Iowa governor signs abortion regulation

[_Hawkeye]

...(snip)...they don't get to dictate to the rest of the world what a person is...

Yeah, because you get to get to dictate that, right?

For myself? Damn right I do. More importantly, women get to dictate that for themselves as well. That's what you don't get. If pregnant religious nuts really believe terminating a fertilized egg is no different that arbitrarily executing a toddler playing in his or her room, then they're free to stay pregnant until birth. But that same person doesn't get to dictate to the rest of society something based on their dumb religious beliefs.

yeah, right.

Exactly right.

[_Jersey Girl]

If religious people really believed their own BS on abortion they wouldn't make any exceptions for rape or incest. It is still "murdering a baby" right?

Exactly so. To suggest otherwise is sheer hypocrisy because some religous folks are willing to negotiate what constitutes life and death based on condition and circumstance.

It's either negotiable or it's non-negotiable. You can't have it both ways to suit your religious purposes. And you sure as heck cannot impose your belief on other citizens in these United States of America.

Look, I personally hate this topic. I hate everything about it. Here we began discussing a decision in Iowa. In order to do justice to the topic, we need to examine the peripheral issues involved. And let me tell you something, brother Hawkeye, no one here really gives a rock solid damn to devote their time to doing so.

So they can stop waving their self righteous flags in this girl's face because it's not their damn business to start with. Posting crap on an internet forum counts for exactly nothing.

I'd like to know what actions these particular critics are taking to improve the life circumstances of children and their families.

My own list is long. Spans three decades and continues to this day.

So far I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that some of the critics here (and in politics) are willing to give anything more to increase benefit to children but lip service and philosophy.

[_subgenius]

If religious people really believed their own BS on abortion they wouldn't make any exceptions for rape or incest. It is still "murdering a baby" right?

Exactly so. To suggest otherwise is sheer hypocrisy because some religous folks are willing to negotiate what constitutes life and death based on condition and circumstance.

how is it hypocrisy?...and is this not what all people do? (negotiate what constitutes life). How is negotiating due condition and circumstance contrary to religion? In fact, i would argue that such negotiations are bedrock for many/most religions.

It's either negotiable or it's non-negotiable. You can't have it both ways to suit your religious purposes.

sure you can, there is no law for/against such a thing....and it is also quite possible for something to be both negotiable/non-negotiable.

And you sure as heck cannot impose your belief on other citizens in these United States of America.

balderdash! imposing beliefs is how a society/community defines itself...even the notion of "murder" is based upon a belief (whether religious or not). Geez, highway speed limit is ultimately an imposition of belief....and even more so, the manner and method by which we define ourselves is based upon imposition...justice is might.....the "will" of the people....so on and so forth.

Look, I personally hate this topic. I hate everything about it. Here we began discussing a decision in Iowa. In order to do justice to the topic, we need to examine the peripheral issues involved.

peripheral issues?...aren't those only necessary for examination by a judge in a court of law...i mean it is a cop's duty to arrest and a court's duty to determine guilt, correct?
I mean is this not the fundamental purpose of being charged with murder?...we don't make murder legal and then just wait for the freedom to kill to be abused, we preserve life by charging for murder and then examining the "peripheral issues involved".

And let me tell you something, brother Hawkeye, no one here really gives a rock solid damn to devote their time to doing so.

totally disagree.

So they can stop waving their self righteous flags in this girl's face because it's not their damn business to start with. Posting crap on an internet forum counts for exactly nothing.

is this meant to be ironic?

I'd like to know what actions these particular critics are taking to improve the life circumstances of children and their families.

well, encouraging that society have integrity and an elevated view of preserving un-born lives would improve life circumstances because it would reinforce such notions of family and kids while simultaneously diminishing selfishness and lack of personal accountability...thus creating a more better culture.

So far I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that some of the critics here (and in politics) are willing to give anything more to increase benefit to children but lip service and philosophy.

I can understand your frustration, perhaps, given that posters like Hawkeye feel that government should always take money from here and put money there, the government should re-direct all the money given in support of abortions to child and family services...ya know, put those resources toward all the living children....not to the programs, people, and services that take children's lives away by the thousands upon thousands.

[_DoubtingThomas]

In fact, an overwhelming majority of philosophers of ethics think just that.

But why philosophy? It is all just mental gymnastics. There are no answers in philosophy because it is all interpretation. In philosophy you can never prove or disprove a worldview.

[_EAllusion]

In fact, an overwhelming majority of philosophers of ethics think just that.

But why philosophy? It is all just mental gymnastics. There are no answers in philosophy because it is all interpretation. In philosophy you can never prove or disprove a worldview.

Whenever you try to reason out a position on abortion, you're doing philosophy. Philosophers are just professional experts at it.

[_Markk]

LOL Wikipedia on a definition of a person written by a random unnamed developed human fetus.

Live with your position Themis, my belief is otherwise.

So you cannot make an actual argument. Not a surprise. You recently ran away on the other thread, you started, after people started to discuss facts. I am just asking you to make an argument for your position. You seem to like having positions but spend no time thinking about whether they are reasonable. Like many, your position looks to be made on feelings only. Feelings are fine but one should have reason and evidence to back them up. So can you do more then just run away?

My argument is that your argument is stupid. My argument is that a human being has a beginning, and I believe the beginning is when the "ingredients" of life are successfully mixed.

You tell me, when does the beginning of a person begin...if it is not when the egg and sperm meet...why the need to abort it, if one does not want a child?

LOL...when did I run away on the other thread? Is this your life posting on this board? Let me know where I ran away so I can address your concern.

[_Themis]

My argument is that your argument is stupid.

Not much of an argument since I didn't make one. I was trying to get you to describe your position.

My argument is that a human being has a beginning, and I believe the beginning is when the "ingredients" of life are successfully mixed.

That's fine, but I was just asking to see if you had any good reasons for these kind of positions. Do you have any logical argument for this, or is it just a feelings based belief? This is why I gave you a link that could start a discussion about what defines things like a person. Then we could maybe get to rational discussion about what rights a fetus should be entitled to.

You tell me, when does the beginning of a person begin...if it is not when the egg and sperm meet...why the need to abort it, if one does not want a child?

First we have to discuss what a person is. Here is the first part of the link I gave you. "A person is a being that has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness". I don't think when the sperm or egg meet we are even close to this.

if it is not when the egg and sperm meet...why the need to abort it, if one does not want a child?

There are many reasons people have to abort. Most religious seem to think it is fine if the women was raped, or the health of the mother. I assume you fit into this group. If you do, then you are conceding that a fetus does not have the same rights to person-hood as everyone else. Why?

LOL...when did I run away on the other thread? Is this your life posting on this board? Let me know where I ran away so I can address your concern.

From your own thread. Shouldn't be hard to find since you haven't started many, and I suspect you already knew which I was talking about.

[Guest]

My argument is that your argument is stupid.

That isn't an argument it is an assertion that is supported by nothing.

My argument is that a human being has a beginning, and I believe the beginning is when the "ingredients" of life are successfully mixed.

Another baseless assertion supported by nothing more than your beliefs.

You tell me, when does the beginning of a person begin...

How about the third trimester, when it first become only possible that the baby could feel pain or experience consciousness.

Fewer than 1% of all abortions are third trimester abortions, and those occur because the mother's life is in danger.

[_subgenius]

How about the third trimester, when it first become only possible that the baby could feel pain or experience consciousness.

um, you answered your own question when you wrote - Another baseless assertion supported by nothing more than your beliefs.

[Guest]

How about the third trimester, when it first become only possible that the baby could feel pain or experience consciousness.

um, you answered your own question when you wrote - Another baseless assertion supported by nothing more than your beliefs.

He asked a question and I answered, I never said it was an argument. But this is already a common argument that is supported by science.

Do Fetuses Feel Pain? What the Science Says

Fetal development

"The science shows that based on gestational age, the fetus is not capable of feeling pain until the third trimester," said Kate Connors, a spokesperson for ACOG. The third trimester begins at about 27 weeks of pregnancy....

"What we can say about the fetal nervous system is that based on the best science we have" on the neurons that carry pain signals is that the "system isn't developed until the third trimester of pregnancy," Davis told Live Science.

Scientists' knowledge of the fetal nervous system was summed up in a 2005 review in the journal JAMA. The authors of that review outlined in detail the evidence on how this system develops, based on a number of previous studies on the anatomy of the fetus at various stages of development.

Davis, who was not involved with that review, noted that though it was published in 2005, the research is still valid, because the scientific community's understanding of fetal development is "pretty much stable." Indeed, since the publication of the review, "no research has contradicted its findings," said a recent statement from ACOG.

In the review, the researchers highlighted several key points in fetal development that are required in order for a fetus to perceive pain. One is that the receptors in the skin that sense an injury must be developed. Research has shown that this happens between 7.5 and 15 weeks of pregnancy, depending on the location of the receptors on the body, according to the review. For example, receptors in the skin around the mouth develop at around 7.5 weeks, whereas receptors in the skin on the abdomen develop at around 15 weeks, according to the review.

Second, the neurons in the spinal cord that transmit that signal up to the brain must be developed. Researchers who looked at fetal tissues reported that this happens at around 19 weeks, the review said.

Third, the neurons that extend from the spinal cord into the brain need to reach all the way to the area of the brain where pain is perceived. This does not occur until between 23 and 24 weeks, according to the review.

Moreover, the nerves' existence isn't enough to produce the experience of pain, the authors wrote in their review. Rather, "These anatomical structures must also be functional," the authors wrote. It's not until around 30 weeks that there is evidence of brain activity that suggests the fetus is "awake."

Davis noted that while these time frames aren't exact — some fetuses may develop a little earlier, and some fetuses may develop a little later — "there isn't any science to suggest that those pathways [for pain] are complete around the 20th week" of pregnancy.

"It's a complicated development process, and it goes in stages," Davis said.

According to a statement from ACOG, a fetus's brain and nervous system "do not have the capacity to process, recognize or feel pain during the second trimester."

Indeed, it's important to remember that early on in pregnancy, the fetus isn't just a very small version of what it looks like later in pregnancy, Davis said. Rather, things are changing and organs are forming, she said. There are number of fetal conditions that can't be diagnosed until later in pregnancy, because the development simply hasn't happened yet, she said.

Reflexes and stress responses

One argument that is sometimes used to suggest a fetus can experience pain before the third trimester is that a fetus can have a withdrawal reflex, or the ability to move away from something when touched.

But performing a reflex action and perceiving pain are two different things, Davis said. Consider, for example, when a doctor tests your reflexes by hitting your knee with a rubber hammer. Your foot will kick out, regardless of whether you experience pain or not.

"Many reflexes occur at the level of the spinal cord," and don't involve the brain at all, Davis said. But the brain is essential for perceiving pain, she said.

Another argument is that a fetus in the second trimester can display certain stress responses, such as increased levels of stress hormones, including cortisol and endorphins. However, the authors of the JAMA review noted that these hormones aren't specific to pain (for example, other stressful conditions may affect their levels). In addition, the hormones are not regulated by the part of the brain associated with consciousness, the authors wrote.

As far as the percentage of late term abortions go, here is FOX News:

"Of the 1.6 million abortions performed in the U.S. each year, 91 percent are performed during the first trimester (12 or fewer weeks' gestation); 9 percent are performed in the second trimester (24 or fewer weeks' gestation); and only about 100 are performed in the third trimester (more than 24 weeks' gestation), approximately .01 percent of all abortions performed."