Of course not. And I had my tubes tied at 22 because I am a firm believer that we should not over populate our planet. I chose a responsible way of maintaining my birth control as the medications, etc, have too many side effects. But to answer you, it's not up to anyone but the persons. I have no right to enforce my opinion on anyone, much like the issue of abortion.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Abortion
- Thread starter Mycroft
- Start date
I know and for that, I am eternally grateful but I have learned to never say never.
If you admit that you have no right to impose sterilization on anyone, why are you arguing for imposing sterilization on people?
Marisa
Well-Known Member
If the court changes, this could change. But the court is arguably the most conservative it's ever been, so short of stacking it with Scalia clones, I don't really see it changing.
What does need to be watched are cases like Texas, which shut down access to abortion through "back door" measures and never challenge the legality of abortion itself. If that case makes it through the appeals process then the test of "undue burden" will have been established, and states like Tennessee stand poised with similar legislation should the Texas law withstand challenge.
Marisa
Well-Known Member
Meh, that's a lofty and likely irrational goal. People don't have kids because of an "evolutionary drive". Homo sapien does not "go into heat". I can only speak for myself, but I had a child because I had lot of love to give, and I wanted to share it with someone that was part me and part my husband. But when I was single and not looking to settle down, I would have made a different choice. In fact, there was a time in my life when I would have said I wanted nothing less than marriage and definitely never kids.
The best way to reduce (because elimination will never happen) abortion is to teach kids that sex isn't this horrible thing that studly guys do and good girls don't. It's a completely natural thing, and it's more important to be safe when exploring it than it is to try to achieve some moral standard which defies this very basic part of our nature. Pregnant isn't the worst thing that can happen. We'd be doing our kids a favor by not teaching them abstinence only, and making contraceptives accessible and affordable, if not free.
I wasn't. I was expressing my opinion on the issue. I was not arguing for this as its not my right to do so. I hope you can see the difference.
Agreed. And no offense to anyone living in those areas, but having traveled to and working in those places, I know how....backward?...they are. Conservative is too bland a term for them. Those areas scare me, but I openly admit my geographic bias here.If the court changes, this could change. But the court is arguably the most conservative it's ever been, so short of stacking it with Scalia clones, I don't really see it changing.
What does need to be watched are cases like Texas, which shut down access to abortion through "back door" measures and never challenge the legality of abortion itself. If that case makes it through the appeals process then the test of "undue burden" will have been established, and states like Tennessee stand poised with similar legislation should the Texas law withstand challenge.
"These women should not be allowed to have children" isn't arguing for sterilization?I wasn't. I was expressing my opinion on the issue. I was not arguing for this as its not my right to do so. I hope you can see the difference.
No, it's an opinion. I should, most likely, have made that more clear. I apologize if it was not to you."These women should not be allowed to have children" isn't arguing for sterilization?
I'm not following you at all, but what I'm hearing is that you wouldn't actually sterilize people against their will if you were able to. If so, good.
Marisa
Well-Known Member
I was born in a rural area of Texas but raised in Dallas, and now I live in Tennessee. Texas is turning purple, than goodness, but as with most areas in the south the cities are lightyears more liberal than the rural areas. Same with Tennessee, Nashville and Knoxville are far more liberal than the small town I live in and the rural areas of the state.
Same thing in Illinois, actually, which sounds surprising to a lot of people who see IL as a blue state through and through. It's all Chicago, Peoria, Springfield, and a few cities near the St. Louis, MO metropolitan area. Most other areas of the state are Fifty Shades of Red through and through. I live in a rather bigger town that is semi-liberal, also the county seat, and also closer to St. Louis (which like Kansas City is largely liberal in a very very red state). But all I have to do is drive 15 minutes southwest toward one of the small rural farming communities that is also located close to a military base, and it's christian conservative billboards and creationism and anti-feminism messages blared everywhere.
I remember managing a studio in my semi-liberal hometown. That studio had three different satellite studios in conservative towns that I managed and was the administrator for. One started in a church basement that had a timeline of Earth's history according to the Bible, all complete across the entire wall of the date God created the world, when Adam was formed, when Eve was formed, when the Fall occurred, when the Flood occurred, and when Jesus was born, died, was resurrected, and ascended.
Not a big deal since it was in a church, but kids walked in and out with parents, and overall would casually mention the timeline as a part of their education and family discussions at home.
It's still fascinating to see how political leanings are so wildly different when living in a rural or urban setting.
How so?
BSM1
What? Me worry?
A judge in a particular city I worked in a few years ago did. There was a particular 22 year old woman there that had 6 children by 6 different fathers just to draw the welfare checks and the con commitment benefits. Social Services had her appear in court and the judge told her that if she had one more child out of wedlock she would go to jail for at least a year. She shaped up, but the damage was done.
Why would she have gone to jail? What crime was she accused of?
I mean, it's not welfare fraud if she really does have the kids. Poor life choices normally aren't *illegal*.
IMO, she was misusing the system, which I suspect is what the judge felt as well. This is how I view this as well. She should have been stopped. Its ludicrous to think that people can continue to suck the teat of government when all they want is the money and not the children. If you cannot see the difference, I simply can't imagine why not. As an aside, here in my state there is a bill before our system that would not allow any person receiving food stamps, or whatever they are called these days, from buying junk food. Is that not restricting personal freedom, from your POV? I don't see it as such however, there are those who oppose this plan, naturally. If a person is on food stamps, why shouldn't they buy nutritional foods? If you hadn't noticed, there is a huge obesity problem in this country and it is largely due to fast food and junk food. I hve never been overweight a day in my life and I continue, in my dotage, to eat healthy foods and with the exception of Ben and Jerry's, no junk food or fast food, ever.
Maine is a more independent state but we do have a considerable amount of "red" here as well. Particularly in the far north which is mostly potatoe country and farmers. But again, I have lived literally in most states in this country, at least for 3 months, and most often, longer. I have yet to be in a southeastern state that did not lean to the right as far as possible. Particularly, the Bible belt. The overt degree of racism, bigotry and prejudice there sickens me. I had a patient who was a slave in his young life. He was illiterate and because of that, when he developed buccal cancer and did not want surgery to remove his tongue, the doctors' did it anyway, claiming he was incompetent owing to his illiteracy. He was, of course, Black. And this was less than a decade ago.
I asked what crime she was accused of. Is "misusing the system" a crime where you are? If so, please show me the law.
Of course I wouldn't. An opinion is just that, an opinion. I suppose there are those who work to get their opinions made into law but this is not an area, with a few very rare exceptions, that I feel should be mandated.
IMO, defrauding the government. In my state, no I dont believe we hold to that. I suspect, as I said, that the judge felt as i do, that she was merely having children to get money, which IMO, is morally, ethically wrong as well as just plain stupid.