• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Abortion

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'm pro choice, although if you dont want to get pregnant, and you do while using the pills, condoms.. etc.. you can take the morning after pill.. why go through the operation.. I guess if deemed necessary than its your body and you have whatever rights you wish to use.. but you are killing another human being, which in the long run (as many of my friends now have babies). if the option was up to me (thank god I got the male end of the bargain) I think I'd stick it out.. I've seen how happy babies make their mothers..

$0.02

CyraKrin
 
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Can you not see that foolish thinking like this will contribute to the downfall of our society? There's 3 billion people (edit: females) in the world, they don't all fscking need to have babies!
Click to expand...
He said society not the world. First almost a million babies are killed a year. Pair this with the fact that people are having fewer babies in general and you do indeed eventually have an affect on society.
Click to expand...
And maybe if we were able to deal with all the live people we already have I'd give a rat's ass...
Click to expand...
We aren't able to deal with what we have now?
Click to expand...
Homeless people (mental patients, veterans, those with families) in every major urban centre, the ugly nature of the foster care system, ~15% (could be wrong) of people in the US living below the poverty line, welfare as a main source of income in some areas... And that's just in one of the most advanced countries on the planet. We're not even bringing in the mass starvation, rampant disease, and genocide seen in other places.

So no, I don't think we can deal with the people we have, no matter which way you slice it. (And I will distingiush between capable and (edit) willing.)

</flamebait>
 
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Can you not see that foolish thinking like this will contribute to the downfall of our society? There's 3 billion people (edit: females) in the world, they don't all fscking need to have babies!
Click to expand...
He said society not the world. First almost a million babies are killed a year. Pair this with the fact that people are having fewer babies in general and you do indeed eventually have an affect on society.
Click to expand...
And maybe if we were able to deal with all the live people we already have I'd give a rat's ass...
Click to expand...
We aren't able to deal with what we have now?
Click to expand...
Homeless people (mental patients, veterans, those with families) in every major urban centre, the ugly nature of the foster care system, ~15% (could be wrong) of people in the US living below the poverty line, welfare as a main source of income in some areas... And that's just in one of the most advanced countries on the planet. We're not even bringing in the mass starvation, rampant disease, and genocide seen in other places.

So no, I don't think we can deal with the people we have, no matter which way you slice it. (And I will distingiush between capable and (edit) willing.)

</flamebait>
Click to expand...

Killing babies will solve this. Well sh!t why didn't you say so?
Contrary to what you probably believe even those below the poverty line enjoy living and most don't get assistance.
A parents financial/ social situation can positively determine what the children will be?
 
Try being raised by people who never wanted you and let you know at every opportunity that you were a huge mistake that ruined their lives.I'm pro-choice,trust me there are worse things than never having been born in the 1st place.
 
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Can you not see that foolish thinking like this will contribute to the downfall of our society? There's 3 billion people (edit: females) in the world, they don't all fscking need to have babies!
Click to expand...
He said society not the world. First almost a million babies are killed a year. Pair this with the fact that people are having fewer babies in general and you do indeed eventually have an affect on society.
Click to expand...
And maybe if we were able to deal with all the live people we already have I'd give a rat's ass...
Click to expand...
We aren't able to deal with what we have now?
Click to expand...
Homeless people (mental patients, veterans, those with families) in every major urban centre, the ugly nature of the foster care system, ~15% (could be wrong) of people in the US living below the poverty line, welfare as a main source of income in some areas... And that's just in one of the most advanced countries on the planet. We're not even bringing in the mass starvation, rampant disease, and genocide seen in other places.

So no, I don't think we can deal with the people we have, no matter which way you slice it. (And I will distingiush between capable and (edit) willing.)

</flamebait>
Click to expand...
Killing babies will solve this. Well sh!t why didn't you say so?
Contrary to what you probably believe even those below the poverty line enjoy living and most don't get assistance.
A parents financial/ social situation can positively determine what the children will be?
Click to expand...
It's pathetic when you have to resort to putting words in the mouth of your opponent to try and win an argument.

Where did I ever say that abortion would solve anything? Where? HUH?!

Exactly. It does not solve those problems, but the same time it does not exacerbate any of them. When we have more people living on the planet right now than at any point in history by several orders of magnitude, why do we need MORE people? Especially when we've not managed to solve all the other problems listed above, pretty much all of them having persisted since the dawn of human history.
 
Originally posted by: Geekbabe
Try being raised by people who never wanted you and let you know at every opportunity that you were a huge mistake that ruined their lives.I'm pro-choice,trust me there are worse things than never having been born in the 1st place.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Can you not see that foolish thinking like this will contribute to the downfall of our society? There's 3 billion people (edit: females) in the world, they don't all fscking need to have babies!
Click to expand...
He said society not the world. First almost a million babies are killed a year. Pair this with the fact that people are having fewer babies in general and you do indeed eventually have an affect on society.
Click to expand...
And maybe if we were able to deal with all the live people we already have I'd give a rat's ass...
Click to expand...
We aren't able to deal with what we have now?
Click to expand...
Homeless people (mental patients, veterans, those with families) in every major urban centre, the ugly nature of the foster care system, ~15% (could be wrong) of people in the US living below the poverty line, welfare as a main source of income in some areas... And that's just in one of the most advanced countries on the planet. We're not even bringing in the mass starvation, rampant disease, and genocide seen in other places.

So no, I don't think we can deal with the people we have, no matter which way you slice it. (And I will distingiush between capable and (edit) willing.)

</flamebait>
Click to expand...
Killing babies will solve this. Well sh!t why didn't you say so?
Contrary to what you probably believe even those below the poverty line enjoy living and most don't get assistance.
A parents financial/ social situation can positively determine what the children will be?
Click to expand...
It's pathetic when you have to resort to putting words in the mouth of your opponent to try and win an argument.

Where did I ever say that abortion would solve anything? Where? HUH?!

Exactly. It does not solve those problems, but the same time it does not exacerbate any of them. When we have more people living on the planet right now than at any point in history by several orders of magnitude, why do we need MORE people? Especially when we've not managed to solve all the other problems listed above, pretty much all of them having persisted since the dawn of human history.
Click to expand...


I'll stop here. You will may get to see why in your lifetime unless we eventually resort to mass immigration.
 
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
that's my point. THEY NEED TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY. don't want kids? DON'T GO AROUND FVCKING EVERYONE!!!!
Click to expand...

Which illustrates my point in regards to "forcing a woman to raise the kid" as a punishment/consequence for what YOU percieve as immoral behavior.

To me, that attitude is morally wrong.
 
even religion isn't consistent on this. early jewish/muslimi law allowed for abortion up to about 40 days. if a woman was caused to miscarry during an attack it was punished by just a fine. the catholic churchs original position was also about 40 days.

go figure eh?

if people were really pro life, any couple having unprotected sex should search through the womans menstral discharges each month to find those natural spontenous abortions that happen to about 80% of conceptions.

bush the pro lifer has had 3 years to better the lives of those in foster homes and orphanages. but guess what, nothing has been done. when the child finishes bouncing from foster home to foster home at 18, they are uncerimoniouslly dumped on the street with no assistence. thats a recipe for success. just goes to show, pro lifers like bush just care about you being born, after that, ur f*cked. tax cuts for the well off mean more then the lives of children to these people. "its your money" after all😛

I don't remember my daughter coming out changing her diapers and fixing her bottles.
Click to expand...

i don't think you understand the concept. viability is based on science and reason. we can easily keep new born babies alive using just basic care and breast milk. science not religion enables us to save the lives of premature babies. before the advances in science, such new borns would not be "viable". if science advances to a degree where doctors can suction out fetuses and grow them in tubs, well, those would be viable too. but until then, you cannot call a fetus viable. no matter what you do with an extracted fetus, it will die at this point in time.
 
without reading anything in this thread, I'd like to say that I have seen many super sh!tty parents, many under the age of 20, who would have been much better off with an abortion (despite it being using as birth control). Not to mention the child has a really crappy upbringing
 
Only solution to abortion is to prevent it in the first place! I think most are just irresponsible for their own action. I heard about some having as many as 5-6 abortion before they realize tehy are killing their own babies!!! The doctors make great $$$, who wouldn't like that?

Those who are glad that abortion is allowed... well the problem is that it becomes a bad habit and addictive as sh^t like weeds, cracks, alcoholics...
 
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Originally posted by: fredtam
Can you not see that foolish thinking like this will contribute to the downfall of our society? There's 3 billion people (edit: females) in the world, they don't all fscking need to have babies!
Click to expand...
He said society not the world. First almost a million babies are killed a year. Pair this with the fact that people are having fewer babies in general and you do indeed eventually have an affect on society.
Click to expand...
And maybe if we were able to deal with all the live people we already have I'd give a rat's ass...
Click to expand...
We aren't able to deal with what we have now?
Click to expand...
Homeless people (mental patients, veterans, those with families) in every major urban centre, the ugly nature of the foster care system, ~15% (could be wrong) of people in the US living below the poverty line, welfare as a main source of income in some areas... And that's just in one of the most advanced countries on the planet. We're not even bringing in the mass starvation, rampant disease, and genocide seen in other places.

So no, I don't think we can deal with the people we have, no matter which way you slice it. (And I will distingiush between capable and (edit) willing.)

</flamebait>
Click to expand...
Killing babies will solve this. Well sh!t why didn't you say so?
Contrary to what you probably believe even those below the poverty line enjoy living and most don't get assistance.
A parents financial/ social situation can positively determine what the children will be?
Click to expand...
It's pathetic when you have to resort to putting words in the mouth of your opponent to try and win an argument.

Where did I ever say that abortion would solve anything? Where? HUH?!

Exactly. It does not solve those problems, but the same time it does not exacerbate any of them. When we have more people living on the planet right now than at any point in history by several orders of magnitude, why do we need MORE people? Especially when we've not managed to solve all the other problems listed above, pretty much all of them having persisted since the dawn of human history.
Click to expand...

Ok, so let me try to understand your philosophy better...

Abortion is NOT a solution, but rather than dealing with the real problem, we should still have abortion because it keeps the population in check.

Riiiiiight
 
Originally posted by: LordMorpheus
I think abortion is OK in extreme cases, but not as birth control (as it is being used now).
Click to expand...

I agree with this. But don't call me pro-life, there's nothing that disgusts me more than seeing pro-lifers on my college campus ranting about how it's the worst kind of murder [though murder arguably, worst kind? i'm not inclined to agree], and showing pictures of dead babies, I don't care to see it, and I'm not pro-choice. Could be a sign that your argument sucks.

An abortion persay does not disturb me, as there are many legit reasons why one might wish to have one, and it's not anyone's legal place to say a woman shouldn't have one. But with that said: I think that the overall attitude with abortions is incorrect. I do not see this as 'hey.. another birth control method' and it concerns me that others do. It just seems another way out of a mistake, rather than owning up to the fact that a mistake was made.

i may be wrong, but i think i read somewhere that an abortion can leave physical trama on the woman having an abortion, and that there is mounting proof it causes emotional damage as well. Haven't googled this, but wondering if anyone else has heard this?
 
Originally posted by: Amused
I think your opinion makes slaves of women. I think no one has a right to tell anyone else what they may, and may not do to thier body.

Here's a neat thing to think about:

How about we attach Richard Simmons to your body. To remove him would kill him, but not you. What would you choose to do?

At the root of the issue: No one, not even a fetus, has a right to force another person to allow it to be biologically dependant on it. That sacrifices the woman's rights for the fetus.
Click to expand...
But the woman forced the fetus to be attached to her through having sexual intercourse. She forced the fetus to be be dependant on her.
 
Originally posted by: Stefan
I don't believe that women should be allowed to abort a child on the grounds that they used bad judgement and made a mistake.
Click to expand...
No. Instead, let's force them to bear children they don't want and are totally unpripared to care for. Let's encourage them to beat and neglect these kids and raise a bunch of psychological basket cases.
What do you guys think of my opinion?
Click to expand...
I think you don't have a right to such an uninformed opinion until you've been a pregnant single woman. Once you've done that, you'll have a much better idea of what they face. Until you do, your best option to avoid embarassing yourself in public is to keep silent, if only to avoid proving your ignorance.
 
Originally posted by: Trevelyan
Ok, so let me try to understand your philosophy better...

Abortion is NOT a solution, but rather than dealing with the real problem, we should still have abortion because it keeps the population in check.

Riiiiiight
Click to expand...
Never said we shouldn't deal with "the real problem" either. I think we have the resources to deal with them, just that the will required, on the level required, to do the things required is what we're lacking. (That's all talking about ideals, though, not the practicality of the here and now.)

If you've ever seen one of those nifty charts that shows estimated human population over the last few thousand years you'd see that we have a HUGE growth spike in the last few centuries. The numbers for births, deaths, and living people nowadays are huge. Now, you seem to be conceding there is a problem that needs to be fixed (that we live in a world where abortion is a viable option of how to deal with a pregnancy) and as a logical person (I assume) I think you'd agree that fixing a problem within a small group is easier than within a large group. So why should the group grow faster than it has to? To save people already here is something different altogether, so please don't try to spin any things in that direction. I'm talking about adding to the problem and how that shouldn't be needlessly encouraged.

Anyway, what are your problems with keeping the population in check, especially in such a passive way as this? It's always the person's choice whether to take advantage of it.

As a whole I have a really pessimistic view of humanity, hence my attitude of "why on earth more of us?"
 
Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon
Originally posted by: Amorphus
Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon
Originally posted by: Amorphus
Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon
Originally posted by: Howard
Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon
I think people should make their own choices...
Click to expand...
I think OREOSpeedwagon is pro-death.
Click to expand...

lol 😛 I just think that if the mother (or father, if he doesn't ditch them) don't have time to take care of the kid (i.e. if they're in college and working full time too, only home a few hours of the day) than it's probably better to get an abortion. if the kid is not going to get raised right, it'd be worse for the kid....
Click to expand...

So let's go into the inner city and kill all the disadvantaged kids? 😕
Click to expand...

no, thats not our decision to make.... I just think if a kid is going to be raised like crap and not cared for than it would be better off if the mom got an abortion before it has to go through any of that.
Click to expand...

So a baby is not a human being, since it hasn't passed the birthing process? Those kids in the inner cities have an overwhelming chance of becoming delinquents and otherwise being raised poorly. By your argument, then, children should not be allowed to live if their life doesn't meet up to your standards of "good".
Click to expand...

how many people remember what it's like before they were born? no one. they will not care if they live or not, hell they don't even know what life means before they're born. if you know the kid is going to live a sh!tty life, why make them go through it?
Click to expand...

quite possibly the silliest and most unconvincing pseudoarrogant pro death arguement to date. Bill CLinton had a sh!tty life as a kid and he was president 🙂
 
if it's not viable, I don't consider it a life. I don't think the church does either. if they did, masturbation would be murder and there would be graves for every aborted and miscarried fetus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top