by ignored_one 217 Replies latest social current
You are either pro-life or pro-death. There just can't be a middle ground to it. I just can't see it.
Maybe you fail to see it because you didn't read/respond to either StinkyPantz or myself?
Is abortion absolutely wrong when the mother will surely die if the baby is carried to term?
. You and I know know coat hangers often results internal injuries and bleed to death trying to kill a babywhich is one very good reason that abortion should be a legal option.
No it isn't. It still doesn't make it any safer than before. Like I said, even after Roe was passed, some women still died on the butcher table, bleeding to death because some legalized doctor (yeah right) screwed up!
Abortion was far few and between long before Roe v Wade came to passhow do you figure? illegal abortion clinics were not likely to broadcast how many abortions they were performing per year....moreover, many women were lucky enough (relatively speaking, of course) to have the means to have their procedures performed in other countries where such practices were legal . additionally, some women were so desparate that they felt compelled to take matters into their own hands. would you really want to see a return to these conditions?
Because abortion wasn't legal then, which resulted in far fewer babies from being butchered compared to when it got legalized in 1973 and it became the ultimate birth control method at $400 a pop (at least that was the price I last heard back in the late 1980s, prolly higher now.).
There's the partial birth abortion whereas some butcher mills will kill your full term baby at a price (some I heard charges 4k or higher) where they will birth your baby up to the neck, turn the baby around, stick a pair of sissors in the back of the neck while the baby writhes in pain, then shove a vacumn tube in the neck that will suck out the brain of the child. Then the child goes limp, pulls the head out and trashes the baby in a plastic trash bag and drops the bag in a trash can next to the doctor.
Now you say some women should have the right to do that to their babies????
what say you about the covenience of butching babies now compared to the pre-Roe case?i'm not sure what you mean, but i'm certainly not convinced that my stance wrong, if that's what youre asking.
I'm speaking of today's covenience which resulted in more babies dead in one single year compare to how many babies died before Roe came to pass in one single year.
I apologize for not making myself understood, english + deafness = grammer sucks sometimes. *blush!*
Yiz
Is abortion absolutely wrong when the mother will surely die if the baby is carried to term?
Well, allow me to answer that question with a question....(I know, frustrating, isn't it?)
How much admiration will you give to a mother IF she decided that her baby's life is more important than her own and decides to give up her life in order to save her baby and have a chance at being born, to grow, to go to school, graduate from school, go to college, graduate from college, get a job, find a spouse, have a family, etc.
You think she'd be brave or crazy?
I've known a few mothers who made those sacrifices and the babies are doing just fine and they thanked their mothers in heaven for a chance at life.
Yiz
How much admiration will you give to a mother IF she decided that her baby's life is more important ...
Yes, that would be admirable in my eyes because I believe the woman has a choice. How can you admire it though? You are saying that abortion is wrong in every possible scenario! So a mother who chooses to die in order to perhaps allow the baby to live is simply doing what you would EXPECT her to do.
You're avoiding my question, but I think we all know your answer. Do you think a mother is absolutely wrong by deciding to abort a fetus that will surely result in her own death?
What about a scenario where both the mother and child will die if the baby is brought to term?
I've known a few mothers who made those sacrifices and the babies are doing just fine and they thanked their mothers in heaven for a chance at life.
Yeah, and I know people who are happy to be alive because the rubber broke. Does that mean no one should use any form of contraceptive? Afterall, a contraceptive is preventing and sometimes destroying what would otherwise become a human being.
I'd like to reply to you, yiz, but seriously, can you cool it with the butcher talk? i really do take offense to that, and if you've noticed, i haven't been slinging names at the anti-choicers here because i believe theyre entitled to voice their opinions without having to worry about being tarred and feathered.
now, then.
No it isn't. It still doesn't make it any safer than before.
are you serious? having an abortion in a sterile environment performed by a highly capable practitioner isnt safer than having a wire hanger hack job?? i know you don't really believe that.
Because abortion wasn't legal then, which resulted in far fewer babies from being butchered compared to when it got legalized in 1973
abortion may not have been legal, but as i stated, they were performed. they were simply often performed in clandestine, unclean locations by practitioners who sometimes lacked proper training, to say the least.
and it became the ultimate birth control method at $400 a pop (at least that was the price I last heard back in the late 1980s, prolly higher now
the ultimate birth control method???? again, are you joking? having an abortion is not as easy a process as you seem to think, and it is certainly less convenient than simply using contraceptives. sadly, contraceptives are not a 100% guarantee.
There's the partial birth abortion whereas some butcher mills will kill your full term baby at a price (some I heard charges 4k or higher) where they will birth your baby up to the neck, turn the baby around, stick a pair of sissors in the back of the neck while the baby writhes in pain, then shove a vacumn tube in the neck that will suck out the brain of the child. Then the child goes limp, pulls the head out and trashes the baby in a plastic trash bag and drops the bag in a trash can next to the doctor
you're right, stuffing a newborn into a garbage bag and throwing that in a dumpster is so much more humane. and i don't recall saying that i supported abortions performed after the third trimester, which last time i checked are not legal in california (please someone correct me if i'm wrong on that)
you're right, stuffing a newborn into a garbage bag and throwing that in a dumpster is so much more humane. and i don't recall saying that i supported abortions performed after the third trimester, which last time i checked are not legal in california (please someone correct me if i'm wrong on that)
I think yiz has been reading too much anti-abortion propaganda. I don't know for certain, but I seriously doubt late term abortions are legal anywhere.
- Like Phil Donahue said when he had the doctor-killer antiabortionist on his show (and I paraphrase)
"Isn't it interesting how the most vociferous antichoice people are almost always male?"
Phil's point was (and he stands by it) that as a man, and therefore incapable of being pregnant, he has no right to tell women what they can do with their bodies.
I am not rigid here. Rape is a consideration for abortion. In fact there are several considerations.
Let me get this right. The foetus that is there because of rape can be aborted. So, therefore, you consider children of rape less valuable than others?
Why is it okay to 'murder' a rape baby by aborting it?
And what other "considerations" would make it okay to perform this 'murder'?
Please clarify. Tks.
... just wonderin'
t
We sure have a lot of labels being thrown around here. So Tink and I disagree more than we agree on this issue. But I think she's great and would make a super friend in the real world. She is like many of the friends I have. They disagree with me but do it respectfully. I don't call them baby butchers and they don't call me names either. What's so hard about disagreeing without throwing around all these labels?
Personally anyone who sees this issue as black and white isn't thinking through the entire issue in my book.
Now I admit last night I tried to emulate Aztec by giving an off handed insult as she has thrown me by referring to her as an embittered person. That wasn't right and it goes against the way I feel. I was told that I was young, naive, didn't get it and something else that I forget now. So I lashed back a bit and I regret doing that. So Aztec although I know you honestly feel you weren't insulting me I do apologize for insulting you. But I was insulted and I do not believe I'm the type of person that looks to be insulted. Perhaps you don't recall what it's like to be 20 and striving to do something useful with your life. I have two years of college yet before I can even get a real job.
Oh yeah I remember how, I also had the makings of a real drama queen.
As I said names don't usually bother me but it was late last night and I guess the names did.
Sorry for behaving in a manner in which I accussed you of behaving Aztec. We won't be friends I'm sure, but I don't need enemies, not even online.
Phil's point was (and he stands by it) that as a man, and therefore incapable of being pregnant, he has no right to tell women what they can do with their bodies.
As I said earlier I disagree. Men should have more of a choice in this matter. Just because a man can't get pregnant and carry a baby doesn't diminish his responsibility in this regard. He will still have to pay child support once the child is born regardless of him wanting the child or not. Thats a double standard. Otherwise there should be a law stating that a man can legally sign away his rights and not ever have anything to do with the child.
Yet quite often women carry out abortions against the father’s wishes. I think there ought to be a law that says if a women is pregnant and there are no other mitigating circumstances then the father of the child ought to be able to have a say in the decision on whether to abort or not.
Merc'
