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.
You are incorrect. We arent talking about the biology of miscarriage vs. abortion, we are talking about the difference in how the respective dead fetuses are perceived.
You must like moving the goalposts to suit you. The responses you've received including mine is to your question: Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
"We all know that deary. You are the one who ask it. The statements made was abortion kills. And so does miscarriage. Begs the question, why are some people not upset when a miscarriage occurs but get their knickers all in a bunch when an abortion occurs." The answers given fully address that question.
Can't wait to see what your next 'oh we're not talking about that' change will be.
You must like moving the goalposts to suit you. The responses you've received including mine is to your question: Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
"We all know that deary. You are the one who ask it. The statements made was abortion kills. And so does miscarriage. Begs the question, why are some people not upset when a miscarriage occurs but get their knickers all in a bunch when an abortion occurs." The answers given fully address that question.
Can't wait to see what your next 'oh we're not talking about that' change will be.
I'd like to know where that poster gets the idea that people aren't sad about miscarriages. With a miscarriage however the mother isn't purposely killing her baby while an abortion does.
These pro-abortionists get more desperate with their lame remarks with each and every post, don't they?
I'd like to know where that poster gets the idea that people aren't sad about miscarriages. With a miscarriage however the mother isn't purposely killing her baby while an abortion does.
These pro-abortionists get more desperate with their lame remarks with each and every post, don't they?
Philosophy or Religion? All those unborn, whether from miscarriage or abortion, were never meant to be born.
The Asian religions believe in reincarnation. It was not the right time for them to be born. It is called working out your karma in your next life. They will be born at another time, place, and to somebody else maybe.
Everyone will be "born again" in the literal sense.
I have heard some people say that you will meet those miscarried babies in heaven. Will they be a baby, child, or an adult? Personally, I find that kind of creepy. I personally prefer the reincarnation belief. My miscarried babies will be born again at another time and not only to me. My duty in this life is to care for my already born children.
Do you want to deny people their own religious views if they don't agree with yours?
Philosophy or Religion? All those unborn, whether from miscarriage or abortion, were never meant to be born.
The Asian religions believe in reincarnation. It was not the right time for them to be born. It is called working out your karma in your next life. They will be born at another time, place, and to somebody else maybe.
snip
This is new to me. Do you have a reference that may explain this more fully, or is this your philosophical opinion?
They seem to not be having problems as they're NOT the ones most often choosing to abort. Look at the statistics I posted. It's the women who can most easily afford to have and raise a baby that are choosing to abort at much higher rates than any other group.
Why do you think poor women remain poor? Even though I don't often agree with you, you're a very intelligent poster and you know why those numbers are what they are just as well as I do - it's those higher-earning women recognizing that for various reasons, having a child will often put a crimp in their earning potential (temporarily or permanently) and increase their expenses, thus decreasing their overall wealth potential. They recognize this because they are higher earning and often intelligent and driven and have generally made good decisions to that point to get where they are in life. Many have high student loan balances to deal with too. They're making a practical decision.
On the other hand, many of these women that are poverty level will have babies and remain poor because of it - they're often single and spend all of their time raising their kids instead of potentially improving themselves. Many of these babies aren't wanted and will end up not reaching their potential at best, or end up as criminals at worst because they're often not brought up in a stable environment. A small percentage will succeed regardless.
Imo it would be better for more wealthy women to have more babies and more women in poverty not to (and yes that means abortions) because my perception is that we are doing a great job of creating multiple generations of ignorant people while intelligent people don't have babies much at all anymore. Not popular to say, but would definitely lead to a better country over time. Unfortunately both the fact that poor women have a lot of babies and wealthy women don't is largely cultural at this point and unlikely to change. The best thing we as a country can do is significantly strengthen family-friendly policies (large amounts of maternity/paternity leave, expanded child tax benefits that apply to higher earning people, etc) that would make higher-earning women and couples more comfortable with the economic aspects of raising a child.
Philosophy or Religion? All those unborn, whether from miscarriage or abortion, were never meant to be born.
The Asian religions believe in reincarnation. It was not the right time for them to be born. It is called working out your karma in your next life. They will be born at another time, place, and to somebody else maybe.
Everyone will be "born again" in the literal sense.
I have heard some people say that you will meet those miscarried babies in heaven. Will they be a baby, child, or an adult? Personally, I find that kind of creepy. I personally prefer the reincarnation belief. My miscarried babies will be born again at another time and not only to me. My duty in this life is to care for my already born children.
Do you want to deny people their own religious views if they don't agree with yours?
Huh? Babies that were aborted out of convenience were never meant to be born????
I'm not a religious person and I don't believe in re-incarnation. Abortion is social immorality to me!
Why do you think poor women remain poor? Even though I don't often agree with you, you're a very intelligent poster and you know why those numbers are what they are just as well as I do - it's those higher-earning women recognizing that for various reasons, having a child will often put a crimp in their earning potential (temporarily or permanently) and increase their expenses, thus decreasing their overall wealth potential. They recognize this because they are higher earning and often intelligent and driven and have generally made good decisions to that point to get where they are in life. Many have high student loan balances to deal with too. They're making a practical decision.
On the other hand, many of these women that are poverty level will have babies and remain poor because of it - they're often single and spend all of their time raising their kids instead of potentially improving themselves. Many of these babies aren't wanted and will end up not reaching their potential at best, or end up as criminals at worst because they're often not brought up in a stable environment. A small percentage will succeed regardless.
Imo it would be better for more wealthy women to have more babies and more women in poverty not to (and yes that means abortions) because my perception is that we are doing a great job of creating multiple generations of ignorant people while intelligent people don't have babies much at all anymore. Not popular to say, but would definitely lead to a better country over time. Unfortunately both the fact that poor women have a lot of babies and wealthy women don't is largely cultural at this point and unlikely to change. The best thing we as a country can do is significantly strengthen family-friendly policies (large amounts of maternity/paternity leave, expanded child tax benefits that apply to higher earning people, etc) that would make higher-earning women and couples more comfortable with the economic aspects of raising a child.
Poor women who can't afford to take care of their own kids have access to birth control so that they don't get pregnant in the first place. Why aren't they using it?
As a man, I really do not understand why or how women are still "accidentally" getting pregnant in the 21st century. It makes zero sense.
-You have condoms.
-You have a variety of contraception and birth control options.
-You have the pull-out method.
-You have oral and manual stimulation options.
-A woman can track her menstrual cycle and avoid vaginal intercourse on the days she is fertile.
None of this is rocket science.
So why are women still "accidentally" getting pregnant?
Are they idiots? Irresponsible?
Did their birth control some how fail?
What's going on?
"In a study of sexual trends in the United States, researchers at the University of Utah found that promiscuity is rising for women and declining for men. The number of women who've had sex with more than 15 partners has increased over the past few decades, from 3 percent to 7 percent. The opposite is true of men, who are having sex with fewer partners than they did in previous years, the researchers said."
[URL]https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-04-women-loosening-sexually.html[/URL]
Do men need to take better care of their sexual health? I mean, they have condoms and abstinence at their disposal. Why are they "accidentally" impregnating women given the financial and emotional support to which it obligates them?
Do men need to take better care of their sexual health? I mean, they have condoms and abstinence at their disposal. Why are they "accidentally" impregnating women given the financial and emotional support to which it obligates them?
This. If a man isn’t using bc every time he has sex during his sexually active years, he has deliberately been having unprotected sex. He is relinquishing his personal responsibility for his own sperm to his partner. Irresponsible. If you call it irresponsible for a woman not to use bc correctly or not using 2 different bc then the same can be said of men. Men need to mind their sperm, especially if they don’t want their offsprings to be aborted.
This. If a man isn’t using bc every time he has sex during his sexually active years, he has deliberately been having unprotected sex. He is relinquishing his personal responsibility for his own sperm to his partner. Irresponsible. If you call it irresponsible for a woman not to use bc correctly or not using 2 different bc then the same can be said of men. Men need to mind their sperm, especially if they don’t want their offsprings to be aborted.
Exactly. I'm tired of the creation story nonsense that women bear all of the responsibility for "sin" and in the end, that's all this is. It's long past time to stop heaping blame on Eve and letting Adam off the hook.
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.
