Now playing on dirty.radio: Loading...

  Dirty Forums > world.

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-28-2011, 03:53 PM
bryantm3
It's Written In The Book!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: alpharetta
Posts: 1,101
abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
I beg both progressives and conservatives alike to read this. All the politicians are talking about abortion, but no one has a real solution. Republican candidates seem determined to rile up their base every election cycle by promising to ban abortion, knowing full well that they could never achieve something like that, and in fact do not even have a plan for how banning such a common procedure would work. What are you going to do, arrest women who have had abortions? That would, of course, be impractical and unconstitutional. Here are some facts to sum up the picture of abortion in the United States:

Over 800,000 abortions occur per year. That’s almost twice the number of people who die from heart disease each year, the leading cause of death in the US. [1]
1 in 3 women will have had an abortion by the time they reach menopause. [2]
47% of women who have an abortion have already had an abortion. [2]

So despite the picture of abortion not being a problem in the United States, it is. It is an elephant in the room that only two extremes are really paying attention to— one who wants to promote the practice of abortion, and the other who wants to strip away women's rights * la Saudi Arabia. Ultimately, it seems that we will always have two sides that are never happy, since it seems both sides will never completely get what they want. Let’s sum up what both sides believe about abortion:

Pro choice:

Abortion cannot be banned because it denies women control of their own bodies
Requiring parties other than the mother to consent to abortion is a violation of a woman's personal rights.
Abortion is a matter of patient-doctor confidentiality and to violate that in cases of abortion would undermine this right in all other cases.

Pro life:

Abortion is the same as murdering a child
Abortion has to be banned despite the consequences it would have on individual liberty
Doctor-patient privacy wouldn't apply in the case of the killing of a child who has already been born, so why should it apply in the case of abortion?

Now these are some tough stances to make a compromise between. But what do the two sides generally agree on? Both sides generally agree that abortions should be reduced and in general are not a good thing, despite the belief of many on the pro-life side— the disagreement seems to be not whether abortion is really taking a life or not, but whether or not it is worth it to compromise women's rights at the same time.

The constitution itself holds an answer. I’m sure you've heard a lot of tea party members citing the tenth amendment when they justify noncompliance with federal programs, but it's a lot more than that. The tenth amendment basically says that states have the right to control their own affairs, working within a federal framework— for example, voting works like this.

The federal government has set a framework for voting; you can't discriminate against people or make certain people take "tests" to let them vote. But outside of this basic framework, states have the ability to do whatever they want with voting— they determine voting districts, create the ballot, determine the type of machine used and the counting methods. This has led to some controversy, notably in the 2000 election, but has generally been extremely reliable and gives the states power over their own affairs. It guarantees, for example, that an entire election could not be rigged since every state controls its own voting process.

My question is: why don't we apply the same principles to the abortion debate? If we apply such a principle to abortion, we could have a federal framework setting up what a state can and cannot do, and then let the states regulate abortion themselves.

This is my plan. I will give further explanation after I’ve laid it out. The plan would require one step at the federal level: a constitutional amendment.

The only way to let states regulate abortion would be a constitutional amendment, since the Supreme Court has already decided that all abortion is legal. In fact, had the federal ban on partial-birth abortion in 2003 been challenged, it would have probably been kicked out.

The constitutional amendment would basically say that it is now up to the states to determine how they want to handle the abortion debate, with limitations. These limitations would include, but are not limited to:

You cannot prosecute a woman for having an abortion, period. This would be a matter of doctor-patient privacy.
Abortion can never be banned in the case of the mother's life being in danger. If the mother's life is in danger, it is a matter of privacy between the doctor and the mother, and the doctor can perform the abortion freely, without having to be questioned by any authority, state or local.
Partial birth abortion (after 24 weeks— this is when the baby can actually live outside the mother's body and is killed) is illegal nationwide.
In the case of a state that bans abortions, abortionists practicing illegally have a maximum sentence of 20 years.
A woman can cross state lines to have an abortion and cannot be restricted from this.

From this point forward, states could determine whether they wanted to keep elective abortion legal or not. Some questions I know you are asking right now, I will answer.

Wait— what if I live in Alabama, and Alabama bans abortion. What if I really need an abortion? This restricts women's rights.

Well, you won't be able to have an elective abortion— in Alabama. The likelihood is that Florida, a bordering state, would not ban abortion. You could cross state lines to have an abortion. This law wouldn't restrict your rights, because you could have someone drive you to a nearby state that hasn't banned abortion.

I live in Utah, and Utah bans abortion. I go to my doctor and he tells me that if I give birth, I have a very good chance of dying. How do I get by the cronies in Utah?

You don't have to— Utah would be federally prohibited from intervening in that kind of affair, and the matter of whether to have an abortion or not would be between you and your doctor. You would not need approval from any government body in this case.

Wait— if I could have an abortion by crossing state lines anyway, what's the point of all this?

This is exactly the point. This system would not effectively ban abortion, but it would reduce the practice by discouraging women who are not in danger of dying to not have abortions. However, in the most severe cases, a woman would be able to have an abortion by crossing state lines.

Bottom line, we live in the United States. Banning abortion under every circumstance would severely curb women's rights, because there are a plethora of situations that policymakers don't account for where a woman may need an abortion. Giving the rights to the states under a federal framework would dramatically reduce the number of abortions occurring in the United States, while still maintaining women's rights.

I have a feeling that the two extremes that read this, hardcore pro-life and hardcore pro-choice advocates, will not be happy. But in all practicality, this gives what both sides really want. The pro-lifers want reduced abortions, and the pro-choicers want women's rights. This is America. Why can't we have both?

If you liked this post, please pass it on, and maybe it will make it to Washington.

Reduce abortions — retain women's rights. The חַי plan.

Daniel Bryant

Sources:

1. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr...cid=ss6001a1_w

2. http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...843717,00.html

3. http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...ckval=GooglePM

4. http://www.pregnancy.org/fetaldevelopment/week-nine

©2011 Daniel Bryant. You may reproduce this, but please give me credit!
  #2  
Old 06-29-2011, 12:16 PM
stimpee
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,823
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
I dont see any argument in this at all. Its a womans body and its her foetus. Its no-one else's business.

The sooner hypocrites like Rick Santorum stop making it the major issue it isnt, the better. http://oursilverribbon.org/blog/?p=188
__________________
UW0764 || Professor: "Underworld have never failed to disappoint me" || Yannick changed my avatar picture.
  #3  
Old 07-02-2011, 08:21 AM
bryantm3
It's Written In The Book!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: alpharetta
Posts: 1,101
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
you don't believe that an unborn child retains any rights?
  #4  
Old 07-02-2011, 02:04 PM
Strangelet
rico suave
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lost in a romance
Posts: 815
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
i honestly don't think it would be the end of the world if states made their own abortion laws, mainly because it would ultimately come to the same state of affairs as we have now. Look, abortions are here to stay. They aren't going anywhere. If people started with that, they might be able to combine perspectives and come to a more humane system for everyone. You're just treading on seriously emotionally charged territory with this stuff so its really hard to have a practical conversation.
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it."

- Mark Twain

  #5  
Old 07-02-2011, 02:19 PM
Strangelet
rico suave
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lost in a romance
Posts: 815
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
incidentally abortion would never be outlawed in Utah. Mormons are pretty pragmatic about it. They don't like it, but they know its a necessary evil that must be available for people who, between themselves and their own conscience, decide they need to do it.

I see a lot of wisdom in that, keeping it personal? you know?
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it."

- Mark Twain

  #6  
Old 07-02-2011, 04:13 PM
jOHN rODRIGUEZ
SystematicallyDisadsomthg
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: THE PLAsTIC VOORRTEEXXX!!!
Posts: 3,570
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
Oh where is cacaphony when I need her to put you sons of bitches in your places?

__________________
8=====)~~(=====8

  #7  
Old 07-02-2011, 04:40 PM
bryantm3
It's Written In The Book!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: alpharetta
Posts: 1,101
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
oh yeah, i remember that.

this ultimately isn't about whether an unborn child is alive or not, at least in this particular debate— i'm trying to come up with a practical solution of how to reduce abortions without entirely removing the option and thereby curbing women's rights. bottom line, nobody LIKES abortions. it's a women's rights/privacy issue. if you can come up with a way to protect those rights and reduce abortions you come up with a good compromise— this is my idea.
  #8  
Old 07-03-2011, 10:30 AM
Strangelet
rico suave
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lost in a romance
Posts: 815
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
I get it, it makes sense what you're doing, but i don't think making it more inconvenient is going to do anything to stop it. If you can't have/don't want a child, there's nothing more inconvenient than 9 months of pregnancy, delivery and the years of responsibility,whether you live up to it or not, that follows.

And maybe I'm wrong but that's the basis of your concept: not making it illegal, but more inconvenient. That's only going to piss people off, and may be send a few moms to be in a back alley with a coat hanger and a bottle of vodka for anesthetic. You know, what they did before Roe V Wade.

Keep it legal, everywhere. Now what?
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it."

- Mark Twain

  #9  
Old 07-03-2011, 06:44 PM
stimpee
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,823
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryantm3 View Post
you don't believe that an unborn child retains any rights?
legally, a child doesnt have "rights" until its born and breathing. Before 24 weeks a woman can do what she wants. And in fact, most abortions are done in the first few weeks. Very few happen after that. 2nd trimester is 15-24 weeks. From what i've read, only 1.5% of USA abortions happen after 20 weeks. And most of those are for life/death/medical reasons rather than for spiritual/political/other reasons.

If a womans waters break the baby is a certainty to die after 20 weeks, its not gonna "avert death" or cause “serious physical impairment of a major bodily function” of the pregnant woman to proceed with an abortion, but its gonna cause infection and trauma. Mental trauma of being legally compelled to give birth to a dead or dying baby is hard enough without making it illegal.

Great article in the Times about abortion after 20 weeks: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/us...n.html?_r=1&hp
__________________
UW0764 || Professor: "Underworld have never failed to disappoint me" || Yannick changed my avatar picture.
  #10  
Old 07-05-2011, 11:25 AM
34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j
blue
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 929
Re: abortion: reducing abortions and retaining women's rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryantm3 View Post
you don't believe that an unborn child retains any rights?
"You're not a human being until you're in my phonebook" - Bill Hicks

I personally find abortion disgusting and morally reprehensible, but our current laws allow for plenty of things that fit that description, and I hate laws that legislate morality. The punishment is the crime!
Post Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.