Abortion debate (1 Viewer)

[Phanatical]

I'm not a pro-lifer in that sense. I believe in Quality of life, and the idea that by conceiving the child, both parents are agreeing to give that child quality of life. If they aren't prepared to do so then they shouldn't conceive the child.

 

[ur_inner_child]

I'm not a pro-lifer in that sense. I believe in Quality of life, and the idea that by conceiving the child, both parents are agreeing to give that child quality of life. If they aren't prepared to do so then they shouldn't conceive the child.

unrealistic, no matter how much you promote abstinence, as you've so suggested

 

[erawamai]

If they aren't prepared to do so then they shouldn't conceive the child.

...and yes...back in the real world.

Those simplistic ideas do not work. It just results in more unwanted pregnancies. Surely you can come up with someone better in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies and hence abortions? Do you not owe it to all the potential lives out there that are aborted? All you have got is 'Don't have sex boys and girls!'. I Think everyone already knows that.

 

[Phanatical]

Society doesn't just need to tell them, it needs to keep reminding them. It needs to show that if you have sex outside of wedlock, then you will suffer the consequences of their actions.

 

[malkin86]

Like how? Like giving children born out of wedlock less rights? (as was the case until about the 60s) After it's born, it's a child, and it shouldn't be used by society as a punishment for its mother.

 

[erawamai]

It needs to show that if you have sex outside of wedlock, then you will suffer the consequences of their actions.

So that's it...that is all you have got to combat unwanted pregnancies?

I have no idea what century you are in...probably the 17th.

What on earth does wedlock have to do with abortions. People have children outside of wedlock and do not abort and people have children when married and abort. There is no correllation between marital status and abortion. To think otherwise indicates stereotyped familial ideas from long long ago.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another issue. Do you believe in safe non penetrative sexual intercourse? I'm talking about

- fellatio
- cunnilingus
- digital penetration of the vagina
- stimulation of the cliterous with the hand and other forms of mutual masturbation?

Do you have any issues with these?

 

[ur_inner_child]

Society doesn't just need to tell them, it needs to keep reminding them. It needs to show that if you have sex outside of wedlock, then you will suffer the consequences of their actions.

i suppose my boyfriend's parents (still together with 3 children) who arent married are suffering arent they. i mean geez theyre not even married, they got what coming didnt they. bastards and theyre not-marrying and having-sex plan.

you're narrow-mindedness hurts my head. keep reminding them, sure. do you feel its that simple? do you feel that icouples who have sex before marriage are irresponsible, full stop no exceptions. i find it hard that you can make exceptions in a few circumstances, but then every so often, you would post again and make a huge over-riding statement such as "if you have sex outside wedlock, then you will suffer the consequences"

you're values are different, i understand and respect them. it is a thing of security and beauty to keep your virginity toward "the one", the person you marry. but others do not. it does not mean that they hold values less than you. perhaps they are willing to take a risk far better than you, such as my example about chris' parents. yes marriage is special, but it is also a title, a construct. if you disrespect those who do not marry but have sex, what is to say that they are not as committed to love and partnership as you would?

you should once or twice take a step back and analyse the constructs that hold you, that they may not necessarily guarantee what you think they would result in. and until you realise that there are other ways and other constructs that people value, and you respect so, then i cannot take your retarded over-generalising, oversimplifying ways seriously

 

[sparkl3z]

ur inner child, staying unmarried is solely their decision, but if they don't get married, the woman or guy has no rights if they ever separate, think children etc.

 

[erawamai]

ur inner child, staying unmarried is solely their decision, but if they don't get married, the woman or guy has no rights if they ever separate, think children etc.

de facto rights...

 

[Phanatical]

The idea of "Wedlock" is to ensure stability for the children if something goes wrong.

 

[erawamai]

The idea of "Wedlock" is to ensure stability for the children if something goes wrong.

You are a very quaint person.

 

[ogmzergrush]

You are a very quaint person.

Either they've redefined quaint while I wasn't looking or that's the euphemism of the century.

 

[erawamai]

Either they've redefined quaint while I wasn't looking or that's the euphemism of the century.

Quiant = old fashioned. Well that's what I meant.

 

[ogmzergrush]

Quiant = old fashioned.

It was more the positive connotations that got me, like old-fashioned in a good way.

 

[erawamai]

It was more the positive connotations that got me, like old-fashioned in a good way.

True...I'll change what I said. Perhaps it's better top say phanatical has anachronistic views.

 

[withoutaface]

i suppose my boyfriend's parents (still together with 3 children) who arent married are suffering arent they. i mean geez theyre not even married, they got what coming didnt they. bastards and theyre not-marrying and having-sex plan.

you're narrow-mindedness hurts my head. keep reminding them, sure. do you feel its that simple? do you feel that icouples who have sex before marriage are irresponsible, full stop no exceptions. i find it hard that you can make exceptions in a few circumstances, but then every so often, you would post again and make a huge over-riding statement such as "if you have sex outside wedlock, then you will suffer the consequences"

you're values are different, i understand and respect them. it is a thing of security and beauty to keep your virginity toward "the one", the person you marry. but others do not. it does not mean that they hold values less than you. perhaps they are willing to take a risk far better than you, such as my example about chris' parents. yes marriage is special, but it is also a title, a construct. if you disrespect those who do not marry but have sex, what is to say that they are not as committed to love and partnership as you would?

you should once or twice take a step back and analyse the constructs that hold you, that they may not necessarily guarantee what you think they would result in. and until you realise that there are other ways and other constructs that people value, and you respect so, then i cannot take your retarded over-generalising, oversimplifying ways seriously

Haha, you're dating a bastard!

[/immature]

 

[loquasagacious]

Interestingly enough for phanatical most abortions are actually to terminate pregancies in wedlock. Far from the stereotype of scared 17 year olds the average abortion is apparently performed on a middle-aged married woman engaging in family planning....

 

[katie_tully]

Soooo...have we reached a resolution.

 

[Generator]

RU open-minded enough Senator?

 

[Phanatical]

Interestingly enough for phanatical most abortions are actually to terminate pregancies in wedlock. Far from the stereotype of scared 17 year olds the average abortion is apparently performed on a middle-aged married woman engaging in family planning....

Not true. Most abortions are carried out in the 20-24 age group, among young mothers who care more about their social lives than about the right to life of the human being that they created.