Do you support aborting a child....

Created by GlitterSucks on Mar 22, 2012

41 votes

Click on an option to vote

No

Yes

Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#45 Mar 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
The look of pity from the extended family?
You admitting that this is something that has crept into the extended family somewhere? Something that you folks have actually experienced?
Nope-not that I know of. I just know that everybody would feel bad for me if I ended up with a defective, especially a queen.
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a clue. If you hide your gay kid from the family or hang your head and wring your hands and wonder what you did wrong to deserve such a fate--well then pitying looks are understandable. If you recognize that your adult child who is gay is still fundamentally the same person you carried home from the hospital and taught to ride a bike and shared Disney movies with and prayed for and dreamed of a future for--well the rest of the folks generally get the message.
Odds are you are not the only one.
Grow up.
Of course after you've gotten to know your kid, and have spent all those years with it, it would be hard to liquidate. I'm talking about when he's conceived. Before all that happens. Yes, I think I would abort.
Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#46 Mar 23, 2012
GlitterSucks wrote:
<quoted text>
What else in your world makes a child defective?
Sexual dyslexics are defective. i.e. Not knowing which part goes into which hole.

If you can accept this in your life, I have no problem with it. More power to you. I wouldn't be able to accept it, though. I would abort.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#47 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope-not that I know of. I just know that everybody would feel bad for me if I ended up with a defective, especially a queen.
<quoted text>
Of course after you've gotten to know your kid, and have spent all those years with it, it would be hard to liquidate. I'm talking about when he's conceived. Before all that happens. Yes, I think I would abort.
You would be surprised at how many people who think like you find all kinds of ways to functionally "liquidate."

One ugly reality about programs that shelter homeless kids is how many of them lost their home, family and church (if they had one) because they are gay.
Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#48 Mar 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
You would be surprised at how many people who think like you find all kinds of ways to functionally "liquidate."
One ugly reality about programs that shelter homeless kids is how many of them lost their home, family and church (if they had one) because they are gay.
I am a traditionalist. I want my kids to have families. I want grandkids and I want them to be a part of my everyday life.

I don't want any alternative lifestyles around me, nor the drama that surrounds that entire subculture. Not to mention the fact that I am a snob, and I just don't like that crap around me, except maybe when I'm watching Jerry Springer.

If you want or can tolerate having that in your life, then more power to you. You are a more tolerant person than I am. I have no problem that this stuff exists and I don't even mind them that much. I just don't want it around me, or in my house or around my family!!!

Which goes back to the original question of whether I would abort, I think the answer is yes.

“Where did I put my tiara?”

Since: Dec 11

Columbus, OH

#49 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a traditionalist. I want my kids to have families. I want grandkids and I want them to be a part of my everyday life.
I don't want any alternative lifestyles around me, nor the drama that surrounds that entire subculture. Not to mention the fact that I am a snob, and I just don't like that crap around me, except maybe when I'm watching Jerry Springer.
If you want or can tolerate having that in your life, then more power to you. You are a more tolerant person than I am. I have no problem that this stuff exists and I don't even mind them that much. I just don't want it around me, or in my house or around my family!!!
Which goes back to the original question of whether I would abort, I think the answer is yes.
Okay, let me start by saying I didn't judge you clueless, nuts, and spam. I know in your head, you always think it's me.

You enjoy watching Jerry Springer; and here I thought you formed your opinions from more reputable programs. Explains quite a bit.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#50 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a traditionalist. I want my kids to have families. I want grandkids and I want them to be a part of my everyday life.
I don't want any alternative lifestyles around me, nor the drama that surrounds that entire subculture. Not to mention the fact that I am a snob, and I just don't like that crap around me, except maybe when I'm watching Jerry Springer.
If you want or can tolerate having that in your life, then more power to you. You are a more tolerant person than I am. I have no problem that this stuff exists and I don't even mind them that much. I just don't want it around me, or in my house or around my family!!!
Which goes back to the original question of whether I would abort, I think the answer is yes.
I think that the issue is, given the reality that there are no prenatal predictors of sexual orientation, how do you choose to handle that reality within your family or extended family? In the past you have denied that there could be any possibility of this being the case within your family (maybe you have identified a prenatal diagnosis and your folks have been quietly aborting them all along?).

It seems to me that there have been several major drivers of gay rights in recent decades. One is the AIDs epidemic and response to it, which served as a catalyst to the gay community. The other is the number of moms (and dads) who confronted the reality that one of their kids is gay and decided that hell, no, they weren't going to throw them out. Instead they made a renewed commitment to being a parent and took on the task of learning every thing that they could about being gay, about gay rights and their child's gay friends. Some years back I went to my first gay wedding, in the back yard of one such mom. Not someone you'd want to mess with. And definitely not the recipient of pitying looks from other family members.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#51 Mar 23, 2012
The Author wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, coming back to answer this ONE egregious error of yours. The "metaphors" are soldiers (i.e., actual people) being killed against their will vs fetuses being aborted. The first case was fixed by amendment, the second one has not. Clear enough?
I NEVER said my wife was dying. In any of my personalities. You need some reading comprehension lessons.
I take you've never carried a CHILD. You've never had the privilege of carrying and giving birth to a CHILD.

Until then: what is (or was) in my uterus is mine to define. It is a CHILD.

Whatever about your fictional life. Those who serve in the armed forces sign a blank check for the amount up to and including their lives to protect you. In general, that is done willingly except in times of declared war. And since the first Gulf War, no draft. Metaphor mixing?

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#52 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a traditionalist. I want my kids to have families. I want grandkids and I want them to be a part of my everyday life.
I don't want any alternative lifestyles around me, nor the drama that surrounds that entire subculture. Not to mention the fact that I am a snob, and I just don't like that crap around me, except maybe when I'm watching Jerry Springer.
If you want or can tolerate having that in your life, then more power to you. You are a more tolerant person than I am. I have no problem that this stuff exists and I don't even mind them that much. I just don't want it around me, or in my house or around my family!!!
Which goes back to the original question of whether I would abort, I think the answer is yes.
You have no choice. And if your force that on your children, you just may regret it. Your children's lives are not yours to control.

“Accept No Substitutes”

Since: Oct 11

Marengo, OH

#53 Mar 23, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
I take you've never carried a CHILD. You've never had the privilege of carrying and giving birth to a CHILD.
Until then: what is (or was) in my uterus is mine to define. It is a CHILD.
Whatever about your fictional life. Those who serve in the armed forces sign a blank check for the amount up to and including their lives to protect you. In general, that is done willingly except in times of declared war. And since the first Gulf War, no draft. Metaphor mixing?
Since the end of Vietnam, no draft.
The Author

Grove City, OH

#54 Mar 23, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
I take you've never carried a CHILD. You've never had the privilege of carrying and giving birth to a CHILD.
Until then: what is (or was) in my uterus is mine to define. It is a CHILD.
Whatever about your fictional life. Those who serve in the armed forces sign a blank check for the amount up to and including their lives to protect you. In general, that is done willingly except in times of declared war. And since the first Gulf War, no draft. Metaphor mixing?
Test
The Author

Grove City, OH

#55 Mar 23, 2012
Tried posting twice and it bombed both times.

Ok, a couple out here aren't getting what I'm talking about with the draft. From WWII to 1973, the country had a draft. That meant young men were forcibly conscripted. If you were 18, 19, or 20, you could NOT vote for or against those who were responsible for conscripting you. You thus definitely lost your liberty, sometimes your health and life, and you had NO say in it. Worse than taxation without representation. After years of sometimes violent protests, the country saw fit to pass the 26th Amendment, which at least meant those under 21 could now vote for those sending them against their will. This was ratified on June 30, 1971, almost two full years before the conversion to an all-volunteer service. That was done partly because Nixon finally, after 4 years of dicking around, got a cease-fire with the N. Vietnamese, so we no longer needed the manpower. It was also established, because if you volunteer, you don't have any right to protest any orders, including deployment. However, the draft can be reinsituted any time, and it was discussed in the Iraq War. Remember all the Guard units called up, and sent for multiple tours? That's because the services were having a great deal of difficulty meeting their needs. So those of you yammering about how we have an all-volunteer force NOW don't understand how it was THEN! A manifest injustice to a small minority of the U.S. population was remedied with the passage of the 26th Amendment in 3 months, faster than any other. This means it had to get 2/3 approval from both houses of Congress, and approved by at least 3/4 of the state legislatures. Next I'll compare this to the anti-abortion movement.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#56 Mar 23, 2012
The Author wrote:
<quoted text>
Test
I don’t know....I need to think about it, but if there was a test for a child that would be born with multiple lying personalities and a need to be confrontational for no particular reason????

Nah even then I would not abort it, but I might have to beat the shyte out of it till he or she got their act together….
The Author

Grove City, OH

#58 Mar 23, 2012
The anti-abortion crowd seems to think that it is obvious that aborting fetuses is at the least immoral and should be completely illegal. Fine. Pass a constitution amendment declaring life begins at conception. The all abortions would be illegal. If this was such a slam-dunk, as the remedy known as the 26th Amendment was, then it should be a piece of cake to get this passed. And yet it's been 39 years since Roe v. Wade, and there's been no serious attempt to even introduce it as an amendment. Why is that? Because, obviously, not everyone sees it as the anti-abortion crowd does. Because logically, legally, and morally, you all are dead wrong.

No mixed metaphors.

And for GJH, once again, I NEVER said my wife was dying. I can't help that you misinterpret stuff based on your faulty reading comprehension. Maybe when you people get more precise and accurate in your use of the English language, you'll do better.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#59 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't want freaks over at my house. I don't want freaks joining us for family dinners. I don't want freaks over for Christmas, cookouts, family parties, graduations, etc. I don't want freaks holding hands at the dinner table being lovey dovey in my house.
That's not control, that's personal preference. It will keep me from not being able to hold down my food. It will save me from having to buy a glock and potentially doing jail time.
Freaks are your definition, not mine.

Am I gay? No. Do I understand the lifestyle? No. Do I care about it? No. Is it right to force my kids what to do with their lives OR disowning them? No. It's something I've considered while raising my kids. And it's all theoretical. None of them are gay, all in hetereo relationships. But, as a mom, you always have to wonder "what if..."

I can't say I would disown my kid over such. I've had friends whose kids have come out. One very close friend in particular has told me she struggled to accept, but never wanted to lose her son by disowning him, either.

And yes, it is control.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#61 Mar 23, 2012
The Author wrote:
The anti-abortion crowd seems to think that it is obvious that aborting fetuses is at the least immoral and should be completely illegal. Fine. Pass a constitution amendment declaring life begins at conception. The all abortions would be illegal. If this was such a slam-dunk, as the remedy known as the 26th Amendment was, then it should be a piece of cake to get this passed. And yet it's been 39 years since Roe v. Wade, and there's been no serious attempt to even introduce it as an amendment. Why is that? Because, obviously, not everyone sees it as the anti-abortion crowd does. Because logically, legally, and morally, you all are dead wrong.
No mixed metaphors.
And for GJH, once again, I NEVER said my wife was dying. I can't help that you misinterpret stuff based on your faulty reading comprehension. Maybe when you people get more precise and accurate in your use of the English language, you'll do better.
If I'm dead wrong, why the phuque am I still breathing?

It has 23 pairs of human chromosomes. It requires nutrients from the mother's body and it is fully formed as early as 8 weeks.

Now, I have never said "outlaw abortion." Keep it legal, keep it discretionary. But I would never, ever counsel anyone to have an abortion, either.

Maybe when you get to be a female and understand fully what it is like to control your reproductive rights -- and that includes making the decision to give birth -- and you decide to get help for your schizophrenia -- I might listen to you. No telling me it's not a child when I've felt it move inside of me... legally, morally, or logically -- you don't have a leg to stand on. There are laws after all that protect the "fetus" if it is killed accidentally due to car accident or crime. Survivors can press criminal charges. So tell me, how did you argue this again?.........

The Row v Wade arguments were in many instances based on "viability." The limits of viability have ever been moving...and against your favor. "Fetuses" born at 20 weeks now can survive.

“Accept No Substitutes”

Since: Oct 11

Marengo, OH

#62 Mar 23, 2012
The Author wrote:
The anti-abortion crowd seems to think that it is obvious that aborting fetuses is at the least immoral and should be completely illegal. Fine. Pass a constitution amendment declaring life begins at conception. The all abortions would be illegal. If this was such a slam-dunk, as the remedy known as the 26th Amendment was, then it should be a piece of cake to get this passed. And yet it's been 39 years since Roe v. Wade, and there's been no serious attempt to even introduce it as an amendment. Why is that? Because, obviously, not everyone sees it as the anti-abortion crowd does. Because logically, legally, and morally, you all are dead wrong.
No mixed metaphors.
And for GJH, once again, I NEVER said my wife was dying. I can't help that you misinterpret stuff based on your faulty reading comprehension. Maybe when you people get more precise and accurate in your use of the English language, you'll do better.
You might as well shut up trying to defend your games, aaahole. You got caught and as long as you show your face here, we'll beat you with it as we please.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#63 Mar 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why I would abort.
Again, as a male, you have not a clue about what you're talking about. I would defy you to say that as a female who knew you were carrying life and wanted a child. Or I would defy you to even attempt to justify this to your "religion."

You are speaking out of your ill-informed hatred and fear.

There is no testing. I am not sure I would undergo or even consent to such testing. If there is a good chance of a true disease or physical deformity, yes -- so that I knew what to do to treat child or to prepare myself for worse.

But you are also talking to someone who had the opportunity 4 times to know the gender of my children ahead of time. Said no each time...we would be happily surprised. Even dad didn't care to know ahead of time. Called unconditional acceptance of a gift.
Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#64 Mar 23, 2012
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, as a male, you have not a clue about what you're talking about. I would defy you to say that as a female who knew you were carrying life and wanted a child. Or I would defy you to even attempt to justify this to your "religion."
You are speaking out of your ill-informed hatred and fear.
There is no testing. I am not sure I would undergo or even consent to such testing. If there is a good chance of a true disease or physical deformity, yes -- so that I knew what to do to treat child or to prepare myself for worse.
But you are also talking to someone who had the opportunity 4 times to know the gender of my children ahead of time. Said no each time...we would be happily surprised. Even dad didn't care to know ahead of time. Called unconditional acceptance of a gift.
I didn't care to know the gender either, but if there were a test to screen out freaks I would take it in a minute. And I would act accordingly.

“Where did I put my tiara?”

Since: Dec 11

Columbus, OH

#65 Mar 24, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't care to know the gender either, but if there were a test to screen out freaks I would take it in a minute. And I would act accordingly.
If your Mom had access to a test for freaks, do you think you'd be alive or would she act accordingly? I'm not much of a betting woman, but I know where I'd place my money on this one.
Curious

Woodbridge, VA

#66 Mar 24, 2012
Abortion is murder.

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.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What do FEMINISTS think about Brucine Jenner? 3 hr Linda 7
Poll Should President Obama go to Baltimore to fix t... 3 hr Linda 7
Freddie Gray riots in Baltimore 3 hr Duke for Mayor 198
News Food pantry leaving gentrified Short North 3 hr Linda 6
Hooters Columbus locations closing due to defla... 3 hr Linda 201
Interesting that Baltimore happened on Obama's ... 4 hr REAL American 4
Watching the KENTUCKY DERBY 11 hr Seriouslady 7
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]