Abortion, (esp live birth abortions..)

Ah. So now we get down to it...

Thanks for doing the homework Aerianne. That says it right there.

So what exactly were you trying to say?
That all there is to taking care of a baby is "there's really only one of a few things they want".

One day, you're going to knock up some girl, and she's going to carry it to term, and you're gonna be there, and if you have the balls to stick around through a helluva lot more than "a few things they want"... you're going to remember just how little you know right now, with these ridiculous quotes.

I'm sorry dude, but you haven't a fuckin clue what it takes to raise a child to adulthood, let alone a baby. Don't really expect you to at your age, but, you have a LOT of life to learn.
Until then, it might be a good idea to not pretend you know how to raise a child with people that have raised them to adulthood.

 

Well that depends on how the electoral college is gerrymandered in the years to come by Republicans...but I hope you're right that we don't go backward on this issue.

---
To answer a question about why the law doesn't allow murder but allows abortion hinders on this reasoning in my opinion.

Abortion is or can be a medical procedure necessary within the context of health and medicine, while murder is not. However even in the case of trying to get someone convicted for murder, the accused still gets a self-defense argument, based on the concept that they were preserving their own life.

Personally, I don't like abortion, but as a male, I acknowledge that if I am intimate with a woman (unprotected or not) I am essentially saying with my actions that if a life is created from these actions I accept that future life being dead OR alive. I think the law as it stands now EXPECTS all men to view the sex act this way. Now I admit the grey area, in the circumstance in where a woman rapes a guy with the intention of impregnating herself (but these cases are rare as far as statistics currently indicate).

--
I think what most people are upset about is where abortion is used as a form of birth control, especially when the resources are there to obviously there to care for another child.

I also think it is fair to say that because anti-abortion groups and lawmakers, both at the state and federal level, have in the past deliberately stalled the abortion process for various girls and women, in cases where State law required paperwork to approve a legal abortion procedure, has set up the current system where abortion is just flat out legal. (But late term abortions still have strings attached as I understand it, and I think only 1 doctor in the entire country will do a late term abortion).

 

Meanwhile, the children of the rich lawmakers who sign the bill would get their abortions out of the country, legally and at no risk whatsoever.

 

You're right.

It's about what those views are.

If someone keeps stating illogical views as though they're fact, there's a good chance they're either brainwashed, or trying to brainwash others. Or a combination.

I'm not saying I think you're an evil brainwasher, just that I think you're not thinking a couple issues through, and considering how they jibe with your other, more logical stances.

An example of an evil brainwasher, who seems to literally be a persona mantained by some entity with a vested interest in the realization of the ideas that he proposes, is our member "Individual".

 

If you force women to have children that they can't afford, then you can not deny them when they ask for government assistance.

That would incl. a certain Healthcare plan that some here *cough* StpLSD25 say they don't support.


Food for thought........

 

Even though I fully agree with the point you've made, the problem is that you can deny them. And they will be denied. Because it's no longer a fetus.

 

Then ppl shouldn't complain about the gov't hand outs for those that need it. Simple as that.

It's my body nobody else's politics can't force me to have a child.

 

It is an interesting point, once a woman gets pregnant the man has no more rights in the decision. Even though he will always be financially responsible if that's what the woman alone decides.

 

You may find it interesting that Cherea made a thread with a proposed solution to this issue. See point number 3 quoted below. http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?p=7480385#post7480385

 

Actually chera's idea sounds really good.

It would even everything, and women would not be in a position to make unwanted children in bad situations, they would hae to want a a child to have a child, couldn't just use one to trap them a baby-daddy.

 

Bingo. She invented an abortion method that doesn't exist, just to piss him off as much as possible. He got played for a fool.

 

Not only that but his custody will be in jeopardy if the woman has the baby and for whatever reason decides she doesn't want him around. Haven't you heard that men are just ATM machines, not fathers?

 

I was going to let this point go, but it's just too important:

No, we won't, because not even God respects conception. If a Higher Power intended for it to be seen as a huge deal, the medical facts would be very different from what they are.

You see, at least half (nobody knows the actual percentage) of all fertilized eggs get flushed down the toilet, ending up at the local sewage treatment plant, or in a septic tank in someone's back yard. A few are discarded in used tampons. According to my gynecologist, for one reason or another, these microscopic fetuses never implant themselves into the uterine lining, or the uterine lining rejects them. Usually, the woman never knows it happened. Up to three weeks into pregnancy, the fetus can be rejected without symptom for the woman, and they aren't visible in her discharge.

If you really want to be consistent with your own beliefs, you should lobby to have the local sewer plant and landfill and every septic tank location designated as a mass grave, with an appropriate marker. Does this seem at all absurd to you? I hope so.

 

I think my comment here was very logical. In fact, I've put a lot of time into soul searching in order to develop my stance on this subject. Perhaps you've mistaken my post for someone else? If not, would you mind pointing what was illogical about it so I could revisit it? I always respect what you have to say, even when we disagree. To be honest I've learned a lot from you over the years

Post 78

 

Wait a minute. Doesn't this illustrate the magnitude of conception even more. To beat all those odds to the point of being viable (to the extent that abortion becomes an considerable option), it must mean something.

There isn't much talk in these debates of the unborn. It's all about the "poor woman in such a state". Uh oh, too late....step up, and don't make ANOTHER mistake.

 

Reminded of this... :hide:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk

 

Actually, you're right, and I agree with your previous post.

I was replying to STP, in the context of your brainwashing post. He. has very absolutist views, which are not entirely logical and usually a sign that those views are not entirely thought out or legitimately personal, but just being repeated.

I guess I started out replying to you, and ended up preaching to the quire, as I often do

 

I believe that this right here is the crux of the fallacy in your statement.

 

No fallacy at all. Original thought is just that: original. It is how I'm inspired to take my stance, and matters TO ME. Go ahead and find your own lies to help you believe humans taking lives is how a species is supposed to behave.