Abortion

Post Reply New Topic

Yes, the miracle of childbirth!
Like eating a hamburger and a turd a comes out.
You 'pro-lifers' checked out the single-mother stats recently?. The miracles are happening everywhere.
How about the food/water/air to people ratio?

If some trailer-trash slut chav wants an abortion, then great. It's one less chav in the world.

I guess if these unwanted potential chavs were dumped on the doors of the 'pro-lifers', then they would be happy to bring them up. I think not.

An inuman and condescending statement. It is the society, that creates 'sluts', that has to be fought, this would ultimately solve the problem of scantiness mentioned above. If more people would abide by the main godly precepts it would all look differently.

Inhuman?
Quite the opposite, it's human nature; the way the world is.

Condescending? Guess that's your opinion, i really have no idea how you interpret these things.

"It is the society, that creates 'sluts', that has to be fought."
What does this mean. Are you taking up arms against human nature.
The riches of the poor create unwanted pregnancies. What are you going to fight them with?
Your fake morals are no weapon.

Another point.
The term 'pro-life' is ridiculous. 'Anti-arbotionists' is what we call them.

People always say, Oh but you wouldn't be around. They're so stupid. I wouldn't have been put through that for 18 years and I would have been unconcious when it happened. (Or course it wasn't legal then so that's irrelevant.) But, I would rather I had not existed than to go through it and I came out of it much better than my brothers did. What would be the point in dying now? I already went through living with her.

But, as to Pro-Life people, I have no problem at all chaining them in the house with her and letting her have at them for 18 years. They would wise up quick.

Which is all just another way for you to say you want to dictate things on other people as long as you don't suffer the consequences. As I said, I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever chaining you and the rest of them in the house with her and letting her go at you for 18 years. None whatsoever. Nor any problem aborting any fetus of a mother that didn't want it, legal or not. I'd do it anyway. If I burn for it, that's the way it's going to be. I only care about the kid. Frankly, I don't give any consideration to the adults involved. They're irrelevant.


And as to your stupid statement about adoption, my mother didn't want kids. She wanted to put the first one up for adoption. But, thanks to sanctimonious people who felt they could dictate to her in the 1950's (and they could back then), she was told to get married or be put in a sanitarium (which by the way a father could do back then).


My point is that until you are that child that lived with the consequences, don't speak for them. They are better off if those people just shut up.

I don't know why people act as if pro-lifers are unwilling to care for unwanted children. Pro-lifers as a group are more willing to adopt then most other groups, especially disabled children.

That is completely unnecessary. Do you really so little of human life?



That fact that someone is raised by a single mother doesn't make them any less of a person. Regardless of what eviormentalists in the 1970s (ie: Paul Ehrlich) said, we are not running of of food and water. Civilization has become more efficient then ever at producing more with less space.



What makes you make such insulting statements?

Who should pay for it? Should it be my tax dollars?

Give me your address.
I am sure i can have a line of unwanted babies outside your door within the next few days.
Seriously.
Do it.
edit: We will see whose post is unnecessary.

Final post on this tonight (sorry for four posts in a row): As long as the Courts as basically declaring abortion to be a constitutional right (include partial-birth abortions) this issue is not going to go away. Roe v. Wade/Doe v. Bolton was a disastrous decision for the Supreme Court (it is condemned by many law professors that support abortion rights and some that don't even want it reversed). The courts, like the Dred Scott decision, stepped into territory that the Constitution did not cover. They declared what was and what was not a person, and further, and dictated the federal and state governments comply to that order.

This ripped the decision away from an electorate that was actually starting to lean somewhat (although not nearly as much as is popularly claimed, as an example Massachusetts was about to pass legislation to give the basic constitutional rights) in the pro-choice direction. This has caused enormous backlash that the court claimed in Roe/Bolton would not happen. In Casey in 1991 the court actually essentially said they had "answered" the abortion question and it was time for both sides of the debate to stop talking, as if that was how the United States works. It has not, and opposition to at least some abortions has increased since that time even as the majority (reduced from 7-2 to apparently 5-4) rule against almost any restrictions on abortion regardless of the popular will or the intention or wording of the constitution.

I would have no objection to adopting a child. At the moment I have no financing resources and have no wife/girlfriend. Incidentally, due to the massive demand for American children (including disabled children), most couples wanting adoptions are advised not to bother getting on the waiting list. This is why most adoptions are from foreign countries.

Dont preach to me about necessisty.
My statement has nothing to do with the value of human life.
It is a statement of fact.
People eat and take a crap.
People f**k, get pregnant and give birth.
What i think about human life is irrelevant.

So that's a 'No' then.
What about all the other 'pro-lifers' who are also up for adopting babies?
They should put their morals where their mouth is.
Either that or shut up.

I think the comparison is absurd, but I don't think this particular debate is going anywhere...

Pro-Choice

If it isn't senitent then it's just a Homo Sapiens and not human. The rights of sentient lifeforms will always outrank the non-sentient.

Maybe it is meant to be absurd.
The anti-abortionist debate is always going to go nowhere.
Do you see why?