Abortion: A Sad Reality

[American4Americ]

Not only do I fully agree with the OP, but I will even take it a bit further. First off God does NOT make mistakes. In a Christian point of view I believe that only God creates a life, so only He can take one. Abortion in any case is wrong, including cases of rape, incest, or death of the mother. God does NOT make mistakes period!

Well said.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You ignore the other side of the equation. The unwanted babies, problem pregnancies, and the swelling of the welfare/public assistance ranks that were not a factor for the last 40 years due to Roe should be considered.

So there are fewer people on welfare now than 40 years ago? Is that really what you meant to say?
In the past unwanted children were put up for adoption. Like Steve Jobs. How many Steve Jobs' have been aborted over the last 40 years?

Fewer people than would otherwise be on welfare; yes. Fewer persons in prison than would otherwise be in prison, less crime than would otherwise be occuring.

How many Hitlers have been aborted?

First of all, prove it.

Second of all, you leftist twits would be OUTRAGED if we suggested that we solve the prison overcrowding problem by simply going in and killing convicted felons in job lots, but you have no problem with the (theoretical, since it's not only unproven, but refuted) solution of killing babies in job lots because they MIGHT grow up to be criminals?

Your logic is not like our Earth logic.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You ignore the other side of the equation. The unwanted babies, problem pregnancies, and the swelling of the welfare/public assistance ranks that were not a factor for the last 40 years due to Roe should be considered.

is this the level of moral bankruptcy our society has degenerated to? We kill unborn children because they might add to our welfare state....

Can you name me a time in the last 3000 years there has been no abortions?

What the hell's THAT got to do with anything?

 

[Cecilie1200]

going back to 5-10k deaths from hatchett jobs is not the answer- a joke...

That meme is a fabrication.

The risk of dying from childbirth is greater than the risk of dying from an abortion.

Prove it.

 

[lakeview]

It's the implication of support for 'planned parenthood' abortion centers.

Connect the dots.

I think you've got this backward. Support for planned parenthood, or any other organization that deals in contraception, indicates a belief that there is a way to avoid pregnancy.

If they were teaching abstinence, why do they brag about how many abortions they've performed?

Lame. Perhaps it is you who needs to connect the dots.

Who said they were teaching abstinence? No one.

btw, I'm still waiting for you to have a nice, laid back discussion with PC about your "limits". What's the matter, you don't want to discuss rape and incest exceptions with her? Yep, there's nothing I care about more than the opinions of a man who has no courage of conviction. I mean seriously dude, you actually Thanked her for a post that directly contradicted what you were arguing for earlier in the thread, that's spineless.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Right and you pushing your morals and wanting to kill your neighbor Is the height of morality....In opposite land

I have no desire to kill anyone. Sorry I misjudged your ability to follow an analogy. Carry on.

Oh so you don't. Ok, Funny how you would compare something legal to something illegal and pretend they are the same. "I'm going to throw away the trash does that mean I can dump the dead body there too!? Why not?"

Be more serious

Funny, how you think "legal" can replace "moral".

And then you wonder why people say you have no morality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Everyone knows what it is silly goose.

No, otherwise the act would not be so common. They know what it is, they do not understand that it's a vile act of indifference toward an innocent growing baby. The baby has been turned into fetal tissue by the abortion industry. No worries, just like having a wart removed.

Where does FREE WILL come in here? God gave man FREE WILL and admonished him to follow his laws. It is man's choice whether or not he chooses to follow God's law. By outlawing abortion you are taking away that FREE WILL.
If a woman uses her FREE WILL and decides to have an abortion it is none of your business. It is between her and God. You have no right to try to remove her FREE WILL and to tell her what she can and cannot do.

FASCINATING argument. So by outlawing murder, and rape, and assault, we are taking away the free will of the people who wish to commit those acts?

Let's try this on for size: If a woman uses her FREE WILL and decides to kill her ex-husband it is none of your business. It is between her and God. You have no right to try to remove her FREE WILL and to tell her what she can and cannot do.

Or how about this one: If a man uses his FREE WILL and decides to rape a woman it is none of your business. It is between him and God. You have no right to try to remove his FREE WILL and to tell him what she can and cannot do.

That sound reasonable to you, Chuckles?

 

[TemplarKormac]

That meme is a fabrication.

The risk of dying from childbirth is greater than the risk of dying from an abortion.

Prove it.

She can't.

As of 2010, the maternal mortality rate is (drumroll please)

21 per 100,000 live births.

Maternal mortality ratio (modeled estimate, per 100,000 live births) | Data | Table

ABORTION FATALITY

In 2008, 12 women died as a result of complications from known legal induced abortion (CDC).
The number of deaths attributable to legal induced abortion was highest before the 1980s (CDC).
In 1972 (the year before abortion was federally legalized), a total of 24 women died from causes known to be associated with legal abortions, and 39 died as a result of known illegal abortions (CDC).

Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion Statistics

 

[Cecilie1200]

Where does FREE WILL come in here? God gave man FREE WILL and admonished him to follow his laws. It is man's choice whether or not he chooses to follow God's law. By outlawing abortion you are taking away that FREE WILL.
If a woman uses her FREE WILL and decides to have an abortion it is none of your business. It is between her and God. You have no right to try to remove her FREE WILL and to tell her what she can and cannot do.

If it's my FREE WILL to murder my neighbor, who are you to tell me I can't? I choose whether or not to follow God's law, so leave me be while I take my chainsaw to the head of the asshole next door.

It is your FREE WILL to murder your neighbor. I can tell you you shouldn't but I cannot stop you. However, if you do so you will be breaking civil law and be subject to prison or the death penality. We don't lock people up until AFTER a crime has been committed. There is no civil law against abortion. You may be breaking God's law but that is between you and God.
And please, stop with the bull shit "chain saw" shit. Before long you will be typing people to the train track

Let me get this straight. You just got done howling about how abortion shouldn't be outlawed because it takes away free will, but THEN you run and hide behind "It's illegal!" when someone brings up killing OTHER human beings?

Why don't you make up your mind and be consistent? Is it because you know your position is nothing but shitty, second-rate rationalization for being evil?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I understand that there is great discord on the issue of abortion, but I cringe whenever someone says "If you don't want an abortion, don't get one". This is like saying "If you don't like killing another person, don't kill anyone". The whole essence behind the pro-life idea is that all people are endowed with the right to life when they are conceived. These rights don't come from government. They come from God.

I would ask those who are obstinately pro-choice to ask themselves this: How would you justify to your creator that you thought this was OK?
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...F4yTSC399IYqNc1tpZLW4SIxIe-px55h4vcEaG78mS5_A

If you say you don't believe in God, then ask yourself this: is it morally right to take someone's life for the sake of convenience?

Forget the instances of rape or the life of a mother. That's about 3% of total abortions. Let's talk about the 97% of the 50 unborn children(or "fetuses" using the pro-choice lingo") killed since Roe v. Wade.

I understand that the majority of Americans are "pro-choice". But I think the reason for that is that they don't know the real story behind abortion. I really wish people could change their mind on this issue.

A fetus and some person are not the same thing. We on the left are BAFFLED as to how anyone could think otherwise.

And besides, if the Right would agree to make child bearing and child raising less financially onerous by collectivizing the costs of it, then abortion would be much less attractive. Child birth should be a cost paid for by taxpayers fully, be they poor or the Trumps. Schooling, through college, should be taxpayer supported. In Europe, where this is the case, the standards for getting into college are where they should be: Very High. The taxpayers are generous, but you do have to earn university education.

Anyway, if you want the demand for abortion to go down, bring the cost of motherhood down.

Hmmm. We on the right are baffled by how such a bunch of biologically uneducated buffoons as you lefties managed to graduate high school (always presuming that you DID).

 

[Cecilie1200]

The law acknowledges the fetus to be a human being, and even allows for the woman to have a choice to abort the unborn child without pain of penalty under the law. Liberals, please exit stage left.

But not a legal person with rights...

Legality only equals morality for people so evil or ignorant or both that they cannot formulate moral thought on their own. For normal human beings, legality is created by morality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The fetus is irrelevant. Many would claim the hardship you save the fetus through abortion is worth the risk of being established a murderer. Upon analyzing humanity in its current state, I can't help but agree.

How wrong you are. The fetus has the same right to life as the mother does. If the child is conceived though consensual means with another consenting adult, she should be forced to carry to full term. So yes, the 'fetus' is relevant.

Consent to sex does not mean consent to pregnancy...

Well, yeah, it actually does to Mother Nature, and her opinion on THAT subject is really the only one that matters.

I hate to break it to you, but you can't legislate away nature, biology, and science, no matter how hard you try.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You ignore the other side of the equation. The unwanted babies, problem pregnancies, and the swelling of the welfare/public assistance ranks that were not a factor for the last 40 years due to Roe should be considered.

So there are fewer people on welfare now than 40 years ago? Is that really what you meant to say?
In the past unwanted children were put up for adoption. Like Steve Jobs. How many Steve Jobs' have been aborted over the last 40 years?

Fewer people than would otherwise be on welfare; yes. Fewer persons in prison than would otherwise be in prison, less crime than would otherwise be occuring.

How many Hitlers have been aborted?

How many Einsteins have been aborted? Nobody knows. So the question would be:

Why is this relevant?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Consent to sex does not mean consent to pregnancy...

Uhh, yeah it does. If you don't make sure your man is wearing his rubbers, then I must assume you wanted the pregnancy. If the condom breaks, it isn't anyone's fault, (Sarcasm well perhaps the child's of course /sarcasm) If the mother is healthy, and capable of child birth and if she conceives by means that exclude rape or incest, she should be made to carry it.

The logic I use here is that if you're putting yourself into a situation where you run the risk of getting pregnant, and you do, while not wanting to; that's tough.

When it comes to you, Kormack, it's easy for you to say force should be imposed upon those other than you. I know women, and even hope to date women more morally onsight than you, for they undergo the same circumstance in which you impose on another without the privilege of counting themselves out on the pain. I know for sure, should the circumstances be reversed, a man such as yourself would look upon force with much scrutiny especially when considered against a man who slipped the condom off without her foresight.

It is easy to impose punishment upon others you will never have to face, it is entirely different to impose the same punishment while looking it in the face. You are a man, you have no right to tell a woman when and wear to bear child, and you have no right to decide for the child whether it would rather live or die.

Pardon me, but didn't you earlier get done saying that, as a penis-bearer, you had no business telling women whether or not to have abortions?

With that in mind, and as a woman myself, may I ask where you get the unutterable GALL to then turn around and declare that women who agree with your lassez faire attitude toward abortion are more "morally onsight"? In fact, what the Hell are you doing in this thread, expressing any ******* opinions at all, you frigging hypocrite?

May I politely suggest that either A) you put your money where your mouth is and hit the road to a thread you haven't already sanctimoniously declared yourself "too moral" to participate in, or B) admit that your position on abortion stems more from a desire to pander to women so you can use them (and conveniently have them free you from the consequences) than it does from any actual respect for us or our freedom? The only "freedom" I see you wanting us women to have is to be ignorant sluts brainwashed into giving cads like you everything you want while believing we're being "empowered". No thanks.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I really wish people could change their mind on this issue.

We live in america and with that comes a thing called "freedom". The law of the land is the constitution, not the bible. You far right wingnuts need to understand that,..

And abortion has nothing to do with the Constitution. You far-left wingnuts need to understand THAT.

Wrong again, as usual:

The decision to terminate a pregnancy is profound and difficult. No person undertakes such a decision lightly--and States may not presume that a woman has failed to reflect adequately merely because her conclusion differs from the State's preference. A woman who has, in the privacy of her thoughts and conscience, weighed the options and made her decision cannot be forced to reconsider all, simply because the State believes she has come to the wrong conclusion. [n.5]

Part of the constitutional liberty to choose is the equal dignity to which each of us is entitled. A woman who decides to terminate her pregnancy is entitled to the same respect as a woman who decides to carry the fetus to term.

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

And spare us your usual tedious, ignorant, and subjective disdain for the Supreme Court and Constitutional case law.

You disagree with the Court and consider its jurisprudence on privacy rights ‘wrong.’

Noted. You’re entitled to your opinion, however much in error.

But it is a fact of law that abortion is indeed an issue that involves the Constitution, and to argue otherwise is idiocy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Thank god we'll have free birth control in a month, and abortions will be cut. The anti abortion zealots live on another planet...going back to 5-10k deaths from hatchett jobs is not the answer- a joke...

You are a ******* joke.

Birth control has been FREE since the 70's! It has been all BUT FREE for the last two decades at a cost of 9 bucks a month....meanwhile back at the ranch abortion clinics have been scuttling and misappropriating billions of federal dollars to pay for millions of abortions at a cost to tax payers- idiot!

The pro life groups want one thing...to protect the life of the babies In Utero from the Dr.'s of death.

Your are full of shit and I am young enough to prove it. My ex-partner and I were responsible enough to use birth control pills in addition to condoms. Had she not been compelled to the IUD which very well may have played a role in her inability to conceive, we may have our own children today. Birth control has hardly been affordable since the 70s, and if you honestly think it has then I must conclude you are mentally retarded. It is anything but affordable.

How are you defining "affordable", hypocrite? Back when I used birth control, my depo provera shot cost $70 out-of-pocket, and provided protection for 3 months. A box of 30 condoms costs $15 or so at the drugstores in my city. May I politely suggest that if those prices are too steep for you, that you should probably be spending your energy looking for a better job, rather than *******?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The only thing I have to say to you is this, "Since when was $9 a month ever free?"
It has only increased tenfold since your last need for use, you are too distant from the facts to be relevant.

I'd love to see your refutation of these facts. Ad hominem will get you nowhere here.

Are you honestly going to rely on the ad hominem argument? Please enlighten me to which of my opinions are fallacious and I will gladly destroy your false logic.

Your opinion that birth control costs have increased tenfold, for a start. I work for a prescription benefits plan management company, and one of the items I see priced out most often is birth control. I assure you, it does not cost $90 a month.

 

[Cecilie1200]

[

Actually not. I have a problem with rapists and incest in general. A) Rape is a crime, a violation of the woman. B) incest can lead to severe genetic deformities in the child. So, am I not allowed to have limits? Or will you hold me to standards that you yourself do not hold to? Unlike you, I don't use rape victims to further a political agenda, I carry a genuine concern for the well being of the victim.

There are two studies, the only of their kind about rape victim abortions, that show regardless of my opinion on the subject, nearly three quarters of the women polled in the year 1981 chose to keep their babies instead of aborting them. How about that?

Funny how the two of you suddenly care for the child, when you've spent the entirety of this thread defending a woman's right to needlessly kill it. I find it strange that I managed to completely reverse your line of reasoning in one simple discussion about abortion.

I have a standard.

Her body. Her decision. But this is interesting.



Okay, if that's a standard, then you would support women who abort fetuses with Down Syndrome and other genetic defects? You are widening the net even further.




I think that if you had actually been alive in 1981, you'd know how really worthless a study like that was. Most women in 1981 didn't report being raped. There was still a stigma attached to it.

Funny how the two of you suddenly care for the child, when you've spent the entirety of this thread defending a woman's right to needlessly kill it. I find it strange that I managed to completely reverse your line of reasoning in one simple discussion about abortion

Where did I say I cared about the child? Or that I even considered it to be one?

For the record, I said no such thing.

I pointed out your double standard that your belief that a fetus is a child, unless he was conceived from rape or incest or had severe genetic deformities, in which case we need to totally kill the **** out of it!

"Her body. Her decision."


No it isn't.


Unless you can explain how 'her body' can have two different sets of fingerprints, and two different blood types.

And don't forget the two different sets of DNA.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Have you bothered to read the thread? What is it with this board and you holier than thou blowhards loving to comment on shit you don't even read?

If you had bothered to read what I had said before you jumped in with your little "contribution", you would have known that I pointed out the hypocrisy in saying that abortion is murder but at the same time wanting to have exceptions for rape and incest.

Try to have just a tiny bit of a clue before you comment.

You wanted to divert attention away from the million-plus abortions each year and focus on victims of rape and incest, using them as a human shield in your exercise.

Smoke and mirrors. Let's catch the pro-lifers in a contradiction and use these rape and incest victims to do it! Then we can carry on aborting a million babies a year!

And you thought you had gotten away with it.

You didn't.

It's a sick little tactic.

So let’s put the million-plus abortions each year on center stage, under the bright lights, no smoke, no mirrors.

Abortion is horrible and terrible and the fault of irresponsible people – it’s also Constitutional.

What, then, is your solution to end abortion that comports with the Constitutional and its case law?

Or do you advocate ‘banning’ abortion, which is just as irresponsible.

"Morality? Legal, legal, LEGAL!!!!" And you're honestly confused as to why people think you're an illogical, brain-damaged moral midget, that's the funny part.

 

[Cecilie1200]

My point....proven....is that she is killing a discrete individual.....a separate entity.

Except that it is not separate. It is attached to her body. If it was separate, it wouldn't need to be attached her via the umbilical cord, would it?

. . . Aaaand this sort of ignorant, biologically-incorrect "thought" is why it's impossible to treat with leftists on the subject of abortion as anything but evil children.

Seriously, did you not graduate high school, or is this just what passes for education in that benighted leftist sewer you call a country?