126,000 babies died today.

[Gentoo]

The pro-choice movement isn't trying to reduce abortions. That is a PR campaign they've cooked up because they are trying to appeal to religious people. The goal of the pro-choice movement is easy, open and unrestricted access to abortions for anyone at anytime in anyway.

Gee, and here I thought I was fighting for women's rights...

 

[jonny]

Gee, and here I thought I was fighting for women's rights...

They are fighting for woman's rights - to have easy, open and unrestricted access to abortions for anyone at anytime in anyway.

 

[McBell]

Gee, and here I thought I was fighting for women's rights...

Don't you just love it when someone else tries to dictate to you what you believe and feel and think?

 

[Gentoo]

You are fighting for woman's rights - to have easy, open and unrestricted access to abortions for anyone at anytime in anyway.

That's quite the assumption you have going on there...

Again, here I thought I was fighting for women's rights to protect themselves from other people forcing them to push out babies.

 

[Gentoo]

Don't you just love it when someone else tries to dictate to you what you believe and feel and think?

*Sigh...

 

[mostly harmless]

That's quite the assumption you have going on there...

Again, here I thought I was fighting for women's rights to protect themselves from other people forcing them to push out babies.

Funny, too, a lot of what I hear from the pro-choice people is abnout properly educating kids and adults in safe sex and such to help reduce the need for abortions....

NO ONE has any right to tell a woman what to do with her body. I don't care what some one else's religious beliefs are, they have no right to inflict them upon another person...and most of the anti-abortion arguments are religious..

Thanks, but, no thanks...I have MY OWN religious beliefs and would like the rights to my own body thankyouverymuch...

Such a personal choice is between the woman, the S.O. in her life and her God(ess)(s)...NOT between her and eveyone else in the world!

 

[McBell]

Society has already got a built in system for taking care of children after they are born. It isn't preschool. It's called the family. The father goes to work and works his *** off to support the family. The mother stays home, works just as hard, and takes care of the children. If a family's situation is less than perfect, accomodations are made that are in the best interest of the children.

The problem isn't that society doesn't care about children. The problem is that parents are selfish with their time and have been brainwashed into believing that taking care of children is a waste of their time. The world revolves around the dollar and getting ahead of the Joneses. We are constantly comparing what we have to what others have and want MORE, MORE and MORE!

The answer to this problem isn't to abort the babies. The answer is for society to again respect the sacred role that mothers and fathers play in the life of a child, for people to quit fighting with each other and start trying to understand and love each other, and for society to put children at its center instead of money and greed. I more than willing for the government to pick up the slack where there are indeficiencies, but I think that Americans need to change their attitudes on this subject big time.

Cop out.
You do not see any where near the same hoo haa over divorce as you do for abortion.
The fact is that your 'built in system' has been broken for some time.

 

[jonny]

That's quite the assumption you have going on there...

Again, here I thought I was fighting for women's rights to protect themselves from other people forcing them to push out babies.

Which is exactly why I am not 100% opposed to abortion in the case of rape (I tend to be in favor of the morning after pill in these cases, when possible). The woman did not choose to have sex and her rights were infringed upon. As soon as she does have sex and becomes pregnant, she's exercised her right to "get it on" and now we've got to consider the rights of another individual. I'll admit I'm not certain on the exact moment that the "cancer" (to use the words of our pro-choice friends) becomes human, but I know it's before it pokes its head out into the world and I'm also certain that we are infringing on its right to live with our current abortion laws.

What you're advocating is abortion as birth control. I am 100% against this attitude. If you don't want babies, don't have sex or get your tubes tied. If you want to have sex, be prepared for the consequences.

 

[jonny]

Cop out.
You do not see any where near the same hoo haa over divorce as you do for abortion.
The fact is that your 'built in system' has been broken for some time.

The system isn't broken unless an individual wants it to be. It works & you do see the same hoo haa over divorce as you do for abortion if you talk to people who really care about what is happening with our families and realize that abortion is an outcome of the destruction of the family.

From the April 2007 General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Divorce by Elder Dallin H. Oaks (or watch it if you don't want to read it).

 

[Gentoo]

What you're advocating is abortion as birth control. I am 100% against this attitude.

I'm not, at all. I find it very irresponsible that some people do this. What I'm advocating is the right to do with my body as I see fit. If I practice safer sex and it fails (as it's almost bound to, since most contraceptives are not 100% effective) the thought of being forced to carry to term frightens me to my very core. I'm trying to avoid this as much as possible. Abortion may not be the right answer, but it's still AN answer, and that's what I want to keep: the option, whether or not I choose to use it.

 

[nutshell]

I'm not, at all. I find it very irresponsible that some people do this. What I'm advocating is the right to do with my body as I see fit. If I practice safer sex and it fails (as it's almost bound to, since most contraceptives are not 100% effective) the thought of being forced to carry to term frightens me to my very core. I'm trying to avoid this as much as possible. Abortion may not be the right answer, but it's still AN answer, and that's what I want to keep: the option, whether or not I choose to use it.

How do you practice "safer sex"?

 

[jonny]

I'm not, at all. I find it very irresponsible that some people do this. What I'm advocating is the right to do with my body as I see fit. If I practice safer sex and it fails (as it's almost bound to, since most contraceptives are not 100% effective) the thought of being forced to carry to term frightens me to my very core. I'm trying to avoid this as much as possible. Abortion may not be the right answer, but it's still AN answer, and that's what I want to keep: the option, whether or not I choose to use it.

How is that not birth control? Even if it is back-up to your planned birth control, it is still serving the same purpose. If you don't want children, why not get your tubes tied or have your husband/boyfriend get his tied off?

 

[nutshell]

How is that not birth control? Even if it is back-up to your planned birth control, it is still serving the same purpose. If you don't want children, why not get your tubes tied or have your husband/boyfriend get his tied off?

I was a pretty good Boy Scout. I think I could tie some decent knots.

 

[McBell]

The system isn't broken unless an individual wants it to be. It works & you do see the same hoo haa over divorce as you do for abortion if you talk to people who really care about what is happening with our families and realize that abortion is an outcome of the destruction of the family.

From the April 2007 General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Divorce by Elder Dallin H. Oaks (or watch it if you don't want to read it).

please stop trying to insult my intelligence.
The system is clearly broken.
the divorce rate is a clear indication, as is the number of children born out of wedlock, as is number of affairs.

"ignoring the five hundred pound gorilla in the corner does not mean it isn't there."
​

Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to US events knows that there is no where near the hoo haa over divorce, adultery, wedlock, etc combined as there is for abortion.
Seems to me that right-to-lifers are concentrating on a symptom and ignoring the causes of said symptom.

 

[McBell]

How do you practice "safer sex"?

by not having sex while skydiving?

 

[jonny]

please stop trying to insult my intelligence.
The system is clearly broken.



the divorce rate is a clear indication, as is the number of children born out of wedlock, as is number of affairs.

"ignoring the five hundred pound gorilla in the corner does not mean it isn't there."​

Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to US events knows that there is no where near the hoo haa over divorce, adultery, wedlock, etc combined as there is for abortion.
Seems to me that right-to-lifers are concentrating on a symptom and ignoring the causes of said symptom.

The system isn't broken because individuals have 100% control over their lives. The system will work if the individuals (both of them) want it to. It has to be evaluated on a home-by-home basis. It worked in my home, and it can work in anyone's home if people are willing to do the work.

For the most part (there are always exceptions), the cause of the high divorce rate and abortion is one and the same - selfishness.

 

[nutshell]

please stop trying to insult my intelligence.
The system is clearly broken.

the divorce rate is a clear indication, as is the number of children born out of wedlock, as is number of affairs.

"ignoring the five hundred pound gorilla in the corner does not mean it isn't there."​

Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to US events knows that there is no where near the hoo haa over divorce, adultery, wedlock, etc combined as there is for abortion.
Seems to me that right-to-lifers are concentrating on a symptom and ignoring the causes of said symptom.

Aren't you stereotyping a bit here?

 

[McBell]

Aren't you stereotyping a bit here?

How so?

 

[nutshell]

How so?

By assuming we aren't concerned and speak out against divorce?

 

[McBell]

By assuming we aren't concerned and speak out against divorce?

I never once said, nor even hinted that right-to-lifers do not speak out about divorce, adultry, etc.
I never once stated nor even hinted that theyare not concerned about it either.

I did say that they make a much bigger fuss over abortion than all those things combined.
Which is true.
So how is that 'stereotyping?'