Facebook Activity



Teen Ink on Twitter

Home > Forums > Teen Ink Forums > News & Issues > Election Results

Teen Ink Forums

Lively discussions with other teens
   
Nov. 15, 2016 at 7:31 am

Here's article proof. I can't post a link so heres the title, more evidence out there if you look for it: Reformed Ab.orti.on Clinic Director: “We Gave Low-Dose B.irth Control Pil.ls We Knew They’d Get Preg.nant On”

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
JubilexThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 15, 2016 at 8:47 pm

I believe she's talking about the mini p.ill, which is a legitimate form of contra.ception. It's not a "low do.se pi.ll", it has only proge.sterone in it, rather than combined est.rogen and progest.erone like the more commonly used pil.ls. For most people, it has to be taken within a 3 hour window of the same time every day to remain effective (not at exactly the same time like she claims). In some cases, the effects can reduce within 21-24 hours and so it's further recommended as a safe guard, that the pi.ll should be taken at the opposite time of day to when they're most likely to have se.x (so in the morning if they'd usually have se.x in the afternoon or evening). If a p.ill is delayed by more than 3 hours, it becomes ineffective and additional means have to be used for 48 hours.
 
Planned Par.entho.od would use this method because it's the cheapest. Which makes sense for a place that struggles with funding and is trying to survive in a capitalist society. It's not the best means of contra.ception for most people, because it relies on being meticulous with taking it and realistically, lots of people aren't going to do that. Especially young people. Hence why in Australia (where I live), most doctors will recommend the combined pi.ll, or a long acting form of contra.ception. Unfortunately those options are expensive in the US and a lot of young people probably can't afford them.
 
The lady in the video also mentioned buying cheap con.do.ms, which really makes no difference because they're still tested for efficacy to make sure they work before they're sold.
 
Then she said about termi.nations being performed throughout all nine months of preg.nancy and I'm relatively confident they're not. They're definitely not here.
 
With a lot of misinformation in the video, it's hard to accept what she's saying for other points where I don't know whether what she's saying is true or not.

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Nov. 15, 2016 at 10:00 pm

You obviously have a lot of time on your hands. When I don't have essays and midterms hanging above my head and more freetime, I will try to do more research and return a stronger point. (Tbh debating is exhausting...)

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Nov. 15, 2016 at 10:04 pm

Actually, I'm not continuing this debate. This topic is very personal and upsetting. I can't help but think about how close I was to being one of those murdered discarded fetus, so I'm not going to further stress myself trying to prove a point or explain my opinion about this.

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
JubilexThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 16, 2016 at 12:34 am

"You obviously have a lot of time on your hands."
 
I'm a medical student currently half way through my exam period. I wouldn't say I have huge amounts of time. But I am very educated on certain areas of this subject. And I know where to find accurate information quickly.
 
"I'm not continuing this debate. This topic is very personal and upsetting."
 
I'm sorry to hear that it's upsetting for you. I can understand why something you feel so strongly about would affect you in that way. If you're not feeling up to replying, then that's perfectly fine. I'd like to continue discussing it, but your wellbeing is more important, so please look after yourself first. If you ever feel like it's something you can handle another time, then I'll be happy to discuss it with you then.

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 16, 2016 at 11:21 am

@WordAddict, P.lanned P.arenthood would not be defunded because they perform a.bortions (although you're right, I think that's reason enough). They would be defunded because we now have video evidence that they are selling the body parts of the babies they've killed. 
 
And...yes, women aren't always coerced into a.bortion. Sometimes it is "their choice." But...it's a rotten choice. The common statistic I hear is that 98% of women regret their abortions. There are so many options for a woman besides a.bortion. Like adoption. Thousands and thousands of couples can't have children but desperately want to. Why on earth can't we encourage women to turn to adoption instead of a.bortion? 
 
And besides, this isn't just about the woman. There's her baby to think about, too. As @warriorwritergirl77 said, a.bortion is murder and kills tiny innocent lives. Nothing should justify that. Murder is wrong. And that statement is as simple as black and white. You can disagree that ab.ortion is murder it if you want (although that a f.etus is a person is a scientifically sound fact), but you can't disagree that murder is wrong. 
 
I hope I don't sound like I'm trying to argue in a mean way. But if there's one topic I'm passionate about, it's this. I just can't believe that 56 million babies have been murdered in America, and we all sit around and talk about it like it's no big deal. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 16, 2016 at 11:24 am

And while we're on the subject of c.ontraception.... As Jubilex pointed out, it's very easy to "make a mistake" and not use it "properly." Lots of teenagers aren't going to be meticulous about what time they take their p.ills. At the same time, being on c.ontraception gives a false sense of security -- "I can have s.ex whenever I want and not worry about the consequences." The natural result? You have s.ex thinking you're "covered" when really you're not. Which leads to unwanted pre.gnancies and more a.bortions. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
WordAddict replied...
Nov. 16, 2016 at 4:32 pm

I do not agree with ab.ortion. I do not think it is the right thing to do, like some of you are saying, but I do not think women should be forced to choose to have an ab.ortion, or forced to choose to not have one if they need it for whatever reason. For the sake of this particular issue, however, I feel that this is not a good reason to defund an organization like PP.
 
I have not heard about their selling of infant body parts... That certainly sounds suspicious, but I'll do my research on that. Also, I think I tried to explain this with an example using animal testing; if you disassemble a company or organization because you disagree with one of their practices, it will not abolish that practice on the spot. It may be one step towards doing just that, but that practice will never be eliminated unless you cut it from the root. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 16, 2016 at 5:18 pm

I agree that defunding P.lanned P.arenthood would not end a.bortion. To end a.bortion, we have to go to the root of the problem and change the culture from one of selfishness, impurity, and fear to one of selflessness, chastity, and love. However, considering that P.lanned P.arenthood is the biggest a.bortion-provider in the country, performing at least if not well over 300,000 a.bortions a year, defunding it would probably save the lives of thousands of babies.
 
I think we need to understand that this is an urgent issue. These are human children being killed. A woman has every right to take care of herself and make decisions regarding her health, but there are certain things no one should have the right to do. Murder is one of them. And a.bortion is murder. In all charity, I can't understand why so many people think "I'm personally opposed, but it's a woman's choice." Would you say the same thing about, say, slavery? "I'm personally opposed, but it's a person's right to decide whether he should own slaves"? I know that seems like an extreme example, since pr.egnancy is such a personal thing compared to running a plantation; but the basic principle is the same. A person has no right to hurt another person. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Nov. 16, 2016 at 6:01 pm

@Jubilex
Sorry if I sounded rude or sarcastic. I admire your ability to gather research and find accurate information. At this piont, I don't know how useful I am for the discussion. Without solid evidence or facts, my opinion is just my opinion. I like what @Lucy-Agnes said about the adoption choice though. That is a way better alternative for abor.tion. If we can convince young women and women to continue the preg.nancy then have the medical resources to ensure the safety of the women and the baby, it would be so much better if the baby could be born and given a chance at life, even if it is adopted but still it has the chance of life. I know some organizations that promote this and I feel like it would be a good compromise. The only real problem would be young women who get preg.nant and are probably too ashamed or the timing is so bad they don't want to carry the baby for nine months and have everybody stare and judge, if we could get past that, then that would be such a good solution.
@Lucy-Agnes
I feel like that would be a better goal for PP. That is what should be funded. Murder should not be the first option. It would be nice if we could turn that 300,000 abr.tions into 300,000 adoptions. Though I'm sure someone might argue about population control or something.
I like your example about slavery, that was also something that people saw as someones right to decide and also required dehumanizing life. Whether its dehumanizing African Americans or dehumanizing early life, it is still life.
 
Sorry you guys my argument lacks factual evidence. I'm not the best debater, I debate from my heart which is why I never did my highschool's Youth and Government ;)

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
JubilexThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 17, 2016 at 4:18 am

Lucy-Agnes
 
"it's very easy to "make a mistake" and not use it "properly." Lots of teenagers aren't going to be meticulous about what time they take their p.ills."
 
That's why se.xual education and easy access to affordable contra.ception is so important for reducing the unplanned pre.gnancy rate. If the more effective means were cheaper and easier to access and people were more aware of how to use the different pil.ls and con.doms effectively, then this wouldn't be as much of a problem.
 
"The common statitic I hear is that 98% of women regret their abor.tions"
 
That's a bold claim without giving me any real reason to believe it. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
JubilexThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 17, 2016 at 4:27 am

warriorwritergirl
 
I understand what it's like to get carried away with emotion when debating. Don't sweat it.
 
I can see a few problems with adoption as a viable solution to abor.tion.
 
1) The US is already filled with hundreds of thousands of un-adopted children in foster care.
 
2) The adop.tion process is tedious and deters many from adopting.
 
3) It doesn't negate any health risks to the mother whilst she is preg.nant
 
Prevention is always going to be better than "damage control" in my opinion. Hence why I think the best way to reduce abor.tion rates is through decent se.x education and easy, affordable access to contr.aception.

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Nov. 17, 2016 at 7:19 am

@Jubilex
So why can't we be funding an organzation that does better se.x education and contraception, and if it still happens adoption? I just want abor.tion to NOT be an option. At all. Just take it out the picture so other options can take it place. No more killing babies, just prevention the unwanted preg.nancy and then if it continues, then adoption process. And I'm sure the medical field can find ways to ensure the health of the mother while preg.nant. I'm not a medical student, soon to be one though (slight dread) but I know there will be ways to have safer pre.gnancies. I wish there could be such a compromise...

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 17, 2016 at 10:20 am

I agree with @warriorwritergirl77 - we should be funding an organization that helps women WITHOUT m.urdering their babies. There are tons of these organizations out there.
We've talked about this a little before, Jubilex, but I don't believe artificial c.ontraception is the answer at all. If we're going to make an effort to change the way people's behavior (as you said we should regarding c.onstraception use) we should go to the root of the problem -- that is, teach kids not to have s.ex until they're ready to be a parent. It's not that hard to figure out. Ab.stinence is the only 100% effective form of bi.rth c.ontrol, with no risk factors and no hard-to-follow instructions.
We are living in a culture of death, where all we care about is our own comfort and our own convenience. We make lots of excuses for why we "need" a.bortion, but the truth is we don't need it. Just like the South didn't need sl.avery. They could talk about the reasons it was a good thing for days and days, but in the end everyone realized they were wasting their breath. I stand by my position that someday a.bortion will be seen as an atrocity that the world was barbaric to allow for so long. We are living through a modern holocaust and making excuses for it.
Not to sound uncharitable, Jubilex, but your argument that adoption is not a viable option makes me want to puke. Allow me to argue against your three points.
1) Regarding foster care: children who are in foster care aren't there because their families put them up for adoption. They're there because their families messed up, made a mistake, and can't care for them properly any more. Most of the time the goal with foster care is to reunite the child with the family. People looking to adopt children don't usually turn to foster care because 1) it's emotionally torturous to get attached to a child and then have to give him or her up, 2) these children are often older, while the couples looking for children to adopt are thinking "newborn," 3) these children often have serious emotional/medical/etc. issues to deal with, things that stem from the abuse they've undergone. Even the newborn babies are often addicted to d.rugs and it's painful to watch them go through withd.rawal. Even so, there are still families who turn to foster care to adopt despite the hardships involve. I know because my two youngest siblings were adopted through foster care, and a family we're friends with are also trying to adopt their foster child. Besides. I'd much rather be alive and in foster care, with all my life ahead of me, than dead in a garbage can -- which is often where a.borted babies end up.

When a woman puts her child up for a.doption, she does it, not through foster care, but through an adoption agency. These agencies have long lists of couples waiting for a child, and they're thrilled to get the call. Any woman who puts her child up for adoption can rest assured that the baby will go to a loving family that has been aching all over for a child to love, sometimes for years. (Some of my best friends were adopted in this way, and I know of a couple at our church who was ecstatic to adopt after waiting for years and years.)

2) So yes, there are plenty of families who are willing to go through the tedious and expensive process of adoption. If the process was less expensive, as I fully believe it should be, there would be even more.

3) As a medical student, you should know how rare it is for a.bortion to be an answer to any health problems. Less than one percent of ab.ortions are performed to save the life of the mother.
 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 17, 2016 at 12:11 pm

Jubilex, I'm sorry if that last post sounds rude or anything....I'm angry at a.bortion, not you. 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Nov. 17, 2016 at 10:34 pm

...I don't believe artifical c.ontraception is the answer at all.
While it may not be ideal- because yes, sometimes teens and adults might not actually be responsible- it's a perfectly reasonable solution to keep an unintended pre.gnancy from happening, especially in a society that isn't going to necessarily maintain ab.stinence. They've been teaching ab.stinence in school for years. Look at how well that turned out. In countries where cont.raception is provided for teens, like the Netherlands, they have a lower percentage of teen pregna.ncies than America, where we teach ab.stinence.
 
Just like the South didn't need sl.avery.
The difference here being that no one actually says that a.bortion is "necessary"- or at least rational people don't. What pro-choice people believe is just what the name suggests. It's your right to choose, not you have to a.bort this baby or you have to carry this baby to term.
 
We are living through a modern holocaust and making excuses for it.
Comparing a.bortion (whether you consider it mur.der or not) to the Holocaust is hyperbolic in the extreme. Separating people from their families and sentencing them to slow, painful death by tort.ure or brutal experiments while also hunting down the ones in hiding is not an apt comparison. 
 
Any woman who puts her child up for adoption can rest assured that the baby will go to a loving family...
Let me state this first: I would rather a baby survive than be a.borted. I just believe it's not my right to tell you what you can do with yourself. So I would rather see a baby be put up for adoption, but there are many kids in foster homes, just as Jubilex said. Especially since it's expensive (which you said) and there's no guarantee of the price lowering, people aren't always keen on adopting.
 
I would also like to point out that the most efficient and realistic way to reduce unwanted preg.nancies, which could easily lead to a.bortions, is through contr.aceptives. Clearly ab.stinence se.x ed is not as effective as you would like, but making contr.aceptives more readily available to teens could lower the number of a.bortions- just as Jubilex said.

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
JubilexThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 18, 2016 at 2:17 am

Warriorwritergirl
 
"So why can't we be funding an organzation that does better se.x education and contraception"
 
I'm all for that.
 
"I just want abor.tion to NOT be an option."
 
I can understand why you would feel that way. I disagree for the usual pro-choice reasons, but I do get that to you it's murder and therefore unacceptable.
 
"I'm sure the medical field can find ways to ensure the health of the mother while preg.nant"
 
There are lots of ways. Most preg.nancies don't have serious complications, but even perfectly healthy people can die from preg.nancy related complications. Let alone anyone with other health issues, or the effects on mental health.
 
"I'm not a medical student, soon to be one though (slight dread)"
 
That's exciting! It's amazing how much more I know now than when I started. Best wishes with the whole process! It's long, but if it's for you then it'll be a great (although stressful) experience.
 
Lucy-Agnes
 
Abstience only se.x education doesn't work. You can't stop people from having se.x (especially those who don't share your beliefs), but you can educate them on how to do it safely. Not that people will always follow that advice though. I understand that from your belief structure, preventing se.x before marriage is what you believe to be right. I just think it's an unachievable goal.
 
1) I really wish more people were open to adopting children who aren't babies. It's unfortunate to have so many in foster care. You other points about foster care stand and I accept those.
 
Currently about 135,000 babies are adopted in the US per year. 60% are from foster care (so people can still adopt foster children), 25% from other countries and 15% from US babies who have been voluntarily given for adoption.
 
That makes 20,000 babies who are given up for adoption and successfully adopted. You're proposing the adoption of 300,000 extra babies. This seems pretty unrealistic to me.
 
2) It would be great if it was less expensive. But I can't comment on how viable that is because I don't know how much it costs, nor where that money goes.
 
3) You're correct, very few abor.tions are needed to save the life of the mother (because she has some other medical problem for which being pre.gnant would be a disaster).
 
However, there are health risks assocaited simply with being preg.nant. And otherwise healthy people die from preg.nancy related problems every year.
 
8 in 100,000 women die within the first 42 days of childbirth in Australia. The majority of those from bleeding. These figures don't account for those who die from clots during preg.nancy, or other less common complications of pre.gnancy. It also doesn't take into account suicide during preg.nancy, which is unfortunately a thing that happens. Then there's all the problems that can cause morbidity (reduced quality of life) without actually killing the mother. I guess to you any complication like this is less severe than death, so it would be worth it from your point of view (which I can understand, but disagree with).

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 19, 2016 at 8:14 pm

@wolvesandwilderness:
 
I agree that just "teaching a.bstinence" isn't going to solve the problem of unplanned pr.egnancies, a.bortion, etc. The problem is much more deeply rooted than anything we can fix through mere human action. As a Christian, I'd say we need a serious case of divine intervention. However, we also need to cooperate with that divine intervention by doing all in our power to build a culture of purity and respect for life.
 
Another problem with c.ontraceptives is that sometimes, often even, they work/correct a time they "didn't work" by making the u.terus a hostile environment, leading to the death of the f.etus in the early stages of pr.egnancy -- in other words, by causing an early a.bortion. 
 
The difference here being that no one actually says a.bortion is "necessary."
Maybe we don't say it's "necessary" on case-by-case terms, but we do seem to have this mindset that "it's a necessary evil." Americans as a whole don't seem to think getting rid of a.boriton is a possible. When someone says, "We should outlaw a.bortion," someone else says, "What do we do with all the unwanted pr.egnancies, then?" This very issue is being discussed elsewhere in this thread (adoption vs. a.bortion). 
 
Separating people from their families and sentencing them to slow, painful death by tort.ure or brutal experiments while alos hunting down the ones in hiding is not an apt comparison.
 
First of all, let me make clear that I am not undermining the horrors of the holocaust. Far from it. I'm just trying to emphasize how bad a.bortion really is. 
-You mentioned seperating people from their families. Well, a.bortion does that, too. It tears apart what is arguably the strongest natural bond on earth -- that between mother and child. If you don't believe women are deeply hurt by a.bortions, look up the organizations "Silent No More" and "Project Rachel" and read the stories of women who have had an a.bortion only to suffer for it later in life.
-You mentioned "slow, painful death by tor.ture." Do you realize how brutal a.bortion really is? A.bortion procedures may:
   -use chemicals to burn a baby's skin off, in which case it may take an hour for the baby to die
   -tear a baby apart piece by piece (arm, leg, head)
   -sucking the baby out of the womb with a powerful vacuum-like tool
   -delivering the baby part-way and then stabbing the baby's head and sucking out his brains
I got the above information from lifenews dot com, in the article entitled "Ab.ortion Methods and A.bortion Procedures Used to Kill Un.born Babies." 
-You mentioned experiments. Using living humans for experimentations is arguably worse than selling baby parts to be used for scientific research, I'll give you that one. But what P.lanned P.arenthood was caught doing on video last summer is still absolutely disgusting and inexcusable.
-You mentioned hunting down the ones in hiding. Babies in the wo.mb don't even have the opportunity to hide. At least the holocaust victims could fight back, try to defend themselves. Un.born babies can do absolutely nothing. They are at the most helpless, innocent, and unprotected stage of life. Killing people who can't so much as cry out for help? If there's anything that approaches the atrocities of the haulocaust, it's that. And a terrible part of it is, the w.omb should be the safest place on earth for a child. We're betraying these little babies who depend on their mothers, not only for life, but for love. Ow.
-And while we're comparing a.bortion to the haulocaust, did you know in some states the bodies of a.borted babies are used as fuel to heat buildings? Yeah. That's bad.
 
I just believe it's not my right to tell you what you can do with yourself.
I agree with that statement. The problem is, we're not telling the woman what to do with herself. We're telling her that she can't kill her own baby. A pre.born baby has its own individual DNA from the moment of c.onception. This isn't the woman we're talking about, it's the baby.
 
 
 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 19, 2016 at 8:18 pm

@Jubilex
 
Did you ever consider that by telling people how to have s.ex safely, we're telling them it's okay to have s.ex? 

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread
Lucy-AgnesThis teenager is a 'regular' and has contributed a lot of work, comments and/or forum posts, and has received many votes and high ratings over a long period of time. replied...
Nov. 19, 2016 at 8:18 pm

(And by that I mean s.ex outside marriage. Haha....that post makes it sound like I want humankind to go extinct.) :)

Reply to this Thread Post a new Thread

Launch Teen Ink Chat
Site Feedback