What's an "abortion extremist" ? Isn't this a tad hysterical ? First you say abortion is good then you say it isn't good.....and why do you think you can't care about your unborn baby? Are you getting upset? I never said there was anything wrong with all that...are you hallucinating? Gee, that's good advice you should take....or do you think everyone should have your opinion??? Hilariously hyperbolic rant BTW......
IF the fetus is ever deemed a person and given rights with those rights comes RESTRICTIONS. The same restriction other persons have. One of those restrictions THAT ALL PERSONS HAVE is that they cannot use another person's body to sustain their own life. You cannot force another person to give you their heart or kidney or a blood transfusion. You cannot force a woman to use her body to sustain your life. IF a woman doesn't consent to letting a fetus use her body to sustain it's life she has the right to self defense and can stop the harm in the only way possible, an abortion. Being pregnant does not take away a woman's rights, the same rights everyone else has... So you can blather on and on about how a fetus is a person but society is run by laws and the law say it isn't.....and even if that was reversed abortion would still be legal
Since a person is a legal definition you won't accomplish squat until you understand the Law of the Land.
I'll bet I understand the law better than you do. A law does not solve anything, many laws are passed by special interests which do not reflect the will of the people or justice or are even beneficial to society. A law without the consensus of the people is just tyranny, and abortion law in the USA does not have the consent of the people - that's why abortion is such a divisive issue.
I'm not familiar with Maryland, but Maryland is not unique in their draconian attitude. Don't go to the Maryland state authorities, try going through a religious organization. For example, Baptist Childrens Homes are in many states, they have a branch in Maryland http://bcmd.org/baptist-family-children-services although I am not familiar with it. The route you can try is to volunteer for a while (and pass the background check and take the required BCH and state classes), then foster a child through BCH, then if it works out adoption is easy. There are religious requirements, BCH is "Baptist" Childrens Homes, you have to be active in a church, have good references from religious people, do good works in the community, and not have any issues in your background (drugs, felonies, etc). One of the goals of BCH is that in many programs they do not accept government funding - which means they are not subject to government draconian decrees. And unofficially, in my state, state workers often unofficially send parents to BCH because of BCH's rapid response time (same day placement in emergencies), deep pockets, huge staff of volunteers and placement homes, and superior care.
There is a majority consensus on support for abortion so that fallacy of yours is blown away! http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/ Secondly there is no "special interests" when it comes to abortion. There are only organizations like the ACLU that UPHOLD all individual rights including your precious 2nd Amendment right to own a gun that can terminate hundreds of human lives in the space of time it takes to do a single abortion. Finally the LEGAL DEFINITION of a person is in the CONSTITUTION. If you want to change the Constitution in order to deprive women of their rights there is a procedure that you can follow that requires the majority consent of We the People. So stop whining and get busy working on changing the Law of the Land since that is the ONLY way you can achieve your "minority tyrannical" ambition to deny women their individual rights. Keep us all informed on your progress, m'kay?
Wrong. The poll does not show a consensus, not even close. It shows 53% of people are in the middle - recognizing there are some situations when abortion is an option, and other situations when it should not be allowed. When you actually look at the data, you see that the vast majority oppose abortion for convenience, but are conflicted over the hardship cases of rape, incest, life of the mother, severe birth defect. I fall in that 53%. You should read before posting. Your link actually supports my argument that abortion is not resolved, not your claim.
Why are you so vehement about controlling women? WHERE in the poll did it mention "convenience"? I honestly missed that word. Now WTF do you mean by "convenience" ? Any abortion YOU don't agree with? ALL, that is ALL, abortions are done because of "convenience", that is why they are done DUH! It is INconvenient to die in pregnancy. It is INconvenient to have a kid you don't want . It is INconvenient to have a kid you can't afford. It is Inconvenient to have a kid at the wrong time. It is inconvenient ...that ' s why ANY abortion is due to inconvenience. WHY did you think women had abortions? For fun???? NO, the "vast majority" do NOT oppose abortion. The majority has always agreed abortion should be legal no matter what they think of it...(since the majority are NOT misogynistic control freaks) The majority still believe women have the same rights as you do....why do you hate that so much ????
IF the fetus is ever deemed a person and given rights with those rights comes RESTRICTIONS. The same restriction other persons have. One of those restrictions THAT ALL PERSONS HAVE is that they cannot use another person's body to sustain their own life. You cannot force another person to give you their heart or kidney or a blood transfusion. You cannot force a woman to use her body to sustain your life. IF a woman doesn't consent to letting a fetus use her body to sustain it's life she has the right to self defense and can stop the harm in the only way possible, an abortion. Being pregnant does not take away a woman's rights, the same rights everyone else has... So you can blather on and on about how a fetus is a person but society is run by laws and the law say it isn't.....and even if that was reversed abortion would still be legal You can run from this post but you can't hide from it
Good, intelligent, logical comments on abortion: ""Personally Im against abortion, but I realize every woman's situation is different, so I mind my own business. We all need to make our own choices""" I'm not quite sure what a "careless pregnancy" is but if abortion stops "Emotionally ill equipped" people from having a kid , I'm all for it, too..
That doesn't sound fair. A stable good home doesn't mean perfect home. Many of those kids go through some horrible experiences in the foster care system. Then they complain there aren't enough people who want to adopt.
Fair enough. I happen to share your opinion that abortion is wrong and efforts to prevent it should be taken. I am always careful to ask questions before making comments on someone’s position. Your comment to me was about getting off my computer and see what is happening as if you have any knowledge of what I see. Of my 5 kids, 3 are adopted. My wife and I also have a few of what we call Bonus Children. They have a parent, but spend a lot of time with us. Saying that people who genuinely care are taking action is an irrefutable fact. You just can’t claim to care if all you’re willing to do is force women to have babies and then make them wards of the state. (At least until they’re old enough for prison.) While I may be against abortion, I cannot cross the line of forcing my beliefs on another person. The reason for your beliefs are irrelevant. It’s her uterus and her choice. Lets assume you are right and the fetus is a person with rights and those who receive or perform abortions are guilty of murder. Now what? What effect would laws have? 1. Record profits in the medical tourism industry your laws created. 2. Powerful criminals selling abortion drugs. 3. Black market abortions. 4. The few cases that are caught will add more to our prison population. Even though I strongly disagree with you, I respect your position because you are one of the few willing to be part of the solution. If someone wants an abortion there is nothing you can do about it. If someone wants to make a difference, there is nothing stopping them.
I know married couples who have had their own children then, when those children leave the nest, the couple chooses to adopt.
What would be my feelings if I was the one in the womb? Probably nothing, because other than random noise and the occasional bump, I wouldn't be aware of the outside world. Factor in the fact that long term memory doesn't start to develop in the brain until about a year to a year and a half after birth (which is why nobody remembers being born), and I don't think I would have cared much one way or the other, because you can't care about stuff you know nothing about.
A lot of the teens who are up for adoption have some serious issues too, so if you have the time and energy to devote to these kids, that's great. A lot of people do not though. Most of the teens who are up for adoption were removed from their homes for a reason, physical abuse, sexual abuse, parents with drug habits, etc. Some of them are really messed up kids, sad to say. Of course I feel bad for some who have been in the system for years. Not having a family/parents must make for a tough life.
If the unborn is a person, then she receives the same protections as any other person. What happens if a woman kills her 1 year old child? Its the same for abortion with the one exception that the life of the mother may truly be at risk and abortion is required. The practical ramifications of heavily restricting abortion (not banning it - life of the mother) are a separate issue. Do we declare that murder is acceptable simply because there will be enforcement issues?
IF the fetus is ever deemed a person and given rights with those rights comes RESTRICTIONS. The same restriction other persons have. ( DO YOU KNOW WHAT "RESTRICTION" MEANS? Doesn't look like it....) One of those restrictions THAT ALL PERSONS HAVE is that they cannot use another person's body to sustain their own life. You cannot force another person to give you their heart or kidney or a blood transfusion. You cannot force a woman to use her body to sustain your life. IF a woman doesn't consent to letting a fetus use her body to sustain it's life she has the right to self defense and can stop the harm in the only way possible, an abortion. Being pregnant does not take away a woman's rights, the same rights everyone else has... So you can blather on and on about how a fetus is a person but society is run by laws and the law say it isn't.....and even if that was reversed abortion would still be legal You can run from this post but you can't hide from it What happens when a woman kills her one year old? DUH, she's charged with murder....why is that even a question???
A 1-year old can be safely surrendered if the parent doesn't want the child. No arguments on either side on that issue. A fetus, unfortunately, cannot be safely surrendered and until an artificial womb is developed, abortion is the only way to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. We have, in fact, declared abortion legal. I don't see how a reasonable person can separate "practical ramifications" from the issue. Its easy to support laws against abortion, but that doesn't make those issues I listed go away. You said it best "A law does not solve anything"
The time a parent has to deal with the "unwanted" 1 year old is limited, it takes time to surrender the child. Its the same with the pregnant woman and the baby, once the woman gives birth she has surrendered the child. In neither case is murder necessary. Again, you are really saying that if a person is too inconvenient, then kill them. If a law does not reflect the will of the people, if the law is merely words on paper, then it is meaningless. Simply putting something in writing and using the police powers of the govt to force the unwanted law upon people accomplishes nothing productive. What's more important, the moral principle or the issues of practical implementation of that principle? Some issues, such as murder or a human right to life and equal representation, supersede the problems of their application. <> Its not really such a hard problem to resolve. The vast majority of people do not fall into the "no abortion ever" camp or the "totally unrestricted abortion" camp. Most people oppose abortion for convenience (and that's >95% of all abortions in the USA), but recognize there are situations when abortion might be an option - life of the mother, rape, severe birth defect. I suspect most people would support making abortion for convenience illegal, allowing abortion as an option for the hardship cases. The "no abortion ever"/"unrestricted abortion" extremes would go crazy, if they were ignored then this issue could be resolved.
