h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Anthony has proved me wrong! I didn't think he'd return after his initial posting; but he keeps coming back, like a recurring nightmare. I also wouldn't have thought that he could have got much more offensive after his first appearance in this forum. Wrong again: he keeps surpassing himself.

There is so much that is bizarre and/or objectionable in Anthony's smug, self-righteous ramblings that it's easy to feel overwhelmed. Here we're dealing with someone who thinks that consent to sex equals consent to having a baby! Is there any point in trying to reason with the unreasonable?

Probably not: but I can't just walk away from this discussion. Here's the biggest single reason why: Anthony has taken it upon himself to pronounce that women who are raped should not have access to abortion.

One of my friends is a rape survivor. It's quite a few years now since she was attacked, but the effects linger on, and probably always will. Sometimes, when we meet, we hug; but I have to take great care not to touch her neck. She can't bear to be touched there, because her attacker tried to strangle her. She's in her thirties, and she's given up on the idea of having relationships. Since the attack, she's been unable to associate sex with love.

According to Anthony's way of thinking, she didn't suffer enough.

According to Anthony, after the attack, she "should" have had to face the fear of having something of the man who'd terrorised her inside her body for up to nine months.

In fact, according to Anthony, any man "should" have the power, in effect, to force any woman he chooses to have his child.

Anthony will say that that's not his intention, that he doesn't advocate rape. But Anthony knows that rape happens, and he knows that the effect of the social policy he's advocating would be to make that already horrific experience much worse for women. And to judge by Anthony's postings thus far, he doesn't care: at least not as much as he cares about those awful women who refuse to listen when he tries to give them the benefit of his infinite wisdom on the subject of abortion.

Anthony wants me to apologise to him for pointing out that he's a misogynist.

Anthony is going to have a very long wait.

i have just printed and re-read this entire thread. i'm not happy about it. i rather enjoy spending my free-time not having to do anything involved. anthony owes me an apology for making me go to so much extra trouble. i suspect i'll be waiting a long time for that, too.

there are some issues i'd like to address, i will reference them where i can.

>>it's really funny talking to pro-aborts like you three.<< post 4. anthony's first contribution to our discussion. how can you come here with an attitude like that and expect to be treated with any ammount of equal respect? the first lesson you need to learn is diplomacy.

>>no one seems to object to ormondroyd's agreement and he's male.<< post 4.
>>my problem was that it seems that "pro-choice" men are allowed to speak for abortion but pro-life men are seen as vile misohynist pigs. i don't see the difference of when i get involved or a man like ormondroyd gets involved except for the fact that i am on a side that is disagreeable.<< post 10.
the difference is that men like ormondroyd are pro-choice primarily because it's none of their business. they realize that they could never possibly be in a position where they would be grounded in passing judgement on others in this position. where as you feel it's okay to tell women in a position that is completely foreign to you that they are wrong.

>>the overwhelming majority of abortionists in america are men.<< post 4.
this is true. it's because the overwhelming majority of PHYSICIANS in america are also men.

>>these women have never complained about the male "escorts" outside the local abortion clinics. i've seen them grab women by the arm and propel them into the clinic. the pro-abortion women find no fault with this behavior.<< post 4.
this is also true. it's because the men are protecting these women from people who would like to do alot worse to them than give them an abortion. think maybe those protesters are the main CAUSE of the mental trauma that accompanies some abortions? besides, pregnant women are usually in no condition to defend themselves.

>>their only complaint is with men who think women deserve better.<< post 4.
our only complaint is with men who feel they can lord their power over us by continuing to tell us what we can and can't do. this isn't the 50's, it's the millenium.

>>many women who conceive after a rape and abort feel much worse than those who carry to term.<< post 10.
i don't think i would fall into that category. i don't think a lot of other women would either. granted some would, but not nearly as many as you would have us believe. rape leaves emotional scars. i know. having living, breathing evidence of the violence that was acted against you on a daily basis would, i think, bring grief and mental trauma as well. how could a mother look at that child and never see a physical presence reminding her of what she had to go through? there was only one perfect man in the world. they hung him on a cross. he could love unconditionally. most of the rest of us can't.

>>also, doesn't the child's life depend on the mother outside of the womb?<< post 10
no, it doesn't. it depends on a nurturing presence to support it. it doesn't have to be the mother. adoption proves this.

>>not to mention the many things that go wrong in these supposedly safe abortion clinics......a d&c abortion where.....bleeding can be considerable.<< post 10.
many things can go wrong in any medical procedure. higher risk involved in any invasive medical procedure. i think maybe there's a higher risk in open heart surgery than in abortion. i swore i wasn't going to do this, but....
i was fine after my abortion. i went back to school, i took some college courses. i eventually got married, divorced, and then married again. i am not an alcoholic. i do not do drugs. i am not homicidal or suicidal. i am not depressed. i am a perfectly well-adjusted adult woman. my divorce had nothing to do with my abortion. the divorce rate is at about 50%, the abortion rate is at about 25%. my divorce was the result of him not being ready to be married. we still talk, often actually, and he gets along great with my new husband.
my delivery however (some six years later) was a nightmare. after failure to progress and disinclination on behalf of the staff to do a c-section, i delivered 22 hours after labor began. the afterbirth refused to budge. after some violent pushing on my stomach to dislodge it, it was decided that i would require an emergency d&c before i hemmoraged. it was messy, it was bloody, it was scary. it was enough to convince my husband (ex) that he never wanted to have another child again so long as he lived. after my procedures and dismissal, i continued to have problems, requiring two subsequent trips to the emergency room for pain and infection.

>>do "accidents" have to happen?<< post 10.
of course they do. otherwise they would be called "on-purposes", and we would lose a very valuable word from our vocabulary. do you intentionally run your car headlong into a post? of course not.

>>before 1973 this [forced abortion] was illegal. now all he has to do is take her to a clinic and the doctors will do it for him.<< post 10.
no, forced abortion is still illegal. you cannot force a woman to unwillingly go through a legal abortion. the doctor's concern is for the woman, not the **** that got her that way.

>>killing people is a bad way to solve social problems.<< post 10
yes, it is. unfortunately until other methods are available it is a necessary evil.

>>no one ever volunteers to die to solve a social problem<< post 10
yes, they do. they're called martyrs.

as for those social problems.....
>>we have more teenage pregnancies,<<
because there is a lack of honest sex education, and a general taboo on the subject.
>>more hunger,<<
because there are more people, and more poor people.
>>more welfare,<<
because the welfare system is in need of reform, and checks and balances.
>>more divorces,<<
because of the general decline of family values, the rise of dysfunctional families, and the ease of obtaining divorces.
>>more women and children living in poverty,<<
because the rich get richer in this country. how many homeless could bill gates pull off the street right now? people with money are desensitized to the ickier aspects of existence. they push it away instead of doing something about it.
>>more child abuse,<<
because there are more unwanted children, and undereducated and unprepared parents.
>>more spousal abuse,<<
see >divorce<.
>>more deadbeat dads,<<
because birth out of wedlock is at a high. you think abolishing abortion would really solve this?
>>more gangs,<<
because these youths have been left to fend for themselves in an environment where, in the absence of traditional families, they have to survive. not that they've gone about it the right way, mind you, but there you are. before the decline of family values kids didn't need to turn to other sources for the attention and support they craved.
>>more drugs,<<
because there is a higher demand, as there are more gangs.
>>more sexually transmitted diseases,<<
see >teen pregnancies<.
>>more high school drop-outs,<<
for all of the above reasons.
>>more homelessness,<<
see >poverty<.
>>generally more fractured and violent society.<<
AMEN!
but abortion has not been the cause of this, and abolising it will not be the answer.
(all of the above also from post 10.)

and lastly...
>>north american law is largely based on the much-cited western philosophy - and inextricably linked to religion as well as pure logic.<< post 20.
i understand that in a nation with as large of a christian population as we boast, it is inevitable that certain aspects of religion will affect law, as those religious beliefs manifest themselves in the legislators and the will of the people. however, this nation was founded on a principle of freedom from religious persecution (among other things). you are free to worship as you choose. it is wrong to impose that religion as law. it violates another basic mandate; the separation of church and state.

>>changing the law did not change the moral status of [abortion].<< post 10.
moral status is in the eye of the believer. it is not law. it is inappropriate to foist your morals upon a non-believer.

sorry for the length. i had to get it all out.

>i do not find him qualified to say that it should be illegal for women in that position to have a choice.<

If I were to view abortion as murder, I think it would be my duty to do whatever I could to stop it, including legislation that criminalized abortion.

One of the things I do have aproblem with pro-lifers about is their ability to allow exceptions for rape or incest. Regardless of the source of the sprem, if a fetus is a person, it is innocent of the cause of its conception. If abortion is murder, it's wrong - period.

Of course, Im not pro-life. I'm very much pro-choice, but I think I can see their side of the argument pretty clearly. I guess it has to do with my being pretty conservative.

Heck, my wife and I have a very clear understanding. If she were to get knocked up and there were any noticeable defects with the fetus, she would get an abortion, or I would get a divorce. I see no point in bringing another defective person into the world. We already have enough. Better to cull them before birth.

do you have any *virtual* protection, 2bit? i'm not talking about prevention, but i think you might get pummeled pretty hard for that last comment.... would you like to borrow my shield?

*offers shield*

i've got to go for now, i'll check back in on you on friday unless i can get back sooner. i'll just leave this here for you in case you need it....

*sets shield down for 2bit*

I've just looked it up, and according to the latest projections from the International Programs Center of the US Bureau of the Census, there are approximately 6,111,213,026 defective people in the world as of November 27 2000.
I am working, of course, on the principle that everyone is "defective" because nobody is perfect.
Not even you, two-bit...

amen 2-bit. here's to seeing both sides of the story!

~8~

I don't think I'm perfect, nor do I think I need a shield.

I don't see it as a kindness to bring a children into the world who are retarded, deformed, autistic and so on. Is their life going to have any quality? They're going to be dependent on others for virtually everything throughout their lives and they'll give nothing or very little back.

I think it's irresponsible to not abort a clearly defective fetus. Just as I think it's irresposible to take risks like smoking or drinking during pregnancy.

I am very tired and overwhelmed. I feel that it is hopeless talking to you people. You take my words and you twist them around to fit your justification of murder. You have now gone to a new low and used my Lord and Savior to justify your killing. I have not used any religious arguments that I can remember, to prove that you don't have to believe in God to be pro-life. But My God commands me to be brave and fight these lies and so I will. But this time I won't be so alone. Semper Pro Vita

"Life don't talk to me about life"marvin

Why you all didn't take this good advice i will never know.But then again i am here now as well so what does that say for me.
The guide does ask one question that is what is the answer to life you seem to think that you know when life starts but is the egg not alive as well we store them for years but when checked some of them are dead and can never be used if you are there for pro-life should not every egg be classed as life so once a month any woman that is having her "time of the month"(sorry but i do not like to be to graphic)is ending a life (this not how ever what i think) to say you know when life starts and ends is strange most doctors would never know for certain.
Then to bring god into this my views are this what right do you have to enforce you view of god on anyone else,does not the bible tell you not to judge others yet that is what you have done.
my views are this i think that you all know what you think is right and wrong stick to what you think is right not what a book or a man of the cloth tells you is right(it will be diffrent for all of use) take people as you find them don't try to enforce your views on others it is you view not theres.There is not a right or wrong here there is just choice yes people regret having abortions but people also regret not having them how many people give up an unwanted baby only to spend the rest of there life thinking about how the child is doing.

>"Life don't talk to me about life"marvin

Why you all didn't take this good advice i will never know.<

Me neither. I almost always avoid discussions on this topic. I really only came here to discuss federalism in another thread. Still, I was drawn here as a moth to a flame.

I don't think we can sit here and say that there is no right or wrong here. If you think abortion is murder, you have to argue against it. You have to get your (state) legislators to try an outlaw it. It would be inhuman to think that abortion is murder and sit by and say, "You know, you really shouldn't kill people."

To me, the issue isn't that big a deal, but I have to respect people who hold serious views about it and press the issue. For them there is definitly a right and wrong choice.

Yes there is a choice but that choice is not for you to force on someone else.

If I hold a gun to someone's head, should you force me to stop?

stop you from holding the gun or pulling the trigger that would depend on why you were doing it if it was you own head i would say know but if it is someone that wants to live we would stop you my view again if the person wants to die and you are helping if you think it is right and they also think it is right why should i object.

In your post, you say

>>how could a mother look at that child and never see a physical presence reminding her of what she had to go through?<<

Later in your post, you say (in reference to "also, doesn't the child's life depend on the mother outside of the womb?" in post 10)

>>no, it doesn't. it depends on a nurturing presence to support it. it doesn't have to be the mother. adoption proves this.<<

You say that the baby can live without the mother through adoption. You also say that she has to be reminded of a child through rape. Can't a woman who was raped put her child in adoptive services?

>>many things can go wrong in any medical procedure. higher risk involved in any invasive medical procedure. i think maybe there's a higher risk in open heart surgery than in abortion.<<

This is more than your opinion, this is medical fact. Someone who has open heart surgery is at a much greater risk than one who has an abortion. However, open heart surgery is ALWAYS used as the last resort. Likewise, abortion should ALWAYS be used as the last resort. It is completely unreasonable to perform surgery where it is not needed. You do not open up someone's chest for the fun of it. There must be a definate danger to the person's life with no other options, no other choices, for any doctor to go in. Similarly, there must be a definate danger to the mother's life with no other options, no other choices, for any doctor to perform an abortion. I think that anthony's point is that abortion harms women. As such (ignoring all moral issues) abortion should only be used when absolutely necessary.

"do 'accidents' have to happen?" post 10.
>>of course they do. otherwise they would be called "on-purposes", and we would lose a very valuable word from our vocabulary. do you intentionally run your car headlong into a post? of course not.<<

Accidents do not have to happen, if you have control of your body. If you decide to not drive, you will not drive into a post. If you decide to not have sex, you will not have a child.

"no one ever volunteers to die to solve a social problem" post 10
>>yes, they do. they're called martyrs.<<

All martyrs choose to die for the cause. An un-born child cannot choose to die. Your logic fails me, I need some clarification.

This post has been removed.

*Lucinda adopts her normal position is such arguments with no help of resolution - sitting on the sidelines making sarcastic comments. After all, it's as productive as any other position.*
--
Allow me to clarify the martyr thing for you, nosretep. You see, the statement was made by Anthony that "no one ever volunteers to die to solve a social problem" (post 15). Broelan was observing that this statement was factually incorrect. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, it is the case that a ball of cells is not in a position to volunteer to die. But broelan never said that it was. If you feel that the whole question of whether people do or do not volunteer to die is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, then you would be well advised to take it up with Anthony.
--
Ormondroyd - it's worse than that. Occasionally there start off with two balls of cells, and partway through pregnancy one of them is ingested by the growth of the other. They found that the cause of one man's migraine was a large clump of embryonic tissue under his skull. As far as I'm aware, he has not yet been charged with murder.

YOW!
I'm glad to hear that the poor guy hasn't yet been charged with murder, Lucinda. But if the case happened in the US Bible Belt, I dare say that private prosecutions are still pending...

I seems to me that there's a lot of personal abuse going on here. How is it relevant to the discussion at hand? Unless this is an insult competition?

No? Good.

As I see it, there are some bad things about abortion:
- it's potentially dangerous to the mother (both physically and mentally)
- it kills the foetus

And some good things:
- it helps keep the population down
- it can help women mentally, especially with rape. Is the morning-after pill not now a standard thing for rape victims who want it?

I admit that my point about abortion as a means of population control is rather callous, but then what else is contraception? There are far too many people in the world, and I at the moment have no particular desire to bring any children into the world, let alone more than one.

I should probably point out at this point that I'm male, since it seems to be so important to you all.

People have sex for pleasure. They always will, because it's one of the most pleasurable things which can be done, and most of us are slaves to our own pleasure, partly the reason why the world's in such a mess (but that's another discussion entirely). Therefore it is logical to have a method of contraception that works reliably. The condom has fantastic rates of prevention of conception, as well as all the other nasty things like STDs, but it does sometimes go wrong, and a woman can get pregnant accidentally.

Also, sex can happen in the heat of the moment, especially when drunk, when one is liable to forget contraception completely.

It may seem a bit odd, but I find the morning-after pill to be perfectly acceptable, since all it does (as far as I know) is prevent the implantation of the newly-formed zygote into the uterus wall. Thus it is flushed out during the woman's period. Apparently many zygotes fail to implant naturally, and the same thing happens to them. At this point it is little more than a ball of cells - little or no differentiation of them has occured. Can you truly say that this microscopic object is a human life?

Surgical abortion is another matter entirely. I'm thankful that I will never have to make such a decision, as any surgical procedure is enough to send me diving for the sick bucket. Abortion, especially in the later stages of pregnancy, is nothing other than killing, and if a mother is going to make that choice, which she has every right to do, she must understand what she is doing, and accept it. If she accepts it, and truly believes that it is in the best interests of all concerned, then I see no reason why she should not be able to go ahead and have the abortion.

Did I say everything I wanted to? I think so.

* ducks *

no need to duck, you can borrow my shield if anthony comes back, since 2bit didn't want it. i think it's still lying where i left it.

This post has been removed.