Comments about ‘In our opinion: Abortion consensus’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 21 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Many conservative states seem to be saying that 20 weeks should be the cutoff for abortions. I think liberals should agree to this, and then we can all call a truce on this divisive issue.

OHBU
Columbus, OH

I agree wholeheartedly that the rhetoric surrounding this issue is unnecessarily overheated. However, the author quickly slips into blame, blame, blame. In the end, it's all the pro-choice advocates' fault for not ceding any ground. How about take a look in the mirror, you might just find a beam. Did the author somehow miss when anti-abortion crowd passed laws forcing rape victims to surrender to transvaginal ultrasounds? Or how about the laws being passed in many states that, while not directly outlawing abortion, are putting the kinds of restrictions on clinics that make it virtually impossible to operate in that state. The so-called heartbeat bills passed in other states that are in direct violation of the constitution. I'm sorry, but this is in no wise a one-sided issue.

Roe v Wade attempted to balance the rights of the mother and the baby, and the dividing line became "viability"--that line is generally around 24 weeks. Some babies do survive from 20 weeks, the vast majority do not. Is it worth risking the life of the mother in some cases, on the less than 1% chance the baby could survive?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Ironic again...

The DN uses the French, Germans, and the rest of and other nations as an example of "good".
Usually, it's the other way around.

The sad fact is -- most businesses WANT America to be like communist China, including abortion and low birth rates. Babies are BAD for business and their bottom dollar.

BTW - they all have Government controlled "Socialized" universal single-payer systems too.
Why the double standard hypocrisy?

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

I think the controversy gets generated on the pro-life side as well. Some are absolutists - no abortion at any time for any reason. This is, of course, in contrast to some on the pro-choice side for which abortion should be available for any reason and at nearly any stage of development. Conflict among the most strident on each side is virtually guaranteed.

For our nation, it would seem best if we could get this (somehow) out of the political realm and back into the medical sphere. No matter which side of the debate you land on, abortion is a lousy method of birth control and should be a last ditch option when medical need determines it is appropriate. It would then likely be done more often than some prefer but much less often than now.

But how do we get it out of the political sphere. That is the trick and I have no good answer. Quite honestly I think some would miss the issue going away. It is a useful tool to fan the political flames on both sides.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

I'm sorry but this is not one of those, well there are extremists on both sides issues. The Republican party as an entity would stand up and cheer if Roe v Wade was abolished. Can you find someone who identifies as a Democrat who wants unfettered abortions, yea, probably, but you're going to have to look long and hard.

The Republicans have completely moved from a fact, science based position to an entirely religious belief based position. Heartbeats, brain activity etc. don't mean life and especially don't mean viability, all those things can be produced in a lab separate and apart from one another.

This is entirely a partisan political strategy promoted by one side.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

And what about the mandatory ultrasounds? The mandatory visits? The shutting down of clinics by imposing arbitrary regulations? The requirement that abortion providers have admitting privileges to hospitals (and then in Ohio's case banning hospitals from providing them admitting privileges)?

Oh and... the compromise (this whole 20 week thing) involves supporting something that has been ruled unconstitutional by federal courts.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

LDS Liberal,
Can you explain in some detail how bad bad businesses are the ones who want late term abortions, and "Babies are BAD for business and their bottom dollar"?

I think you're going to have a hard time substantiating that claim.

- Without babies... who are they going to sell their next generation of products too?
- Without babies... who is going to work in their factories, stores, or work for their suppliers, etc?

Fact is... when families start having babies... their spending increases significantly (and bad bad business LIKE when people's spending and consumption of their product increases). That's how they stay in business and grow their business.

So why... would they be against babies?

That's just absurd anti-business blather.

I think we SHOULD have a limit on deciding to abort a baby as late as you want for any reason.

That's why I didn't understand the furry in the left's response to Texas even talking about limiting late-term abortions. "trying to wipe out abortion rights" (as the leftists put it). Google it and read some of the rants in the Huffington Post and NY Times.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

There is no such thing as the right to life. You can’t buy it, you can’t sell it. You can’t even give it away. Life is just something that happens. It comes and goes of its own accord. We might think we create life when we bring the proper ingredients together, but life itself is something more than a mechanical process. We don’t make it happen.

The issue of abortion is an issue of control. The powers seeking to control others have as their number one resource the number of people in their flock. Their number one source of new members is the birth of new members by current members. Hence the religious concern over birth control and abortion.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "There is an abortion consensus"

Okay, let's agree on a post 20-week ban.

But, only as a starting point.

Once that's in place, we'll use that well-worn liberal tactic -- incrementalism -- to go after whatever we can get next.

And, after that? We'll keep pushing.

Make no mistake, the abortion problem will not be "solved," and its stench cannot be purged from America, until Roe v. Wade and its phony "right" to an abortion have been properly consigned to the dustbin of history, and the human rights of the innocent unborn are once again honored and protected.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

Nobody likes abortions. They are, however, sometimes a medical necessity. Who gets to decide what constitutes "necessary" is the issue. "Pro-choice" advocates say that this is a personal decision properly left to the woman and her doctor.

"Pro-life" advocates don't want women to have that option, claiming that they are acting solely on behalf of unborn babies.

That argument would have credibility if the same people claiming to be motivated by "life" had some kind of follow-up position indicating that they care as much about the health and well-being of children after they're born. But they don't - not remotely. Every position taken by today's hyper-conservatives involves cutting programs for the medical care, nutrition, and early education of children. Their actions reveal that they in fact couldn't care less about the well-being of children.

If your goal is to dramatically lower the rate of abortions, then you have to acknowledge the critical role that frank, comprehensive public education about sexuality, STD's, and contraception play in this discussion.

When the GOP supports improving sex-education as a way to reduce unwanted pregnancy, then I'll take them seriously.

happy2bhere
clearfield, UT

Ironic that so many liberals, who are likely to be pro choice, like to point to the health care systems of the European countries as examples of what America should be doing. Now this news, which by the way I had never heard before. Wonder why? I might add that the anti death penalty folks also use those same "civilized" countries as examples of why America should not have a death penalty. What a turn around.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Babies won't "buy" anything for 20+ years.
Businesses look at 3 month quarter to quarter earnings, and not one day more.

Deductibles for a live normal birth with NO complications - $2500.
Deductible and coverage for a vasectomy is ZERO out of pocket.

Businesses have to pay higher Healthcare costs for maternity coverage
AND coverage for the entire family of their employees :-(

No to mention the $Million coverage for pre-mature births.

Businesses also must pay paid for 6 weeks of maternity leave,
and ask any working woman how the boss or business reacts to her leaving early or missing work to take care of the needs of her kids.

Shall I continue?...
There's so much MUCH more?...

The Solution
Las Cruces, NM

Okay, those who are trying to claim that the abortion issue is about protecting the mother in a life in danger scenario are trying to sheild the truth. First of all, that case is rare. Second, there is no reason why a law couldn't accommodate that exception.

The problem here is MURDER! Abortion is killing--is murder. You do not have a right to play God and murder unborn children? If you are religious, then you must know that you will be accountable before God for murdering one of his children.

If you are not religious and believe that you became alive randomly, then you need to stop and ponder the concept that had your organism been one of these aborted ones, you would not exist. Now take a few moments and try to contemplate never existing. After you have done so for an appropriate ammount of time, reconsider this artificial debate about so-called women's rights. Roe vs. Wade made an unconstitutional ruling, for the fetus of the unborn child has as much claim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as the mother. We do not have the right to choose consequences of our actions.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

I also like the french attitudes towards discussing sex and preventing pregnancy.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@Roland Kayser – “Many conservative states seem to be saying that 20 weeks should be the cutoff for abortions. I think liberals should agree to this, and then we can all call a truce on this divisive issue.”

That would be fine – I would even say the cutoff should be closer to 12 weeks – but much of this fight is simply Newton’s 3rd Law of Motion playing out in politics.

There is a large segment of people who believe a human being exists at conception. There’s nothing scientific about this view… it’s a purely religious conviction. But they will continue to make this a political fight until they get a Constitutional Personhood Amendment (or all States to outlaw any abortion).

The other side is simply reacting to this fact with a “cede no ground” strategy, while the rest of the world (the four counties Fiorina noted notwithstanding) deals with this issue in a pragmatic, common sense way and goes on with their business.

Ironic that the country founded on compromise (and apparently taught it to the world) is now largely incapable of practicing this necessary feature of democratic self-government.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@The Solution
Half of abortions are obtained by Catholics or evangelicals. Let's face it, abortions will happen, the methods just get more desperate if you reduce access to safe, legal abortions. The nation with the lowest abortion rate isn't even one where it's illegal, it's Belgium. Maybe if you actually cared about reducing abortions you'd support methods proven to work like expanded access to birth control through universal coverage. Instead you conservatives care about nothing more than shaming women who have abortions, and then shaming women who are single parents on welfare. Guess what, they chose life. They did what you wanted... and then you attack them. What hypocrites you are.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

The Solution: "The problem here is MURDER! Abortion is killing--is murder...you will be accountable before God for murdering one of his children."

Really? Do you know how many pregnancies spontaneously abort? About a third - most of the time the woman is completely unaware. And if you really are religious, and you believe that Noah's flood was a real historical event, how many small children and pregnant women did your God kill in that flood? Fact is, the God you say you believe in is the biggest abortionist/murderer of all time.

Is a blastocyst a human? Seriously - answer that.

Will you acknowledge the critical role of comprehensive sex education in lowering the abortion rates in other nations?

If you're so concerned about the wellbeing of babies, will you support the restoration of funding that Republicans are slashing for children's healthcare programs? How about child nutrition and early education?

If your opposition to a woman's right to control her own body really is motivated by a desire to protect babies, then where is the evidence that you care about them after they're born?

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Liberal,
- Parents buy stuff for their babies every day.
- Each baby will buy a lifetime of stuff. Why would businesses want them aborted instead?

Businesses/employers don't control your vasectomy or your birth control, they just pay for your insurance. When was the last time your evil employer told you you couldn't have a vasectomy or an abortion? Maybe your INSURANCE company does, but your evil employer has never told you what procedures you can have (that's totally in the insurance provider's court).

Evil businesses seem to have no problem giving employees maternity leave. Has your company ever complained about maternity leave to you? You really think they would rather their employees have abortions than take a few weeks of maternity leave??

Please... tell us more about how businesses would rather their employees have abortions than be punished with a baby and all that maternity leave.

Blue,
The letter didn't mention medically necessary abortions. Most realize there are medically-required abortions (usually early-term). We're talking about consensus here... not extremes.

PS
The "backup-plan" for those who support life is called "Adoption".

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Does anyone have the unilateral right to destroy another human being? Society's laws were written to protect those who cannot protect themselves. The Court MUST appoint council for those brought before it if that accused person cannot provide obtain his own council. But, in the case of abortion, which by definition is the termination of life within the womb of a woman, that soul whose life is being terminated has no legal representation. ONE PERSON and only one person needs to demand that the life be terminated.

It's easy to see how that happened. Evil and corrupt men, who wanted sexual freedom without the responsibility to support their offspring, decided that destroying a life before it was born would absolve them of financial responsibility and public disgrace. Women whose motives were more important to them than the life of an unborn baby, signed on. The Court, in total violation to equal protection under the law, decreed that a woman could unilaterally decide to destroy the life within her.

The result, in America alone, is that more than 55,000,000 children were NOT born, but were destroyed without having representation AFTER life had commenced.

Maudine
SLC, UT

If we are going to talk about abortions in Germany and France, let's be honest and do a real comparison.

Teens in Germany and France are educated about safer sex and have easy and cheap (sometimes free) access to birth control. Access to legal abortion is easy and cheap so there are no financial roadblocks to a timely abortion - in France, the cost of abortion is reimbursable, making them, in effect, free.

Later abortions are allowed to save the mother's life or in cases of severe fetal impairment.

Both France and Germany ensure paid maternity leave at 100% for 14 or 16 weeks, including time before the due date. Both France and Germany have universal healthcare. Both France and Germany provide money to families to help care for the children and to help pay for childcare when the mother returns to work.

In other words, they have systems that address the concerns of pro-choice individuals in the US because their systems address the leading causes of abortion including preventing unwanted pregnancies and making sure families can care for their children. Also, legal abortions are easy to get.

Please, let's fully adopt one of their systems.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments