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.
No one mentions adoption. Why? Look at all the wealthy actresses that are adopting now. Guess they have their careers now they miss their children they gave up.
Plenty of women put their baby up for adoption. To do so you still have to carry it to term and give birth.
Im sure thy may regret and endure emotional pain of giving up an actual baby more so than aborting a fetus or potential baby.
The woman pro-abortion used to get the law passed never had an abortion, they just used her to get the law passed.
She wanted an abortion but couldn't get one legally. That she changed her mind much later really isn't relevant; it was her experience at the time that affected the case and its outcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144
No one mentions adoption.
Several people have mentioned it, to varying degrees. Are you not paying attention?
She recounted: “I had an abortion at 17 and it was the worst thing I ever did . . . I went alone. I was terrified. It was full of other young girls, and we were all terrified and looking at each other and nobody was saying a bloody word. I howled my way through it, and it was horrible. I would never recommend it to anyone because it comes back to haunt you. When I tried to have children, I lost three — I think it was because something had happened to my cervix during the abortion.”
It would be great if she started a program to educate teen girls on the bad effects of abortion.
She was born in 1952, so she would have had her abortion in 1969. Was it done in a hospital, or was it a back-alley procedure? You also have to consider the medical techniques that were used at that time vs. how it is done now.
How many of these unwanted children have you taken under your wing, or how many have you helped families adopt ? I bet none. All your side wants to do is preach about "a baby" and how wrong it is, but you do not want to be part of the solution.
In fact, you would also love to dismantle Planned Parenthood, whose primary function is EDUCATING women and young girls, so they can prevent unwanted pregnancies. So easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, when you have no one in the game.
Well, they perform 330,000+ abortions a year, so I would say they are doing a terrible job on their "education" wouldn't you?
She was born in 1952, so she would have had her abortion in 1969. Was it done in a hospital, or was it a back-alley procedure? You also have to consider the medical techniques that were used at that time vs. how it is done now.
There really isn't any comparison.
It was probably under local anesthesia. Now, it would be done under general, and there are even abortion doulas to provide counseling to someone who has to be alone before and after the procedure.
Well, they perform 330,000+ abortions a year, so I would say they are doing a terrible job on their "education" wouldn't you?
Good sex ed in grammar and high schools would go a long way to helping that. But wouldn't you know it? The pro-forced-birth crowd is against that, too.
We already know mammograms aren't offered there. You seem to be confused. Parasites use nutrients from the host, which is what pregnancy does.
Parasites cause HARM.
Seriously, bio 101? Even a 5th grader knows that. There are other types of relationships. Symbiotic is one, and it defines a mother/baby relationship.
Please go read a dictionary.
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.