Abortion

[MasterWeavile898]

Why would anyone have sex with their partner in the first place? That doesn't make sense to me

 

Not that I actually care, just attempting to point out that people do things that seem perfectly rational to them, but perfectly irrational to many others

 

In this case I think it has to do with how "real" their sex is. Apparently birth control makes it less real, so people mess with it (or fail to use it at all) I don't remember exactly how it goes, I paid little attention in my health class

[Obscure_Trash]

Why would someone tamper with their partner's birth control? That... doesn't make any sense at all to me.

Because they're controlling and manipulative and abusive. Because they want children and their partner doesn't and we do not teach healthy relationships. Because they know that if they make their partner have a child, they are very unlikely to leave the relationship. It's an awful, awful thing, it truly is. :<

[JavaTigress]

Because they're controlling and manipulative and abusive. Because they want children and their partner doesn't and we do not teach healthy relationships. Because they know that if they make their partner have a child, they are very unlikely to leave the relationship. It's an awful, awful thing, it truly is. :<

No kidding about it being a rotten situation. You would think that a child being involved would make someone MORE likely to leave an abusive partner, not less, given that I would think that if someone abuses their partner, they would be likely to abuse the child as well. Sad situation all around.

 

As for the other, the guy that would mess with his girlfriend/wife's BC JUST to make the sex feel more real... all i can say is... UGGGGG! Am I terribly sexist if I say that some specimens of the male of the species disgust me at times?

 

Makes me glad I am asexual, honestly.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Silverswift

[MasterWeavile898]

You do have to realize that it does go both ways, though not as much. It's not sexist as long as you don't only care if it's based on sex

 

And yes, it's quite disgusting, doesn't stop people from doing it

[JavaTigress]

You do have to realize that it does go both ways, though not as much. It's not sexist as long as you don't only care if it's based on sex

 

And yes, it's quite disgusting, doesn't stop people from doing it

Absolutely... the woman who lies about BC so that she can get pregnant in the hopes of trapping a guy is JUST as disgusting.

[Obscure_Trash]

No kidding about it being a rotten situation. You would think that a child being involved would make someone MORE likely to leave an abusive partner, not less, given that I would think that if someone abuses their partner, they would be likely to abuse the child as well. Sad situation all around.

If you've never been in an abusive relationship, it's really hard to understand why people don't just leave. But there's a really great metaphor I came across a while ago that is perfect for this: "if you put a frog in boiling water, it'll hope out. If you put a frog in water and slowly warm it up, you'll end up with cooked frog." (Yes, I know it's literally not true, but it's an old saying.)

 

Abusive relationships don't normally start out abusive. Abusers are really great at blending in. They're charming and friendly. Over time, they slowly reveal their true selves, and by then you're already trapped. You've fallen in love or you think they're a good person and you think they'll come back to you or you think it's your fault.

Here's an incredibly important explanation on the steps of abuse: http://gynocraticgrrl.tumblr.com/post/5973...mestic-violence

 

It is even more dangerous to leave when you have a kid. It's hard enough to imagine yourself escaping, much less trying to bring a young child with you. (Besides all the wants and needs of wanting a two-parent family for your child and the thoughts that tell you that perhaps if you guys have the child, the abuser will stop abusing.) It's dangerous and you do not want to bring that kid out only to have them get murdered.

 

But I don't want to get too off the topic of abortion here, so any further replies you wanna make about this, I'll bring my own reply to an appropriate topic once I decide on one. <3

[whitebaron]

In this case I think it has to do with how "real" their sex is. Apparently birth control makes it less real, so people mess with it (or fail to use it at all) I don't remember exactly how it goes, I paid little attention in my health class

acually, that's mostly people who dont use birth control themselves -at all.

if you dont like condoms because its less real, you wont put one on and make a hole in it.

 

tampering usually goes into the direction of hormonal contraceptives not being taken, being wrongly dosaged or sabotaged by various side effects.

 

@Sock: Tampered Birth Control is still not the majority of cases, though, as bad as it sounds. As are abusive relationships. In your line of argument, it always sounds like that's the major or even only reason. (it was btw 1/3 of the people where birth control failed that got tampered with..)

[MasterWeavile898]

Ah, okay then. Like I said, I paid little attention in Health class, which is where I learned about this sort of thing. I just recall that being a thing that happened

 

And 1/3 is still a massive number, especially if no other types of cases surpass 1/3. And Sock very clearly stated at the top of the page that it was 1/3. I fail to see where you pick up on that being the entire reason for everything? The discussion has simply moved to being specifically about that for the moment (I could just be being a moron though and failing at social skills, as always :/)

Edited March 22, 2014 by MasterWeavile898

[JavaTigress]

If you've never been in an abusive relationship, it's really hard to understand why people don't just leave. But there's a really great metaphor I came across a while ago that is perfect for this: "if you put a frog in boiling water, it'll hope out. If you put a frog in water and slowly warm it up, you'll end up with cooked frog." (Yes, I know it's literally not true, but it's an old saying.)

 

Abusive relationships don't normally start out abusive. Abusers are really great at blending in. They're charming and friendly. Over time, they slowly reveal their true selves, and by then you're already trapped. You've fallen in love or you think they're a good person and you think they'll come back to you or you think it's your fault.

Here's an incredibly important explanation on the steps of abuse: http://gynocraticgrrl.tumblr.com/post/5973...mestic-violence

 

It is even more dangerous to leave when you have a kid. It's hard enough to imagine yourself escaping, much less trying to bring a young child with you. (Besides all the wants and needs of wanting a two-parent family for your child and the thoughts that tell you that perhaps if you guys have the child, the abuser will stop abusing.) It's dangerous and you do not want to bring that kid out only to have them get murdered.

 

But I don't want to get too off the topic of abortion here, so any further replies you wanna make about this, I'll bring my own reply to an appropriate topic once I decide on one. <3

Good point, of course, Sockie. It sort of puts the victim of abuse in a very bad situation whatever she does... sort of a no win if there is a child involved. It is definitely a bad situation for both the mom and the kid in that case. As you say, shouldn't derail the topic too much. Did anyone have any thoughts on my question on 'cut off' for abortion?

Edited March 22, 2014 by Silverswift

[High Lord November]

acually, that's mostly people who dont use birth control themselves -at all.

if you dont like condoms because its less real, you wont put one on and make a hole in it.

 

tampering usually goes into the direction of hormonal contraceptives not being taken, being wrongly dosaged or sabotaged by various side effects.

 

@Sock: Tampered Birth Control is still not the majority of cases, though, as bad as it sounds. As are abusive relationships. In your line of argument, it always sounds like that's the major or even only reason. (it was btw 1/3 of the people where birth control failed that got tampered with..)

If we take all birth control to be 99% effective, that means that one out of every 300 acts of sex with birth control has been tampered with, if I've worked this out properly. That's pretty high.

[Obscure_Trash]

@Sock: Tampered Birth Control is still not the majority of cases, though, as bad as it sounds. As are abusive relationships. In your line of argument, it always sounds like that's the major or even only reason.

Is there a reason you are trying to derail the conversation about forced abortions and forced pregnancy and birth? Or why you want to brush off domestic abuse? My post was perfectly in line with the topic I specifically tackled, thank you.

 

Should there be an 'age limit' of sorts for abortions? Say, for example, they shouldn't be allowed past a certain point in gestation barring unusual circumstances... like the situation the poster above mentioned where the continuing the pregnancy is found to be a threat to the mom's life... or should abortion be allowed for any reason right up until birth?

 

If there should be a cut-off, at what point should that be?

 

Sorry, somehow I missed this post. I think you must have ninja'd me while I was posting my first post. :3

 

Legally? Absolutely not, IMO. Most doctors will not do late term abortions without good medical reason, anyway. And if you're going to get an abortion, unless you do not know you're pregnant, you're pretty much going to do it sooner rather than later - you are not going to wait into the third trimester. So most late term abortions are for situations where the fetus or pregnant person is going to die without medical intervention. Putting limits on it is just going to stop people who need abortions from getting abortions.

 

I'm trying to find something I saw earlier about when late term abortions are allowed with less legal restrictions. But it was about more lives being saved (language in comments things like this) and how people don't just go get late term abortions in greater numbers simply because they can.

 

Relevant:

 

“The Guttmacher Institute reports that already seven in 10 women who had a second-trimester abortion wanted to do so earlier in pregnancy but were unable to because they could not afford it. Economists who study family planning policy argue that the costs a woman seeking an abortion faces do not only come in the form of dollars, but also in the time required to access an abortion. A 2001 study by Marianne Bitler and Madeline Zavodny shows that state restrictions that impose mandatory waiting periods (in other words, a time cost) also delay abortions into the second trimester. A 1994 study of Mississippi’s mandatory delay laws showed a 17 percent jump in second trimester abortions after the law took effect.”

[prpldrgnfr]

Good point, of course, Sockie. It sort of puts the victim of abuse in a very bad situation whatever she does... sort of a no win if there is a child involved. It is definitely a bad situation for both the mom and the kid in that case. As you say, shouldn't derail the topic too much. Did anyone have any thoughts on my question on  'cut off' for abortion?

Pro-choice here, but the thought of aborting an otherwise healthy 7-8 month fetus sickens me, as it could be viable outside the womb. I also think that that amount of time is more then enough to make a decision one way or the other (providing safe, timely abortions are available). Anything up to 3-4 months should be no questions asked, it's the period between 4 and 7 I have trouble with, only because I'm not sure about fetal development stages.

 

ETA:Plus what Socky said.

Edited March 22, 2014 by prpldrgnfr

[JavaTigress]

Actually it would make sense if late term abortion was rare. I mean, why would you carry the pregnancy that long if you had no intent to actually deliver a child?

 

I guess that is why I brought the question up... because a seven to eight month fetus, as prpldrgnfr gave as an example, is... a whole lot MORE like a baby than the very early stages of development, as an example. AND I know some states DO have laws making abortions illegal after a certain point.

[edwardelricfreak]

Why would anyone have sex with their partner in the first place? That doesn't make sense to me

 

Not that I actually care, just attempting to point out that people do things that seem perfectly rational to them, but perfectly irrational to many others

Because they love each other. Because they're perfectly comfortable with each other and want to share that level of physical and emotional bonding. At least that's how I feel with my boyfriend. I think that's how it should be in healthy relationships.

 

Sex should never seem irrational...it's a natural occurrence. Now, I'd say rape is irrational, as it's harming someone (or at least just forcing them to do something, which usually leads to harming them physically if they're struggling).

[BlitzDrake]

Because they love each other. Because they're perfectly comfortable with each other and want to share that level of physical and emotional bonding. At least that's how I feel with my boyfriend. I think that's how it should be in healthy relationships.

Some relationships can deal without sex and are quite content without it. With others, as you said, are perfectly comfortable with each other. Based on sexuality really.

[Pixxelation]

It sort of puts the victim of abuse in a very bad situation whatever she does...

Erm, guys can be stuck in abusive relationships too.

[KageSora]

Because they love each other. Because they're perfectly comfortable with each other and want to share that level of physical and emotional bonding. At least that's how I feel with my boyfriend. I think that's how it should be in healthy relationships.

In some healthy relationships. It's very possible to have a healthy romantic but non-sexual relationship. Sexual couples can have a perfectly healthy, romantic, intimate relationship without the sex provided that they're both comfortable with that decision. Also, asexual individuals.

 

If you're in a sexual relationship, it's a great thing--but it's not how it should be in all healthy relationships.

 

 

Re: Cutoff date:

 

Personally, I don't know if there even truly needs to be a legally mandated upper limit. I cannot imagine somebody waking up one day and going "Gee, it's been 8 months, I think I'll have an abortion!" It would seem to me that by that point an abortion would be sought because something happened that makes it unwise to go through with the birth.

 

Though I'm all for doctors setting their own limits if the legal cutoff ever was done away with--they should be allowed to set their limits and the circumstances in which they'll perform the procedure beyond those limits, if at all.

[JavaTigress]

In some healthy relationships.  It's very possible to have a healthy romantic but non-sexual relationship.  Sexual couples can have a perfectly healthy, romantic, intimate relationship without the sex provided that they're both comfortable with that decision.  Also, asexual individuals.

 

If you're in a sexual relationship, it's a great thing--but it's not how it should be in all healthy relationships.

Very true, Kage Sora. I mean, for me personally I would mimic Weevile's question... thing is, although i don't really care that much about it, myself, I do know that sex is very important to a lot of people in this world.

 

My personal preference would be to see more use of BC, that would make for fewer abortions, would it not? Funny that some who oppose abortions also oppose BC...

Edited March 22, 2014 by Silverswift

[brairtrainer]

My thoughts on upper limits? I'm fine with those laws as long as there is a procedure to seek them for medical reasons. I'd mostly prefer something where one doctor puts it as medically recomended/nessicary and require that there be guidelines for doctors who are performing late term abortions.

 

Because the surgery is that much more dangerous and in some cases you are dealing with toxins it would make sense for those doctors to have extra training before operating on their own.

 

However, I'd like that the law could specify that any doctor could recomend a late term abortion and have an OB/GYN agree with the assessment, as well as a clause affirming that mental health professionals may recomend late term abortions.

 

EDIT: To clarify this is something I'm thinking from 7 month on.

Edited March 22, 2014 by brairtrainer

[edwardelricfreak]

In some healthy relationships. It's very possible to have a healthy romantic but non-sexual relationship. Sexual couples can have a perfectly healthy, romantic, intimate relationship without the sex provided that they're both comfortable with that decision. Also, asexual individuals.

 

If you're in a sexual relationship, it's a great thing--but it's not how it should be in all healthy relationships.

I meant it for sexual relationships. Obviously you can still be in a healthy relationship without it.

[Buggzter]

I am very strongly prolife. I myself was adopted as a baby, and my firstborn I gave up for adoption.

 

At conception, there IS a separate beginning of life, separate from the mother's DNA although being supported and nurtured by the mother's body. I personally don't understand the thought pattern others have where the growing child within the womb is not alive yet, or could be considered as not a baby - I don't see how it could not be human, couldn't be your progeny, your offspring. I don't understand how it could be anything else. (OK, I can understand how someone says OH! It's just a blob of cells! But then, when it forms a head, arms, legs, heart and circulation system, brain, brainwaves, etc... how is that a blob of cells? And much of that is just a couple weeks after conception before people know they are pregnant usually!)

 

Now, I do understand people's views about WHY abortion "needs" to be available. Although, MOST of the time an unborn child does not need to be killed to save the mother's life, there ARE times where it is needed. The child would likely die anyways, and the mother would surely die. In those cases I can understand. BUT, It hurts me to see children punished and killed for the mistakes of their parents - or because it's inconvenient for the mother (and yes, I DO know of people who have had abortions because of convenience and say so proudly! It's not the norm, and I'm not saying it's the norm. But it does happen as well) or dad doesn't want to support the kid.

 

I feel we need to take more responsibility as a society for our children. We need to connect through the generations and VALUE our families more. I feel that can help reduce the "need" for abortion in the first place. I also feel that, medically speaking, the children within the womb that can react to outside influences should be allowed to have the chance to live.

 

Their body is a separate body that relies on the mother to care for it. Once the baby is born, it STILL requires constant care as the child grows. It's just can be separated from the mother's contact then. And nearly all of the time, it was the mother's choice to put herself in a position to get pregnant - why should the child be punished for the mother's inability to be responsible? And adoption of babies is VERY easily done - there are families all over the place that want a baby and can't have one. They spend TONS of money searching for a birth mother. Trust me - I was a birth mother too. I also lived in a maternity home for my second pregnancy when the father refused to help care for me and I was too ill to work from complications, so I saw many other young mothers give their children for adoption as well as keep them to care for them. It's tough, but doable. It's a matter of taking responsibility for your actions, too - something a LOT of people don't want to do in so many areas of life (I work in retail pharmacy, so I see a LOT of crap from people of all sorts. There are many stories behind it, but... people still have to make their own choices and stand up to take the consequences instead of blaming others all the time....)

 

It's painful to know how easily I could have been killed and kept from living my life if my mother had decided to not take responsibility for her action that got her pregnant. She also was adult enough to know she wasn't ready to raise me, thus gave me up for adoption. It gave me the peace to do the same for my son when he was born (I was only 19 and NOT ready to be a mother).

 

I also know of people who have had nearly 2 dozen abortions by the time they were 20 because of convenience, those that abort because of the child's disabilities would be difficult to deal with if they were born, those that think some people should be sterilized by force since X Y and Z happened.... But people have to make their own choices. Free will.

 

I know that if abortion was illegal, it would still happen. it would also kill a lot of women that had abortions. It would kill a lot less people overall compared to the number of children who die every day through abortion, but it would still be significant because those women have families, have history and friends and lives that they have lived and touched other people. The children that are being lost currently don't have that connection to people generally - some do that were wanted and then aborted because of deformities, genetic problems, or other such issues.

 

I believe that God should be the chooser for who lives and dies - especially with these children. Abortion is an easier fix than, say, changing society. I'm not saying it's easy in any way shape or form - but it is easier to have that offered easily and people not understand how their child is growing, how their brain is functioning, how the child reacts to so many stimuli... than to change society's general actions and patterns which hurt children that are outside of the womb (neglect, abuse, various endangerments and maltreatments...).

 

This is a tough subject, and there is no easy answer. But I also don't think that the most innocent of them all - our children, whether born or unborn - should be made to bear the consequences of our adult mistakes.

 

This is a painful subject for me, as I do see kids all the time who likely should not have been born to their parents as they are not being raised well - but those parents made the choice to get pregnant in the first place. It, IMO, is a societal issue really. Not an abortion-is-necessary issue. Things like this make me want to weep for these children, all these kids who could come up with masterpieces, music, solutions to problems, cures for disease.... Many inventors and composers of the past would be "ideal" candidates for abortions according to those who support, while others that we wish were never born were "ideal" candidates to not be aborted. (I say "ideal" because of those situations where abortion is often more supported/encouraged by pro-abortion people or not encouraged, as the case may be...)

 

My writing sounds harsh to me, I'm sorry - I don't mean for it to be. Of all my coworkers, I'm actually the "best" people person in our retail store, I'm very compassionate. I don't judge those who have had abortions - they are not evil people. I just feel they are often misguided. I also respect people's decisions, even if I disagree. I love on people, though it may not be coming across here - I do all I can to help my patients, and have commiserated with friends who faced this decision. I told them my view, but said I'd love them no matter their choice and I was there to help them through anything they need me to help with.... *sigh* I wish things weren't so gray, ya know? Much easier to deal with

[Brite]

At conception, there IS a separate beginning of life, separate from the mother's DNA although being supported and nurtured by the mother's body. I personally don't understand the thought pattern others have where the growing child within the womb is not alive yet, or could be considered as not a baby - I don't see how it could not be human, couldn't be your progeny, your offspring. I don't understand how it could be anything else. (OK, I can understand how someone says OH! It's just a blob of cells! But then, when it forms a head, arms, legs, heart and circulation system, brain, brainwaves, etc... how is that a blob of cells? And much of that is just a couple weeks after conception before people know they are pregnant usually!)

 

There are fetal tumors that have limbs, even heartbeats, and they'll never become a full human or person.

 

Now, I do understand people's views about WHY abortion "needs" to be available. Although, MOST of the time an unborn child does not need to be killed to save the mother's life, there ARE times where it is needed. The child would likely die anyways, and the mother would surely die. In those cases I can understand. BUT, It hurts me to see children punished and killed for the mistakes of their parents - or because it's inconvenient for the mother (and yes, I DO know of people who have had abortions because of convenience and say so proudly! It's not the norm, and I'm not saying it's the norm. But it does happen as well) or dad doesn't want to support the kid.

 

I don't see a child being punished. And abortions that DO kill the fetus at late trimester are RARE and usually because the mother's life is at risk.

 

 

Their body is a separate body that relies on the mother to care for it. Once the baby is born, it STILL requires constant care as the child grows. It's just can be separated from the mother's contact then. And nearly all of the time, it was the mother's choice to put herself in a position to get pregnant - why should the child be punished for the mother's inability to be responsible? And adoption of babies is VERY easily done - there are families all over the place that want a baby and can't have one. They spend TONS of money searching for a birth mother. Trust me - I was a birth mother too. I also lived in a maternity home for my second pregnancy when the father refused to help care for me and I was too ill to work from complications, so I saw many other young mothers give their children for adoption as well as keep them to care for them. It's tough, but doable. It's a matter of taking responsibility for your actions, too - something a LOT of people don't want to do in so many areas of life (I work in retail pharmacy, so I see a LOT of crap from people of all sorts. There are many stories behind it, but... people still have to make their own choices and stand up to take the consequences instead of blaming others all the time....)

 

Wrong. Sure, adoption is simple. Simple to throw it in the system actually. Reality: only 3-4% of children are adopted a year. Families want healthy children and are very biased. (Not all, but most are) Argument invalid

 

It's painful to know how easily I could have been killed and kept from living my life if my mother had decided to not take responsibility for her action that got her pregnant. She also was adult enough to know she wasn't ready to raise me, thus gave me up for adoption. It gave me the peace to do the same for my son when he was born (I was only 19 and NOT ready to be a mother).

 

You wouldn't have been aware. Period.

 

I also know of people who have had nearly 2 dozen abortions by the time they were 20.

Good for them. It's their business and no one else's.

 

 

I believe that God should be the chooser for who lives and dies

Let's seriously leave G-d out of this. It's a big reason why so many people feel the need to stomp other's privacy in the first place.

 

[edwardelricfreak]

...or could be considered as not a baby...

 

BUT, It hurts me to see children punished and killed for the mistakes of their parents - or because it's inconvenient for the mother (and yes, I DO know of people who have had abortions because of convenience and say so proudly!

 

I feel we need to take more responsibility as a society for our children. We need to connect through the generations and VALUE our families more. I feel that can help reduce the "need" for abortion in the first place.

 

And nearly all of the time, it was the mother's choice to put herself in a position to get pregnant - why should the child be punished for the mother's inability to be responsible? And adoption of babies is VERY easily done - there are families all over the place that want a baby and can't have one. It's a matter of taking responsibility for your actions, too - something a LOT of people don't want to do in so many areas of life (I work in retail pharmacy, so I see a LOT of crap from people of all sorts. There are many stories behind it, but... people still have to make their own choices and stand up to take the consequences instead of blaming others all the time....)

 

It's painful to know how easily I could have been killed and kept from living my life if my mother had decided to not take responsibility for her action that got her pregnant. She also was adult enough to know she wasn't ready to raise me, thus gave me up for adoption. It gave me the peace to do the same for my son when he was born (I was only 19 and NOT ready to be a mother).

 

I also know of people who have had nearly 2 dozen abortions by the time they were 20 because of convenience, those that abort because of the child's disabilities would be difficult to deal with if they were born, those that think some people should be sterilized by force since X Y and Z happened.... But people have to make their own choices. Free will.

 

But I also don't think that the most innocent of them all - our children, whether born or unborn - should be made to bear the consequences of our adult mistakes.

 

(I say "ideal" because of those situations where abortion is often more supported/encouraged by pro-abortion people or not encouraged, as the case may be...)

 

I don't judge those who have had abortions - they are not evil people. I just feel they are often misguided.

It has to be born to be a baby, I believe:

 

• a very young child, esp. one newly or recently born

• a young or newly born animal

• the youngest member of a family or group

 

So if it's not born yet then it's not a baby by definition. I guess it could be considered an unborn baby, but that's not until later in a pregnancy, I think.

 

So you want to punish the mother instead? That's still not very fair. I'm sorry, but I would REFUSE to be inconvenienced by having a child right now, ESPECIALLY if I used birth control and it failed.

 

Abortion IS responsible. What has been proven to reduce teen pregnancy and abortions isn't valuing family more, but proper sex education, which the United States (and several other countries) is lacking in right now.

 

That's because most of the time (especially if we're talking about younger people here) they don't know that it takes just ONE time of having sex to get pregnant. They might not know that sex in general can get them pregnant. Why should the mother be punished with a child that she might not love? Granted, she could put it up for adoption, but the adoption system is NOT very pretty. Unless you already have people asking for your child, the child could be in the adoption system until they're adults and kicked out without ever having been adopted. It's also very hard to adopt children due to the very specific restrictions put in place. Again, abortions ARE taking responsibility.

 

My grandmother knew that her son wasn't mature enough or ready to ever take care of a child. She also knew that my mother wasn't in the best financial standing. She suggested my mom abort me or at least put me up for adoption. She had gotten into contact with a couple looking for a baby. Did my mom choose either one? No. I'm glad she didn't. I could have never been born or a completely different person. But I STILL support a person's right to have an abortion if she wishes. My mother did what she thought was responsible. Many women do the responsible thing by having abortions. Others, like you and your mother, decided to go with abortion. I don't believe a single one of those decisions to be wrong or irresponsible.

 

I'm certainly not 20 yet. I'd have as many abortions as possible until I'm ready for a child if condoms break or I forget a pill. I don't want any more children going into the awful adoption system. I'd rather the children already there being adopted and clearing up the "backlog", as it were.

 

If a child is born to a family that can't support it, or in a system where they may never have a family, that seems more cruel than ending its existence before it's born.

 

I'm sorry, but I don't believe anyone here is "pro-abortion". We are pro-CHOICE. We want women to be able to choose whether or not they can have abortions. Though I will say, thank you for being one of the TRUE pro-life people out there- most don't really care about the other people or once the child is actually born...

 

I'd actually say a majority of the population is misguided. They aren't taught proper sex ed and are misled to believe a LOT of crazy, false rumors about it. I really hope we can have required comprehensive sex ed in schools that covers more than just the organs and STD's.

[TikindiDragon]

@Buggzter - As it happens several of us on here would greatly like to be strelised but run into a problem where Doctors simply refuse to do so. If you're under 35 with no children it's almost impossible to get it done. You run into the age-old argument of "Well you might want children one day.". It *should* be a choice for those of us that know we never want children, but that option is just not available. So we have to rely on imperfect methods of contraception (or just not have sex - but many of us *are* adult and are in long-term relationships and I don't think that level of intimacy and bonding is something we should be denied with our partners either).

[JavaTigress]

@Buggzter - As it happens several of us on here would greatly like to be strelised but run into a problem where Doctors simply refuse to do so. If you're under 35 with no children it's almost impossible to get it done. You run into the age-old argument of "Well you might want children one day.". It *should* be a choice for those of us that know we never want children, but that option is just not available. So we have to rely on imperfect methods of contraception (or just not have sex - but many of us *are* adult and are in long-term relationships and I don't think that level of intimacy and bonding is something we should be denied with our partners either).

And... the doctors simply WON'T let a person make that choice?