Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
and you are entitled to your opinion as well. by all means, don't drive while you are drunk if you are opposed to it. now, does that really make sense. how about this. you may be opposed to beatind your children. by all means then, don't do it.
Your comparisons don't even make sense. Having an abortion endangers no one but the woman making the choice herself. Driving drunk endangers everyone on the road.
This is poorly expressed but what I think you are trying to say is that children aren't always loveable because they are hard work, but that's not the same thing as growing up unwanted and unloved. There is a vast difference between a child who has a rough day and Mom is relieved when the child settles down for the night, and child who never receives and sort of affection or validation and is truly unwanted.
Really??? Well I would like to hear these because I can't think of a single argument I can make that would be remotely applicable for killing either.
why arre you bringing god into this. i don't think god should be brought into it at all and i do not do so.
however, LOl, i imagine there is some threshold level for high cholesterol where 1/3 of those who exceed that level die.
I was not in any way responding to your posts, so it's really irrelevant to me whether you think I should bring God into this discussion or not. If you don't wish to discuss religious reasons for opposing abortion, then don't respond to the posts, but please don't try to tell others what they can or cannot discuss.
And then you attempt to compare high cholesteral to miscarriage????
having an abortion kills human life. i would call killing something endangering it.
so. you are only for first trimester abortions, right?
i wasn't comparing high cholesterol to miscarriage per se. i was comparing the arguments.
maybe you should define human life...when it begins and what exactly makes it human?
Your arguments won't fly, and your solution won't work until the US addresses the poverty that drives women to abort their children.
Your arguments won't fly, and your solution won't work until the US addresses the poverty that drives women to abort their children.
Yes having unprotected sex is not their fault. Someone drove them to do it.
having an abortion kills human life. i would call killing something endangering it.
so. you are only for first trimester abortions, right?
Your comparisons don't even make sense. Having an abortion endangers no one but the woman making the choice herself. Driving drunk endangers everyone on the road.
This is poorly expressed but what I think you are trying to say is that children aren't always loveable because they are hard work, but that's not the same thing as growing up unwanted and unloved. There is a vast difference between a child who has a rough day and Mom is relieved when the child settles down for the night, and child who never receives and sort of affection or validation and is truly unwanted.
Really??? Well I would like to hear these because I can't think of a single argument I can make that would be remotely applicable for killing either.
I was not in any way responding to your posts, so it's really irrelevant to me whether you think I should bring God into this discussion or not. If you don't wish to discuss religious reasons for opposing abortion, then don't respond to the posts, but please don't try to tell others what they can or cannot discuss.
And then you attempt to compare high cholesteral to miscarriage????
having an abortion kills human life. i would call killing something endangering it.
so. you are only for first trimester abortions, right?
i wasn't comparing high cholesterol to miscarriage per se. i was comparing the arguments.
maybe you should define human life...when it begins and what exactly makes it human?
The phrase human life means nothing to me. Because at conception it is alive. And it is human in that the dna is human. But it's certainly not a baby.
And I still know too many pro lifers who simply refuse to acknowledge anything outside of "baby at conception" or "murder at conception". It is pointless to even discuss this topic with those people as I think they are living a fantasy.
having an abortion kills human life. i would call killing something endangering it.
so. you are only for first trimester abortions, right?
Let me be clear. The choice to end a pregnancy rests with the woman and her doctor, no matter what point she is in her pregnancy. Regardless of what kinds of lies the anti-abortion faction likes to tell, late term abortions are extremely rare, and nearly alway done to save the life of the mother. Amnio-centisis can't be done during the first tri-mester, and that's the test to determine genetic abnormalities, so no I don't believe abortion should be restricted to first trimester only.
Most of the women having abortions are poor women who cannot afford to have more children. What part of that are you missing? No mother's allowance, no subsidized day care, no maternity leave - no wonder poor women are having abortions in high numbers.
Why not address the scandal and outrage that every other first world country gives support to pregnant women and their children except the USA? You talk about women taking responsibility, aborting a child you cannot afford is most definitely taking responsibility.
Your arguments won't fly, and your solution won't work until the US addresses the poverty that drives women to abort their children.
Yes having unprotected sex is not their fault. Someone drove them to do it.
People can, and often do, get pregnant protected or not.
It is THAT concept I wish to return to culturally. A culture in which human life is valued and not seen as throwaway because it is inconvenient or an unwanted hardship. When most Americans saw life that way, there were far fewer unwanted pregnancies and far fewer abortions. Certainly had we not changed to a culture in which throwing away a life is seen as acceptable purely for convenience, we would not see 54+ million abortions as the legacy of Roe v Wade.
It is THAT concept I wish to return to culturally. A culture in which human life is valued and not seen as throwaway because it is inconvenient or an unwanted hardship. When most Americans saw life that way, there were far fewer unwanted pregnancies and far fewer abortions. Certainly had we not changed to a culture in which throwing away a life is seen as acceptable purely for convenience, we would not see 54+ million abortions as the legacy of Roe v Wade.
You pay lip service to valuing life, yet you oppose maternity leave, government funded health care, subsidized day care, and other social supports that would raise the cost of goods and services. You have chosen to value things over people. That is why poor women must abort their babies.
You have to teach people to value lives ahead of cheap goods and to provide a better social safety net for poor families. Until you do, the abortion rate isn't going to change. Every country that provides a strong social safety net, sex education in the schools, easy access to birth control, and paid maternity leave, has low rates of abortion. The US provides none of these things and a high rate of abortion.
These are you options - pick one.
In all due respect DragonLady, you have no idea what I oppose and what I support other than what I have volunteered on this thread. You know little or nothing about me. When you have walked a few decades in my shoes, you might have some standing to judge my point of view based on the life I have led and based on what I do and do not support and believe.
In all due respect DragonLady, you have no idea what I oppose and what I support other than what I have volunteered on this thread. You know little or nothing about me. When you have walked a few decades in my shoes, you might have some standing to judge my point of view based on the life I have led and based on what I do and do not support and believe.
You have been very clear that the costs of raising children are the sole responsibility of the parents. You have been very judgemental about women aborting children for "convenience" even though the information you posted showed that overwhelmingly, poverty was the reason for the abortions.
Not once have you advocated ANYTHING in terms of social programs, family supports, or even better sex education on avoiding unwanted pregancies. I can only judge you by your words, which have been very judgemental towards women who choose abortion. I based my responses on YOUR WORDS.
You may chose to think that I haven't made my point, but the only point you've made is to show how out of touch you are with the realities that most women face in their lives today. The fact that you haven't offered a single solution to the problem and your only suggestion is to turn back the clock to 1950's values, shows how bankrupt you are of practical ideas, and all the while you blame the poor for their choices.
You take real offence at me judging you, well, I find your judgement on the women having abortions to be repugnant and disgusting. You have no right to criticize these women for their choices until you have to chose between the roof over your head for you and your children, and giving birth to another child you can't afford to feed.
There is no case, let alone an "excellent" case that abortion ends a human life. Life begins with the first breath. End of that story.
The real story here is religious zealots attempting to inflict a particular persuasion's beliefs on others. Hilariously even the Bible doesn't back them, and of course the Constitution is silent on the issue, so all of the mumbo jumbo is made up.
Next.
Sorry, but that baby in my womb was very much the same person he or she was an hour later when he or she was officially born. And every component of that baby was present in the fertilized egg that attached itself to the uterine wall. You cannot point to any stage of the entire process that was not part of a human life or necessary to it.
If you want to make this a diatribe against religious zealots, I suggest you find a different thread. I don't believe anybody who is seriously debating the topic on this thread has made religion in any form the basis for defending the unborn. I know I haven't.
The Way It Was | Mother Jones
This is a very hard article to read, and will be for both sides of the discussion. I'm pro-choice, though that is not a choice I would ever make for myself. The first page is quite graphic, giving specifics of abortion. The rest is graphic as to what happens when it's not a legal option.
It's a long article, but I believe it to be worth the time it takes to read it.
I really wouldn't want to see Roe v Wade repealed.
The abortion statistics are pretty telling when you read them for what they are:
Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion Statistics
And again, I am not going to judge any woman who has had an abortion because I don't KNOW why she chose to have an abortion. Nor am I saying that abortions are never necessary or that those that are should not be legal and safe.
But 54+ million babies aborted since Roe v Wade should not be an acceptable number to anybody.
I read the report. I guess you missed the No. 1 reason why women have abortions:
Or this little tidbit:
3/4 of the women say that they cannot afford a child. 2/3 of the women who receive abortions, are on Medicaid.
Among women who obtained abortions in 2009, 40.2% had no prior live births; 46.3% had one or two prior live births, and 13.6% had three or more prior live births (CDC).
Over 46% of the women who obtained an abortion are married or living with their partner, and over 60% of these women already had one of more children. So much for the notion that women in loving relationships don't abort. That women wouldn't kill they babies if they really understood they were destroying a life. Or that they abort babies simply because they are inconvenient.
What emerges in reading this report is a picture of the women who get abortions. Adults more than teenagers, married or in a relationship, but desperate poor and unable to raise any more children.
Hardly the careless vapid fun seeker the anti-abortion crowd in this thread portray. Everything in the articles confirms what I have been saying throughout this thread.
And please Foxfire, don't insult my intelligence and say that raising the child is the parents' responsibility, because these parents are saying they are too poor to do it. So if you want to stop abortions, try giving the poor some family supports, because they're having all the kids they can at the moment.
Pre Roe v Wade, most women who could not afford to raise a child, and that would be a lot of the unmarried ones, gave the child life and then handed it over to a loving couple who desperately wanted a baby and could give it everything he or she needed. The mother was far less likely to see it as an option just to kill the child she didn't want or couldn't care for. She was far more likely to revere the life and demonstrate love in its highest form.
There is no case, let alone an "excellent" case that abortion ends a human life. Life begins with the first breath. End of that story.
The real story here is religious zealots attempting to inflict a particular persuasion's beliefs on others. Hilariously even the Bible doesn't back them, and of course the Constitution is silent on the issue, so all of the mumbo jumbo is made up.
Next.
Sorry, but that baby in my womb was very much the same person he or she was an hour later when he or she was officially born. And every component of that baby was present in the fertilized egg that attached itself to the uterine wall. You cannot point to any stage of the entire process that was not part of a human life or necessary to it.
If you want to make this a diatribe against religious zealots, I suggest you find a different thread. I don't believe anybody who is seriously debating the topic on this thread has made religion in any form the basis for defending the unborn. I know I haven't.
Religion, not science is the basis for anti-abortion nonsense. The upside is that abortion can't be stopped, even if people pretending there is no religious basis pass nutter laws trying to stop it.
Last but not least, obviously what you believe is different than the Constitution and the Bible inform us about freedom and life. Unfortunately the norm today has become examples of the failures of public education in America, so you have plenty of company.
That is pretty funny.
The only rational arguments against abortion are religious and legal, and neither the Bible nor the Constitution supports your meddling in my family's rights.
We are through here.
There are none so blind as those who will not see. If you refuse to acknowledge that your society must FIRST provide family-friendly social programs, child care and medical care and assistance to low income families, then you are being wilfully ignorant.
You blame the number of abortions on societies attitudes towards children, then misplace the blame for this on mores instead of a poor parents instead on self people who have never had to truly struggle in their lives society which blames the poor for their situation.
I've pointed out the fallacies of your arguments time and time again, with facts, figures and studies and still you say no no that's not right, only a change in attitude will help. No amount of fact and logic will get in the way of what you know is right.
