What should abortion laws be?

[☭proletarian☭]

? I did post some info, but I don’t think you read my post

If you did, I don''t recall seeing it- JD probably buried it under the latest batch of puppies she birthed.

Could you post it again?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

The question is not something you imply that is so absurd as to indicate that it is common or current, or something that happened specifically between a canine and human, but that genetic interbreeding is entirely possible. Even that it is possible that humans intermingled with wolves so much back in prehistoric times, that the two created the dog- now considered mans best and most loyal friend.

There is a lot of anthropological history behind the relationship between humans and wolves, and then humans and dogs. Dogs as a species, have only been known to be around for about 10,000 years, while wolves and humans lived together, and hunted-gathered together for thousands of years before then.

Anyways, whether dogs were or weren't made as a result of some weird interbreeding situation...

What?! You think we domesticated thew hound by having sex with it and bestial whores like you then gave birth to dogs?

I don't think your dog is safe...

 

[☭proletarian☭]

If the legal definition of death requires an absence of electrical potential in the brain of the deceased, does it make sense to legally define life at the point which the voltage in the brain of a fetus first becomes measurable?

WTF.

"What is missing? The missing piece is individuality ... auton- omy ... a biologically discrete person. As long as the fetus is physically within the woman's body, nourished by the food she eats, sustained by the air she breathes, dependent upon her circulatory and respiratory system, it cannot claim individual rights because it is not an individual. It is part of the woman's body and subject to her discretion."

Wendy McElroy

Wow, another whore with no understanding of biology.

What's your point?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

My contention stands firm, that sentience and the beginning of the individual's life begins at birth, by the act of breathing.

What world do you live in?

I have proven that the heart cannot beat or bring oxygen to cells without breathing to occur

The heart can beat without breathing being present. *holds breath*

Moron.

 

[AllieBaba]

Sorry, dude, I would have pos repped you but apparently I neg repped you too recently.

Remind me later.

 

[DiamondDave]

Hate to tell the guy.. but the unborn child does breathe amniotic fluid before being exposed to air...

Personally I am against abortion unless there is life threatened or if the well being of the mother in a mental capacity would be traumatic to a point where she would endanger herself or the child... I am also for father's rights that are equal to mothers rights, for it takes 2 to tango

This is a developing independent life we are talking about here... with it's own DNA signature that is unique.. if this were only about the woman's body it would be her identical DNA in the child and there would be no need for a man

 

[FA_Q2]

Still waiting for conservatives to have more of a suggestion than, "Make abortion illegal". What happens to the kids? The mother?

I gave you a ******* solution and you have yet to say WHY you are against it. What happens to the baby and mother? THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENS NOW IF THERE IS NO ABORTION!

Well, my son was born three days late, and his lung collapsed, and he DID need medical attention.
Whats your point?

Follow the conversation...
You said
"Oh and lets be clear about the differences between a live birth and the birth of a "viable" fetus.
A viable fetus isn't very ******* viable if it is born in a taxicab, or out in the middle of nowhere, in some mud hut somewhere, where access to life"
Obvously this is not true as my son was viable at 8 months and would have been fine in a mud hot, taxicab or anyware else for that matter.
Folloe that now. Your statement is incorrect.

He can take responsibility for having sex, also. Women are not the sexual gatekeepers. If you want to argue this, then you have to concede that much. Women do not choose to get pregnant any more than men choose to get them pregnant. There are no "guilty parties" in this, besides both of the people who had sex to begin with. Sorry, honey, but as long as the man never married the woman, he really has no say in the matter. He is not her "partner", he is just her "sperm donor", and until THAT problem is rectified, then he has no REASON to try to make any claim about what she does with her body. The problem is not with people having SEX, it is with people having sex before they are married, and women being made to be the villains, without fail. If she becomes an unwed single parent, she is also vilified. Men who are required to pay child support are treated as victims, as usual. If they are late, the family, friends, and employers they have actually feel sorry for them. Men can actually use the argument "I need this job- I am late on my child support payments!" and actually get some empathy from an employer. Women who say "I have a child I have to support alone, whose father has never given me a penny to help" are treated like whores. This is how life is, and it is not equal, and not fair to women.

I never said there were guilty parties. No one is guilty of anything here but there are RESPONSIBILITIES that come with having sex and you must own up to them. I have no idea where you get the idea that men are somehow pitied for being late on child support. I, and everyone I know, never felt sorry fore someone behind on child support. The term “dead beat dad” is a worse slur to me than “whore” also. People hate dead beat dads. On the other hand, I DO feel sorry for single mothers and again, I don’t think I have even met anyone that EVER put forth the idea that a single mother was anything but a victim. Most people ask in wonderment how they do it. I do not know what kind of sick people are treating someone like a whore because she is a single mother but you may want to consider not socializing with them

You ignored the rest of my post- Some women do not even find out that they are pregnant or that something is seriously wrong, until later on in the pregnancy. Is it really such a strain on you that you cannot imagine such an event occurring as this??

I ignored that because it is a farce. Sure it happens but it is fairly rare and as I already stated, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHECK THAT SORT OF THING. Get a damn test every three months if you are that worried and are not approaching sex safely enough. Killing a fetus should not be a “fix” to “oh, I was to lazy to check.“

I only have one question- How is it any less convenient or any more moral for a woman to terminate the pregnancy, just because of the "life in danger" clause?

It is better to save 1 than kill 2. No one’s life has priority over the other and the mother is the only one with a voice so she is the one that decides who lives. To the rest of that ridiculous blather, it is IMMINENT danger to life, not “oh I have a little higher blood pressure.”

Even that it is possible that humans intermingled with wolves so much back in prehistoric times, that the two created the dog- now considered mans best and most loyal friend.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hate to say it buuuuuuut.....
wolf = d o g
Dogs have just been domesticated for so long they have slightly changed form. As a side note, wolves and dog can interbreed, since they are the same species of course.

People who think that the brain having function makes for a sentient fetus. I have proven this theory to be incorrect. If you wish to argue this further, I will happily QUOTE the articles directly, if you really need someone to hold your hand through the reality of it all.

Apparently I do. I have seen no PROOF that there is no sentience. If you can pull that one out I would be forced to concede the argument. All I have seen is conjecture that active, NON RANDOM brain waves, reactions and active dreaming are somehow not signs of sentience. I fail to see any reason in that train of thought. I conceded that at the 30 day mark the brain wave were erratic and random in much the same way that muscle twitching is and that is why I did not completely agree with pro about the 7 week line. The assumption that the formation of higher brain functions are not signs of sentence though is a stretch.

To the rape point – Rape is its own story because personal responsibility has been taken from the woman in this instance. That, to me, is the deference between rape and normal abortions. In rape, it was not the woman’s choice to have sex and therefore it should not be the woman that bears the responsibility of its consequences. It should be noted that I do not believe that rape victims should be allowed any difference in abortion because I believe that abortion should be legal for the first trimester. This would give a rape victim the time to decide and take the necessary steps for an abortion.

Sure- I have seen that happen too. Shame that men go so long without supporting their children. It is NOT a shame that the women actually go and hire an attorney to fulfill the judgment and collect the male's obligation.
Still, about 95% of all unpaid child support is NOT collected.
Here is from the Office of the Inspector General, on medicare granted health care workers, mostly physicians in arrears:

From your own source JD

Forty-one percent of sample cases closed following debt
compromise, either after lump sum payments or with all debt
settled. In all closed cases in our sample, the noncustodial parent owed
only an arrearage. Noncustodial parents in 65 percent of cases that
closed paid lump sums as part of the debt compromise agreements. In

[next page]

the remaining 35 percent of cases that closed, the full amount of the
arrearage was settled because CSE officials determined that the
noncustodial parents were unable to pay any amount or that the
families were best served by settling all of the

Note that 95% is nowhere in there at all. Not even close. I was surprised at the larger numbers though, and I must admit that I misread your original statement. I had thought that you said 95% of child support is not collected, not that 95% or uncollected child support goes uncollected. With a little more research I came up with this…

debt.Child Support - Main

It basically says an entire third goes unpaid in the middle of tons of other data. I agree that this is NOT taking responsibility but really has nothing to do with the issue as they are supposed to be taking that responsibility. That is a matter of enforcement and something is obviously wrong in the enforcement of child support. There is another thread that addresses this, as well as some of the rate insanities, though.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Um.. FA, I have to correct you on something. Wolf=/= dog, if dog is referring to the domesticated breeds.

Dogs are wolves, wolves are not all dogs-- Canine Lupis Familiaris is a subspecies of Canine Lupus.

 

[Bern80]

My contention stands firm, that sentience and the beginning of the individual's life begins at birth, by the act of breathing.

What world do you live in?

I think she needs to be reminded that just because she would like it to be that way doesn't make it so. That a baby somehow measurably becomes more sentient in minutes (or even several hours for long labors) is ridiculous. The notion that a baby goes from NO sentients at all to complete sentients in the same time frame is even more so. Sentients is a factor of mental capacity. Your BRAIN. Not your lungs.

 

[GHook93]

the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.

There are some negative effects if you define a person once born for the mother. What do you do with an abusive husband that beats the shit out his pregnant wife and the unborn wanted baby dies? Or a random assault on pregnant women? Back in the day, case law defined it as assault on the woman, because a baby was not considered a person until conception and hence was not able to be murdered. That changed of course as it should.

Personally, I think a woman's right to choose should be protected without question in the first trimester. Going it should start to be restricted during the 2nd (incest, rape victims, indigent etc). And there must be a very very good reason (such as serious birth defects or the mother's life is in danger) for abortion in the 3rd trimester.

 

[GHook93]

The first issue I take is the definition that seems to be the norm. The word fetus is largely used by abortionists to separate an unborn child from being human. Ending the life of a fetus is somehow not the same as ending the life of a unborn child. This is ridiculous. The question rises, when does life begin? It always makes me incredibly angry when abortionists claim that the fetus is not human until the umbilical cord is cut or the child takes their first breath.

So, my assertion that it is not a *person* until the moment it takes it's first breath makes you angry? Oh and please do not confuse "person" with "human". I do not claim that a fetus is not human. It most certainly is HUMAN, it simply is not A PERSON.


To say that a fetus is A PERSON, is to entitle it to rights that are impossible to enforce for it. The non-viable fetus is subjected to every danger that it's PERSON, THE WOMAN carrier is subjected to experiencing, including death, injury, and destruction by the organism's outside world. For a fetus, the outside world is everything beyond the uterus, and of course, everything that is introduced TO the uterus, which happens to be by the choice OF said carrier woman. So, if she smokes Crack, or has HIV, or even has a few drinks one night- the fetus is subjected to die as a result. If the woman is hit by a car, in a train, ship, or plane wreck, or is caught in a bad storm and electrocuted, even, that fetus is ABSOLUTELY not going to have any opportunity to get away. The FETUS does not have a livelihood to protect- there is nobody to hold it, to cuddle it, to talk to it, or to nurture it. All there is, is the woman who carries it. THIS is why the fetus is considered a part of the woman's body- because it is contained within it- and is also why a fetus will never have independent rights, because it IS CONTAINED IN SOMEONE'S BODY.
Before an egg hatches, it is NOT A CHICK. It is STILL an egg, dude. Got it?
You really do not know what characteristics a fetus has before birth anyways. It is impossible for us to currently make any absolutes on what may or may not be going through a fetus' mind, if anything really does. We all know they have a nervous system, and once they have a cerebral cortex, we know that they certainly have the equipment available to think.. But just like having ovaries or testicles does not mean that the thing is capable of reproduction (as a fetus), we cannot say for certain that having any other equipment serves any actual purpose before birth.
FYI- I consider it to be at the point of taking it's first breath, because the bible defines it that way. Before it takes that essential first breath, it can feasibly go BACK INSIDE and still grow a little longer. Once it takes that breath, there is no possible way it can survive in the uterus. This is proof positive to me that breathing is the number one essential to life. When a person stops breathing, they die NOT because their heart stops. Their heart STOPS because there is no longer a FUNCTION for it. The heart is responsible for carrying oxygen to the various cells and tissues, using the component Blood to deliver that oxygen. This is health 101, man. I am not trying to demean you in any way, but I think that certain things need to be cleared up to you, before we can continue this conversation in an intelligent manner, when you discount breathing as though it is a non-issue to life. I find that pretty ridiculous, myself.



That is absolutely ridiculous. It takes TWO people to make a ******* baby. TWO people have to screw to get that sperm in there, to say hi there and hello to the Egg Flavor of the Month. I have more to say on this shit.. Because it is absolutely positively INANE.



Well, in that case, if you smoke the lowest tar, highest filtered cigaretted, and get lung cancer, or you break your arm as a result of riding a bike (even when using safety equipment)- then it is your own damn fault, and you should also not seek medical treatment. You knew the risks, and now you must face the consequences. /sarcasm

Sorry, guy, but people do a great many things for recreation. The pleasure is worth the risks- 99.99999% of the time. I can't personally use birth control. I am allergic. It gives me hives, and makes me hemmorhage like crazy. So for me, I am stuck with condoms. I don't always ******* have one of those. Tough shit.
If you see someone without a helmet, riding a bike or a skateboard, do you tell them that a head injury would be something they just have to forego medical treatment for, and live with their risky behavior for the rest of their lives? No, you do not. Well. I hope not, anyways. ;-) Same goes with pregnancy. When something negatively affects your body that you could have probably controlled better, you might regret that you were careless.. but I promise you- you will not be regretting seeing a Doctor for treatment. Nope. No way..
Furthermore, it STILL takes two to tango. Don't want kids? Dont have sex with a woman who is not ready to have a baby. Don't want to pay child support? Dont have sex until you have enough money to support those munchkins. PERSONAL ******* RESPONSIBILITY DOES GO BOTH WAYS. We are NOT your SEXUAL GATEKEEPERS.



Well, unfortunately most hospitals are religiously based, usually Catholic, and they typically do not offer abortion on demand. Some offer life saving abortions, and rarely, you find one that will do it if you had a case of rape or incest. Hospitals being the only places to get abortions would be horrible.. a VERY big injustice to the American People. Perhaps the county health department can have their own abortion clinics, as well- Oh but wait- that will make everyone think that government funding is paying for them. And on the same token, you sure don't want abortions paying your government official's bi-weekly check, either, now would ya. Gosh. What a predicament.



Oh noooo.. We do not need anyone EDUCATING us on abortion or what is happening inside of our bodies. Good grief. Will Big Brother EVER take a LOAD OFF??? Hey as long as you are advocating for the babysitting of adult citizens, why not force all moms and dads to take a 100 hour course in parenting and healthy relationships, child bonding, etc. That would certainly help to cure the current child ABUSE trend.. ONE IN FIVE. YES.
A huge number, compared to the number of abortions every year. I digress though.. We don't need to be ******* SCHOOLED. We KNOW we don't want the ******* baby, and all you would be doing is delaying us in getting it. That paired with your First Trimester rule, and nobody would ever get to the clinics in time. So how, then, DO you actually SUPPORT first trimester abortion, in the first place???? I don't buy it. I think you are just saying that to make yourself look a little better. Read the children's book "The Wolf and the Kids". It is about a wolf who dresses in sheeps clothing, and then eats an entire family of goats. The mom goat comes home, finds the wolf asleep, and slices his stomach open, freeing her still alive "kids", and then shoves rocks in his tummy and sews him back up. Good versus Evil. Good RULES. ALWAYS.



The cerebral cortex doesn't come into the picture until late in the second trimester, though.. and again, having the equipment does not guarantee use of that equipment, as I have already illustrated with the ovaries and testacles.
Also- What is it with you "pro lifers", who always, without fail, are more than happy to "allow" (or maybe encourage- that is societally closer to the right definition) a woman who has already experienced a great deal of pain, to go and commit "murder", on the "human person" she is carrying? Is a woman being on her death bed, being raped, or molested by a family member, just one big BONER MOMENT for you folks?? It is not enough that you call pro choicers like me who have had an abortion "baby killers" who "dehumanize" the FETUS (the scientifically accurate term, btw) by calling it a fetus- You guys have to revictimize women who might not actually WANT to abort by creating some sociological standard of "deservance" to this "right to life" that you speak of- and act as though no woman SHOULD want a baby if it was the product of rape. That is LOOOOOOWWWWWW.
It's MADNESS, it is ABUSE, it is a form of MIND CONTROL, and it is not AT ALL being PRO anything. Y'all say "rape" and "incest", and even "near death" as if they are ALL experiences that a LITTLE BITTY WEAK ASS WOMAN cannot possibly endure or survive. Get ******* over yourselves.
That argument is the WEAKEST SHIT I HAVE HEARD, AS OF YET.



I really don't understand where you got this from. The bible does not say anywhere within it, that life begins while we are in the uterus. That is just something I like to call a LEAP, like most false religious teachings tend to be. Also, it works into the whole circular logic issue, but I will save that argument for later in the discussion.

If a woman fails to abort in the first trimester, then the child should be given protection. At that point, an abortion should be considered manslaughter at the least. I know there will be doctors that would circumvent the law and women that will try as well but with charges that high it would limit it. There is a large gray aria here for problems like substance addiction but I will not get into that now as this post is long enough and I am tired. Please give me your thoughts.

Ohhhh So all we have to do is get hooked on CRACK or something, and we are in the clear, because we are SUCH WEAK LITTLE BITCHES and only the DUMBEST MOST FUCKED UP BITCHES should be allowed to avoid prosecution for "killing" their "protected" offspring??

You are a TOTAL misogynist. Did you know that???

And you're a baby hater. Did you know that?

That is a little unfair. Supporting abortion rights doesn't make you a baby hater or evil.

 

[FA_Q2]

Um.. FA, I have to correct you on something. Wolf=/= dog, if dog is referring to the domesticated breeds.

Dogs are wolves, wolves are not all dogs-- Canine Lupis Familiaris is a subspecies of Canine Lupus.

Typed it backwards

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Um.. FA, I have to correct you on something. Wolf=/= dog, if dog is referring to the domesticated breeds.

Dogs are wolves, wolves are not all dogs-- Canine Lupis Familiaris is a subspecies of Canine Lupus.

Typed it backwards

Kingdom Animalia

Phylum Chordata

Subphylum Vertebrata

Class Mammalia

Order Carnivora

Suborder Caniformia

Family Canidae

Species Canis lupus

Subspecies Canis lupus familiaris

ADW: Canis lupus familiaris: Information


Sorry, dude, but I take weight the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology more heavily than your post

 

[FA_Q2]

Hmmmm, did I miss something pro? I was agreeing with you!

 

[JD_2B]

Still waiting for conservatives to have more of a suggestion than, "Make abortion illegal". What happens to the kids? The mother?

I gave you a ******* solution and you have yet to say WHY you are against it. What happens to the baby and mother? THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENS NOW IF THERE IS NO ABORTION!

Well, my son was born three days late, and his lung collapsed, and he DID need medical attention.
Whats your point?

Follow the conversation...
You said
"Oh and lets be clear about the differences between a live birth and the birth of a "viable" fetus.
A viable fetus isn't very ******* viable if it is born in a taxicab, or out in the middle of nowhere, in some mud hut somewhere, where access to life"
Obvously this is not true as my son was viable at 8 months and would have been fine in a mud hot, taxicab or anyware else for that matter.
Folloe that now. Your statement is incorrect.

No it is not, and the fact that you refuse to accept reality as it sits, is nobody's problem but your own.
Having the capacity to be born and survive that birth, to achieve life, without technological assistance, based on some stupid statistic, does NOT at ALL equate to viability being some sort of guaran-*******-tee that the fetus will be born alive, you numbskull. I have repeatedly pointed this out as an erroneous misconception, given you examples to back that up, and no amount of crossing your fingers and wishing is going to change that fact into anything other than what it is. Viability is a potential, it is NOT an ultimatum. Get used to it.

I never said there were guilty parties. No one is guilty of anything here but there are RESPONSIBILITIES that come with having sex and you must own up to them. I have no idea where you get the idea that men are somehow pitied for being late on child support. I, and everyone I know, never felt sorry fore someone behind on child support. The term “dead beat dad” is a worse slur to me than “whore” also. People hate dead beat dads. On the other hand, I DO feel sorry for single mothers and again, I don’t think I have even met anyone that EVER put forth the idea that a single mother was anything but a victim. Most people ask in wonderment how they do it. I do not know what kind of sick people are treating someone like a whore because she is a single mother but you may want to consider not socializing with them

Guess what? Having an abortion is just one of three ways that WOMEN own up to the responsibility of having sex. Men have every right to help make this choice, when they are married to the woman, just as they have every right to choose what happens to a child that is born, if that is a choice that is made, as well. The fact that a woman can CHOOSE to abort is what you want to define as not taking responsibility "for having sex". Sorry, darling, but having sex is not something that people do for the sole purpose of procreation. People also do it for RECREATION, and as such, any result of sexual activity is not necessarily a chosen result, even if it might be a known risk involved with having intercourse. For instance- a person can get unwanted chlamydia from having wanted sex. Chlamydia is undesirable, and the person who contracted it will generally seek medical attention to get rid of it. This is an individual right. Just because the person had sex, does not mean that the person CONSENTED to getting that disease.. just the same way that a person who had sex did not consent to getting pregnant. Both of these conditions, Chlamydia and unwanted pregnancy with a subsequent abortion, can and generally are easily avoidable, by the simple act of typing the knot, and getting married, as long as both of the partners are in a monogamous relationship. However, even married people, who have two and three kids, or more, also have unwanted pregnancies, and abortions. It is not that they have the abortions because they have no sense of value or personal responsibility for having sex or being parents- it is because they simply do not want the additional child, and do not want to deal with the accidental pregnancy, because they have had enough kids already. Over 60% of abortions are had by women who already have previous children. Also, pregnancy is no picnic, for many women. Some women have it good- they have wonderful pregnancies, and their resulting babies sleep a lot, are incredibly healthy, and cause mom AND dad no problems whatsoever. MANY women have colicky babies, and decide after they become pregnant that they do not want to deal with the post partum depression, the sleepless nights, the esophagal reflux, colic, constant phone calls to work, for the baby's health, disrupting the person's career and finances, etc, etc, etc. Now, you may say that women who have had a rough time with their first and/ or second child could also have their tubes tied, but for some weird reason- these women hold on to hope that their next pregnancy will be better. There is a LOT of stress and trouble that comes with pregnancy alone, and having one when someone does not think they can handle it, either emotionally, financially, physically, or otherwise, can lead a person to consider terminating the pregnancy. THIS IS PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

If a mother does not feed herself, how on earth shall she feed her kids? "Putting the kids first", is the BIGGEST mistake that parents make these days. A person can only care for another person as much as they take care of themselves. If a person cannot EVEN handle being PREGNANT for a few MONTHS, then how the hell do you expect them to deal with NINE whole months of it, much less labor and delivery, as well as the impending life long burden of parenthood, WHICH IS A GIVEN, regardless of whether she was to parent the child herself or give it to another parent for adoption?
I can assure you, this is not some kind of SHALLOW decision making process that people make. Everyone has to take care of themselves, and you should have, as a PERSON, enough kindless and humility to accept this as a fact, as well as ENCOURAGE people to take care of themselves, to the fullest extent of their capacity. Anything less IS indigent, and treating ALL women as some kind of baby-ovens who are only put on this planet to reproduce, based on YOUR emotional reaction to them making a PERSONAL CHOICE, just because you see the fetus as some kind of an above it all GOD, who should have rights that go above and beyond her own. THAT is an injustice in morality, if there ever was one. Not abortion itself- but the idea that women should appeal to your every controlling whim, rather than do something for themselves that might actually be GOOD. What is wrong with you.

I ignored that because it is a farce. Sure it happens but it is fairly rare and as I already stated, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHECK THAT SORT OF THING. Get a damn test every three months if you are that worried and are not approaching sex safely enough. Killing a fetus should not be a “fix” to “oh, I was to lazy to check.“

Oh that is ridiculous. Women are not lab rats, and do not need to HEED some kind of absurd rule that they should get tested every few months, for pregnancy, just because you have some screws loose in your head about controlling women, or putting fetuses on a pedestal. Get over it, Tiger. Rar!!

It is better to save 1 than kill 2. No one’s life has priority over the other and the mother is the only one with a voice so she is the one that decides who lives. To the rest of that ridiculous blather, it is IMMINENT danger to life, not “oh I have a little higher blood pressure.”

Exactly my point.. You would rather a woman risk actually ACHIEVING the inevitably IMMINENT threat to her life (which could kill her anyways, if she does not get the abortion in time), than to make a decision that is well thought out, and avoid that danger entirely. Pig.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hate to say it buuuuuuut.....
wolf = d o g
Dogs have just been domesticated for so long they have slightly changed form. As a side note, wolves and dog can interbreed, since they are the same species of course.

No dummy, wolves and dogs are not the same species. I have shown you enough links, which you so obviously ignored, just because the idea of a fetus being half- human being aborted is just as nauseating to you as the idea that you somehow got that I was talking about humans and dogs having sexual intercourse, which was not at all my point.. But anyways- the entire point on this was missed, so fuhgetaboutit.

Apparently I do. I have seen no PROOF that there is no sentience. If you can pull that one out I would be forced to concede the argument. All I have seen is conjecture that active, NON RANDOM brain waves, reactions and active dreaming are somehow not signs of sentience. I fail to see any reason in that train of thought. I conceded that at the 30 day mark the brain wave were erratic and random in much the same way that muscle twitching is and that is why I did not completely agree with pro about the 7 week line. The assumption that the formation of higher brain functions are not signs of sentence though is a stretch.

LOL!! Again, you miss the point.. Any fetus sucking it's thumb, will have brain activity in specific areas of the brain. Of course it will.. That does not indicate sentience. It only indicates that the brain is functional, and that the reflex of thumb sucking has been activated. With "dreams", memories being activated also does not mean that the fetus has achieved sentience, just because the brain registers memories. We have no way of even knowing if or how those memories/ reflexes are processed. This AGAIN (lather, rinse, keep repeating) is NOT some clear indicator of sentience. You are grasping at straws bud.

To the rape point – Rape is its own story because personal responsibility has been taken from the woman in this instance. That, to me, is the deference between rape and normal abortions. In rape, it was not the woman’s choice to have sex and therefore it should not be the woman that bears the responsibility of its consequences.

Consent to sex =/= consent to pregnancy.

(hammering it home, lather rinse and repeat, another thousand times until you start to understand this)

You accept rape because you want to discourage women from making their own decisions freely, and you want women to feel like less than capable of dealing with a pregnancy, because it *helps* the anti-feminism movement to make women feel like they should not be capable of dealing with a rape, period- This is a power and control issue. Rape is NOT about sex. The SEX is not an issue to women, when they are raped. It is the FEELING of being controlled and ignored about what their OWN choices are. Raped women are EASY targets in the abortion issue, because control freaks like you can manipulate them into thinking that having an abortion should be their choice, and is actually ENCOURAGED by people like you, BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT ABORTION IS HORRENDOUS, so why wouldn't you coerce raped women into getting someting so "horrendous" done to them, right? Power and control, by BALL-LESS, impotent FREAKS, that is what the rape issue is about. Feminism IS NOT GOING AWAY. Deal accordingly.

It should be noted that I do not believe that rape victims should be allowed any difference in abortion because I believe that abortion should be legal for the first trimester. This would give a rape victim the time to decide and take the necessary steps for an abortion.

What is especially weird about the rape scenario, is that rape victims are the only ones who use state funds to get abortions. They are also supposed to be offered a Plan B pill at the ER, when they go in and report it, and get their rape kit done. I honestly think that pregnant rape victims should have mandatory counseling and unbiased empowerment courses, especially surrounding the whole issue regarding aborting, adoption, or parenting. They should be armed with ACTUAL CONTROL over the situation, rather than coerced, psychologically, into having an abortion, and inevitably becoming anti abortion, because of how they relate their own abortion and lack of personal and social stygma control, to the negative psychological effects of the rape, thereby thinking that somehow being raped is the only way that a person can have an unwanted pregnancy. Again, the women's movement is alive and well, and is not going to be (excuse the pun) aborted any time in the near future. Grow with the times, and learn to love women, rather than just trying to control us all.

Sure- I have seen that happen too. Shame that men go so long without supporting their children. It is NOT a shame that the women actually go and hire an attorney to fulfill the judgment and collect the male's obligation.
Still, about 95% of all unpaid child support is NOT collected.
Here is from the Office of the Inspector General, on medicare granted health care workers, mostly physicians in arrears:

From your own source JD

Forty-one percent of sample cases closed following debt
compromise, either after lump sum payments or with all debt
settled. In all closed cases in our sample, the noncustodial parent owed
only an arrearage. Noncustodial parents in 65 percent of cases that
closed paid lump sums as part of the debt compromise agreements. In

[next page]

the remaining 35 percent of cases that closed, the full amount of the
arrearage was settled because CSE officials determined that the
noncustodial parents were unable to pay any amount or that the
families were best served by settling all of the

Note that 95% is nowhere in there at all. Not even close. I was surprised at the larger numbers though, and I must admit that I misread your original statement. I had thought that you said 95% of child support is not collected, not that 95% or uncollected child support goes uncollected. With a little more research I came up with this…

debt.Child Support - Main

It basically says an entire third goes unpaid in the middle of tons of other data. I agree that this is NOT taking responsibility but really has nothing to do with the issue as they are supposed to be taking that responsibility. That is a matter of enforcement and something is obviously wrong in the enforcement of child support. There is another thread that addresses this, as well as some of the rate insanities, though.[/quote]

Bullshit.. You love to skew numbers and words.

I did not say that 95% of ALL child support is not paid.. But I can see how an extremist control freak like you would jump to such a conclusion.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/childsupport/chldsu07.pdf

Now, the number of parents that child support is collected from, of the amount collected may be closer to 75%, that is enforced, at least- but these graphs are too complex to show us just how much money is lost due to unpaid child support every year. Notice that the graphs do show partial payments vs non payments, and full payments, but do not show the percentage of the overall picture, opposing a non paying or partially paying non custodial parent's responsibility and arrears, compared with what HAS been collected, irregularly or not at all.
Out of THIS, 95% is NOT collected. JUST because most men pay some of their child support, or make lump sums occassionally, does not mean that they are not in arrears, in the tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Obviously the government (who wants us to trust it in a state of relative blindness, and for whatever reason against which I am sure I have a gun to protect myself) can't just come out and ADMIT when the child support system is an absolute failure.

But I do not NEED the census' overly detailed and skewed graphs written up in an unexplainable text format, rather than an Excel document, which is far more legible, even, to KNOW that child support enforcement is a ******* facade of epic proportions..

ASK 10 RANDOM single parents how much child support they have received in their lives, and compare THAT number with the amount they are owed. Also, ask them how many times they have modified it, since a change of job of increase in income.

Poof. 95%.

I have gotten a grand total of a little less than 5,000 dollars in child support from my child's now deceased father. At the time of his death, he OWED my kid 35,000 dollars.

Do the ******* math.

4800/35000= 13.7 % of the total awarded amount being paid. That leaves 86.3% of the remaining amount, to BE paid. The ONLY reason mine is SO much lower than the average, is because I never went back to court and got a modification of child support, when we were both making more money. The award that my child was allotted was based on him being a minimum wage employee, and me being fresh out of the military, and an unemployed new custodial mommy.
Had I actually been a complete witch about it, and enforced the judgment a little further, the percentage owed would be in the VERY high 98-99% range.

Again, DEAL. This is basic stuff, man.

Also- check out how corrupt child support enforcement is:

A Review of the Mississippi Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Hmmmm, did I miss something pro? I was agreeing with you!

Sorry, I misunderstood; I thought you mean I wrote it backwards

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Just because the person had sex, does not mean that the person CONSENTED to getting that disease.. just the same way that a person who had sex did not consent to getting pregnant

So a baby is an STD to be cured with homicide?

"Putting the kids first", is the BIGGEST mistake that parents make these days.

That doesn't make the least bit of sense.

I can assure you, this is not some kind of SHALLOW decision making process that people make.

Yes, it is. Most pregnancies are done so the woman can continue being a slut and having unprotected sex at the night club. Almost none are ever done in cases of rape or incest and a small minority are medically necessary.

Exactly my point.. You would rather a woman risk actually ACHIEVING the inevitably IMMINENT threat to her life (which could kill her anyways, if she does not get the abortion in time), than to make a decision that is well thought out, and avoid that danger entirely. Pig.

You're a ******* moron. Get your head out of your girlfriend's muff, put down the militant neo-feminist flyer and pay attention. Just because he doesn't think some Skinhead should be allowed to kill blacks on sight doesn't mean he doesn't believe in self-defense; just because he doesn't believe you should kill your baby ay time it gets in the way of your sex life and binge drinking doesn't make him some misogynistic woman beater, you idiot.

Go read some Kate O'Beirne or Betty Friedan- maybe they can cure you of the stupidity you've been infected with by the militant lesbian man-haters whom you borrow your 'argument' (read: hate speech) from.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Women-Who-Make-World-Worse/dp/1595230092]Amazon.com: Women Who Make the World Worse: and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports (9781595230096): Kate O'Beirne: Books[/ame]

No dummy, wolves and dogs are not the same species.

Do you know what a subspecies is? No? Thought not.

Tell us again how Fido got you pregnant and you had his puppies.

You accept rape because you want to discourage women from making their own decisions freely

YOu have any evidence he supports rape? No? You're lying again? Thought so.

Just you you know, YOU ARE NOT A FEMINIST. FEMINISM WAS ABOUT EQUALITY BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN. THE FIRST AND SECOND-WAVE FEMINISTS WHO FOUGHT FOR SUFFRAGE AND EQUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE HAVE LONG STOOD IN OPPOSITION TO FAR LEFT SEXIST FEMINAZI SCUM LIKE YOU, BECAUSE YOU UNDERMINE THE VERY PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH TRUE FEMINISM WAS FOUNDED. YOU ARE TO FEMINISM WHAT THE BLACK PANTHERS AND CHARLIE BASS ARE TO THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT OF DR KING ET AL.


Now grow the **** up, little girl, and show some personal responsibility- you know, like you want to poor drunk bastard who nailed your ass when you're begging for that child support check.

 

[Bern80]

LOL!! Again, you miss the point.. Any fetus sucking it's thumb, will have brain activity in specific areas of the brain. Of course it will.. That does not indicate sentience. It only indicates that the brain is functional, and that the reflex of thumb sucking has been activated. With "dreams", memories being activated also does not mean that the fetus has achieved sentience, just because the brain registers memories. We have no way of even knowing if or how those memories/ reflexes are processed. This AGAIN (lather, rinse, keep repeating) is NOT some clear indicator of sentience. You are grasping at straws bud.

You're the one grasping dear. What REAL evidence do you have that a baby is somehow less sentient minutes before it born than after? We all get that your OPINION (made simply for the sake of the most convenient rationalization) is that sentients is defined by breathing on your own. Unfortunately that is not how sentients is defined;

sen·tient (snshnt, -sh-nt) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Having sense perception; conscious:

Experiencing sensation or feeling.

Breathing is not what kick starts sentients. A baby has all of those things well before they reach birth at full term.

Consent to sex =/= consent to pregnancy.

Actually, yes it does. You choose the behavior, you choose the consequences of it. If you consent to sex you consent to the possible outcomes of having sex. One of the potential consequences of sex is pregnancy. Most people here understand that libs like yourself have extreme aversions to being held accountable for actions. Most of us here have offered reasonable scenarios under which this potential consequence can be dealt with without bring a child to term. Have an abortion in the first trimester before the fertilized egg can be remotely considered a human being. If the mother's health or life is in jeopardy, she should be allowed to choose. So what does that leave that is so unreasonable to you? Essentially the only type of abortion us 'pro-lifers' are against is are one's where the mother is so irresponsible that she doesn't even bother to check to see if she's pregnant for three months THEN decides it's okay to kill her baby because now just isn't the most convenient time to have one. You're right JD. We are soooooo unreasonable.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is hard to follow pro and bern as they pointed out the obvious again but alas, I will….

No it is not, and the fact that you refuse to accept reality as it sits, is nobody's problem but your own.
Having the capacity to be born and survive that birth, to achieve life, without technological assistance, based on some stupid statistic, does NOT at ALL equate to viability being some sort of guaran-*******-tee that the fetus will be born alive, you numbskull. I have repeatedly pointed this out as an erroneous misconception, given you examples to back that up, and no amount of crossing your fingers and wishing is going to change that fact into anything other than what it is. Viability is a potential, it is NOT an ultimatum. Get used to it.

I am and I stated as such since I do not prescribe to that idea. The fact is that it does refute the insane concept that all you are doing is removing the life support. All I was stating is that late term abortions are NOT doing that. They are actually killing the fetus to remove it, not simply removing it or there would be a significant survival rate for lat term fetuses. That argument is a fallacy and dead. Just stick with your assertion that autonomy is the main point as you actually have a leg to stand on there

Guess what? Having an abortion is just one of three ways that WOMEN own up to the responsibility of having sex.

That is bullshit and you know it. That is not taking responsibility for it, it is avoiding responsibility. Said before.

For instance- a person can get unwanted chlamydia from having wanted sex. Chlamydia is undesirable, and the person who contracted it will generally seek medical attention to get rid of it. This is an individual right. Just because the person had sex, does not mean that the person CONSENTED to getting that disease.. just the same way that a person who had sex did not consent to getting pregnant.

And we went over this as well. The PROPER medical treatment to pregnancy IS prenatal care not an abortion. You just don’t want to face that fact.

MANY women have colicky babies, and decide after they become pregnant that they do not want to deal with the post partum depression, the sleepless nights, the esophagal reflux, colic, constant phone calls to work, for the baby's health, disrupting the person's career and finances, etc, etc, etc. Now, you may say that women who have had a rough time with their first and/ or second child could also have their tubes tied, but for some weird reason- these women hold on to hope that their next pregnancy will be better. There is a LOT of stress and trouble that comes with pregnancy alone, and having one when someone does not think they can handle it, either emotionally, financially, physically, or otherwise, can lead a person to consider terminating the pregnancy. THIS IS PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

Once again, that is AVOIDING RESPONSIBILITY NOT TAKING IT. That is a lot of waaa waaa kick and scream self centered bullshit. AS I SAID, YOU HAV 3 MONTHS TO MAKE A CHOICE.

"Putting the kids first", is the BIGGEST mistake that parents make these days. A person can only care for another person as much as they take care of themselves.

WOW!!! The truth comes out! My kid DEFINATLY comes before me and I have no problem caring for him. That is incredibly self centered.

Oh that is ridiculous. Women are not lab rats, and do not need to HEED some kind of absurd rule that they should get tested every few months, for pregnancy, just because you have some screws loose in your head about controlling women, or putting fetuses on a pedestal. Get over it, Tiger. Rar!!

Yes they should and not because of me but because they ARE having sex. Same way as anyone that has many partners should be regularly tested for STD’s. That is the responsible thing to do, not that you would understand responsibility.

LOL!! Again, you miss the point.. Any fetus sucking it's thumb, will have brain activity in specific areas of the brain. Of course it will.. That does not indicate sentience. It only indicates that the brain is functional, and that the reflex of thumb sucking has been activated. With "dreams", memories being activated also does not mean that the fetus has achieved sentience, just because the brain registers memories. We have no way of even knowing if or how those memories/ reflexes are processed. This AGAIN (lather, rinse, keep repeating) is NOT some clear indicator of sentience. You are grasping at straws bud.

No, I am not. Thos parts of the brain would be RANDOMLY FIRING if there was no sentience to control it. That is why, even though there is electrical activity, 30 day brain activity is not necessarily sentience but later activity IS. You are ignoring all evidence based on bias and the notion that breathing somehow indicates sentience WITHOUT ANY SCIENTIFIC EVEDENCE. All you have said is not breathing causes death, not that it creates sentience.

Raped women are EASY targets in the abortion issue, because control freaks like you can manipulate them into thinking that having an abortion should be their choice, and is actually ENCOURAGED by people like you, BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT ABORTION IS HORRENDOUS, so why wouldn't you coerce raped women into getting someting so "horrendous" done to them, right?

Where did I encourage abortion in cases of rape? That’s right, I did NOT. I did say that since their choice is removed so is their personal responsibility. I still believe that a rape victim should still be subject to the same rule that everyone should be subject to – 3 months then no abortion.

Bullshit.. You love to skew numbers and words.

I did not say that 95% of ALL child support is not paid.. But I can see how an extremist control freak like you would jump to such a conclusion.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/child...t/chldsu07.pdf

Now, the number of parents that child support is collected from, of the amount collected may be closer to 75%, that is enforced, at least- but these graphs are too complex to show us just how much money is lost due to unpaid child support every year. Notice that the graphs do show partial payments vs non payments, and full payments, but do not show the percentage of the overall picture, opposing a non paying or partially paying non custodial parent's responsibility and arrears, compared with what HAS been collected, irregularly or not at all.
Out of THIS, 95% is NOT collected. JUST because most men pay some of their child support, or make lump sums occassionally, does not mean that they are not in arrears, in the tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Obviously the government (who wants us to trust it in a state of relative blindness, and for whatever reason against which I am sure I have a gun to protect myself) can't just come out and ADMIT when the child support system is an absolute failure.

But I do not NEED the census' overly detailed and skewed graphs written up in an unexplainable text format, rather than an Excel document, which is far more legible, even, to KNOW that child support enforcement is a ******* facade of epic proportions.. ASK 10 RANDOM single parents how much child support they have received in their lives, and compare THAT number with the amount they are owed. Also, ask them how many times they have modified it, since a change of job of increase in income.

Poof. 95%.

I have gotten a grand total of a little less than 5,000 dollars in child support from my child's now deceased father. At the time of his death, he OWED my kid 35,000 dollars.

Do the ******* math.

4800/35000= 13.7 % of the total awarded amount being paid. That leaves 86.3% of the remaining amount, to BE paid. The ONLY reason mine is SO much lower than the average, is because I never went back to court and got a modification of child support, when we were both making more money. The award that my child was allotted was based on him being a minimum wage employee, and me being fresh out of the military, and an unemployed new custodial mommy.
Had I actually been a complete witch about it, and enforced the judgment a little further, the percentage owed would be in the VERY high 98-99% range.

Again, DEAL. This is basic stuff, man.

Again, completely ignoring the actual data. THE TABLES SHOW HOW MUCH IS UNPAID, PARTALLY PAID AND FULLY PAID BY PAYMENT AMOUNTS. That number IS CLEARLY DISPLAYED AND NOWHERE NEAR 95%. Stop ignoring any data that disagrees with you just because YOU do not get yours. It is basic and you have failed to even bother understanding it.

I could use my example too where my mother claimed tons of unpaid child support and my father actually paid MORE than was owed. Does that mean all cases are like that, NO. You are NOT the norm.

 

[AllieBaba]

BTW, if your child's father is deceased and paternity was established before his death (child support order should do it) then your underaged child is entitled to survivor's benefits. And it's quite a chunk. Call your local social security office.