Abortion debate (1 Viewer)

[katie_tully]

I never said it was intended for the Christians. Personally I care nothing for brainless zombies. It was there for the interest of people with an iota of intelligence.

 

[googooloo]

I think it is wrong to kill life u carry within u under any circumstance, u ppl here may feel differently, but even before joining my religion I felt I personally could never do it, even if rapped.

 

[katie_tully]

I'm glad that you couldn't terminate an unwanted pregnancy, even when "rapped". Being rapped would truly be a traumatic experience, especially if you became pregnant after being rapped.
I guess being raped would be a completely different story.

 

[erawamai]

They are against homosexulity because they believe it's not the way that God created man (or woman) to be. But in saying that, people also weren't created to lie or steal either. So, Christians aren't against the PEOPLE they're against the ACTION. Christian's are called to love everyone, whether homosexual or hetrosexual.
I'm a Christian.

- Homosexuality is wrong

- But we homosexuals as christians...but they are still wrong and should burn in hell. But we still love them! Dont forget it. But they should burn in hell. but we love them! But they are terrible awful awful people. Butwe love them!

Sure :uhhuh:

 

[spell check]

They are against homosexulity because they believe it's not the way that God created man (or woman) to be. But in saying that, people also weren't created to lie or steal either. So, Christians aren't against the PEOPLE they're against the ACTION. Christian's are called to love everyone, whether homosexual or hetrosexual.

who are you to say what god did or didn't do. you can't just say all the things you don't like weren't created by god, that would be putting yourself above god

anyway if homosexuality was going against god why did he create animals that are homosexual

 

[katie_tully]

The Bible says it, spell. And the Bible is apparently the word of God. Animals being homosexual doesn't work, as animals have different brains (der). Their primary function is to procreate, so really that argument is flawed.
Ancient socities had different "gods", thus homosexuality was a common practice.

People don't just say god said homosexuality is bad, it is actually written in the Bible. Old and New Testement. It just depends on where you stand socially. Some Christians are accepting of homosexuals, and some homosexuals are Christian. How you interpret the so called sin is up to an individuals choice..

How did we go from abortion to homosexuality.

 

[Serius]

*shakes head*

Making a statement in bold achieves nothing, and in this case it only serves to strengthen the suggestion that you are nothing more than a patriarchal prick who is unable to even comprehend the complexities of the current issue and that of women's reproductive rights in general.

Edit: Sorry about the language, Moonlight.

whats that word that means attack the argument not the speaker? you are showing your own flawed character if you feel that that accusing me of being patriarchal and ignorant is going to refute my argument. I am more than happy for you to point out mistakes in my arguement or points where you do not agree and i will try and help clarify...

Being patriarchal? no i dont feel iam. If there is a word which means iam considering both genders equally than thats what i am being.

As clarrification for my wish to end the use of the "womans body" argument here are my main reasons [ please dissagree with the reasons themselves and not insult me just because you may not agree]

- I and many other anti-abortion supporters allready understand that the womans life should not be threatened byt the prgnancy and if it is than the pregnancy should be terminated. That is not in despute but it repeatedly comes up as some sort of reason to support abortions. Not that iam not advocating banning every single abortion ever... iam advocating a stricter control on who and why people can get abortions. as an example:

you don't think that argument should be used because it is too relevant?

what if the woman dies during childbirth, or has some injury that makes it impossible for her to have children again

how will we offset her for that under your grand scheme?

spell check here must not have seen my posts because i allready said that i agree that the woman should be allowed to abort the baby if there is a legitimate medical reason.as we are both in agreeance here, i dont think it should be used as an arguement anymore.

- as for its the womans body and her right to decide what happens with it... that is a more complicated debate when we talk about the right to on a whim destroy any possability of having that child. I think i allready went into this with enough detail where i said that both the man and the woman who once the baby is born are equally responsible should also be equally responible in deciding wether the embryo is aborted or not..

- finally the third most common arguement used is of the question of rape. Now i am not a woman so no matter how hard i try i will allways never be able to fully understand the situation. But from my reasoning the child is both the rapists and the womans... it would be killing your own child. But like i said iam not a woman so i am willing to give this one the bennefit of the doubt and say that rape victims should be allowed to get an abortion. That said i wonder how many abortions are for rape victims? Allmost all rape victims i have heard of take the morning after pill after the attack[ originally called something like the "rape pill" and only administered by doctors]

- My final reason for not wanting to use this as an arguement is because it is a strong point in that both sides will never change their ideas about the womans body and what rights they have...

I proposed we dont use that arguement because whenever it comes up we go arround in circles again, so it was for the purpose of furthering the debate... not destoying it.

I hope to god you never locate your penis. I'm not a religious person, but I think I'd pray for the girl and child involved.
Please. Don't ever procreate.

You have missed the point entirely. There is no such thing as 100% effective contraception, unless you count abstinence. Nothing guarantees 100%. You can take every precaution in the world - you would have to be extremely unlucky, but it happens.
Being ready for sex, and being ready for the consequences are two different things. You're such a twit. You keep going on about the rights of the unborn child. Why should a child be born into an unloving or unstable family? What quality of life is it going to have? Especially with you as a father. Making the girl have a child is only going to create problems. There will always be one parent who didn't want the child, obviously a relationship with you would be strained - thus effecting the child.

Think about the whole picture, not just between your skewed lines.

Katie_Tully you have allready made your position quite clear and yet you try and further your arguement by insulting me and laying out that there is no such thing as 100% contraception. You ofcourse are perfectly right. what i dissagree with you about is that you think being ready for sex and understanding that sex can lead to pregnancy is 2 different things. Likewise there is not 100% contraception and people should understand that before they partake in a sexual liason that could result in a pregnancy. An Abortion should not be seen as a last line of defence for an unwanted baby. It should be seen as an important life saving operation for when a woman has complications [ or possibly a deformed baby but i sit on the line for this one].

I find it kind of hard in that i understand both points of view and i see where people are coming from.

Katie its nice of you to call me a twit[ definetely less offensive than some] but i wonder why you think a child being born into an unstable, or unloving or not as financially stable family means that it should not live? I mean my family is pretty unstable but iam damned glad that iam alive. Its unfair to make decisions for an unborn child based on what you think its future life will be like and based on how happy you think it will be. Society today has made it very easy to work hard and have upward mobility... I think everyone deserves that chance.

I reccomend reading a book called " a boy named it" its a true story about a child that was tortured and beaten and completely unloved in his own home and grew up like that. His school teacher noticed the marks and he got into a foster home where he lhad a happy existance. He is now alot older and has a nice cabin in the forrest where he likes to go and enjoy nature. He is enjoying life, but by your judgement he should never have been born because he wasnt going to be in an ideal home.

Wishing that i never procreate is a quite evil thing for you to do. People should not miss out on the joys of raising children. I thought that being a girl you would be more willing to ackowledge the joys of raising children but instead you seem to wish on others a pretty terrible thing.

 

[katie_tully]

Don't try and make yourself out to sound rational. Your argument before was disgusting, crude and unnesessary. I stand by my comment about you being a twit.
Thank you for enhancing it.

 

[erawamai]

every sperm is sacred!

 

[Serius]

Don't try and make yourself out to sound rational. Your argument before was disgusting, crude and unnesessary. I stand by my comment about you being a twit.
Thank you for enhancing it.

here lets see if u can write a reply like you


Your arguements lack depth and logic. You think that the death of an unwanted baby is completely normal. You sicken and disgust me. You are a fool and you symbolise of the kind of femminist [read: sexist]bullshit that i stand against.
Dont try and make a stand against the truth because your lack of education comes through clearly

 

[erawamai]

here lets see if u can write a reply like you


Your arguements lack depth and logic. You think that the death of an unwanted baby is completely normal. You sicken and disgust me. You are a fool and you symbolise of the kind of femminist [read: sexist]bullshit that i stand against.
Dont try and make a stand against the truth because your lack of education comes through clearly

Wouldn't it be a great world if the male was the one at risk of pregancy after sex.

I think the abortion debate would be very different.

An Abortion should not be seen as a last line of defence for an unwanted baby. It should be seen as an important life saving operation for when a woman has complications [ or possibly a deformed baby but i sit on the line for this one

For example the above is an illogical argument of yours.

Every potential life is sacred. Why should a deformed child not have a chance at life? You are putting the convenience of the mother ahead of the life of the child...deformed or otherwise...has a right to life.

Disgraceful

 

[Serius]

yeah it would be great, the world would be a much better place. If the issue of carrying a child for 9months is such a hassle why do so many people do it?
i wouldnt mind it all that much...bringing a life into the world would be the most amazing feeling and if i could it would be great.

and i quote from myself previously

haha the funny thing about that is that i posted my reply before reading your post.

I dont think women are inferior. In many respects i think they have become more powerful than men in certain legal issues[ ironic that they were fighing for equality and now they are more powerful then men and keep going... they really should switch sides and get men back into just as much power to balance it out]

Although i would class myself as a Christian i do not beleive in many of the typical Christian ideals and it has next to no effect on my position.

Women have plenty of say in this topic so it has nothing to do with stripping them of power with children. Its about making sure that an equal say is given by both the man and the woman in anything regarding children. A man should never have total say as in what has happened in the past and still happens in third world countries... yet i also dont think that just because the woman carries the baby she should have the sole say in the issues. Fuck, if i could i would willingly strap your uterus on me and share in the carrying of the child.

I dont think that the flagship argument of the pro abortion debate [the woman carries the baby] should be brought into this debate anymore. We all know this and we all share different ideas on what this means to the issues at hand that arent going to change. I for one am not going to bring up this issue again unless brought up by another or addressed to me personally that i feel must deal with.

As of now we shouldnt use the old " the woman carries the baby" argument anymore :d

edit: you edited! cheater. Yeah i would prefer not to use the word sacred but yeah every life is important. Perhaps we have a different idea about deformed. I was thinking about the fucked up baby my mum deleivered the other day which had some of its internal organs on the outside. It died shortly after. But i agree with you in that they should still be able to have a stab at life. Hence the sitting on the fence in that whole new can of worms

 

[erawamai]

Why is every potential life sacred? Why is it disgraceful?

I was being facetious on purpose.

---------------------------------------------------

@ Serius. The issue is that some women will not want the baby. They will resent the baby being inside them for 9 months. They may not be emotionally ready to have a baby and know it. Do you think that is a good thing?

She may not have the family support to have the baby.

She may not have the money to be able to raise the child.

The father may not want to be a part of it. Like most boys he will run to Queensland.

The boy may not want to pay child support for a mother and child for the rest of his life.

The mother may not want to make a person who she had an accidental MISTAKEN night with pay for the rest of his life.

The mother may not want to be assoicated with the father ever again.

Numerous reasons. The world and economy which we live in today does not accomodate unplanned pregnancies.

-------------------------

@Serius again. I assume you support abortions for rape victims?

 

[Generator]

whats that word that means attack the argument not the speaker? you are showing your own flawed character if you feel that that accusing me of being patriarchal and ignorant is going to refute my argument. I am more than happy for you to point out mistakes in my arguement or points where you do not agree and i will try and help clarify...

Attacking the message rather than the messenger? The manner in which a message is expressed cannot be ignored, and I can see no point in refuting an argument of little to no substance, and that lack of substance is more than illustrated by your attempt to 'rationalise' the dismissal of the central notion that a woman should retain control of her reproductive rights.

Don't try and make yourself out to sound rational. Your argument before was disgusting, crude and unnesessary. I stand by my comment about you being a twit.
Thank you for enhancing it.

Beaten to the punch, it seems. Oh well.

 

[Serius]

I was being facetious on purpose.

---------------------------------------------------

@ Serius. The issue is that some women will not want the baby. They will resent the baby being inside them for 9 months. They may not be emotionally ready to have a baby and know it. Do you think that is a good thing?

She may not have the family support to have the baby.

She may not have the money to be able to raise the child.

The father may not want to be a part of it. Like most boys he will run to Queensland.

The boy may not want to pay child support for a mother and child for the rest of his life.

The mother may not want to make a person who she had an accidental MISTAKEN night with pay for the rest of his life.

The mother may not want to be assoicated with the father ever again.

Numerous reasons. The world and economy which we live in today does not accomodate unplanned pregnancies.

-------------------------

@Serius again. I assume you support abortions for rape victims?

yeah theres alot of problems in the world that need solving. Its not a good thing for the mother to resent having a child and being emotionally unstable about it... but from the fathers prespective it is not fair that he has no say in regards to a consequence that they are both legally responable for. Thie system i have come up with is far from perfectr. In fact it is pretty shit, but it does have some stengths that our current system does not have and i think it would be a step in the right direction.
iam not exactly the kind of person who makes up new laws and systems and things but i tried to lay out an idea previously which i think would work better than what we currently have :

yeah ive sort of got an idea of how to approach abortions in regards to both the mans and the womans rights. Both man and woman should get a vote to go ahead with the abortion or not. If one partner decided not to then the abortion cannot go through. it is effectively vettoed but certain responsabilites must be taken if one of the two wants the baby.

ok bob and jane have sex... 2 months later Jane decides to tell bob she is pregnant. one of them doesnt want the child[ if both wanted it she would just have it so no abortion issue here]

scenario 1
Jane wants the baby. Bob does not.
here what should happen: Bob offers to pay half of the cost of the abortion for jane to pay for the unwanted baby[ half only seen as they are both equally responsible for the baby] Jane tells him no, she wants the baby. As she has decided to take on the responsability for the baby... if Bob so wants he can opt out of responsability for this child as he wanted the abortion. Bob has no contact or rights with the child[unless Jane lets him] But on the upside he doesnt have to make childcare payments as Jane by refusing to abort has taken on responsability for the child.
Jane raises the child alone


scenario 2
Bob wants the baby. Jane does not.

Jane wants to get an abortion. As this would be effectively killing Bobs child he wants the baby. Jane must carry the baby to term. She is compsenated[ either by Bob or by the government i havent decided which yet... By the government makes sense if they want less abortions though] for the time she is inconvenienced [ iam not a specialist on pregnancies but iam guessing maybe 6 months? iam going off this because i know a girl who was still working who was 3 months pregnant and she looked fine] Upon birth, custody of the child is given to Bob. Jane if she so chooses can decide not to have any responsability for the child as above.

I think this basically works pretty well. The only hitch i came accross was the actual time of the pregnancy itself so i thought up compsenating the woman for her time.

This ofcourse assumes that the womans life is not at risk by the pregnancy and that the sexual encounter that produced the child was legal[ i.e rapists have no rights]

what do u guys think?

the first 2 of your scenarios can be resolved in that if she votes for an abortion and the father votes to keep the baby, then he is give nresonsability so she does not have to have the family or money to support the baby...infact she does not have to have anything to do with the child after birth.

In your third scenario i guess the woman would be allowed to go through with the abortion as there is no father present to take responsability.
the 4th scenario means that nether parents want the baby... in my system then unfortunately they would be allowed to abort so you win there.

In the 5th scenario it doesnt have to pay for the rest of her life...as with scenario 1 and 2 she can choose not to have contact with the child or father ever again after birth.. This also clears up the 6th scenario[ although unfortunately the mother would have to have contact with the father preceding the birth... but thats a fair compromise to ensure both father and mother get a fair say in the choice to have the child].

I resently got into contact with some friends of my mother [ my mother being a midwife] who seemed to be saying that at the absolute most a woman is inconvenienced for 6 months... some not even that, some are only inconvenienced in the last trimester[sp?].

It could probably be based off her salary. Average salary we will assume is 40k so the mother gets paid 20 000 dollars compensation plus any costs associated with pregnancy e.g clothing, doctors appointments etc.

like i said in that post, rape victims i guess would have to be given the bennefit of the doubt[ currently the law is far to shaky on rape for me to want to tackle this issue, with most rapists getting far less time than the average murderer... so iam going to assume that rape victims would be allowed to abort if they wish[ father getting no say as he is a criminal]



The difference between my stance and those of other anti-abortionists is that i understand that abortion is a necessary evil. [ rape victims and medical reasons make for a clear cut reason for abortions to be used.]What i am against is abortions happeneing against the fathers wish who is someone else who could provide care for the child. i mean if the woman doesnt want the baby fair neough you cant make her raise it herself because it would probably have a shit life and get abused or maybe even killed... but if a normal father is being cut out of the loop and he is not looked at as an alternative to raising the child... then the system is flawed. Katie's attempts to use facts to simplify the issues wasnt very successful. upon reading what she quoted alot of it didnt click. Like her defenition of a fetus and the article stating abortions often occur up to 14 weeks for example...
I hope one day a real, compulsory contraception is discovered.... would solve the problem of women not wanting babies and having to abort them.

Generator... no it was a latin word... its a method of rhetoric which isnt accepted in high profile debates.
You place high regard on the womans reproductive rights and yet do not aknowledge the importance of the males reproductive rights and a males right to bare children.

 

[erawamai]

so iam going to assume that rape victims would be allowed to abort if they wish[ father getting no say as he is a criminal]

To apply your own logic.

Why should rape victims get to choose to have an abortion? Would that not be murder? Killing an unborn foetus because the mother didn't consent to the sex? Killing a potential life for the conscience of the women? Why does the unborn child have to be punished?

I cannot see how you can hold a stance whereby killing an unborn foetus for other reasons should be illegal or is wrong but that in the case of rape she should be allowed to terminate? Isn't it murder all the same?

-----------

I'm not going to respond to the rest because it is barely readable.

 

[katie_tully]

I think I'll add Serius to my ignore list. His every post angers me, but what angers me more is his self righteous attitude. After his initial post I have lost any respect I may have had for him as a forum poster, but I definately have no respect for him as a person.
Maybe I'll take some deep breaths before I deconstruct your argument...again.

 

[Xayma]

To apply your own logic.

Why should rape victims get to choose to have an abortion? Would that not be murder? Killing an unborn foetus because the mother didn't consent to the sex? Killing a potential life for the conscience of the women? Why does the unborn child have to be punished?

I cannot see how you can hold a stance whereby killing an unborn foetus for other reasons should be illegal or is wrong but that in the case of rape she should be allowed to terminate? Isn't it murder all the same?

-----------

I'm not going to respond to the rest because it is barely readable.

No, you are assuming that they are a human to be murdered.

The grouping of cells isn't being punished by simply not knowing life. By the same logic if you refused to impregnate another/be impregnated as the case may be, it would be punishing the child that could result from it.

Considering a pig will have a much larger intelligence then the group of cells maybe we should stop killing pigs.

 

[Phanatical]

I think the issue isn't so much "life", but "quality of life". If a child is going to be brought into the world as the product of rape, that child will carry with it forever that stigma. If a child is going to be brought into the world into a poverty stricken family that obviously cannot care for him or her, then that child will most likely live a life of misery. We should protect life, yes, but more importantly we should take responsibility and set boundaries around what sort of "life" is worth bringing a child into.

This is not to say I support abortion on demand. Far from it, I think abortion should be an Exception, rather than a rule, and that we should be focusing more on preventing pregnancies from happening in the first place.

 

[katie_tully]

This is what happens with a lack of discipline and a school system encouraging students to practice "safe sex" instead of "no sex".

And we all know how that turned out ......

Ohio received $8,086,793 in federal funding for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs
Ohio does not require schools to teach sexuality education. However, the board of education of each school district must establish a health curriculum for “all schools under their control,” that includes information regarding STDs (Sexually Transmitted diseases) and HIV/AIDS. This information must emphasize that “abstinence from sexual activity is the only protection that is one hundred per cent effective against unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted disease, and the sexual transmission of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.”

From the thread in light/offbeat news. Restrictive to Ohio I know, but it really annoys me when people keep preaching abstinence as the only way to be safe from pregnancy. Der, everybody knows that the only way to not become pregnant is to not have sex. It's not a feasible option.

Everybody is aware of the risks of having sex, stop being so ignorant to think they don't. People aren't going to stop having sex because they are going to maybe, perhaps, possibly fall pregnant.