Pro-Death

i think abortion is unnecessary now.

There's the emergency pill (not the RD-486) but another, that alters the hormones and only works in the first 3 days after fecundation (sp?).
 
Don't want a baby? Don't fuck.

Want a baby? Be ready to pay for it for the next 18 years, and possibly more.

Got raped? Put it up for adoption.
 
k, my mistake, the abortive pill is not RD-486, is RU-486, anyway, that pill is considered illegal in most countris.

The one that is legal is sold everywhere, don't know the name in english, but it must be named something like emergency anticonceptive
 
Well said fury! And if you do want children, and don't mind it not being your own DNA, consider adopting.

Never, NEVER breed like hamsters like they are doing in Africa. I just hate this:

"me not have food, not have job, have family, 9 children, 32 grandchildren, and me wife is pregnant too, and the AIDS.."

If you can't care for your children, DO NOT FUCK! It is a simple logical thing! How smart do you have to be? That will avoid a lot of problems down the road and no abortion will be necessary.
 
The anti-abortion people that get up on a soap box drive me absolutely insane. I wonder how many of the people picketing outside abortion clinics (usually planned parenthood centers) have ever held a crack addicted baby....much less ever cared for one full time? Do they know the first thing about FAS?? Are they aware these babies are born addicted?? ....and they suffer from the moment they are born. Some of these babies lie in an incubator or a crib in the hospital for weeks or months detoxing. If they manage to live long enough to make it out of the hospital, they then must overcome tremendous disabillities, most of which remain with them for life. More often then not these babies don't have anyone to love them. So they go into the system. Maybe they'll get adopted, more likely they'll get bounced from foster home to foster home.

I wonder how many of the anti-abortion fanatics provide foster care for the babies they "save". I wonder how many anti-abortion fanatics could make better use of their time providing daycare for single moms who dedcided to keep their babies, as opposed to picketing, bitching, making flyers and websites and taking photographs of women entering abortion clinics?
 
It's more fun to wait till they reach the ripe old age of 18 and think they know everything.

Ever held a crack addicted baby LL?
 
Interesting how most of the responses (all but one) are provided by the males of our happy little community. So at the grave risk of being thoroughly beaten about the figurative head and face, I'll weigh in with a female perspective.

Prefacing this statement with the firm belief that people should accept and be responsible for the concequences of their actions... It does not matter why someone gets pregnant, it does not matter how she got pregnant. What does matter is the right of a person to her own body. A woman simply should have the choice to make that kind of decision herself - it shouldn't matter why or how she got that way.

But it's murder you say. If you believe that a human being is formed at the moment of conception, from the moment that sperm and egg join, then any abortion for any reason would constitute murder. I don't believe that, any more than I believe a tumor is human or an appendix is human.

I will admit that I waiver on whether abortion becomes unacceptable at a certain point in pregnancy. I think it likely that at sometime the fetus does become "human" and should be covered by the same laws that govern "born" children. Having carried and birthed two children of my own, I can say that from my perspective there would have been a point at which losing the pregnancies would have meant experiencing the death of someone close. But from the same perspective, and having seen what said children look like at 6 weeks into gestation (the size of the tip of my pinkie finger at most - and not really all that human in form) there would have been a point at which a miscarriage would have merely been a setback in my plan of life and not been viewed as the loss of a "child".

Is a zygote made from human DNA a human? I think not. Human DNA does not confer humanity.

Whether or not you are "pro-choice", "pro-life" or just interested in the subject, here is a website that has a good visual explanation of fetal development...
http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html
 
I have to agree with the women here ...

While I don't condone abortion as a means of mere "birth control", I don't believe I have the right to tell anyone what to do with their lives ... so regardless of my view, it's mine as far as what's right for me .. not what's right for other people. I don't live their lives, pay their bills, nor will I be there to care for that child ... so I have no right to tell them what is wrong or right.
 
Shadowfax said:
Ardsgaine, don't try to lecture me on whether I make valid arguements to make my statements clear.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying that if you're going to criticize the way someone else argues, then lead by example.

I admit that was really FUBAR-ed english.
Click to expand...

S'alright. Maybe it wasn't fair to pick on it, since English isn't your first language. French is the only other language I could even begin to converse in, and my French is much worse than your English.

I read that like: kill the people who helped with the abortion, that'll help solve our overpopulation a little bit. Maybe my interpretation was wrong?
Click to expand...

No, you were right, and it was a dumb thing for him to say.

Killing people who assisted in an abortion is murder in my opinion. And I really can't see how people can call that justice.
Click to expand...

We've had a huge communication gap here. I don't consider abortion murder. I'm pro-abortion. I do, however, believe in the death penalty for murder. I didn't realize that you were putting those two issues together, I thought they were separate. We just got crossed up on that one. Hope that clears it up.

And if you can't understand that, I sure hope you get the 'opportunity' to have a close relative get raped and getting pregnant. Wonder if that'll make you change your point of view.
Sounds harsh? Yeah, but this topic is.
Click to expand...

It's a controversial topic, but that's still a bit harsh.

I don't agree on the point of view of the anti-abortionist.
Click to expand...

Neither do I.

Thus it does make a difference whether she's raped or not in my point of view.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It doesn't matter how the woman got pregnant, what matters is whether she has the right to terminate the pregnancy. That's the point you have to argue in order to make your case. If you only think she has that right in the case of rape, or in cases where she can't support the child, then what you end up with is an ad hoc position that is easily knocked down.

If it's simply a matter of not having the money, then the anti-abortionist can say that all we have to do is provide her with money to get through the pregnancy, and then she can put the child up for adoption. If it's because she was raped, then the anti-abortionist can say, how does killing the baby help the situation? Two wrongs don't make a right.

So what I was arguing with you about wasn't whether or not abortion is murder, we agree that it isn't. Our disagreement is about whether or not you were making your case. In my opinion, you were arguing about the wrong things. The central issue is whether abortion is murder or not. To show that it isn't you have to show that the fetus is not a person and/or is not entitled to the protection of law accorded to individual persons.

It's not quite clear to me whether you follow their point of view or not...also a small mishap in your communication towards me I guess...so don't lecture me.
Click to expand...

Perhaps so. Hopefully I've cleared that up now.

I got pissed at the guy because he made some really idiot comments without even TRYING to explain why he made them.
Click to expand...

Yes, but on the other hand, he's 19 yrs old and he's still sorting out what he thinks on these issues. He has an active mind, and he does think about the issues. If you want to convince him of something, or get him to think an issue through better, the way to do it is to lead by example. If that doesn't work, you can be sure that screaming at him won't either.
 
i'm pro choice

i don't think shadowfax was saying that abortion should only be made available for rape cases, merely illustrating a point that there are situations where a woman getting pregnant is not a clear cut matter

the morning after pill is well and good but it only works up to 72 hours, if you can get it, and is only about 75% effective.

abortion and contraception are two seperate issues.

abortion is not somehting taken lightly by those that choose it, it is a difficult and often painful choice. but it is a choice.
 
LastLegionary said:
If you can't care for your children, DO NOT FUCK! It is a simple logical thing! How smart do you have to be? That will avoid a lot of problems down the road and no abortion will be necessary.
Click to expand...

Janimal and I were married for nine years before we had our first child. Until we made the decisioin to have a child, we did not want one. Are you saying that during that time we should have abstained from sex? Absurd!

Now it is true that Janimal had strong objections to having an abortion, but that was because she didn't want to go through the experience, not because she thought it was wrong. We discussed the possibility that she might become pregnant and agreed in advance that we would keep the child, ready or not. Morality demands that people think about the possible consequences of their actions and consider whether they are prepared to accept those consequences before they act.

The purpose of the law, however, isn't to enforce morality, but to protect people from the initiation of force, from the violation of their rights. The fundamental question about abortion, then, is whether or not it is a violation of anyone's rights. Your answer depends on when you think a fetus becomes a child. In my opinion, that does not happen until birth. Before that the fetus is not an individual, and cannot be treated as an individual without violating the woman's right to her own body.

It would be absolutely monstrous for any woman to carry a fetus right up to the point of birth and then decide on a whim that she didn't want to have it after all. It would be monstrous for a doctor to perform the abortion for such a woman. (I'm not sure it can even be done without inducing labor and causing the fetus to be born.) It would be monstrous, but in my opinion, it wouldn't be a violation of rights, because the fetus is not an individual person and has no rights.
 
Shadowfax said:
I admit that was really FUBAR-ed english.
Click to expand...

i think your english is very good, and i got what you meant, i don't know why he didn't understood your post.
 
Ardsgaine: i think is a pretty lame attitude to pick on non-english speaking people for their small mistakes, i know you have enough intelligence to understand what they are trying to say.
 
Luis G said:
Ardsgaine: i think is a pretty lame attitude to pick on non-english speaking people for their small mistakes, i know you have enough intelligence to understand what they are trying to say.
Click to expand...

I think it is a lame attitude to try to turn this into an issue. I have never made fun of, or picked, on anyone here-- non-English speaking or otherwise-- for a small mistake in grammar or spelling.
 
Ok y'all .. I think it's time to chill ... this is a subject that, as unc has mentioned, has been hashed and rehashed a few times before ... we all have views ... let's try to respect that fact if nothing else.

As far as Ardsgaine's comments, I feel he's attempting to make light of a tense situation with a few little comments that are, to me, quite refreshing ... I'm sure many of you can see that ... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top