Visit Edward Sebastian's column >>

EDWARD SEBASTIAN

A reader first, a writer second.
Add To Watchlist
Articles Posted: 21; Links Seeded: 42
Member Since: 1/2006Last Seen: 1/28/2008

Mississippi House committee votes to ban most abortions

advertisement

"Holland said he brought up the near ban on abortion because he's tired of piecemeal attempts to add new restrictions year after year. He said he woke up about 3 a.m. Tuesday and decided to introduce his proposal, and he only told two House staff members about his plans before he made the move."

[...]

"Whether it's South Dakota or Mississippi, our goals are the same. We want to end abortion in our lifetime, and we want to see Mississippi be the first state to end abortion."

I don't think it's just me. This country isn't shifting. It has shifted.

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
1.6
0.7
{"commentId":44539,"authorDomain":"murat"}

Shifting toward theocracy...

{"commentId":44539,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"murat"}
    Reply#1 - Wed Mar 1, 2006 12:35 PM EST
    {"commentId":44713,"authorDomain":"sethasaurus"}

    Absolutely disgusting. Like it or not, we all know the results of Roe vs. Wade, and attempts by individual states to make abortions illegal are unconstitutional. Expect to see this make its way up the courts.

    {"commentId":44713,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"sethasaurus"}
      Reply#2 - Wed Mar 1, 2006 2:36 PM EST
      {"commentId":46719,"authorDomain":"celestina"}

      Really frightening. I've never been clear on how the pro-lifers justify the destruction of the life of a woman who is already here...and this article just confirms my suspicions that they are insane. You can argue ten ways to Sunday about the point at which life begins, but in the case of rape, you certainly cannot blame the woman for her lax morals. And what is to be the fate of a child conceived by rape and brought to term? Who's life are they protecting, here? Add that in with the inevitability of back-alley abortions and their complications. Indeed, faith does make one like a little child...

      {"commentId":46719,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"celestina"}
        Reply#3 - Thu Mar 2, 2006 10:39 PM EST
        {"commentId":46730,"authorDomain":"edwards"}
        Add that in with the inevitability of back-alley abortions

        There is no inevitablity to that. In fact, there would be no problem with abortions if people knew how to keep their pants on, to be blunt. Rape is a different matter, and I don't really know how to respond to that, but from "casual" or extra-marital sex abortion shouldn't be an option.

        {"commentId":46730,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"edwards"}
          Reply#4 - Thu Mar 2, 2006 10:51 PM EST
          {"commentId":46786,"authorDomain":"murat"}
          There is no inevitablity to that [back alley abortions]. In fact, there would be no problem with abortions if people knew how to keep their pants on, to be blunt.

          Or if birth control was widely available and not stigmatized, and if information about birth control and other matters regarding sex were openly and candidly discussed among young people.

          Possible pregnancy need not be a deterence to sex in this day and age.

          {"commentId":46786,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"murat"}
            Reply#5 - Thu Mar 2, 2006 11:32 PM EST
            {"commentId":46815,"authorDomain":"celestina"}

            Passing legislation making abortion illegal never has and never will stop abortion. It merely makes the ways and means much sketchier. There are still women today who try to perform abortions on themselves because they are afraid to go to a doctor, or are afraid of facing their parents (in states where the guardian's consent is required for a minor), or simply cannot afford it. Women have been finding means to terminate unwanted pregnancy since the ancient Egyptians. So, yes, at least to some extent it is inevitable.

            I understand that most people who view themselves as "pro-life" feel that they are defending the lives of those who cannot defend themselves. But in cases of rape especially, one must also consider the life of the victim, the would-be mother. She has already been the victim of a life-altering event. Should she be further penalized by being forced to nurture and protect a child growing inside her which is half her attacker? Do you honestly think she would? If this bill is passed, I imagine you can expect to see a rise in the incidence of fetal alcohol syndrome and other preventable diseases in infants in Mississippi. Not to mention that not making allowance for incest means that you will have a rise in genetic diseases. While I feel that all life is sacred, I have to question whether a life confined to an institution is any life at all.

            In more general terms, the answer to preventing abortion lies not in legislation, and not in the blind assumption that people who don't want babies should not have sex. People have sex for many beautiful reasons besides producing offspring; it's a compelling natural urge we all have. The answer lies in making information about pregnancy prevention and birth control more available and removing the taboos about it. Children need to grow up understanding that sex is a natural part of life, and that being responsible about using birth control is a natural part of sex. That understanding and acceptance will prevent more abortions than any amount of legislation ever could.

            {"commentId":46815,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"celestina"}
            • 1 vote
            Reply#6 - Thu Mar 2, 2006 11:47 PM EST
            {"commentId":46860,"authorDomain":"edwards"}

            I definitely agree that making abortion illegal is not the only step. Completely putting any moral aspect of this aside, the culture has, quite frankly, grown used to abortions. What you are saying as the result of such a decision is quite likely and needs to be addressed.

            People have sex for many beautiful reasons besides producing offspring; it's a compelling natural urge we all have. The answer lies in making information about pregnancy prevention and birth control more available and removing the taboos about it.

            People make the case that people will have lots of sex whether or not abortion is legal. Fine. But if it is between two consenting adults, then it is their responsibiltiy to raise whatever child they bring into the world. People are getting so used to getting whatever they want whenever they want. It's fueling an ignorance of responsibiltiy and maturity. The simple fact is: if you have sex, you have babies. You are responsible for that baby, whether or not you like it. Sure, it's an urge. Not an uncontrollable one.

            People have urges to shoplift. They're still responsible for their actions, regardless if they had an urge or not.

            {"commentId":46860,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"edwards"}
              Reply#7 - Fri Mar 3, 2006 12:27 AM EST
              {"commentId":47026,"authorDomain":"murat"}

              So, you think personal responsibilty should be enforced by law, even if it results in something as horrible as backalley abortions?

              {"commentId":47026,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"murat"}
                Reply#8 - Fri Mar 3, 2006 4:05 AM EST
                {"commentId":47566,"authorDomain":"baka"}

                Apart from my personal feelings about abortions or the justifications which deal more with a philosophic position on the existence of life than with any possible consequences or benefits, this and the recent move in S.C. look to be an attempt to set the stage for a nicely tailored test case on the matter for the Supreme Court.

                Idealy one would want a case that sets the stage neatly without excessive extraneous facts and circumstances for a Court to be able to overrule Roe as protection for abortion as it exists, and enforce only a Constitutional right to abortion to protect the life of the mother, and leave the legality of every other variation to the state's discresion.

                {"commentId":47566,"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003","authorDomain":"baka"}
                  Reply#9 - Fri Mar 3, 2006 12:46 PM EST
                  {"canLink":false,"threadId":"26791","isPrivate":false}
                  Leave a Comment:
                  You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                  As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                  {"threadId":"26791","contentId":"114003"}
                  Start TrackingStart Tracking
                  Stop TrackingStop Tracking