| This is an archived forum, so it is here for read-only purposes only. We are not accepting new members and members cannot post any longer. Members can, however, access their old private messages. Strawberry Fields was open from 2006 until 2011. There is a Strawberry Fields Beatles Forum on Facebook. If you are registered with Facebook, join us at the group there! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Liberal for Life; The Abortion Discussion Thread | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 10 2006, 09:23 AM (3,017 Views) | |
| McGoo | Jun 14 2006, 10:56 AM Post #101 |
![]()
|
Yip, excellent post. Impossible to argue with that. |
| |
![]() |
|
| SherryO | Jun 14 2006, 02:46 PM Post #102 |
|
Thank-you, Bill! Yes, knowing now what I didn't know then, I would have been more responsible in protecting myself. My Mother didn't tell me anything. It was a taboo subject. I learned about getting my period from a girlfriend. Yes, I was angry at her for not being more open, but then, I realized that it's her generation, & the way they were brought up. Mind you, how many really responsible 17 yr. olds do you know? I wasn't one, & in my ignorance, felt 10 ft. tall, & bullet-proof. Trust me, sitting in my doctors' office, I realized how irresponsible I'd been, & how uneducated. I am glad that I wasn't permanently tied to the young man in question. I found out some very unpleasant things about him, & was glad to see the back of him. Having said that, I am a little sad that I carried that pregnancy longer than any other since. After many years, my wonderful spouse, & I have decided that it's now too late, & we aren't sure that we want to adopt now, either. Again, thinking that I don't want to be on retirement's doorstep, & pushing a child out my door to face the world. Selfish, or smart? I'm not sure. I know that we've all had difficulties in our lives, & we've seemed to meet them, & get beyond them, but as you can see, the pain that some decisions create never goes away. Sometimes, that pain is still being felt generations down the line. I also feel that that is also a crime, but we will all know our limitations when our time to meet our Maker comes. |
![]() |
|
| SherryO | Jun 14 2006, 02:52 PM Post #103 |
|
My thanks also to Mozart! Great post, & thanks for telling us your story!
|
![]() |
|
| theonlyfab4fan | Jun 14 2006, 05:58 PM Post #104 |
|
I AM THE BIGGEST JOHN FAN!
|
Tony, I found your post concerning my story to be a bit dismissive and patronizing, but I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt that that was not your intent. As for therapy I have had many many years of therapy and while I have learned to deal and cope with the things that were not my fault and beyond my control the scars and pain will always be there. I don`t know what your life circumstances have been or how old you are or whether you have a family of your own or not, but the things that happen in childhood are a major part of forming who and what you are. Physical pain leaves you , emotional pain does not. You deal with it and put it away, but there are times when it comes back to haunt you and you feel it as intensely as you did the first time it occurred. Your leg may hurt like hell if you break it but when it heals the pain is a memory but not something that you will physically feel ever again. Emotional pain is very different and is felt time and time again. |
|
You say you want to save humanity but it`s people that you just can`t stand John came to me in a dream and this is what he said. "I had a vision of a man on a flaming pie, and he told me that Betsy with a B not Lisa with a L is the biggest fan of mine". John trumps 'the boss' ! I WAS ROBBED BY THAT DEVIL WOMAN | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Jun 14 2006, 11:40 PM Post #105 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
I, too, was a victim of my parents emotional abuse. I don't even think it was intentional. I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars on therapy and medication for my depression. I have faced suicide in the face and chosen not to do it. I will not keep a gun in my home because I do not trust myself not to use it on myself. Those scars from childhood are the root of my depression, which first cropped up in 5th grade. And, Mozart, that was one great post. |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Jun 15 2006, 07:05 AM Post #106 |
|
Great posts from everyone! Thank you all.
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Jun 15 2006, 08:53 AM Post #107 |
|
I realize that this thread is about abortion, but I cannot ignore the above post. We are taught that some of the leading risk factors in suicide attempts are previous attempts, history of mental disorders (especially depression), and family history of child maltreatment. So you’ll have to forgive me if I am reading too much into this. The number one cause of suicide is depression. Over 80% of Americans who suffer from depression can be effectively treated. Only 30% actually seek help. Of those 30%, about 15% are accurately diagnosed. Almost 83% of gun related deaths in private homes are the result of suicide. Almost 60% of all suicides are caused by guns. Although men are four times more likely to die from suicide, women report attempts three times more often than men. Suicide rates are higher in Western states than in Eastern states or the Midwest. All of these statistics are from the Center for Disease Control, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. The United States has many phone centers staffed with trained counselors 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including 1-800-SUICIDE (1-800-784-2433) and 1-800-273-TALK (1-800-273-8255), 1-800-799-4TTY (1-800-799-4889) for the hearing impaired. Every state in the United States has its own additional lines. You do not have to have a gun to your head or pills on the nightstand to call. Many callers are simply people who want to talk about their problems and hopefully get a little of that weight lifted from their shoulders. Prevention is always preferable to intervention. Linda, unless I am mistaken about your state, these might be some good numbers in your area: Suicide Prevention Hotline (719) 596-5433 (719) 544-1133 (719) 564-6642 Suicide Prevention Partnership (719) 596-2575 (719) 573-7447 Suicide & Crisis-A Hotline (303) 860-1200 The Suicide & Crisis Control (303) 756-8485 Suicide Education & Support Services (970) 506-2737 Jefferson Center for Mental Health - North Jeffco (303) 425-0300 Comitis Crisis Center (303) 343-9890 Broomfield Mental Health Center - Emergency Psychiatric Service (303) 447-1665 Mental Health Center of Boulder County Inc. (303) 447-1665 Mental Health Center of Broomfield County (303) 447-1665 Community Social Human Services Light for Life Foundation International (303) 429-3530 Yellow Ribbon Suicide Prevention Program (303) 429-3530 North Range Behavioral Health (303) 857-2723 (970) 347-2120 Pikes Peak Mental Health - Crisis Center (719) 635-7000 Suicide Resource Center of Larimer County (970) 635-9301 Steamboat Mental Health Center (970) 870-1244 |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Jun 15 2006, 09:01 AM Post #108 |
|
As for abortion, I posted on a different message board that I am on neither side of this issue and I was told that I need to make up my mind and that I must indeed be stupid to not have choosen a side. Here, people are thanking me and complimenting me when I basically said the same thing. Not that I post to get compliments, but it is better than being told I am stupid. I am not trying to make this a competition between boards, but from what I am reading here, this board is far friendlier than that board (whichever one it may be). I, for one, would rather discuss the divisive issues with friendly people. |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 15 2006, 01:19 PM Post #109 |
|
Deleted User
|
Regardless if people are for it or against it this board is full of great people who can discuss a serious subject without being reprehanded by big brother. I thank everyone who has participated in this debate for posting in freedom and with higher standards. |
|
|
| maccascruff | Jun 15 2006, 02:56 PM Post #110 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
Mozart, I know I veered off topic. I'm in very good hands now and I do not feel suicidal. Haven't for many years now, but I thank you for your assistance. You've got my county listed and I wouldn't hesitate to call them. Last time I made a crisis call was June 11, 2001. Want to take a guess as to what happened that day? And, yes, Tony, we have discussed this topic without fighting and without over moderation. |
![]() |
|
| maccagirl1428 | Jun 16 2006, 11:53 PM Post #111 |
|
Unregistered
|
Thats great your neutrall~ Alot are on this issuse
|
|
|
| beatlechick | Jun 17 2006, 04:12 PM Post #112 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
Amen, to that my brotha!! Amen!! |
| |
![]() |
|
| maccagirl1428 | Jun 18 2006, 12:35 AM Post #113 |
|
Unregistered
|
I agree~if this was at the macca board it would have turnned to WW3!!! Thats what i about this board people are mature enough to discuss issuses like this~
|
|
|
| maccascruff | Jun 18 2006, 02:25 AM Post #114 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
Yes, it would be turning into WWIII if it was elsewhere. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 19 2007, 03:14 AM Post #115 |
|
Deleted User
|
All I can say is it is about time!!! Justices uphold abortion procedure ban By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 53 minutes ago The Supreme Court's new conservative majority gave anti-abortion forces a landmark victory Wednesday in a 5-4 decision that bans a controversial abortion procedure nationwide and sets the stage for further restrictions. It was a long-awaited and resounding win that abortion opponents had hoped to gain from a court pushed to the right by President Bush's appointees. For the first time since the court established a woman's right to an abortion in 1973, the justices said the Constitution permits a nationwide prohibition on a specific abortion method. The court's liberal justices, in dissent, said the ruling chipped away at abortion rights. The 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion. Siding with Kennedy were Bush's two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, along with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. The law is constitutional despite not containing an exception that would allow the procedure if needed to preserve a woman's health, Kennedy said. "The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice," he wrote in the majority opinion. Doctors who violate the law could face up to two years in federal prison. The law has not taken effect, pending the outcome of the legal fight. In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the ruling "cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court." Dr. LeRoy Carhart, the Bellevue, Neb., doctor who challenged the federal ban, said, "I am afraid the Supreme Court has just opened the door to an all-out assault on" the 1973 ruling in Roe. Wade. The administration defended the law as drawing a bright line between abortion and infanticide. Reacting to the ruling, Bush said that it affirms the progress his administration has made to defend the "sanctity of life." "I am pleased that the Supreme Court has upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial birth abortion," he said. "Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America." It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how — not whether — to perform an abortion. Abortion rights groups as well as the leading association of obstetricians and gynecologists have said the procedure sometimes is the safest for a woman. They also said that such a ruling could threaten most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy, although Kennedy said alternate, more widely used procedures remain legal. The outcome is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions. "I applaud the Court for its ruling today, and my hope is that it sets the stage for further progress in the fight to ensure our nation's laws respect the sanctity of unborn human life," said Rep. John Boehner (news, bio, voting record) of Ohio, Republican leader in the House of Representatives. Jay Sekulow, a prominent abortion opponent who is chief counsel for the conservative American Center for Law and Justice, said, "This is the most monumental win on the abortion issue that we have ever had." Said Eve Gartner of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America: "This ruling flies in the face of 30 years of Supreme Court precedent and the best interest of women's health and safety. ... This ruling tells women that politicians, not doctors, will make their health care decisions for them." She had argued that point before the justices. More than 1 million abortions are performed in the United States each year, according to recent statistics. Nearly 90 percent of those occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, and are not affected by Wednesday's ruling. The Guttmacher Institute says 2,200 dilation and extraction procedures — the medical term most often used by doctors — were performed in 2000, the latest figures available. Six federal courts have said the law that was in focus Wednesday is an impermissible restriction on a woman's constitutional right to an abortion. "Today's decision is alarming," Ginsburg wrote in dissent for the court's liberal bloc. She said the ruling "refuses to take ... seriously" previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion. Ginsburg said the latest decision "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists." Ginsburg said that for the first time since the court established a woman's right to an abortion in 1973, "the court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman's health." She was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens. The procedure at issue involves partially removing the fetus intact from a woman's uterus, then crushing or cutting its skull to complete the abortion. Abortion opponents say the law will not reduce the number of abortions performed because an alternate method — dismembering the fetus in the uterus — is available and, indeed, much more common. In 2000, the court with key differences in its membership struck down a state ban on partial-birth abortions in a challenge also brought by Carhart. Writing for a 5-4 majority at that time, Justice Breyer said the law imposed an undue burden on a woman's right to make an abortion decision in part because it lacked a health exception. The Republican-controlled Congress responded in 2003 by passing a federal law that asserted the procedure is gruesome, inhumane and never medically necessary to preserve a woman's health. That statement was designed to overcome the health exception to restrictions that the court has demanded in abortion cases. But federal judges in California, Nebraska and New York said the law was unconstitutional, and three appellate courts agreed. The Supreme Court accepted appeals from California and Nebraska, setting up Wednesday's ruling. Kennedy's dissent in 2000 was so strong that few court watchers expected him to take a different view of the current case. Kennedy acknowledged continuing disagreement about the procedure within the medical community. In the past, courts have cited that uncertainty as a reason to allow the disputed procedure. "The medical uncertainty over whether the Act's prohibition creates significant health risks provides a sufficient basis to conclude ... that the Act does not impose an undue burden," Kennedy said Wednesday. While the court upheld the law against a broad attack on its constitutionality, Kennedy said the court could entertain a challenge in which a doctor found it necessary to perform the banned procedure on a patient suffering certain medical complications. The law allows the procedure to be performed when a woman's life is in jeopardy. The cases are Gonzales v. Carhart, 05-380, and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood, 05-1382. Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten |
|
|
| Mista_Jim | Apr 19 2007, 03:22 AM Post #116 |
|
Well, this is going to get some posts. Nothing like trowing gas on the fire,Tony. lol |
![]() |
|
| vidgamerjon | Apr 19 2007, 03:44 AM Post #117 |
![]()
|
Bout freakin time.
|
|
The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today Is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips Then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.--dcTalk | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Apr 19 2007, 04:19 AM Post #118 |
|
Which is it? Will doctors go to prison for saving their patient's lives or not? |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 19 2007, 10:46 AM Post #119 |
|
Deleted User
|
Next the full overturning of Roe v. Wade! Lissa you know if they left in a medical reason to kill the unborn this way the baby butchers would just say it is a medical reason that they have to do it. Those Doctors are just going to have to prove it from now on. Abortion = Murder |
|
|
| FamousGroupie | Apr 19 2007, 10:57 AM Post #120 |
![]()
Obsessive Saddo Fangirl
|
Hoo boy, Tony, talk about opening a fresh can of worms. I'm going to refrain from posting my thoughts here, as they're liable to get nasty. |
| I don't believe in Bondi. I don't believe in rugby league. I believe in Yoko, John Lennon, the Lost Weekend and me. | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 19 2007, 11:04 AM Post #121 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
As it is a continuation of the same topic, I have merged this thread with the original 'Liberal for Life' topic started by Tony last year. All I can say about the legislation that if it stops abortions after 12 weeks, then I'm in favour of it. I am very uncomfortable about abortions being performed at any later stage. If, however, it makes doctors who perform such operations in order to save the mother's life open to prosecution and we will therefore see mothers dying because doctors don't want to go to jail, then I am against it. I would thoroughly condemn a full overturning of Roe vs. Wade and hope that America would never take such a backward step. I do not believe that abortion = murder. I also do not believe that a government has a right to tell people what they must adhere to, ethically, on the subject of abortion. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 19 2007, 01:03 PM Post #122 |
|
Deleted User
|
Neglecting to save the woman's life=murder. Lissa was just asking about the contradiction in the article. So the procedure is not completely banned? |
|
|
| Bill | Apr 19 2007, 01:23 PM Post #123 |
|
Whoa Tony, I think you're reading something that isn't there. Generally I agree with your position, but I do not agree with not leaving open the option to do it in order to save the mother's life and I don't see where it would be allowed if doctors could prove it. Every law and moral code in the world allows for killing in self defence. This would take away that right and that disturbs me. Beyond that, I welcome the ruling. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| BlueMolly2009 | Apr 19 2007, 04:37 PM Post #124 |
|
LOLcat Freak
|
I need to edit what I wrote, because I sounded like a idiot in my response. I personally wouldn't have an abortion unless it was a major health issue or the baby couldn't live outside of the womb. I do think women should have a ChOICE in the matter. With late term abortions I think unless it's going to be a major health issue with the mother or the baby won't live outside the womb I think it should be limited to those types of procedures. I however don't like the idea that the government wants to tell women what to do with their body. It's the woman's and the doctor's choices on late term abortion. If the doctor thinks the pregnancy is going to jeopardize the woman's life then they should be allowed to do so. I know that there is a stipulation in the law, but it's going to scare off more women who will probably die because they think they can't have the abortion. |
|
Molly Myspace My Twitter My FriendFeed My Facebook ![]() Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks) | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 19 2007, 10:39 PM Post #125 |
|
Deleted User
|
Andy I would have posted to this thread but I forgot it was here. I must clarify the baby butchers remark, that is aimed at the doctors and clinics that have turned abortion into a money making industry. I should have worded that better and I am sorry if it offended anyone. That being said I do believe that this is a sign of things to come. We as a society seem to use and dispose of everything, including unborn children. That is what a fetus is no question about it. When Roe v Wade was first argued medical opinion was that a baby could not live on its own as we now know they can. According to wikpedia a partial birth abortion is: Intact dilation and extraction (IDX or Intact D&X), is a surgical abortion wherein an intact fetus is removed from the womb via the cervix. The procedure may also be used to remove a deceased fetus (due to a miscarriage) that is developed enough to require dilation of the cervix for its extraction. Though the procedure has a low rate of usage, representing 0.17% of all abortions in the US in 2000 according to voluntary responses to an Alan Guttmacher Institute survey,[1] it has developed into a focal point of the abortion debate. Partial-birth abortion (PBA) is a non-medical term used to refer to some late-term abortion procedures.[2] In the United States, "Partial-birth abortion" has been legally defined by federal statute as any abortion in which the fetus is extracted "past the navel [of the fetus] . . . outside the body of the mother," or "in the case of head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother," before the fetus is terminated. In 2003, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was signed into law, and on Wednesday April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the law 5 to 4 as constitutional in Gonzales v. Carhart. The IDX procedure may be used to remove a deceased fetus (due to a miscarriage) that is developed enough to require dilation of the cervix for its extraction, but removing a dead fetus does not meet the federal law definition of "partial-birth abortion," which specifies that partial live delivery must precede "the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus."[3] |
|
|
| maccascruff | Apr 20 2007, 02:44 AM Post #126 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
I don't think abortion after 12 weeks should be allowed unless the mother's health is endangered. However, before that time, I will always believe in a woman's right to choose. We feminists from the 60's and 70's worked very hard to get Roe v. Wade and will work hard to keep Bush and his cronies from overturning it. Abortion does not equal murder. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 12:31 PM Post #127 |
|
Deleted User
|
That is a good response, Molly.
|
|
|
| ~LovelyRita~ | Apr 20 2007, 02:13 PM Post #128 |
|
Abortion is an issue which I haven't completely made my mind up on yet. One of my uber liberal friends really does see it as basically a form of birth control, she already has the numbers of abortion clinics in her phone book in case of emergency. That, I believe, is a very wrong attitude to have. I think that the option for abortion should be available, but that the rules should be strengthened a little. Limits on how many weeks into the pregnancy and for what reason the mother wants the abortion should be enacted. I'm kinda leaning towards thinking that abortion should only be legal if the mother's life is endangered or if the child would have extreme disabilities if given birth to. As for the new ban on partial birth abortion, I think it's kind of silly. Why just punish the doctors when it is just as much the fault of the mother. As Bill Clinton said on Larry King last night, "If the doctor is the murderer than the mother is the number one accomplice". Also, if the only way to save a mother's life would be through this form of abortion, banning it seems completely unfair. Imagine being a mother faced with death and your only option to survive being a back ally abortion or the possibility causing a doctor to be put in jail. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 02:23 PM Post #129 |
|
Deleted User
|
People are going to find a way of doing it anyway, so why make it illegal?
But seriously, I think it's an issue which is hard to feel too strongly about either way. I am prochoice with some serious reservations. |
|
|
| Rose | Apr 20 2007, 02:35 PM Post #130 |
![]()
Well, here's another clue for you all, the Walrus was Paul...
|
I'm not sure exactly where I stand on this issue. Well, maybe I am but I never really examined my true feelings before. As a mother of 2 children...I know that personally, I could never have an abortion. But that is MY CHOICE. That being said...I don't feel the government or anyone else should have a say in what a woman does with her body. That is between her and her doctor. I think it is scary that people want to control other peoples lives...and their bodies. I guess that makes me pro-choice? |
![]() "I'm in awe of McCartney. He's about the only one that I am in awe of. He can do it all. And he's never let up... He's just so damn effortless." ~ Bob Dylan | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 20 2007, 02:59 PM Post #131 |
|
Well, at the risk of fanning some flames here, I'd like to remind people that once a woman is pregnant, it's not longer just about her body but someone else's as well. So let's get away from this mantra about government telling a woman what she can do with her body. The problem should be stopped before it starts. Education and contraception! In fact, if you want to talk about government interfering with what a woman does with her own body, then look no further than abstinance-only sex education..... and I use that last word in its loosest possible meaning. I fully support the right to choose. If you choose not to give birth, then choose not to get pregnant. There are numerous ways of achieving this. And please don't give me the tired old comeback of "what about rape/incest?" The main cause of the overwhelming majority of abortions can be summed up in one word. And that word is "oops." Far too many people regard abortion as just an after-the-fact means of contraception - as Grace's post disturbingly shows. If you want to control what happens to your body, then control it. Take control. Self control. If two sexually active adults can't find a way between them to avoid an unwanted pregnancy then they are the ones who ought to be aborted. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:10 PM Post #132 |
|
Deleted User
|
Kinda like what some people say about guns. Sorry couldn't resist Fiona. :lol: |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:15 PM Post #133 |
|
Deleted User
|
What do you think I am, a moron? That is exactly what I was alluding to by making that remark! :lol: |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:18 PM Post #134 |
|
Deleted User
|
So may I ask a question to those who support abortion. If a baby can stay alive with medical intervention outside the womb do you still support the right of the mother to have an abortion? 30 years ago medical opinion said a baby couldn't survive outside the womb until much later. Now thats changed, where once you may have supported late term abortions has that changed? |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:20 PM Post #135 |
|
Deleted User
|
I wouldn't have said that, maybe allude to it though. you know i'm kidding with you I hope. |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:39 PM Post #136 |
|
Deleted User
|
No, my world is now crumbling. You were my rock, Tony. Why, damnit, WHY!?! |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 03:43 PM Post #137 |
|
Deleted User
|
I'm your rock? Sweeeeeet. Andy ain't gonna like that. (edited by me not for Icarus, just for me) |
|
|
| BlueMolly2009 | Apr 20 2007, 04:36 PM Post #138 |
|
LOLcat Freak
|
May I pose a question to those against abortion, and for those who think once a woman gets preganant they shouldn't just think about their bodies? Would you let the woman die just to save the baby if the woman's life was in jeopardy? That's what it sounds to me you're saying. |
|
Molly Myspace My Twitter My FriendFeed My Facebook ![]() Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks) | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 20 2007, 04:43 PM Post #139 |
|
No, of course I wouldn't and I have said so on many occasions. As I said a little bit up the page, every law and moral code in the world allows for killing in self defence. I have no problem with aborting a feotus at any stage of its development if it would seriously endanger the mother's life to deliver it. And that's the only problem I have with the recent ruling. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 05:31 PM Post #140 |
|
Deleted User
|
Molly you said it, their bodies, not just the mothers. I do believe that if the mothers life is in danger then yes an abortion should (if wanted) be performed. However not being able to go to school right away or not wanting a kid right now is not a danger to ones life. |
|
|
| Queenbee | Apr 20 2007, 06:02 PM Post #141 |
|
Moderator
|
Kind of like POT, couldn't resist too! We're just teasing you Fiona
in a loving way.
|
|
PEACE and love to my friends, Judy When the Power of Love over comes the Love of Power, the world will know Peace. -Sri Chinmnoy Ghose Till me meet again ~ I Love you Mike! You were one of a kind. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 06:26 PM Post #142 |
|
Deleted User
|
*sigh* No one gets me...
I appreciate that, Judy, I can take a joke.
I just don't think people are understanding that's exactly why I said it! (That's not really my argument for why pot should be legal anyway. )
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 20 2007, 07:07 PM Post #143 |
|
Deleted User
|
I got that you were throwing it back to the gun debate, had toyed with the idea of adding the anti gun trap remark to it. Just having fun with ya. Now I am all for making marijuana legal, at the very least for medicinal reasons. |
|
|
| BlueMolly2009 | Apr 20 2007, 07:54 PM Post #144 |
|
LOLcat Freak
|
I do agree with you on women having abortions because they don't want to have the child. Using abortion as birth control isn't the way to go. This isn't saying I am anti-abortion, but I think women need to think before having sex of what is going to happen. |
|
Molly Myspace My Twitter My FriendFeed My Facebook ![]() Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks) | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 21 2007, 04:05 AM Post #145 |
|
I'd like to turn Molly's question around and ask those who say a woman shouldn't be told what to do with "her" body, what they would say to a woman who drinks and smokes while pregnant. Should you mind your own business because she is taking control of her own body - or should the baby be considered as well?
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| beatlechick | Apr 21 2007, 08:21 AM Post #146 |
|
In Paul's Arms!
|
First of all I have to ask you a question. What quality of life will that newborn have? Will it be sickly? Will it be mentally retarded? Will there be deformities that can not be corrected? or per chance will it be able to lead a normal life? I have known babies born at 6 months gestation and be born at just about 1 lb. They lived but had a lot of problems. Only thing was, the babies were planned and wanted. As for late term abortions, not for it. I had to comment on this quote:
Tell that to the now 3316 troops dead in Iraq. |
| |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Apr 21 2007, 09:35 AM Post #147 |
|
Sending recently pregnant women to prison would only give sympathy to the pro-abortion movement. Whereas with doctors, people already have a natural distrust.
We should give guns to the pregnant woman and the fetus and let them duke it out.
No. Let's not. If men could get pregnant you know there would be no way in hell that the government would be allowed to regulate their pregnancies.
And where are all these people? I know of no one who actually sees abortion as contraception. Do you? Every single story I have heard of a woman actually getting an abortion involves a great deal of soul searching and an acceptance of the fact that she really does not want to do this, but feels there is little choice. Statistically, how many women really see abortion as just another means of contraception? Let's get away from this anti-abortion movement mantra. |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 21 2007, 01:26 PM Post #148 |
|
Well, you can ask Grace about that. We can argue forever about how things might be if men carried children but we don't. Sorry! Does that mean we have no say whatsoever in the value of life? Gee, that's progressive! I can empathise with the soul searching and I don't envy people who find themselves in that position one little bit. But the point is that if they and their partners had done a little soul searching before it got in there, then the later soul searching would probably be unnecessary. Look folks, I didn't invent the human reproductive system, okay? So please don't blame me for stating a few basic facts about it. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 21 2007, 01:38 PM Post #149 |
|
How do you measure quality of life? Would you abort Stephen Hawking? Or Helen Keller? |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 21 2007, 01:51 PM Post #150 |
|
Deleted User
|
oh there's lots i could say but i can't b bothered. well since you pleaded i will. the right to bear arms carries with it the right to kill. pro abortion but against capital punishment - nope dont get that point of view. in the uk the amount of women who have had three or more abortions has grown in the last decade. if there is someone i haven't upset please inform me and i will rectify the situation. |
|
|
| ~LovelyRita~ | Apr 21 2007, 03:52 PM Post #151 |
|
At least two of my friends honestly do. They say they would have no guilt what so ever if they were to get an abortion. And the way they're going.... they're probably going to have to get one eventually too. <_< |
![]() |
|
| Sandra | Apr 22 2007, 10:01 AM Post #152 |
|
Mozart8mytoe Presumably as you are basing your observations on people you know, therefore you are likely to be talking about a group of educated articulate well informed women. In which case I grant you it is much less likely to happen but not impossible. In UK society it does get used as a means of contraception. I've seen people coming back requesting their fourth termination and that is not an isolated occurence. All the education and contraceptive advice doesn't register with some people until they are faced with the reality of an unwanted pregnancy. The termination if performed won't be recorded statistically as a contraceptive measure of course. Usually the 2 doctors required to agree a termination is neccessary will record it under the category that to continue the pregnancy would be detrimental to the mothers health but to all intents and purposes when someone attends seeking their fourth termination it is contraception. |
| <a href='http://eapr-1/@0@Sandra@1@Edinburgh%2C%20Scotland@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Dorfliedot | Apr 22 2007, 10:12 AM Post #153 |
![]()
Beatlelicious
|
It a baby they cut up . if they were show the child parts. maybe, they think twice. I my self don't believe in it. I think it is murder. but, that is my opinion and my belief.. What you do to your own body is up to you. |
![]() Add Glitter to your Photos | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 22 2007, 10:30 AM Post #154 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
Which is disgraceful, Sandra - and even as one who advocates a woman's 'right to choose' - the actions of said people really upset and sadden me. Four abortions is an abuse of the procedure, in my opinion - but I still wouldn't take away their right to have that procedure if they so desire. The phrase 'detrimental to the mother's health' is an interesting one. Of course, there is health in it's very obvious physical sense, but mental health is also important and I'm sure it is a factor is many people's decisions to have terminations. I really don't like abortion and the idea of abortion and I would much rather see people not having abortions than having them, but recognise that some people simply are not fit to be parents at certain stages of their lives and that going full term and then giving their babies away for adoption is also not a viable option to the emotionally unstable. I also do not believe that those who disagree with abortion have the right to legislate their own morality on this issue. I have read that abortion=murder on these 'pages'... well to many people meat=murder. Many anti-abortionists eat meat, calling for the sanctity of life to be preserved and then happily chowing down their steaks, lamb, chicken and fish for which living animals have had to be slaughtered. It's rather difficult to reconcile those, what appear to be, opposing views on upholding how precious life is whilst eating the flesh of dead animals. Of course, you can throw it back to me, as a vegetarian, but I would support early-term termination of any animal's pregnancy if parenthood was going to cause physical or mental anguish. Still, having said that, I'm not attempting to force my 'morality' on anybody else. I'm not calling for legislation to make the eating of meat illegal even though I am fundamentally opposed to it. Why? Simply put, I would rather people make up their own minds on this issue rather than have it forced upon them and I believe that the same should apply to abortion. I believe that people should make their own decisions as to whether abortion is right and ethical and that people will make what they believe to be the right choice. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't have anything to do with anybody else. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| lit'l willow | Apr 22 2007, 01:05 PM Post #155 |
|
Outstanding post.
|
![]() |
|
| Sandra | Apr 22 2007, 09:34 PM Post #156 |
|
Andy, I was paraphrasing somewhat with the 'detrimental to the mothers health' comment I've since looked up the actual wording from the 1967 Abortion Act which was the law in force at the time (there have been amendments) It states - that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; you are right it was the broader health issue than that of the physical health of the mother, the impact on her mental health was often cited as the reason for granting a termination of pregnancy. I have long hesitated about whether to say this on the numerous occasions that this issue has arisen on the board(s) but decided I would go ahead. As a student nurse I have participated in the termination of pregnancies. I was offered the chance to opt out as the abortion act requires this on the grounds of a conscientious objection to the procedure. However like you I do not feel that I should impose my moral beliefs on others and I did not exercise that right. My rational for this decison was that a fundamental requirement of my job is that I have a duty to provide care to anyone who needs it regardless of their lifestyle religion ethnicity etc and as I saw it this is no different. I have had to provide care to people in many circumstances of which I personally disapprove - wife beaters, paedophiles, drunk drivers, who have killed other road users. Young thugs who have assaulted others to their severe injury or death and those who have assaulted me or my colleagues. Yet I have to provide the same standard of care as I would to any other person who required it. Many people will I know, find this difficult to understand but I believe strongly that it is right. On a personal level I find it almost impossible to think of circumstances where I would have chosen to have had an abortion but I think others should have the right to make their own choices. The two biggest issues I struggled with in providing care was when I felt the terms of the abortion act were being misused and terminations were allowed as an alternative means of 'contraception' also when there was a complete disregard for the rights of fathers. I find this to be a very disturbing double standard. I am quite a strong advocate for women's rights but if we are truly striving for equality our rights should not be given precedence over those of men. Preparing to take some flack.
|
| <a href='http://eapr-1/@0@Sandra@1@Edinburgh%2C%20Scotland@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 23 2007, 11:48 AM Post #157 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
I would hope that you wouldn't get any flack, Sandra, because yours is a reasonable and compassionate viewpoint. I agree with you about the rights of the fathers and have read many accounts by men who have felt utterly betrayed by their (at least sexual) partner's actions (some of those people went on to be anti-abortion activists which seems to be misdirected anger to me), but for me it comes down to the fact that it is the woman who will have to carry the child and, perhaps in the absence of a partner, bring up and care for the child. Of course, the ideal situation is for both of the parents to come to a decision together and, if the child is not wanted they feel unable to support the child emotionally or financially, then the ideal situation in that case is for the child, once born, to be given to a childless couple who will care for it. However, this is hardly ever an ideal world, and I believe that there should be further options for those who truly need them. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 23 2007, 11:49 AM Post #158 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
Thanks.
|
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Sandra | Apr 23 2007, 04:00 PM Post #159 |
|
Thank you. |
| <a href='http://eapr-1/@0@Sandra@1@Edinburgh%2C%20Scotland@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Apr 24 2007, 10:04 AM Post #160 |
|
So they have not actually used abortion as contraception? They simply say they would. At this point it is only speculation. For all they know, if they do get pregnant they will lose their blasé attitudes and go through the same heartwrench and soul searching as everyone else.
Try not to cut off my microphone, but this is why you get into endless debates over semantics. I questioned the mantra of abortion as contraception and you respond with "Does that mean we (men) have no say whatsoever in the value of life?" I think you know that no one has said that. Or do you? The exclamation points are a nice touch, though.
I hate to say this (ok, maybe not), but this is exactly the kind of hyperbole Bill O'Reilly would use. Maybe the people I know are more educated and more informed. I take that as a compliment, Sandra. But my point is that every story I have heard of a woman getting an abortion involved days or weeks of heartbreak. I am not talking about only people I actually know, but firsthand accounts of anyone anywhere. I have never actually heard anyone say that they used it as contraception, Grace's friends' posture that they would, theoretically, nothwithstanding. It seems to me that if most or half or even a good percentage of abortions were done as contraception, Fox News would tell us about it every day. |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 24 2007, 11:33 AM Post #161 |
|
You questioned it by playing the "if men got pregnant" card. I played it back. And you're not above a little hyperbole yourself when you're passionate about something. I seem to remember a very good line about eating around the dog turd when meat was served to you. Fair comment too. I could make comparisions to Ann Coulter, but despite a shared air of moral and intellectual superiority, there are still a few major differences between the two of you. You're female, for start. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Bill | Apr 24 2007, 11:39 AM Post #162 |
|
Whereas if they'd been smart and used contraception instead of assuming they could have an abortion if they got pregnant, the speculative heart wrenching would remain a moot point. |
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 24 2007, 11:42 AM Post #163 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
:lol: Hilarious! |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 24 2007, 12:36 PM Post #164 |
|
Deleted User
|
A third termination by abortion is considered here as conception, it fits in with abortion on demand, something else that isn't supposed to be happening here. A second termination should be questioned vigoursly but it seems they ain't. A third well we should drag her in give a her that big word thingy ore make her have the child. |
|
|
| Sandra | Apr 24 2007, 10:57 PM Post #165 |
|
It was intended as a compliment Lisa. I don't mean to suggest for one second that a termination of pregnancy was/is a lightly taken decision, Many of the women I encountered did endure days or weeks of heartbreak and for some real anguish before they reached their decision. If this was the case for all women however, how would you explain requests for a third or fourth termination? Which although not common was by no means a unique occurence. You won't hear people say they use a termination of pregnancy as a contraceptive measure and I ndicated in my post that it wouldn't be recorded statistically as such either. It is my subjective opinion, I aknowledge that but I wonder how you would categorise it differnently and how many of the stories you have personal knowledge of or read about were woman soul searching over their fourth termination? I have since met women (the majority) who continue to feel they made the right decision. I've met others who have regrets and wish they had taken a different course. |
| <a href='http://eapr-1/@0@Sandra@1@Edinburgh%2C%20Scotland@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Apr 26 2007, 09:28 AM Post #166 |
|
Not every statement is a card. Maybe we need to get off that mantra. As for hyperbole, I see nothing wrong with it when appropriate. I just enjoy pointing out your penchant for sounding quite O'Reillyesque at times (for obvious reasons). I do not recall the dog turd comment, but it seems unlikely that I used the word turd. As for Ann Coulter, go right ahead. I would like to see these comparisons. While you often disagree with O'Reilly, your writing sounds eerily similar to his at times. While I almost always disagree with Coulter, my writing is, need I say, morally and intellectually superior to hers. Also, I like to think that I have a sense of humor. Ann is somewhat lacking in that department. You might not want to read this, but you and Bill have very similar humor.
All of this is moot. I have still never heard of anyone who actually used abortion as contraception.
I know, Sadra. (If I were not morally opposed to smiley faces, there would be one here).
They could probably explain their actions better than I could. The question is, does having more than one abortion automatically mean that they are using it as contraception? Could there be other factors? Could it be that maybe these are simply really stupid women?
Why not? If it is as rampant as people are suggesting, why will no one admit to it? |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Sandra | Apr 26 2007, 10:08 PM Post #167 |
|
because it is not one of the legally valid reasons for a doctor to agree to perform a termination of pregnancy and women whether they be stupid or intelligent collude with that. Anyway I've exhausted my wish to comment any more on this particular topic - except to say that I hope I didn't suggest it was rampant. I only meant to suggest that it was not uncommon. |
| <a href='http://eapr-1/@0@Sandra@1@Edinburgh%2C%20Scotland@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Mariele | Apr 27 2007, 05:04 PM Post #168 |
|
I couldn't agree more with your post Andy. Brilliantly put. I tend to get very passionate about this discussion - but as you have summed up my thought exactly I will say no more. |
|
www.illustrationsbymariele.com www.wirelesstheatrecompany.co.uk | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Apr 28 2007, 01:50 AM Post #169 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
Andy, you summed up my feelings on this topic very well, too. I sure wish I had your writing talents. I never had to face the decision of whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. I honestly do not know what I would have done. I have never known anyone who saw abortion as contraception. However, I am not familiar with how today's teenagers look upon contraception. I find it quite disturbing at the number of pregnant teenagers I see. Doesn't anyone teach them about contraception and make it available to them? Parents shouldn't be so naive as to think their child is not going to have sex. I find it disturbing that college kids say they would not hesitate to have an abortion. Sure sounds like they do consider it contraception. Why do they feel this way? I don't get it. I was very careful during the years I could get pregnant and I wasn't using the most reliable form of contraception. I used a diaphragm. However, it worked or something was wrong with me or him. I will never know, as at my age, it is impossible for me to get pregnant. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 29 2007, 02:13 PM Post #170 |
|
Deleted User
|
Ok, so I have this picture that I want to share with all of you. If you are pro-choice or pro-life either way it will hopefully have an effect. http://www.emofree.com/Inspiration/loving-picture.htm |
|
|
| foolonthehill | Apr 29 2007, 02:17 PM Post #171 |
|
Oh wow
|
|
all of those pictures on the wall... what makes them fall? ![]() sminking.deviantart.com | |
![]() |
|
| maccascruff | Apr 29 2007, 03:12 PM Post #172 |
|
Sing the Changes
|
When I worked at the IRS, people used to send in abortion pictures with their tax returns. Nothing phases me any more. |
![]() |
|
| ~LovelyRita~ | Apr 29 2007, 06:59 PM Post #173 |
|
Because early in the pregnancy, they don't see the fetus as an actual baby. To many people I know, the fetus is no more baby than an egg or sperm. |
![]() |
|
| kink | Apr 29 2007, 07:01 PM Post #174 |
|
on again, off again
|
that's because it isn't |
|
Strawberry Fields: We put the FUN in dysfunctional. -BeatleBarb, 2007 | |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Apr 30 2007, 06:06 AM Post #175 |
|
Are abortions tax deductible? |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Bag O' Nails | Apr 30 2007, 06:20 AM Post #176 |
|
MaccaMomma
|
Anyone who knows me knows I am definitely Pro-Life.
In the past on the Macca board, I made dozens and dozens of posts regarding this. My stance has not changed and I stand firmly against the killing of innocent unwanted babies, at any stage of development. |
![]() One sweet dream came true....London & Liverpool '08 | |
![]() |
|
| BlueMolly2009 | Apr 30 2007, 07:07 AM Post #177 |
|
LOLcat Freak
|
Even though I don't agree with your stance, Heidi, I do respect it. I remember you kept going over and over your stance over at the Macca board and I remember I always thought you were forcing things down people's throats, but I was wrong. I'm pro choice, but I think both sides should listen to each others sides. There is no way people are going to change their minds though. |
|
Molly Myspace My Twitter My FriendFeed My Facebook ![]() Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks) | |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Apr 30 2007, 07:43 AM Post #178 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
I certainly agree with you that people should listen to different views, Molly. Although it's probably true that the vast majority of people know where they stand on this issue, I don't believe that every mind is closed. Minds change all the time on all manner of subjects and who knows... perhaps reading things and taking part in discussions can help people reach a conclusion or arrive at a stance that they personally feel comfortable with. Certainly thinking about issues and taking the time to read many different opinions can give you a deeper understanding of different people's perspectives and experiences. |
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Kopite | Jun 28 2007, 04:27 PM Post #179 |
![]()
You'll Never Walk Alone
|
Early in the pregnancy I don't think the fetus is an actual baby. Abortion after a month or so, I have no problem with, I wouldn't call that killing a baby. But after a while in the pregnancy it is indeed a baby. I think abortions after 12 weeks should be illegal. That's how it is where I live. After 12 months I think we can call it a baby with feelings, ability to move around, feel pain and things like that. In Canada abortions are legal throughout the entire pregnancy, I think that's wrong. Pro choice advocates say it's not a baby, but when is it? Not until birth? Abortion after 8 months and three weeks, is that ok? |
|
“Above all, I would like to be remembered as a man who was selfless, who strove and worried so that others could share the glory, and who built up a family of people who could hold their heads up high and say, 'We're Liverpool'.” - Bill Shankly | |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 28 2007, 05:00 PM Post #180 |
![]()
|
MMMMMMMM....I am a bit conservative on my beliefs on abortion.... I'm completely PRO-LIFE.... I'll not ever judge anyone who has had an abortion... but I personally would not be able to live with myself .... I find the two train of thoughts interesting though....conservative versus liberal.... ISSUE CONSERVATIVE Abortion Human life begins at conception. Abortion is the murder of a human being. Nobody has the right to murder a human being. Support legislation to prohibit partial birth abortions, called the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban” (partial birth abortion - the killing of an unborn baby of at least 20 weeks by pulling it out of the birth canal with forceps, but leaving the head inside. An incision is made in the back of the baby’s neck and the brain tissue is suctioned out. The head is then removed from the uterus.) LIBERAL A fetus is not a human life. The decision to have an abortion is a personal choice of a woman regarding her own body and the government should stay out of it. Women should be guaranteed the right to a safe and legal abortion, including partial birth abortion. |
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 28 2007, 05:03 PM Post #181 |
|
Deleted User
|
That outline sounds a bit biased. I don't think it's quite that simple.
|
|
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 28 2007, 05:30 PM Post #182 |
![]()
|
ROTFLMAO!!! :lol: You noticed that tiny bit of bias!!!
|
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 28 2007, 05:45 PM Post #183 |
|
Deleted User
|
I looked it up and while it might not have come from Liberals Are Scum website, it still doesn't make us look very good.
|
|
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 28 2007, 05:53 PM Post #184 |
![]()
|
I would NEVER go to a website titled Liberals are scum... :lol: :lol: I was raised by liberals... BOTH my parents were/are BLEEDING LIBERALS.. I"m liberal in 'some' areas..... but do lean conservative... GO FIGURE!
|
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 28 2007, 06:00 PM Post #185 |
|
Deleted User
|
Abortions are awful, awful things. I always thought you were too nice to be a Republican, Val.
|
|
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 28 2007, 07:28 PM Post #186 |
![]()
|
LMAO....well...I'm a registered INDEPENDENT.... :lol: But like I said...I do lean conservative in 'some' areas...
and I AM NICE!!! :lol: :lol:
|
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| ogoble | Jun 28 2007, 07:28 PM Post #187 |
![]()
|
I only support abortion in cases of rape or incest. |
Beatles/Paul McCartney & Wings Fan
| |
![]() |
|
| Kaleidoscope~Eyes | Jun 28 2007, 07:39 PM Post #188 |
|
Pro choice and Pro life are bad labels! Those who are against abortion are surely not the only ones who are "pro life" and those who are for choice are surely not against life. This issue is very personal for each individual case. I hardly think anyone who makes the choice to have an abortion does so with a light heart and without much consternation and pain over it. And in most cases those who believe it's wrong are not against it in cases of rape or incest. There is some leeway here with compassion being the rule in all cases. I have my own thoughts on this but, I do think we tend to extremes when we discuss this issue. The answer to this is in doing what is the best overall for the most people. It's really a philosophical question. It's sad I think to most of us that it has to happen at all if it does but people are coming from such different perspectives on this that it's difficult to say exactly what the "law" ought to be with any certainty. This isn't a question I can answer with any comfort because I do not know for sure when a life IS a life. I'm glad I haven't had to face this in my personal life but, I won't judge those who have. I'd maybe have to walk a mile in their shoes before I did that. |
![]() |
|
| JeffLynnesBeard | Jun 29 2007, 12:10 AM Post #189 |
|
Administrator & Moderator
|
Good post. I wholeheartedly agree with you about the 'Pro-Choice' and 'Pro-Life' labels as well.
|
| ...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make. | |
![]() |
|
| Mr Bellamy | Jun 29 2007, 12:23 AM Post #190 |
|
I CAN confirm that you are VERY NICE!!
|
| Through our love, we can do things that they said were impossible. | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 29 2007, 02:21 AM Post #191 |
|
Deleted User
|
12 months? I think allot sooner than that.
|
|
|
| Bill | Jun 29 2007, 03:19 AM Post #192 |
|
And I think that was Tony's point from the beginning. He identifies as a "liberal" but is against abortion. So it's really not as simple as choosing a side and falling into step with whatever that side's perceived views are.
|
| Put a puppet on it. | |
![]() |
|
| Kopite | Jun 29 2007, 08:51 AM Post #193 |
![]()
You'll Never Walk Alone
|
Oops... I meant 12 weeks... :lol: maybe even sooner than that, I don't know.
|
|
“Above all, I would like to be remembered as a man who was selfless, who strove and worried so that others could share the glory, and who built up a family of people who could hold their heads up high and say, 'We're Liverpool'.” - Bill Shankly | |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 29 2007, 03:11 PM Post #194 |
![]()
|
Thanks honey!!!
|
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| Blondie10 | Jun 29 2007, 03:13 PM Post #195 |
![]()
|
ROTFLMAO!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: OH GOD..I did not even notice that you put 12 MONTHS....lets see...that would be.....a FOUR MONTH OLD BABY!!!
|
| There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a> | |
![]() |
|
| mellaw99 | Jun 30 2007, 08:20 AM Post #196 |
|
I had a friend that had an abortion. I supported her in her choice. She had had sex with her boyfriend, and the condom broke. She went and got it done and she was fine the next day. I felt bad for her having to go through all that. On the other hand I don't think I could personally ever have an abortion unless I was raped. I am married and have a beautiful son. I don't want anymore children so my husband and I take precautions. If I was to become pregnant I would of course keep the child. I couldn't imagine aborting my husband's child. But my opinion is that it's a woman's personal choice and the goverment shouldn't have anything to say about it. |
"If there is such thing as a genius then I am one if not I really don't care."
| |
![]() |
|
| mozart8mytoe | Jul 1 2007, 09:19 AM Post #197 |
|
|
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Things We Said Today · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







about this board people are mature enough to discuss issuses like this~












:lol: maybe even sooner than that, I don't know.

8:21 AM Jul 11