• December 19, 2014

San Antonio reader questions restrictions on Texas abortions

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, September 8, 2013 4:30 am

To the Editor:

In regards to the recently passed restrictions on abortion in Texas, a number of questions do not seem to have been addressed. Among them:

If a woman has the right to not have her body used against her will by an already born private party, why does she not have the same right where the unborn are concerned?

If an already born private party does not have the right to use the body of a woman against her will, why are the unborn being allowed to do this?

If the state is forbidden to force a woman, against her will, to surrender her body to an already born private party, what is the basis for forcing her, against her will, to continue a pregnancy by denying her access to an abortion?

Julie A. Robichaud

San Antonio

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

24 comments:

  • RussellCrawford posted at 1:39 pm on Fri, Sep 27, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    I am sorry I let you suffer. I would have answered if I had known you were so hurt.

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 1:37 pm on Fri, Sep 27, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    "Your “scientific fact” would mean there are no lifeguards that are pro life. No emergency room doctors or nurses who save lives on a daily basis could possibly be pro life. There is not a policeman, fireman or EMS worker on this planet that is pro life because according to your science “pro lifers only kill lives they don’t save them.”

    Lifeguards, etc., can save life and kill life. Pro lifers may save fetuses but the kill babies.

    --------

    “You have a choice, you may save an innocent baby or you can let it die and save a fetus instead.”

    "The question you want me to answer is hypothetical."

    No it is not, you are killing life right now.


    " It would be like me asking you to choose to save the life of an already born serial killer or the life of the unborn human fetus your mother is carrying."


    No it is not.

    "They are both hypothetical. Whatever you choose, whatever I choose is really not pertinent other than to know what somebody would do in a hypothetical situation."

    No it is not hypothetical. You are killing as we converse.

     
  • Roody2 posted at 1:11 pm on Fri, Sep 27, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340

    RussellCrawford:

    I’ve awaited you to explain your facts
    But you're gone with your deceit and spin.
    So, I shall go and wait no more
    And declare the debate over. I win!

     
  • Roody2 posted at 11:55 am on Wed, Sep 25, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340

    “Only pro lifers claim to save life when in fact they are letting one life die to save another”

    Your “scientific fact” would mean there are no lifeguards that are pro life. No emergency room doctors or nurses who save lives on a daily basis could possibly be pro life. There is not a policeman, fireman or EMS worker on this planet that is pro life because according to your science “pro lifers only kill lives they don’t save them.”

    “You have a choice, you may save an innocent baby or you can let it die and save a fetus instead.”

    The question you want me to answer is hypothetical. It would be like me asking you to choose to save the life of an already born serial killer or the life of the unborn human fetus your mother is carrying.

    They are both hypothetical. Whatever you choose, whatever I choose is really not pertinent other than to know what somebody would do in a hypothetical situation.

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 5:28 pm on Tue, Sep 24, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    Roody said: "I was really trying to grasp the logic in your posts but, I'm not the only one "twisting" things. "

    I am not twisting anything. I am stating scientific fact.

    "You're using statistics of events that would occur regardless of whether pro life groups exist or not. So, I don't see how they are relevant to the subject."

    No, only pro lifers claim to save life when in fact they are letting one life die to save another that may not even have a chance of living or being human.

    "I did learn how to win a debate, though. Just declare the other person the loser. "

    You have a choice, you may save an innocent baby or you can let it die and save a fetus instead. Answer that honestly and you will be less of a loser.

    Thanks

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 1:30 pm on Tue, Sep 24, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    No only pro lifers.claim to save life while actually letting born life die. You can try to spin that but I won't let you get away with your deceit

     
  • Roody2 posted at 12:48 pm on Tue, Sep 24, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340

    RC,

    I was really trying to grasp the logic in your posts but, I'm not the only one "twisting" things.

    You're using statistics of events that would occur regardless of whether pro life groups exist or not. So, I don't see how they are relevant to the subject.

    I did learn how to win a debate, though. Just declare the other person the loser.

    Thanks

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 1:05 am on Sun, Sep 22, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    Every person that attempts to procreate kills 2.33 conceptions for every born baby. So the fact that pro lifers kill 2.33 babies intentionally is an important fact that causes me to ignore any claims they make about other peoples' abortions. .

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 1:02 am on Sun, Sep 22, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    Dr. Strangelove:
    You have a choice, there are 70 billion born humans on Earth, they are all dying and all will die. They are dying at the rate of 1.8 per second so you can't save them all no matter what you do. So you have a choice you may save one of the born babies, children or adults, or you may let it die and save a fetus instead. Pro lifers usually let the born babies die and attempt to save the fetuses that may or may not be human and may or may not be alive.
    To me, one should save our innocent born babies and not let them die, why not help me do that and stop murdering born babies?

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 12:58 am on Sun, Sep 22, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    Roody2 said: "Mamma G, if a woman is having unsafe sex and killing her unborn child she obviously has some self-respect issues! It’s pretty simple; women who don’t have self-respect will attract men who don’t respect them."

    70 percent of all conceptions die in the first trimester. So any woman or man that consents to sex is consenting to abortion 70 percent of the time. There is nothing they can do about it, they will murder their baby if they believe a zygote is a baby. So your comments are really unwise. Every woman or man is agreeing to "killing their unborn child" every time they have sex, either protected or unprotected. Pro lifers that have intentional sex to procreate will kill 2.33 "children" on average for every child they have.

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 12:47 am on Sun, Sep 22, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    "RussellCrawford, Okay, let me get this straight. You're saying:"

    No you didn't get it straight, you twisted it. So you fail.

    "1. Pro life causes loss of life because there was an increase of 25 million births after legalized abortion and there's scientific proof those 25 million wouldn't have been born if it wasn't for abortion."

    No, the scientific fact is that there is a 25 million increase in births after Roe, so the pro life claim that there has been a decrease in life of 55 million is a lie. You claim there were 55 million abortions when in fact there are 550 million abortions in that time frame. So abortion did not lead to fewer births, it lead to ALL births. There will always be at least 2.33 abortions per birth.


    "2. Pro-life movement can't prove their claim that 55 million babies have been aborted. So, it’s not that millions of babies are being killed but the fact that not as many millions as they claim that’s the important issue here. "

    No, what is important is that the number of abortions does not matter. As abortions increased, so did births.

    "3. There is such a thing as a “natural” deliberate termination of a human pregnancy. "

    Any choice to have sex is a deliberate termination of a human pregnancy. The fact is that 70 percent of all conceptions end in abortion. So any consent to sex is consent to abort.


    "4. If anyone debates these facts they will lose. "

    You just lost.

     
  • Roody2 posted at 11:08 pm on Sat, Sep 21, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340

    RussellCrawford, Okay, let me get this straight. You're saying:

    1. Pro life causes loss of life because there was an increase of 25 million births after legalized abortion and there's scientific proof those 25 million wouldn't have been born if it wasn't for abortion.

    2. Pro-life movement can't prove their claim that 55 million babies have been aborted. So, it’s not that millions of babies are being killed but the fact that not as many millions as they claim that’s the important issue here.

    3. There is such a thing as a “natural” deliberate termination of a human pregnancy.

    4. If anyone debates these facts they will lose.

    Got it!

     
  • RussellCrawford posted at 6:01 am on Sat, Sep 21, 2013.

    RussellCrawford Posts: 20

    The fact is that the pro life movement is causing the loss of life and not saving life as they claim. And they refuse to debate the scientific laws that prove they are wrong. For example the fact is that before Roe, there was a decrease in births of over 6 million babies, after Roe there was an increase of 25 million babies. The pro life movement claims that 55 million babies died. Where is their proof? Natural Abortions occurred to 550 million zygotes/embryos/fetuses and yet pro lifers discount those natural abortions. If the concern is for life, then abortion has lead to 25 million more babies than the pro life movement.
    The main problem for the pro life movement is that every time they enter into debate on the subject, they lose. As a result they hide and refuse to debate.

     
  • Roody2 posted at 11:41 am on Tue, Sep 10, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340

    Mamma G, you didn't read my disclaimer, did you… or, are you insinuating all cases are rape when the woman ends up pregnant and doesn’t want the baby?

    When Ms. Robichaud said in her letter, “A woman has the right to not have her body used against her will” SHE is admitting the woman is a willing participant and I happen to agree with her. (EXCLUDING cases of actual rape, of course)

    If the woman is exercising “her right to not have her body used against her will” that means she’s not letting the man do anything “with her body” that she didn’t want him to do. Therefore, she is a willing participant. So, if she’s willing, why is she trying to put the blame on the man and complain about “her rights” now that she’s pregnant?

    When a woman willfully gets pregnant, that should void “her right” to willfully get an abortion because, through her own actions, she willfully helped begin the life she now wants to take out of existence. Instead, she should be responsible for her own actions and stop trying to place blame elsewhere!

    DISCLAIMER: Rape is a heinous crime of violence. I am aware it exists and my above comments do not embrace such evil acts. I do not condone rape in any shape, form or fashion. I also do not condone someone using the term carelessly to shirk their own responsibility.


     
  • Mamma Griz posted at 8:23 am on Tue, Sep 10, 2013.

    Mamma Griz Posts: 259

    barbie500:: Did you ask the woman if she wanted to be raped by some two-legged male animal who doesn't know how to respect women? Many women who have self respect get attacked and raped-- they didn't ask for it. But many men don't have any respect for women. Thank goodness I don't know any of those animals. All the guys I know respect themselves and respect me.

     
  • Mamma Griz posted at 8:14 am on Tue, Sep 10, 2013.

    Mamma Griz Posts: 259

    Roody2:: Blame it on the woman? That is just like a male. Self respect doesn't enter into the problem when some two-legged male animal attacks her and rapes her. The two-legged male should have some self respect for women-- but that isn't the norm these days. At least I respect "my guys" and they respect me-- and it pays to be gramma's age.

     
  • Roody2 posted at 10:58 am on Mon, Sep 9, 2013.

    Roody2 Posts: 340


    Mamma G, if a woman is having unsafe sex and killing her unborn child she obviously has some self-respect issues! It’s pretty simple; women who don’t have self-respect will attract men who don’t respect them.

    It's that annoying "R" word.... no, not "Republicans" (though, some might have you believe if you read through the comments) It's "RESPONSIBILITY!" Responsibility for one’s own actions!

    Women libbers don't want anyone telling them what to do with their bodies then, as soon as they willingly let the man get them pregnant they want to place the blame on the man. Can't you see the hypocrisy???

    Disclaimer: The above comment excludes cases of actual rape. Be advised, the standard for “rape” covers a wide spectrum depending on who you ask. Ex: The Whoopie Goldberg standard is, “It’s not Rape, rape!” even if the child is 13 and the man is 43 and has his way with her by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy and other lewd and lascivious acts. (In reference to film director Roman Polanski)

     
  • Dr Strangelove posted at 9:00 am on Mon, Sep 9, 2013.

    Dr Strangelove Posts: 572

    Mamma Flower Power Griz: There you go again making a foolish comment and avoiding the issue. Wake up and smell the pot you’re smoking. I do agree men has no respect for women today and why is that? Men treat women bad these days and I can’t blame them. If women are giving it up or shacking up; technically she is an unpaid prostitute. That’s why women are treated the way they’re treated today. All the free love and sex your generation marched too in the sixties didn’t work for women. It’s great for men we’re laughing all the way to the bedroom thinking; what a dumb chick I’m getting all this free milk and I have no responsibly. She gets knocked up, hey go to nearest abortion mill and flush it down a sink or take a pill and get breast cancer ten years later—a lot of guys don’t care as long as they get some free milk. So it’s not the guys that are DUMB—we’re having a great time; thanks hippies like you.
    [cool]

     
  • Mamma Griz posted at 2:14 am on Mon, Sep 9, 2013.

    Mamma Griz Posts: 259

    Dr. Strangeguy:: Because the dumb male doesn't have his brains between his ears and doesn't have any consideration of the female of the species. Besides, what if the dumb male isn't getting any free milk from the woman? But it all boils down to the fact that the dumb male has no respect for a woman. If he did, he would know how to treat her-- but that is impossible for a lot of men. Do you know how to respect a woman? From your comment, I would doubt it very much.

     
  • Dr Strangelove posted at 11:27 am on Sun, Sep 8, 2013.

    Dr Strangelove Posts: 572

    Why would a guy get married to pay for milk when the dumb woman is giving him free milk.

     
  • Dr Strangelove posted at 11:24 am on Sun, Sep 8, 2013.

    Dr Strangelove Posts: 572

    Because the baby has RIGHTS! If they could talk they’d say, “I want to live.” You are brainwashed to think abortion helps women. Top bio blood doctors will look at a woman’s blood and can see she practices birth control or use contraceptives—you many noticed the rise in breast cancer that’s the reason birth control and abortion are the reasons. Not only do you support the killing of babies you support the killing of women.

    Now let’s look at the real reason for abortion that the abortion lobby doesn’t tell you:

    Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the World. The majority of profit they make is from abortions it is NOT minor. At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the "black" and "yellow" peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

    They talk about women’s heath but don’t care about the baby’s health what hypocrites.

    The majority of abortions mills in the United States are in minority neighborhoods—why do you think that is Julie? White people in the South can’t hang black people on trees anymore they go after them in the womb! Please put down the Kool-Aid and do some research. Please get educated on the evil of abortion. Oh abortion was alive and well just before the fall of the Roman Empire—think about it?

    Today men are just so laughing at all the free sex they get because if they get a woman pregnant they tell her to go to an abortion mill and kill it. They take no responsibility at all, treat women like a piece of meat; and women like you drank the Kool-Aid.

     
  • Smithjr38 posted at 11:07 am on Sun, Sep 8, 2013.

    Smithjr38 Posts: 114

    What about the Father of that child? Was he to cheap to marry the women and care for his child? or just taking advantage of the GOP policy of supporting dead beat daddies .? Have you notice that while the GOP passed the sonic gram test to be paid by the women that the GOP did not act on a policy that would help the women give hospital birth by requiring DNA test on the baby to find the daddy and force him to either marry the women and be a real father or Fine him to pay for the Hospital cost of giving birth?

     
  • Smithjr38 posted at 10:59 am on Sun, Sep 8, 2013.

    Smithjr38 Posts: 114

    Unfortunately the Texas GOP and the anti abortion lobby is making a lot of money off the fact that most people would rather spent money on that lobby in the name of saving the children and that lobby and GOP whom do not really want to stop or even reduce abortions. for their own gain and not really the care of babies.

    And the fact that both history and evolution is not allowed in the Texas school system.

    So most people are unaware that the evolution of DNA is the revere of the Creation theory that women was created out of man.The history of DNA is that women DNA evolved man for breeding and protection Instead of the other way round.

    And the fact the the USA Constitution say we all are created equal both men and women .So both have the same rights to the control of their own bodies.

    But History tells us even after the civil war to free the slaves if was really only male slaves whom would be set free as women both black and white in the South or the North were not allowed any freedom and were under the control of men until
    women got the right to vote. only then were women created equal but still the GOP did not want to give women the right to vote as then did not want to give women equal pay or equal work ( still part of the GOP platform)

    So I hope Wendy Davis will demand a study of just why women get abortions ,even thought the anti abortion lobby and GOP will resist.
    So some real fact can be brought our . Fact the it is cheaper to get a abortion than go though the process of giving hospital birth.
    Fact it a male caused the women in getting in a family way and that a lot of males whom are the fathers refuse to say they know the women and then bad mouth her.
    The GOP supports those dead bead daddies and even allows them to join the GOP.

    So the best hope of women is for Wendy Davis to be elected governor
    and for real history and evolution be taught in Texas schools system.

     
  • barbie500 posted at 8:48 am on Sun, Sep 8, 2013.

    barbie500 Posts: 143

    Did you ask this little unborn if they wanted to be in your body or did you just answer your animal instincts and not ask it?