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

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: 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

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

Posted by: PsiTre_01 Jan 23 2004, 04:20 PM

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

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...

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

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 ?? 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 !!! 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

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 ?? 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 !!! 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. Abortion in no way should be used as a means of contraception. -Holla 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'. But that's a whole OTHER can of worms.

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 - 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 ? 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 ? (I know you probably missed it.....but go back up and run your mouse over the words)

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 Of course, you know there's a 'SO THEN' coming, right ? And you know the question I'm going to ask, right ?

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