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.
Besides the fact that allowing a man to walk away from his child would increase the likelihood of a woman having an abortion, this whole men's rights argument makes for strange bedfellows with pro-life. This meme that women are somehow getting the better deal in the reproductive role of our species seems really odd to me. I can see men making the argument because they don't understand all that we go through, but women?
Women, next time you get your cycle and are doubled over with cramps remember how privileged you are to be able to do that because men will never get to experience that or PMS (firsthand that is, we're not totally heartless, we'll share our foul mood if you want) We could draw a few zits on your face once a month but I don't know how we simulate that awesome feeling of your entire bottom half falling out . Should I feel sorry for men because they've never gotten to experience staining through their clothing in a public place and hoping you have something to tie around your waist so you can get somewhere to clean yourself up without being seen? "Wow, bold fashion choice, Janice. White pants with a SpongeBob Squarepants backpack tied to your ass." How about when you find the PERFECT coral colored sheets; not too pink, not too orange. A bit pricy but totally worth it because they're PERFECT. Then BAM! you have new rags to wipe the Windex off the bathroom mirror. every.dang.month.for.40.years.
I know some women enjoy being pregnant but I wasn't one of them. I can't imagine anyone enjoying labor and delivery except for the knowledge that the pregnancy is almost over with. Hey, if a woman dies giving birth should we shoot the husband, you know...just to be fair?
I blew up like a dang ballon. Luckily I didn't get stretch marks but don't get me started about what it did to my boobies. I've seen women with stretch marks that look like they were drawn on with a pink sharpie clear up to their Alabama. I now sometimes pee when I laugh too hard and definitely when I sneeze. Both of those things are a frequent occurrence. I have a few spider veins leftover on my calves from carrying all that weight but all-in-all I survived my privilege status pretty unscathed. Do you know what my husband has? A tattoo with our daughter's name.
I did revel in my morning sickness though. It was awesome how the smell of my husband mouth breathing down a big mac could make me vomit. I really felt sorry for him enjoying food while I got the privilege of feeling like I was one weird smell away from emptying the context of my stomach. Just kidding there was nothing in my stomach, I couldn't keep anything down. Another thing that's fun is when the little bugger starts moving around. At first, that is. Then the kid gets bigger and treats your womb like the set of a Bruce Lee film. I remember one night my belly was pressed up against my husbands back and he said, with glee, that the baby was kicking him all night. Yeah honey, I know. Hey, what do you say we go to the emergency room just to make sure there's nothing wrong with my kidneys?
-an observation on politics: The GOP favors free use of guns, but not of abortion. It's the opposite for Dems. Apparently the Republicans think it's OK to kill people but not babies, while the Dems think it's OK to kill babies but not people.
I'm glad I cleared that all up for everyone
You cleared nothing up because your "observations" are misguided and ignorant of the facts.
Dems want to control people. They pretend to care for minorities yet minorities are targeted for aborting the most. THAT is genocide! You only need to read up on Sanger, the sociopath racist who started "Planned Parenthood" (an oxymoron) for the intentional purpose of extinguishing non-white races.
Republicans and Libertarians do not want to kill people. To say that they do is the most ignorant premise anyone could hold. You might as well believe they want to throw old people off a cliff. It's insane to believe that. It's even more insane to actually share the belief of such an absurd thing, even under an anonymous handle. Just because nobody knows who you are doesn't mean we don't think you a nut.
The only thing you got right is that Dems (Progs to be exact) want to kill babies to save the planet. THAT is what it boils down to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L8Gr8Apost8
Besides the fact that allowing a man to walk away from his child would increase the likelihood of a woman having an abortion, this whole men's rights argument makes for strange bedfellows with pro-life. This meme that women are somehow getting the better deal in the reproductive role of our species seems really odd to me. I can see men making the argument because they don't understand all that we go through, but women?
You cleared nothing up because your "observations" are misguided and ignorant of the facts.
Dems want to control people. They pretend to care for minorities yet minorities are targeted for aborting the most. THAT is genocide! You only need to read up on Sanger, the sociopath racist who started "Planned Parenthood" (an oxymoron) for the intentional purpose of extinguishing non-white races.
Republicans and Libertarians do not want to kill people. To say that they do is the most ignorant premise anyone could hold. You might as well believe they want to throw old people off a cliff. It's insane to believe that. It's even more insane to actually share the belief of such an absurd thing, even under an anonymous handle. Just because nobody knows who you are doesn't mean we don't think you a nut.
The only thing you got right is that Dems (Progs to be exact) want to kill babies to save the planet. THAT is what it boils down to.
It certainly is a complex question. I know how I would rule on it if I were Emperor, but I don't know if it's 'right" or not.
A few observations &/or facts:
- among non-mammalian animals, often the female expels oocytes into the water and the nearby male squirts out some sperm. The new little life starts when the two combine. Is that also true for mammals, whose offspring generally are not independently viable until birth?
-MotherNature tries to keep the species healthy by prohibiting the birth of imperfect fetus(es) [Note: fetus is a 4th declension Latin noun. Plural of fetus is really fetus.] It is estimated that 25% of human conceptions result in spontaneous abortion (miscarriage, usually very early-- "Gee, my period was two weeks late and I just spotted a little. How strange!) God must approve of abortion when things aren't perfect. --->
-What's "perfect?" In Nature, it usually refers to physical attributes (good health) that allow competitive survival. For humans, maybe we need to include psychological &/or economic "good health." ...Remember the SuperBowl commercial a few yr ago featuring the almost good enough to be a professional quarterback, Tim Tebow? He professed that his mother could have had an abortion, but didn't; "She wanted me and look how good I turned out!"...I couldn't help but think a good counter-argument would be for the camera to pan across the tiers of Cook County Jail and the announcer to say-- "Most of these guys were the result of unwanted pregnancies."
-re: fetus "feeling pain." Pain is a reflex arc. Any worm will "feel pain" when presented with a warm dry spot. It will reflexly move away to a cool, wet spot. It feels "pain." It does not suffer.
- an argument against abortion is that any fertilized egg is a "potential human being." Are we to prosecute any woman who goes unfertilized and menstruates? Every oocyte is a "potential human being." And what about the 10,000,000 sperm in each ejaculation? Pretty flimsy argument against abortion.
-In a perfect world, all pregnancies would be wanted.... But the world ain't perfect. If a woman is not impeded by a religion, we should allow her to accomplish her goal in as safe and clean an environment as possible. There's plenty of studies confirming that medical abortion during the 1st trimester is safe and effective and leaves very few serious physical or emotional scares on the woman....That can't be said for woman who give birth but then give the baby up for adoption-- very high rate of psychiatric trauma.
-an observation on politics: The GOP favors free use of guns, but not of abortion. It's the opposite for Dems. Apparently the Republicans think it's OK to kill people but not babies, while the Dems think it's OK to kill babies but not people.
I'm glad I cleared that all up for everyone
The GOP thinks it's ok to defend you and your family's lives...not just take innocent lives (baby or adult.)
The only reason someone aborts at 9 months is because of a major health issue or for a non-viable fetus due to medical problems or deformities.
But Rs want to make hypothetical abortions at 9 months the center of the debate when the reality is the vast majority of people who get abortions seek them in the first trimester.
At 9 mo( actually about 26 weeks or more), it shouldnt even be an abortion, but a delivery. And if the child is born alive, you provide lifesaving care. There is no reason for an abortion as opposed to delivery at that point. The baby/fetus can feel pain at that point.
Women are free to choose before engaging in sex. They can do an act that won't result in pregnancy or use 2 different methods of normally reliable birth control. If you know you absolutely do not want to be pregnant then use the pill correctly and a condom, or iud and a condom or stermacidal foam, etc. The number of abortions due to rape or incest are minute. Over 30 percent of abortions are 2nd, 3rd , 4th or more. Thats just irresponsible. Especially since there is the morning after pill/plan B for accidents, rape.
As far as I know, late term abortion is a misnomer. The woman still has to go through labor, and the baby comes partway out its mother vagina, and then the baby is killed by the dr. So the baby could have been normally born and lived, its just a convenient way to kill off the baby. Think about it. If the child is say 7 or 8 months along, but its mother is having medical problems, the Dr could perform a csection, the baby and mother both get to live.
As far as I know, late term abortion is a misnomer. The woman still has to go through labor, and the baby comes partway out its mother vagina, and then the baby is killed by the dr. So the baby could have been normally born and lived, its just a convenient way to kill off the baby. Think about it. If the child is say 7 or 8 months along, but its mother is having medical problems, the Dr could perform a csection, the baby and mother both get to live.
Well, you are just wrong. Senator Sanders, for instance, is now calling for 'population control' as a solution to global warming.
Solyent green, anyone?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RowingFiend
Unfortunately for you, OP, there is NO PLACE in the Democrat Party for you. Just ask Bob Casey. The Democrats demand 100% pro-choice up until birth and sometimes afterwards. They'll happily collect your vote, but don't you dare voice your opinion on this topic, be active with the party, or God forbid run for office.
Well, you are just wrong. Senator Sanders, for instance, is now calling for 'population control' as a solution to global warming.
Solyent green, anyone?
Birth control anyone?
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.
Senator Sanders, for instance, is now calling for 'population control' as a solution to global warming.
