Another reason to ban abortion...

[Cajuncowboy]

Another reason it should be banned...


Artist hanged herself after aborting her twins

Last Updated: 2:03am GMT 22/02/2008

An artist killed herself after aborting her twins when she was eight weeks pregnant, leaving a note saying: "I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum."

Emma Beck was found hanging at her home in Helston, Cornwall, on Feb 1 2007. She was declared dead early the following day - her 31st birthday.

Her suicide note read: "I told everyone I didn't want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies: they need me, no-one else does."
advertisement

The inquest at Truro City Hall heard that Miss Beck had split up with her boyfriend, referred to as "Ben" after he "reacted badly" to the pregnancy.

She saw her GP before the termination, but missed an appointment at a hospital in Penzance. She then cancelled, but later turned up to an appointment at a clinic at Royal Cornwall Hospital in Treliske. The counsellor was on holiday so a doctor referred Miss Beck to a pregnancy counselling telephone service eight days before carrying out the abortion when she was eight weeks pregnant, the inquest heard.

The coroner, Dr Emma Carlyon, ordered that the identities of the doctor who performed the abortion and her lead consultant be kept secret.

The inquest heard that Sylvia Beck, the victim's mother, wrote to the hospital after her daughter's death, saying: "I want to know why she was not given the opportunity to see a counsellor.

"She was only going ahead with the abortion because her boyfriend did not want the twins.

"I believe this is what led Emma to take her own life - she could not live with what she had done."

The doctor said: "I discussed Emma's situation with her, and wrote on the form, 'Unsupported, lives alone, ex-partner aware'.

"It is normal practice to give a woman the number for telephone counselling when a counsellor is not available.

"I am satisfied that everything was done to make sure that Emma consented to the operation.

She added: "We have since appointed more counsellors so there is more holiday cover."

Katie Gibbs, Miss Beck's GP, told the hearing: "She was extremely distressed by the abortion procedure, and I didn't think she ever came to terms with it.

"She had a long history of anxiety and depression. Despite my best efforts, she was not willing to see a counsellor after the termination."

Her boss at the clinic, said: "The time that can be given to a woman by a counsellor is limited in a busy hospital.

"I am satisfied everything was done to make sure Emma was consenting to surgery. I don't feel there was any gap in the counselling service.

"There were lots of individuals who would be alert to any doubts. The comments made by Emma's mother are not about a doctor I recognise."

Mrs Beck told the court: "Emma was considered a talented artist, and sold a number of paintings.

"She was pleased when she became pregnant, but Ben reacted badly to the news."

Recording a verdict of suicide, Dr Carlyon said: "It is clear that a termination can have a profound effect on a woman's life.

"But I am reassured by the evidence of the doctors here."

[ScipioCowboy]

Cajun, I predict this will go over like a lead balloon with some posters on this forum.;)

[Mavs Man]

Cajun, I predict this will go over like a lead balloon with some posters on this forum.;)

Mythbusters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZSkM-QEeUg)

:D

[ScipioCowboy]

Mythbusters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZSkM-QEeUg)

:D

Now that is just cool.:)

[vta]

I don't agree with abortion at all. Only one thing comes from that embryo and that's another human being and if you set that phase of life in motion, you're obligated to see it through, for the sake of that life.

That said, I understand it. It can be banned I suppose, but it won't cease to exist, anymore than any other aspect of humanity's short comings will. Keeping it legal at least keeps it humane and does not leave a woman vulnerable to the atrocities she may face if she has to do it illegally.

I don't like it, but I understand it.

[Aikbach]

I don't agree with abortion at all. Only one thing comes from that embryo and that's another human being and if you set that phase of life in motion, you're obligated to see it through, for the sake of that life.

That said, I understand it. It can be banned I suppose, but it won't cease to exist, anymore than any other aspect of humanity's short comings will. Keeping it legal at least keeps it humane and does not leave a woman vulnerable to the atrocities she may face if she has to do it illegally.

I don't like it, but I understand it.I don't wish to chase this rabbit here on a message board but how on earth is killing a child humane?

[vta]

I don't wish to chase this rabbit here on a message board but how on earth is killing a child humane?

It's not.
But in keeping it legal, at least two lives aren't being destroyed (though the mental state of some women, as noted in the OP, proves that's not always the case).

I think overall abortion is misused, as I remember looking at stats some time ago and the cases of abortion concerning rape or incest were very low overall, but it's not always the case that it is being misused.

Oddly enough, my wife was in the hospital a month ago for an ectopic pregnancy. Her roommate was informed that she was going to give brith to a child with spina bifida, mental retardation and something else, I either don't remember or subconciously blocked out. Their recommendation was an abortion.

I don't know what I'd do if I were given that awful news.

I hate to cite a worse case scenario, because I know that's a ploy to excuse the fickle nature of some, but sometimes it's relevant.

[Cajuncowboy]

I don't agree with abortion at all. Only one thing comes from that embryo and that's another human being and if you set that phase of life in motion, you're obligated to see it through, for the sake of that life.

That said, I understand it. It can be banned I suppose, but it won't cease to exist, anymore than any other aspect of humanity's short comings will. Keeping it legal at least keeps it humane and does not leave a woman vulnerable to the atrocities she may face if she has to do it illegally.

I don't like it, but I understand it.

Keeping it legal only takes away the legal consequences. However, as seen in this case, it doesn't do away with the emotional consequences. Having been involved with Post abortion ministries, I have seen this way too often.

[vta]

Keeping it legal only takes away the legal consequences. However, as seen in this case, it doesn't do away with the emotional consequences. Having been involved with Post abortion ministries, I have seen this way too often.

I understand that, but I wouldn't want the government legislating emotional consequences. I've known a few women who have had abortions, and I understand their pain and knowing that, I'd rather not see them strapped with the added pressure of legal consequences. For some, it exacts it's own retribution and I'm not comfortable with piling on someone who's already hurt.

I'm not saying you are, just, as I've stated above, I don't like it, but I do understand it.

[Big Dakota]

South Dakota is gonna try it again next time it comes up for a vote. You guys should see the right to life people that picket on a daily basis in Rapid City, and we don't even have a clinic here, it's in Sioux Falls. I kid you not, it's EVERY DAY on several corners around this town.

Looks like the front lines of the ban abortion front is right here in little South Dakota. Personally, I'd like to see it banned but it probably will be voted down again.

[ScipioCowboy]

The central question here is this:

Does abortion constitute the taking of an innocent human life?

If it does, unborn children deserve the same protection under the law that we enjoy, and there's absolutely no reason abortion should be permitted except in the most extreme circumstances, such as a pregnancy that imperils the mother's life.

[Aikbach]

The central question here is this:

Does abortion constitute the taking of an innocent human life?

If it does, unborn children deserve the same protection under the law that we enjoy, and there's absolutely no reason abortion should be permitted except in the most extreme circumstances, such as a pregnancy that imperils the mother's life.The hypocrisy we have on the books is that if a pregnant woman regardless of trimester is murdered then the perpetrator will be charged with a double homicide, right then and there we've declared it a life if its wanted and expendable if its not which is absolutely grotesque.

[vta]

The central question here is this:

Does abortion constitute the taking of an innocent human life?

I think it does and I think the argument that it's not a life until a certain stage is a bogus one. After just six weeks of my wife's pregnancy, we thought she was miscarrying and went to the emergency room. There was a heartbeat and there was my daughter who is now 4.

Nothing else comes from there but a human being and it should be valued as such from day 1. Unfortunately it isn't and the extremes want to control all aspects based on an extreme ideology. Can it save the mother? Is it legitimate to avoid a lifetime of suffering for another human? Yes, but on the same token we will be dealing with abuses, such as some who simply treat it as birth control.

Is it worth it to help some, at the cost of these abuses? I think (hope) so.

[ScipioCowboy]

I think it does and I think the argument that it's not a life until a certain stage is a bogus one. After just six weeks of my wife's pregnancy, we thought she was miscarrying and went to the emergency room. There was a heartbeat and there was my daughter who is now 4.

Nothing else comes from there but a human being and it should be valued as such from day 1. Unfortunately it isn't and the extremes want to control all aspects based on an extreme ideology.

So, it's an extremist ideology to believe that every innocent human being has an inherent right to life and that the law should safeguard that right for everyone?

Is that what really passes for extremism today?

Although I don't agree with those who are pro-abortion, I can at least understand their position if they refuse to view an unborn child as a human being. But I simply can't understand a pro-abortion position from someone who acknowledges that a fetus is a living human being yet refuses to extend it the same legal protections that we all enjoy.

Criminals aren't absolved from consequences simply because they're traumatized by their actions. Furthermore, the act of killing shouldn't be legally validated just so we can lessen the emotional trauma for the persons involved in the killing.

[Bizwah]

I don't agree with abortion at all. Only one thing comes from that embryo and that's another human being and if you set that phase of life in motion, you're obligated to see it through, for the sake of that life.

That said, I understand it. It can be banned I suppose, but it won't cease to exist, anymore than any other aspect of humanity's short comings will. Keeping it legal at least keeps it humane and does not leave a woman vulnerable to the atrocities she may face if she has to do it illegally.

I don't like it, but I understand it.

See, I don't understand this at all.

If you believe this way, then why not legalize all drugs? I mean, people are gonna do it anyway, why not have a doctor or some pharmacist inject herion addicts...or cocaine addicts?

As a pro-lifer, I've come to the realization that we will probably never ban abortion. I think it's wrong that the states can't decide for themselves, but that's our system.

I liken the abortion issue to that of slavery years ago. Very passionate activists....and few people are indifferent towards it.

[vta]

So, it's an extremist ideology to believe that every innocent human being has an inherent right to life and that the law should safeguard that right for everyone?

Is that what really passes for extremism today?

I never said it was, I asserted that citing extreme cases to justify a law is. I also said that sometimes the extremes are relevant, but on the whole I'd rather see it weighed upon rationally.

Although I don't agree with those who are pro-abortion, I can at least understand their position if they refuse to view an unborn child as a human being. But I simply can't understand a pro-abortion position from someone who acknowledges that a fetus is a living human being yet refuses to extend it the same legal protections that we all enjoy.

I'm not pro abortion, I said I don't like it, but I understand it for the reasons mentioned.

[vta]

See, I don't understand this at all.

If you believe this way, then why not legalize all drugs? I mean, people are gonna do it anyway, why not have a doctor or some pharmacist inject herion addicts...or cocaine addicts?

As a pro-lifer, I've come to the realization that we will probably never ban abortion. I think it's wrong that the states can't decide for themselves, but that's our system.

I liken the abortion issue to that of slavery years ago. Very passionate activists....and few people are indifferent towards it.

When exactly is heroine ever going to be necessary? You can't compare recreational idiocy to a sometimes valid medical procedure.

[zrinkill]

See, I don't understand this at all.

If you believe this way, then why not legalize all drugs? I mean, people are gonna do it anyway, why not have a doctor or some pharmacist inject herion addicts...or cocaine addicts?

As a pro-lifer, I've come to the realization that we will probably never ban abortion. I think it's wrong that the states can't decide for themselves, but that's our system.

I liken the abortion issue to that of slavery years ago. Very passionate activists....and few people are indifferent towards it.

I very much agree with this post.

[ConcordCowboy]

Abortion is legal and it's a woman's choice as it should be.

Pro Choice all the way!

[vta]

Abortion is legal and it's a woman's choice as it should be.

Pro Choice all the way!

That's a crass post. It completely disregards the fact that someone is getting killed.

You shouldn't be pro choice, you should be pro-find-an-alternative-to-killing-a-baby.

It's legal all right, due to circumstance, as was slavery at one time. Because it's legal doesn't mean that it should be celebrated or that it's right, it means we're still a work in progress and far from enlightened.

From this point on an effort should be made to make it less of a habit and more of an exception when a continued pregnancy threatens a life.

The fact that you would post with what seems to be levity, while Bizwah is comparing it to recreational drugs, is indicative of the lack of understanding about something as serious as deciding to kill an offspring.

[The30YardSlant]

Abortion is legal and it's a woman's choice as it should be.

Pro Choice all the way!

If the woman doesnt want a kid, she either should have been more careful or not opened her legs in the first place. Almost 75% of all abortions are believed to be performed on women who got pregnant using no forms of protection.

Ignorance and stupidity are not excuses for murdering a human being

[ConcordCowboy]

That's a crass post. It completely disregards the fact that someone is getting killed.

You shouldn't be pro choice, you should be pro-find-an-alternative-to-killing-a-baby.

It's legal all right, due to circumstance, as was slavery at one time. Because it's legal doesn't mean that it should be celebrated or that it's right, it means we're still a work in progress and far from enlightened.

From this point on an effort should be made to make it less of a habit and more of an exception when a continued pregnancy threatens a life.

The fact that you would post with what seems to be levity, while Bizwah is comparing it to recreational drugs, is indicative of the lack of understanding about something as serious as deciding to kill an offspring.

Don't preach to me or tell me what I should be doing or what I don't understand.

I said what I said and I ment...if you don't like it that's your problem...not mine.

It's legal and I think it should be and it is a woman's choice...as it should be.

I'm Pro Choice...deal with it.

[ConcordCowboy]

If the woman doesnt want a kid, she either should have been more careful or not opened her legs in the first place. Almost 75% of all abortions are believed to be performed on women who got pregnant using no forms of protection.

Ignorance and stupidity are not excuses for murdering a human being

If a woman wants to get a abortion she should be allowed.

It's legal and it's her choice.

Take it up with the Supreme Court.

[vta]

Don't preach to me or tell me what I should be doing

I didn't.

or what I don't understand.

Then don't post on a public board where you risk having the obvious pointed out.

I said what I said and I ment...if you don't like it that's your problem...not mine.

I know what you said and meant, it was as shallow as a rain puddle and I didn't misread it. I responded accordingly.

It's legal and I think it should be and it is a woman's choice...as it should be.

Completely disregarding that a woman can't get herself preganant and a man might be involved in the choice.

I'm Pro Choice...deal with it.

It's not mine to deal with.

[peplaw06]

The hypocrisy we have on the books is that if a pregnant woman regardless of trimester is murdered then the perpetrator will be charged with a double homicide, right then and there we've declared it a life if its wanted and expendable if its not which is absolutely grotesque.The first time I heard that Scott Peterson was going to be charged with double homicide I think I threw up a bit in my mouth. And that was in the Bay Area of California.

The hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Not to mention that probably 90% of the people who will tell you they're pro-choice will also tell you that they are anti-death penalty. If you can square holding those two viewpoints at the same time, you're a smarter man than I.

[ScipioCowboy]

I never said it was, I asserted that citing extreme cases to justify a law is. I also said that sometimes the extremes are relevant, but on the whole I'd rather see it weighed upon rationally.

Are you contending it's irrational to point out that some women experience deep depression after having an abortion?

In my opinion, a person is being perfectly rational when he or she asserts that basic legal protections should be extended to all human life. Do you not agree?

I'm not pro abortion, I said I don't like it, but I understand it for the reasons mentioned.

You believe abortion should remain legal, correct? Is that not pro-abortion?

[peplaw06]

If a woman wants to get a abortion she should be allowed.

It's legal and it's her choice.

Take it up with the Supreme Court.The sad thing is you probably don't even know how the SCOTUS came to the decision, but will hide behind them until they overturn it. And I think it will be overturned some day. It's such a fallacious opinion that it can't possibly stand forever.

[vta]

Are you contending it's irrational to point out that some women experience deep depression after having an abortion?

Not at all. I believe for that reason, as I've stated above, that for many simply having an abortion exacts it's own kind of punishment and the state should not compound that misery with legal ramifications.

In my opinion, a person is being perfectly rational when he or she asserts that basic legal protections should be extended to all human life. Do you not agree?

Yes. But I understand where we are at the moment and acting with out regard to all variables is dangerous. Right now it's legal. Pull the rug out from under that and it may have adverse affects. I think we should try to ease away from our shortcomings instead slapping a ban on them.

You believe abortion should remain legal, correct? Is that not pro-abortion?

No. I think it's an area of our society that needs addressing. Let's be honest, what is the cause of abortion? Is it sex? No. We all have sex; we all aren't involved in aborting a child though. The cause is irresponsibility. We won't get rid of irresponsibility, ever. It's as part of human nature as is responsibility. The only thing that can be done is to try to diminish it.

It's too late now, abortion is legal and a sudden reversal wouldn't bring about great results where people are suddenly responsible, it would bring about tragic results for desperate people, in the form of having to get it done illegally.

I don't think we can legislate responsibility, if we want to maintain our freedom, because then responsibility will become interpretive and will swing with the social mood of the times, as is evident by the fact that abortion is legal. I think it was a mistake that we should deal with carefully.

[ConcordCowboy]

I didn't.

You shouldn't be pro choice, you should be pro-find-an-alternative-to-killing-a-baby.



That seems like preaching to me...to me.


Then don't post on a public board where you risk having the obvious pointed out.

Oh just because I'm Pro Choice...I don't understand what happens?

No I understand perfectly..I've also witnessed a few in Surgery at my Hospital...But I still think it's her choice...And even if it wasn't legal I would still think it's her choice.



I know what you said and meant, it was as shallow as a rain puddle and I didn't misread it. I responded accordingly.

That one hurt me.


Completely disregarding that a woman can't get herself preganant and a man might be involved in the choice.

When he carries the baby then he will have a choice in the matter.

Until then SHE's the one that has the choice. It would be nice if she involved him...but if she doesn't there's nothing he can do about it.

[ScipioCowboy]

When exactly is heroine ever going to be necessary? You can't compare recreational idiocy to a sometimes valid medical procedure.

I can't speak for him, but I believe his point was this:

You're asserting that abortion should remain legal because women will have the procedure regardless of whether or not it's illegal and, therefore, we should provide them the safest possible avenue for doing so.

He's using anti-drug laws to challenge your logic: Because drugs are illegal, junkies can only acquire and use them through very unsafe methods--injecting themselves with used hypodermic needles; dealing with backalley drug dealers who maim and even kill if they don't receive payment; being forced to hide one's drug abuse in seedy, unsanitary, and dangerous environments; etc. We could protect the junkie (who's going to use drug regardless of their legality) from these dangers by decriminalizing drugs. Therefore, by your logic, we should simply legalize drugs. Right?

In fact, I contend that your argument is more logical applied to drugs than abortion. Drug abuse is a behavior of one and only one person. Abortion, on the other hand, is a behavior with terrible consequences for two people, and its very legality denies basic legal protections to a certain group.

[ConcordCowboy]

The sad thing is you probably don't even know how the SCOTUS came to the decision, but will hide behind them until they overturn it. And I think it will be overturned some day. It's such a fallacious opinion that it can't possibly stand forever.

I could give a rats *** how they came about it.

The fact is it's legal and I support that decision..but even if it were illegal I would still support a woman if she wanted to get one.

[peplaw06]

Not at all. I believe for that reason, as I've stated above, that for many simply having an abortion exacts it's own kind of punishment and the state should not compound that misery with legal ramifications.



Yes. But I understand where we are at the moment and acting with out regard to all variables is dangerous. Right now it's legal. Pull the rug out from under that and it may have adverse affects. I think we should try to ease away from our shortcomings instead slapping a ban on them.



No. I think it's an area of our society that needs addressing. Let's be honest, what is the cause of abortion? Is it sex? No. We all have sex; we all aren't involved in aborting a child though. The cause is irresponsibility. We won't get rid of irresponsibility, ever. It's as part of human nature as is responsibility. The only thing that can be done is to try to diminish it.

It's too late now, abortion is legal and a sudden reversal wouldn't bring about great results where people are suddenly responsible, it would bring about tragic results for desperate people, in the form of having to get it done illegally.

I don't think we can legislate responsibility, if we want to maintain our freedom, because then responsibility will become interpretive and will swing with the social mood of the times, as is evident by the fact that abortion is legal. I think it was a mistake that we should deal with carefully.Do you not think that the fact that it is legal right now adds to the number of women who have it done?

Obviously if certain states made it illegal then the numbers of abortions would decrease.

[peplaw06]

I could give a rats *** how they came about it.You stay classy CC.

The fact is it's legal and I support that decision..but even if it were illegal I would still support a woman if she wanted to get one.You support a decision that you have no idea about? Wow. Do you work for Planned Parenthood?

[The30YardSlant]

I could give a rats *** how they came about it.

The fact is it's legal and I support that decision..but even if it were illegal I would still support a woman if she wanted to get one.

Like I said, ignorance is never an excuse

How you liberal types can support abortion and loathe the death penalty at the same time will always boggle my mind

[ConcordCowboy]

You stay classy CC.

You support a decision that you have no idea about? Wow. Do you work for Planned Parenthood?

It doesn't matter one iota why or how they came about their decision.

Do you think that every person on either side of this debate knows all the details of Roe V Wade?

I think not...nor do they care...all they care about is...is it legal or not.

That's the bottom line.

[ConcordCowboy]

Like I said, ignorance is never an excuse

How you liberal types can support abortion and loathe the death penalty at the same time will always boggle my mind

Talk about ignorant.

I always laugh when people like you come in here and say crap like that and label people.

I'm Pro Choice AND Pro Death Penalty...and I'm on the record here as saying that long before this discussion.

Can I REALLY be a Liberal?

Let that boggle your mind some more.

[zrinkill]

That's the bottom line.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/stone-cold-steve-austin.jpg

And thats the bottom line ..... Cause Concord Cowboy says so!

[The30YardSlant]

Talk about ignorant.

I always laugh when people like you come in here and say crap like that and label people.

I'm Pro Choice AND Pro Death Penalty...and I'm on the record here as saying that long before this discussion.

Can I REALLY be a Liberal?

Let that boggle your mind some more.

Fine

That doesnt change the fact that the majority of democrats are pro-choice and anti-death penalty.

It also doesnt change the fact that you are feverishly supporting murder

[ConcordCowboy]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/stone-cold-steve-austin.jpg

And thats the bottom line ..... Cause Concord Cowboy says so!

:laugh2:

[zrinkill]

:laugh2:

Just thought this thread needed something to break the tension that is mounting. ....

[ConcordCowboy]

Fine

That doesnt change the fact that the majority of democrats are pro-choice and anti-death penalty.

It also doesnt change the fact that you are feverishly supporting murder

Call it whatever you want as long as she has the choice...and we still carry out the Death penalty when needed.

[ConcordCowboy]

Just thought this thread needed something to break the tension that is mounting. ....


True.

:p:

[The30YardSlant]

Call it whatever you want as long as she has the choice...and we still carry out the Death penalty when needed.

So if I went out and killed a dozen or so infants and got off because the courts ruled it was "my choice", you'd be just fine with that?

You're a sick individual

[zrinkill]

Well this thread is getting out of hand.

[ConcordCowboy]

So if I went out and killed a dozen or so infants and got off because the courts ruled it was "my choice", you'd be just fine with that?

You're a sick individual

Ah here we go with the stupid analogies.

It's legal to begin with so there's no "getting off" when a woman choices to get a abortion.

Sick individual?

I like that.

[arglebargle]

It is kind of interesting to see the Abolitionist fervor of the Pro-Life movement. And if I accept your base premises, it makes a certain sense.

I personally have some big problems with the Anti-Choice movement. (Comment on labelling there). While the focus seems to be on banning abortion by government fiat, there are things I see about the movement that bother me. There are a lot of things that could be done to lessen the number of abortions. Many of the movement oppose these things.

You could promote condom use. 'Oh no, that would never do!'. Increase the availability of birth control. 'Again, oh, no!'. Support sex education programs in schools as opposed to the abstinance programs that have been shown not to be successful. 'Unthinkable!' Increased availability of Ru-486, a drug designed to essentially make the womb inhospitable for the fertilized egg. 'Absolutely not!'

Essentially I see this as being more about sin, a particularly doctrinaire view of sin. There are lots of things that can be practically, pragmatically done to lower rates of abortion. But since these things go against this view on Sin, they'd rather have the loss of life as they see it. Apparantly.

There appears to be a weird dichotomy too, a tremendous interest in the welfare of the fetus up until the time of birth, whereupon that interest dies, until it later comes time to throw them in jail. I would have expected more of the movements fervent believers to be adopting hard to place mixed race kids or babies, disabled kids, etc.

Now I know that there are those here who actively put their money (and time) where their mouth is, and do good works. My hat's off to them. I just think there is more that could be practically done. But it seems to be actively fought by the same groups that wail over the losses.

[ConcordCowboy]

Well this thread is getting out of hand.

It doesn't take long when the labeling and name calling starts. :p:

[The30YardSlant]

Ah here we go with the stupid analogies.

It's legal to begin with so there's no "getting off" when a woman choices to get a abortion.

Sick individual?

I like that.

You're just dancing around the issue at this point

How are you, as a fellow human, able to justify killing another person just because a woman is afraid of responsiblity?

[The30YardSlant]

You could promote condom use. 'Oh no, that would never do!'. Increase the availability of birth control. 'Again, oh, no!'. Support sex education programs in schools as opposed to the abstinance programs that have been shown not to be successful. 'Unthinkable!' Increased availability of Ru-486, a drug designed to essentially make the womb inhospitable for the fertilized egg. 'Absolutely not!'

I agree with all of this. I'm 100% for teaching safe sex among high school and college students. Obviously, you'd recommend abstinence as the best policy, but follow up with the above.

[vta]

You shouldn't be pro choice, you should be pro-find-an-alternative-to-killing-a-baby.

That seems like preaching to me...to me.

Perhaps, but I'd view it more as sound reasoning regarding something as important as killing someone, than sermonizing. But hey, I'm sure there were plenty citing the law when slavery was perfectly legal. Take it up with the Supreme Court. :cool:

In other words, what is law right now doesn't dictate true right and wrong, as the factual evidence of our own country's evolution proves. Don't bother leaning on it, it won't support your assertion.

Oh just because I'm Pro Choice...I don't understand what happens?

No I understand perfectly..I've also witnessed a few in Surgery at my Hospital...But I still think it's her choice...And even if it wasn't legal I would still think it's her choice.

You work in a hospital, and am I to take it that you don't understand what a fetus is? That it's merely a choice based on an individuals right and not the killing of a baby? Is it because the baby doesn't matter because it can't be heard? It can't protest? It can't assert it's own selfishness?

When he carries the baby then he will have a choice in the matter.

Until then SHE's the one that has the choice. It would be nice if she involved him...but if she doesn't there's nothing he can do about it.

It would be nice. Right. The Hollywood wisdom that bore this nonsense out is laughable. It takes two to make a baby, regardless of how a selfish generation wants to percieve it. Don't get pregnant if you don't want to carry.

[peplaw06]

It doesn't matter one iota why or how they came about their decision.

Do you think that every person on either side of this debate knows all the details of Roe V Wade?

I think not...nor do they care...all they care about is...is it legal or not.

That's the bottom line.I agree that most people don't know what Roe says. No argument there.

What I don't understand is how someone can so unequivocally say they support the decision when they don't know what it says... which is what you did.

You can say I am pro-choice without saying I completely support Roe.

Plus, if you actually read and understood the decision, it would probably lend some understanding to the issue at hand. If you're going to be so militant in your opinion, wouldn't you think you need to be as informed as possible?

I know that I tend to leave room for disagreement if I am uninformed on a topic. Maybe that's just me?

[peplaw06]

It doesn't take long when the labeling and name calling starts. :p:
Translation: when HH enters the fray.

[ConcordCowboy]

You're just dancing around the issue at this point

How are you, as a fellow human, able to justify killing another person just because a woman is afraid of responsiblity?

Hey Rockhead...I don't have to justify ANYTHING to you or anybody.

I'm Pro Choice and I support a woman's right to get a abortion if she chooses.

The Supreme Court says it's legal and I agree with that decision.

You can call me sick or a murderer or whatever you like...if that makes you feel better...but it's NOT going to change how I think or feel...certainly not to please you.

CAN I BE ANY CLEARER THAN THAT?

[vta]

Do you not think that the fact that it is legal right now adds to the number of women who have it done?

Yes. I think it was a mistake and legitimized it as a practise for carelessness, but we're beyond that point now and here it is. Simply reversing it could have consequences. Consequences that should be considered.

Obviously if certain states made it illegal then the numbers of abortions would decrease.

I'm not too sure. Responsibility isn't legislated and because something is definitively banned doesn't change human nature. It would get ugly.

Let's be clear, I don't like abortion. I feel a fetus is a life from day one and should be considered as legit as the clown who's grown to make an assertion about such things, (such as myself and everyone else here).

Abortion and killing and the choice of the mother to kill it, solely because she doesn't want to shoulder the responsibility, is a sad comment on our society; a society of selfish values, married to the extreme point of pretending that a life is not a life to avoid having the responsibility.

Right now there is a law. I think it requires more than a simple reversal, as per implications of the title of this thread, and a more serious consideration to how it should be handled.

[ConcordCowboy]

Perhaps, but I'd view it more as sound reasoning regarding something as important as killing someone, than sermonizing. But hey, I'm sure there were plenty citing the law when slavery was perfectly legal. Take it up with the Supreme Court. :cool:

In other words, what is law right now doesn't dictate true right and wrong, as the factual evidence of our own country's evolution proves. Don't bother leaning on it, it won't support your assertion.



You work in a hospital, and am I to take it that you don't understand what a fetus is? That it's merely a choice based on an individuals right and not the killing of a baby? Is it because the baby doesn't matter because it can't be heard? It can't protest? It can't assert it's own selfishness?



It would be nice. Right. The Hollywood wisdom that bore this nonsense out is laughable. It takes two to make a baby, regardless of how a selfish generation wants to percieve it. Don't get pregnant if you don't want to carry.

Oh we could go one all day about this...and it won't change either of our minds.

[The30YardSlant]

Hey Rockhead...I don't have to justify ANYTHING to you or anybody.

I'm Pro Choice and I support a woman's right to get a abortion if she chooses.

The Supreme Court says it's legal and I agree with that decision.

You can call me sick or a murderer or whatever you like...if that makes you feel better...but it's NOT going to change how I think or feel...certainly not to please you.

CAN I BE ANY CLEARER THAN THAT?

So let's clarify. You support something that....

1: You admittedly don't know much about
2: You cannot morally justify to yourself or others
3: You agree with only because the supreme court said it's ok

Did I miss anything?

[ConcordCowboy]

Translation: when HH enters the fray.

....:D

[vta]

Oh we could go one all day about this...and it won't change either of our minds.

Well, for the sake of knowing, but not for trying to change your mind: you do work in a hospital, you'd said. In what capacity, if you don't mind me asking?

[ConcordCowboy]

So let's clarify. You support something that....

1: You admittedly don't know much about
2: You cannot morally justify to yourself or others
3: You agree with only because the supreme court said it's ok

Did I miss anything?

1: Explain to me Roe v Wade...right now with out looking it up.
2: I don't have to justify anything to you. Who the frick do you think you are?
3: I have many reasons...some personal for thinking it's OK...all of which have nothing to do with the Supreme Court..or you.

Are we clear?

[ZeroClub]

People are entitled to their opinions on abortion / choice, but the suicide of a woman who had a long history of mental health problems doesn't inform the issue.

Does this story (http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1258688,00.html?f=rss) mean we should outlaw pets?

Does this story (http://archives.tcm.ie/breakingnews/2002/05/22/story51137.asp) mean we should abolish math tests?

Research (http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/161/12/2295) suggests that physicians have elevated suicide rates. Does this mean we should close medical schools?

[ConcordCowboy]

Well, for the sake of knowing, but not for trying to change your mind: you do work in a hospital, you'd said. In what capacity, if you don't mind me asking?

I've worked there for 21 years.

I work in MRI now...In CT for 10 years before that and before that In X-Ray.

It was during my 3-4 years in X-ray that I had to go up to Surgery to take X-Rays for numerous exams.

I became friends with numerous Doctors during that time and I would watch their surgeries that didn't have anything to do with X-ray.

During that time I'd say that I saw about 5-6 abortions.

I also got to see many other interesting things like one Urologist that I was friends with always liked to show me how he did vasectomies.

He would pull out the vas deferens and they looked like small shrimp and he would cut them and sow them up in less than 5 minutes. Amazing.

[ConcordCowboy]

I agree that most people don't know what Roe says. No argument there.

What I don't understand is how someone can so unequivocally say they support the decision when they don't know what it says... which is what you did.

You can say I am pro-choice without saying I completely support Roe.

Plus, if you actually read and understood the decision, it would probably lend some understanding to the issue at hand. If you're going to be so militant in your opinion, wouldn't you think you need to be as informed as possible?

I know that I tend to leave room for disagreement if I am uninformed on a topic. Maybe that's just me?

I have my reasons for being Pro Choice...like I told HH...and they wouldn't change no matter why or how the Supreme Court came about their decision.

They have nothing to do with the Supreme Court.

Let me put it this way...I think that a woman has a right to choose and should have the right to an abortion...the fact that the Supreme Court says it legal is just a bonus if you will...for lack of a better word.

Even if they said it was illegal...I would STILL feel the way I do...the ruling itself has no bearing whatsoever on how I feel about the subject.

[Bizwah]

If a woman wants to get a abortion she should be allowed.

It's legal and it's her choice.

Take it up with the Supreme Court.

Why?

Is the Supreme Court infallible?

Chief Justice Taney once said that a black man has no rights a white man is bound to respect.

They were wrong there weren't they?

I think they were wrong on abortion too.

[Bizwah]

When exactly is heroine ever going to be necessary? You can't compare recreational idiocy to a sometimes valid medical procedure.

When exactly is abortion necessary?

I do agree in very rare circumstances the life of the mother may be at stake, but in most cases it's simply a matter of a woman not wanting to be inconvenienced.

[vta]

When exactly is abortion necessary?

I do agree in very rare circumstances the life of the mother may be at stake, but in most cases it's simply a matter of a woman not wanting to be inconvenienced.

I know that, as I've already stated about the irresponsiility factor with abortion, but I just don't find it an equitable comparison with heroine or anything else like it. We don't need to drink, smoke or self medicate when healthy; these are extraneous things people do for what some might call 'fun' or to smother other emotional problems.

Sometimes abortion has it's legitimate cause and for that, it's abused by a greater number of people who are simply irresponsible.

[ConcordCowboy]

Why?

Is the Supreme Court infallible?

Chief Justice Taney once said that a black man has no rights a white man is bound to respect.

They were wrong there weren't they?

I think they were wrong on abortion too.

Supreme Court infallible?

Hardly.

But in this case I don't think so...you do...and that's OK...we just don't agree.

I said take it up with the Supreme court because they are the ones making it legal not me.

And arguing with someone on the internet isn't going to do a thing about it...only the Supreme Court can change things and so far they haven't.

So if he has a beef about it being legal...it's with the Supreme Court...not me.

[peplaw06]

I have my reasons for being Pro Choice...like I told HH...and they wouldn't change no matter why or how the Supreme Court came about their decision.

They have nothing to do with the Supreme Court.

Let me put it this way...I think that a woman has a right to choose and should have the right to an abortion...the fact that the Supreme Court says it legal is just a bonus if you will...for lack of a better word.

Even if they said it was illegal...I would STILL feel the way I do...the ruling itself has no bearing whatsoever on how I feel about the subject.It may seem trivial to you, but the SCOTUS hasn't ruled that abortion is "legal."

What they've done is held that certain state bans on abortions are unconstitutional, and that's a pretty big difference.

There are different methods, some of which have been made illegal and have been upheld by the SCOTUS.

But yeah, even if bans on abortion are held constitutional, you're still entitled to your opinion... no matter how wrong you may be ;)

[Cajuncowboy]

It is kind of interesting to see the Abolitionist fervor of the Pro-Life movement. And if I accept your base premises, it makes a certain sense.

I personally have some big problems with the Anti-Choice movement. (Comment on labelling there). While the focus seems to be on banning abortion by government fiat, there are things I see about the movement that bother me. There are a lot of things that could be done to lessen the number of abortions. Many of the movement oppose these things.

You could promote condom use. 'Oh no, that would never do!'. Increase the availability of birth control. 'Again, oh, no!'. Support sex education programs in schools as opposed to the abstinance programs that have been shown not to be successful. 'Unthinkable!' Increased availability of Ru-486, a drug designed to essentially make the womb inhospitable for the fertilized egg. 'Absolutely not!'

Essentially I see this as being more about sin, a particularly doctrinaire view of sin. There are lots of things that can be practically, pragmatically done to lower rates of abortion. But since these things go against this view on Sin, they'd rather have the loss of life as they see it. Apparantly.

There appears to be a weird dichotomy too, a tremendous interest in the welfare of the fetus up until the time of birth, whereupon that interest dies, until it later comes time to throw them in jail. I would have expected more of the movements fervent believers to be adopting hard to place mixed race kids or babies, disabled kids, etc.

Now I know that there are those here who actively put their money (and time) where their mouth is, and do good works. My hat's off to them. I just think there is more that could be practically done. But it seems to be actively fought by the same groups that wail over the losses.

Only thing I want to comment on is the fact that we are not for Sex Education. I am fully for it, however, I think that education is up to the parents. That is their place, not the public school system. If you bring your children up right and give them the moral fiber that is required to stand strong in the face of peer pressure and temptation then you would have a far lower occurrence of teen pregnancy. Also, if you teach abstinence along with that you will greatly decrease the pressure on our welfare and medical system.

There is a ripple effect for good behavior.

BTW, anyone else find it extremely ironic that the RU486 pill also could be called ...

"Are You For 86ing" a baby?

The fact that 86ing is slang for killing someone, I just thought that was quite ironic.

[Cajuncowboy]

Supreme Court infallible?

Hardly.

But in this case I don't think so...you do...and that's OK...we just don't agree.

I said take it up with the Supreme court because they are the ones making it legal not me.

And arguing with someone on the internet isn't going to do a thing about it...only the Supreme Court can change things and so far they haven't.

So if he has a beef about it being legal...it's with the Supreme Court...not me.

This is why the Presidential election is so important, so we don't allow leftists like Obama or Clinton have the power to put judges on this court. Enough legislation from the bench.

[locked&loaded]

I hate religion.

If i was going to be born into a family thatt didnt love me, i would have wanted to be aborted. If my parents couldnt have raised me, i would have liked to been aborted. Religion makes me sick, between this and not letting homosexuals get married. not to mention countless other issues.

[zrinkill]

It doesn't take long when the labeling and name calling starts. :p:

Both sides are guilty of that.

[Cajuncowboy]

I hate religion.

If i was going to be born into a family thatt didnt love me, i would have wanted to be aborted. If my parents couldnt have raised me, i would have liked to been aborted. Religion makes me sick, between this and not letting homosexuals get married. not to mention countless other issues.

So you think that those kids who were put up for adoption when they were babies, if given the choice, would have been elected to be killed? Is that what you are saying?

No wonder you feel this way, you don't even have any respect for your own life, why would anyone think you would respect the life of another.

Absolutely appalling. So glad you don't make the rules.

[ScipioCowboy]

Yes. But I understand where we are at the moment and acting with out regard to all variables is dangerous. Right now it's legal. Pull the rug out from under that and it may have adverse affects. I think we should try to ease away from our shortcomings instead slapping a ban on them.

And while we're "easing away," over 1 million unborn children are being killed per year.

This isn't an issue from which we can ease away. As the slavery debate taught us, when humans are given absolute control over other humans, they seldom cede that power easily or slowly. Many of our founding fathers recognized slavery as wrong. They even debated outlawing slavery during the Constitutional Convention, and fully intended to phase it out over the next few decades. However, as we all know, slavery wasn't phased out, and the issue became more and more volatile the longer it persisted.

As I said earlier, the central point of the entire abortion issue is this:

If unborn children do indeed constitute human life, they have the same right to life and deserve the same constitutional protections that we all enjoy.

[ScipioCowboy]

I personally have some big problems with the Anti-Choice movement. (Comment on labelling there). While the focus seems to be on banning abortion by government fiat, there are things I see about the movement that bother me. There are a lot of things that could be done to lessen the number of abortions. Many of the movement oppose these things.

You could promote condom use. 'Oh no, that would never do!'. Increase the availability of birth control. 'Again, oh, no!'. Support sex education programs in schools as opposed to the abstinance programs that have been shown not to be successful. 'Unthinkable!' Increased availability of Ru-486, a drug designed to essentially make the womb inhospitable for the fertilized egg. 'Absolutely not!'

Essentially I see this as being more about sin, a particularly doctrinaire view of sin. There are lots of things that can be practically, pragmatically done to lower rates of abortion. But since these things go against this view on Sin, they'd rather have the loss of life as they see it. Apparantly.

There appears to be a weird dichotomy too, a tremendous interest in the welfare of the fetus up until the time of birth, whereupon that interest dies, until it later comes time to throw them in jail. I would have expected more of the movements fervent believers to be adopting hard to place mixed race kids or babies, disabled kids, etc.

So, proceeding under your logic, if a person opposes and denigrates the Bush tax cuts, he should be voluntarily paying more taxes than is required of him by law. Right?

And if he's really concerned about global warming, he should immediately cease driving and flying, and assume a more primitive existence. Right?

Oh, and if he really wants more stringent gun legislation and a reduction in the prevalence of firearms, he should be actively helping people learn various self-defense techniques so they don't need guns to protect themselves. Right?

It seems you're trying to open a door that swings both ways.

People help where and when they can, and some are capable of helping more than others.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Another reason it should be banned...


Artist hanged herself after aborting her twins

Last Updated: 2:03am GMT 22/02/2008

An artist killed herself after aborting her twins when she was eight weeks pregnant, leaving a note saying: "I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum."

Emma Beck was found hanging at her home in Helston, Cornwall, on Feb 1 2007. She was declared dead early the following day - her 31st birthday.

Her suicide note read: "I told everyone I didn't want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies: they need me, no-one else does."
advertisement

The inquest at Truro City Hall heard that Miss Beck had split up with her boyfriend, referred to as "Ben" after he "reacted badly" to the pregnancy.

She saw her GP before the termination, but missed an appointment at a hospital in Penzance. She then cancelled, but later turned up to an appointment at a clinic at Royal Cornwall Hospital in Treliske. The counsellor was on holiday so a doctor referred Miss Beck to a pregnancy counselling telephone service eight days before carrying out the abortion when she was eight weeks pregnant, the inquest heard.

The coroner, Dr Emma Carlyon, ordered that the identities of the doctor who performed the abortion and her lead consultant be kept secret.

The inquest heard that Sylvia Beck, the victim's mother, wrote to the hospital after her daughter's death, saying: "I want to know why she was not given the opportunity to see a counsellor.

"She was only going ahead with the abortion because her boyfriend did not want the twins.

"I believe this is what led Emma to take her own life - she could not live with what she had done."

The doctor said: "I discussed Emma's situation with her, and wrote on the form, 'Unsupported, lives alone, ex-partner aware'.

"It is normal practice to give a woman the number for telephone counselling when a counsellor is not available.

"I am satisfied that everything was done to make sure that Emma consented to the operation.

She added: "We have since appointed more counsellors so there is more holiday cover."

Katie Gibbs, Miss Beck's GP, told the hearing: "She was extremely distressed by the abortion procedure, and I didn't think she ever came to terms with it.

"She had a long history of anxiety and depression. Despite my best efforts, she was not willing to see a counsellor after the termination."

Her boss at the clinic, said: "The time that can be given to a woman by a counsellor is limited in a busy hospital.

"I am satisfied everything was done to make sure Emma was consenting to surgery. I don't feel there was any gap in the counselling service.

"There were lots of individuals who would be alert to any doubts. The comments made by Emma's mother are not about a doctor I recognise."

Mrs Beck told the court: "Emma was considered a talented artist, and sold a number of paintings.

"She was pleased when she became pregnant, but Ben reacted badly to the news."

Recording a verdict of suicide, Dr Carlyon said: "It is clear that a termination can have a profound effect on a woman's life.

"But I am reassured by the evidence of the doctors here."


tell me how is your little grenade here any different than when a so called "lib" says you should have gun control because a psycho blew away a bunch of students?

My view on abortion has always been that since men don't have to carry the children, we should have no say in whether a woman can have one or not. Furthermore, unless men who are against abortion are willing to care for crack babies, AIDS babies, unwanted children (by that I mean bring them into their home, not just pay lip service to it) etc, then they should not comment.

If women are considered equal to us, then they should have the right to control their bodies.

[ConcordCowboy]

This is why the Presidential election is so important, so we don't allow leftists like Obama or Clinton have the power to put judges on this court. Enough legislation from the bench.

You are right about that...Presidents can put Justices on the bench that can affect your life no matter which side you are on long after the President is gone.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I can see banning late term abortions although the line is the same as those who are against banning assault rifles, you would be on the slippery slope to a total ban. However, that being written, how can anyone claim that life begins at conception given that "life" cannot survive outside the womb until 25 weeks and then only with massive amounts of medical intervention.

[ScipioCowboy]

I can see banning late term abortions although the line is the same as those who are against banning assault rifles, you would be on the slippery slope to a total ban. However, that being written, how can anyone claim that life begins at conception given that "life" cannot survive outside the womb until 25 weeks and then only with massive amounts of medical intervention.

Because life isn't defined in that way. Biologically, there's absolutely no debate whether or not a life begins at conception. We're debating how that life should be classified, and quite frankly, I don't find your argument very compelling. A newborn baby cannot survive without someone caring for it. Is it any less human?

[ConcordCowboy]

It may seem trivial to you, but the SCOTUS hasn't ruled that abortion is "legal."

What they've done is held that certain state bans on abortions are unconstitutional, and that's a pretty big difference.

There are different methods, some of which have been made illegal and have been upheld by the SCOTUS.

But yeah, even if bans on abortion are held constitutional, you're still entitled to your opinion... no matter how wrong you may be ;)

Legal...certain state bans are unconstitutional...whatever...as long as you're not going for a partial birth abortion or one after the first trimester or something like that you can get one and how's this....It's not against the law...is that better?

And again...as long as it's the woman's choice and "It's not against the law" notice I didn't say legal ;) I'm OK with it.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Because life isn't defined in that way. Biologically, there's absolutely no debate whether or not a life begins at conception. We're debating how that life should be classified, and quite frankly, I don't find your argument very compelling. A newborn baby cannot survive without someone caring for it. Is it any less human?

Is a clump of cells life?

[ScipioCowboy]

Is a clump of cells life?

You're a clump of cells.

So, yes.;)

[ChldsPlay]

If women are considered equal to us, then they should have the right to control their bodies.

That's the biggest problem with the Pro-Choice point of view. It isn't the woman's body that's at issue, it's the body of another human being.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

That's the biggest problem with the Pro-Choice point of view. It isn't the woman's body that's at issue, it's the body of another human being.

It isn't a human being until it is born so you are wrong in your first premise.

Second weak argument is the one that says you should prefer the "rights" of a fetus over a member of society.

Ask yourself this question, if your doctor told you and your wife that if she continued to carry the fetus, her life would be in severe danger and she would likely die, would you still choose to force to carry fetus?

My wife and I waited for years for her to get pregnant, ultimately having to go through IVF. It cost us a fortune but she got pregnant on the first implant. However, despite the cost and the heart wrenching decision to be made, had her doctor said that her pregnancy was going to put her at risk and that the only sure way to save her life was to abort, there would have been no decision.

[Cajuncowboy]

I can see banning late term abortions although the line is the same as those who are against banning assault rifles, you would be on the slippery slope to a total ban. However, that being written, how can anyone claim that life begins at conception given that "life" cannot survive outside the womb until 25 weeks and then only with massive amounts of medical intervention.

That's crazy. With that definition, then anyone one a breathing machine should be killed. Or Kidney Dialysis. They need massive amounts of medical intervention to survive.

The difference, they can speak for themselves and the unborn cannot. That is why I and others like me are the voice for them.

[Cajuncowboy]

tell me how is your little grenade here any different than when a so called "lib" says you should have gun control because a psycho blew away a bunch of students?

My view on abortion has always been that since men don't have to carry the children, we should have no say in whether a woman can have one or not. Furthermore, unless men who are against abortion are willing to care for crack babies, AIDS babies, unwanted children (by that I mean bring them into their home, not just pay lip service to it) etc, then they should not comment.

If women are considered equal to us, then they should have the right to control their bodies.

You have your arguments messed up. First of all grenades are not guns.

Second, the reason why the woman should not "have control over her body" :rolleyes: is that it isn't her body we are talking about. She has the baby in 9 months and it's over unless she wants to keep it and put it up for adoption. But the baby is affected forever based on that decision.

Plus it's in our constitution, everyone has the right to LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are just protecting that right of the baby.

[big dog cowboy]

Plus it's in our constitution, everyone has the right to LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are just protecting that right of the baby.
For those who argue that life begins at conception....

+1

[sacase]

You have your arguments messed up. First of all grenades are not guns.

Second, the reason why the woman should not "have control over her body" :rolleyes: is that it isn't her body we are talking about. She has the baby in 9 months and it's over unless she wants to keep it and put it up for adoption. But the baby is affected forever based on that decision.

Plus it's in our constitution, everyone has the right to LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are just protecting that right of the baby.

I am pro choice and pro death penalty.

I belive that every woman should have the choice to as to what affects her body. She is the one that will be responsible for incurring the medical costs of having a baby, of raising the child. It is her body that is going to get stretched out, it is her body that may have complications. Now, I am in a position that if my girlfriend got pregnant then I would want her to have my child, but it still comes down to her choice. Unless you are going to pay for this mother to raise her child I really suggest keeping quiet.

Until the the fetus can survive on its own then it is not truly alive, it is just a collection of cells. While I am pro choice I still recognize the need for limits on abortions. They should be considered very early in the pregnancy, not later.

The comparison of abortion to being charged with two murders if a pregnant mother is killed is just stupid. The law is there for an obvious reason. To increase jail time for people who kill pregnant women, it has little to do with the unborn child. (watch pep come in here and say I am wrong.) I would wager that most pregnant women who are murdered are murdered by their significant other.

[Cajuncowboy]

For those who argue that life begins at conception....

+1

I just noticed that I said "Constitution" And it should read Declaration of Independence. :o:

Too Early...

[Cajuncowboy]

I am pro choice and pro death penalty.

I belive that every woman should have the choice to as to what affects her body. She is the one that will be responsible for incurring the medical costs of having a baby, of raising the child. It is her body that is going to get stretched out, it is her body that may have complications. Now, I am in a position that if my girlfriend got pregnant then I would want her to have my child, but it still comes down to her choice. Unless you are going to pay for this mother to raise her child I really suggest keeping quiet.

Until the the fetus can survive on its own then it is not truly alive, it is just a collection of cells. While I am pro choice I still recognize the need for limits on abortions. They should be considered very early in the pregnancy, not later.

The comparison of abortion to being charged with two murders if a pregnant mother is killed is just stupid. The law is there for an obvious reason. To increase jail time for people who kill pregnant women, it has little to do with the unborn child. (watch pep come in here and say I am wrong.) I would wager that most pregnant women who are murdered are murdered by their significant other.

Um, did you read post 84 before post 85?

[sacase]

Um, did you read post 84 before post 85?

yes I did. Hell with the way you define things then we should save every sperm cell and egg ever produced since they are "alive". An embryo is not allive. There may be a heart beat but are all other organs formed and functioning? You are trying to compare a group of cells that are not fully formed to someone who has already been alive.

You are trying to force your views on people. I have my views on it and right wrong or indifferent they are mine. Just like yours are yours. I do not force my view point on you and you should not force yours on others, but you are. What would you feel if my view point said that every fetus that is mentally retarded or otherwise deformed should be terminated as soon as it discovered since they obviously serve no purpose in society and are a financial drain? What about if I had a view that said people who can't get pregnant naturally should not be having kids since obviously their genes are defective and are not meant to carry on. You would get upset with that right? How about if I said you cannot have kids unless you can financially support them?

Abortion is obviously not for you and that is your right, but you are trying to deny other PEOPLE, not fetuses, their right as well.

[Doomsday101]

Even if Roe vs Wade was overturned all that would do is put it back in the hands of individual states. I really don't see this happening but I'm pleased that even many advocates of choice sees late term abortions as wrong. I do think that if a woman chooses to have an abortion that no fed dollars should be used for this elective procedure

[ScipioCowboy]

yes I did. Hell with the way you define things then we should save every sperm cell and egg ever produced since they are "alive". An embryo is not allive.

Um, no.

Sperms cells and egg cells cannot reproduce themselves. Embryos can. Also, neither sperms cells nor eggs have the necessary genetic material to be considered human life.

There may be a heart beat but are all other organs formed and functioning?

There are many people who lack organs or who need various machines and apparatuses to keep them living. Are they less alive than you or me?

Newborn children cannot survive without some caring for them. Are they not alive?

You are trying to force your views on people. I have my views on it and right wrong or indifferent they are mine.

It sounds very much as if you're trying to force a very specific view of life on society.

[Sasquatch]

You are trying to force your views on people. .

No, it's about advocating on behalf of those who cannot speak for or defend themselves. :rolleyes:

Convenient isn't it?

[iceberg]

how long has the abortion debate been going on? hell, back in 83 in high school i was hearing debates over it all the time.

is there anything new or is it the same old argument proped up with a little more conviction to try and hold one side or the other together?

i'm against abortion on my own personal beliefs, but that's me. i've never seen forced "morality" work well and if you look at abortion, it's still not working well on either side. as medical advances grow, so will this procedure. like it or not.

people are going to be for it for reasons of their own, like it or not. and if they're for it, they're going to do it. period.

coat hanger in the closet by whack job doctor or in a clinic where it can be made as safe as possible?

those are the real choices, to me. ban it, it goes underground and the fight goes on. legalize it and the moral right cry in outrage cause of the huge nature of the sin to them. there's never going to be a common ground and as far as i know so very few change their minds w/o direct need to do so, if even then.

but abortion is not going away simply because the deeply religious (and even not so deep) do not approve. it's here. period.

but the arguing will continue for many more decades to come, i suppose.

[joseephuss]

This thread started with a story and how it related to another reason to ban abortion. I thought that was silly. It implied that people who choose to have an abortion or support pro-choice have never considered the emotional effects that such a choice brings. The vast majority of people who support pro-choice are not calloused people that don't care about human life. They know how difficult such a decision can be and the kind of help people will need to not only make the decision, but help they may need after they have gone through an abortion. Being pro-choice does not even mean that you support abortion as the first choice or option. They just don't want to see abortion become a non-option.

Abortion is perhaps the toughest decision anybody will ever have to make. I think very few people take it lightly. Sure there are some knuckleheads that truly don't care, but they are in the small minority. There are knuckleheads in every phase of life and they are usually in the smallest of minorities. There are knuckleheads on the pro-life side of the argument that will blow up an abortion clinic and kill doctors or nurses that perform abortions. That doesn't mean every pro-lifer is some idiot.

I support pro-choice. I hope whomever becomes pregnant can find some other way to face their individual situation without having to resort to having an abortion, but I would hate to see them not have that option.

It is great that someone can speak for the fetus, but you still have the mother who should be spoken for as well. To force a mother/pregnant woman to carry the fetus to full term can't be the right thing to do if that is not what she wants. If those speaking for the fetus can help a mother carry the mother to full term and find an option that works for the mother and child, I say go for it. It just does not always work out that way and we all know it.

What if someone dropped off a baby on your doorsteps and by law since it was on your property it now became your responsibility for the rest of its life? You wouldn't rush out to kill it, but you would probably be seeking a way to deal with it. Maybe you want that baby. Maybe you don't. Maybe you are set up to add a baby to your life. Maybe you are not. What are your options? How easy are those options to obtain? Some options are more readily available to some people than they are to others. There is a lot to consider and contend with and the issues are never as clear cut as made out to be in this debate.

I for one believe life begins at conception. I think abortion essentially is killing the fetus. However, I don't think abortion is murder. Murder is something different to me. Abortion is one of the rare cases where the rights of two individuals are in direct conflict with each other.

Technology may lesson this debate in the future. Maybe one day will be an easy way to simply take a fetus/embryo out of one person and either put it into another person or care for it in some other fashion until adopted. That would provide another option.

But to go back to the original article, even a mother that give up their children to adoption will still need help to deal with their emotions and feelings. Heck, we all probably have met or dealt with people that have children that still have emotions and feelings that they have to sort through about those children and how they impact their lives.

[ConcordCowboy]

This thread started with a story and how it related to another reason to ban abortion. I thought that was silly. It implied that people who choose to have an abortion or support pro-choice have never considered the emotional effects that such a choice brings. The vast majority of people who support pro-choice are not calloused people that don't care about human life. They know how difficult such a decision can be and the kind of help people will need to not only make the decision, but help they may need after they have gone through an abortion. Being pro-choice does not even mean that you support abortion as the first choice or option. They just don't want to see abortion become a non-option.


That's impossible...we are all calloused...sick...murderous individuals that have no soul.

:D

All joking aside...you hit the nail on the head with this...especially the bolded part.

[ScipioCowboy]

Being pro-choice does not even mean that you support abortion as the first choice or option.

And being pro-slavery didn't necessarily mean that you owned slaves or believed slavery was right.

At what point do we acknowledge that human life is being denied basic constitutional protections?

[iceberg]

And being pro-slavery didn't necessarily mean that you owned slaves or believed slavery was right.

At what point do we acknowledge that human life is being denied basic constitutional protections?

after it's born apparantely.

again, you have your views and as entrenched as you are in them, the other side is just as strong in their belief.

when will both sides admit there will be no common ground and let people make up their own minds?

[Sasquatch]

At what point do we acknowledge that human life is being denied basic constitutional protections?

So abortion in countries without a written constitution is okay?

[Doomsday101]

So abortion in countries without a written constitution is okay?

No but as Americans we only have a say so in our own country.

[joseephuss]

And being pro-slavery didn't necessarily mean that you owned slaves or believed slavery was right.

At what point do we acknowledge that human life is being denied basic constitutional protections?

I acknowledge that, but there are also the mother's basic constitutional protections to consider as well. This is a true instance of where two people's basic rights come into direct conflict with each other. That is why there is no easy, straight forward answer. No matter, which side you are on.

[Sasquatch]

No but as Americans we only have a say so in our own country.

Tell that to the Iraqis.

[ScipioCowboy]

So abortion in countries without a written constitution is okay?

I do not believe so...just as I do not believe that murder is "okay" in countries without written constitutions.

But it is extremely difficult to work changes in countries that are not one's own (see Operation Iraqi Freedom). We can, however, attempt to work changes in this country.

And the body of law giving documents in this country happens to include the Constitution.;)

[Doomsday101]

Tell that to the Iraqis.

They are putting together their own constitution and they create their own laws. We are not doing that, the Government in control in Iraq was not the government that was the best for the US there were a couple of other candidates who was closer to the US so we did not determine who their leader would be they did.

[locked&loaded]

So you think that those kids who were put up for adoption when they were babies, if given the choice, would have been elected to be killed? Is that what you are saying?

No wonder you feel this way, you don't even have any respect for your own life, why would anyone think you would respect the life of another.

Absolutely appalling. So glad you don't make the rules.

like i said, religion only leads to closed minded people.

[Sasquatch]

I do not believe so...just as I do not believe that murder is "okay" in countries without written constitutions.

But it is extremely difficult to work changes in countries that are not one's own (see Operation Iraqi Freedom). We can, however, attempt to work changes in this country.

And the body of law giving documents in this country happens to include the Constitution.;)

So then what are you basing this universal definition of "murder" and "human" if not on the traditions of this country? ;)

[ScipioCowboy]

after it's born apparantely.

again, you have your views and as entrenched as you are in them, the other side is just as strong in their belief.

when will both sides admit there will be no common ground and let people make up their own minds?

The slavery issue was very similar.

Certain people sought to deny rights to slaves on the basis that they were an inferior form of life.

Other people fought to free slaves.

And others believed that people should be left to decide the slavery issue for themselves. This third opinion prevailed for decades, and lead to a series of ultimately pointless compromises.

[Sasquatch]

Certain people sought to deny rights to slaves on the basis that they were an inferior form of life.

Among them religious zealots who cited Genesis and the "curse of Cain."

[ScipioCowboy]

So then what are you basing this universal definition of "murder" and "human" if not on the traditions of this country? ;)

The traditions and practices of this country have certainly helped shaped my perception of what constitutes murder. No doubting that.

But we're not the only country that has sought to provide legal protections for innocent human life.

Societies often disagree on what constitutes murder and/or innocent human life - this is the very reason there's a constant social dialogue surrounding this issue.

[ScipioCowboy]

Among them religious zealots who cited Genesis and the "curse of Cain."

This is true (even though there's really no biblical basis for it).

Also among them were "enlightened rationalists" (some of whom were our Founding Fathers) who believed that skin color and other purely physical attributes were determinants of intelligence.

I would also add that various churches were extremely active in the abolitionist movement.

[ScipioCowboy]

I acknowledge that, but there are also the mother's basic constitutional protections to consider as well. This is a true instance of where two people's basic rights come into direct conflict with each other. That is why there is no easy, straight forward answer. No matter, which side you are on.

I understand your point, and your argument is very rational.

I would only add that one's freedom of choice is not absolute.

[joseephuss]

I understand your point, and your argument is very rational.

I would only add that one's freedom of choice is not absolute.

I agree. That is why this debate will never end. People will always and should always fight for their and other's rights.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

No but as Americans we only have a say so in our own country.


I don't know big guy, I saw a ton of Americans crapping on France for not joining Bush's crusade in Iraq, many here crapped on Canada for getting into that war, you have overthrown the Iraq government, overthrew Noriega in Panama etc

Anyway, I digress

I just cannot understand how anyone could put more value to a fetus' rights than a woman carrying that fetus. After all, you cannot get a birth certificate until there is a live birth etc

[peplaw06]

The comparison of abortion to being charged with two murders if a pregnant mother is killed is just stupid. The law is there for an obvious reason. To increase jail time for people who kill pregnant women, it has little to do with the unborn child. (watch pep come in here and say I am wrong.) I would wager that most pregnant women who are murdered are murdered by their significant other.You called it. :)

How can it have "little to do with the unborn child," when the only difference between a woman and a pregnant woman is the fact that the pregnant woman is carrying an unborn child?

You can get an enhancement for family violence, but you can't be charged with two crimes for assaulting/killing your wife/girlfriend. The reason a man would be charged with two crimes is an unborn child's "life" was ended.


What if someone dropped off a baby on your doorsteps and by law since it was on your property it now became your responsibility for the rest of its life? You wouldn't rush out to kill it, but you would probably be seeking a way to deal with it. Maybe you want that baby. Maybe you don't. Maybe you are set up to add a baby to your life. Maybe you are not. What are your options? How easy are those options to obtain? Some options are more readily available to some people than they are to others. There is a lot to consider and contend with and the issues are never as clear cut as made out to be in this debate. The obvious answer is that the people having a baby dropped off at their doorstep didn't have a choice in the matter.

And if they turned around and smothered it, they'd be charged with murder.

[heavyg]

You called it. :)

How can it have "little to do with the unborn child," when the only difference between a woman and a pregnant woman is the fact that the pregnant woman is carrying an unborn child?

You can get an enhancement for family violence, but you can't be charged with two crimes for assaulting/killing your wife/girlfriend. The reason a man would be charged with two crimes is an unborn child's "life" was ended.

The obvious answer is that the people having a baby dropped off at their doorstep didn't have a choice in the matter.

And if they turned around and smothered it, they'd be charged with murder.


So if they had a choice in the matter it would be ok to kill the child?

If a woman gets pregnant it was her choice to have sex in the first place and her choice (along with the man) not to use protection.

I am against abortion for any reason. BUT, I also know we can never ban it or outlaw it. There will always be some back alley "doctor" willing to endanger a womans life for a quick buck. I think the only solution now is to offer more alternatives and more education before the abortion.

[peplaw06]

So if they had a choice in the matter it would be ok to kill the child?I don't think I said that.

If a woman gets pregnant it was her choice to have sex in the first place and her choice (along with the man) not to use protection.I agree with this completely.

[Cajuncowboy]

yes I did. Hell with the way you define things then we should save every sperm cell and egg ever produced since they are "alive". An embryo is not allive. There may be a heart beat but are all other organs formed and functioning? You are trying to compare a group of cells that are not fully formed to someone who has already been alive.

You are trying to force your views on people. I have my views on it and right wrong or indifferent they are mine. Just like yours are yours. I do not force my view point on you and you should not force yours on others, but you are. What would you feel if my view point said that every fetus that is mentally retarded or otherwise deformed should be terminated as soon as it discovered since they obviously serve no purpose in society and are a financial drain? What about if I had a view that said people who can't get pregnant naturally should not be having kids since obviously their genes are defective and are not meant to carry on. You would get upset with that right? How about if I said you cannot have kids unless you can financially support them?

Abortion is obviously not for you and that is your right, but you are trying to deny other PEOPLE, not fetuses, their right as well.

Babies have a right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. They are alive even as an "embryo". It is life. And you get all on your high and mighty horse about forcing views down peoples throat yet here you are doing the same thing. Seems hypocritical to me.

As a matter of fact, abortion was illegal and it was "Forced" down our throats by a society who was increasingly devaluing life. And that is what you are doing now.

[Cajuncowboy]

The vast majority of people who support pro-choice are not calloused people that don't care about human life.

I stopped reading there because I knew the rest would be BS propaganda.

You can't kill a baby in the womb and still care about innocent human life.

[Cajuncowboy]

like i said, religion only leads to closed minded people.

Close minded? I guess when it comes to murdering babies, sure. I'm not keeping an open mind about that.

But this is laughable coming from someone who would have rather been dead than adopted. Your opinion is worth less than spit in the gutter. Anyone who devalues life the way you do has no care nor consideration for anyone. You have been exposed by your own words as such.

[Cajuncowboy]

I don't know big guy, I saw a ton of Americans crapping on France for not joining Bush's crusade in Iraq, many here crapped on Canada for getting into that war, you have overthrown the Iraq government, overthrew Noriega in Panama etc

Anyway, I digress

I just cannot understand how anyone could put more value to a fetus' rights than a woman carrying that fetus. After all, you cannot get a birth certificate until there is a live birth etc

You don't have the right to make others pay for your mistakes. If you don't want the baby, keep your legs closed. Don't make an innocent life pay because you couldn't keep your hormones in check. Take on some responsibility.

That's all abortion is anyway, a way to avoid the consequences of your actions. But the baby suffers the consequences. It is a totally ignorant thing to do this to the innocent all because someone had to get their groove on. :mad:

[zrinkill]

That's all abortion is anyway, a way to avoid the consequences of your actions.

Thats exactly how I feel. Exactly.

[Cajuncowboy]

Thats exactly how I feel. Exactly.

It's really what our society has become.

Spread your legs, get pregnant, kill the problem.

Don't work, stay home, get welfare for your entire life.

Come in illegally, get caught, get amnesty.

Use drugs, commit a crime, get medical attention.

Rape a child, claim you were abused, get off easy.

If people can't see a pattern here they are stark staring crazy.

If you think I'm kidding or exaggerating the problem, check this link out from my local news station. This was just yesterday!

http://www.wkrn.com/nashville/news/police-arrest-same-man-416-times/136315.htm

[Aikbach]

Among them religious zealots who cited Genesis and the "curse of Cain."You conveniently leave out the fact that those zealots also spearheaded abolition movements across western civilization but you've never been known for a sound coherent argument.

Is that really what this is about, Christianity bad, humanism good? It seems to me based off of many of your dubious arguments that is what your stance comes down to.

[jrumann59]

While I do not agree with it and ridiculous that many pro lifers are for the death penalty, and many pro choice are against the death penalty. The thing is Roe v. Wade should have never been taken by the Supreme Court and it should have been kicked back to each state and let them decide since most states have referendum voting so things like this can hit the ballot, see South Dakota last election.

[arglebargle]

You conveniently leave out the fact that those zealots also spearheaded abolition movements across western civilization but you've never been known for a sound coherent argument.



I checked it out, and Quakers lead the way again! Go Quakers! They have always been in the forefront, and certainly do a good job of living by example.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I do laugh at the view that people see abortion as a way to get out from their actions.

In other words, because you got laid and unluckily it was on one of three days you might get pregnant in a month, or the rubber broke or whatever, you should compound it by being forced to bring another mouth into the world regardless of the situation.

[joseephuss]

I stopped reading there because I knew the rest would be BS propaganda.

You can't kill a baby in the womb and still care about innocent human life.

That sounds about right for you. Always so open minded.

[sacase]

Babies have a right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. They are alive even as an "embryo". It is life. And you get all on your high and mighty horse about forcing views down peoples throat yet here you are doing the same thing. Seems hypocritical to me.

As a matter of fact, abortion was illegal and it was "Forced" down our throats by a society who was increasingly devaluing life. And that is what you are doing now.

Wrong, I am not forcing abortion on you. You still have the right to NOT have an abortion. So no, you still have the ability to practice your rights. However, you are forcing others to have a baby. Let's be real here. People are going to have sex and people are going to have unwanted pregnancy, you can use all the birth control you want and all the protection you want but women still will get pregnant. You want to force people to have kids, but you do not want to help take care of them. Get off your frickin high horse and quit forcing your morals on others.

[zrinkill]

You want to force people to have kids, but you do not want to help take care of them. Get off your frickin high horse and quit forcing your morals on others.

So expecting people to be responsible for their own actions and taking care of the kids they create is forcing morals on them?

:laugh2:

[zrinkill]

I do laugh at the view that people see abortion as a way to get out from their actions.

In other words, because you got laid and unluckily it was on one of three days you might get pregnant in a month, or the rubber broke or whatever, you should compound it by being forced to bring another mouth into the world regardless of the situation.


Thats right ..... as a matter of fact, anyone who loses their jobs or are having rough times should be allowed to kill their kids.

I mean we do not want another mouth to feed right? That just compounds their problems.

[Sasquatch]

You conveniently leave out the fact that those zealots also spearheaded abolition movements across western civilization but you've never been known for a sound coherent argument.

Is that really what this is about, Christianity bad, humanism good? It seems to me based off of many of your dubious arguments that is what your stance comes down to.

Dubious arguments? I made a comment that was factual and irrefutable.

If you want to add that Christians participated in the abolitionist movement, go ahead, I won't deny it.

[joseephuss]

Wrong, I am not forcing abortion on you. You still have the right to NOT have an abortion. So no, you still have the ability to practice your rights. However, you are forcing others to have a baby. Let's be real here. People are going to have sex and people are going to have unwanted pregnancy, you can use all the birth control you want and all the protection you want but women still will get pregnant. You want to force people to have kids, but you do not want to help take care of them. Get off your frickin high horse and quit forcing your morals on others.

But Cajun does not believe in contraceptive use. And to overgeneralize and stereotype, many pro-lifers don't endorse contraceptive use. They don't want to support a way to minimize the number of women from getting pregnant in the first place. That in turn would reduce the number of abortions, which is what they are trying to do. Very contradictory.

[heavyg]

But Cajun does not believe in contraceptive use. And to overgeneralize and stereotype, many pro-lifers don't endorse contraceptive use. They don't want to support a way to minimize the number of women from getting pregnant in the first place. That in turn would reduce the number of abortions, which is what they are trying to do. Very contradictory.

I guess you missed my post saying a woman choses to have sex and along with the man choses not to use protection

[BrAinPaiNt]

It's really what our society has become.

Spread your legs, get pregnant, kill the problem.



Geez...nobody ever gets raped, is involved in sexual molestation or incest.

Nobody ever uses birth control that somehow fails.

Geez...you would think every woman is a leg opening slut in your world if they have an abortion.

That is what I hate about people in the world that only see black and white.

[sacase]

But Cajun does not believe in contraceptive use. And to overgeneralize and stereotype, many pro-lifers don't endorse contraceptive use. They don't want to support a way to minimize the number of women from getting pregnant in the first place. That in turn would reduce the number of abortions, which is what they are trying to do. Very contradictory.

pretty much. Can't teach the kids sex ed, they might want to go out and do it. (like they aren't already) No its better to tell them to practice abstinence since the good book says that is how things should be. Can't give them contraception either. (Never mind that some of the people are not of the same relegion or posses the same beliefs).

Teach kids about sex, talk about it openly (this is a good thing), encourage them to practice it safely if they do decide they want to take that next step. Quit thinking kids are dumb, they are not, however they do make bad decisions. But you have to give them the tools to deal with life and the world.

[iceberg]

Geez...nobody ever gets raped, is involved in sexual molestation or incest.

Nobody ever uses birth control that somehow fails.

Geez...you would think every woman is a leg opening slut in your world if they have an abortion.

That is what I hate about people in the world that only see black and white.

and there's a lot out there.

but again, i avoid this topic for this very reason - just about everyone involved will get worked up over it, no one will change their mind and everyone will get off this thread at one point and go CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS GUY??? to anyone who'll listen in real life.

and nothing will change.

people will have sex
people will have abortions
some will have good reasons for it
some won't
hating it won't change it
but people will argue against it anyway
and for it
and it will go on and never be ultimately decided except for what the majority of the people want at the time.

given we're an IGS (instant gratification society) abortion is going nowhere.

may as well do what we can with it to ensure it's safe and keep the research and education going.

[heavyg]

pretty much. Can't teach the kids sex ed, they might want to go out and do it. (like they aren't already) No its better to tell them to practice abstinence since the good book says that is how things should be. Can't give them contraception either. (Never mind that some of the people are not of the same relegion or posses the same beliefs).

Teach kids about sex, talk about it openly (this is a good thing), encourage them to practice it safely if they do decide they want to take that next step. Quit thinking kids are dumb, they are not, however they do make bad decisions. But you have to give them the tools to deal with life and the world.

That is not fair. If my self or Cajun used the bible in this discussion we would have been chastised for it by the powers that be.

[zrinkill]

Reagan's rule was No abortions unless the pregnancy was the result of a crime.


What is wrong with that?

[heavyg]

Reagan's rule was No abortions unless the pregnancy was the result of a crime.


What is wrong with that?

Because it couldnt be used as birth control then. I have a family member (in law side) that is unmarried and just gave birth to her 5th child. I keep asking her if she knows what causes it but they get mad at me. Now, I am not saying she should have aborted any of those children but she is an example of someone who apparently can not use common since when it come to sex. Im gonna open a whole new can of worms here and say someon like her should be forced to have her tubes tied.

[iceberg]

Reagan's rule was No abortions unless the pregnancy was the result of a crime.

What is wrong with that?

what if the mother is sick and having a baby is likely to kill her or the baby? or both?

what if the baby is so premature it's likely to die weeks to months after being born?

it doesn't matter where you draw the line in this one - one side is going to be very unhappy in the end. it's a moral issue people have to decide upon for themselves.

making it illegal won't make it go away anymore than making pot illegal so people will quit using it.

[heavyg]

what if the mother is sick and having a baby is likely to kill her or the baby? or both?

what if the baby is so premature it's likely to die weeks to months after being born?

it doesn't matter where you draw the line in this one - one side is going to be very unhappy in the end. it's a moral issue people have to decide upon for themselves.

making it illegal won't make it go away anymore than making pot illegal so people will quit using it.

I have made it clear that I am personally against abortion. However, I also know there is no way we can ever make it illegal. I think we need to offer more alternatives to abortion and more education in regards to abortion. I also feel its wrong that a 13 yr old can go into a clinic and get an abortion without her parents consent

[zrinkill]

what if the mother is sick and having a baby is likely to kill her or the baby? or both?

what if the baby is so premature it's likely to die weeks to months after being born?

it doesn't matter where you draw the line in this one - one side is going to be very unhappy in the end. it's a moral issue people have to decide upon for themselves.

making it illegal won't make it go away anymore than making pot illegal so people will quit using it.

Doctor make the choice all the time to safe whatever human has the best chance to survive. (as in the case of separating conjoined twins)

Sorry Ice but I hate that pot argument. If thats the case we should take away the law against other types of murders because people still do it.

I understand what you are saying buddy ..... I just do not agree.

[sacase]

That is not fair. If my self or Cajun used the bible in this discussion we would have been chastised for it by the powers that be.

I think what the whole thing boils down to is the freedom of choice. If you want to not have an abortion, then fine, you have that right. If you do need to have one then, that is your right as well. I don't think anyone is condoning the use of abortion as birth control.

Let the woman or couple decide what is best for them. Being a Parent is a huge undertaking, not only on the financial side but life altering in many other respects. Once again, people are not going to stop having sex. People are not going to stop acting irresponsibly. So things should be in place to at least make sure people are able to safely abort the baby if that is what the couple decides is best.

On a personal note, my sons mother and I discussed her having an abortion when she got pregnant. I was 20 at the time. I asked her not to have one but ultimately left the choice up to her. Thankfully she decided to go through with the pregnancy and I have a wonderful son now. I made a lot of sacrifices but I always knew that he would be well taken care of since I was in a good psotion to ensure that. However on the flip side...she now has three kids by three different men. My son sees the difference in how I live and how she lives and comments on it from time to time.

Abortion is not for everyone, but by allowing the option, you are allowing others to practice their beliefs at the same time you are practicing yours.

[iceberg]

I have made it clear that I am personally against abortion. However, I also know there is no way we can ever make it illegal. I think we need to offer more alternatives to abortion and more education in regards to abortion. I also feel its wrong that a 13 yr old can go into a clinic and get an abortion without her parents consent

i think you and i are close in our views here. we're against it, would not use it, but i don't view it as something my own morality should stop or prevent. so, work to educate people, reduce the birth control this is used for, but keep the overall practice out of suitcase doctors and back alleys.

Doctor make the choice all the time to safe whatever human has the best chance to survive. (as in the case of separating conjoined twins)

Sorry Ice but I hate that pot argument. If thats the case we should take away the law against other types of murders because people still do it.

I understand what you are saying buddy ..... I just do not agree.

but the doctor can't make the choice if law says ONLY CRIME. you kinda made my point for me in that somewhere along the line someone NOT in our government has to make that call. in this case it's usually the mother.

so are you going to punish someone who has an abortion after it's illegal? we going to stack would-be mothers in jail now because they committed a felony in their abortion? then the "doctors" who do it for $50 or whatever. are they convicted killers now and we'll put them in there with those who kill people who actually have spent a few minutes on this planet?

so while i agree my analogy would seem to say 'remove the law cause no one will follow it' - we both know there are degrees of seperation from one extreme to the other.

understand i agree with you that fundamentally i'm against abortion. rare cases being exceptions in crimes and health of mother/baby to consider. as a form of birth control i'm against it and would talk openly to those who would listen to NOT do it.

but i can't make their choice for them in the end based upon my own morality.

[ScipioCowboy]

Geez...nobody ever gets raped, is involved in sexual molestation or incest.

Nobody ever uses birth control that somehow fails.

Geez...you would think every woman is a leg opening slut in your world if they have an abortion.

That is what I hate about people in the world that only see black and white.

I think rape, incest, and life of the mother account for only 5 percent of all US abortions.

Therefore, I would wholeheartedly support any law that outlawed abortion in every case except those listed above. I stated as much earlier in this thread.

[ConcordCowboy]

Reagan's rule was No abortions unless the pregnancy was the result of a crime.


What is wrong with that?

Because people have sex...and I know this is hard for some people to grasp sometimes...for the pleasure of it...not for procreation.

What if these people were having sex for fun...not to have kids and the condom broke or the pill didn't work or something went wrong with her diaphram...ALL of which have happened from time to time.

These people DIDN'T want a child and took the proper precautions...but now because of something not working as it should they are stuck having a child that they didn't want and took precautions to avoid.

That's whats wrong with that.

[heavyg]

Because people have sex...and I know this is hard for some people to grasp sometimes...for the pleasure of it...not for procreation.

What if these people were having sex for fun...not to have kids and the condom broke or the pill didn't work or something went wrong with her diaphram...ALL of which have happened from time to time.

These people DIDN'T want a child and took the proper precautions...but now because of something not working as it should they are stuck having a child that they didn't want and took precautions to avoid.

That's whats wrong with that.


Why can't that child be put up for adoption (adoption process needs to be adressed as well). Why should that unborn child die because something went wrong?

[zrinkill]

Because people have sex...and I know this is hard for some people to grasp sometimes...for the pleasure of it...not for procreation.

What if these people were having sex for fun...not to have kids and the condom broke or the pill didn't work or something went wrong with her diaphram...ALL of which have happened from time to time.

These people DIDN'T want a child and took the proper precautions...but now because of something not working as it should they are stuck having a child that they didn't want and took precautions to avoid.

That's whats wrong with that.

I do not believe that your example happens in most cases.

Thats the problem here Concord. In most cases people are using abortion as a type of Birth Control, and that is wrong.

(look as us two class clowns getting all serious and stuff :laugh1:)

[ScipioCowboy]

Because people have sex...and I know this is hard for some people to grasp sometimes...for the pleasure of it...not for procreation.

What if these people were having sex for fun...not to have kids and the condom broke or the pill didn't work or something went wrong with her diaphram...ALL of which have happened from time to time.

These people DIDN'T want a child and took the proper precautions...but now because of something not working as it should they are stuck having a child that they didn't want and took precautions to avoid.

That's whats wrong with that.

So, let's assume that I choose to invest my money in common stock. I research thoroughly and take all the necessary precautions. Yet, my companies still go belly up.

Do I get my money back? Does the Federal government come along and save me?

Nope.

Why not? I studied carefully. I didn't enter into it haphazardly. It was an honest mistake that could've happened to anyone.

But I still don't get my money back because I made the decision. And sometimes there are consequences for the decisions we make.

And another human life shouldn't have to pay the consequences for our mistakes.

[ConcordCowboy]

Why can't that child be put up for adoption (adoption process needs to be adressed as well). Why should that unborn child die because something went wrong?

I'm not saying it can't be put up for adoption.

But they took they proper precautions to avoid a pregnancy and the woman shouldn't be forced to have the child if she doesn't want too.

This is where we will always disagree if you think she should be forced to have the baby without the option of abortion.

[heavyg]

So, let's assume that I choose to invest my money in common stock. I research thoroughly and take all the necessary precautions. Yet, my companies still go belly up.

Do I get my money back? Does the Federal government come along and save me?

Nope.

Why not? I studied carefully. I didn't enter into it haphazardly. It was an honest mistake that could've happened to anyone.

But I still don't get my money back because I made the decision. And sometime there are consequences for my decisions.

And other human life shouldn't have to pay those consequences.


we are all just doing this :bang2: neither side will give in

[heavyg]

I'm not saying it can't be put up for adoption.

But they took they proper precautions to avoid a pregnancy and the woman shouldn't be forced to have the child if she doesn't want too.

This is where we will always disagree if you think she should be forced to have the baby without the option of abortion.

So from your point of view the unborn childs rights should be completely ignored?

[ConcordCowboy]

I do not believe that your example happens in most cases.

Thats the problem here Concord. In most cases people are using abortion as a type of Birth Control, and that is wrong.

(look as us two class clowns getting all serious and stuff :laugh1:)

No I agree that the example was one that doesn't happen most of the time...BUT it does happen and if abortion was only a option after a crime then these people would be stuck...unfairly to me.

I was just pointing out one problem that can happen when you limit it to just a crime.

I know getting serious...what the hell is that all about. :laugh2:

[iceberg]

I'm not saying it can't be put up for adoption.

But they took they proper precautions to avoid a pregnancy and the woman shouldn't be forced to have the child if she doesn't want too.

This is where we will always disagree if you think she should be forced to have the baby without the option of abortion.

the flip side of this is how do we even propose to make every pregnancy a court issue? we simply can't.

shouldn't.

would you want to be the husband/wife in court having to go over why the precuations you used failed? there are so many scenarios out there the courts simply should not get into out of privacy reasons.

just because someone got pregnant, i don't think they did the cajuncowboy "spread their legs and get after it" approach. many do - but now seperate that in court and make people who are trying to be responsible now subject to court mitigation.

not practical.

[heavyg]

the flip side of this is how do we even propose to make every pregnancy a court issue? we simply can't.

shouldn't.

would you want to be the husband/wife in court having to go over why the precuations you used failed? there are so many scenarios out there the courts simply should not get into out of privacy reasons.

just because someone got pregnant, i don't think they did the cajuncowboy "spread their legs and get after it" approach. many do - but now seperate that in court and make people who are trying to be responsible now subject to court mitigation.

not practical.

Again from your stand point the unborn childs rights gets ignored

[ConcordCowboy]

So, let's assume that I choose to invest my money in common stock. I research thoroughly and take all the necessary precautions. Yet, my companies still go belly up.

Do I get my money back? Does the Federal government come along and save me?

Nope.

Why not? I studied carefully. I didn't enter into it haphazardly. It was an honest mistake that could've happened to anyone.

But I still don't get my money back because I made the decision. And sometimes there are consequences for the decisions we make.

And another human life shouldn't have to pay the consequences for our mistakes.

Look we disagree...Yes I don't think that they should pay when they used protection to avoid the situation.

[ConcordCowboy]

So from your point of view the unborn childs rights should be completely ignored?

If that's the way you see it...yes.

[heavyg]

If that's the way you see it...yes.

Interesting

[iceberg]

Again from your stand point the unborn childs rights gets ignored

and from the flip side, the rights of the parents get ignored also. either way - someone gets ignored.

don't take 1 post to be all encompassing. also understand i'm against abortion in my own life and practice. but to me the issue isn't about me getting my way - it's the evolution of society on the whole and whether the deepliy religious like it or not, science will continue to research the birth process and one day replicate it.

evil?

not if you need a liver and they could clone you one. or a heart, lungs, kidneys and the like. now i'm not advocating "the island" because then, do clones have rights?

God gives us an ability to think, learn, grow and evolve, yet the deeply religious fight it every step of the way as Gods will.

that's the biggest delima i see usually.

[heavyg]

and from the flip side, the rights of the parents get ignored also. either way - someone gets ignored.

don't take 1 post to be all encompassing. also understand i'm against abortion in my own life and practice. but to me the issue isn't about me getting my way - it's the evolution of society on the whole and whether the deepliy religious like it or not, science will continue to research the birth process and one day replicate it.

evil?

not if you need a liver and they could clone you one. or a heart, lungs, kidneys and the like. now i'm not advocating "the island" because then, do clones have rights?

God gives us an ability to think, learn, grow and evolve, yet the deeply religious fight it every step of the way as Gods will.

that's the biggest delima i see usually.

Be careful we arnt supposed to use God in our arguments on the board ;-)

[ConcordCowboy]

the flip side of this is how do we even propose to make every pregnancy a court issue? we simply can't.

shouldn't.

would you want to be the husband/wife in court having to go over why the precuations you used failed? there are so many scenarios out there the courts simply should not get into out of privacy reasons.

just because someone got pregnant, i don't think they did the cajuncowboy "spread their legs and get after it" approach. many do - but now seperate that in court and make people who are trying to be responsible now subject to court mitigation.

not practical.

Boy we sure would jam up the courts good if we did that. :eek:

[heavyg]

Found this interesting

http://forerunner.com/forerunner/X0438_Former_Abortionists.html

[ConcordCowboy]

Interesting

I commend you...at least you didn't call me a callous...sick...murderous individual with no soul...even though you really wanted too. :D

[heavyg]

I commend you...at least you didn't call me a callous...sick...murderous individual with no soul...even though you really wanted too. :D

Just trying to keep the discussion civil. I have seen first hand this stuff get out of hand. I am a firm believer in ones right to voice their opinion

[iceberg]

Be careful we arnt supposed to use God in our arguments on the board ;-)

my bad. : ) but this in the end is a moral issue, not a legal one. people make it a legal one because of the passion around either side.

there is no fair answer. in the end, life or the potential thereof, is over and out OR forced upon someone who didn't want it.

there is no wisdom of solomon here and there is no compromise. it's one or the other, making it the issue that it is.

[heavyg]

my bad. : ) but this in the end is a moral issue, not a legal one. people make it a legal one because of the passion around either side.

there is no fair answer. in the end, life or the potential thereof, is over and out OR forced upon someone who didn't want it.

there is no wisdom of solomon here and there is no compromise. it's one or the other, making it the issue that it is.

Agree 100% I wish they would have a woman who is thinking about abortion speak with or listen to women who have had it done. I am pretty sure the majority of them regret having it done

[ConcordCowboy]

Just trying to keep the discussion civil. I have seen first hand this stuff get out of hand. I am a firm believer in ones right to voice their opinion

A civil discussion...what an idea. :D

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think rape, incest, and life of the mother account for only 5 percent of all US abortions.

Therefore, I would wholeheartedly support any law that outlawed abortion in every case except those listed above. I stated as much earlier in this thread.

Well that is good in theory, but with the legal system slow as it is it would defeat the purpose for the individual.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I do not believe that your example happens in most cases.

Thats the problem here Concord. In most cases people are using abortion as a type of Birth Control, and that is wrong.

(look as us two class clowns getting all serious and stuff :laugh1:)

One of my wife's sister is a result of her parents using birth control and it not working. Not only that they also believe that is why she is slightly retarded.

Not everything fits into a nice little black and white world.

[WoodysGirl]

Agree 100% I wish they would have a woman who is thinking about abortion speak with or listen to women who have had it done. I am pretty sure the majority of them regret having it done
I ordinarily would stay out of this argument, but everyone considering an abortion goes through a very thorough screening process before the procedure is done. It was described to me in detail about the counselors on hand before any paperwork is signed or money paid. All of which is done to be sure the woman is sure before going ahead with the procedure.

Take it for what you will, but considering I know a number of women who have had the procedure, it's not that cut and dry.

[ScipioCowboy]

Well that is good in theory, but with the legal system slow as it is it would defeat the purpose for the individual.

Do a few difficult court cases justify the denial of legal protection to unborn children?

[zrinkill]

One of my wife's sister is a result of her parents using birth control and it not working. Not only that they also believe that is why she is slightly retarded.

Not everything fits into a nice little black and white world.

Well I don't think they should have aborted her ..... so what was your point?

And I am not being a smartarse ..... I really do not know why you brought that up, because I know you are not saying she should have been aborted.

[ScipioCowboy]

One of my wife's sister is a result of her parents using birth control and it not working. Not only that they also believe that is why she is slightly retarded.

Not everything fits into a nice little black and white world.

Personally, I don't believe that slight mental retardation warrants abortion.

I know many mentally-challenged people who are happy, love life, are productive members of society, and have loving parents and families.

In my opinion, it's imposing a "little black and white world" when we decide that the only life worth living is one that fulfills some intellectual standard.

I'm only making a point here. I'm not saying that you were implicating any of this.

[zrinkill]

I would like to REALLY STRESS that I am sure thats not what Brain was saying ..... I think he was just trying to show the problems with some contraceptives.

[ScipioCowboy]

I would like to REALLY STRESS that I am sure thats not what Brain was saying ..... I think he was just trying to show the problems with some contraceptives.

I think so as well.

I was only make a point about "little black and white worlds.";)

When we assume that human life is not worth living because it fails to meet some intellectual standard, we're equally guilty of imposing blacks and whites.

[Sasquatch]

I'll agree to ban abortions after the first 3 months if pro-lifers will agree to cut our defense budget by 30% in order to fund free daycare, free health care for all children up to 18 years of age, and increased funding for public education.

Any takers?

[zrinkill]

I'll agree to ban abortions after the first 3 months if pro-lifers will agree to cut our defense budget by 30% in order to fund free daycare, free health care for all children up to 18 years of age, and increased funding for public education.

Any takers?

20% and you got a deal ....... and I will even throw in that you can continue to starve to death braindamaged women.

:)

[ConcordCowboy]

20% and you got a deal ....... and I will even throw in that you can continue to starve to death braindamaged women.
:)

See...compromise can be done.

:p:

[BrAinPaiNt]

Do a few difficult court cases justify the denial of legal protection to unborn children?

Do A few difficult court cases justify the denial of legal protection for a woman?

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well I don't think they should have aborted her ..... so what was your point?

And I am not being a smartarse ..... I really do not know why you brought that up, because I know you are not saying she should have been aborted.

Just further ragging on the idea that some, like cajun, believe that people only get pregnant from lack of responsibility.

Pointing out that all things are not as simple as a girl just spreading her legs like he makes out in his one post.

[heavyg]

Do A few difficult court cases justify the denial of legal protection for a woman?

So a childs rights are less important than an adults? This can go back and forth forever like i sad we are :bang2:

[BrAinPaiNt]

I would like to REALLY STRESS that I am sure thats not what Brain was saying ..... I think he was just trying to show the problems with some contraceptives.

Correct. It was not a diaphram or condom. It was something else that is no longer on the market due to problems others have had...but hey, you know only lose girls spread their legs and get pregnant.:cool:

[BrAinPaiNt]

So a childs rights are less important than an adults? This can go back and forth forever like i sad we are :bang2:

Exactly...it is not black and white like many make it out to be.

Normally I would not even get into this discussion because of it.

However that thing cajun said just ticked me off a little.

[BrAinPaiNt]

20% and you got a deal ....... and I will even throw in that you can continue to starve to death braindamaged women.

:)

Is this where we slam our fist on the table and yell Man Law in unison.:laugh2:

[heavyg]

Just further ragging on the idea that some, like cajun, believe that people only get pregnant from lack of responsibility.

Pointing out that all things are not as simple as a girl just spreading her legs like he makes out in his one post.


I would like to see the percentages of failed birthcontrol from an abortion clinic. I would be willing to wager a large percentage would be oh ohs

[zrinkill]

Anyway we have fixed it ......

Abortion will be illegal after month 3

We will cut back our defense budget by 20%

And Sassy can starve to Death all the brain damaged women he wants to.


Compromise Rocks!

:yourock:

[ScipioCowboy]

Do A few difficult court cases justify the denial of legal protection for a woman?

Legal protections and rights have limits, and they aren't absolute...except in a hypothetical "black and white world.";)

Your rights and protections become highly regulated at the point that another human life begins.

[ConcordCowboy]

Anyway we have fixed it ......

Abortion will be illegal after month 3

We will cut back our defense budget by 20%

And Sassy can starve to Death all the brain damaged women he wants to.


Compromise Rocks!

:yourock:

And I would like to suggest that we take all the food that we save from starving brain damaged women to death and put it in a bank to feed all the children that aren't aborted after month 3...if needed.

Hey give and take...it's what compromise is all about.

:D

[zrinkill]

And I would like to suggest that we take all the food that we save from starving brain damaged women to death and put it in a bank to feed all the children that aren't aborted after month 3...if needed.

Hey give and take...it's what compromise is all about.

:D

I think thats Hillary's health plan ...... unfortunately she falls in the parameters, and I think Sassy is gonna starve her to death.

[ConcordCowboy]

I think thats Hillary's health plan ...... unfortunately she falls in the parameters, and I think Sassy is gonna starve her to death.

ZING!

[sacase]

I would like to see the percentages of failed birthcontrol from an abortion clinic. I would be willing to wager a large percentage would be oh ohs

Does pulling out count as a form of birth control? :laugh2:

[arglebargle]

Does pulling out count as a form of birth control? :laugh2:

About 14% of the time......

[zrinkill]

pre-c*m = the leading cause of Pregnancy for dumb men who have no clue how their own penis works.


Happened to me twice ...... :laugh2:

[peplaw06]

I think rape, incest, and life of the mother account for only 5 percent of all US abortions.

Therefore, I would wholeheartedly support any law that outlawed abortion in every case except those listed above. I stated as much earlier in this thread.I agree with your premise.

However, I have serious questions as to how this would be implemented. Do you have to have charges pending for rape in order to get an abortion, or do you have to have an actual finding of guilt? Is there time for that? Do you have to have your uncle come to the abortion clinic with you and tell the doctors it was incest?

Just seems like if they limited it to those situations, the percentages would go up, because that's the only way they can get one.

I think the only realistic way to limit it without making it completely illegal is to outlaw late-term, or 2nd trimester, or wherever you want to draw the line.

[ConcordCowboy]

I agree with your premise.

However, I have serious questions as to how this would be implemented. Do you have to have charges pending for rape in order to get an abortion, or do you have to have an actual finding of guilt? Is there time for that? Do you have to have your uncle come to the abortion clinic with you and tell the doctors it was incest?
Just seems like if they limited it to those situations, the percentages would go up, because that's the only way they can get one.

I think the only realistic way to limit it without making it completely illegal is to outlaw late-term, or 2nd trimester, or wherever you want to draw the line.

That's a good point.

What about a girl who couldn't get one because it would have to be rape and lets say the boyfriend dumped her as soon as he found out about the pregnancy and she got mad...would that girl falsely accuse him in order to get a abortion?

Just a thought.

[vta]

Does pulling out count as a form of birth control? :laugh2:

Works for me.

:muttley:

[ScipioCowboy]

I agree with your premise.

However, I have serious questions as to how this would be implemented. Do you have to have charges pending for rape in order to get an abortion, or do you have to have an actual finding of guilt? Is there time for that? Do you have to have your uncle come to the abortion clinic with you and tell the doctors it was incest?

Just seems like if they limited it to those situations, the percentages would go up, because that's the only way they can get one.

I think the only realistic way to limit it without making it completely illegal is to outlaw late-term, or 2nd trimester, or wherever you want to draw the line.

I don't think a conviction is necessarily required to establish that a person has been raped.

In many cases (not all), the act of rape leaves behind physical evidence, which is collected by various medical personnel and forensics experts. If these people hold the opinion that a woman has been raped, I'm inclined to trust them even in the absence of a conviction or a suspect.

Obviously, such a law would not be perfect. No laws are. Anti-discrimination laws, for instance, frequently suffer from a similar kind of ambiguity: Employers can be falsely accused of discrimination, forever tarnishing their reputations. Conversely, the laws may fail to protect people who experience genuine discrimination. Despite these problems, however, I think most of us would agree that anti-discrimination laws are necessary; they help maintain a level of equality within society.

Similarly, I believe unborn children deserve the same legal and constitutional protections that we all enjoy. Admittedly, such laws will not be perfect. But we can learn as we go, just as we do with other types of laws.

Let me add one more thing. I believe abortion is justifiable in only one instance: The pregnancy threatens the life of the mother.

However, the circumstances surrounding rape and incest are entirely unique, and if we could pass a law outlawing abortion in any instance except those two and life of the mother, we would eliminate well over 90 percent of the abortions in the country. I would support such a law wholeheartedly and without any second thoughts.

That was my only point.

[Cajuncowboy]

That sounds about right for you. Always so open minded.

I stopped reading there because it was an idiotic statement and the rest would follow suit, as usual.

[Cajuncowboy]

Wrong, I am not forcing abortion on you. You still have the right to NOT have an abortion. So no, you still have the ability to practice your rights. However, you are forcing others to have a baby. Let's be real here. People are going to have sex and people are going to have unwanted pregnancy, you can use all the birth control you want and all the protection you want but women still will get pregnant. You want to force people to have kids, but you do not want to help take care of them. Get off your frickin high horse and quit forcing your morals on others.

Um, so you are all for taking the consequences out of bad behavior and killing a baby in the process.
Sorry, I'll stay on that "frickin high horse" because murdering a baby just because you couldn't keep your legs closed is immoral and the baby had nothing to do with it.

Forcing people to have kids? No, forcing them to stand up to their responsibilities, yes.

[Cajuncowboy]

But Cajun does not believe in contraceptive use. And to overgeneralize and stereotype, many pro-lifers don't endorse contraceptive use. They don't want to support a way to minimize the number of women from getting pregnant in the first place. That in turn would reduce the number of abortions, which is what they are trying to do. Very contradictory.

Idiotic statement once again. If you have the stones, go find one post where I said I am against contraception. Just one. Until then shut up! You don't know what you are talking about.

I have counseled young men and women on the practices of safe sex. Your overall post is absolutely wrong. Proving once again you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Cajuncowboy]

Geez...nobody ever gets raped, is involved in sexual molestation or incest.

Nobody ever uses birth control that somehow fails.

Geez...you would think every woman is a leg opening slut in your world if they have an abortion.

That is what I hate about people in the world that only see black and white.

The truth is, if you want to admit it, is that your scenarios are a very small percentage of abortions. You need to get the facts straight.

[Cajuncowboy]

pretty much. Can't teach the kids sex ed, they might want to go out and do it. (like they aren't already) No its better to tell them to practice abstinence since the good book says that is how things should be. Can't give them contraception either. (Never mind that some of the people are not of the same relegion or posses the same beliefs).

Teach kids about sex, talk about it openly (this is a good thing), encourage them to practice it safely if they do decide they want to take that next step. Quit thinking kids are dumb, they are not, however they do make bad decisions. But you have to give them the tools to deal with life and the world.

DO you see a key word anywhere in that bolded sentence??? It is not for the schools to teach. It is for the parents to teach. You want the government out of your personal life by saying you don't want the Patriot act, yet you want them to teach your kids about sex because you are too darn lazy or uncaring enough to do it.

[Aikbach]

Dubious arguments? I made a comment that was factual and irrefutable.

If you want to add that Christians participated in the abolitionist movement, go ahead, I won't deny it.My point and subsequently the source of your dubious arguments is that you like to throw around the word zealot as an ad hominem when it serves your purposes and you do it exclusively to Christianity thus it makes it appear you have an axe to grind with them and their worldview.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

pre-c*m = the leading cause of Pregnancy for dumb men who have no clue how their own penis works.


Happened to me twice ...... :laugh2:

are you saying two men have impregnanted you because they didn't know sperm was in their pre,,,,

[CanadianCowboysFan]

problem is you can ban abortion all you want but a woman will get one if she wants one. better to have it safe and sterile than in the back alley with a coat hanger.

furthermore, what are you going to do, prevent pregnant women from leaving the US? abortion is legal in Canada so Americans would come up here if they had to. just try and prove they had an abortion and not a miscarriage during their um "holiday"

[BrAinPaiNt]

The truth is, if you want to admit it, is that your scenarios are a very small percentage of abortions. You need to get the facts straight.

And the fact is that although it would be a small percentage it STILL HAPPENS and not every woman who gets pregnant is a slut like you portray in your black and white world.:rolleyes:

[heavyg]

And the fact is that although it would be a small percentage it STILL HAPPENS and not every woman who gets pregnant is a slut like you portray in your black and white world.:rolleyes:

I think the idea of it being legal for rapes and incest only has already been mentioned. But that is not good enough for most abortion supporters

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think the idea of it being legal for rapes and incest only has already been mentioned. But that is not good enough for most abortion supporters

And as it has been argued...with the legal system the way it is now, it would take too long for the person in question to get the abortion in the first place.

[heavyg]

And as it has been argued...with the legal system the way it is now, it would take too long for the person in question to get the abortion in the first place.

I guess that depends on if we ban partial birth abortions. Which is the most horrid thing ever. Its not like (at this time) a woman has to get it done within 3 months. Just like every other law. There would have to be adjustments made. The problem is as I said most abortion supporters are not willing to compromise and make it impossible for abortion to be used as birth control.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I guess that depends on if we ban partial birth abortions. Which is the most horrid thing ever. Its not like (at this time) a woman has to get it done within 3 months. Just like every other law. There would have to be adjustments made. The problem is as I said most abortion supporters are not willing to compromise and make it impossible for abortion to be used as birth control.

To me partial birth abortions and late term abortions are not an option. I am NOT for those.

I also am not for people who continually use abortion as a form of birth control.

I think if there are abortions than the woman should foot the bill, not the government.

I also think that if someone goes in for a second abortion they must be required to have their tubes tied. That way if down the road they change their minds and want kids they can have the procedure reversed.

Let's make one thing clear in my case. I do not like the idea of abortion. I would rather women (and men as it takes two to tango) be more responsible and use birth control. I would rather women have the child and put the child up for adoption as there are many couples who can not have children.

The problem I have is in certain cases where things do not fit in a black and white world. Sure they might be rare but I want no restriction or problems with those women that do fit that small criteria.

At least I hope that conveys my feelings.:cool:

[heavyg]

To me partial birth abortions and late term abortions are not an option. I am NOT for those.

I also am not for people who continually use abortion as a form of birth control.

I think if there are abortions than the woman should foot the bill, not the government.

I also think that if someone goes in for a second abortion they must be required to have their tubes tied. That way if down the road they change their minds and want kids they can have the procedure reversed.

Let's make one thing clear in my case. I do not like the idea of abortion. I would rather women (and men as it takes two to tango) be more responsible and use birth control. I would rather women have the child and put the child up for adoption as there are many couples who can not have children.

The problem I have is in certain cases where things do not fit in a black and white world. Sure they might be rare but I want no restriction or problems with those women that do fit that small criteria.

At least I hope that conveys my feelings.:cool:

Yes it does and we really are not that far apart on our stand. My problem when talking with most abortion supporters is they believe that the unborn child IS NOT ALIVE.

I hope this is not out of line but I found a series of videos on youtube. I think there are 5 in the series. They are called "The Silent Scream". This is the first in the series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THS2zZ4m260

[joseephuss]

DO you see a key word anywhere in that bolded sentence??? It is not for the schools to teach. It is for the parents to teach. You want the government out of your personal life by saying you don't want the Patriot act, yet you want them to teach your kids about sex because you are too darn lazy or uncaring enough to do it.

I am not lazy or uncaring, but there are people out there that are. There are also people out there that care very much, but they still have kids that get pregnant. There is someone out there with your exact same views on the matter and same approach, but they also have a pregnant teenager.

[joseephuss]

Why is abortion okay if a woman is raped?

I won't pretend that I could understand the kind of mental and emotional distress a woman must feel if she were raped and ended up pregnant. It makes much sense that she would want to terminate her pregnancy so she is not reminded daily of what transpired. Each day her body changes and it constantly reminds her that she was raped.

Can a pro-life/anti-abortion person accept that abortion is okay for this circumstance? It definitly addresses the woman's rights, but there are still the baby's rights that I keep seeing mentioned. The baby here is not the evil one. The baby is just the by product of some evil person who committed a horrible crime. The baby is innocent and did nothing wrong.

So, how do you draw the line?

I draw it at partial birth abortions. That is just too late in the matter for me.

[sacase]

Um, so you are all for taking the consequences out of bad behavior and killing a baby in the process.
Sorry, I'll stay on that "frickin high horse" because murdering a baby just because you couldn't keep your legs closed is immoral and the baby had nothing to do with it.

Forcing people to have kids? No, forcing them to stand up to their responsibilities, yes.

Dude sex is not "bad behavior" nor is it "immoral". So let me guess you were a virgin before you got married. If you were not you need to keep quiet cause you are being a hypocrite. (Enter in the "I was saved" argument :rolleyes: )Besides who are you to dictate to others what is moral or immoral, especially if they do not belive in the same things as you do.

So can you get a Fetus certificate? Oh wait, you can claim them on your taxes as soon as they are concieved, right? What about that social security number? I am sure there are people who want that extra $300 even though the baby isn't born yet.

So answer me this, are you against birth control and sex ed too?

[heavyg]

Why is abortion okay if a woman is raped?

I won't pretend that I could understand the kind of mental and emotional distress a woman must feel if she were raped and ended up pregnant. It makes much sense that she would want to terminate her pregnancy so she is not reminded daily of what transpired. Each day her body changes and it constantly reminds her that she was raped.

Can a pro-life/anti-abortion person accept that abortion is okay for this circumstance? It definitly addresses the woman's rights, but there are still the baby's rights that I keep seeing mentioned. The baby here is not the evil one. The baby is just the by product of some evil person who committed a horrible crime. The baby is innocent and did nothing wrong.

So, how do you draw the line?

I draw it at partial birth abortions. That is just too late in the matter for me.

Personally I have never said it was ok. But I know there is no way to ever have abortion completely illegal. And would compromise if we could make it where there had to be a legitimate reason (other than whoops) to have the abortion. I think its murder no matter how you cut it

[zrinkill]

are you saying two men have impregnanted you because they didn't know sperm was in their pre,,,,

Wow Canadianboy tries his best to take a shot.

Listening to your drivel makes me rethink the abortion argument.

Would Canada have paid for yours?

[Sasquatch]

20% and you got a deal ....... and I will even throw in that you can continue to starve to death braindamaged women.

:)

I appreciate that. Giving up "killing babies" and starving invalids to death at the same time would be asking too much. It would be unbearably dull to have to devote myself solely to realizing a one-party socialist utopia without any sort of outlet for enjoyment. Invalids beware!

And, of course, although Iraq-sized all out invasions are probably off the table, feel free to bomb the occasional third world country inhabited by brown people or assault small Carribean or Latin American countries whenever you feel the need to reaffirm your manhood and status as "number one."

Compromise does rock! :yourock:

:tongue:

[zrinkill]

Feel free to bomb the occasional third world country inhabited by brown people or assault small Carribean or Latin American countries whenever you feel the need to reaffirm your manhood and status as "number one."

To counter that proposal I will agree to only bomb brown skinned Countries when my liberal President is being impeached for lying under oath.

(Article 19 of said proposal takes "waterboarding" off the table but does allow the playing of Jessica Simpson music 24 hours straight in a captured terrorists cell)

:owned:

[sacase]

To counter that proposal I will agree to only bomb brown skinned Countries when my liberal President is being impeached for lying under oath.

(Article 19 of said proposal takes "waterboarding" off the table but does allow the playing of Jessica Simpson music 24 hours straight in a captured terrorists cell)

:owned:

so then you are in favor of harsher methods of torture?

[zrinkill]

so then you are in favor of harsher methods of torture?

:bow:

[Cajuncowboy]

And the fact is that although it would be a small percentage it STILL HAPPENS and not every woman who gets pregnant is a slut like you portray in your black and white world.:rolleyes:

That's your words and I don't hold that view. Seems like you may be projecting your own thoughts on me.

[Cajuncowboy]

Dude sex is not "bad behavior" nor is it "immoral". So let me guess you were a virgin before you got married. If you were not you need to keep quiet cause you are being a hypocrite. (Enter in the "I was saved" argument :rolleyes: )Besides who are you to dictate to others what is moral or immoral, especially if they do not belive in the same things as you do.

So can you get a Fetus certificate? Oh wait, you can claim them on your taxes as soon as they are concieved, right? What about that social security number? I am sure there are people who want that extra $300 even though the baby isn't born yet.

So answer me this, are you against birth control and sex ed too?


Let me start with the first bit of drivel in this asinine post.

#1 if you must know no, I wasn't. As a matter of fact I was involved with a girl getting an abortion when I was 19. So if you want to call me a hypocrite you would have every right to. But at the same time, I watched what happened to her and myself. I have had to live with the second consequence of my bad behavior for the rest of my life. I know first hand. So you can get off your high horse on that.

I grew up and matured and that was one fo the moments I look back on and wished I could change that.

#2 why take a shot as someone being saved? THat does play an important part but I held this view before I was saved. So you can :rolleyes: all you want and make fun of it but it doesn't change a thing.

#3 We all have the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If you don't believe that then maybe you are not fit for American society. You may want to look into another country whose Ideals are a better fit for you. I am just defending those who cannot defend themselves.

You really need to educate yourself on this before you make posts such as you have because it is obvious you have little knowledge about it.

[vta]

So can you get a Fetus certificate? Oh wait, you can claim them on your taxes as soon as they are concieved, right? What about that social security number? I am sure there are people who want that extra $300 even though the baby isn't born yet.

This is the barometer with which we hold the value of life?
I guess those homeless bums, who have no SS# or can not be claimed on taxes must not have much right to be alive then...?

How ever did we as a race get this far before the legitimacy of Social Security numbers and Tax claims came along to make our lives worth something?

[BrAinPaiNt]

That's your words and I don't hold that view. Seems like you may be projecting your own thoughts on me.

Spread your legs, get pregnant, kill the problem.

So what are you saying about women by saying...spread your legs.

Sure sounds you have the world wrapped up in a little box like the WOMAN just spread her legs because she WANTED to.

To which I say there are women or girls that get pregnant against their will...but I am sure that does not matter to you because you live in a black and white world.

[Cajuncowboy]

So what are you saying about women by saying...spread your legs.

Sure sounds you have the world wrapped up in a little box like the WOMAN just spread her legs because she WANTED to.

To which I say there are women or girls that get pregnant against their will...but I am sure that does not matter to you because you live in a black and white world.

What I said was that for those, who are in the vast majority who have abortions as a way of birth control, they need to keep their legs closed. if they want to be 100% sure they don't want to have kids.

Don't know why that is so hard to understand.

I never said anything on this board about rape or anything else. Go find it if you think I did.

[BrAinPaiNt]

What I said was that for those, who are in the vast majority who have abortions as a way of birth control, they need to keep their legs closed. if they want to be 100% sure they don't want to have kids.

Don't know why that is so hard to understand.

I never said anything on this board about rape or anything else. Go find it if you think I did.

No you never differentiated one way or the other...your words not mine....Spread your legs, get pregnant, kill the problem.

Somehow I don't think you believe the cases of rape, incest or molestation should be allowed to have an abortion anyways so the point you are currently arguing seems moot.

[joseephuss]

How do you force someone to be responsible?

A guy gets a girl pregnant or a girl gets pregnant and they don't want to have the baby. How do you force them to take on the responsibility of having the child and raising the child? Not only raising it, but doing a decent job of raising it. If these people are all just careless, worthless people as claimed, then why would you count on them to be diligent in raising a child. Seems to me that that would be worse on the child than getting aborted.

What happens if abortion just stopped over night? It doesn't mean that every single person/people that would end up having these babies would want to make the effort to raise them or be capable of raising them. Could they all be given up for adoption? Could half of them be given up for adoption?

There are about 130,000 adoptions annually in the U.S.

There are about 840,000(which keeps falling by the way) abortions annually in the U.S.

I have a hard time imagining that the number of adoptions is going to increase significantly enough to contend with the sudden influx of 840,000 births annually. Even if you cut that number in half due to some of the people deciding that they want the child once they do give birth, there would still be about 420,000 children left to contend with in the U.S. annually.

Are we supposed to be naive enough to believe that every child that is born will be nurtured and homes will be found for every single one of them? We don't always see that occurring with the children that are already being born. If we did we would not see approximately 1,000,000 homeless children in the U.S.

I will be callous about one thing. What is the cost to tax payers for an abortion vs. the cost to tax payers to provide for a homeless child or a child in a bad home environment? I don't even use that as a reason to support pro-choice, but it is something to consider.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Wow Canadianboy tries his best to take a shot.

Listening to your drivel makes me rethink the abortion argument.

Would Canada have paid for yours?

come on you can do better than that

[Doomsday101]

How do you force someone to be responsible?

A guy gets a girl pregnant or a girl gets pregnant and they don't want to have the baby. How do you force them to take on the responsibility of having the child and raising the child? Not only raising it, but doing a decent job of raising it. If these people are all just careless, worthless people as claimed, then why would you count on them to be diligent in raising a child. Seems to me that that would be worse on the child than getting aborted.

What happens if abortion just stopped over night? It doesn't mean that every single person/people that would end up having these babies would want to make the effort to raise them or be capable of raising them. Could they all be given up for adoption? Could half of them be given up for adoption?

There are about 130,000 adoptions annually in the U.S.

There are about 840,000(which keeps falling by the way) abortions annually in the U.S.

I have a hard time imagining that the number of adoptions is going to increase significantly enough to contend with the sudden influx of 840,000 births annually. Even if you cut that number in half due to some of the people deciding that they want the child once they do give birth, there would still be about 420,000 children left to contend with in the U.S. annually.

Are we supposed to be naive enough to believe that every child that is born will be nurtured and homes will be found for every single one of them? We don't always see that occurring with the children that are already being born. If we did we would not see approximately 1,000,000 homeless children in the U.S.

I will be callous about one thing. What is the cost to tax payers for an abortion vs. the cost to tax payers to provide for a homeless child or a child in a bad home environment? I don't even use that as a reason to support pro-choice, but it is something to consider.

Question. Should the father of the unborn child have a say so? Right now a man has no choice

[heavyg]

Question. Should the father of the unborn child have a say so? Right now a man has no choice

Exactly what if the would be father of this child is more than willing and able to care for the child? Can pay for the birth and all medical procedures that go with it

[joseephuss]

Question. Should the father of the unborn child have a say so? Right now a man has no choice

It is true that legally the father doesn't have the final word. I'm naive enough to believe that when the father steps up and tells the mother he is willing to take the child once it is born that in most cases the woman will agree. I'm realistic enough to realize that it doesn't happen in every case. Legally I don't know how you get past that obstacle.

[zrinkill]

come on you can do better than that


Well I could have went with a "your momma" joke ..... but being that you are Canadian I figured anything I could say would already be a given.

[vta]

Question. Should the father of the unborn child have a say so? Right now a man has no choice

It seems most here think not. Considering the woman has to the heavy lifting, so to speak, they'd rather it be open and shut for the woman to be firmly in control.

I find that to be a bit shallow and one sided; if we're going base all judgements on the physical aspects of a thing, while ignoring the psychological and emotional aspects of both parties, we can pretty much go back to the loin cloth and club and rule in that fashion.

[Doomsday101]

It is true that legally the father doesn't have the final word. I'm naive enough to believe that when the father steps up and tells the mother he is willing to take the child once it is born that in most cases the woman will agree. I'm realistic enough to realize that it doesn't happen in every case. Legally I don't know how you get past that obstacle.

Actually one of my best friends is a single dad and even though his child was already born he was given custody of that child. I just think that both the mother and father should have a voice in this. Like others I do believe we are talking about a human life and while I may not have as hardcore of a stance on abortion as some others but I do draw the line when it comes to late term abortions which are currently banned and I think that when a person chooses an abortion that like any other elective procedure they should pay for it not the government.

[Doomsday101]

It seems most here think not. Considering the woman has to the heavy lifting, so to speak, they'd rather it be open and shut for the woman to be firmly in control.

I find that to be a bit shallow and one sided; if we're going base all judgements on the physical aspects of a thing, while ignoring the psychological and emotional aspects of both parties, we can pretty much go back to the loin cloth and club and rule in that fashion.

I think some have this ideal that the man should have no say so yet when the choice is to have the child then the law mandates that the man must pay child support and while it is the right thing to do I find it a bit hypocritical to say that a man has no say so on his unborn child living or being put to death. Ater all that is just as much his child as it is the woman’s.

[iceberg]

so i take it we're close to getting this resolved and everybody happy? : )

[Doomsday101]

so i take it we're close to getting this resolved and everybody happy? : )

Yeah that will happen. :laugh2:

[ConcordCowboy]

Anyway we have fixed it ......

Abortion will be illegal after month 3

We will cut back our defense budget by 20%

And Sassy can starve to Death all the brain damaged women he wants to.


Compromise Rocks!

:yourock:

And I would like to suggest that we take all the food that we save from starving brain damaged women to death and put it in a bank to feed all the children that aren't aborted after month 3...if needed.

Hey give and take...it's what compromise is all about.

:D

so i take it we're close to getting this resolved and everybody happy? : )

Well we were close and then it all went to hell and a handbasket again. :D

[joseephuss]

Well we were close and then it all went to hell and a handbasket again. :D

No we are going to hell to weave handbaskets for all eternity.

[ConcordCowboy]

No we are going to hell to weave handbaskets for all eternity.

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u179/funnycatmacros/handbasket.jpg

[CanadianCowboysFan]

That's your words and I don't hold that view. Seems like you may be projecting your own thoughts on me.

I don't know Cajun, you referred to a woman spreading her legs, that is at best a poor choice of words and at worst mysoginistic

[peplaw06]

There are about 840,000(which keeps falling by the way) abortions annually in the U.S. If this is right, color me even more disgusted.

840k (a falling number), probably means what an average of a million for like 10-20 years?

6 million people were killed in the Holocaust.

[Cajuncowboy]

No you never differentiated one way or the other...your words not mine....Spread your legs, get pregnant, kill the problem.

Somehow I don't think you believe the cases of rape, incest or molestation should be allowed to have an abortion anyways so the point you are currently arguing seems moot.

I am sorry you can't read in context. That's a YOU problem, not a ME problem.

[Cajuncowboy]

I don't know Cajun, you referred to a woman spreading her legs, that is at best a poor choice of words and at worst mysoginistic

I am referring to those women who use abortion as a form of birth control. Who use the murder of innocent life to cover their error. If you cannot grasp that, then it is on you.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I am referring to those women who use abortion as a form of birth control. Who use the murder of innocent life to cover their error. If you cannot grasp that, then it is on you.

It isn't murder anymore than it is when you step on an ant.

You basically think if you score and get knocked up, you should be forced to carry the child regardless of the circumstances. Just admit it.

As an aside, are you against the morning after pill or the abortion pill what is RU 238? If you are, why.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I am sorry you can't read in context. That's a YOU problem, not a ME problem.

So are you saying it is ok for women that have been involved in rape, molestation or incest to get an abortion if they desire?

[zrinkill]

It isn't murder anymore than it is when you step on an ant.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/ant-1.gif = http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/fetus1.jpg

Wow.

[zrinkill]

So are you saying it is ok for women that have been involved in rape, molestation or incest to get an abortion if they desire?

Thats what I have said the whole time. If there was a crime involved.

[ConcordCowboy]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/ant-1.gif = http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/fetus1.jpg

Wow.


Stepping on ants should be illegal.

[iceberg]

Stepping on ants should be illegal.

especially if they're pregnant.