pro life or pro choice.

[MJ_junkie86]

what are u guys?

MJ

[ZenziC]

Me I'm pro choice. I don't like the idea of abortion, but I choose to have birth control. Whenever I choose, I'll have a baby, just not ready for one right now.

[MJ_junkie86]

i agree with abortion, tho not as a birth control option.
accidents do happen, even if ur being careful, and i dont think abortion is bad in that case.
but sleepin around or even havin unproctected sex with the same person and using abortion as a birth control ISNT a good thing.

am pro choice coz there are too many unwanted kids as it is, we dont need to add any more unwanted kids into this world.

MJ

[DustyBottoms]

They say a picture is worth a thousand words..

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/dustybottoms/antiabortion.jpg

It is obvious how I feel...

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/dustybottoms/smallest_baby.jpg

[Ateo]

Pro choice.

The anti-abortion argument, while based on moral belief (nothing wrong with that), has a gaping, glaring inconsistency: you never hear the pro-life people say ONE thing about invitro fertilization, which results in the destruction of thousands & thousands of embryos. You don't hear one peep.

[w1che]

IVF fosters life and abortion is the destruction of life. I miss the connection.

You also don't hear pro-life advocates say much about mis-carriage either..

[Ateo]

As a result of the IVF process, thousands of embryos are thrown in the trash. Is anti-abortionism about the destruction of pre-birth human life or isn't it?

So you're saying the pro-life position is that the morality of killing embryos is relative?

[w1che]

Everything is relative or none of us would be alive..

Relative.. a thing having a relation to or connection with or necessary dependence on another thing..

[MJ_junkie86]

Originally posted by DustyBottoms
They say a picture is worth a thousand words..

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/dustybottoms/antiabortion.jpg

It is obvious how I feel...

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/dustybottoms/smallest_baby.jpg


now imagin that child, 6 months down the line, left in a doorway to die because the parents didnt want the child and cant cope.

or imagin that child, 18 years old, in a childrens home all its life, then chucked into a council flat because they are too old for the home. no family to support it, never had the love a family gives. feels lonely. all because the parents didnt want it and gave the child up.

i dont see how that is a good thing.

MJ

[MJ_junkie86]

Originally posted by w1che
You also don't hear pro-life advocates say much about mis-carriage either..

miscarriage is hardly a choice.

MJ

[DustyBottoms]

Originally posted by MJ_junkie86
now imagin that child, 6 months down the line, left in a doorway to die because the parents didnt want the child and cant cope.

No problem, the parents can easily be found and put in prison which is what they would deserve for being such scum for leaving a little baby to fend for him/herself.:mad

or imagin that child, 18 years old, in a childrens home all its life, then chucked into a council flat because they are too old for the home. no family to support it, never had the love a family gives. feels lonely. all because the parents didnt want it and gave the child up.

i dont see how that is a good thing.

MJ

We at least he/she had a chance. I know! Lets give them that chance but if they end up like you describe... then we kill them. Instead of killing them while they are babies, we let them grow up first to see if they are then wanted by someone. If not - retro-active abortion. :clap

[w1che]

Yep, we could start out by killing the dope head homeless people we have already..

Everyone that get abortions are not poor either, but killing babies seems to be the main thing that drives you libs so live & die with it in your heads..

[dave404]

Pro choice. The destruction of any kind of life is regrettable, but often necessary. And the doctrine that life begins at fertilization is not good science anyhow.

Yes w1che, baby-killing is my hobby. At weekends I get together with other baby-killers, and we rampage around the countryside looking for babies to massacre. We call ourselves the Herodites, and our slogan is "the only good baby is a dead baby". Happy now?

[w1che]

You always make me happy Davy....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v678/w1che/Death.gif

[Idnew]

How many times has this subject been discussed now?

I'm pro choice.

[MJ_junkie86]

lol am new! im allowed to repeat topics!


wow idnew, i wouldnt have thought u were pro choice. good on ya tho girl :)


"No problem, the parents can easily be found and put in prison which is what they would deserve for being such scum for leaving a little baby to fend for him/herself. " DB
its not about the parents being in prision. the child is still dead and suffered.
with an abortion, you have it before the child has depeloped and feels pain.
i cant remember the dates but they worked out that an unborn child only starts feeling things at a certain number of weeks. the abortion takes place before that.

so if it comes down to a healthy child freezing to death or a bunch of cells with no feelings dying, i know which i choose.

lol yeah kill all the homeless people, and all the druggies, its mainly them who abandon the kids (i said mainly)
(lol now am gonna be accused of being some sort of nazi or somethin)


MJ

[mtz23]

I guess pro choice. I can't really choose a definite stance unless I faced with the "issue".

I got a woman pregnant once. She didn't tell me. I found out later that she aborted. She told me that she thought I didn't want it. I told her didn't know. I can't say now.

[DustyBottoms]

Originally posted by mtz23
I guess pro choice. I can't really choose a definite stance unless I faced with the "issue".

I got a woman pregnant once. She didn't tell me. I found out later that she aborted. She told me that she thought I didn't want it. I told her didn't know. I can't say now.

She didn't tell you but she aborted anyway? Telling you that she thought you didn't want it was her justification for the truth.... she didn't want it.

How convienient, No one is to blame...

Next time use a damn condom.

[Ateo]

The majority of Americans (sorry to be so US-centric here) support a woman's choice. It's just common sense. A woman has right to her own body. If fundamentalist righties think embryonic life is so precious, their blatant ambivalence about the thousands of embryos that are destroyed through invitro fertilization speaks volumes about the lack of credibility of their argument.

[mtz23]

Originally posted by DustyBottoms
Next time use a damn condom.

"Assumption is the mother of all f*ck up's." - mtz23

We had sex three times. Everytime I wore a condom. Sometimes they don't work. And Yes, I was the only one she was with at the time.

I would've thought you were a little more smarter than that.

[w1che]

I'm for aborting liberals from birth up to the age of 80. Someone or something has already sucked their brains out so it would be like a mercy abortion..

Tig you need to get off of that little talking point you have because it doesn't hold water.. but I guess if it makes you feel better about supporting genocide of little babies that have no voice then hang in there..

You do know that most of those babies you guys supported killing would have grown up to be liberal voters don't you? Just think even at that, I still hate the killing of little babies..

[dave404]

As you well know, w1che, the issue is not the killing of "little babies" (or indeed medium-sized or Family Pack Economy Size babies).

It's your boneheaded insistence that disposing of a fertilized egg and slaughtering a toddler are morally equivalent acts. You may think so if you like, but most of the rest of us think you are off your trolley. No-one can deny that there are ethical issues to be addressed, but the only people who know all the answers are the simple-minded and the lockstep bigots.

[Ateo]

Tig you need to get off of that little talking point you have because it doesn't hold water.. Then why don't you present a sensible argument to it? And why is it only "little babies" when it's abortion? Aren't invitro throwaways "little babies" too?

And if all you can do is spout rhetorical catchphrases then don't bother responding.

[MJ_junkie86]

Originally posted by w1che
I'm for aborting liberals from birth up to the age of 80. Someone or something has already sucked their brains out so it would be like a mercy abortion..


You do know that most of those babies you guys supported killing would have grown up to be liberal voters don't you? Just think even at that, I still hate the killing of little babies..

how does this add to the arguement?
its jus u being stupid coz u hate liberals.

MJ

[sinecure]

Originally posted by tigsnort
Then why don't you present a sensible argument to it? And why is it only "little babies" when it's abortion? Aren't invitro throwaways "little babies" too?

And if all you can do is spout rhetorical catchphrases then don't bother responding.

Speaking of "catchphrases"... what's with this "her body, her choice" crap?

"Choice" is something you make when deciding to get another tattoo, a few more holes in the ear, liposuction, or a nose job. When it involves killing a proto-human [not one that's in a Petri dish, but one well on its way to becoming a human], it's a "choice" alright... a "choice" to kill a human.

[w1che]

Tig you're one to talk about spouting rhetorical catchphrases..

Most thinking people are well aware that an abortion is not done on an egg with a sperm head stuck in it. I think that is somewhere around the DNC area but who wants facts when it comes to killing babies..

I already explained the difference between IVF and abortion but of course you pro baby killers can't be bothered with that large difference.. Choice is a nice cleanup word but in fact choice in this case means the taking of a human life..

Why don't you pro-abortion advocates call it something like the "Finale Solution?" No wait, that has already been used for another type of genocide..

[DustyBottoms]

Yes, I'm sick of the liberal zygote - cell - sperm justification for killing babies up to the third trimester where they are almost speaking.

[Ateo]

Originally posted by sinecure
"Choice" is something you make when deciding to get another tattoo, a few more holes in the ear, liposuction, or a nose job. When it involves killing a proto-human [not one that's in a Petri dish, but one well on its way to becoming a human], it's a "choice" alright... a "choice" to kill a human. So when it's "in a petri dish" it's less human than when it's at the same stage of development in a woman's body...even though the embryo in the petri dish is equally as capable of becoming a human being.

That doesn't make sense. It's like saying a green banana that is ripened artifically isn't really a banana, because it didn't ripen on the plant.

[DustyBottoms]

Originally posted by tigsnort
So when it's "in a petri dish" it's less human than when it's at the same stage of development in a woman's body...even though the embryo in the petri dish is equally as capable of becoming a human being.

That doesn't make sense. It's like saying a green banana that is ripened artifically isn't really a banana, because it didn't ripen on the plant.

OK Tig you always go back to the zygote argument.

In your opinion, how many cells must be present before it is alive and human?

[Ateo]

The terms "alive" and "human" are useless in the abortion debate, because they're too general. They might mean one thing to me & something different to you.

An embryo isn't aware of anything. It may respond to pain like a bug or a worm does, but is it human in the sense that I or you are? I believe it's potentially human, but not completely human (yet), so the term comes with a strong caveat for me.

Is an embryo "alive"? Depends on who you ask. I believe it's technically alive, as any life form is, but again...is it comparable to me or you being alive? No. Again, strong caveat.

Here's the thing. Anti-abortionists want to frame the argument in black & white, absolute terms--because that serves their argument. Pro-choicers want to frame the argument in philosophical terms, because if you want to have a serious discussion about things like "life" and "humanity", it requires more than black & white parameters.

[w1che]

DB, You should know better than to ask a liberal to make a judgement call on right & wrong. They deal in what's philosophical, you know in the ream of the gray matter.

One minute a baby is a glob of human waste and the next minute it's ALIVE & the liberals want to do everything for the KIDS..

I think we all know where the problem is with the gray matter..

[Ateo]

Well if you want to argue this in black & white, right or wrong terms, then you need to explain why I.F. is okay and abortion isn't...otherwise you're introducing relativity into the discussion, and you can't have it both ways.

[w1che]

I'm not going to play your little IVF game any longer. I think I have respond to that point two or three times already with nothing to show for it but you bringing it up again.

If you don't know the differance between IVF a procedure used for starting human life & abortion a procedure used for ending human life, then you're to stupid to even be in this discussion..

but then again... What's new..

[Ateo]

Ah, back to calling me stupid again. You're no fun.

If you can't even make an effort to defend your position why do you even participate in these discussions?

[dave404]

w1che, it seems to me that you're the one advancing the change-in-a flash argument. According to you, there is a sperm, and an egg, and no-one gives a monkey's. Then the two fuse, and still no-one gives a monkey's. Then the process of fertilisation kicks in and... oh no, wait, that would cover IVF. So still no-one gives a monkey's. But then the fertilized egg gets attached to the uterine wall, and... bam! A miracle occurs. Now it's a fully-fledged human with the same rights as my granny.

You may say that the abortions you object to are not *these* abortions, but if you're going to suggest that all abortions, even the "morning-after pill" be banned, then I can't see how you are saying anything other than this, which is the classic "pro-life" position as I understand it.

I disagree with this picture. The fertilized egg is just a cell. It has interesting potential, but hey, so do some of the posters on this board. I'm not holding my breath. And an implanted egg is not very different. It's just passed through another gate on the long 9-month march to being born. So what happens? Is it all right to kill foetuses just before they are born? No, it isn't. That's pretty much the same as killing babies. Where do you draw the line? *There is no logical place*. There is a pretty smooth transition from "not important" to "very important". I know, it's not convenient, but it's true. It's no good at all, by the way, talking about what's "alive". The sperm is alive, so's the egg, and so on all the way to adulthood and senescence.

It's a bit like the transition from childhood to adulthood. Observing that kids are not equipped to make sensible decisions about things like alcohol, tobacco and sex, we have to come up a rule that protects them from their inadequacies. Unfortunately our rules say that one night you go to bed without the ability to decide whether to smoke or not, and awake the next morning fully equipped. Which is obviously mad, but so far we haven't come up with a better idea. I reckon maybe we should link it to educational level, as some of my friends would have worked a lot harder as a result, but that's another matter. The point is that we have to settle for something unsatisfactory. So 'tis with abortion.

Now, if you want to have a debate about where to draw this arbitrary line, OK. But claiming to occupy the moral high ground just because you have a spectacularly dumb idea about where to draw it, is a non-starter.

I'm not enamoured of the "pro-choice" position as such: I can't really believe that mothers should be allowed to do whatever they like to their kids. But the idea that fertilized eggs are invariably to be allowed to come to term come Hades or high water, is just too absurd to contemplate. So, the lesser of two dumbos...

[sinecure]

It's not all THAT difficult for me, Dave...

If we can call the time of death at the cessation of brain activity, why can't we call the beginning of "life" at the commencement of brain activity.

Not a perfect answer IMO [when...exactly does brain activity commence?] , but I think it's pretty logical.

...or not...http://www.kurts-smilies.de/hae.gif

[w1che]

It's a natural occurrence for the human body to discard eggs & sperm by the millions so you can put that back under the table you pulled it out from under. When you have to pump a saline solution into a womans body to kill something that means that something was alive or when you have to pull it's feet out so you can stick a probe into it's scull for sucking it's brains out. To me it was alive & you just killed it because that's what some woman wanted who's boyfriend just dumped her and she now doesn't want to have that Aholes baby..

No matter how you sugar coat it. Abortion leads to the death of a baby. Take your support of abortion to your grave with you because in your book you become nothing but dirt anyway..

[dave404]

Sin,

Well that's a reasonable criterion all right, but as you say it's going to need a tighter definition before its useful. I think I could probably support it, but I can't see either the pro-life or the pro-choice lobbies signing up to it, as it violates both of their "principles".

w1che,

If you want to talk about what is "natural", you're only going to end up in a mess. How much of our present existence, in your estimation, is "natural"? I take it you have no truck with medical treatments when you get ill? IMO, the use of the word "natural" is generally just a short-hand for the personal prejudices of the user. What do you really mean?

No-one is sugar-coating anything here. Yes, we're talking about killing stuff. You maintain, however, that killing a single fertilized egg is morally equivalent to taking a chainsaw to someone's toddler. Yet you offer no arguments to back this up, other than your own personal conviction.

Instead we get all this propaganda about how horrible late abortions are. If you want to argue that *all* abortions are wrong, you can't just focus on a subset. You have to talk about *all abortions*.

The funny thing is, you seem to know all killing is not the same. You're quite prepared to contemplate shooting people who don't stop for the police, or executing felons. If you had a fundamental belief that all acts of killing were the same, I would disagree, but you would at least be more consistent.

So explain it to us again. Why is killing a fertilized egg no different from murdering your granny?

[w1che]

Who would have thought I would have to explain what natural means Davy.. I sure didn't... You know when you go to the bath room to take a Pi*s? That's a natural act, but yes I do understand there are machines but it then becomes an un-natural act..

I look at life like I do a computer program. You start with a 1 & a 0. As you you start writing the program you keep adding more 1s & 0s until at some point you have a crude program that can do some little thing while you just keep building that program until it becomes what you want it to really be. The point where those 1s & 0s became a crude program is where they became alive and you should back them up to hard disk..

[DustyBottoms]

I just can't comprehend how you could justify killing these (tig's words) cells.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/dustybottoms/abort.jpg

[Ateo]

But killing these "cells" are perfectly fine, justified, and necessary:

http://www.bushbacklash.com/NewFiles/Images/iraqi_child_2.jpg

(warning: graphic)

[DustyBottoms]

Originally posted by tigsnort
But killing these "cells" are perfectly fine, justified, and necessary:

http://www.bushbacklash.com/NewFiles/Images/iraqi_child_2.jpg

(warning: graphic)

What does this have to do with abortion?

The old "Tig sidestep" is alive and well....

Lets stay on topic..

[Ateo]

Your position is that abortion is the killing of innocent children, therefore it's unacceptable, murder. Moral absolutes, black & white, killing babies is wrong and all that.

If you feel there's an exception for the child in the pic I posted, please explain why.

[dave404]

w1che, the reason you "didn't think" you should explain what "natural" means is that you can't, as you have ably demonstrated.

Your analogy with computer program seems a bit odd to say the least. Cells such as sperm and eggs can already do far more than most computer programs, in terms of their complexity. Where are you going to draw a line based on your analogy, and why?

Let's try it again. Why is killing a fertilized egg no different from murdering your granny?

DB, I understand you don't support late abortions. What kind of abortions, if any *do* you support?

[Idnew]

That gruesome pic has nothing to do with this topic tig.

[Idnew]

A study of 2,525 women revealed that women who had an abortion were more likely to report depression or lower satisfaction with their lives. However, they also often reported rape, childhood physical and sexual abuse, and violent partners.

Now in those four instances do you really think a woman should carry a baby if she doesn't want to?

[w1che]

Quote Dave.. Cells such as sperm and eggs can already do far more than most computer programs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How do they do the above? Are they alive or?..........

Well I see you want to play games with what's natural and what's not, so I may as well let that go.

Ok, the 1s & 0s getting arranged in complex form as in a program was a little over your head.

Lets use kiddie blocks. We start with one blue & one pink, now you have a lot of different colored blocks in a box so just two of them doesn't mean much. At some point you start building a complex house with all the different rooms out of your box of different colored blocks. You started this house by stacking your blue & pink block together. At some point your work becomes what we know as a house because a house is all you can build out of your box of blocks.. Take it from there in your mind..

Hint: I don't believe HUMAN life begins at conception any more than I believe you have a beautiful flower when you only have a pack of seed. I believe at conception you have the building blocks coming together that's necessary for the building of human life.. Once you can look at these cells/blocks & see what you know must be a human because that's all that can be build out of these cells/blocks then at that point these cells/blocks should be protected at all cost. Just as you are.. Yeah Yeah I know you won't get my point but I had a little time to waste..

Idnew what you found the need to post is almost worthless in a general debate about abortion. If your point was that most women that get abortions have had bad things happen to them then that's simply not true.. As you should know, there should be no reason for someone who was raped to wait until she has to abort a baby. Incest is a different story altogether..

[dave404]

How do they do the above? Are they alive or?. Yes. They are alive. No need for any or...
I don't believe HUMAN life begins at conception any more than I believe you have a beautiful flower when you only have a pack of seed.
Well that's cool. We agree on something. Does this mean you wouldn't want to ban all abortions, even the morning-after pill? Just the ones that have reached the threshold you're talking about? If so, we have very little left to argue about - just where to draw the line.

If I went and revised my now rather outdated degree materials, I could give you a fairly detailed account of human development at the molecular level, so there's no need to get too carried away with coloured bricks and computer programs. Feel free to be as technical as you like in this discussion. I won't complain.

Of course, we still have to decide where the line oughta be...

[Idnew]

Idnew what you found the need to post is almost worthless in a general debate about abortion. If your point was that most women that get abortions have had bad things happen to them then that's simply not true.. As you should know, there should be no reason for someone who was raped to wait until she has to abort a baby. Incest is a different story altogether..
Oh excuse me.........you do believe in abortions but only under certain circumstances............is that right? Your talking about the morning after pill or something you can take for rape victims? Hmmm but it's already an egg isn't it? So most women that get abortions get them for what reason in your opinion? Really W1che unless you're a woman you have no idea what your're talking about.

Most of the time I agree with you but not on this issue and I don't think it's all liberal or conservative, but a choice an individual "woman" has the right to make and that choice is what she has to live with. At one time I was dead set against abortion, but then when there was a chance I might become pg in my late 40's I changed my mind, because after raising 6 children to adulthood I certainly was not going to have a baby and start over.

[sinecure]

Originally posted by Idnew
That gruesome pic has nothing to do with this topic tig.

Tig posted:
But killing these "cells" are perfectly fine, justified, and necessary:

http://www.bushbacklash.com/NewFile...aqi_child_2.jpg

Well... as I understand Tig's "point"... that child was blown to bits by his/her mother, who didn't wish to be bothered with the inconvenience of a child anymore.

You know... her "choice" and all that.

Right, Tig???

[Ateo]

Originally posted by sinecure
Tig posted:


Well... as I understand Tig's "point"... that child was blown to bits by his/her mother, who didn't wish to be bothered with the inconvenience of a child anymore.

You know... her "choice" and all that.

Right, Tig??? No, it was blown to bits as a direct result of a policy (which was also a choice) you fully approve of & cheer on daily. In this case you were an accomplice to the abortion, Sin.

But that kind of abortion is different, I know. Moral relativity and all that.

[sinecure]

Originally posted by Idnew
Really W1che unless you're a woman you have no idea what your're talking about.

This is one attitude that grinds me good...

My perturbation can be expressed in a message I saw on a T-shirt recently. It read--

"Here's a man who conceived a child and doesn't want to be father. He's called a dead-beat dad.

Here's a woman who conceived a child and doesn't want to be a mother. She's called pro-choice."

At one time I was dead set against abortion, but then when there was a chance I might become pg in my late 40's I changed my mind, because after raising 6 children to adulthood I certainly was not going to have a baby and start over.

Idnew-- I gotta comment that if, by your late 40's, you DON'T KNOW how you get "pg", and at least a couple of efficient and effective ways to prevent such a thing from happening... well, it would seem to me that "becoming pg" shouldn't be near the top of your list of "Things To Worry About."

[sinecure]

Originally posted by tigsnort
No, it was blown to bits as a direct result of a policy (which was also a choice) you fully approve of & cheer on daily. In this case you were an accomplice to the abortion, Sin.

But that kind of abortion is different, I know. Moral relativity and all that.

I suppose in your little, cramped Bush-hating mind, the evil US military aimed a destructive device directly at that poor little kid?

.... and the abortionist's forcepts/curette just "accidentally" dislodges and kills the fetus...??

Like all good liberals, you can't accept that one is an accidental, unintentional killing and one is quite specific and premeditated?

Sorry, when it comes to tossing guilt, it tends to best adhere to YOUR arguement.

[Ateo]

Originally posted by sinecure
I suppose in your little, cramped Bush-hating mind, the evil US military aimed a destructive device directly at that poor little kid?Of course not. But everybody knows--you, me, Bush, the military--that this stuff happens in wars. It's an inevitability that children and innocent people will die.

Even in justified wars, the unintentional death of innocents isn't "accidental". It's an inevitable side effect & everybody knows it. That why war sucks, remember?

[w1che]

Let me see if I have this right. Since I'm not a woman then I have no right to say killing unborn babies is wrong.. I think I have that right but there is no way I'm going to agree with it..

I'm for any form of birth control but if you want to wait around until it gets a heart beat before you decide you're going to exercise your choice not to have your baby then I will condemn that every chance I get. If it has it's own heart beat then it's a human baby because it sure can't be anything else..

[sinecure]

Originally posted by tigsnort
Of course not. But everybody knows--you, me, Bush, the military--that this stuff happens in wars. It's an inevitability that children and innocent people will die.

Even in justified wars, the unintentional death of innocents isn't "accidental". It's an inevitable side effect & everybody knows it. That why war sucks, remember?

Yes, Tig.... and there are a certain number [actually a quite high number] of toddlers who will die by drowning in common 5-gallon plastic buckets this year. Nobody planted the buckets to intentionally drown them, but it will UNintentionally happen while the buckets were being used for something else. I have several of these buckets around the house.

Perhaps it would be OK if I would load a couple of them with explosives and detonate them in a mall, or next to a church just to make some sort of a point?

Do you know that the child in your photo was killed by a US munition? If your answer is "It doesn't matter." then you've lost your arguement as well as your mind.

Now, to relate all this back to the point of the thread... Please explain to me again how the forcepts/curette of the abortionist were "unintentionally/acidentally" employed to end a human life....

[dave404]

Idnew,

I think it's going to far to say that men shouldn't have an opinion about abortion. We do have brains, when we choose to actually use them, and a capacity for ethical judgements. And if our partner brings a baby to term, our lives are also affected.

On the other hand, men with strong opinions on this topic should recognize that their views are of a somewhat *theoretical* nature. Whether they would feel differently about the issue if they had to do the child-bearing, we'll likely never know, but nor do they. A bit of modesty would do no harm at all here.

[Idnew]

Idnew-- I gotta comment that if, by your late 40's, you DON'T KNOW how you get "pg", and at least a couple of efficient and effective ways to prevent such a thing from happening... well, it would seem to me that "becoming pg" shouldn't be near the top of your list of "Things To Worry About." Again sin you have no idea how I might have or anything about my medical situation and condoms don't always work and why should I be layed up for 6 weeks to have myself fixed. I could no longer take any form of birth control. So I put it on my husband to get himself fixed. He did.

I'm for any form of birth control but if you want to wait around until it gets a heart beat before you decide you're going to exercise your choice not to have your baby then I will condemn that every chance I get. If it has it's own heart beat then it's a human baby because it sure can't be anything else..
Answer the question W1che. Who do you think should get an abortion? Most women don't even know their pg until around 6-8 weeks.

If there is a man that got his g/f, wife pg then of course I think he should be consulted before the woman makes a decision on having the baby or not, but I know of several 14 yr old girls that now have babies and the dad's are nowhere to be found. Who's raising these children? Grand-parents.

[w1che]

Quote Idnew.. Answer the question W1che. Who do you think should get an abortion? Most women don't even know their pg until around 6-8 weeks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

After the first trimester there should only be two reasons to allow abortions.. To save the life of the Mother (being able to prove that's the case by agreeing ahead of time to release medical records pertainting to the abortion) and incest.. Someone who was really raped should have had things taken care of long before the end of the first three months..

Women & 14 year old girls not keeping their legs crossed or using birth control is a whole different problem that abortion is not the answer to..

[MJ_junkie86]

w1tch, you, and sin too, obviously have no idea, do you even understand anything about being a woman? that stupid comment to idnew was pathetic and am sure you guys, in all your years of wisdom, would know birth control doesnt always work.
and seeing as ur a man, u've never been raped, how would u know what the girl would be thinking? or even if shes thinking straight at all.
this is more than just black or white.
u gotta look at that would be childs life, will this child being born hav a decent life?
you've seen the ads on tv for "save the children", how would you feel if the child turned out like one of the little children on the ads.

idnew, if these guys were girls, they would be pro choice without any question. lets face it, they could father a kid, drop outta the picture, pay a few quid a month, and never have to worry about it again. its the women who brings up the child, has to struggle, find money to feed and clothe it. so it should be MAINLY our choice, seeing as in a yr or two, when the guys found something better to do, he'll be off and we'd be on our own with a child.

MJ

[Idnew]

idnew, if these guys were girls, they would be pro choice without any question. lets face it, they could father a kid, drop outta the picture, pay a few quid a month, and never have to worry about it again. Absoulutly.............My daughters have raised there children without the father until they are already grown then they want to play "daddy".

[sinecure]

Well... I guess legally killing the baby DOES tend to eliminate the "inconvenience" of it all, doesn't it?

http://www.kurts-smilies.de/motz.gif

[w1che]

Quote MJ.. u gotta look at that would be childs life, will this child being born hav a decent life?
>>>>>>>>>>>
So we should make life & death judgement calls on how WE think someones life MAY turn out?

You need to look into the backgrounds of some very rich & famous people, both in sports and many other professions..

[MJ_junkie86]

yeah well guys.
u can have all the opinions you want.
at the end of the day this has never and will never happen to you so you do not know what you would do if in that situation.

w1tch. its up to the parents/mother to choose. and she will know how the childs life will turn out. lets face it, f shes a druggy or homeless or anything like that, its quite safe to say that the childs life will not be the happiest it could be.
so its not about how WE think the life MAY turn out, its the mother looking at the cold hard facts and making a decision which will benefit that child.

MJ

[Idnew]

You need to look into the backgrounds of some very rich & famous people, both in sports and many other professions..
You have no idea who is going to adopt that child. It could be some perverts or some rich and famous person. A good example is Joan Crawford. Rich and famous and treated her adopted children like dirt.

It all boils down to "what the mother" wants to live with for the rest of their life. You men that speak of anti abortion haven't a clue.

[sinecure]

Just how big of a "clue" do YOU need to understand the legally-sanctioned murder of an innocent baby for the "convenience" of the "mother"? :question http://www.kurts-smilies.de/nono2.gif

[w1che]

Idnew, I never said anything at all about adoption but that's not a bad idea vs killing a baby..

A large number of very successful people came from one parent very poor backgrounds, you read about them all the time.. Oprah Winfrey is one. Should she have been aborted just because she didn't start life like some of us did? She is now worth Billions and does a lot of good things for others so I think not.. There are many cases, Read about the woman that writes Harry Potter if you like a good rags to riches story..

[MJ_junkie86]

there is a different between one parent poor families, and a junkie livin on the street who is more worried about feeding her habit than her child.

this isnt an "innocent child" its an unborn buch of cells which is terminated before it has developed feelings.

sin, i wish you could look after a new born child, have to work two jobs just to pay the bills, and still dont know where your going to get the money from to feed the child.
then try to tell me you are anti abortion.

you guys have no idea, this doesnt happen to you.
MJ

[w1che]

Oh, so now you were just talking about Junkies having abortions.. Ok I'll go along with that.. If when they abort the baby they cut her tubes or maybe give her a real strong dose of H.. We don't need junkies and we don't need abortions on demand..

[MJ_junkie86]

all im saying is that you say your dead against abortions, no matter what.
am just pointing out that there are different things which need to be taken into consideration.

i agree that abortions shouldnt be handing out willy nilly to any idiot that gets themselves preg and doesnt want it.
but i dont think that abortions are bad or should never happen.

MJ

[w1che]

Quote MJ..all im saying is that you say your dead against abortions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

MJ if you're going to post to a thread you need to know what's been posted and by whom on that thread..

I'm not dead set against abortions & have stated so on this very thread..

[MJ_junkie86]

alright alright.
excuse me for not being able to remember word for word everything you and everyone else has ever said.
jesus.

MJ

[Idnew]

Ok I'll go along with that.. If when they abort the baby they cut her tubes or maybe give her a real strong dose of H.. We don't need junkies and we don't need abortions on demand.. This is the second time you have sorta agreed to certain abotions so once again just tell us which kinds of abortions you do agree with?

[w1che]

Some people need to learn to read the thread.. I've already said where I stand on abortion... :smash

[Idnew]

Hint: I don't believe HUMAN life begins at conception any more than I believe you have a beautiful flower when you only have a pack of seed. I believe at conception you have the building blocks coming together that's necessary for the building of human life.. Once you can look at these cells/blocks & see what you know must be a human because that's all that can be build out of these cells/blocks then at that point these cells/blocks should be protected at all cost.

As you should know, there should be no reason for someone who was raped to wait until she has to abort a baby. Incest is a different story altogether.. Most thinking people are well aware that an abortion is not done on an egg with a sperm head stuck in it.I'm for any form of birth control but if you want to wait around until it gets a heart beat before you decide you're going to exercise your choice not to have your baby then I will condemn that every chance I get. If it has it's own heart beat then it's a human baby because it sure can't be anything else.. After the first trimester there should only be two reasons to allow abortions.. To save the life of the Mother (being able to prove that's the case by agreeing ahead of time to release medical records pertainting to the abortion) and incest.. Someone who was really raped should have had things taken care of long before the end of the first three months.. The point where those 1s & 0s became a crude program is where they became alive and you should back them up to hard disk..


hmmmm first it's ok about cells to aport them(rape, incest etc) then you need to protect those cells and let them grow..........like I said a lot of women/girls don't even know their pg until 6-8 wks into it:question :confused