Justice Samuel Alito, the architect of overturning Roe v. Wade, told senators he viewed the abortion rights landmark as 'important precedent.' Now he says 'stare decisis' doesn't protect it

[heybruce]

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

If they want to avoid being destitute single mothers or getting abortions , they they should take measures to avoid getting into that predicament  

That's what safe, legal abortion accomplishes.

[Mac Mickmanus]

Just now, Lacessit said:

You really need to get out more, stealthing is quite common. The man simply takes the condom off before entering from behind, the first the woman knows about it is when he ejaculates into her.

 

Do you have any evidence to back that up ?

(One report published in three magazines five years ago isn't proof or evidence) 

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Another way would be for her to have a responsible partner who wouldn't want to or try to remove the condom during sex , not to have a relationship with a man whose going to have unprotected sex and take the condom off first chance he gets .

   She needs to find a responsible man to have sex with and if she doesnt fully trust the man, she needs to protect herself by talking the pill 

You've already made your point that you think birth control and unwanted pregnancies are entirely the woman's responsibility.  You don't have to keep finding ways to repeat it.

Edited June 26, 2022 by heybruce

[placeholder]

27 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

Actually that is not true.  The majority of fertilized eggs do not develop into viable fetuses, in fact in the majority if cases no pregnancy ever develops.

 

Pregnancy requires 2 things: (1) fertilization of an egg by sperm, which occurs in the fallopian tube, not the womb;  and (2) successful implantation of the fertilized ovum on the wall of the uterus. Only then is a pregnancy established.  More often than not, this fails to occur. The woman's menstrual period occurs as usual and she has no idea that fertilization of an egg occurred. This happens very, very often.

 

This idea that  a unique soul is present from the moment of conception, in addition to being unprovable/based on a religious concept not everyone (or even all religions) shares, is also very hard to reconcile with biological fact. Why would all these souls fail to develop?  Should women be grieving at every menstrual cycle for the possible death of a soul? etc etc

 

Of course this has no direct relevance to abortion as an abortion, by definition, can only be performed after an embryo is present in the uterus. 

 

But it is very relevant to some types of contraception, e.g. the IUD and the "morning after pill" which many anti-abortion activitists consider to be "abortifactants" because they may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. There is every likelihood that these forms of birth control will also face attempted legal bans in the near future.

Those medications already are banned in some states for any other use except in the case of miscarriage. Practically what that means is that doctors are very reluctant to prescribe the medications for  fears they will be prosecuted for assisting in an abortion.

For the same reason, pharmacies often refuse to fill a prescription for those medications.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The Females should get to know the guy a bit more  before she decides to reproduce with him , get to know him to the extent that she would know whether he is the type of guy to do a runner or not 

Please share with us where women can get a hold of an infallible diagnostic test for that.

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

You've already made your point that you think birth control and unwanted pregnancies are entirely the woman's responsibility.  You don't have to keep finding ways to repeat it.

If a woman chooses a sexual partner who will take the condom  off without her knowledge to impregnate her mid sex, then she needs to take precautions herself to avoid getting pregnant 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If a woman chooses a sexual partner who will take the condom  off without her knowledge to impregnate her mid sex, then she needs to take precautions herself to avoid getting pregnant 

So I guess that means before having sex she should ask her perspective sexual partner if he plans to take off his condom before entry.

[Mac Mickmanus]

OK, there are some guys here who have mentioned they've had sex with 1000's of females and some guys have mentioned they don't use condoms , so there may be some people who favour abortions for that reason . 

   Best to leave it there .

[Bkk Brian]

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do you have any evidence to back that up ?

(One report published in three magazines five years ago isn't proof or evidence) 

Actually its more common than you think, 32% of women have reported being victim to stealthing

[ThailandRyan]

8 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If a woman chooses a sexual partner who will take the condom  off without her knowledge to impregnate her mid sex, then she needs to take precautions herself to avoid getting pregnant 

Even using the Pill or a Inter uterine device is not 100 percent effective, nor are condoms.  Your thinking is false even if she takes the precautions you say.

[Sheryl]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Those medications already are banned in some states for any other use except in the case of miscarriage. Practically what that means is that doctors are very reluctant to prescribe the medications for  fears they will be prosecuted for assisting in an abortion.

For the same reason, pharmacies often refuse to fill a prescription for those medications.

I think you are confusing the "morning after pill" with the medications used to induce a medical abortion.

 

Morning after pill is not used in miscarriage, and is (thus far) not banned anywhere. However, as many of the extreme anti-abortion movement insist that birth control methods that prevent implantation are also a form of abortion (contrary to the actual science and medical definitions of pregnancy and abortion), they may face ban in some states in the future.  There is also the whole can of worms around fertility treatments since this often involves the laboratory creation of fertilized eggs most of which then are not implanted and end up being  destroyed. If any destruction of a fertilized egg  is considered an abortion then a large percentage of fertility treatments would have to be banned.

 

Medically, of course  it is not an abortion; abortion is the termination of a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, and in these cases no pregnancy exists because the fertilized eggs have never implanted in a uterus.  But medical/scientific  fact is at odds with the (religion-based) stance that conception = human life.

[Mac Mickmanus]

10 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Actually its more common than you think, 32% of women have reported being victim to stealthing

So 32 % of woman , would be about 1 . 2 Billion woman .

You are stating that 1.2 Billion woman have had sex with a man where he removed the condom mid sex ? 

   I am quite sure that isnt correct .

1200000000 Woman have had sex with a man when he removed the condom ?

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So 32 % of woman , would be about 1 . 2 Billion woman .

You are stating that 1.2 Billion woman have had sex with a man where he removed the condom mid sex ? 

   I am quite sure that isnt correct .

1200000000 Woman have had sex with a man when he removed the condom ?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6306234/

 

Thirty-two percent of women (95% CI: 29%,35%) and 19% of MSM (95% CI: 17%,22%) reported having ever experienced stealthing. Women who had been stealthed were more likely to be a current sex worker (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 2.87, 95% CI: 2.01,4.11, p <0.001).

 

For the purpose of this study, ‘stealthing’ was defined as condom removal without consent, where consent to sex was conditional upon use of a condom.

Edited June 26, 2022 by ozimoron

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

We seem to be talking about knife wielding rapists who get underage girls drunk and then impregnate them and then do a runner because they don't have a job . 

   Those people are the tiny minority and they shouldn't be regarded as the norm 

So what IS the "norm"?

 

36 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If they want to avoid being destitute single mothers or getting abortions , they they should take measures to avoid getting into that predicament  

You seem to blame the women all the time. 

 

IIRC, for me at least it was a shared responsibility between the two of us and nobody else.

 

2 x yes = yes

2 times no = no

1 time yes and 1 no = no

 

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So 32 % of woman , would be about 1 . 2 Billion woman .

You are stating that 1.2 Billion woman have had sex with a man where he removed the condom mid sex ? 

   I am quite sure that isnt correct .

1200000000 Woman have had sex with a man when he removed the condom ?

What a ridiculous statement, this is from a survey in a developed country, Australia. Its also a growing problem in the US and UK

 

Here's some more facts for you from the US:

'Rape-Adjacent': Imagining Legal Responses to Nonconsensual Condom Removal

[GroveHillWanderer]

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So 32 % of woman , would be about 1 . 2 Billion woman .

You are stating that 1.2 Billion woman have had sex with a man where he removed the condom mid sex ? 

   I am quite sure that isnt correct .

1200000000 Woman have had sex with a man when he removed the condom ?

That figure is actually from a survey done in Australia (see @ozimoron's link).

 

So it would actually represent a little over 4 million women.

[GroveHillWanderer]

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Those are extremes , we are talking about the normal .

Rape isnt the normal occurrence 

Rape happens a lot more often than you appear to believe.

 

According to the figures:

 

Quote

1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime.

Victims of Sexual Violence: Statistics

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Aren't those the things that the kids Father should be providing ? 

And shame on those who don't. Problem solved!

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do you have any evidence to back that up ?

(One report published in three magazines five years ago isn't proof or evidence) 

I can direct you to a website where the members boast about it, doubt it would be allowed under forum rules.

Do you have any evidence to say it isn't so?

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

  But medical/scientific  fact is at odds with the (religion-based) stance that conception = human life.

There are very few areas where science and religion agree.

Science is fact, based on observation of tangible phenomena. Religion is belief in an entity that cannot be seen, heard or felt.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

2 x yes = yes

2 times no = no

1 time yes and 1 no = no

 

One no was always enough for me.

[jak2002003]

4 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

No, I am talking about males and females who regularly have sex without precautions and just get an abortion when a pregnancy occurs .

  Quite a few posters on this forum take pride in not wearing a condom 

I do not think any woman is using abortions as a standard contraception option. ????

[Fat is a type of crazy]

3 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

Actually that is not true.  The majority of fertilized eggs do not develop into viable fetuses, in fact in the majority if cases no pregnancy ever develops.

 

Pregnancy requires 2 things: (1) fertilization of an egg by sperm, which occurs in the fallopian tube, not the womb;  and (2) successful implantation of the fertilized ovum on the wall of the uterus. Only then is a pregnancy established.  More often than not, this fails to occur. The woman's menstrual period occurs as usual and she has no idea that fertilization of an egg occurred. This happens very, very often.

 

This idea that  a unique soul is present from the moment of conception, in addition to being unprovable/based on a religious concept not everyone (or even all religions) shares, is also very hard to reconcile with biological fact. Why would all these souls fail to develop?  Should women be grieving at every menstrual cycle for the possible death of a soul? etc etc

 

Of course this has no direct relevance to abortion as an abortion, by definition, can only be performed after an embryo is present in the uterus. 

 

But it is very relevant to some types of contraception, e.g. the IUD and the "morning after pill" which many anti-abortion activitists consider to be "abortifactants" because they may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. There is every likelihood that these forms of birth control will also face attempted legal bans in the near future.

Are you suggesting I used the term 'shortly thereafter' sex because I am not sure of the timing of when things happen? Correct.  

I find topics like this can become left versus right, and never the twixt shall meet, so if I can I like to point out that both sides have a point.

There are steps at different points that can stop there being a baby.

Some will take it to the extreme of wanting to ban contraception. Some will say late abortions are OK as it is still not a baby. I think both arguments can be reasonably dismissed. 

My point is though that if someone considers that at the time the pregnancy is established, this is a form of life and a potential future baby, then I do not consider it is an inarguable fact that they are wrong or illogical to have an opinion that stopping that is wrong. 

Religion or souls do not need to be bought into the discussion as to when a life commences.  Religion opens a whole new deeper can of worms.

This is a difficult area and my point is that, though it is appropriate that people are scientifically informed about what is actually there at different stages, it is hard to be definitive saying when life commences.

Therefore it might be best to turn the argument to what right one human has to control the body of a different human. That leaves the issue of when a fetus could be deemed a human. 

 

Edited June 26, 2022 by Fat is a type of crazy

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 hours ago, ozimoron said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6306234/

 

Thirty-two percent of women (95% CI: 29%,35%) and 19% of MSM (95% CI: 17%,22%) reported having ever experienced stealthing. Women who had been stealthed were more likely to be a current sex worker (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 2.87, 95% CI: 2.01,4.11, p <0.001).

 

For the purpose of this study, ‘stealthing’ was defined as condom removal without consent, where consent to sex was conditional upon use of a condom.

Although that is 32 % of the 5000 people who were questioned at a sexual health clinic and they are likely to have attended the sexual health clinic because they had condom free sex or/and were sex workers and its quite possible that instead of opening admitting to condom free sex , thy just used the excuse that he took the condom off without  his/her knowledge .

    The survey was carried on people who often work in the sex industry .

The 32 % figure is not 32 % of the female population as a whole , its 32 % of people who work in the sex industry , and its quite possible that a fair percentage of that 32 % were lying and just using it as an excuse .

   But 32 % of the non sex worker population has not been stealthed 

[ozimoron]

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although that is 32 % of the 5000 people who were questioned at a sexual health clinic and they are likely to have attended the sexual health clinic because they had condom free sex or/and were sex workers and its quite possible that instead of opening admitting to condom free sex , thy just used the excuse that he took the condom off without  his/her knowledge .

    The survey was carried on people who often work in the sex industry .

The 32 % figure is not 32 % of the female population as a whole , its 32 % of people who work in the sex industry , and its quite possible that a fair percentage of that 32 % were lying and just using it as an excuse .

   But 32 % of the non sex worker population has not been stealthed 

Findings indicated that 87% of women experienced noncoercive CUR from a partner and 49% experienced coercive CUR. Of these women, 58% and 19% reported having engaged in noncoercive and coercive CUR, respectively. Twelve percent of women had a partner engage in stealthing;

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30826133/

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/15/opinions/stealthing-california-law-michaela-coel-stewart/index.html

Edited June 26, 2022 by ozimoron

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Findings indicated that 87% of women experienced noncoercive CUR from a partner and 49% experienced coercive CUR. Of these women, 58% and 19% reported having engaged in noncoercive and coercive CUR, respectively. Twelve percent of women had a partner engage in stealthing;

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30826133/

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/15/opinions/stealthing-california-law-michaela-coel-stewart/index.html

Yes , that is a survey asking people who have "increased sexual risk characteristics" (sex workers ?) and 87 % of then stated that there partner asked whether they could have condom free sex . 

   The survey was carried out on people who often work in the sex industry .

If the people surveyed were non sex industry workers , the percentages are very likely to be very lower .

   The survey was carried out on sex workers /promiscuous people and not the general population, so the figures aren't reflective of society in general 

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes , that is a survey asking people who have "increased sexual risk characteristics" (sex workers ?) and 87 % of then stated that there partner asked whether they could have condom free sex . 

   The survey was carried out on people who often work in the sex industry .

If the people surveyed were non sex industry workers , the percentages are very likely to be very lower .

   The survey was carried out on sex workers /promiscuous people and not the general population, so the figures aren't reflective of society in general 

Prove your assertion. You can't.

[Mac Mickmanus]

Just now, ozimoron said:

Prove your assertion. You can't.

I got the info from the links that you provided .

Shall I post the same links back to you ?

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I got the info from the links that you provided .

Shall I post the same links back to you ?

They don't say what you claim. Your claim is that non sex workers would experience minimal or much less stealthing. This is unsubstantiated and you don't address the CNN article which describes it as a problem. You are minimising the issue to suit your own bias and not providing any evidence.

 

Last week, California passed a law that makes stealthing, or non-consensual condom removal during intercourse, a civil offense. In doing so, they've officially moved this act out of a gray area: Stealthing is illegal, full stop. The state joins several countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland, Canada and New Zealand, that have already criminalized stealthing.

Edited June 26, 2022 by ozimoron

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I can direct you to a website where the members boast about it, doubt it would be allowed under forum rules.

Do you have any evidence to say it isn't so?

Plenty evidence of that on this forum