| Jan 14, 2006 @ 2:23 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
Angel54214
Posts: 14,056
|
does a cucumber have sperm?  Pete you make me laugh!
Heaven, my post was food for thought really.
I don't support abortion. I feel the government is all backwards on the whole issue. They can't justify their past failed mistakes in society. Look at how long welfare took place and still taking place. People having kids just to pick up that added income per month. It went all out of porportion from the origin. All the governments fault there. Now they been sweeping the country to ween out welfare in each state.
Abortion is a moral issue and should not be a government controlled life issue. Just like church and state is separate. The government needs to take a good look at what the outcome has been, where they went wrong and fix it. They milk the crime in our country and you see no positive change on crime rate. Its all about money, how they can make more money on all ends of all issues. If they pass to legalize abortion, they just better be prepared for all outcomes even the lack of education to women that choose to have one on the health risks factors and even self death. Abortion shouldn't even be on the table, its the other garbage the government should be focusing on and strenghen where they are weak. We are not over populated with unwanted babies and children, we are opver populated with illegal immagrants. I could go on forever, but I will calm down now...
|
|
  |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 2:43 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
mangolover60
Posts: 635
|
Well, actually, I wasn't really supposed to be conceived, let alone born. But somebody had to do my job, So, my father married and I came about. 
Also, Heavenly, on sin the of Onan, and the evenutual fatal punishment, was not so much about "wasting his seed", which Christians use for an argument against masterbation, it was more about contract law. He was violating the contract that was a marriage custom of the times. The contract was of course, "seeding" his brothers wife because his brother was not around (i.e. dead).
However, under the law any offspring would be considered his late brother's, which he did not like. So, he thought he'd take the law into his own hands (so to speak) and thought he'd go through a loop hole (so to speak) , which was much like Bush complies with the law, screwing her without paying. The upper courts, i.e. "God" in this case, ruled against, and did not offer clemency.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 2:53 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
mangolover60
Posts: 635
|
Look at how long welfare took place and still taking place. People having kids just to pick up that added income per month.
Angel, how rampant do you think this practice is?
Do people still believe in Regan's Welfare Queen?
And, funny, these money hungry women are the exact women the government is trying to stop having abortions!
So, which is better? Paying for more kids, or paying for abortions?
BTW, rich women can always get the choice they can pay for!
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 3:38 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
Angel54214
Posts: 14,056
|
Mango...you got some very good points there: New Thread?
Angel, how rampant do you think this practice is?
Its not a rampant practice but a state program. I know by the government per state to stop the income increase on addition children stopped over 10 years ago. It started on the east coast and swept to the west do to population. California and Texas the last states due to being the largest ones. Its not a rampant program any longer.
And, funny, these money hungry women are the exact women the government is trying to stop having abortions!
I didn't state "women" gender, but I stated people. It takes 2 to tango...  The misuse of government funds by buying drugs and alcohol instead of using funds for the children has been the prolonged fall back on the program. Crime also and these people who sucked up welfare wrongfully by lieing and having more children, they are the ones that are uneducated for jobs and many too lazy to get education and a job.
Abortion is not a rampant aftermath of the welfare recipients. Abortion is from all classes of life and reasons of the choice.
So, which is better? Paying for more kids, or paying for abortions?
These two components you mentioned, should not be chosen of either one. The average american family in the last 50 years has been 3-4 children or less. The parents are responsible for the economy of their own children. Due to high divorce rate and break-ups, unfortunately our prisons are over crowded with non-paying parents (both genders). So the little children suffer the most. Lack of food, clothing, medical, education, love and upbringing. Then public support is in search for these needs.
I think women that have chosen abortion comes from these areas:
Responsibility
Money
Lack of Job
Not Educated
Children having Children
Health Factors
Single Parenthood
Encouraged by boyfriend/spouse
Rape
Giving It Up
Thats the important top ones that come to my mind.
BTW, rich women can always get the choice they can pay for!
It is not always a safe choice. Women that have an abortion are in high health risk, even death. The breast cancer is at 50% of the Mother. Abortion also can and does cause permanent sterilization in women. Here are a few complications that take place after an abortion is performed:
Cervical tearing and laceration from the instruments.
Perforation of the uterus by instruments. This may require major surgery, including hysterectomy.
Scarring of the uterine lining by suction tubing, curettes, or other instruments.
Infection, local and systemic.
Hemorrhage and shock, especially if the uterine artery is torn.
Anesthesia toxicity from both general or local anesthesia, resulting in possible convulsions, cardiorespiratory arrest, and in extreme cases, death.
Retained tissue, indicated by cramping, heavy bleeding, and infection.
Postabortal syndrome, referring to an enlarged, tender and soft uterus retaining blood clots.
Failure to recognize an ectopic pregnancy. This could lead to the rupture of a fallopian tube, hemorrhage, and resulting infertility or death, if treatment is not provided in time.
*Have to keep in mind that men have a great role in the abortion component issue as the male parent.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 4:06 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
mangolover60
Posts: 635
|
Angel,
It's great that you list all the problems with having a surgical abortion, it almost reads like the warning sheet you get when you sign off on open heart surgery! Also, a lot of unsavory things can happen to you if you cross some streets in LA, as well.
Every one of the women that I know who have had an abortion are educated and thought long and hard weighing their particular situations, risks, and consequences before they made their decision. I can say without a doubt, that for not one of them it wasn't anything less than an emotionally grueling decision.
I've also known friend who went through 9 miscarriages trying to have "her own" kids, knowing each time she got pregnant, she had a 90% chance of not going to term. And she lost most of them between the 2nd and 3rd trimesters.
So, now on the other side of the coin, what about those 15 "kids" that never came to be, because of her known uterine problem? What should the government do or not do there, and why?
[BTW, on her 10th pregnacy, with quadruplets, she carried til almost 8 months, born premature though C-section due to death of two, two lived, and are now about 8 years old.] The kids were on medication for many years, and I think are now considered healthy, but they are small for their age.]
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 5:37 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
Angel54214
Posts: 14,056
|
Well God forbid if government intervenes on women's choice of having children and any risk factors. Today's medical teams develop procedures to help the stages of fetus to come full term. One techinique called a Cerclage that is inserted for additional uterus support to help the duration of the pregnancy for a full term infant.
A woman is a baby machine as a fact. The wonderful gender that can reproduce a human being. Having twins, triplets, etc. is genetic chromesone splitting, Just like a person born with more than 10 toes or fingers. Life is not perfect for sure. Women go through their most inner being during the nine month developement period. Its tragic when loss takes place. But to try and try again only shows the woman more determined to not fail in the very part that makes life.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 6:14 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
darknitexx
Posts: 12
|
i was reading through only some of the responses, so i don't know if this point was brought up yet....
if a pregnant woman is killed, whether she knew of the pregnancy or not, it's considered a double homicide. even if the baby was conceived the day before. why then are we allowed to kill unborn children legally? how is there a difference? because the mother said it was ok? doesn't make much sense to me. how is a fetus a human being if someone else kills it, but only another cell if killed by its own mother? seems like this should be the new definition, webster...
murder: the killing of an unwanted human being.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 6:16 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
Classy_Blonde
Posts: 6,034
|
Yes Dark,
At least a couple of people here have brought that up. Thanks.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 6:25 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
mangolover60
Posts: 635
|
The fetus being counted in as a double murder has have some debate, as it was the intention of the anti-choicers to get that to into the law, or keep it from getting removed, I can't remember which.
But, all in all, that's just accounting. Murder is just murder. Why is murdering two is really any worse than murdering one?
I find it strange, however, that the following dicotomy exists (with the people that I converse with, I'm not siting any certified survey).
The people who are for a womans choice are against the death penalty.
The people who are against a womans choice are supporters for the death penalty.
The people who are for a womans choice are against sending people off to war.
The people who are against a womans choice are supporters for the war.
Just my observations.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 6:53 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
waiting41
Posts: 1,926
|
Waitings views:
Pro-life
Opposed to the death penalty
Opposed to war
A double murder is twice as bad
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 7:02 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
Heaveninawildflower
Posts: 15,332
|
Heaven's views:
Pro-choice
Anti-war (except in our own defense)
Opposed to death penalty
However, our straw poll here won't change a thing. If Roe v. Wade is reversed, women who choose to have abortions and can afford it will go overseas for them once again, which may help our struggling airlines. The infections and maiming caused by amateur abortionists will resume. As Mango said, rich women always have a choice.
[Edited on 1/14/2006 7:16 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 8:02 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
FreekMe1974
Posts: 58
|
Heaven's views:
Pro-choice
Anti-war (except in our own defense)
Opposed to death penalty
You can't be pro choice and anit abortion. The two go hand in hand. The right to have an abortion is the right to choose in it's most rawest form. Basically what this abortion issue amount to is the far christian right trying to turn their opinions into law. I don't agree to abortion personally but I would never tell another woman she couldn't have one just because I don't believe in it. I would most certainly not try to legislate that opinion.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 8:14 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
chinabull2000
Posts: 7,012
|
I was an unwanted child. My birth-mother had a one-night-stand with a travellign salesman and I was the result. I was given up for adoption straight after my birth.
My daughter was an "accident". I was just about to leave her mother when I found out about the pregnancy, and I stuck around, married her, and consequently suffered the worst few years of my life. But now I am a single-parent to my beautiful little girl, and I cannot imagine life without her.
Because of my own experiences with this, I can certainly say that I am not a supporter of abortion, but at the same time I fully believe that people have the right to choose what is best for them.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 8:32 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
Greystone1
Posts: 1,677
|
You can't be pro choice and anit abortion.
Really?
I don't agree to abortion personally
Anti-Abortion
but I would never tell another woman she couldn't have one just because I don't believe in it.
Pro-Choice
[Edited on 1/14/2006 8:34 PM]
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 9:43 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
FreekMe1974
Posts: 58
|
but I would never tell another woman she couldn't have one just because I don't believe in it.
Pro-Choice
Non-Communism. Pro Civil Liberties, Pro Constitution.
Greystone = Right Wing Propagandist.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 9:44 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
Pete73052
Posts: 19,368
|
Greystone, I noticed that too...
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 10:11 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
greenizenora
Posts: 629
|
I don't think this has been mentioned yet. . .
Maybe what really needs to be done is make the "morning after" pill over-the-counter.
IF conception has taken place, the fertilized egg is prevented from implanting in the uterus. . . and it never gets bigger than a few cells.
If you think about it in those terms. . . as just a few cells. . .is it really any different than losing an eyelash. . .they're made up of several thousand cells.
BTW, I'm pro-choice, pro-death penalty, and pro-war
Go figure.
[Edited on 1/14/2006 10:13 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 10:13 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
FreekMe1974
Posts: 58
|
Maybe what really needs to be done is make the "morning after" pill over-the-counter.
This option has been on the table for a long time now but some pharmacies won't sell it to patients cause they think it's the same thing as abortion. It's the pharmacists descretion if they want to sell it or not so some women get it and some don't.
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 10:14 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please)
|
|
Pete73052
Posts: 19,368
|
Greystone = Right Wing Propagandist.
Libertarian would be my guess. Me too!
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 14, 2006 @ 10:22 PM |
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice (Enter calmly please) |
|
greenizenora
Posts: 629
|
It's the pharmacists descretion if they want to sell it or not so some women get it and some don't.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. . .that would be like them deciding pain medication led to illegal drug activity, so they weren't going to sell them to anybody.
Besides. . .conception may not have even taken place. . .they're only to be taken when unsure of the effectiveness of your birth control.
|
| |
|
|
|
|