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.
They can not exist without the mother and if you don't want to reduce women to breeding machines, forced to bear unwanted children, you can not make abortion illegal.
Once science finds a way to extract a fetus and allow it to grow in another environment, then you can stop abortion.
Until then, abortions will be a fact of life, always have been, legal or not.
On the other hand, if all fetuses were born, how many more millions of them would be receiving welfare benefits etc. Not something most "conservatives" would be in favor of.
__________________
The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it. ~Henry David Thoreau
They can not exist without the mother and if you don't want to reduce women to breeding machines, forced to bear unwanted children, you can not make abortion illegal.
Once science finds a way to extract a fetus and allow it to grow in another environment, then you can stop abortion.
Until then, abortions will be a fact of life, always have been, legal or not.
On the other hand, if all fetuses were born, how many more millions of them would be receiving welfare benefits etc. Not something most "conservatives" would be in favor of.
Is it too difficult for you to call it a baby. Could it be that it just doesn't sound as friendly to say "extract a BABY," so instead you have to use the word "fetus?" Though "fetus" was once a good word that spoke of a young human being, it is now used with a negative connotation. Referring to the fetus allows us not to use the B-word, which the pro-choice movement labors to avoid for it reminds us of the reality that abortion kills a baby. Well my friend, semantics may affect perceptions, but they do not change realties; a baby is a baby no matter what we call her. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. A baby by any other name is still a baby!
Is it too difficult for you to call it a baby. Could it be that it just doesn't sound as friendly to say "extract a BABY," so instead you have to use the word "fetus?" Though "fetus" was once a good word that spoke of a young human being, it is now used with a negative connotation. Referring to the fetus allows us not to use the B-word, which the pro-choice movement labors to avoid for it reminds us of the reality that abortion kills a baby. Well my friend, semantics may affect perceptions, but they do not change realties; a baby is a baby no matter what we call her. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. A baby by any other name is still a baby!
A FETUS is not a BABY. A fetus develops into a baby.
I am not going to debate abortion here any further, plenty of threads on that topic. I am saying it will always happen, until there is a way to extract the fetus. There have always been abortions and there will always be abortions, until this is a possibility.
__________________
The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it. ~Henry David Thoreau
back on topic, I don't understand why anyone would have a problem with this. is it not their right for peaceful protest? like I said earlier, PETA shows graphic and gross images all the time, but no one bothers them.
Today I went out to run some errands, and a religious anti-abortion group was holding up graphic signs of dismembered fetuses on the side of a major road. There was absolutely no way to avoid seeing them. I was disgusted by this, and my first thought was, is this legal??? I mean, anyone who drives down this road is unknowingly forced to look at these graphic images, children included. Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, do you think this was appropriate? I'm curious to hear people's responses.
Personally, I don't think it's the best technique to use.
However, people need to be made aware of the fact that we are butchering a million or so innocents each year...
I've seen them. And it only makes me think "What a stupid, insensitive bastage!"... especially when I have my kids in the car.
I don't think that has anything to do with pro-choice or right or wrong or any of that. My BIGGEST issue is that unsuspecting children are subjected to this. Every time I've seen these protestors, they're out and about at a time of day when parents are transporting kids to/from school, or moms of preschoolers are heading to the grocery store. THAT'S my problem with this.
I am generally anti death-penalty. I don't want my kids watching an execution to prove my point! I am not going to take them to the slaughterhouse just because I'm vegetarian (we're not actually), or show them images of blown up soldiers to prove my opposition to the war. Nor am I going to show them graphic photos of the results of STD's to make sure they practice safe sex.
The reasoning behind it is irrelevant and doesn't justify the method, so yeah, it causes me to "think", but only about what kind of f-ed up person would subject children to these images to further their agenda.
Fierce, this is not directed to you or anyone in particular. You just happen to have been one of several who comment about the outrageousness of being caught unaware and your children seeing these images.
What's wrong with kids seeing these pictures? Are they too disgusting? Are they too sad? Aren't many of the movies and video games that kids have now just as bad? (hell they can even interactively slaughter people in some games) Or could it be that these are real whereas the movies and the video games are not? Why not just turn to your child and explain exactly what it is? What's wrong with the truth?
Fierce, this is not directed to you or anyone in particular. You just happen to have been one of several who comment about the outrageousness of being caught unaware and your children seeing these images.
What's wrong with kids seeing these pictures? Are they too disgusting? Are they too sad? Aren't many of the movies and video games that kids have now just as bad? (hell they can even interactively slaughter people in some games) Or could it be that these are real whereas the movies and the video games are not? Why not just turn to your child and explain exactly what it is? What's wrong with the truth?
Well I already addressed this in my earlier post. There are some things my children will not see until they are emotionally ready and *I* should be the one to decide that, not some yahoo on the corner.
And jmarquise, an aside... that goes for PETA too. Or anyone else protesting in this way, whether I agree with their position or not.
In all the other examples I gave, I still feel it's my place to introduce (or not) graphic images.
Furthermore, I do not believe these images are accurate in depicting the reality of abortion. IF I were wanting my kids to see abortion pics, it would be truthful, not exaggerated propaganda.
As for movies/games, I am not concerned with what others choose to let their kids see/play. Lots of kids see lots of scary things way before it's time. But no, not MY children. I don't expose them to images just for shock value.
When my son was little, up until age 5, I was a vegetarian for primarily reasons having to do with my opposition to the inhumane treatment of animal... do you think I showed my son slaughterhouse pics at age 4 to prove my point???
I'm not really arguing here that these people should be arrested or that their rights to protest should be impeded. I am really just arguing that they are disgusting, misguided jerks who probably have mental problems. Yes, they have a right to do it, but they aren't accomplishing much in the process.
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.