Abortion

[JOEBIALEK]

On this 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, I would like to share my views on the issue of abortion.

Life begins at the point of conception. No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue. What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death. Would these very same people agree that a similiar choice should have been made about their own existence? Abortion today is used primarily as a birth control of convenience because people are too self-centered to take precautions. They prefer their own pleasurable self-indulgence over the care and sanctity of the life they created. What ever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions in this country? Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption? Nine months of discomfort is nothing compared to life in prison for voluntary manslaughter! Does the father of the child have a say in this? And what about the constitution of the United States? Are not all people conceived in this country deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I believe abortion is a crime against humanity and should be outlawed. We need to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and get back to cherishing life in this country. For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.

[auntie aubrey]

Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK

No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue.

yes, because 100% of all embryos result in viable fetuses.

[Avalon]

On this 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, I would like to share my views on the issue of abortion.

Life begins at the point of conception. No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue. What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death. Would these very same people agree that a similiar choice should have been made about their own existence? Abortion today is used primarily as a birth control of convenience because people are too self-centered to take precautions. They prefer their own pleasurable self-indulgence over the care and sanctity of the life they created. What ever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions in this country? Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption? Nine months of discomfort is nothing compared to life in prison for voluntary manslaughter! Does the father of the child have a say in this? And what about the constitution of the United States? Are not all people conceived in this country deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I believe abortion is a crime against humanity and should be outlawed. We need to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and get back to cherishing life in this country. For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.

Evidently, you didn't get the memo...Duke is back on ICQ.

[topcat]

Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK

On this 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, I would like to share my views on the issue of abortion.

Life begins at the point of conception. No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue. What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death. Would these very same people agree that a similiar choice should have been made about their own existence? Abortion today is used primarily as a birth control of convenience because people are too self-centered to take precautions. They prefer their own pleasurable self-indulgence over the care and sanctity of the life they created. What ever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions in this country? Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption? Nine months of discomfort is nothing compared to life in prison for voluntary manslaughter! Does the father of the child have a say in this? And what about the constitution of the United States? Are not all people conceived in this country deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I believe abortion is a crime against humanity and should be outlawed. We need to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and get back to cherishing life in this country. For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.

it really is a shame your mother didnt have one.

[auntie aubrey]

Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK

For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.

not to put too fine a point on it, but does that mean afghanistan, albania, algeria, andorra, angola, antigua, argentina, armenia, australia, austria, azerbaijan, bahamas, bahrain, bangladesh, barbados, belarus, belgium, belize, benin, bhutan, bolivia, bosnia, botswana, brazil, brunei, bulgaria, burkina faso, burundi, cambodia, cameroon, canada, cape verde, central african republic, chad, china, columbia, comoros, congo (brazzaville), congo (zaire), cook islands, costa rica, cote d'ivoire, croatia, cuba, cyprus, czeck republic, denmark, djibouti, dominica, dominican republic, ecuador, eritrea, estonia, ethiopia, figi, finland, france, gabon, gambia, georgia, germany, ghana, greece, grenada, guatemala, guinea, guinea bissau, guyana, haiti, hong kong, hungary, iceland, india, indonesia, iran, ireland, israel, italy, jamaica, japan, jordan, kazakhstan, kiribati, north korea, kyrgyszstan, laos, latvia, lebanon, lesotho, liberia, libya, lichtenstein, lithuania, macedonia, madagascar, mali, mauritania, mauritius, mexico, micronesia, moldova, monaco, montenegro, morocco, mozambique, myanmar, namibia, nepal, netherlands, new zealand, niger, nigeria, niue, norway, oman, pakistan, palau, panama, papua new guinea, palistinian territory, paraguay, peru, philippines, poland, portugal, qatar, romania, russia, rwanda, saint kitts, saint lucia, saint vincent & the grenadines, samoa, san marino, sao tome and principe, senegal, serbia, seychelles, sierra leone, singapore, slovakia, slovenia, somalia, south africa, spain, sri lanka, sudan, suriname, swaziland, sweden, switzerland, tiawan, tajikstan, tanzania, thailand, togo, tonga, trinidad & tobago, tunesia, turkmenistan, tuvalu, uganda, ukraine, united kingdom, uruguay, uzbekistan, vanuatu, venezuela, vietnam, yemen, yugoslavia, zambia and zimbabwe all cannot far from self destruction????????

wow.

i mean, who knew?

[Stephi_B]

^Also interesting for JOEBIALEK to notice that with the exception of merely 5 countries (one of which being Vatican City; are there so many women - except nuns - who hold the citizenship?) all countries, even the very, very, very conservative ones, allow abortion at least to save the mother's life (who may have a bunch of other small children at home to support&raise, yeah well, and maybe also has a right to live - who knows... ).

[Earthling]

Hey, Dad aborted the sperm to create me over a thousand times before getting me 'out of my shell'.
Am i suppose to regret the effort that resulted in me. I think not !

[Coffee]

Sooooo...masturbation is abortion of riff raff sperm in order to get to the Einsteins at the bottom of the ball bag?!

[craig johnston]

i always wondered why the people who are the most ardent anti-abortionists are also the most rabid pro-capital punishmentists.

[Stephi_B]

^One of the big mysteries not even 3 years at ICQ/CE could answer me.

[Avalon]

Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption?

Yes it is. They can't place the kids that are in orphanages now..but, with your brilliant and innovative solution, I am sure that will be remedied with every right to lifer being required to adopt a minimum of 7 unwanted children. We'll start with you since it is your idea..please send pics of the family to share with the class.
OR
Is it too much to ask for every man to be sterilized? How about, all men are required to donate to a sperm bank, then be sterilized, so that every birth will be planned. Sound like a winner? Oh, and you'd still be required to adopt more children than you can afford regardless of income, health, or other situation.
Yeah, I didn't think so.

i always wondered why the people who are the most ardent anti-abortionists are also the most rabid pro-capital punishmentists

I have always wondered why they are always all talk, no solution.

[auntie aubrey]

Originally Posted by craig johnston

i always wondered why the people who are the most ardent anti-abortionists are also the most rabid pro-capital punishmentists.

i've always wondered why anti-choice advocates never seem to provide solutions for the children whose lives they think they're saving. i guess once the baby hits the birth canal, they stop caring.



(i say "anti-choice" because saying "anti-abortion" no truer than saying "pro-abortion" or "pro-life." the issue is not about WANTING abortions to take place. like waving pompoms and shouting "yay abortions!" the debate is about choice. you're either for choice or against it. and pro-life? who the hell is anti-life? no one. the "pro-life" term is nothing but a disgusting attempt at spin.)

[Stephi_B]

Thought again about the seeming contradiction...

Originally Posted by CJ

i always wondered why the people who are the most ardent anti-abortionists are also the most rabid pro-capital punishmentists.

(one could also add here pro-war-leading, pro-easy-weapon-access, anti-social-security, ... - i.e. not the best attempts for saving innocent lives)

Originally Posted by Auntie

the "pro-life" term is nothing but a disgusting attempt at spin.

(just like showing pictures of well-developed, often already viable fetuses instead of few-weeks-old embryos which look just the same as other mammal and even reptilian embryos - yeah, well, that could also disturb the Creationism/Intelligent Design picture...)

... and the more I think about it, the saving of lives might not play the real role for the banning-abortion-crowd, it's about controlling females, or better said the female body and that's something done/tried by various means (ban of contraception means, forced dress code, keeping females at home, genital mutilation, ...) in many places and usually justified by religion or tradition (and usually BS) and if one thinks further even the mass-rape-strategy in many wars goes in that direction. All of these things make the female body, female sexuality and it's inherent procreation ability a public affair.

[Hyakujo's Fox]

Originally Posted by craig johnston

i always wondered why the people who are the most ardent anti-abortionists are also the most rabid pro-capital punishmentists.

Originally Posted by Jost, Glaser, Kruganski, & Sulloway

Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism, dogmatism—intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, systemjustification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r = .50); system instability (.47); dogmatism—intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (—.32); uncertainty tolerance (—.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (—.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (—.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.

that sort of thing

[Peregrine]

I find that it's generally better for my stress level if I don't get myself involved in debates like this. Unless it's my wife or my daughter who's pregnant, I don't have or need a reason to have a say on the matter, and until that happens, I'm not going to worry about it, and I'm not going to stress myself out about someone else's life choices.

For example, you may notice that the origional poster hasn't said anything else since the first post, and by most appearances, hasn't even logged in. And the majority of responders seem to be more or less in agreement. So what does it matter to us, and our purposes here?