Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Deicide on November 16, 2008, 02:55:29 PM
-
those unwanted children.
Religious folk: what do you say? Are you willing to adopt all those children who have been saved from 'murder'? You know it is your duty.
-
So you're obviously a member of what will someday no doubt be known as "The Bailout Generation."
I guess the words "personal responsibility and accountability" have no place in your vocabulary.
-
So you're obviously a member of what will someday no doubt be known as "The Bailout Generation."
I guess the words "personal responsibility and accountability" have no place in your vocabulary.
A girl is brutally raped and she should be forced to have the child and raise it? No, I don't believe in that kind of "personal responsibility and accountability"; do you?
-
(http://www.recyclethis.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/wire_hanger.jpg) :-X
-
(http://www.recyclethis.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/wire_hanger.jpg) :-X
fuck, I guess I'm twisted because this made me laugh :) :-\
-
(http://www.recyclethis.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/wire_hanger.jpg) :-X
Did I miss something?
-
fuck, I guess I'm twisted because this made me laugh :) :-\
lol
-
fuck, I guess I'm twisted because this made me laugh :) :-\
It is funny.
The thing is... people who do not want the little shit stain for what ever reason will find a way to abort the pregnancy. Change in law will not make a difference.
These religious nutjobs would never accept the responsibility of raising these kids. Just another example of them telling everyone else how they should live without obeying every rule themselves.
-
It is funny.
The thing is... people who do not want the little shit stain for what ever reason will find a way to abort the pregnancy. Change in law will not make a difference.
These religious nutjobs would never accept the responsibility of raising these kids. Just another example of them telling everyone else how they should live without obeying every rule themselves.
Big time word.
-
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
Rape and incest are almost negligible reasons for abortion according to 2004 stats, so taking it out of the equation the reasons given by women are matters of personal responsibility. Why not teach people to be smarter and safer before they spread there legs? Since the massive liberal invasion since the 1960's, people, especially my generation 18-25 years old, know they have this safety net so they are not responsible. I personally know 10 girls who had abortions before the age of 19, two having multiple abortions. They all admitted to having unprotected sex or constantly not taking their pill correctly. I wonder how much the contraceptive shots are because they should give that shit out to the young dumb girls roaming the country.
-
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
Rape and incest are almost negligible reasons for abortion according to 2004 stats, so taking it out of the equation the reasons given by women are matters of personal responsibility. Why not teach people to be smarter and safer before they spread there legs? Since the massive liberal invasion since the 1960's, people, especially my generation 18-25 years old, know they have this safety net so they are not responsible. I personally know 10 girls who had abortions before the age of 19, two having multiple abortions. They all admitted to having unprotected sex or constantly not taking their pill correctly. I wonder how much the contraceptive shots are because they should give that shit out to the young dumb girls roaming the country.
From the link:
Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in "hard cases" are estimated as follows: in cases of rape or incest, 0.3%; in cases of risk to maternal health or life, 1%; and in cases of fetal abnormality, 0.5%. About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons.
-
From the link:
Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in "hard cases" are estimated as follows: in cases of rape or incest, 0.3%; in cases of risk to maternal health or life, 1%; and in cases of fetal abnormality, 0.5%. About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons.
exactly
A girl is brutally raped and she should be forced to have the child and raise it? No, I don't believe in that kind of "personal responsibility and accountability"; do you?
horrible reasoning for allowing all to have abortions at will.
-
those unwanted children.
Religious folk: what do you say? Are you willing to adopt all those children who have been saved from 'murder'? You know it is your duty.
your arguement is ignorant im sure your against poverty and homelessness but im sure you dont let stray bums sleep in your house or give half you paycheck away to homelss do you?
-
It has nothing to do with someone's rights, so many people have gotten too caught up into the idea of "it's my right to..." (fill in the blank)
It all boils down to those that are pro-choice do not believe it is a life they are taking...the few that do believe this assume they have the "right" to take it. Pro lifers believe it is a life that is being taken and is no different then murder.
Point being, the question of this thread is useless. The only thing that will change anything is if everyone were to agree on it being taking a life or not.
Personally, I don't see why someone who is pregnant with an unwanted baby (however she got pregnant) cannot simply give up the baby for adoption. Sure, maybe the baby never ends up getting adopted and grows up in an orphanage, but at least the child's life wasn't taken and the child now has its own opportunity to make his or her life a success or failure.
-
those unwanted children.
Religious folk: what do you say? Are you willing to adopt all those children who have been saved from 'murder'? You know it is your duty.
I'm a Libertarian and not what I'd call religious and I still think this is wrong. If people can't accept the responsibility of pregnancy and children then they shouldn't engage in the adult activity of having sex. IMO, this is just another example of people failing to take responsibility for their actions.
But, hey, whatever placates their conscious (or lack of).
-
From the link:
Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in "hard cases" are estimated as follows: in cases of rape or incest, 0.3%; in cases of risk to maternal health or life, 1%; and in cases of fetal abnormality, 0.5%. About 98% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons.
Amen...
Abort the fuck out of 'em... If I knocked some chick up, I'd definitely pay for her to abort it.
Bam!
Guess what gang... Most people are still cool with Abortion... It's overwhelming pro-choice these days... Well, except for you religious old types.
-
It has nothing to do with someone's rights, so many people have gotten too caught up into the idea of "it's my right to..." (fill in the blank)
It all boils down to those that are pro-choice do not believe it is a life they are taking...the few that do believe this assume they have the "right" to take it. Pro lifers believe it is a life that is being taken and is no different then murder.
Point being, the question of this thread is useless. The only thing that will change anything is if everyone were to agree on it being taking a life or not.
Personally, I don't see why someone who is pregnant with an unwanted baby (however she got pregnant) cannot simply give up the baby for adoption. Sure, maybe the baby never ends up getting adopted and grows up in an orphanage, but at least the child's life wasn't taken and the child now has its own opportunity to make his or her life a success or failure.
If it were simply a matter of snapping one's fingers and having this occur... no doubt there would be more babies available for adoption, ...but before that can occur... a woman must go through the ordeal of a pregnancy and childbirth, which is extremely traumatic to the body. If she doesn't want to have a child, ...chances are pretty great she also does not want to experience her hair falling out in clumps, her teeth falling out, stretch marks all over her body, months of nausea, bloating, backache, infirmity, not to mention all the emotional, psychological, and physical trauma associated with pregnancy as well. When a fetus is capable of sustaining life on it's own, that's one thing... until then, it is technically speaking no more than a parasite, and women have the right to choose what occurs within their own bodies.
You are arguing for a child, ...but it is not a child, ...it is a parasite, that has the potential to grow into a child.
-
Amen...
Abort the fuck out of 'em... If I knocked some chick up, I'd definitely pay for her to abort it.
Bam!
Guess what gang... Most people are still cool with Abortion... It's overwhelming pro-choice these days... Well, except for you religious old types.
Prove it. I've looked for statistics a couple times within the past week and here is what I found:
Poll: 60 Percent Oppose All, Most Abortions; 28% of "Pro-Choice" are Pro-Life
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 14, 2008
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new national poll of Americans finds a large majority take one of three pro-life positions opposing all or most abortions. The survey also finds more than one-quarter of people who say they are "pro-choice" on abortion really take a pro-life position against abortions.
The Marist College Institute of Public Opinion conducted the survey between September 24 and October 3.
Some 60 percent of Americans say abortions should never be allowed or only in the rarest of circumstances, such as rape and incest, that constitute less than two percent of all abortions nationwide.
The Marist survey showed 13 percent say abortion should never be permitted, another 15 percent say abortions should only be allowed to save the life of the mother, and 32 percent say abortions should be allowed in that rare case and when the mother is a victim of rape or incest.
Just 40 percent took one of three pro-abortion positions and only 8 percent agreed with Barack Obama's position that abortions should be allowed any time during pregnancy for any reason.
Another 8 percent believed abortions should be allowed any time during the first 6 months of pregnancy and 24 percent say they should be allowed only in the first trimester.
The results showed the terms pro-life and "pro-choice" are confusing to a large percentage of Americans. Even though the survey found 60 percent of respondents took a pro-life position against all or most abortions, 50 percent of Americans called themselves "pro-choice" while 44 percent said they were pro-life.
In fact, the Marist poll found 5 percent of people who self-identified as "pro-choice" said abortions should never be permitted, 3 percent said only to save the life of the mother and 20 percent said only in cases of the life of the mother, rape or incest.
In other words, 28 percent of Americans who call themselves "pro-choice" actually take a pro-life position opposing 98 percent or more abortions.
The poll also revealed that only 15% of those describing themselves as "pro-choice" favored unrestricted abortion throughout a pregnancy as another 71 percent said they favored more abortion limits.
The pro-life group Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal order, asked Marist to commission the poll and Carl Anderson, the head of the group, commented on the results.
He said they are "indicative of the fact that term 'pro-choice' - when applied broadly - needlessly polarizes the discussion of abortion and masks the fact that there is broad consensus among Americans that abortion should be significantly restricted."
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4446.html
-
It is funny.
These religious nutjobs would never accept the responsibility of raising these kids. Just another example of them telling everyone else how they should live without obeying every rule themselves.
This comment is laughable and makes no sense. How is not taking care of someone kid contradict a believe in the prevention killing of an innocent child?
The other thing that is funny about this thread is that there is a waiting list in this country to adopt infants.
What I really really dont understand is why there are so many damn abortions? I have been with my wife for like 16 years and we have had two kids both planned. how hard is it to just use birth control.. I mean WTF!
-
If it were simply a matter of snapping one's fingers and having this occur... no doubt there would be more babies available for adoption, ...but before that can occur... a woman must go through the ordeal of a pregnancy and childbirth, which is extremely traumatic to the body. If she doesn't want to have a child, ...chances are pretty great she also does not want to experience her hair falling out in clumps, her teeth falling out, stretch marks all over her body, months of nausea, bloating, backache, infirmity, not to mention all the emotional, psychological, and physical trauma associated with pregnancy as well. When a fetus is capable of sustaining life on it's own, that's one thing... until then, it is technically speaking no more than a parasite, and women have the right to choose what occurs within their own bodies.
You are arguing for a child, ...but it is not a child, ...it is a parasite, that has the potential to grow into a child.
You obviously dont have kids do you? It simply amazes me that any woman (or anyone for that matter) can call a child a parasite.... I love how people dehumanize a child before a certain point so that they can justify it..
OMG im gonna get strech marks and my boobs will sag more oh no! I better kill this baby. seriously? lol.
oh and by your definition, if some guy takes a baseball bat to a 3 month pregnant womans stomach thats not murder right? I mean the child couldnt live outside the womb?
-
If it were simply a matter of snapping one's fingers and having this occur... no doubt there would be more babies available for adoption, ...but before that can occur... a woman must go through the ordeal of a pregnancy and childbirth, which is extremely traumatic to the body. If she doesn't want to have a child, ...chances are pretty great she also does not want to experience her hair falling out in clumps, her teeth falling out, stretch marks all over her body, months of nausea, bloating, backache, infirmity, not to mention all the emotional, psychological, and physical trauma associated with pregnancy as well. When a fetus is capable of sustaining life on it's own, that's one thing... until then, it is technically speaking no more than a parasite, and women have the right to choose what occurs within their own bodies.
You are arguing for a child, ...but it is not a child, ...it is a parasite, that has the potential to grow into a child.
As I said above, it all boils down to if you believe you're taking a life or not. If someone is convinced 100% that the fetus inside of them is a living human being, then no person with a hint of morality or conviction would terminate the pregnancy...and the opposite applies as well, if someone does not believe the fetus is a living human being, then sure, terminating the pregnancy isn't that big of a deal.
Do I hate people who have had abortions? Of course not...my girl friend had an abortion years before we met when she was 18...it is something that she now regrets and has to live with for the rest of her life. She has said if she knew what she knows now there is no way she would have done it.
jaguarenterprises, it's quite obvious that you and I have very different views on a lot of things, but for whatever it's worth I enjoy discussing and arguing things with you...doesn't piss me off that we don't agree at all and I hope it doesn't you...because I thoroughly enjoy it :)
-
You obviously dont have kids do you? It simply amazes me that any woman (or anyone for that matter) can call a child a parasite.... I love how people dehumanize a child before a certain point so that they can justify it..
It's not a child until it's born. Until then it is a zygote... a blob of cells, ...a parasite that survives because it has a host to feed off.
OMG im gonna get strech marks and my boobs will sag more oh no! I better kill this baby. seriously? lol.
oh and by your definition, if some guy takes a baseball bat to a 3 month pregnant womans stomach thats not murder right? I mean the child couldnt live outside the womb?
it would be aggravated assault
-
It's not a child until it's born. Until then it is a zygote... a blob of cells, ...a parasite that survives because it has a host to feed off.
it would be aggravated assault
*They have heartbeats
*They have brain waves activity the same as someone outside the womb
*Sound wave testing has proved that these "zygote(s)" murmur, cry and giggle while in the womb
*Their motor skills are functioning...obviously if there is brain activity.
*They can get sick, only living beings can get sick
One thing that I can't understand how some people can ignore. The baby is born and immediately knows who its mother is...a brand new born baby will always be calmer in its mothers arms then anyone else. Some would argue it's pure instinct...but it has been in the mothers womb for 9 months...and if all the above bullet points are true...and they are facts, then it should be no surprise that the baby knows who it's mother is...it's been a living being with its mother for 9 months.
-
*They have heartbeats
*They have brain waves activity the same as someone outside the womb
*Sound wave testing has proved that these "zygote(s)" murmur, cry and giggle while in the womb
*Their motor skills are functioning...obviously if there is brain activity.
*They can get sick, only living beings can get sick
One thing that I can't understand how some people can ignore. The baby is born and immediately knows who its mother is...a brand new born baby will always be calmer in its mothers arms then anyone else. Some would argue it's pure instinct...but it has been in the mothers womb for 9 months...and if all the above bullet points are true...and they are facts, then it should be no surprise that the baby knows who it's mother is...it's been a living being with its mother for 9 months.
There's a difference between a zygote, and a fetus, and an infant.
-
This comment is laughable and makes no sense. How is not taking care of someone kid contradict a believe in the prevention killing of an innocent child?
Because as a Christian YOU have to step up to the plate and take responsibility for your faith. If you are truly against abortion then YOU must be the one to support these little bastards that someone didn't want. It may sound harsh but Abortion has made many lives better.
-
It's not a child until it's born. Until then it is a zygote... a blob of cells, ...a parasite that survives because it has a host to feed off.
it would be aggravated assault
Usually homicide if the child died. Explain to the father and mother of that dead child that it was just assault.
It's true though. These Hollywood women would rather adopt some foreign baby than a baby from here or God forbid actually have a baby and possibly ruin their body. Big whoop.
Windsor, why don't you tell the celebs to adopt kids from here? They have the money to do it. Christians/Catholics believe in the life of the child, unlike people who want to have sex with no consequences. What happened to personal responsibility? Abortion is one of the many reasons why men and women don't engage in smart or safe sexual practices.
-
A girl is brutally raped and she should be forced to have the child and raise it? No, I don't believe in that kind of "personal responsibility and accountability"; do you?
No, of course not... but as has been pointed out already, that's a very extreme example that accounts for a very tiny percentage of all abortions that are performed.
-
If the male sex bore the responsibility of carrying a fetus to term and giving birth,
...abortions would be available on demand at every 7-11 and jiffy-lube across America.
-
Prove it. I've looked for statistics a couple times within the past week and here is what I found:
Poll: 60 Percent Oppose All, Most Abortions; 28% of "Pro-Choice" are Pro-Life
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 14, 2008
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new national poll of Americans finds a large majority take one of three pro-life positions opposing all or most abortions. The survey also finds more than one-quarter of people who say they are "pro-choice" on abortion really take a pro-life position against abortions.
The Marist College Institute of Public Opinion conducted the survey between September 24 and October 3.
Some 60 percent of Americans say abortions should never be allowed or only in the rarest of circumstances, such as rape and incest, that constitute less than two percent of all abortions nationwide.
The Marist survey showed 13 percent say abortion should never be permitted, another 15 percent say abortions should only be allowed to save the life of the mother, and 32 percent say abortions should be allowed in that rare case and when the mother is a victim of rape or incest.
Just 40 percent took one of three pro-abortion positions and only 8 percent agreed with Barack Obama's position that abortions should be allowed any time during pregnancy for any reason.
Another 8 percent believed abortions should be allowed any time during the first 6 months of pregnancy and 24 percent say they should be allowed only in the first trimester.
The results showed the terms pro-life and "pro-choice" are confusing to a large percentage of Americans. Even though the survey found 60 percent of respondents took a pro-life position against all or most abortions, 50 percent of Americans called themselves "pro-choice" while 44 percent said they were pro-life.
In fact, the Marist poll found 5 percent of people who self-identified as "pro-choice" said abortions should never be permitted, 3 percent said only to save the life of the mother and 20 percent said only in cases of the life of the mother, rape or incest.
In other words, 28 percent of Americans who call themselves "pro-choice" actually take a pro-life position opposing 98 percent or more abortions.
The poll also revealed that only 15% of those describing themselves as "pro-choice" favored unrestricted abortion throughout a pregnancy as another 71 percent said they favored more abortion limits.
The pro-life group Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal order, asked Marist to commission the poll and Carl Anderson, the head of the group, commented on the results.
He said they are "indicative of the fact that term 'pro-choice' - when applied broadly - needlessly polarizes the discussion of abortion and masks the fact that there is broad consensus among Americans that abortion should be significantly restricted."
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4446.html
Seriously BB... You're going to quote "Lifenews.com" to show that I'm wrong?
Really?
HAHAHA!!!
-
If the male sex bore the responsibility of carrying a fetus to term and giving birth,
...abortions would be available on demand at every 7-11 and jiffy-lube across America.
I'd be willing to bet that you're right...there would be some out there that would change their opinion rather quickly. Even so, "what if's" don't make something right.
...might as well add this...there would probably be some pro choice women out there who would change their view if your "What if" were true.
-
Seriously BB... You're going to quote "Lifenews.com" to show that I'm wrong?
Really?
HAHAHA!!!
"The Marist College Institute of Public Opinion conducted the survey between September 24 and October 3." Now what?
And what about this?
Two polls were released in May 2007 asking Americans "With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?" A CNN poll found 45% said pro-choice and 50% said pro-life.Within the following week, a Gallup poll found 49% responding pro-choice and 45% pro-life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-choice#United_States
There is also the poll I quoted for you last week, which showed a majority of Americans favor at least some restrictions on abortion. That makes three polls that do not support your claim that "Most people are still cool with Abortion... It's overwhelming pro-choice these days... Well, except for you religious old types."
Like I said, prove it.
-
This thread is hardcore.
-
"The Marist College Institute of Public Opinion conducted the survey between September 24 and October 3." Now what?
And what about this?
Two polls were released in May 2007 asking Americans "With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?" A CNN poll found 45% said pro-choice and 50% said pro-life.Within the following week, a Gallup poll found 49% responding pro-choice and 45% pro-life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-choice#United_States
There is also the poll I quoted for you last week, which showed a majority of Americans favor at least some restrictions on abortion. That makes three polls that do not support your claim that "Most people are still cool with Abortion... It's overwhelming pro-choice these days... Well, except for you religious old types."
Like I said, prove it.
The 2008 votes are more proof than any of these articles Beach.
Anti-abortion efforts fizzle
California voters rejected a ballot measure that would have required doctors to notify parents before performing an abortion on a minor. The defeat of Proposition 4 marks the third time in four years that supporters of the measure have failed to limit abortions for teenage girls.
The initiative was similar to laws in 35 states and would also have required a two-day waiting period before a minor could get an abortion. Opponents said it was a thinly disguised attempt to chip away at abortion rights.
Elsewhere, voters in Colorado and South Dakota rejected measures that could have led to sweeping bans of abortion, and Washington became only the second state — after Oregon — to offer terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide.
The Colorado measure, which was defeated soundly, would have defined life as beginning at conception. Its opponents said the proposal could lead to the outlawing of some types of birth control as well as abortion.
Minus California, those are Totally RED states... This is the religious groups havens... and yet they were defeated in each one.
How are you going to sit here and talk to me about Polls, when voters are proving my point?
Remember that polls are once again not talking to most young people... Polls only call land lines and young people in the US do not use land lines.
-
There's a difference between a zygote, and a fetus, and an infant.
You are kidding yourself lady.
-
If the male sex bore the responsibility of carrying a fetus to term and giving birth,
...abortions would be available on demand at every 7-11 and jiffy-lube across America.
This is a completely rediculous claim that could never be substantiated.
I tell you one thing. Guys would be more dilligent about wearing condoms.
-
This is a completely rediculous claim that could never be substantiated.
I tell you one thing. Guys would be more dilligent about wearing condoms.
Indeed, 'rediculous'...
Though I believe it to be too late I still think English desperately needs an orthographic reform.
-
The 2008 votes are more proof than any of these articles Beach.
Minus California, those are Totally RED states... This is the religious groups havens... and yet they were defeated in each one.
How are you going to sit here and talk to me about Polls, when voters are proving my point?
Remember that polls are once again not talking to most young people... Polls only call land lines and young people in the US do not use land lines.
CO and WA are hardly "totally red states." SD, maybe. CO is divided pretty evenly between R's, D's, and I's but WA is definitely not "red" in any which way.
-
A girl is brutally raped and she should be forced to have the child and raise it? No, I don't believe in that kind of "personal responsibility and accountability"; do you?
this is THE DUMBEST argument that is made for abortion. will you cut the shit already? everyone knows that women are not getting abortions because they are raped. how can people like you cling to an argument like that when it is so far removed from the reality of the situation. i personally support the decision in roe v wade. i believe that the people who passed the law had their heart in the right place. in the 70's the right argued that if they passed roe v wade, that it would be too slippery a slope and there would be tons and tons of abortions every year simply as a matter of convenience. the left called those people crazy bible thumping idiots. now here we are 30 some odd years later. we have close to 2 million a year in the U.S. Less than 7% of those abortions are for reasons of rape/incest, danger to the mother, or danger to both mother and fetus. Yes i believe if a woman is raped she should be allowed to have an abortion. but the fact is that the majority of abortions are for reasons of convenience. so cut the shit already.
-
CO and WA are hardly "totally red states." SD, maybe. CO is divided pretty evenly between R's, D's, and I's but WA is definitely not "red" in any which way.
True, WA is not... but I feel that CO is aside from Denver and SD absolutely...
The reality is that the younger generation just doesn't care about it... That's the truth, and if this election showed us anything it was that the younger people when they come out to vote, are not voting to ban abortion, it's just the older voters.
-
CO is a red state outside of Denver and Boulder. The last election was an anonomly.
But, like a lot of other states including OR, NM, and even CA., one to two cities run the entire show...
-
Indeed, 'rediculous'...
Though I believe it to be too late I still think English desperately needs an orthographic reform.
Sorry I will be sure to use spell check just for you man. I am sorry it bothered you so much that you go offtopic to show everyone how poorly I can spell.
Hey guys. Please disregard everything I have said in the thread. I have misspelled "ridiculous" so clearly I fail at conveying any rational thought. ;)
As an aside. Pointing out my spelling/grammar errors would be a full time job for anyone. I type very fast and move on as I usually have a lot of work to do. This probably is from online gaming back in the day, but I am sure most people understand the gist of what I am saying.
-
The 2008 votes are more proof than any of these articles Beach.
Minus California, those are Totally RED states... This is the religious groups havens... and yet they were defeated in each one.
How are you going to sit here and talk to me about Polls, when voters are proving my point?
Remember that polls are once again not talking to most young people... Polls only call land lines and young people in the US do not use land lines.
I didn't give you articles. I gave you poll numbers that directly conflict with your contention that abortion is just fine with the overwhelming majority of the public. That may be your opinion, but it isn't factual.
So a few measures regarding abortion restrictions didn't pass in a few states. Does this prove your claim that the overwhelming majority of the public favors abortion on demand under any circumstances? Absolutely not. Does the election outcome support your opinion? Again, absolutely not. This election was about the economy, Bush, and the war. If you have exit polls or any other solid indication that the overwhelming majority of Americans support your viewpoint, then I'd like to see it.
-
those unwanted children.
Religious folk: what do you say? Are you willing to adopt all those children who have been saved from 'murder'? You know it is your duty.
I agree and say this so many times.
I have never in my life met an anti-abortion fanatic who is an adoptive parents, never met one volunteering etc.
I've always found that interesting. Preaching is easy, actually doing something to help is something many aren't willing to do.
Rhetorical arguement anyway, can't be stopped. It's kind of like trying to stop stealing, whatever we do people will do it. Instead of preaching to a fruitless endevour, why not actually do something to help kids if one is so concerned :-\
-
I agree and say this so many times.
I have never in my life met an anti-abortion fanatic who is an adoptive parents, never met one volunteering etc.
I've always found that interesting. Preaching is easy, actually doing something to help is something many aren't willing to do.
Rhetorical arguement anyway, can't be stopped. It's kind of like trying to stop stealing, whatever we do people will do it. Instead of preaching to a fruitless endevour, why not actually do something to help kids if one is so concerned :-\
I personally know a lot of people that adopt chilldren and everyone of them had to adopt internationally because ther eis a huge waiting list for infants in the US....
I have 3 people in my family who have adopted at least two children and I know several others who have as well.
So I just need to forget about the killing of innocent children and join big brother, big sisters? SWEET!
This arguement makes no sense. If I have high regard for human life it means just that. Whether or not I adopt has no relevance. If I aborted a child because I was inconvienenced then yes I would be a hypocrite.
-
Because as a Christian YOU have to step up to the plate and take responsibility for your faith. If you are truly against abortion then YOU must be the one to support these little bastards that someone didn't want. It may sound harsh but Abortion has made many lives better.
It's not a matter of taking responsibility for ones faith. This is a matter of personal responsibility for ones actions.
It's not even truly a religious issue. It's about respect for human life.
-
I personally know a lot of people that adopt chilldren and everyone of them had to adopt internationally because ther eis a huge waiting list for infants in the US....
I have 3 people in my family who have adopted at least two children and I know several others who have as well.
So I just need to forget about the killing of innocent children and join big brother, big sisters? SWEET!
This arguement makes no sense. If I have high regard for human life it means just that. Whether or not I adopt has no relevance. If I aborted a child because I was inconvienenced then yes I would be a hypocrite.
I have to agree.
CQ are you really saying that a person cannot be Pro Life unless they adopt kids?
-
this is THE DUMBEST argument that is made for abortion. will you cut the shit already? everyone knows that women are not getting abortions because they are raped. how can people like you cling to an argument like that when it is so far removed from the reality of the situation. i personally support the decision in roe v wade. i believe that the people who passed the law had their heart in the right place. in the 70's the right argued that if they passed roe v wade, that it would be too slippery a slope and there would be tons and tons of abortions every year simply as a matter of convenience. the left called those people crazy bible thumping idiots. now here we are 30 some odd years later. we have close to 2 million a year in the U.S. Less than 7% of those abortions are for reasons of rape/incest, danger to the mother, or danger to both mother and fetus. Yes i believe if a woman is raped she should be allowed to have an abortion. but the fact is that the majority of abortions are for reasons of convenience. so cut the shit already.
Actually, it's the most important point in the whole discussion. :)
If you truly believe that abortion is murder, then it is so across the board. There can be no dispensation for raped or incest victims (the numbers are under-reported, but I digress) or the health of the mother, since a life is a life. There can be no deciding by man which one should live, the cards have to fall where they may. I'm assuming there are a plethora of men out there willing to raise the child of their wife's rapist. :)
Also, if abortion is truly murder, then punishment should follow, as in the death penalty or life imprisonment, since it would be considered first degree murder. That includes, the woman, the man, if he helped, all doctors, nurses, etc... Currently, rape victims are given a morning after pill immediately upon arrival at hospital, so that goes.
Acceptance of anything less is hypocrisy and the admittance that abortion really isn't murder at all.
Religious fundie leaders have finally admitted their real goal, which is to get rid of birth control. Bush policies have followed. So all those people out there currently utilizing the pill, the patch... anything other than condoms, are guilty of murder too, right this very minute.
ps... one person's inconvenience, is another person's desperation.
-
I personally know a lot of people that adopt chilldren and everyone of them had to adopt internationally because ther eis a huge waiting list for infants in the US....
I have 3 people in my family who have adopted at least two children and I know several others who have as well.
So I just need to forget about the killing of innocent children and join big brother, big sisters? SWEET!
This arguement makes no sense. If I have high regard for human life it means just that. Whether or not I adopt has no relevance. If I aborted a child because I was inconvienenced then yes I would be a hypocrite.
Much as I'm sure your heart is in the right place, and you are a good person who takes responsibility for your actions, you simply cannot force others to be like you, or legislate happiness. :)
You're speaking from a personal point of view, which is the wrong way to look at it. Legislation happens with a view to the masses.
btw... forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're the guy who made a derogatory comment about women being inconvenienced, and worrying about their breasts sagging? It was a funny comment considering that most of the people who frequent this board are those who are/admire people who inject massive quantities of drugs into their bods to be huge, freak at every 1% of new bodyfat, and starve, train themselves into oblivion for a plastic trophy. I found it ironical. :)
I would say that most women don't resort to medical intervention because of an inconvenience. Mostly it's a result of economic inability to sustain a child, desperation, etc. The numbers show that.
-
Much as I'm sure your heart is in the right place, and you are a good person who takes responsibility for your actions, you simply cannot force others to be like you, or legislate happiness. :)
You're speaking from a personal point of view, which is the wrong way to look at it. Legislation happens with a view to the masses.
btw... forgive me if I'm wrong, but you're the guy who made a derogatory comment about women being inconvenienced, and worrying about their breasts sagging? It was a funny comment considering that most of the people who frequent this board are those who are/admire people who inject massive quantities of drugs into their bods to be huge, freak at every 1% of new bodyfat, and starve, train themselves into oblivion for a plastic trophy. I found it ironical. :)
I would say that most women don't resort to medical intervention because of an inconvenience. Mostly it's a result of economic inability to sustain a child, desperation, etc. The numbers show that.
This is actually one of the best replies on this subject I have seen. My thing isnt that I want to legislate happiness, its just that I feel that we are looking at the greatest holocaust since WWII in what is happening with the numbe of Abortions. I feel that Human life starts at conception and should be respected and protected. Are there situations where a child must be aborted? Yes, but the use of Abortion of a contraception method or even late term abortions are even more appalling.
I think this should be an issue handled at the state level.
I am absolutely the one who made the comment about the breast sagging etc... now keep in mind I was replying to someone who in my opinion has little value for human life... I have two children and I respect greatly what my wife went through to have them. I know what it did to her body and how hard she had to work to get back into shape and I greatly respect and appreciate that. That said.... Both of us strongly agree that its a small price to pay to bring a child into the world.
The irony of the statement in regards to bodybuilding wasnt lost on me but it I was just trying to downplay things seem trivial compared to a human life.
Do these numbers look similar to what you have seen?
UNITED STATES
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700
Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.
Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.
Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".
Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.
Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).
At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.
Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.
Abortion coverage:
48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.
Copyright 1996-2008, The Alan Guttmacher Institute. (www.agi-usa.org)
-
Indeed, 'rediculous'...
Though I believe it to be too late I still think English desperately needs an orthographic reform.
what "procentage" of people do you think would agree?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=237299.0
-
what "procentage" of people do you think would agree?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=237299.0
lol. :D
-
Deicide must be Dutch--that's the Dutch spelling of "percentage." NOW it all makes sense, the Netherlands being one of the most liberal countries on earth.
Is dat echt waar? Ben jij soms toevallig een Nederlander, Deicide? :D
-
If it were simply a matter of snapping one's fingers and having this occur... no doubt there would be more babies available for adoption, ...but before that can occur... a woman must go through the ordeal of a pregnancy and childbirth, which is extremely traumatic to the body. If she doesn't want to have a child, ...chances are pretty great she also does not want to experience her hair falling out in clumps, her teeth falling out, stretch marks all over her body, months of nausea, bloating, backache, infirmity, not to mention all the emotional, psychological, and physical trauma associated with pregnancy as well. When a fetus is capable of sustaining life on it's own, that's one thing... until then, it is technically speaking no more than a parasite, and women have the right to choose what occurs within their own bodies.
You are arguing for a child, ...but it is not a child, ...it is a parasite, that has the potential to grow into a child.
first off they chose to engage in sexual intercourse more than likely without the use of a contraceptive so you get what you deserve...but we could argue about that all day long
I want to know if you believe in a mans decision to not support their child? Whats the difference between a woman getting an abortion and a man not paying child support responsibility wise? Im sure you disagree with men not paying child support but why?
-
first off they chose to engage in sexual intercourse more than likely without the use of a contraceptive so you get what you deserve...but we could argue about that all day long
I want to know if you believe in a mans decision to not support their child? Whats the difference between a woman getting an abortion and a man not paying child support responsibility wise? Im sure you disagree with men not paying child support but why?
It's true, because the leech that he will have will last 18 years not 9 months before you can get rid of it. If women can get abortions then men should be able to be dead beat dads. I'm not advocating it but hey, I should decide what I want to do with my pay check after taxes.
-
Much as I'm sure your heart is in the right place, and you are a good person who takes responsibility for your actions, you simply cannot force others to be like you, or legislate happiness. :)
You're speaking from a personal point of view, which is the wrong way to look at it. Legislation happens with a view to the masses.
It's not legislating "happiness" it's legislating morality...there is a big difference.
Many pro choicer's will say you can't and shouldn't legislate morality. True to an extent...someones thoughts and opinions should never be legislated, but actions, some of them, by all means yes...think about it, here in the U.S. morality has been legislated and enforced for a long, long time on some key issues that no "moral" person would want otherwise:
*It's against the law to be a pedophile. Why? It's immoral.
*it's against the law to discriminate in the work place? Why? It's immoral
*It's against the law to sell pornography to minors. Why? It's immoral
...the list can go on and on.
Why are all those things considered illegal? Because the immorality harms another individual. Obviously in a the eyes of many who are pro choice this wouldn't apply to abortion since they don't see a fetus as an individual...he in lies the problem. Either way, it is still a moral issue at its core.
-
It's not legislating "happiness" it's legislating morality...there is a big difference.
Many pro choicer's will say you can't and shouldn't legislate morality. True to an extent...someones thoughts and opinions should never be legislated, but actions, some of them, by all means yes...think about it, here in the U.S. morality has been legislated and enforced for a long, long time on some key issues that no "moral" person would want otherwise:
*It's against the law to be a pedophile. Why? It's immoral.
*it's against the law to discriminate in the work place? Why? It's immoral
*It's against the law to sell pornography to minors. Why? It's immoral
...the list can go on and on.
Why are all those things considered illegal? Because the immorality harms another individual. Obviously in a the eyes of many who are pro choice this wouldn't apply to abortion since they don't see a fetus as an individual...he in lies the problem. Either way, it is still a moral issue at its core.
Good points, but I am always amused that is it considered immoral to say sell porn to a kid, but killing 100,000 Iraqi's is somehow fine. They both suck IMO, but killing 100,000 ppl ranks way higher on the sucky scale.
Besides, again, can't be stopped. Here we have no separation of church and state and abortion has always been illegal in all cases. Actually all porn is illegal too as an FYI. Doesn't stop either - females who wish an abortion will just go get one elsewhere. Why people cannot be more pragmatic I do not know, and work on compromises that may actually happen - as all 50 states, then all 270 nations/territories worldwide won't be banning abortion, so it will always be accessible. Fact.
-
lol. :D
You are bizarre. :) All you want is for loser people to be lost in your religion. :)
-
I personally know a lot of people that adopt chilldren and everyone of them had to adopt internationally because ther eis a huge waiting list for infants in the US....
I have 3 people in my family who have adopted at least two children and I know several others who have as well.
So I just need to forget about the killing of innocent children and join big brother, big sisters? SWEET!
This arguement makes no sense. If I have high regard for human life it means just that. Whether or not I adopt has no relevance. If I aborted a child because I was inconvienenced then yes I would be a hypocrite.
What does a waiting list for infants have to do with anything? That happens in the entire 1st world - infants aren't the ones that need help. The toddlers who have HIV, the older kids who have been abused etc - they need help.
If everyone you know went internationally, that was their choice - there are 500,000+ kids in the US whom need adopting. They obviously choose not to adopt them.
The point is always relevant, if people care about things - HELP! Talk is cheap, anyone can spout words, while refusing to help as many fd
Why people aren't consistent I don't know. Half these people screaming about some rights for a embyro support an invasion that kills people daily. Which one is it - regard for human life or not? If people claim to have regard, then they should be fighting to stop the mass murder being waged with their tax dollars.
-
What does a waiting list for infants have to do with anything? That happens in the entire 1st world - infants aren't the ones that need help. The toddlers who have HIV, the older kids who have been abused etc - they need help.
If everyone you know went internationally, that was their choice - there are 500,000+ kids in the US whom need adopting. They obviously choose not to adopt them.
The point is always relevant, if people care about things - HELP! Talk is cheap, anyone can spout words, while refusing to help as many fd
Why people aren't consistent I don't know. Half these people screaming about some rights for a embyro support an invasion that kills people daily. Which one is it - regard for human life or not? If people claim to have regard, then they should be fighting to stop the mass murder being waged with their tax dollars.
you are seriously reaching here. Basically what you are saying is if someone believes in the rights to life of a human child they have no credibility unless they adopt a child. WTF are you talking about lol. So if I go adopt a child am I eligble to care about babies being killed? Will that give me care cred?
No what I cannot understand is what Abortion is used as a contraceptive. Its discusting. Who the hell cannot afford a condom or birth control?
there have been 45 million abortions since 1973. 45 million lives that were to be but are now gone. That is insanity to me.
so would those 500,000 kids that need adopting prefer to be dead do you think? by your criteria they werent wanted so shouldnt even be here right?
Then we have the Iraq war comment. cant forget that little gem. I wonder what the Iraqi people would say to you if you asked them what this invasion meant to them. what their country is like now compared to before we came.
And are you saying that our troops are over in Iraq at this moment randomly killing Iraqis day an night? Do you guys only get MSNBC in the Carribean?
No the mass murder will come after this congress and president pull out prematurely before we have secured their country. (rememer nam?)
Pulling out never works.... Just ask that 45 million I just mentioned.
-
You are bizarre. :) All you want is for loser people to be lost in your religion. :)
I was laughing at the fact that someone who makes fun of people for misspelling words started a thread with a misspelled word. But a paranoid anti-religious extremist might miss the humor.
-
Good points, but I am always amused that is it considered immoral to say sell porn to a kid, but killing 100,000 Iraqi's is somehow fine. They both suck IMO, but killing 100,000 ppl ranks way higher on the sucky scale.
Besides, again, can't be stopped. Here we have no separation of church and state and abortion has always been illegal in all cases. Actually all porn is illegal too as an FYI. Doesn't stop either - females who wish an abortion will just go get one elsewhere. Why people cannot be more pragmatic I do not know, and work on compromises that may actually happen - as all 50 states, then all 270 nations/territories worldwide won't be banning abortion, so it will always be accessible. Fact.
I understand what you're saying, I can see your point. Here's how I see it when it comes to the two.
*Selling porn to children: obviously this exposes them to things that no child needs to be or should be exposed to...let kids be kids. Otherwise exposing them to this opens up a host of problems in their futures.
*Iraq: we went into a nation that was run by an evil dictatorship, one that had killed millions since being in power. Regardless of WMD's being there or not, regardless of oil, something should have been done long before hand. Something should be done in all countries that have similar situations.
If my own country ever came under an evil dictatorship, I would hope that some country that had the means to help would do so and drive that insanity out. Yes, there would be an enormous risk to citizens such as myself and my family, but it would be one I wholeheartedly welcomed if it meant an end to that dictatorship that held me and my family down or even threatened our lives. There would be some innocent lives lost, and that's the evil nature of war...but as with all justifiable wars, sometimes there is the element of necessary evil.
For the record, of the over 100,000 dead in Iraq, the majority have been part of the old regime, Sunni Muslims who supported the old regime and wished to see it reinstated by force; insurgents from Iran and Syria; and of course insurgents from al qaeda who come from every country in that region.
Yes, innocent civilians have lost their lives...and yes, that sucks. But should we have done nothing? I look at it no differently then if my neighbor is beating the crap out of his wife. If I know this is happening and I can hear or see it happening, I should step in. SUre, there is a risk, he could pull a gun, he could shoot me, he might even end up shooting her (her being an innocent) but that doesn't mean I did the wrong thing. Standing by and doing nothing, that is the wrong thing, that is the immoral thing.
-
you are seriously reaching here. Basically what you are saying is if someone believes in the rights to life of a human child they have no credibility unless they adopt a child. WTF are you talking about lol. So if I go adopt a child am I eligble to care about babies being killed? Will that give me care cred?
No what I cannot understand is what Abortion is used as a contraceptive. Its discusting. Who the hell cannot afford a condom or birth control?
there have been 45 million abortions since 1973. 45 million lives that were to be but are now gone. That is insanity to me.
so would those 500,000 kids that need adopting prefer to be dead do you think? by your criteria they werent wanted so shouldnt even be here right?
Then we have the Iraq war comment. cant forget that little gem. I wonder what the Iraqi people would say to you if you asked them what this invasion meant to them. what their country is like now compared to before we came.
And are you saying that our troops are over in Iraq at this moment randomly killing Iraqis day an night? Do you guys only get MSNBC in the Carribean?
No the mass murder will come after this congress and president pull out prematurely before we have secured their country. (rememer nam?)
Pulling out never works.... Just ask that 45 million I just mentioned.
good post. i bolded the one part because back in 1973 the people on the right were fighting against roe v wade because this is what they thought would happen. the left called them bible thumping maniacs for believing that kind of garbage. its funny how no one remembers that anymore. definitely gives me a different perspective when sanctity of life issues are discussed. horrible things can be rationalized very easily in this country when it is convenient.
-
good post. i bolded the one part because back in 1973 the people on the right were fighting against roe v wade because this is what they thought would happen. the left called them bible thumping maniacs for believing that kind of garbage. its funny how no one remembers that anymore. definitely gives me a different perspective when sanctity of life issues are discussed. horrible things can be rationalized very easily in this country when it is convenient.
45 Million unwanted kids... Kids that because they were unwanted would be left to fend for themselves, resulting in 45 Million criminals on the streets.
Roe v. Wade is the greatest crime prevention law ever passed.
To argue it is ridiculous.
-
What does a waiting list for infants have to do with anything? That happens in the entire 1st world - infants aren't the ones that need help. The toddlers who have HIV, the older kids who have been abused etc - they need help.
If everyone you know went internationally, that was their choice - there are 500,000+ kids in the US whom need adopting. They obviously choose not to adopt them.
The point is always relevant, if people care about things - HELP! Talk is cheap, anyone can spout words, while refusing to help as many fd
Why people aren't consistent I don't know. Half these people screaming about some rights for a embyro support an invasion that kills people daily. Which one is it - regard for human life or not? If people claim to have regard, then they should be fighting to stop the mass murder being waged with their tax dollars.
darling alot of lefties are pro choice and anti death penalty...again ive said this everytime you bring it up just b/c you arent proactive for a cause doesnt mean you dont have or cant have an opinion. Your against homelessness but you dont let them stay at your house do you?
-
45 Million unwanted kids... Kids that because they were unwanted would be left to fend for themselves, resulting in 45 Million criminals on the streets.
Roe v. Wade is the greatest crime prevention law ever passed.
To argue it is ridiculous.
No this post is rediculous. My mom was 15 years old when she had me. I could have easily been one of these 45 million. So say that any of these children would be criminals is rediculous. Did we have a mass influx of criminals pre-1973? I am suprised crime hasnt been eradicated by now using your logic. ::)
-
No this post is rediculous. My mom was 15 years old when she had me. I could have easily been one of these 45 million. So say that any of these children would be criminals is rediculous. Did we have a mass influx of criminals pre-1973? I am suprised crime hasnt been eradicated by now using your logic. ::)
Actually, yes we did have a mass influx of criminals... Notice how Crime was on a rampant rise until the mid 90s?
You will probably ignore the statistics because you don't like them... but there are a few facts you should think about.
1. Most crimes occur by those between the ages of 15 and 30.
2. Crime was on a rampant spike until the early 90s... Even so much that Clinton mentioned it in a state of the Union address.
3. Roe v. Wade was 1973.
4. After 1994 crime started to tumble by huge percentages.
Now... you take those 4 facts and you put them together... and YES... a large portion of those 45 Million would probably be criminals.
You said your mother had you when she was 15... Great... Notice how she WANTED you... Those who were aborted were NOT wanted.
Those who are NOT wanted will by most statistical standpoints become criminals.
Your situation isn't even relevant to my points what so ever.
-
Actually, yes we did have a mass influx of criminals... Notice how Crime was on a rampant rise until the mid 90s?
You will probably ignore the statistics because you don't like them... but there are a few facts you should think about.
1. Most crimes occur by those between the ages of 15 and 30.
2. Crime was on a rampant spike until the early 90s... Even so much that Clinton mentioned it in a state of the Union address.
3. Roe v. Wade was 1973.
4. After 1994 crime started to tumble by huge percentages.
Now... you take those 4 facts and you put them together... and YES... a large portion of those 45 Million would probably be criminals.
You said your mother had you when she was 15... Great... Notice how she WANTED you... Those who were aborted were NOT wanted.
Those who are NOT wanted will by most statistical standpoints become criminals.
Your situation isn't even relevant to my points what so ever.
please give a link to prove that.
-
please give a link to prove that.
The information is provided by many links, of which you can search.
I'm sure you can find lots of links to argue against it by pro-life supports.
You disagree with the understanding that unwanted children are left to their own devices, and to run the streets, they will inherently gravitate towards crime?
-
The information is provided by many links, of which you can search.
I'm sure you can find lots of links to argue against it by pro-life supports.
You disagree with the understanding that unwanted children are left to their own devices, and to run the streets, they will inherently gravitate towards crime?
just curious, your statment implies that humans are inherently evil then im guessing? b/c if they are left to their own devices there is just as good a chance they will be productive members of society.
-
just curious, your statment implies that humans are inherently evil then im guessing? b/c if they are left to their own devices there is just as good a chance they will be productive members of society.
No belief in the The Lord of The Flies?
-
Actually, yes we did have a mass influx of criminals... Notice how Crime was on a rampant rise until the mid 90s?
You will probably ignore the statistics because you don't like them... but there are a few facts you should think about.
1. Most crimes occur by those between the ages of 15 and 30.
2. Crime was on a rampant spike until the early 90s... Even so much that Clinton mentioned it in a state of the Union address.
3. Roe v. Wade was 1973.
4. After 1994 crime started to tumble by huge percentages.
Now... you take those 4 facts and you put them together... and YES... a large portion of those 45 Million would probably be criminals.
You said your mother had you when she was 15... Great... Notice how she WANTED you... Those who were aborted were NOT wanted.
Those who are NOT wanted will by most statistical standpoints become criminals.
Your situation isn't even relevant to my points what so ever.
dude wtf are you talking about seriously. So a good portion of everyone who was born around 1973 was a criminal? I mean that is who we are talking about is the people who were born. What event caused this? Was it the fact that people in the 70s were fucked up drug users who were selfish and got divorced? other factors?
You are seriously reaching here man. So after 93 all those kids who were criminals turned 20 and starting bieng good, so then we would have 45 million productive members of society post 93 right?
My situation has everything to do with it because my mother was absurdely young and there was still an expectation back then that you take care of your kid rather than abort it.
I could have easily been aborted because of my mothers age and situation. I had a messed up ass childhood too, but you bet your ass im glad I wasnt aborted.
If you look at the below chart you will also see a coorelation in what you stated earlier. Abortions were pretty high and droppped off sigificanly during the 90s.
Seems those who were born during and shortly after the time of Roe V Wade have a different opinion about abortion than their parents did.
-
dude wtf are you talking about seriously. So a good portion of everyone who was born around 1973 was a criminal? I mean that is who we are talking about is the people who were born. What event caused this? Was it the fact that people in the 70s were fucked up drug users who were selfish and got divorced? other factors?
You are seriously reaching here man. So after 93 all those kids who were criminals turned 20 and starting bieng good, so then we would have 45 million productive members of society post 93 right?
My situation has everything to do with it because my mother was absurdely young and there was still an expectation back then that you take care of your kid rather than abort it.
I could have easily been aborted because of my mothers age and situation. I had a messed up ass childhood too, but you bet your ass im glad I wasnt aborted.
If you look at the below chart you will also see a coorelation in what you stated earlier. Abortions were pretty high and droppped off sigificanly during the 90s.
Seems those who were born during and shortly after the time of Roe V Wade have a different opinion about abortion than their parents did.
Dude, you seriously don't read very well... As I wrote, but you couldn't comprehend... Most of those babies were UNWANTED.
Unwanted children become criminals... No... everyone who was born wasn't a criminal... but the unwanted ones would have had a predisposition to lean towards crime.
No one is talking about YOU or your situation... I'm talking about those who were aborted... Aborted because they were unwanted.
Stop acting like it's about you personally... It's not.
-
Dude, you seriously don't read very well... As I wrote, but you couldn't comprehend... Most of those babies were UNWANTED.
Unwanted children become criminals... No... everyone who was born wasn't a criminal... but the unwanted ones would have had a predisposition to lean towards crime.
No one is talking about YOU or your situation... I'm talking about those who were aborted... Aborted because they were unwanted.
Stop acting like it's about you personally... It's not.
You are right. People don't see the big picture. They ignore hard facts.
I am pro choice but against late term abortion.
-
You are right. People don't see the big picture. They ignore hard facts.
I am pro choice but against late term abortion.
That whole crime statistic argument is so lame--so let's kill the unwanted kids in case they turn out to be criminals??!? Sounds just a wee bit Orwellian if you really stop and think about it. Or maybe a wee bit Minority Report-ish. Or both, really.
It's ironic that so many pro-choicers are the same people who are anti-death penalty.
What's the difference between a pre-emptive execution (abortion, according to the above argument) and a criminal being executed after he/she's actually committed a capital crime? Which of the two seems more fair and just to you?
-
That whole crime statistic argument is so lame--so let's kill the unwanted kids in case they turn out to be criminals??!? Sounds just a wee bit Orwellian if you really stop and think about it. Or maybe a wee bit Minority Report-ish. Or both, really.
It's ironic that so many pro-choicers are the same people who are anti-death penalty.
What's the difference between a pre-emptive execution (abortion, according to the above argument) and a criminal being executed after he/she's actually committed a capital crime? Which of the two seems more fair and just to you?
I agree. It really makes no sense. There is no provable link between abortion and crime.
Reminds me of Minority Report. :)
-
I agree. It really makes no sense. There is no provable link between abortion and crime.
Reminds me of Minority Report. :)
You just don't like the statistical correlation, so you ignore... That's fine, but it's still a correlation.
Just like correlations in sports teams do actually count... 90% of the time if you're a football team and you run less yardage and you throw less yardage, you lose... The same can be said of these statistics.
While you may not like the statistics... You can not say there is no correlation because you want there to be none.
Roe v. Wade and time show there is a direct correlation between the drop in crime in the 90s and the fact that almost exactly 20 years earlier abortion was legalized across the board.
You might not like it... but statistics show that is the only correlating item that holds true.
Policing tactics didn't do it... or else many cities where they had more police per capita would have had less crime, but they did not... many times they had more.
So if you say it wasn't abortion, then it is up to YOU to show me what changed to cause the drop in crime in the early - mid 90s.
My statistics correlate... do yours?
-
Actually, yes we did have a mass influx of criminals... Notice how Crime was on a rampant rise until the mid 90s?
You will probably ignore the statistics because you don't like them... but there are a few facts you should think about.
1. Most crimes occur by those between the ages of 15 and 30.
2. Crime was on a rampant spike until the early 90s... Even so much that Clinton mentioned it in a state of the Union address.
3. Roe v. Wade was 1973.
4. After 1994 crime started to tumble by huge percentages.
Now... you take those 4 facts and you put them together... and YES... a large portion of those 45 Million would probably be criminals.
You said your mother had you when she was 15... Great... Notice how she WANTED you... Those who were aborted were NOT wanted.
Those who are NOT wanted will by most statistical standpoints become criminals.
Your situation isn't even relevant to my points what so ever.
abortion was never meant to be a means to cure social ills. it was meant to be a last resort for women who found themselves in very bad situations. you are seriously misguided. adolf hitler had ideas similar to yours at one time. you need to seriously rethink how you defend abortion. the people who passed roe v wade and had their heart in the right place would never want to associate themselves with a person who thought like you.
lets take your misguided and ignorant argument a little further. you know we can deter crime even more in this country if we didnt allow people who make under 15k a year to have babies? the overwhelming majority of our felons are from very low income households. do you think we should mandate abortions for lower income families? do you know how much money we could be saving if we euthanized all of our old and indigent? we could wipe out the national debt in under 10 years.
-
You just don't like the statistical correlation, so you ignore... That's fine, but it's still a correlation.
Just like correlations in sports teams do actually count... 90% of the time if you're a football team and you run less yardage and you throw less yardage, you lose... The same can be said of these statistics.
While you may not like the statistics... You can not say there is no correlation because you want there to be none.
Roe v. Wade and time show there is a direct correlation between the drop in crime in the 90s and the fact that almost exactly 20 years earlier abortion was legalized across the board.
You might not like it... but statistics show that is the only correlating item that holds true.
Policing tactics didn't do it... or else many cities where they had more police per capita would have had less crime, but they did not... many times they had more.
So if you say it wasn't abortion, then it is up to YOU to show me what changed to cause the drop in crime in the early - mid 90s.
My statistics correlate... do yours?
I ignore things that don't make any dang sense. You have nothing that shows a direct relationship between abortion and crime. It is literally impossible for you or anyone to show that an aborted baby would have become a criminal.
Where are the statistics that show specific "unwanted" babies who were not aborted actually became criminals?
-
oh yeah and the statistics are my side as well.
-
You just don't like the statistical correlation, so you ignore... That's fine, but it's still a correlation.
Just like correlations in sports teams do actually count... 90% of the time if you're a football team and you run less yardage and you throw less yardage, you lose... The same can be said of these statistics.
While you may not like the statistics... You can not say there is no correlation because you want there to be none.
Roe v. Wade and time show there is a direct correlation between the drop in crime in the 90s and the fact that almost exactly 20 years earlier abortion was legalized across the board.
You might not like it... but statistics show that is the only correlating item that holds true.
Policing tactics didn't do it... or else many cities where they had more police per capita would have had less crime, but they did not... many times they had more.
So if you say it wasn't abortion, then it is up to YOU to show me what changed to cause the drop in crime in the early - mid 90s.
My statistics correlate... do yours?
Who gives a shit about your statistics? Is that even the point?
I'm sure if we pre-emptively executed potential criminals (who've already been born), the statistics would also show a decrease in crime. ::)
-
abortion was never meant to be a means to cure social ills. it was meant to be a last resort for women who found themselves in very bad situations. you are seriously misguided. adolf hitler had ideas similar to yours at one time. you need to seriously rethink how you defend abortion. the people who passed roe v wade and had their heart in the right place would never want to associate themselves with a person who thought like you.
lets take your misguided and ignorant argument a little further. you know we can deter crime even more in this country if we didnt allow people who make under 15k a year to have babies? the overwhelming majority of our felons are from very low income households. do you think we should mandate abortions for lower income families? do you know how much money we could be saving if we euthanized all of our old and indigent? we could wipe out the national debt in under 10 years.
So you're saying it should be about old people now?
Sorry to burst your bubble there big guy, but I'm simply showing the statistical truth to the situation... I am not saying abortion is right or wrong in my statement.
But, since you seem to want to know it anyway.
Hell yes, I'm pro-choice, because I've got two kids and if I happen to get unfortunate enough to have a condom break or something, I don't want to have 3rd kid... especially one out of wedlock.
So what?
I have two kids I love to death and do everything for... You think all of a sudden I'm a bad guy because I don't think a mistake should be shoved at someone.
Wah for you... The other reality that no one likes, especially the pro-lifers is that todays youth while perhaps not pro-choice and may be pro-life are certainly fine with abortion being the way it is.
I think the funny part is that the people who talk about personal responsibility are the people who are injecting their beliefs in someone else's life.
Here's a tip... if you're not the one knocked up, or you're not the one who knocked the chick up... Guess what?
It's not really any of your business...
Unless you admit of course you're really just a busy body who wants to make everyone do what they want them to do.
Is that you?
-
Who gives a shit about your statistics? Is that even the point?
I'm sure if we pre-emptively executed potential criminals (who've already been born), the statistics would also show a decrease in crime. ::)
Yes they would show a decrease.
-
I ignore things that don't make any dang sense. You have nothing that shows a direct relationship between abortion and crime. It is literally impossible for you or anyone to show that an aborted baby would have become a criminal.
Where are the statistics that show specific "unwanted" babies who not aborted actually became criminals?
You can't show that statistic beach because they weren't alive yet...
Again... My analysis shows real cause and effect, and you can't dispute it with any other causality... so you ignore it.
Fine by me.
-
You can't show that statistic beach because they weren't alive yet...
Again... My analysis shows real cause and effect, and you can't dispute it with any other causality... so you ignore it.
Fine by me.
Yes I am ignoring the contention that "unwanted" babies aborted since Roe v. Wade reduced the crime rate, because there is zero proof. Tu this really makes no sense.
-
Yes I am ignoring the contention that "unwanted" babies aborted since Roe v. Wade reduced the crime rate, because there is zero proof. Tu this really makes no sense.
Beach... There is direct timeline correlations... You just ignore what you want.
Continue down the path of ignorance Beach.
-
Beach... There is direct timeline correlations... You just ignore what you want.
Continue down the path of ignorance Beach.
No there is zero evidence of cause and effect. Show it to me. You have a link? I'll read it.
-
So you're saying it should be about old people now?
Sorry to burst your bubble there big guy, but I'm simply showing the statistical truth to the situation... I am not saying abortion is right or wrong in my statement.
YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT THINK THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT.
But, since you seem to want to know it anyway.
Hell yes, I'm pro-choice, because I've got two kids and if I happen to get unfortunate enough to have a condom break or something, I don't want to have 3rd kid... especially one out of wedlock.
So what?
I have two kids I love to death and do everything for... You think all of a sudden I'm a bad guy because I don't think a mistake should be shoved at someone.
JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE 2 KIDS DOESNT EXCUSE YOU FROM ANY FURTHER PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. WHAT A JOKE.
Wah for you... The other reality that no one likes, especially the pro-lifers is that todays youth while perhaps not pro-choice and may be pro-life are certainly fine with abortion being the way it is.
THATS BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE COMPLETELY INTOLERANT OF A PRO LIFE PERSONS OPINION. POT MEET KETTLE.
I think the funny part is that the people who talk about personal responsibility are the people who are injecting their beliefs in someone else's life.
Here's a tip... if you're not the one knocked up, or you're not the one who knocked the chick up... Guess what?
It's not really any of your business...
IF MURDER OF A BABY IS LEGALIZED IN A COUNTRY WHERE I AM A TAX PAYING CITIZEN. YEAH IT IS MY BUSINESS.
Unless you admit of course you're really just a busy body who wants to make everyone do what they want them to do.
NO I WANT TO TAKE A STAND FOR MEN WHO BELIEVE IN TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND I WANT MY SON TO SEE HIS FATHER TAKING THAT STAND. YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT TO TELL ME WHAT TO HAVE OR NOT HAVE AN OPINION ON.
Is that you?
-
Yes they would show a decrease.
So your argument is that reduced crime statistics justify those 45 million abortions performed since 1973.
So would you advocate pre-emptive executions of potential criminals if it would result in reduced crime statistics? Really??? That's a scary place to go if you want to follow your course of logic but that's what you're implying.
-
So your argument is that reduced crime statistics justify those 45 million abortions performed since 1973.
So would you advocate pre-emptive executions of potential criminals if it would result in reduced crime statistics? Really??? That's a scary place to go if you want to follow your course of logic but that's what you're implying.
No... I'm not saying that... I'm just showing statistical correlation.
You can make your own mind up about whether or not it's worth it... I'm just relaying facts.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong... Just tossing the statistical analysis out there for people.
-
Dude, you seriously don't read very well... As I wrote, but you couldn't comprehend... Most of those babies were UNWANTED.
Unwanted children become criminals... No... everyone who was born wasn't a criminal... but the unwanted ones would have had a predisposition to lean towards crime.
No one is talking about YOU or your situation... I'm talking about those who were aborted... Aborted because they were unwanted.
Stop acting like it's about you personally... It's not.
Actually dude its you who doesnt comprehend very well apparently. The only reason I bring up my situation is because its very typical of the unwanted pregnancys that end up in abortion. A young ass teenager gets knocked up... who wants a kid at 15?? Back in the day it was shot gun wedding. you had sex now you take care of your responsabilites. Once abortions were legalized that was not the case.
The assumption you are making is that all of these babies because they were unwanted would have turned out to be criminal is stupid because there is a nice little thing built into our species that makes you attatched to your children. They might have not like the situation, but they would have provided for their child as best they could. Its not like all of these children woud be abused neglected, etc.... you have no way of knowing.
-
You just don't like the statistical correlation, so you ignore... That's fine, but it's still a correlation.
Just like correlations in sports teams do actually count... 90% of the time if you're a football team and you run less yardage and you throw less yardage, you lose... The same can be said of these statistics.
While you may not like the statistics... You can not say there is no correlation because you want there to be none.
Roe v. Wade and time show there is a direct correlation between the drop in crime in the 90s and the fact that almost exactly 20 years earlier abortion was legalized across the board.
You might not like it... but statistics show that is the only correlating item that holds true.
Policing tactics didn't do it... or else many cities where they had more police per capita would have had less crime, but they did not... many times they had more.
So if you say it wasn't abortion, then it is up to YOU to show me what changed to cause the drop in crime in the early - mid 90s.
My statistics correlate... do yours?
First thing they teach in psychology....
Coorelation does not = Causation.....
There are so many other factors involved with your "Theory" it makes my head spin..
-
So you're saying it should be about old people now?
Sorry to burst your bubble there big guy, but I'm simply showing the statistical truth to the situation... I am not saying abortion is right or wrong in my statement.
But, since you seem to want to know it anyway.
Hell yes, I'm pro-choice, because I've got two kids and if I happen to get unfortunate enough to have a condom break or something, I don't want to have 3rd kid... especially one out of wedlock.
So what?
I have two kids I love to death and do everything for... You think all of a sudden I'm a bad guy because I don't think a mistake should be shoved at someone.
Wah for you... The other reality that no one likes, especially the pro-lifers is that todays youth while perhaps not pro-choice and may be pro-life are certainly fine with abortion being the way it is.
I think the funny part is that the people who talk about personal responsibility are the people who are injecting their beliefs in someone else's life.
Here's a tip... if you're not the one knocked up, or you're not the one who knocked the chick up... Guess what?
It's not really any of your business...
Unless you admit of course you're really just a busy body who wants to make everyone do what they want them to do.
Is that you?
See everything you have said here is irrelevant.
It comes down to this. Either you think that a pregnant woment is carrying a human life or you think that what she is carrying will become human life.
If you think they are carrying a human life, then you feel that life should be protected just like the rest of us under the constitution.
If you think that they are carrying something that could will eventually be human life then you can easily justify ending its existence before it becomes "human"
If you think they are carrying human life and you think that its ok to end that life to avoid an inconvience, then in my opinion you are a special kind of asshole.
-
That whole crime statistic argument is so lame--so let's kill the unwanted kids in case they turn out to be criminals??!? Sounds just a wee bit Orwellian if you really stop and think about it. Or maybe a wee bit Minority Report-ish. Or both, really.
The reasoning was fine by you when Rumsfeld used it
-
See everything you have said here is irrelevant.
It comes down to this. Either you think that a pregnant woment is carrying a human life or you think that what she is carrying will become human life.
If you think they are carrying a human life, then you feel that life should be protected just like the rest of us under the constitution.
If you think that they are carrying something that could will eventually be human life then you can easily justify ending its existence before it becomes "human"
If you think they are carrying human life and you think that its ok to end that life to avoid an inconvience, then in my opinion you are a special kind of asshole.
Haha...
Thanks!
-
The reasoning was fine by you when Rumsfeld used it
ad hominem argument. and was it fine by him?