Feds may define fetus as a child; prenatal-care plan stirs abortion debate

[yllus]

<< Yep, no matter where in life you go, you can always find an asshole. >>

Yes, that would be you. You've managed to stay off-topic in this thread with every reply - you're a real credit to your kind!

Why do some people assume because an atheist/agnostic does not believe in some higher power, we're without morals? My morals are shaped by my community, the way I was raised, my own inner logic. Not all of us need to fear a Hell in order to keep in line.

On-topic:
As someone said, this really does sound like a slippery slope situation. It sounds that the administration is starting to inch towards closing the door on legal abortion.

Although it saddens my heart to think of aborting a child I really think that the decision lies TOTALLY with the mother-to-be - keep YOUR emotional cries, grubby little hands and beliefs to yourself. Have some faith that a fellow human being is truly doing the right thing for both themselves and the child.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<< Although it saddens my heart to think of aborting a child I really think that the decision lies TOTALLY with the mother-to-be - keep YOUR emotional cries, grubby little hands and beliefs to yourself. Have some faith that a fellow human being is truly doing the right thing for both themselves <U>and the child</U>. >>





Interesting perspective. A mother knows when it is best to kill her child? Well it is right to kill I guess.

 

[BDawg]

<< It is a VERY grim thought. The problem is that abortions impact children other than these miserable victims. What we need to do is to postpone abortions until after birth and see if this is the case. We could form another federal agency, and the Director of Post-Birth Abortion could decide who's life wasn't worth living. We all know that an abused child could not possibly contribute to society, or have any personal happiness. Just think of the money we'd save. >>



As long as we're in the ignorant, could be, fantasy world, how about this thought.

We should not allow abortion because it kills babies. Instead, people who do not want their babies should choose adoption...only many of them don't choose adoption. Since I care about the best interest of the baby, we should force adoption on these people We could set up a cabinet level position...maybe director of homeland fertility who judges if a mother really wants the child. If so, she may keep the baby. Otherwise, the department takes the baby from her and gives it to a loving family.

Or better yet, we decide who really wants to have babies and who doesn't. We only allow people who want to have babies the right to fornication. The others can just rot. Or better yet, how about a test to see who the best parents are. Only they are allowed to reproduce the others can work to provide for the breeders babies.

 

[cressida]

<<

<< Although it saddens my heart to think of aborting a child I really think that the decision lies TOTALLY with the mother-to-be - keep YOUR emotional cries, grubby little hands and beliefs to yourself. Have some faith that a fellow human being is truly doing the right thing for both themselves and the child. >>





Interesting perspective. A mother knows when it is best to kill her child? Well it is right to kill I guess. >>



annoying.....

 

[yllus]

<< Interesting perspective. A mother knows when it is best to kill her child? Well it is right to kill I guess. >>

Does the female know about her own weight as a mother, her ability to provide for a child, if the child will be able to grow up in suitable circumstances...or do you?

 

[Kev]

<<

<< Interesting perspective. A mother knows when it is best to kill her child? Well it is right to kill I guess. >>

Does the female know about her own weight as a mother, her ability to provide for a child, if the child will be able to grow up in suitable circumstances...or do you? >>


That doesn't matter. What matters is: does her knowing this JUSTIFY killing the child.

Hypothetical: If you were the baby in one of these situations, would you personally rather have been aborted or put up for adoption?

That's what it all boils down to, the rights of the unborn child.

 

[rahvin]

<<This is actually a rather simple exercise. I assume that we all agree that a baby is a person. By baby, I mean a newborn. Starting at this point, let's go backwards moment by moment until the baby is no longer a person, and then explain to me what the difference is.>>

When the fetus can't survive outside the womb of the mother it's not a seperate entity, in fact it could be considered before that point as more of a parasitic lifeform because it's survival is dependent on the host. The term parasite has connotations though so don't consider that when you reply.

<< Your aunt could have adopted nearly overnight if she had been willing to adopt outside her race. >>

Uh, she did. >>


I'm curious, did she adopt a black/mixed child? My sister has had no problems adopting those children deemed in little demand. It got a little difficult after the 5th adoption but none took 4 years. I think your aunt was probably a little selective about what she was willing to accept in an adopted child.

<<Just one more ignorant comment in a (continuing) string of intellectually challenged posts from rahvin lately. LOL, given time, however, the odds are in your favor that at some point your "snap judgements" about people's situations, that you've got little clue about, might actually be correct.........but don't bet the farm on it.>>

If I keep at it, I just might be as ignorant as you some day, but I have a feeling that would take way to much practice on my part and I'm just not up to that.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<<

<< Interesting perspective. A mother knows when it is best to kill her child? Well it is right to kill I guess. >>

Does the female know about her own weight as a mother, her ability to provide for a child, if the child will be able to grow up in suitable circumstances...or do you? >>



Perhaps she should have thought about this before she got pregnant <hears the gasp>
I know lots of unfit mothers. Perhaps that is the fault of the woman and not the child? Seriously, I know many who would love to care for a child. But it is easier to get a Rolls Royce than to adopt a child. Anyway this could go a thousand different directions, personal responsibility, abuse, the whole nine yards. But a little story about mothers and personal responsibility. I knew a woman who lost a baby. I expressed my sympathy to her. Her response was, Yeah, I really wanted another kid so I could get a bigger welfare check. Well that made an impression on me. Was abortion the answer here? No a mandatory shot of Depo Provera every 3 months if she wants the check. Saying abortion is the "answer" is defining the pregnancy as the problem. No it the woman who is the problem Perhaps we should figure out how to keep people from getting knocked up and rewarded at the same time.

 

[Corn]

<< Does the female know about her own weight as a mother, her ability to provide for a child, if the child will be able to grow up in suitable circumstances...or do you? >>



Let me ask you a question 0sully: How many "poor" or "unloved" children choose for themselves to remain alive? They understand all too well the challenges they face in life, yet this very demographic is no more apt to commit suicide than spoiled rich kids. It would seem, that as far as these children are concerned, they believe it's in their best intrest to live.

If you were born into a poor family with no father, would you have killed yourself?

 

[Zwingle]

Have as many kids as you want....if you can support yourself and the children you have. If you get pregnant and you cannot afford your children don't expect me and other taxpayers to pay for your mistake. I am pro-abortion and pro-death penalty. Imaagine how high our taxes would be if all the children that were aborted had been born by mothers that could not take the responsibility of raising them. I believe that women that have had abortions were taking responsibilty for their actions. If abortion was outlawed now, can you imagine the death rate of mothers that were performing their own home abortions and trying to take responsibilty? Poverty would be much higher than it is and unemployment rates would be higher had abortion not been made legal. Pro lifers should be forced to pay more taxes if they feel that strongly about a bunch of cells that has no bearing on society. If pro-lifers were forced to pay more taxes, I believe we would see more pro-abortioners. I don't want to pay for someone else's mistake.
Pro-lifers - Put your money where your mouth is and take responsibilty for those irresponsible losers who cannot.
Don't expect any help from me, I am tired of paying taxes to take care of people that cannot.

 

[Mursilis]

<<

<< Liberal jerks!

Don't know a good thing when you see it.

You are so afraid of the "slippery slope" that you would rather deny prenatal care to those in need.

Friggin' idiots. >>



Right Wing Christian Conservative Nazi >>



It's sad pro-choicers continue the fallacy that the only possible basis of the pro-life position is theology/religion. Go here to learn otherwise: Atheist and Agnostic Pro-life League

 

[Corn]

<< If I keep at it, I just might be as ignorant as you some day, but I have a feeling that would take way to much practice on my part and I'm just not up to that. >>



Don't sell yourself short rahvin.......and get a damn tan you freak.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So Zwigle, I have a compromise. I will pay more in taxes if it is used to sterilize those women. I assume that would suit you.

 

[Mursilis]

<< and obviously people like you don't respect the a woman's decision on whether they are capable of providing a good home for the child or not. >>



No worse than people like you who don't respect a woman's decision to beat little Johnny senseless when he gets out of line. Or do you?

 

[Kev]

<< Have as many kids as you want....if you can support yourself and the children you have. If you get pregnant and you cannot afford your children don't expect me and other taxpayers to pay for your mistake. I am pro-abortion and pro-death penalty. Imaagine how high our taxes would be if all the children that were aborted had been born by mothers that could not take the responsibility of raising them. I believe that women that have had abortions were taking responsibilty for their actions. If abortion was outlawed now, can you imagine the death rate of mothers that were performing their own home abortions and trying to take responsibilty? Poverty would be much higher than it is and unemployment rates would be higher had abortion not been made legal. Pro lifers should be forced to pay more taxes if they feel that strongly about a bunch of cells that has no bearing on society. If pro-lifers were forced to pay more taxes, I believe we would see more pro-abortioners. I don't want to pay for someone else's mistake.
Pro-lifers - Put your money where your mouth is and take responsibilty for those irresponsible losers who cannot.
Don't expect any help from me, I am tired of paying taxes to take care of people that cannot. >>



wow, you are sick, greedy scumbag. sorry but not everything in this world boils down to the almighty dollar.

 

[Zwingle]

Read my thread again:
Don't expect any help from me, I am tired of paying taxes to take care of people that cannot.
Pregancy can be prevented.....sterilization is not the only option.....condoms can be gotten for free......

 

[Tsaico]

Often time to explain why there is so much pain and suffering in the world with our Creator at the helm, we say "He has given us the power to make our own choices. For good or bad, they are up to us, and in all circumstances he will forgive" and yet when it come to us, we throw this free choice idea out and say, "Wait, He didn't really mean to give us free choice, do as I say, since my choices are more valid than your own and I know better."

And an attempt to stay on topic, I think defineing the fetus as aunborn so the mom can get some help is a great idea. While I am pro-choice, I do not think that we should deny anyone health care. Most of the women are poor and most likely without a good support from husband or famly and need all the help they can get. Instead we seek t deny them health care and and frown on them when they leave their homes. You guys talk about compassion, try a little on these women who are scared about their futures. You would be surprised how many just want someone to listen. For those of you who are so "pro-life" walk into an abortion clinic and talk to some of the women why they are here and listen to what they say.

 

[gopunk]

<<

<<
Burn any churches lately?

no, but i can point you to a few ultra conservatives who have. >>



OK, so what you're saying is that anyone who is pro-life and/or likes Bush is an ultra-conservative? hoooboy. I'm not thinking you're an "ultra-liberal" for being pro-choice! >>



huh? show me where i said that...

 

[gopunk]

Like it or not, there is a practiced universal morality throughout the world, with clear right/wrong issues like murder and rape, while there are also some more hazy issues like abortion. So don't protest against someone forcing their morality on you, because it's your morality also. The only diffence is which side of the line you put abortion.

just because people happen to have morals that largely coincide with other people's does not mean that morality is a universal truth. morality is *defined* by where that line is placed.

 

[SleeplessHeart]

my reasoning is simple:

man won't carry child and so be it, at least woman should have the right to decide for her body and pregnancy

and by the way, i think al gore will probably fight the war as good as bush does, if not better; but when it comes to domestic and economic issues, bush is always an obedient conservative doctrine fan... hiding behind his universal remarks and his stupid smirk [come on, those traits could be best suited for a friend but not for a president :disgust:], he's probably goin' to screw up everything

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Tsiaco- Perhaps you are not a christian, so this may not apply. As I understand it God forgives, but I seem to remember that it says somewhere- Go and sin no more.

Anyway, suffering is not unique to these women. What I am saying is they should not in most cases have been there in the first place. If half of NOWS energy were spent in educating women and offering support so they would not have gotten pregnant in the first place, perhaps there would be less demand for abortion. Perhaps if they were not rewarded with the "You choose- either way It's on us" attitude, perhaps the incentive would decrease. Do these women want to go through this proceedure? Hell no. BUT for every act, good or ill there is a consequence.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<< my reasoning is simple: man won't carry child and so be it, at least woman should have the right to decide for her body and pregnancy and by the way, i think al gore will probably fight the war as good as bush does, if not better; but when it comes to domestic and economic issues, bush is always an obedient conservative doctrine fan... hiding behind his universal remarks and his stupid smirk (come on, those traits could be best suited for a friend but not for a president isgust, he's probably goin' to screw up everything >>



Your reasoning is TOO simple

 

[gopunk]

...and I get a big kick out of the friggin' morons who splurt out phrases like religi-nazis. When were the Nazis religious? When did the Nazis talk about SAVING life. Fvck heads!!

*sigh*

there's a *reason* people modify the word "nazi". if they intended that the target was in fact, an actual nazi, there would be no reason to modify the word. "nazi" in this sense, is used to indicate a way of thought or practice that restricts human rights.

it's just like the term "sand-great person". clearly, this term is not used to indicate that the target is african-american, because the word "sand" is modifying it. had it been intended to indicate that the target is african-american, they would have simply said "great person".

got it?

 

[Tsaico]

Hayabusarider- you bring up some good points. I agree that education is the key for nearly everything. If they are educated then they are less likely to have children at a young age. I am pretty sure there were studies to back that up, though none come to mind. Not to mention, if they are educated then they will also be more likely to be able to support their (her) new baby. So you would support dumping more money into education? See people, open minds and talking can slove much.

I also agree that the issue cannot be over simplified, as the stakes are high (who knows, what if we ARE wrong in the cosmic universe and abortion IS wrong?)

 

[gopunk]

What I am saying is they should not in most cases have been there in the first place. If half of NOWS energy were spent in educating women and offering support so they would not have gotten pregnant in the first place, perhaps there would be less demand for abortion.

perhaps, but unless you support NOW, you don't really have a say in what they should or shouldn't be doing. if i were you, i would try and get the education system to institute more family planning classes.

Perhaps if they were not rewarded with the "You choose- either way It's on us" attitude, perhaps the incentive would decrease. Do these women want to go through this proceedure? Hell no. BUT for every act, good or ill there is a consequence.

and what, you don't consider surgery a consequence?