Abortion stances

[SVMc]

Sub: aren't you a moderator?

Shouldn't you be avoiding one liners and setting an example by providing a more substantive argument?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Life is precious, 1.3 million Americans yearly are denied the basic right to life because of the selfish actions of one person.

In any other context, this would be an outrage. Instead, its honored and defended... go figure.

[Starboy]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Life is precious, 1.3 million Americans yearly are denied the basic right to life because of the selfish actions of one person. In any other context, this would be an outrage. Instead, its honored and defended... go figure.

Hey if they allowed cloning and stem cell research there could be a whole lot more people born each year.

Starboy

[Mr.Vicchio]

The most effective birth control, abstinance.

The most effective way to avoid unwanted pregnancies... abstinance until marriage.

OR...

You could just say "here's a condom go for it kids, and if you get pregnant, we'll take care of that and your parents don't even have to KNOW about it! iIsn't that fun?"

[Starboy]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio The most effective birth control, abstinance. The most effective way to avoid unwanted pregnancies... abstinance until marriage. OR... You could just say "here's a condom go for it kids, and if you get pregnant, we'll take care of that and your parents don't even have to KNOW about it! iIsn't that fun?"

Make up your mind. Either you want more people on the globe or you don't.

Starboy

[Osborn F Enready]

Vic, maybe you should solicit all those women with your name and address since YOU DONT MIND PAYING FOR THEM ALL. Everyone has their OWN reason for choosing abortion, and I find it hard you can easily dismiss those reasons which are based on fact, economics, future impact, ability to provide the child a decent childhood and future, instead of a story book (Bible, or whatever your religion of choice) principles set forth.

I am not slamming religion here, I am slamming religious extremists, who feel they have the "moral right of way" over anyone who is non-religious or believes differently then "themselves".

If you can't see the logical reason of why some people choose abortion, you aren't facing the facts. Does this mean ALL abortions are morally sound? NO, I am not saying that. Abortion shouldn't be used as birth control, but there are cases where abortion is the only answer to THE INDIVIDUAL that is carrying the egg.

Just because religions think it is wrong to have abortion, should the GOVERNMENT BE EXPECTED TO PAY? NO, and the same goes for all the other CRAP that people expect the government to pay for.

That is my opinion.

[SVMc]

When we tell teenagers (who account for the most unwanted pregnancies, and the most abortions in the United States) that abstinance is the answer we fail. We fail teenagers, we fail unwanted children born to teenagers, we fail a nation.

Preaching abstinance above sex-education is the reason that the United States not only has the highest teen pregnancy rate of any developed nation, but in fact had double the teen pregnancy and teen birth rate of any other industrialized nation (Victor C. Strasburg, MD, New Mexico School of Medicine).

Teenagers in the United States are NOT more sexually acitve and are NOT sexually active at a younger age than teenagers in Canada, Sweeden or Britain (some of the lower teen pregnancy rates), the difference is that in the United States, sex and birth control are not talked about openly in schools resulting in a high amount of teens who do not know how to effectively use birth control. This greatly contributes to the 54% of women who have abortions, stating that they used birth control (Alan Guttmacher Institute).

Reducing the abortion rate is directly linked to sex-education. Education teenagers about contraception does NOT lower the age at which teenagers become sexually active, or increase the amount of teens who choose to become sexually active. Over 250 studies agree on this point (National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, CNN.com, ETR Associates in Scotts Valley, California, National Center for Health Statistics - and there are more).

If people are so against abortion why aren't they doing more to prevent unwanted pregnancies?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Maybe they should have KEPT THIER PANTS on before engaging in sex before they were fully ready to deal with getting pregnant. Why do the pro-abortion/choice people always ignore that point?

Hmm?

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Maybe they should have KEPT THIER PANTS on before engaging in sex before they were fully ready to deal with getting pregnant. Why do the pro-abortion/choice people always ignore that point? Hmm?

I hope that since you say they should keep their pants on the fact that they don't doesn't bother you. Truth usually gets in the way of a good argument doesn't it?

And speaking of ignoring things, it appears you have positioned yourself as the protector of the unborn OVER the life of the mother.

[Osborn F Enready]

Not to mention if the parents WERE RESPONSIBLE they would have taught their kids some common sense. That is the problem, mom and dads are working to support their famillies since one wage earner just don't cut it anymore. The ones who can afford to be home, are to busy competing with the joneses with the newest crap from china at the lowest cost, and have no time for "raising kids".

The modern conception is that if you work for a living, the state raises your kids. You spend some time with them here and there, play a little catch when you can, but generally ignore and argue with each other because you can't relate to what planet the other is on. The whole point is parents can't do everything anymore, and the public education has fostered the nanny mentality since the mid 1950's.

If parents cared to teach kids basic morals, and REALLY TEACH THEM, not just go over them from time to time, then we wouldn't have this problem at the magnitude we do now. I don't know anyone in the lower, lower middle, middle class that says "I have plenty of quality time to spend with my kids."

We need to make accountability LESSON 1. We do that by example. Kids today look at our political system and can see the lies before they even gain intrest in the subject. Some do, but most just call'em like they see'em. I had one class on government in High School. He started his first day introduction to his class by saying this....

"Hello, my name is Mr. Sorosiak. I will be your American Government teacher for your senior year. I am the only government teacher at this school, and you MUST pass my class to graduate. I want you all to know right now, I do accept gifts, and promptness and manners are a MUST to participate in my class. I have you under the gun, it is your job to convince me you need to pass."

This was not a joke, he was TOTALLY serious. He was the biggest cock I ever met, but I passed his class without kissing his ass by requesting extra credit work. He made me hate the subject so much that even though I voted, I did it with whimsy. It wasn't until Perot ran for President that I became interested in politics again. And the I found the libertarian party, and felt like a found a group of people I truly understood and could associate with. We agreed on almost everything.

The reason teachers like this exist, is because kids see it everywhere. In politics, hollywood, everyday life, after school jobs.... it is everywhere. Liars, cheats irresponsible morons running the country. How is that for leading by example.

Just once I would like to balance my checkbook, come up 7 billion short, and write it off to SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY FOR, with no action against me, no people to answer to, no question, no nothing. Just a parade wave and a smile.

Hi, my names __________, I am the President, and I just royally screwed you and your kids with debt they will suffer from for their entire life. Have a nice day. Buh bye.

Welcome to modern politics, and what WE have let it become.

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: SVMc Sub: aren't you a moderator? Shouldn't you be avoiding one liners and setting an example by providing a more substantive argument?

Haha, probably. But I did mean it.

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Vic, maybe you should solicit all those women with your name and address since YOU DONT MIND PAYING FOR THEM ALL. Everyone has their OWN reason for choosing abortion, and I find it hard you can easily dismiss those reasons which are based on fact, economics, future impact, ability to provide the child a decent childhood and future, instead of a story book (Bible, or whatever your religion of choice) principles set forth. I am not slamming religion here, I am slamming religious extremists, who feel they have the "moral right of way" over anyone who is non-religious or believes differently then "themselves". If you can't see the logical reason of why some people choose abortion, you aren't facing the facts. Does this mean ALL abortions are morally sound? NO, I am not saying that. Abortion shouldn't be used as birth control, but there are cases where abortion is the only answer to THE INDIVIDUAL that is carrying the egg. Just because religions think it is wrong to have abortion, should the GOVERNMENT BE EXPECTED TO PAY? NO, and the same goes for all the other CRAP that people expect the government to pay for. That is my opinion.

I think it is a horrible misconception that pro-lifers are religious. I am very certain it is not. Religion plays into one side sure, but that is the weakly formed side of it. I very strongly understand that something qualitative begins are conception. And life begins not too far there-after. The potential for life is an important quality as well. But what about jerking off? It takes two to tango, first off. Egg and Sperm. Secondly, don't jerk off, it makes you go blind.
Don't get me wrong here, I agree with you, theist should be banished from this country, don't pass Go, don't collect $200. I also dont think abortion should be illegal. I really hate the government, and especially the police, and i don't want to give those shits another place of power. I also don't care about potential or actual life, even a little. Iraqis and fetuses (feti?) alike. I don't mind anything a woman does with her own body or her own baby. I just don't care. But it is clear to be regardless that the fetus is alive. And if you're not cool with killing, don't be an abortionist.

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Maybe they should have KEPT THIER PANTS on before engaging in sex before they were fully ready to deal with getting pregnant. Why do the pro-abortion/choice people always ignore that point? Hmm?

How the hell do you engage in sex with your pants on?
and to answer your question....
pro-choice people ignore that because they like paying welfare.

[SVMc]

Maybe they should have KEPT THIER PANTS on before engaging in sex before they were fully ready to deal with getting pregnant.

Obvioulsy logical argument isn't working.... let's try this:

[scarcasm] OoooohHHHHH! Now I get it!! This whole abortion, teen pregnancy, unwanted pregnancy thing is solved!!! We'll just all keep our pants on!! You're a genius!! Why has no one ever thought of this... okay, debate ended, no more need for discussion. Apparently all of us who have any remote interest in solving why we have so many abortions due to unwanted pregnancies forgot to consider the "keep the pants on" argument. [/scarcasm]

I have nothing against teaching abstinence, parental repsonbibility the probablility of getting pregnant if you do engage in sex. However, I believe there is enough proof out there to indicate (much of which I've already supplied) that the "keep your pants on" argument isn't solving the teen pregnancy and high abortion rate connundrum. Telling people what they should have done is not a solution.

Let me put this in plain language.... pro-choice does not ignore the abstinance argument... we just think it's insufficient.

[SVMc]

Secondly, don't jerk off, it makes you go blind.

Please tell me this is a scarcastic comment.

[Suburbanite]

Hey no one liners!

[SVMc]

LOL,

There should have been a question mark at the end of that sentence, then it's ceases to be argumentative until you answer. :)

[Ken Carman]

Quote by: nykoelle I believe there are really three stances on abortion: 1. Pro Life: Abortion is wrong, it should be banned, end of discussion 2. Pro Choice: My personal beliefs on the matter shouldn't control the legal rights of others. They deserve the right to legally believe and practice how they feel. 3. Pro Abortion: I believe that the fetus is not a baby, and abortion should be legal for all. I think most people fall under Pro Choice, even though they don't even really know it. It's a shame really, I've talked to a lot of Pro Life people in my time, and they pretty much agreed with me on everything, only they thought abortion was wrong. But they didn't want it banned. Do you agree or disagree with this? Also, personal stances? I'm pro abortion, but I respect anyone that is pro choice in that they don't try to control the country's beliefs based on their own.

Not quite sure I agree with your categories. I don't believe the fetus is a "baby," but it is a baby in the making so it deserves more concern, compassion and regulation than say an appendix. I don't want to regulate what others do with their body but I think it's best if regulations help guide the mother into A/ giving birth then B/ adoption C/early abortion ... as you can see the noose tightens. I think underage mothers should have to inform their parents and the father UNLESS it's pretty obvious that would endanger the mother and/or the fetus. Yet I don't believe either, or the state, should be able force someone to give birth. We are dealing with two living beings here, one born, one unborn. Too often one side or another gives most of it's attention to one but not the other. Yet I still give preference to the born. The unborn, by very definition, are unborn. The mother should never be owned by the state, becoming some slave-incubator. The state interfers with "the family" and individuals too much as it is.

BTW, I am pro-death penalty. But I do believe it should be far harder fir the state to take a life. For political and social pressure issues it's far easier for the state to take more life than one individual... in most cases. Opting for less power over the individual by the state is a pretty strong guidleline for me.

[legallyblonde16]

I think that there are really only two categories pro-life and if theres a pro-life the other choice is obviously pro-death. If your saying you're pro-choice you are really saying I believe an innocent child should not have the choice to live even if the woman carrying it deceided to crawl up in bed with some guy but wasn't ready to face the consequences. I am completely pro-life because life begins at conception. Just because it was a rapist father doesn't mean that the child will turn out that way. Plus abortion leaves mental scars on the woman so the whole argument of a woman that got raped not being able to handle the trauma of carrying her child to full term then people need to think about how shes going to handle killing her own child down the road. When she sees someone else child she'll think what if? Abortion is an evil practice depriving everyone involved of life. It deprives the mother because she carries around the decision to terminate her child with her for the rest of her life, it deprives the father because he never gets to meet his heir. It deprives the grandparents of their doting. And it deprives the child obviously of his life before he even gets a chance to live it.

[Ken Carman]

Quote by: legallyblonde16 I think that there are really only two categories pro-life and if theres a pro-life the other choice is obviously pro-death. If your saying you're pro-choice you are really saying I believe an innocent child should not have the choice to live even if the woman carrying it deceided to crawl up in bed with some guy but wasn't ready to face the consequences. I am completely pro-life because life begins at conception. Just because it was a rapist father doesn't mean that the child will turn out that way. Plus abortion leaves mental scars on the woman so the whole argument of a woman that got raped not being able to handle the trauma of carrying her child to full term then people need to think about how shes going to handle killing her own child down the road. When she sees someone else child she'll think what if? Abortion is an evil practice depriving everyone involved of life. It deprives the mother because she carries around the decision to terminate her child with her for the rest of her life, it deprives the father because he never gets to meet his heir. It deprives the grandparents of their doting. And it deprives the child obviously of his life before he even gets a chance to live it.

"If your saying you're pro-choice you are really saying I believe an innocent child should not have the choice to live even if the woman carrying it deceided to crawl up in bed with some guy but wasn't ready to face the consequences."

By the very definition of being unborn a fetus cannot make choices. I don't mean this in a nasty way, but if they wish attempt to "ask a fetus" if it wants to be born yet bepore a person has an abortion, I'm all for regulating that, but any answer or non-answer other than a clear, "No" gives the option over to the mother in my opinion. No "channeling" allowed. So much is made of "innocent child." No, it is a fetus. An "innocent child" has been born. An "innocent Fetus?" Maybe, of course "innocence" is a relative term. At some stages in the birth process you might as well be saying innocent rock or sperm or egg. How much of an empty vessel the just born are, rather than "innocent," is open for discussion, not to mention the unborn.

"Just because it was a rapist father doesn't mean that the child will turn out that way".

I know of no one, personally, that claims this. But this kind of puts a crimp on your "wasn't ready to face the consequences" argument. So in other words women who are raped should be forced to face those consequences? Up until birth an individual's body, including all that goes on inside, in my opinion, is their own. If I have to choose between the state forcing a mother to give birth or the right to have an abortion, then I will choose in favor of the mother who is the born, supposed adult, in the situation. Giving the state rule over a woman's body and what's inside is a bad idea because it can be as easily turned into forced abortions as a ban. Now, regulations that favor birth as a choice? As long as they aren't simply an attempt to ban abortion by other means, I think think phrased and framed wisely, they are a good idea. In the current climate they don't make sense because either side will use them to force their all or nothing agendas.

That stinks, and I know it does. I blame extremists on both sides.

"Abortion is an evil practice depriving everyone involved of life. It deprives the mother because she carries around the decision to terminate her child with her for the rest of her life, it deprives the father because he never gets to meet his heir. It deprives the grandparents of their doting. And it deprives the child obviously of his life before he even gets a chance to live it"

Depends upon the reasoning of those who choose the option. If the mother's life is at risk and the fetus has no chance, I disagree. If just the mother's life is at risk, I still disagree. If neither's life is at risk but the choice is made because of the outlook for mom, the future child... whatever, it's a lot more of a grey area in my opinion. If it's done for birth control, well you may be right. But I would never want our laws to outlaw all "evil." What is "evil" is for preachers and individuals to decide. Legislating out "evil" is impractical most of the time. Should it never be attempted? Of course there are cases where we should attempt to do so, understanding that one will never outlaw evil. Is this one of those cases, generally speaking, we disagree.

I know people who have had abortions that regret it and do live with the trauma of what they have done. I know people who have no problem with it. You might try second guessing that deep inside they are seething with guilt but that's exactly what it would be, second guessing, just as I might second guess that those who are torturing themselves over the decision would probably have tortured themselves over some other decision if not that one.

Margaret Sanger herself said that abortion, at best, was a very bad form of birth control. (Paraphrased, of course.) But the question really comes down to an individual's choice about what is happening inside their body vs. the state's right to order an individual to give birth or abort. I choose to encourage giving birth through reasonable regulations, but otherwise keep the state out of the decision making process. If I were "pro-death" I wouldn't even bother making the distinction.

It is, simply put, not a black and white issue no matter how hard either side tries to make it into one. Most issues aren't.