| Advertise Here » Browse ad-free by donating | |
|
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
 |
| | Thread Tools |
Jan 17, 2005, 02:18 pm
| #121 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED: Repeated insults Posts: 4,828 | Quote:
Starboy | |
|  |
|
Jan 21, 2005, 12:01 pm
| #122 (permalink) (top) |
| Lazy Sniper Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 513 | If you believe that abortion is wrong than what do you do that is constructive to preventing the need for abortion? We know that legislation does not reduce the frequency of abortion. We also know that making people pay for abortions does not reduce the frequence of abortions. But the majority of people here are aruging for legislation against abortion on a moral ground. We can assume that a woman who has an abortion, never wanted to make the choice in the first place. We know that people who are pro-life would be more comfortable if there were no abortions. So lets talk about why there are abortions and how you can help to reduce the amount of abourtions. The majority of abortions are a direct result of teen pregnancy, usually among women who are of lower income http://www.agi-usa.org/presentations/abort_slides.pdf (Alan Guttmacher Institute) 54% of women (in the 2002 report) 53% of women (in the 2004 report) used birth control and still got pregnant. The reason the statistic is so high is the lack of knowledge on proper birth control methods among teenagers in the United States. 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 you do nothing about a problem except condem it from a soap box (or your computer chair) you are part of the problem. |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 11:53 am
| #123 (permalink) (top) |
| BANNED  Posts: 1,267 | Pro Life .I am pro life due in most part to my faith. I have no choice in this matter. However, allow me to sit on the fence when the mothers life is endangered (by he pregnancy) or in cases of rape. I would hope that, in the near future, if the pregnancy is unwanted, the fetus or the zygote could be raised in vitro and adopted. This would nullify the pure pro death soapboxers, and give a wonderful outcome to an otherwise horrible situation. Last edited by MerlinsByte; Jan 23, 2005 at 11:57 am. Reason: tupid miss tat takes |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 12:06 pm
| #125 (permalink) (top) | |
| Skeptical Patriot  Posts: 7,832 | Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 12:25 pm
| #127 (permalink) (top) |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,832 | Which is why I asked about your "modified" fence-sitter stance on certain parts of the issue. Does your faith not condemn ALL abotions across the board? And if it does, how does one decide to support only parts of it without in effect breaking your "agreement" with whatever faith it is you chose? |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 03:57 pm
| #128 (permalink) (top) |
| Lazy Sniper Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 513 | MB - please don't take this as an attack but rather a curiosity. I am always happy to discuss with someone who does not see the world as black and white, and I rather tend to think the fence sitters often have a fair perspective on the world. I've thought about religion for many years, which one, how could I accept etc... etc... the problem has always come down to exactly what you expressed. While I do not expect faith to be easy, I do expect it to possess a feeling of spirtuality and wholism to it. And when I find that there are (I guess the best way to express it is:) absolutes, then I find a faith lacking compassion, because I am largely unable to see the world as black and white either or. So maybe you have or haven't reconsiled your views on absolutes and your faith in this case, but in any case it would be interesting to know how you come to your conclusions and still feel faithful. |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 04:17 pm
| #130 (permalink) (top) | |
| Molten Ash Location: uk Posts: 128 | Quote:
 Live and love for today! There may be no tomorrow! | |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 04:47 pm
| #134 (permalink) (top) | |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,832 | Quote:
People THINK it is their business because their beliefs allow them to think they have control over people's freedoms. | |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 04:51 pm
| #135 (permalink) (top) | |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,832 | Quote:
I know there are exceptions to that 6 month cutoff line, but I don't allow for that. | |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 05:06 pm
| #136 (permalink) (top) |
| BANNED: Repeated insults Posts: 4,828 | In earlier cultures where infant mortality was high the child didn't become human until several years after its birth. With the advent of modern medicine the child mortality rate has plummeted and it is very likely that if you have one child then that child will live a long life. I would also contend that this same medical knowledge is creating more difficulties since eventually it will be possible to clone humans with a high probability that this cloned life could life into old age. So the idea of "human life" is becoming a very difficult one to deal with since the cell nuclei that exist in your feces which are flushed down the toilet could be a potential human life. No one seems to get bent out of shape over that? We are rapidly reaching a point in our history where talking about the potential of human life is just ridiculous. It will be more like "What particular human life did you have in mind?" We will be designing our children. Our concept of life will have to change. And not only because we would have taken much of the chance out of it but because of the shear numbers of people that will be on the planet. No one seems to be concerned about the ramifications of holding every nucleus to be sacred. To hold potential life to be more important that actual life. All I can say is that we have it too good and have no problems with letting all comers join the party. At some point people are going to realize that there are just too many people at the party. But I am afraid they will not figure it out until after they trash the place. Starboy |
|
| |
|
Jan 23, 2005, 06:57 pm
| #137 (permalink) (top) |
| Alive  Location: Sandusky, Ohio Posts: 102 | There's also Pro-Death, I kid you not. Simply people sick of seeing more people and/or china's population limit. "Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it." |
|
| |
|
Feb 12, 2005, 11:48 am
| #138 (permalink) (top) |
| Sedimentary Rock  Posts: 1 | Before reading everyone's response, I will respond in terms of my own thoughts. The abortion debate will forever exist as a polemical, dismal stew that mixes politics, religion, and culture. I certainly see what many pro-life folks are saying: abortion is murder if one construes that life begins immediately at conception. We enter into a slippery slope of what life truly is and what we mean by life. Like the word "education" there is little concurrence on how we define "life" and more specifically "the beginning of life". Indeed, it is complicated. Assuming for a moment, though, that we all buy into the "culture of life" we are thrust even further into confusion. Just what in the world does that mean in relation to everything else consisting of 'life'? Certainly, by a culture of life, we mean NO abortion. But, what else SHOULD it mean? - Should it mean a viable social safety net that protects these children once they're born? Anti-abortionists willa rgue that this a spurious argument. But let's assume that we all buy into the concept of 'a culture of life' mentality. I want to know what we do POST birth to ensure a meaningful, quality of life. - Should a culture of life entail a rehabilitative prison system that ensures our prisoners are not penalized their entire lives, but honed to be better, contributing members of society? - Should a culture of life entail federally-funded schools that mandates a quality, well-rounded education for ALL children? - Should a culture of life ensure health insurance for ALL children? The list could go on and on. My reason for incorporating this is that so many fail to address the real structural aspects that exist in society. Who gets penalized most? Not the adults. It's the CHILDREN. By placing our money and efforts where our mouths are, we make meaning of such drivel as opposed to using it as a catch-phrase to further divide people. We need to have discussion on this topic in a way that is indeed meaningful and moves beyond cell clusters and into the realm that encompasses ALL life...but are we really for that approach? I'll leave it there for now. Best to all of you. Neat board! The Mindvillage |
|
| |
