Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

The personhood thing makes absolutely no sense. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will to save their life, so it doesn't matter if they give it personhood.

Share this post


Link to post

I my self is for and against abortion, my first child us when I was on the pill and condoms. I still became pregnant. Even then I can say I did not want him but I kept him because I was not forced or raped. The only time I would agree to an abortion is if I was physically raped. Because I would not want a constant reminder of the rapists face in my mind. I am now a mother of two kids, of my choice of messing around. I also have been taught "if you think your smart enough and ready to mess in that situation then you should be smart and ready for the consequences" quoted from my stepfather he lives with me now, not regretting my choices on keeping the kids they all adore each other and get along greatly @-@ :-)

Share this post


Link to post
I also have been taught "if you think your smart enough and ready to mess in that situation then you should be smart and ready for the consequences" quoted from my stepfather he lives with me now, not regretting my choices on keeping the kids they all adore each other and get along greatly.

What is your stance on other people getting abortions?

 

Mind you - not all people are capable of taking proper care of an unplanned child, and many wouldn't even love that child. And then there are people who would not, physically or mentally, be able to endure a pregnancy.

 

A pregnancy might be a consequence, yes, even if you take precautions - however, abortion is one way of taking responsibility, and should always be a freely available option.

Share this post


Link to post

As far as the personhood laws, I think it's their next best thing to outlawing birth control. As the previous poster mentioned, they were on two kinds but still got pregnant. It's people like the FRC and Catholic church have not been shy about saying sex should only be used for procreation. They can't make it illegal to have sex, so this is the next best thing.

 

But it raises some interesting issues. As people have pointed out, 50% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Do each of those women go to trial?

 

If a woman is pregnant and drinks, is she guilty of giving a minor alchohol?

 

If a man has sex with a woman who is pregnant, is it incest or statutory rape?

 

Can pregnant women use the HOV lanes?

 

If fertilized embryos are taken to a fertility clinic without their consent, is it kidnapping?

 

Will we have to change birthdays to conception days?

 

etc etc tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
I my self is for and against abortion, my first child us when I was on the pill and condoms. I still became pregnant. Even then I can say I did not want him but I kept him because I was not forced or raped. The only time I would agree to an abortion is if I was physically raped. Because I would not want a constant reminder of the rapists face in my mind. I am now a mother of two kids, of my choice of messing around. I also have been taught "if you think your smart enough and ready to mess in that situation then you should be smart and ready for the consequences" quoted from my stepfather he lives with me now, not regretting my choices on keeping the kids they all adore each other and get along greatly @-@ :-)

It's great that YOU are happy with your kids and wanted to keep them. It really is. I'm glad you have a happy family, and I'm really happy for you. Not everyone wants to, though. And it's not about "messing around"--what if someone's in a committed relationship, on the pill and condom, but don't want a kid? Should they just not have sex with their partner? That kinda sucks. I am mentally ill and literally could not handle the stress of a kid, and my medication isn't compatible with pregnancy--am I not allowed to have sex with a man if I want just because of my illness, since I might get knocked up? Well...darn. Good thing my partner has two X chromosomes. wink.gif

 

And even in the case of "messing around"--a kid is not a punishment for something that's "your fault." That's a dangerous and rather misogynistic view. After all, men are allowed to have sex without having to go through nine months of misery with lasting bodily effects, incredibly painful childbirth, and then raising a squalling infant/grumpy toddler/argumentative schoolkid/teenager. (Yes, single fathers are plentiful, but men are rarely forced to raise kids full-time like women are.)

Share this post


Link to post

if you think your smart enough and ready to mess in that situation then you should be smart and ready for the consequences"

 

So what about married couples that never want children? They should be celibate? What about people whose partners lie about being sterile or tamper with their birth control method? It's not like women have the option to be sterilised.

Share this post


Link to post

Edited out because I am not good with my own words.

Edited by AxelFlynn

Share this post


Link to post

There are plenty of ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

 

None of which are 100%. I would repeat myself a little: hat about married couples that never want children, or people whose partners lie about being sterile or tamper with their birth control method?

 

If you don't want a child, prevent it. It is that simple.

 

And if that prevention fails? Even used perfectly, birth control can fail.

 

Punishing an unborn child for them is not the way.

 

So punishing an unborn child which has no guarantee that it will become human is wrong, but punishing a woman for something you deem wrong is okay? You would rather force a woman to allow something she doesn't want to grow inside her and use her without her consent for nine months...and then what? Sentence them both to a life of resentment, or play the odds and hope that the mother can afford to give a child up for adoption, and that child is one of the lucky 1-2% that gets adopted within a very small window of opportunity?

Share this post


Link to post
Personally, I am against it for the most part. The only reason I see abortion fit is if;

 

1) The child was conceived through unwanted sex.

2) Ultrasounds reveal that something is horribly wrong with the child. I am not speaking of small defects or mental retardation, either. I am talking about severe brain, heart, or other defects that would most likely mean it would be nothing but a short life of pain for the child.

 

Otherwise...I despise the thought. There are plenty of ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies. If you don't want a child, prevent it. It is that simple. I know we are all only human but we must learn from our mistakes. Punishing an unborn child for them is not the way.

 

I am not reading through other peoples' posts to look for any arguments. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and this is mine.

Leaving aside all the rest - have you never heard of contraceptive failure ?

Share this post


Link to post

None of which are 100%. I would repeat myself a little: hat about married couples that never want children, or people whose partners lie about being sterile or tamper with their birth control method?

 

 

 

And if that prevention fails? Even used perfectly, birth control can fail.

 

 

 

So punishing an unborn child which has no guarantee that it will become human is wrong, but punishing a woman for something you deem wrong is okay? You would rather force a woman to allow something she doesn't want to grow inside her and use her without her consent for nine months...and then what? Sentence them both to a life of resentment, or play the odds and hope that the mother can afford to give a child up for adoption, and that child is one of the lucky 1-2% that gets adopted within a very small window of opportunity?

I suppose I should have added more to my post and maybe been a bit more specific. I will not address all the points that you made, but I will say that I do not disagree with them, regardless if that is contradictory to my post.

 

I only dislike abortion when it is women who are old enough to know better, but err...uhh...spread themselves around like butter on toast to put it nicely. Women who are immature about it. Women who make the same mistakes over and over again without caring. Most women who have abortions are emotionally scarred by it or at least have some coflict. It is the ones who have absolutely no feeling over it and that treat it no differently than a daily chore that disgust me. Like, "oh whatever I can hookup with this guy I probably will never see again. so what if I get pregnant...I have extra coat hangers at home" And you can't say that there aren't girls out there with morals like that.

 

 

And even then...I guess I am more disgusted by the woman than the fact that she having an abortion, because if she really has morals like that, then she doesn't deserve the gift of a child.

Edited by AxelFlynn

Share this post


Link to post
Most women who have abortions are emotionally scarred by it. It is the ones who show no remorse and that treat it no differently than a daily chore that disgust me.

I feel no remorse for the one I had. But nor have I ever spread myself like butter,

Share this post


Link to post
Most women who have abortions are emotionally scarred by it.

There are also many women who are relieved by an abortion. It's a myth that an abortion turns a woman into emotional wreck - quite oppositely, abortion is often the far safer option for a woman's mental health.

 

- Many women suffer severe and irreversible mental damage from pregnancies which are carried to term. Post-birth depression and psychosis are scary. Plus, each year, between four and five million pregnant women commit suicide.

Share this post


Link to post

Most women who have abortions are emotionally scarred by it.

 

Where do you get this? Do you have some unbiased, peer-reviewed study that says so? Because I've one that says that 80% of women were not depressed or mentally scarred after having an abortion.

 

They were satisfied with their decision, believed they had benefited more than had been harmed by their abortion, and would have the abortion again were they table to go back in time and make it again.

 

Nearly 70% of women reported being satisfied with the decision, and 72% reported more benefit than harm. Of those who reported depression or regret after the abortion, most were depressed or had emotional problems prior to becoming pregnant.

 

And just because I don't sound enough like my wife, citations come from here:

Psychological Responses of Women After First-Trimester Abortion by

Brenda Major, PhD; Catherine Cozzarelli, PhD; M. Lynne Cooper, PhD; Josephine Zubek, PhD; Caroline Richards, PhD; Michael Wilhite, PhD; Richard H. Gramzow, PhD

It is the ones who show no remorse

 

Hold on a minute here, now, just to be clear, I volunteer as an 'other-options' counselor, but why, for you, is emotional scarring or remorse necessary?

 

There is no guarantee a fetus will become human until long after the legal cut-off for abortion, and many people and religions believe that life and/or the soul is not present until after birth, like when one is brain dead but the heart and lungs still function.

 

Why must a woman show remorse if she's doing it in the best interest of the child? If she can't afford to feed herself, or is incapable of loving it, or knows she can't give it a good life -- why must she be guilty for that? If she is literally suicidal because of the fetus, why must she show regret?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
There are also many women who are relieved by an abortion. It's a myth that an abortion turns a woman into emotional wreck - quite oppositely, abortion is often the far safer option for a woman's mental health.

 

- Many women suffer severe and irreversible mental damage from pregnancies which are carried to term. Post-birth depression and psychosis are scary. Plus, each year, between four and five million pregnant women commit suicide.

These are also not the kinds of women that I am talking about. I'm not talking about ones who have abortions because they know it is better for themselves and/or the child. I am talking about the ones who just flat out don't care.

 

*pokes edited post*

Share this post


Link to post
These are also not the kinds of women that I am talking about. I'm not talking about ones who have abortions because they know it is better for themselves and/or the child. I am talking about the ones who just flat out don't care.

 

*pokes edited post*

That I understand. It's just a whole lot different from what you actually said.

Share this post


Link to post
I'm not talking about ones who have abortions because they know it is better for themselves and/or the child. I am talking about the ones who just flat out don't care.

Don't you think that a woman who does not care should still have the chance to get rid of the fetus, since if she does not care about something as elementary as taking precautions while having sex, she probably isn't fit to take care of a child anyway?

 

It is perfectly fine to disapprove with a certain kind of behavior - just don't take actions which can potentially harm others (like actively voting against abortion).

Share this post


Link to post
That I understand. It's just a whole lot different from what you actually said.

My apologies for so much editing and being unclear about things. It is just a subject that I've always been so iffy about, but I think having this small discussion here has made me come to know more about what my actual beliefs are....

 

 

I think abortions can be justified in any situation now that after explaining myself, I realize that it is sometimes the woman I am disgusted with rather than the abortion.

 

If it is to the point where I am disgusted with that woman as a person, then it is probably still the best alternative seeing an innocent child should not have to pay for their parent or parent's stupidity.

 

 

^ last input I am offering. I hope the message comes across that now that I think of it, I actually agree with everything that is being said by the people who were addressing me.

Share this post


Link to post

So, a Catholic College is telling a group of students that hand out condoms and teach safe sex, to stop it. At least they are being consistent in their attempts to outlaw birth control I guess.

 

(CNN) -- The letter is signed "cordially" but students who received the instruction to stop handing out condoms on campus say they were taken aback by demands they feel could go as far as threatening their rights.

 

Various dorm rooms at Boston College in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, have a "Safe Site" symbol on their door. That signifies that inside are male and female condoms, personal lubricant and safer sex information, according to BC Students for Sexual Health. "If you are in need of condoms, you may knock (on) one of these doors and just ask!" the group's website says.

 

Lizzie Jekanowski, chair of BCSSH, told CNN that the college has always been aware of the group's activities. "We've had a positive and open relationship with the administration up to this point," she said.

 

But earlier this month, college administrators sent letters to students whose dorm room doors have the logo saying that distributing condoms on campus "is not in concert with the mission of Boston College as a Catholic and Jesuit university."

 

"Should we receive any reports that you are, in fact, distributing condoms on campus, the matter would be referred to the student conduct office for disciplinary action by the University," concluded the letter sent by dean of students Paul J. Chebator and director of residence life George Arey.

 

"Private universities have the right to set their own policies and to discipline students who violate their policies. The distribution of condoms is incongruent with the university's values and traditions," Jack Dunn, spokesman for Boston College, told CNN on Wednesday.

 

"The university has commitments to uphold in regards to Catholic social teaching. Students are aware of that when they enroll here. This is a group of students who are trying to challenge those commitments in a very public manner," he said.

 

The BCSSH group is not recognized by the university and gets its funding elsewhere. It claims to be the only resource on the Boston College campus that provides free sexual health programming, information and physical resources for students -- mostly from dorm rooms. Every three to four weeks, the organization also hands out condoms on public sidewalks, which is what the university so vehemently opposes.

 

Dunn said the college administration reached out repeatedly but unsuccessfully about the matter but Jekanowski said the "abrupt e-mail" was the first warning.

 

"It's disappointing that they sent a very threatening letter to individuals that are stepping up and providing resources to students that Boston College is not," Jekanowski said.

 

The group's next stop was to check in with the local branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, which said Boston College could be violating the rights of students by threatening disciplinary action against them.

 

"While Boston College is religiously affiliated it's not a church," Sarah Wunsch, an attorney at ACLU of Massachusetts told CNN.

 

"The religious freedom is that they can speak out; they can express their values and views and can try to persuade people of them, but not to the extent of punishing those who have a different view of contraception," she said.

 

For now, Jekanowski is hoping to be able to sort things out with the college.

 

But if a legal resolution was sought, one expert says Boston College has a strong case.

 

"I think it's one thing if it's off-campus. But on campus grounds, I suspect that the university is on firm legal footing there. It does have the right to set its own policies," Sunny Hostin, CNN legal contributor said.

 

"You can't force a private institution to allow that," she said.

 

Boston College is a private university, founded in 1863, that is "committed to maintaining, and strengthening the Jesuit, Catholic mission of the University," according to the school's website. A total of 14,600 students are enrolled.

 

It's funny that Catholics can seek to pass laws/rules against free speech and prohibiting people from explaining about safe sex, but they can force women seeking abortions to view ultrasounds and get wands up their arse because... responsibility. Right.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I think it's a lot like the Gay Marriage argument in many ways....

 

Basically, whether or not you think its wrong, it's ultimately up to the mother to decide. You can't know or understand her situation. Every one is different. No one can truly understand another's decision like that.

 

If you think it's wrong, don't get one. But, you cannot foist your own ideals and beliefs and agendas on another person. No one has the right to do that. It's really that simple.

Edited by Riverwillows

Share this post


Link to post

This, in light of cuts in funding for programs such as Women Infants and Children’s, that provide food to the underprivileged children, already?

 

Pro-"life": protecting things in the womb; you're on your own once you're out. rolleyes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Pro-"life": protecting things in the womb; you're on your own once you're out. rolleyes.gif

Reminds me of a great thing I saw in a collection of tweets from the #safetytipsforwomen/#safetytipsforladies tags. (For those that don't know, sarcastic tips to avoid getting raped from women who are fed up with stupid "helpful" ideas like "don't wear revealing clothes")

 

It was something like "Stay in the womb, it's the last time you have full personhood anyway".

 

It's... Sad, but true.

Share this post


Link to post

Pro-"life": protecting things in the womb; you're on your own once you're out. rolleyes.gif

Despite the fact that there are some people like this, no, that's not a pro-life position. I can provide you with links to several local aid centers for pregnant women and post-birth women that provide shelter and supplies to young mothers who chose birth instead of abortion. A truly pro-life position includes options to care for the mother and the child post-birth, not scaring women away from abortion mills.

Share this post


Link to post
Despite the fact that there are some people like this, no, that's not a pro-life position. I can provide you with links to several local aid centers for pregnant women and post-birth women that provide shelter and supplies to young mothers who chose birth instead of abortion. A truly pro-life position includes options to care for the mother and the child post-birth, not scaring women away from abortion mills.

Such lovely word choice there with "abortion mills" and all.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.