Ok, the WTF America spawned this, I think it deserves its own space:

Abortion isn't just only for women who've been raped, victims of incest, or the fatally ill. Any woman should be able to have an abortion safely if that's her choice. Abortions are not things that are done lightly or casually. It's her body and she should be able to do what she wants with it.

There's a lot of rubbish that goes around when people talk about abortion. Women can't just go on having constant abortions, one after another, as a substitute for birth control. The whole process will damage the system eventually and could make her infertile, or lead to miscarriages. It's also not something without emotional or physical pain. As well as cost, monetary and psychological. Just the same as a pregnancy carried to full term in many ways.

Women are people, not living baby incubators! They have free will and choice and in a proper free society they should be able to have full access to the benefits of medical science.

Some extra bits:

jude_boi
Okay, then what about the father's choice?

Yeah, whatever. Like the father really risks anything... It's SPERM man! Men produce billions of the things. His body and his life isn't directly impacted. Use your head.

jude_boi
should we kill the fetus? Should it punished for the sins of it's father?

Yep, kill it then bruy it, burn it, or flush it; Whatever you want to do. It's not a human, it's just a few bodily organs inside a real human.
And I'm speaking for the whole world on this issue, or at least all countries that consider themselves advanced and enlightened, not just America.

Abortion is such a sensative issue, I mean, I should know - I went to Catholic school for 12 years, so "no abortion ever" was pretty much shoved in down my throat, alon with facts like:
93% of all abortions occur for social reasons
1% of all abortions occur because of rape
6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child
---
taken from abortionfacts.com:
" * Never, in modern times — except by a small group of physicians in Hitler’s Germany and by Stalin in Russia — has a price tag of economic or social use-fullness been placed on an individual human life as the price of its continued existence.
* Never, in modern times — except by physicians in Hitler’s Germany — has a certain physical perfection been required as a condition necessary for the continuation of that life.
* Never — since the law of paterfamilias in ancient Rome — has a major nation granted to a father or mother total dominion over the life or death of their child.
* Never, in modern times, has the state granted to one citizen the absolute legal right to have another killed in order to solve their own personal, social or economic problem.

And yet, if this is human life, the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in America and permissive abortion laws in other nations do all of the above. "

"Alive means that this being is growing, developing, maturing, and replacing its own dying cells. It means not being dead. And a fetus, an embryo is exactly this - cells that will grow into a human. "
---

My whole opinion about abortion is that I personally wouldn't do it - ideally, but I don't know what I'd do in a situation where I would want an abortion. However my personal opinion shouldn't be a factor in what someone elses personal opinon is.
And, yes, abortion should be legal - if only because girls are going to do it anyway, and have illegal and unsafe ones if they don't have access to an abortion clinic, so rather them be safe than tossing themselves down flights of stairs, or stabbing their insides with a clotheshanger.
Besides, it's not as though you go in get an abortion and leave. They give you information while you're their about the different processes, and the other options you have, and then there's a short waiting period for you decide if you want the abortion or not, and then you get scheduled for your aboriton if you choose to go through with it.

abortion is murder. nuff said.

If I was president, I will pass a law that will criminalize this barbaric, brutal act. Whoever commits this will be punished the same way as a murderer.

The only time that abortion can be legal is if it has been established that the mother's life is threatened. period.

Lame excusers who made a stupid mistake... try it and you'll be treated like a murderer. I feel sorry for these babies that have to die just like that. :cry: Why punish them for somebody else's fault? If you dont like to make babies, dont do it... or wear a fucking condom or birth control. If you make a mistake, just send it to the orphanage and hope somebody else will be willing to pick up your mistake.

Thats what I'd do. And at a later point in my life, I'm planning to adopt a kid... Yeah... I'm planning to pick up somebody else's mistake. And hopefully, he//she will take care of me in my old age... and inherit what is left of my savings.

:-D

kYuPoL
abortion is murder. nuff said.

By who's definition? Even the Bible can be used to claim that birth is at conception or when the baby takes it's first breath or even more than a year after birth.

If you use science, is the fertilized cell considered viable even if it isn't implanted on the uteral wall? Or maybe after it's implanted, but only a handfull of cells? Or maybe when there are more than 100 cells? Or maybe when it starts forming organs? Or maybe when it can survive outside of the woman's body on it's own?

I dunno man. Saying "nuf said" doesn't seem to solve the problem at all.

If I was president, I will pass a law that will criminalize this barbaric, brutal act. Whoever commits this will be punished the same way as a murderer.

And what way is that? How would you punish a murderer?

The only time that abortion can be legal is if it has been established that the mother's life is threatened. period.

Ha! So you make a choice between the woman's life and the embryo within and give the woman more importance. Interesting. Now try to understand those in favor of choice who say that the woman's health and well being is more important to an unborn mass of fetal tissue.

Also, how do you define "the mother's life is threatened?" are we talking instant death on the table only? Because there are lots of after birth problems that can shorten the mother's life long after the child is born.

Lame excusers who made a stupid mistake... try it and you'll be treated like a murderer.

Lame excusers who put the woman's life as more important than the fetal tissue's?

I feel sorry for these babies that have to die just like that. :cry:

Yes, yes. boo-hoo babies. What government support are you willing to pay for for these forced births you want to legislate? Someone needs to feed, clothe and educate them, and I'm thinking the mother who wanted to not have the child may not want to raise it.

Why punish them for somebody else's fault? If you dont like to make babies, dont do it... or wear a fucking condom or birth control. If you make a mistake, just send it to the orphanage and hope somebody else will be willing to pick up your mistake.

The health risks of carrying a baby to term can be irreversable and not limited to the personal responsibility you want to foist on people you don't know.

Thats what I'd do. And at a later point in my life, I'm planning to adopt a kid... Yeah... I'm planning to pick up somebody else's mistake. And hopefully, he//she will take care of me in my old age... and inherit what is left of my savings.

:-D

Raising children as indentured servitude. Much more humane, I guess.

________

Also, think about this...

If you illegalize all abortions, you will have an increase in "miscarriages". Do you want to require murder investigations into every miscarriage? Are you willing to pay the increased taxes to pay for these many thousands of investigations? Is it worth harassing a poor woman who lost a potential child just to find the few amongst them that are in fact guilty?

If I was president, I will pass a law that will criminalize this barbaric, brutal act. Whoever commits this will be punished the same way as a murderer.

You'd never be President, then.
The current administartion, the congress, the senate, and even the supreme court hold a conservative majority. And they aren't even thinking about it.

Why? Because it gets YOUR people to vote at election time. If you created a law that abolished it, then you wouldn't have that talking point on your side. Bush KNEW he wouldn't change that law, but he used that talking point over and over, to get people to vote for him and not Kerry. Funny thing is Kerry was against abortion too. Idiots...

This isn't the only "hot button" issue that gets people to the polls, though. Gay marriage and gun control are great motivators, too. Btw, these were also 2 more things that Kerry was against, but the Bushies made it seem otherwise.

Now, personally, I think A MAN has no business deciding what a woman can do with her own body. But further, I also don't believe that ANYONE should be telling someone what they can and cannot do with their body.

Hell, suicide should be legal too. If you want to off yourself, that should be your right. Just be courteous and leave a note.

.: SpANG! :.

If you make a mistake, just send it to the orphanage and hope somebody else will be willing to pick up your mistake.

If you make a mistake, go through 9 months of morning sickness back pain mood swings and a shit load of pain to give this thing you never wanted in the first place up for adoption so that the governemtn and tax payers can pay to clothe and feed it in a group home so that they will, one day, hopefully, be adopted - even though if a child isn't adopted in infancy and grows up in a group home they will, more than likely, lead a very bad life, fall in with the wrong crowd, etc... because they won't know stability, and will always have to live with the fact that their birth mother didn't want them, and coudln't nurture them.

I don't know how it is in other countries - hell, even other cities, but in NYC most children who are in the Social Service system - growing up in group homes, etc... don't have a very good outlook for the rest of their lives, once they're out of the state's care.

Ozone
His body and his life isn't directly impacted

I'd be inclined to disagree, on the subject that if it was a concious decision of both parties, but then the woman had second thoughts and went to have an abortion without talking to her signifigant other, that would greatly bring him emotional hurt.



And if abortion is illegalized, EVER, just imagine what some women would do to themselves if they didn't want the baby. From coat hangars to vacuum cleaners, they'd probably very much damage themselves by trying to do a 'home' abortion.

Personally, I'm for it. I might sound a bit cold hearted and blunt by saying this, but it's a form of birth control, just as miscarriage and gay people are (not saying that gay people live ONLY as a birth control). That doesn't nessesarily mean that I support those idiots who figure 'Oh, well, at least I can have an abortion' and be happy about it. My sister knew of a girl, and was completely read to punch her in the face.

can i just point out that so far the people who have objected to abortion are all male, and they will never never have to go through the mental anguish of a termination.
And it's all very well saying put the children up for adoption but my parents who struggled to concieve me wanted to adopt but were told that my father was too old. I want children of my own someday and i also want to adopt.
Another point is what if the child will be severely disabled with no quality of life, in constant pain with no way of comunicating with the world? would you terminate.
The biological definition of life is
movement
reproduction
nutrition
excretion
respiration
growth

at some point or another the fetus will develop these atributes so technically it is life.

The man also has a reponsibility in this whole process, yes in effect he is just a sperm donor but if the child lives then he will be expected to pay maintence on the child and act as a father figure, i know that if i made the decision to have an abortion then i would want my boyfriend there to support me.

personally i dont think that this issue will ever be resolved as the reactions to it are so polar but some agreement has to be reached. (i dont mean on this forum i mean world wide)

And if abortion is illegalized, EVER, just imagine what some women would do to themselves if they didn't want the baby. From coat hangars to vacuum cleaners, they'd probably very much damage themselves by trying to do a 'home' abortion.

Not to mention the damage it could do to the child if it was a botched attempt.

IF THEY DON'T WANT A FUCKING BABY, DON'T FUCK! IT'S FUCKING SIMPLE AS THAT!

*sigh*

I don't see why people see these things as such strong issues(I'm not saying you all are, of course), but honestly as a woman I ... really don't care. I'm all for people having abortions if they want, and if you want to have a baby, by all means go ahead. Those are the two categories I'd put it into. I don't want it. I want it.

sure, it's life. I completely agree that a fetus shows the normal biological signs of life, but its also a compacted tissue of stupidity. People who have decided that they want it have to realize that they are bringing an orb of stupid into the world that they will have to de-ignorant-ify themselves.

In terms of the bible and abortion, I'm not the religious type, so if a good christian could go find me a passage where it clearly says its wrong(and it doesn't even have to say it so clearly, but it shouldn't say anything where life begins either) for I want to see the passage where people scold women for using it... and perhaps even get scolded for using clothes hangers... and perhaps even have the doctors way taken from them as well.

As someone who really doesn't care however, I would much rather be called a woman than a live baby incubator... the thought of having a baby scares the living hell out of me, actually... and what scares me even worse is that I'll carry the thing for nine months, go through a painful delivery, and have 18 years of its on and off requited love and its using me for money, and then it will possibly hate me in different intervals. And then it could die before I do, and no parent wants to bury his/her/their child.

But continuing on with this ball of stupid, it is stupid, and very very dull-sensed to the knowledge of pain. Throw a hand in its face and it doesn't flinch? How trusting. Though they may be sweet, they aren't intentionally so in the least bit and are even cute in the times they aren't expensive to raise and defecating in the sacs tied round their waists. Honestly, I wish people could limit themselves to how many children they have.
Can't use a condom? Well, can you keep track of your menstrual cycle?
Can't use birth control? See answer for condom.
Can't use any contraceptive? See above.

And if I'm not mistaken, humans have sex for fun, as well as reproduction... or whatever the reason may turn to. And if you had AIDs, lets say and you wound up having a child with your significant other with AIDs, would it be wrong to let this child live to die until some cure is found in this profoundly overpopulated world? This is the only subject matter I feel strongly of. If you know the baby will be of ill-health and diseased, I say don't raise it. End it's life while it's still a ball of stupid, or fetal matter or stupid for that matter. It won't have missed anything, and it does seem humane to me.

...Babies are cute though. :)

ozoneocean
And I'm speaking for the whole world on this issue, or at least all countries that consider themselves advanced and enlightened, not just America.

I think that's a bit too far of a jab to make. :S While I do think that women should have that choice, I wouldn't go so far as to say that those who disagree are not advanced or enlightened.

This is difficult for me to say since I'm currently not pregnant and not worrying over an unwanted pregnancy...but I would hope that should I ever get a surprise one, I would keep the baby. Regardless of what other people think, to me that's a soon to be born baby. So unless my life is in danger, I think there's something horrifically selfish of me to snuff out a possible baby just because I think it's inconvenient to carry it around for 9 months. If I can't support a baby, then I should just put the baby up for adoption. If I didn't want to get pregnant in the first place, then I shouldn't be having sex. If you're old enough to have sex, then you're old enough to know that sex can result in pregnancies.

The ultimate rejection isn't putting up a baby for adoption, it is sucking the baby out of your womb piece by piece and throwing the bits into the garbage. Maybe the baby will grow up miserable but there's also the possibility that the baby will grow up happy and in a loving home.

But people will disagree with me and they are free to make that choice. More importantly, differing opinions is perfectly okay. Everybody should be able to make that decision and be willing to live with the consequences of it. In a way, it becomes an extremely personal and meaningful decision if you are presented with that choice.

On a different but related note, I find it interesting that while a woman can decide to keep or not keep a baby, the father cannot. If the father wants the baby but the mother doesn't, then tough luck for dad because the baby's getting evicted. If the father doesn't want the baby though but the mother does, then tough luck for dad as he's going to have to pay child support for the next 18 years.

Given that this situation will not likely change, all guys should take note: wear the condom because if there's a bun in the oven, you're not the one who gets to set the timer.

Back to that research paper. ^^;;;

.: Black Kitty :.

PoisonedV
IF THEY DON'T WANT A FUCKING BABY, DON'T FUCK! IT'S FUCKING SIMPLE AS THAT!

>.> Poisoned, at the Debate and Discussion forum, we use our Adult voices. At the Top Drawer, we can use our Child voice...

Black Kitty
I think that's a bit too far of a jab to make. :S While I do think that women should have that choice, I wouldn't go so far as to say that those who disagree are not advanced or enlightened.

This is difficult for me to say since I'm currently not pregnant and not worrying over an unwanted pregnancy...but I would hope that should I ever get a surprise one, I would keep the baby. Regardless of what other people think, to me that's a soon to be born baby. So unless my life is in danger, I think there's something horrifically selfish of me to snuff out a possible baby just because I think it's inconvenient to carry it around for 9 months. If I can't support a baby, then I should just put the baby up for adoption. If I didn't want to get pregnant in the first place, then I shouldn't be having sex. If you're old enough to have sex, then you're old enough to know that sex can result in pregnancies.

The ultimate rejection isn't putting up a baby for adoption, it is sucking the baby out of your womb piece by piece and throwing the bits into the garbage. Maybe the baby will grow up miserable but there's also the possibility that the baby will grow up happy and in a loving home.

But this isn't the question. First of all, anti-choice people basically think that aborting any embryonic tissue is out of the question - regardless of how developed it is.

And the question that needs to be asked not whether or not YOU would do it, but whether or not you think OTHER PEOPLE should not be able to do it.

But people will disagree with me and they are free to make that choice. More importantly, differing opinions is perfectly okay. Everybody should be able to make that decision and be willing to live with the consequences of it. In a way, it becomes an extremely personal and meaningful decision if you are presented with that choice.

Exactly. Have you also noticed that the "small government" whiners are usually the anti-choice people too?

On a different but related note, I find it interesting that while a woman can decide to keep or not keep a baby, the father cannot. If the father wants the baby but the mother doesn't, then tough luck for dad because the baby's getting evicted. If the father doesn't want the baby though but the mother does, then tough luck for dad as he's going to have to pay child support for the next 18 years.

Given that this situation will not likely change, all guys should take note: wear the condom because if there's a bun in the oven, you're not the one who gets to set the timer.

The perspective shouldn't be that the father doesn't get the baby, but that the woman controls her health and her destiny. Until the bun is fully cooked, it's just a thing.

Ronson
The perspective shouldn't be that the father doesn't get the baby, but that the woman controls her health and her destiny. Until the bun is fully cooked, it's just a thing.

But once the metaphorical bun is out of the oven, the man is obligated to be a father. My point isn't that the father is denied a baby but that the father is not in the same position as the mother when it comes to choice. The father cannot choose to accept the baby or not, the father must accept the choice the mother makes.

This is especially true once the baby is born. I could be wrong but in most cases, the father must provide financial support for the child until he/she is 18 unless the child is put up for adoption. The father has the right to see his child but whether or not he acknowledges that child as his child is irrelevant when it comes to financial support. For some guys, this is 18+ years of supporting someone that they were hoping wouldn't be born.

I don't think there's any solution to this but I think it's something interesting to note. If I'm wrong though, then there's nothing much to note. :D But a woman isn't just controlling her health and destiny here but her partner's too. Whether the man is to be a father or not hinges on whether the woman wants to be a mother.



.: Black Kitty :.

Quote:
On a different but related note, I find it interesting that while a woman can decide to keep or not keep a baby, the father cannot. If the father wants the baby but the mother doesn't, then tough luck for dad because the baby's getting evicted. If the father doesn't want the baby though but the mother does, then tough luck for dad as he's going to have to pay child support for the next 18 years.

Given that this situation will not likely change, all guys should take note: wear the condom because if there's a bun in the oven, you're not the one who gets to set the timer.


The perspective shouldn't be that the father doesn't get the baby, but that the woman controls her health and her destiny. Until the bun is fully cooked, it's just a thing.

That is why I will never impregnate or marry (*shudders at the thought of marriage*) a USA woman or any woman contaminated with this garbage in her brain. That is why I stopped even seeing prostitutes or doin fuckin one night stands even if I got a fuckin condom. Cuz of the guilt I carry... that if I impregnate her by accident and she decides to kill my kid, I wont have a fuckin choice... and I wont even know about that.

I dont wanna see my child die. I might be pushed to grab a gun and shoot the bitch... or do anything that may qualify as "harrassment". I dont wanna be powerless to stop the murder of my child. I will carry that with shame and disgrace in my heart until the day I die. Because I do not see an embryo as a "thing".

I'm stayin out of trouble. I'll be a virgin again... or marry a woman from my country or anybody not contaminated by this "abortion is right" crap. Because women like that are like ticking time bombs. No thanks. Blech!!! Yuck!!! EWWWW!!!


And I advise every sane man out there to follow my advise. Or learn your lesson the hard and painful way.

kYuPoL
I dont wanna see my child die. I might be pushed to grab a gun and shoot the bitch... or do anything that may qualify as "harrassment". I dont wanna be powerless to stop the murder of my child. I will carry that with shame and disgrace in my heart until the day I die. Because I do not see an embryo as a "thing".

I think shooting someone is a wee bit more then harassment kYuPoL. :? I find it interesting that you're okay with shooting someone so long as it saves what you think is important.

.: Black Kitty :.

FinbarReilly

kYuPoL
That is why I will never impregnate or marry (*shudders at the thought of marriage*) a USA woman or any woman contaminated with this garbage in her brain. me bombs.

Sorry; but...Chart of Countries and Abortion Laws [pregnantpause.org].

You are aware that pretty much every country has some form of legalized abortion, and the US is part of a large group that allows a lot of freedom in that area. It's okay if you use a general statement, but to pick on one country is just not right...

FR

Oops... my bad...

I picked on USA (might as well include Canada) because I noticed that the people living in these countries have a "mind-your-own-business-dont-give-a-fuck" mentality... which is not conducive to the existence of a stable family and long-lasting relationships.

I dunno... Coming from a 3rd world country where relations are warmer... that was the ultimate culture-shock to me that I had to adapt that attitude if I wanna survive in here. I had to be more impersonal, more materialistic... and I had to learn to be a self-centered asshole. I had to torture myself emotionally in order to change my mindset.

Because if I didnt change my attitude, I will end up being used up then tossed in the garbage like an old rag. A girl whom I loved with all my heart and soul taught me that lesson I will never forget.

I will not survive with my old attitude. I will just fuckin die... of depression and suicide. But I refuse to go down. I'm a fuckin fighter and I will fight until I die. Change or die.

For some reason, the north-american country has alot of distance. People always want distance and think of themself. Fuck it. Even in driving, the distance you must observe is alot farther. Space space space. Give me my fuckin personal space. Yeah.

Self-centeredness is the root cause of abortion. People just make a fuckin mistake. People only wanna enjoy the happy part of making a baby without the responsibilities attatched. The culture of hate and self-centeredness is what is causing depression, crime, fucked up families, fucked up laws, etc. etc. etc.

I cannot start a family here with that kinda shit lurking around. Fine. I'll just give my space of children to some dude in a 3rd world country and his 16 children. :-D

for those people who says that any unwanted babies could be left at the orphanage instead... clearly has such a naive view of how the world works.

not all babies instantly gets adopted. some grow up to still have no parents at all. especially if they're black, or in some other racial minority group. or even if they're retarded, or had some disability.

most babies that gets adopted are fully healthy, white and has no disabilities.

I have personally known deaf people, being deaf myself. and they were adopted. But here's the thing... they weren't adopted until they were around 15 years old... because there was plenty of folks out there who wasn't sure if they actually wanted to have an adopted, DEAF baby.

and in that 15 years that they didn't get adopted, they got bounced around foster families.

and if you don't know what foster families are like, then I'm here to tell you that the majority of them in my state are trailer trash types. they chain-smoke, go on drinking binges, and leave trash lying about everywhere. and they don't care about what the kids do, as long as they don't bring the attention of authorities on them.

so basically the foster kids go on to commit a lot of offensives, do drugs, etc.

my friends before they got adopted, they had a lot of self-steem problems, and many other mental problems. As an result, they did drugs and shoplifted a lot.

it wasn't until they managed to get adopted by decent families did those problems go away, and they were able to stop their drug addictions.

so every time you say an unwanted baby should be left at the orphanage, think of the facts here.

the adoption processes are flawed, and they have a very poor foster family care system, because it seems that the majority of foster families are just taking in the kids because the kids are cash cows to them. because they get paid for it, etc. and that the majority of them are also trailer trash people who are using the money for alcohol, etc.

are those the kind of people you want to raise those kids? since those kids have the potential to grow up to become rapists, criminals and drug dealers. especially if they continue to let those trailer trash people be foster parents.

By thinking that you're doing a good deed by not having an abortion, BUT leaving it off somewhere at some orphanage, you're sadly mistaken. you're probably contributing more by adding one more even fucked up human who has parent issues and such, especially if they didn't get adopted until the age of 15.

Aurora Moon
By thinking that you're doing a good deed by not having an abortion, BUT leaving it off somewhere at some orphanage, you're sadly mistaken. you're probably contributing more by adding one more even fucked up human who has parent issues and such, especially if they didn't get adopted until the age of 15.

So those people are better off dead? Perhaps we should kill anyone who isn't adopted by the time they're 15.
This viewpoint always bothers me. Sure they may get bounced around foster families, have unstable homes and run a greater risk of committing crimes but there is also a chance that they would grow up to be contributing members of society. Not all criminals are orphens or adopted. Criminals have also come from normal loving families as well.

This is different from arguing "oh that's just a thing attached to the body, just flush it out." This is saying "this thing may become useless people. Those useless people shouldn't exist, they're better off never having been born."

It's very easy to pass that judgement when you're not the one who's going to be sucked out from the womb. I don't doubt that the adoption process can be flawed but ask any of them if they feel they're better off dead. Tell them that since they come from unstable families and are bouncing from one foster family to another, they are potentially unstable and see if they'll agree to save the rest of us the trouble and kill themselves.

.: Black Kitty :.

The problem is that parenthood has been elevated to some almost revered position.

Naturally, this is a instinctual reaction to the propagation of the species. Make everyone want to have children and the human race keeps going strong.

But honestly, nearly everyone in the world can be a parent. Regardless of ability, regardless of personal disposition. It isn't a miracle, simply because it happens every time.

So the problem with strong anti-choice positions is that they always argue from the point that having the child is some brave feat or worthy of some sort of respect. It isn't. Lots of people do it and lots of people do it badly.

I would argue that more people do it badly than do it well, and that bad parents deserve no respect whatsoever. (not for being parents, anyway)

I admire someone who terminates a pregnancy because they feel they can't raise the child in a responsible manner much more than someone who pumps out the babies because God told them they had no alternatives.

that was not what I was saying.

I was just saying that the people who thinks that they're making the world a better place by banning abortion solely based on thier princles are wrong.

Because by outlawing abortion, they are pretty much effectively making the world a worse place to be. the oprahanages and the adoption centers are already swaped with a lot of problems, espeically that of millions of kids still needing homes badly rather than being stuck with trailer trash foster parents.

by outlawing abortion, you'd see a lot of orpanages so overrun with kids that half of them may end up living on the streets.

in fact, there's already a few that slipped though the cracks and are living on the streets.

I would rather abort my babies if I didn't want them, than knowingly give it up to an flawed system that can't even gurrate my children would get a nice family to care for it.

in fact, if my fetus had an high chance of becoming deaf like me, and I didn't want it... then I'd abort it than rather let it end up like my high school friends who were adopted at the age of 15.

I don't think my conisence could truly rest knowing that if it wasn't adopted, it was most likely being raised by a bunch of achohlics who saw my baby as nothing than a cash cow.

In fact the only way I would give it up for adoption was if I had met with some famlies beforehand to ensure that the baby would have a good life.

I would rather have the babies and children out there have a good decent life than one where they were so miserable that they would rather die than live.

Every child deserves an parent who really loves them for what he/she is, and an parent who can care for them.
there's nothing worse to an child than an parent who doesn't love them at all.

Ronson
The problem is that parenthood has been elevated to some almost revered position.

Naturally, this is a instinctual reaction to the propagation of the species. Make everyone want to have children and the human race keeps going strong.

But honestly, nearly everyone in the world can be a parent. Regardless of ability, regardless of personal disposition. It isn't a miracle, simply because it happens every time.

So the problem with strong anti-choice positions is that they always argue from the point that having the child is some brave feat or worthy of some sort of respect. It isn't. Lots of people do it and lots of people do it badly.

I would argue that more people do it badly than do it well, and that bad parents deserve no respect whatsoever. (not for being parents, anyway)

I admire someone who terminates a pregnancy because they feel they can't raise the child in a responsible manner much more than someone who pumps out the babies because God told them they had no alternatives.

that's also one of my pet peeves.

there's a lot of people out there who dont believe in abortion, but some of them doesn't really love thier children. they just raise the kids because they see it as the right thing to do, but most of the time they raise the kids badly.

and if I didn't know better, I'd say they were being hycrocities about the kid's life being a prcerious thing.

They leave the babies in hot cars while they go shopping, because they don't want to deal with the hassle of carrying the baby around....
they leave thier children alone with large dogs that has been known to attack irrationally.

the list goes on... it seems that even though they're pro-life, the types that never wanted children in the first place, yet do.. they're the ones who puts thier kids lives in danger!

of course not all people who are anti-abortion are like that, but the ones that does that sort of thing despite the whole talk about babies' lives being precious... well it just grates my nerves!

and they start to see the kids as "the ones that ruined my life". Oh yeah, that makes sense. you were the one who believed condoms and birth control pills were against god, and didn't even stay cerebrate. Dude, it was YOUR fault, not your kids'!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-rape_female_condom [en.wikipedia.org]

Oh, and christians don't think condoms are against god, so shut the fuck up.

PoisonedV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-rape_female_condom [en.wikipedia.org]Oh, and christians don't think condoms are against god, so shut the fuck up.

I never said the word christain did I? I just said "people who believe in god"

that could be any kind of people out there.

for instance I know some cathlotic churches who are against birth control pills and condoms..... they say it's an sin to use those, because sex is only supposed to be for procreating, not for pleasure.

of course, there are MANY different kinds of chrsitains, catholics and so on forth. many churches has different teachings.

for example, one chirstain church could teach people that while homosexuality is supposed to be an sin, that we should forgive and tolerate them.

another church however would say that homosexuality was straight out wrong and shouldn't ever be tolerated.

and both of my parents are chrstains, so don't assume things about me, and tell me to shut up.

the church my parents used to go to was competely against birth control of any kind, inducing condoms. of course they switched to another church which teachings they agreed more with.

Well, heres what you said: you were the one who believed condoms and birth control pills were against god, now, does that apply to everyone who hates their kids cuz of that?

I also said that didn't apply to everyone.

of course not all people who are anti-abortion are like that,but the ones that does that sort of thing despite the whole talk about babies' lives being precious... well it just grates my nerves!

read my posts more thoughly, thanks.

Please note that what I usually say in these threads are not personal. I may sound a bit abrupt or pushy but I am generally not commenting on you or anyone as a person. Just a disclaimer. :)

Aurora Moon
I was just saying that the people who thinks that they're making the world a better place by banning abortion solely based on thier princles are wrong.

And I would argue that those who think that their principles (that being those who don't have good families are better of dead) are a better alternative may not actually be making the world a better place either.

China and India currently have an imbalance number of males and females. This is due to families having a cultural perference towards sons and the abortion of baby girls. It would not be a surprise that if the baby is born a girl and there are no records of such a birth, the girl will mysteriously "disappear." If the girl is lucky, she'll be put up for adoption.

I'm sure you can find a lot of people in China and India to justify this. Why let this girl be born if everyone will wish she was a boy? For some families, they can only have one child. Why waste that precious spot on a girl who will later marry into another family? Why subject the girl to an orphanage so that she can, at best, be adopted by some foreigner and at worse, live the rest of her childhood in an orphanage? Now a boy would be MUCH better off.

How different is this mode of thinking from the one you expressed earlier? I can argue that by allowing abortions, we will be allowing people to abort babies for any sort of reason they can come up with. The baby may have blue eyes but you wanted brown? Abort it. The baby may be a girl and not a boy? Abort it. That baby may not be tall enough, strong enough, pretty enough...let's just abort it.

I do not deny that bouncing from one foster home to another is a horrible experience. As someone whose brother is autistic, I don't deny that it's a tough life for those who have some form of disability. But I do find it curious that instead of suggesting we fix the adoption system, we should just make sure there's no one occupying it instead.

What I strongly object to isn't the abortion itself but the intent of the abortion. There's a difference between thinking "that's just a thing and like a toenail, I should just cut it off" and "this is a potential person which I personally think won't amount to anything good or will be unhappy. I'll save everyone the trouble and just kill it while I still can."

Don't misunderstand here, I'm not anti-choice. While I do think women should have the right to choose, I think suggesting that this is just (and only just) about the woman is missing all the other baggage this issue comes with. I can understand aborting the baby if both the mother and the father do not want it. Neither of them want to be parents and both of them probably have strong personal beliefs that bringing that child into the world is wrong. That's their choice, their decision to make and while I may not personally agree, I am not part of the equation in that matter.

Yet for all this talk about controlling destiny, nobody really talks about the father's destiny. If this was about deciding your own destiny, then who else is more fit to decide the father's destiny but the father himself?

Why should the mother be allowed to carry that baby if the father doesn't want it? Why should he be forced to pay child support? Why are we not subjecting mothers to abortions?

I don't necessarily agree with what I'm arguing but I find it interesting that it's hardly considered. I'm a girl so I appreciate all this power but I know that this power is taken at the expense of another. If I wanted to keep the baby, the father is going to come along for the ride whether he wants to or not. It isn't fair but if I'm going to risk a pregnancy, then he can risk being a father.

And let's all be nice here. :( No need to be rude.

.: Black Kitty :.

Black Kitty
What I strongly object to isn't the abortion itself but the intent of the abortion. There's a difference between thinking "that's just a thing and like a toenail, I should just cut it off" and "this is a potential person which I personally think won't amount to anything good or will be unhappy. I'll save everyone the trouble and just kill it while I still can."

If the decision to abort is ever really that vapid, can it remain so through the process? It won't be so again...

Why does everybody seem to think abortions are so easy? Even when medical science makes the process smoother, society and psychology still puts a weight on the woman's shoulders.

Fathers should only get more of a say when they have the ability to bear the child instead.

I firmly believe that the adoption system needs to be fixed. but until that day, you can't really say that giving it up for adoption would be actually be a postive expernice or a better expernice for the baby, espeically if it grows up and it still hadn't been adopted into a family yet.

being aborted while in the womb, it has no expernice of anything, so it can't know what it's missing.

that said... as ozoneocean have said, aborting isn't that easy as you think it is. in fact, giving birth to it is actually easier than aborting it, due to the medical preducures and the pain.

and also keep in mind that while I'm pro-choice, I'm also for limitations on the abortions.. espeically if the fetus delvoped to the point where it could easily live outside the womb. having all the fuctional organs, etc.

I'm okay with early stages, because that's when it's the easiest (even though it's still very painful).

one to two months is the time for it. but any longer than that...? ehhh.
I can't really grasp the idea of an 8-month baby being aborted.
I mean, if you were so sure that you didn't want it, then why wait so damn long to have an abortion, for pete's sake? and it's not like you didn't know you were pregant or something... it becomes very obivous early on, after all.

oh by the way, I never said the children who were in bad familes would be useless or an bad member of socieity forever, and therefore be killed off. I NEVER SAID THAT. for those people who read it that way, sorry, but that was not what I meant at all.

I'm just saying that some people who does the abortion may be actually thinking of what would be best for the fetus, and not selfish people who was only thinking of themselves.

For instance, I may not want the fetus to have an life of misery growing up, espeically if I know for sure that if I was to hand the child over to the state, that it've a bad life. If the child was to turn up one day and then ask me why I gave it up, and then blame me for all the bad stuff that happened in the child's life... then I'd know that the child was right to blame me, because I was responsible for the child's life being so goddamn shitty in the first place. espeically if I knew how crapastic the state's adoption system is in the first place.

I mean, honestly there's children who ran away from the children's homes to live on the streets. they honestly choose to starve and fight for survival on the streets rather than to put up with what the state's systems did to them. that's how bad it is in some states. and those child walfare people can't even find those kids again, or doesn't seem to even try.

so to me, it's an act of mercy at times.
espeically with my family, who has had an history of problems with babies during childbirth. there's been Deafness, which is no problem.
But there's also being half braindead, a lot of health complications which would inffere with the baby even growing up to become an fuctional part of society. certain conditions that would reiqure for the baby to be taken care of for the rest of it's life. it'd need to be in a wheelchair, have life support standing by, etc. I have an cousin withthat same exact condition because the mother didn't believe in abortion.
she can't speak, and doesn't seem to regonize what goes on around her. she drools, and stays pretty much motionless in her wheelchair. she only moves slightly when she's being poked. her eyes can't even focus on anything.

and she's gonna be like that for the rest of her life. meaning that she needs people to take care of her. so what happens to her if her parents die? she has no brothers or sisters to take care of her... and most of the other family members are usually rather old themselves, not counting myself and my brother who has an family of his to take care of. I can't even imagine living like that.