You must have edited after I quoted. I didn't see that last sentence. Adoption as an alternative to abortion? I'm sure there are plenty of folks who would love to have a baby and can't. I think it would be a great idea to start vetting them now and have a list. They could pay for the baby and birth with their insurance, as if it was their own. Mothers do not want to carry a child to term. There is much more to this they don't tell anyone. The easiest way is abstinence. Children having children is a bad idea for society. This abortion fad is bad for social security and is the reason for immigration at such high rates. The government is a business and is losing money as the population declines. They know they have to have immigration to offset this. That's why we need a better pathway to citizenship, and now. Not ten years from now. Knowing children won't stop having sex, the best way to prevent abortion is to prevent pregnancy with contraceptives. IUDs seem to do very well. I don't like the pollution of our water systems with those chemicals. No one talks about that. Men drink those in tap water. It's not good. No one seems to care about men. Families are needed in this country. They are good for society and the economy. One parent staying home is a great way to live and that's gone. Why is it great? The other parent used to get a higher pay. They pay the same to two, now. So, it wasn't a great solution after all. When two adults work together and have like minds, children are healthier mentally and physically. One parent of a healthy couple teaching and caring for the children is ideal for instilling great values and character. It's too complicated for me to figure out. Too many societal changes have occurred. I'm not saying they were bad. I'm saying they had effects no one foresaw and now we have new issues which are more complicated. With all the atheists today, it's almost impossible to have a conscience. Religious beliefs of Christianity in it's various forms curtailed out of wedlock pregnancy. Advancements in science created the birth control methods of today. Not having them in years gone by and living in shame was a deterrent to sex out of wedlock. Christianity was a deterrent. I don't know what is today. Everyone thinks they have a right to sex and it is glamourized. It isn't special any more. Along with that, women seem to have less respect in the dating world. They are pumped and dumped and seem to like it to some extent. Others are completely disgusted with it and don't bother dating. It's a strange time in history. We have gone backward to Roman and Greek style society. I just don't know anymore. It's too complicated for me.
What about the botched abortion where the baby is born alive and either killed or left to die???? Explain that!!!!!!!!!!!!
Abortion is legal, you can't fine someone for doing it. Plus, you can't really get away with fining on person for someone else' actions. The mother is the one who chooses whether or not to have an abortion. The choice is solely on her hands, not the fathers'.
It might be better to place all girls who start menstruation on a list and give them IUDs, until they can apply for a child or reach a certain age, like 27. That's a hell of a thought. It would slow the legal murder of babies. It would prevent victims of rape through incest or strangers from the trauma of pregnancy. Hell, it's free contraception. If they don't get it changed on time, they have to pay for their own abortion. They can seek 50% from the sperm donor. I think I could agree to that according to my beliefs. I think atheists could, too.
Hmmm why IUDs? Especially since that can cause long term complications Easier to sterilise males then the men can make a withdrawal of banked sperm if and when they have proven fit to father a child
How about you explain it Know of about 2 cases out of millions of abortions Most abortions now occur within the first 10 weeks Lots of luck considering a 8 week old foetus as a "baby" and as for survival.........
IUDs work better than the pill. Their use can be monitored, unlike the pill, which has been abused plenty since it's creation. What can cause long term complications? I thought the ones like Morena were safe long term? Why not the pill? It can be used to control a sperm donor, and has. I don't understand the suggestion of permanent contraception of men. Maybe check your emotions at the door? Looks very safe compared to unwanted pregnancy. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/iud
Why all the burden on the ladies?? Perhaps they should create a pill for men where it rendered the sperm unhealthy for the duration where he wishes the woman not to get pregnant.
Why all the burden on the ladies to prevent pregnancy? Because they can get pregnant. lol No, seriously, I don't know of any contraceptives for men that can be monitored. If there are some that are as effective as those for women, please post a link. Plus, this thread is about abortion prevention or curtailment.
It's called "keep it holstered until you are ready to be a daddy." Works 100% of the time Oh...and there isn't such a thing as abortion "prevention." Never gonna happen.
Contraception = Abortion Prevention = Abstinence You have a better chance of someone taking a pill, having an IUD inserted, or wearing a condom than you do of them being abstinent. I agree with you in a perfect world. This world or rather, our western society is far from perfect.
In which case you would be all for providing free long acting contraceptives that reduce unwanted pregnancies to less that 1%, right? http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1110855#t=article https://www.self.com/story/planned-parenthood-texas-donation-larcs
Please provide CREDIBLE medical evidence of that occurring. No, lifesitenews does not count as a credible source and neither do the anti-abortion disinformation sites.
Only if they are mandatory and monitored, and started at the onset of menstruation for all except those parents signing a contract they will not be getting an abortion, will pay for the baby through their insurance or personal funds and raise the child or find willing parents for adoption who will pay for the medical expenses. Breach of contract will be under penalty of law.
Sounds unnecessarily onerous to me. For starters it requires a doctor to provide the LARC so it is automatically monitored anyway. Secondly the onset of menstruation is usually at least a couple of years BEFORE sexual activity begins and it would require the permission of the parents. I am sure that some parents would have objections on various grounds to that requirement. Then there is the fact that there will still be failures that necessitate an abortion if the woman concerned so chose. It would be the height of stupidity to force anyone to raise an unwanted child that they could not afford. There is absolutely no need to impose that burden on anyone, including the child. Lastly there is no way that what is proposed would ever get through Congress and if it did it would fail in the courts because it violates privacy and reproductive rights.
Which would have the additional advantage in that very few men would admit to it if the government was overtaxing them
I don't want to pay for abortions. I know many say we don't, but I am sure we do. I've looked it up. It will not be monitored sufficiently unless the records are checked. Those abortions due to failures can be paid for by the parents of the parties having intercourse. Those pregnancies caused by rape from incest or strangers will not be prevented unless contraception is used, otherwise adding undue burden to the child and parents. Those who decide they do not want to use the contraception will have to be made aware of the consequences of their choices, which would include the responsibilities and costs of raising a child. Being parents, I would guess they'd already have a little inkling of what is involved. At what age do you believe a human has reproductive rights? It seems we avoid responsibilities rather than addressing them.
I've got an idea. Why don't we just do what the Founding Fathers intended and leave abortion up to the women getting it or not. It really NOBODY's business but theirs unless it's within the parameters where the fetus is seen as viable outside the mother. IMO it's nobody's business right until the baby is born, but the SCOTUS says different.
