Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision

Full story: Newsday 305,564
Thousands of abortion opponents marched from the National Mall to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in their annual remembrance of the court's Roe v. Wade decision. Full Story

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278924 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care about any medical procedures that women have that involve the body they were born with. I don't want to know if a woman suffers from low blood sugar or if she has a bad thyroid gland.
What I do care about is the new life that is growiong inside her womb which was not part the body that she was born with. I believe every new life is its own seperate entity. Abortion kills new life and this is what makes it wrong and anything this wrong should be made known publically.
Pregnancy is a medical condition and abortion is a medical procedure. Therefore, they are protected by HIPAA. It doesn't really matter what you believe.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278925 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
What right did women have in making abortion a legal choice?
Why should having the right to kill off people you don't want in your life be something worth fighting for?
Please reword your first question. Btw, I am speaking of a moral right; Susanm had me clarify that. You don't have a moral, ethical right to make abortion an illegal choice.

I believe that the right to medical autonomy is absolutely worth fighting for. You have no idea that you take advantage of that right on a regular basis. How naive you are.

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#278926 Jan 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Why, when your side does nothing BUT point out the good things? Given your...ahem....."logic "....THEY should also be pointing out the hardships, right? Then why aren't you fussing about it to them as well?
Your deflection is fooling no one.
Ocean is NOT trying to talk them into not continuing their pregnancies. She's trying to make young girls think twice BEFORE HAVING SEX IN THE FIRST PLACE. And there is NOTHING wrong with that. Nothing.
Those who are truly Pro-Life, should be pointing out the hardships of being a single mother, especially if that mother is a teenager.

Pro-Life people should try to disuade young girls/women from having sex if they can't afford to raise a child and/or if they are single. Yet, if/when they do become pregnant, they should have the baby and raise it the best they can or give it up for adoption.

I believe every teenage girl or young woman should at least TRY to make it work despite the hardships she will experience. Then if it turns out is just too much for her, then she should give that child up for adoption.

I think Ocean56 doesn't want young girls/women to even try to make it work. If I'm reading her right, she wants them instead to immediately get an abortion if/when they get pregnant. This is why I'm against Ocean56's hardships message.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278927 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe its my moral duty to fight for the unborn -- for the people who are currently developing inside the womb. I believe these people have a right to be born and the right to be born trumps the (US Supreme Court-given) right that women have in this nation to kill off those people.
Killing off people should be everyone's business in my opinion.
The unborn do not have the status of persons. If a fetus had the same rights as the woman, the woman would be a second-class citizen. Her rights must always supersede any that the fetus may have. The unborn cannot have equal rights to the born, logically.

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#278928 Jan 22, 2013
Katie wrote:
<quoted text>
No ZEF has a right to be born. That is equivalent to claiming every pregnancy is guaranteed to go full term.
If no ZEF is guaranteed to go full term, why do so many women who want children persist in taking them to full term? Are they stupid?

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278929 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, owning a home is very risky. There's always the possiblity that it could burn down, be blown down by a tornado, be infested by termites, or could lose 50% of its value if the home market collapses.
Yet, despite these risks, you don't see real estate agents constantly telling young people/young couples that they may want to think twice about owning a home.
There are some things in life you should do despite the risks involved and having children is one of them.
I believe Ocean56 is throwing out all the possible hardships of motherhood for the purpose of scaring young girls/women into not having them or having perhaps just one child.
She has every right to tell them about the hardships of motherhood yet to be fair she should, at the same time/in the same literature, point out the benefits and joys of being a mother. She should give both the pros and the cons of motherhood to young girls/women.
Why do you care what one woman writes on an internet forum? You are way too reactive to her. It's weird.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#278930 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
Those who are truly Pro-Life, should be pointing out the hardships of being a single mother, especially if that mother is a teenager.
Pro-Life people should try to disuade young girls/women from having sex if they can't afford to raise a child and/or if they are single. Yet, if/when they do become pregnant, they should have the baby and raise it the best they can or give it up for adoption.
I believe every teenage girl or young woman should at least TRY to make it work despite the hardships she will experience. Then if it turns out is just too much for her, then she should give that child up for adoption.
I think Ocean56 doesn't want young girls/women to even try to make it work. If I'm reading her right, she wants them instead to immediately get an abortion if/when they get pregnant. This is why I'm against Ocean56's hardships message.
You're not "reading her right". She is talking about BEFORE THEY HAVE SEX. There IS no pregnancy to decide about if there has been NO sex. Correct?

So, what you're trying hard to NOT say, is that you only want them "informed" if it will result in the decision YOU want them to make. Got it.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#278931 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
If no ZEF is guaranteed to go full term, why do so many women who want children persist in taking them to full term? Are they stupid?
Because they want to try. It's their choice. No one said every z/e/f is guaranteed to NOT go to term, either, Moron.

Damn, you're stupid. Utterly stupid.

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#278933 Jan 22, 2013
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>The unborn do not have the status of persons. If a fetus had the same rights as the woman, the woman would be a second-class citizen. Her rights must always supersede any that the fetus may have. The unborn cannot have equal rights to the born, logically.
Consider the following scenerio:

Say there are two women and both of them get pregnant on the same day.

Now after six months, one of the women has a pre-mature baby and it is put in an incubator. Three months later, the second woman comes to the hospital, has her baby, and a few days later both mothers leave the hospital with their babies.

According to you PCers, the premature baby in the incubator, between the age of six-to-nine months, is given the status of 'person' while the fetus/baby in the other woman's womb is a non-person, even though both the born baby and the unborn baby are the same age during this time period.

Why is this?
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278934 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
If no ZEF is guaranteed to go full term, why do so many women who want children persist in taking them to full term? Are they stupid?
What?

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#278935 Jan 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Because they want to try. It's their choice. No one said every z/e/f is guaranteed to NOT go to term, either, Moron.
Damn, you're stupid. Utterly stupid.
So, if you think that the women who want babies should try to go to full-term despite having no guarantees, then why should any woman not try to raise a baby if she has one?

You PCers should encourage every young girl/women to try to raise a baby if/when she gets pregnant. They should never be encouraged to 'wimp out' and get an abortion if/when they get pregnant.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278936 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
If no ZEF is guaranteed to go full term, why do so many women who want children persist in taking them to full term? Are they stupid?
You ask some truly ridiculous questions.

“Post at your own risk”

Since: Sep 09

Whining is unbecoming

#278937 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
Consider the following scenerio:
Say there are two women and both of them get pregnant on the same day.
Now after six months, one of the women has a pre-mature baby and it is put in an incubator. Three months later, the second woman comes to the hospital, has her baby, and a few days later both mothers leave the hospital with their babies.
According to you PCers, the premature baby in the incubator, between the age of six-to-nine months, is given the status of 'person' while the fetus/baby in the other woman's womb is a non-person, even though both the born baby and the unborn baby are the same age during this time period.
Why is this?
C'mon! Think. The infant in the incubator is born. Born. Unattached, crying, being fed, being changed and most importantly breathing.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#278938 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
Consider the following scenerio:
Say there are two women and both of them get pregnant on the same day.
Now after six months, one of the women has a pre-mature baby and it is put in an incubator. Three months later, the second woman comes to the hospital, has her baby, and a few days later both mothers leave the hospital with their babies.
According to you PCers, the premature baby in the incubator, between the age of six-to-nine months, is given the status of 'person' while the fetus/baby in the other woman's womb is a non-person, even though both the born baby and the unborn baby are the same age during this time period.
Why is this?
No, they are not "the same age". Age, like personhood, begins at birth.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#278939 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if you think that the women who want babies should try to go to full-term despite having no guarantees, then why should any woman not try to raise a baby if she has one?
You PCers should encourage every young girl/women to try to raise a baby if/when she gets pregnant. They should never be encouraged to 'wimp out' and get an abortion if/when they get pregnant.
No, there is no "should". There is the woman's choice of whether or not to do so. Period.

Who said anything about raising a baby? Do try to focus.

No one here is encouraging anyone to have an abortion.

When you must lie to make a point, you've already lost the argument, Strawman.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278940 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if you think that the women who want babies should try to go to full-term despite having no guarantees, then why should any woman not try to raise a baby if she has one?
You PCers should encourage every young girl/women to try to raise a baby if/when she gets pregnant. They should never be encouraged to 'wimp out' and get an abortion if/when they get pregnant.
What? The point of being for choice is to dissuade anyone BUT the woman/girl from encouraging or discouraging any decision the woman/girl makes determining HER pregnancy.

Since: Jun 08

Atrisco Village

#278941 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
Consider the following scenerio:
Say there are two women and both of them get pregnant on the same day.
Now after six months, one of the women has a pre-mature baby and it is put in an incubator. Three months later, the second woman comes to the hospital, has her baby, and a few days later both mothers leave the hospital with their babies.
According to you PCers, the premature baby in the incubator, between the age of six-to-nine months, is given the status of 'person' while the fetus/baby in the other woman's womb is a non-person, even though both the born baby and the unborn baby are the same age during this time period.
Why is this?
Because the preemie is born and the fetus is not born.

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#278942 Jan 22, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not "reading her right". She is talking about BEFORE THEY HAVE SEX. There IS no pregnancy to decide about if there has been NO sex. Correct?
So, what you're trying hard to NOT say, is that you only want them "informed" if it will result in the decision YOU want them to make. Got it.
If I was to tell young people that college has hardships involved, like sometimes having to walk to class in bad weather, sleepless nights, stress before exams, and poor diet among other things, I can guarantee you that I will probably disuade about 25% of them not to go to college.

What I have to ask myself is 'do I have a right to try to disuade them from going to college'?
grumpy

Stony Point, NY

#278943 Jan 22, 2013
Gtown71 wrote:
<quoted text>
No grumps, I'm afraid you have no idea.
My daughter WAS part of my wifes body.
She's five years old now and she is still part of my wife 'her mothers " body.
She will forevermore be part of my wifes body.
You're the one that doesn't understand.
This is a precious life.
You are a precious life!
You may think your daughter is part of your wife's body but your daughter doesn't think that your wife is part of your daughter's body. Just wait until your daughter is a teen-ager and demands that you figuratively sever the umbillical cord that you literally couldn't sever when she was born.
Katie

Puyallup, WA

#278944 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>

I believe every teenage girl or young woman should at least TRY to make it work despite the hardships she will experience. Then if it turns out is just too much for her, then she should give that child up for adoption.
This much too glib a thought to be taken seriously. Do ever think things through before putting it out there for others to read/hear?

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.

Hartford Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr shinningelectr0n 1,109,489
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr punte 46,608
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 8 hr WARRIOR 19,207
CT Who do you support for Governor in Connecticut ... (Oct '10) 10 hr Tippy Faulker 792
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 11 hr Eric 69,368
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 22 hr TRD 68,469
Ryan Thompson Case (Feb '09) Sep 14 jem 21
•••
•••
•••

Hartford Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

Hartford People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Hartford News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hartford
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••