COUPLE ABORT IVF TWIN BOYS BECAUSE THEY WANTED A GIRL

[bears]

again - distinction without a difference.

Why not make a thread every time anyone chooses to have an abortion anywhere the world becaseu they don't want the eventual  baby?

whats the difference what the reason is that they don't want it?

Because Roe v Wade was never intended to turn into this.  Even the most liberal democrats back in the 1970's would abhor this type of behavior in the name of Roe v Wade. If the most liberal, most staunch proponent of Roe v Wade back in the 1970's, read your post, they would be disgusted.  

The reality of the situation is that society will take the laws given to them as far as they possibly can.  That is why people need to use a little bit of foresight, a little bit of sensitivity, and a lot of knowledge of our country's history when voting.  Your post is a perfect example of what conservatives were saying Roe v Wade would eventually turn into and a perfect example of what liberals were saying that it wasn't.

You seem to think that you're staying true to what your liberal ideals are by defending everything that has to do with killing unborn babies.  What you are really doing is turning the good hearted liberals who fought for Roe v Wade in an effort to help those who could not help themselves into liars.  

[Straw Man]

Because Roe v Wade was never intended to turn into this.  Even the most liberal democrats back in the 1970's would abhor this type of behavior in the name of Roe v Wade. If the most liberal, most staunch proponent of Roe v Wade back in the 1970's, read your post, they would be disgusted.  

The reality of the situation is that society will take the laws given to them as far as they possibly can.  That is why people need to use a little bit of foresight, a little bit of sensitivity, and a lot of knowledge of our country's history when voting.  Your post is a perfect example of what conservatives were saying Roe v Wade would eventually turn into and a perfect example of what liberals were saying that it wasn't.

You seem to think that you're staying true to what your liberal ideals are by defending everything that has to do with killing unborn babies.  What you are really doing is turning the good hearted liberals who fought for Roe v Wade in an effort to help those who could not help themselves into liars.  

this couple is in Australia so Roe v. Wade has nothing to do with them.

the article also says if they are not given the option to choose the sex of their child that they will come to the US to do it so apparently we allow that.

IF you're going to do IVF then I don's see why they can't do something as simple as choose the sex of their child

[tonymctones]

this couple is in Australia so Roe v. Wade has nothing to do with them.

the article also says if they are not given the option to choose the sex of their child that they will come to the US to do it so apparently we allow that.

IF you're going to do IVF then I don's see why they can't do something as simple as choose the sex of their child

if youre going to have unprotected sex then I dont see why they cant do something as simple as have the baby...

[Straw Man]

if youre going to have unprotected sex then I dont see why they cant do something as simple as have the baby...

? - no idea how this relates the the topic

[tonymctones]

? - no idea how this relates the the topic

lol bet you dont 

[bears]

this couple is in Australia so Roe v. Wade has nothing to do with them.

the article also says if they are not given the option to choose the sex of their child that they will come to the US to do it so apparently we allow that.

IF you're going to do IVF then I don's see why they can't do something as simple as choose the sex of their child

OK but the debate is still the same.  One side saying that an unborn baby has a right to live and the other side saying that it is no one's business what a woman does with her body.  The debate is obviously alive and well in Australia just like it has been in the US, hence the reason the article was written in the first place.  However, it seems that the Australian people haven't quite bought into the liberal lies about why people actually want abortion.  they still see it as a last resort option.  they still see it as a lesser evil.

The US on the other hand, has been overrun by leftist ideology and they know that we don't give a fuck why someone wants an abortion. if you want a baby dead, we'll find a way to rationalize the killing of it.  

[bears]

? - no idea how this relates the the topic

its called personal responsibility.  it's some conservative thing.

[Straw Man]

lol bet you dont 

I don't have time wade through that that house of mirrors inside your skull so go ahead and explain it for me professor

when I get home tonight we can review how your attempt to explain valid form while simultaneosly misunderstanding the very wiki page you used to support your argument

[Straw Man]

OK but the debate is still the same.  One side saying that an unborn baby has a right to live and the other side saying that it is no one's business what a woman does with her body.  The debate is obviously alive and well in Australia just like it has been in the US, hence the reason the article was written in the first place.  However, it seems that the Australian people haven't quite bought into the liberal lies about why people actually want abortion.  they still see it as a last resort option.  they still see it as a lesser evil.

The US on the other hand, has been overrun by leftist ideology and they know that we don't give a fuck why someone wants an abortion. if you want a baby dead, we'll find a way to rationalize the killing of it.  

This couple lives in Victoria who only recently changed their abortion laws so I don't really see what business it is of ours to tell someone in another country how to conduct their life or how to write their laws.

This couple will have to live with their decision.  It has no effect whatsoever on your or me

Victoria: Until 2008, Victorian abortion law was based on the Victorian Crimes Act as interpreted by the Menhennitt ruling of 1969, in the case of R v Davidson. Under the ruling, abortions were legal if necessary to preserve the woman from a serious danger to her life or health – beyond the normal dangers of pregnancy and childbirth – that would result if the pregnancy continued, and is not disproportionate to the danger being averted. Sweeping changes to abortion laws were legislated in 2008 after Premier John Brumby announced "our existing laws are out of step with community sentiment."[6] Legislation to decriminalise abortion up to 24 weeks (with abortions after that time requiring two doctors to agree that it is appropriate, based on the women's current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances[7]) passed the Lower House 49–32 after a conscience vote. It then proceeded to the Upper House[8] where it was passed unamended (23 votes to 17).[9]

[tonymctones]

I don't have time wade through that that house of mirrors inside your skull so go ahead and explain it for me professor

when I get home tonight we can review how your attempt to explain valid form while simultaneosly misunderstanding the very wiki page you used to support your argument

yesss yesss run out and go buy your post office stock  

[Straw Man]

yesss yesss run out and go buy your post office stock  

while I'm doing that go back and re-read the thread from last night and see if you can figure how you got completely twisted around and confused by the very source you used to try to make your argument

[tonymctones]

while I'm doing that go back and re-read the thread from last night and see if you can figure how you got completely twisted around and confused by the very source you used to try to make your argument

lol hahahahah nice try....

[Straw Man]

lol hahahahah nice try....

I'm serious

go study your posts and I'll catch up with you tonight

[bears]

This couple lives in Victoria who only recently changed their abortion laws so I don't really see what business it is of ours to tell someone in another country how to conduct their life or how to write their laws.

This couple will have to live with their decision.  It has no effect whatsoever on your or me

now thats just a silly post.  i'm giving my OPINION.  i'm not telling them how to conduct their life.  we are on a political message board.  i'm fairly certain that every topic you have ever discussed on this board has not been because it has had a DIRECT effect upon you. 

[Soul Crusher]

And if the govt legalized murder and I decided I am sick of your posts and kill you - would that be ethical ?

BUMP

[bears]

one more thing that I want to add.  Straw Man is giving very typical responses from someone on the left.  I am giving very typical responses from someone on the right. 

Here's something to think about.  100 years from now, maybe even 50 years from now when thousands of babies are being aborted every year because they carry the homosexual gene, the leftist rhetoric as it comes to abortion will change.  The right's will not.  On this particular issue the right stands on firm ground.  The left dances around and directs their moral compass in the direction that feels comfortable to them at the time.

[Straw Man]

one more thing that I want to add.  Straw Man is giving very typical responses from someone on the left.  I am giving very typical responses from someone on the right. 

Here's something to think about.  100 years from now, maybe even 50 years from now when thousands of babies are being aborted every year because they carry the homosexual gene, the leftist rhetoric as it comes to abortion will change.  The right's will not.  On this particular issue the right stands on firm ground.  The left dances around and directs their moral compass in the direction that feels comfortable to them at the time.

100/50/20/0  years from now no one will give a shit if you're homosexual or not

And I expect that even when they do find a gay gene that religious kooks will still claim it's a choice (as it it even mattered what other people choose to do in their private lives)

[tonymctones]

100/50/20/0  years from now no one will give a shit if you're homosexual or not

And I expect that even when they do find a gay gene that religious kooks will still claim it's a choice (as it it even mattered what other people choose to do in their private lives)

lol ppl are genetically predisposed to being violent, is it still not a choice to go hit someone?

genetic predisposition doesnt take away the choice

[Straw Man]

lol ppl are genetically predisposed to being violent, is it still not a choice to go hit someone?

genetic predisposition doesnt take away the choice

they are

I wasn't aware they found a violence gene and had proven such a thing as you're saying.  They might have clues, like they have clues about a lot of things but I wasn't aware it was a proven fact. 

btw - I couldn't care less if being gay is 100% choice.  I don't see how that makes any difference

[Soul Crusher]

BUMP

bump

[bears]

100/50/20/0  years from now no one will give a shit if you're homosexual or not

And I expect that even when they do find a gay gene that religious kooks will still claim it's a choice (as it it even mattered what other people choose to do in their private lives)

really?  no one will give a shit?  you know that for sure?  bottom line is you're guessing for the sake of your argument with me.  and the bottom line is if people start aborting because the child will be born with a predisposition to homosexuality the left will have something to say about it.  all of a sudden abortion will be a wrong choice and they will insist on "placing laws on women's bodies".  and the hypocrisy will be palpable.

also there is a plethora of evidence showing that there is a genetic predisposition towards violence and criminal behavior.  you are WRONG about that.  again you are refuting certain things simply for arguments sake.

my friend works for a bioethics non profit company that researches where we are headed with regards to all of this.  these are all issues that they are discussing.  that NEED to be discussed.  because they are a reality.  No one fighting for the freedom to have an abortion in this country ever fathomed that there would be 1.5 million a year, every year, for the next 40 years.  no one.

fortunately there are people out there who remember that and take it into account when they decide on current and future legislation.  you don't sound like you do.

[bears]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/genetics/article6919130.ece

[boonasty]

straw man why won't you answer 333's question?

[bears]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/genetics/article6919130.ece

it is scary to think that this defense could soon enter american courthouses

[Straw Man]

really?  no one will give a shit?  you know that for sure?  bottom line is you're guessing for the sake of your argument with me.  and the bottom line is if people start aborting because the child will be born with a predisposition to homosexuality the left will have something to say about it.  all of a sudden abortion will be a wrong choice and they will insist on "placing laws on women's bodies".  and the hypocrisy will be palpable.

also there is a plethora of evidence showing that there is a genetic predisposition towards violence and criminal behavior.  you are WRONG about that.  again you are refuting certain things simply for arguments sake.

my friend works for a bioethics non profit company that researches where we are headed with regards to all of this.  these are all issues that they are discussing.  that NEED to be discussed.  because they are a reality.  No one fighting for the freedom to have an abortion in this country ever fathomed that there would be 1.5 million a year, every year, for the next 40 years.  no one.

fortunately there are people out there who remember that and take it into account when they decide on current and future legislation.  you don't sound like you do.

Almost no one gives a shit now so I don't see why that would change in the future.  Also if were able to pick genetic traits in the future then so be it.  I don't give a shit what some future couple wants in there private life and I doubt anyone will either.  If people want there kids to be blond blue eyed and straight then that's their business