It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pregnant Woman Perfectly Tells Off Anti-Abortion Protestors

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Most women will go to the man and discuss it. However if he wants a child and she does not that's the end of the discussion. He cannot force her to deliver him a child. Sorry if this happened to you but it was her choice. Period.
I doubt she was a man hating woman though. Some man got close enough to get her pregnant. reply to: pheonix358


edit on 1252014 by AutumnWitch657 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Yes criminal activity is handled according to law. And laws are important. We all should live within the law.
The law says women can terminate a pregnancy.


You're entitled to feel any way you like about it but the law is the law.


reply to: jjkenobi


edit on 1252014 by AutumnWitch657 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Unless it's via a confirmed/proven rape...

Edit: Or if a full term carry would endanger the mother...


Abortion should be illegal.


Otherwise wear a condom, take the pill, even the morning after pill...


Too many options out their to justify the laziness of some people.
Lazy murderers at that.
edit on 5-12-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: Stated.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Really Charlie, it aint your body to dictate to.

Women have always done things to control their fertility or limit the number of children that they have to care for.

I stated the alternatives earlier - ie drinking herbal poisons or exposing a child on a hillside.

Are you going to care for the worlds unwanted children and monitor the pregnant mothers in a prison cell?


edit on 5-12-2014 by skalla because: typo



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AutumnWitch657

I respect your pov and just making discussion so go easy?

How about too young. Or unmarried or hell I just don't want to be a mother? Any reason at all. It only needs to matter to the woman . No one else. No woman has to justify this choice. It's a decision that is never easy and for some may color the remainder of their lives but that decision no matter the reason is hers and hers alone to make. She could say the reason is because it's Tuesday and that's her business.

According to that logic (because its Tuesday) it could be stretched to anytime after birth as well? Just wondering what is considered the red line. Not blaming or accusing just getting the woman's perspective on it.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: eletheia

I agree with the 14 week thing. There should be a cutoff.
But after that cut off its not only her body, it's the human living inside her body that deserves a choice.
Where does the fetus become a life?




It is still her body which for whatever reason she chooses she is

'allowing' it to be used as an incubator (surrogate mother?)

The foetus (ensuing child ) will not have the brain development till

well after its birth to make or take any personal decisions.

*Parental control* laws till the age of 16 Years?



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Unless it's via a confirmed/proven rape...
Abortion should be illegal.


Otherwise wear a condom, take the pill, even the morning after pill...


Too many options out their to justify the laziness of some people.
Lazy murderers at that.


So what happens if one of those measure fails? None of them are 100% effective.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I asked the same question earlier and never got an answer. the law says it's okay so just deal with it doesn't work for me. the law also says gays can't get married. should we just deal with that too?



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: skalla

And who are we as a society to decide babies shouldn't be born once impregnation has occurred?


Are you going to care for the worlds unwanted children and monitor the pregnant mothers in a prison cell?

There are too many ways to curb pregnancy in the first place...
Pills, potions, condoms, implants... Etc...

The morning after pill is much cheaper than an abortion...


So imo it's laziness.

Unless it's rape... People don't usually have the choice to use protection in such circumstances.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: skalla

And who are we as a society to decide babies shouldn't be born once impregnation has occurred?


Are you going to care for the worlds unwanted children and monitor the pregnant mothers in a prison cell?

There are too many ways to curb pregnancy in the first place...
Pills, potions, condoms, implants... Etc...

The morning after pill is much cheaper than an abortion...


So imo it's laziness.

Unless it's rape... People don't usually have the choice to use protection in such circumstances.



We are those that would have to feed, clothe and look after them for a considerable number of years, and terminations will happen regardless - history shows this.

Now of course we can educate people and support them in making choices that do not lead to unwanted pregnancy, and provide support for prospective/new mothers and fathers so that they will be better able to care for a child, but as a civilised society we also need a healthy option to terminate as it will happen anyway.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: PaJoe52
a reply to: boymonkey74

I could never agree with anyone getting an abortion for any reason short of rape. But it was a treat to see a black woman speak perfectly intelligible.
 

**ALL MEMBERS** The recent surge in Hatred, Racism, and Sheer Stupidity STOPS NOW
The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS




Hmmnnn..... Your post and *signature* are at odds with one another



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nothing is 100%...
Abortion safety isn't 100%...
Nor is abortion success rate..


What's your point?
edit on 5-12-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Well you are arguing that protection should be used so that these women don't have to get abortions, but I'm saying that protection isn't 100% reliable. So when a lady uses protection and still gets pregnant, your solution is, "Tough s#. Deal with it."
edit on 5-12-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia


Using that logic, a child born with downs syndrome will never have full brain capacity to make serious personal decisions. they are still considered people.
I still think that there needs to be a cutoff date.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Surely it is still an invasion of privacy without permission to film though? If i objected to the Police that someone was filming me without permission, they would have to delete the film. What is different here?


You're in the UK. I agree with you, and I think Canada's laws are similar.
From what I've seen watching so much American news, they don't have the same type of privacy laws that the UK and Canada are fortunate to have.
Zero privacy. ...



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You can look at it as "tough # deal with it"...

I look at it as you're responsible for your actions...



Don't have sex unless you want to procreate...
That's the best contraception.

But what about carnal urges?

That's your next line of defence.


Look mate I always enjoy your input but neither of us is gonna change the others mind.


Let's agree to disagree.



edit on 5-12-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: eletheia
Using that logic, a child born with downs syndrome will never have full brain capacity to make serious personal decisions. they are still considered people.
I still think that there needs to be a cutoff date.



I have already given you my personal views on cut off dates, which are more

stringent than that of the law.


Where as a downs syndrome IS and is not just considered a person

I don't believe the law would consider any serious personal decisions made by

one without legal intervention?



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

exactly. They need protected just like children.



posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71




I agree with the 14 week thing. There should be a cutoff.


Why? I never understood this logic from the pro-life community. Murder is murder, right? What difference does it make if it's done at 6 weeks, 24 weeks or 32 weeks?

Usually, women who choose to abort after 22 weeks do so because of a doctors suggestion, and because that's the only time that the viability of the fetus, birth defects and danger to the mother can be detected. Even then, some women will defy the odds and try to carry the pregnancy to term anyway. Sometime, this decision results in such danger to the mother, that late term abortions have to be done to save the life of the mother.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join