OT - The New Thread

[Socratic Methodist]

Ok....Dave, Laura.....continue....

[Rick]

I agree with this being true, but disagree that it should be used as an excuse....People in the southern states were BROUGHT UP to be racist. Using that theory it would be alright for them to be racist because they were brought up that way.

And making abortion legal is a slippery slope, leading to further questions. Should the government OR state have a say in anything relating to YOUR child. I mean women should be able to decide whats best in EVERY decision in their children's lives, right? I mean, if the government gives a woman the power to kill a child - shouldn't it give them the right to beat a child that is not aborted?

I can't get into the way you fact things out in your mind. Not everything is black and white. Maybe you're just being the devils advocate, but there is a huge difference between removing a 4 - 8 week old embryo and beating a living, breathing & thinking child. You've got to see the difference.

[Socratic Methodist]

I agree with this being true, but disagree that it should be used as an excuse....People in the southern states were BROUGHT UP to be racist. Using that theory it would be alright for them to be racist because they were brought up that way.

And making abortion legal is a slippery slope, leading to further questions. Should the government OR state have a say in anything relating to YOUR child. I mean women should be able to decide whats best in EVERY decision in their children's lives, right? I mean, if the government gives a woman the power to kill a child - shouldn't it give them the right to beat a child that is not aborted?

I can't get into the way you fact things out in your mind. Not everything is black and white. Maybe you're just being the devils advocate, but there is a huge difference between removing a 4 - 8 week old embryo and beating a living, breathing & thinking child. You've got to see the difference.

Not so different than the logic, or lack thereof, of the counter-argument that giving kids access to condems is giving them permission to have sex.....

The government doesn't want to be in your womb, but sure as hell wants to be in your bedroom.

[Socratic Methodist]

It all comes down to responsibility. If you don't want the child, don't have unprotected sex. It is that simple.

The problem is people want to be irresponsible, and then let some lame-ass law bail them out.

Quickie abortion
Quickie divorce

It is TOO easy to cover up being a fuckup. Not counting instances of rape and health issues.

And while we are on the topic of males not understanding the women's point of view - the women get the good end of the law in EVERY instance.

So I say to the women. How do you think a male feels when he has to pay an EXORBINANT amount of child support, and visitation on weekends? Or that it takes an act of god and two miracles, witnessed by a Rabbi named Hymie to get custody of your child? Talk about emotional states. You women get all grieved(understandably) over a proto-child. Imagine the emotion that encompasses a non-custodial father?

[Socratic Methodist]

I asked my nine year old the other day(we were watching 70s show) why women were always looking at guy's bums...He said, VERY seriously and nonchalant, 'Cause that's where the wallet is'....Imagine that from a NINE YEAR OLD.

[*Laura]

It all comes down to responsibility. If you don't want the child, don't have unprotected sex.

That would be ideal! That's where the responsibility should begin.But let's face it - there are so many ignorant people that don't even know how to use a condom,let alone how a pill works! Then think about people having sex while they're drunk or high,do they think about birth control,are they responsible?Of course not.

The problem is people want to be irresponsible, and then let some lame-ass law bail them out.

Maybe some think that way,but even if the law would forbid abortion,women would still do it.They would still choose what they want to do.
If booze would be forbidden by law,would people give up drinking?I guess not.
If you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurant,you get up and go outside.It IS your choice and no law can stop you.
Is smoking a bad choice?It is.So is abortion,but women choose to do it exactly because of what I have said in the other thread.A multitude of reasons.

So I would say again that responsibility should start in bed,like you said yourself.

So I say to the women. How do you think a male feels when he has to pay an EXORBINANT amount of child support, and visitation on weekends? Or that it takes an act of god and two miracles, witnessed by a Rabbi named Hymie to get custody of your child? Talk about emotional states. You women get all grieved(understandably) over a proto-child. Imagine the emotion that encompasses a non-custodial father?

You are not fair by comparing the human emotions and feelings that a woman experiences with a pregnancy with the financial stress of a man who has to pay child support or to visit his kid.
Both difficult situations,but different things,SM!

However,parenthood is an equal responsability.

[Socratic Methodist]

It all comes down to responsibility. If you don't want the child, don't have unprotected sex.

That would be ideal! That's where the responsibility should begin.But let's face it - there are so many ignorant people that don't even know how to use a condom,let alone how a pill works! Then think about people having sex while they're drunk or high,do they think about birth control,are they responsible?Of course not.

The problem is people want to be irresponsible, and then let some lame-ass law bail them out.

Maybe some think that way,but even if the law would forbid abortion,women would still do it.They would still choose what they want to do.
If booze would be forbidden by law,would people give up drinking?I guess not.
If you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurant,you get up and go outside.It IS your choice and no law can stop you.
Is smoking a bad choice?It is.So is abortion,but women choose to do it exactly because of what I have said in the other thread.A multitude of reasons.

So I would say again that responsibility should start in bed,like you said yourself.

So I say to the women. How do you think a male feels when he has to pay an EXORBINANT amount of child support, and visitation on weekends? Or that it takes an act of god and two miracles, witnessed by a Rabbi named Hymie to get custody of your child? Talk about emotional states. You women get all grieved(understandably) over a proto-child. Imagine the emotion that encompasses a non-custodial father?

You are not fair by comparing the human emotions and feelings that a woman experiences with a pregnancy with the financial stress of a man who has to pay child support or to visit his kid.
Both difficult situations,but different things,SM!

However,parenthood is an equal responsability.

I don't think they are different things, Laura. Just like WE cannot exactly know how it is to be a female who has gone through an abortion. YOU cannot know what it is like to not be able to see your child. Because the laws ALL favor the women.

And it seems to ME that either choice a woman makes comes with it's own set of emotions. So why not just have the kid and give it away?

[RedWingFan]

If you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurant,you get up and go outside.

Why are smokers forced to go outside to smoke? So as to not harm anyone else with secondary smoke.

It IS your choice and no law can stop you.

Then why have any laws?

Is smoking a bad choice?It is.So is abortion,but women choose to do it exactly because of what I have said in the other thread.A multitude of reasons.

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

[*Laura]

I don't think they are different things, Laura. Just like WE cannot exactly know how it is to be a female who has gone through an abortion. YOU cannot know what it is like to not be able to see your child. Because the laws ALL favor the women.

While men will never know how it is to give birth or to have an abortion,women KNOW how it is not to be able to see their own child.Unfortunately,there are many women who go through that.As well as men,of course.
I guess law favors the women because THEY are considered the source of the life they gave birth to.I'm not desconsidering men's parental skills here,it's just that a Mom will always have that extra something that entitles her to "own" her creation.

So why not just have the kid and give it away?

If a woman can give away her child and continue to live her life undisturbed,then we are talking about bitches that don't deserve to be called Mothers.

[*Laura]

If you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurant,you get up and go outside.

Why are smokers forced to go outside to smoke? So as to not harm anyone else with secondary smoke.

It IS your choice and no law can stop you.

Then why have any laws?

Is smoking a bad choice?It is.So is abortion,but women choose to do it exactly because of what I have said in the other thread.A multitude of reasons.

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I gave those examples solely to illustrate what the power of choice means.If people would be capable of respecting the laws ad literam,we would be living in a perfect world.We are not,obviously.We can choose to DO things that aren't good for us or for the ones around us.
No set of laws will ever be able to change that.
The laws are good tho.At least we have an idea about how the world should work.

[larryfromnextdoor]

is this the LOVE THREAD?

[ArnelRox]

It all comes down to responsibility. If you don't want the child, don't have unprotected sex. It is that simple.

I wish I'd had that choice. I neither wanted the child nor the sex.

Ur posts are really getting to me! I'm not afraid to speak about this. How many other less outspoken women here are laying back saying nothing but feeling the pain of what ur saying?

[RedWingFan]

If you are not allowed to smoke in a restaurant,you get up and go outside.

Why are smokers forced to go outside to smoke? So as to not harm anyone else with secondary smoke.

It IS your choice and no law can stop you.

Then why have any laws?

Is smoking a bad choice?It is.So is abortion,but women choose to do it exactly because of what I have said in the other thread.A multitude of reasons.

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I gave those examples solely to illustrate what the power of choice means.If people would be capable of respecting the laws ad literam,we would be living in a perfect world.We are not,obviously.We can choose to DO things that aren't good for us or for the ones around us.
No set of laws will ever be able to change that.
The laws are good tho.At least we have an idea about how the world should work.

Okay

[ArnelRox]

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I smoke but I totally agree w/the no smoking in public places law. No one should have to be subjected to my smoke.

However, any woman who is raped & becomes pregnant as a result was not protected by ANY laws. If her rapist is a member of her family, no one protected her. She should NEVER be forced to go thru w/the pregnancy. The law failed to protect her from her rapist. Now the law should protect her from the trauma of that pregnancy, if she doesn't want to go thru w/it. She should be allowed to abort.

[Rick]

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I smoke but I totally agree w/the no smoking in public places law. No one should have to be subjected to my smoke.

However, any woman who is raped & becomes pregnant as a result was not protected by ANY laws. If her rapist is a member of her family, no one protected her. She should NEVER be forced to go thru w/the pregnancy. The law failed to protect her from her rapist. Now the law should protect her from the trauma of that pregnancy, if she doesn't want to go thru w/it. She should be allowed to abort.

Very well said.

[Greg]

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I smoke but I totally agree w/the no smoking in public places law. No one should have to be subjected to my smoke.

However, any woman who is raped & becomes pregnant as a result was not protected by ANY laws. If her rapist is a member of her family, no one protected her. She should NEVER be forced to go thru w/the pregnancy. The law failed to protect her from her rapist. Now the law should protect her from the trauma of that pregnancy, if she doesn't want to go thru w/it. She should be allowed to abort.

I agree with you as well. I think the only part where I could never support would be partial birth abortions.

[ArnelRox]

I agree with you as well. I think the only part where I could never support would be partial birth abortions.

Yeah, I have some trouble w/that concept myself. It just always seems like it could have been decided earlier & by then, it's just too late. But maybe there's something I don't know about that.

[RedWingFan]

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I smoke but I totally agree w/the no smoking in public places law. No one should have to be subjected to my smoke.

Do you think pregnant women should be allowed to smoke 2 packs a day? Do you think a pregnant woman should be allowed to START a crack habit? Even though it could result in damage to the child?

However, any woman who is raped & becomes pregnant as a result was not protected by ANY laws.

Yes, she was! Rape is illegal! The law is there to threaten possible offenders with punishment! That's all any law can do. I could turn it around and say, "let's just make rape legal, then nothing will be wrong with it" That'd be ridiculous wouldn't it?
Wrong is wrong. Slavery was wrong even though it was legal. Rape is wrong. Abortion is wrong.

Now the law should protect her from the trauma of that pregnancy, if she doesn't want to go thru w/it. She should be allowed to abort.

Now you're trying to paint an innocent life as the abuser or the criminal!

[Greg]

I agree with you as well. I think the only part where I could never support would be partial birth abortions.

Yeah, I have some trouble w/that concept myself. It just always seems like it could have been decided earlier & by then, it's just too late. But maybe there's something I don't know about that.

I think most women if they decided to have an abortion would do so very early in the pregnancy. However, there are some who feel they don't have complete choice unless they have that choice up to the point of birth. While many (including myself) have banged our heads against the wall trying to agree as to when life starts, I think most can agree that when it can obviously live outside of the mother's womb, it's a separate human being.

[conversationpc]

I understand that women considering an abortion for whatever reason go through real, powerful emotions and, for whatever reasons, they may decide to go through with it. I understand that women who become pregnant by rape or inces, may not want to go through with the pregnancy and that the decision one way or the other is excruciating. Even though I can't fully understand it, I acknowledge it.

However, the unborn child is not able to speak for himself/herself. Shouldn't he/she have rights also? Shouldn't someone be allowed to speak for them since they are not able to make decisions about their own body? Despite the fact that the unborn child's father may have been a raping, incestuous scumbag, does that mean the child should die for his/her father's sin? While it's important to not forget the situation that an unfortuante woman is in, it's also important not to forget the most innocent person of all who has no voice to speak for themselves.

[Greg]

I understand that women considering an abortion for whatever reason go through real, powerful emotions and, for whatever reasons, they may decide to go through with it. I understand that women who become pregnant by rape or inces, may not want to go through with the pregnancy and that the decision one way or the other is excruciating. Even though I can't fully understand it, I acknowledge it.

However, the unborn child is not able to speak for himself/herself. Shouldn't he/she have rights also? Shouldn't someone be allowed to speak for them since they are not able to make decisions about their own body? Despite the fact that the unborn child's father may have been a raping, incestuous scumbag, does that mean the child should die for his/her father's sin? While it's important to not forget the situation that an unfortuante woman is in, it's also important not to forget the most innocent person of all who has no voice to speak for themselves.

That's a good point as well.

[Rick]

I understand that women considering an abortion for whatever reason go through real, powerful emotions and, for whatever reasons, they may decide to go through with it. I understand that women who become pregnant by rape or inces, may not want to go through with the pregnancy and that the decision one way or the other is excruciating. Even though I can't fully understand it, I acknowledge it.

However, the unborn child is not able to speak for himself/herself. Shouldn't he/she have rights also? Shouldn't someone be allowed to speak for them since they are not able to make decisions about their own body? Despite the fact that the unborn child's father may have been a raping, incestuous scumbag, does that mean the child should die for his/her father's sin? While it's important to not forget the situation that an unfortuante woman is in, it's also important not to forget the most innocent person of all who has no voice to speak for themselves.

Well there's the argument also as to when does it become a child. It's certainly not a child when it's a blastocyst, it's just a group of cells. It's not a child as an embryo, then it starts to look like something that would become a child as a fetus, but until that fetus grows enough to have it's first cognizant thought, I don't think it's a child. That's why I'm against the partial birth abortion. At that point the infant has had thought and has memory.

[Greg]

I understand that women considering an abortion for whatever reason go through real, powerful emotions and, for whatever reasons, they may decide to go through with it. I understand that women who become pregnant by rape or inces, may not want to go through with the pregnancy and that the decision one way or the other is excruciating. Even though I can't fully understand it, I acknowledge it.

However, the unborn child is not able to speak for himself/herself. Shouldn't he/she have rights also? Shouldn't someone be allowed to speak for them since they are not able to make decisions about their own body? Despite the fact that the unborn child's father may have been a raping, incestuous scumbag, does that mean the child should die for his/her father's sin? While it's important to not forget the situation that an unfortuante woman is in, it's also important not to forget the most innocent person of all who has no voice to speak for themselves.

Well there's the argument also as to when does it become a child. It's certainly not a child when it's a blastocyst, it's just a group of cells. It's not a child as an embryo, then it starts to look like something that would become a child as a fetus, but until that fetus grows enough to have it's first cognizant thought, I don't think it's a child. That's why I'm against the partial birth abortion. At that point the infant has had thought and has memory.

It's a sticky subject where you are never going to get people to agree with fully. I mean, there is also the argument of life begins at conception, which makes a lot of sense, and that life begins when the baby is able to live on its own outside of the mother's womb...which also makes sense...except for the case of premature babies needing to be on life support.

[conversationpc]

Well there's the argument also as to when does it become a child. It's certainly not a child when it's a blastocyst, it's just a group of cells. It's not a child as an embryo, then it starts to look like something that would become a child as a fetus, but until that fetus grows enough to have it's first cognizant thought, I don't think it's a child. That's why I'm against the partial birth abortion. At that point the infant has had thought and has memory.

That's part of my argument, though. If you don't know for sure, you shouldn't be making a decision to kill if you're not sure.

[scarygirl]

In lots of cases, the law fails rape victims. I have heard of cases where the assailant won visitation rights to the child. Also, lots of women don't have the support system necessary to substain themselves emotionallly. Lots of families blame the victim, and try to hide teh abuse under the rug like it never happened. Irregardless, in cases of sexual abuse that involve an abortion, the facility should have to report all instances of neglect. Otherwise, the abortion could be used as a way of hiding the crime.

The no smoking in public places law is to keep people from harming others with their actions. That's exactly what the abortion law does.

I smoke but I totally agree w/the no smoking in public places law. No one should have to be subjected to my smoke.

Do you think pregnant women should be allowed to smoke 2 packs a day? Do you think a pregnant woman should be allowed to START a crack habit? Even though it could result in damage to the child?

However, any woman who is raped & becomes pregnant as a result was not protected by ANY laws.

Yes, she was! Rape is illegal! The law is there to threaten possible offenders with punishment! That's all any law can do. I could turn it around and say, "let's just make rape legal, then nothing will be wrong with it" That'd be ridiculous wouldn't it?
Wrong is wrong. Slavery was wrong even though it was legal. Rape is wrong. Abortion is wrong.

Now the law should protect her from the trauma of that pregnancy, if she doesn't want to go thru w/it. She should be allowed to abort.

Now you're trying to paint an innocent life as the abuser or the criminal!

[Red13JoePa]

However, the unborn child is not able to speak for himself/herself. Shouldn't he/she have rights also? Shouldn't someone be allowed to speak for them since they are not able to make decisions about their own body?

Yes, Dave.

And it's sickeningly barbaric that those children don't have those rights.

[Socratic Methodist]

All things aside, my point WAS that the REAL issue with abortion is the right to CHOOSE. It really isn't about the child. The movement is called PRO-CHOICE. That says it all.

A vast majority of the women harp on the right to CHOOSE over the actual termination of a life.

The PRO-LIFE movement could have been called the ANTI-CHOICE movement - which would be the movement against people having choices in that situation - but they didn't, because they see the actual issue in all this - LIFE. And thus named their movement accordingly.

Again, I've asked nearly 2,000 women of all demographics why they chose, or have chosen to terminate a pregnancy - and close to 80-90 percent have stated 'Choice' as the number one reason.

When women argue this issue, they argue it from the wrong standpoint....

[*Laura]

All things aside, my point WAS that the REAL issue with abortion is the right to CHOOSE. It really isn't about the child. The movement is called PRO-CHOICE. That says it all.

A vast majority of the women harp on the right to CHOOSE over the actual termination of a life.

The PRO-LIFE movement could have been called the ANTI-CHOICE movement - which would be the movement against people having choices in that situation - but they didn't, because they see the actual issue in all this - LIFE. And thus named their movement accordingly.

Again, I've asked nearly 2,000 women of all demographics why they chose, or have chosen to terminate a pregnancy - and close to 80-90 percent have stated 'Choice' as the number one reason.

When women argue this issue, they argue it from the wrong standpoint....

I believe women argue the abortion issue from a woman's standpoint,you know?The burden is on them,so it's extremely difficult to understand why they decide what they decide.

Every case is different.Ultimately,the woman will take responsability for her actions.It's a complex problem going from physical,to spiritual, from ethical to legal...Not sure if we will ever get to the bottom of the issue.

Personally,I could debate this issue only theoretically,as I have never had an abortion.My daughter was a wanted child,I was ready for her.
So as long as I haven't walked in the shoes of a woman who has to decide on the future of her pregnancy,I can only share opinions.

[Socratic Methodist]

All things aside, my point WAS that the REAL issue with abortion is the right to CHOOSE. It really isn't about the child. The movement is called PRO-CHOICE. That says it all.

A vast majority of the women harp on the right to CHOOSE over the actual termination of a life.

The PRO-LIFE movement could have been called the ANTI-CHOICE movement - which would be the movement against people having choices in that situation - but they didn't, because they see the actual issue in all this - LIFE. And thus named their movement accordingly.

Again, I've asked nearly 2,000 women of all demographics why they chose, or have chosen to terminate a pregnancy - and close to 80-90 percent have stated 'Choice' as the number one reason.

When women argue this issue, they argue it from the wrong standpoint....

I believe women argue the abortion issue from a woman's standpoint,you know?The burden is on them,so it's extremely difficult to understand why they decide what they decide.

Every case is different.Ultimately,the woman will take responsability for her actions.It's a complex problem going from physical,to spiritual, from ethical to legal...Not sure if we will ever get to the bottom of the issue.

Personally,I could debate this issue only theoretically,as I have never had an abortion.My daughter was a wanted child,I was ready for her.
So as long as I haven't walked in the shoes of a woman who has to decide on the future of her pregnancy,I can only share opinions.

Hi Laura, thanks for responding....As always, I'm not attacking you.

I think the hilighted quote in your response is unsound. People are convicted on a daily basis for making assumptions on individual's mental states, and more specifically, 'intent'. Doctors who have never mudered anybody are called on to make a judgement on a person who HAS.

Non-military people are making judgements on the Iraq war. Supervisors are hired just for their supervisory skills, without knowledge of the actual job they are supervising. I don't think you have to walk a mile in anyone's shoes to have a take on things.

I think the 'mile in my shoes' defense(and that is what it is) is a defense mechanism people use when they are being questioned/challenged on a given issue. When they can't think of anything to say, and are uncomfortable. Justifying one's actions can be a bitch.

People just don't like being confronted on a decision they have made....especially when they are wrong.

[*Laura]

Hi Laura, thanks for responding....As always, I'm not attacking you.

I think the hilighted quote in your response is unsound. People are convicted on a daily basis for making assumptions on individual's mental states, and more specifically, 'intent'. Doctors who have never mudered anybody are called on to make a judgement on a person who HAS.

Non-military people are making judgements on the Iraq war. Supervisors are hired just for their supervisory skills, without knowledge of the actual job they are supervising. I don't think you have to walk a mile in anyone's shoes to have a take on things.

I think the 'mile in my shoes' defense(and that is what it is) is a defense mechanism people use when they are being questioned/challenged on a given issue. When they can't think of anything to say, and are uncomfortable. Justifying one's actions can be a bitch.

People just don't like being confronted on a decision they have made....especially when they are wrong.

I certainly didn't feel like I was attacked! My idea (the one you've highlighted) was that it is really difficult to fully understand the abortion issue from a woman's point of view,especially one that has actually experienced the fact.I haven't,nor I ever will,so all I can do is guess.
Sure,we can all understand the implications of abortion,people in charge can make laws or try to educate the masses,debates can go on and on...

See,I am not exactly trying to defend abortion,it's more trying to analyze the possible reasons why it happens.

I also promised myself not to analyze anything from Friday to Monday...