.
Comments
-
Just-A-Girl does point out a remarkable inconsistency regarding people's sense of outrage.
Thank God I've come to a point where:
1. Not everything in life has to make sense.
2. I no longer fight every injustice on the planet.
When I was 8, my parents bought me a hamster for my birthday, not knowing it was pregnant. When the babies were born, we didn't have time to separate them before the mother started eating her babies. I was horrified. My parents explained that's what some animals do as part of their natural instinct.
We are animals. Sometimes mothers kill their babies. It's preferable they do that before the baby is born. No matter how much we wish human beings are better than that, we are not, and no amount of legislation will stop it.0 -
How is that any different than deciding the same after its born and killing it?Last-12-Exit said:Or don't want a baby, have an abortion. It's that easy also.
So a mother decides she would be happy with a child. Three weeks later she realizes it's hard work, and kills them. It's the same selfishness, the same "I don't wanna" mentality. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I also doubt rape related abortions are even close to %1 of the cases that go on.. But you're right, I'm not using research to back that up, just logic.
Last, the car accident logic makes zero sense. There are risks in everything.
Choosing to have sex and someone else hitting you out of nowhere is totally different, that's the same argument as a rape victim. You didn't choose to have an accident, you chose to drive. That was the other guys fault. Getting pregnant through sex, is a risk both parties are taking, understanding the risks involved. Yes driving is the same, but at the same time that's like saying you have the right to choose to kill the guy for hitting you / as you both knew the risks of driving, he made a mistake so now that justifies him killing you?
Again it's hard to debate since the topic is so different.
Post edited by JUST A GIRL on0 -
Because killing it after its born is murder.
Doing it before is legal. And I'm ok with that.0 -
JUST A GIRL said:
How is that any different than deciding the same after its born and killing it?Last-12-Exit said:Or don't want a baby, have an abortion. It's that easy also.
So a mother decides she would be happy with a child. Three weeks later she realizes it's hard work, and kills them. It's the same selfishness, the same "I don't wanna" mentality. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I also doubt rape related abortions are even close to %1 of the cases that go on.. But you're right, I'm not using research to back that up, just logic.
Last, the car accident logic makes zero sense. There are risks in everything.
Choosing to have sex and someone else hitting you out of nowhere is totally different, that's the same argument as a rape victim. You didn't choose to have an accident, you chose to drive. That was the other guys fault. Getting pregnant through sex, is a risk both parties are taking, understanding the risks involved. Yes driving is the same, but at the same time that's like saying you have the right to choose to kill the guy for hitting you / as you both knew the risks of driving, he made a mistake so now that justifies him killing you?
Again it's hard to debate since the topic is so different.
Most people think taking a pill to terminate a pregnancy in which the "baby" as you call it, is a slightly differentiated mass of cellular membranes is very different from killing a baby which has been through the trauma of birth and is breathing air and drinking milk.JUST A GIRL said:
How is that any different than deciding the same after its born and killing it?Last-12-Exit said:Or don't want a baby, have an abortion. It's that easy also.
So a mother decides she would be happy with a child. Three weeks later she realizes it's hard work, and kills them. It's the same selfishness, the same "I don't wanna" mentality. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I also doubt rape related abortions are even close to %1 of the cases that go on.. But you're right, I'm not using research to back that up, just logic.
Last, the car accident logic makes zero sense. There are risks in everything.
Choosing to have sex and someone else hitting you out of nowhere is totally different, that's the same argument as a rape victim. You didn't choose to have an accident, you chose to drive. That was the other guys fault. Getting pregnant through sex, is a risk both parties are taking, understanding the risks involved. Yes driving is the same, but at the same time that's like saying you have the right to choose to kill the guy for hitting you / as you both knew the risks of driving, he made a mistake so now that justifies him killing you?
Again it's hard to debate since the topic is so different.
Monkey Driven, Call this Living?0 -
If someone thinks there is no difference between a born baby and a partially developed fetus inside a woman's own womb, there really is no arguing against that. Thank goodness the supreme courts of Canada and the US felt differently.With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0
-
Then you are partially conflicted.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
How is the life of a unborn child as a result of rape different from that spawned from a night of unprotected sex or failed birth control?"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
I'll answer this JAG:rgambs said:
The logic is simple, and pretty much unassailable, but it leaves some distasteful implications lingering about.JUST A GIRL said:
How so? Because some people get pregnant on accident? Well, tough shit. You knew it could happen by having sex.Gern Blansten said:
People can choose to have protected sex and still get pregnant. People can get pregnant via rape.JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Your argument doesn't make a lot of sense.
Don't want a baby? Don't choose to have sex.
Don't want to be addicted to crack? Don't choose to smoke it. The logic is simple.
Rape victims are different than people who choose to have sex.
If you wish to engage with your partner, there's ways to do that without having intercorse.
The population on this planet is becoming a serious problem, making adoptions for all unwanted pregnancies pretty much impossible.
It also places a heavily disproportionate burden on women. Men are free to have the freedom of unburdened sexual release and women remain encumbered as they have been for thousands of years. I understand that life isn't fair, but women have had a tough enough time throughout history, it's high time that they have the same sexual freedom as men have always enjoyed.
Don't be a girl. You wanna have lots of sex without having to worry about carrying a baby to term and nursing it afterwards... then be a guy.
It's just that simple."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Seriously?? When two adults CHOOSE to have sex, they are taking a risk.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Then you are partially conflicted.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
How is the life of a unborn child as a result of rape different from that spawned from a night of unprotected sex or failed birth control?
When some asshole rapes a girl, that's not the girl choosing, it's one person only choosing. The girl being raped had zero say so. She didn't choose to have sex. She didn't understand and still ignore the risk.
But, The girl who had one too many glasses of wine and decides "lets fuck!!" Then gets pregnant, and decides she can't handle the choice she (already) made, and decides to kill a child due to her own selfishness and lack of responsibility, is two totally different situations.
If you can't see that, I can't help you.
Same with major birth defects. Sometimes it's in the benefit of the child's quality of life, to end the life rather than have it live from day one being miserable. That's the same as putting down an animal who is too sick to recover, for the sake of the animal.
That's not being selfish or irresponsible either.
You do realize, in today's world, that nearly ALL abortions are just because the mother doesn't want to have a kid. Right? It's kids fucking without a sense of responsibility, and when they have this happen they "deal with it" it's not all peaches and cream, last resort stuff here. It's almost always (from my experience at least) about being unresponsible and taking the easy solution to a problem, which in turn ends the life of someone who has no say so.
Post edited by JUST A GIRL on0 -
I was thinking about this earlier, Thirty. That life (or whatever we choose to call it) is still there, no matter the circumstances of how it came to be.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Then you are partially conflicted.
How is the life of a unborn child as a result of rape different from that spawned from a night of unprotected sex or failed birth control?
This just underscores how it's really not a black-and-white issue to me; it can't be.
0 -
Yah. I'm real serious.JUST A GIRL said:
Seriously?? When two adults CHOOSE to have sex, they are taking a risk.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Then you are partially conflicted.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
How is the life of a unborn child as a result of rape different from that spawned from a night of unprotected sex or failed birth control?
When some asshole rapes a girl, that's not the girl choosing, it's one person only choosing. The girl being raped had zero say so. She didn't choose to have sex. She didn't understand and still ignore the risk.
But, The girl who had one too many glasses of wine and decides "lets fuck!!" Then gets pregnant, and decides she can't handle the choice she (already) made, and decides to kill a child due to her own selfishness and lack of responsibility, is two totally different situations.
If you can't see that, I can't help you.
Same with major birth defects. Sometimes it's in the benefit of the child's quality of life, to end the life rather than have it live from day one being miserable. That's the same as putting down an animal who is too sick to recover, for the sake of the animal.
That's not being selfish or irresponsible either.
You do realize, in today's world, that nearly ALL abortions are just because the mother doesn't want to have a kid. Right? It's kids fucking without a sense of responsibility, and when they have this happen they "deal with it" it's not all peaches and cream, last resort stuff here. It's almost always (from my experience at least) about being unresponsible and taking the easy solution to a problem, which in turn ends the life of someone who has no say so.
What are you arguing? Are you (A) flaunting your morals and telling everyone how they should live and what choices they should make? Or are you (B) arguing for the lives of unborn children no matter what stage of development they might be in?
If you are arguing for (A)... nobody's interested. And such a tactic is tantamount to knocking on people's doors and trying to convince them of the impending apocalypse and salvation from it.
If you are arguing (B)... and then saying, "Oh, but yah... f**k the unborn child conceived from rape"... then you are conflicted. What difference exists between the gooey messes as far as the gooey messes are concerned?
So which is it? (A)... or (B)?
* For the record... I do think it is immoral to resort to an abortion after being recklessly careless. However, I still think that decision is an individual choice.
"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Can you cite a link backing that number up? I simply don't believe that. You tend to lose credibility when you throw numbers out like this.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
There is a huge difference. One can survive on its own. The other cant.PJ_Soul said:If someone thinks there is no difference between a born baby and a partially developed fetus inside a woman's own womb, there really is no arguing against that. Thank goodness the supreme courts of Canada and the US felt differently.
0 -
It's neither. I feel a certain way about the issue. I stated that and left it alone.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Yah. I'm real serious.JUST A GIRL said:
Seriously?? When two adults CHOOSE to have sex, they are taking a risk.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Then you are partially conflicted.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
How is the life of a unborn child as a result of rape different from that spawned from a night of unprotected sex or failed birth control?
When some asshole rapes a girl, that's not the girl choosing, it's one person only choosing. The girl being raped had zero say so. She didn't choose to have sex. She didn't understand and still ignore the risk.
But, The girl who had one too many glasses of wine and decides "lets fuck!!" Then gets pregnant, and decides she can't handle the choice she (already) made, and decides to kill a child due to her own selfishness and lack of responsibility, is two totally different situations.
If you can't see that, I can't help you.
Same with major birth defects. Sometimes it's in the benefit of the child's quality of life, to end the life rather than have it live from day one being miserable. That's the same as putting down an animal who is too sick to recover, for the sake of the animal.
That's not being selfish or irresponsible either.
You do realize, in today's world, that nearly ALL abortions are just because the mother doesn't want to have a kid. Right? It's kids fucking without a sense of responsibility, and when they have this happen they "deal with it" it's not all peaches and cream, last resort stuff here. It's almost always (from my experience at least) about being unresponsible and taking the easy solution to a problem, which in turn ends the life of someone who has no say so.
What are you arguing? Are you (A) flaunting your morals and telling everyone how they should live and what choices they should make? Or are you (B) arguing for the lives of unborn children no matter what stage of development they might be in?
If you are arguing for (A)... nobody's interested. And such a tactic is tantamount to knocking on people's doors and trying to convince them of the impending apocalypse and salvation from it.
If you are arguing (B)... and then saying, "Oh, but yah... f**k the unborn child conceived from rape"... then you are conflicted. What difference exists between the gooey messes as far as the gooey messes are concerned?
So which is it? (A)... or (B)?
* For the record... I do think it is immoral to resort to an abortion after being recklessly careless. However, I still think that decision is an individual choice.
Then others brought my opinion up, and we're debating it, so I was trying to clarify.
I won't keep confirming how I feel. You guys get it. Sorry to be so harsh about how I feel, i still can't wrap my head around how so many can justify it. I don't expect everyone to agree.
0 -
Here is where your position loses merit. The bolded statement tells me your anti-choice view is just punitive. Allow me to explain.JUST A GIRL said:
No, rape victims and babies to be born with huge birth defects, those reasons are acceptable, and likely the reason abortion was created in the first place.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Rape victim? Victim of incest? You're saying 'tough shit deal with it'?JUST A GIRL said:I am happy to see some here acknowledging my comments.
While I do support the right for freedom, and to not be told how and when to do things, when it comes to this I just can't wrap my head around the logic. I hear so often that it's a "choice" but no one has an answer to this. There is a clear choice in the matter.. If you refrain from sex, you can't get pregnant. Period. That's the "choice" we all have. After you've made your "choice" you either have to live with the repercussions, which most everyone knows is possible; or, come up with a valid excuse to get what you want.. Which is how I feel this has turned. Can anyone explain why more don't argue this?
Would it be fair for someone who couldn't afford an abortion to have a child, bring it home and kill them? Because they didn't want a child? What about the dumpster babies? I see no difference.
Please forgive my harshness. It just can not make sense in my brain. At all.
And in today's world, where a video of a dog getting kicked, or a baby being neglected will spark the biggest outcry you've ever seen, or hell, even the shrine left to the dead raccoon in Toronto..
All of this outcry towards things like this, but when it comes to killing a fetus/infant it's debated to death and mindlessly repeated "we have a choice" like the sound bites successfully planted inside everyone's brains in the late 80s, with no real back up as to why the choice is not sex, but to get rid of the child.
You're right to choose is to choose to have sex or not! Anything beyond that is a cop out.
Sex is a pretty strong instinct we have and it's one of the more enjoyable things human beings can enjoy during their brief time on this planet. In the event of an accidental pregnancy, a young woman shouldn't be sentenced to 'life with child' in the event she's not ready for that stage of life.
Dumpster babies are not the same thing as mucky goo. If a woman brings a child into the earth, she can give the child to adoption agencies before throwing it away while it has senses and can feel pain and discomfort.
I'll be harsh too. We have too many people on this planet as it is. The Christian families with 12 children place an incredible burden on the planet's ability to sustain lives.
And unwanted and unloved children often become problems for everyone later in life as a by-product of their upbringing.
I am speaking of anyone who willingly has sex and uses abortion as birth control. That's 99.9% of abortions in the USA by the way.
After several posts, some graphically, referring to abortion as murder, you state that abortion in the case of rape or huge birth defects is acceptable. Why? Because they are unwanted pregnancies, correct? I think most of us would agree she should have the option to abort.
Now, in the case of a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy not resulting from rape or fetal birth defect, you say “tough shit.” Why? Because [if you] “don't want a baby? Don't choose to have sex.”
Hmmm.
In both cases, there is an unwanted pregnancy. In the first case of rape or birth defect, you show compassion for the woman and agree she should legally have the choice to abort. I would too. However, in the second case, your No-Choice position would not allow her to decide what is best for her situation. You would expect her to “live with the repercussions” and deny her the option to abort because you do not like her choice. I strongly disagree with this position.
That is the crux of the Pro-Choice versus the No-Choice positions. The No-Choice position seeks to control the decisions of women and limit their options. The Pro-Choice position lets women decide what is best for themselves.
No. They call it 20 weeks because the gestational period for humans is measured in weeks using proper medical terminology, with 20 weeks being the halfway point in the 40 week gestational period.JUST A GIRL said:
Not 6 months, but 5 months is ok. Lever wonder why they call it 20 weeks and not 5 months? Because more people don't realize they are killing a child more than halfway developed this way.PJ_Soul said:
Yeah, I've noticed that. They act as though any woman can go in and have her 6 month old fetus taken out by means of chopping off its limbs and deflating its head. Such elective abortions do not exist. Pro-lifers are liars.Gern Blansten said:Yes and I would think that those type of abortions are relatively rare. The right likes to paint the picture of mass abortions of viable fetuses which isn't the case.
0 -
Sorry JAG...
After all your strong words, you don't get to say 'no mas' and expect people to leave it at that. As Asterisk has pointed out, you're actually scenario (A) as per my previous description.
So, yes, you are not conflicted because you are not arguing for life."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
That's what it looks like to me too. Her issue is with the behaviour of the mother and whether or not she thinks the mother acts in a morally upstanding way. And insisting that the mother who didn't behave properly in her view deserves the punishment of not being allowed to have an abortion if she wants one (how that would impact the baby's quality of life is apparently neither here nor there). Abortions are punitive. How fucked up. The life of the fetus has nothing to do with it in the long run. If it did, then how the mother got pregnant wouldn't matter.Post edited by PJ_Soul onWith all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0
-
i am going to support a bake sale at a pro-life church function.
i am going to bring a bowl of batter and call it a cake."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
When you mix the cake batter in a bowl and give your kid the spoon to lick they sure are happy there is a cake in the makinggimmesometruth27 said:i am going to support a bake sale at a pro-life church function.
i am going to bring a bowl of batter and call it a cake.0 -
-
gimmesometruth27 said:
i am going to support a bake sale at a pro-life church function.
i am going to bring a bowl of batter and call it a cake.
0 -
it is not a cake until it is baked and iced. just sayin.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
When you mix the cake batter in a bowl and give your kid the spoon to lick they sure are happy there is a cake in the makinggimmesometruth27 said:i am going to support a bake sale at a pro-life church function.
i am going to bring a bowl of batter and call it a cake."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lOG3rD5CrQCategories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help