|
|
Post by MeAtHome on Dec 14, 2002 11:14:06 GMT -5
You guys are way to complcated,Life starts when an egg is fertilized.Duh!
also how can protesters use 1933 german terrorist tactics in this country and get away with it? also how can a person sit in a church and thank God a Doctor was killed? Who gets the most abortions ? The rich the poor? blacks whites ? show me the numbers - They can target the population that does ! or is that racial profiling.he he
And for all those protesters-Remember millions upon millions of peple have been killed because of the God they worship, is that ok? Osama hates you and wants to kill you because you wont follow his religion.Is that ok?He is also using God to justify killing you - That must be ok then. Its like the anti war protestors, what do we do when the terrorists start bombing us here like in Isreal ? Just say oh well I will stay home.But wait terrorists have rights too! I often wonder that when I buy gas am I supporting terrorists? that guy behind the counter that I seen for the last 2 years really doesnt seem to freindly. Gee after 2 years you think he may start to be freindly to his american customers? Abortion is the least of our problems kids. The special intersts are making this country all screwed up.We need to make america whole again not divided.Trust me they dont care what church you go to !! Have Fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by kit2002 on Dec 14, 2002 11:53:15 GMT -5
The one thing that matters is that we are created in the image of God our creator. Our bodies are a temple of the Holy Spirit. I am glad I wasn't aborted. Being a victim of incest and rape I don't think that justifies abortion. Its not the child or the victims fault way add insult to injury. Why punish them more?  There are so many people that would love to adopt a child those who can't have children of there own. I was adopted after being removed from an abusive family. God is the creator of life. "Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, So are the children of one's youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; They shall not be ashamed, But shall speak with their enemies in the gate."--Psalm 127 vs3-5
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephanie on Apr 22, 2003 22:44:54 GMT -5
Birth control is free, but it doesn't always work. Have you ever heard of a condom breaking? That is not "irresponsible" it is an accident. Should someone really have to pay for it for the rest of her life?
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Apr 23, 2003 0:40:28 GMT -5
Pregnancy only lasts 9 months. Mistakes DO happen! Should someone really have to pay for it WITH THEIR LIFE!
|
|
Theflossingofamerica
Guest
|
Post by Theflossingofamerica on May 4, 2003 1:14:01 GMT -5
This is a post in comment to the idea of abstinence.
Using abortion as birth control is wrong. Those that try to argue the contrary are so washed up in our hospital clean language that they cannot see reality. I will not take up room on this message board to rattle off statistics in regards to abortion, who is getting them, their race, their economic background, etc. All of this information is easily accessible on the instrument you are using to read this post.
That aside, the idea of offering only abstinence is silly. Sex is a basic instinct, and it is foolish to believe or teach otherwise. However much we would like to believe our children will make proper choices with sex, often youth and inexperience will prevail, especially when it comes to things rooted in emotion. Giving people options has always proved a better solution than "do this or else." Allowing sex-education to encompass safe sex practices would reduce pregnancy and disease. Condoms break, often because they are used incorrectly. I'm not saying to disregard teaching abstinence, but what do you do if they aren't listening to that? Is it so wrong to offer other alternatives to abstinence, especially when you know that argument is falling on deaf ears for most of the population?
This abortion debate will go on forever, until we stop pretending we are all puritans. People have sex. They don't always conform to our moral values that surround sex. So, taking that as truth, let's stop shoving abstinence down the throat of the inexperienced and curious, and give them an opportunity to make a CHOICE before they even happen upon abortion as an option.
|
|
Theflossingofamerica
Guest
|
Post by Theflossingofamerica on May 4, 2003 2:13:23 GMT -5
This is a post in comment to arguments of rape and incest, and that of a high risk of personal injury to the mother if she gives birth.
If we could greatly reduce the amount of abortions sought as a method of birth control by offering better sex education and allowing the easing of adoption restrictions, this argument would be nearly moot.
It is a grievous error for society to make any law disallowing someone to make choices in regards to their own body when all choices were taken away from them to leave them in the predicament in which they stand. If a woman is pregnant as a result of a rape or incest, it is completely within her rights to make a decision that she believes she can live with. I am a woman. I don't think I, under any circumstance could have an abortion, but I would not place that decision on any other woman.
There are many things that are overlooked in the argument of rape and incest. I hear a lot of "well, it is only nine months." Or, "it is such a small percent of people who are faced with this problem."
I'll begin with the nine month crap. I don't care if it is fifteen minutes, I am not going to tell another person that, "I'm sorry, but I don't believe in abortion. I don't care if you were raped. You will go through with this pregnancy, all the good and bad. Every time you feel that child kick, it may bring back the feeling of your attacker kicking and assaulting you, but that doesn't matter to me. Why? Because I don't have to live it. I have read women post, saying, "I gave birth, it wasn't that bad." Well, honey, you weren't brutalized when that child was conceived, why don't you post after you've been there. Even if that were the case, we are all idividuals and experience horror and pain in different ways.
The second point of it being such a small percentage. What would it matter if there were only two? Seriously, have they no rights because they are of a minority? Read the constitution. Please. Our government is set up to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL. Only our elected officials are based upon majority rules, not our laws governing the land. If the majority ruled everything in this country, we would all vote on all new laws...heck, we would all be Christians. Having our government protect individual rights allows for someone to be a buddhist, jewish, or any other religion they so choose. Religion is just one example, and I don't believe I have to further a list of things that change individually from person to person nor do I need to list off our rights that allow those differences.
Please don't come back with "People aren't dying based upon one's religious beliefs," I think the contrary to that statement is abundantly clear, given the events in recent past. In fact, through history, more people have died, exponentially, in the name of someone's god, than for any other reasons, combined...yes, I said, combined.
Lastly, if a woman believes that she will die if she continues with her pregnancy, she should be able to decide to save her own life. It's HER life we are talking about. How dare we be so pompous that we would tell someone else when to stand in front of the bullet. (I know the stories of people giving birth, even when told they were in danger, and they lived, the child lived, and happily ever after, and blah blah. These stories are a great testament to strength, and of miracles. But, a choice was made, a choice was allowed. It was a choice I would make, but again, I will not make that decision for someone else, it's not my life!)
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on May 5, 2003 1:06:59 GMT -5
It has nothing to do with religion. The concept of "thou shalt not kill" is not considered a religious belief, but a basic moral principal in civilized society all over the world. The only question is- is the un-born human life? If so, it is immoral to kill it in any other circumstances other than the immediate life saving acts on the mother's behalf-self defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on May 5, 2003 1:20:43 GMT -5
|
|
Theflossingofamerica
Guest
|
Post by Theflossingofamerica on May 6, 2003 1:25:18 GMT -5
will you please read the study one more time...then try and give me the results of it one more time. That is like giving me the movie "Traffic" as a reasoning to stop the war on drugs. LOOK at your information you are given...read it without blinders...then decide the reality of the numbers...MO, you are so much smarter than this study...there is something you are missing, you can find it, but not in this study...this study is blind in it's premise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kris on Nov 13, 2003 22:02:59 GMT -5
Abortion is a very serious, and obviously controversial subject. However, in my opinion, it all comes down to the choice of the woman. If the woman does not believe she is fit to be a mother, or even to carry a child, I do not think she has to do so. With today's technology, we are able to make these changes for the benefit of the mother.
For example, lets just a say a 14 year old does get pregnant. I know many 14 year olds, who I do not think are physically or mentally ready to carry a baby. Yes, it was their fault for conceiving the child in the first place, but whats done is done. Now, this 14 does not want the child, and cannot handle it. What is going to stop her from drinking, smoking, etc., all of these things which can potentially harm the child.
Part of me says, its your fault, have the baby. But, there is the major part of me that says PRO CHOICE! If a woman does not want to have a baby, that is her choice. There some circumstances that this is the best option for HER. Plus (I know this is going to make some people really angry, but oh well) the world is way over populated! The world's population is growing at an exponential rate, and unwated babies add to the problem. Yeah, I am sure a bunch of you are going to hate that. I AM NOT SAYING that the solution to over population is killling people and babies, I am saying that if a baby is going to be put up for adoption, and never taken, then it is almost better for them to not exist. It's just another mouth to feed.
One last thing, is embryo research. Think about the possbilities! Yes, I know I am contradicting myself, but the potential is great. We could save lives through this research, lives that have a brain to understand what is happening. Lives that have families who care for them!
Ok, sorry for all the people I just made mad! This is my biased, conservative, teenage opinion!
|
|
|
|
Post by Angmar on Jan 18, 2004 23:38:08 GMT -5
It's very simple in most cases--most of the conservatives would rather not slaughter people. Extenuating circumstances warrant consideration, however.
|
|
|
|
Post by raja on Mar 11, 2004 22:14:18 GMT -5
This is a small statement in responce to part of Kris's post "Now, this 14 does not want the child, and cannot handle it." That statement right there is (despite the girl's age) selfish. Look at any reason a woman gives (excluding danger to her health or the baby's) using the words "I can't handle it" or "How is this going to affect ME" "Me, ME, I, I" to consitute her abortion and please TELL ME that that doesn't sound as selfish as you can get. It's called sacrifice, a thing done by our parents for us ALL the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by raja on Mar 11, 2004 22:20:29 GMT -5
This is a post in responce to part of theflossingofamerica'a post that bothered me.
"It is a grievous error for society to make any law disallowing someone to make choices in regards to their own body "
--very true, but since no one should make choices regarding other people's bodies, the person should's make a choice regarding an unborn child's body either...right?"
also, "I am a woman. I don't think I, under any circumstance could have an abortion, but I would not place that decision on any other woman.
--I am also a woman, and (example) I despise my neighbor, but the other woman across the street hates him more, I WOULD NEVER KILL HIM, but she wants to go ahead and shoot him, why should i try to stop her and tell her not to, it's her choice how she rids herself of a nuisance, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by raja on Mar 12, 2004 17:10:20 GMT -5
In responce to Fred's post on page two. "I think it is wrong; however I would drive my daughter right down to the clinic if she was raped or pregnant from a total loser " --Well boys and girls, this statement right here is what i would show as a PRIME, text book example of hypocrisy.
also, "Men do not want kids from women who want abortions, if they do they are really stupid"
--Once again...the uneducated statement speaks for itself about the speaker
And one other thing, "To me abortion is not my topic; I really don't have strong feelings either way."
-- And yet once again, the hypocrisy...if it's not your topic than why even spend two paragraphs and many other posts discussing it...
|
|
There are so many people that would love to adopt a child those who can't have children of there own. I was adopted after being removed from an abusive family. God is the creator of life. "Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, So are the children of one's youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; They shall not be ashamed, But shall speak with their enemies in the gate."--Psalm 127 vs3-5 