Activist: "Abortion Threatens Black A...

Activist: "Abortion Threatens Black America's Future"

There are 5999 comments on the Booker Rising story from Sep 24, 2012, titled Activist: "Abortion Threatens Black America's Future". In it, Booker Rising reports that:

The From Catholic Online : "Adding to the argument that abortion threatens one sector of American society over others, Catherine Davis, president of The Restoration Project, pointed out to the great racial disparity of women currently getting abortions." The article continues: "Davis said that according to the Centers for Disease Control, ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Booker Rising.

Katja

Tulsa, OK

#3371 Feb 6, 2014
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, no. The issue of child support is a separate issue. The woman is not deciding that a father must support his child, the state is, just as the state is deciding that the MOTHER must also support her child. Unless the child is given up for adoption, and they renounce all parental rights.

The man DOES have legal rights before a pregnancy is conceived. He can choose to wear a condom, to have a vasectomy, or to remain celibate. Those are his only options, and that's not legal, but biological. If you have a problem with that inequity in biological design, I suggest you take it up with the Designer.

Since the woman is the one gestating, facing the possibility of physical damage, and is the only one financially responsible by law for the cost of prenatal care, labor and delivery, then legal justice DEMANDS she be the one who decides if she will do so.

It's the epitome of stupid that you think a man being equally obligated to ALSO financially support his child, should enable him to force a woman to abort. That's a really odd position to take.
Precisely. I especially like this part:

"The man DOES have legal rights before a pregnancy is conceived. He can choose to wear a condom, to have a vasectomy, or to remain celibate. Those are his only options, and that's not legal, but biological. If you have a problem with that inequity in biological design, I suggest you take it up with the Designer."

Couldn't improve on this post if I tried. May I save it for future reference?

:)

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3372 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> The issue is "some" and "some" don't..the difference is women want the legal right to decide if they want to factor in the man's feeling on rather he wants to be a father or not..and hold him legally and socially responsible if they decide to go forward.. Men should also have legal protection over their income and should not be at the mercy of women. do you agree?
Women HAVE the legal right to make medical decisions about our OWN health and well-being. Men also have the legal right to make medical decisions about THEIR own health and well-being. Where's the inequity?

And why are you characterizing men as 'victims' anyway? Inability to gestate is, for men, a constraint of biology....not civil child-support law.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> I disagree...Women want LEGAL backing to secure or protect their interest...at this puts men at risk..not only do they face social backlash for not physically/financially/emotion ally supporting the children they don't want (although women can just murder the ones they don't want)..Men also face jail time..and lost of income..and Women shouldn't have a problem to LEGALLY get rid of child support if the majority of them aren't getting it anyway? And women should also stop having problems with men who abandon their unwanted kids as well..as men cannot murder them before they are born to get rid of them as women can... Would you say that is fair?
Awww, the poor little men....so victimized for being sexually irresponsible.

Pardon me if I don't cry a river over them...I'll leave that up to you.
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3373 Feb 6, 2014
Katja wrote:
<quoted text>Precisely. I especially like this part:
"The man DOES have legal rights before a pregnancy is conceived. He can choose to wear a condom,
so can she
Katja wrote:
to have a vasectomy,
so can she (tube ligation)
Katja wrote:
or to remain celibate.
so can she..( But you sound like this was wrong earlier for women...but men should practice this?)
Katja wrote:
Those are his only options, and that's not legal, but biological. If you have a problem with that inequity in biological design, I suggest you take it up with the Designer.

:)
Abortion is legally issued not biologically issued...just like child support..
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3374 Feb 6, 2014
Bitner wrote:
Again, no. The issue of child support is a separate issue. The woman is not deciding that a father must support his child, the state is, just as the state is deciding that the MOTHER must also support her child. Unless the child is given up for adoption, and they renounce all parental rights..
You're missing the point or purposely by-passing mines...You want to focus on after the fact..when my comments are about rights before the fact (just as women decide before the child is born..if the fetus will live or die...within her power of course)...others clearly understood and agree..that maybe the law should change the rules to make things more fair to the man...
Bitner wrote:
The man DOES have legal rights before a pregnancy is conceived. He can choose to wear a condom,
.
so can she
Bitner wrote:
to have a vasectomy,
.
so can she "so to speak (Tubal ligation)
Bitner wrote:
or to remain celibate.
.
so can she
Bitner wrote:
Those are his only options, and that's not legal, but biological.If you have a problem with that inequity in biological design, I suggest you take it up with the Designer.
Biological?..celibacy, vasectomy, and condoms aren't biological....as the women can do all of those as well (tubectomy in place of vasectomy of course)....so why aren't she ONCE Again not held to the same standard of the male BEFORE a child is conceived?
Bitner wrote:
Since the woman is the one gestating, facing the possibility of physical damage, and is the only one financially responsible by law for the cost of prenatal care, labor and delivery, then legal justice DEMANDS she be the one who decides if she will do so.
It's the epitome of stupid that you think a man being equally obligated to ALSO financially support his child (which IS after the fact, something you wish to ignore) should enable him to force a woman to abort. That's a really odd position to take.
You're another one who doesn't read what is actually written before your eyes...No where did I write a man to force a woman to abort (Hello..I've been arguing against abortion this whole time)...
now..what I actually arguing is that men don't have a legal say so on when they can be fathers like women have when they want to be mothers....even though they both had consensual sex (minus rape)...if a woman doesn't want an unwanted child..she can opt for abortion legally..yet if a father doesn't want an unwanted child..he cannot make the woman abort legally or can he make her carry the baby to term if he wants a child.....he doesn't even have a right to decide to financially support a child or not..this shouldn't be legal..and soon the laws will change...as Father rights are working towards just that...for more equality in the laws and not one that favors women..and this shouldn't be a problem to anyone who is fair.
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3375 Feb 6, 2014
Abortion is legally issued not biologically issued...just like child support..

* I should say; abortion is legally protected

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3376 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> <quoted text> There is nothing to deny..abortion is not a unique quality to the female gender..
Having an abortion is.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> deliberate termination of a human pregnancy is what abortion is and male (doctors or 3rd party) can cause a "deliberate termination of a human pregnancy" (as many do all the time)...
As defined by the dictionary, Abortion is the ending of pregnancy, prior to term. Male doctors are incapable of having abortions.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> keyword"a pregnancy...
no kiddin'?
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> Quality is define:a distinctive attribute or characteristic possessed by someone or something...
...such as the ability to have or obtain an abortion....
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> again..abortion does not qualify as a distinctive attribute or characteristic to females because males can deliberately terminate A pregnancy
They cannot, however, get or have an abortion. Those are strictly feminine qualities.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> (but they cannot be pregnant themselves)
And they can't have an abortion either.

Next...
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3377 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>Women HAVE the legal right to make medical decisions about our OWN health and well-being. Men also have the legal right to make medical decisions about THEIR own health and well-being. Where's the inequity?
And why are you characterizing men as 'victims' anyway? Inability to gestate is, for men, a constraint of biology....not civil child-support law.
<quoted text>Awww, the poor little men....so victimized for being sexually irresponsible.
Pardon me if I don't cry a river over them...I'll leave that up to you.
This isn't about the ability to gestate...it's about having the legal right to embrace parthood when one decides for themselves...and that includes men..I don't see where the problem is.
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3378 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text> Having an abortion is.
<quoted text>As defined by the dictionary, Abortion is the ending of pregnancy, prior to term. Male doctors are incapable of having abortions.
<quoted text>no kiddin'?
<quoted text>...such as the ability to have or obtain an abortion....
<quoted text>They cannot, however, get or have an abortion. Those are strictly feminine qualities.
[QUOTE who="dedbebbies"]
<quoted text>And they can't have an abortion either.
Next...
Quality is define:a distinctive attribute or characteristic possessed by someone or something...
attribute or characteristics not ability...

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3379 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> so can she<quoted text> so can she (tube ligation)<quoted text> so can she..( But you sound like this was wrong earlier for women...but men should practice this?)..
Hold the phone....nowhere, in any post, have I said (or 'sounded like') women are wrong for using contraceptives, or for voluntarily sterilizing ourselves. I think we would be far better off if EVERYONE did.

In fact, I support the idea of reversibly sterilizing EVERYONE at birth, and requiring everyone, men and women alike, to take and pass some sort of 'pre-parenthood' curriculum before applying to have it reversed. That, would be 'fair'.

You up?
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> Abortion is legally issued not biologically issued...just like child support..
For someone so enamored of dictionary definitions, you sure don't like this one:

abortion /abor·tion/(ah-bor´shun)
1. expulsion from the uterus of the products of conception before the fetus is viable.

2. premature stoppage of a natural or a pathological process.

----------

complete abortion - one in which all the products of conception are expelled from the uterus and identified.

habitual abortion - spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurring in three or more successive pregnancies, at about the same level of development.

incomplete abortion - that with retention of parts of the products of conception.

induced abortion - that brought on intentionally by medication or instrumentation.

inevitable abortion - a condition in which vaginal bleeding has been profuse and the cervix has become dilated, and abortion will invariably occur.

infected abortion- that associated with infection of the genital tract.

missed abortion - retention in the uterus of an abortus that has been dead for at least eight weeks.

septic abortion- that associated with serious infection of the uterus leading to generalized infection.

spontaneous abortion - that occurring naturally.

therapeutic abortion - that induced for medical considerations.

threatened abortion - a condition in which vaginal bleeding is less than in inevitable abortion and the cervix is not dilated, and abortion may or may not occur.

Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers.© 2007
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3380 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>Women HAVE the legal right to make medical decisions about our OWN health and well-being. Men also have the legal right to make medical decisions about THEIR own health and well-being. Where's the inequity?
And why are you characterizing men as 'victims' anyway? Inability to gestate is, for men, a constraint of biology....not civil child-support law.
<quoted text>Awww, the poor little men....so victimized for being sexually irresponsible.
Pardon me if I don't cry a river over them...I'll leave that up to you.
Nobody is speaking about inequality over the ability to gestate..we're speaking about men having legal rights concerning parenthood..and with the push of father rights group..we will see more equality in this area... I don't see a problem...:)

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3381 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> This isn't about the ability to gestate...it's about having the legal right to embrace parthood when one decides for themselves...and that includes men..I don't see where the problem is.
You are saying you want men to have the legal right to determine whether or not a woman gestates. They already have it.

If he determines she should not gestate his child, BEFORE a pregnancy occurs, his only options, biologically, are:

A) to not have sex with her, or

B) preclude, with sterilization/contraception, his ability to impregnate her.
Those are his rights.

He cannot decide 'for himself' that she will, or won't gestate. He's not pregnant. She is.

He can only decide for himself that he doesn't want to 'embrace parenthood', and refrain from procreative sex in accordance with that decision.

No changes to the legality of child support OR abortion, are going to change that.
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3382 Feb 6, 2014
Katja wrote:
<quoted text> You don't decide what any one else 'has to' answer, Lisa. You really are a controlling little wench. Get over yourself.
If you continue down the path of name-calling..I will have to ignore your posts.. this will be the last time
Katja wrote:
Just for the record, why would I 'have to' share a man....? Just because there are fewer of them than there are women? That's already the case, and I'm still not 'forced' to share my husband with any other women. Your hypotheticals don't make any sense.
We were talking about the need for men in repopulating the earth..it which you pointed out fewer men are needed..so obvious..these few men will be helping procreate with the many women available...and it's obvious some of these women will be sharing a man (or men..as is now)..so I propose the question to you on the subject at hand..in which..I said you didn't really have to answer it..
Katja wrote:
Frankly, I DO appreciate that you're not obligated to think and behave like people you don't agree with. Since you're a woman, the rights I wish to retain are your rights also - even if you don't ever intend to exercise them.
Appreciate the fact that I'm not obligated to think and behave like YOU or anybody else, as well, why don'tcha?
of course I do...
Katja wrote:
I already posted a general definition of sexual responsibility...from a medical dictionary, no less. My personal definition was given as a courtesy. Don't like it? Who cares?
who said I didn't like it? Why do you add so much assumptions in what you read from my posts..it doesn't make for an honest exchange... I asked you about some other sexual behavior and did you regard them as sexually responsible or not?
A few were:
* Women having sex with underage boys
* Women having sex with a lot of men
* Women cheating on their husbands (be he at war or whatever)
* Women having sex with animals
(If any of these resulted in pregnancy...wouldn't be the cause to seen some women to the abortion clinic)?
Katja wrote:
And in answer to your clumsily-phrased question above, yes. I believe people BOTH genders act irresponsibly by having indiscriminate sex. I just DON'T believe women should be the ones who have to pay the piper, by carrying an unwanted pregnancy. I don't think that's fair to the born children.
Remember them? Or can you only see the plight of unwanted fetuses?
But you think men should pay the piper for unwanted children?

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3383 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>Quality is define(ed) as: a distinctive attribute or characteristic possessed by someone or something...
attribute or characteristics not ability...
the ability to have or obtain an abortion, is a characteristic of women....and only women.

Nice try though.

Next....

“Blessed Be”

Level 1

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3384 Feb 6, 2014
Katja wrote:
<quoted text>Precisely. I especially like this part:
"The man DOES have legal rights before a pregnancy is conceived. He can choose to wear a condom, to have a vasectomy, or to remain celibate. Those are his only options, and that's not legal, but biological. If you have a problem with that inequity in biological design, I suggest you take it up with the Designer."
Couldn't improve on this post if I tried. May I save it for future reference?
:)
Sure :)
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3385 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>You are saying you want men to have the legal right to determine whether or not a woman gestates.
I have to remind you once again..this isn't about gestating...
dedbebbies wrote:
They already have it.
If he determines she should not gestate his child, BEFORE a pregnancy occurs, his only options, biologically, are:
A) to not have sex with her, or
B) preclude, with sterilization/contraception, his ability to impregnate her.
Those are his rights.
Those are also HER rights (she could not have sex with as well and she had "tie her tubes" also if she doesn't want to be pregnant)...
Those are about being sexually responsible..yet you want his to end at biological....while her's continue..even when her biological body is naturally designed to carry the fetus...you want her to have the legal right to override it...
dedbebbies wrote:
He cannot decide 'for himself' that she will, or won't gestate. He's not pregnant. She is.
He can only decide for himself that he doesn't want to 'embrace parenthood', and refrain from procreative sex in accordance with that decision.
No changes to the legality of child support OR abortion, are going to change that.
that's not up for question..it's about the man having equality in embracing fatherhood..and since he doesn't have the legal right to decide if a child is born or aborted.. he should have the legal right on whether he wants to financially support a wanted or unwanted child..
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3386 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>the ability to have or obtain an abortion, is a characteristic of women....and only women.
Nice try though.
Next....
It's not about the ability dear....
abortion itself would have to be a characteristic...

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3387 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
If you continue down the path of name-calling..I will have to ignore your posts.. this will be the last time
I'm fine with that.....ignore away.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
We were talking about the need for men in repopulating the earth..it which you pointed out fewer men are needed..so obvious..these few men will be helping procreate with the many women available...and it's obvious some of these women will be sharing a man (or men..as is now)..so I propose the question to you on the subject at hand..in which..I said you didn't really have to answer it..
And even though you don't get to dictate what I do and don't 'have to answer', I gave you an answer. You proceeded to get pissy again, because I didn't answer the way you wanted me to.

*shrug*
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
of course I do...
Then why the hell are you arguing against rights we both possess?
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
who said I didn't like it?
Your need for control of the conversation, which permeates most of your posts, says you don't like it.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you add so much assumptions in what you read from my posts..it doesn't make for an honest exchange...
You wouldn't know an honest exchange if you had one.

Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked you about some other sexual behavior and did you regard them as sexually responsible or not?
A few were:
* Women having sex with underage boys
* Women having sex with a lot of men
* Women cheating on their husbands (be he at war or whatever)
* Women having sex with animals
No. I don't think the above behaviors are sexually responsible for either gender. But again, since you don't believe women impregnated through rape should be allowed to abort at will, you don't seem to be accounting for sexual responsibility as regards abortion anyway.

In other words, you want women to be the ONLY gender REQUIRED to be "sexually responsible."

I call bullshit.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
(If any of these resulted in pregnancy...wouldn't be the cause to seen some women to the abortion clinic)?
This is word salad. Can you make some sense of it? Because I have no idea what you're trying to communicate here. Thanks.
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
But you think men should pay the piper for unwanted children?
I think both parties should carefully consider whether or not they want to risk an unwanted pregnancy before they have sex. I also think the only person who should decide whether or not a pregnancy is gestated, once there is a pregnancy involved, is the person who is pregnant.

I don't know if I can make it any clearer....but if you still don't get it, I'll be glad to try.
Lisa

Tulsa, OK

#3388 Feb 6, 2014
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>
Hold the phone....nowhere, in any post, have I said (or 'sounded like') women are wrong for using contraceptives, or for voluntarily sterilizing ourselves. I think we would be far better off if EVERYONE did.'.
I was talking about celibacy...when it was assumed earlier for women...you didn't seem to agree with that..yet when someone suggest men should practice it..you seem to be high fiving...Why the double standard?
dedbebbies wrote:
You up?
<quoted text>For someone so enamored of dictionary definitions, you sure don't like this one:
abortion /abor·tion/(ah-bor´shun)
1. expulsion from the uterus of the products of conception before the fetus is viable.
2. premature stoppage of a natural or a pathological process.
----------
complete abortion - one in which all the products of conception are expelled from the uterus and identified.
habitual abortion - spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurring in three or more successive pregnancies, at about the same level of development.
incomplete abortion - that with retention of parts of the products of conception.
induced abortion - that brought on intentionally by medication or instrumentation.
inevitable abortion - a condition in which vaginal bleeding has been profuse and the cervix has become dilated, and abortion will invariably occur.
infected abortion- that associated with infection of the genital tract.
missed abortion - retention in the uterus of an abortus that has been dead for at least eight weeks.
septic abortion- that associated with serious infection of the uterus leading to generalized infection.
spontaneous abortion - that occurring naturally.
therapeutic abortion - that induced for medical considerations.
threatened abortion - a condition in which vaginal bleeding is less than in inevitable abortion and the cervix is not dilated, and abortion may or may not occur.
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers.© 2007
What's the problem?

“Blessed Be”

Level 1

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3389 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text>
"You're missing the point or purposely by-passing mines...You want to focus on after the fact..when my comments are about rights before the fact"

The issue of child support IS after the fact. That is not my doing, nor is it any woman's doing. Again, if you have an issue with it, take it up with the state.

"(just as women decide before the child is born..if the fetus will live or die...within her power of course)...others clearly understood and agree..that maybe the law should change the rules to make things more fair to the man..."

How, exactly, would you do that?

"so can she"

Yes. But since she is the one who is pregnant, who faces the possibility of damage to her health, and is the only one legally obligated for the costs of the pregnancy and delivery, she ALSO gets to be the only one who decides if the pregnancy continues.

"so can she "so to speak (Tubal ligation)"

Yes, though generally speaking, it's easier for a man to get a vasectomy than for a woman to get a tubal ligation. Doctors are more reluctant to do one if the woman doesn't meet certain conditions. Still, since she is the one who is pregnant, who faces the possibility of damage to her health, and is the only one legally obligated for the costs of the pregnancy and delivery, she ALSO gets to be the only one who decides if the pregnancy continues.

"so can she"

Yes. But since she is the one who is pregnant, who faces the possibility of damage to her health, and is the only one legally obligated for the costs of the pregnancy and delivery, she ALSO gets to be the only one who decides if the pregnancy continues.

"Biological?..celibacy, vasectomy, and condoms aren't biological....as the women can do all of those as well (tubectomy in place of vasectomy of course)....so why aren't she ONCE Again not held to the same standard of the male BEFORE a child is conceived?"

She is. She just has one more option, being the one who is actually pregnant, a biological condition, by the way.

"You're another one who doesn't read what is actually written before your eyes...No where did I write a man to force a woman to abort (Hello..I've been arguing against abortion this whole time)..."

You're position implies it. How else would you be proposing to "make it more fair for the man" other than allowing him a decision in the pregnancy, which would automatically INCLUDE forcing abortion as it would forcing continued gestation. Please, if you have another, practical solution, then stop being coy, and state it.

"now..what I actually arguing is that men don't have a legal say so on when they can be fathers like women have when they want to be mothers....even though they both had consensual sex (minus rape)...if a woman doesn't want an unwanted child..she can opt for abortion legally..yet if a father doesn't want an unwanted child..he cannot make the woman abort legally or can he make her carry the baby to term if he wants a child.....he doesn't even have a right to decide to financially support a child or not..this shouldn't be legal..and soon the laws will change...as Father rights are working towards just that...for more equality in the laws and not one that favors women..and this shouldn't be a problem to anyone who is fair."

Again, your issue is with child support then, and that is a separate issue. The state decides that both parents are obligated to financially support any child born. Take it up with the state.

The law doesn't "favor women". Both women and men have the right to make their own medical decisions. Neither of them is obligated to continue an unwanted medical condition if there is an available medical remedy, not even if the condition is one they caused. The difference is biological....only women can get pregnant, so only women can make the medical decisions regarding that condition. Again, if you have a problem with that biological inequity, I suggest you take THAT up with the biological Designer.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#3390 Feb 6, 2014
Lisa wrote:
<quoted text> It's not about the ability dear....
abortion itself would have to be a characteristic...
It is.

Do men spontaneously abort?

No?

Do women?

There's your answer. Face it, you're beat.

Next....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
How has Africa from the begining of time influe... (May '13) 1 min Moses 4,015
News Dueling groups to rally at Confederate landmark 4 min True Judgement 2,157
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 7 min KiloEcho 46,673
Black African's Moors Ruled Europe 700 Years (Aug '12) 14 min Moses 2,809
Why don't prostitutes sleep with black men? 26 min Joe 23
Why are black men raping women? 48 min Mick 38
All women prefer white men (Jan '15) 56 min Mick 5,752
Black Failure 1 hr Sicklecell Supporter 40
Hebrew Israelite (Feb '11) 2 hr Moses 136,211
5 stabbed @ white nationalist trump rally 4 hr RMG El Rey de Tra... 134
White Man Sentenced to 40 Years for Throwing Feces 6 hr Truth Hurts 44
More from around the web