, 9/17/2015: HCG - 827, 9/21/2015 - HCG 3,327!Just wanted to note that I didn't say it just to stir up the pot or be cantankerous.
But there are a few things I want to add.
1. Folks who keep saying they are pro-life for themselves but pro-choice for other people: This means that you are pro-choice. Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion, it means that you respect women's autonomy when it comes to making this decision. Being pro-life for yourself alone means that you are a pro-choicer who chooses to carry her baby to term in every circumstance. It means you would never choose abortion for yourself, you would choose life. But you're ok with other people choosing to terminate. But please, don't be afraid to call yourself pro-choice!!!! It gives the false impression that pro-choicers are waiting in the wings to kill all the babies, and that is just not true.
2. Re: @nerdymama15's post, here are three reasons that abortion is not murder and is not and should not be prosecuted as such in any scenario:
- First: Miscarriage is medically called "spontaneous abortion" because your body has rejected the birth. Many times this is because the embryo/fetus is defective and cannot survive or has already died, and many times it is because your body is not able to sustain that pregnancy. In no way is it a conscious decision; it is not murder, it's a biologically-ordained mercy-killing. And so, now that we have the technology to do this safely, we can control a bit more of this. Preventing a child from being born into an abusive home could be seen as a mercy-killing--the only difference is that we are consciously making that difficult ethical decision.
- Second: We do not call killing in self-defense "murder" or even "manslaughter." So why, if we are saving ourselves from a pregnancy that will be traumatizing or dangerous to our health, is that not self-defense? It is.
- Third: While I disagree strongly with the Castle doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws, they are enormously popular and justify killing another human being should you feel threatened by that person in any way, shape, or form. Nothing is more invasive than a child growing in your body. So if I'm allowed to protect my "castle" and shoot intruders without penalty, why is that not even more true for an unwanted pregnancy?
Note that these arguments all presume that the embryo/fetus/child is, in fact, human, and that when a woman makes the decision to terminate that there are still two lives at stake. Many more radical pro-choice folks (and many religious people who define life as beginning at birth or at the quickening and not before) will not concede to this point. But in the service of not doing what @LadySamLady despises and talking past one another, I am presuming that life begins at conception (even though my religious tradition, Judaism, does not actually subscribe to that--we believe that life begins when baby draws its first breath, just as Adam was not alive until God breathed life into him).I can't believe people are actually calling for Presidential pardons! I mean, call for a retrial, maybe, but a full on pardon? Come on people. To me, a far more upsetting failure of justice is the trial of Robert Durst (anyone seen The Jinx??)
I'm with you both about the unfairness of the trial. While I may think he is guilty, I don't think he was treated fairly by the courts. Same with Adnan from serial, his trial was BS. Of course I've seen The Jinx
I hate super long quote boxes. Scrolling through posts that can't even be read anymore because the lines are only one letter long!
QBF
The same things are being said by the same people. The discussion is going nowhere and it's not going to change anyone's mind.
I wasn't saying anything rude or snarky. Just surprised that two days later we are still having the same conversation. Especially since the same points of view have been hashed out for 36 hours at that point.
Thanks grrrlllll. Really wasn't meant in a mean way. If that made anyone feel "uncool" my sincerest apologizes.
That's tantamount to saying "no one on this board is capable of assimilating new perspectives or considering new ideas." Sure, it's probably fair to say that some people have already considered every single point ever made by anyone else in a discussion (although who they are and how they're so omniscient would be worth knowing), and it's probably more fair to say that some people are not interested in learning from others' views, but I'd like to think that there are at least maybe one or two people in the world -- perhaps even on this board! -- capable of considering old ideas from new angles, and perhaps reconsidering previously limited views.
God knows if I never listened to any new ideas I'd still have all the same opinions I had when I was 14, and I had some real dumb opinions when I was 14.
That's tantamount to saying "no one on this board is capable of assimilating new perspectives or considering new ideas." Sure, it's probably fair to say that some people have already considered every single point ever made by anyone else in a discussion (although who they are and how they're so omniscient would be worth knowing), and it's probably more fair to say that some people are not interested in learning from others' views, but I'd like to think that there are at least maybe one or two people in the world -- perhaps even on this board! -- capable of considering old ideas from new angles, and perhaps reconsidering previously limited views.
God knows if I never listened to any new ideas I'd still have all the same opinions I had when I was 14, and I had some real dumb opinions when I was 14.
-------QBF------
Seriously? Obviously no one involved in this discussion is budging on their opinions. I think abortion is murder and @dshannah wants to write a 200 word response on why it's not. You take the opportunity to point out to everyone that you're rich and even if it was outlawed in the US, you could easily fly overseas and have it done. I'm saying that this discussion has been going on for 2 days and while everyone is throwing out their own opinions, opinions that we all seem to feel very strongly about, no one is doing any convincing. We're beating a dead horse by saying the same things over, and over, and over again.
Also, I was defending @yogahh's comment after being told it was "uncalled for".
Something that I think about not that infrequently (although it usually comes up in the context of dog training, more specifically, when people like to argue that "you can't get X behavior reliably in Y circumstance without punishment") is the difference between "I can't/won't do something" and "something can't/won't be done by anyone."
It is always totally fair to say "I can't [or won't] do something." If you want to say "I have opinion X, and there is no information or argument or experience in all the world that will ever cause me to budge on opinion X," I would certainly have no argument with that. No one knows your own mind better than you do.
Where I get a little twitchy is when that broadens into the claim that "no one can/will do something." How do you know? That's a genuine question. How do you know the mind of everyone who might participate in a given discussion? How can any of us say there's not some lurker here today or tomorrow or five years from now who might read these words and change their thinking in some small way? How can any of us say that we won't be glad to have heard and considered these ideas when our future kids get old enough to ask us about these questions?
A discussion that's been going on for two days is only exhausted when people stop listening to one another, and if you look at the debate, people really were listening to one another and responding to the new points other posters were making. And, might I add, respectfully! Uncharacteristically so for the internet. Just because you and @yogahh stopped reading with interest doesn't mean that others of us weren't still reading and responding thoughtfully.
And perhaps no one will do a 180 degree turn, but that doesn't mean we can't get anything from listening--either the ability to nuance our own perspectives or a wider range of perspectives to consider when formulating our own arguments (to make our arguments stronger, perhaps), or (heaven help us!) we might even consider something we'd never seen before and begin an incremental move toward a different position.
So my comment to @yogahh still stands: even if it was light-hearted--why be so dismissive of folks who are still finding the discussion productive?
A discussion that's been going on for two days is only exhausted when people stop listening to one another, and if you look at the debate, people really were listening to one another and responding to the new points other posters were making. And, might I add, respectfully! Uncharacteristically so for the internet. Just because you and @yogahh stopped reading with interest doesn't mean that others of us weren't still reading and responding thoughtfully.
And perhaps no one will do a 180 degree turn, but that doesn't mean we can't get anything from listening--either the ability to nuance our own perspectives or a wider range of perspectives to consider when formulating our own arguments (to make our arguments stronger, perhaps), or (heaven help us!) we might even consider something we'd never seen before and begin an incremental move toward a different position.
So my comment to @yogahh still stands: even if it was light-hearted--why be so dismissive of folks who are still finding the discussion productive?
********
Wow if me saying "is this still going on" is enough to "shut down" a thread I have a lot more power than I ever thought.
At this point, I think you are being argumentative just to be argumentative with me (and @LadySamLady as you also singled her out in one of your replies for no reason) This all started because you said sometime crass (which you later clarified and I respected) that I disagreed with. I bet if I agreed with you this wouldn't be an issue. Why you are so offended by an off handed, light hearted comment is beyond me. I feel like you and I have had a good repoire so hate to see that severed due to such a silly comment. I could see if I said "shut up/ no one cares/ etc" but a joking comment..?!?! I'm over it. Enjoy your Sunday!
This is at least the third UO thread on this BMB that had overstayed it's welcome. Let's keep these to Thursday, that's why it's called UO THURSDAY.
I responded to @LadySamLady because her point was the one I was responding to. Perhaps I should have quoted it, but as it was her last point I thought I didn't have to.
And I was arguing with @nerdymama15 because she said something I wanted to respond to, and I thought that my comments in response to hers would advance the debate.
And I argued/am arguing with you because your comment seemed to derail a discussion that I was (and I thought others were) invested in. Not because you disagree with me on that discussion (which, quite honestly, I'd forgotten, because when you and I disagreed about it, we were both civil and understanding and I acknowledged and appreciated your point, as you did mine).
Your last comment offended me because it was dismissive (humorously or no) of people who were taking things seriously. And no matter how light-hearted that dismissal is, it always signals superiority and makes the people who are talking feel like they shouldn't be. Can you imagine being at a party, walking away from a group of people who are having a heated debate which they feel is important and interesting, then, going back and finding that they are still talking about the same thing and saying: "I can't believe you guys are still talking about this!" before walking away again? You would never do that, even to be cute, because it's just rude. There's just no call for it.
To put this in personal terms: I wrote my long post when I did because I had an exceptionally busy day and had only 20 minutes at the end of it for bumping (which, sadly, is one of my primary ways to relax these days), and when I saw what other people were saying, I felt compelled to respond. They were things other people hadn't said, responding to posts which had not been responded to. I was looking forward to seeing what other people thought. Imagine my surprise when I come back to see that you, of all people, from whom I have come to expect a certain level of thoughtfulness and civility, had decided that my post was not worth anyone reading, not because of the content, but because of its timing.
You and I generally get along even when we disagree, but I thought that that remark was both uncalled for and out of character, and I considered figuring out how private messages work to tell you so. But by that point it was so far after the post that I thought it might be helpful for other people who felt dismissed by your post to see someone objecting to it.
Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
Menopur 75ml (upped to 112.5ml), Ovidrel, & IUI IUI #1 8/31/2015
9/15/2015: BFP HCG - 400, 9/17/2015: HCG - 827, 9/21/2015 - HCG 3,327!lol Don't hate, @Bluejay3030
Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
Menopur 75ml (upped to 112.5ml), Ovidrel, & IUI IUI #1 8/31/2015
9/15/2015: BFP HCG - 400, 9/17/2015: HCG - 827, 9/21/2015 - HCG 3,327!Me: 31
DH: 29, SA - Great
Married: June 12,2011
TTC #1: 1/2014
Diagnosis: Hypothalamic Amenorrhea
Treatment: Clomid: 50mg, 100mg, 150mg - not successful and not monitored
Menopur 75ml (upped to 112.5ml), Ovidrel, & IUI IUI #1 8/31/2015
9/15/2015: BFP HCG - 400, 9/17/2015: HCG - 827, 9/21/2015 - HCG 3,327!I think arbitrarily cutting off discussions is probably not a great idea. Setting aside any personal disagreements that might be going on in this thread (of which I'm largely and happily unaware, because as far as I've seen, everybody has been pretty respectful in their posts and I haven't really seen any personal attacks), just as a general matter, if there's a conversation going on and nobody's being personally threatened, bullied, or harassed, where's the harm in letting it continue?
Sometimes new ideas come to light and sometimes it's just fun (maybe not in this example, but it's not hard to imagine others where that could be the case). Sometimes people learn new things (I often do) and sometimes opinions do get moved a little. It wasn't all that long ago that cross-racial marriages were taboo and spaying or neutering family pets was considered ridiculous. But social norms change, culture changes, and that happens in no small part through reasonable discussion and the free exchange of different views.
Why shut that down when no harm's being done? Everyone has the option to just not click on a thread and effectively vote with their posts if they're not interested.
First Pregnancy
Second Pregnancy
- BFP: 09/11/2015
- EDD: 05/25/2016
Baby Born04/15/2016
PGAL
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
As far as keeping opinions to a single day post, that will be a little ridiculous if we start being the bump police and go ahead telling everyone who got a little busy on a particular day that their opinion is no longer valued or appreciated on that specific board. Especially if everyone agrees we are trying to keep the number of new posts relatively clean.
Also - I have been having trouble with The Bump since last Thursday so this was really the first chance I had an opportunity to go through and post. I hope I'm not kicked out for my tardiness.
Man this thread comes back to life more than Michael Myers!
Any Steeler fans here? On Saturday nights game, the announcer called Big Ben the Micheal Meyers of Football, cause when he gets knocked down he gets right back up.