Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Bothwell
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:35 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bothwell »

Can you be anti abortion and pro Death penalty?

Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this post
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by lady cop »

Bothwell wrote: Can you be anti abortion and pro Death penalty?

Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this post
yes...one has to do with innocents, one has to do with stone killers. easy choice for me.
User avatar
CVX
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 12:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by CVX »

Bothwell wrote: Can you be anti abortion and pro Death penalty?

Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this post


Yes, I agree with lady cop. One group is the innocents. The second group has taken lives.
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by lady cop »

this could become a theological topic having to do with souls and biblical injunctions. i personally would rather only address the practical considerations of crime and punishment. my views on abortion are mixed depending on individual circumstances. but i am 100% certain that ted bundy et al will never kill another human being. is DP unevenly applied? historically yes. i am grateful for forensic science in helping to correct wrongs. and convict the guilty. and now we have seen even someone with a million-dollar lawyer can be convicted. but will a young white male receive death? i would be surprised. as an aside...can anyone here honestly say they could kill? soldiers must. i may have to one day in defense of an innocent or myself, and am prepared to do so. but many who say they would "throw the switch"...could they really? i am firmly in favor of the DP for garbage like danny rolling, richard allen davis, david westerfield, and many less known. and i personally know some murderers. it's my daily fare. have talked to "dead people walking". that's another post! sorry to go on!
beautyful
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:54 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by beautyful »

I don't think i could ever have an abortion but it is a personal choice. I would choose not to have one coz I don't agree with it but each woman should be able to make that choice for herself without someone telling her she is a murderer. At that time in a woman's life when she has to decide something like that, she is already under enough emotional stress as it is. I think anyone who has had an abortion would tell you its not an easy decision and is never undertaken lightly except in the case of teenagers but thats something different.

Sorry, bit heavy that but I had to get it off my chest
LoveMama
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:47 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by LoveMama »

lady cop wrote: yes...one has to do with innocents, one has to do with stone killers. easy choice for me.


Linda.......I'm pro choice and anti death penalty! I think I'm a liberal! LOL

I REFUSE to let any man in this world tell me that I don't have the choice to have a abortion! THERE. I guess I'm a women 'liber".........never thought I was but dang it , guess I am!

xxxxxxxxxxxooo

mama
Bothwell
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:35 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bothwell »

Absloutely agree Lovemama, my personal opinion is that only a woman has the right to decide on an abortion. This stance has made me unpopular before and it will again but I do not believe that any man can understand the issue fully.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Most people I know are anti-choice and pro-death. That makes me rather unpopular, as well. Too bad, so sad. (LOL)
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle
User avatar
greydeadhead
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:52 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by greydeadhead »

totally up to the woman.. I mean I am a guy. Who am I to tell a woman what to do with her body. DP.. if it guilt has been proven beyond a doubt and I do mean beyond a doubt including DNA testing and such then the person has forfeited the right to live. Juice them up and let them be tried by the supreme being of thier choice..
Feed your spirit by living near it -- Magic Hat Brewery bottle cap
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

greydeadhead wrote: totally up to the woman.. I mean I am a guy. Who am I to tell a woman what to do with her body.


But it's not her body, it's someone elses.
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

Bothwell wrote: Absloutely agree Lovemama, my personal opinion is that only a woman has the right to decide on an abortion. This stance has made me unpopular before and it will again but I do not believe that any man can understand the issue fully.


So, if the woman wants an abortion, and the man does not, OK.

If the man wants the woman to have an abortion, no way.

If the woman wants to have the baby and the man does not want it, he has to pay for the support of the baby. Something wrong here.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by anastrophe »

Bill Sikes wrote: But it's not her body, it's someone elses.


the problem, of course, is that it's not that black & white. if it were, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
beautyful
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:54 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by beautyful »

Bill Sikes wrote: So, if the woman wants an abortion, and the man does not, OK.

If the man wants the woman to have an abortion, no way.

If the woman wants to have the baby and the man does not want it, he has to pay for the support of the baby. Something wrong here.


let's not forget, it is the woman's body...it is her body that will have to carry a baby for nine months,it will be her that gets left holding it if the man gets bored or whatever, if she has to go through an abortion then she will have to suffer the emotional pain that goes with it. there is nothing wrong here, a woman should be able to decide what to do with her own body
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Bill Sikes wrote: So, if the woman wants an abortion, and the man does not, OK.

If the man wants the woman to have an abortion, no way.

If the woman wants to have the baby and the man does not want it, he has to pay for the support of the baby. Something wrong here.Hmmmm.....well, the man doesn't have to create any of the above circumstances, does he? The man can forgo sex or be very sure of his birth control.



And let's not forget turn-around:

If the woman says no to sex, the man has the ability to force his way regardless. She lives with that -

If a single woman gets pregnant, in many circles she is labeled as a whore, still today.

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to abort, then she's labeled as bad.

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to keep the child, asking the father to contribute more than just sperm, then she's labeled as greedy.

Society is cruel and unforgiving to women with labels...and their children as well.

A woman will consistently earn less than a man over her entire lifetime (currently at 30% less).

A man can batter a woman with few consequences, but women who fight back are often jailed.



Life is unfair, Bill. It can be rotten to both genders, in many ways.



But the one thing I really want to express is that it is ALWAYS a woman's body. She may share it during pregnancy, but it is still her own.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

beautyful wrote: let's not forget, it is the woman's body...it is her body that will have to carry a baby for nine months,it will be her that gets left holding it if the man gets bored or whatever, if she has to go through an abortion then she will have to suffer the emotional pain that goes with it. there is nothing wrong here, a woman should be able to decide what to do with her own body


It's not just her body, though. Babies can be adopted. Young ones are particularly in demand. The woman doesn't have to go through the emotional pain you describe, and in fact if you do something, knowingly, that will cause you pain, then you surely can't expect anything else! Don't forget that it's the man's body too - why should he have to labour to pay for something he didn't want?
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

A Karenina wrote: Hmmmm.....well, the man doesn't have to create any of the above circumstances, does he? The man can forgo sex or be very sure of his birth control.


Erm, hang on just a minute - that works both ways.



A Karenina wrote: And let's not forget turn-around:

If the woman says no to sex, the man has the ability to force his way regardless.


No, that's very different, it's rape. The number of abortions due to that is

a tiny fraction of the whole. In most cases, I am sure, abortion takes place

because a baby would be inconvenient, sometimes very inconvenient, for

the woman to have a baby. But - it's only inconvence, that's all.



A Karenina wrote: She lives with that -

If a single woman gets pregnant, in many circles she is labeled as a whore, still today.

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to abort, then she's labeled as bad.

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to keep the child, asking the father to contribute more than just sperm, then she's labeled as greedy.

Society is cruel and unforgiving to women with labels...and their children as well.




I do not think that the above is true. However, our societies differ, which

may be why.



A Karenina wrote: A woman will consistently earn less than a man over her entire lifetime (currently at 30% less).

A man can batter a woman with few consequences, but women who fight back are often jailed.


What's that got to do with the above?





A Karenina wrote: Life is unfair, Bill. It can be rotten to both genders, in many ways.



But the one thing I really want to express is that it is ALWAYS a woman's body. She may share it during pregnancy, but it is still her own.


"Unfair to bothy sexes" is correct. Are we so Victorian that we have to

apply an incorrect term - gender? Shall we put lace around the piano legs

so that no-one will see tham?

Yes, a woman shares her body during pregnancy. That is quite obvious!

However, I don't think it's right, to use a simile, that an established lodger

is given fatal notice.

This will draw all sorts of shite, I'm sure. However, I'm not a bible-thumping

rigidly anti-abortion chap; it seems to me that the term is everything. What

about dropping the latest date at which an abortion can be performed, say

to 14 weeks, 3 1/2 months? In the "civilised" world, where abortion is common,

the medical system is also the most advanced - it should be quite possible to

work out that she's pregnant after 3 1/2 months!!
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Good morning, Bill. I completely agree that saying no to sex or using birth control works both ways. While I am still pro-choice, I would love to see development in birth controls - surely this is our best means to prevent abortions without imposing on others?



The rest of my post was just to point out that although yes, men have a raw deal, women also have a raw deal. The rape scenario was not offered in relation to abortion. It was in response to the thoughts you had expressed where men are treated unfairly. I was also trying to make it clear that I don't think it's ok for either men or women to be treated unfairly; I have no wish to see either suffer.



I'm completely lost on the "gender" versus "sexes" thing. Incorrect term? Victorian? Please help me out here, because I haven't got a clue. Seriously.



It's clear you are not a bible-thumper. Not one of your arguments has a religious base. It's also very probably that the UK is more civilized, and that women on the whole are safer there. It would be nice to think so because it would mean there is hope for us all. But in the US, current figures claim that 1 out of 3 women in the US will suffer at least one form of abuse from the male closest to her. I mention it because the entire abortion debate in the US centers around women's rights (or minority rights).



On a personal level, I don't think it's "right" for a woman to abort unless the circumstances are extreme. But it's offset with my feeling that I don't have the authority to tell another person they must have a baby, or they must live according to my views, or they must anything.



I firmly believe we all need to step out of the box, quit looking at it as black and white, and find alternative solutions. Better birth control, increased education, opportunities for women to keep their babies and still continue with their lives (in terms of college, work/quality day care)...these are workable possibilities.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

A Karenina wrote: Good morning, Bill. I completely agree that saying no to sex or using birth control works both ways. While I am still pro-choice, I would love to see development in birth controls - surely this is our best means to prevent abortions without imposing on others?


Yes, IMO prevention is 100% better than "cure". There are many methods around now - hopefully the "male pill" will be generally available soon (this will upset feminists, but that's a different story! BTW, I class "feminists" as being the same as "male chauvanists" in the desirability stakes). Implants are available, too - these last a number of years, so "forgetting to take the pill" becomes a thing of the past. Yes, I know these methods are not infallible - but the sheer number of abortions conducted seems to indicate that failings in these methods of contraception can't come close to an explanation.



A Karenina wrote: The rest of my post was just to point out that although yes, men have a raw deal, women also have a raw deal. The rape scenario was not offered in relation to abortion. It was in response to the thoughts you had expressed where men are treated unfairly.


There's a difference between being treated unfairly and being subject to a criminal attack, IMO!



A Karenina wrote: I was also trying to make it clear that I don't think it's ok for either men or women to be treated unfairly; I have no wish to see either suffer


Hurrah!



A Karenina wrote: I'm completely lost on the "gender" versus "sexes" thing. Incorrect term? Victorian? Please help me out here, because I haven't got a clue. Seriously.


Sex is what sex you - male or female. Gender is a grammatical classification -

masculine, feminine, common, neuter. I mention the Victorians, as apparently they were obsessed with things of a sexual nature, and "dressed" furniture legs for decency... this IMO is an UL.





A Karenina wrote: It's clear you are not a bible-thumper. Not one of your arguments has a religious base.


Ta.

A Karenina wrote: It's also very probably that the UK is more civilized, and that women on the whole are safer there. It would be nice to think so because it would mean there is hope for us all. But in the US, current figures claim that 1 out of 3 women in the US will suffer at least one form of abuse from the male closest to her. I mention it because the entire abortion debate in the US centers around women's rights (or minority rights).


I have no idea about the UK/US thing. There are, IME, pockets of certain "class" or geographical area which are more resistant to change or "new" ideas. These are worldwide, and indeed vary within countries.

If "the entire abortion debate in the US centers around women's rights (or minority rights)" only, I have a big, big quarrel with it - because, as I mentioned in my previous contribution, I think the term has a lot to do with the acceptability of abortion. A "morning after" pill - fine. An abortion at an early stage, well OK. An abortion at late term - not fine, or OK.



A Karenina wrote: On a personal level, I don't think it's "right" for a woman to abort unless the circumstances are extreme. But it's offset with my feeling that I don't have the authority to tell another person they must have a baby, or they must live according to my views, or they must anything.


We're always telling other people what they can and can't do.



A Karenina wrote: I firmly believe we all need to step out of the box, quit looking at it as black and white, and find alternative solutions. Better birth control, increased education, opportunities for women to keep their babies and still continue with their lives (in terms of college, work/quality day care)...these are workable possibilities.


There are IMO many possibilities, all of which need to be explored.
User avatar
rachelg
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:31 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by rachelg »

Hey Bill,

Where are you from? In the US, Sex and Gender can be used interchangabley. Also, where do you get your data for the statement, "The number of abortions due to that is a tiny fraction of the whole. In most cases, I am sure, abortion takes place because a baby would be inconvenient, sometimes very inconvenient, for

the woman to have a baby. But - it's only inconvence, that's all."

My guess is that you're guessing at it. Sorry I don't know how to use the quote boxes. I'm new to this forum. I don't think an issue as hot as this can be backed up with guesswork. Also, those implants you mention that are so infallible. I know someone who had to have a hysterectomy from her reaction to them. Until you have real data to back up your argument, you should stop thinking you have the right to tell women what they can or can not do with their bodies. :mad:
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

rachelg wrote: Hey Bill,

Where are you from? In the US, Sex and Gender can be used interchangabley.


Well I'm not from the U.S.A.



rachelg wrote: Also, where do you get your data for the statement, "The number of abortions due to that is a tiny fraction of the whole. In most cases, I am sure, abortion takes place because a baby would be inconvenient, sometimes very inconvenient, for

the woman to have a baby. But - it's only inconvence, that's all."

My guess is that you're guessing at it. Sorry I don't know how to use the quote boxes. I'm new to this forum. I don't think an issue as hot as this can be backed up with guesswork. Also, those implants you mention that are so infallible

.


You mean "so fallible" I take it. I don't know how to quote easily, either, I

cut'n'paste the begin/end bits appropriately. I'm referring to data concerning

the reliability/failure rate of various contraceptive devices versus the rate o

abortion.



rachelg wrote: I know someone who had to have a hysterectomy from her reaction to them.


Sounds like very bad medical care to me.

rachelg wrote: Until you have real data to back up your argument, you should stop thinking you have the right to tell women what they can or can not do with their bodies. :mad:


It seems to me that you're guessing and trying to make a smokescreen.

Look at your last sentence. Absolutely pathetic.
User avatar
rachelg
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:31 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by rachelg »

Infalliable falls under the same rule as flamable and inflamable, they mean the same thing. Around here, infalliable means incapable of error. That is what I meant. You're trying to apply rules from word use in one country to another. The only pathetic thing I see about this strand is a man who will never have a cirumstance to need the right for an abortion trying to say no one should have that right.
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

rachelg wrote: Fallible and infallible fall under the same rule as flamable and inflamable, they mean the same thing. You're trying to apply rules from word use in one country to another.


Get a dictionary, you need one! Even Webster, which AFAIK is an American dictionary, agrees.



rachelg wrote: The only pathetic thing I see about this strand is a man who will never have a cirumstance to need the right for an abortion trying to say no one should have that right.


Re-read what I said, which is nothing like what you have indicated, and try to respond with concrete arguments that have something to do with the subject matter, and not a load of hot air and whingeing.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by anastrophe »

Bill Sikes wrote:

No, that's very different, it's rape. The number of abortions due to that is

a tiny fraction of the whole. In most cases, I am sure, abortion takes place

because a baby would be inconvenient, sometimes very inconvenient, for

the woman to have a baby. But - it's only inconvence, that's all.




'inconvenience' isn't the right word. it trivializes the changes brought about by having a child. it's like saying, 'it would be inconvenient to be taken from your home and forcibly moved to another country where you would be required to serve 18 or so years of hard labor, and it is not your choice to do so'. having a child is a completely life-changing event.



of course, i have no children, so i'm talking through my hat.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
rachelg
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:31 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by rachelg »

You quoted my thread before I got it the way I meant it. Supposedly this thread is about abortion, not word use anyway. I recognize you to be the sort who thinks he can try to win his argument with attacks on things that have nothing to do with the subject. That is considered very petty around here. Until I see some real concrete facts, I don't see what proof you have in your argument. You're basing your argument on guesswork and opinion and until there is proof of exactly when the soul enters the body, there will be nothing but opinions.
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

rachelg wrote: You quoted my thread before I got it the way I meant it. Supposedly this thread is about abortion, not word use anyway.


Erm, that's not *quite* true - clue - look at the title and OP.



rachelg wrote: I recognize you to be the sort who thinks he can try to win his argument with attacks on things that have nothing to do with the subject. That is considered very petty around here.


"Around here"? Where? You'll be using the inclusive "we", next. I don't think you do recognise me as that sort - try reading what I wrote again.



rachelg wrote: Until I see some real concrete facts, I don't see what proof you have in your argument. You're basing your argument on guesswork and opinion and until there is proof of exactly when the soul enters the body, there will be nothing but opinions.


What are you wittering on about now? Why don't you tell me what my argument is, and we'll go from there.
User avatar
rachelg
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:31 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by rachelg »

First, you'll have to define "wittering". That isn't a word around here (meaning the eastern side of the US)
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by anastrophe »

folks, i'm not a moderator, although i play one on the tiny tv set in my mind.



let's cool things down. abortion is an extremely volatile topic. opinions tend to be very, very strong about it, and they tend to be polarized. it's best not to infer someone's position based upon questions they may pose (or spelling or grammar errors they may or may not commit, or for that matter, point out).



there are people who believe that the decision to have an abortion is a Right with a capital 'R', and there are those who believe abortion is Murder with a capital 'M'. there are many shades of opinion that fall between those extremes, but those are the defining extremes of the debate. i fall in the realm of "i am personally against abortion, but it is not for me to decide for a pregnant woman faced with the choice whether it is right or wrong".



I am of the opinion that those who believe it is a Right are not evil people, and those who believe it is Murder are not evil people either.



the topic started exploring whether there is a moral/ethical inconsistency in being anti-abortion and pro death-penalty. i'd like to get back to exploring that.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Bill Sikes wrote: There are many methods around now - hopefully the "male pill" will be generally available soon (this will upset feminists, but that's a different story! BTW, I class "feminists" as being the same as "male chauvanists" in the desirability stakes).
Ack!! I don't understand modern feminism. If men can have a safe and reliable method of birth control, then I'm all for it. Every person should be able to make the decision to be a parent or not...regardless of their sex (Bill Sikes wrote: Ta.
Ta is good, an accord? Or? :o



Bill Sikes wrote: I think the term has a lot to do with the acceptability of abortion. A "morning after" pill - fine. An abortion at an early stage, well OK. An abortion at late term - not fine, or OK.
I have read such contradictory information on late term abortions that I no longer know which way is up. I can understand it if the mother's life is in mortal danger. Some of my research insists that late terms abortions are not performed except under these circumstances. Yet other research indicates that this is not the case. Perhaps we can start anotehr thread on this so that we can all explore a bit more.



Bill Sikes wrote: We're always telling other people what they can and can't do. Well, stop it! Everybody just stop it! :wah: Sorry, but I couldn't resist that one.



Bill, I appreciate your thoughtful response. I think we agree a lot more than we disagree, overall. Kinda cool, eh? (grin)



So, getting back to the original topic at hand ~



The contrast between pro-life and pro-death penalty versus pro-choice and anti-death penalty used to confuse the heck outta me. I'm just beginning to understand that it is the same philosophy used consistently, no matter which combination a person chooses.



I *think* that those who are pro-life and pro-death penalty are doing their best to preserve life. I can't defend their position with any great authority or real emotion because I disagree with the direction even as I agree whole heartedly with the intent.



I've found that those who are pro-choice and anti-death penalty are repulsed by the notion of controlling another person's life. The same desire to preserve life is there, but quality of life also plays a part.



I've rambled enough for now, so I'll leave it to the rest of the Garden to share their thoughts.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bill Sikes »

A Karenina wrote: Ta is good, an accord? Or?


"Ta" is an abbreviation of "thank you"... I think it comes from the North of England, or possibly London.



A Karenina wrote: I have read such contradictory information on late term abortions that I no longer know which way is up. I can understand it if the mother's life is in mortal danger. Some of my research insists that late terms abortions are not performed except under these circumstances. Yet other research indicates that this is not the case. Perhaps we can start anotehr thread on this so that we can all explore a bit more.


A new thread is indicated, I think. If anyone can be bothered, please start one & mention it in this thread!

FWIW in the UK the latest limit is 24 weeks, which is 6 months. At that time, there is a good possibility that a baby delivered would develop normally, given appropriate medical care in the first part of its life. There's currently a scandal due to a senior GP apparently breaking the law:

http://tinyurl.com/6xutl

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... stid=62934

It's this sort of thing that I disagree with.



A Karenina wrote: Bill, I appreciate your thoughtful response. I think we agree a lot more than we disagree, overall. Kinda cool, eh? (grin)


Hope so - I think that most people do agree largely about many things....



A Karenina wrote: So, getting back to the original topic at hand ~



I *think* that those who are pro-life and pro-death penalty are doing their best to preserve life. I can't defend their position with any great authority or real emotion because I disagree with the direction even as I agree whole heartedly with the intent.



I've found that those who are pro-choice and anti-death penalty are repulsed by the notion of controlling another person's life. The same desire to preserve life is there, but quality of life also plays a part.


Interesting, very interesting. As mentioned before, we're always controlling other people's lives, by expressing sentiments which become laws, amongs other ways.

That seems to me to conflict with the ideals of the second group above. With capital punishment, there seems to be an element of revenge and dissuasion of others. I'm not sure that these two groups have anything incompatible - I'm a bit confused by the terminology, I guess - pro/anti DP is easy for me, although I think that there are for many people various shades of grey - however what is pro-choice, or presumably anti-choice, in terms of abortion? Is it simply absolutely against any abortion, full stop, for abortion under any desired circumstance, or are there again many shaded of grey in between?
jahamaa
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:24 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by jahamaa »

lady cop wrote: yes...one has to do with innocents, one has to do with stone killers. easy choice for me.
Lady, while I am against the death penalty your answer here is right on target.
GOD CREATED MAN AND SAM COLT MADE THEM EQUAL
Jives
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Jives »

A Karenina wrote: Hmmmm.....well, the man doesn't have to create any of the above circumstances, does he? The man can forgo sex or be very sure of his birth control.


That's a solution, AK? Tell all men not to have sex? Not too realistic is it? Why can't men use birth control? I understand that a pill for men is on the way. instead of throwing out unreasonable statements, why not try to find an answer?

The rest of your post is unbelieveably sexist...have you had a bad time with guys?



If the woman says no to sex, the man has the ability to force his way regardless. She lives with that -


So all men are rapists? I've never forced a girl in my life, nor have any of my friends. I would never do that and thanks a lot for implying that my gender will get sex whether the woman wants it or not.

If a single woman gets pregnant, in many circles she is labeled as a whore, still today.


Where do you get this? I certainly don't do that! I have three teenage girls in my school that are pregnant, not one of them is what I or anyone here wold label a whore. As a matter of fact I resent the whole "labeling" label.

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to abort, then she's labeled as bad.


Again, you are off base, coloring everything through your own values. i certainly didn't label my girlfriend as "bad" when she had an abortion whle I was away at boot camp. When she told me she had done it (three years later) I did what I always do, I stuck with her, remembering that she is a human being. I comforted her and told her that it wouldn't change things between us. I never got a chance to have that baby, she never even told me she was pregnant...so who really got the short end of the stick here?

If a woman is pregnant and chooses to keep the child, asking the father to contribute more than just sperm, then she's labeled as greedy.


What?!! What nonsense!! You seem to have some idea that all men are sex-hungry, greedy, unfeeling monsters. Cut down a tree, build a bridge, and get over that idea!! if I ever fathered a child and didn't intend to marry the girl, of course I would pay child support!, and I certainly wouldn't judge the woman as greedy! As a matter of fact, she wouldn't even have to ask for support, I consider it a man's responsibility! Again, you judge all men as bad and irresponsibile.



A man can batter a woman with few consequences, but women who fight back are often jailed.


OH! Hahahahahaha....stop it now, you're killin' me! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. If a girl says that she was beaten, the man goes to jail.....with or without evidence! I was in the Phoenix jail once for driving on a suspended license. The other six guys in my cell were all in jail because their girlfriends had 'said" that they had done something.

Not one of them had actually done anything. Each of them told me that the police came and arrested them on the girl's say so alone. One even said he hadn't even been in the state and could prove it. It's common knowledge among men that if it comes down to a girl's word against a guy's, the guy is going to jail.



But the one thing I really want to express is that it is ALWAYS a woman's body. She may share it during pregnancy, but it is still her own.


So...would you have an abortion and never even tell the father that you were pregnant? You seem to be implying that. In that scenario, the guy is the one that is getting the bad deal and it's the woman who's doing the dirt. So much for your feminine altruism. :mad:
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Jives, wow!! I would like it very much if you'd continue reading my subsequent posts, and perhaps they will explain a little better what I'm trying to say.

The only response I will make here is that I never once used the terms "always", "all men (or women", and so on. I'm sorry if you can't see that - perhaps I touched a wound. If I did, please accept my apologies.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle
User avatar
BTS
Posts: 3202
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 10:47 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by BTS »

It's just tissue in the womb........Or is it?

What do you think?

Bothwell, why do you title this Anti-Choice/Pro DP?

Why not Pro Life-Pro DP?



What about that little hand below?

WHERE is his choice?

Ooops, sorry I keep forgetting, that is just tissue below not a little formed hand ...







Joseph Bruner touches the hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel Armas during spina bifida surgery (By Michael Clancy for USA TODAY).







There's little difference between a newborn baby and a 32-week-old fetus. A new wave of research suggests that the fetus can feel, dream, even enjoy The Cat in the Hat.



At 32 weeks of gestation - two months before a baby is considered fully prepared for the world, or "at term" - a fetus is behaving almost exactly as a newborn. And it continues to do so for the next 12 weeks.



By nine weeks, a developing fetus can hiccup and react to loud noises. By the end of the second trimester it can hear.



Just as adults do, the fetus experiences the rapid eye movement (REM) sleep of dreams.



The fetus savors its mother's meals, first picking up the food tastes of a culture in the womb.



Among other mental feats, the fetus can distinguish between the voice of Mom and that of a stranger, and respond to a familiar story read to it.



Even a premature baby is aware, feels, responds, and adapts to its environment.



Just because the fetus is responsive to certain stimuli doesn't mean that it should be the target of efforts to enhance development. Sensory stimulation of the fetus can in fact lead to bizarre patterns of adaptation later on.



The roots of human behavior, researchers now know, begin to develop early - just weeks after conception, in fact. Well before a woman typically knows she is pregnant, her embryo's brain has already begun to bulge. By five weeks, the organ that looks like a lumpy inchworm has already embarked on the most spectacular feat of human development: the creation of the deeply creased and convoluted cerebral cortex, the part of the brain that will eventually allow the growing person to move, think, speak, plan, and create in a human way.



At nine weeks, the embryo's ballooning brain allows it to bend its body, hiccup, and react to loud sounds. At week ten, it moves its arms, "breathes" amniotic fluid in and out, opens its jaw, and stretches. Before the first trimester is over, it yawns, sucks, and swallows, as well as feels and smells. By the end of the second trimester, it can hear; toward the end of pregnancy, it can see.



By 13 to 15 weeks a fetus' taste buds already look like a mature adult's, and doctors know that the amniotic fluid that surrounds it can smell strongly of curry, cumin, garlic, onion and other essences from a mother's diet. Whether fetuses can taste these flavors isn't yet known, but scientists have found that a 33-week-old preemie will suck harder on a sweetened nipple than on a plain rubber one.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Bobbob
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Bobbob »

maybe truth will shine some light on the matter http://www.abortionviolence.com/

Of course this will be side stepped, ignored etc.
Jives
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Jives »

Radicals - sheesh. You guys are probably both anti-birth control too.

So what are you going to do when the population of the Earth hits 10 billion in the next century or so, and your personal standard of living approaches equality with a Chinese rice picker's?

I'll bet you'll still be crying "no abortions" when they are processing the dead and turning them into food because the oceans are polluted and sterile and there's not enough arable land left to feed everyone.

Well....I'm not worried. When America's population approaches China's, the whole abortion issue will become a moot point.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
User avatar
greydeadhead
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:52 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by greydeadhead »

Ahh yes... the TRUTH... according to who..?? Pulleeezzee.. if you are gonna join a discussion try to disuss it on a realistic basis.. don't just go posting links... that is just the easy way out..
Feed your spirit by living near it -- Magic Hat Brewery bottle cap
Jives
Posts: 3741
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:00 pm

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by Jives »

aemdiate wrote: If abortion was made illegal IT WOULD NOT STOP HAPPENING - forgive the caps but I think this is an important point.

Women do not have abortions because they want to - they see them as necessary. So illegalise it, and all those witch doctor abortionists are going to go out there with their dirty tools and lack of medical expertise, and not only are the foetuses going to die, but the mums are as well. Double the deaths-hooray.


Outstanding point, Aemdiate.....There were abortions before it was legalized. Probably have been since the dawn of time. Just get a coat hanger and go for it! I don't think these guys realize what they are advocating. So after they criminalize abortion, what next? Throwing the young, unwed mothers in jail?

I believe a child born unwanted and neglected to a parent incapable or unwilling to take care of them is a greater tragedy than a baby not born at all.
All the world's a stage and the men and women merely players...Shakespeare
User avatar
hotsauce
Posts: 1444
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:15 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by hotsauce »

I read a story not too long ago about a young woman who had her boyfriend hit her in the stomach repeatedly (with a baseball bat) until she lost the baby. Abortions will always be. A safe option has to be available.



Although a safe option was available for these to individuals, they felt they could not talk to their parents. Major breakdown in the lines of communication.



The point is...people will always find a way when they feel backed into a corner.
User avatar
greydeadhead
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:52 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by greydeadhead »

hey. here is an idea. Every person that believes that abortions should be outlawed should be obligated to adopt a child. I mean shure..outlaw abortion but who is going to take care of the unwanted children that would be born if this ever comes to pass. That is a question that I have not heard anwsered yet..
Feed your spirit by living near it -- Magic Hat Brewery bottle cap
LWR VENTURES
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 12:27 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by LWR VENTURES »

I do not agree with the death penalty. Perhaps if we had a flawless justice system. To high a price to pay for a possible erroneous verdict. Criminals are never concerned with consequences. In most cases their egos just convince them that they want get caught. It does not give murderers what they deserve, but instead, allows them an easy way out. People who commit those kind of crimes place no value on human life, even their own. It is only their comfort they are concerned with. Its not that they want to go to jail or be put to death. In most cases their egos just convince them that they want get caught Or if , they do get caught, that they are so smart they can get out of it. My Conclusions. Death Penalty is not a deterrent. It serves no useful purpose. In most cases, because of automatic appeals, it cost more to execute. Other than to make the victims / survivors feel better for about five min. What other purpose does it serve. I also believe that those who would kill children should be held in a facility where physical punishment was an everyday thing. Or enslaved to the victims family for the rest of their lives. Bet they would loose their smudginess real quick. You want to deter. Perhaps public corporal punishment .Of course, some will say, that this would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Would not be willing to see them in pain, but would be willing to see them executed. I just can’t figure people sometime. Hum, I wonder if that kid, that got whipped with the cane in Singapore has stayed out of troubled? Isn’t Singapore a crime-free society? Make no mistake, and think, that just because I am against the death penalty, that I am soft on crime. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’m just more interested in prevention that revenge. Just my opinion

:thinking:
LWR VENTURES
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 12:27 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by LWR VENTURES »

I’m also against abortion. But I don’t think that it should be illegal. I just don’t think that it should be so easy that it is used as a , whoops, oh well we can just kill it type of contraceptive. However, every situation is different. If an abortion is needed then it should not be against the law. Why do we need to legislate everything. If we would stop writing new laws the idiots would die off faster, LOL. And on that note, if we could get rid of some of the old laws we could speed that process up a bit. :wah:
LWR VENTURES
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 12:27 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by LWR VENTURES »

Welcome to the board Louise and aemdiate. Thanks for sharing your experience! I agree that it is your choice. But I also believe that these choices and responsibilities should be taken more serious before getting pregnant. It would save a lot of young women this dilemma of , should I, or shouldn’t I? That has to be a hard decision to make. If only you could convince other young couples that making that decision will be a lot easier if made before getting pregnant. But I am concerned, that the easier it is to get an abortion. The less young couples will take this responsibility seriously. I do not believe that it should be illegal. That want fix it.
john8pies
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 10:53 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by john8pies »

I think it is really very sad when anybody is obliged to make this decision, but we can`t condemn them one way or the other, as we`re not in their actual position or situation.
LWR VENTURES
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 12:27 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by LWR VENTURES »

LOL, aemdiate . I’m not suggesting it. I’m flat out stating it. It is your fault. Well you and your partners. I’m sorry if it offends you. You know that the contraceptives are not 100% and you make a choice. Now you have to make another. Despite your efforts. This life came to be. Kind of makes you wonder don’t it? Wish you the best of luck! Hope it works out for you!
A Karenina
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am

Anti-Choice/Pro DP

Post by A Karenina »

Jives wrote: Radicals - sheesh. You guys are probably both anti-birth control too.
Who are you to make that judgment, Jives?



Jives wrote: So what are you going to do when the population of the Earth hits 10 billion in the next century or so, and your personal standard of living approaches equality with a Chinese rice picker's?
Is this just a continuation of your assumption that they are anti-birth control?



Jives wrote: I'll bet you'll still be crying "no abortions" when they are processing the dead and turning them into food because the oceans are polluted and sterile and there's not enough arable land left to feed everyone.
How about everybody cry about responsible sex, better birth control, and informed choices whenever possible?



What has gotten into you lately? Jumping to conclusions and then using sarcasm to address those conclusions is wayyy below you...and becoming somewhat of a habit lately, I noticed. Just my opinion.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Aristotle

Return to “Abortion”