i guess we can all afford to trust women for one week outta the year. As long as we are all forewarned and armed.
Trust women week? How about trust men week? I am a man and I would not trust 95% of the men on this planet...at best. Whereas I would trust about 25% of the women. This planet would be FAR better off if women ran things and men just stuck with business and the military.
oh. thank goodness it's over. Jan 20 to 27 wasn't it? at ease. Don't mean they aren't planning murder in their hearts waiting for next years 'celebration'.
Sorry, gathering stats like that is subjective at best and, as I read your link, I see this...However, 7.3% of women who were currently at risk of unintended pregnancy were not using a contraceptive method So...42.7% of those 'unintended' pregnancies were by women using contraceptives. That is a significantly high failure rate. Doesn't that show that abstinence is a better option?
Sigh....Abstinence is simply not a realistic option for many. Do you expect married women to forego sex? Some education on the proper use of contraceptives would help cut the rate, such as that provided by Planned Parenthood. Some research on new and better contraceptives would also help.
Murder is not simply killing of a human being. It is unlawful killing. And laws are made of opinions. I think its OK to kill a human if the human either threatening you, or does not have a mind (embryos before 5th month, braindead humans).
Abstinence (abstaining from procreational intercourse) is 100% effective. Contraceptives are about 43% effective. There is no contest. I don't 'expect' anyone to do anything I am must stating fact. Bottom line...If you really, really, really, really don't want to get pregnant, don't have procreational sex. That will be 100% effective.
Yes that is correct. That is a bad analogy. For instance, a brain-dead human being will never be viable, a fetus will most likely be viable human being if left to develop naturally.
but it is a LEAP to claim that of those 'unintended pregnancy' MOST are 'unwanted'. see how they do it? they get questioned and they conveniently back up what they can and ignore the rest of their comment hoping we will not notice..
So I suppose that all of these women are having abortions because the baby is trying to kill them? I highly doubt that. And as for brain-dead, I mean why? What is the minimum IQ to be considered a real human? Can I kill retards and call them brain dead? Bottom line is that human is human, and unless the baby is actually threatening your life, I don't see anything that justifies murdering them in cold blood.
many things in life are not intended but that doesn't mean they are unwelcome or unwanted. I don't intend to find a million dollars on my doorstep tomorrow but will be delighted if it happens. I am not intending to have more kids but I would be overjoyed if I found myself pregnant (and so would MANY other women).
With an almost 50% chance of getting pregnant even with a contraceptive, why would a woman NOT intend to get pregnant having procreational sex? I thought women were more educated today. OR...maybe it's just YOU.
Unmarried women have 69% of unplanned pregnancies, and poor women are 4 times more likely to have an unplanned pregnancy than others. It seems unlikely that women in either group would be overjoyed by the news.
I see, so most women are nothing more than victims or just plain stupid. I think that is the feminist position though. Not mine.
Yes, a fetus WILL have a mind in the future, but it does not have it at the moment, so it is not a person yet. Future potential cannot be treated the same as actuality, because potential is subjective (even sperm and eggs have the same potential, it depends on how far in the past do you draw the line, which is subjective), so contraception is also killing potential persons which would otherwise appear, and if you dont want to commit omission bias fallacy, even refusing sex kills potential persons. Which is, as we may all agree, an absurd proposition. Ergo, potential is irrelevant.
Minimum IQ is any IQ above 0. Foetus has 0 IQ. We dont give rights to things. Retards are not braindead by far. Human itself has no value. It is human MIND that is the sole source of our value and rights. Without it, humans are just things, a biological material, no more valuable than plants or rocks. We dont even need to justify killing such humans anymore than I need to justify killing a carrot in my garden, as they dont possess a right to life, because things cannot have rights.
A woman using contraceptives doesn't INTEND to get pregnant, otherwise why would she use them? Furthermore, many people trust contraceptives more than they should.
Now that wahler managed to grace us with his ignorant and condescending tripe, back to the regularly scheduled programing, I mean topic...
Its not about intent, it is about taking risks. She took the risk, she should not be allowed to kill her child in utero because she doesn't like the outcome of her risk taking!
Why? We take risks every time we get into a car, but we would expect medical help if we were to be involved in an accident.
