PDA

View Full Version : Pro choice or pro life?


NoBel_ToKYo ™
February 5th, 2009, 11:00 AM
You heard the man. I thought this would fit best in other chat, so..

Abortion. Are you pro life, or pro choice?

I know the poll is a little misleading, but treat Pro as pro choice and no as pro life. Go wild.

Soul Eater
February 5th, 2009, 11:11 AM
I think abortion should be allowed for reasons needed. Like, say if a young girl was raped, it would be an option for her to have the opportunity to get an abortion, as long as she got the baby out before it developed in her stomach.

To me, I think there alot of advantages to having options for abortion but then you'll always have disadvantages, where people decide they don't want their baby and they are already some months into their pregnancy.

I just think it should be a something needed, a sort of privilege for those that maybe too young to have babies. A lot of young girls get raped and end up pregnant and it's sometimes hard for them to get pregnant at young ages.

Then again, some of those young girls are getting themselves pregnant on purpose.

Sublime
February 5th, 2009, 11:11 AM
Completely and 100% against it.
Abortion is murder of a helpless child that could have had a wonderful life.

My abortion thread got locked...:<

NoBel_ToKYo ™
February 5th, 2009, 11:14 AM
Personally i lean against abortion, but i'm just leaning over while still tip-toeing on the fence :3 There are situations when i think it's more pro, and situations when it's more no. It really depends on the "patient" i.e. The girl/woman who is pregnant.

Soul Eater
February 5th, 2009, 11:15 AM
Completely and 100% against it.
Abortion is murder of a helpless child that could have had a wonderful life.

My abortion thread got locked...:<

I actually heard it's not wrong, as long as you don't wait for like...a few months into the child's development or whatever.

I mean those that get raped or whatever, they need to have an option to get rid of the fetus. There isn't any other way that I know of for them to get rid of the fetus, if they are just...too young. D:

Tokyo: Same for me. I kind lean in between yes and no for abortion. Like i said, there can be good things about it and then there can be bad things.

devilicious
February 5th, 2009, 11:21 AM
I'm pro-abortion.
I think it should be an option to whoever got pregnant due to a mistake, or was raped, or anything of the like.

Abortion is murder of a helpless child that could have had a wonderful life.

I'm not going to flame you for your opinion, but a fetus is not a child.
And, being an unwanted child, he or she could not have had a wonderful life aswell.

One of my cousin's friend got pregnant on accident, and wasn't ready to have a child due to psychological and monetary reasons.
But, because she couldn't abort it, she had to have the child and now lives in poberty with a kid she never wanted. Neither of them live a 'wonderful life' like you suggest.

Sublime
February 5th, 2009, 11:23 AM
I'm pro-abortion.
I think it should be an option to whoever got pregnant due to a mistake, or was raped, or anything of the like.



I'm not going to flame you for your opinion, but a fetus is not a child.
And, being an unwanted child, he or she could not have had a wonderful life aswell.

One of my cousin's friend got pregnant on accident, and wasn't ready to have a child due to psychological and monetary reasons.
But, because she couldn't abort it, she had to have the child and now lives in poberty with a kid she never wanted. Neither of them live a 'wonderful life' like you suggest.

I'm not going to flame either, but I have to disagree.

Just because it's not a fetus isn't a child doesn't give right to destroy it's opportunity at life.

And, if a baby is so unwanted, it could simply be given to an adoption center where it could have a better life.

Soul Eater
February 5th, 2009, 11:24 AM
That's not always true. I mean it maybe be part of god's plan for life but, having the baby isn't going to be...pleasant.

I mean if a twelve year old girl gets raped, are you saying she should keep the baby? I've heard a few cases here in Arizona where young girls get pregnant, as young as twelve and it's usually not a good thing. Girls that young shouldn't be put through the battle of having a baby.

Kimicatdemon
February 5th, 2009, 11:24 AM
I'm pro to an extent.

If the woman in question got drunk and did a few things she regrets, it shouldn't be an option. She did it either way. (although it is still sad.)

However if it was rape, then they should have a chance to abort it if they want. Also if it's going to kill the mother to have a child, then it should be a choice.

Aurafire
February 5th, 2009, 11:30 AM
I am strictly anti-abortion, except for extreme cases of rape or the mother's life is in danger. Any other situation does not warrant the destruction of human life. While others may see a little clump of cells as just a little clump of cells, I see the potential that those cells have, and therefore see it as a human life. To me, abortion is flat out murder.

And while some may argue that it is a woman's "choice" to have an abortion or not, a human life shouldn't be destroyed just because it's an inconvenience. As Sublime said, have the child and then put it up for adoption, where it at least has a chance at having a good life.

devilicious
February 5th, 2009, 11:30 AM
And, if a baby is so unwanted, it could simply be given to an adoption center where it could have a better life.

Huh. No.
I have an adopted sister, and I've been to many adoption centers.
The chance of getting adopted and living a better life is as common as winning the loterry. I could feel the suffering of the children that were imprisoned there.

Also, 'life' itself is something very relative.
Anyone who comes saying 'potential of life', 'to be life', 'almost life', please, be more specific. Because I fail to see a point in that.

edit;
And agreeing with matt561 below. Please, keep religion out of this.

matt561
February 5th, 2009, 11:33 AM
I agree with you Kimi if they dident want kids then they should of used protection OR just not of had sex in the first place

Also i know im no moderator but i think it would be best for everyone if we kept religious views out of this multi cultural/reliegion based forms

And thats from someone who doesent worship anything

Cosmic Tyrant
February 5th, 2009, 11:49 AM
I'm pro-choice, but only under certain critera. If the woman was raped, or if the baby is better off not being born, then I believe abortion should totally be an option. Otherwise, I think the birth should take place. That's my opinion on the matter

Metatron
February 5th, 2009, 12:22 PM
...I don't think anyone's pro-abortion.

Maybe changing the title to say "pro-choice" would make a bit more sense?

Yrie
February 5th, 2009, 12:30 PM
Well for me, no matter what the case is, it's murder.

(Prepare for me to go a little religious here.)
If that girl ended up getting pregnant, rape or otherwise, it was part of God's plan for her. But if she aborts it, taking that innocent life would be interfering with God's plan. Everything happens for a reason. And remember, a baby is God's opinion that life should go on

The fetus doesn't even possess a brain that works much like a human brain does until the 23rd week, though there is electrical brain activity somewhere between the 5th and 7th week, I think (yay for health class). And in the early stages of pregnancy, it looks like nothing that would eventually develop into a human. Is it right that we could once consider people of Asian or African descent as less than human in comparison to those of European descent, and then something that doesn't even resemble a human in appearance as a human? I mean, its not like I believe in killing a child, because its selfish to take a life once its capable of survival with dependence on its own bodily functions, I'm just presenting a point here. Besides that, would God necessarily want for one of his creations to be scarred for life?

[Edit] Though if you got pregnant because you didn't use protection, then its basically a selfish choice to end the life of the child, because it was the carelessness of the to-be-parents that caused it to begin its life cycle in the first place. In that case, I am against abortion. However, there's many cases in which that's not the case, and if a girl is raped and therefore becomes pregnant, I'm not exactly supportive of abortion, but nor am I against it. In a few cases, the girl is young though (I'm saying 13-14 years of age), and having a child at that young of an age can kill the mother, in which abortion is a perfectly valid choice, provided that its a choice made in the early stages.

Honest
February 5th, 2009, 12:51 PM
I didnt vote cause my answer would be that it depends.

If you had the child when your like 18 or whatever, it would probably be for the best. You're to young to be starting the family. You're not even married (most likley)

However, if you ARE married, thats different. It would be completly wrong then.

Yrie
February 5th, 2009, 12:58 PM
If you had the child when your like 18 or whatever, it would probably be for the best. You're to young to be starting the family. You're not even married (most likley)

Not really, I mean, seriously, there are 15 year old parents who decided to keep their child, and they can be absolutely fine with their decision. However, there's definitely more risks and chances of complications if you have a child at an unusually young age, as in usually below 20-21ish. And then there's a point when having a child could be downright dangerous, as mentioned before, having a child around the age of 13 could kill the mother, and its usually a valid argument if the mother's life is in danger.

kissing. raindrops
February 5th, 2009, 01:01 PM
I don't mind/care if other people have an abortion. Becoming pregnant could happen to ANY FEMALE, if they want it or not. You don't know their situation if a girl gets pregnant and wants an abortion. Many girls my age at my school, including my two best friends, aren't virgins. If YOU made a mistake, wouldn't you want a way to reverse it? If that mistake was pregnancy, wouldn't you want at least an option such as an abortion? Having a child ruins some young girls' lives. I'm not against it at all.

CHG-Swampert
February 5th, 2009, 01:10 PM
Abortions should not even exist. Babies should not suffer or die b4 being born just because you love sex but can't deal with kids =/

Penguin13
February 5th, 2009, 01:22 PM
Pro. I don't want to explain.

Akio123
February 5th, 2009, 01:24 PM
I'm actually pro-choice. I mean honestly, I think it is more the woman's choice if anything if she is going to have the baby.

Blue_Drifblim
February 5th, 2009, 01:32 PM
Nope. I'm 100% against it.

Ivysaur
February 5th, 2009, 01:34 PM
Pro-choice. The mother is going to be the one to get pregnant, stand the process and have a kid. Only her can choose what to do, telling her what to do without having felt that is somewhat hypocritical in my opinion.

Plus, as far as I know, the goverment registers kids once they get born, so, until the kid is so developed an intervention would only risk the mother's life (not like after three or four months she wouldn't have made up her mind), all the mothers should be free to choose. Once again, I seriously and completely doubt everyone is going to say no, a mother is usually inclined to keep the baby unless some big problems come. And if she's going to have a kid with a bunch of problems, she'd better be happy and not have it.

Netto Azure
February 5th, 2009, 01:41 PM
To be frank I was thinking about this before I fell asleep yesterday...

Let me state it here: I'm nominally Pro-Choice at the moment.

I'm torn really. Morally it's wrong but practically it's up to the female to whether do it. The girl will carry the burden of her decision. But proper Sex Education (Not those useless "abstinence only" programs) should be implemented nationwide to educate people before they "do it" and the consequences of the decision to "do it".

Technically your Poll is misleading. Please put in another option, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice is the Appropriate ters to use in this poll. So I won't vote on it and instead type my opinions here....

Being Pro-Choice does not mean you want "to killz teh babiez"
It's just that you believe that the person can make mature decisions on their own. Not cramming beliefs down their throat. Also when the child is born how will they be brought up poorly or will the parents suffer? Will adoption agencies accept, etc?...Many issues affect this so... =/

Also spontaneous natural abortions happen regularly....

Hay...I'm just torn 'cuz of my Liberal beliefs and being brought up a Catholic. D=

Argh...I can go on and on but I don't have the time....I agree no flaming please...it's usually such things that get the possibility of a mature discussion locked. ^_^

Edit: Bottom of page = Lonely :(

Lightning's later post has put into words my current position on abortion. Abortion is horrendous but for the safety of the Women is a necessary evil. :<

Callandor
February 5th, 2009, 01:41 PM
While I think it's wrong, I really couldn't care less if they want one or not.

Cherrim
February 5th, 2009, 01:43 PM
Lol, no one is "pro-abortion". It's not like anyone who is pro-choice goes "LOL HAY I'M GONNA ABORT THIS BABY SOUNDS LIKE FUN Y/Y?" I'm pro-choice but I think abortion is a horrible thing. It's not like it happens once and goes away--most people who end up having an abortion, be it because they didn't want the baby or because their life would have been in danger, etc. either regret it or are just emotionally unstable or traumatized because of it for years and years afterwards. It's not a light thing.

I'm pro-choice and for legalizing abortion if only because it'll mean that instead of having to go to back-alley underground abortion centres (or, god forbid, trying it themselves), there will be clean, sterile clinics for it so that the woman is less at risk. I realize this means abortions will be closer to being more commonplace but... well, I dunno. It's kind of like those drug clinics in some places where they'll give you sterile needles for whatever you're illegally taking so that you aren't just reusing needles or sharing them, etc. since that's so dangerous. Yeah, it's not exactly a "NO DRUGS ARE BAD STOP USING THEM" black and white approach but... I'm still all for it. :/ I know it's kind of a harsh comparison to make but there you go.

I'm also one of those people who sits there thinking "well, if the woman is just getting knocked up and getting an abortion to curb responsibility of a child, that's wrong... but those who were raped, etc. shouldn't be forced to bear the child" but that'd never work so I forced myself to pick a side regardless and I'd rather be pro-choice. The option is there if people need it and if they don't, they can ignore it. (That seems to be my philosophy on most things, haha.)

Callandor
February 5th, 2009, 01:50 PM
It apperes we all agree that women getting raped validates abortion, while stupid people does not. Sounds good to me.

NoBel_ToKYo ™
February 5th, 2009, 01:52 PM
I'll be sure to contact one of the mods and get the poll rectified. "Pro" and "no" are..Well, black and white words for a discussion of this magnitude XD

But while we're on that, does anyone have a particular suggestion for what the poll should be changed to? Cause then i'll tell Chibi/Drifloon and then they can change it..Pro choice didn't actually occur to me at the time of making it so i apologise :P

Netto Azure
February 5th, 2009, 02:05 PM
I'll be sure to contact one of the mods and get the poll rectified. "Pro" and "no" are..Well, black and white words for a discussion of this magnitude XD

But while we're on that, does anyone have a particular suggestion for what the poll should be changed to? Cause then i'll tell Chibi/Drifloon and then they can change it..Pro choice didn't actually occur to me at the time of making it so i apologise :P

As I said in the edit of my initial post. The proper political and "official" names to "brand" your position on abortion is "Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life" Google the definitions if you want. =/

icomeanon6
February 5th, 2009, 02:12 PM
I consider abortion to be a barbaric and scientifically backwards act. A fetus is a living thing that feels pain more acutely than adults do. I don't find the argument that "It's the mother's choice" to hold any validity. What you do to your own body is one thing, but what you do to another human's body is completely different. A fetus isn't a cluster of cells or a body part. It has its own DNA and is the starting point for a unique person. The notion that a fetus is a merely a byproduct of reproduction is a blatant lie. They are alive, and we should treat them as such.

The only time I think an abortion could be acceptable is in the event of rape, incest, or when the mother's life is in danger. Unfortunately, the vast majority of abortions aren't the result of any of those things. Most abortions are the result of sexual irresponsibility.

However, I will say that I certainly do not condone some of the practices that some pro-life activists have used in their protests, specifically the attempt to shock people by showing pictures of aborted fetuses. Using shock and fear to convince someone of something is no better than terrorism.

Ripper
February 5th, 2009, 02:18 PM
Technically this thread should be 'Pro Choice' of 'Pro Life', not how it is now, for basically it means either we agree that abortion must be done, or mustn't.

I'm Pro Choice. There are so many factors that are unpredictable, meaning, even when being careful and taking anticonception measures, you can't always be sure they will work.

Plus there's all the rape stuff and all.

EDIT: At icomeanon6, how can it be proven the fetus' feel more pain than us?

Hawkfish
February 5th, 2009, 03:46 PM
Let's see... It's ok in my opinion if it's in the early stages of development(the fetus) or if the mother is at risk.

Shikon no Tama
February 5th, 2009, 03:54 PM
I'm a mix of both, actually.

I believe that if it was due to a rape, then yes, it is okay. Picture this: a 15 year old girl just got raped. She's pregnant. Do you think a 15 year old girl is ready for that responsibility? Probably not. If it is a fetus, or in the very early stage of pregnancy, then I see no problem with abortion as it is not a murdering of a human life.

However, if it is in the later stages of pregnancy, where the child is fully developed and "living", then that is just humanely wrong. At that stage, the child can think, you know. And heck, if you ever watched Juno, you know those babies even have fingernails [random fact, I know XD]. Just imagine if that child had the knowledge and will to do something good for the world. You strip away the right to live a possibly meaningful life.

icomeanon6
February 5th, 2009, 04:05 PM
EDIT: At icomeanon6, how can it be proven the fetus' feel more pain than us?
It's called science, and it's perfectly possible to detect brain activity. By the fourteenth week, the fetus has feeling throughout its entire body. Babies don't just magically start feeling things once they're born, they're just as alive while in the womb as they are outside of it. Neurosurgeons have stated that a partial birth abortion may be the most agonizing experience an infant can have. Try reading this (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_14.asp), the authors can explain it better than I can.

I Laugh at your Misfortune!
February 5th, 2009, 04:25 PM
I am pro-choice, but I believe that the limit should be considerably shorter thsn it is (due to the reasons icomeanon6 pointed out). If a woman is raped, or if protection fails for some reason (and this can happen to anybody) then I believe an abortion should be available, but I do not believe that we should abort babies at twenty-four weeks if they can be born and survive at twenty-three.

However, I find it difficult to understand people who are so completely against this, they are even against the morning after pill. At the time this works, the 'child' will be a minute bundle of about thirty cells, not even remotely human, imho.

Wish
February 5th, 2009, 04:44 PM
I'm against abortion.

I view the fetus as a living thing and killing it otherwise would be considered murder. I do not believe if a woman gets pregnant on her own will that she would be eligible for an abortion. I believe the baby is alive from the time of conception. I tend to be more lenient toward woman who were raped or were pregnant against their will, but any other situation besides that, You were the one who chose to have unprotected sex, you suffer the consequences.

These are my views and I'm not changing how I feel about Abortion.

♣Gawain♣
February 5th, 2009, 04:50 PM
If the girl is raped, the mother is dying, or the zygote(not fetus) is dysfunctional, abortion should be used.

Other reasons than that... it should not be used.

I'm not a "pro-abortionist" or anti. It only depends on the situation.

Shikon no Tama
February 5th, 2009, 04:51 PM
I'm against abortion.

I view the fetus as a living thing and killing it otherwise would be considered murder. I do not believe if a woman gets pregnant on her own will that she would be eligible for an abortion. I believe the baby is alive from the time of conception. I tend to be more lenient toward woman who were raped or were pregnant against their will, but any other situation besides that, You were the one who chose to have unprotected sex, you suffer the consequences.

These are my views and I'm not changing how I feel about Abortion.

But what if a woman got abortion early in her pregnancy? Before the first two weeks, you can't really call it "living" yet. It's more or less just a cell that's slowly evolving. At that stage, you can't really say it's a living human being.

Wish
February 5th, 2009, 04:59 PM
But what if a woman got abortion early in her pregnancy? Before the first two weeks, you can't really call it "living" yet. It's more or less just a cell that's slowly evolving. At that stage, you can't really say it's a living human being.

I believe that single cell is living and it would be considered murder if it was aborted. I know it sounds crazy to you people who are pro-choice, but that's my opinion and I won't be judged by it.

Spinor
February 5th, 2009, 05:00 PM
First of all I am pro-abortion if it isn't due to irresponsible reasons or changes of mind.

I also need to say that a fetus is part of the woman's body until it develops to the point were is has too many tissues to be simple.

Which would pretty much be: abortion is only good before the 2nd trimester.

Sublime
February 5th, 2009, 05:04 PM
I believe that single cell is living and it would be considered murder if it was aborted. I know it sounds crazy to you people who are pro-choice, but that's my opinion and I won't be judged by it.

My thoughts exactly.

No matter how young, old, big, or small, a fetus in my eyes will always be a human being. And abortion would be murder of this human.

But that's just me being the pro-life person I am.

ANARCHit3cht
February 5th, 2009, 05:16 PM
I am for it. Even though I believe that it is wrong, I am for it. It really is their choice. While that fetus could grow up to be a child, it wouldn't be wanted, or have a pretty bad life. They get abortion's because they don't the child, or simply can't own one. That could be due to emotional problems, or parents or whatever. I think, that if it was illegal lots of more people would end up dead. Teenage girls who didn't want one, would pay somebody who said that they could give them an abortion even if all that person used was a coat hanger. I am all for it, despite how much I think it is wrong.

wolf
February 5th, 2009, 05:30 PM
I am definitely anti-abortion. Doing it takes away a life that could have done great things, I think it is like murder.

Spinor
February 5th, 2009, 05:56 PM
Ok, so let me explain a few things.

The date of Birth is the day a person comes into the world.

A soul is pretty much the human essence in a body that gives consciousness.

However, a fetus isn't human because it can't provide for itself, as long as it is dependent on other systems, like any other human system, it is part of that body.

At the point were the fetus doesn't NEED the mother, when it can finally survive on its own outside even for a few minutes, then it is human, because it was able to live using its systems, but wasn't able to for long because of lack of development.

Before that point is objected. Its almost like as if an arm could lift something, but not for long because the muscle isn't developed by exercise enough. It was still capable.

Usually, a baby can survive at least some time by the time the third trimester comes by. However it still develops for higher chance of survival.

So in conclusion, adding by my last post, an abortion is Ok if it was unwanted due to rape in the first trimester, frowned upon in the second trimester, and probably illegal in the third trimester.

Because a fetus isn't human if it is dependent on another body.

Penguin13
February 5th, 2009, 06:03 PM
Well for me, no matter what the case is, it's murder.

(Prepare for me to go a little religious here.)
If that girl ended up getting pregnant, rape or otherwise, it was part of God's plan for her. But if she aborts it, taking that innocent life would be interfering with God's plan. Everything happens for a reason. And remember, a baby is God's opinion that life should go on.

Hrm.. EVERYTHING happens for a reason?
Does an innocent teen getting murdered in a drive-by shooting because they were standing by the target happen for a reason?
Does a child get born with a horrible, debilitating, deadly disease for a reason?
Does thousands of innocent people getting killed in a terrorist attack happen for a reason?

If so, please explain to me the reason. Please.

(I'd get more into the religious aspect of this, but I want to stick to the topic at hand. Maybe another time.)

And now for my opinion on abortion:

People choose to get abortions because they are not ready to have a baby. Whether it be financially, emotionally, or otherwise. I'm not speaking in terms of a case-by-case basis, but in general.

Sure, there are people who go out and have unprotected sex and just get an abortion. Sure, there are people that get raped. Sure, there are people that just can't afford it. Sure, there are honest accidents, such as a slipped or broken condom, ineffective birth control, etc. But really, if someone is dumb enough to have unprotected sex because they CAN get an abortion, they're too dumb to have a baby anyway.

Not everyone is a devout [religion]. Please don't force people to suffer just because YOU think it's wrong; Church and state were separated for a reason.

mystletainn
February 5th, 2009, 06:13 PM
I support abortion. I'm not one to support telling people what do (no matter how gross it is).

Volkner's Apprentice
February 5th, 2009, 07:00 PM
I'm anti-abortion for most cases. If the woman was raped, any incest occurs, or it's an extreme danger to the woman's life I support having the decision to remove the pre-child ASAP.

Otherwise, my response is don't have sex, ya lame-os. Sex is special and not part of an initial love process. I'm not preaching abstinence, but I do believe that couples should definitely be together for quite a long time before they consider it. Not that people don't have the ability to really get to know each other fast enough so that process quickens, but seriously...can't you like, wait? XD Self-control. Sex isn't an activity you do because you and your loved one are bored on a Friday night.

In my recent love of genetic sciences, I'm going to bring a slightly iffy topic in. I also support abortion if genetic testing during the first trimester proves that the child may have a serious genetic disease or mental disability is likely. There is no reason any being of life should have to go through the torture of living a life as a mentally disabled person. With todays testing, many of the possibilities can be determined well in advanced, as long as the couple agrees to it as a worthwhile expense before/during pregnancy (which of course, it definitely is.) I mean..a lifespan of 30 years at best, a gigantically difficult life in school/career building, a hardtime making friends?..it's too hard to cope with. Not to mention the stress, strain, and pressure of all varities it puts on the caretakers. If it can be stopped, it should be.

wolf
February 5th, 2009, 07:07 PM
I'm anti-abortion for most cases. If the woman was raped, any incest occurs, or it's an extreme danger to the woman's life I support having the decision to remove the pre-child ASAP.

Otherwise, my response is don't have sex, ya lame-os. Sex is special and not part of an initial love process. I'm not preaching abstinence, but I do believe that couples should definitely be together for quite a long time before they consider it. Not that people don't have the ability to really get to know each other fast enough so that process quickens, but seriously...can't you like, wait? XD Self-control. Sex isn't an activity you do because you and your loved one are bored on a Friday night.

In my recent love of genetic sciences, I'm going to bring a slightly iffy topic in. I also support abortion if genetic testing during the first trimester proves that the child may have a serious genetic disease or mental disability is likely. There is no reason any being of life should have to go through the torture of living a life as a mentally disabled person. With todays testing, many of the possibilities can be determined well in advanced, as long as the couple agrees to it as a worthwhile expense before/during pregnancy (which of course, it definitely is.) I mean..a lifespan of 30 years at best, a gigantically difficult life in school/career building, a hardtime making friends?..it's too hard to cope with. Not to mention the stress, strain, and pressure of all varities it puts on the caretakers. If it can be stopped, it should be.
Agreed all the way! That is what I think.

Tinhead Bruce
February 5th, 2009, 07:13 PM
@ Sublimea long time ago: I haven't had time to read all these posts, but if everything happens for a reason, then obviously the "baby " (not really) being aborted is part of the almighty gosh's plan as well. You can't just say that all things happen for a reason, and then contradict your own statement by saying that by doing something you are going against the big dude in the sky's plan.

I live in a very politically active, and liberal city, and through that I am well-informed. I am pro choice. I think it is situational, but I support choice in most cases.

However, there are some situations I do not think an abortion is in order. Not because "it goes against God's plan," but because I think it's taking the easy way out. Say a young girl gets pregnant, not through incest or rape. Getting an abortion takes a huge emotional and physical toll, but the girl is basically getting a pass by having the ability to get an abortion. Making the girl have the baby will teach her life lessons, and make her learn. I believe in this situation only if the family of the girl is stable enough to take care of the baby.

TRIFORCE89
February 5th, 2009, 08:48 PM
Religion aside, I think that even scientifically life begins at conception simply because you're dealing with living, human cells.

So, to me it is morally wrong. But, I think there can be some exceptions. In general, I would say pro-choice simply because the options are basically everything or nothing. Most of my opinions on controversial topics generally lie in a grey, middle area. But that's never an option, so I have to pick one of them. XD

For me, I think it should be available to expectant mothers where going through with child birth would be harmful or even deadly to her. I think the option should also be available to those who were raped and other such extreme cases. I would prefer that they give the child up for adoption instead, but that's not my decision to make.

Other than that, no. Not really for it. Seems weird to me that in one room in the hospital you'll be having an abortion and in the room next door they're trying to save a premature baby. I don't want to see it become an active form of birth control (not opposed to contraception except for when it takes place after the fact). I would like to think that most women would not take advantage of it if the option is available, but... it's all about convenience. More new mothers are having C-sections out of convenience and not necessity despite it actually being riskier than the traditional route. So, it wouldn't surprise me and I'd rather it be avoided.

Also, partial birth abortions = no.

jasonresno
February 5th, 2009, 09:21 PM
Huh. No.
I have an adopted sister, and I've been to many adoption centers.
The chance of getting adopted and living a better life is as common as winning the loterry. I could feel the suffering of the children that were imprisoned there.

Also, 'life' itself is something very relative.
Anyone who comes saying 'potential of life', 'to be life', 'almost life', please, be more specific. Because I fail to see a point in that.

edit;
And agreeing with matt561 below. Please, keep religion out of this.

For those of faith, they have the right to let their religion influence their beliefs and decisions. And, in fact, it's expected of them.

With that said: I am a religious person but even I've come to a more liberal stance on abortion.

First off: Nobody is PRO abortion. Nobody wants to kill unborn children. Nobody wants to be put in that situation. So I think that moniker is completely wrong and misleading. I think the question should be: Should abortions be legal or no.

And I think they should be legal but extremely regulated. They should only be used:
--To save the life of the Woman.
--Or in the event of rape.

There is no other way I could possibly see abortions being alright. Abortions are not a form of birth control. Abortions are not for the reckless Ashley and Joes that say "We don't need a condom.".

But the sad fact is that if a woman wants an abortion then she'll find a way to have one...with or without the clinic. And that's scary.

and whyyy must everywhere I turn there be heavy topics to discuss that I can't keep out of.

Ughah.

Blitzballer
February 5th, 2009, 09:38 PM
I think this is a bad title for the thread. No one is really pro-abortion. You can be pro-choice, but pro-abortion would imply that you think abortion is the only logical answer all the time. Same with anti-abortion, which implies that you'd do anything to stop it (say, blow up an abortion clinic). Most of you won't agree with me on that last one, but I'm going by terminology. Now, pro-life, on the other hand, means you agree with the preservation of life.

Now, my lecture aside...I'm taking the legal side. I think a woman has a right to get an abortion, regardless of her reasoning. That doesn't mean that I would chose abortion, but I think it's her choice. Also, if she isn't allowed to get it, she'd go to some back-alley doctor to do it, or do it herself, and probably end hurting herself. I would accept teenage pregnancy as a reason to get an abortion, or rape/incest. I don't like it when people abort a fetus because of mental disability. I think it is also acceptable if the mother's life is in danger (i.e. ectopic pregnancy).

Also, lets be real here people. The majority of people get abortions for reasons above. I don't think it'd be fair to lump those abortions in with the abortions that take place in China, for example. I'm talking about their method for decreasing their population.

I have other reasons to justify my stance, but that's the gist of it.

jasonresno
February 5th, 2009, 09:41 PM
I think this is a bad title for the thread. No one is really pro-abortion. You can be pro-choice, but pro-abortion would imply that you think abortion is the only logical answer all the time. Same with anti-abortion, which implies that you'd do anything to stop it (say, blow up an abortion clinic). Most of you won't agree with me on that last one, but I'm going by terminology. Now, pro-life, on the other hand, means you agree with the preservation of life.

Now, my lecture aside...I'm taking the legal side. I think a woman has a right to get an abortion, regardless of her reasoning. That doesn't mean that I would chose abortion, but I think it's her choice. Also, if she isn't allowed to get it, she'd go to some back-alley doctor to do it, or do it herself, and probably end hurting herself. I would accept teenage pregnancy as a reason to get an abortion, or rape/incest. I don't like it when people abort a fetus because of mental disability. I think it is also acceptable if the mother's life is in danger (i.e. ectopic pregnancy).

Also, lets be real here people. The majority of people get abortions for reasons above. I don't think it'd be fair to lump those abortions in with the abortions that take place in China, for example. I'm talking about their method for decreasing their population.

I have other reasons to justify my stance, but that's the gist of it.

Doesn't it seem absurd that the child should suffer for the woman's mistake (assuming the pregnancy was caused because of unprotected consensual sex)? I think teens should have to own up for their mistakes as well.

But you did flesh out the big problem. If a woman is denied at a legitimate clinic she'll find her own way to do it and hurt herself in the process. That's the catch 22 of the situation.

Blitzballer
February 5th, 2009, 09:50 PM
Doesn't it seem absurd that the child should suffer for the woman's mistake (assuming the pregnancy was caused because of unprotected consensual sex)? I think teens should have to own up for their mistakes as well.

But you did flesh out the big problem. If a woman is denied at a legitimate clinic she'll find her own way to do it and hurt herself in the process. That's the catch 22 of the situation.

This is my honest question: In the early stages, does a fetus feel pain, etc.?

If I had to answer this, I'd say no, because there isn't a nervous system. If someone'd like to explain this to me (in a scientific, not religious, way), I'd be happy to listen.

And to answer you're question (even though I think it was rhetorical), I don't think it's absurd. Based on the answer I just gave to my own question (haha), I think bringing a child into the world to an unfit mother is worse, because it's just continuing the circle. Now, this isn't even considering adoption. That has it's downsides/problems, but it's my preferred solution to the teen pregnancy problem.

Regardless of how I feel about abortion of a teen pregnancy, I think the teen has every legal right to get one.

jasonresno
February 5th, 2009, 09:58 PM
That's the thing though. I don't think it matters if a fetus can feel pain at all because the bottom line is that, if left alone, a child will be born. That's all I need to know.

What if your mother, at the time, wasn't fit to have a kid. What if she had aborted you? Say your best friends mother didn't look fit to have a kid and decided to just abort her? That's the line you walk with abortions. Maybe a fetus doesn't feel pain. Maybe that question is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there IS a child waiting to be born.

The what-if game is crazy. And this is me speaking completely without my religious bias. What if Obama had been aborted? What if Einstein had been aborted? To lose life before it's even been truly granted just seems so tragic.

I think I've come full circle on this issue. And just a disclaimer: If my views rub you the wrong way just let me know. I don't mean to get anyone upset and if you let me know I'll be sure to keep my posts in check.

Amachi
February 5th, 2009, 10:05 PM
I guess no one read icomeanon6's link? Here's a link to the entire book. (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_contents.asp)

And some of my favourite quotes.
A Realtime ultrasound video tape and movie of a 12- week suction abortion is commercially available as, The Silent Scream, narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title...

and in other chapters...
In this method, the abortionist must first paralyze the cervical muscle ring (womb opening) and then stretch it open. This is difficult because it is hard or "green" and not ready to open. He then inserts a hollow plastic tube, which has a knife-like edge on the tip, into the uterus. The suction tears the baby’s body into pieces. He then cuts the deeply rooted placenta from the inner wall of the uterus. The scraps are sucked out into a bottle (see color photo in back of book). The suction is 29 times more powerful than a home vacuum cleaner.

Because of these problems, the D&E or Dilatation & Evacuation method was developed and largely replaced the above. It involves the live dismemberment of the baby and piecemeal removal from below.

A pliers-like instrument is used because the baby’s bones are calcified, as is the skull. There is no anesthetic for the baby. The abortionist inserts the instrument up into the uterus, seizes a leg or other part of the body, and, with a twisting motion, tears it from the baby’s body. This is repeated again and again. The spine must be snapped, and the skull crushed to remove them. The nurse’s job is to reassemble the body parts to be sure that all are removed.

If you can't guess, I'm pro-life.

@I'm Betting On Alice: You're wrong. (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_14.asp)

@jasonresno: Why are you apologising? There is no need to.

Also, everyone should refrain from involving religion in this, just because your beliefs don't apply to everyone.

Aether
February 5th, 2009, 10:51 PM
I don't really understand the huge deal people make over this controversy, but I do personally believe a woman has the right to do whatever the heck she wants with what's inside her body.

.02

Melody
February 5th, 2009, 11:27 PM
Personally, I'm a Pro-Lifer. I do not condone abortion. Now, I'm not going to sit here and try to rattle off the moral reasons why or anything like that, because to be perfectly honest, I'm not a bible thumper.

I do believe that abortion should be allowed in certain situations. Only if the health of the Mother and/or Child are in extreme danger, should there be an option to abort. If there is a medical condition where the birth is likely to kill the mother or cause harm to the child, then abortion isn't really wrong. So I'm against any law which would completely ban abortion. I just think that expecting mothers shouldn't be able to walk into any clinic or doctor's office or whatever and ask for one. It should be a highly regulated procedure.

Now I know you Pro-Choice fans will probably gripe at me for this, but not even being raped is a good enough reason to abort a child. If the mother and child are healthy, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO ABORT.

If the mother doesn't feel like she is capable of taking proper care of the child, she should be able to (within the child's first year of life), put the child up for adoption, without fear of penalty by law or society. There are plenty of couples who would love to have children, but cannot have one themselves because either the male or female is sterile, or have other medical problems.

Just to clarify, I'm not against contraceptive measures, like the morning after pill. That's not too bad either. I'm just saying that abortions ought to be heavily regulated. as for rape victims, abortion shouldn't be an option after a set timeframe. So if a woman is raped, but she keeps her mouth shut about it and ends up finding out she's pregnant a month later....it's her own fault for not reporting it and having herself checked immediately afterward.

Also, if it's still in the embryonic stage, I really dont consider it a person until it reaches the Fetus stage.

Idiot!
February 6th, 2009, 01:15 AM
I am pro-choice. Different people, different opinion, different response. So, just because it's murder to you doesn't mean it is murder to someone else. That's why pregnant women should have a choice to abort or not to abort. It's pretty simple when it comes to the legality(if the word exists) of abortion. Let the girls decide. Men can never get pregnant naturally, so who's to say men should decide if abortion is legal or not.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 01:51 AM
I don't really understand the huge deal people make over this controversy, but I do personally believe a woman has the right to do whatever the heck she wants with what's inside her body.

.02
Back in the day people could do whatever they wanted to their slaves, including ending their life. The only difference now is that people think it's alright to kill a life because of it's age, handicap and place of location.

And what's inside her body isn't just a "thing". It's a human life. A unique human life. It may be her body, but not her life. Plus, half of the murdered kids are male.
Personally, I'm a Pro-Lifer. I do not condone abortion. Now, I'm not going to sit here and try to rattle off the moral reasons why or anything like that, because to be perfectly honest, I'm not a bible thumper.

I do believe that abortion should be allowed in certain situations. Only if the health of the Mother and/or Child are in extreme danger, should there be an option to abort. If there is a medical condition where the birth is likely to kill the mother or cause harm to the child, then abortion isn't really wrong. So I'm against any law which would completely ban abortion. I just think that expecting mothers shouldn't be able to walk into any clinic or doctor's office or whatever and ask for one. It should be a highly regulated procedure.

Now I know you Pro-Choice fans will probably gripe at me for this, but not even being raped is a good enough reason to abort a child. If the mother and child are healthy, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO ABORT.

If the mother doesn't feel like she is capable of taking proper care of the child, she should be able to (within the child's first year of life), put the child up for adoption, without fear of penalty by law or society. There are plenty of couples who would love to have children, but cannot have one themselves because either the male or female is sterile, or have other medical problems.

Just to clarify, I'm not against contraceptive measures, like the morning after pill. That's not too bad either. I'm just saying that abortions ought to be heavily regulated. as for rape victims, abortion shouldn't be an option after a set timeframe. So if a woman is raped, but she keeps her mouth shut about it and ends up finding out she's pregnant a month later....it's her own fault for not reporting it and having herself checked immediately afterward.

Also, if it's still in the embryonic stage, I really dont consider it a person until it reaches the Fetus stage.
If the health of the child is in danger an abortion won't help it o_o
If both lives are in danger and both can be saved, fantastic! But it's usually the case that whenever the mother has to have an abortion or else she'll be risking her life, the child is already doomed anyway, so it's better to save one life than to doom both. The problem now is that abortion is mostly used to kill one life instead of saving one.

You're right about the lack of regulation regarding abortion. Accurate records aren't even kept, plus the procedure differs greatly to the way other surgeries are carried out.
http://i40.tinypic.com/28busrl.jpg
from here (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_17.asp)

I don't understand why you're okay with the morning after pill, since it works in three ways, two of which are contraception, the final being an abortifacients.

Why the distinction between stages? Nothing changes in between except the child's size - it has human DNA from the start.

Also, you're not pro-life.
I am pro-choice. Different people, different opinion, different response. So, just because it's murder to you doesn't mean it is murder to someone else. That's why pregnant women should have a choice to abort or not to abort. It's pretty simple when it comes to the legality(if the word exists) of abortion. Let the girls decide. Men can never get pregnant naturally, so who's to say men should decide if abortion is legal or not.
Murder is murder. The unborn child is human in every way, and it's murder if you kill it.

It's mostly women who participate in pro-life movements, but regardless, it could be my child. It could be my grandchild. It could be my nephew, niece, or cousin.

It could just be another human life. Why can't I care for that life? Why does the rights of the mother override that of the unborn child? Why can anyone decide whether the unborn child lives or dies?

Furthermore, by your logic doctors wouldn't be able to treat a disease unless they've had the disease.

Angela
February 6th, 2009, 07:05 AM
Well I'm pro abortion, I think the baby is not a baby until it's to big to abort, tho I do love baby's and if I get pregnant what the hey, I'll keep it, but if I got raped then I WILL have it aborted, it's that simple, no one takes away my pride, my dignity then expects me to carry something that was meant to go into the bedsheets, I would never give the rapist the honor of me having his child, I would not bring him the joy of being a father of a child, tho some other weak woman would do that, then I can say for myself I that I would abort the rape baby,


If I'm not sick, or the pregnancy was caused by a rape, then I'll definitely keep the baby.

So I'm pro abortion.

It seams to me that the ones that are mostly against this are the ones that have no say in this, weird.

And yes I'm that interdependent that I won't let the father of my baby tell me what I'll do to the baby,
If I want to keep it then I will, if I want it out then it's going out.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 07:30 AM
The baby is never too big to kill, unless it's already born, but in some countries like Japan, they aren't officially counted as born until 72 hours after they leave the womb, meaning a child can be killed legally.

It's actually not all that easy to get pregnant - many married couples try for ages without any success. While there are those who are unfortunate enough to become impregnated, is it fair to kill the child for the fathers crime? Would you execute the children of a murderer (or the abortionist)?

"Since men can’t get pregnant, they have nothing to say about abortion." If that were true, doctors couldn’t treat a disease unless they had it first. How could we train funeral directors when they have never died? How can we oppose Hitler’s genocide if we’re not Germans or Jews — or slavery if we were not slaves or slave holders? In any case, each child has a father. And 52% of all unborn babies are boys.

And it's as much the father's child as it is the mother's. You just want to kill the baby when you could give birth and never see it again.

Josephine
February 6th, 2009, 07:37 AM
is it fair to kill the child for the fathers crime?The father? It takes two to have any chance of getting pregnant.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 07:45 AM
Uh... yes, I know. I was talking about in the case of male-on-female rape where the female does not consent, that's all. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Cassino
February 6th, 2009, 07:47 AM
I don't think I have a say and so play the indifference card.

Angela
February 6th, 2009, 07:49 AM
The father? It takes two to have any chance of getting pregnant.
It takes two, but in couple of years the men won't be needed, they can take cell's from the woman or other womans (Most likely other womans since the gens need to be different so the baby will be healthy) and make a child from the cells, I don't remember when I read this, but it was in a magazine within the past 2 years.

As a member of the male population, I don't think I have a say and so play the indifference card.
Amen to that!

Barney.
February 6th, 2009, 07:53 AM
Usually in these kind of things i vote the choice closest to: "I don't care"

But in this case...I am no.

I think the fact that you are killing an innocent child is horrible...

Now, I know this may not have been the womans choice to become pregnant, but,

Why kill the baby? Why not give it to a loving family who are unable to hae kids of their own..

Why not put it up for adoption?..

Surely that's better than killing a baby.

Milke
February 6th, 2009, 08:11 AM
Well for me, no matter what the case is, it's murder.

(Prepare for me to go a little religious here.)
If that girl ended up getting pregnant, rape or otherwise, it was part of God's plan for her. But if she aborts it, taking that innocent life would be interfering with God's plan. Everything happens for a reason. And remember, a baby is God's opinion that life should go on.

This. I'm glad to see another person not afraid to display their religious beliefs on a pokemon site. =) *Thumbs up*

If a person kills a pregnant woman, he is charged with a double homicide. A fetus is a living child. It is murder to "terminate a pregnancy."

Cassino
February 6th, 2009, 09:18 AM
Why kill the baby? Why not give it to a loving family who are unable to hae kids of their own..

Why not put it up for adoption?..

Surely that's better than killing a baby.
Human childbirth is comparatively dangerous.
I would be very aprehensive.

Gold warehouse
February 6th, 2009, 09:50 AM
I am pro-life, but I'm not one to tell anybody what to do with their own body. Also if giving birth to the child would kill the mother and baby or something similar then in that case abortion would be the best option.
It's a hard choice to make.

wakachamo
February 6th, 2009, 10:10 AM
Well for me, no matter what the case is, it's murder.

(Prepare for me to go a little religious here.)
If that girl ended up getting pregnant, rape or otherwise, it was part of God's plan for her. But if she aborts it, taking that innocent life would be interfering with God's plan. Everything happens for a reason. And remember, a baby is God's opinion that life should go on.

So you're saying God plans on raping people?

K.

Clairissa
February 6th, 2009, 10:28 AM
Pro-choice.
The option should always be there, I for one don't care if it's easier in your mind to put the child up for adoption, if you think it is, you can push it out and tell me how easy that one, maybe you'll get a nice little c-section scar...
Though I've never been pregnant, nor do I plan on being anytime soon, or for a long time, and if I do I probably will get an abortion because my life isn't exactly on track and I don't need some kid in my stomach making it worse before it's even sentient.

txteclipse
February 6th, 2009, 11:35 AM
Back in the day people could do whatever they wanted to their slaves, including ending their life. The only difference now is that people think it's alright to kill a life because of it's age, handicap and place of location.

And what's inside her body isn't just a "thing". It's a human life. A unique human life. It may be her body, but not her life. Plus, half of the murdered kids are male.

If the health of the child is in danger an abortion won't help it o_o
If both lives are in danger and both can be saved, fantastic! But it's usually the case that whenever the mother has to have an abortion or else she'll be risking her life, the child is already doomed anyway, so it's better to save one life than to doom both. The problem now is that abortion is mostly used to kill one life instead of saving one.

You're right about the lack of regulation regarding abortion. Accurate records aren't even kept, plus the procedure differs greatly to the way other surgeries are carried out.
http://i40.tinypic.com/28busrl.jpg
from here (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_17.asp)

I don't understand why you're okay with the morning after pill, since it works in three ways, two of which are contraception, the final being an abortifacients.

Why the distinction between stages? Nothing changes in between except the child's size - it has human DNA from the start.

Also, you're not pro-life.

Murder is murder. The unborn child is human in every way, and it's murder if you kill it.

It's mostly women who participate in pro-life movements, but regardless, it could be my child. It could be my grandchild. It could be my nephew, niece, or cousin.

It could just be another human life. Why can't I care for that life? Why does the rights of the mother override that of the unborn child? Why can anyone decide whether the unborn child lives or dies?

Furthermore, by your logic doctors wouldn't be able to treat a disease unless they've had the disease.

Thank you! You said exactly what I think about this subject. I was losing hope that anyone else thought the same as I do.

Clairissa
February 6th, 2009, 11:49 AM
It could just be another human life. Why can't I care for that life? Why does the rights of the mother override that of the unborn child? Why can anyone decide whether the unborn child lives or dies?

Why 'do' you care for that life? Because the mother wants to "kill" it? Because you think it should have some sort of fighting chance? Another 'why' question, why do you get to decide for someone else if they should put themselves through the months of pregnancy? The fact is you are not that person and you cannot decide for them, the lack of choice is that of saying "we control you and your body".


Furthermore, by your logic doctors wouldn't be able to treat a disease unless they've had the disease.

No, by that logic it would be "doctors cannot treat disease unless they are able to get them", he did not say "only pregnant women and mothers should decide", he said "only those who are able to get pregnant should decide".

Mitchman
February 6th, 2009, 11:52 AM
I might sound down right morally screwed up in the head but i am both. Why? Cause look. Lets say someone who knows everything and such is married. But they arent ready for a kid. Ending up pregnant and such during a marriage wantful or not should be a wonderful thing and you should take the experience now cause you might not think so but everyone no matter how terrible they seem are parents from birth. On the other hand if my girlfriend and i were to have a little bedroom rompus and the safety measures had a loophole i would drag her straight into that office. I am sorry but i am not going to be on the recieving end from her parents until i am old enough to wed.

wakachamo
February 6th, 2009, 11:58 AM
I might sound down right morally screwed up in the head but i am both. Why? Cause look. Lets say someone who knows everything and such is married. But they arent ready for a kid. Ending up pregnant and such during a marriage wantful or not should be a wonderful thing and you should take the experience now cause you might not think so but everyone no matter how terrible they seem are parents from birth. On the other hand if my girlfriend and i were to have a little bedroom rompus and the safety measures had a loophole i would drag her straight into that office. I am sorry but i am not going to be on the recieving end from her parents until i am old enough to wed.

I think you need to learn to speak English before you even try to form a paragraph.

Gunn
February 6th, 2009, 12:03 PM
I think you need to learn to speak English before you even try to form a paragraph.

HAHAHAA! pwned.

I have to say that I'm for it. My sister had an abortion. Pretty much the entire story behind that is what makes my stand for abortion today.

Mitchman
February 6th, 2009, 12:21 PM
I think you need to learn to speak English before you even try to form a paragraph.
While this is off topic a bit i really dont care. English is my first language and well i really dont feel like typing properly just long sentences. If you have a problem well then yeah.

I Laugh at your Misfortune!
February 6th, 2009, 12:21 PM
I might sound down right morally screwed up in the head but i am both. Why? Cause look. Lets say someone who knows everything and such is married. But they arent ready for a kid. Ending up pregnant and such during a marriage wantful or not should be a wonderful thing and you should take the experience now cause you might not think so but everyone no matter how terrible they seem are parents from birth. On the other hand if my girlfriend and i were to have a little bedroom rompus and the safety measures had a loophole i would drag her straight into that office. I am sorry but i am not going to be on the recieving end from her parents until i am old enough to wed.

Well, does that not put you in the same position as someone who says abortions should never, ever happen, under any circumstances. i have the smae thing to say to both parties - the woman is the one who is pregnant, stop telling her what to do. Dragging someone to an abortion clinic and forcing them to abort their baby is completely morally wrong.

Dukey
February 6th, 2009, 01:21 PM
I think it should be allowed.
But maybe a court could decide.
I mean, if someone was raped then that's fair enough, but if it's jst cause they are some chick that reckons she's all that, no way.

Ripper
February 6th, 2009, 01:29 PM
It's called science, and it's perfectly possible to detect brain activity. By the fourteenth week, the fetus has feeling throughout its entire body. Babies don't just magically start feeling things once they're born, they're just as alive while in the womb as they are outside of it. Neurosurgeons have stated that a partial birth abortion may be the most agonizing experience an infant can have. Try reading this (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_14.asp), the authors can explain it better than I can.

I wasn't talking about waiting 14 weeks. That is wrong.

To clarify, abortion should be done ASAP.

s0nido
February 6th, 2009, 01:32 PM
It all depends on circumstances. I don't support pre-marital sex or extra-marital sex, so anything that goes wrong is your fault. If you do have a baby when you are not ready to, just nurture it first, then give it away to one of those places. It was your problem if you got into a mess with your girlfriend or someone else, so you should be the one to look after the baby.

But if a girl was raped and she got pregnant from that, well, she should have an abortion, then. It wouldn't be fair for her to look after something she didn't want.

Also, if the child will turn out deformed and will live a life of suffering, the pregancy should be aborted. It would mean a hard and painful life for the child, and it wouldn't be right for the parents to live with that pain in them.

But this is a human life we are talking about, so we shouldn't be quick in our decisions.

Cherrim
February 6th, 2009, 01:46 PM
If I were to be raped, I'm preeeeetty sure I wouldn't want a constant reminder every. single. day. for about 9+ months. It would be traumatizing enough without having to carry around and nurture a baby I don't even want and that would only remind me of it. I'm pretty sure that would be just horrible for my mental health. Sure, I could put it up for adoption but uh... yeah that's not gonna get me my 9 months back. And pregnancy isn't, from what I've heard, a lot of fun. Yeah, it's selfish but hey--my body. I'd like to have control over it as much as possible. :) And I do realize the actual likelihood of getting pregnant because of rape and whatnot isn't very high but the chance is there all the same.

As for an abortion itself, there's tons of trauma with that too. I hate saying terms like this but I don't know anyone personally who's had an abortion so... a friend of a friend of mine had one and my friend says she's still traumatized by it. She regrets it even though it was the "right thing" at the time. She was a heavy drug or alcohol (or both?) user and because of her unhealthiness the baby probably would have been very unhealthy and it wasn't a very good situation, etc. But it's not like the people who go in for abortions--be it because of rape, incest, unprotected sex, etc.--come out all happy with the whole ordeal. They're not thinking "yes, I don't have to have that stupid baby!" It's not a lightly-made decision. Anyone who makes that choice likely thinks long and hard about it. Taking that choice from someone--forcing a woman to carry a baby she doesn't want, that wasn't her choice to conceive... I just don't like that. I can respect not wanting to take a life but until the government declares that a baby is a baby from the moment of conception, it's legal in my eyes and thus the choice should be there.

Besides, if they properly legalize it, it can be regulated more easily à la table that Ray linked to. It's just no one wants to touch the subject at all. I'd love to see abortion made fully legal with constraints: anyone underage needs full consent of their guardians to go through with it, it can only be done up to a certain point and after that the baby must be carried to term, etc. At the same time, the world really needs better birth control education (and maybe better availability of birth control to those underage). It might curb some of those people we all seem to mention having problems with--the ones who have unprotected sex and drop responsibility by getting an abortion when they inevitably get knocked up. But the rest of them with "legitimate" reasons for an abortion as people seem to be pointing out? Yeah, I'd like for them to have their choice.

And to the people saying if a woman gets raped, that was God's will for her or something to that extent? If you're taking it that way and twisting a human's free will so that it's manipulated like that by God (since it would've been the rapist's "free will" that caused it) then how can you say it wasn't God's will that the child was aborted? I'm probably going to get a "yeah but years of trauma != death" kind of answer so I dunno why I'm asking, really, but I don't see the basic difference at all to be honest.

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 03:24 PM
I can respect not wanting to take a life but until the government declares that a baby is a baby from the moment of conception, it's legal in my eyes and thus the choice should be there.
While that is true and I agree, I don't think that's the best of reasoning. There have been many minorities and groups in the past that weren't considered to be legal persons at one point. I don't think that would justify the killing of those people :\

I Laugh at your Misfortune!
February 6th, 2009, 04:06 PM
I agreed with almost all of what Lightning said:

I'd love to see abortion made fully legal with constraints: anyone underage needs full consent of their guardians to go through with it,

This, I don't necessarily agree with. What if we have the rape scenario and while the mother is pro-choice, her parents are devout, fundamental Catholics? Most people would say: 'let her have the abortion' but because her parents are dedicated to Pro-life, the decision has been made for her. I can see a serious problem arising from this. Granted, its unlikely, but it is a very compromising situation.

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 04:13 PM
I agreed with almost all of what Lightning said:



This, I don't necessarily agree with. What if we have the rape scenario and while the mother is pro-choice, her parents are devout, fundamental Catholics? Most people would say: 'let her have the abortion' but because her parents are dedicated to Pro-life, the decision has been made for her. I can see a serious problem arising from this. Granted, its unlikely, but it is a very compromising situation.
Then it's would be a no go. If you're underage then you're your parents responsibility.

Maybe if they make it match the age of consent, then the parents wouldn't be involved. But, I'm pretty sure patient-doctor confidentiality includes the parents until you're of legal age.

Neety
February 6th, 2009, 04:33 PM
Yeah, I think it does, because while it's in one way 'confidential' if an underage girl gets pregnant there's a law that doctors are responsible for the wellbeing of a minor.

Personally, I wouldn't abort if I was the one carrying the child, even if I was raped, but that's only because that's my belief, also I have a condition wherein my fertility would be compromised if I had an abortion. I think under what I would call exceptional circumstances for example if a woman was raped or the child would be born severely disabled to the point where their existence would be full of needless suffering, rape is an option. If a girl is unfortunate enough to fall pregnant without planning then I don't think abortion should be viewed as the 'easy way out'.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 04:38 PM
Hey who changed the tread title? Nice job (b'-')b

Human childbirth is comparatively dangerous.
I would be very aprehensive.
No it's not. In fact, having an abortion, which is an invasive and unnatural procedure, is much more life threatening than carrying a baby to full term. You can hemorrhage, get an infection from the procedure, or even become sterile. Furthermore, every abortion a woman has before her first full-term pregnancy is linked to increasing her chances of breast cancer.

In addition, you cannot forget the dangerous after affects of post-abortion syndrome, and while such a condition is comparable to post-natal depression, those suffering from PAS don't often get the help they need as abortion chambers don't provide it.
Why 'do' you care for that life? Because the mother wants to "kill" it? Because you think it should have some sort of fighting chance? Another 'why' question, why do you get to decide for someone else if they should put themselves through the months of pregnancy? The fact is you are not that person and you cannot decide for them, the lack of choice is that of saying "we control you and your body".

No, by that logic it would be "doctors cannot treat disease unless they are able to get them", he did not say "only pregnant women and mothers should decide", he said "only those who are able to get pregnant should decide".
Because a life is a life. I'm against killing, and I'm arguing for the rights of the unborn child, who by your logic, can be killed at any time through out the pregnancy in any number of ways, such as having their limbs torn off piece by piece while still inside the womb. Pleasant, huh?

ahaha, touché. But even so:

Most involved in the pro-life movement are in fact, women.
Men have to be involved. Fathers, politicians, doctors, teachers, people. Abortion concerns the life of another human being like ourselves (well, at least half of the unborn children). This does involve men.
Well, does that not put you in the same position as someone who says abortions should never, ever happen, under any circumstances. i have the smae thing to say to both parties - the woman is the one who is pregnant, stop telling her what to do. Dragging someone to an abortion clinic and forcing them to abort their baby is completely morally wrong.
Just because we're pro-life doesn't mean we don't allow exceptions. If the mother's life is in danger and the only way to save her is to abort the unborn child, then it's better to do that than to have them both die.
If I were to be raped, I'm preeeeetty sure I wouldn't want a constant reminder every. single. day. for about 9+ months. It would be traumatizing enough without having to carry around and nurture a baby I don't even want and that would only remind me of it. I'm pretty sure that would be just horrible for my mental health. Sure, I could put it up for adoption but uh... yeah that's not gonna get me my 9 months back. And pregnancy isn't, from what I've heard, a lot of fun. Yeah, it's selfish but hey--my body. I'd like to have control over it as much as possible. :) And I do realize the actual likelihood of getting pregnant because of rape and whatnot isn't very high but the chance is there all the same.

As for an abortion itself, there's tons of trauma with that too. I hate saying terms like this but I don't know anyone personally who's had an abortion so... a friend of a friend of mine had one and my friend says she's still traumatized by it. She regrets it even though it was the "right thing" at the time. She was a heavy drug or alcohol (or both?) user and because of her unhealthiness the baby probably would have been very unhealthy and it wasn't a very good situation, etc. But it's not like the people who go in for abortions--be it because of rape, incest, unprotected sex, etc.--come out all happy with the whole ordeal. They're not thinking "yes, I don't have to have that stupid baby!" It's not a lightly-made decision. Anyone who makes that choice likely thinks long and hard about it. Taking that choice from someone--forcing a woman to carry a baby she doesn't want, that wasn't her choice to conceive... I just don't like that. I can respect not wanting to take a life but until the government declares that a baby is a baby from the moment of conception, it's legal in my eyes and thus the choice should be there.

Besides, if they properly legalize it, it can be regulated more easily à la table that Ray linked to. It's just no one wants to touch the subject at all. I'd love to see abortion made fully legal with constraints: anyone underage needs full consent of their guardians to go through with it, it can only be done up to a certain point and after that the baby must be carried to term, etc. At the same time, the world really needs better birth control education (and maybe better availability of birth control to those underage). It might curb some of those people we all seem to mention having problems with--the ones who have unprotected sex and drop responsibility by getting an abortion when they inevitably get knocked up. But the rest of them with "legitimate" reasons for an abortion as people seem to be pointing out? Yeah, I'd like for them to have their choice.

And to the people saying if a woman gets raped, that was God's will for her or something to that extent? If you're taking it that way and twisting a human's free will so that it's manipulated like that by God (since it would've been the rapist's "free will" that caused it) then how can you say it wasn't God's will that the child was aborted? I'm probably going to get a "yeah but years of trauma != death" kind of answer so I dunno why I'm asking, really, but I don't see the basic difference at all to be honest.
I can't really explain it better than these people.

"Interestingly, the pregnant rape victim’s chief complaint is not that she is unwillingly pregnant, as bad as the experience is. The critical moment is fleeting in this area. It frequently pulls families together like never before. When women are impregnated through rape, their condition is treated in accordance, as are their families.

"We found this experience is forgotten, replaced by remembering the abortion, because it is what they did." M. Uchtman, Director, Suiciders Anonymous, Report to Cincinnati City Council, Sept. 1, 1981

"In the majority of these cases, the pregnant victim’s problems stem more from the trauma of rape than from the pregnancy itself." Mahkorn & Dolan, "Sexual Assault & Pregnancy." In New Perspectives on Human Abortion, University Publishers of Amer., 1981, pp. 182-199 239

As to what factors make it most difficult to continue her pregnancy, the opinions, attitudes, and beliefs of others were most frequently cited; in other words, how her loved ones treated her. Mahkorn, "Pregnancy & Sexual Assault." In Psychological Aspects of Abortion, University Publishers of Amer., 1979, pp. 53-72

What's legally declared a baby in the eyes of the government is a dangerous thing to follow. In Japan a child is not legally born till 72 hours after it comes out of the womb...

It wasn't God's will to cause the event of rape, but it was God's will to have the human life created. It's not that easy to have a child, many married couples try for months with no success, and the likelihood of a rape victim becoming impregnated is at 1 or 2 in a 1000. Some see that as a miracle.

And God doesn't command us to kill, you should know that :)

Clairissa
February 6th, 2009, 05:13 PM
Because a life is a life. I'm against killing, and I'm arguing for the rights of the unborn child, who by your logic, can be killed at any time through out the pregnancy in any number of ways, such as having their limbs torn off piece by piece while still inside the womb. Pleasant, huh?

ahaha, touché. But even so:

Most involved in the pro-life movement are in fact, women.
Men have to be involved. Fathers, politicians, doctors, teachers, people. Abortion concerns the life of another human being like ourselves (well, at least half of the unborn children). This does involve men.

"Oh no I didn't know what happens during an abortion!" Shall I use some PETA arguments? "Do you eat meat? Do you know what happens to animals they SLAUGHTER AND ABUSE?!!!!!!?!????!?!?" (Side-note: I eat meat)
Anyway, not everyone is religious, and not every religion is against abortion, while I'm not going to get into a religious debate, religion should 'never' be used as the reason to be pro-life.
Most involved in pro-choice are women, coincidence?! I think so! Since it effects:
1. Women
2. Women

Men do 'not' have to be involved, just because my husband would want me to have the child when I am not ready does not mean I will go through with it as an example.
If my father wanted me to have the kid and not get an abortion and I still didn't want too, since it's my choice and my body I will get one.
I don't listen to politicians and I'm not friends with any teachers, nor am I in school anymore, but a teacher should have no say in anything that happens to a student (unless the child is abused, but that's another thing), doctors can only tell you the risks of something, they cannot legally tell you that you can't have it done if it's something considered cosmetic unless you have a high chance of death or other complications.

Also, I did not say "at any point" during pregnancy should it be allowed, I never said the time in which an abortion can be preformed should be lengthened, I think it is fine, there is already enough time to decide if you want the child or not. What I am saying, is that if you are not ready for a child, you are not ready to go through labor, you are too young, the pregnancy happened under abhorrent conditions (rape, incest, ect), then abortion is more then acceptable if the mother wants that to happen, the choice should "always" be available for numerous reasons, a big one being someone will always want an abortion, and letting a women go to a doctor instead of a thug in an ally with a coat hanger and vacuum is a great option.

Removal of the option will not end abortions, but it will keep the women who get them much safer then if they were not readily available, nor should your own beliefs be forced on others, but again, I won't get into a religious debate.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 05:59 PM
"Oh no I didn't know what happens during an abortion!" Shall I use some PETA arguments? "Do you eat meat? Do you know what happens to animals they SLAUGHTER AND ABUSE?!!!!!!?!????!?!?" (Side-note: I eat meat)
Anyway, not everyone is religious, and not every religion is against abortion, while I'm not going to get into a religious debate, religion should 'never' be used as the reason to be pro-life.
Most involved in pro-choice are women, coincidence?! I think so! Since it effects:
1. Women
2. Women

Men do 'not' have to be involved, just because my husband would want me to have the child when I am not ready does not mean I will go through with it as an example.
If my father wanted me to have the kid and not get an abortion and I still didn't want too, since it's my choice and my body I will get one.
I don't listen to politicians and I'm not friends with any teachers, nor am I in school anymore, but a teacher should have no say in anything that happens to a student (unless the child is abused, but that's another thing), doctors can only tell you the risks of something, they cannot legally tell you that you can't have it done if it's something considered cosmetic unless you have a high chance of death or other complications.

Also, I did not say "at any point" during pregnancy should it be allowed, I never said the time in which an abortion can be preformed should be lengthened, I think it is fine, there is already enough time to decide if you want the child or not. What I am saying, is that if you are not ready for a child, you are not ready to go through labor, you are too young, the pregnancy happened under abhorrent conditions (rape, incest, ect), then abortion is more then acceptable if the mother wants that to happen, the choice should "always" be available for numerous reasons, a big one being someone will always want an abortion, and letting a women go to a doctor instead of a thug in an ally with a coat hanger and vacuum is a great option.

Removal of the option will not end abortions, but it will keep the women who get them much safer then if they were not readily available, nor should your own beliefs be forced on others, but again, I won't get into a religious debate.

You didn't even quote the part where I mentioned God, so why are you bringing up religion? I mean fair enough, not everyone follows the same faith so in an discussion like this it's pointless. I was only responding to another post, otherwise I wouldn't have brought God into this (cause I know how sensitive some of you pro-abortion folks are).

Oh and unborn children aren't animals. I'll go kill an animal right now, just for funsies, if I could be bothered.

You realise half of the children killed in womb are male, right?

You're making this whole thing about the mother while completely ignoring the child inside. I'm fine with people doing whatever they want with their body, but the child is another body, unique, with their own heartbeat and brainwaves. They react to light, sound, and even the emotions of the mother. Why should anyone be able to kill it? (besides the obvious saving the mother thing)

I'm gonna quote Abraham Lincoln here:
"No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong."

People used to be fine killing their black slaves back in the day, and the situation with abortion is basically the same thing today.

Abortions, even when performed legally, aren't all that safe. Furthermore, mother's aren't warned of the dangers of infection, sterility, hemorrhaging, cancer, increased likelihood of premature birthing or miscarriage in future pregnancies, and post-abortion syndrome. The only change from back-alley abortions is that now you go through the front door. All the dangers remain the same. Deaths didn't spike downwards once abortions were legalised in any nation, such as in the U.S.

http://i43.tinypic.com/2rxd251.jpg

Deaths still occurring today however, are now the result of legal abortions. Furthermore, these deaths are either misrepresented or under reported.

And the coathanger stories are all myths.

Clairissa
February 6th, 2009, 06:13 PM
You didn't even quote the part where I mentioned God, so why are you bringing up religion? I mean fair enough, not everyone follows the same faith so in an discussion like this it's pointless. I was only responding to another post, otherwise I wouldn't have brought God into this (cause I know how sensitive some of you pro-abortion folks are).

I brought it up because even though what I had in quote from you had nothing to do with it, the rest did.

Oh and unborn children aren't animals. I'll go kill an animal right now, just for funsies, if I could be bothered.

I never said they were, but killing an animal for no reason is still not a good thing to do, both because coming from a pro-lifer it's hypocritical and because killing animals "for fun" outside of hunting is normal considered psychopathic tendencies.

You realise half of the children killed in womb are male, right?

That has anything to do with... What? A fetus is a fetus, the gender has nothing to do with it, if more were women you would have 'less' of a problem with it?

You're making this whole thing about the mother while completely ignoring the child inside. I'm fine with people doing whatever they want with their body, but the child is another body, unique, with their own heartbeat and brainwaves. They react to light, sound, and even the emotions of the mother. Why should anyone be able to kill it? (besides the obvious saving the mother thing)

It's not a child until it's actually moving around, becoming sentient, until then it's pretty much just like fungus or mold, it grows but it doesn't know anything at all.
Go ahead and say "you're calling fetuses fungus!" but a fetus is pretty much a parasite, it gives nothing to the mother while it's inside and siphons nutrients from her, but that's nothing to do with this.

I'm gonna quote Abraham Lincoln here:
"No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong."

People used to be fine killing their black slaves back in the day, and the situation with abortion is basically the same thing today.

No, it's not, if anything the fetus/child makes the parent work more and provide for it, the situation is backwards if you want to use that as an example.

Abortions, even when performed legally, aren't all that safe. Furthermore, mother's aren't warned of the dangers of infection, sterility, hemorrhaging, cancer, increased likelihood of premature birthing or miscarriage in future pregnancies, and post-abortion syndrome. The only change from back-alley abortions is that now you go through the front door. All the dangers remain the same. Deaths didn't spike downwards once abortions were legalised in any nation, such as in the U.S.

http://i43.tinypic.com/2rxd251.jpg

Deaths still occurring today however, are now the result of legal abortions. Furthermore, these deaths are either misrepresented or under reported.

And the coathanger stories are all myths.

They do not happen as often as you may think, you gave a graph for reported illegal abortions and not even a source for your own "facts", and coathanger abortions being a myth?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-induced_abortion

Many women actually do panic over the controversies of abortion if they want one and some try to do it themselves, normally leading to death.

Cassino
February 6th, 2009, 06:29 PM
I find this thread title confusing now, explain please.

No it's not.
What it is comparatively dangerous to is the childbirth of other mammals, not abortion procedures.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 07:07 PM
I brought it up because even though what I had in quote from you had nothing to do with it, the rest did.

I never said they were, but killing an animal for no reason is still not a good thing to do, both because coming from a pro-lifer it's hypocritical and because killing animals "for fun" outside of hunting is normal considered psychopathic tendencies.

That has anything to do with... What? A fetus is a fetus, the gender has nothing to do with it, if more were women you would have 'less' of a problem with it?

It's not a child until it's actually moving around, becoming sentient, until then it's pretty much just like fungus or mold, it grows but it doesn't know anything at all.
Go ahead and say "you're calling fetuses fungus!" but a fetus is pretty much a parasite, it gives nothing to the mother while it's inside and siphons nutrients from her, but that's nothing to do with this.

No, it's not, if anything the fetus/child makes the parent work more and provide for it, the situation is backwards if you want to use that as an example.

They do not happen as often as you may think, you gave a graph for reported illegal abortions and not even a source for your own "facts", and coathanger abortions being a myth?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-induced_abortion

Many women actually do panic over the controversies of abortion if they want one and some try to do it themselves, normally leading to death.
You mean the last lines of my post? Sure, cause that summarised my entire post.

An animal != a human. And you meant to say that hunters aren't doing it for fun? Besides, it's irrelevant in this discussion.

Though you're right, I probably wouldn't be able to kill an animal for no reason - but most abortions are done without reason.

No, it's a human, with DNA and a yearning for life. Fungus isn't human. You're not even being scientifically accurate and just use such words to dehumanise the child, making it easier to kill.

Of course the gender wouldn't make a difference, but you're all claiming how gender makes a difference as to who has a say on abortion.

From the moment of fertilisation, the child is alive. It has human DNA. Nothing will be added or removed from. It only depends on it's mother for shelter and food, otherwise it takes care of itself. It just needs time to grow, but even then the baby may still be killed. Ever heard of a partial-birth abortion? Click the spoiler, though I must warn you it is graphic.

A more recently developed method here is the partial birth abortion, also called "brain suction" or "D&X" methods.

- These are done after 4 or 5 months.

- 80% of babies are normal.

- Most babies are viable.

This is like a breech delivery. The entire infant is delivered except the head. A scissors is jammed into the base of the skull. A tube is inserted into the skull, and the brain is sucked out. The now-dead infant is pulled out. The drawings illustrate this.

http://www.abortionfacts.com/image/literature/9313PB_A.JPG
http://www.abortionfacts.com/image/literature/9313PB_B.JPG
http://www.abortionfacts.com/image/literature/9313PB_C.JPG

The baby's heart begins to beat at 18 days. At 40 days brainwaves can be detected. Organs start to grow 4 weeks after conception. They can start sucking their thumb after 7 weeks, and move even more from there. They can feel pain.

The comparison to slavery is perfectly fair due to the incredible amount of similarities.
http://i41.tinypic.com/ea59vn.jpg

That graph was sourced. If you want where I've gotten all my information and arguments from, I've linked it numerous times in the few posts I've made in this thread. This book (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_contents.asp), which has references all over it. I'd reference more in my posts but it'd just make everything a huge mess and I'd just lose track of my thoughts. PC totally needs a footnoting system.

And you just linked to wikipedia.

It doesn't prove that coathanger abortions actually occurred. Any links to a recorded incident, cause as far as I'm aware there are none.

They panic over the controversies so they jam a coathanger into their body? As retarded as that sounds, maybe it's because they believe abortion is the only choice, meaning they have been grossly misinformed.

I find this thread title confusing now, explain please.

What it is comparatively dangerous to is the childbirth of other mammals, not abortion procedures.
Apparently pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion, and anti-abortion makes it seem that wanting a child to live is a negative thing. Though now the poll makes no sense at all.

Makes sense even though maternal deaths have dropped significantly this century. [11 in 100,000 according to WHO (http://www.who.int/whosis/mme_2005.pdf)].

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 07:38 PM
Abortion should be up to the person at hand. Think about what goes through a 14 year old's mind when she finds out she's pregnant.

How can I tell my mom ?
Will he be there for me ?
How will I provide for it ?

These are questions that come across a girls mind.

Clairissa
February 6th, 2009, 07:44 PM
No, slaves and slavery is not like abortion.
"Go ahead and say "you're calling fetuses fungus!" ", glad you took my advice.
Saying "don't tell people they're going to hell if you get an abortion" is not like saying "you can't enslave a fellow human being".
Also, yearning for life would involve yearning, fetuses are unable to even voice an opinion, or understand what opinion means, making them, essentially, animals, while that may sound hypocritical to the "don't kill animals for no real reason" thing, I only support abortion for legitimate causes, IE, rape, age, financial situation, ect. that would make this "wonderful life" you think it being alive would ensue for the parent, in those cases it wouldn't... Adoption agencies and families are horrible by the way.

I'll be awaiting your next post with the same reworded paragraphs about fetus development, "slavery=abortion" and 'scary' photos of a fetus being ripped out of a uterus.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 07:48 PM
Abortion should be up to the person at hand. Think about what goes through a 14 year old's mind when she finds out she's pregnant.

How can I tell my mom ?
Will he be there for me ?
How will I provide for it ?

These are questions that come across a girls mind.
So instead of waiting for an answer they should just kill the child?

Though the mother may be very supportive.
The father may be very responsible.
There are pregnancy support groups out there.
There are plenty of people willing to adopt a child, even those who are handicapped.

Killing the child should not be a choice (unless her life is in danger). Abortion is just the quick-fix, easy way out that our society today just loves, even though there are dangers.

wakachamo
February 6th, 2009, 07:50 PM
I don't think that it matters that the fetus doesn't have "an opinion of its own," but rather the fact that we're still dealing with a form of life. It may not be self-cojcious to the point of which it can decide for itself, but keep in mind that we're still talking about a living thing.

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 07:54 PM
So instead of waiting for an answer they should just kill the child?

Though the mother may be very supportive.
The father may be very responsible.
There are pregnancy support groups out there.
There are plenty of people willing to adopt a child, even those who are handicapped.

Killing the child should not be a choice (unless her life is in danger). Abortion is just the quick-fix, easy way out that our society today just loves, even though there are dangers.

What if your poor and live in a foster home ?
Imagine he's the one telling you to go ahead with the abortion.
Seeing other young girls struggle with there pregnancies is not support.
They're are also kids already on the earth that need adoption.

It's not human until it develops a brain and our characteristics.

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 07:56 PM
Of course the gender wouldn't make a difference, but you're all claiming how gender makes a difference as to who has a say on abortion.
I would like the father to have a say in the decision, but that's not always possible or wise. If you're married, yeah he should have a say (she still decides though). If you're young and you find yourself pregnant (I don't think you should abort for such a reason anyway, but whatever) and the father has gone and run off somewhere. Then, no. No say for him. Dude's an ass. Not married, but in a serious relationship, I would say he should be involved.


The baby's heart begins to beat at 18 days. At 40 days brainwaves can be detected. Organs start to grow 4 weeks after conception. They can start sucking their thumb after 7 weeks, and move even more from there. They can feel pain.
Heartbeat and brain development doesn't start until weeks 4-6 of the embryonic cycle. Essential organs start to form around the six week mark to eight weeks.

Most places that allow abortion have the waiting period set between 12 weeks to 24 weeks. That's a long time. I would prefer if the process occurs before heartbeat and brain development, but chances are you're not going to know you're pregnant by then. I would limit it then to before it enters the fetal stage.

Still bad, still a living thing, still human cells. But...I think that's a better window. Two months after having sex.

EDIT: Hey. Half my message disappeared :c Let's fix that...

I live in Canada, so I'm not sure how it is in the States, but... I was under the impression that abortion was legal. With differing rules from state to state (parental notification, consent, waiting period, etc). But, despite that - proper abortion providers are still limited.

Here in Canada, it's legal and the procedure is funded by the provinces (except Quebec and some northern territories), performed in hospitals, and covered under universal health care.

Side note: We're at a point now where we can know the gender of a baby before hand. I fear a little bit, that this plus abortion would lead to selective births if you don't get the gender you want at first. :\

wakachamo
February 6th, 2009, 07:58 PM
What if your poor and live in a foster home ?
Imagine he's the one telling you to go ahead with the abortion.
Seeing other young girls struggle with there pregnancies is not support.
They're are also kids already on the earth that need adoption.

It's not human until it develops a brain and our characteristics.

So because it's not human, you think it's okay to take the life out of something?

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 08:01 PM
So because it's not human, you think it's okay to take the life out of something?

Abortion is also not considered murder because you'd see more than thousand woman either in jail or on trial.

wakachamo
February 6th, 2009, 08:10 PM
Abortion is also not considered murder because you'd see more than thousand woman either in jail or on trial.

You didn't really answer me question. Plus, they're not in jail because the government doesn't consider it to be murder. If they did, they'd obviously be all facing the bars right now, don't you think?

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 08:19 PM
You didn't really answer me question. Plus, they're not in jail because the government doesn't consider it to be murder. If they did, they'd obviously be all facing the bars right now, don't you think?

Ok then to answer your question. I'm saying because it's not considered a mammal nor aquatic life it can be terminated.

The government doesn't think it's murder because it's not human.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 08:21 PM
No, slaves and slavery is not like abortion.
"Go ahead and say "you're calling fetuses fungus!" ", glad you took my advice.
Saying "don't tell people they're going to hell if you get an abortion" is not like saying "you can't enslave a fellow human being".
Also, yearning for life would involve yearning, fetuses are unable to even voice an opinion, or understand what opinion means, making them, essentially, animals, while that may sound hypocritical to the "don't kill animals for no real reason" thing, I only support abortion for legitimate causes, IE, rape, age, financial situation, ect. that would make this "wonderful life" you think it being alive would ensue for the parent, in those cases it wouldn't... Adoption agencies and families are horrible by the way.

I'll be awaiting your next post with the same reworded paragraphs about fetus development, "slavery=abortion" and 'scary' photos of a fetus being ripped out of a uterus.
But you did say that, and I quote
It's not a child until it's actually moving around, becoming sentient, until then it's pretty much just like fungus or mold, it grows but it doesn't know anything at all.

What about hell? I'm confused as to why you even mention it.

If you ask people today who survived after their mother attempted to abort them, I'm pretty sure they'd say they want to live.

There's also the movie, The Silent Scream (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek). Please watch it.

The Silent Scream, narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title.

Rape is a fair enough reason, but I don't think it will help with the trauma.
Age? She had sex. Sex makes babies. Abortion is not a contraceptive.
Financial situation? Support is available, from either families or non-profit organisations.

Sure they are. Any proof?

"scary"? It wasn't meant to be scary. It was to show you the reality of the procedure.

I would like the father to have a say in the decision, but that's not always possible or wise. If you're married, yeah he should have a say (she still decides though). If you're young and you find yourself pregnant (I don't think you should abort for such a reason anyway, but whatever) and the father has gone and run off somewhere. Then, no. No say for him. Dude's an ass. Not married, but in a serious relationship, I would say he should be involved.


Heartbeat and brain development doesn't start until weeks 4-6 of the embryonic cycle. Essential organs start to form around the six week mark to eight weeks.

Most places that allow abortion have the waiting period set between 12 weeks to 24 weeks. That's a long time. I would prefer if the process occurs before heartbeat and brain development, but chances are you're not going to know you're pregnant by then. I would limit it then to before it enters the fetal stage.

Still bad, still a living thing, still human cells. But...I think that's a better window. Two months after having sex.

EDIT: Hey. Half my message disappeared :c Let's fix that...

I live in Canada, so I'm not sure how it is in the States, but... I was under the impression that abortion was legal. With differing rules from state to state (parental notification, consent, waiting period, etc). But, despite that - proper abortion providers are still limited.

Here in Canada, it's legal and the procedure is funded by the provinces (except Quebec and some northern territories), performed in hospitals, and covered under universal health care.

Side note: We're at a point now where we can know the gender of a baby before hand. I fear a little bit, that this plus abortion would lead to selective births if you don't get the gender you want at first. :\
Well of course if the father isn't there he shouldn't have a say. Couldn't, even, since he isn't even there.

But if men don't have a say then why are we required to pay child support? (not specifically directed at you Tri, just a general statement).

Ah, I was just saying those are as early they have been detected. My bad once more.

Sadly enough, in some countries selective births are already occurring. Heck, we all know the situation in China with people leaving their freshly born daughters out on the street.
Abortion is also not considered murder because you'd see more than thousand woman either in jail or on trial.
it's because in the eyes of the law the child inside is not considered human, though as someone mentioned earlier, if someone kills a pregnant woman and the child inside, some laws regard that as double homicide. Funny that.

How is it not human when it has everything it needs to become a human?

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 08:24 PM
Ok then to answer your question. I'm saying because it's not considered a mammal nor aquatic life it can be terminated.

The government doesn't think it's murder because it's not human.
Uhhh....

Well, a fetus is a developing viviparous vertebrate (meaning the embryo develops inside the mother and the creature forming will have backbones or spinal columns). And that means a mammal.

And it is human. It may not legally be a "person". But it is living and it is human.

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 08:28 PM
it's because in the eyes of the law the child inside is not considered human, though as someone mentioned earlier, if someone kills a pregnant woman and the child inside, some laws regard that as double homicide. Funny that.

How is it not human when it has everything it needs to become a human?

In some states it also depends on how far along the mother is, before it can actually be considered double homicide.

Everything has a chance at being human, it's the development we take along the way that differentiates us from them.

@ Tri: It's only considered living after a heartbeat is heard. Which is the 5 - 6 week, still within law borders of 5 weeks.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 08:39 PM
In some states it also depends on how far along the mother is, before it can actually be considered double homicide.

Everything has a chance at being human, it's the development we take along the way that differentiates us from them.
What the difference between a toddler, a teenage, an adult, and an old person?

They're all human. They're just at different stages in their life. So is the child in the womb, it's just at another stage.

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 09:12 PM
Oh! I'm sorry I mean Embryo. Egg --> Chick --> Chicken ? Do you call an egg a bird ?

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 09:17 PM
Oh! I'm sorry I mean Embryo. Egg --> Chick --> Chicken ? Do you call an egg a bird ?
No, an egg doesn't turn into a bird. A bird comes out of the egg. The egg protects the bird embryo. An embryo is living because it grows and cell division is present.

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 09:17 PM
Well the chick inside is a bird, just like the child inside the mother is human.

Rellyms
February 6th, 2009, 09:20 PM
No, an egg doesn't turn into a bird. A bird comes out of the egg. The egg protects the bird embryo. An embryo is living because it grows and cell division is present.
I wasn't saying it did, but you don't hear normal people saying " I want some bird embryo sunny side with a side of bacon."

TRIFORCE89
February 6th, 2009, 09:21 PM
I wasn't saying it did, but you don't hear normal people saying " I want some bird embryo sunny side with a side of bacon."
I think I read a Zits comic like that once. XD

Amachi
February 6th, 2009, 09:25 PM
I wasn't saying it did, but you don't hear normal people saying " I want some bird embryo sunny side with a side of bacon."
Well technically it's a bird's period. Sounds delicious huh?

NoBel_ToKYo ™
February 7th, 2009, 03:00 AM
I had just finished watching "The silent scream" through Drifloons link, and i have to state that i simply could not stop watching it. Both in the way that it was presented by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, and the way it's content was factual and was explained to us in an honest fashion. I completely agree that this video/similar video should be shown to all people at least before they attempt to go through the procedure of abortion. I also implore people here, whether they are pro choice or pro life, to watch the amazing video that's been provided on the thread.

So congratulations, Watch That Pin, Drifloon! You and Nathanson have officially converted me to pro life.

wakachamo
February 7th, 2009, 07:35 AM
While this is off topic a bit i really dont care. English is my first language and well i really dont feel like typing properly just long sentences. If you have a problem well then yeah.

uhhhhhh English isn't my first and I can speak it? Not exactly something to be proud of.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that has a problem with it, since nobody can understand a thing you say most of the time.

If you want to speak gibberish, then by all means go ahead. Don't expect anybody to understand and agree with you, though.

Cassino
February 7th, 2009, 07:42 AM
So because it's not human, you think it's okay to take the life out of something?
Most humans, if they are honest, would have to say yes to that.
Many kill flies and spiders and things unnecessarily.

wakachamo
February 7th, 2009, 07:45 AM
Most humans, if they are honest, would have to say yes to that.
Many kill flies and spiders and things unnecessarily.
Would you not call it a necessity instead of "unnecessarily"?

Not saying it's not unnecessary, but that can point of view can vary from person to person.

Amachi
February 7th, 2009, 08:07 AM
uhhhhhh English isn't my first and I can speak it? Not exactly something to be proud of.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that has a problem with it, since nobody can understand a thing you say most of the time.

If you want to speak gibberish, then by all means go ahead. Don't expect anybody to understand and agree with you, though.
no need to go off-topic, keep that sort of thing to VM/PM.
Most humans, if they are honest, would have to say yes to that.
Many kill flies and spiders and things unnecessarily.
Yeah, so? We are talking about people here, not animals.

Blitzballer
February 7th, 2009, 08:32 AM
Yeah, so? We are talking about people here, not animals.

Human~
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mamalia
etc, etc.

Also, I searched around the site you've been supplying for reasoning behind your beliefs. Conclusion: It's kindddaa biased. Like major biased. I'd prefer to look to a site written by those in the science realm, not the "why I'm right, and reasons you're wrong" realm. The site also isolates African-Americans, saying that they are for abortion because it's a "civil right." It also gives stereotypical reasons for being pro-choice.

Gold warehouse
February 7th, 2009, 08:36 AM
Human~
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mamalia
etc, etc.

I can't believe you just posted that...

Amachi
February 7th, 2009, 09:42 AM
Human~
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mamalia
etc, etc.

Also, I searched around the site you've been supplying for reasoning behind your beliefs. Conclusion: It's kindddaa biased. Like major biased. I'd prefer to look to a site written by those in the science realm, not the "why I'm right, and reasons you're wrong" realm. The site also isolates African-Americans, saying that they are for abortion because it's a "civil right." It also gives stereotypical reasons for being pro-choice.
Does that mean you would regard yourself as being equal to something like, a cow? Do you really think that?

"The first time, I felt like a murderer, but I did it again and again and again, and now, 20 years later, I am facing what happened to me as a doctor and as a human being. Sure, I got hard. Sure, the money was important. And oh, it was an easy thing, once I had taken the step, to see the women as animals and the babies as just tissue."

--abortionist quoted from a radio talk show by John Rice in "Abortion" Litt D. Murfreesboro, TN.
You're really just trying to dehumanise the child so that you can freely think that nothing is wrong with abortion, just like the person above.

I was just quoting that book I linked to, which was written by a doctor and his wife. I'll look through the rest of the site when I wake up to look into the rest of your claims though.

However, is there really anything right about killing an unborn child?

Stronkadonk
February 7th, 2009, 10:15 AM
The only time that I say an unborn child may be killed is when a rape occurs. Especially when it is a teenager.
It should be up to them in that case.
But when it is between husband and wife, the child MUST be born, you can't just go around recklessly making children with your partner; you must be responsible for what you made.

Eucliffe
February 7th, 2009, 10:20 AM
I'm honestly 110% against it. The only reason why I'd be with it would be if some little girl somehow got pregnant due to a molester of a father, some sick stranger, or something like that. But, I highly doubt something so monstrous would be bound to happen. I would also be for it if someone who got pregnant was going to die if they gave birth. I mean, the baby is a whole new form of life, but I would feel very sorry for the child if it were born and didn't have someone to call "mother" for quite a while.

Well, I actually saw Juno for the third time on Thursday, and that is probably one of the best anti-abortion movies ever, or at least in my opinion. As showed in the movie (though fictional, it is at the same time educational and very, very realistic), she chose not to get an abortion but instead give the child away to a family she knew would take care of them. This is one of the main reasons why I'm against abortion. If you're going to have a kid but can't take care of it, why kill the thing when you can give it to a family that can love it and feed it and do all sorts of things with it?

And, of course, if you wish to give the kid away, you should definitely interview the family before you decide to give them the child. They could be molesters, or even cannibals ('course, I don't think you'll see many of those these days). Nonetheless, you need to know the family you interview is the kind that will take care of the child you're to bear.

That is all I can say on the topic.

jasonresno
February 7th, 2009, 10:38 AM
I pretty much think that you can't O.K abortion because:
--A teen got pregnant due to consensual sex.
--A person cannot afford the child. (Leads me to think they should be practicing safe sex!)
--A means of birth control.

The only case I can ever see where abortion is OK is:
--Due to rape.
--Due to the health of the mother.

I just can't imagine a woman would want to live and nurture the face of their rapist. That's too twisted.

I have to give it to you guys. I came into this thread pretty liberal and more in line with "Their body, their choice" but a few well thought out posts and well placed links changed my mind.

Melody
February 7th, 2009, 10:52 AM
This thread has always been a hot topic. That wont change. There are a lot of differing opinions here.

Anyways, back on topic, I happen to feel that they are wrong in comparing slavery with abortion. Slavery IS NOT abortion and it's not really a citizen which is protected under ANY rights doctrine until it's born in a country where the laws protect it's life. Therefore, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. The unborn child does not enjoy the same rights because it has not yet been born into being a citizen of any country. However, I do agree that abortion is wrong in most situations. As I've said before, abortion should only be used in circumstances where the life of both the mother and the child are threatened.

I do agree that the mother shouldn't have the choice to terminate pregnancy at any point beyond the morning after. (yes, i do agree with use of the morning after pill, it's not abortion, it's a contraceptive measure, and if you think it isn't one it's because you've been lied to)

Yamikarasu
February 7th, 2009, 01:39 PM
I think the answer is pretty clear: contraceptives. Use them. Abortion should be allowed in cases like rape or if the health of the mother is jeopardized.

Blitzballer
February 7th, 2009, 05:06 PM
I think the answer is pretty clear: contraceptives. Use them. Abortion should be allowed in cases like rape or if the health of the mother is jeopardized.

My thoughts exactly! Contraceptives are a very important part of sex. Not only that, but some, such as condoms, are a means of protecting yourself from HIV, herpes, etc. If pregnancy does occur, I think it's the woman's choice. I wouldn't stop her, even if I don't agree with her reasoning. Unless there was a father who would take the baby for the mother, I wouldn't push her.

Akio123
February 7th, 2009, 05:10 PM
I think the answer is pretty clear: contraceptives. Use them. Abortion should be allowed in cases like rape or if the health of the mother is jeopardized.
Yeah but contraceptives don't have a 100% guarantee. I mean yeah I see where you are going, but I just wanted to make that clear that only reduces the risk of an STD or pregnancy.

Amachi
February 7th, 2009, 06:18 PM
The only time that I say an unborn child may be killed is when a rape occurs. Especially when it is a teenager.
It should be up to them in that case.
But when it is between husband and wife, the child MUST be born, you can't just go around recklessly making children with your partner; you must be responsible for what you made.
If you just allow it for rape, what will happen is that many women will lie about how they became pregnant. I'm not saying that women are liars and I mean no offense to those who are a victim of rape, but if abortion is permitted exclusively for the reason above, both women and even abortionists will fabricate the story and falsely report so that the woman may have an abortion.

Radical feminist guru Gloria Steinem, in a 1985 interview with USA Today said that "to make abortion legal only in cases of rape and incest would force women to lie."

Up until 1988, Pennsylvania’s Medicaid program funded abortions, for women who claimed they had been raped, without any requirement for reporting of the purported assault to a law enforcement agency. Under this law, abortion clinic personnel issued thinly veiled public invitations for women to simply state that they’d been raped, and the state ended up funding an average of 36 abortions a month based on such unsubstantiated claims. In 1988 the legislature added a requirement for reporting the rape to a law enforcement agency, and the average dropped to less than three abortions per month.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_29.asp

So if abortion was only permitted in the case of rape, victims would need to be more responsible in informing the police and increased involvement would need to be required on the part of law enforcement agencies.
I pretty much think that you can't O.K abortion because:
--A teen got pregnant due to consensual sex.
--A person cannot afford the child. (Leads me to think they should be practicing safe sex!)
--A means of birth control.

The only case I can ever see where abortion is OK is:
--Due to rape.
--Due to the health of the mother.

I just can't imagine a woman would want to live and nurture the face of their rapist. That's too twisted.

I have to give it to you guys. I came into this thread pretty liberal and more in line with "Their body, their choice" but a few well thought out posts and well placed links changed my mind.
I think the answer is pretty clear: contraceptives. Use them. Abortion should be allowed in cases like rape or if the health of the mother is jeopardized.
Immediate hospital treatment, after rape, can be abortive through the use of the morning after pill. Since the morning after pill does work like a contraceptive as well as a abortifacient, the abortion would still be available to rape victims.

However, both rape and having an abortion are traumatic experiences and terrible tragedies. At the very least an abortion should not be encouraged. Instead, help should be provided to the mother so that she can heal.

What percentage of rape pregnancies are aborted?

Less than half. The balance carry the baby to term. In one study of 37 rape pregnancies, 28 carried to term. S. Makhorn, in Psychological Aspects of Abortion, Mall & Watts, Univ. Pub. 1979, Pg. 58
That number may well have changed in recent years, but mothers do not always kill the baby.
This thread has always been a hot topic. That wont change. There are a lot of differing opinions here.

Anyways, back on topic, I happen to feel that they are wrong in comparing slavery with abortion. Slavery IS NOT abortion and it's not really a citizen which is protected under ANY rights doctrine until it's born in a country where the laws protect it's life. Therefore, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. The unborn child does not enjoy the same rights because it has not yet been born into being a citizen of any country. However, I do agree that abortion is wrong in most situations. As I've said before, abortion should only be used in circumstances where the life of both the mother and the child are threatened.

I do agree that the mother shouldn't have the choice to terminate pregnancy at any point beyond the morning after. (yes, i do agree with use of the morning after pill, it's not abortion, it's a contraceptive measure, and if you think it isn't one it's because you've been lied to)
I wasn't comparing slavery to abortion. I was comparing the situation black people and unborn children were/are in. Slaves weren't considered citizens or more than the property of the master, and children inside the womb aren't considered citizens either or more than the property of the mother. Did you even read my post or did you just make an assumption?

What does organised religion have to do with anything here? What does studying the bible have to do with this? Don't try and make yourself look big, especially since no one cares.

I can't believe that I have to try and explain this to you again.

Actually, stuff that. Here, read this.

The combination pill has three functions. One is to thicken the mucus plug at the opening of the cervix. This can act as a barrier mechanism to prevent sperm entrance. The main function of the pill is to prevent ovulation.

If there is no egg, there can be no fertilization. A third function is to harden the lining of the womb. If fertilization does occur, this can and, at times, does prevent implantation at one week of life resulting in a micro-abortion at that time.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_35.asp

It does both - it can prevent fertilisation or it can kill the newly created life, and that's obviously an abortion.
Yeah but contraceptives don't have a 100% guarantee. I mean yeah I see where you are going, but I just wanted to make that clear that only reduces the risk of an STD or pregnancy.
Exactly. AIDS can actually move freely through the condom, even though sperm cannot.

Furthermore, teenagers are not informed that contraceptive methods are not 100% effective in preventing anything, and so teen pregnancy and STD rates rise as a result of sex education only seeming to encourage sex between teenagers.

Blitzballer
February 7th, 2009, 10:12 PM
If you just allow it for rape, what will happen is that many women will lie about how they became pregnant. I'm not saying that women are liars and I mean no offense to those who are a victim of rape, but if abortion is permitted exclusively for the reason above, both women and even abortionists will fabricate the story and falsely report so that the woman may have an abortion.

Exactly. AIDS can actually move freely through the condom, even though sperm cannot.

Furthermore, teenagers are not informed that contraceptive methods are not 100% effective in preventing anything, and so teen pregnancy and STD rates rise as a result of sex education only seeming to encourage sex between teenagers.

I agree with you about people cheating the system to get an abortion. Where I don't follow you is on the education front. Where I live, "abstinence only" is taught in many schools, and is shown to fail. Teens don't listen to the "don't have sex" talk and then have no idea to use a condom or contraceptive. If you're going to use sex, contraceptive do help to lower the odds of fertilization. The sex education I see doesn't condone sex AT ALL.

Also, male condoms are the single best way to prevent the spread of HIV, while having sex. Sperm doesn't move freely, neither does the HIV virus. In fact, studies show that of couples where a partner has AIDS and the other doesn't, infection rates for a year are less than 1%. Unbiased link here! (http://www.wpro.who.int/media_centre/fact_sheets/fs_200308_Condoms.htm)

Note: Part of the link might not be found appropriate for immature minds.

Amachi
February 8th, 2009, 12:45 AM
I agree with you about people cheating the system to get an abortion. Where I don't follow you is on the education front. Where I live, "abstinence only" is taught in many schools, and is shown to fail. Teens don't listen to the "don't have sex" talk and then have no idea to use a condom or contraceptive. If you're going to use sex, contraceptive do help to lower the odds of fertilization. The sex education I see doesn't condone sex AT ALL.

Also, male condoms are the single best way to prevent the spread of HIV, while having sex. Sperm doesn't move freely, neither does the HIV virus. In fact, studies show that of couples where a partner has AIDS and the other doesn't, infection rates for a year are less than 1%. Unbiased link here! (http://www.wpro.who.int/media_centre/fact_sheets/fs_200308_Condoms.htm)

You're right though, teens do need to be educated, but if they should be informed that nothing always works.

Note: Part of the link might not be found appropriate for immature minds.
Maybe it's just a coincidence then that teen-pregnancy has seen an increase then? [here's a link! (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_sexEd2006.html)]

Well it very well could be a coincidence given our society nowadays. A lot of things are probably contributing to the rise.

Overall, Davis and Weller estimated that condoms provided an 85% reduction in HIV/AIDS transmission risk when infection rates were compared in always versus never users.
[here's another link! (p.17) (http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/about/organization/dmid/PDF/condomReport.pdf)]

But yeah, we are sorta sliding off-topic here.

Mooshykris
February 8th, 2009, 06:38 AM
I'm heavily pro-life. I believe it is wrong to abort something, because no matter when or what they can feel, they're a living being at conception.

I will say though, I won't force my morals and beliefs down other people. So I feel they have the right to choose. However, only if THEY'RE paying for it.

So in the end, I'm pro-life.

TRANSPARANCY
February 8th, 2009, 06:52 AM
Look... if he or she is going to suffer because of a BIG mental or physical disability and it has been proven then yea, it would be sad to see someone live and knowing that they can't do what most people take for granted.

I know this because I've seen it before. I was getting a lift home with a friend of mine last year. His mum worked at a nursing home so we had to go there to drop her off. This guy comes out in a wheelchair and his body is a bit... the only way i can politely say it without making it sound like i hate him is twisted. He also has mental issues too. I should say had cause he did because he passed away a few months ago.

Still if teens want to get into bed and... you know make out without thinking about it in the first place, then a month later finding out that her boyfriend got her pregnant... well it's both their fault for doing what they did in the first place.

Other than that I believe MOST people deserve to live.

viridian doubletongue
February 8th, 2009, 11:08 AM
Being in favour of choice does not denote being "anti life."

Frostbiteकर्म
February 8th, 2009, 11:17 AM
I'm Pro Choice...but if people are seriously having unprotected sex and they don't want a baby, then I don't think that's a very good choice.

~ Yukishii
February 8th, 2009, 12:28 PM
I don't like the idea of taking a 'soon to be' life.
But hell, life is taken every second, and I am in no place to judge what a mother decides.
I personally admire rape victims keeping the rape child by choice though.
I'm Pro Choice...but if people are seriously having unprotected sex and they don't want a baby, then I don't think that's a very good choice.

Rape happens too you know.

Edit; I can admire the rape victim keeping her rape child because even though that extra life was thrown at her, she made the choice to keep it.
It's sort of like saying 'I love my children no matter what'.

HoneyBubbles
February 8th, 2009, 12:33 PM
I'm pro-choice.
I don't like the idea of abortion, but I believe it's the mother's choice. But the baby must be aborted before it develops too much.

Netto Azure
February 9th, 2009, 02:05 PM
Sorry for being off topic but did the Title change but the Poll did not? Because I still am not voting on that misleading Poll. =/

Yuoaman
February 9th, 2009, 02:09 PM
I am pro-choice, it is the woman's choice, and if they want it, they are entitled to it.

Xairmo
February 9th, 2009, 03:35 PM
I am not Pro-Abortion, I'm Pro-Choice.
While I don't full agree with abortion, I think women who want to should always have the option. If you don't want to abort your baby that's fine with me, but no one should ever be able to push their beliefs and morals onto other people by changing the law.

Agent Cobalt
February 9th, 2009, 05:17 PM
I'm pro-life and against abortion in all cases.

The idea that abortion needs to be legal for health reasons is nonsense and an excuse to keep it available. Less than 1% of abortions are to save a mother's life from things like ectopic pregnancies. Today it's just a form of birth control, and it's disgusting to me that we tolerate such infanticide. A woman has no right to end a life simply because of inconvenience. And no, rape and incest are not legitimate reasons to take innocent life. The pretenses for the creation of the life have no bearing on the value of said life or the protection, safety and respect it should be given. Either life is sacred and the lives of the innocent ought to be protected at all costs, or life is expendable and can be extinguished for any reason. If that seems extreme so be it.

As is said so often- It's a child, not a choice.

Tinhead Bruce
February 9th, 2009, 05:25 PM
This is not a good reason to be pro choice, but just remember: There are 6+ billion humans of this earth. Way more people than resources available. If our population continues to grow, someday we may all be starving.

Also, there are people in every continent starving right now. We have a responsibility to take care of the people already alive, before we take care of the "people" not yet born.

Xairmo
February 9th, 2009, 09:29 PM
I'm pro-life and against abortion in all cases.

The idea that abortion needs to be legal for health reasons is nonsense and an excuse to keep it available. Less than 1% of abortions are to save a mother's life from things like ectopic pregnancies. Today it's just a form of birth control, and it's disgusting to me that we tolerate such infanticide. A woman has no right to end a life simply because of inconvenience. And no, rape and incest are not legitimate reasons to take innocent life. The pretenses for the creation of the life have no bearing on the value of said life or the protection, safety and respect it should be given. Either life is sacred and the lives of the innocent ought to be protected at all costs, or life is expendable and can be extinguished for any reason. If that seems extreme so be it.

As is said so often- It's a child, not a choice.
So say a 14 year old girl is raped by her father, and in the process she gets impregnated. You think she should have to bare that child? To every day have to look at her child with anger and regret, instead of love and joy. To look at the child as a daily reminder, a manifestation if you will, of that nightmare. And for that child to know his or her history, to know how they came into the world. To have to bare such a burden, knowing how utterly unwanted they are.

Like I said, I don't fully agree with what abortion is but I think women should always have that option. A woman should not be further punished after being raped by being forced to keep the child.

Metatron
February 9th, 2009, 09:50 PM
I'm pro-life and against abortion in all cases.


Hah. No surprises here, having come from someone with a picture of Ronald Reagan in their signature. Don't even bother to try and consider the other side of the argument. Oh, and there's a difference between a mass of cells on a petree dish, and a living, breathing human child, btw.

Typically, I'm against abortion, especially after a certain point in pregnancy. I don't agree with people that claim "a human fetus is not living because it need its mother's nourishment to survive." After a certain point in pregnancy, the embryo can feel pain and that, I believe, constitutes a human life.

However, under extreme circumstances, such as acts of rape or incest, and if the pregnancy is not in the final stages of development, then I see no reason why abortion should not be an option to the mother. If a woman is raped, why should she be forced into enduring the physical pains of labor, and conceive a child that was not her choice?

A woman who makes the mistake of having unpredicted sex and has waited past a certain point in the pregnancy when the human embryo starts to take shape, I believe, shouldn't be given the choice. I hate to sound like an unsympathetic bastard, but...it's her own fault.

So, in short, I'm really on the fence about this topic. I believe it should be kept legal, but with far more strict conditions than there are now =/

Cosmic Tyrant
February 9th, 2009, 10:01 PM
Typically, I'm against abortion, especially after a certain point in pregnancy. I don't agree with people that claim "a human fetus is not living because it need its mother's nourishment to survive." After a certain point in pregnancy, the embryo can feel pain and that, I believe, constitutes a human life.

However, under extreme circumstances, such as acts of rape or incest, and if the pregnancy is not in the final stages of development, then I see no reason why abortion should not be an option to the mother. If a woman is raped, why should she be forced into enduring the physical pains of labor, and conceive a child that was not her choice?

A woman who makes the mistake of having unpredicted sex and has waited past a certain point in the pregnancy when the human embryo starts to take shape, I believe, shouldn't be given the choice. I hate to sound like an unsympathetic bastard, but...it's her own fault.

So, in short, I'm really on the fence about this topic. I believe it should be kept legal, but with far more strict conditions than there are now =/

You've taken the words right outta my mouth. Though I disagree on the "right time" to abort. In my opinion, life needs knowledge to grow. A fetus only knows three things; it's dark, damp, & warm. That's what it knows from being in the womb. Babies can be brought up in different ways. If one tries real hard, they can make a child think becoming a serial Killer is perfectly normal, and anything else is "wrong." Development may be different, but in the end, all children can be brought up the same with effort. To me, life is meaningless without knowledge to help nourish it. But I still stand ground against abortion if the mother wasn't protected. It was her foolishness and carelessness that led to the birthing, and it would be selfish to abort something that could've been prevented.

Agent Cobalt
February 9th, 2009, 10:09 PM
So say a 14 year old girl is raped by her father, and in the process she gets impregnated. You think she should have to bare that child? To every day have to look at her child with anger and regret, instead of love and joy. To look at the child as a daily reminder, a manifestation if you will, of that nightmare. And for that child to know his or her history, to know how they came into the world. To have to bare such a burden, knowing how utterly unwanted they are.

Like I said, I don't fully agree with what abortion is but I think women should always have that option. A woman should not be further punished after being raped by being forced to keep the child.

What was I thinking? No, you're right, just kill the kid. Yes she should bare the child. The origin of the conception had no bearing on the worth of the child. And you can champion abortion as the cure to self-pity after a rape all you want, but killing that child isn't going to unrape that girl and it's not going to help her mind. Abortions have even shown to harm a woman's health and mental stability. Caring after children and enduring motherhood and parenthood are by no means easy, but I'm sure endometriosis, a scarred uterus, stressed mental health, and prolonged guilt trips throughout life won't be pretty in the long term either. And hey, there's always adoption. Maybe she won't love that child, but there are plenty of people willing to give the child their love.

Like I said, it's a child not a choice. I don't follow that line of thinking that a child is a punishment either. And I'm not a mindreader that assumes he knows that that child will hate itself either. And even then, it's not like the child's better off not being born. Abortions don't prevent child abuse or feeling bad. In fact, crimes against children you think are unwanted or are self-hating have increased since abortion became legal nation-wide and haven't gone down. And I'll reiterate and correct a previous statement of mine regarding abortion today being used as birth control. Less than 7% of abortions are ever performed to save the mother's life or for health reasons and less than 1% are because or rape and/or incest. Add to that more abortions come from largely unmarried, well off women in their 20's. Your scenario is unlikely statistically, and really almost non-existent. You can come up with many more I'm sure, but I won't be guilted into supporting the smothering of an innocent life; when faced with these situations I er on the side on life.

Hah. No surprises here, having come from someone with a picture of Ronald Reagan in their signature. Don't even bother to try and consider the other side of the argument. Oh, and there's a difference between a mass of cells on a petree dish, and a living, breathing human child, btw.

Thanks for assuming I'm close-minded on issues like abortion because I have a signature with one of my favorite statesmen in it and because I mentioned I'm pro-life in all cases. I've considered the other side for quite some time and I still do. Any thinking man constantly questions himself and his beliefs. I'll let you in on a little secret- I used to be a very non-conservative, moderate social liberal and rabid atheist years ago. I'm not above critical thinking and changing my mind. And the tired point about the baby being a clump of cells doesn't change when life begins, the worth of the child, the child's rights, that that breathing human child comes from that mass of cells, or draw the line as to when ending human life is and is not acceptable.

Metatron
February 9th, 2009, 10:47 PM
What was I thinking? No, you're right, just kill the kid.
Whoa, slow down there, buddy. If you hadn't noticed, there's a huge difference between this (http://healthcare.zdnet.com/images/stem-cell-harvest.jpg) and this. (http://ecostreet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/baby-gown.jpg)

And you can champion abortion as the cure to self-pity after a rape all you want, but killing that child isn't going to unrape that girl and it's not going to help her mind.
..."Killing" isn't necessarily a word I would use for stopping the growth of a tangled mass of cells that could *potentially* become a human life in later stages of development, but you're saying that, even if a woman was raped, she should still be forced into giving birth to a child that she had no choice over? And think about the well being of the "child." If it was conceived through rape, you don't think that could cause any emotional harm on it in later stages of its life? Growing up without a father? Knowing it was the product of a man forcing himself upon a woman, and impregnating her?

And hey, there's always adoption. Maybe she won't love that child, but there are plenty of people willing to give the child their love.
While I do agree that adoption is the best alternative to having an abortion, it is said that roughly 3 out of every 100 children born here in the US are put up for adoption. How many of those children, I wonder, are actually placed into homes with loving, caring families?

Less than 7% of abortions are ever performed to save the mother's life or for health reasons and less than 1% are because or rape and/or incest.
Okay, fine. I understand that the option of having an abortion is widely abused by people who have made the stupid mistake of having unprotected sex, getting themselves knocked-up, and deciding that they're not responsible enough to raise a child, but...what about in those other cases? You said yourself that 7% of abortions are performed in order to save the mother's life, so what about in those circumstances? How is it decided who lives? A woman who is conscious and aware of what's going on in the world around her, or an undeveloped human embryo?

Look dude, I'm not trying to completely tear-apart your post here, I just think that saying "abortion is wrong in all circumstances" is...a bit harsh. I mean, lets be realistic here; whether or not abortion is legal or not, it's gonna happen. It can either be a sanitary procedure that is highly regulated, where the "child" feels no pain, or we can do away with it completely, and "back-alley" abortions will occur. Like I said, I generally disagree with abortions, but I try to keep myself with an open mind for the more extreme of circumstances =/

Agent Cobalt
February 10th, 2009, 07:07 AM
Whoa, slow down there, buddy. If you hadn't noticed, there's a huge difference between this (http://healthcare.zdnet.com/images/stem-cell-harvest.jpg) and this. (http://ecostreet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/baby-gown.jpg)

Yes, you tried to bring that to my attention in your previous post. If you hadn't noticed, there's a difference between conception and birth and yet both involve human life.

..."Killing" isn't necessarily a word I would use for stopping the growth of a tangled mass of cells that could *potentially* become a human life in later stages of development, but you're saying that, even if a woman was raped, she should still be forced into giving birth to a child that she had no choice over? And think about the well being of the "child." If it was conceived through rape, you don't think that could cause any emotional harm on it in later stages of its life? Growing up without a father? Knowing it was the product of a man forcing himself upon a woman, and impregnating her?To put to death. To deprive of life. To put an end to; extinguish. Look, just because you don't recognize that that clump of cells is living, is a unique life, and is human doesn't mean you're not killing it when you end its life. I know people who have been raped and people who were conceived through rape and none of them would have been better off dead or not born. Everyone deserves a chance to live, regardless of the misconceptions others would project onto them about how miserable their lives must be. And I grew up largely without a father in my life, as do many Americans. I don't recommend it, but I'd rather a child live without a father than not at all. A mother isn't being forced to give birth; she's just not killing her child. The child has nothing to feel guilty about; it's innocent. And even if that child is miserable I'd rather take that chance than not give it a chance to live. I stand by my position that the circumstances for the child's conception have no bearing on the worth of that child's life. And I'll repeat myself- I won't be guilted into not siding with life.

While I do agree that adoption is the best alternative to having an abortion, here in the US, it is said that roughly 3 out of every 100 children born here in the US are put up for adoption. How many of those children, I wonder, are actually placed into homes with loving, caring families?From what I've read, there are thousands of people upon thousands of people waiting to adopt all the time. From people that can't have children themselves to those just looking to care for those with nobody to care for them. I'd say a lot of them do. Now there's a waiting period for legal and bureaucracy reasons, but that's just the system. At light speed we could likely find a home for every child. Anyway, the system isn't perfect, no, but then what is?

Okay, fine. I understand that the option of having an abortion is widely abused by people who have made the stupid mistake of having unprotected sex, getting themselves knocked-up, and deciding that they're not responsible enough to raise a child, but...what about in those other cases? You said yourself that 7% of abortions are performed in order to save the mother's life, so what about in those circumstances? How is it decided who lives? A woman who is conscious and aware of what's going on in the world around her, or an undeveloped human embryo?7% of abortions are for "health reasons" but doesn't even mean anything. The honest truth is that there's virtually *never* a case where abortions are used to save a woman's life. That 7% includes "psychological reasons" and not just physical harm, which I take with a grain of salt. The actual physical issues are also able to be fixed without abortions with things like C-sections. So honestly the health reason is an excuse either to not get surgery that might leave a scar or to avoid mental stress. The only case where a woman's health is truly at risk would be something like an ectopic pregnancy in which the child attaches to the fallopian tubes and not the uterus, in which case the mother and child will both likely die, and the procedure to save the mother isn't so much an abortion (which is meant to kill) but a procedure to protect life; the child's death is the unfortunate result of trying to move the egg from the tubes and into the uterus. Now I'm sure the next argument is going to be guilting me into supporting abortions so a mother won't have to live with a scar on her stomach.

Look dude, I'm not trying to completely tear-apart your post here, I just think that saying "abortion is wrong in all circumstances" is...a bit harsh. Well the world is harsh. And sometimes being bold, sticking to your guns, and seeing things in black and white is the only way to keep things in order. I know to many I probably come off as a caveman, but so be it. My ethics come before my "sensitivities."

I mean, lets be realistic here; whether or not abortion is legal or not, it's gonna happen.So will murder, rape, theft, and any other crime that ought to remain illegal and not just legalized because "people will do it anyway."

It can either be a sanitary procedure that is highly regulated, where the "child" feels no pain, or we can do away with it completely, and "back-alley" abortions will occur. Like I said, I generally disagree with abortions, but I try to keep myself with an open mind for the more extreme of circumstances =/Or, and I'm just throwing this out there, it can be banned like it used to be not that long ago and those that break the law can be prosecuted under the law for their crimes like they used to. And the child can feel pain by a few weeks. You'd be surprise how quickly a human grows in the womb. It's sad really; there used to be a time when women like Susan B Anthony were around that thought a woman's right to choose had to do with voting against Woodrow Wilson, not killing their offspring in vile fashions; in fact, they were vocal opponents of it. Now it's mainstream. Thanks Margaret Sanger.

Angela
February 10th, 2009, 11:01 AM
Yes, you tried to bring that to my attention in your previous post. If you hadn't noticed, there's a difference between conception and birth and yet both involve human life.


Actually the first picture is not human it's just a mix human gens, just spit in a jar with couple of your buddies and whola! (Sorry couldn't resist)



To put to death. To deprive of life. To put an end to; extinguish. Look, just because you don't recognize that that clump of cells is living, is a unique life, and is human doesn't mean you're not killing it when you end its life. I know people who have been raped and people who were conceived through rape and none of them would have been better off dead or not born. Everyone deserves a chance to live, regardless of the misconceptions others would project onto them about how miserable their lives must be. And I grew up largely without a father in my life, as do many Americans. I don't recommend it, but I'd rather a child live without a father than not at all. A mother isn't being forced to give birth; she's just not killing her child. The child has nothing to feel guilty about; it's innocent. And even if that child is miserable I'd rather take that chance than not give it a chance to live. I stand by my position that the circumstances for the child's conception have no bearing on the worth of that child's life. And I'll repeat myself- I won't be guilted into not siding with life.

And what will you say when you get rapped and get pregnant, oh wait you can't your a boy (You can't get pregnant that is, never know what rapists are into so I can't say that about rape), so let me ask you, do you hate the morning after pill since it kills a "form" of life that enters the woman?

I would never spoil my body just because some loser downtown couldn't keep it in his pants, I would want to wake up and see the scared on my lower are just to remind me off what happened, but I would be willing to spoil my body when I'm older and have a husband.

And a woman never knows what will happen to a baby ones given away, does it get a good home, is it being treated better, is it happy, is it hungry is it crying is it sick, will it hate me when it grows up because I gave it away, will it blame me for being put into the care of a neglectful family, so I would never give away a child, so I would not be carry a child just to give it away.


And you know the violent gene the father has, the one that makes him rape, the burst of violence he momentarily had when he did the thing he did, it passes on to the child, and I would not be comfortable knowing that I was making a caring a baby that may some day do what his father did too me to another young girl.


From what I've read, there are thousands of people upon thousands of people waiting to adopt all the time. From people that can't have children themselves to those just looking to care for those with nobody to care for them. I'd say a lot of them do. Now there's a waiting period for legal and bureaucracy reasons, but that's just the system. At light speed we could likely find a home for every child. Anyway, the system isn't perfect, no, but then what is?

Now I'm going to sound like a total godoholic, like some members have been sounding in this thread *Note that I say this with a sarcastic tone*

Maybe god didn't plan for them to have children, since that people can't have children then it's god's doing, I'm totally going to ignore the fact that it's biological and say god did it.

*Okay sarcastic loony hour over, I'm sorry the person I'm quoting I know you didn't talk about god, so that wasn't aimed at you, but it was aimed at some of the MALES on here that think a rape is god's doing*



7% of abortions are for "health reasons" but doesn't even mean anything. The honest truth is that there's virtually *never* a case where abortions are used to save a woman's life. That 7% includes "psychological reasons" and not just physical harm, which I take with a grain of salt. The actual physical issues are also able to be fixed without abortions with things like C-sections. So honestly the health reason is an excuse either to not get surgery that might leave a scar or to avoid mental stress. The only case where a woman's health is truly at risk would be something like an ectopic pregnancy in which the child attaches to the fallopian tubes and not the uterus, in which case the mother and child will both likely die, and the procedure to save the mother isn't so much an abortion (which is meant to kill) but a procedure to protect life; the child's death is the unfortunate result of trying to move the egg from the tubes and into the uterus. Now I'm sure the next argument is going to be guilting me into supporting abortions so a mother won't have to live with a scar on her stomach.

Your sure were right about that, a c-section for a rape, that sounds like the tRADE OF A LIFE TIMe, thank god that you will never have any say in anything about abortion, thank god that it's entirely up to the woman to decide if the baby get's aborted or born, thank god that there is no law that says the father has a say in the abortion, actually I would do a c-section for a baby I would have with a man I loved.

I'm actually going to focus more on the fact that you think it's right to abort when the child is attached to the tubes, I mean stick with your arguments, you think it's okay to kill a child when it's stuck to the tubes, are you sick or something (No offence),,,,,,,,


Now with it in mind that you think it's justable to abort when the baby is killing both the mother and the baby, then I want you to keep this in mind, feel the feeling that you feel when you claim that that kind of abortion is justable, then multiple it with two, and then you'll see how us woman's feel about rape abortions,


Now I think I may have widen you horizon gotten you to feel what other's feel about another kind of a abortion, your lucky I was able to do that, you admitted something that gave me a chance to communicate with you, some boys on here haven't had that benefit.

Well the world is harsh. And sometimes being bold, sticking to your guns, and seeing things in black and white is the only way to keep things in order. I know to many I probably come off as a caveman, but so be it. My ethics come before my "sensitivities."

So will murder, rape, theft, and any other crime that ought to remain illegal and not just legalized because "people will do it anyway."

Or, and I'm just throwing this out there, it can be banned like it used to be not that long ago and those that break the law can be prosecuted under the law for their crimes like they used to. And the child can feel pain by a few weeks. You'd be surprise how quickly a human grows in the womb. It's sad really; there used to be a time when women like Susan B Anthony were around that thought a woman's right to choose had to do with voting against Woodrow Wilson, not killing their offspring in vile fashions; in fact, they were vocal opponents of it. Now it's mainstream. Thanks Margaret Sanger.

Abortion is not murder.

What is a feuds suppose to be old to be considered having a soul according to Christianity? anyone?




My final words in this posts are,

Boys, the woman's opinion is the only opinion that matters, the boy/male has no saying in if she has it born or not, there is no law stating the father of the child has any say in the abortion so until that changes you'll just have to face the cruel cold world, that she's not going to carry your mistake, and you can't do anything to change her mind, you can't force her to do anything.

Metatron
February 10th, 2009, 12:25 PM
Just allow me to play the Devil's advocate here for a quick minute:

Actually the first picture is not human it's just a mix human gens, just spit in a jar with couple of your buddies and whola! (Sorry couldn't resist)

Actually, no. The first picture was, as I had put before, "a tangled mass of human stem cells on a petree dish." I'm pretty sure your spit doesn't contain embryonic stem cells =x

And what will you say when you get rapped and get pregnant, oh wait you can't your a boy

...What?
I don't think that's the point he was trying to make. Even though I don't agree with his logic, to say "You couldn't get pregnant, therefore you wouldn't understand" really...doesn't make too much sense. I mean, of course putting it into perspective would help someone to understand what an important choice the woman is faced with, but to say that, because he isn't a woman that his opinion doesn't matter, just isn't fair.

And you know the violent gene the father has, the one that makes him rape, the burst of violence he momentarily had when he did the thing he did, it passes on to the child, and I would not be comfortable knowing that I was making a caring a baby that may some day do what his father did too me to another young girl.
"Violent gene?" Does that even exist?
You can't just assume that because the father had a sick, twisted mind, that the child will necessarily be born that way. While I certainly do agree that the woman should not be forced into conceiving a child that was her choice, to say that the child *might* grow up to be like the father in that aspect doesn't really seem like a legitimate point of arguement. Otherwise, you're basically saying that people will mental health issues shouldn't be allowed to breed =x

Now I'm going to sound like a total godoholic, like some members have been sounding in this thread
Actually, I think we've all been pretty good about not bringing religious beliefs into this debate :3

Abortion is not murder.

Depends how far off into the pregnancy we're talking about. 2 weeks? No. 4 Months? Yes.

Boys, the woman's opinion is the only opinion that matters, the boy/male has no saying in if she has it born or not...
Oh, so because the man isn't the one to face pregnancy, then his opinion regarding the fate of the child doesn't matter at all, despite the fact it was his sperm that was partially responsible for the creation of the child? Yeah, that totally makes sense. Well, then I guess we shouldn't permit any males to even post in this thread anymore, seeing as their opinion doesn't matter at all.

there is no law stating the father of the child has any say in the abortion so until that changes you'll just have to face the cruel cold world.
Actually, if the couple are legally married, then yeah, the father does have a say in whether or not an abortion should be practiced. And even if the couple isn't married, the male does still have the option of petitioning legal custody of the child, even if it is still in the womb (although this is usually unsuccessful).

Angela
February 10th, 2009, 12:57 PM
Just allow me to play the Devil's advocate here for a quick minute:


Actually, no. The first picture was, as I had put before, "a tangled mass of human stem cells on a petree dish." I'm pretty sure your spit doesn't contain embryonic stem cells =x

I was kidding about the spit.

...What?
I don't think that's the point he was trying to make. Even though I don't agree with his logic, to say "You couldn't get pregnant, therefore you wouldn't understand" really...doesn't make too much sense. I mean, of course putting it into perspective would help someone to understand what an important choice the woman is faced with, but to say that, because he isn't a woman that his opinion doesn't matter, just isn't fair.
Actually it is fair, since that is the cold hearted truth.


"Violent gene?" Does that even exist?
You can't just assume that because the father had a sick, twisted mind, that the child will necessarily be born that way. While I certainly do agree that the woman should not be forced into conceiving a child that was her choice, to say that the child *might* grow up to be like the father in that aspect doesn't really seem like a legitimate point of arguement. Otherwise, you're basically saying that people will mental health issues shouldn't be allowed to breed =x
Actually it has been proved that the violent gene passes on, as does the gene that makes people become alcoholic, and you may ask what makes people become alcoholic, well it is more likely for people with ADHD to become addictive to something because a lack of the chemical Dopamine that causes happiness so that the person keeps seeking into some kind of comfort, such as dope, alcohol and others, it has been proven that the violent gene passes on, and yes I think it's fair seeing he might get that gene, I mean I'm not going to keep the baby, so why create a monster just send it away from me, well I must be really cold hearted to think like that, but so would the rapist be.

And if crazy people want to have children then they can have them, but they'd just be spreading their decease, it doesn't matter to me if the people with mental health issues want to breed, so long as they don't use me for it.


Actually, I think we've all been pretty good about not bringing religious beliefs into this debate :3You can't deny seeing one or two, abortion is wrong because the baby's were made by god.

Depends how far off into the pregnancy we're talking about. 2 weeks? No. 4 Months? Yes.If I remember correctly then 4 months is too late to abort, after those months I believe their is a baby in there, so I would considered that murder, but I'd have it aborted anyway if it were possible.

Oh, so because the man isn't the one to face pregnancy, then his opinion regarding the fate of the child doesn't matter at all, despite the fact it was his sperm that was partially responsible for the creation of the child? Yeah, that totally makes sense. Well, then I guess we shouldn't permit any males to even post in this thread anymore, seeing as their opinion doesn't matter at all.

Actually, if the couple are legally married, then yeah, the father does have a say in whether or not an abortion should be practiced. And even if the couple isn't married, the male does still have the option of petitioning legal custody of the child, even if it is still in the womb (although this is usually unsuccessful).@bolded: Could not have said it better myself, I mean he's not going to be the one squeezing a baby out there lower body, and if the baby get's born, the I would force him to pay me money for the baby, so you can look at it this way, while the baby is inside me the father has no say, when it's out well, "Here's your baby, enjoy, have him back by 6"<<<< this is only if the baby was conceived by the act of love.


And again, while it is inside ME, then the father has no say,


Well I'm a stubborn woman so no court would tell me to have a baby, if they would then I'd just throw myself down a staircase or something, or smoke like crazy, or lie to a doctor and say that I was not married, my body my option, and if those fail then I'd drink to make sure the baby would be ugly since the father is going to take it away from me anyway.

I know call me a cold hearted woman, but my body, I decide what I do with it no one else!

Virtual Chatot
February 10th, 2009, 01:02 PM
In my opinion, pro-life.

Let me just shift the perspective on the idea that a fetus is not human, and merely a "jar of spit".

If it is not human, then it has the potential to become a human, and why would you still want to keep that mass of cells from becoming human? Advocates of the pro-choice movement always say that they are protecting women's rights, but they neglect the fact that they are destroying millions of potential women.

Aurafire
February 10th, 2009, 01:04 PM
Um...Angela, it takes two people to make a baby. A man and a woman. Why do you have sole control over what happens to it when, without the man, you wouldn't be able to have a baby in the first place? Just because it's in your body doesn't mean half of the child didn't come from a man.

I'm also....slightly disturbed at how you would handle it if you weren't granted permission to have an abortion. Why would you take it out on your innocent child? That's almost as bad as having an actual abortion, and you're putting the child at great risk by smoking and drinking while pregnant. Is that fair at all?

Angela
February 10th, 2009, 01:16 PM
Um...Angela, it takes two people to make a baby. A man and a woman. Why do you have sole control over what happens to it when, without the man, you wouldn't be able to have a baby in the first place? Just because it's in your body doesn't mean half of the child didn't come from a man.

I'm also....slightly disturbed at how you would handle it if you weren't granted permission to have an abortion. Why would you take it out on your innocent child? That's almost as bad as having an actual abortion, and you're putting the child at great risk by smoking and drinking while pregnant. Is that fair at all?
Actually the drastic measures were merely for shock value, as I live in Iceland and the laws are different, so I were never compelled to do that.

You do know what alcoholic baby syndrome is? (Google it)


Tell me how many persons does it take to push out the child, how many of the people get ripped from vayvay to arse??

And may I remind you all young ladies out there, as my mom and teacher told me, use protection, and the morning after pill, unless your on the pill, but taking the morning after pill with the pill does not hurt, always use condom.

Stronkadonk
February 10th, 2009, 01:19 PM
Why shouldn't a father have a say in it?
He was part of the one who created that baby.
If they were both willing, or were both reckless, then that's their problem.
It's called using 'protection'.
Or, have the direct intent of having a child.
Don't go bonkers and then expect to have even more handed to you: Getting rid of the kid that would seem a burden to you.
It's your fault if you and the father/wife got carried away, so since you were reckless, screw you, and deal with it.

Metatron
February 10th, 2009, 01:28 PM
Actually it has been proved that the violent gene passes on, as does the gene that makes people become alcoholic, and you may ask what makes people become alcoholic, well it is more likely for people with ADHD to become addictive to something because a lack of the chemical Dopamine that causes happiness so that the person keeps seeking into some kind of comfort, such as dope, alcohol and others, it has been proven that the violent gene passes on, and yes I think it's fair seeing he might get that gene, I mean I'm not going to keep the baby, so why create a monster just send it away from me, well I must be really cold hearted to think like that, but so would the rapist be.

Oh, okay. So just kill it off because it could potentially be born with some sort of disease. That seems totally legit. I guess every kid with any sort of mental disability is a "monster" then too, huh? I'm bipolar, and I have ADHD. I guess I should never be allowed to have kids then, huh?
Oh, and the bold: Wanna tell me where you got that little piece of information? I had no idea that the lack of Dopamine influenced ADHD. In fact, I was always under the impression that it was the other way around. Plus, to the line stating "Dopamine causes happiness," you should probably do your homework before saying things like that. Depression and ADHD, although often seen together, are two entirely different mental health disorders.

And if crazy people want to have children then they can have them, but they'd just be spreading their decease, it doesn't matter to me if the people with mental health issues want to breed, so long as they don't use me for it.
ADHD=/= Crazy. Just thought I'd put that out there.

If I remember correctly then 4 months is too late to abort, after those months I believe their is a baby in there, so I would considered that murder, but I'd have it aborted anyway if it were possible.
Oh, so you're acknowledging that, after a certain point the child is alive, but you just don't care. I'm not even sure where you stand in this arguement any more. Typically, the counter-arguement for people who are pro-choice is that the child isn't living on its own, and relies on its mother's nourishment to survive, which is legit. You're just saying that, because you don't want it, you don't care whether or not it feels any pain at all, you're gonna have it killed anyways. And, sorry, I was wrong. In the US, abortions can still take place within 3 months of pregnancy, not 4. Regardless, the brain, heart, and spinal cord all begin to develop within 3 weeks of the pregnancy, the basic shape of a human embryo is noticeable by week 5, and the central nervous system begins to develop by week 9.


And again, while it is inside ME, then the father has no say.

I was just telling you that, legally, the father does have a choice in the fate of the pregnancy. But apparently you're above the law anyways, so...


Well I'm a stubborn woman so no court would tell me to have a baby, if they would then I'd just throw myself down a staircase or something, or smoke like crazy, or lie to a doctor and say that I was not married, my body my option, and if those fail then I'd drink to make sure the baby would be ugly since the father is going to take it away from me anyway.
I...don't even know how to counter that. Well, if you really think it's okay to just go throw yourself down a flight of stairs because you don't want to have to support a baby, then you should probably seek mental help. Which, according to your logic, means you should probably never have a baby anyways, seeing as you may pass down that "violent gene" to it.

Look, haven't changed my views at all since posting here, I still believe that a woman should be given the choice up to a certain point in the pregnancy, especially under the circumstances of rape and/or incest, or if it puts her own life in danger, but your logic here is seriously flawed.

Virtual Chatot
February 10th, 2009, 01:34 PM
At least give the baby away to adoption, I don't see the logic in harming an innocent child just because you don't feel like having it.

That's like saying it was fine for the Holocaust to have happened, because the Nazi Germans did not want them to exist.

Stronkadonk
February 10th, 2009, 01:37 PM
But if you are saying ALWAYS give it up for adoption, would you truly say the same if it were a raped women?

Avey
February 10th, 2009, 01:39 PM
Well I'm a stubborn woman so no court would tell me to have a baby, if they would then I'd just throw myself down a staircase or something, or smoke like crazy, or lie to a doctor and say that I was not married, my body my option, and if those fail then I'd drink to make sure the baby would be ugly since the father is going to take it away from me anyway.

I know call me a cold hearted woman, but my body, I decide what I do with it no one else!

Angela, I'm sorry, but what you're saying is ridiculous. First off, it's your body and even though the child wouldn't be inside of it without the male's sperm, the decision as to whether or not the abortion should take place lies completely with you? I'm sorry, but that sounds to me like you're just extremely bias against men and that you don't believe they possess any good form of judgement at all.

And Angela, the whole thing about killing the baby by throwing yourself down a flight of stairs or making it look ugly by drinking obsessively is just... sick. I'm sorry, but it's pretty obvious that no one would do that to themselves unless they were seriously messed up. The law is flawed in many aspects, but unfortunately that doesn't give you the right to rise above it and kill your child because things aren't going your way.

Are you honestly petty enough to wreck up your child's life in order to get back at the father? Do you have any idea how crazy that sounds, at all? Seriously, Angela, it's not fun reading psychotic posts.

Also, sorry guys, I'll post a huge tl;dr post about my views on abortion when I get the time.

Agent Cobalt
February 10th, 2009, 02:13 PM
And what will you say when you get rapped and get pregnant, oh wait you can't your a boy (You can't get pregnant that is, never know what rapists are into so I can't say that about rape), so let me ask you, do you hate the morning after pill since it kills a "form" of life that enters the woman?

I don't consider sperm anything more than sex cells. If contraception is used to prevent conception, that's one thing. If it's used to terminate it, that's another thing. I believe life begins at conception because it's scientifically true and I believe that's when the spirit of life is breathed into mankind. So if you're using pills to kill a child in the womb, yeah I have a problem with that. If contraception is being used to stop the sperm from even getting near the eggs, that's not as big a deal because the components of life haven't even come into contact yet.

I would never spoil my body just because some loser downtown couldn't keep it in his pants, I would want to wake up and see the scared on my lower are just to remind me off what happened, but I would be willing to spoil my body when I'm older and have a husband.

What? Could you rephrase that?

And a woman never knows what will happen to a baby ones given away, does it get a good home, is it being treated better, is it happy, is it hungry is it crying is it sick, will it hate me when it grows up because I gave it away, will it blame me for being put into the care of a neglectful family, so I would never give away a child, so I would not be carry a child just to give it away.

So because you don't know for sure that the child would live like a king with no burdens in life, you'd rather just pull the plug? What's more important- the child living with someone that wants and can care for it or your feelings being hurt over thoughts that your child that is being raised by another family might resent you for putting its best interests ahead of your own? Look, we all like to think that a parent's job is to be loved by their child rather than make sure their child gets love from them; we like to think parents are meant to be their child's friend first. Well it's not your job to worry about being liked by your kid. You're supposed to be their parent first and their friend second, so if giving them up for adoption is the only way you know they'll have a chance because you know you're not going to be able to provide for them, you do what's best for your child and to hell with any ill will the child might bear towards you years later. So they might not slobber over you when they're older because they learn you gave them up. At least you'll live knowing you put your child's future before your own selfish feelings or self-pity, and eventually the child might come around and realize this too. A parent should put their kids before their feelings. Maybe it sounds harsh, but if being hated by your kid is the price you have to pay to give them a shot at life, so be it.

And you know the violent gene the father has, the one that makes him rape, the burst of violence he momentarily had when he did the thing he did, it passes on to the child, and I would not be comfortable knowing that I was making a caring a baby that may some day do what his father did too me to another young girl.

Violent gene? What? Seriously.

Now I'm going to sound like a total godoholic, like some members have been sounding in this thread *Note that I say this with a sarcastic tone*

Maybe god didn't plan for them to have children, since that people can't have children then it's god's doing, I'm totally going to ignore the fact that it's biological and say god did it.

*Okay sarcastic loony hour over, I'm sorry the person I'm quoting I know you didn't talk about god, so that wasn't aimed at you, but it was aimed at some of the MALES on here that think a rape is god's doing*

Well let's bring up God then. I assume you're talking about the Lord, my God. Let's take a look at what the Bible has to say about this.

Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

Psalm 139:13-16 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

Exodus 21:22-25 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."

The Bible states that God knows us in the womb and knows us before birth, and that anyone that harms a pregnant woman and kills her child should be treated no differently than a murderer that killed a grown man. Seriously, I'm not a theologian, but I at least try to learn what the Bible and my God have to say on a topic. And that's not a response to you because I didn't even get what you were saying. <=/

Your sure were right about that, a c-section for a rape, that sounds like the tRADE OF A LIFE TIMe, thank god that you will never have any say in anything about abortion, thank god that it's entirely up to the woman to decide if the baby get's aborted or born, thank god that there is no law that says the father has a say in the abortion, actually I would do a c-section for a baby I would have with a man I loved.

Oh yes, thank God some jerk on the internet that suggested that it's better to get an operation to birth birth to a child and live with a scar than to just kill the child out of inconvenience will never dictate policies on unnecessary child smothering. I mean, you're so right! Why let the child be born if it means you'll have to live with a harmless scar on your gut? Your image way is more important than a human life after all.

And yeah, screw those selfish dads that don't want their partners ending the lives of their children! They only contribute half the chromosomes to create the kid and are just as much the child's parent as the mother, so it's not like they should have a say in the matter or anything right? For God's sake...

I'm actually going to focus more on the fact that you think it's right to abort when the child is attached to the tubes, I mean stick with your arguments, you think it's okay to kill a child when it's stuck to the tubes, are you sick or something (No offence),,,,,,,,

...WHAT? Do you even know what an ectopic pregnancy is? Instead of growing in the uterus, the fertilized egg ends up sticking to the fallopian tubes and growing there. If the child isn't moved then the child will die and the mother will as well. It's not an abortion in my view to intervene in that situation where both lives will end up being lost. But maybe I'm sick for not wanting to lose two lives instead of (regrettably) one. Maybe I'm sick for not wanting the child to get crushed in the tubes and leave the mother to endure the destruction of her innards. Yeah, it's sick to not want a literal explosion in a person to kill her. I'm messed up alright.


Now with it in mind that you think it's justable to abort when the baby is killing both the mother and the baby, then I want you to keep this in mind, feel the feeling that you feel when you claim that that kind of abortion is justable, then multiple it with two, and then you'll see how us woman's feel about rape abortions,

So it is sick to move the child from the fallopian tubes to save one of the lives rather than lose both, but it's not sick to kill a child unnecessarily when no one's life is in danger because of how the woman got pregnant? Yeah, that's consistent.

Now I think I may have widen you horizon gotten you to feel what other's feel about another kind of a abortion, your lucky I was able to do that, you admitted something that gave me a chance to communicate with you, some boys on here haven't had that benefit.

Are you kidding? No, yeah, you're very generous to take time out of your schedule to educate me. You've opened my eyes.

Abortion is not murder.

I don't think I said it was. I said it was killing. Murder is the illegal killing of another person, which invokes the law. Currently thanks to judicial activists abortion is legal and not technically murder, which is odd since a man can be charged with second degree murder for killing a pregnant woman, but that's the law. But it is still killing human life.

What is a feuds suppose to be old to be considered having a soul according to Christianity? anyone?

What?

My final words in this posts are,

Boys, the woman's opinion is the only opinion that matters, the boy/male has no saying in if she has it born or not, there is no law stating the father of the child has any say in the abortion so until that changes you'll just have to face the cruel cold world, that she's not going to carry your mistake, and you can't do anything to change her mind, you can't force her to do anything.

Well it's only your opinion that the only opinion that matters is the woman's opinion. It's my opinion that my opinion is just as valid an opinion as any woman's opinion regardless of my inability to get knocked up. And it's just my opinion that being a woman shouldn't give you a monopoly over life. It takes two to tango, and I think that if the father doesn't want the body of his offspring ripped apart with medical appliances, maybe he should be consulted since it's just as much his child as it is the mother's child. Kind of goes back to what I said- it's a child, not a choice.

Virtual Chatot
February 10th, 2009, 02:16 PM
But if you are saying ALWAYS give it up for adoption, would you truly say the same if it were a raped women?I'll repeat what I said earlier, why would you want to kill the child? In my mind, that makes the woman just as bad as the rapist.

Angela
February 10th, 2009, 03:43 PM
Oh, okay. So just kill it off because it could potentially be born with some sort of disease. That seems totally legit. I guess every kid with any sort of mental disability is a "monster" then too, huh? I'm bipolar, and I have ADHD. I guess I should never be allowed to have kids then, huh?
Oh, and the bold: Wanna tell me where you got that little piece of information? I had no idea that the lack of Dopamine influenced ADHD. In fact, I was always under the impression that it was the other way around. Plus, to the line stating "Dopamine causes happiness," you should probably do your homework before saying things like that. Depression and ADHD, although often seen together, are two entirely different mental health disorders.
ADHD=/= Crazy. Just thought I'd put that out there.
Oh, so you're acknowledging that, after a certain point the child is alive, but you just don't care. I'm not even sure where you stand in this arguement any more. Typically, the counter-arguement for people who are pro-choice is that the child isn't living on its own, and relies on its mother's nourishment to survive, which is legit. You're just saying that, because you don't want it, you don't care whether or not it feels any pain at all, you're gonna have it killed anyways. And, sorry, I was wrong. In the US, abortions can still take place within 3 months of pregnancy, not 4. Regardless, the brain, heart, and spinal cord all begin to develop within 3 weeks of the pregnancy, the basic shape of a human embryo is noticeable by week 5, and the central nervous system begins to develop by week 9.
I was just telling you that, legally, the father does have a choice in the fate of the pregnancy. But apparently you're above the law anyways, so...
I...don't even know how to counter that. Well, if you really think it's okay to just go throw yourself down a flight of stairs because you don't want to have to support a baby, then you should probably seek mental help. Which, according to your logic, means you should probably never have a baby anyways, seeing as you may pass down that "violent gene" to it.
Look, haven't changed my views at all since posting here, I still believe that a woman should be given the choice up to a certain point in the pregnancy, especially under the circumstances of rape and/or incest, or if it puts her own life in danger, but your logic here is seriously flawed.


Actually my point with the ADHD was that those were the people who were at more risk to become addicted to alcohol and drugs, and it has been proved, let me ask you, whom of us is majoring in nature science, oh wait that's me, I did a whole essay on Dopamine, and a bunch of the nerve chemicals, got a 95%, and that was just an example to show you that there are more things out there that were caused by inheriting, kids with any sort of ADHD are in more danger of becoming addicted to drugs, and FYI I stopped talking about the ADHD people when I say'd crazy people, ADHD people are not crazy, what ever would make you think that?




And yes the violence gene is inherited between generations, that's my main point, while trying to drag 2 different subject's into this I apologize for that, and yes,


Really bipolar, interesting, I'm gonna get to know you better, well bipolar may be a curtain crazy, but exactly the crazy I was referring to, I was more talking about rubbing shjit on walls crazy,


And that stairs comment was meant for shock value, so glad it caught your attention, and do you know whom replied to this, men, there is no female that said anything, that's because the men know their powerless, I'm just rubbing it in their face, seriously I myself would never toss myself down some stairs, but I'm glad I caught your attention, I got the reaction I wanted, the men to realize their lack off power when it comes to this matter that is why they all commented here some accusing me of being crazy, you know what I see from reading the post, they all accuse me a of violence against the baby how odd, well I'm pretty sure that most of them would use violence on me if I were carrying their baby and would want to have it aborted, in fact they'd probably use violence on their teen girlfriends that want an abortion then spit it in their face that they would be hurting a baby,

Actually the abortion takes merely minutes, and I think thats better then a whole life of being hated (That is for the rape child), and as I stated in a post couple of pages forward, I would not abort a baby unless I was raped or had a medical decease, so I wont be going down any stairs ever, because I wont have too, I plan on keeping my baby's, I'm gonna have a lot of them.


And the alcohol was merely to rub it into the face of the males on here that they are coming of to needy, and if they do then someday some horrible woman will do that.

At least give the baby away to adoption, I don't see the logic in harming an innocent child just because you don't feel like having it.

That's like saying it was fine for the Holocaust to have happened, because the Nazi Germans did not want them to exist.
The only person I'll ever truly trust is me, so I can't imagine giving away my child to anyone else, and I would not give the baby to a family member because it's my baby, and would be my responsibility no ones else,

So no adoptions for me ever, unless I'm the one adopting.
Were the Jewish people in my tummy?

Angela, I'm sorry, but what you're saying is ridiculous. First off, it's your body and even though the child wouldn't be inside of it without the male's sperm, the decision as to whether or not the abortion should take place lies completely with you? I'm sorry, but that sounds to me like you're just extremely bias against men and that you don't believe they possess any good form of judgement at all.

And Angela, the whole thing about killing the baby by throwing yourself down a flight of stairs or making it look ugly by drinking obsessively is just... sick. I'm sorry, but it's pretty obvious that no one would do that to themselves unless they were seriously messed up. The law is flawed in many aspects, but unfortunately that doesn't give you the right to rise above it and kill your child because things aren't going your way.

Are you honestly petty enough to wreck up your child's life in order to get back at the father? Do you have any idea how crazy that sounds, at all? Seriously, Angela, it's not fun reading psychotic posts.

Also, sorry guys, I'll post a huge tl;dr post about my views on abortion when I get the time.
To be honest I'm a complete troll when it comes to men and their opinion on how they should behave, I'm a feminist inspirit (I live in a country with a lesbian primeminester so what else to expect from me), men can make good decision but when it comes to womans they're judgment is all cloudy, the woman has been in the shadow in the male for so long and still is in some countries, so I don't really listen to males and their judgments on things like that, I mean for the passed 2000 years he has had the control over things as simple as that (or at least he thought he had it), and some off that narrow minded male view still lingers here today, so I'm sorry to come off so anti male, I mean men have great judgment on some fields, such as science.


I don't consider sperm anything more than sex cells. If contraception is used to prevent conception, that's one thing. If it's used to terminate it, that's another thing. I believe life begins at conception because it's scientifically true and I believe that's when the spirit of life is breathed into mankind. So if you're using pills to kill a child in the womb, yeah I have a problem with that. If contraception is being used to stop the sperm from even getting near the eggs, that's not as big a deal because the components of life haven't even come into contact yet.
What? Could you rephrase that?



So because you don't know for sure that the child would live like a king with no burdens in life, you'd rather just pull the plug? What's more important- the child living with someone that wants and can care for it or your feelings being hurt over thoughts that your child that is being raised by another family might resent you for putting its best interests ahead of your own? Look, we all like to think that a parent's job is to be loved by their child rather than make sure their child gets love from them; we like to think parents are meant to be their child's friend first. Well it's not your job to worry about being liked by your kid. You're supposed to be their parent first and their friend second, so if giving them up for adoption is the only way you know they'll have a chance because you know you're not going to be able to provide for them, you do what's best for your child and to hell with any ill will the child might bear towards you years later. So they might not slobber over you when they're older because they learn you gave them up. At least you'll live knowing you put your child's future before your own selfish feelings or self-pity, and eventually the child might come around and realize this too. A parent should put their kids before their feelings. Maybe it sounds harsh, but if being hated by your kid is the price you have to pay to give them a shot at life, so be it.



Violent gene? What? Seriously.



Well let's bring up God then. I assume you're talking about the Lord, my God. Let's take a look at what the Bible has to say about this.

The Bible states that God knows us in the womb and knows us before birth, and that anyone that harms a pregnant woman and kills her child should be treated no differently than a murderer that killed a grown man. Seriously, I'm not a theologian, but I at least try to learn what the Bible and my God have to say on a topic. And that's not a response to you because I didn't even get what you were saying. <=/
Oh yes, thank God some jerk on the internet that suggested that it's better to get an operation to birth birth to a child and live with a scar than to just kill the child out of inconvenience will never dictate policies on unnecessary child smothering. I mean, you're so right! Why let the child be born if it means you'll have to live with a harmless scar on your gut? Your image way is more important than a human life after all.
And yeah, screw those selfish dads that don't want their partners ending the lives of their children! They only contribute half the chromosomes to create the kid and are just as much the child's parent as the mother, so it's not like they should have a say in the matter or anything right? For God's sake...
...WHAT? Do you even know what an ectopic pregnancy is? Instead of growing in the uterus, the fertilized egg ends up sticking to the fallopian tubes and growing there. If the child isn't moved then the child will die and the mother will as well. It's not an abortion in my view to intervene in that situation where both lives will end up being lost. But maybe I'm sick for not wanting to lose two lives instead of (regrettably) one. Maybe I'm sick for not wanting the child to get crushed in the tubes and leave the mother to endure the destruction of her innards. Yeah, it's sick to not want a literal explosion in a person to kill her. I'm messed up alright
So it is sick to move the child from the fallopian tubes to save one of the lives rather than lose both, but it's not sick to kill a child unnecessarily when no one's life is in danger because of how the woman got pregnant? Yeah, that's consistent.
Are you kidding? No, yeah, you're very generous to take time out of your schedule to educate me. You've opened my eyes.
I don't think I said it was. I said it was killing. Murder is the illegal killing of another person, which invokes the law. Currently thanks to judicial activists abortion is legal and not technically murder, which is odd since a man can be charged with second degree murder for killing a pregnant woman, but that's the law. But it is still killing human life.
What?
Well it's only your opinion that the only opinion that matters is the woman's opinion. It's my opinion that my opinion is just as valid an opinion as any woman's opinion regardless of my inability to get knocked up. And it's just my opinion that being a woman shouldn't give you a monopoly over life. It takes two to tango, and I think that if the father doesn't want the body of his offspring ripped apart with medical appliances, maybe he should be consulted since it's just as much his child as it is the mother's child. Kind of goes back to what I said- it's a child, not a choice.

The are you sick comment was a joke, of course no one wants two people too die, but do you honestly want the a child to be born in this world unwanted, with people that throw people words around peoples face, with all these peoples wore shipping a 1000 years old book I'm not really sure if I want to bring a baby to this world (A joke).


"I would never spoil my body just because some loser creep downtown couldn't keep it in his pants, I would not want to wake up and see the scare on my lower body that would just remind me off the rape, I could not bare it having to remember the rape every day for the rest off my life, but I would be willing to spoil my body when I'm older and have a husband.."

"I feel pity for the girl you wind up with, you'll slave her until she has 20 kids *A joke*", not allowing her to take the morning after pill that kills anything that might have gotten to far, so your also against the morning after pill, listen mister if you don't change your attitude then you'll be paying the mother's of your baby's money for the rest of your life.


And yes I believe pulling the plug is better then having a unwanted child.


And yes there is a gene that controls violence it passes on from one generation to another, and it has been proved that some rapist and most violent people have it, such as the ones that hit their wifes, that gene passes on from father to son, or father to daughter, and if your lucky the child won't get the gene.


I'll repeat what I said earlier, why would you want to kill the child? In my mind, that makes the woman just as bad as the rapist.
Actually no it does not.








EDIT:
Okay people I'm out, keep up the conversation I only hope I have spiced it up I'm off to bed so good night, I'll reply more tomorrow.

Metatron
February 10th, 2009, 04:05 PM
Actually my point with the ADHD was that those were the people who were at more risk to become addicted to alcohol and drugs, and it has been proved, let me ask you, whom of us is majoring in nature science, oh wait that's me, I did a whole essay on Dopamine, and a bunch of the nerve chemicals, got a 95%, and that was just an example to show you that there are more things out there that were caused by inheriting, kids with any sort of ADHD are in more danger of becoming addicted to drugs, and FYI I stopped talking about the ADHD people when I say'd crazy people, ADHD people are not crazy, what ever would make you think that?


Alright, look; I don't now who the hell you think you are talking to me like that. You don't know me, or anything about my life, so just stop assuming that, because you got a good score on your science test last week, you're somehow the most qualified person here to be talking about subjects like this. I fail to see how taking a "nature science" course could possibly educate you on the chemical balance of people faced with mental health disorders, but whatever, I don't judge you. I only ask that you inturn, don't judge me or anyone else at this site, and stop assuming that you know more than you actually do. Especially when you start making claims such as "men should not have the right to an opinion over abortion because they can't get pregnant."

Oh, and your terrible grammar doesn't help help your case much either. "Say'd," huh?


Really bipolar, interesting, I'm gonna get to know you better, well bipolar may be a curtain crazy, but exactly the crazy I was referring to, I was more talking about rubbing shjit on walls crazy

"Curtain Crazy?" Is that the label you're gonna give people like me now? Alright, well, you can think whatever you want about about me; I honestly could care less.


And that stairs comment was meant for shock value, so glad it caught your attention, and do you know whom replied to this, men, there is no female that said anything, that's because the men know their powerless
...Powerless against what? You're not making any sense, Seriously, you should probably start working on the way you're wording things because it seems like no one here is actually able to understand what the hell you're trying to say.

the men to realize their lack off power when it comes to this matter that is why they all commented here some accusing me of being crazy
No, people here accused you of being crazy because you said that, if you got pregnant and didn't want to take care of the child, and if it was too late into the pregnancy to get an abortion, you would throw yourself down a flight of stairs. Seems like a legit reason to me, anyways. Even if you didn't actually mean it, and it was for the "shock" factor, the fact that you would even talk like that totally sickens me. You've somehow managed to twist this thread into an entirely different conversation. Good job.

Agent Cobalt
February 10th, 2009, 08:27 PM
The are you sick comment was a joke

Really?


I'm actually going to focus more on the fact that you think it's right to abort when the child is attached to the tubes, I mean stick with your arguments, you think it's okay to kill a child when it's stuck to the tubes, are you sick or something (No offence),,,,,,,,

That doesn't really read like a joke. I mean, you even put "no offense" which you usually don't do when joking; you say something like "just kidding." No offense is something people say when they know they're being offensive but don't want to get in trouble for it. But then I'm fan of logic and reason, so my bad if I didn't understand your joke. (No offense)

of course no one wants two people too die, but do you honestly want the a child to be born in this world unwanted, with people that throw people words around peoples face, with all these peoples wore shipping a 1000 years old book I'm not really sure if I want to bring a baby to this world (A joke).No child is unwanted. Just because you wouldn't want it doesn't mean someone someone else wouldn't.

"I would never spoil my body just because some loser creep downtown couldn't keep it in his pants, I would not want to wake up and see the scare on my lower body that would just remind me off the rape, I could not bare it having to remember the rape every day for the rest off my life, but I would be willing to spoil my body when I'm older and have a husband.."Ok, so we've established that you value looks over life and that to be responsible and give birth to your child would be spoiling your body. Gotcha.

"I feel pity for the girl you wind up with, you'll slave her until she has 20 kids *A joke*", not allowing her to take the morning after pill that kills anything that might have gotten to far, so your also against the morning after pill, listen mister if you don't change your attitude then you'll be paying the mother's of your baby's money for the rest of your life.You know, you're not really that funny, and it's not because of your bad writing. It's because your jokes aren't really jokes. They're insults with *joke* added at the end, and since this isn't a Comedy Central Roast I don't "get" the hit and run attacks.

And yes I believe pulling the plug is better then having a unwanted child.So convenience for you over life. Ok.

And yes there is a gene that controls violence it passes on from one generation to another, and it has been proved that some rapist and most violent people have it, such as the ones that hit their wifes, that gene passes on from father to son, or father to daughter, and if your lucky the child won't get the gene.Right, just like the obesity/gay/drug use/ADD/road rage/suicide/enter bad behavior here gene. I don't believe at all in a violence gene. Instead of trying to put the blame for people's actions on genes, why not hold people responsible for their own actions? I mean, I guess you would kill your kid to avoid a scar because of a selfish gene and not because that's just who you are right? *joke* I guess it's good you wouldn't have the kid so it wouldn't get your condition. *joke*

Yamikarasu
February 13th, 2009, 02:51 PM
Right, just like the obesity/gay/drug use/ADD/road rage/suicide/enter bad behavior here gene.

Not to go off topic, but this incredibly stupid comment pretty much invalidated every post you've made, but we'll just pretend it never happened, shall we? Take your bigotry (or just blatant ignorance) elsewhere, I don't want to hear it. I'm really having trouble controlling my anger right now and keeping my language clean, so needless to say if this wasn't a Pokemon forum, you'd be hearing a lot more from me about it.

Anyway, I've posted in this topic before, and like I've said my opinion is that people should use contraceptives. If they don't use these and have a baby, then that is their fault, and they should live with it without aborting the future child. Even if a couple uses contraception, and for some reason it doesn't work, then the couple should have been prepared for that possibility before they had sex and again, they should take responsibility.

Now, I don't think abortion is anywhere near the same level as killing an actual human being, which in my opinion is a person who has actually been born. While still an embryo, the "child" is really no more than a clump of cells, and while it has the "potential" to become a human being, it is not equal to a human being until it is born. If I had to give a more precise definition of the line between pre-human and human, it would be the moment when the baby can survive outside of the womb without artificial support.

Abortion should be used in cases like rape, and in cases like this I would think it would be best to abort the embryo as soon as possible. In cases outside of rape or some other form of forced impregnation, it's the couple's own damn fault and they should take responsibility.

And I really don't think that is the woman's choice alone, it's the couple's choice.

Agent Cobalt
February 13th, 2009, 04:41 PM
Not to go off topic, but this incredibly stupid comment pretty much invalidated every post you've made, but we'll just pretend it never happened, shall we? Take your bigotry (or just blatant ignorance) elsewhere, I don't want to hear it. I'm really having trouble controlling my anger right now and keeping my language clean, so needless to say if this wasn't a Pokemon forum, you'd be hearing a lot more from me about it.

If you have a problem with something I've said, then out with it. I shouldn't have to deal with lame hit and run insults like yours without an explanation. If you think throwing insults at me, telling me to keep quiet, and acting like there's nothing else that needs to be said as if to say "case closed" is going to contain me and silence me, you're wrong. I don't know what on God's green Earth was so wrong with what I said that caused you to have a temper tantrum. I saw the bolded words and I still think you're mad over nothing. I find that those that are more interested in making libelous claims than they are in making points really have nothing important to say explaining said claims.

Tinhead Bruce
February 13th, 2009, 04:47 PM
Hmm, I think that he thought that you were saying that being gay and being overweight are genetic detrimental (well I mean no one wants to be overweight... but you know what I mean) traits.

I don't think this is what you were saying. I think you were saying that saying that the above listed things are genetic is ridiculous, just like the violent gene. That's what I thought you said, but I'd like to know: Is that what you meant to say?

Agent Cobalt
February 13th, 2009, 04:53 PM
Hmm, I think that he thought that you were saying that being gay and being overweight are genetic detrimental (well I mean no one wants to be overweight... but you know what I mean) traits.

I don't think this is what you were saying. I think you were saying that saying that the above listed things are genetic is ridiculous, just like the violent gene. That's what I thought you said, but I'd like to know: Is that what you meant to say?

God no, I wasn't saying being fat or gay is genetic. I was giving examples of things people try to blame on genes rather than the human condition. If he was mad about me saying people are predestined to be obese then he needs to recheck what I've posted.

Anyway, you were right.

Frostbiteकर्म
February 13th, 2009, 04:57 PM
I don't like the idea of taking a 'soon to be' life.
But hell, life is taken every second, and I am in no place to judge what a mother decides.
I personally admire rape victims keeping the rape child by choice though.


Rape happens too you know.

Edit; I can admire the rape victim keeping her rape child because even though that extra life was thrown at her, she made the choice to keep it.
It's sort of like saying 'I love my children no matter what'.


Oh I know it happens, and I'm not saying the mother has the choice of having sex or something. That's far from what I meant. What I mean is that I don't think if you choose to willingly have sex and have it unprotected (without wanting a baby/being unmarried) is very smart. If the person is raped, I don't think that they can help it much.

processr
February 16th, 2009, 01:20 AM
Okay, I'm going to attempt to wade into this debate and actually justify my stance without simply saying "rape, you get me?".

I am pro-choice in certain circumstances. The labels of pro-choice and pro-life are very limiting, I feel, and many see them as two extremes. I think abortion is permissible in cases where the mother or child is at grave physical or mental risk (or in mortal danger) as a result of the birth, and in cases where the child would be severely physically or mentally handicapped (as in, to the point where their quality of life would be so low that it wouldn't be a life worth living). Additionally, I believe an abortion should only be carried out before 24 weeks of the pregnancy have passed - the point at which it is currently accepted (under British law, at any rate) that a baby can survive outside of the womb, albeit with extensive care. My view is much in line with the British legal system's view, though I frown upon abortions performed because the mother believes she cannot care for the baby, or simply does not want it.

And now for my reasoning. I believe a person should have autonomy over their body, on the most part; childbirth is supposedly the most painful experience a woman can go through, and to go through that to give birth to a child who may not survive or may have a severely reduced quality of life cannot be good. In the case of children who are simply not wanted or cannot be supported financially I would be in favour of putting them up for adoption. Ultimately, I think a woman should have the right to choose what happens to their own body, and if they have the conscience to go through with an abortion then so be it, in my opinion (presuming the conditions I stated above are met).

So, to sum up, I am in favour of a woman's right to have an abortion:

When the mother's physical or mental health is at grave risk. When the child's physical or mental health is at grave risk. When the child's quality of life would be severely low. When the child would be severely physically or mentally handicapped. Where the mother's life is in grave danger. Where the child's life is in grave danger.

Additionally, in all cases except the final two the woman must not have been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.

I am opposed to abortion:

When the mother has been raped. (This is probably the main point upon which I differ from the majority of pro-choice people.) When the mother cannot afford to support the child. When the mother simply does not want the child. (Assuming her reasoning is not one of the cases in which I support abortion.) When the mother or father simply 'forgot' to use contraception. When the mother has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.

Please counter my points and I will attempt to come back with some justification.

Zet
February 16th, 2009, 02:19 AM
Okay, I'm going to attempt to wade into this debate and actually justify my stance without simply saying "rape, you get me?".

I am pro-choice in certain circumstances. The labels of pro-choice and pro-life are very limiting, I feel, and many see them as two extremes. I think abortion is permissible in cases where the mother or child is at grave physical or mental risk (or in mortal danger) as a result of the birth, and in cases where the child would be severely physically or mentally handicapped (as in, to the point where their quality of life would be so low that it wouldn't be a life worth living). Additionally, I believe an abortion should only be carried out before 24 weeks of the pregnancy have passed - the point at which it is currently accepted (under British law, at any rate) that a baby can survive outside of the womb, albeit with extensive care. My view is much in line with the British legal system's view, though I frown upon abortions performed because the mother believes she cannot care for the baby, or simply does not want it.

And now for my reasoning. I believe a person should have autonomy over their body, on the most part; childbirth is supposedly the most painful experience a woman can go through, and to go through that to give birth to a child who may not survive or may have a severely reduced quality of life cannot be good. In the case of children who are simply not wanted or cannot be supported financially I would be in favour of putting them up for adoption. Ultimately, I think a woman should have the right to choose what happens to their own body, and if they have the conscience to go through with an abortion then so be it, in my opinion (presuming the conditions I stated above are met).

So, to sum up, I am in favour of a woman's right to have an abortion:


When the mother's physical or mental health is at grave risk.
When the child's physical or mental health is at grave risk.
When the child's quality of life would be severely low.
When the child would be severely physically or mentally handicapped.
Where the mother's life is in grave danger.
Where the child's life is in grave danger.


Additionally, in all cases except the final two the woman must not have been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.

I am opposed to abortion:


When the mother has been raped. (This is probably the main point upon which I differ from the majority of pro-choice people.)
When the mother cannot afford to support the child.
When the mother simply does not want the child. (Assuming her reasoning is not one of the cases in which I support abortion.)
When the mother or father simply 'forgot' to use contraception.
When the mother has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.


Please counter my points and I will attempt to come back with some justification.
So in a nutshell you're pretty much saying women do have their rights to abortions only if it falls under a particular category? For example you're girlfriend/wife was raped and got pregnant and they wanted to abort you wouldn't allow them to abort and just keep the unwanted baby?
Aaaand, if the woman has a metal pipe sticking right through her she's allowed to abort? and if the baby has a metal pipe through it, the woman can abort it?

processr
February 16th, 2009, 02:31 AM
So in a nutshell you're pretty much saying women do have their rights to abortions only if it falls under a particular category? For example you're girlfriend/wife was raped and got pregnant and they wanted to abort you wouldn't allow them to abort and just keep the unwanted baby?

I believe that aborting a baby that has resulted from an act of rape only serves to add to the destruction. And perhaps I didn't quite get down everything I wanted to in the post. While I oppose abortion in certain cirumstances I wouldn't completely forbid someone to do so. Jeez, since when was I the ultimate authority? ¬_¬

Aaaand, if the woman has a metal pipe sticking right through her she's allowed to abort? and if the baby has a metal baby through it, the woman can abort it?

What have metal pipes and metal babies got to do with anything?

Zet
February 16th, 2009, 02:33 AM
oops I meant a metal pipe sticking through the baby *edits* xD and as I said it's another example on the matter of grave danger to rape

True Reign
February 16th, 2009, 02:35 AM
I am pro choice.

In my opinion, I believe that a woman should have a fair choice on if she gets to keep the baby or not since it is her body and she is the one that is going to go through all that pain in child birth.

processr
February 16th, 2009, 02:39 AM
oops I meant a metal pipe sticking through the baby *edits* xD and as I said it's another example on the matter of grave danger to rape

;D

If the mother has a metal pipe through her... Well, I doubt she's going to survive with that through her. =| As for the baby, who the heck put their pipe in someone's womb? D=

Aside from being facetious, in terms of a mother's/child's life being in danger when they are born, I usually turn to the example of the ectopic pregnancy. The mother's life is in great danger if the child develops in the Fallopian tubes, and thus I would consider it to be morally justified if the pregnancy was terminated, as it would be saving the mother's life. I guess this sort of example would fall under the Doctrine of Double Effect.

Vannah☆
February 16th, 2009, 08:38 AM
Why give the kid a terrible life? Honestly...

icomeanon6
February 16th, 2009, 08:58 AM
Why give the kid a terrible life? Honestly...
So you're saying it's okay to kill someone just because it looks like their life isn't likely to be a good one? I disagree completely. Everyone has a right to pursue happiness, and who are we to take that right away from a child? Besides, not all babies who might have been aborted are going to be raised by people who don't want children. Have you ever heard of an institution called adoption? There are a ton of people out there who want to take care of the babies that are being thrown away through abortion.

processr
February 16th, 2009, 09:02 AM
Why give the kid a terrible life? Honestly...

Care to give, oh, I don't know, some reasons why you think this?

And I'll echo icomeanon6's sentiments about adoption.

latioslegends
February 16th, 2009, 11:36 PM
Pro Life.

I just don't see how is it is possibly right at all to kill a child. Human cell or not, it still becomes a child no matter what, and under any circumstance is it 100% wrong right just to kill it for personal desire. If the carrier does not want the child, at least try adoption as a option if the case was rape, or got pregnant as a teenager out of some stupid mistake.

UltimaLink007
February 16th, 2009, 11:51 PM
Pro-Life. There should only be an abortion if the mother's life is in danger. Not just for the reason of murder either, although that is the biggest one. Allowing abortions is like a "get out of jail free card" for teenagers to have unprotected sex.

"Oh, wow... I got pregnant!"

"It's okay baby, just get an abortion and let's have some more fun!"

"Okay!"

Starom
February 17th, 2009, 04:36 AM
Pro-Life. There should only be an abortion if the mother's life is in danger. Not just for the reason of murder either, although that is the biggest one. Allowing abortions is like a "get out of jail free card" for teenagers to have unprotected sex.

"Oh, wow... I got pregnant!"

"It's okay baby, just get an abortion and let's have some more fun!"

"Okay!"

Exactly! People are careless, have a child, and then go and kill the child because they can't be bothered with it :P Its pretty awful, to be honest.

the bitter end.
February 18th, 2009, 10:10 AM
I'm for pro-life.

It dosen't matter if your young, you made the decision, and decisions have consequences. You can'y just, basically commit murder to make those consequences easier.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 12:46 PM
I'm for pro-life.

It dosen't matter if your young, you made the decision, and decisions have consequences. You can'y just, basically commit murder to make those consequences easier.

@Bold: So you're saying that some girls make a choice to be raped?

the bitter end.
February 18th, 2009, 01:18 PM
Hmm... Well in that case I think it should be pro-choice.

But only in the case of rape.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:02 PM
I think we should allow abortion only because of rape or when the mothers life is in danger. But the problem is, if you offer abortion to some you must offer it to all.

jasonresno
February 18th, 2009, 02:05 PM
@Bold: So you're saying that some girls make a choice to be raped?

I really don't think he even so much as implied that. He didn't even address rape in his post. He's talking about the retarded women and men that go sleezing around without protection.

I'm assuming, anyway.

processr
February 18th, 2009, 02:08 PM
I'm for pro-life.

It dosen't matter if your young, you made the decision, and decisions have consequences. You can'y just, basically commit murder to make those consequences easier.

And what about if giving birth to the child was likely to result in the death of the mother?

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:13 PM
I really don't think he even so much as implied that. He didn't even address rape in his post. He's talking about the retarded women and men that go sleezing around without protection.

I'm assuming, anyway.

Based on his post, it seemed to me that he was generalizing all cases of abortion to people who sleep around without protection. And I hardly think it's fair for you to judge those people by calling them "retarded". They don't need anymore criticisms. They made a mistake, so what? Are you perfect? I don't think it's right that you can look down on them and judge them and then go even further by pushing your beliefs on them by making it law.

jasonresno
February 18th, 2009, 02:16 PM
Based on his post, it seemed to me that he was generalizing all cases of abortion to people who sleep around without protection. And I hardly think it's fair for you to judge those people by calling them "retarded". They don't need anymore criticisms. They made a mistake, so what? Are you perfect? I don't think it's right that you can look down on them and judge them and then go even further by pushing your beliefs on them by making it law.

Oh no.
How can you defend people slutting around without protection and then killing the kids because they don't want to deal with it?

It's not "a mistake". It's a lifestyle and one that I'm personally sad to see so rampant across my country.

And you're right. He was generalizing. But I'm sure if he was politely asked to go more in depth, he could.

I'm all for equality and freedoms but I'm not going to endorse such a crappy lifestyle. And I'm not trying to step on your toes or be rude. It's just my mindset. Just like you have your own. And that's totally fine but you aren't going to debate me into agreeing with ya.

the bitter end.
February 18th, 2009, 02:18 PM
Yes, I agree with Jason completely.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:21 PM
Oh no.
How can you defend people slutting around without protection and then killing the kids because they don't want to deal with it?

It's not "a mistake". It's a lifestyle and one that I'm personally sad to see so rampant across my country.

I'll tell you how I can defend them, when you tell me why you're so worthy to give them judgment. I don't personally agree with abortion myself; but I think there's a difference between a living, breathing kid and a fetus in a petri dish.

What if they use protection and it doesn't work? What if the condom breaks?

jasonresno
February 18th, 2009, 02:22 PM
I'll tell you how I can defend them, when you tell me why you're so worthy to give them judgment. I don't personally agree with abortion myself; but I think there's a difference between a living, breathing kid and a fetus in a petri dish.

What if they use protection and it doesn't work? What if the condom breaks?

Oh God. I can tell you enjoy arguing.

I was CLEARLY condemning a SPECIFIC lifestyle. OBVIOUSLY I was not talking about RANDOM CONDOMS BREAKING. I was VERY SPECIFIC when I said SLUTTY.

Why am I worthy to judge them?

Why are you worthy to defend them?

Cause it's your right, just like it is mine.

Here is why I think your wrong when you point out "there is a difference between a child and a fetus". Without ANY abortion that fetus will become a child. That's all I need to know. Without any unnatural intervention a child will be born.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:31 PM
Oh God. I can tell you enjoy arguing.

I was CLEARLY condemning a SPECIFIC lifestyle. OBVIOUSLY I was not talking about RANDOM CONDOMS BREAKING. I was VERY SPECIFIC when I said SLUTTY.

Why am I worthy to judge them?

Why are you worthy to defend them?

Cause it's your right, just like it is mine.

Here is why I think your wrong when you point out "there is a difference between a child and a fetus". Without ANY abortion that fetus will become a child. That's all I need to know. Without any unnatural intervention a child will be born.

Just as I can tell you enjoy arguing or else you wouldn't even bother to reply or to add comments such as that which have no purpose other than to provoke. >.>

Yes you were specific as to why you think abortion is wrong, but you centralize your entire arguement on one of the many possibilities of why someone gets an abortion. Not everyone who gets an abortion is "slutty". I don't endorse a promiscuous lifestyle, neither do I endorse someone passing critical judgement on another person who does not need it.

jasonresno
February 18th, 2009, 02:32 PM
Just as I can tell you enjoy arguing or else you wouldn't even bother to reply or to add comments such as that which have no purpose other than to provoke. >.>

Yes you were specific as to why you think abortion is wrong, but you centralize your entire arguement on one of the many possibilities of why someone gets an abortion. Not everyone who gets an abortion is "slutty". I don't endorse a promiscuous lifestyle, neither do I endorse someone passing critical judgement on another person who does not need it.

I enjoy an argument because I responded to posts that were directed at me?

To the bold text: I am condemning a specific lifestyle that is worth condemning. Not a specific person. Not someone you know. Stop being sensitive.

And to top it off you've been in this thread a while. I understand that in my post I did not outline every single possibility but I did condemn one of them. That is fine.

http://www.pokecommunity.com/showpost.php?p=4339759&postcount=124

I posted this A WHILE BACK CLEARLY OUTLINING MY ENTIRE STANCE.

Your posts are hypocritical and reek of attempts to incite a full fledged argument. You started this ENTIRE ARGUMENT based on ONE OFF HAND comment. If you want to defend promiscuity, that's fine, but I don't have to.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:34 PM
I enjoy an argument because I responded to posts that were directed at me?

Okay, whatever you're perfect and don't like to argue. I'm not going to go off-topic with you to have a petty argument. I have my opinion, and you have yours. Why don't we just leave it at that?

I'm Pro-Choice, and I'm probably not gonna change my mind.

jasonresno
February 18th, 2009, 02:39 PM
Okay, whatever you're perfect and don't like to argue. I'm not going to go off-topic with you to have a petty arguement. I have my opinion, and you have yours. Why don't we just leave it at that?

I'm Pro-Choice, and I'm probably not gonna change my mind.

What are you talking about? Who said I was perfect? You are so dramatic it's borderline funny.

The fact is you did nothing but incite a petty argument based off of one off hand remark.

:congratulations:

I'm out.

Xairmo
February 18th, 2009, 02:47 PM
Your posts are hypocritical and reek of attempts to incite a full fledged argument. You started this ENTIRE ARGUMENT based on ONE OFF HAND comment.

What are you talking about? Who said I was perfect? You are so dramatic it's borderline funny.

The fact is you did nothing but incite a petty argument based off of one off hand remark.

:congratulations:

I'm out.

It takes two to tango, buddy.
This topic will always incite an argument, because it is a sensitive topic. I'm sorry that you can't differentiate between a debate and an argument. I'll own up to the fact that I can get a little caught up in a debate, but I don't think you can honestly say your innocent in the whole thing. At the very least I don't resort to childish name calling.

A big part of why I'm Pro-Choice has to do with the fact that I'm utterly tired of right-wings forcing their morals onto me by making it a law.

Tinhead Bruce
February 18th, 2009, 06:40 PM
Everything is natural, just wanted to say that.