Not getting into it too much - but we've just studied this in Constitutional Law and i think it's an ignorant statement to think that it's just about "convenience" to the "mother". There are a lot more situations from which abortion arises - one of the most important being threat of physical violence from the husband and family.
Not getting into it too much - but we've just studied this in Constitutional Law and i think it's an ignorant statement to think that it's just about "convenience" to the "mother". There are a lot more situations from which abortion arises - one of the most important being threat of physical violence from the husband and family.
why cant the people just let them decide for themselves? If you dont want to have an abortion, dont have one. You shouldnt be able to take that right away from other people. It is THEIR decision. That baby will get brought up in a wrecked home where the mother can barely support herself. What pisses me off even more is that this is all church and state. We are not separating church and state and its horrible. We are going against our constitution. Its bs that Bush's administration is trying to incorporate their policies based on their religious beliefs. What is the world coming to ughh
Svnla
Lifer
- Nov 10, 2003
- 17,986
- 1,388
- 126
If pro life folks are so gun ho about saving children. Where are they when children living in poverty at present time?
Children, especially in the poor south <Louisiana and Miss>, are in the number of millions living in the cycle of poverty and despair. If you care so much about children as you say you are, why don't you spend time and money to taken care of the LIVING children first? I am talking about until they are 18 years old or old enough to taken care of themselves, not just spend some money and some time at soup kitchen over the weekend and such.
It seem to me that pro life folks are so adament <yelling and screaming at abortion clinics, even shoot abortion doctor, etc.> about saving the unborn children until he/she is born. After that, the caring level is way off. Just my observation.
Children, especially in the poor south <Louisiana and Miss>, are in the number of millions living in the cycle of poverty and despair. If you care so much about children as you say you are, why don't you spend time and money to taken care of the LIVING children first? I am talking about until they are 18 years old or old enough to taken care of themselves, not just spend some money and some time at soup kitchen over the weekend and such.
It seem to me that pro life folks are so adament <yelling and screaming at abortion clinics, even shoot abortion doctor, etc.> about saving the unborn children until he/she is born. After that, the caring level is way off. Just my observation.
agreed.......hell, look at sudan right now....their are 2890348720947239084798234 kids suffering of starvation.
IAteYourMother
Lifer
- Nov 3, 2004
- 10,491
- 22
- 81
i will start with the partial birth abortion. It is disgusting. Not only because it looks horrible. but because it is a viable life. and it is being put to death on the whim of a women who just decided to do that. I would not care if it was just a saline needle ... like they used to do to attempt abortions. you say there are riskier procedures... riskier for whom? The baby? seems the outcome is the same for an 8 month unborn baby no matter what the procedure. This just makes it less risky for the mother... but in any case, for a women to carry to 8 1/2 months and just change her mind.... it is wrong. if the baby is viable outside the mother, it is murder. there is nothing that anyone could say to me to make me think it is ok for anyone to kill a baby that could live, grow and thrive if given the chance.
next... i would like to ask you this... if having a baby is such a life altering event for a woman, shouldnt the same be said for the father? why does he not have a say? I dont mean just about abortion, but as you bring up... having a baby. if a mother gets to decide that that she does not want to have a baby because it will alter her life too much, shouldnt men be able to just walk away and not have thier lives altered? They are not given that opportunity because the woman's decision alters her life, the kids life and the man who will be paying to support a kid he did not want for 18-21yrs. Why is it ok for a woman to choose not to have that life altering event, but men are not?
The 8-10 years... i stated that rape, incest and health were exempt. if a woman is so irresponsible that she needs to 'terminate' a prenancy more often than that... it is my opinion that there is a problem.
The government tells ppl what they can and cannot do with their bodies all the time. Drugs are illegal. People go to jail for it all day long. They have banned smoking in many places. does this mean that it is ok to protect non smokers but not a developed unborn baby? I think that if a woman want to screw the entire military in a weekend, or spend a month in an all male prison that is entirely up to her... and i dont care if she goes thru them in alphabetical order or size order or whatever... but if she wants to have unprotected sex and kill viable babies, then something should be said about it.
And as far as leaving it up to God... it was left up to God. He determined how babies are made. And he decided that when men and women had sex without protection, at certain cycles, a woman would get pregnant. And getting pregnant and having kids... that is a gift from God. Not a supposed punishment. A gift.
that is my opinion. that is how i was raised and how i raised my daughter. other ppl feel differently. and again, i am not in charge. and i am sure there are millions of women across the country who are having a huge sigh of relief over that.
Imagine if everyone had adopted that attitude, sometimes you have to speak about what you believe in
IAteYourMother
Lifer
- Nov 3, 2004
- 10,491
- 22
- 81
what are you talking about? If the mother is hooked up to the fetus, then she has the right to abort the damn thing, but don't go aborting the child during the fvcking third trimester, when it can survive outside the mother's body. Not to mention that a mother who's hooked up to a fetus can still move around and still be a human being. Face it, your analogies are flawed and retarded, and you're attacking the wrong people, making flawed assumptions.
Originally posted by: TBone48
Originally posted by: Arkitech
My wife is 7 months along in her pregnacy and it's so amazing to me to see how new life is developing and growing. Even though the baby is still forming he responds to my voice and my wife's, it's an incredible experience.
Now I realize not every child has the benefit of being born to a pair of loving parents, in some cases babies are born to totally unfit and possibly unstable people. Then there are the cases where some unfortunate women have become the victim of rape and I can totally sympathize with why they feel the need to go for an abortion. But for the most part it seems to me that many people choose abortion because they don't want the responsibility. It's really sad, in fact it's downright heartbreaking because every abortion is taking away the life from a helpless child. Everyone gets up in arms when they hear of child porn, child abuse, molestation and any other atrocity (sp?) commited against kids but why does'nt that type of feeling extend to unborn babies. After all they're the most helpless and have the least means of defending themselves.
I don't want this to degenerate into a flamefest I just felt like stating something I feel strongly about and hopefully sparking some intelligent discussion.
Somehow the nature of the child in the womb has become dependent on how the mother sees the pregnancy. If she decides that she wants the baby, it's a baby. But if not, then it isn't.
that's kinda sad, the ability to abort a perfectly innocent life that easily (and some people do it without a second thought) is a reflection of our times. if something is a problem divorce it or abort it
Originally posted by: amicold
Originally posted by: Arkitech
My wife is 7 months along in her pregnacy and it's so amazing to me to see how new life is developing and growing. Even though the baby is still forming he responds to my voice and my wife's, it's an incredible experience.
Now I realize not every child has the benefit of being born to a pair of loving parents, in some cases babies are born to totally unfit and possibly unstable people. Then there are the cases where some unfortunate women have become the victim of rape and I can totally sympathize with why they feel the need to go for an abortion. But for the most part it seems to me that many people choose abortion because they don't want the responsibility. It's really sad, in fact it's downright heartbreaking because every abortion is taking away the life from a helpless child. Everyone gets up in arms when they hear of child porn, child abuse, molestation and any other atrocity (sp?) commited against kids but why does'nt that type of feeling extend to unborn babies. After all they're the most helpless and have the least means of defending themselves.
I don't want this to degenerate into a flamefest I just felt like stating something I feel strongly about and hopefully sparking some intelligent discussion.
Because I'm sure most women are having the abortions before the baby forms to the point you're at. Regardless, there's a lot of beautiful things in life. Some find insects or arachnids beautiful but that doesn't stop you from stepping on ants, spiders, etc. Or grabbing the can of Raid when those wasps nest near your house.
wow, you just compared human life to that of an insect
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,561
- 969
- 126
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
i will start with the partial birth abortion. It is disgusting. Not only because it looks horrible. but because it is a viable life. and it is being put to death on the whim of a women who just decided to do that. I would not care if it was just a saline needle ... like they used to do to attempt abortions. you say there are riskier procedures... riskier for whom? The baby? seems the outcome is the same for an 8 month unborn baby no matter what the procedure. This just makes it less risky for the mother... but in any case, for a women to carry to 8 1/2 months and just change her mind.... it is wrong. if the baby is viable outside the mother, it is murder. there is nothing that anyone could say to me to make me think it is ok for anyone to kill a baby that could live, grow and thrive if given the chance.
next... i would like to ask you this... if having a baby is such a life altering event for a woman, shouldnt the same be said for the father? why does he not have a say? I dont mean just about abortion, but as you bring up... having a baby. if a mother gets to decide that that she does not want to have a baby because it will alter her life too much, shouldnt men be able to just walk away and not have thier lives altered? They are not given that opportunity because the woman's decision alters her life, the kids life and the man who will be paying to support a kid he did not want for 18-21yrs. Why is it ok for a woman to choose not to have that life altering event, but men are not?
The 8-10 years... i stated that rape, incest and health were exempt. if a woman is so irresponsible that she needs to 'terminate' a prenancy more often than that... it is my opinion that there is a problem.
The government tells ppl what they can and cannot do with their bodies all the time. Drugs are illegal. People go to jail for it all day long. They have banned smoking in many places. does this mean that it is ok to protect non smokers but not a developed unborn baby? I think that if a woman want to screw the entire military in a weekend, or spend a month in an all male prison that is entirely up to her... and i dont care if she goes thru them in alphabetical order or size order or whatever... but if she wants to have unprotected sex and kill viable babies, then something should be said about it.
And as far as leaving it up to God... it was left up to God. He determined how babies are made. And he decided that when men and women had sex without protection, at certain cycles, a woman would get pregnant. And getting pregnant and having kids... that is a gift from God. Not a supposed punishment. A gift.
that is my opinion. that is how i was raised and how i raised my daughter. other ppl feel differently. and again, i am not in charge. and i am sure there are millions of women across the country who are having a huge sigh of relief over that.
I am against abortions in the 3rd trimester. It's a little iffy in the second too if you ask me but personally I am not going to sit here and preach that I know what is right for every person who makes a mistake in their lives. God, I fvcking hate the right to lifer's position on this. Self righteous assholes the lot of them.
My .02
Mo0o
Lifer
- Jul 31, 2001
- 24,227
- 3
- 76
The way I see it, the big rift between pro life and pro choice isn't whether it's the woman's choice or not, it's when the fetus become a human being. All pro choicers will tell you killing an newborn is clearly wrong, because they also consider it to be a human being. I dont for see prolifers getting angry over spilled semen or a woman pulling out a few strands of hair. Indeed the fundamentl rift between these two factions is whether the fertilized embryo upon conception is considered a human being with rights or it's simply a grouping of cells that are nutritionally dependent on the mother. And I dont think this is something that can be argued one way or another because it's simply your opinion of what one can consider life.
BrokenVisage
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2005
- 24,771
- 14
- 81
Address rape then. Are you saying 'tough shit' to the rape victims, that it's simply the consequence of 'having a pussy'? You have such a hard-on for your stance that you ignore the unintentional situations.
Well, I'm not saying tough shit to those women. Those woman do and should have a choice not to be the victim of a dispicable crime to will effect her life forever. You can argue having an abortion when the sex is arbitrary and consentual, but don't think of rape victims as some kind of loophole into your precious ideals, it's real life.
I agree with most of the above. But we need to make exceptions for the health of the mother. The other procedures are riskier for the mother. These "partial birth" (<---this term created as a slogan by prolifers) abortions can be very necessary when the mother's life is at risk.
The life-altering thing is not the reason a woman should have a right to abort, but it is a criteria that she may use in her own personal decision of whether or not to abort. The reason is that she should the right to do what she wants with her body.
Men do not have the choice, because nowhere is their body being taken up by a mass of cells.
The reason life-altering was brought up was that some people believe as soon as a woman has sex she is consenting somehow to have a baby. And somehow that is a binding contract, and therefore she must bring the baby to term. It's not a matter of consent, but a matter of responsibility.
I agree there is a problem with responsibility there. But it is not something the government should be regulating, since the woman has a right to her own body.
Does the government tell people what they should do with their physiology? With their nutrients? They regulate what we put into our bodies, but not what occurs inside our body itself. There are no laws that say we must use our nutrients in this way, our oxygen in this sort of way. If you look at a potential law outlawing abortion, it would in effect be saying that a woman must use her body in such a way to make it habitable for the fetus. There is absolutely no precedent for such a law.
God gave us the gift of choice and free-will. Having babies and getting pregnant is a gift. The mothers who have abortions for no good reason are irresponsible. But the judgement of what will happen to those people, should be determined by God, as it's his gift. The government should not act as the judgement. Furthermore, everyone's God is different. I'm sure my vision of God is different than yours. We cannot use God to make our laws.
that is my opinion. that is how i was raised and how i raised my daughter. other ppl feel differently. and again, i am not in charge. and i am sure there are millions of women across the country who are having a huge sigh of relief over that.
there are actually millions of women who agree with you.
all I ask is that the government stays out of an individuals life, especially when it comes to their own body.
Only in your opinion. Why are people using opinions as facts in these "discussions"? What a joke.
The whole point was you could move around and still be a human being, even with me attached to you. i only weighed less than a pound. the analogy is perfect, but looks like i was "attacking" the wrong person. we actually agree for the most part. but that'll teach you to take up another's (OdiN's) cause without reading what he's written.
IAteYourMother
Lifer
- Nov 3, 2004
- 10,491
- 22
- 81
how is the analogy perfect? I didn't engage in an act that would warrant me having to be attached to you. And even if I did, I would have at least 6 months to decide to chuck your tubes off my body. After that, if I chucked your tubes off your body, you might still live. On the other hand, through abortion, I'm not just chucking the tubes off, I decide it's easier to simply put a bullet through your brain
i think the media wants you to think that.
the actual issue is whether the mother has the right to do whatever she wants with her body physiology and tissues, and whether a fetus can trump that right. to resolve this issue, it really doesn't matter whether its a human being or not, in fact, it might even be better to take it as a human being to avoid that issue altogether.
how can you not get this? I am myself, yet I am in the exact same position as a fetus. I need your life support for nine months. there's no way you're chucking the tubes off, you'll have to abort me just like a fetus. now, would you do it?
but at least we progressed (finally) to the next stage of the argument - whether the act of sex means that a mother must consent to attachment to the fetus. and i'll ask you now - why must she consent to the attachment?
the analogy is perfect, as it makes a point and furthers the argument. i'm not pulling this analogy out of my a**. i've used it in *serious* debate with people who are against abortion.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter