[ Interaction Index Page | The Study Center | Resources | Site Front Page (Home) ]

Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
The 5th Quarter > 5Q Lounge > Abortion, Right or Wrong?


Posted by: taz719 Jan 22 2004, 03:54 PM
I was talking to a friend earlier about the 5Q and how the majority of the time you can get good advice and opinions and she began telling me about her little sister who is 14 and is pregnant. She doesn't know whether to have the abortion or keep the baby. Her lil sister has some health problems that can harm the baby's life and her's if she has the baby. She doesn't want to have the abortion because she doesn't want to kill the baby but she doesn't want to risk her health either. So my question is what would you do? And do you think abortion is right or wrong? Or in a case like this does it depend on the situation?

Posted by: *Mikka* Jan 22 2004, 03:56 PM
*sigh*

In her case I think she should go on and have the abortion if there is a risk to her heath, and the baby's health

I think abortion should be up to the woman, because it is HER body, and she's the one that would have to live with whatever feelings of guilt that might result

And I don't think abortion should be a case-specific issue.

Posted by: DonKing202 Jan 22 2004, 05:17 PM
I agree. It should be availible to anyone who chooses it for themselves and their body. Point Blank. Who is society to designate what women can and cannot do with their body?

But in the 14 year olds case, she definetly doesn't need that baby...Shoot, she can't even get a job to support that baby. If she has to rely on sombody else to raise that child (ie. family) than she most definetly doesn't need to have that child.
Why does her family have to raise her baby?

Posted by: LadyDMjr04 Jan 22 2004, 06:34 PM
i was wonderin when i would see a post about this topic... I think that it is mainly the woman's decision but the father does have a say-so in the matter(its his child too...even if it isn't a child technically)... I cant really say what i would do because that decision could only be made if i was in that position... I'm not really for abortion, but I'm not against it either... in a way I feel it is wrong becuz if is a life inside of u and u should take responsibility for ur stupidity... in another way i feel it is aight becuz not everybody can take care of the child and there are already way too many kids waitin to be adopted...also, it isn't technically a child yet... i do agree with others in sayin that she would probably benefit more if she got the abortion...

TWard
check it out and join
http://drawinkiuok.proboards20.com

Posted by: ooak69 Jan 22 2004, 06:41 PM
QUOTE (DonKing202 @ Jan 22 2004, 06:12 PM)
I agree. It should be availible to anyone who chooses it for themselves and their body. Point Blank. Who is society to designate what women can and cannot do with their body?

But in the 14 year olds case, she definetly doesn't need that baby...Shoot, she can't even get a job to support that baby. If she has to rely on sombody else to raise that child (ie. family) than she most definetly doesn't need to have that child.
Why does her family have to raise her baby?

This is my opinion of abortion. It is wrong in most cases and only should be allowed on very bad circumstances. DonKing, you say that a woman should not be told what to do with her body. Thats true. But at the same time, is that her body? By the time that the egg is fertilized in a womans body, scientifically that is another person. What about that person????

He/she has no choice or say so in whether they should live or die. That is someones soul, you know. Why should that baby have to suffer because a 14 year old was hot in the pants. Her parents should have raised her better. If she wasnt so fast in trying to get out and do things, she wouldnt have to worry about it. Is that the baby's fault? NO! Its irresponsible, and running from problems. Many women that have abortions ends up regreting it later and life and it can lead to many mental issue.

Abortion to me is the same as blindfolding a person and shooting them in the head. That person has no say-so over his/her life but gets killed anyway. A baby is a person too, its just common sense.

The only circumstance where abortion should be allowed is if a woman is raped and they have to terminate tha baby to save the mother or something like that.

Other than that, Abortion is W-R-O-N-G!

Posted by: Highly_Insane Jan 22 2004, 07:05 PM
QUOTE (ooak69 @ Jan 22 2004, 07:36 PM)
Why should that baby have to suffer because a 14 year old was hot in the pants. Her parents should have raised her better. If she wasnt so fast in trying to get out and do things, she wouldnt have to worry about it.


Now, I believe that abortion is wrong also....but in regards to your statement who said that she was being hot in the pants supposed she was raped (hope not). But yeah suppose she was raped, or something like that. Just because she was 14 and pregnant does not mean that she was hot in the pants. ANd dont always blame it on the parents cause I know my momma raised me right but I wanted to go and experience things for myself. TEST THE WATERS. so yeah

Posted by: SoulChildofGod Jan 22 2004, 09:11 PM
Whoa....... I agree with some things you said Ooak and then again I don't.... You can't just up and assume that the girl was hot in her pants or that her parent's didn't raise her right or things like that..... So let's scratch that out..... because it could be totally oposite for instance...... I've had the best paren'ts in the world I believe....... haven't been perfect but I've learned alot from my parent's they've taught me well.... I've many opporunties where I could have been out wit God knows who and done God knows what.. BUT because I am my own person and because it was my choice and because It's my body and because that is not my lifestyle..... I chose not to be that way..... It's all about what you choose to do with yourself in life...... Life is all about CHOICE..... It's not about what parent's teach your or whatever it's your Choice......
Now...... My opinion on abortion is I don't believe it is right...... Killing a baby no matter how many month's is just like murder....... If they weren't raped then they had no business laying down and doing it in the first place.. If you you know the responsibilities and consequences then why even risk the chance?......

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 05:23 AM
I was just listening to a lady who was pro-life on Family Life Today not too long ago - I forgot her name, but her mother was raped and gave birth to her.

43 million unborn people have been murdered over the years since Roe v. Wade came about. Now, even the chick who was the original 'Roe' in the issue is Pro-life and has been heading up a campaign to get her very case overturned.

Babies that come about as of rape..... why should they be murdered ? What did they do wrong to deserve to be ripped from their mothers' wombs, burned by saline solution and dismembered, chopped up ( D & C) and flushed down a toilet or wherever their remains are taken to ?

My pastor's great grandmother, matter of factly, was raped and gave birth to his grandfather.

Let her know that this is what she'd be doing to her unborn CHILD:

http://www.theologyonline.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=46

http://www.mttu.com/abort-pics/

Also, there's a constant refrain I hear about 'it's her body, it's her body' - no IT ISN'T. It's her body AND the body of another dwelling within her. As such, there are not one, but TWO people here as an issue. Even the Scott Peterson case shows this to be true - he's being charged with DOUBLE murder (strangely enough, folks from the ACLU, NARAL and other groups were UPSET that he was being charged with DOUBLE murder.... )

Her health is an issue. I know several folks who have had health problems that could have possibly harmed their children, but ended up having perfectly healthy children (some of whom are now full grown adults). My ex-girl is perfectly healthy, but her son has epillepsy.
Wilma Rudolph was born with bad health and could barely walk, but later in life her health cleared up and she went on to win gold medals in the olympics. One way or another, even with the doctor's diagnosis, the final decision on the health of the child is in the hands of God.

She should go ahead and have the child.

No situation calls for the murder of the perfectly viable unborn. Should children who are checked in the womb as being mentally retarded be killed as well ? How about those born with an extra finger or toe ? How about those who we can know will have asthma or some other health condition ? How about those whose optic nerves have no developed or won't develop, so they'll be born blind ? How about those whose legs or arms will not work when they are born ? All of these health problems cost $$$$$$$ throughout the life of a person. Should will eliminate the physically imperfect in the name of mercy ?

I'd like to see how some of you pro-choicers answer these questions.

Posted by: ooak69 Jan 23 2004, 08:49 AM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:18 AM)


Also, there's a constant refrain I hear about 'it's her body, it's her body' - no IT ISN'T. It's her body AND the body of another dwelling within her. As such, there are not one, but TWO people here as an issue.

Thats exactly what I have been saying! Its not a womans choice because that is a seperate person. So like I said before, its still murder. I understand rape(highly insane) because that was a forced action. Remember when I was talking about "circumstances?" Well rape is another circumstance. Thanks BS for explaining to people that it is indeed, another person inside a person that you are killing. Another person that cant defend his/herself.

Think about it.

Posted by: ooak69 Jan 23 2004, 08:52 AM
QUOTE (Highly_Insane @ Jan 22 2004, 08:00 PM)
QUOTE (ooak69 @ Jan 22 2004, 07:36 PM)
Why should that baby have to suffer because a 14 year old was hot in the pants. Her parents should have raised her better. If she wasnt so fast in trying to get out and do things, she wouldnt have to worry about it.

Now, I believe that abortion is wrong also....but in regards to your statement who said that she was being hot in the pants supposed she was raped (hope not). But yeah suppose she was raped, or something like that. Just because she was 14 and pregnant does not mean that she was hot in the pants. ANd dont always blame it on the parents cause I know my momma raised me right but I wanted to go and experience things for myself. TEST THE WATERS. so yeah

Aint that what I said earlier???



Quote:OOAK69

The only circumstance where abortion should be allowed is if a woman is raped and they have to terminate tha baby to save the mother or something like that

Posted by: MaDMaX2000 Jan 23 2004, 11:45 AM
Wrong.... " You dont want him/her give em to me I'll raise em." TrickDaddy

Posted by: ToTheEast Jan 23 2004, 11:59 AM
me personally, i've taken several friends to have that procedure done, and i dont see anything wrong with it, if the situation is not a good one, but if ur getting them just cause u ended up pregnant, then that's some bulls#*t!

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 12:25 PM
Dang! I just finished taking a class on Sexuality and forgot politically label for my belief but anywho:

I believe abortions are justified as long as the unborn child is unable to survive without the woman's support. So I don't support late-term abortions.

I personally have never been in the position to have an abortion. If I ever did, I wouldnt go through with it.

Some people believe it is wrong under any circustance (Very Conservative)

-or-

Some people believe that the fetus is just another piece of bodily tissue (Very Liberal)

- Im somewhere in the middle!


-HOLLA angel.gif



Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 12:40 PM
Also.....

Thinking about it from a societal point of view.

A 14 year old child/adolescence will be set back by the responsibility of raising a child. Shes already a statistic, already being subjected to social pressures in one measure. If she aborted the child she would have (sort of ) a 2nd chance. She would be able to finish school, and move on. She would not have to look forward to the dilemmas, and difficulties that come with being a young mother.

If your worried about her after the abortion, statistics show that around 80% of women that have an abortion are fine (psychologically and physically). The 20% that have trouble after is because (it was forced (meaning they really didnt want to do it) , or there was little or no support from a family member or significant other). So educate our young sister on the importance of safe sex, give her the realities of being a young mother. Sit her down with some material, and give her choices. Allow her to make the decision.
wink2.gif

Abortion in no way should be used as a means of contraception.


-Holla angel.gif

Posted by: MaDMaX2000 Jan 23 2004, 12:47 PM
*edit*

Posted by: BandDetective6 Jan 23 2004, 04:10 PM
Oh Lord, an abortion topic.

First, about the 14 year old. A-B-O-R-T-I-O-N! She's 14! She doesn't need a child at 14! She'll still be depending on her parents and she won't have a job to provide for a child. She has the rest of her life ahead of her to have another child, if she pleases.

Second, my opinions. Abortion is right. Whether if be because of rape or not wanting the baby, it's right.

You guys are talking about murder. Most women have abortions when they're 3 months. So, murder? What are you murdering, a blob of cells who don't know what their jobs are to be? At 3 months, that child is nothing.

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 04:17 PM
QUOTE (BandDetective6 @ Jan 23 2004, 05:05 PM)
Oh Lord, an abortion topic.

First, about the 14 year old. A-B-O-R-T-I-O-N! She's 14! She doesn't need a child at 14! She'll still be depending on her parents and she won't have a job to provide for a child. She has the rest of her life ahead of her to have another child, if she pleases.

Second, my opinions. Abortion is right. Whether if be because of rape or not wanting the baby, it's right.

You guys are talking about murder. Most women have abortions when they're 3 months. So, murder? What are you murdering, a blob of cells who don't know what their jobs are to be? At 3 months, that child is nothing.

I dont totally agree with your view, BUT I DEFINITELY understand what you're saying!!!!!

Posted by: PsiTre_01 Jan 23 2004, 04:20 PM
door.gif

Man I ain't touchin this one with a 40 ft pole.

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 04:26 PM
QUOTE (ooak69 @ Jan 23 2004, 09:44 AM)
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:18 AM)


Also, there's a constant refrain I hear about 'it's her body, it's her body' - no IT ISN'T.  It's her body AND the body of another dwelling within her.  As such, there are not one, but TWO people here as an issue.

Thats exactly what I have been saying! Its not a womans choice because that is a seperate person. So like I said before, its still murder. I understand rape(highly insane) because that was a forced action. Remember when I was talking about "circumstances?" Well rape is another circumstance. Thanks BS for explaining to people that it is indeed, another person inside a person that you are killing. Another person that cant defend his/herself.

Think about it.


Hmmm...How can I express myself with getting irrate?

If I was ever in the position to go through with an abortion, and the father of the child decided that he too had a say in what I did with my BODY!!! I'd laugh in his face!! Because even if I was careless, got pregnant, and was using abortion as a means of contraception.

THAT MAN (Human species incapable of reproduction) HAS NO SAY IN WHAT I DO WITH MY BODY! AND IF MY BODY BELONGED TO ME AND THE FETUS, THEN THE FETUS WOULD NOT NEED 9 MONTHS to DEVELOP WITHIN ME! IT WOULD BE FULLY CAPABLE OF SURVIVAL ON ITS OWN FROM CONCEPTION!

So, all you fellas out there that feel you should have say...Please...
(Just my opinion)


-Holla angel.gif

Posted by: jag4life Jan 23 2004, 04:56 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:35 PM)
Also.....

Thinking about it from a societal point of view.

A 14 year old child/adolescence will be set back by the responsibility of raising a child. Shes already a statistic, already being subjected to social pressures in one measure. If she aborted the child she would have (sort of ) a 2nd chance. She would be able to finish school, and move on. She would not have to look forward to the dilemmas, and difficulties that come with being a young mother.

Example...I know a wonderful woman who had a child at 15...she's a college grad and working as an accountant here in Houston...there are many more examples like that. Abortion is traumatic also...

Posted by: jag4life Jan 23 2004, 05:00 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 04:21 PM)
THAT MAN (Human species incapable of reproduction)

I didn't know that... confused.gif

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 05:34 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:20 PM)
I believe abortions are justified as long as the unborn child is unable to survive without the woman's support.

Okay, so a mother is justified in not feeding her child after its' born because she doesn't want it, right ?

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 05:38 PM
QUOTE (BandDetective6 @ Jan 23 2004, 04:05 PM)

You guys are talking about murder. Most women have abortions when they're 3 months. So, murder? What are you murdering, a blob of cells who don't know what their jobs are to be? At 3 months, that child is nothing.

Monique, you've been lied to.

This is an 8 week (2 month) old aborted baby. Click on the link.

Does this look like a blob of cells to you ?

http://www.theologyonline.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=46

There's MUCH more to the issue, dear. Go ask when a CHILD in the womb can feel pain, heart starts beating, nerve development and so-forth.

Posted by: MaDMaX2000 Jan 23 2004, 05:45 PM
QUOTE
THAT MAN (Human species incapable of reproduction) HAS NO SAY IN WHAT I DO WITH MY BODY! AND IF MY BODY BELONGED TO ME AND THE FETUS, THEN THE FETUS WOULD NOT NEED 9 MONTHS to DEVELOP WITHIN ME! IT WOULD BE FULLY CAPABLE OF SURVIVAL ON ITS OWN FROM CONCEPTION!
Then 9 months after he/she comes the DNA samples, And child support papers claiming it's my jit.....But I have no say so with it, during pregnancy. you done lost your mind.. Give em to me I'll raise em.. he/she could have had a wonderful life. Sex is for reproduction, although some use it for pleasure it's really meant for making kids.

Posted by: ooak69 Jan 23 2004, 06:28 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 05:21 PM)
QUOTE (ooak69 @ Jan 23 2004, 09:44 AM)
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:18 AM)


Also, there's a constant refrain I hear about 'it's her body, it's her body' - no IT ISN'T.  It's her body AND the body of another dwelling within her.  As such, there are not one, but TWO people here as an issue.

Thats exactly what I have been saying! Its not a womans choice because that is a seperate person. So like I said before, its still murder. I understand rape(highly insane) because that was a forced action. Remember when I was talking about "circumstances?" Well rape is another circumstance. Thanks BS for explaining to people that it is indeed, another person inside a person that you are killing. Another person that cant defend his/herself.

Think about it.


Hmmm...How can I express myself with getting irrate?

If I was ever in the position to go through with an abortion, and the father of the child decided that he too had a say in what I did with my BODY!!! I'd laugh in his face!! Because even if I was careless, got pregnant, and was using abortion as a means of contraception.

THAT MAN (Human species incapable of reproduction) HAS NO SAY IN WHAT I DO WITH MY BODY! AND IF MY BODY BELONGED TO ME AND THE FETUS, THEN THE FETUS WOULD NOT NEED 9 MONTHS to DEVELOP WITHIN ME! IT WOULD BE FULLY CAPABLE OF SURVIVAL ON ITS OWN FROM CONCEPTION!

So, all you fellas out there that feel you should have say...Please...
(Just my opinion)


-Holla angel.gif

wow, can we say, womens liberation organization? calm down, just giving an opinion. you dont have to agree with it.

Posted by: jag4life Jan 23 2004, 06:30 PM
QUOTE (MaDMaX2000 @ Jan 23 2004, 05:40 PM)
Sex is for reproduction, although some use it for pleasure it's really meant for making kids.

ONLY THAT? Why?

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 08:01 PM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:29 PM)
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:20 PM)
I believe abortions are justified as long as the unborn child is unable to survive without the woman's support.

Okay, so a mother is justified in not feeding her child after its' born because she doesn't want it, right ?

This guy handicap.gif ??

No THAT'S MURDER, GENIUS!!!!

After a child is leaves the womb (get a SS#, ID card, all that) It's murder! And I think thats pretty much agreed - WAIT ISNT THAT LAW rolleyes.gif !!!

But if a fetus, is unable to support itself without the mother then I think it is totally up to a female on whether or not she wants to abort or carry the fetus to term.

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 23 2004, 08:10 PM
QUOTE (jag4life @ Jan 23 2004, 05:51 PM)
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:35 PM)
Also.....

      Thinking about it from a societal point of view.

                A 14 year old child/adolescence will be set back by the responsibility of raising a child.  Shes already a statistic, already being subjected to social pressures in one measure. If she aborted the child she would have (sort of ) a 2nd chance. She would be able to finish school, and move on. She would not have to look forward to the dilemmas, and difficulties that come with being a young mother.

Example...I know a wonderful woman who had a child at 15...she's a college grad and working as an accountant here in Houston...there are many more examples like that. Abortion is traumatic also...


Actually, I am the only woman in my family that hasn't had a child or been pregnant in her teen years. And I've seen both sides of the coin, I watched someone struggle and make it; and someone struggle and not really do too good. I've seen the aftermath of abortion. I've been there when the father wants the child and the mother doesn't.

But, it all has something to do with support. Each situation is different; But each women that has gone through a teen pregnancy, even with the support of a father. -AGREES that it aint EASY!!!!

So, its utimately up to the young lady, but; all these fellas out there talking about
abortion this, abortion that, will forever be only able to view it from a fella's point of view. Never will they be in the shoes of a young lady faced with such a big decision.


-Holla angel.gif

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 08:16 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 07:56 PM)
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:29 PM)
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:20 PM)
I believe abortions are justified as long as the unborn child is unable to survive without the woman's support.

Okay, so a mother is justified in not feeding her child after its' born because she doesn't want it, right ?

This guy handicap.gif ??

No THAT'S MURDER, GENIUS!!!!

After a child is leaves the womb (get a SS#, ID card, all that) It's murder! And I think thats pretty much agreed - WAIT ISNT THAT LAW rolleyes.gif !!!

But if a fetus, is unable to support itself without the mother then I think it is totally up to a female on whether or not she wants to abort or carry the fetus to term.

Scientifically speaking, the only difference between a child inside the womb and outside of the womb is stage of development. Uninteruppted, the pre-born child would still require assistance outside of itself in order to be fed and nourished - no difference except now its' outside the womb and the mother's body now is set to feed it from the outside.

Babies kick in the womb, they are able to see, hear, feel, cognitively develop so as to be able to hear their mothers' voice and know it, know a few dozen words in the english language, shows self-awareness, etc..etc... prior to birth.

A social security number doesn't define a human being. The things I mentioned above, DO.

You can yell 'it's my body' all you want to - scientifically, there are TWO bodies - the body of the mother with its' own DNA, blood type, thoughts, etc... and the body of the pre-born child, with its' own DNA, blood type, thoughts, etc....

No amount of reasoning, screaming and ranting against it will ever show it to be anything less in the final analysis than INFANTICIDE. A baby outside of the womb can't 'take care of itself' anymore than a baby inside the womb can.

Now if you're down with 'it's my life and if I don't feel like supporting a child, I shouldn't have to, whether in the womb or outside' is your thing, then by all means admit to it so your position can be clear.

But don't - PLEASE DON'T - come on here and attempt to have us believe that a living being with a heartbeat, blood type, brainwave patterns, independent thought, .....


You know what, don't take my word for it, take Discovery Channel's:
QUOTE

Closer to birth, your baby sleeps 85 to 90 percent of the time, the same as a newborn. 

Around the ninth week of pregnancy, your baby starts making her first movements. Those movements are probably visible with an ultrasound, even though they can't be felt for several more weeks. By thirteen weeks, your baby may be able to put a thumb in her mouth, although the sucking muscles aren't completely developed yet. 

Although your baby's first muscle movements were involuntary, the first voluntary muscle movements occur around week 16. After this point, awake or asleep, your baby moves 50 times or more each hour, flexing and extending her body, moving her head, face, and limbs, and exploring her warm, wet compartment by touch. A baby may touch her face, touch one hand to the other hand, clasp her feet, touch her foot to her leg, or her hand to the umbilical cord. By week 37, your baby has developed enough coordination so that he or she can grasp with the fingers.  

Along with these common movements, babies perform some odder activities, including licking the uterine wall and "walking" around the womb by pushing off with its feet. 

Fetuses also react with motion to their mother's actions. For instance, ultrasounds have shown a fetus bouncing up and down when the mother laughs. Watching this on the screen, moms-to-be often laugh harder, and the fetus starts moving up and down even faster! 

Second or third children may have more stretching room in the womb than first babies because a woman's uterus is bigger and the umbilical cord longer after her first pregnancy. These children usually get more motor experience in utero and tend to be more active infants. 

By week 29, you should be feeling your baby move at least 10 times an hour. 


Learning and Memory
Along with the ability to feel, see, and hear comes the capacity to learn and remember. For example, a fetus may be startled by a loud noise, but stops responding once the noise has been repeated several times. 

Twins at 20 weeks' gestation can be seen developing certain gestures and habits that persist into their postnatal years. In one case, a brother and sister were seen playing cheek-to-cheek on either side of the dividing membrane. At one year of age, their favorite game was to take positions on opposite sides of a curtain, and begin to laugh and giggle as they touched each other and played through the curtain. 

Studies have also shown that babies can feel and remember their mother's emotional state. An experiment in Australia revealed that unborn babies were participating in the emotional upset of their mothers watching a disturbing 20-minute segment of a movie. When they were reexposed to this film up to three months after birth, they still showed recognition of the earlier experience. 


There's a whole lot more at:

http://health.discovery.com/centers/pregnancy/americanbaby/alertness.html

Monique - it's a human being dear.... not just a blob of cells. Whoever told you that is a liar.


I Define Real - call it what you want - scientifically speaking, it's the MURDER of a pre-born human being.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 08:27 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 23 2004, 12:35 PM)
If your worried about her after the abortion, statistics show that around 80% of women that have an abortion are fine (psychologically and physically). The 20% that have trouble after is because (it was forced (meaning they really didnt want to do it) , or there was little or no support from a family member or significant other). So educate our young sister on the importance of safe sex, give her the realities of being a young mother. Sit her down with some material, and give her choices. Allow her to make the decision.
wink2.gif

Abortion in no way should be used as a means of contraception.


-Holla angel.gif

Where are these statistics from and from how long after the abortion ? I can cite studies (stats waiting to be cut and pasted along with links) that show exactly the opposite in the majority of women who have been victims of the abortion industry.

There's also an interesting stat regarding ultrasounds..... 80-90% of women who actually see the ultrasound of their baby when contemplating an abortion.....choose life.


For those interested in the truth, Focus on the Family had a former abortion clinic worker speak on their show yesterday (1/22) and today (1/23). You can catch the broadcast online @ www.family.org . She tells the story of her trek from being raised in a Catholic home, to radical feminist/pro-choice and working in abortion clinic to one day seeing the remains of a fully-formed boy on the tray in the 'procedure room' (death-speak has such wonderful terms to sterilize abortion and make it sound so emotionless....) and realizing "HEY STUPID - IT'S NOT A BLOB OF CELLS, BUT A HUMAN BEING THAT WAS JUST MURDERED HERE!". She now runs a pregnancy resource center (actually, a few of them) and has even let pregnant women stay with her and helped take care of them during the course of their pregnancy.


There is a legit link between breast cancer and abortion.... as well as infertility (and I had an ex who had an abortion at the same age and chick couldn't get pregnant nor had a regular menstrual cycle for pushin' up on 15 years afterward), increased risk of tubal pregnancy when pregnancy does occur.....

Further, the abortion industry is all about money. Ain't never seen no doctor give away 'free abortions'. lol.gif But that's a whole OTHER can of worms.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 08:28 PM
QUOTE (jag4life @ Jan 23 2004, 06:25 PM)
QUOTE (MaDMaX2000 @ Jan 23 2004, 05:40 PM)
Sex is for reproduction, although some use it for pleasure it's really meant for making kids.

ONLY THAT? Why?

Sex was meant for both. Ever read Song of Solomon before ?

Take a look at the short commentary I wrote on it in my journal here on the site. It's near the bottom of the second page.

Posted by: saxfine Jan 23 2004, 10:07 PM
I don't think there's anything wrong with abortion. It is the woman's body no matter what any male may want to say therefore she has the right to do to her body whatever she chooses.
Pregnancy can be stressful and fearful and some women may not be able to able the stress. Young girls become outcasts from there family and friends and many unwanted children end up in bad situations if there isn't someone else willing to take the child, so I think abortion can sometimes be for the best.

Posted by: BandDetective6 Jan 23 2004, 11:01 PM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 06:33 PM)
QUOTE (BandDetective6 @ Jan 23 2004, 04:05 PM)

You guys are talking about murder. Most women have abortions when they're 3 months. So, murder? What are you murdering, a blob of cells who don't know what their jobs are to be? At 3 months, that child is nothing.

Monique, you've been lied to.

This is an 8 week (2 month) old aborted baby. Click on the link.

Does this look like a blob of cells to you ?

http://www.theologyonline.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=46

There's MUCH more to the issue, dear. Go ask when a CHILD in the womb can feel pain, heart starts beating, nerve development and so-forth.

I don't mean to sound heartless and uncompassionate, but I really wasn't moved by that picture. Here's what I saw:

~10 very tiny phalanges.
~Tiny arms and legs.
~No head.
~A rib cage.

Okay, it wasn't a blob of cells, but from what I saw, it looked like the internal organs haven't even started to develop.

There is no nerve development. There's really nothing more than what I said earlier. No, it's not a blob of cells, but the cells within the fetus don't know what to do. As the months go on, brain cells, muscle cells, ect. will develop, but at 2 months, I highly doubt it.

To round it all up, what I saw was cartilage. That's what makes up a child's body before bones develop, cartilage. If that doctor wanted to, he could've easily bent the aborted baby in two.

My opinion rests as before: I think abortion is right and should be continued.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 23 2004, 11:07 PM
Meanwhile....


Recent survey shows http://www.guile.net/guile/opencms/sites/en/show_nachricht.html?f_action=show&f_newsitem_id=635........


Someone's noticing the truth.

I'm sorry you feel that way, Monique. Maybe one day you'll see it for what it is - murder. And contrary to your statement, yes the nerves are developed. Read the discovery statement above and click on the link to it as well as the 'pregnancy at a glance' one.

by the way, the typical abortion process is a vaccum sucking and ripping the infant from the womb. Did you expect to see all the parts in well working order ?

I'm also just asking - can you describe a D & C (it's an abortion technique) for me ?

Posted by: jag4life Jan 24 2004, 12:59 AM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 23 2004, 08:23 PM)
QUOTE (jag4life @ Jan 23 2004, 06:25 PM)
QUOTE (MaDMaX2000 @ Jan 23 2004, 05:40 PM)
Sex is for reproduction, although some use it for pleasure it's really meant for making kids.

ONLY THAT? Why?

Sex was meant for both. Ever read Song of Solomon before ?

Take a look at the short commentary I wrote on it in my journal here on the site. It's near the bottom of the second page.

I was going to refer to Song of Soloman after I got a response...I knew where to look...but thanks.

Posted by: DonKing202 Jan 24 2004, 01:23 AM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 24 2004, 12:02 AM)
Meanwhile....


Recent survey shows http://www.guile.net/guile/opencms/sites/en/show_nachricht.html?f_action=show&f_newsitem_id=635........


Someone's noticing the truth.

Hey buddy,

Where in the world is that from? Is it the US? or somwhere in Europe?


Moving on.....

Why should a child be brought into this world if it cannot be properly cared for and loved? Hell scientific studies show that shildren in unstable childhoods usually grow into unstable adults? WHy do it to the children?

WHat if that child was aborted within 5 weeks? Or law was changed making abortion legal up until the 5th week?

Is there any comprimise?

QUOTE

Methods of Terminating Pregnancies

What is suction abortion

Suction abortion is a procedure followed for women who are still in their first trimester of pregnancy (up to 12 weeks). There are two types of procedures: menstrual extraction and vacuum curettage.

Menstrual extraction:
This is performed as early as one week after conception, but no later than two weeks after a missed period. The procedure involves placing a soft, flexible tube through the cervix into the uterine cavity. The free end of the tube is connected to a hand-held syringe that provides suction as the doctor pulls back on it. The failure rate of this procedure is very high at 25%. Therefore, make sure that you go to the doctor for a follow-up examination after a couple of weeks to ensure that your uterus has been fully emptied.

Vacuum curettage:
This is performed between 7 and 12 weeks of pregnancy. This procedure involves dilating the cervix after which the doctor positions a plastic tube through the dilated cervix and attaches its free end to an electric suction pump. The process of emptying the uterine cavity takes barely three to five minutes. 
 

What is D & C

The full form of D & C is dilatation and curettage. A method of diagnosing and treating pelvic problems, it is also used in the termination of pregnancy. Dilatation is the widening of the cervix using progressively wider metal rods. Curettage refers to the insertion of a spoon-shaped instrument, called a curette, in order to scrape out the tissue that lines the uterine cavity. A D & C takes about 15 minutes and causes the patient little or no post-operative discomfort. 
 

What is D & E

D & E stands for dilatation and evacuation. This procedure for the termination of pregnancy is opted for between 13 and 16 weeks of pregnancy. The D & E essentially follows the same procedure as the D & C, but it uses special instruments to remove the larger volume of tissue found at a later stage of pregnancy.
 

What is instillation abortion

If the pregnancy has to be terminated after 16 weeks, doctors will use a method called instillation abortion to terminate the pregnancy. In this procedure, the women goes through actual labour, but delivers a foetus with no life.  The doctor inserts a needle though the lower abdomen and instills (puts in drop by drop) one of three substances into the amniotic fluid sac in order to induce labour. The three substances used in this procedure are: salt solution (saline), a drug (prostaglandin), or a chemical compound (urea). Labour pains will begin within a few hours and delivery of the foetus occurs between eight and seventy two hours.

This method has its drawbacks depending on the substance used to induce labour. The saline method may cause fluid retention, which could prove dangerous for women with serious kidney or heart disease. Prostaglandin is known to cause nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea in 50% of the cases. The urea method takes the longest time and may require other drugs, which in turn could lead to clotting abnormalities.



Does the bible speak on abortion?? And what are its views on it??

Posted by: ECityScreamer2 Jan 24 2004, 11:06 AM
In MY OPINION its the females choice period, plus i think the child would suffer more in a dumpster or being in foster care or coming up in poverty not knowin when the next time he/she is goin to eat, or hatin to go home because there no heat/air, or lights. Thats why I think its the womans choice to have an abortion or not, and just because you know a few women that have had a child when they where young and they made it through ok doesnt mean the next woman can because everyone one is not that strong, thats why you have parents killin the kids and then commiting suicide. But thats just my opinion on the situation

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 24 2004, 01:28 PM
I was raised in a Catholic home, Went to catholic school - I also consider myself a feminist.

I have one FOND memory, in school one day....Father Whatever his name was and our teacher took us to a little auditorium and showed us horrible slides of how FETUSes look after abortion (different types of abortions, saline- partial birth)...

I was horrified....but I watched all the slides. I guess in a way it actually DE-sensitized me...Then growing up...and realizing that life is NOT so cut and dry...That this PROCEDURE has HISTORY and was not developed as another means of MURDER, but as a way to PREVENT SOCIAL PRESSURES, INEQUALITY etc.

I realized that EVERYTHING HAS A PURPOSE! Like i said, I would never have the procedure done...But I would never prevent my daughter, sister, etc. from having the procedure.

My statistics come from case studies...Unfortunately, I've tried to find my info and cant find it.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 24 2004, 05:03 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 24 2004, 01:23 PM)
  I was horrified....but I watched all the slides. I guess in a way it actually DE-sensitized me...Then growing up...and realizing that life is NOT so cut and dry...That this PROCEDURE has HISTORY and was not developed as another means of MURDER, but as a way to PREVENT SOCIAL PRESSURES, INEQUALITY etc.

  I realized that EVERYTHING HAS A PURPOSE! Like i said, I would never have the procedure done...But I would never prevent my daughter, sister, etc. from having the procedure.

  My statistics come from case studies...Unfortunately, I've tried to find my info and cant find it.

Interesting.

Interesting, indeed.

Of course, I disagree that abortion was created as a means of helping to end social inequities, etc.... that's a bunch of shullbit.gif lol.gif - the solution to social inequities is to attack the inequities themselves, not the people born into the situations..... WRBS radio station up in Baltimore is one such example of doing the RIGHT thing. It's God's providence that I just heard this ad over the radio before stepping in the house in front of this computer - WRBS mentioned that there are women who are being TOLD to have abortions, but want to have their babies....but because of financial reasons, find it impossible to do so. So as part of a current campaign, WRBS is throwing the city's biggest 'baby shower' for poverty-afflicted and financially burdened mothers. They're GIVING AWAY diapers, cribs, car seats, etc...... and from what I can tell, it's part of a larger outreach to the city beyond just a one-time thing.

On-demand abortion has never been anything else than after-the-fact contraception for selfish people who are looking for excuses not to take responsibility for their actions. And even in the 1-2% of cases which constitute rape, incest, life of the mother, etc.... the former two's children could simply be given up for adoption. There are more childless couples waiting now (albeit, muddled in red-tape and bueracracy) to adopt kids in the U.S. than there are kids to be adopted. And there are couples who WANT to adopt handicapped kids, kids with other disabilities, terminally ill kids, etc.... so if you wanna talk about keeping the kids out of socially degraded situations, there's a place waiting for every last one of them in the U.S. right NOW. How about you lobby to get rid of the red tape in the adoption process so these kids can get in loving homes with people who actually WANT them instead of killing them because of some lame societally-inept excuse ?

In addition, there have been more people than not, born into poverty situations who lived a decent life, rose above them and contributed to the welfare of this nation, this economy and in some cases, the entire world. So the poverty/social pressures/equality answer is a SAD excuse for taking the life of a pre-born human being. YOU or anyone else cannot say jack about how a child born in the ghetto WILL grow up and whether or not that person will be a positive influence upon society (or even just live a decent life), nor can you say with absolute assurance that the child born into that situation WILL be depressed over being in a poverty-stricken condition, commit suicide, ect....etc.... that's flat out NONSENSE (not to mention that statistics and experiences of people WE know mitigate against the 'poverty' argument all across the board). Typical pro-abortion hubris.

I find it contradictory, though, that you say you would never murder your own preborn child, but don't mind if others do.

Strange.

There's still that very interesting statistic about 80-90% of women who come into hospitals and clinics wanting an abortion changing their mind when they see an ultrasound.... I wonder why ? user posted image

By the way, Ed, you asked what country was the stat in that I cited on the majority of women in the US being pro-life.... why don't you go back up and click on the link that you quoted and read the article ? smile.gif (I know you probably missed it.....but go back up and run your mouse over the words)

Posted by: Xplosion Jan 25 2004, 12:30 AM
I think it's funny how most people who are pro life haven't experienced abortion or speak form an outside POV on abortion i look at it like this a woman who becomes pregnant and does not wat to have her child and does not have an abortion is most likely to neglect that child and we wonder why the rates of child abuse and child deaths and major injuries have risen over the years and In my opion it's not up to the federal goverment it is a choice made by an individual. As people we have the choice to do something right or wrong; sin or do the right thing. My thing is as long as the ability to make a choice exists people are gonna make descisions good or bad the most we can do is offer our guidance on the situation not everyone is ready or responsible, or finacially able to raise a child.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 25 2004, 02:46 AM
QUOTE (Xplosion @ Jan 25 2004, 12:25 AM)
I think it's funny how most people who are pro life haven't experienced abortion or speak form an outside POV on abortion i look at it like this a woman who becomes pregnant and does not wat to have her child and does not have an abortion is most likely to neglect that child and we wonder why the rates of child abuse and child deaths and major injuries have risen over the years and In my opion it's not up to the federal goverment it is a choice made by an individual. As people we have the choice to do something right or wrong; sin or do the right thing. My thing is as long as the ability to make a choice exists people are gonna make descisions good or bad the most we can do is offer our guidance on the situation not everyone is ready or responsible, or finacially able to raise a child.


Actually, there's a growing number of women who are former victims of the abortion industry who are now pro-life. Some head up pro-life organizations, others head up pregnancy resource centers and such.

For those who haven't 'experienced abortion or speak from an outside point of view....' Well, white abolitionist preachers like William Wilberforce didn't have to experience slavery to know it was wrong, either. Charles Spurgeon lived in England and wrote vociferously against the evils of American slavery. I'm sure their white brethren over here told them:

'well, most abolitionists haven't experienced the need for slaves that we have over here in the U.S. They don't know from our point of view how much slave labor is needed and how these coons help to provide for us and and our children. It's a financial bind that forces us to have slaves; if we don't, we won't be able to survive. And on top of it, we're doing them a service! they get food to eat, shelter and such. In my opion it's not up to the federal goverment it is a choice made by an individual. As people we have the choice to do something right or wrong; sin or do the right thing. Raisin' our families is the right thing. My thing is as long as the ability to make a choice exists people are gonna make descisions good or bad the most we can do is offer our guidance on the situation not everyone is ready or responsible, or finacially able to run a plantation without slaves. '

(interestingly enough, as you do your research, you'll find that much of these things WERE used as a justification for slavery by some white slave owners back in the 1800's.....and THEN to support segregation in the 1900's....especially the 'government shouldn't be regulating it' argument.....)

Your argument for the murder of the pre-born child sounds equally as ridiculous as this one posted above for slavery.

Posted by: DonKing202 Jan 25 2004, 11:23 AM
EDIT

Posted by: Hype H2O Jan 25 2004, 02:29 PM
Well...

Persoanlly, I have made the choice in my life that if I was to ever get pregnant outside of marriage then I am not having the baby, PERIOD. I refuse to be a single mother...and in my life, I have seen very FEW men who have babies with women stay around longer than a year or two. I don't just want a check and some diapers at the beginning of each month, I want a MAN who is goign to be there in the household with me to help raise the child we created out of love. I think people get it mixed up...rasing a child is more than physical and financial...it's an emotional and spiritual thing that I do no tbelieve was meant to be put on just one parent.

I am from a single parent household...and I do not want my kids to go through that. A lot of internal questions (even those we aren't all willing ot admit that we ask) get asked in the minds of bastard children, and knwoing how it can affect kids, I don't want that uneeded strain on their great little brains.

I am not sayign all kids raised by single parents are just all fugged up in the head...and I am not saying all two parent kids have it all either, but personally I notice a difference in kids from two parent homes than from me and 90% of my friends...I can't quite explain it, but they just have a different vibe and view on things.

I mean...you *can* live without a hand...but if you could choose between having one hand or two...why choose to only have one?

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 25 2004, 02:47 PM
QUOTE (Hype H2O @ Jan 25 2004, 02:24 PM)
I think people get it mixed up...rasing a child is more than physical and financial...it's an emotional and spiritual thing that I do no tbelieve was meant to be put on just one parent.

I am from a single parent household...and I do not want my kids to go through that. A lot of internal questions (even those we aren't all willing ot admit that we ask) get asked in the minds of bastard children, and knwoing how it can affect kids, I don't want that uneeded strain on their great little brains.

I am not sayign all kids raised by single parents are just all fugged up in the head...and I am not saying all two parent kids have it all either, but personally I notice a difference in kids from two parent homes than from me and 90% of my friends...I can't quite explain it, but they just have a different vibe and view on things.

Actually (referring to the 'vibe' you mentioned), I understand EXACTLY where you're coming from, Terri. You make a LOT of good points in here that I would agree with 100%.....


Do you believe you, as a product of a single family household, turned out okay ?

Posted by: Hype H2O Jan 25 2004, 09:06 PM
Well, I really didn't have much choice in the matter...but yeah I turned out okay. I also see parts of my personality that would be different if I had grown up in a two parent home...for example, my trust issues with men, and my whole views on love, relationsips, and marriage would probably be a little different had I seen an in home example of a healthy husband and wife.

To me it's similar to the case of only children versus those who grew up with at least ONE brother or sister. Yeah, they eventually learn how to share and work with others, but it takes a lot more work...and you can still always tell those who grew up alone versus those who grew up in a tribe. (I have two sisters and a brother, but seeing as they are all at least 15 years older than me and moved out before I can remember them ever living with me and my mom, I consider myself an only child...)

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 12:38 PM
QUOTE (Hype H2O @ Jan 25 2004, 09:01 PM)
Well, I really didn't have much choice in the matter...but yeah I turned out okay. I also see parts of my personality that would be different if I had grown up in a two parent home...for example, my trust issues with men, and my whole views on love, relationsips, and marriage would probably be a little different had I seen an in home example of a healthy husband and wife.

To me it's similar to the case of only children versus those who grew up with at least ONE brother or sister. Yeah, they eventually learn how to share and work with others, but it takes a lot more work...and you can still always tell those who grew up alone versus those who grew up in a tribe. (I have two sisters and a brother, but seeing as they are all at least 15 years older than me and moved out before I can remember them ever living with me and my mom, I consider myself an only child...)

Again, good points that I agree with you on 100%. Your head's in the right place here smile.gif

Of course, you know there's a 'SO THEN' coming, right ? smile.gif

And you know the question I'm going to ask, right ? smile.gif

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 01:06 PM
QUOTE
I Define Real - call it what you want - scientifically speaking, it's the MURDER of a pre-born human being.



Can you really murder something that isnt born, yet? Something that doesnt have the ability to even breathe on its own.


- Sounds like an oxymoron to me! Kinda like killing the undead.

- We might as well, start outlawing spermicides and infertilization techniques.
Isn't that murdering the pre-born???


-Holla angel.gif


Posted by: AKAWoodwind Jan 26 2004, 01:06 PM
I used to be pro-choice, until I read Jeremiah 1:5. "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Although God was talking to the prophet Jeremiah, it made me realize my views on abortion were wrong. If God knew Jeremiah before he was even conceived, then what makes me or anyone else any different?


Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 01:13 PM
Everyone says Adoption this, Adoption that....

-Sounds like a plan- ELIMINATE the red tape that goes along with Adoption.
-I can tell you where there is no red tape - ABORTION!!!!
-You go in a wait for your name to be called...less than an hour later....You're done, go home lay down, and life goes on....


In all reality, we live in a society that ALLOWS abortion, and adoption. Ultimately, it is less time consuming to get rid of an unwanted child...than to gain one.

OH WELL!!!!!

- HOLLA

Posted by: AKAWoodwind Jan 26 2004, 01:38 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 26 2004, 02:08 PM)
Everyone says Adoption this, Adoption that....

-Sounds like a plan- ELIMINATE the red tape that goes along with Adoption.
-I can tell you where there is no red tape - ABORTION!!!!
-You go in a wait for your name to be called...less than an hour later....You're done, go home lay down, and life goes on....


In all reality, we live in a society that ALLOWS abortion, and adoption. Ultimately, it is less time consuming to get rid of an unwanted child...than to gain one.

OH WELL!!!!!

- HOLLA

There are many things that are allowed, but just because it's allowed doesn't mean it's good for us.

I suggest you read I Cor. 10:23

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 01:40 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 26 2004, 01:01 PM)
QUOTE
I Define Real - call it what you want - scientifically speaking, it's the MURDER of a pre-born human being.



Can you really murder something that isnt born, yet? Something that doesnt have the ability to even breathe on its own.

There are people who are hooked up to machines in hospitals. They can't breathe on their own. Would it be wrong to unplug the machine ?

And to answer your question - YES - Scott Peterson is being charged with DOUBLE HOMICIDE - one for killing his wife and two for killing his UNBORN SON, Connor (God rest his soul).

QUOTE
    - We might as well, start outlawing spermicides and infertilization techniques.
      Isn't that murdering the pre-born???


Life begins at conception. A sperm by itself is not a human being, cannot form a human being by itself. neither can an egg. but the two when combined together, form something DIFFERENT - and that something DIFFERENT is a human being at the first stage of its' development.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 01:42 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 26 2004, 01:08 PM)
Everyone says Adoption this, Adoption that....

-Sounds like a plan- ELIMINATE the red tape that goes along with Adoption.
-I can tell you where there is no red tape - ABORTION!!!!
-You go in a wait for your name to be called...less than an hour later....You're done, go home lay down, and life goes on....


In all reality, we live in a society that ALLOWS abortion, and adoption. Ultimately, it is less time consuming to get rid of an unwanted child...than to gain one.

OH WELL!!!!!

- HOLLA

Very telling statement. Thank you for posting it.

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 01:47 PM
Abortion wasnt created as a means to terminate unwanted pregnancies?? In order to avoid societies' negativity???
http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_1.asp#Ultimate Pro-Abortion Goals
QUOTE

But legalizing abortion was sold to us as a cure for many of our social ills.

Let’s look at the record.

Social Concern                             1970    1990

Illegitimate Births                         10.7%  26.2%

Children with Single Mothers          11%    22%

Violent Crime Rate   (per 100,000) 36.42   73.

Teen Suicide Rate                        5.9%    11.3%

Children on Welfare                     8.5%     11.9% 


- These facts are of course out - dated....but do the math.
- Abortion was sold as a cure for social ills.


Women would use hangers and mutilate their inner organs to terminate a pregnancy, just for contraception?

You're trying to tell me that it was a means to eliminate societal ills??

Women drank bleach and other poisons, just for contraceptive purposes?

Women would commit harm to their own bodies, just for contraceptive purposes?

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 01:54 PM
QUOTE
There are people who are hooked up to machines in hospitals. They can't breathe on their own. Would it be wrong to unplug the machine ?


H3LL No! In fact, I've already been faced with that decison. I watched my father attached to a machine and decided to take him off the machine... It would be cruel to leave a man on a machine. As it would be cruel to bring an unwanted child into the world.


- HOLLA!




Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 02:18 PM
HUH ???? You cited stats that actually show that abortion HASN'T cured any social ills.
QUOTE

But legalizing abortion was sold to us as a cure for many of our social ills.

Let’s look at the record.

Social Concern                             1970    1990

Illegitimate Births                         10.7%  26.2%

Children with Single Mothers          11%    22%

Violent Crime Rate   (per 100,000) 36.42   73.

Teen Suicide Rate                        5.9%    11.3%

Children on Welfare                     8.5%     11.9% 


QUOTE

- These facts are of course out - dated....but do the math.
- Abortion was sold as a cure for social ills.

Actually, that's what YOU posted earlier in this very thread.
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 24 2004, 01:23 PM)
  I was horrified....but I watched all the slides. I guess in a way it actually DE-sensitized me...Then growing up...and realizing that life is NOT so cut and dry...That this PROCEDURE has HISTORY and was not developed as another means of MURDER, but as a way to PREVENT SOCIAL PRESSURES, INEQUALITY etc.

  I realized that EVERYTHING HAS A PURPOSE! Like i said, I would never have the procedure done...But I would never prevent my daughter, sister, etc. from having the procedure.

  My statistics come from case studies...Unfortunately, I've tried to find my info and cant find it.


and it is true - abortion was touted in the early 70's a cure for social ills and unwanted children. Fact is, though, there IS no such thing as an unwanted child anymore - since there are more couples willing to adopt NOW than there are children available to adopt!

And if arrangements are made prior to birth, the process of giving a child up for adoption is not THAT difficult. What IS difficult is actually ADOPTING a child - at least the first one. After that, once you've established a relationship with folks in the system, they can and do speed things along for you.

QUOTE

Women would use hangers and mutilate their inner organs to terminate a pregnancy, just for contraception?


The majority of abortions prior to 1972 were done in hospitals, not in back alleys with coat hangers.

And in the first place, what the woman AND man possibly in that situation should do is take into consideration that sex does equal pregnancy the majority of the time. Not ready to take responsibility for a child ? Act responsibly by closing your legs.
QUOTE

Women would commit harm to their own bodies, just for contraceptive purposes?


What if they were lied to and told that it was:

- 'simple procedure, nothing more than removing a blob of cells....like a pap smear!'
- 'It would be better for you in the long run, since you can't afford to take care of a child now'
- 'Well you don't have the $75, but we'll work with you and you can pay it off when you can'
- 'there's no emotional after-effects. you'll be just fine.'
- 'there's no physical after-effects. You may experience some soreness for a few weeks, so just take it easy and everything will be fine.'


http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0433_Deception__Abortion_.html

Combined with the fact that most women seeking an abortion consider it a crisis, they ain't thinkin' straight. All that's needed is a counselor to give them all the 'good reasons' to continue forward and get an abortion.... and then set it up, make it as painless (ha!) and easy as possible.

http://www.family.org/physmag/issues/A0014337.html by Brian Taylord, M.D.


http://www.familylife.com/fltoday/realfamilylife.asp?id=7147 by Dennis Rainey of Family Life Today. I do plan on adopting, as the Lord leads me, when I get married.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 02:29 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 26 2004, 01:49 PM)
QUOTE
There are people who are hooked up to machines in hospitals. They can't breathe on their own. Would it be wrong to unplug the machine ?


H3LL No! In fact, I've already been faced with that decison. I watched my father attached to a machine and decided to take him off the machine... It would be cruel to leave a man on a machine. As it would be cruel to bring an unwanted child into the world.


- HOLLA!

I'm sorry to hear that.

Was he conscious and aware of his surroundings, but just unable to breathe on his own ?

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 02:56 PM
QUOTE
The majority of abortions prior to 1972 were done in hospitals, not in back alleys with coat hangers.


Actually, prior to the legalization there were no government REGULATIONS! Hospitals dont mean regulated, sanitary practices (Correlation doesnt mean Causation).

What if something else was at stake? Like their LIVELIHOOD!
QUOTE
Was he conscious and aware of his surroundings, but just unable to breathe on his own ?


Why would it matter his state of consciousness? The point is a machine was breathing for him!
I mean it doesnt matter one's SES or Demographics or even REASON...an abortion is an abortion. The family or person did not want the child.

Also, I didnt say abortion cured social ills, but that is how it was sold to the public.

Some people just decide that this world is not a place they would want to bring another being into.

There is no cure for social ills (especially not in a free society), not even; religion.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 26 2004, 03:08 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 26 2004, 02:51 PM)
QUOTE
The majority of abortions prior to 1972 were done in hospitals, not in back alleys with coat hangers.


Actually, prior to the legalization there were no government REGULATIONS! Hospitals dont mean regulated, sanitary practices (Correlation doesnt mean Causation).

What if something else was at stake? Like their LIVELIHOOD!
QUOTE
Was he conscious and aware of his surroundings, but just unable to breathe on his own ?


Why would it matter his state of consciousness? The point is a machine was breathing for him!
I mean it doesnt matter one's SES or Demographics or even REASON...an abortion is an abortion. The family or person did not want the child.

Also, I didnt say abortion cured social ills, but that is how it was sold to the public.

Some people just decide that this world is not a place they would want to bring another being into.

There is no cure for social ills (especially not in a free society), not even; religion.

Rape and life-of-the-mother cases of abortion only comprise 2-3% of all abortions.

Even with that as a concession for allowable cases for abortion, the other 98% of abortion cases aren't medically necessary.


And why does it matter if he was conscious or not ?

Simple: would disconnect a person who was in physical pain, BUT was conscious and desired to live and not endure the pain of dying slowly from hypoxia/asphyxiation ?


Did you read...never mind, you probably didn't.... rolleyes.gif

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 26 2004, 03:50 PM
QUOTE
Even with that as a concession for allowable cases for abortion, the other 98% of abortion cases aren't medically necessary.



I said livelihood...not medical reasons...Livelihood includes lack of finances, environmental risk factors, product of recreational sex, etc.

A child can just simply interfere with a woman's livelihood. A woman must make drastic changes, at some point.

I mean honestly a man can decide how much impact the birth of a child can have on them. (one extreme to the other , abandonment to being very supportive)

A woman must adjust and be prepared for a life change, abort, or place for adoption.

Posted by: Hype H2O Jan 26 2004, 04:28 PM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 26 2004, 01:33 PM)
QUOTE (Hype H2O @ Jan 25 2004, 09:01 PM)
Well, I really didn't have much choice in the matter...but yeah I turned out okay. I also see parts of my personality that would be different if I had grown up in a two parent home...for example, my trust issues with men,  and my whole views on love, relationsips, and marriage would probably be a little different had I seen an in home example of a healthy husband and wife.

To me it's similar to the case of only children versus those who grew up with at least ONE brother or sister. Yeah, they eventually learn how to share and work with others, but it takes a lot more work...and you can still always tell those who grew up alone versus those who grew up in a tribe. (I have two sisters and a brother, but seeing as they are all at least 15 years older than me and moved out before I can remember them ever living with me and my mom, I consider myself an only child...)

Again, good points that I agree with you on 100%. Your head's in the right place here smile.gif

Of course, you know there's a 'SO THEN' coming, right ? smile.gif

And you know the question I'm going to ask, right ? smile.gif

uh...i'm having a blond moment....i don't

Posted by: Hype H2O Jan 27 2004, 01:17 AM
Bionic......


you are going to ask the question, no?

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 27 2004, 07:24 AM
QUOTE (Hype H2O @ Jan 27 2004, 01:12 AM)
Bionic......


you are going to ask the question, no?

(in voice of Brad Pitt in Meet Joe Black )
YES. smile.gif


Let me wake up properly, first. smile.gif

Posted by: Teacher Mommy Jan 27 2004, 09:24 AM
I stayed away from even viewing this topic for a long time and it saddens me that people can negate the fact that the embryo (soon to be fetus) has a beathing heart. What the he!! does breathing on its own have to do with anything...its killing babies and if that's what you want to do then that's on you...but don't try to comeon here and type that crap about not being able to breathe on your own....i have seen many folks that can't breathe on their own.

As you guys know, I have chosen? LIFE twice and I have never had a regret.

Posted by: SoulChildofGod Jan 27 2004, 09:57 AM
^That's true...... It's alot of folks out here now that can't breathe on their own they have to use some type of machine or some utensil to help them breathe....... does that mean they need to be killed too?.......

Thats A very interesting Point

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 27 2004, 10:27 AM

The point of breathing is so minute.

Development! A fetus, embryo, unborn child...develops within a female body. So, if a female decides not to go through with the whole development process...so be it....abortion!

- Holla... angel.gif

I guess im a bleeding heart liberal!!!!

Im all for Abortion, Euthanasia, Legalization of Marijuana, anything....it is them who will deal with the consequences... So I Dont Care!!!! I really could care less...

Because I despise the sound of someone preaching in my ear about what's right and wrong blahblah.gif . That is one of the most annoying things in the world.

Posted by: Christy Jan 27 2004, 10:32 AM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 27 2004, 10:22 AM)
Because I despise the sound of someone preaching in my ear about what's right and wrong blahblah.gif . That is one of the most annoying things in the world.

MESSAGE.  

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 27 2004, 11:43 AM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 27 2004, 10:22 AM)
The point of breathing is so minute.

                  Development! A fetus, embryo, unborn child...develops within a female body. So, if a female decides not to go through with the whole development process...so be it....abortion!

  - Holla... angel.gif

  I guess im a bleeding heart liberal!!!!

    Im all for Abortion, Euthanasia, Legalization of Marijuana, anything....it is them who will deal with the consequences... So I Dont Care!!!! I really could care less...

    Because I despise the sound of someone preaching in my ear about what's right and wrong  blahblah.gif . That is one of the most annoying things in the world.

Wow. At least you're a consistent liberal.


But you're doing the exact same thing (telling us what is right and wrong and what we should believe and what should be legal, etc.....). That's what an opinion is - your view of what is right and wrong and how you feel about an issue.

So as much as you think it's annoying, aren't you just as wrong for stating your views ? Or are you the only one who has a right to do so because you believe you alone and those who agree with you are right ?  

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 27 2004, 01:05 PM

I'm not really trying to impose my views on anyone.

Im the type of person that will not agree with you, but; will understand.
But, when it comes to someone trying to prevent someone from a liberty or
right based on WHATEVER reason (as long as the act isnt illegal for public safety purposes)...that bothers me.

- Like some believe that persons should be subjected to the beliefs of the majority - thats wack!




- Holla angel.gif

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 27 2004, 06:44 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 27 2004, 01:00 PM)
Like some believe that persons should be subjected to the beliefs of the majority - thats wack!

but that's the essence of democracy......  

Posted by: octopusdrummer Jan 27 2004, 10:28 PM
Shame on all of you that are pro-death!

Posted by: taz719 Jan 27 2004, 11:52 PM
In her case I think she should have the abortion or give it up for adoption. She has been through alot within the past few weeks and has no way of supporting the baby. I personally wouldn't have the abortion because that is killing a living being, but she can't support it because her mom died in december, she can't get a job and her sister is struggling trying to make ends meet to the two of them. But if her ob-gyn says she can have the baby with no really serious health problems, I would suggest she give it up for adoption. But if she can't have the baby without risking her or her baby's lives she should have the abortion. But that's just my opinion.

Posted by: Legion 1 Jan 28 2004, 01:25 AM
I hope someone else has not posted this but if they have I still want to put this out there.
Everyone always want to tell a woman (or anybody) how they SHOULD live or govern their lives. I won't get in to where it starts because that will open up a whole can of worms. But I will say this... A person's life is a persons life. They MUST do what is best for them. Yeah you might say that the child that is "growing" inside of a female is a person, but they are not capable of making a decision for themselves, which it must then be left up to the next of "kin" (for lack of better words). Now I believe both parents should be involved in what ever the decision is, however if there is a struggle between those two it should be left up to the "immediate" next of kin, the mother.
Now, I know someone might say something crazy like "you didn't even give the child a chance to decide".......When do you let them decide, after they are here for 15 years and can make a logical decision about it???? After the mother has struggle for 10 years with no child support, no help from the system, no family support. etc. So before you say you should, we should, they should, examine your life and ask yourself what YOU should be doing!!! It's ok if you do or don't believe in it. If the situation comes around to you THEN THAT is the time you need to act on your beliefs. Not when it comes to me.
You have made your mistakes in life and you have learned so this could be one of someone else's few mistakes and this is the lesson they are supposed to learn.

*****Some people need to open their minds and stop listening to EVERYTHING they have been taught........... Because people teach you what they want you to know, which is not necessarily always the right thing...............It's a form of oppression!!!!!********

Ok back to the topic.

Posted by: I Define Real Jan 28 2004, 09:37 AM
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 27 2004, 07:39 PM)
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 27 2004, 01:00 PM)
Like some believe that persons should be subjected to the beliefs of the majority - thats wack!

but that's the essence of democracy......


That is not the essence of a democracy...

The essence of a democracy is free society.


You forget that the majority...enforced slavery and segregation, And that a minority started and finished a change.

If it wasnt for ( a minority ) someone standing up sayin that it was inhumane, wrong, etc. You'd still be where your Great-great-great-great granddaddy was....Serving someone!

-Holla  

Posted by: AKAWoodwind Jan 28 2004, 10:26 AM
Every action has an equal and and opposite reaction...

Every action has consequences involved...

So, if you are having sex, and more specifically unprotected sex, then there is a possibility pregnancy may occur...

Knowing that pregnancy is a possible consequence of engaging in sexual activity, perhaps one should not engage in such activity if they are not able to accept the consequences.

Folks are quick to say "a woman has to do what's best for her." Well perhaps what was best for her was to keep her legs closed...

If you can't afford to have a baby, then perhaps you can't afford to have sex. If you feel you are too young too birth a baby, then perhaps you're too young to be having sex in the first place!

Besides my spiritual beliefs, the thought of getting pregnant before I was emotionally and financially preprared to care for a child was enough for me.

Posted by: TheBionicSIGMA Jan 28 2004, 02:03 PM
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 28 2004, 09:32 AM)
QUOTE (TheBionicSIGMA @ Jan 27 2004, 07:39 PM)
QUOTE (I Define Real @ Jan 27 2004, 01:00 PM)
Like some believe that persons should be subjected to the beliefs of the majority - thats wack!

but that's the essence of democracy......


That is not the essence of a democracy...

The essence of a democracy is free society.


You forget that the majority...enforced slavery and segregation, And that a minority started and finished a change.

If it wasnt for ( a minority ) someone standing up sayin that it was inhumane, wrong, etc. You'd still be where your Great-great-great-great granddaddy was....Serving someone!

-Holla

Actually, you're correct. I need to revise my statement, since technically, we're not simply a 'democracy', but a republic (and the two terms are not synonyms). I stand corrected and your point on slavery IS correct.


Still, abortion in 98% of cases, is a medically unnecessary procedure, scientifically it IS the taking of a human life at a lower stage of development, morally it is the destruction of a cognitively developed/developing, sentient and self-aware human being. It is still the willful destruction/murder of a living, human person. Does the woman's right over her own body include the right to kill a living, human, person ?

I don't believe that the majority of women who support abortion are supporting the murder of the unborn intentionally. I believe the majority simply don't realize that they're taking a human life.

I actually just ran across a series by R.C. Sproul on the topic of abortion (6-part series) and he's discussing the different aspects and issues (social, theological, political, etc....) that cover the debate. It's actually a very VERY GOOD series and I'm learning some things right now. The title of the series is Abortion: A Rational Look At An Emotional Issue.

http://www.ligonier.org and click on the link to past radio broadcasts. I'm about to go listen to part 2 right now.  

Posted by: CRAZYLEGS Jan 28 2004, 06:38 PM


Man, this is a pretty interesting topic!!!! It's good to see folks actually attack this issue from both sides...


As I read through some of these responses, there are a couple of things that need to be clarified for posterity sake:


1) The period where sentient life begins is the real crux of the abortion debate, not when specific bodily systems are formed....When does this celluar process pass over into the development of a sentient human being???

That's a concept that may never be completely explained by scientific means...It's always going to be a point of social conjecture, forever influenced by personal faith and belief...


2)When you address whether abortion is right or wrong, you've got to address the social climate that makes folks believe that the act of abortion is a necessary, viable option. Irregardless of how many stats both sides come up with, you can walk outside your front door (or open up a history book) and find reasoning why both movements exist...

If you're pro-life, you can't really rant and rave about how wrong abortion really is when so many of the folks that support the movement directly and indirectly contribute to the social enviornment that fostered the pro-choice movement in the first place...

what are the realistic options out there for single moms that don't want to take that route??? Are there realistic support systems for the moms (and their kids) to have a fighting chance to deal with the added hardships that being a single parent entails?

what are the realistic prospects for those children (minority children in particular) that will effectively become wards of the state when they come into this world?

What are the realistic possibilities of adoption for kids that are apart of that growing population of "state" children??? Will the foster care system ever be gutted and re-vamped for the children's benefit??? Will Families that truly want to adopt kids be allowed to do so without going through the enormous amounts or red tape involved with the system???

etc....etc....etc....etc....ad nauseum *smh*....


If you're pro-choice, you're also feeding into the factors that created this social monster...The actual ability to make the choice isn't the issue...how these situations are created for that decision to be made is the real problem...

outside of the obvious uncontrolled scenario (i.e. rape, incest, life-threatening birth complications for Mom & fetus, etc), There are alot of women out there that are faced with this prospect because of choice...Whether it be that one time you didn't use a condom, or the realization that a child isn't financially sound after the fact, Or that the pregnancy in question is a by-product of some other "self-induced" trauma (i.e. drug-use, lifestyle issues, etc...)

It's about exploring all feasible options before you place that call to planned parenthood...By that time, it's too late to fix the problem either way...


The bottom line is that this demand will exist as long as there's enough societal decay present in our country to feed it...That's how the demand for this practice came about in the first place...Here's how you remove the need to make that choice:

Universal Child Care (funded at both the state and federal level, with additional funding from big industry)

A "Balanced" comprehensive, Sex Ed initiative, that emphasizes ABSTINENCE and CONTRACEPTION EQUALLY among both sexes, as well as the CONSEQUENCES of not taking these measures...PARENTAL/Guardiean involvement would be MANDATORY, with violators facing fines and /or jail time, or both...


Tax Breaks and available financial support for single moms, as well as families that are willing to ADOPT at ANY age...


Increased enforcement of Child Support Initiatives EQUALLY; .


among other things.....


Until steps like these are implemented and the social enviornment drastically changes for the better, there's going to be a demand for the practice.


You don't take the ability tho choose away, Remove the factors driving you to make that choice away...


Until then, neither side is doing it's part to make it uneccessary...

[ Interaction Index Page | The Study Center | Resources | Site Front Page (Home) ]

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)