Unreal: YES on 2 and NO on 4
- Thread starter optimusprime_IHB
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
You are an intelligent woman, but the argument you are trying to advance is really nonsensical and very arrogant.
If a woman could make a decision to terminate a pregnancy in a manner that had no impact on anyone else, you would have a point. But the fact is that from the moment of conception a unique human life is created. Our freedoms are based on concepts that allow individuals to act as they want until the point comes where their actions interfere with someone else's freedoms. At that point, your freedom to act is limited to actions that don't interfere with another's rights. The right to life of an abortion victim outweighs the convenience of the mother and those rights must be protected.
Protecting the innocent isn't the exclusive domain of one gender or the other. If we want to call ourselves "human", we should all be doing whatever we can to defend those who can't defend themselves.
ROFLMAO! Eva, you rule!
You obviously haven't read much of what I have posted here. If you had, then you would know that I don't believe in having the government involved in anything it is not authorized to do by the Constitution. By definition, anyone wanting an abortion doesn't want to raise a child. There is no shortage of people wanting to adopt children. The problem of raising children who aren't murdered is easily solved through adoption.
You're right. My eyes generally gloss over most of what you post. Since you're so altruistic, I congratulate you in advance for adopting one of those unwanted children. I suggest you start your search in some of the nearby dumpsters.
I remember that story. My first thought was "How's that for a vacation memory?"
As much as I agree with you, Winex... I think Nude's point was that... if men have no say in the matter then they shouldn't be financially responsible either. If women get to make all the decisions, they should have all the responsibilities too. It is not fair to the fathers to view them only as Johnny Paycheck and give them no say in the matter. (I don't think his point is that the fathers have no moral responsibility to support their own offpsring. That's how it sounded but I don't think that's what he means.) Does that sound about right, Nude? If not, please correct me.
Thanks, and that is my interpretation as well. (It's a different topic, but I have read of male sperm donors being forced to support their offspring)
In case it isn't clear, my own personal belief is that the right to life trumps everything else. Also, if you look at the scientific definition of life, it is clear that life begins at conception.
Life begins at birth. In humans, the period of gestation is ~9 months. It is possible to give birth to a child sooner and have it survive naturally (meaning normal respiration, feeding, growing, etc.) or be "viable" if you like, but anything earlier than ~7 1/2 months into the gestation period would require massive amount of medical assistance to survive. Depending on where one lives, that assistance may or may not be available which means the fetus may or may not be viable. And now to your question and it's point: If a fetus is aborted prior to it being naturally viable, then the process (no matter how graphically one wishes to describe it) is not murder because it would not be living outside of the womb either. After the point of natural viability, it is my belief that an abortion procedure would be a murder of a child.
Medical advances might one day make possible in vitro gestation and we can all re-define life to suit current technology if we wish, but until a human fetus can live and develop outside of the womb with no medical assistance, it cannot be considered "life" in my mind.
Yikes. I didnt realize that my using the words "Rope" and "Sheet" could cause such a fuss.
As others have mentioned. I always wonder how a poor family that is already on welfare
or assistance. Something most conservatives find very vile in its own right. Lets say
the 15 year old girl is molested by an older cousin or other relative. Genetically this
is a dangerous pregnancy to take to term. Also the trauma has already been realized by the victim. So the "state" should force the victim to see the pregnancy to term ?
Who is going to support this victim and the possible health care costs of a genetically
deficient child ? Conservatives want no part in the long term situation. They just want to live in their narrow world and "Save a Life". Its not "When does life begin". Its up to the woman. Its HER BODY. Not the states. By forcing these laws upon society we create the
underground abortion clinic. Or force poor people to cross state lines or go to Mexico
or Canada.
I have a personal experience on this subject. My mother who has since passed away this year
had a botched abortion as a young woman. It ruined her "Female" health for a good part of her
adult life. It was something she talked little about. By outlawing abortion we are taking
the rights of women away from them. And as other have said. Men will never know or experience this situation first hand.
Thank god Obama will keep our Supreme Court from becoming too "right of center" and Roe v Wade is safe for more than likely another generation.
irvinesinglemom said:
You are an intelligent woman, but the argument you are trying to advance is really nonsensical and very arrogant.
If a woman could make a decision to terminate a pregnancy in a manner that had no impact on anyone else, you would have a point. But the fact is that from the moment of conception a unique human life is created. Our freedoms are based on concepts that allow individuals to act as they want until the point comes where their actions interfere with someone else's freedoms. At that point, your freedom to act is limited to actions that don't interfere with another's rights. The right to life of an abortion victim outweighs the convenience of the mother and those rights must be protected.
Protecting the innocent isn't the exclusive domain of one gender or the other. If we want to call ourselves "human", we should all be doing whatever we can to defend those who can't defend themselves.
ABC123_IHB
New member
Winex, since you support teenage girls having children, I am going to assume that you also support having your taxes raised to support those soon-to-be welfare mothers. You should be celebrating Obama's victory.
caycifish_IHB
New member
EvaLSeraphim said:
ROFLMAO! Eva, you rule!
stepping_up_IHB
New member
Ditto and then I laughed again remembering Roo's old avatar and the discussions around what it really was.caycifish said:
ABC123 said:
You obviously haven't read much of what I have posted here. If you had, then you would know that I don't believe in having the government involved in anything it is not authorized to do by the Constitution. By definition, anyone wanting an abortion doesn't want to raise a child. There is no shortage of people wanting to adopt children. The problem of raising children who aren't murdered is easily solved through adoption.
ABC123_IHB
New member
WINEX said:
You're right. My eyes generally gloss over most of what you post. Since you're so altruistic, I congratulate you in advance for adopting one of those unwanted children. I suggest you start your search in some of the nearby dumpsters.
ABC123_IHB
New member
Expect to be seeing more stories like this in the future:
Baby girl found at Denny's in Anaheim
ANAHEIM – A customer at a Denny’s restaurant found a newborn baby girl in a trash can inside the women’s restroom Monday afternoon, police said.
The baby girl was breathing when she was discovered at about noon at 1168 W. Katella Ave. near Disneyland, Anaheim police Sgt. Rick Martinez said.
Fire dispatchers instructed the customer who found the baby to administer first aid prior to the arrival of paramedics. The baby was then taken to Western Medical Center-Anaheim and is in good condition, Martinez said.
“It’s obvious that the child was in danger of dying and we are fortunate that the quick actions of many people, including the paramedics resulted in this baby living,” Martinez said.
A 17-year-old girl from Indiana with blood-stained pants and blood dripping down her legs was also transported to the hospital.
Baby girl found at Denny's in Anaheim
ANAHEIM – A customer at a Denny’s restaurant found a newborn baby girl in a trash can inside the women’s restroom Monday afternoon, police said.
The baby girl was breathing when she was discovered at about noon at 1168 W. Katella Ave. near Disneyland, Anaheim police Sgt. Rick Martinez said.
Fire dispatchers instructed the customer who found the baby to administer first aid prior to the arrival of paramedics. The baby was then taken to Western Medical Center-Anaheim and is in good condition, Martinez said.
“It’s obvious that the child was in danger of dying and we are fortunate that the quick actions of many people, including the paramedics resulted in this baby living,” Martinez said.
A 17-year-old girl from Indiana with blood-stained pants and blood dripping down her legs was also transported to the hospital.
caycifish_IHB
New member
ABC123 said:
I remember that story. My first thought was "How's that for a vacation memory?"
SoCal78_IHB
New member
WINEX said:
As much as I agree with you, Winex... I think Nude's point was that... if men have no say in the matter then they shouldn't be financially responsible either. If women get to make all the decisions, they should have all the responsibilities too. It is not fair to the fathers to view them only as Johnny Paycheck and give them no say in the matter. (I don't think his point is that the fathers have no moral responsibility to support their own offpsring. That's how it sounded but I don't think that's what he means.) Does that sound about right, Nude? If not, please correct me.
SoCal78 said:
Thanks, and that is my interpretation as well. (It's a different topic, but I have read of male sperm donors being forced to support their offspring)
In case it isn't clear, my own personal belief is that the right to life trumps everything else. Also, if you look at the scientific definition of life, it is clear that life begins at conception.
SoCal78_IHB
New member
Right - I agree with you. I shudder to think how a father feels when he does want the baby and the mother chooses to end his child's life. That just happened this summer to a neighbor of mine. She and her husband already have two kids and she felt two and nothing more, was the perfect family size. (They do not struggle financially and they have lots of family support too. She found out she was expecting. Her husband wanted the baby but she went had an abortion. I can't imagine how it would feel to be a man and feel so helpless in that situation. I'm not looking to spark any big debates but I am a woman and that is just how I feel.
Nude_IHB
New member
Let me be clear so you can quit trying to draw me into whatever trap you think I am falling into here.WINEX said:
Life begins at birth. In humans, the period of gestation is ~9 months. It is possible to give birth to a child sooner and have it survive naturally (meaning normal respiration, feeding, growing, etc.) or be "viable" if you like, but anything earlier than ~7 1/2 months into the gestation period would require massive amount of medical assistance to survive. Depending on where one lives, that assistance may or may not be available which means the fetus may or may not be viable. And now to your question and it's point: If a fetus is aborted prior to it being naturally viable, then the process (no matter how graphically one wishes to describe it) is not murder because it would not be living outside of the womb either. After the point of natural viability, it is my belief that an abortion procedure would be a murder of a child.
Medical advances might one day make possible in vitro gestation and we can all re-define life to suit current technology if we wish, but until a human fetus can live and develop outside of the womb with no medical assistance, it cannot be considered "life" in my mind.
bltserv_IHB
New member
caycifish said:
Yikes. I didnt realize that my using the words "Rope" and "Sheet" could cause such a fuss.
As others have mentioned. I always wonder how a poor family that is already on welfare
or assistance. Something most conservatives find very vile in its own right. Lets say
the 15 year old girl is molested by an older cousin or other relative. Genetically this
is a dangerous pregnancy to take to term. Also the trauma has already been realized by the victim. So the "state" should force the victim to see the pregnancy to term ?
Who is going to support this victim and the possible health care costs of a genetically
deficient child ? Conservatives want no part in the long term situation. They just want to live in their narrow world and "Save a Life". Its not "When does life begin". Its up to the woman. Its HER BODY. Not the states. By forcing these laws upon society we create the
underground abortion clinic. Or force poor people to cross state lines or go to Mexico
or Canada.
I have a personal experience on this subject. My mother who has since passed away this year
had a botched abortion as a young woman. It ruined her "Female" health for a good part of her
adult life. It was something she talked little about. By outlawing abortion we are taking
the rights of women away from them. And as other have said. Men will never know or experience this situation first hand.
Thank god Obama will keep our Supreme Court from becoming too "right of center" and Roe v Wade is safe for more than likely another generation.