9 reasons abortion MUST remain legal.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#920 Nov 1, 2012
ZEF

Why don't you answer a simple question?

What are you doing to save these "babies" you claim to care so much about? All you do is talk smack about it online.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#921 Nov 1, 2012
Whisgean Zoda wrote:
I find it curious that so many on the right that are dead set against abortion and yammer on about the sanctity of life have no issue with blowing away some kid trying to steal their lawnmower or something.
"Abortion is murder! Now get the hell offa my property!"
BANG!
Really good question.

Wish I'd asked it...

And I really like your moniker, too.
Welcome to the thread!!

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#922 Nov 1, 2012
hwyangel wrote:
<quoted text>
Men don't get to walk away from their responsibility. 18 years of child support vs only 9 months of pregnancy. The consequences for men is jail, loss of driver license, garnished wages, interest on late payments, and confiscated federal income tax. For women its 9 months of not being able to participate in extreme sports or toxic substances.
Pregnant women risk death. Male contributors to unwanted pregnancy walk away from their responsibilities EVERY SINGLE HOUR of EVERY SINGLE DAY.

My ex-husband has so far paid a cumulative TOTAL of $64.00 in child support, for two children, over the course of 21 years. He got away with this, as a result of having skipped the state we lived in, and returning to the state of his birth. He never spent a minute behind bars, never lost his driver's license, and never PAID federal income tax, as he worked for cash only, and does so to this day.

What planet are you living on, anyway?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#923 Nov 5, 2012
LILJON wrote:
don't have sex. period.
You, first.

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#924 Nov 5, 2012
zef wrote:
<quoted text> You think
Anne Frank was never a fetus? I think she was. And since human rights are inherent, people of evey age have human rights, including people as young as fetus.
The "human rights" of a fetus are those his/her mother allows it to have.

What will you say to a woman who refuses pre-natal vitamis, or who drinks, or smokes, while pregnant? What about the women who work long hours, don't get enough rest and even after being told to stay in bed, get up and do things they're told by their physician not to do?

Or is it that you're using the argument of fetal "human rights" to foster your own agenda, while forgetting that the coin ALWAYS has two sides, and you are simply ignoring the remainder of that which amounts to the same?

Sheket B'vakasha!
Ocean56

AOL

#925 Nov 6, 2012
zef wrote:
My beliefs? I have no affiliation with godvoter.org .
http://www.godvoter.org/abortion-is-murder.ht...
Human rights, including the most basic human right, the right to life, are the foundation of our government. And protecting those human rights is the purpose of our government. The blood-crazed tyrants whom you sychophants worship don't have the the right to kill anyone, with abortion or any other method.
Zeffie, I couldn't care less whether you're affiliated with some religionist nutjob website. As far as I'M concerned, your beliefs are as stupid as they are BACKWARD. I certainly don't take any of them seriously, and most intelligent women don't either.

The fact remains that the ONLY person who decides about a pregnancy is the WOMAN who is pregnant. Not YOUR pregnancy? Not your decision, it's as simple as that.

Since today is ELECTION Day, I'm going out later on to VOTE FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA and every other DEMOCRAT who is running for office. If you and other anti-choice kooks don't like it, too bad. MY vote, MY choice.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#926 Nov 6, 2012
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
The "human rights" of a fetus are those his/her mother allows it to have.
What will you say to a woman who refuses pre-natal vitamis, or who drinks, or smokes, while pregnant? What about the women who work long hours, don't get enough rest and even after being told to stay in bed, get up and do things they're told by their physician not to do?
Or is it that you're using the argument of fetal "human rights" to foster your own agenda, while forgetting that the coin ALWAYS has two sides, and you are simply ignoring the remainder of that which amounts to the same?
Sheket B'vakasha!
Zeffie would like to tie her to the bed and have at her until she conceives, and leave her strapped down thereafter for 9 months and the length of her labor.
God only knows what it would do with the baby...

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#927 Nov 6, 2012
shovelhead72 wrote:
<quoted text>Zeffie would like to tie her to the bed and have at her until she conceives, and leave her strapped down thereafter for 9 months and the length of her labor.
God only knows what it would do with the baby...
Donate it? Ooooops, sorry; not politically correct; give it up for adoption?

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#928 Nov 6, 2012
Conservative Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
Donate it? Ooooops, sorry; not politically correct; give it up for adoption?
Probably bronze it.
Logical Thinker

Newville, PA

#929 Nov 6, 2012
Most scientists would agree that life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, which means that abortion is the killing of life. Everyone would be in an uproar if the government agreed to pass a law that would simply kill all the orphans, because they're unwanted children. It's just as immoral to kill the child when it's not yet born. Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here. But if the woman made the mistake of having the child, and her life is not in danger, then I do not believe that the child should be killed just so the woman can go have more sex and most probably get pregnant again. That is unfair to the unborn child getting killed, and that's generally agreed upon no matter what your lifestyle or world view is.

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#930 Nov 6, 2012
Logical Thinker wrote:
Most scientists would agree that life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, which means that abortion is the killing of life. Everyone would be in an uproar if the government agreed to pass a law that would simply kill all the orphans, because they're unwanted children. It's just as immoral to kill the child when it's not yet born. Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here. But if the woman made the mistake of having the child, and her life is not in danger, then I do not believe that the child should be killed just so the woman can go have more sex and most probably get pregnant again. That is unfair to the unborn child getting killed, and that's generally agreed upon no matter what your lifestyle or world view is.
Uh, no, it's GENERALLY agreed upon that women are people, and citizens, with rights, and that fetuses, which aren't people or citizens, don't have rights - especially not any which trumps the woman's. And 'life' began billions of years ago - it's a continuum, not an 'event'. Lastly, sperm and egg are both alive, so by your line of reasoning, male masturbation should be outlawed, as well as miscarriage.

Good luck with that.
Kid

Coachella, CA

#931 Nov 8, 2012
Wooh dude

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#932 Nov 9, 2012
zef being currently absent from the thread, I'm going to guess it has no further input.

Just as well - if we wanted input from Aliens, we'd have made at least one a member of a focus group by now.

Next?

Since: Nov 12

Mohali, India

#933 Nov 9, 2012
dont know

“searching myself”

Since: Sep 09

In Charming CA

#934 Nov 9, 2012
urwithnitin02 wrote:
dont know
Me neither. I just rely on morality.

Next...

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#935 Nov 10, 2012
Logical Thinker wrote:
Most scientists would agree that life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, which means that abortion is the killing of life. Everyone would be in an uproar if the government agreed to pass a law that would simply kill all the orphans, because they're unwanted children. It's just as immoral to kill the child when it's not yet born. Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here. But if the woman made the mistake of having the child, and her life is not in danger, then I do not believe that the child should be killed just so the woman can go have more sex and most probably get pregnant again. That is unfair to the unborn child getting killed, and that's generally agreed upon no matter what your lifestyle or world view is.
I want to personally thank you for this kind and thoughtful statement and I quote "Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here", hope you did not go through to much "trouble" in vomiting that up, your deep concern is noted.

To consider life at the "joining of sperm and egg" equivalent to the life of the woman/girls with equal rights is insulting, degrading and consistent with a high disregard and second class citizenry concepts pertaining to women in general.

How many pregnancies have you carried? I would like to hear about them.

“2014 TDF”

Since: Mar 09

Boca Raton, FL.

#936 Nov 12, 2012
Logical Thinker wrote:
Most scientists would agree that life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, which means that abortion is the killing of life. Everyone would be in an uproar if the government agreed to pass a law that would simply kill all the orphans, because they're unwanted children. It's just as immoral to kill the child when it's not yet born. Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here. But if the woman made the mistake of having the child, and her life is not in danger, then I do not believe that the child should be killed just so the woman can go have more sex and most probably get pregnant again. That is unfair to the unborn child getting killed, and that's generally agreed upon no matter what your lifestyle or world view is.
There's nothing "logical" about what you state. If life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, then are you saying the egg and the sperm are not alive? The joining of those two cells only causes a scientific process called cell mitosis. No "life" has commenced that can be, in any way, shape, or form, compared to the life of even an embryo.

Some believe life begins at conception and that's fine. But, fact is, PREGNANCY, does not begin until uterine implantation of a zygote and considering that 60% of zygotes fail to implant in the uterus, then it's axiomatic that G-d kills, I'm sorry, aborts, 60% of "babies."

While you're considering your response, if you're going to respond, read Hosea 13:16. Then go on and tell me that G-d is pro-life, or against abortion.

BTW, I'm a Jewish man and in my religion (which is the one from which Christianity originated) the life of the mother is always paramount to that of the unborn. It is the reason why in Judaism, an abortion is MANDATORY, if the life of the mother is at stake. BTW, that's an abortion AT ANY STAGE OF THE PREGNANCY.

And that's a fact that Christianity has conveniently chosen to ignore.
Ocean56

AOL

#937 Nov 13, 2012
Logical Thinker wrote:
Most scientists would agree that life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg, which means that abortion is the killing of life. Everyone would be in an uproar if the government agreed to pass a law that would simply kill all the orphans, because they're unwanted children. It's just as immoral to kill the child when it's not yet born. Now, of course the women's life has to be taken into account here. But if the woman made the mistake of having the child, and her life is not in danger, then I do not believe that the child should be killed just so the woman can go have more sex and most probably get pregnant again. That is unfair to the unborn child getting killed, and that's generally agreed upon no matter what your lifestyle or world view is.
Sorry (not really), but your BELIEFS, which are not facts, don't control my sexual and reproductive decisions. Whether you like it or not, a WOMAN's right to make her own medical decisions without interference from the church or the state trump any beliefs held by the anti-choice crowd. Motherhood is OPTIONAL, not required, even if a pregnancy happens. That means a woman can easily opt OUT of motherhood if she doesn't want pregnancy or children.

What YOU think is "fair" or not is irrelevant to me, and it is probably just as meaningless to any other woman who doesn't wish to stay pregnant. Not YOUR pregnancy? Not your decision, it's as simple as that.

someone

Toronto, Canada

#939 Nov 15, 2012
Thanks this helps a lot
palamirtam marimuthu

Singapore, Singapore

#940 Nov 16, 2012
[tell the men to co-operate

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.

Abortion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 min June VanDerMark 337,213
News Catholic students lobby at UN commission on women (Mar '13) 21 hr C Kersey 2
News At CPAC, Joy Villa responds to criticism about ... Apr 23 cpeter1313 4
News RCMP spies saw womena s movement through a red-... Apr 23 Spy 1
News Halton Catholic students stage walkouts to prot... Apr 21 Good on em 1
News Idaho House approves 'abortion-reversal' bill Apr 20 cpeter1313 4
News Anti-abortion politicians push efforts to prose... Apr 20 Joey 1