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 your post says to me is that it is not the actual fetus your concerned about but the actions, or perceived sin, of the mother.
You avoid the statement by saying all deaths should be everyone's concern instead of addressing why no one is concerned over the millions of miscarriages, or those fertilized eggs destroyed in IVF or certain BC that prevents fertilized eggs from implanting. Then you explain its not the loss of life but the cause of the loss of life." intended loss of life by the mother "
You might want to read up on birth control methods. The IUD prevents implantation. The minipill focuses on preventing implantation not ovulation. One step of combination oral contraceptives is preventing implantation if breakthrough ovulation occurs. Just FYI.
Just because I support a woman's choice to legal, safe, reasonable abortion does not mean I have an agenda. I'm way past childbearing age, have sons who are past reproduction worries and only have grandsons, so abortion doesnt affect me personally. No reason for me to have an agenda.
And yes I am upset by the daily stories of children being neglected, molested, physically abused, tortured and killed by their parents as well as the children I see in my community being raised by relatives because their parents abandoned them. Whether a fetus, I'm not even aware of, gets snuffed out before it has a chance to develop and become a born child dosent even register with me and I cant understand why others worry so much about them.
The more I hear anti choice people speak the more I'm convinced they arent, its the women being able to make that choice that is bothering them.
Nothing in my post indicates that I think it's a sin for a woman to have sex. In fact all I have said is she should protect herself from an unwanted pregnancy. You're just making stuff up to defend your pro-abortion stance and you know it.
Miscarriages cannot be avoided it's Mother Nature at work. Just more strawman arguments from you. I don't need to read up on BC methods. I am married and with three children. When my wife and I didn't want a baby she used birth control pills and that was all that was needed as she never got pregnant while on them. If she had we wouldn't have aborted the baby we would have accepted it into our lives and cared for it.
What you seem to gloss over is that most abortions are out of convenience and that shouldn't be the case even if BC fails.
Don't even try to pretend that you're defense of abortion is due to unwanted children being abused. It's a cop out. Babies can always be adopted out and are much more desirable than an older child. I see right through your lame excuses.
I'm not anti-choice I'm anti-abortion under most cases. It has nothing to do with controlling women. It's about the destruction of human life to me. However, if the mother's life is in danger or she has been raped those are exceptions with me. Those are the two times when the woman should have priority over the unborn.
How do you know they arent. Are men really that stupid and helpless that they have to be asked or told to wear a condom?
Neither my boys nor grandsons had to be asked. They took it upon themselves to be responsible for their own reproduction and made sure they had and used condoms. So did my brother and my brothers by other mothers years ago.
Why are men becoming more irresponsible and helpless?
Again, you push the blame on men who aren't the ones to get pregnant. Should they be responsible? Of course, but ultimately it is up to the woman to make sure that she and her sexual partner are protected. I don't know why you just don't get that.
Again, you push the blame on men who aren't the ones to get pregnant. Should they be responsible? Of course, but ultimately it is up to the woman to make sure that she and her sexual partner are protected. I don't know why you just don't get that.
Bingo…truly amazing how this is argued, but a great recipe for women to get themselves pregnant and blame meanie men for it.
Nothing in my post indicates that I think it's a sin for a woman to have sex. In fact all I have said is she should protect herself from an unwanted pregnancy. You're just making stuff up to defend your pro-abortion stance and you know it.
Miscarriages cannot be avoided it's Mother Nature at work. Just more strawman arguments from you. I don't need to read up on BC methods. I am married and with three children. When my wife and I didn't want a baby she used birth control pills and that was all that was needed as she never got pregnant while on them. If she had we wouldn't have aborted the baby we would have accepted it into our lives and cared for it.
What you seem to gloss over is that most abortions are out of convenience and that shouldn't be the case even if BC fails.
Don't even try to pretend that you're defense of abortion is due to unwanted children being abused. It's a cop out. Babies can always be adopted out and are much more desirable than an older child. I see right through your lame excuses.
I'm not anti-choice I'm anti-abortion under most cases. It has nothing to do with controlling women. It's about the destruction of human life to me. However, if the mother's life is in danger or she has been raped those are exceptions with me. Those are the two times when the woman should have priority over the unborn.
You are concerned with women having abortions, the sin of terminating a pregnancy. I did not say for having sex.
Again, "miscarriages is mother nature" indicates its not the fetus your concerned about but the means by which it perished.
Do you realize everyone else out there is not your and your wife. The fact you wife used BC does not mean you know anything about how different BC works.
Again, your concern with the means not the actual fetus "you seem to gloss over is that most abortions are out of convenience"
And this made up "convenience", really.
Convenience is rescheduling an appointment not events that are life altering. Making a decision to avoid poverty or overall quality of life. For the fetus never having been is not the worst thing that can happen.
I never said my defense of abortion is due to unwanted children being abused. You are confusing yourself. I merely stated that I, personally, am more concerned for actual children here on earth than concerning myself with other women's uteri.
Anti choice is being against a woman's choice to have a safe, legal abortion, so yes you are anti-choice.
And once again, an exception for rape says you dont see that particular fetus as killing a baby as you would a fetus conceived by consensual sex. Again, your focus on the means not the actual fetus. Your statement declaring the two times a woman should have authority over her own body is a control issue.
You are concerned with women having abortions, the sin of terminating a pregnancy. I did not say for having sex.
Again, "miscarriages is mother nature" indicates its not the fetus your concerned about but the means by which it perished.
Do you realize everyone else out there is not your and your wife. The fact you wife used BC does not mean you know anything about how different BC works.
Again, your concern with the means not the actual fetus "you seem to gloss over is that most abortions are out of convenience"
And this made up "convenience", really.
Convenience is rescheduling an appointment not events that are life altering. Making a decision to avoid poverty or overall quality of life. For the fetus never having been is not the worst thing that can happen.
I never said my defense of abortion is due to unwanted children being abused. You are confusing yourself. I merely stated that I, personally, am more concerned for actual children here on earth than concerning myself with other women's uteri.
Anti choice is being against a woman's choice to have a safe, legal abortion, so yes you are anti-choice.
And once again, an exception for rape says you dont see that particular fetus as killing a baby as you would a fetus conceived by consensual sex. Again, your focus on the means not the actual fetus. Your statement declaring the two times a woman should have authority over her own body is a control issue.
You know, your assumptions, erroneous claims about me and other anti-abortionists and arguments are getting way out of whack and ridiculous, don't you? There is no reaching people like you that are hell bent on defending the indefensible. You won't even accept the fact that I do prioritize the woman under certain circumstances. Nothing will satisfy you unless someone agrees with you 100%. Buh, bye!
Again, you push the blame on men who aren't the ones to get pregnant. Should they be responsible? Of course, but ultimately it is up to the woman to make sure that she and her sexual partner are protected. I don't know why you just don't get that.
You know it dosent matter if they are the ones physically carrying the fetus. The fetus is biologically part of them and they are legally responsible for it.
And for the record, I am not placing blame on anyone. Throughout these discussions I have done the opposite of blaming anyone. I stress the fact that people are human and fallible and that regardless there will be a percent of the population that is irresponsible in general and I get accused of making excuses for women. It is some other posters who are constantly placing blame on women. Good grief the title of this thread is do women need to take more responsibility.
I'm 100% about personal responsibility.
that means a women is 100% responsible for her protection and a man is 100% responsible for his protection. I do not believe a woman is responsible for her partners protection. If he cant take responsibility for himself he shouldn't be having sex.
And I will stress again. The birth rate, the fertility rate and the abortion rate have declined over the past 30 years. It would not be declining if people were not taking more responsibility as in taking advantage of BC resources.
You know it dosent matter if they are the ones physically carrying the fetus. The fetus is biologically part of them and they are legally responsible for it.
And for the record, I am not placing blame on anyone. Throughout these discussions I have done the opposite of blaming anyone. I stress the fact that people are human and fallible and that regardless there will be a percent of the population that is irresponsible in general and I get accused of making excuses for women. It is some other posters who are constantly placing blame on women. Good grief the title of this thread is do women need to take more responsibility.
I'm 100% about personal responsibility.
that means a women is 100% responsible for her protection and a man is 100% responsible for his protection. I do not believe a woman is responsible for her partners protection. If he cant take responsibility for himself he shouldn't be having sex.
And I will stress again. The birth rate, the fertility rate and the abortion rate have declined over the past 30 years. It would not be declining if people were not taking more responsibility as in taking advantage of BC resources.
What you’re failing to realize is that just because the fetus is part of them doesn’t mean they’re going to stick around. It also doesn’t mean they’re going to be found, are able to pay child support, help with the baby, etc…, hence why women need to be responsible by using birth control or saying no if a man won’t.
You are placing blame and insisting men should use condoms. Problem is, when they don’t, and women have sex with them anyway, they most often end up pregnant.
What you’re failing to realize is that just because the fetus is part of them doesn’t mean they’re going to stick around. It also doesn’t mean they’re going to be found, are able to pay child support, help with the baby, etc…, hence why women need to be responsible by using birth control or saying no if a man won’t.
You are placing blame and insisting men should use condoms. Problem is, when they don’t, and women have sex with them anyway, they most often end up pregnant.
You're exactly right! Who is forcing these women to have sex with a man who refuses to use a condom? If I were a woman and didn't want to get pregnant I would use birth control myself and if I were really worried about getting pregnant anyway I would insist that my male partner do so also. If they refused then I would not have sex with them. Why can't that poster understand that but instead she chooses to ask silly questions about the male involved instead? You can't control what others will or won't do so you take matters into your own hands then.
You're exactly right! Who is forcing these women to have sex with a man who refuses to use a condom? If I were a woman and didn't want to get pregnant I would use birth control myself and if I were really worried about getting pregnant anyway I would insist that my male partner do so also. If they refused then I would not have sex with them. Why can't that poster understand that but instead she chooses to ask silly questions about the male involved instead? You can't control what others will or won't do so you take matters into your own hands then.
They’d rather blame men and make excuses for women even though only the woman can get pregnant, even though the women often end up as single mothers and men are nowhere to be found, and they complain about how hard it is for a woman to take care of children on there own, and especially financially. Makes zero sense.
They’d rather blame men and make excuses for women even though only the woman can get pregnant, even though the women often end up as single mothers and men are nowhere to be found, and they complain about how hard it is for a woman to take care of children on there own, and especially financially. Makes zero sense.
Yep, it does make zero sense that men can get someone pregnant and then absolve themselves of responsibility by going somewhere they can’t be found. Many situations where this happens are actually intended pregnancies, but men decided they can’t be bothered after the woman is pregnant or the child is born. I had one friend in grad school was the oldest of 8 (family is Catholic) and it wasn’t until then that the father decided to leave the mom on her own with them and was nowhere to be found.
It is very unusual these days that any parent is able to care for children financially on his/her own due to the increasing costs of childcare. It is hardly the woman’s fault. Even though people had one-income families in the past, that still isn’t the same as having one income and that one income has to pay for childcare while that parent works. I would imagine that even in the good old days, it was difficult. My great grandfather was disabled, so my great grandmother had to raise five kids on her own income. She encouraged her four daughters to get good jobs so they could provide for a family if they needed to on their own income. It has never been easy. Things happen that are not planned.
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.
