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.
What galls me is when women state that they have the right to control their own bodies. How about controlling it (abstinence or birth control methods) so they don't get pregnant in the first place and then claim that they have a right to control their bodies via an abortion?
Most birth control methods when used properly do not fail either.
I want to thank everyone who has been giving me rep points. I also want to encourage you to participate in the discussion.
Silence is why the pro-choice supporters truly believe that they are a majority, when they aren't.
Every poll indicates that the trend is shifting to pro-life and has been for almost a decade. The latest polls actually show that the country is evenly split, with more women supporting pro-life and more men -- in spite of every single prochoice posters opinion and belief -- supporting abortion.
What galls me is when women state that they have the right to control their own bodies. How about controlling it (abstinence or birth control methods) so they don't get pregnant in the first place and then claim that they have a right to control their bodies via an abortion?
Most birth control methods when used properly do not fail either.
I did have a right to a legal abortion when I had an unwanted pregnancy. Sorry, I forgot to ask random old guys on the internet if they approved. My bad!
What galls me is when women state that they have the right to control their own bodies. How about controlling it (abstinence or birth control methods) so they don't get pregnant in the first place and then claim that they have a right to control their bodies via an abortion?
Most birth control methods when used properly do not fail either.
Wrong. Look up birth control failure percentage by method when properly used.
Human embryos from the one-cell (zygote) stage forward show uniquely integrated, organismal behavior that is unlike the behavior of mere human cells. The zygote produces increasingly complex tissues, structures and organs that work together in a coordinated way. Importantly, the cells, tissues and organs produced during development do not somehow “generate†the embryo (as if there were some unseen, mysterious “manufacturer†directing this process), they are produced by the embryo as it directs its own development to more mature stages of human life. This organized, coordinated behavior of the embryo is the defining characteristic of a human organism.
In contrast to human embryos, human cells are alive and, under some circumstances, they can assemble into primitive tissues and structures. Yet under no circumstances do mere human cells produce the kind of coordinated interactions necessary for building a fully integrated human body. They do not produce tissues in a coherent manner and do not organize them so as to sustain the life of the entity as a whole. They produce tumors; i.e., parts of the human body in a chaotic, disorganized manner. They behave like cells, not like organisms.
By your definition, thousands upon thousands of "babies" are in a frozen limbo due to IVF, are you good with that?
Do you want IVF banned right along with abortion?
In fact, IVF is worse than abortion. Women do not get pregnant on purpose just so they can have an abortion.
On the other hand, women who use IVF make "babies" ON PURPOSE knowing full well most of them will spend eternity in a frozen grave and are as good as dead. How moral is that?
How about we remove fetuses intact, flash freeze them and treat them exactly the same as we treat IVF "babies"?
This is why I’m firmly pro-choice. It’s the height of hubris to believe you know better about what’s best for another person. To believe that is an extremely self centered viewpoint that seeks to dismiss and override the reality of the person effected by an unplanned pregnancy. No one knows what another person is struggling with or what toll remaining pregnant would take on their health, family, financial stability etc. “Pro-Lifers†attempt (poorly) to negate these issues. Funny how “pro-life†is very anti compassion and very much pro bashing women. I guess it’s easier to kick em when they’re down.
Great post. That's why I refused to use the moniker "pro-life." They are pro-forced-birthers. The woman, her personal situation, her family, her finances, her ability to care for a child, her own health and well-being, hell, even the life of the child once it is born--all of those mean absolutely nothing to a pro-forced birther. They care about one thing and one thing only, forcing women to give birth against their will. Don't flatter them with the pretense they care about life, because that concern stops at the other end of the birth canal.
Great post. That's why I refused to use the moniker "pro-life." They are pro-forced-birthers. The woman, her personal situation, her family, her finances, her ability to care for a child, her own health and well-being, hell, even the life of the child once it is born--all of those mean absolutely nothing to a pro-forced birther. They care about one thing and one thing only, forcing women to give birth against their will. Don't flatter them with the pretense they care about life, because that concern stops at the other end of the birth canal.
Yep. And they seem to be the first ones who b*tch about taxes that support babies born to women without the financial or emotional health to care for them. It all comes down to shaming women for having sex. The men who impregnated them of course get a pass.
It's not correct simply because I posted it. It's correct because it is the truth.
The baby has different DNA and can have a different blood type. It is a separate human being.
The fact that you as a "biologist" think a finger is equal to a baby indicates you had a very, very poor education.
And fact the baby shares DNA with the mother. As stated at least 10% of the fetus DNA flows through the mothers veins. Fetal DNA remains in the mother forever. So she carries her mothers DNA and her fetuses DNA.
Fact a fetus, up to viability which is cut off for abortion, can not survive outside the womb, just like a tumor, appendix, gallbladder can not survive independent of the body.
This in no way in the mind of an average adult equates to believing a finger is equal to a baby. I never said that, never mentioned the word finger. That was your belief and words, so goes to your education.
out of curiosity - let's say a couple has sex, it unexpectedly produces a child, but the man didn't expect or want to have a child. Should he be required to support that child in any way?
IMO, it would depend on the circumstances.
Are they married. Yes.
In a long term relationship.Yes
Casual sex and he will never be in the child's life. No
Problem arises when he changes his mind, which many men do, and there is nothing to prevent him from later contacting or having a relationship with his child.
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.
