http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060306/ap_on_re_us/abortion_south_dakota
Apparently, the rights of clumps of fertilized cells trump those of fully sentient human beings in South Dakota.
It's a Brave New World, indeed.
:puke
Abortions for some, miniature american flags for others!
C'mon Rome, I support abortion rights, but that's way too simplistic.
Besides, I don't see them overturning Roe v Wade. Even with Bush's lackeys in there.
Women are forbidden to have a pregnancy terminated in South Dakota and doctors are forbidden to perform them unless the mother's life is in danger.
What part of that sentence did I exaggerate or over-simplify?
Yes! Go right wing agenda.
QuoteWomen are forbidden to have a pregnancy terminated in South Dakota and doctors are forbidden to perform them unless the mother's life is in danger.
What part of that sentence did I exaggerate or over-simplify?
The middle part.
The facts are never unclear. The belief system surrounding those facts are. This has never been about the actual procedure. You either think it's OK to abort potential life, or it is unacceptable to prematurely terminate any life.
I'm more of a pragmatist. A sterile surgical procedure is better than throwing your girlfriend down the stairs, coat hangers, and dumping newborns in trash cans/toilets/etc.
Basic civil rights are under siege every day at every level of government by insidious right-wing crackpots and they won't be happy until everyone thinks, looks, talks, and acts like them.
This is just another step for them and it will undoubtedly be met with crashing indifference by the American public just as every other attack on individual civil liberties has been during the past 5 years.
Dude, civil liberties have been disappearing for way longer than the past 5 years.
And there are apparently no left-wing crackpots doing the same thing.
Quote from: Susquehanna Birder on March 06, 2006, 04:42:18 PM
And there are apparently no left-wing crackpots doing the same thing.
Shh! Don't let common sense get in the way of Jerome embarrassing himself. ;)
Left-wing crackpots don't infringe upon civil liberties, they infringe upon financial liberties of hard-working people.
Which is why affiliating yourself with either side is idiotic and narrow minded. Both sides are despicable for different reasons. Arguing which is worse makes no sense.
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 06, 2006, 04:19:30 PM
A sterile surgical procedure is better than throwing your girlfriend down the stairs, coat hangers, and dumping newborns in trash cans/toilets/etc.
Dude, you are abolutely nuts. There is not way in hell that a surgical procedure is better than pushing a girlfriend down the stairs.....especially one of the X variety.
I own a ranch to avoid the temptation myself.....
I just stay outdoors.
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 06, 2006, 04:19:30 PM
I'm more of a pragmatist. A sterile surgical procedure is better than throwing your girlfriend down the stairs, coat hangers, and dumping newborns in trash cans/toilets/etc.
*ding*
Abortion sucks and is fundamentally evil, but you can't make it illegal now.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 06, 2006, 04:49:24 PM
Left-wing crackpots don't infringe upon civil liberties, they infringe upon financial liberties of hard-working people.
Which is why affiliating yourself with either side is idiotic and narrow minded. Both sides are despicable for different reasons. Arguing which is worse makes no sense.
Will you quit it with the obviously-correct opinions that I can't help but agree with?
P.S. Rome... get off Stingo's cack, hippy. Your shtein stinks just as bad as the other side's.
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
I wonder how many of the lawmakers who support this bill also support funding for orphanages? And how many support tax subsidies for adoption? Don't even bother asking how many have actually adopted, or would adopt, children born of incest, born to crack heads, gas huffers, and meth fiends, born of rape? I mean, who wants a rape baby? Certainly not rich white lawmaker guy. That's for sure.
Just another reason to avoid that state and any companies based therein...as if I needed one. Stupid hicks.
Rapists should be subject to torturous forms of punishment.
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 06:09:35 PM
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
I wonder how many of the lawmakers who support this bill also support funding for orphanages? And how many support tax subsidies for adoption? Don't even bother asking how many have actually adopted, or would adopt, children born of incest, born to crack heads, gas huffers, and meth fiends, born of rape? I mean, who wants a rape baby? Certainly not rich white lawmaker guy. That's for sure.
Just another reason to avoid that state and any companies based therein...as if I needed one. Stupid hicks.
It is a crying shame that a mythical Greek Hero makes more sense that our elected officials.
Beer should be free.
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
Quote from: Butchers Bill on March 06, 2006, 04:48:03 PM
Shh! Don't let common sense get in the way of Jerome embarrassing himself. ;)
Weak, even for you, freakboy.
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
You're not sensitive; you just have a conscience.
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 06:09:35 PM
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
Last time I checked, rape wasn't about procreation.
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
I'm pretty much in agreement with you. If you make a baby, deal with it. Step up and raise this child. The only time I agree with abortion is if it is a rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger.
And if a female gets pregnant and doesn't want to have it, then give it to the father. I had a friend whose girlfriend got pregnant and she had it aborted but my friend was excited about being a father. But she didn't want to have a child so she just went and had the procedure done.
Quote from: Susquehanna Birder on March 06, 2006, 08:53:23 PM
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 06:09:35 PM
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
Last time I checked, rape wasn't about procreation.
Correct. It's about power. And what greater sense of farged up, warped power could a sociopath get than the power to force a woman to give birth to his unholy spawn? Dio is right. This is farged up.
Personally, I think using abortion as a convenient method of contraception is sickening and should be discouraged whenever possible.
However, it's not up to me. The woman carries the child so if she wants to get rid of it at an early stage, then that's her decision and that's the end of it.
Politicians poking their noses into the reproductive lives of citizens they serve is blatant fascism. Basing laws on religious ideals borders on the medieval and if the good people of South Dakota think that abortions are going to cease in their state because politicians have banned them, well... they've got another thing coming.
Abortions will continue in South Dakota. They'll continue because women get pregnant and have to deal with unwanted pregnancies. That's the bottom line here. Most don't have the money to travel to neighboring states to have them done, so unlicensed and often unqualified butchers will do them.
How delightful.
I have to respectfully disagree, Rome. I think that it is a crime for a nation to turn its back on those that most need its protection. I have no problem with contraception: pills, condoms, and the like. However, to take the life of the developing child is murder to me.
I am admittedly probably more "conservative" than just about everyone else here in this matter, but I feel that everything possible needs to be done to protect the child, and as a nation we've turned our backs for far too long.
A child isn't a child until its born, in my humble opinion. The last thing this world needs is unwanted babies. There are enough shteinheaded humans running around already.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 06, 2006, 09:09:47 PM
Personally, I think using abortion as a convenient method of contraception is sickening and should be discouraged whenever possible.
However, it's not up to me. The woman carries the child so if she wants to get rid of it at an early stage, then that's her decision and that's the end of it.
Politicians poking their noses into the reproductive lives of citizens they serve is blatant fascism. Basing laws on religious ideals borders on the medieval and if the good people of South Dakota think that abortions are going to cease in their state because politicians have banned them, well... they've got another thing coming.
Abortions will continue in South Dakota. They'll continue because women get pregnant and have to deal with unwanted pregnancies. That's the bottom line here. Most don't have the money to travel to neighboring states to have them done, so unlicensed and often unqualified butchers will do them.
How delightful.
Well to some people that baby is alive from conception, and abortion is considered murdering an innocent life. Like I said I have a real struggle dealing with the rape thing, but to me to get rid of a "unwanted pregnacy" by abortion is wrong. This society takes no responsibility for it's actions at times and this is a prime example to me.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 06, 2006, 09:23:26 PM
A child isn't a child until its born, in my humble opinion. The last thing this world needs is unwanted babies. There are enough shteinheaded humans running around already.
Wow, have you ever felt a pregnant womens stomach when the non life form kicks, or seen an ultrasound of a baby moving around? You might have a different opinion after that.
Allowing a child of rape/incest to be born without legal medical action being available to the mother is a prime example of this society not taking responsibility for its actions. Get a grip.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 06, 2006, 09:26:50 PM
Allowing a child of rape/incest to be born without legal medical action being available to the mother is a prime example of this society not taking responsibility for its actions. Get a grip.
Hello, I have an issue with that, I've said it from the start.
Outlawing a medical procedure will not stop the procedure from being done. Why do people refuse to accept that simple fact?
I just don't understand it.
Women will continue to terminate pregnancies. That's just the way it is, folks. Criminalizing their actions will only make a bad situation worse.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 06, 2006, 09:29:02 PM
Outlawing a medical procedure will not stop the procedure from being done. Why do people refuse to accept that simple fact?
I just don't understand it.
Women will continue to terminate pregnancies. That's just the way it is, folks. Criminalizing their actions will only make a bad situation worse.
Well then we should just take murder or any other crime off the books then since they will always be done by someone, sounds good.
Abortion is not murder. Murder involved the intentional killing of one human being by another human being.
A fetus is not classified as a human being. Well, it isn't in 49 out of 50 states, anyway.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 06, 2006, 09:23:26 PM
A child isn't a child until its born, in my humble opinion. The last thing this world needs is unwanted babies. There are enough shteinheaded humans running around already.
RJS,
Our society has given us mixed messages on that. Part of the reasoning given for abortion-on-demand is that the fetus is not a human, and has no rights. Yet, in some instances, society acts when a crime is perpetrated on an unborn child.
Example: Man Charged with Murder in Fetus Death (http://www.onnnews.com/Global/story.asp%203206726&nav=LQlCYeBs)
Excerpt:
Quote(Sylvania, OH) --- A Springfield Township woman survives in what police call a vicious attack by her ex-boyfriend, but the apparent target - her unborn baby - is killed.
Now the suspect faces a murder charge for the death of the 10-week-old fetus.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 06, 2006, 09:31:39 PM
Abortion is not murder. Murder involved the intentional killing of one human being by another human being.
A fetus is not classified as a human being. Well, it isn't in 49 out of 50 states, anyway.
So a state says it is not a human being and they are right, but one state says something different and they are "Fascist Kooks"
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 09:28:01 PM
Hello, I have an issue with that, I've said it from the start.
Quote from: Geowhizzer on March 06, 2006, 09:31:42 PM
RJS,
Our society has given us mixed messages on that...
Fair points. And I will even listen to the argument that a fetus is 'human' once it would be able to survive outside the womb. But I find it far more irresponsible for people who are unprepared to raise a child to be forced to do so (more than likely ruining their lives and giving their child almost no chance at a productive life) than I find it to provide them with the means, however unpleasant, to correct a mistake that would otherwise negatively impact everyone involved.
Do I like the idea of abortion as birth control? No. Do I think it's possible to stop stupid/irresponsible/drunk/teenaged people from having sex? No. Do I want those people to have children that they don't want? No.
You can't dictate morals to people so this argument will never get anywhere, but to me it is the lesser of two evils.
Bottom line is that some people believe a fetus is a human being, some don't. there is some gray area with the rape and incest, but overall both sides will continue to fight this forever.
Laws delineating precisely when a fetus becomes a child would go a long way towards defining what is acceptable and what is not in terms of abortion.
Personally, in my own mind, a fetus becomes a child when it is capable of sustaining life on its own outside the womb. If it's nothing more than fertilized cells, it's not a child.
Minds far more wise and knowledgeable than mine would have to determine that, though.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 06, 2006, 09:36:30 PM
Minds far more wise and knowledgeable than mine...
Preposterous!
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 06, 2006, 09:31:39 PM
Abortion is not murder. Murder involved the intentional killing of one human being by another human being.
A fetus is not classified as a human being. Well, it isn't in 49 out of 50 states, anyway.
Rome, even taking religious arguments out of it, our judicial history gives us mixed messages about whether killing a fetus is murder.
And who gets to decide the "classification" of a fetus?
Quote
And who gets to decide the "classification" of a fetus?
I say Coach Gibbs should be consulted.
Ha. Good to see that everyone is at least keeping their sense of humor.
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 09:43:45 PM
Quote
And who gets to decide the "classification" of a fetus?
I say Coach Gibbs should be consulted.
:-D
The word strengths is the longest word in the English language that contains only one vowel.
That's hot.
PS: Gibbs is God so he already knows the answer. Duh.
Hey everyone, let's talk about abortion on a message board!! I'm all for it, what do you say??
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 10:20:34 PM
Hey everyone, let's talk about abortion on a message board!! I'm all for it, what do you say??
Well seeing that you already posted twice on the first page, sure why not.
Go, beer!
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 06:09:35 PM
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
I wonder how many of the lawmakers who support this bill also support funding for orphanages? And how many support tax subsidies for adoption? Don't even bother asking how many have actually adopted, or would adopt, children born of incest, born to crack heads, gas huffers, and meth fiends, born of rape? I mean, who wants a rape baby? Certainly not rich white lawmaker guy. That's for sure.
Just another reason to avoid that state and any companies based therein...as if I needed one. Stupid hicks.
Oh I thought you meant this one.
As I was saying, beer is great!!
Aborted fetuses: Less filling, TASTE GREAT!
We already have a law on the books saying a fetus is a human being. If you kill a pregnant woman, no matter how long she's been pregnant, you get nailed with 2 murder counts, not one.
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 07, 2006, 07:46:28 AM
We already have a law on the books saying a fetus is a human being. If you kill a pregnant woman, no matter how long she's been pregnant, you get nailed with 2 murder counts, not one.
Not at all. Depends on the state.
QuoteFetal Homicide Laws - What You Need to Know
From Apply Now,
Your Guide to Women's Issues.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Discover the history, facts and arguments for fetal homicide laws.
Issue:
Fetal Homicide Laws: Do fetal homicide laws limit mothers' rights? Are they just an agenda by the pro-life movement to end abortion? Or are they laws to support the fetus of a woman who hoped to carry the baby to full term?
History/Facts:
Historically, a fetus was not recognized as a legal entity separate from the pregnant woman. In fact, abortion was generally not illegal until the latter half of the 1800s, when many states enacted laws criminalizing the procedure.
Many states have recently enacted fetal homicide laws, which create a separate crime for actions taken against a woman that result in the death of - or harm to - her fetus. These laws treat the fetus as an individual, apart from the woman. Some of these laws do not contain exceptions for the woman or her doctor, which could possibly allow criminal proceedings for measures taken as a course of treatment (radiation treatment for cancer or antibiotics) or for abortion.
On the federal level, in 1999 the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (which does contain exceptions for the woman, her doctor, and abortion) was proposed and passed the House of Representatives.
These states have fetal homicide laws where fetuses are victims at any stage of development:
o AZ
o ID
o IL
o LA
o MI
o MN
o MO
o ND
o NE
o ND
o OH
o PA
o SD
o UT
o WI
These states have fetal homicide laws where fetuses are victims at only specific stages in development:
o AR
o CA
o FL
o GA
o MA
o MS
o NV
o OK
o RI
o SC
o TN
o WA
The following states criminalize certain conduct that terminates pregnancies or causes miscarriages:
o IA
o IN
o KS
o NC
o NH
o NM
o VA
Argument For Fetal Homicide Laws:
Fetal homicide laws have been described as supporting and protecting women who decide to carry their babies to term. Those supporting these acts, most often pro-life advocates, say that both the lives of the pregnant woman and the fetus should be explicitly protected. They declare that fetal homicide laws justly criminalize cases and provide the opportunity to protect unborn children and their mothers. Some pro-lifers hope fetal homicide laws will establish a precedent that fetuses are human beings, thereby fueling efforts to reverse the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.
Argument Against Fetal Homicide Laws:
Those against fetal homicide laws fear that laws to protect a fetus could infringe on a woman's right to choose an abortion. Pro-choice leaders say these laws grant a fetus legal status distinct from the pregnant woman - possibly creating an adversarial relationship between a woman and her baby. Those against these laws are also concerned as to whether they could be interpreted to apply to a woman's behavior during her pregnancy, such as smoking, drinking or using illegal drugs. Instead, they prefer to criminalize an assault on a pregnant woman and recognize her as the only victim.
Current Status:
The most recent case involving fetal homicide laws is that of the Laci Peterson homicide. Her husband, Scott Peterson was convicted in November, 2004 by a California jury. Peterson could get the death penalty for the count of first-degree murder for killing his wife and the count of second-degree murder for killing their unborn child. Lacy Peterson was in her 8th month of pregnancy when she disappeared. Under California law, murder charges can result if the fetus is older than seven weeks. To convict Peterson of murdering his unborn son, prosecutors had to prove that he intended to kill the fetus or knew that it would die as a result of his wife's death.
There has been debate on both sides of this issue. "If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder," Morris County NOW President Mavra Stark told reporters. Marie Tasy, public and legislative affairs director for New Jersey Right To Life, counters that a double-murder charge against Scott Peterson is appropriate.
Food for Thought:
* If a woman can choose to have a late-term abortion, should the father have the same right to kill the baby before it is born?
* If a woman is scheduled to get an abortion, but the baby is killed in-utero by an outside person the day before that abortion, should that person be charged with murder?
Bottom line is this...and I will make one post to this thread.
No matter what the law is, abortions will continue to happen. Only now, as mentioned already, it will be done by some backalley hack looking to make a quick buck.
We should also put into perspective that this is South Dakota. If you live in South Dakota, you pretty much deserve all the bullshtein that you have to deal with from hick-ass lawmakers. Right?
If it looks like Afghanistan, and it smells like Afghanistan.....
There is not way in hell that a surgical procedure is better than pushing a girlfriend down the stairs
everyone knows you dont touch women...i instead leave banana peels around the house
A child isn't a child until its born
and even after its born and before it knows what life death happy sad blue red night day are i feel as tho they are barely people....but certainly before they are born no way....if someone chooses to terminate a day before birth just because they feel like it then let em...overpopulation gets the gas face
i cant fathom how people care more about an unborn baby than they do an american soldier in iraq or iraqi children dying every day...or how about the impoverished americans who die everyday due to starvation or sickness...
i might be more on the side of anti abortion heads if they first put their efforts into making a better life for people who are actually alive (other than themselves)
FF... no one gives a shtein about South Dakota, least of all me. What concerns me is the precedent that this law of theirs sets.
Bible-bangers want it all their way or no way at all. shtein, man... you live in the south. Tell me those fargers don't annoy the hell out of you.
Many of them are not willing to allow abortion in cases of rape, incest or even when the mother's life is in danger. Nope, to them, clumps of fertilized cells are more important than the "whore" who got herself raped, farged by her father, or even worse, had the poor form to develop complications during her pregnancy that threaten her life.
It's unreasonable to deny medical treatment to an entire set of Americans when a small group of them abuse the system or the procedure. If right-wingers are so dead-set against unwanted pregnancies, then how about allowing sexual-education courses in public schools? The object should be to prevent unwanted pregnancies before they occur yet the religious right doesn't even want sex to be discussed. They've taken the ostrich's course and this is the result.
Don't lump all "right-wingers" in on this. The "religious right" is a different story.
Look... I don't know how any politician loses perspective, except that I can only assume that they are pandering to a majority of their constituency in order to get re-elected OR they are selling their votes to the highest bidder. Either way, these guys don't have views on anything that represent real peoples' opinions.
Abortion is wrong and unnatural. I don't care what angle you take to convince yourself that a forming life ever should be allowed to be vacuumed out and have its head chopped off, but it's sketchy at best. That said, people are evil sunsofbitches, and abortion's been legal for more than 3 decades. It makes even less sense than justifying abortion does to NOW try to make it illegal. Imagine what would happen if they made marijuana and cocaine legal for 3 decades, then made it illegal again... can't do it. They tried with prohibition.
The moral compass of America and the world is permanently busted. But trying to turn back the clock to make things right only makes people more resistant and demanding of their "rights". It's simply too much to ask to have politicians use logic to figure that sort of thing out. This is more applicable in the social arena to "right-wingers", but is more applicable in the fiscal arena to "left-wingers". They all suck.
Quote from: PhillyGirl on March 07, 2006, 08:29:25 AM
Bottom line is this...and I will make one post to this thread.
No matter what the law is, abortions will continue to happen. Only now, as mentioned already, it will be done by some backalley hack looking to make a quick buck.
Doesn't have to be. If the issue was left up to the voters in the states, I bet most of New England and California would vote to keep it. Those from the midwest and the south who are seeking it would travel there. I am personally against it and think history will view our society's toleration akin to history's view on societies who promoted slavery.
I always hear the argument about rape. Are there any reliable figures that show what percentage of abortions are from rape or to save the life of the mother? It is probably too controversial and no one on either side wants to track it.
There is no source out there claiming that rape & incest cases are any more than 5% of all abortions, and the more accurate figure is probably at or under 1%... but if you outlawed abortion in all other cases, I think you'd see the number of women getting pregnancies terminated by a lot, but a much higher % would claim rape or incest just to get the procedure done legally and in a medically-sound way.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 10:51:54 AM
There is no source out there claiming that rape & incest cases are any more than 5% of all abortions, and the more accurate figure is probably at or under 1%... but if you outlawed abortion in all other cases, I think you'd see the number of women getting pregnancies terminated by a lot, but a much higher % would claim rape or incest just to get the procedure done legally and in a medically-sound way.
Good point.
I'm more worried you'll see more dumpster dumping, suffocations and the like.
Look... people suck. They're going to do illegal and stupid acts with frequency anyway. But that's no reason to practically dare them to break the law, by taking away something which they've grown to consider a right.
I feel compelled to clarify once again just how disgusting and wrong I think abortion is. Personal opinions are no reason to push aside pragmatism and live in happy happy joy joy land, though.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 09:00:00 AM
Abortion is wrong and unnatural.
If your wife's life was in danger, and an abortion was the only way to save her, would you still think that way?
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 09:00:00 AM
Abortion is wrong and unnatural.
If your wife's life was in danger, and an abortion was the only way to save her, would you still think that way?
i dont disagree with that point of view. but, is that a medically possible scenerio?
Um, yes. It's actually relatively common.
Um, yes. It's actually relatively common.
link¿
I was simply asking FF to place himself in a position that would prompt him to make a decision that went against his beliefs.
Like I've said previously, I'm not wild about abortion. In fact, I think the number of abortions that are performed in this country is reprehensible, especially considering the almost universal and unfettered access we have to prophylactics and other birth control devices.
That said... there are times when an abortion is a necessity and if "murdering" a child is acceptable sometimes, then why isn't it acceptable other times?
The "right" for a woman to be able to have an abortion should be absolute simply because denying them access for one reason while allowing it for another is hypocritical. Either we allow them legally or we don't. If we don't, if we criminalize the procedure, they're still going to be done and they'll probably be done just as frequently as well.
I would contend that the "right thing" also shouldn't necessarily be guided/controlled by what is most expedient. For the most part I am pragmatic as well, but this is an issue I find too important morally to think about what "will work."
I don't think that the SD law will hold up, at least as stated, in the court system. There's been too many precedents swinging the other way for something that sweeping to get through.
As I said, I am probably more conservative in this issue than most that frequent this board. My wife and I have discussed the issue before. She is pro-life as well, but we've debated the issues of rape/incest and the such.
I struggle with the issue of abortion in cases of rape and incest. I can't help but see it as creating another victim of the crime when the mother aborts the baby because of the traumatic event. I aslo can't judge the woman in these cases, as I can never experience what they are going through.
And bastiches that are guilty of rape or child molestation should have their genitals removed and spend the rest of their lives being repeatedly gang-raped by 600-pound mountain gorillas.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 07, 2006, 11:22:08 AM
Um, yes. It's actually relatively common.
i know a woman can have irreversible complications during child birth. but at that point abortions are illegal anyway. but my question (it's a serious question that i do not know the answer to), is it possible, or has it happened where a woman is given the choice by a doctor of "have an abortion, or die"
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:27:10 AM
I was simply asking FF to place himself in a position that would prompt him to make a decision that went against his beliefs.
and i was simply asking if that position is a possibility. if it is, fine. if it is not, then it's like saying "dont drink that bottle of pepsi, koala's die every day"
FWIW, my wife and I mutually agreed we had neither the time nor the patience for a Down's syndrome child or the like. We had amnios performed so if there was a problem, we could abort. Luckily, it didn't come to that, and we didn't have to make that call. But I doubt I'd of had kids if that wasn't an option.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:27:10 AM
That said... there are times when an abortion is a necessity and if "murdering" a child is acceptable sometimes, then why isn't it acceptable other times?
The "right" for a woman to be able to have an abortion should be absolute simply because denying them access for one reason while allowing it for another is hypocritical. Either we allow them legally or we don't. If we don't, if we criminalize the procedure, they're still going to be done and they'll probably be done just as frequently as well.
Just like murder is a capital punishment but murder in self-defense is not. This doesn't have to be all or nothing. Many laws have loopholes or exceptions. It's not hypocritical. Hypocritical is Dio's example of not allowing abortion but then not funding orphanages or supporting tax subsidies or incentives for adoption. If the religious right is so supportive of pro-life, every church should be filled with adopted kids, IMO.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 09:00:00 AM
Abortion is wrong and unnatural.
If your wife's life was in danger, and an abortion was the only way to save her, would you still think that way?
Killing my wife goes more against my morals and beliefs than killing a fetus/child I never met. If I had to choose during childbirth between my wife and my child, my wife would win every time.
Now's when you get to call me a hypocrite because I actually answered your question instead of dodging it.
P.S. Not a day would go by in my life that choosing to kill my baby wouldn't haunt me.
Settle down, Nancy. :-D
The intent of my question wasn't to call you a hypocrite if you answered like you did. I would choose the same option as you every time.
My point in asking it was to reinforce my belief that it's a horrible choice any way you look at it, but it's a choice that should remain legal because criminalizing it would only make things worse.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:46:17 AM
My point in asking it was to reinforce my belief that it's a horrible choice any way you look at it, but it's a choice that should remain legal because criminalizing it would only make things worse.
Then you've failed to realize that I 100% agree with that statement, and I've said nothing to make you believe otherwise throughout this thread.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 11:39:42 AM
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on March 07, 2006, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 07, 2006, 09:00:00 AM
Abortion is wrong and unnatural.
If your wife's life was in danger, and an abortion was the only way to save her, would you still think that way?
Killing my wife goes more against my morals and beliefs than killing a fetus/child I never met. If I had to choose during childbirth between my wife and my child, my wife would win every time.
Now's when you get to call me a hypocrite because I actually answered your question instead of dodging it.
P.S. Not a day would go by in my life that choosing to kill my baby wouldn't haunt me.
It would be a very tough choice for me- tougher than any I have had to make, and I pray that I never am faced with that decision. I would have to acquiese to my wife's wishes in the end, as it is her life in the balance. Personally, I would be anguished over either decision.
If the baby was viable, I believe she would go for keeping the child. I would support her wholeheartedly, and if the baby was not viable I would have to suggest terminating the pregnancy for her safety.
And I agree with FF, the pain and mourning would be endless.
Quote from: Geowhizzer on March 07, 2006, 11:47:37 AM
If the baby was viable, I believe she would go for keeping the child. I would support her wholeheartedly, and if the baby was not viable I would have to suggest terminating the pregnancy for her safety.
I'm not a good enough person to acquiese to her wishes. If I allowed her to make that decision, which I'm almost sure she would make in favor of the child's life and not her own, I'd have to raise our child alone... always harbouring a bit of resentment for him or her for killing my wife. No thanks.
I will never understand anyone who would choose the as yet unborn child over their wife. Never.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 07, 2006, 11:53:40 AM
I will never understand anyone who would choose the as yet unborn child over their wife. Never.
If it were just me, I'd choose my wife if it came to a decision as to which one lives, and the choices are mutually exclusive. But it's not just me, and it's not my life at stake.
i care more about pretty much every living breathing human being (and some animals) on earth than i do about any unborn child...except my own of course
Any half-decent woman would choose her child's life in that situation, so it would be up to the husband to not allow her to make that decision. Even if I knew it would cause my wife to divorce me afterwards because she wanted so desperately in that moment to be a martyr, I still wouldn't let her die.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 07, 2006, 11:53:40 AM
I will never understand anyone who would choose the as yet unborn child over their wife. Never.
You can always have more kids. Maybe not naturally but there's always adoption if things don't work out.
We have friends who went through miscarriage after miscarriage before they finally stopped trying. The wife just wasn't able to carry a child to term for some reason.
They ended up adopting two kids and are just as fulfilled with them as if they had their own biological children.
you could always get another wife too.
Adoption is a better option anyway. (http://www.concretefield.com/forum/index.php?topic=17967.0)
Quote from: hunt on March 07, 2006, 12:24:25 PM
you could always get another wife too.
There's an old Irish saying, hunt...
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on ME.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 07, 2006, 12:26:55 PM
Adoption is a better option anyway. (http://www.concretefield.com/forum/index.php?topic=17967.0)
Quote8. Don't get pregant when you are 15. Even if your boyfriend promises that he will love you forever. He will not love you when you are fat, which you will be when you are pregnant, even if it is the baby that is making you fat. Your boyfriend is 15 and most likely dopic and doesn't know the difference.
Wow. You're girlfriend is a riot, dude. Hang on to that one.
Too bad. She's just suckling at his salary until she gets through school. Then, she'll dump his ass, no doubt.
Yeah, but its a sweet deal for her in the mean time. Because, you know, I can lay the pipe.
If you say so.
I'm with wiggy on this 100%.
Quote from: Diomedes on March 07, 2006, 07:37:41 PM
I'm with wiggy on this 100%.
And yet another of the Seven Seals is broken...
The world has to be very close to ending, one way or another.
Good times.
Yeah, I'm late chiming in. So what?
Quote from: Diomedes on March 06, 2006, 06:09:35 PM
This is great news for rapists in South Dakota. They get to invade the woman for nine months instead of just 80 seconds, and they get the satisfaction of knowing their DNA will survive. Rapists 1; Girls 0.
I wonder how many of the lawmakers who support this bill also support funding for orphanages? And how many support tax subsidies for adoption? Don't even bother asking how many have actually adopted, or would adopt, children born of incest, born to crack heads, gas huffers, and meth fiends, born of rape? I mean, who wants a rape baby? Certainly not rich white lawmaker guy. That's for sure.
Just another reason to avoid that state and any companies based therein...as if I needed one. Stupid hicks.
Ha! and True.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on March 06, 2006, 08:56:05 PM
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
I'm pretty much in agreement with you. If you make a baby, deal with it. Step up and raise this child. The only time I agree with abortion is if it is a rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger.
And if a female gets pregnant and doesn't want to have it, then give it to the father. I had a friend whose girlfriend got pregnant and she had it aborted but my friend was excited about being a father. But she didn't want to have a child so she just went and had the procedure done.
I'm all about people living with the consequences of their actions. What I'm against is stupid people getting pregnant because they don't know how to use protection and then bringing a child into this world that they will undoubtedly raise to be more stupid than they are. [Dio]Stupid People: 1; Society:0[/Dio]
Quote from: rjs246 on March 06, 2006, 09:23:26 PM
A child isn't a child until its born, in my humble opinion. The last thing this world needs is unwanted babies. There are enough shteinheaded humans running around already.
Agreed. I saw an episode of The People's Court a few years ago where these people got their dogs together to breed them. The owner of the male was to get "pick of the litter." When the female gave birth, there were 2 pups. One still born, the other fine. The owner of the male wanted the healthy pup and the owners of the mother refused so they went to court. Ed Koch ruled in favor of the defendants stating that in order for there to be a litter, there has to be more than 1 live puppy.
Yes, people and puppies are apples and oranges but the concept is the same. A still born child does not get a birth certificate because it was never ALIVE. BTW, The People's Court is the know all, end all for every possible argument.
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 09:36:03 PM
Bottom line is that some people believe a fetus is a human being, some don't.
The People's Court argument above should help clear things up for you. ;)
Also, if an unborn fetus is infact, a living thing, shouldn't you be able to get Life Insurance for it or something? I'm being serious too. Parents take out life insurance policies on their kids and if the kid dies, they get paid. Can expecting parents get paid large sums of cash if the mother doesn't produce a living child after 40 weeks?
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 07, 2006, 11:40:38 PM
Yes, people and puppies are apples and oranges but the concept is the same. A still born child does not get a birth certificate because it was never ALIVE. BTW, The People's Court is the know all, end all for every possible argument.
Ummm...
Couple's stillborn child to get birth certificate (http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050531/NEWS01/505310303/1002)
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 07, 2006, 11:40:38 PM
Also, if an unborn fetus is infact, a living thing, shouldn't you be able to get Life Insurance for it or something? I'm being serious too. Parents take out life insurance policies on their kids and if the kid dies, they get paid. Can expecting parents get paid large sums of cash if the mother doesn't produce a living child after 40 weeks?
That question may be answered by the courts:
In The Courts | Indiana Man Files Federal Lawsuit Over Life Insurance Claim for Stillborn Fetus (http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=19996)
That's obviously a sympathy exception being made. It's not a law and it shouldn't be a law. I'm sorry those people lost their kid but let's not taint reality just to make them or anyone else feel better or feel like they had a child.
That dumbass in Indiana is going to lose that case and it doesn't really fall directly under what I was talking about. That guy is in the military and in order to be list a child as a dependent you must provide a birth certificate and an SSN, neither of which are issued prior to the birth. Therefore, he has no case.
I'm wanting to know if you can actually purchase life insurance for an unborn child. State Farm, Prudential, All State? Any of them? Will any of them insure an unborn child? As far as I know, you can't.
I think I got an entire box of Kleenex pregnant last week. No WAY I'm having that kid.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 08, 2006, 12:09:00 AM
I think I got an entire box of Kleenex pregnant last week. No WAY I'm having that kid.
Just one box? Slacker. I knocked up an entire box of tissues, 3 tube socks and the entire lingerie section of the Sears catalog. And that was just over the weekend.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 08, 2006, 12:07:23 AM
That's obviously a sympathy exception being made. It's not a law and it shouldn't be a law. I'm sorry those people lost their kid but let's not taint reality just to make them or anyone else feel better or feel like they had a child.
Sarge, it was a change in policy:
QuoteThe state Department of Public Health has changed its policy, allowing for the issuance of stillborn birth certificates, enabling the Sanfords to receive official certification of their daughter Olivia's birth on June 20, 2004.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 08, 2006, 12:07:23 AM
That dumbass in Indiana is going to lose that case and it doesn't really fall directly under what I was talking about. That guy is in the military and in order to be list a child as a dependent you must provide a birth certificate and an SSN, neither of which are issued prior to the birth. Therefore, he has no case.
I'm wanting to know if you can actually purchase life insurance for an unborn child. State Farm, Prudential, All State? Any of them? Will any of them insure an unborn child? As far as I know, you can't.
I haven't found anything on the major life insurance companies, but I've found a few tidbits that suggest that the Department of Health and Human Services will be offering it:
BUSH ADMINISTRATION FINALIZES COVERAGE OF UNBORN CHILD IN HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM (http://www.nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release092702a.html)
I know that this is a biased site, I have not confirmed this with an independent news source.
how about in this case...
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=69722
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 05, 2006, 10:35:02 AM
how about in this case...
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=69722
Thats just messed up.
That's awesome.
I call bullshtein on that! It looks like the Baby prop from the Dinosaurs sitcom.
its def true...i saw it on cnn as well...
my obgyn friend emailed me the following....
I've seen it before, it's an anacephalic infant- basically born without a brain. It's usually diagnosed early in the pregnancy and terminated because they always never survive more than a few hours. It's rare that you see one go to term though. That's some crazy stuff...... nature can be a cruel MF.
Chromosomal issues can cause all kinds of issues in babies, and yes, screenings that would identify these well in advance are now commonplace in developed countries.
That baby loved puns. But only for half an hour.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 05, 2006, 01:59:47 PM
That baby loved puns. But only for half an hour.
Way to throw the baby out with the bath water, rjs.
Quote from: rjs246 on March 08, 2006, 12:09:00 AM
I think I got an entire box of Kleenex pregnant last week. No WAY I'm having that kid.
Holy shtein, I nominate for post of the year! :-D :-D :-D
Congratulations - you're the proud parents of a new baby lump.
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on April 05, 2006, 02:01:43 PM
Way to throw the baby out with the bath water, rjs.
I admit it, I have no idea what that means in this context.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 05, 2006, 02:44:14 PM
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on April 05, 2006, 02:01:43 PM
Way to throw the baby out with the bath water, rjs.
I admit it, I have no idea what that means in this context.
LOL. You've never heard that expression?
Yes I've heard it, but...
QuoteThrow the baby out with the bathwater
Meaning:
We use this expression when we want to keep the valuable things when we get rid of the things we don't want. It is usually used in the negative to mean that we don't want to throw out the good stuff when we throw out the bad stuff.
How in the hell does that apply to anything I said?
Baby reference
+
Abortion thread
=
Pun
rjs = thick as a brick.
Take your pick, numbnuts.
So you took my reference to a baby and then made completely unrelated use of an old saying? That isn't a pun. Are you retarded?
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on April 05, 2006, 03:30:09 PM
Baby reference
+
Abortion thread
=
Pun
That's simply incorrect. It's also not ironic, so don't go there either.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on March 06, 2006, 08:56:05 PM
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
I'm pretty much in agreement with you. If you make a baby, deal with it. Step up and raise this child. The only time I agree with abortion is if it is a rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger.
And if a female gets pregnant and doesn't want to have it, then give it to the father. I had a friend whose girlfriend got pregnant and she had it aborted but my friend was excited about being a father. But she didn't want to have a child so she just went and had the procedure done.
this is not the j i know......or is it?
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 22, 2012, 07:38:29 PM
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on March 06, 2006, 08:56:05 PM
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
I'm pretty much in agreement with you. If you make a baby, deal with it. Step up and raise this child. The only time I agree with abortion is if it is a rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger.
And if a female gets pregnant and doesn't want to have it, then give it to the father. I had a friend whose girlfriend got pregnant and she had it aborted but my friend was excited about being a father. But she didn't want to have a child so she just went and had the procedure done.
Wow , there's an old one. Funny, my wife is now about 5 months away from our 5th kid, yay!
this is not the j i know......or is it?
Quote from: phillymic2000 on April 22, 2012, 07:48:00 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 22, 2012, 07:38:29 PM
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on March 06, 2006, 08:56:05 PM
Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 06, 2006, 06:38:22 PM
I have a hard time dealing with Abortion, on one side I understand the issue of rape. On the other hand it seems like a way to not take responsibilities for your actions, an easy out to being stupid. Opps I got pregnant, oh well I'll just terminate the little one in there. I maybe a little sensitive :paranoid on the issue as my wife is about 3 months away from giving birth to our third child and everynight the baby is moving all over the place, it is really cool to watch my wife's belly move around.
I'm pretty much in agreement with you. If you make a baby, deal with it. Step up and raise this child. The only time I agree with abortion is if it is a rape, incest or if the mothers life is in danger.
And if a female gets pregnant and doesn't want to have it, then give it to the father. I had a friend whose girlfriend got pregnant and she had it aborted but my friend was excited about being a father. But she didn't want to have a child so she just went and had the procedure done.
Wow , there's an old one. Funny, my wife is now about 5 months away from our 5th kid, yay!
this is not the j i know......or is it?
Funny, my wife is now about 5 months away from having our 5th kid, yay!
She stays at home? How can you manage if she don't?
Yes and no, she stays home during the week, but runs a talented and gifted program for a University 20 saturdays a year, for grades k-12(she taught for 5 years before we started having kids), It's really good cash for the limited hours she puts in. I do some side jobs (construction, moving, etc.) too so we can keep her home with the kids. We are really blessed that it works out.
igy got drunk and brought back a 6 year old abortion thread. i want to be at your house right now.
holy shtein texas J
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 08:32:12 PM
holy shtein texas J
gotta be a stolen password situation...thats what im going with anyway
or maybe he got drunk and this was the abortion version of defending the thome at bat the other night
I agree with everything that J wrote.
it was also 2006 and a different time in the world, i dont know what to believe but i dont want to believe what i see
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 08:37:04 PM
it was also 2006 and a different time in the world, i dont know what to believe but i dont want to believe what i see
my eyes are still closed
if this is real then everything i thought was good in the world has just been smashed into pieces
lol
Wow...nope thats me. I still believe that too. I don't really support abortions except in extreme circumstances.
this is like 9/11 all over again
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 22, 2012, 08:43:12 PM
lol
Wow...nope thats me. I still believe that too. I don't really support abortions except in extreme circumstances.
Good for you
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to a lot of issues but abortion isn't one of them. You make a child you have it and take care of it. Other wise give it up for adoption.
The government (or men for that manner) don't have the right to tell a woman to just have a child. It's her choice what she wants to do with it. Saying as much doesn't mean you support abortion.
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 08:44:24 PM
this is like 9/11 all over again
no this is like tommy hutton all over again...and its no a coincidence that both debacles have taken place in texas
so is sd chris boniol?
probably a fair statement
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 08:45:59 PM
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 22, 2012, 08:43:12 PM
lol
Wow...nope thats me. I still believe that too. I don't really support abortions except in extreme circumstances.
Good for you
I'm pretty liberal when it comes to a lot of issues but abortion isn't one of them. You make a child you have it and take care of it. Other wise give it up for adoption.
Same here...abortion and the death penalty are two things I sway away from my liberal side on.
those are pretty much the only things we liberals have these days
Have you anti-abortion people done any adopting yourselves? Or is it just a nice idea you encourage others to go for?
i always laugh at men who are anti abortion....it one of lifes great dichotomys....then again i think its born into males to rule over and tell females what to do
the government cant tell me what to do!* mind your own god damn business!*
*abortion
I for one think the world needs more unwanted and unloved children. I also believe that college students who were having some random hookup sex should be forced to derail the rest of their lives over one poor decision. I believe this because a book was written 1900 years ago that says a magic omnipotent space zombie was born of a virgin and it seems like a good idea to follow the rules it lays down.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 22, 2012, 09:44:48 PM
I for one think the world needs more unwanted and unloved children. I also believe that college students who were having some random hookup sex should be forced to derail the rest of their lives over one poor decision. I believe this because a book was written 1900 years ago that says a magic omnipotent space zombie was born of a virgin and it seems like a good idea to follow the rules it lays down.
POTE
Quote from: Diomedes on April 22, 2012, 09:30:10 PM
Have you anti-abortion people done any adopting yourselves? Or is it just a nice idea you encourage others to go for?
There are a lot of couples who can't have a child and would consider it a gift to have one. I know that's a foreign concept to many of you but it's the truth.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 22, 2012, 09:44:48 PM
I for one think the world needs more unwanted and unloved children. I also believe that college students who were having some random hookup sex should be forced to derail the rest of their lives over one poor decision. I believe this because a book was written 1900 years ago that says a magic omnipotent space zombie was born of a virgin and it seems like a good idea to follow the rules it lays down.
If the universe and nature didn't want teenagers or college kids to become pregnant then it would have made them that way.
I find it amazing how many of you will sit there and cry about global warming and the sanctity of nature and Earth's balance then simultaneously advocate killing an unborn child because people don't want to be responsible for their own actions.
I fully expect the Eagles to blow the Saints out in New Orleans.
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 10:19:18 PMI find it amazing how many of you will sit there and cry about global warming and the sanctity of nature and Earth's balance then simultaneously advocate killing an unborn child because people don't want to be responsible for their own actions.
this is the beauty of the abortion debate.
no one is PRO abortion. i do not want people to get abortions. i simply do not care if someone else does nor am i going to tell other people what they can and cannot do with their bodies. thats with its called pro choice, because you are giving people the simple option to make up their own damn minds.
you, personally, are not wrong for wanting to keep the baby or thinking people should. you, however, are wrong for wanting to force your beliefs on other people.
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 10:29:07 PM
you, personally, are not wrong for wanting to keep the baby or thinking people should. you, however, are wrong for wanting to force your beliefs on other people.
You're right in this respect, what other people do with their bodies is their own business. And regardless of what I or anyone else says it's not going to change anything, but nature agrees with me.
On the other hand men should have a say in the matter...it's their sperm after all meaning the baby is 50% theirs.
OK so youre pro choice, but you personally would not get an abortion or advocate for one if your were involved in the situation.
most people think like this. theres nothing wrong with it. though all i can say is keep an open mind until its you thats called up to bat.
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 10:35:06 PMOn the other hand men should have a say in the matter...it's their sperm after all meaning the baby is 50% theirs.
lol typical postscript from someone who cant stomach women having a say. yea BUT men need to have a say. its half theres.
uhhhh no how about you be supportive and rationally go through the steps if its your baby or your daughter. ultimately its the call of the person who is pregnant because its their body.
Sometimes, I fall in love a little bit with MDS with posts like these. Sometimes.
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 10:55:18 PM
OK so youre pro choice, but you personally would not get an abortion or advocate for one if your were involved in the situation.
most people think like this. theres nothing wrong with it. though all i can say is keep an open mind until its you thats called up to bat.
I was called up to bat 4 years ago. I was just out of the Navy and a stupid college kid living with Mom. I never gave the abortion debate much thought but once I was up at bat it just seemed like the right thing to do. I hate baby's momma and dealing with her misery but if I had to do it all over again I would.
You ever knock a girl up? If not then you shouldn't be included in this conversation.
terrific.
you never gave it much debate, and im sure the mother is a doll. but what if she wanted to get rid of it? great, she didnt. you have a lovely daughter and all that bla bla bla.
thats the call you guys made and it was right for you. other people are in the same spot and they go the other way. and if someone does that it aint for you or me or anyone else to judge or comment.
its not just you but all people need to stop thinking about abortion or guns or any topic in terms of what they would do or whats best for them. not everything is about you. you arent special.
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
You ever knock a girl up? If not then you shouldn't be included in this conversation.
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 11:06:43 PM
terrific.
you never gave it much debate, and im sure the mother is a doll. but what if she wanted to get rid of it? great, she didnt. you have a lovely daughter and all that bla bla bla.
thats the call you guys made and it was right for you. other people are in the same spot and they go the other way. and if someone does that it aint for you or me or anyone else to judge or comment.
I'm not only falling in love, but in lust at this point.
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 11:07:50 PM
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 11:03:26 PM
You ever knock a girl up? If not then you shouldn't be included in this conversation.
WRONG!!
You have an opportunity right now to change your response in order to save face.
Answer this question:
Why do you give a farg so hard about what other people do with their bodies?
Even if he does knock up a girl, he still don't have a say in what she does with her body.
Sorry but unless you've been in the situation your opinion on this doesn't matter...to me anyway.
Quote from: hbionic on April 22, 2012, 11:11:58 PM
Answer this question:
Why do you give a farg so hard about what other people do with their bodies?
I've already answered this question:
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 10:35:06 PM
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 10:29:07 PM
you, personally, are not wrong for wanting to keep the baby or thinking people should. you, however, are wrong for wanting to force your beliefs on other people.
You're right in this respect, what other people do with their bodies is their own business. And regardless of what I or anyone else says it's not going to change anything, but nature agrees with me.
Not sure why the fact that people get pregnant means nature agrees with you. Nature also takes it upon itself to end pregnancies sometimes. Nature also prevents people who are trying to get pregnant from getting pregnant sometimes. Just because something happens in nature, I don't see how that has any bearing on whether women should or shouldn't have the legal choice to control what happens with their bodies.
SD is wrong in this case but he's also right.
In theory men should have the opportunity to express their opinions in whether a woman terminates a pregnancy. However, ultimately it is solely the woman's choice, and she should be permitted to make that choice without fear of reprisal, especially from government thugs who are far less concerned with the welfare of actual people than fertilized eggs.
Quote from: Rome on April 22, 2012, 11:24:34 PM
SD is wrong in this case but he's also right.
In theory men should have the opportunity to express their opinions in whether a woman terminates a pregnancy. However, ultimately it is solely the woman's choice, and she should be permitted to make that choice without fear of reprisal, especially from government thugs who are far less concerned with the welfare of actual people than fertilized eggs.
I can live with that
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 11:13:58 PM
Sorry but unless you've been in the situation your opinion on this doesn't matter...to me anyway.
lol whatever.
all that matters is if and when you step inside the booth you vote for people who arent going to tell women what they can and cannot do.
other than that be who you be
Quote from: MDS on April 22, 2012, 11:35:09 PM
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 11:13:58 PM
Sorry but unless you've been in the situation your opinion on this doesn't matter...to me anyway.
lol whatever.
all that matters is if and when you step inside the booth you vote for people who arent going to tell women what they can and cannot do.
other than that be who you be
I'm a registered democrat and have been my entire life. This is one thing I don't understand when Conservatives align themselves with Republicans. The main reason the religious right/conservatives vote the way they do because somewhere in their minds they think that Republicans actually give shtein and are going to make abortion laws tighter or ban it altogether. Truth be told neither party gives a shtein. They keep trying to tell me about Obama and late term abortions completely leaving out that he only approved that if the Mothers life was at risk. The whole thing is a sham but whatever Obama has my vote.
your on the good team but probably just a bench player
its ok, we need utility guys. freddy galvis? wilson valdez? SD
I do believe the guy has the choice. Just because we do not carry the child doesn't mean we don't have a choice in the outcome of the child we helped create.
If she doesn't want it then she can pop it out and hand it over to me and shirk her responsibility. I'll be a single dad then.
Not sure how it's ever okay to expect a woman to go through a pregnancy/birth simply because a man wants her to.
So if you get a girl pregnant and you want the baby, you want to be a father...you think its cool to not have a choice in the matter?
I would tell the girl what I thought and would hope she'd take my opinion into consideration, but it would still ultimately be her choice.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 23, 2012, 12:54:05 AM
So if you get a girl pregnant and you want the baby, you want to be a father...you think its cool to not have a choice in the matter?
oh no its worse than we thought
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 10:19:18 PM
Quote from: Diomedes on April 22, 2012, 09:30:10 PM
Have you anti-abortion people done any adopting yourselves? Or is it just a nice idea you encourage others to go for?
There are a lot of couples who can't have a child and would consider it a gift to have one. I know that's a foreign concept to many of you but it's the truth.
So, the latter.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 23, 2012, 12:54:05 AM
So if you get a girl pregnant and you want the baby, you want to be a father...you think its cool to not have a choice in the matter?
Yep.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on April 23, 2012, 12:54:05 AM
So if you get a girl pregnant and you want the baby, you want to be a father...you think its cool to not have a choice in the matter?
until men can carry children yeah its pretty much the womans decision
if you arent sure whether the person you are dumping your semen into is willing to carry a baby for you then you are probably best not entering that person
Quote from: SD on April 22, 2012, 10:19:18 PM
I find it amazing how many of you will sit there and cry about global warming and the sanctity of nature and Earth's balance then simultaneously advocate killing an unborn child because people don't want to be responsible for their own actions.
You're joking, right? When have I ever said anything about the sanctity of nature or Earth's balance. Give me a break. I believe in science and research. Science tells us that humans are impacting the environment. Research shows us that unwanted kids are at extremely high risk for all kinds of bad shtein including prison.
You consider it irresponsible to get pregnant and terminate. Fine. I consider it irresponsible to bring another unwanted life into the world to subject them to a substandard life right out of the blocks.
Also can we stop associating abortion or any other single issue with democrats/republicans? All that does is feed into the us vs. them mentality that has completely destroyed our political system.
Al Gore is your Jesus
The Climate is your God
Climate Change is your religion
An Inconvenient Truth is your Bible
Hippie
That's quite an axe you're grinding there.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 22, 2012, 09:44:48 PM
I for one think the world needs more unwanted and unloved children. I also believe that college students who were having some random hookup sex should be forced to derail the rest of their lives over one poor decision. I believe this because a book was written 1900 years ago that says a magic omnipotent space zombie was born of a virgin and it seems like a good idea to follow the rules it lays down.
Jesus wasn't a zombie, he was a Lich. Otherwise, I agree with everything you wrote.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/abortion-restrictions-in-oklahoma
I read shtein like that and it enrages me so much I actually want harm to come to those iceholes. Ugh this country is so farged up it makes me sick to my stomach.
yeah that story repulses me.....these religious nuts went crazy when kermit gosnell was exposed yet they pass every law possible that will give rise to more kermit gosnells
That makes perfect sense though, doesn't it?
These are the ones who elect people who (claim to) hate government so they can govern badly, in turn proving that government is bad.