What a fucking idiot.

This guy would have been better off to just come out and tell it like he means it. Seems like his opinion is human life is above all.

Personally, I say its the choice of the women. Human life is no greater than any other thing on this planet. I even believe it should be up to the parents, if defects are found after birth. If only one parent wants to deal with it, then they take full responsibility. Then if the kid turns out to strike gold, its their choice whether they have anything to do with the other parent.

On a side note: I don't agree with circumcision.

Life is more complex than any one point of view. That is why the whole sugar coating our views needs to end. Say what you believe, and be accepting to what others believe. There are no wrong answers.

Yeah, looks like he was. I only just now saw the whole context for his comment, and I can't see any other way to interpret it than, "If she got pregnant, it wasn't rape rape." It's witch trial logic.

Well, there is a relation, that's what I was trying to say. I'm not saying it's 1 to 1, but the article mentioned what I underlined. So I'm just stating what I'm reading, and it could be false, but don't tell me what I'm saying is incorrect I simply stated the article.

Instead of saying what I'm saying is false, try to understand what I posted and see if possibly it's not me that made a bad post, but that the article I was retranscribing was poorly summarized. As such, my post is not false, it is just based off of something that you would disagree with.

Good point. Only, one is natural, the other is man-decided. It is a specific choice to choose to terminate the life of an infant, and is not equivalent to a miscarriage.

For instance, miscarriages happen when children are being born. Would that be an acceptable time to abort? Clearly not...

So your argument feels off and alarming.

I thought you were trying to state that a miscarriage could potentially "deal" with an illegitimate pregnancy. Is that what you were going for?

Bottom line yes. To tie back into your post, equating miscarriage to abortion is that what you were going for on your end?

As far as i can tell you were tryingto back up the implication that women have mysterious ways of dealing with it. It is plain and simple fact that they do not. Your linked study is not wrong in what it said. But you were assuming it said something it did not, which as i outlined earlier is a bad extension of logic or i guess, recursion.
All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles squares. Same situation with your link, your link says women who have miscarriages have sometimes shown high cortisol levels, but you thought it was saying that high cortisol levels cause miscarriages, on top of which it doesnt solve the problem kahn brought up that the miscarriage is murder and is almost worse pointing it out because that sounds like lots of people with accidental miscarriages will yhink they murdered their own child.

The fact is, it simply isnt true. It's not your link or idea or anything other than the fact that a woman does NOT hqve some way of dealing with it. It was a boneheaded comment made by a bonehead who seems to believe in magic.

I get a bad vibe from your tone, honestly. I can't see through my computer but you seem upset.

Anyway, I'll read the rest of your post and edit when done.

EDIT: Now to actually comment on the post content.

Well, let's put the Mr Khan aside because I'm debating that with him atm. For the record, I am strongly disagree with calling natural death a murder. A tsunami death is not a murder, nor is a non human-induced miscarriage. Murder is will to kill out of an evil intent, or out of ignorance of human wrongdoing, imho. So you won't win me using that value-system.

As for the article, I did remind you that I underlined a sentence in the article, I will post it again and I want you to show me how it does not say what I read:

http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/news/20030605/how-stress-causes-miscarriage

"June 5, 2003 -- Stress has long been suspected as a possible cause ofmiscarriage, with several studies indicating an increased risk among women reporting high levels of emotional or physical turmoil in their early months of pregnancy or just before conception. But while a relationship has been noted, researchers didn't know exactly how a woman's stress could cause miscarriage."

So, and I quote:

1) "Stress has long been suspected as a possible cause of miscarriage."

2) "studies indicate: increased risk in women reporting high levels of emo or physi turmoil in early moths of preg or just before conception."

In both cases, it doesn't mention anything of restricting the finding to women with high cortisol levels (unless there's a segment of the article I missed that says what you're saying). Either way, it is same diff because even a woman who does not regularly have high cortisol level, yet develops it for a period due to trauma, nothing says that she is not prone to the same fate? The relationship between the factor and the outcome exists, so what makes you restrict it to women with naturally high cortisol levels?

Is it "desirable" to have a miscarriage as a resolution to an unwanted pregnancy, though?