If killing your baby was acceptable, would more women do it?

Would you rather your taxes going to free contraceptives to pay for prevention of more unwanted children in the world or would you rather your taxes increasingly go to pay for all the unwanted children born (due to lack of contraceptives by parents) who are put into the foster and adoption system, that's 18 years of each child's life meant to feed, clothe, educate and house them vs. cheap contraceptives which would reduce the number of unwanted children in the system, reduce the number of ABORTIONS, and probably even reduce taxes over time in terms of what we are forced to pay for every unwanted child raised in the welfare system.

Think about it.

 

Exactly! Every $1 spent on family planning saves $4 in government spending down the line.

 

well for me its an easy decision. obviously, i would rather pay for the necessities of life that children need. rather than pay for other's contraception. I mean why dont we all pay for each other's recreational activity then... am i right? i'll be waiting for my new shoes, maybe a video game or two, some songs on itunes, some nice new clothes.... maybe even an ipod i could give to my girlfriend for her birthday... seems fair... but until that day comes, i will never want me or anyone else to pay for other people's recreational activity... the notion is preposterous.

 

The notion that there would be LESS taxes in the long run, LESS abortions and LESS unwanted children bouncing around in the system and developing serious emotional problems seems preposterous to you?

The fact that there would be MORE healthy and prepared parents and healthy family units in the long run also seems preposterous to you? Interesting. This really solidifies your views that you do not want to stop abortions and protect the fetuses but you are much more interested in punishing women for choosing sex.

You know how it is so easy to determine this? Because you are against something that would actually decrease the number of abortions performed. I don't understand why anyone who believes abortion is murder would object to something that might help eliminate it. Absolutely baffling.

 

there are ways to stop abortion without forcing everyone to pay for other people's recreational activities....

1. i could care less about taxes

2. ban abortion... that will make less abortion

3. what a cruel way to stereotype people...people who have been adopted, or ophans have grown up to be great and loved people. they grow up to have families of their own, pursue their dream careers, make great friends, even become loved members of society... so i find it very offensive to call people unwanted just because they have dead beat parents. 1st off, all people are wanted in the eyes of God. secondly, while yes their lives are different... and most likley they are going to be more challenging. that does not mean they lose their right to live it. ask any "unwanted" child if they would want to die? most of them of course would say no. you cant deny people the joys, relationships, and love in life simply because its going to cost us some more money....

 

Yet the idea that we would use taxes for contraceptives bothers you?

Banning abortion does not make less abortion, all it does is make it more dangerous and deadly for the woman.

Never said they don't do any of these things. I did say that they do develop emotional issues from bouncing around the adoption and foster system. Ever heard of abandonment issues? The vast majority of children in the system will develop deep and difficult to overcome abandonment issues which makes it extremely difficult for them to bond with other people.

http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/foster_care

Children in foster care often struggle with the following issues:

Which god? There are thousands of them, you need to be specific. Also I should add I do not believe in any of them. So it's a touching notion, but very irrelevant to the issue.

I am not talking about abortion here though, I am talking about more widespread contraceptive use which would PREVENT unplanned or unwanted pregnancies in the first place. There would be no pregnancy to be had, there would be no unwanted children put into the system. We're talking about less children forced into the system and left feeling abandoned and traumatized and more planned parenthood (not the clinic mind you), but people who wait to go off their birth control when they WANT to and can AFFORD to be parents and have a healthy and stable home environment. How can you be against this?

 

does the idea of using american taxmoney to pay for a video game for me bother you?

listen... you can stereotype people all you want. put them down. say their life is garbage and terrible. and they might have been brainwashed enough to agree with you. i for one do not an will not accept that. people can find joy outside the "norm" of joy. foster kids have friends, they enjoy many moments in life. they laugh and love. grow up and are satisfied with their lives. i will not accept just because they are different means we kill them off and just because they may have a harder time, kill them off. just not a rational approach.

im not against contraception... however. you cant force one american to pay for another american's contraception as much as you can force one american to pay for another one's new sports car or video game. IMO people should pay for their own things. its not that hard of a concept to understand. it doesnt mean i am "against contraception"... no... you need contraception? you pay for it. i am no slave to others, you pay for your own stuff... i pay for my own. very simple concept indeed. and no i will not sacrifice all of my values to serve the abortionists. abortion needs to be illegal. end of story. innocent life needs to be protected. by that same standard people should not have to pay for other people's optional actions.

 

Yes it does because I care about where my taxes go. I care that they go to actually help society as a whole (and lessening the number of unwanted or unplanned pregnancies and thus the number of abortions and the number of unwanted kids being traumatized with abandonment issues is a good thing.)

You said you do not care about taxes at all, so I don't see why it bothers you that it would go to pay for contraceptives let alone pay for people's video games.

You are once again not listening. I am talking about preventing the unwanted pregnancies altogether. You are back on abortion and discussing killing the fetus. That is not what I am talking about.

I will not accept that children should be subjected to anything that can emotionally harm or disturb them and sorry but it is a fact that the adoption and foster care system traumatize a great portion of children that are in it. I will never accept that this is a healthy and good thing to do to any child and quite frankly I would prefer that less children were conceived to make this a possibility. Like I said, men and women who have more and easier access to contraceptives will be more likely to put off parenting until they are stable enough to have kids and have much healthier family units. What do you find wrong with this?

Taxes go to many things people dislike on both sides of the fence. However more widespread and easy access to contraceptives is a win/win for both pro-lifers and pro-choicers. You know why? Because for pro-lifers it dramatically decreases the number of abortions women will have and for pro-choicers it gives people more access to better and safer reproductive choices.

People are going to have sex whether you like it or not. People are going to also continue to get pregnant whether you like it or not and people will also have abortions whether you like it not. But considering you are so interested in meddling in other people's medical choices and making those choices FOR them and expecting them to pay for the choices you make for them (cost of prenatals, cost of home/hospital birth, additional cost of c-section if necessary, and then cost of 18+ years of life for the child born) I'd think you'd be interested in meddling in their lives in a way that would be favorable to your opinion. Easier access to contraceptives = less abortions. Why are you against this when you are in favor of forcing people to pay the choices YOU want to make for them?

Most people already do pay for their own birth control, but it's clearly not enough when abortion is still happening so frequently.

It is very clear here that saving the fetuses lives is not the most important thing to you. Punishing men and women for choosing to have sex is what your goal is.

You'd think you would be in favor of anything that would minimize the need for abortion, something that kills fetuses, something you claim deserves the right to live and yet you oppose it at every turn. Insanity.

Good luck making abortion illegal because it doesn't look like it's about to happen any time soon, however as more and more people lose their jobs and lose access to birth control it seems there will be more abortions to come in the future.

 

saving the fetus is my most important goal... however, i have very strong morals in other issues as well. being slaves to others is also something i am very against. i will not become a slave to others to save innocent children when i dont have to. hear that DONT HAVE TO. there are other ways of preventing abortion, weather you like or not, that does not require all americans to be slaves to people who dont want to buy their own contraception.

as for taxes... i said i dont care about taxes in response to you saying i would pay less taxes. i dont really care about the amount i pay in taxes... i most CERTAINLY care about where my tax dollars go however.

 

Interesting. You don't want to be a slave to save children but you expect women to be a slave to save the life of their fetus?

We are all already slaves to paying taxes and we already don't get to decide where they go the vast majority of the time. I quite frankly do not mind if my portion of taxes goes to pay for contraceptives for others and I am sure the other half of the pro-choice population agrees. Our half of the taxes can go to pay for contraceptives and yours and the pro-life half can go to paying support the 18 years of early life of all the fetuses you save after they are born, how's that sound?

My apologies and thank you for the clarification.

 

Makes perfect sense. No wonder Hitler was able to sell his ideas to the german people! Un-born, un-german, they are not people. Terminating them now can save countless lives in the future, and increase quality of life (at least for those who are still living).

I just hope when you are talking about "contraceptives" and "family planning" you are not including abortion in there.

 

Actually when I was talking about contraceptives I was literally not thinking of abortion at all. What we're discussing here is actually preventing unwanted pregnancy to begin with, preventing the conception in fact, which should be the common goal of both sides, pro-life and pro-choice. I feel like this is one issue we should easily be able to come to an agreement on...unfortunately it just never is so easy now is it?

 

Correction, the woman is just the co-creator of the life she carries. That life inside her is the result of thousands of ancestors that went before her and the male that provided the sperm.

It is unfair that she decided to receive the male's sperm with the full knowledge of the fact a new life could be created inside her when she has made no commitment to fulfill her actions. It is wrong-headed and stupid of her. If she aborts she will certainly have to personally bear the guilt. That is IF she has any morals at all. Her best course of action is to get married to the father of her child. The next best thing is to go through with the pregnancy and give her child up for adoption (if she is truly incapable, un-caring and incompetent).

Of course, all that could be avoided by just not allowing the penis in her vagina in the first place when no commitment has been made.

If she is expecting to be a parent then why push abortion on her? If a woman knows she is not capable of being a good parent, she should not engage in procreational sex. Same for the man. Both are being irresponsible and negligent with the great gift of life with which men and women have been endowed. Unfortunately, liberal, progressive secular-humanists have managed to normalize immorality.

These same, liberal, progressive, brain-washed so-called 'feminist' women embrace the moral relativity fed to them by Planned Parenthood and feminists while they become one-person, narcissistic, judge, jury and hangman of the developing life inside them.

 

Contraception is not 100%. Therefore, if a woman does not want to get pregnant 100% of the time, she should not engage in procreational-type sex.

 

Just like a man who wants to be completely sure he will never have to pay child support should be prudent about who he has sex with. Marriage was created for a reason, you know!

 

So was divorce.

 

Time for the history lesson...see, humans have been around for a long, long time, some say 10,000 years.

Humans, female AND male, have shown that since the beginning they have sex, not always wisely but that is human nature. It is human nature to have sex.



Human nature will not change. NO human is perfect. NO human never makes mistakes....and that includes Anti-Woman Anti-Choicers.

People who enjoy sex are not evil...they are just having something that Anti-Woman Anti-Choicers don't.

This makes Anti-Woman Anti-Choicers jealous so they lash out and want to villify and demonize women. That's why they refer to women as immoral, irresponsible, stupid, uncaring...etc.

The Puritans did this by making women wear a Scarlet Letter on their chest after they refused the attentions of powerful males who claimed the women "sinned".


Now, I don't know who or what created humans but they were created with a sex drive, Humans did NOT create themselves.

So, if anyone doesn't like this flawed thing called a human...speak to the manufacturer...they sure did a lousy job by not making ANYONE perfect.

 

no, women should not have to be responsible for their kid. however, this doesnt mean kill them because the baby is temporarily inside her. thats not a rational approach. but after the birth of course she shouldnt be a slave to the child...although im not sure how one could refer to their own flesh and blood child in such a manner

sounds fine to me...

 

Mother's body, mother's choice.

It is not required of me to like or dislike her reasons for having an abortion. I can have all the opinions in the world and they have no meaning beyond my own mouth for this issue, because her privacy and her rights to her own body exist completely independent of how I may feel about her choices.

 

Regardless of how many ancestors contributed genes to the fetus, this fetus only has life because of the gift of one particular woman in whom it resides. It has no life of its own, it takes its life from her.



I

It is possibly unfair to the egg she produces each month that she does not procure a sperm to match it. However unfair, every little egg isn't going to see personhood. Every fertilized egg isn't going to see personhood either. No sense getting all emotional over a fertilized egg whose chances aren't very good anyway.

I'm sure she'll remember that NEXT time, but for now, she has to deal with what is.

Your only message seems to be "don't have sex." Women have been hearing that for thousands of years, and yet one persuasive man comes along and says "if you love me..." Guess which message wins.

 

I know contraceptives aren't 100% but clearly telling people, "No, don't have sex." has not been working. If you look at the stats for countries that have more widely available and cheap contraceptives and the stats on countries who do not just see who has more unplanned/unwanted pregnancy in the end. Contraceptives help because people will have sex no matter how many times you wag your finger at them.

Surely you too would also like to see less unplanned or unwanted pregnancies amongst our society and more healthier and stable family units? That is what widespread contraceptive use ultimately promotes because it gives people the opportunity despite all their human fallibility to put off having children until they are in a stable relationship and are financially secure enough to want, have and raise a family.

 

Except you are forgetting that pregnancy is a difficult, long and potentially dangerous and life-threatening journey for every woman. She must first give her consent to continue taking the risks involved with pregnancy. She should not be a slave to be forced to risk her health and life to maintain the life of another.

 

It's human nature to do a lot of things that are deleterious...What's your point?

I am pro-choice. I would counsel men and women to make the right choice and not engage in procreational sex without making a commitment to each other and the human they may create.

Please....Try to post something besides false, feminist talking point lies.

Women who allow a penis in their vagina without making a commitment are stupid and irresponsible as are the men that think they can pump some woman full of their semen and walk away. Feminists have caused this irresponsibility in our society.

The Scarlet Letter is a work of fiction.

I see...So because humans have a sex drive, they must always satisfy that sex drive?

There is a difference between letting one's short-term desires run rough-shod over one's life and striving to be a responsible human being.

 

I am not against the use of contraceptives...I just think men should not put their penis in a woman's vagina without making and receiving a life commitment to raise any child that may result. This runs counter to the feminist-pro abortion philosophy of 'no-fault' procreational type sex.

 

Again no matter how much finger wagging you do to young people they will have sex. My own mother was very aware of this as I was growing up. Her mother told her to save it until marriage and that was it. But my mom had been having sex long before marriage in her youth. When I reached puberty she told me that if I ever planned to have sex I needed to tell her so she could get me on birth control because she knew she couldn't stop me just like her mother couldn't stop her. But on the flip side she also instilled into me good moral values and told me if I ever have sex I should save it for someone I truly care about. Despite all the pressures and all the sex talk in middle school and high school I didn't have sex until I was 18 years old with someone I really cared about. We made mistakes, we learned from them, we broke up and now I am in a much happier and stable relationship with a man I love very much and plan to marry. Dating people and having sex and learning to be safe and learning from your mistakes are all a part of growing up. This is normal.

You can teach kids to be responsible with their sexual choices and also teach them to have good moral values at the same time. If they were put more hand in hand with one another then we might just have less teen pregnancies, less sex at extremely young ages, and less unprotected/unsafe sex when people do finally choose to be intimate with one another.