Oklahoma Abortion Law

[LoneMateria]

That's rather myopic in my opinion. Think about it. By keeping a tally of certain women who have had to make the difficult choice of terminating life. They now have plenty of ammo to silence an intelligent, opposing viewpoint with a rabble-rousing document of abortion.

What's myopic my view or goal I speculated was set forth by politicians?   I never disagreed that keeping a tally of women having an abortion couldn't be used as ammo.  Don't get me wrong I'm fairly confident that such data will be used in the future.  But saying thats the motivation behind this isn't taking it back far enough.  Once you think they are doing this then you need to ask yourself why?  Is this a scare tactic used to help motivate women into keeping their unborn children?  Is this a way to make the religious right happy and help assure reelection in the future?  If I understand you right then you need to keep asking questions until you find the root of this.  Even the root of this in your reasoning will eventually come back to religion.  The staggering majority of pro-life/anti-abortion supporters are religiously motivated.  It is what it is.

Please don't take things like this on face value, there is probably a more ominous reason behind them.

I agree and I said it, its religion.

[Big Mac]

Please allow me to elaborate.

Let's say 20 year old Sally Simpatica decides to terminated her pregnancy because she is not ready for kids and does not want to carry to term because she knows it would be almost impossible to give up the child for adoption. After much thought she heads down to the clinic. The usual protesting crowds on both sides are doing their usual dance while women make a difficult decision.

The procedure was routine for the doctor and he must now log the information into the database. She is young, unsure of where life will take her, and is a college student. The most responsible decision was for her to perform this. However, state law requires her info to become public knowledge. After the shock from certain folks finding out (ie her folks) it quickly is put aside for the other things in a person's life (school, family, romance, etc.) and she never imagines it will ever be brought up again.

Fast-forward roughly 15 years down the road. Sally is now an educated woman with a husband and family. She has decided to enter the political arena because one of the current senators for her state is an overtly corrupt son of a bitch. Mr. Sleaze (well I guess this could apply to almost all politicians) fights dirty and has his staff look up some dirt on Sally. For the most part there is nothing interesting. The biggest problem she had with the law was a speeding ticket that was dismissed. Oh but wait, says she had an abortion. It's one thing to be pro-choice but to actually go through with the procedure is kicking the debate up a notch.

Now the "honorable" senator is glad he helped pass that bill those years ago. Nevermind he had abortions for his mistresses to be off the books after the law was enacted but the nobility of this country can't be bothered with silly things like equal application of the law.

So what I'm saying it doesn't seem so much religious as a political tool. Religion is invoked so the ignorant masses can rally behind it like the bleating sheep they seem to be.

[LoneMateria]

Why is it a political tool?  Because she loses votes from the religious right.  Its power comes from the religious right and yes could possibly be used as a political tool but it still stems from religion.  If the religious people were as adamant about, for example, planting flowers.  Say for the sake of argument that raising flowers and owning flowers is the equivalent to having an abortion.  If someone takes a picture inside Sally's home and sees a flower and some jackass senator wants to use it against her does this "crime" stem from politics or religion?  Does this law have any benefit to society as a whole?  Is it correct to force women to give away certain information that can lead to violence against them and ruin their lives and their families?

Lets modify the example you used.  Say Sally Simpatica decides to terminate her pregnancy because the child is defective and will be born without a head.  She is put into the database and 15 years down the road she has a family and a career but some jackass senator wants something to use against her.  Oh she had an abortion according to this database.  Although her family and friends understood that the abortion was necessary the religious nuts are not so understanding.  Her and her family is harassed, threatened, and have had several religious asshats shoot at them.  Because of this she resigns and the jackass senator gets someone more sympathetic to his cause which is the criminalization of all non-christian religions in the U.S.  The U.S. eventually becomes the Christian Nation the religious right has been striving for and in 40 years has caused WW3 and got nuked out of existence.

This potential for this law to become a "tool" for politicians is really just a tool of convenience for them.  Its power and its roots comes from religion.

[Big Mac]

Why is it a political tool?  Because she loses votes from the religious right.  Its power comes from the religious right and yes could possibly be used as a political tool but it still stems from religion.  If the religious people were as adamant about, for example, planting flowers.  Say for the sake of argument that raising flowers and owning flowers is the equivalent to having an abortion.  If someone takes a picture inside Sally's home and sees a flower and some jackass senator wants to use it against her does this "crime" stem from politics or religion?  Does this law have any benefit to society as a whole?  Is it correct to force women to give away certain information that can lead to violence against them and ruin their lives and their families?

Lets modify the example you used.  Say Sally Simpatica decides to terminate her pregnancy because the child is defective and will be born without a head.  She is put into the database and 15 years down the road she has a family and a career but some jackass senator wants something to use against her.  Oh she had an abortion according to this database.  Although her family and friends understood that the abortion was necessary the religious nuts are not so understanding.  Her and her family is harassed, threatened, and have had several religious asshats shoot at them.  Because of this she resigns and the jackass senator gets someone more sympathetic to his cause which is the criminalization of all non-christian religions in the U.S.  The U.S. eventually becomes the Christian Nation the religious right has been striving for and in 40 years has caused WW3 and got nuked out of existence.

This potential for this law to become a "tool" for politicians is really just a tool of convenience for them.  Its power and its roots comes from religion.

But Peter Pendejo comes in with some blackmail. True the religious nature of the stigma helps but really this is more of a political weapon than a religious one. Religion is merely the cover in which it's being implemented. These are from the same people who don't really read the bible and only believe in da jesus because it's convenient. It's hard to debate them because they don't even know their own bible. Hell one guy at work never heard of the passage Jesus states to go in your closet and pray in private not in public. Not the first time. I think the use of religious rationale for anti-abortion views tend to be superficial and more about control.

[LoneMateria]

But Peter Pendejo comes in with some blackmail. True the religious nature of the stigma helps but really this is more of a political weapon than a religious one. Religion is merely the cover in which it's being implemented. These are from the same people who don't really read the bible and only believe in da jesus because it's convenient. It's hard to debate them because they don't even know their own bible. Hell one guy at work never heard of the passage Jesus states to go in your closet and pray in private not in public. Not the first time. I think the use of religious rationale for anti-abortion views tend to be superficial and more about control.

How is an abortion law a religious cover?  Again i'm not saying that there can't be a political benefit from this.  I'm saying that this stems from religion, is probably made to appease the religious so they feel something is being done instead of nothing, and this law is a disaster waiting to happen.  

I don't know if its quite true that the people who want this don't know their bible.  Considering that a majority of the religious right is evangelical and fundamentalist those tend to be the groups of people who actually know what is said in their bible but found some way to cope with it.  Next time your buddy at work tells you about how wonderful and kind God is remind him of 2Kings 2

Anyway this law is going to cause problems for people ... period.  I think thats what it was designed to do.  There might be some interesting statical trends from people who get abortions (and part of me is very interested in looking at the numbers) but if this law is religiously motivated (which it probably is) then its a violation of Church State Separation and it needs to be addressed.  Like I said before I think this is their way of getting their foot in the door and then going from there.  However there will undoubtedly be some incidents where women suspected of getting abortions will be targeted by members of their community and quite possibly with violence (because we've all seen it).  This is a very gray area here and it definitely merits further investigation.  The weird thing is I thought laws were supposed to be passed to protect people ... this doesn't seem to do it and shouldn't be a law in the first place.

[Big Mac]

Why do you hate America, sir?

[Ultima22689]

oh wow, please tell me you aren't trolling again, well actually that would be better than you actually asking such a retarded question. If you can't refute an argument any longer than that's when you concede buddy, if this is a troll I think and hope everyone will just accept it as you conceding.

[Big Mac]

oh wow, please tell me you aren't trolling again, well actually that would be better than you actually asking such a retarded question. If you can't refute an argument any longer than that's when you concede buddy, if this is a troll I think and hope everyone will just accept it as you conceding.

That was a joke, actually. I'm not really disagreeing with the whole religious aspect but my point is that I believe the people who enact these prudish laws tend to be more than Joe-Blow bible thump. They have an even more nefarious agenda besides making baby jesus happy. There's no way to really concede in a debate about hypothetical and speculative things. Since there's no tangible evidence for either side, this is more of an exercise.

My question to you is why so serious?!

[Ultima22689]

oh wow, please tell me you aren't trolling again, well actually that would be better than you actually asking such a retarded question. If you can't refute an argument any longer than that's when you concede buddy, if this is a troll I think and hope everyone will just accept it as you conceding.

That was a joke, actually. I'm not really disagreeing with the whole religious aspect but my point is that I believe the people who enact these prudish laws tend to be more than Joe-Blow bible thump. They have an even more nefarious agenda besides making baby jesus happy. There's no way to really concede in a debate about hypothetical and speculative things. Since there's no tangible evidence for either side, this is more of an exercise.

My question to you is why so serious?!

A. I'm a serious dude when it comes to serious things

B. Sarcasm and humor is very hard to detect with nothing but text .


Also, good point.

[seasonsofmadness]

It does sound like the main purpose is to intimidate women, although I could understand it having some legitimate statistical value as well.

[Big Mac]

It does sound like the main purpose is to intimidate women, although I could understand it having some legitimate statistical value as well.

I don't disagree with that. It seems like it has religious undertones but I think the higher up the christian hierarchy you go, the less you'll find ardent believers in that shit. It seems like people who have figured out how to control a large group of people fairly effectively. It sounds like another thing that starts with a c.....cu...cu.....cul....

[Ellainix]

As long as the information is anonymous, I am fine with answering a dumb survey after blending my child.

[Big Mac]

As long as the information is anonymous, I am fine with answering a dumb survey after blending my child.

That's a little callous. Abortion is not a light matter. It is terminating potential life. I agree with the bible-thumper morons. By aborting a fetus, you could prolong/prevent the person who cures AIDS/Cancer/World Hunger/etc. with their action. It is still their right but I wish people took other alternatives such as contraceptives or possibly putting them up for adoption.

This information has potential for studies. As people of science and reason, do we not dare explore something we may find controversial? Science is not affected by what is wrong. We complain about bible thumpers who wish to remove Evolution and such from their classrooms but if this is maintained on a strict anonymous basis, it could help enlighten us on the socio-economic-ethinic group that gets abortions the most frequently. We are bound by the unbiased rule of science to allow the uncovering of the world around us even if the truth hurts.

Perhaps this information can help us reduce the number of abortions by preventing the need for them. You can't attack the source of an illness if you only focus on its symptoms.

[LoneMateria]

It does sound like the main purpose is to intimidate women, although I could understand it having some legitimate statistical value as well.

Even if it has statistical value it doesn't need to be a law.  It needs to be a volunteer survey after the fact, maybe by completing it you pay them $50 to help with the cost of the abortion itself.  Again this law doesn't serve to protect anyone from anything its just a law that gives the state the power to harass women.

By aborting a fetus, you could prolong/prevent the person who cures AIDS/Cancer/World Hunger/etc. with their action. It is still their right but I wish people took other alternatives such as contraceptives or possibly putting them up for adoption.

Would you still agree to this if the potential child had a defect that would kill it and possibly the mother?  Or how about for women who take fertility treatments and get pregnant with 5 kids or so?  More then 2 children is considered very high risk for everyone involved.  I saw a story that was posted on reddit where a lady was taking fertility treatments and got pregnant with 6 kids, against the wishes of the doctors decided to keep them all (after talking with their church of course).  With that many kids there is a near 100% chance that each kid will suffer some major problems.  Well surprise surprise since she didn't get the reduction (abortions for the excess kids) she gave birth 14 weeks early and the doctors wouldn't have bothered trying to save the kids lives if the parents didn't special request it.  3 died shortly after birth one died a week later and the other 2 are still in the Intensive Neonatal Care Unit.  Those 2 remaining kids will suffer from a myriad of conditions and probably will never live normal lives.  If she got the reduction chances are the 2 kids that were left would be fine and healthy.  

This issue is not black and white Big Mac.  The "potential lives" cannot be measured to current lives.  That specific child is more likely to be a serial killer then the one who discovers the cure to aids (statically).  Remember women are almost always able to have more kids (I know of an exception because she was retarded and had like 8 abortions and now can't have children ... but she is the exception not the rule).

[Will]

That's a little callous. Abortion is not a light matter. It is terminating potential life.

Men masturbating and women ovulating would be termination of potential life. At what point does the potential life earn the right to be protected? I know science can't (yet) answer the question "when does life begin?", neither can philosophy, therefore it falls to the law. In the US, Roe v. Wade says that a woman has a legal right to determine if she can terminate the pregnancy. Until some new information comes alongâ€"and as always, I'm totally open to new informationâ€"I'm sticking with the law on the issue.

Abortion isn't murder, and posting the private information of women that have abortions online is a sick way for religious nutbags to get revenge on innocent women that happen to do something their ancient books of myths don't even mention.