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.
That is not a solution, and you know it... we already have sex education in public schools, and yet teens are still getting pregnant right & left. So AGAIN, what do you do with unwanted pregnancies - not the idea of getting pregnant, but addressing the cells that are already forming in a woman's uterus.
I'm already very well-educated on safe sex, and have practiced it since the day I lost my virginity. So if I get pregnant tomorrow, despite everything I know, and decide I don't want the baby - how do you suggest handling me, if you had control over the right to choose? What will you do to ensure I don't terminate the pregnancy?
Here's a hypothetical situation for all of you who believe abortion should never happen under any circumstances:
A married couple, who practice birth control but it fails somehow and the wife ends up pregnant. They later find out if she tries to carry the baby to term, she will die because of some pre-existing health condition, and on top of that the baby will most likely have brain damage and have to be on life support until it eventually dies. If that was you or your wife in the story, what would you do?
We've been over this already. Anyone up until the age of say 10 is dependent upon other bodies for survival. Where do you draw the line?
And what about the body of the fetus? Why don't its right get protected?
There we go again with the parasite argument. A parasite is not related to the host. A parasite doesn't share 50% of the host's genes. A parasite wasn't put into the body by the host being irresponsible.
She DID have a choice. She ignored the fact that she might get pregnant. She needs to take responsibility.
I get what you're saying.. but listen.. in addressing your questions it goes back to using the arm of the law in forcing a mother to carry a fetus to full term..
It's what would be optimal, but unfortunately we cannot do that.. it's unconstitutional against the woman..and by default it effects the very life of the child.. You're absolutely right. So I guess the bigger question is.. WHERE DO WE DRAW A LINE?? we've answered that.. with individual choice..
so that's where we're at.. there's really no other way to address the issue it's one of those catch 22 legal issues when trying to fit a biological issue into the constructs of a modern society with a rule of law. You can't fit any parameters around it.. the mother/child relationship during pregnancy is essentially untouchable by the arm of the law..
I totally understand the "what should happen" but you don't get to tell someone what to do with their body or their reproductive rights.. I'm sorry.. no matter how you package it, or however you justify it.. that's what you would have to do.. and it's unconstitutional.. period. You can't talk your way around that. So personal choice is where the law stands.. if you don't like it.. or disagree.. again.. I'm sorry.
parasite - an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
A baby is not a parasite. My children clean up around the house, provide me endless pleasure and will hopefully take care of me in my old age and keep my name going. No hookworm is going to do that.
Once AGAIN! (Cheese... frikkin broken record here!) Morality is black and white. Morality can be summed up quite easily. If you negatively affect someone else, then you are being immoral. Period. That's it. Every moral question boils down to that core component. Every. ONE!
That being the case, abortion is very immoral.
And I think it highly immoral to force a rape or incest victim to be further punished with the burden of carrying and birthing a child they never asked for in the first place forced on them through an act they never consented to. THAT would be negatively affecting someone else as well...or are only YOU entitled to those shades of gray?
No doubt. I really hate to say this, because I know it's inherently unfair on a moral level... but men really SHOULDN'T have a say (at least not a legally binding one) in this debate. When a man is faced with an unwanted pregnancy, he can simply walk away and wash his hands clean of the whole thing. The WOMAN is the one who must carry the child, and the only one can ultimately make the decisions on whether to choose abortion, adoption, or child-rearing.
Yeah a woman who gets pregnant is trapped. But if you reverse the situation (where a woman wants an abortion and the man wants the child and would gladly take care of it himself if the woman were to carry it to term) then we are left with something that is essentially the same thing: a man who is trapped. We are powerless to protect our own children. The law doesn't protect OUR rights to protect our own children.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by boiseguy
I get what you're saying.. but listen.. in addressing your questions it goes back to using the arm of the law in forcing a mother to carry a fetus to full term..
It's what would be optimal, but unfortunately we cannot do that.. it's unconstitutional against the woman..and by default it effects the very life of the child.. You're absolutely right. So I guess the bigger question is.. WHERE DO WE DRAW A LINE?? we've answered that.. with individual choice..
so that's where we're at.. there's really no other way to address the issue it's one of those catch 22 legal issues when trying to fit a biological issue into the constructs of a modern society with a rule of law. You can't fit any parameters around it.. the mother/child relationship during pregnancy is essentially untouchable by the arm of the law..
I totally understand the "what should happen" but you don't get to tell someone what to do with their body or their reproductive rights.. I'm sorry.
What's even sadder are women are hardening themselves to the Life they gave, not treasuring it as a symbol of life but reviling it as a parasite. They're shunning it and in a way shunning a part of themselves.
I understand not all women want to be mothers, and in this day and age, I forsee a future where birth control will be so advanced that abortion isn't even necessary. I hope I see that day, because it will certainly make birth control less bloody.
Even if this magic 100% guaranteed pill did exist, guess what...the abortion industry will still fight tooth and nail against it with all kinds of propaganda, just like some of the petroleum companies resist solar technology.
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.
same species
.
