All part of the plan. Make abortion a "sacrament", and the population stays under control Don't mess with my rights!!!! I have been brainwashed!!Bring in the third worlders replace us!!!Id10Ts....
I remember what it was like when abortion was illegal. I would not do that to anyone.
I have thoroughly read our founding documents and have seen NOTHING on this issue. Near as I can tell you are trying to impose YOUR view of morality on everyone.
Far as I can see if it is not your kid and not your family, time too STFU.
Hey Winston, guess what? This is my fucking blog. If you don't like my views, you don't have to come back. But telling me to STFU? No sir, not going to fly.
As a Libertarian, while I feel morally repulsed by women who are chronic abortion abusers, I don't believe it's my place to prevent them from killing their babies.
But that being said, I also find it beyond fucked up that my tax dollars should fund abortions. Make them legal, make them available, make them pay for their own damn abortions.
I think that being willing to kill your own unborn child shows a certain lack of compassion. It will always lead to eugenics, culling of the old and those who the majority deam unneccissary.
It took less than 30 years for abortion to go from legal to where we are now. Questioning when life starts is sexist, people use abortion to select the gender of their children and many people see abortion as their primary form of birth control. And planned parenthood sees baby organs as a commodity. Can anyone honestly say that they would see nothining wrong with allowing a company to set up a program where anyone can walk in and decide that another person must die because they see it as a good thing? And that the person they select to die has no say in the matter and once they are killed their organs will be harvested?
Publicly funding it is a stain on our society. Morally the idea of killing a child is horrific to me. I honestly feel that the abortion on demand industry is a major part of why are nation is where it is now.
Hello Winston. I would personally have a 25 year old son or daughter. I would more than likely be a grandfather. That child was murdered without so much as a word to me untill the child was killed. Winnie's mother cogolled, pressured, and insisted she get a abortion. She is to this day and will be untill she dies mad at herself for letting herself be convinced. I do have a dog in this hunt. I have four beautiful daughters now. I should have five. Steve in KY.
One more thing. President Lincoln said that all the dead and wounded may be God's just judgement for 100 years of slavery. What then will be our just punishment for 30,000,000 murdered babies.
And in spite of Roe V Wade, I don't see a fucking thing in the founders writings that advocate for it either. Nor in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.It is a medical procedure that has been granted the same status as Free Speech, or the 2A....How did the Nazis in the Black Robes have to twist words to get there? Margaret Sanger is smiling from Hell over that.
Wow. Brave guy comes in here, posts anonymously, and reserves his right to brutally murder infants.
When you're talking about taking a life for the sake of your own convenience, you're the one forcing your morals on other people, not the other way around.
my youngest child was adopted...by all rights, she should have been an abortion stat...ADD, ADHD, probly BiPolar, you name it, she was a living poster girl for abortions..but, instead we had her for 24 1/2 years...laughter, tears, pain,joy, and love..we lost her this year in a car wreck, and we are amazed we kept her alive for as long as we did....was it EASY,... NO! But neither is life. She left us with sweet memories and a lovely little boy...who would not have been here if his mom had been an abortion stat...everyone has to make their on decisions on the subject, but I don't think EASY is always the way to go..........
I hate abortion. But I support Angel. This issue is really more complicated than people think. I am a Christian. But if I tell the 18 year old unwed girl who just had her family toss her out and her boyfriend leave her, to keep her baby, am I then willing to have her come and live with my family? Am I willing to support her, to help send her to college and to babysit while she does, so she can make a life for her and her baby, which I so easily made her choices for? And are all the other prolife people out there also willing to do that? Like I said, I hate abortion. But things are not always as simple as they seem. So if you aren't willing to help raise someone's child, you have no right to decide anything for them.
With all due respect that's a strawman argument (and I suspect you know it).
I've said it before and I'll say it again – No woman (since about 1975) has become pregnant and had a child except by stupidity, laziness or by deliberate choice. Fact, period, dot!
As a (second career) nurse (and midwifery trained) I can say that the current (NHS) catalogue of prophylactic options runs to over a hundred pages. They're all available (as there) either free or so cheap they're effectively so. They're available from hospitals, surgeries, pharmacies, in pubs, clubs, newsagents, libraries and even schools. Not to have and use them occurs ONLY because of one of the above options. Please don't quote “as the result of incest/rape” at me either since here in the UK, especially with the 'morning after pill', no such cases has arisen in decades (and it'll be the same there), “extreme genetic abnormalities” which unhappily would account for hundreds of such sad/desperate (and unusually in all this, really legitimate) choices rather than the millions we see yearly, or “they aren't 100% effective” (almost all the real research shows the many 'I was using …' claims turn out in actuality to be more 'I didn't use them properly' or 'I couldn't be bothered/forgot' in fact). Fact.
The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of abortions occur because of women not liking/not bothering/choosing not to take precautions because the dual benefits of welfare (if she decides to have the child) or abortion as a prophylactic choice are available at whim (excused by the medical establishment as an emergency, citing she doesn't want/can't be bothered/it'll cramp her social life as a 'medical' reason for such).
But what about the men, I hear you cry? Men have no/zero/zilch say in it. Her body, her choice? If the woman doesn't want the child and the man does – no child! If the woman does want it, and the man not – there WILL be a child (even in long-term, stable, married situations). So when one side makes a unilateral choice, why blame the party which has no say (well except for being required to fund her choices that is)?
But what about it causing a return to 'the bad old days of Victorian waifs left homeless and committing suicide' or 'the back street coat-hanger abortions of the past'? Rubbish! Those situations arose because there was no alternative, precaution – prophylactics – available.
So your hypothetical “unwed girl”, like the millions of her sisters, would instead be (and this is exactly why it is so vehemently fought for by the feminists and lefties) forced to 'take responsibility for her own choices/actions' for a change and, rather than millions of 'unwanted babies' (amazingly they fail to consider both the millions receiving 'assisted fertility treatments' or the massive, unfulfilled demand for adoption at the same time, but they would interrupt the narrative wouldn’t they?), it would most likely presage a return to abstinence, stable family units and (gaia forbid /sarc) marriage.
I'm with Angel on this, I don't like it but don't see it as my place to dictate, whilst utterly despising those who force me to pay for others poor choices (whilst enriching themselves). What's to bet if those women were expected to pay for their own abortions they'd suddenly either start buying the cheaper prophylactics or keeping their legs crossed more?
I have no problem dictating my belief regarding abortion on others.
We dictate our beliefs regarding bank robberies, rape, home invasion, animal cruelty, and murder upon others without a second thought. But when it comes to abortion suddenly we don't have the moral fortitude to put a stop to it.
If we as a society can look at pictures of severed heads and crushed torsos and tiny lifeless fingers with a shrug of our shoulders and mutter "well it's complicated and who am I to say" then we really are doomed and deserve whatever fallout we get from not standing up to evil.
I'm all about liberty but some things are some fundamental things that are just plain wrong. Murder is one of them. I'm more than ok in telling someone that you shouldn't murder or be in favor of someone who wants to arrange a murder.
Abortion is murder.
That being so stated I'm guilty of financing one 35 years ago and daily feel shame for it. I paid for a murder. I feel that guilt daily and especially when topics like this come up.
I'm sorry but it's personal to me, and it's hard for me to watch everyone get all intellectual about it.
I have to agree with RB and I disagree with the view that says, "Well I'm a Libertarian, so it's not my place to say a woman can't have an abortion." To me it's simple. Taking an innocent human life is murder. Period. There is no difference in murdering a baby 6 months before it would have been born or 6 months after. It's the same baby! We all have no problem dictating that the 6-month-old baby can't be killed. Why isn't it our place to dictate that the in utero baby can't be killed? I like to think that I'm as libertarian as most who hang out here, but murder is murder. One's political views have nothing to do with it. - steve
First, to Volfram, I won't argue with you, but will simply say, you are wrong. To Abe, I thank you for your rational and fairly worded argument, and I would like to respond in a similarly kind manner.
I said that I agree with Angel in that I don't think that the public should pay for private abortions. I thought that was clear, but apparently not, and so for that I apologize.
If I am to understand the main points of your post, and I don't mean to put words into your mouth, but simply wish to compress the main ideas for time, you feel that birth control is widely available and is the responsibility of the woman, and if she doesn't take care of that, then she bears the responsibility of a possible pregnancy and any cost resulting from a possible abortion. I again apologize, for cutting so short, but do so only in the interest of time, not to minimize your concerns.
Understanding as I think I do, all of your post, not just the brief synopsis I wrote here, I think you fail to consider a few other pertinent points.
1. The age of the woman. Even though a woman has the maturity to assent to sex, she may not have the emotional maturity to understand the real world consequences of pregnancy. A case in point is the so call pregnancy pact in the news a few years ago in new England involving high school girls. Perhaps somewhat discredited, it still existed to some extent.
2. Sex education. I don't know the state of sex ed. in the U.K. but here in the U.S., from what I have learned from the young people that I speak with, there is much taught about nuts and bolts mechanics and avoiding the spread of disease, but little about the emotional and real world aspects of pregnancy.
3. Poverty. It is not a popular thing to discuss, but quite often, those whose incomes are the lowest have lower education, less understanding of birth control methods, lower self esteme, etc. These all go hand in hand with out of control unwanted pregnancy.
4. Peer pressure. Don't mock this. I know from experience that this is real, as I have seen it happen at least two times, to two different young women, who felt pressured by other teenagers to have sex before they were ready.
5. Male pressure. Again, not much needs to be said about this. A man will say anything to have sex with a woman.
6. Biology. Just as eating is a natural human biological function, so too is the human sex drive. Just saying for a woman to keep her legs together is not only naïve, but borders on cruel.
In many of these cases, the woman can end up in the situation where she is found with little hope, no support, and little help. I have never had to make the choice for my daughter on whether to have an abortion, thank God. But I would certainly never want to make the choice for someone else. This issue is not a clear cut one. If I ruled the world, I would say no abortion except in case of saving the mothers life. I really am a Christian, no matter what some may think, and believe in self defense. That would possibly be a case for it. However, I don't rule the world, and even though I hate abortion, I have not come to the place in my life where I can say that a woman can never chose. This is based almost entirely upon the point of my first post. Until we as a society get to the place where we give women who, not use abortion as retroactive birth control, but who are in real despair, with little support or hope, some measure of help, until then, I can't say you can't chose. I can say, I don't want my money to pay for something that I find morally, and in this country, constitutionally, wrong.
Angel, I am trying to be kind here. If you or someone else find me to be too outspoken, I will stop and just be a visitor. I don't wish to anger anyone. I do wish to make someone think, even if the continue to disagree.
Abortion is murder, plain and simple. It's not a complex issue. It's not shades of gray. It's tearing apart a helpless life for your inconvenience. It's forcing someone who can't object to bear the price for your own mistakes. It's the only thing more irresponsible than the acts that lead to it.
Gay marriage is a complex issue. Welfare is a complex issue. War is a complex issue. Public decency is a complex issue.
Using hemostats to rip apart an infant who can't even scream about the pain? That's pretty cut and dry. Anybody who says otherwise is the purest of evil and there's a special place in Hell for them.
Here in the UK multiple media outlets have, over the years, undertaken surveys of school-age children regarding their 'career choices'. 'All' those in the last twenty-plus years have shown that whilst boys will 'wish' for careers in industry, media, the military, etc. the overwhelming majority of (twelve year-old and younger) girls state categorically that they 'intend' (choose, deliberately) to “become pregnant and get free housing and welfare so as not to have to work”. They are fully cognisant of the 'benefits' of the choices even at that age (there 'may' be some naïve young ladies who aren't, another tiny, rare minority (unfortunately, the lack of childhood innocence is another indicator of a decline I personally think) cited as a the norm, but rather than they being likely to have 'unwanted/unplanned' pregnancies I suspect most are considerably more likely to be 'good girls' who will simply/sensibly not 'indulge').
It is precisely because there is no 'down-side' for girls/women (and freely available abortion is part of that – paying some women to have children and others, often the very same ones, to abort others) that this degradation of both our societies (and the murder of over 53 million children there, and over 12 million here, can be categorised as nothing less) has occurred.
Women are (and always have been) the 'gate-keepers' of sex (and dating/relationships/marriage). Chivalry was a two-way street where men treated women with respect (provided and protected) and … women 'only' dated/married men who did so!
Girls and women are both more mature (and to an extent realistic) about who they 'marry' (men being attracted to looks, figure, personality and … er, reputation, whilst women 'always' include a status/prospects/income aspect that is arguably a greater decider than any other factor).
Currently (and for decades thanks to 'feminism') is that they can 'have their cake and eat it', dating the bad-boys (80% of women sleep with only 20% of men, rewarding the very behaviour they 'publicly at least' claim to abhor), sleeping around, killing any child she doesn't want (just then or with that particular guy) and then (when she decides to keep a child) either taking the 'sperm donor' (they simply aren't allowed to be 'fathers' any more) to the cleaners or expecting 'society' to support her bad choices.
You can raise all/any factors you think pertinent (although laughably claiming some 'biological imperative' that will cause suffering/pain/death if not indulged has to be a stretch even for you) but the simple fact remains that where there is no more (and arguably less) education, where there is 'real' poverty, but where there is also no/less tolerance/support/reward for 'loose' behaviour (where sex before marriage is frowned on, where unwed mothers are still stigmatised, where 'loose' women and men were sent to Coventry – just like it was both there and here until the 50's) there are both less single mothers, unwed sex, unwanted/unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
I don't want to put words in Angels mouth (also to alcade and RB) but I suspect, in saying “I/we don't wish to 'dictate' to others”, that she, like I, is basing that on one thing only – that those making those choices be expected to take responsibility for those choices actions and preferably … get to experience the consequences, good and hard. “Wisdom, knowing the right choices, is based on experience making the wrong choices”. If you cushion (excuse, support or even reward) bad choices, they will never learn or take responsibility and you'll predictably get more of it (but perhaps that's the real point from some peoples point of view). They’re happy with this since they are shielded from what they actually do, are supported and rewarded and never, never, never have to face any responsibility/consequences.
I believe that I stated that I find abortion to be both morally and legally wrong. I will say that I believe life begins at conception. I am a born again, Bible believing Christian. At issue is not whether or not you or I believe it is right or wrong. I think the main issue was with public money being used to pay for abortion. Something that I again think is a misuse of taxpayers money. If we debate ending abortion in this country, then I say sure, let's end it. But then I say, we have to also plan for and be willing to build up the network to help some of the young women who really have no one to turn to. I am not talking about those who have several abortions in a row, using it as birth control, although I don't know if that is real or just urban legend.
I have learned in life that when you begin to make judgements as to what is right or wrong for someone other than yourself, you risk having someone make judgements for you.
I will not post any more on this topic. I am grateful for the discussion and look forward to more on something else less contentious.
Regarding the Constitution and founders... This is addressed...sort of. The 10th Amendment says (I'm paraphrasing): If it aint't written here, it's up to the States.
Madison clarified this in Federalist 45 where he wrote the the powers of the federal government are few and defined and powers to the states are varied and infinite.
Hell, up until well into the 19th century several States had official religions!
The point is, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and he Federalist all support this being a State issue.
The tricky part is deciding whether or not it is murder. If it is, all my points are moot.
No person shall be deprived of property, liberty, or life without due process.
If it's a life, Roe v Wade sure as Hell was not due process. Give the baby it's day in court and a fair chance to defend itself and then maybe I'll think you pro-murderers have a point.
If it's not a life then it is a thing. At what point does a man sign for permission to have his property taken from him? It takes two to tango, it is just as much his property as it his hers. If you doubt that or don't believe me, then, uh, hey, STUPID FUCK, SCIENCE!
So either way, somebody is being deprived of something without due process.
Welcome to the land of your rights are not guaranteed. And the pro-murder crowd applauds it openly.
Is it just me or people are completely ignoring the facts the question of whether you should let those unborn children struggle to live their every day lives in this fuck up world? Also, there are people out there who got pregnant as a result of RAPE. Please whould somebody tell me that these ladies have full consent on wanting to get pregnant? And the excuse that those ladies always want the baby, have you ever heard of maternity instinct? Beside, if they went to the labor section of the hospital then they already decided they want the baby. Other wise they whould have try to hide or get ride of it ages ago.
And yes, I'm a coward, that's why I don't give my name.
31 comments:
His point is ironclad, hers shows zero thought.
All part of the plan. Make abortion a "sacrament", and the population stays under control Don't mess with my rights!!!! I have been brainwashed!!Bring in the third worlders replace us!!!Id10Ts....
Both sides talking past each other. Same old.
I remember what it was like when abortion was illegal. I would not do that to anyone.
I have thoroughly read our founding documents and have seen NOTHING on this issue. Near as I can tell you are trying to impose YOUR view of morality on everyone.
Far as I can see if it is not your kid and not your family, time too STFU.
Winston
Hey Winston, guess what?
This is my fucking blog. If you don't like my views, you don't have to come back. But telling me to STFU? No sir, not going to fly.
As a Libertarian, while I feel morally repulsed by women who are chronic abortion abusers, I don't believe it's my place to prevent them from killing their babies.
But that being said, I also find it beyond fucked up that my tax dollars should fund abortions. Make them legal, make them available, make them pay for their own damn abortions.
And now, Winston, you may fuck the fuck off.
I think that being willing to kill your own unborn child shows a certain lack of compassion. It will always lead to eugenics, culling of the old and those who the majority deam unneccissary.
It took less than 30 years for abortion to go from legal to where we are now. Questioning when life starts is sexist, people use abortion to select the gender of their children and many people see abortion as their primary form of birth control. And planned parenthood sees baby organs as a commodity. Can anyone honestly say that they would see nothining wrong with allowing a company to set up a program where anyone can walk in and decide that another person must die because they see it as a good thing? And that the person they select to die has no say in the matter and once they are killed their organs will be harvested?
Publicly funding it is a stain on our society. Morally the idea of killing a child is horrific to me. I honestly feel that the abortion on demand industry is a major part of why are nation is where it is now.
Exile1981
Hello Winston. I would personally have a 25 year old son or daughter. I would more than likely be a grandfather. That child was murdered without so much as a word to me untill the child was killed. Winnie's mother cogolled, pressured, and insisted she get a abortion. She is to this day and will be untill she dies mad at herself for letting herself be convinced. I do have a dog in this hunt. I have four beautiful daughters now. I should have five.
Steve in KY.
One more thing. President Lincoln said that all the dead and wounded may be God's just judgement for 100 years of slavery. What then will be our just punishment for 30,000,000 murdered babies.
Winston; The founding fathers didn't say anything about not robbing banks either. By your perverted logic it must be ok to rob a bank.
Greggbc
If you're pro choice, just make the choice to keep your legs closed.
And in spite of Roe V Wade, I don't see a fucking thing in the founders writings that advocate for it either. Nor in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.It is a medical procedure that has been granted the same status as Free Speech, or the 2A....How did the Nazis in the Black Robes have to twist words to get there? Margaret Sanger is smiling from Hell over that.
Angel, I'm so fucking proud of you right now.....
My work is done.
Wow. Brave guy comes in here, posts anonymously, and reserves his right to brutally murder infants.
When you're talking about taking a life for the sake of your own convenience, you're the one forcing your morals on other people, not the other way around.
my youngest child was adopted...by all rights, she should have been an abortion stat...ADD, ADHD, probly BiPolar, you name it, she was a living poster girl for abortions..but, instead we had her for 24 1/2 years...laughter, tears, pain,joy, and love..we lost her this year in a car wreck, and we are amazed we kept her alive for as long as we did....was it EASY,... NO! But neither is life. She left us with sweet memories and a lovely little boy...who would not have been here if his mom had been an abortion stat...everyone has to make their on decisions on the subject, but I don't think EASY is always the way to go..........
vaquero viejo
I hate abortion. But I support Angel. This issue is really more complicated than people think. I am a Christian. But if I tell the 18 year old unwed girl who just had her family toss her out and her boyfriend leave her, to keep her baby, am I then willing to have her come and live with my family? Am I willing to support her, to help send her to college and to babysit while she does, so she can make a life for her and her baby, which I so easily made her choices for? And are all the other prolife people out there also willing to do that?
Like I said, I hate abortion. But things are not always as simple as they seem. So if you aren't willing to help raise someone's child, you have no right to decide anything for them.
Pigpen
With all due respect that's a strawman argument (and I suspect you know it).
I've said it before and I'll say it again – No woman (since about 1975) has become pregnant and had a child except by stupidity, laziness or by deliberate choice. Fact, period, dot!
As a (second career) nurse (and midwifery trained) I can say that the current (NHS) catalogue of prophylactic options runs to over a hundred pages. They're all available (as there) either free or so cheap they're effectively so. They're available from hospitals, surgeries, pharmacies, in pubs, clubs, newsagents, libraries and even schools. Not to have and use them occurs ONLY because of one of the above options. Please don't quote “as the result of incest/rape” at me either since here in the UK, especially with the 'morning after pill', no such cases has arisen in decades (and it'll be the same there), “extreme genetic abnormalities” which unhappily would account for hundreds of such sad/desperate (and unusually in all this, really legitimate) choices rather than the millions we see yearly, or “they aren't 100% effective” (almost all the real research shows the many 'I was using …' claims turn out in actuality to be more 'I didn't use them properly' or 'I couldn't be bothered/forgot' in fact). Fact.
The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of abortions occur because of women not liking/not bothering/choosing not to take precautions because the dual benefits of welfare (if she decides to have the child) or abortion as a prophylactic choice are available at whim (excused by the medical establishment as an emergency, citing she doesn't want/can't be bothered/it'll cramp her social life as a 'medical' reason for such).
But what about the men, I hear you cry? Men have no/zero/zilch say in it. Her body, her choice? If the woman doesn't want the child and the man does – no child! If the woman does want it, and the man not – there WILL be a child (even in long-term, stable, married situations). So when one side makes a unilateral choice, why blame the party which has no say (well except for being required to fund her choices that is)?
But what about it causing a return to 'the bad old days of Victorian waifs left homeless and committing suicide' or 'the back street coat-hanger abortions of the past'? Rubbish! Those situations arose because there was no alternative, precaution – prophylactics – available.
So your hypothetical “unwed girl”, like the millions of her sisters, would instead be (and this is exactly why it is so vehemently fought for by the feminists and lefties) forced to 'take responsibility for her own choices/actions' for a change and, rather than millions of 'unwanted babies' (amazingly they fail to consider both the millions receiving 'assisted fertility treatments' or the massive, unfulfilled demand for adoption at the same time, but they would interrupt the narrative wouldn’t they?), it would most likely presage a return to abstinence, stable family units and (gaia forbid /sarc) marriage.
I'm with Angel on this, I don't like it but don't see it as my place to dictate, whilst utterly despising those who force me to pay for others poor choices (whilst enriching themselves). What's to bet if those women were expected to pay for their own abortions they'd suddenly either start buying the cheaper prophylactics or keeping their legs crossed more?
I have no problem dictating my belief regarding abortion on others.
We dictate our beliefs regarding bank robberies, rape, home invasion, animal cruelty, and murder upon others without a second thought. But when it comes to abortion suddenly we don't have the moral fortitude to put a stop to it.
If we as a society can look at pictures of severed heads and crushed torsos and tiny lifeless fingers with a shrug of our shoulders and mutter "well it's complicated and who am I to say" then we really are doomed and deserve whatever fallout we get from not standing up to evil.
Able nailed it.
I'm all about liberty but some things are some fundamental things that are just plain wrong. Murder is one of them. I'm more than ok in telling someone that you shouldn't murder or be in favor of someone who wants to arrange a murder.
Abortion is murder.
That being so stated I'm guilty of financing one 35 years ago and daily feel shame for it. I paid for a murder. I feel that guilt daily and especially when topics like this come up.
I'm sorry but it's personal to me, and it's hard for me to watch everyone get all intellectual about it.
RB
I'm calling BS on pigpen51. Liberal atheist running a false flag. Not a Christian.
I have to agree with RB and I disagree with the view that says, "Well I'm a Libertarian, so it's not my place to say a woman can't have an abortion." To me it's simple. Taking an innocent human life is murder. Period. There is no difference in murdering a baby 6 months before it would have been born or 6 months after. It's the same baby! We all have no problem dictating that the 6-month-old baby can't be killed. Why isn't it our place to dictate that the in utero baby can't be killed? I like to think that I'm as libertarian as most who hang out here, but murder is murder. One's political views have nothing to do with it.
- steve
It's not my place (or anyone's IMO) to tell someone, anyone, how to live their life.
There is a lot to be said for 'live and let live'.
First, to Volfram, I won't argue with you, but will simply say, you are wrong.
To Abe, I thank you for your rational and fairly worded argument, and I would like to respond in a similarly kind manner.
I said that I agree with Angel in that I don't think that the public should pay for private abortions. I thought that was clear, but apparently not, and so for that I apologize.
If I am to understand the main points of your post, and I don't mean to put words into your mouth, but simply wish to compress the main ideas for time, you feel that birth control is widely available and is the responsibility of the woman, and if she doesn't take care of that, then she bears the responsibility of a possible pregnancy and any cost resulting from a possible abortion.
I again apologize, for cutting so short, but do so only in the interest of time, not to minimize your concerns.
Understanding as I think I do, all of your post, not just the brief synopsis I wrote here, I think you fail to consider a few other pertinent points.
1. The age of the woman. Even though a woman has the maturity to assent to sex, she may not have the emotional maturity to understand the real world consequences of pregnancy. A case in point is the so call pregnancy pact in the news a few years ago in new England involving high school girls. Perhaps somewhat discredited, it still existed to some extent.
2. Sex education. I don't know the state of sex ed. in the U.K. but here in the U.S., from what I have learned from the young people that I speak with, there is much taught about nuts and bolts mechanics and avoiding the spread of disease, but little about the emotional and real world aspects of pregnancy.
3. Poverty. It is not a popular thing to discuss, but quite often, those whose incomes are the lowest have lower education, less understanding of birth control methods, lower self esteme, etc. These all go hand in hand with out of control unwanted pregnancy.
4. Peer pressure. Don't mock this. I know from experience that this is real, as I have seen it happen at least two times, to two different young women, who felt pressured by other teenagers to have sex before they were ready.
5. Male pressure. Again, not much needs to be said about this. A man will say anything to have sex with a woman.
6. Biology. Just as eating is a natural human biological function, so too is the human sex drive. Just saying for a woman to keep her legs together is not only naïve, but borders on cruel.
In many of these cases, the woman can end up in the situation where she is found with little hope, no support, and little help.
I have never had to make the choice for my daughter on whether to have
an abortion, thank God. But I would certainly never want to make the choice for someone else.
This issue is not a clear cut one. If I ruled the world, I would say no abortion except in case of saving the mothers life. I really am a Christian, no matter what some may think, and believe in
self defense. That would possibly be a case for it.
However, I don't rule the world, and even though I hate abortion, I have not come to the place in my life where I can say
that a woman can never chose. This is based almost entirely
upon the point of my first post. Until we as a society get to
the place where we give women who, not use abortion as retroactive birth control, but who are in real despair, with little support
or hope, some measure of help, until then, I can't say you can't chose. I can say, I don't want my money to pay for something that
I find morally, and in this country, constitutionally, wrong.
Angel, I am trying to be kind here. If you or someone else find me to be too outspoken, I will stop and just be a visitor. I don't wish to anger anyone. I do wish to make someone think, even if the continue to disagree.
Civil discourse is fine, telling me to STFU is not.
Carry on.
Thank you. I bet you didn't expect this much civil discourse over such a cute post. At least I saw the funny side of it.
Abortion is murder, plain and simple. It's not a complex issue. It's not shades of gray. It's tearing apart a helpless life for your inconvenience. It's forcing someone who can't object to bear the price for your own mistakes. It's the only thing more irresponsible than the acts that lead to it.
Gay marriage is a complex issue. Welfare is a complex issue. War is a complex issue. Public decency is a complex issue.
Using hemostats to rip apart an infant who can't even scream about the pain? That's pretty cut and dry. Anybody who says otherwise is the purest of evil and there's a special place in Hell for them.
Pigpen
Here in the UK multiple media outlets have, over the years, undertaken surveys of school-age children regarding their 'career choices'. 'All' those in the last twenty-plus years have shown that whilst boys will 'wish' for careers in industry, media, the military, etc. the overwhelming majority of (twelve year-old and younger) girls state categorically that they 'intend' (choose, deliberately) to “become pregnant and get free housing and welfare so as not to have to work”. They are fully cognisant of the 'benefits' of the choices even at that age (there 'may' be some naïve young ladies who aren't, another tiny, rare minority (unfortunately, the lack of childhood innocence is another indicator of a decline I personally think) cited as a the norm, but rather than they being likely to have 'unwanted/unplanned' pregnancies I suspect most are considerably more likely to be 'good girls' who will simply/sensibly not 'indulge').
It is precisely because there is no 'down-side' for girls/women (and freely available abortion is part of that – paying some women to have children and others, often the very same ones, to abort others) that this degradation of both our societies (and the murder of over 53 million children there, and over 12 million here, can be categorised as nothing less) has occurred.
Women are (and always have been) the 'gate-keepers' of sex (and dating/relationships/marriage). Chivalry was a two-way street where men treated women with respect (provided and protected) and … women 'only' dated/married men who did so!
Girls and women are both more mature (and to an extent realistic) about who they 'marry' (men being attracted to looks, figure, personality and … er, reputation, whilst women 'always' include a status/prospects/income aspect that is arguably a greater decider than any other factor).
Currently (and for decades thanks to 'feminism') is that they can 'have their cake and eat it', dating the bad-boys (80% of women sleep with only 20% of men, rewarding the very behaviour they 'publicly at least' claim to abhor), sleeping around, killing any child she doesn't want (just then or with that particular guy) and then (when she decides to keep a child) either taking the 'sperm donor' (they simply aren't allowed to be 'fathers' any more) to the cleaners or expecting 'society' to support her bad choices.
You can raise all/any factors you think pertinent (although laughably claiming some 'biological imperative' that will cause suffering/pain/death if not indulged has to be a stretch even for you) but the simple fact remains that where there is no more (and arguably less) education, where there is 'real' poverty, but where there is also no/less tolerance/support/reward for 'loose' behaviour (where sex before marriage is frowned on, where unwed mothers are still stigmatised, where 'loose' women and men were sent to Coventry – just like it was both there and here until the 50's) there are both less single mothers, unwed sex, unwanted/unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
I don't want to put words in Angels mouth (also to alcade and RB) but I suspect, in saying “I/we don't wish to 'dictate' to others”, that she, like I, is basing that on one thing only – that those making those choices be expected to take responsibility for those choices actions and preferably … get to experience the consequences, good and hard. “Wisdom, knowing the right choices, is based on experience making the wrong choices”. If you cushion (excuse, support or even reward) bad choices, they will never learn or take responsibility and you'll predictably get more of it (but perhaps that's the real point from some peoples point of view). They’re happy with this since they are shielded from what they actually do, are supported and rewarded and never, never, never have to face any responsibility/consequences.
Volfram,
I believe that I stated that I find abortion to be both morally and legally wrong. I will say that I believe life begins at conception. I am a born again, Bible believing Christian.
At issue is not whether or not you or I believe it is right or wrong. I think the main issue was with public money being used to pay for abortion. Something that I again think is a misuse of taxpayers money.
If we debate ending abortion in this country, then I say sure, let's end it. But then I say, we have to also plan for and be willing to build up the network to help some of the young women who really have no one to turn to. I am not talking about those who have several abortions in a row, using it as birth control, although I don't know if that is real or just urban legend.
I have learned in life that when you begin to make judgements as to what is right or wrong for someone other than yourself, you risk having someone make judgements for you.
I will not post any more on this topic. I am grateful for the discussion and look forward to more on something else less contentious.
Regarding the Constitution and founders... This is addressed...sort of. The 10th Amendment says (I'm paraphrasing): If it aint't written here, it's up to the States.
Madison clarified this in Federalist 45 where he wrote the the powers of the federal government are few and defined and powers to the states are varied and infinite.
Hell, up until well into the 19th century several States had official religions!
The point is, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and he Federalist all support this being a State issue.
The tricky part is deciding whether or not it is murder. If it is, all my points are moot.
No person shall be deprived of property, liberty, or life without due process.
If it's a life, Roe v Wade sure as Hell was not due process. Give the baby it's day in court and a fair chance to defend itself and then maybe I'll think you pro-murderers have a point.
If it's not a life then it is a thing. At what point does a man sign for permission to have his property taken from him? It takes two to tango, it is just as much his property as it his hers. If you doubt that or don't believe me, then, uh, hey, STUPID FUCK, SCIENCE!
So either way, somebody is being deprived of something without due process.
Welcome to the land of your rights are not guaranteed. And the pro-murder crowd applauds it openly.
Is it just me or people are completely ignoring the facts the question of whether you should let those unborn children struggle to live their every day lives in this fuck up world? Also, there are people out there who got pregnant as a result of RAPE. Please whould somebody tell me that these ladies have full consent on wanting to get pregnant? And the excuse that those ladies always want the baby, have you ever heard of maternity instinct? Beside, if they went to the labor section of the hospital then they already decided they want the baby. Other wise they whould have try to hide or get ride of it ages ago.
And yes, I'm a coward, that's why I don't give my name.
Puzzled Passerby
Post a Comment