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.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,016,954 times
Reputation: 36027
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl
I never thought I’d hear you agree with my “no people under any circumstance should breed” stance. Kudos.
It’s none of your business what any woman chooses to do with her body.
Uh ... If you reread my post that you responded to, you'd see that I was being very sarcastic. In no way, shape or form do I ever agree with your anti "breeding" stance.
Location: where the moss is taking over the villages
2,184 posts, read 5,550,483 times
Reputation: 1270
any plan, public or not,
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
So your point is pregnant women and their disabled children are refused medical treatment because we don't have a public option that, if we believe the Democrats, doesn't ration care yet saves money over the private insurance system that does?
Why even debate this. There are no restrictions on the why. You can abort because you had a bad day. Or downs. Or as in China, because it's a girl. Or when the test is created, gay. Its a womans right to abort a perfectly healthy future gay. But only if she thinks she may experience psychological irritation of some sort because of it. I'm sure you agree. How ironic if abortion on demand leads to the extinction of gays. The abortion tool scrapes both ways.
As I stated in a previous post, being gay is not equatable with being autistic. Gay people aren't sick and can function perfectly fine in the world. Aborting a baby because it will be gay would be similar to aborting your baby because it will have brown eyes and you want it to have blue eyes. I guess we know what will happen to your baby if it gets 'diagnosed' as gay in womb.
On a side note
I like the discussions everyone is having. It seems people have some very vocal opinions about the issue. I think it is good to talk these situations out.
If a man doesn't want to be a father, he should wrap it, snip it, or keep it in his pants.
Go back and reread what I wrote:
" he also can't get her pregnant if she says no or take proper precautions. The same goes for men, if he doesn't want kids, say no or take precautions. That is one thing I can say that more men need to do is to take precautions into their own hands as well."
I clearly stated that men need to take responsibility for it too. However, unfortunately, you can't trust your partner to take precautions. You have to take them yourselves. There are women who will tell a man she is on birth control when she isn't. Or men who say they have been snipped when they haven't. Excluding long term relationship or marriages (and sadly sometimes that isn't even the case) each individual must take responsibility themselves.
I would never trust a man if he told me he couldn't get me pregnant. I would make sure I was protected myself. Just as he shouldn't take my word that I am protected. He should protect him self.
Plus when both partners take precaution it significantly helps decrease the margin of error.
So actually no I didn't sound sexist. My post was just misread or not read in its entirity.
And for that matter I am female. I am not sexist against my own gender.
If a child was diagnosed with ADD/ADHD at age two could the woman chose to kill him? Could she kill her unborn baby girl if she was discovered to be genetically predisposed to be gay or overweight? You need to provide a list of when it's ok to kill and when life can be considered sacred. . . or if it's just the woman's unilateral choice. Does the father have a choice? Can he kill the life against the woman's wishes, and if so, for what acceptable reasons?
Next we can move onto addressing animals. . . baby chicks beginning to emerge from their eggs always give me pause. Can you crush them if a piece of shell remains attached or is it unacceptable if over 1/2 their head is through the shell? So many questions.
Location: where the moss is taking over the villages
2,184 posts, read 5,550,483 times
Reputation: 1270
oooohhhh don't get started on chickens. the answer to your rhetorical question is that if they could do that, they would. it would be more humane than what happens now. topic for elsewhere.
no one can diagnose much of anything with any certainty in the womb except m-a-y-be an unclosed spinal cord. and that's reparable. when you have a kid, you don't get to pick what you're dealt. it can take years for some things to get diagnosed or to surface.
Well.....Earlier this week, my aunt called the family to tell everyone that her son was diagnosed with autism. This unfortunate news prompted me to research a bit into the disease and it seems that doctors are very close to making a prenatal test for it.
Similarly to Down Syndrome, we can probably assume that when a prenatal test becomes available for autism, the fetuses diagnosed with the disease will vastly be aborted.
What are your all's thoughts on this? I'm particularly interested in hearing pro-lifeers opinions on the issue.
Its important to keep in mind that only a small minority of people diagnosed with autism fall on the 'high-functioning' end of the spectrum.
I guess I'll go first and say that I don't have a problem with women aborting a fetus if it is diagnosed with a disability in the womb.
do you have a link to an article about the prenatal test. Since they don't know what causes autism, I would be really surprised to find out they could test for it in the womb.
do you have a link to an article about the prenatal test. Since they don't know what causes autism, I would be really surprised to find out they could test for it in the womb.
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.
right on
i was implicating the other side because they love the flames so much.
any plan, public or not,
if i'm wrong, pretty please prove it. i would dearly enjoy being proven wrong on this one.
kate
