So... Does one humans right to convenience really outweigh another human beings actual right to live?
Leaving aside the whole Human "being" conundrum.....YES. The Human who contains the other one, can speak and think, has citizens rights, and owns the vessel the other one requires to live gets to call the shots.
YES, one human's rights give it the right to have a medical procedure to save it from inconvenience....it is done all the time. Would you be OK with being forced to give your heart to another human being to save their life? Does one human's opinion really outweigh another person's rights? You seem to think a fetus is a person. If it was it wouldn't have the right to use another's body to sustain it's life. You and I don't have that right, why should a fetus?
Both are equally human beings and as such it seems that you are in favor of ONE human being owning another one which is slavery which is unconstitutional. - - - Updated - - - How did the fetus end up in that position? We are not allowed to put another human beings life in danger and just walk away, to do so is murder. - - - Updated - - - By the way, a fetus is undoubtedly a person, without question...
No, a fetus is not legally a person. Why couldn't you answer the questions ?? Would you be OK with being forced to give your heart to another human being to save their life? Does one human's opinion really outweigh another person's rights? You seem to think a fetus is a person. If it was it wouldn't have the right to use another's body to sustain it's life. You and I don't have that right, why should a fetus?
This is not the correct question to ask. I actually agree with Tecoyah here: The mother is in de facto control of the unborn child. That's the way it's always been, that's the way it'll always be. And I say this as someone who believes an abortion is NOT the route a woman should choose to go in 95% of the situations she finds herself in. But it is ultimately the mothers decision whether to continue the pregnancy. Prior to abortions being made legal, it wasn't the case that there were no abortions, it was rather the case that abortions took place in back alleys, performed by unqualified people, at great risk to the mother. It appears that you and I would both prefer to see a reduction in the number of abortions performed. In order to do that, I suggest we work towards reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies that occur every year, encourage parents to stay engaged within the lives of their teenaged kids, and educate women about other options available to them (including easy ways of giving the child up for adoption). That's how I'd approach the issue, for what it's worth.
Sounded good until you got to "" and educate women about other options available to them (including easy ways of giving the child up for adoption). "" There is only one other option to not wanting to raise a kid, adoption...and it isn't easy . It takes 9 months out of a woman's life, permanently affects her body, may cause death, does cause pain and enormous financial loss, possible job loss, educational and/or career setbacks .(all of which YOU won't pay for)..and uh, women know what adoption is, they don't need someone "educating" ( pressuring them) to adopt out the kid.... - - - Updated - - - BTW, forcing women to give birth is slavery
Yes - That's why we have the ability to conveniently bomb people in lands far far away of we don't like them. Just think if we couldn't shoot people as a convenient way of feeling safer! People like f##king for the fun of it and the results can be very inconvenient.
And so begins the conundrum and the massive ego example that follows. We begin the unfortunate process of watching one individual claim they have such incredible importance that the opinions they hold must be used to guide the lives of perfect strangers in order to save the life of a developing human that has no ability to think or function as an independent organism. The actual basis for this sad display would be the aforementioned self important egotistical malady that unfortunately inflicts such unpleasant mental disability....and he does not even see the effects. As an aside HE is not female and gets to avoid the damage to freedoms he wishes to inflict on HER.
I see. So for you, abortion remains an acceptable form of birth control. Well there, we'll simply have to agree to disagree, because for me, abortion is not and will never be an acceptable form of birth control. If a woman gets pregnant, it's normally because of (a) what she and a male partner did (engage in sexual intercourse) and (b) what she and a male partner didn't do (make use of the many forms of birth control now available). The question of "Oops, what do we do now?" rarely leads to clear thinking. So yes, educate the mother-to-be that there are actually people who would help her take the baby to term in exchange for adopting the child once delivered.
Yes, abortion IS a form of birth control.....Obviously. Fortunately that YOU disagree with it is not relevant to anyone beyond the woman you impregnate. Check your Ego at the door snowflake and stop trying to force strangers to live their lives for YOU.
OK, so don't have one , just don't try to legislate your opinion. OMG! I know anti-Choicers don't have any respect for women but that's a doozy! You really think a woman becomes stupid because she became pregnant !!!!?? Or do you think women are always stupid and need your "special guidance" when they become pregnant So women are so stupid , according to you, that they don't know adoption exists........mind blowing....it would seem you sure don't know many women....
"""That's why we have the ability to conveniently bomb people in lands far far away of we don't like them."" Great Point! The point anti-Choicers overlook or try to avoid because it's INCONVENIENT....
You needn't comment about what I actually say, but I take exception to your representing me as something that I'm not. So I'll try to it state this as clearly as I can for you: the choice of whether or not to take a pregnancy to term belongs with the woman. That's the way it has always been, that's the way it will always be. Period. This has been and will be true, whether or not abortions are done in a medical facility or in a back alley. I believe it is better for a woman to be able to have the procedure done in a medical facility. That said, I believe we should do everything we can to keep the number of abortions performed as low as possible. Period. If you'd like to discuss these positions, I'm happy to oblige. If not, fine. But please don't misrepresent my positions, because that just ticks me off.
Here is your comment: """If a woman gets pregnant, it's normally because of (a) what she and a male partner did (engage in sexual intercourse) and (b) what she and a male partner didn't do (make use of the many forms of birth control now available). The question of "Oops, what do we do now?" rarely leads to clear thinking"""" That statement indicates that you think women can't think when they become pregnant and need your "special guidance' to lead them to adoption because they are too stupid to have thought of it themselves. IF that is not what you meant then feel free to explain.
Well, two things. (1) If a woman becomes pregnant unintentionally, that would seem to be a pretty good indication that she's not acting in very smart ways to begin with. You disagree? (2) I believe it's quite possible for a pregnant woman not to be aware of the number of people who would be willing to adopt a healthy baby. You disagree? Please stop telling me what I think, even as I attempt to tell you what I think...
Many women throughout the history of the world have gotten pregnant unintentionally. So do you think all women who have unintentional pregnancies are stupid? Many women who have used birth control have gotten pregnant. Do you think they are stupid? Women are under no obligation to use birth control and may know exactly what chances they are taking and don't care because if they get pregnant they have every right to have an abortion. Yes, there are people willing to adopt a healthy white perfect baby....many in the system NEVER get adopted. Women are under no obligation to provide others with children. In your desperate need to "educate" these poor helpless stupid women do you also inform them of what pregnancy entails? Do you tell her it's 9 months out of her life which includes temporary and permanent damage to her body, considerable pain, financial loss, possible job loss, education and career setbacks, the possible trauma of giving up a kid...all to provide someone else with a kid....Do you tell these women (that you think you have a right to "counsel" )all that? Do you give them lots of money and drive them to the doctor appointments and fill in for them at work when they can't work ???? I am not telling you what to think, I'm telling you to think.
BTW, IF you really want to reduce the number of abortions petition your Republican congressman to quit trying to close down clinics where women can obtain accessible, affordable birth control Petition drug companies to make SAFE, affordable, effective birth control.
Oh look! Another claim to care about human life. I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You may care more deeply than just posting on forums. Once they are born, they are still unable to survive on their own for at least another 18 to 26 years. How many have you adopted?
A woman does not have to be stupid for mistakes to happen. However, they should be encouraged to act responsibly. So basically you'd prefer to not have women act responsibly. I understand. Ah, I was wondering how long it would be before you called me a racist. Ok, so what color am I? Never said they were. This is part of the first suggestion I made, which you chose to ignore. "I suggest we work towards reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies that occur every year, encourage parents to stay engaged within the lives of their teenaged kids...". You seem to think a woman is too stupid to understand that she needs to take responsibility for her actions. Me, I merely suggest we offer supportive reminders of the very important fact that women are responsible for what they do.
Funny how you think only women have to be "encouraged" as if they're children.You never mention how men should be encouraged to have vasectomies to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Are you saying only women should be responsible? And yes, even for people who act responsibly mistakes happen. I'm sure though that you have never made a mistake. . No, I hold no delusions that I am responsible for others......I prefer that people be free to act as they choose....even you. Ah, I'm wondering when your comprehension skills will improve. I NEVER called you a racist . Here is what I wrote: """Yes, there are people willing to adopt a healthy white perfect baby....many in the system NEVER get adopted."" POINT OUT where EXACTLY I called you a racist. That exists only in your mind. And I never said you did, I stated a fact. (That reading comprehension thing again) . You seem to think women are so stupid they need you to tell them what their responsibilities are. . Why? Unless you think women are too stupid or childlike that they need your assistance with life..... Gee, why don't you remind men of the very important fact that they are responsible for what they do? AND some people, myself included, find it very responsible to abort a pregnancy if one can't afford, or doesn't want, a kid. BUT I prefer to let others decide for themselves what is or isn't responsible, I don't have a control or god issue. Have you contacted Republicans yet to petition for them to stop closing clinics where women can get accessible, affordable BIRTH CONTROL??????
It would be good to know how many of these posters who are blubbering on about adoption actually have adopted any kids. They think having a kid and adopting it out is so easy peasy....so why haven't they adopted any? It's got to be easier than having one....don't they know what their responsibilities are?? Let's sit back and wait for the excuses, excuses, excuses.....
True. So many claims to care about human life, but not one willing to participate in caring for a child.
It seems very clear they very much care as long as it is still inside a woman....afterward it's on it's own. Strange us it not how they only care about "Babies" until they actually become one?
