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.
There is nothing lawful about abortion. Something may be legal - but that does not make it lawful.
Someone needs to buy you a dictionary.
Quote:
Definition of Lawful
1 a: being in harmony with the law <a lawful judgment> b: constituted, authorized, or established by law :rightful <lawful institutions>
It's real simple folks, if you do not want an abortion - don't get one. It's called choice. I would like to understand why those of you who don't believe in abortion have a right to make that decision for someone else? What gives you the right to make decisions about someone elses body hmmm?
I believe differently, I believe life begins at a viable birth and not before. So help me understand why you (the pro-life crowd) have a right to make my healthcare choices about my body? I believe my healthcaredecisions should be between me and my doctor. Tell me what gives you the right to make my healthcare decisions?
The implication is you don't think we as woman are capable of making our own decisions about our healthcare. You do not own me or my body nor do you have a right to make my decisions for me.
I have a right to my beliefs just as you do yours, but I do not have a right to make those decisions for you nor do you have a right to make my decisions for me.
Again, real simple - don't believe in abortion - don't get one.
As far as Akin is concerned, his statement shows true lack of knowledge as to how a woman's body works, I find it offensive that he made such a statement and anyone that ignorant shouldn't be in a position to make ANY decisions as far as woman are concerned.
Finally, a true pro-choicer, one who believes life doesn't begin until the blob leaves the woman's body and prefers no restriction on abortion at any time before 'viable' birth.
Phrasing abortion as a 'healthcare decision' is a nice tactic aimed at making it sound like the state is interfering with her decision to have a lump removed from her breast. Abortion is a medical procedure. It is most often a financial or personal circumstances decision, unrelated to 'healthcare.'
Finally, a true pro-choicer, one who believes life doesn't begin until the blob leaves the woman's body and prefers no restriction on abortion at any time before 'viable' birth.
Phrasing abortion as a 'healthcare decision' is a nice tactic aimed at making it sound like the state is interfering with her decision to have a lump removed from her breast. Abortion is a medical procedure. It is most often a financial or personal circumstances decision, unrelated to 'healthcare.'
Baloney.
What about those of us who live with genetically inherited orphan diseases? The ones that cause a child to suffer horribly and be crippled if they make it to be a teen and dead by the time they are in their 30s, if they make it that far? The medical recommendation is to screen the fetus and if the gene is present, to abort to spread the effect of the disease.
Or do we get the standard mealy mouth "take personal responsibility" BS from those who sit on their high horses and judge others?
That would be about 800,000 new children of single moms every year. How many of those would be on some form of government assistance? YOUR taxes will go up to pay for these children.
About half of ALL women who have abortions would qualify with just one child.
Victims of rape would be financially responsible for a decision that they didn't make. If that woman has no insurance she may get state aid. The cost of prenatal care, labor and delivery is FAR more expensive than abortion. If she doesn't qualify that is easily $10,000 out of her pocket for something she had no choice in.
Of those women who give birth say half choose to keep their children. There would be about 800,000 new children put into the adoption/foster care system. The government pays for foster care, so your taxes will be going up to pay for those children. It also adds more children to a system that is already over taxed. There are around 600,000 children currently in the system, and most of them will age out without ever being adopted. Many of those that age out have no support system. They end up on the streets, in jails, using drugs. Not all, but many. There goes more money to house those that become criminals just to survive.
In the case of the health of the mother, who pays the ADDITIONAL medical expenses? How many of those women will die?
Don't forget property taxes to pay for new schools for those extra million+ kids a year.
It sounds all nice and fluffy to say you are pro-life, but what happens to those lives after they are no longer a fetus?
I find it interesting that no one has remarked on this.
Until you have some idea of how to handle the MILLION + new children EVERY year, you have no business trying to force women to have those children.
What about those of us who live with genetically inherited orphan diseases? The ones that cause a child to suffer horribly and be crippled if they make it to be a teen and dead by the time they are in their 30s, if they make it that far? The medical recommendation is to screen the fetus and if the gene is present, to abort to spread the effect of the disease.
Or do we get the standard mealy mouth "take personal responsibility" BS from those who sit on their high horses and judge others?
I was careful to use the qualifier 'most often' but still get a canned response. I'll stick with the truth ---Most Often abortion is not a healthcare decision.
I was careful to use the qualifier 'most often' but still get a canned response. I'll stick with the truth ---Most Often abortion is not a healthcare decision.
Oh that is nice. Really nice. My 26 year old nephew is going to be in a wheelchair soon, his mother is losing the ability to control her lower limbs and mine was a "canned response." Uh huh. Gotta love that attitude from some of the people who are pro-life at any cost.
I had a shirt-tail relative who gave birth to two sons born without legs. If that had happened after ultrasound was invented and the parents could have been given a choice whether or not they were up to the extreme challenges those births brought into their lives, I don't think anyone else has the right to judge them if they had aborted.
I find it interesting that no one has remarked on this.
Until you have some idea of how to handle the MILLION + new children EVERY year, you have no business trying to force women to have those children.
Nobody is forcing anything. The choice here should be whether to have sex or not, to use protection or not. Not whether to kill the being THEY created through free will.
I was careful to use the qualifier 'most often' but still get a canned response. I'll stick with the truth ---Most Often abortion is not a healthcare decision.
Correct. I am still waiting for someone to tell me which "life threatening" conditions to the mother would warrant aborting her child. Not holding my breath....
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.
