Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, OK. Then the answer to your question is yes. I would shed tears for anyone who is injured or killed in that way. It doesn't seem right to me for voluntary castration to be illegal, but that's another issue for another thread.
So, should I create a separate thread about this specific topic?
Also, though, I don't think that elective surgical castrations are illegal. Rather, the issue appears to be excessive "gate-keeping" on the part of medical professionals.
People appear to have forgotten (some never knew) why abortion was made legal in the first place. Maybe it should be illegal again. It probably wouldn't take 100 years again to make it legal, once and for all. Probably less than 5 years before the NEED for such interventions is uncontested. THEN, when abortion is legalized for a second time... when abortion is legalized, once and for all, there will be less opposition to it.
Was abortion made legal in the first place due to "back-alley" castrations? If so, then I would like to point out that I myself certainly wouldn't be convinced by the "back-alley argument" if I was politically anti-abortion.
So, should I create a separate thread about this specific topic?
Also, though, I don't think that elective surgical castrations are illegal. Rather, the issue appears to be excessive "gate-keeping" on the part of medical professionals.
Yes, I think that excessive gate-keeping would be better as a topic for a separate thread. It covers a lot more ground than just whether or not abortion should remain legal.
Come on, all you righteous right-to-lifers! Each of you adopt AT LEAST ONE special needs child in the foster care system, and raise them to adulthood, with NO government assistance...are you up to it??
While I second this challenge, but also demand that anti-infanticide people likewise accept this challenge. Indeed, are you anti-infanticide people up to it?
Yes, I think that excessive gate-keeping would be better as a topic for a separate thread. It covers a lot more ground than just whether or not abortion should remain legal.
OK. Thus, I will create a separate thread about excessive "gate-keeping" tomorrow.
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, pushed for the legalization of abortion because she believes that "we need to do something about the N***o problem in America." Legalized abortion was the means by which she wanted to advance her white supremacist agenda of eugenics, which included eliminating the African American population by abortion and attrition.
Actually, I thought that Margaret Sanger was politically anti-abortion. Indeed, am I wrong in regards to this?
There is no excuse for birth control pills still costing $130/mo. in 2015. They were invented in 1965 and have not been improved an iota since then. IUD's are $1K. An IUD is a Cracker Jack prize with some artificial estrogen on it. They probably cost $0.50 to make per batch of 100. So you just made the perfect case for safe, legal abortion. Thank you very much.
Oh, I completely agree with you that birth control needs to be made cheaper or even free. However, to be fair, $1,000 is certainly "chump change" in comparison to both 18+ years of child support and a lifetime of hormone replacement therapy (after surgical castration, which itself costs more than $1,000).
Lucky for her, abstinence is the only birth control method that costs nothing and is 100% effective, thus, it is a wise financial decision.
*Cough* Rape *Cough*
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.