Most of those kids would be raised by the parent(s). How many people have children that were "unprepared" and "surprised" by a pregnancy, had tremendous fear and reservations, but ultimately kept the kids and were happy about their choice? Millions.
Science Is Giving the Pro-Life Movement a Boost
- Thread starter Smallcock
- Start date
- Status
If science tells us that humans develop in the body faster than we thought, would you concede that the window for an abortion should also be reduced?
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/joseph_stalin_388302
SC - your approach is going against the western agenda... all the way.
You go against feminism, against pro-choice (a derivation of the feminist movement), against the separation of the government and religion (any of them lol), against pornhub.com... and last but not least you go against puppies (yes ! - who will have time for puppies if they need to raise children...???).
...and eventually many other topics which are going to kneel our civilization (or is it already defeated at the social dynamic level ?).
to clear: i am for puppies all the way ! (i love kitties too)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0SR6yMZw-8
Last edited:
Too much of a moral gray area to legislate I think. When in doubt you have to leave it to the individual to decide.
That said, I think 99+% of abortion’s are the result of callous and irresponsible behavior by women. In the US it’s at epidemic levels in the African American community, sad that life has so little value. For black women 40%ish (stats are inconsistent) of pregnancies end in abortion.
That said, I think 99+% of abortion’s are the result of callous and irresponsible behavior by women. In the US it’s at epidemic levels in the African American community, sad that life has so little value. For black women 40%ish (stats are inconsistent) of pregnancies end in abortion.
We import immigrants because without them our population would decline and we wouldn't be able to sustain our workforce. Kill two birds with one stone - stop killing your kids (for the moral win!) and you have yourself a workforce.
Overall things worked pretty good for centuries before abortions became the norm. It's use as a form of birth control has been another knock to accountability, responsibility, morality.
Overall things worked pretty good for centuries before abortions became the norm. It's use as a form of birth control has been another knock to accountability, responsibility, morality.
… and when either one of them is your body, you get a deciding voice. Otherwise all you get is your right of free speech.
What the OP and other anti-abortionists don't realize is that there is no legislative solution to "end abortion". All any anti-abortion legislation will do is drive it underground, again. The weird thing is, I always get the feeling that they know this, they just want to wipe their hands of it. In other words, they're not really "pro-life" because they couldn't give a shit if a young, scared girl dies due to an illegal abortion done in a back alley.
Yup. Or at least it should be.
That said, it has very little to do with the article. That quote from smallcock seems to be an attempt to dumb down any kind of debate on this article to the level where he can participate, in-order to ensure back-and-forth on TERB.
In reading the article, this seems to be what’s being mentioned repeatedly as the problem in this case of both sides using science inappropriately to “win” a moral debate.
The science in-effect, as funded by pro-choice or pro-life is increasingly quack-science, as it’s debateable. Science isn’t debateable, unless you ask global-warming denialist “scientists.” The science, funded by neither group is being misinterpreted or misrepresemted in many cases by both groups.
As with the quote I posted, if you read the title or scanned only a part of the article and got “See, science proves it. Killing babies is wrong....” you went looking for acknowledgement of your own prejudices, and found them in a place that doesn’t or shouldn’t exist.
This remains a moral debate, but one that both sides are trying to win with science, which is a break from the past for pro-life.
That is the dumbest fucking thing I've read in a LONG time. (Thanks BTW for my laugh of the day.)
Does the term "unwanted child" mean anything to you? (Rhetorical question since obviously you don't get it.)
Women who have abortions do not want their children. They are not prepared for them, they do not want the responsibility of raising them, they are not in a position to raise them. That's why they are UNWANTED. And I would wager than in 99% of the cases, the sperm donors don't want the child either and have long since flown the coop leaving all of the responsibility of raising a child to the woman.
I remember reading somewhere that they asked women who recently had abortions what emotion they felt after having abortion. The number 1 response was relief.
So I ask you again, what do you propose to do with the huge number of UNWANTED children that would result in any kind of abortion ban.
Uggh.
Missed this.
The same politicians that condemn abortions seem to have little trouble ordering drone strikes (et al) on civilian targets, and continue to allow state executions. If all life was actually something deserving of protection, why not start there, instead of circling the drain on this absolutely ridiculous debate?
The ideological forefathers of this debate kept condoms and birth control out of the hands of those who wanted them, and I feel we’re better off for the fact that their voices have mostly been silenced, replaced by this grandmas’s fart of an argument on whether or not a woman should have ultimate control over her body.
Personally, I’d never side with a group rooted in that type of ignorance.
Those same systems of law establish the properly lawful occasions when individuals are permitted (even encouraged) to kill: Everything from nuclear war and ethnic cleansing, soldiering and policing, through 'stand your ground' and self-defence to the death penalty has been, and is 'lawful'. Including abortion.
It's one's personal choice about when and how to use that moralizing word 'should' which you've set up as the point of argument in your thread, and it's up to you to justify yours.
The law however, is whatever the sovereign says it is, and morally neutral.
Abortion rates are going down
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...n-rate-falls-to-lowest-level-since-roe-v-wade
plan parenthood is known for covering up sexual abuse of underage girls
http://www.iowartl.org/get-the-facts/planned-parenthood/aids-sex-predators/
a recent Canadian case
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...-youth-abortion-abuse-athena-clinic-1.4259519
plan parenthood also known for covering up botched abortions
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/01/04/...-clinic-trying-to-cover-up-botched-abortions/
plan parenthood selling fetus tissue
http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/26...inis-exec-busted-trying-sell-baby-body-parts/
Fetal tissue is used in medical research and to make vaccines
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/17/health/fetal-tissue-explainer/index.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...n-rate-falls-to-lowest-level-since-roe-v-wade
plan parenthood is known for covering up sexual abuse of underage girls
http://www.iowartl.org/get-the-facts/planned-parenthood/aids-sex-predators/
a recent Canadian case
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...-youth-abortion-abuse-athena-clinic-1.4259519
plan parenthood also known for covering up botched abortions
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/01/04/...-clinic-trying-to-cover-up-botched-abortions/
plan parenthood selling fetus tissue
http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/26...inis-exec-busted-trying-sell-baby-body-parts/
Fetal tissue is used in medical research and to make vaccines
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/17/health/fetal-tissue-explainer/index.html
I would think that these happy outcomes are in the minority. Henry Morgentaler once said that unwanted babies are often unloved and they turn out badly. I have read that there are statistics showing a drop in crime rates in jurisdictions where abortions have been allowed.
Nonsense. The young women I knew who were shoved into Unwed Mothers Homes certainly wouldn't agree, nor would the majority of women who supported getting the laws changed to allow choice. Nor did the couple of adult friends who began life as some of those unwanted babies have anything good to say about that process. And that's without recalling the true horrors of institutions like the Magdalen Laundries, or of botched and deadly back street abortions that killed and maimed uncounted women through those centuries of yours.
Give us a single shred of evidence to justify saying "… overall things worked pretty good for centuries before abortions became" legal†. Of course the men who never bore a single baby, endured even one pregnancy, suffered through even an easy labour, nor ever had to nurse an unwanted child might say something like that in their smug ignorance. I assume you're one of them. How be we leave the matter for the women to decide for themselves?
--------------------
† By no stretch of definitions can one say abortions have become the norm; it's clear you meant 'legal'. If I'm mistaken, then you also owe us stats to show that norm. As for its use as birth control, what else could it be?
Sorry, but deaths resulting from war and policing are not related nor analogous to abortion. There only similarity is in protecting innocent life against a threat.
Abortion is a moral decision. The fact that you don't see it as one, speaks to the problem.
This makes no sense. Enemies obviously have to be killed for self-preservation. As for State executions... I'm opposed to those.
Incorrect. The decision to have a body within your body was the choice made. Now that other body must be protected.
That's what foster homes and adoptions are for. And unwanted can easily change to wanted once the child is born. Happens all the time, and throughout all of human history.
Adoptions? We can't even find homes for the kids today awaiting adoption.
Using American Statistics
There are 107,918 foster children eligible for and waiting to be adopted. In 2014, 50,644 foster kids were adopted — a number that has stayed roughly consistent for the past five years. The average age of a waiting child is 7.7 years old and 29% of them will spend at least three years in foster care.Dec 8, 2015
Link
So you propose adding millions of unwanted children to an already overwhelmed system? That's your solution.
You tend to think in a very simplistic way and spout cliches about how in your opinion all this should work.
Here's the deal.
Millions of unwanted children would need to be taken care of and raised. The system we currently have simply could not handle it. We would need to put in place a huge infrastructure network to support and raise millions of unwanted children. This would require very large tax payer funding. It's funny because usually the "right to life" crowd are usually the ones who scream the loudest about welfare moms and welfare bums and eliminating social assistance etc. etc.
The "Right to Life" crowd should more aptly be named, "Right to birth" because once the kid is born, they, like you, just figure that it's "mission accomplished" (yes, that's a George W Bush analogy because we all know how well that worked out) and it's now someone else's problem (like your post when I asked you who is going to raise all of these unwanted children, and your simplistic (even child like) response was, "their parents". I don't know what planet you are on on this one frankly.)
When I pressed you to come up with a realistic solution, your next solution was, "adoption and foster care" and harping on about the good ole days it wasn't a problem (like you would know.)
Well the adoption and foster care system can't handle the kids we do have right now.
So again, I ask you, "what's your plan for dealing with millions of unwanted children"
I await your well thought out response. And waxing poetic with anecdotes about the good ole days is not a solution.
So lets here about how you plan to house, feed, educate, socialize well adjusted children whose parents did not want them.
There are consequences to actions, my friend. It's like telling a would-be criminal: "Don't do the crime if you don't want to do the time". There is no get-out-of-jail card for them.
"Unwed Mother Homes" is not a term or institution with any stigma today. Single motherhood is celebrated, and even considered an ideal among some extremists. I think women would welcome "Unwed Mother Homes" with open arms today.
You're a smart guy so your friends are smart too. They did ok in life despite the trials in early childhood. The process wasn't good? Make the institutions better.
I'm arguing against abortion so what do back street abortions have to do with my argument? Nothing.
Society has come along very well. It's up to you to put forth evidence of your unsubstantiated claims to the gruesome brutality that not using abortion as a form of birth control had on society.
Every single person on this board, male and female, knows someone that got an abortion. That's how normalized and common it's become.
- Status
