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.
It has everything to do with sacredness - of course, that depends on the attitude and reasons for entering into the marriage. If you dont really want to love someone forever, I would suggest not making the vow to begin with, lol.
The Catholics (as a group) take marriage very seriously and consider it sacred. They have the lowest divorce rate among the Protestants. However, their divorce rate is still 28%!!
No one goes into marriage thinking it will fail, and they all believe that their marriage will go on forever.
I know of so many situations where an older couple everybody thought was a perfect couple and who were married for many decades, get divorced out of the blue (or so it seemed to strangers). So we cannot know whether the marriage will succeed forever even if it is going great now. Only on our deathbed, we would know.
I think it's too bad that people don't realize that they really are ending the life of a baby in an abortion.
Our society is so messed up in the head that they have to go through and call them "not yet human" just so they can sleep at night.
The baby is there and exists. Whether or not it has all the organs yet, it is THERE and when you stop the growing process you're ending the life of a HUMAN BEING.
This shouldn't be about christianity or atheism.. it's simply ending the life of a baby.
Feel free to whine about women's rights, but it's not only the woman here. Women deserve equal opportunity in jobs, voting and daily life.. but it doesn't give them the right to end the life of anybody.
This article and this situation, I might agree that having the abortion should be allowed. Especially if there's a good chance this child will die while giving birth. It will only put both the baby and the child at risk for death.
Here is me "whining":
Even if everyone in the USA was in agreement, including myself, that "life begins at conception," then i would still be able to "sleep at night" having had an abortion and killed my "baby."
Moving beyond "my body my choice," (which i think is the most obvious rationale) here are some other morality based justifications that I'm sure anti-choice people will appreciate even less.
- If "all human life is sacred," then why do DNR orders exist?*
- If "all human life is sacred," then why do we have the death penalty?
- If "all human life is sacred," then why do we allow people to reject cancer treatment and die?*
- If "all human life is sacred," then why are there thousands of mentally retarded people in state run facilities after being discarded by their own parents?
- If "all human life is sacred," then why are so many people against welfare programs that support life?
- If "all human life is sacred," then why did a doctor on here recently post about "hoping drug users eventually kill themselves?"
- If "all human life is sacred," then why do we start wars which kill both civilians and soldiers?
- If "all human life is sacred," then why do nuclear bombs exist?
- If "all human life is sacred," then why are next of kin allowed to stop life support if a patient is in a comma that s/he is not expected to recover from?
*Some are inclined to argue that in these (few) instances the person had a "choice" that a baby does not have. Yet isn't it the *purpose* of a mother to care for and make decisions for her child? Letting a baby be born into a life of poverty, a life lacking love, etc, is a very neglectful decision for a mother to make for her child.
Many also assume by default that the child *wants* to be born. No one but the "mother" (of a fetus or live baby) should make this decision.
So if a fetus is a "baby" then the carrier is a "mother." She has just as much right to make "end of life" decisions for her child as others make for themselves.
Last edited by Utopian Slums; 05-11-2015 at 05:45 AM..
It has everything to do with sacredness - of course, that depends on the attitude and reasons for entering into the marriage. If you dont really want to love someone forever, I would suggest not making the vow to begin with, lol.
I dont think many people really pay attention to what they are promising when they take the vows, and I love how some people try to scam a marriage from the onset by making their own vows.
I entered my marriage not for money, or just a big fancy party followed by a whirlwind vacation to somewhere exotic. My husband entered under the same circumstances. We stand together through everything, which is priceless. I know I can depend on him having my back at all times, and likewise, I will always have his back. If either one of us falters, its not an automatic excuse to dump each other. What's mine is his, and what's his is mine and has been for over 26 years in a marriage, and 34 years of simply living together. We are richer than most in that respect. There is no object that can lure us away from each other, and never has been.
Like anything else in life, you get out of a marriage what you put into it. Put in crap and you get crap, lol.
What God enjoys is a solid life-long commitment, not the slavery and bondage you describe marriage to be.
I am my husband's property, and he is my property, and always will be. Only the self-absorbed would want a marriage to be otherwise. Again, if someone cant live up to the vows, and know they or their partner wont - then stay partners for as long as the fun/LLP lasts.
Just because certain people have lost sight of what the true meaning of marriage and cultural diversity and the precious gift of life is - doesnt mean that meaning has changed any. Between abortion and infertility issues, it's a true miracle that anyone gets born these days.
This may end up being the one chance that 10 year old has of reproducing. Is she old enough and mature enough to know the risks of aborting the fetus to her future?
I totally disagree with you. The child is 10 years old and she can very well die giving birth.
I guess about marriage we will agree to disagree. I believe the divorce rate is,awfully, high, but if two people are miserable why should they be?
I remember back in the day when women who were not rich enough to go overseas for the procedure literally died trying a local backdoor way to rid themselves of the stigma of an unwanted pregnancy.
Back then, I felt like everyone's entitled to a mistake.
Today however, who cares that someone is an unwed mother? Who cares if people live together without the benefit of marriage? Who cares...about a lot of things that used to be very important in society? In the mainstream, these things mean nothing anymore, where as, back in the day they could ruin a young woman's life forever.
I have read that at 9 weeks, a fetus is fully developed, and the rest of the time in gestation is simply for growth.
If that is the case, what right does anyone have to end that life?
Who is more innocent and defenceless than that baby?
In the end, most South Americans I have met are very religous, and dont even consider practicing birth control. I doubt this rare case will result in making abortion legal there.
you might want to do a bit more "reading" about a nine week old fetus.
who has the right to terminate a pregnancy. the woman who is carrying it. no one should be forced to carry a baby to term, labor and deliver a baby against their will.
At this point termination would have to be done by C-section. The "fetus" already weighs 1-1.5 lbs. That wouldn't fit through her vagina, as it's no different than giving birth.
As far as girls dying during childbirth....anyone with lack of adequate prenatal care can die during childbirth. This is more of a problem of poverty vs. age. Paraguay probably has a high fetal/maternal mortality rate anyway. The fact that so many young girls are getting pregnant just adds to the statistics.
I feel like people are ignorant about what an "abortion" means at this stage of pregnancy. The baby is about 1/3 the weight of a full term baby. We're not talking about a walnut size embryo. We're talking about a 22-23 week old fetus that is about 1-1.5 lbs and about 11 inches long.
At this point termination would have to be done by C-section. The "fetus" already weighs 1-1.5 lbs. That wouldn't fit through her vagina, as it's no different than giving birth.
As far as girls dying during childbirth....anyone with lack of adequate prenatal care can die during childbirth. This is more of a problem of poverty vs. age. Paraguay probably has a high fetal/maternal mortality rate anyway. The fact that so many young girls are getting pregnant just adds to the statistics.
I feel like people are ignorant about what an "abortion" means at this stage of pregnancy. The baby is about 1/3 the weight of a full term baby. We're not talking about a walnut size embryo. We're talking about a 22-23 week old fetus that is about 1-1.5 lbs and about 11 inches long.
I can't believe they allowed it to get this far along for one, and for two I'd still be for the abortion even at this point. No kid should have to go through that!
I can't believe they allowed it to get this far along for one, and for two I'd still be for the abortion even at this point. No kid should have to go through that!
And how does one accomplish this? Personally, the thought of delivering a viable baby and then murdering it to "punish" the person who raped the mother is morally destitute. Will they smother it? Stab it in the delivery room? Snap its neck? Leave it in a corner to die? The whole concept just makes NO sense to me. The baby is almost viable. Don't you think it would be traumatic to give birth and then watch people kill your baby (or watch your baby slowly die from lack of oxygen)?
So much easier said than done. As despicable as the crime was, the baby is still 1/2 hers. What about what SHE wants? The situation is already traumatic for her. There is no getting out of this one easily. Abortion would have been a viable option 10 weeks ago. It's too late now.
Maybe pro-life people should be required to adopt and take care of the babies who would have otherwise been aborted. That would change the view points quickly.
Maybe pro-life people should be required to adopt and take care of the babies who would have otherwise been aborted. That would change the view points quickly.
Mick
Considering how much people pay to adopt healthy newborns all over the world...I don't think you'd have any problems finding takers.
I consider myself solidly pro-choice. But I don't believe in late term abortions. I have had children of my own, and I wonder if that makes a difference. The thought of "aborting" a viable, healthy baby, makes me sick.
Maybe pro-life people should be required to adopt and take care of the babies who would have otherwise been aborted. That would change the view points quickly.
Mick
There are many people who would love to adopt a healthy newborn baby.
If the people having abortions of convenience had to carry the baby to term instead of aborting it, they most likely would have second thoughts about carelessly creating a second baby they didn't want either.
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.
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.
