Vol_Bengal Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 [quote name='Bengal Migration' post='777563' date='May 20 2009, 10:44 AM']This is a very convenient position for a man to take, imo. He doesn't have to deal with the consequences. He doesn't have to carry to term, and he doesn't have to deal with the aftermath. He might be forced to deal with payments of some sort or another, but that's about it. I've said this before... Men should have ZERO say in this debate. Beyond putting on a condom before the act begins. Have a womb? Have a choice. Otherwise, stfu. I don't mean this with any disrespect to you, Vol, or anyone else. But when you have to deal with the consequences for not only 9 months, but the rest of your life, you get a say. Until then, your say comes when you choose to be smart and wrap it up.[/quote] I understand your point of view... but strongly disagree. She makes a mistake... she can choose to immediately fix it. I make a mistake... I have no control over whether she has an abortion or not. If she elects to keep the child I'm on the hook for child support for the next 18 years... that, to me, is more than just "dealing with payments of some sort or another"... as you succinctly put it. Make no mistake, I've made my point of view very clear as to where I stand on the issue. The additional problem that I hold with this whole debate is the exact one you just brought up. I have no control what happens after said mistake but could very easily be financially obligated. Woman makes mistake, she can immediately fix it. If you wanted to remove this argument from the debate table then have a legal document / motion stating that woman is acknowledging man's wish to abort, and woman is keeping anyway... so man is off the hook for financial support. Double-standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Don't forget there is another dimension to the "hard cases." Determining rape. If a girl says she was raped, must she have a trial and a conviction before she could be approved for an abortion? Its been said that most cases of rape go un-reported. If only "hard cases" are allowed by law, we would be forced to add more shame the woman as she first has to admit she was raped, provide a culprit and corresponding evidence. Vol...about the man...doesn't he forfiet his rights for decision making the moment he chooses to park the meat bus in tuna town of a chick he's not married too? I think another issue is whether or not "recreational sex" is ok. If recreational sex is okay by societal standards then that allows for cases where both the man and the woman decided they don't want a child but do want sex. They follow the proper contraception techniques (the pill and a condom) but end up with a child. Both of them only signed up for sex, took every precation neccessary to keep it only at sex, and still ended up with a child. Why should they be forced to keep it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777662' date='May 20 2009, 03:27 PM']Don't forget there is another dimension to the "hard cases." Determining rape. If a girl says she was raped, must she have a trial and a conviction before she could be approved for an abortion? Its been said that most cases of rape go un-reported. If only "hard cases" are allowed by law, we would be forced to add more shame the woman as she first has to admit she was raped, provide a culprit and corresponding evidence. [b]Vol...about the man...doesn't he forfiet his rights for decision making the moment he chooses to park the meat bus in tuna town of a chick he's not married too?[/b] I think another issue is whether or not "recreational sex" is ok. If recreational sex is okay by societal standards then that allows for cases where both the man and the woman decided they don't want a child but do want sex. They follow the proper contraception techniques (the pill and a condom) but end up with a child. Both of them only signed up for sex, took every precation neccessary to keep it only at sex, and still ended up with a child. Why should they be forced to keep it?[/quote] So, because the man made a "mistake" he has no so in fixing said mistake... but, the woman makes a "mistake" she can elect to keep or abort... if she elects to keep the man is on the hook for child support for 18 years... Nutz - by your standard... doesn't said woman forfeit her rights for decision making the moment she chooses to open the parking garage for the meat bus without verifying the meat bus driver has wrapped things up or she's taken her own precautions and is on the pill? You know, you make your bed... it goes both ways. In closing, the man has no recourse in his mistake, while the woman does??? Can you say double standard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='777669' date='May 20 2009, 03:40 PM']So, because the man made a "mistake" he has no so in fixing said mistake... but, the woman makes a "mistake" she can elect to keep or abort... if she elects to keep the man is on the hook for child support for 18 years... [b]Nutz - by your standard[/b]... doesn't said woman forfeit her rights for decision making the moment she chooses to open the parking garage for the meat bus without verifying the meat bus driver has wrapped things up or she's taken her own precautions and is on the pill? You know, you make your bed... it goes both ways. In closing, the man has no recourse in his mistake, while the woman does??? Can you say double standard?[/quote] By MY standard the woman has all the say in the matter. If a man wants a baby, he needs to find a lady that wants a baby and fire up the bus. If we're talking random encounters and the woman is pregnant and wants to get rid of it but the guy says "hey baby lets keep it, I really want kids and this would be a great way to build our love for each other" (or something to illustrate that he wants a baby and she doesn't) too bad. Natures mechansisms give more creedence to the woman because her job is harder. Its kinda shitty that you can be on the hook for child support from a one night stand, but IMO, so goes life as the "lesser" reproductive partner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777674' date='May 20 2009, 03:48 PM']By MY standard the woman has all the say in the matter. If a man wants a baby, he needs to find a lady that wants a baby and fire up the bus. If we're talking random encounters and the woman is pregnant and wants to get rid of it but the guy says "hey baby lets keep it, I really want kids and this would be a great way to build our love for each other" (or something to illustrate that he wants a baby and she doesn't) too bad. Natures mechansisms give more creedence to the woman because her job is harder. Its kinda shitty that you can be on the hook for child support from a one night stand, but IMO, so goes life as the "lesser" reproductive partner.[/quote] Good enough. I see your point of view while disagreeing in principle. Essentially, I'm playing devils advocate as I'm against abortion on the whole except in the rape / incest / life of mother situations (yes, there would be much controversy there as well). This is one of the larger arguments regarding abortion as it is essentially double-jeopardy for the man with no safety net, while the woman holds all the cards. You're fine with that, I'm not. Neither of us is right, neither is wrong. But, we'll agree to disagree on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColorChanginClique Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777104' date='May 18 2009, 04:13 PM']I agree with you...but until we get to a point where everyone has access to medically sound sex education and proper contraception there will unfortunately be girls getting pregnant who had no idea that is what would happen. Plus even when precations are taken, accidents happen and I would still support terminations.[/quote] Are you serious? Do you really think what we lack is proper sex education? I think at this point every 7th grader knows how to put on a condom thanks to our sex education. This idea of mass numbers of girls getting pregnant that had no idea it was possible it hilarious. Poll every person who had an abortion, and ask each of them if they had "any idea" they might get pregnant when a penis was inserted into their vagina. I wonder what less than 0% looks like. I love the accidents happen line. Yes many women jog naked and run into a man outside who also happens to be naked and accidentally slips her vagina on top of his penis and remains there, accidentally, long enough to produce semen. Woops! Uneducated 10 year olds don't make up any portion of abortions, sorry. And can we stop with the "health of the mother" bullshit. This isn't 1950, in 2009 our medical advancements have made it possible that it is almost never the case where a mother will die and the only thing that can save her is an abortion. I have no problem with that being in the statutes, but it would never be used. They'd just use it as a loophole to try to get an abortion anyway. Dr. C Everett Koop, former US Surgeon General, said in his 38 years as a pediatric surgeon he was never aware of a single situation where an unborn child's life had to be taken in order to save the mother. Also less than 1% of all abortions are due to rape or incest. I really do enjoy the "I'm not for abortions but I think a woman has the right to choose" shtick that many people pull. You're either for them, or you're not. It's quite simple. If I said, "I don't support parents abusing their kids. But I think they have the right to choose whether or not to do it," would that make sense to anyone? Because that's how moronic every left wing abortion lover sounds when they try to appease people by claiming, "nobody likes abortion, but I think it's a woman's right". Even certain statutes, like here in New York, have abortion a crime after 24 weeks. The idea that at 23 weeks, 6 days and 23 hours it's ok to kill. But another hour and hold on we've got a life! From the moment of conception they have the same 46 human chromosomes they'll have when they die. By the 4th week the heart, brain, intestines, vertebra, eyes, arms and legs are all delevoping and blood is flowing. 3 months into development all the essential organs are there as well has hair and the baby can suck it's own thumb. But yeah it's totally fine to kill them what with all that amniotic fluid surrounding them and whatnot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColorChanginClique Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 [quote name='bengalrick' post='777543' date='May 20 2009, 10:05 AM']BTW, the problem I have with the word "health of the mother" is b/c how unbelievably vague and open to interpretation that is. If it will cause a woman to think she will have mental problems dealing with it, that is enough to give the go ahead. And that is absolutely ridiculous.[/quote] Also I would support life in the instance of rape. Two wrongs don't make a right. There are many more couples in our country wanting and waiting to adopt a baby (about 200,000)than there are babies available to adopt (about 25,000). Why not take a horrible situation (being raped) and turn it into a positive one for someone else. It's not fair to kill the baby when they had no say or choice in anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Women should have clean access to abortions for reasons they shouldn't have to explain to anyone other than maybe the fathers of their children. I don't want coat-hangar abortions.... I don't want abortions to be a form of birth control.... How you regulate that is beyond me, hence...legal abortions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 [quote name='ColorChanginClique' post='777781' date='May 20 2009, 11:45 PM']Are you serious? Do you really think what we lack is proper sex education? [b]I think at this point every 7th grader knows how to put on a condom thanks to our sex education.[/b] This idea of mass numbers of girls getting pregnant that had no idea it was possible it hilarious. Poll every person who had an abortion, and ask each of them if they had "any idea" they might get pregnant when a penis was inserted into their vagina. I wonder what less than 0% looks like. I love the accidents happen line. Yes many women jog naked and run into a man outside who also happens to be naked and accidentally slips her vagina on top of his penis and remains there, accidentally, long enough to produce semen. Woops! Uneducated 10 year olds don't make up any portion of abortions, sorry. And can we stop with the "health of the mother" bullshit. This isn't 1950, in 2009 our medical advancements have made it possible that it is almost never the case where a mother will die and the only thing that can save her is an abortion. I have no problem with that being in the statutes, but it would never be used. They'd just use it as a loophole to try to get an abortion anyway. Dr. C Everett Koop, former US Surgeon General, said in his 38 years as a pediatric surgeon he was never aware of a single situation where an unborn child's life had to be taken in order to save the mother. Also less than 1% of all abortions are due to rape or incest. I really do enjoy the "I'm not for abortions but I think a woman has the right to choose" shtick that many people pull. You're either for them, or you're not. It's quite simple. If I said, "I don't support parents abusing their kids. But I think they have the right to choose whether or not to do it," would that make sense to anyone? Because that's how moronic every left wing abortion lover sounds when they try to appease people by claiming, "nobody likes abortion, but I think it's a woman's right". Even certain statutes, like here in New York, have abortion a crime after 24 weeks. The idea that at 23 weeks, 6 days and 23 hours it's ok to kill. But another hour and hold on we've got a life! From the moment of conception they have the same 46 human chromosomes they'll have when they die. By the 4th week the heart, brain, intestines, vertebra, eyes, arms and legs are all delevoping and blood is flowing. 3 months into development all the essential organs are there as well has hair and the baby can suck it's own thumb. But yeah it's totally fine to kill them what with all that amniotic fluid surrounding them and whatnot.[/quote] Thanks to the billion+ dollars spent on abstinence-only-sex-ed in the last twenty years...you are wrong. The bias in your writing is amazing. You support forcing a woman who was raped, and probably acquired a STD in the process, to now spend the rest of her life dealing the resulting child...then again by your whacko religious right beliefs you probably support the idea that a woman must marry a man who has raped here as outlined in Leviticus. You sicken me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xombie Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777111' date='May 18 2009, 04:28 PM']How many 14 year old girls take the time to go out of their way to walk to a public health facility and garner themselves an education on a topic they aren't even talked to about by their parents? Wouldn't the better option be to make these places you speak of the schools which they are already attending?[/quote] Unfortunately, the same girl in question doesn't, most likely, go to school to listen to sound advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 [quote name='Bunghole' post='777787' date='May 20 2009, 11:01 PM']Women should have clean access to abortions for reasons they shouldn't have to explain to anyone other than maybe the fathers of their children. I don't want coat-hangar abortions.... I don't want abortions to be a form of birth control.... How you regulate that is beyond me, hence...legal abortions.[/quote] Coat hanger abortions are a myth spawned by the pro-death lobby. The abortions done prior to 1973 were done by the same methods they used after 1973. As for abortions as birth control, the last statistics I saw indicated that almost 50% of all abortions were a woman's second or more. That sounds like abortion as birth control to me. I have my doubts that Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton will ever be overturned, so I do think abortions should be regulated the same as any other surgery. Which means informed consent (i.e. the facts about the procedure, the risks, and the developmental state of the unborn child should be explained, which is not required nationally) parental consent and spousal notification, and abortions should only be performed by a licensed surgeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 [img]http://www.blackcoffeegasoline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/abortions-tickle.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 [quote name='Ben' post='778087' date='May 22 2009, 12:16 AM'][img]http://www.blackcoffeegasoline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/abortions-tickle.jpg[/img][/quote] :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 [quote name='Jason' post='778017' date='May 21 2009, 06:18 PM']Coat hanger abortions are a myth spawned by the pro-death lobby. The abortions done prior to 1973 were done by the same methods they used after 1973. As for abortions as birth control, the last statistics I saw indicated that almost 50% of all abortions were a woman's second or more. That sounds like abortion as birth control to me. I have my doubts that Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton will ever be overturned, so I do think abortions should be regulated the same as any other surgery. Which means informed consent (i.e. the facts about the procedure, the risks, and the developmental state of the unborn child should be explained, which is not required nationally) parental consent and spousal notification, and abortions should only be performed by a licensed surgeon.[/quote] I agree except I'd need a cite on the claim that abortions prior to Roe v Wade were performed in the same manner as after and that there weren't dangerous, illicit abortions occuring (coathanger notwithstanding) beforehand, since they were illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 [quote name='Bunghole' post='778107' date='May 22 2009, 01:23 AM']I agree except I'd need a cite on the claim that abortions prior to Roe v Wade were performed in the same manner as after and that there weren't dangerous, illicit abortions occuring (coathanger notwithstanding) beforehand, since they were illegal.[/quote] Surgical procedures don't get invented overnight. True, the "early" illegal abortions may have been done by different means, but by the time abortions were legalized, most of the methods were already in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColorChanginClique Posted May 24, 2009 Report Share Posted May 24, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777850' date='May 21 2009, 09:30 AM']You support forcing a woman who was raped, and probably acquired a STD in the process, to now spend the rest of her life dealing the resulting child...then again by your whacko religious right beliefs you probably support the idea that a woman must marry a man who has raped here as outlined in Leviticus. You sicken me.[/quote] No, nobody has to be "forced" into into anything. There's this fantastic and amazing thing known as adoption as I pointed out. My whacko religious beliefs? I'm not actually religious, though I do believe in God, I just have basic traditional morals. And one of them happens to be that aborting babies is wrong. Then you claim I "probably believe women must marry their rapist", which you know perfectly well that I don't, nor does any other reasonable person, support something so ridiculous. It's an absolutely pointless attack on me. But then again it's completely expected from a liberal. Throwing out slandering remarks to support your argument. (Although I use the term argument loosely, since most of what you said was just exaggerations and absurd assumptions.) It would be the equivalent of me saying you "probably support killing infants and toddlers thanks to your whacko liberal beliefs". Instead of constantly only focusing on women who were raped, how about you address the other 99%+ of abortions from women who were not in your counter argument. You're putting this huge emphasis on an aspect of abortion that's a statistical anomaly. This is the 2nd post I've seen of yours ending with "You sicken me" or some variation. Strange how someone having a different opinion makes you sick. Just doesn't seem healthy. Also can Bung or whoever else believes this explain the rationale behind the "I want abortions done by legal professionals and definitely not by the mythical coat hanger method.) Because on 1 front, abortions performed by doctors are not anywhere near fool proof or completely safe. There are serious risks and complications and deaths have resulted from them. And whether it's legal or illegal, the baby dies either way, so what difference does it make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted May 25, 2009 Report Share Posted May 25, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='777850' date='May 21 2009, 08:30 AM']Thanks to the billion+ dollars spent on abstinence-only-sex-ed in the last twenty years...you are wrong. The bias in your writing is amazing. [b]You support forcing a woman who was raped, and probably acquired a STD in the process, to now spend the rest of her life dealing the resulting child[/b]...then again by your whacko religious right beliefs you probably support the idea that a woman must marry a man who has raped here as outlined in Leviticus. You sicken me.[/quote] Um, adoption? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted May 26, 2009 Report Share Posted May 26, 2009 [quote name='Jason' post='778575' date='May 25 2009, 12:57 AM']Um, adoption?[/quote] Thats right, my bad, she forgets....as soon as its out and given up, she never thinks of it again. I heard an interesting observation over the weekend. Would anyone say there is a difference between the mourning a family goes through when their 8 month old child dies vs when the mother has a miscarriage at 3 months? How often do people have burials and funerals and memorials and ceremonies for dead infants vs miscarriages? I think this is an indirect way to gauge how people truly feel about abortions. If it is such a terrible thing to destroy a fetus' life, if this is in direct opposition to how we are supposed to love and feel for human life at this stage...shouldn't there be a lot more mourning? I'm in no way suggesting that a mother who miscarries doesn't mourn...but our cultural practices for mourning the born seem far greater than for mourning the un-born and since most people on the pro-life side treat them the same when they talk, shouldn't they treat them the same in practice? I could be way off base here, but the discussion in which I heard this, no one had heard of any instance of ceremonial mourning for the un-born, let alone widespread practice that would match the numbers of miscarriages in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColorChanginClique Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='778806' date='May 26 2009, 02:59 PM']Thats right, my bad, she forgets....as soon as its out and given up, she never thinks of it again. I heard an interesting observation over the weekend. Would anyone say there is a difference between the mourning a family goes through when their 8 month old child dies vs when the mother has a miscarriage at 3 months? How often do people have burials and funerals and memorials and ceremonies for dead infants vs miscarriages? I think this is an indirect way to gauge how people truly feel about abortions. If it is such a terrible thing to destroy a fetus' life, if this is in direct opposition to how we are supposed to love and feel for human life at this stage...shouldn't there be a lot more mourning? I'm in no way suggesting that a mother who miscarries doesn't mourn...but our cultural practices for mourning the born seem far greater than for mourning the un-born and since most people on the pro-life side treat them the same when they talk, shouldn't they treat them the same in practice? I could be way off base here, but the discussion in which I heard this, no one had heard of any instance of ceremonial mourning for the un-born, let alone widespread practice that would match the numbers of miscarriages in the world.[/quote] I do appreciate the well thought out post. I do think some women who miscarry do go through mourning, and some very painfully so. But all women aren't going to hold the same views, so you'd have to ask a few individuals who've experienced it. I'm not a women so I'm not going to try to guess how I'd feel but I imagine it would be pretty saddening. I think obviously though, people who have abortions choose to and want them, so they're not going to mourn and the thought of a funeral or service of any kind obviously would be stupid to them. Nobody's going to choose to kill their unborn baby then have a funeral. So I'd just say with regards to miscarriages, mothers who are pro life would generally mourn and it would be something incredibly painful. But societal norms are built in and so entrenched in our lives, I think we're so used to not having actual services for miscarriages that it's just become the norm for mothers and potentially their husband/bf to mourn privately. Besides that, I think abortion at any stage in pregnancy is equal. One isn't worse than the other to me. I previously laid out some quick basics on how quickly babies develop organs, limbs, blood, etc... And I think the entire idea of something being okay to kill one day, but the next day it's all of a sudden worthy of living is just illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted May 27, 2009 Report Share Posted May 27, 2009 [quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='778806' date='May 26 2009, 02:59 PM']Thats right, my bad, she forgets....as soon as its out and given up, she never thinks of it again. I heard an interesting observation over the weekend. Would anyone say there is a difference between the mourning a family goes through when their 8 month old child dies vs when the mother has a miscarriage at 3 months? How often do people have burials and funerals and memorials and ceremonies for dead infants vs miscarriages? I think this is an indirect way to gauge how people truly feel about abortions. If it is such a terrible thing to destroy a fetus' life, if this is in direct opposition to how we are supposed to love and feel for human life at this stage...shouldn't there be a lot more mourning? I'm in no way suggesting that a mother who miscarries doesn't mourn...but our cultural practices for mourning the born seem far greater than for mourning the un-born and since most people on the pro-life side treat them the same when they talk, shouldn't they treat them the same in practice? I could be way off base here, but the discussion in which I heard this, no one had heard of any instance of ceremonial mourning for the un-born, let alone widespread practice that would match the numbers of miscarriages in the world.[/quote] I can't speak for others but I know a woman that had a miscarriage and she and her husband celebrated a birthday everyday on the baby's projected delivery date. She'd cry at all the other kids birthday parties, etc. it was a very hard situation for her... anything that reminded her of her miscarried child would cause these feelings of loss. Just my .02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#22 Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I absolutely couldn't believe this when I read it: [url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090610/ap_on_re_us/us_abortion_shooting"]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090610/ap_on_...ortion_shooting[/url] you stay classy, pro-lifers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrlnutz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I suppose I'd rather them try to put it out of business this way than bomb it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#22 Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Well, except that they "put it out of business" by killing the doctor who ran the place. O_o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='778925' date='May 27 2009, 09:55 AM']I can't speak for others but I know a woman that had a miscarriage and she and her husband celebrated a birthday everyday on the baby's projected delivery date. She'd cry at all the other kids birthday parties, etc. it was a very hard situation for her... anything that reminded her of her miscarried child would cause these feelings of loss. Just my .02.[/quote] They're both in desperate need of therapy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.