Predictably, many of my Mormon friends are cheering the abortion ban than just passed in the backwards state of Alabama.

I am angered at the hipocrisy of Mormons having anything to do with politics, but this in particular. One of the things I actually liked about Mormonism was the idea of "Choose the Right."

CHOOSE to do what you think is the right thing, even if/when the pressure to do something else is great.

That encapsulates being a good person, IMO.

Mormons CHOOSE not to drink or smoke, despite those two being ubiquitous. They CHOOSE to dress "modestly," even when those styles are outdated and not popular. It actually takes strength of character to stick to what you believe when the social norms are pushing you in the other direction. Strength of character is to be commended.

So why are they now cheering on the brute force of law which takes away choice for people? Why are they so hell-bent on controlling others when the value of personal convictions lies in being in a position to make a mistake, to take a risk, to put your professed beliefs to the test?

This country is going backward, and fast. And Mormons are now cheering that on.

>> CHOOSE to do what you think is the right thing, even if/when the pressure to do something else is great.

>>That encapsulates being a good person, IMO.

Ah yes, but the church's version of choosing what is right is choosing what the church tells you is right. Go against the pressure and do something else and you have chosen the wrong.

If the church teaching was "choose the right, and only you know whats right for you, and if it isn't the church, we wish you the best of luck and have no animosity towards you" then I might agree with your notion that LDS choose the right is commendable.

The sort of person would who want to have an abortion should be allowed to have one. In a lot of cases I would actually encourage it and would advocate that it be provided free as a public health service. In the case of the poor, it is certainly far less expensive than allowing the production of another child that will be a massive expense to the state/fed government for at least 20 years.

I'm waiting for the simple and easy test that predicts the IQ and 'body image' of the less-than-30-day-old fetus, so that if the fetus isn't 'up to snuff', the State will pay to have it flushed out. That way we'll never have to get around to sterilizing those who shouldn't reproduce, as advocated by progressives in the 1920s and 1930s...much less have to waste time culling the defectives from the human herd.

And nobody has to get their hands dirty!



Do I really advocate this? I don't know. We are, after all, just animals, so why not have a breeding program? Unfortunately had such a program existed 75 years ago, I wouldn't have been born. So there's that...

>> We are, after all, just animals, so why not have a breeding program?

That's a slippery slope. Soylent green is people you know?

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm waiting for the simple and easy test that
> predicts the IQ and 'body image' of the
> less-than-30-day-old fetus, so that if the fetus
> isn't 'up to snuff', the State will pay to have it
> flushed out. That way we'll never have to get
> around to sterilizing those who shouldn't
> reproduce, as advocated by progressives in the
> 1920s and 1930s...much less have to waste time
> culling the defectives from the human herd.

I know you're being ironic but this actually makes a lot of logical sense. You could even take the state out of it and let the choice be on the prospective parents who'd have to raise the end result if viable.


> Do I really advocate this? I don't know. We are,
> after all, just animals, so why not have a
> breeding program? Unfortunately had such a
> program existed 75 years ago, I wouldn't have been
> born. So there's that...

"I wouldn't be born" if such-and-such didn't take place is such a fallacious argument. Obviously you were born at the time and place you were because you weren't born from a different set of ancestors..

Everybody practices eugenics whether they call it that or not. The choice is between eugenics or dysgenics. Do you want humanity to be better or worse?

Next, we'll be hiring a firm to seek breeding applicants and to then winnow through them to find the best match possible based on our budgets.

The more key points of our genetic make-up that you can afford to have measured, the better your chances will be to find genetic happiness! Eventually 'falling in love' will be silly, barbaric custom, viewed with the same disdain as going to a barber to be bled of your bad humors.

Science is the key to happiness and drug companies deliver that happiness!

It is ironic, is it not, when people unwittingly reprise Huxley without knowing where that story leads?

I’d buy stock in Cliff Notes if it were not for the fact that those who should read, don’t read.

Gattaca.

They already abort children with Down Syndrome in Iceland, and in some places, if they find the baby is female they abort her too, which has led to a gender balance in some parts of the world.

You're supposed to have the inner strength to live how you believe, and you're not supposed to judge others, AND you're supposed to charitably help those in need, even if they're deemed "sinners." Therefore, this abortion bill ought to be abhorred by the Mormon rightwing crowd.

I have seen first hand how unwanted children are raised. I've seen what happens when teenage moms try to go it alone (after being shunned by their holier-than-thou friends and family). They end up with malnourished kids because they don't know how to feed their babies. They don't know how to breast feed, they're too embarrassed and shamed to ask for help, they don't have enough money for decent formula and food.

If Mormons are going to be anti-abortion to the point of cheering on a bill that doesn't even leave exceptions for rape cases, then they should by all means be creating a nationwide support system for mothers. FREE daycare. FREE information. FREE child psychology classes. FREE babysitters. FREE nutrition guidance. If you want a young, unprepared, unwilling mother to raise a child, then help her out.

Rant over. I need a beer.

forgotmyname Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have seen first hand how unwanted children are raised.

Agreed. Every child should be wanted. Results when they are born unwanted are terrible.

Agree with your rant and joining you for a virtual beer!

They’ll ban abortion but they won’t ban drone strikes.

and while we are at it... let's have an honest chat about birth control... country where their are no non-sense sex education classes and readily available birth control have a much lower rate of those pesky unwanted pregnancies... the need to control the morality of everybody else is the bedrock of the MorgCo religion these days... besides where's the fun in not being able to shame those unfortunates that are stuck with unplanned pregnancies... they just love to throw stones from their glass houses!

This world is built on "forcing your ways on others." Period. Since the beginning of time.

Yes there are some good Samaritans sprinkled in here and there. Yes some leaders have taught peace and reciprocity. But what rules the world is strength, not goodness.

From the beginning of time it has always been so. Might equals right has always been the underlying current of everything. Religion knows this. Religion knows how critical it is to have government do their bidding. The religious are adapting. The Mormon church is as political as any or more so.

The Holy Crusades are not a thing of the past. They are just more P.C. these days. They don't buy horses and swords nowadays, they buy politicians or raise them.

Done & Done Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This world is built on "forcing your ways on others." Period. Since the beginning of time.

Absolutely. Sad but true. Vulnerability is a poor strategy in the world.

They can't choose,
And don't want to,
And don't want others to...

Life is a set of robotic reactions to mormons, to the environment, to life itself.

Question: Do any of you know the actual stand of the church on abortion? Hunt it down. You may be surprised.

Yes, it is one of their Jell-O teachings.


The problem is that a male priesthood runs the church. As long as women go to their male religious authorities, they will not own their own bodies and decisions.

And then when you finally do CHOOSE the right and decide to leave their cult, it's "wait a minute, we didn't mean choose what's right for you, we meant choose what's right for our bank account."

I don't agree with the extremely strict abortion laws they are passing right now, but I do not agree with late term abortions. There are so many other ways. Morning after pills should be readily available. Birth control pills should be paid for by insurance like Viagra is. There are so many ways to avoid a lot of abortions and yet people don't use them and they aren't educated about them, they don't have access. Planned Parenthood I do know gives out birth control as my son's last girlfriend got her's there.

I just don't get it. Why would you want to go through a procedure like an abortion when you have so many other options. AND for hell sakes, have the abortion before LATE TERM. They have all those months to decide and they hold out until the baby is late term. Hell, I wouldn't do that to an animal.

The frustrating thing is that the same people who want to prohibit abortions are usually the ones fighting against the things that would help prevent it: easy access to free birth control, early public sex education and easy close access to health care and abortion providers earlier in the pregnancy.


There are attempts to stall the woman every way possible until later in the pregnancy which contributes to the very thing most want to avoid: late term situations.

Abortion is a sticky issue.

My personal take on it is this:

I have no objection to an abortion up to 10-12 weeks or so. However, once there is a heartbeat, brain activity, the ability to feel pain, etc., that's where I start to draw the line personally.

3rd-trimester abortion is murder -- plain and simple.

I do allow for exceptions for rape, incest, and the health of the mother. However, let's be honest -- those exceptions only account for about 1% of total abortions.

Lorenzo Snowjob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I have no objection to an abortion up to 10-12
> weeks or so. However, once there is a heartbeat,
> brain activity, the ability to feel pain, etc.,
> that's where I start to draw the line personally.

Heartbeat is visible on ultrasound at three weeks past fertilization. The brain is developing before that. It’s not even enough time for the woman to miss a period. The Alabama law is an attempt to stop ALL abortions.

For the most part, I agree with you. I think Roe vs. Wade was a generally balanced decision that weighed the rights of the mother against the developing rights of the fetus. Having said that, I am a staunch supporter of birth control, and think it should be widely and easily available, along with complete and effective sex education. My undergraduate University did a really good job of promoting birth control through the student health clinic. There were signs up in the dorms telling young women and young couples where to go and what to do.

I used highly reliable birth control methods as a sexually active young woman, and never once got pregnant. IMO for most people, it's doable.

As for late term abortions, I only support them in the most dire medical circumstances, i.e. the fetus is already dead, or the life of the mother is in peril due to unforeseen circumstances.

IMO, there are simply too many things that can go wrong to mandate that a pregnant woman in the early stages of pregnancy must give birth.

I don't know if people have read about the mother in Michigan who was kidnapped and raped as a 12 year old. Her rapist served a relatively short amount of time in jail, and went on to rape another woman. And now he wants parental rights, and one idiot judge granted them (it's being appealed.) I find this appalling.

"LATE TERM" abortion is rare and tragic. These aren't women who just didn't get around to deciding. These are MEDICALLY NECESSARY interventions.

Contrary to popular thought, a woman cannot just walk into an abortion provider at 7 months along and say, "Hey ya, I just decided this is not for me." Women don't do that and if they did, the provider would say NO.

If you guys saw what was put in the garbage disposal of an abortion clinic you would not be so ready to defend it.

In the long run, if you examined the lives of unwanted children you might prefer taking out the trash.

... Just another point of view...

Isn't entitled to one. Slippery slope.

Being born is a slippery slope; it's the ride of a lifetime! But it's messy...

If you think 'life' is sacred, go ahead and ask ghawd how to run your life and ask his forgiveness when you sometimes fail. And yes, I get that ghawd tells you how to run everyone's life if they'd only listen to you!

Yeah, I know, you're speaking for all the unborn babies who never had a chance, and yes, it sounds wonderful. But I'd be a lot more impressed if you devoted your life to raising and caring for the unwanted newborns. But frankly, I'd be a lot more impressed if you worked this hard to keep drunk drivers off the roads.

Laura Dern, Kurtwood Smith, and Bert Reynolds acted in a 1996 movie, Citizen Ruth, that made some good points on this topic. Dern played the lead as a weak, confused, drug-addled woman with four children already in state custody who got pregnant yet again and wanted an abortion but was dissuaded by a gaggle of pro-life enthusiasts.

Those pro-lifers took her in, nurtured her, and turned her into a reluctant symbol of women who choose to bear their children rather than take the easy way out. Then, however, the child is born and the pro-life advocates vanish. There are scenes in which a tumble weeds would not have been out of place.

So there they are, an innocent baby perfect in all ways in the care of a weak, confused, drug-addled woman with four children already in state custody.

And that baby, along with the other four, may well be tithe payers some day!! Praise Chuy!!

What does Che have to do with it?

In Mexico, Chuy is simply the nickname given to men named Jesus. So I was just being irreverent, not political.

I was going to say, Che died but I don't think he was resurrected.

Chuy has better credentials.

"Choose the Right" isn't the full quote. The complete one is "Choose the Right after we have removed all other choices."

Very interesting discussions here. A judge has today blocked my state of Mississippi law of no abortion after heartbeat.

Btw, every public health clinic in my state offers free birth control to anyone walking in who wants it. Despite that I believe our teen pregnancy and unwed mothers birth rate is the highest in the nation.

When I was the webmaster for a state agency I published those statistics but since I moved on they have been removed, but while I was there around 90% of births in the state were to unwed teen mothers.

It is "choose the right," most definitely. But when the prophet has decided, the choosing has been done.

Fair enough.

Since you are clearly pro-choice, I am sure you would likewise allow me to CHOOSE to stockpile as many automatic and semi-automatic weapons as I like.

Pro choice means making sure someone isn't forced to have an abortion too, remember.

If you decide to store your guns in your rear, I'll consider defending your right for body autonomy. It's your body.

It's one thing to allow people to make reproductive choices for their own body. It's another subject when we are talking about safety of other external individuals.

I assume you would be fine with everyday citizens who choose to stockpile all the nuclear bombs they want? Do you have any limits between what impacts the safety of external people and what impacts your internal decisions about your own body? We have to draw the line somewhere.

May heavens, Dags, you and I are on the same page again--something you should find alarming.

I read LS's post an hour ago and wanted to come back and mention that if someone shoves a weapon up a gun enthusiast's ass, that enthusiast should be legally required to keep it there for nine months--and any doctor who has the temerity to remove the weapon lest it cause physical injury or death should be imprisoned.

After all, a gun rights advocate's body falls within the purview of state authority.

Hahahaha. That is perfect. Beauty post.

Also, we should make sure there are no clinics available to treat any accidental gunshot if they fart or bend over wrong. We wouldn't want to endanger the gun.

Instead, they can get thoughts and prayers sent their way.

Stopping here to avoid getting in trouble. :-\

And there should be no prophylaxis or prophylaxis education. People should be free to put pistols, even assault rifles, in other people's orifices at will!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2019 04:45PM by Lot's Wife.

...this phenomenon is quite common in International Airports. Concealment of many items find their way into the lower, and even upper body cavities. It's in the "discovery process" that makes one weak in the knees.

CTR = Can't Think Rationally

There are no choices in Mormondom. Things are chosen for you. What you think, what you can do, etc. Even what you are allowed to say to other cult members so they don't get offended by hearing an opposing viewpoint. All active cult members deserve a hard life based on their poor choice of joining the cult in the first place. TBM's also deserve cancer, just because.

What exactly is the churches stated policy on abortion?

Mormonnewsroom.org/official-statement/abortion


I especially like the 'rule' that nothing is to be done until you meet with the dentist, attorney or local store owner who rules the local fiefdom in which you reside.

As a former women's health care provider, I can say that the vast majority of women seeking abortion do so in the first trimester, when it can be done with pills and doesn't require a procedure beyond that. Later term senarios are often because of poor access to care, or mostly anomalies . The idea that women terminate healthy 3rd trimester pregnancies is BS. Early delivery for maternal health, ie. high blood pressure, multiples, etc, happens all the time. These are not abortions.
Politicians need to stay out of women's health care decisions. Women do not take these decisions lightly, regardless of the circumstances.

Thank you for saying that. And thank you for providing for women's health care needs.

Doesn't it boil down to the question, "Is life sacred?"

Once the decision is made that life is sacred, being anti-abortion is a given.

Look at the pictures. Abortionists dom't want you to see them any more than the military wants you to see pictures of people it kills.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7633239/mum-photos-miscarriage-dead-son/


"'HE'S A REAL BABY' Brave mum shares photos of dead son born at 14 weeks after doctors brand him ‘medical waste’

---
HAVING a stillbirth or miscarriage is every parent's worst nightmare.

But even more distressing is having doctors tell you that your baby is nothing but "medical waste" that should be aborted.
---

Now, Sharran is sharing her photos in a bid to show just how fully formed babies can be at such an early stage.

Sharran, from Fair Grove, Missouri, US, said: "Looking at him, holding him in my hand, looking at how perfectly formed he was: I was amazed.

"I just couldn't believe how perfect everything was on him. His ears, his tongue, his gums, his lips. I couldn't believe it.
---

She says that unborn babies are "dehumanised", and that the way we see foetuses affects not only women who elect to have terminations but also mums who lose their wanted babies.

Movies do a heck of a good job showing us what war is like.

There are two sides (at the very least) to the abortion issue, your side and the prospective mother's side. Why are you so keen about ignoring her side?

I have a friend who is a dermatologist in a farming community. She repairs facial injuries and sun-damage in elderly men all the time. All to the good, it is, other than her habit of sending me the horrific surgery photos. It would be easy to conclude, on a visceral level, that no cancer should ever be excised again.

It's a bit like your war photos and movies, which evoke strong emotions irrespective of the underlying equities. The point being that using imagery to shock people is not a great way of conducting political or moral discourse.