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.
If there was a pill that did the deed say up to 12 weeks, not sure if there is already one, then this whole matter would be a non issue.
The fact that abortions are required, tells me that assistance is required for a decision of not wanting a baby that was not planned.
I know there a a number of attacks at present against planned parenthood in the USA and I am amazed the folk do not think these things through. I have heard the argument "I do not want my tax dollars paying for an abortion" but if that unwanted baby goes to term and the mother cannot care for it, she either has to give it up for adoption or becomes a liability to the state in providing for the child on govt handouts. Which is more costly?
Of course, the prevailing abstinence program does not seem to be working as the incidences of teen pregnancies appear to happen in the areas where abstinence is the supposed norm. If planned parenthood provides for contraception for those that either cannot afford it or in cases where they are denied it by their peer groups/families etc. How is that a bad thing?
The abortion issue is sadly viewed as some moral conscience but ignores the other factors I have mentioned. IMO, sex ed and planned parenthood should be pushed as planned families usually fare better than unplanned. Expecting abstinence when the hormones are going crazy which is our drive/natural instinct to procreate, is stupid. A 16 YO has these urges and is in no way ready to become a parent. Forced marriages to save face are archaic and I know if this ever happened to my daughter who is already 19, I would not allow her to marry till she got her degree. However, we have given them sex ed from our side and as parents do not fool ourself they are little angels.
This has been happening since the beginning of time, no one can say that these urges were not the focal point of teenagers 300 years ago. Of course, back then women were mere walking incubators and married early. Society has changed and women are now equal to men.
The odd thing is that Mary was impregnated at approx 14 and that is "unheard" of in the modern christian society yet it was no big issue back then. I never believed in the immaculate conception as we all know how women get pregnant. Invisible people cannot make real people pregnant. Oh it does happen that minors get pregnant but that just goes to show that we need to adjust to try and prevent this from happening, any father that lets a 14 YO girl go on dates is asking for trouble. That said, I do think already at this age, their fascination with boys is a little how can you say - more suggestive?
If there was a pill that did the deed say up to 12 weeks, not sure if there is already one, then this whole matter would be a non issue.
The fact that abortions are required, tells me that assistance is required for a decision of not wanting a baby that was not planned.
I know there a a number of attacks at present against planned parenthood in the USA and I am amazed the folk do not think these things through. I have heard the argument "I do not want my tax dollars paying for an abortion" but if that unwanted baby goes to term and the mother cannot care for it, she either has to give it up for adoption or becomes a liability to the state in providing for the child on govt handouts. Which is more costly?
Of course, the prevailing abstinence program does not seem to be working as the incidences of teen pregnancies appear to happen in the areas where abstinence is the supposed norm. If planned parenthood provides for contraception for those that either cannot afford it or in cases where they are denied it by their peer groups/families etc. How is that a bad thing?
The abortion issue is sadly viewed as some moral conscience but ignores the other factors I have mentioned. IMO, sex ed and planned parenthood should be pushed as planned families usually fare better than unplanned. Expecting abstinence when the hormones are going crazy which is our drive/natural instinct to procreate, is stupid. A 16 YO has these urges and is in no way ready to become a parent. Forced marriages to save face are archaic and I know if this ever happened to my daughter who is already 19, I would not allow her to marry till she got her degree. However, we have given them sex ed from our side and as parents do not fool ourself they are little angels.
This has been happening since the beginning of time, no one can say that these urges were not the focal point of teenagers 300 years ago. Of course, back then women were mere walking incubators and married early. Society has changed and women are now equal to men.
The odd thing is that Mary was impregnated at approx 14 and that is "unheard" of in the modern christian society yet it was no big issue back then. I never believed in the immaculate conception as we all know how women get pregnant. Invisible people cannot make real people pregnant. Oh it does happen that minors get pregnant but that just goes to show that we need to adjust to try and prevent this from happening, any father that lets a 14 YO girl go on dates is asking for trouble. That said, I do think already at this age, their fascination with boys is a little how can you say - more suggestive?
There is what is called a morning after pill that has been brought up before on this issue in other threads, yet the devout anti-choice people had issues with that as well.
There is what is called a morning after pill that has been brought up before on this issue in other threads, yet the devout anti-choice people had issues with that as well.
Even worse, there are those with a problem against condoms as well. Apparently not giving the sperm a chance to get to an egg is interfering with gods plan or something. As if an imaginary magical god couldnt plan for condoms.
Even worse, there are those with a problem against condoms as well. Apparently not giving the sperm a chance to get to an egg is interfering with gods plan or something. As if an imaginary magical god couldnt plan for condoms.
I have read that as well. It really makes me wonder.
Oh - and just in case anyone knows - Planned Parenthood never used government funding to pay for abortions. They use the funding to pay for things like exams, cancer screenings - and all sorts of stuff that teenage girls and women without health insurance need.
Also - for those that are interested - the morning after pill does not cause an abortion. The morning after pill prevents a pregnancy. That is why it has to be used so soon after intercourse - it prevents a pregnancy from occuring.
To be perfectly honest - after being pregnant myself - I really think all abortions should happen within the first 8 weeks. That is before you can hear a heartbeat. But that is my personal feeling. The sooner the better - but I'd say definitely within the first trimester.
Even though I would never get one and I don't think that they are "great" solutions - I'll never be able to forget how I felt as a teenager, petrified that I was pregant. I'm lucky that I was always safe and that I never got pregnant. However, I'm such a crazy that I used to be afraid that I was pregnant before I had even had sex!
I'm such a crazy that I used to be afraid that I was pregnant before I had even had sex!
LoL - gets image of a prowling holy ghost.
I think it the "shame factor" society has burdened women with. For men there are no real consequences. For me it was always odd how a family could almost disown a child if they got in the family way. Being the youngest, my brother was 23 when he got a 15YO pregnant. As a 13YO I vowed never to be that irresponsible. He married, had another kid and they divorced after 6 years.
I still remember my xian folks considering abortion at the time. Her father however refused and he was not xian go figure. Of course, my brother brought shame on the family name as my dad was a deacon at that stage.
It did turn out alright for awhile and my dad got over it and loved his grand kids.
I agree with you Nea...life is just sooooooo "complicated" now. Says I...as I type on a computer. LOL!
Oh, and TKramar (I really dig your cynical/sarcastic style)...I rarely agree with Nea...but this I have learned---She is REALLY sharp...incredibly tenacious...and can "sting you" if you give her the slightest opening. You have your work cut out for you if you go "toe to toe" with her. Believe THAT!
She can't provide one example of a person so important that the world would miss him or her. And in fact, if ALL people were extinct, the planet could heal. Animals don't abuse the planet, and nature takes care of overabundant animal populations--where humans haven't come in and taken out the predators in the area.
I really hate the way the poll is worded. You only have two very black and white choices: Either you're pro-life (as though life is a clearly defined, black and white choice in itself) or you're pro-abortion (which sounds like you actually prefer the entire human race abort all developing fetuses).
The truth of the matter is that I don't feel like I have a horse in the race. Women have the right to their bodies and their reproductive rights and that's the only stance I really take on the issue. Any restriction of a woman's reproductive rights or taking a choice away from what they want to do with their bodies, I am against. If that means they can opt to have an abortion to terminate a zygote then so be it.
In reality, I don't think that most women just go out, have sex, and then go about aborting babies because it's something they just feel compelled to do. Yeah, there might be a few people sick in the head who do it to garner attention, but, by and large, I think it's probably one of the most demonstratively difficult decisions a woman would probably ever make in her entire life.
So, let's can the misnomer of "pro-abortion" and go with "pro-choice." Otherwise, the OP has already provided a red herring and the premise of this entire thread is flawed.
She can't provide one example of a person so important that the world would miss him or her. And in fact, if ALL people were extinct, the planet could heal. Animals don't abuse the planet, and nature takes care of overabundant animal populations--where humans haven't come in and taken out the predators in the area.
Us HUMANS are a part of this world, we evolved here as did the animals. And while I agree we use and abuse, it in no way means we should just wipe ourselves out. It would be more productive to find a way to reduce impact and turn things around. Which we are doing little by little, a little to slow for my taste. Again WE are apart of this world, unless you mean the earth has a brain and is aware and conscience.
Unfortunately for the planet, we're a pox upon it. We've done nothing that's benefited the planet, and a lot to harm it.
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.
