women who seek abortions — Are they just lazy?

I often say that anti choicers should put their money where there mouths are.

 

And what happens if this woman recklessly gets herself pregnant again, do we have to dish out another payment? Where does it end?

We already have welfare moms. If pro-life starts paying out money to stop women having abortions, I could really see some women just taking advantage of the situation, intentionally becoming pregnant just to get a pay-out. Maybe pro-life would have to adjust the don't-have-an-abortion payments by race and income level? To still give the middle class women enough incentive not to have an abortion, but not give the poor enough incentive to intentionally get pregnant.

And what about women who might just threaten to have an abortion if they did not get paid, even though they might have otherwise not had any intention of getting an abortion? No, I do not think this idea would work.

I don't see why mothers should be allowed to effectively hold their own babies for ransom.

 

Only if you want to force her to give birth. Or you could just leave her alone and allow her to make her own choices in regards to her situation like many already do.

 

I guess you have to figure out which dog you have in the fight.

If its about the rights of the child, its a different argument from the economic one.

if its the rights of the child are: pay up, and support the child if you are anti choice, and invest in education, training and support for mothers.

if its economic - then the costs of terminating a pregnancy is hardly an impost ar all .... your objections could be directed to outcomes that would save taxpayers far more money.

 

aside from rape or incest, they could be too lazy to love or rear a child, so that is why they should have abortions.

a child should be euthanized than be forced to be carried by an uncaring, unfit, and lazy mother.

Until women become more responsible, abortions are the only answer.

 

So where does it stop?? Are you going to make it illegal for pregnant women to eat Paw Paw just in case they spontaneously abort? (Paw Paw is an abortifacient) Are you going to stop women from indulging in vigorous a in case they are pregnant?

Where do you draw the line?

 

Gee! Amazing how fast idea of prevention of "murder" of the "unborn child" is dropped as soon as money is involved

What price a human life??

 

I just love this - one of the major reasons for abortion is failure on behalf of the MALE to support the pregnant woman

Perhaps we should have a special fund set up that men have to pay into from the time they are 15 or so. If they make a woman pregnant - the money is taken from the fund to support the baby. If they "tap out" the resources of the fund then they have a choice - find someone else to pay, have their pay docked or be sterilised

Sounds fair to me! (says she sticking her tongue firmly in her cheek)

 

Your female friend isn't very smart. She should have used contraceptives instead of riding dirty.

 

I will offer an observation.
Take it for what it is worth;

People who are either militantly-opposed to abortion,
or
militantly-in-favor-of-abortion,
BOTH
tend to cling to absolute statements.
Black.
Or white.

No room for uncomfortable, gray, real, real-life, outside the box realities.
Just blacks or whites.

"Women who seek abortions are lazy."

"Women who oppose abortion are simple-minded, dogmatic, overly-religious twits."

"Girls who get pregnant are whores."

"Girls who get pregnant are victims."

"Girls who choose to have their babies are saints."

The world is full of the uncomfortable, intangible, hard-to-pigeon-hole grays.
Not everything is black and white.

It's the real world.
You can either join it, or ignore it.
Accept it, or be oblivious.

These arguments.
This thread.
Narrow-minded.
Limited.
Constrained.

In the end, not very effective.
Nor terribly compelling.

I'm still waiting to hear from somebody who doesn't have a polarized agenda.

 

How about the individual pregnant women themselves? The one's standing there saying, "I don't want to be pregnant and nobody is going to stop me from taking my own life into my own hands and make my own choices without the input of EITHER side?"

Surely the women making their own decisions for themselves are not doing so as per any agenda, but for themselves and the sake of their own lives and futures.

 

That's an interesting point.

I guess there's a reason why we don't hear from newly-pregnant women on these internet web forums.

The ones who wish to keep the baby, and raise that child, are excited, happy, a bit scared, and are extremely busy making plans for the future.
It's doubtful they have time to log onto the internet, enter web forums, and get into pi$$ing contests over their choice.

The ones about to have an abortion; The ones who got pregnant, and don't want to be pregnant, are feeling stupid, foolish, regretful, upset, a bit scared, and are extremely busy making plans for the future.
It's doubtful they have time to log onto the internet, enter web forums, and get into discussions where they are going to be called a dumb a$$ (for getting pregnant in the first place), and a murderer (for what they are about to do).

Makes a lot of sense when you sit down and think about it.

 

Who would excited and happy pregnant women get into a ******* contest over their choice WITH? Exactly WHO in a web forum would criticize a woman who chooses to continue a pregnancy? You seem confused about the pro-CHOICE movement. Pro-choicers support whatever choice a woman makes. They oppose both forced birth and forced abortion.

Yes, there are those who would blame a pregnancy entirely on the woman and demonize her for attempting to control her own reproduction. A woman in this situation is not likely to invite the self-righteous wrath of pro-lifers.

 

Cool your jets.
I wasn't making an argument for or against your admittely-passionate position.

I was just speculating. Thinking out loud.

As to your points:

There are those who would criticize a woman who chooses to have a baby.
Not on internet web forums, certainly.
But in titters on the back row of church.
On the next aisle in Walmart.

"She's already got two kids she can barely clothe and feed. What in the world does she want with another?"

"That child is just 16. Why for heaven's sake does she want to have a baby? What are her parents thinking? It'll ruin her life. She'll never finish school now."
etc, etc.

I'm not saying that those nattering nay-sayers are right, but that's the kind of thing you hear.

To your statement, "Yes, there are those who would blame a pregnancy entirely on the woman and demonize her for attempting to control her own reproduction."
I would never blame any pregnancy solely on the woman.
But in this day and age, I put MOST of the responsibility on the woman.
Men (and boys especially) rarely come to grow a sense of responsibility and accountability until they are well past their prime fathering years. Some of them think responsibly about condoms and such, but most just want to stick their d1ck into the nearest moist spot, and rarely think about the consequences.
Girls mature just a little faster, or so I have learned in my years in college studying psychology.

A girl, therefore, HAS to be the responsible one.
She HAS to be able to say no.
She HAS to take on the lions share of the responsibility for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.
She HAS to insist on taking precautions, and not rolling the dice on 'pulling-out', or playing the fertility calendar game.

You do agree, don't you?

 

There are certainly always busy bodies who second guess other people's life decisions. However, I was addressing your statement, "guess there's a reason why we don't hear from newly-pregnant women on these internet web forums."

First you said you don't blame pregnancy entirely on the woman. Then you proceeded to explain why "she HAS to be the responsible one." Boys will be boys--that's the crux of your thinking. No, I don't agree.

 

utterly amazing how 'empowered' and 'capable' these women suddenly get when pregnant! suddenly their thinking is clear and their courage bolstered!!

apparently there is some hormone released in the early stages of pregnancy because if the woman was TRULY so empowered and capable, and sure of what she wanted her future to be like....she wouldn't BE pregnant to start with.

funny how smart pregnant women are compared to the freakin' idiots drinking and dopin' and (as another poster put it) 'riding dirty'....even when they are the SAME woman...

 

Well, I have more experience in these matters than you, and I have studied human psychology longer than most people on these boards, so you are just going to have to trust me;
The girl, FOR HER OWN PROTECTION AND SAFETY has to be the more responsible one.

It's not a matter of giving boys a pass, or making excuses for them.
Far from it.

It's a matter of common sense, and an acceptance of the way of human nature.
Girls generally mature a little faster than boys.
Boys have the sex urge to insert their penis into as many vaginas as possible, and as often as possible, generally-speaking.
Girls have the urge to find love, have a monogamous exclusive relationship, eventually make a family, create a nest, again generally-speaking.

There are exceptions, of course.
There ARE young men and boys who are accountable, thoughtful, tender, giving, and responsible.
There ARE young girls who are basketball team-humping slatterns, willing to have sex with any and all comers.
But those are the exceptions, not the rule.

Accordingly, even though they BOTH bear the responsibility for an unwanted pregnancy,
THE GIRL HAS to take on the burden of MOST of the responsibility for avoiding that pregnancy.
a. she's the one who will either carry the child full term, or have to ponder abortion
and
b. she's the one who, in this sad society, will end up raising the child.
Especially in poorer, urban cultures and locales.


PS I am a father of grown daughters.
I RARELY take the side of boys, on any topic related to my girls.

 

I think many abortions are definately carried out because of money but also because folks just do not want a baby.

I do not see anything wrong with this. Why should a woman have a child when she does not want one ?

 

Murder of humans is already criminalized. The single cell at conception is not a human. It has the potential become a living human down the road but it is not one at this stage nor for a long time after.

 

May I ask what the point of this rant is? I never said anything about 'empowerment'. I was only discussing how individual women who make their own choices are not doing so as per anyone's own political agenda but only for themselves and their own lives.

 

I cannot speak for everyone who opposes abortion, but I was referring to unborn babies here, not zygotes.

Because immediately getting rid of the child requires killing it. If the woman really didn't want to have the child, she shouldn't have had sex with a sexual partner she wasn't committed to.

 

When the zygote turns into a baby?

 

More like: "nobody is going to stop me from taking my baby's life into my own hands"
The baby does not get any input into its own future. Should the decission be left up to a mother who is obviously only taking her own desires into consideration?

Selfishness is no justification for murder.

 

You say abortion is murder but you have not yet proved that it is. Please provide evidence and facts as to why abortion is murder in each stage of pregnancy, particularly by trimester if you would.

 

You would not allow input for either the the fetus or the woman.

It is a decision that does involve her profoundly, does it not?

Abortion has nothing to do with selfishness or murder. Try to stay on topic.