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.

 

Kansas governor signs abortion law

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Yes I have had two miscarraiges, not very pleasant, I almost died during one.
I begged the nurses to leave me be.

Still to this day would I have wished to have the child.
WIS




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   
A reply to WIS:

Your detractors have no concept of real courage, or sacrifice, or humility - only selfishness and arrogant pride.
edit on 8-4-2015 by Seamrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: WalkInSilence
a reply to: olaru12

Yes I have had two miscarraiges, not very pleasant, I almost died during one.
I begged the nurses to leave me be.

Still to this day would I have wished to have the child.
WIS


And that should be YOUR choice! Not the purview of some bloated governmental agency telling other women what to do with their bodies; usually from the opinion of old white men. See the disconnect?

That should be a private matter between the woman and her doctor. The Kansas state government has no place in this.

I find it astonishing that conservatives hate the government until it suits their partisan issues, like this one.

I prefer the government to stay out of my personal life. I have a very hard time giving any right wingers any credibility on anything as they
seem so willing and ready to grant others freedom...only on their terms....hypocrites!!


edit on 8-4-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

And that should be YOUR choice!

That should be a private matter between the woman and her doctor.




A totally self-centered, self-serving outlook on human life.

Not one mention of the unborn life growing within the woman!

No 'doctor' (read butcher) should come between a mother and the unique life within her.

The ultimate right, is the right to LIFE.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I don't know if Mom had a choice, I know I had twenty five wonderful, incredible years with that person.

I know she loved me.
I know she taught me every thing I needed to know about being a human being.
I know she taught me how to love.
I know she taught me to respect everything, those who oppose me, those who hate me, those I don't understand.
I know she taught me to find the beauty in every single moment of my life. In nature, people, the universe.
She was the most wonderful being.
One day in her precense would could make up for a millenium of commpassion.

And when her time came she gave me another lesson.
Stay With Me. We stand by each other.

Why am I defending her choice/my self?
This is sad. Defending fifty plus years of life. Sad.
I am crying because of ignorance. Crying. Emotional yes, I have had a rewarding life.
WIS



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Seamrog

Forgive my ignorance but I don't understand?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: WalkInSilence

Your mother knew that the life growing within her was a blessing, bestowed with an un-destroyable soul.

The callous among us would mock her for that understanding, as they view it as a 'blob of flesh.'

A pregnancy, in their eyes is a burden that is to be removed - a consequence to a lifestyle that in their mind should have no consequences.

A person who can accept the murder of an innocent life for convenience as a matter of 'personal choice' by definition has no understanding of sacrifice and the courage it takes to make a sacrifice on behalf of another.

I think your ability to respect such people is remarkable.

I don't have that ability.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: WalkInSilence




Why am I defending her choice/my self?


I'm not asking you to defend your mother's choice, or your life. I'm asking you why you honor your mother's choice, but want to remove that choice from other women suffering the same condition.


edit on 8-4-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Sremmos80


Hey, I dare anyone to watch the informational videos for expectant mothers posted and tell me it is OK to kill it.

Seriously.
I watched the videos.

I still support a woman's right to choose. I personally would never wait until 13 weeks to have an abortion myself, but then again I've never had to make that choice because I'm not an idiot and practice safe sex.


Well, don't have a Chrons attack and throw up your birth control pill while having an extremely emotional cry fest and last chance sex act with your husband you've just recently told you are divorcing.

Sometimes things just happen.

--------------------

If abortions were free via the government, no woman would need to take weeks to find the money to pay for an abortion.


edit on 8-4-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WalkInSilence








Why am I defending her choice/my self?






I'm not asking you to defend your mother's choice, or your life. I'm asking you why you honor your mother's choice,


Why should I honor Her, she loved me, as I posted before she gave me life, compassion, understanding.


but want to remove that choice from other women suffering the same condition.


What if they (the children) had been able to travel all over the world as I have, read wonderful books, encounter amazing people, we don't know, do we.

WIS



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: PageLC14
And that's why I said there are plenty of ways to avoid getting pregnant in the first place. More money should be going into that sort of stuff than into killing helpless babies. If people can not take the necessary precautions while having sex then they need the life lesson that's handed to them. Like I was.


Newsflash: Those methods of avoiding pregnancy are not foolproof. Oh, yeah, and there's also this thing called rape and coercion. And then severe life debilitating defects, ect. Welcome to the real world.

Your life lessons are your own. Do not try to enforce them on others, unless you walked in their shoes.





All of that can result in two people planning for a child as well. Even if its bad planning.


It is far more likely to arise from unwanted, unplanned pregnancies. Like, WAY more likely.

Adoption as a one-size-fits-all solution is plain idiotic where we already have an overload of unwanted babies dumped into a system that does not have anywhere near the number of families wanting to adopt. Most kids put up for adoption never find permanent homes.

Oh, and by the way, it's not just the woman that must "suffer the consequences" of her actions. Society suffers the consequences via overloaded, bloated welfare systems, unwanted kids growing up to be anti-social criminals overloading our prison system, violence and loss of life and property.

By the way, nice touch solely blaming the woman, when last time I checked, the only way a woman can get pregnant is if a man gets her pregnant. What about his "consequences"? You do realize that many women have abortions under pressure from the man who impregnated them, right?

Come out and visit the real world sometime.




posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: WalkInSilence

Being pregnant while also having uterine cancer is life threatening. What if the pregnant woman wants to continue living? Shouldn't she have that choice?



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Honestly Wind, I don't know.
I really don't, who am I to jugde.
I bow my head I submit. I don't know.

I know life is precious.
Thank you for challenging me in a most kind manner.

What does the OP have to say of all this?
WIS



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   
The thing is, abortion is always a choice... it just comes down to whether that choice is considered legal.

Abortions are going to happen whether you like it or not... the question is do we force those abortions into potentially life threatening "back ally" scenarios, or do have compassion for women that are forced to make that difficult choice (for whatever reason), and provide a caring environment that fosters education, and finding the best resolution for an unfortunate situation... without needlessly making people into criminals.

It's impossible to adequately enforce a "no abortion" policy, while still retaining the rights of all individuals (if you consider an unborn an individual) involved. So, do we give the choice to the functioning mother, or to an undeveloped individual who has no voice?.

The reality is that the fetus isn't an independent individual until it can survive without the symbiotic support of the mother... and while you may consider it heartless and selfish, it is still the woman's choice if they want to allow another entity to reside within them for 9 months, and subject the host mother to considerable physical stress.

Just carrying a baby to term comes with its inherent risks, and who is anyone to impose their will on another person's propensity for risk? A woman may just "feel" that her life may be in danger by carrying the baby, and that's her prerogative with her own body.

A woman always has a choice regardless of any documented laws, or government mandated processes... if abortion is illegal, we will just have more women inexplicably taking up intensive activities like "horse riding" or "kick boxing" to force a miscarriage, or performing self-surgery with a coat-hanger.

It's the woman's choice until the child's viability... Pro-lifer's need to get over their control freak mindset, and not limit choices of the individual.
edit on 9-4-2015 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Krazysh0t

LOL,

You guys are ok to charge "Felony Animal Cruelty" to a woman who killed some damn goldfish on the premise that it was "cruel" but dismembering babies is OK?

LOL
LOL
LOL

Watch the video from parents magazine on the 2nd trimester and tell me that isn't cruel.






A goldfish is sentient. A 2nd trimester human isn't. Pretty easy distinction there.



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
So Kansas is leading the way in new and interesting ways to restrict abortion rights.


There is no "right" to having an abortion.


Approximately 11% of induced abortions are performed in the second trimester. In 2002, there were an estimated 142,000 second-trimester abortions in the United States


In 2002, that means that there was approximately 1,290,909 abortions (assuming there were no third-trimester abortions)?!?!

That's a disgusting number.



So basically, this law is a run around way of banning second trimester abortions (except in cases where it threatens the mother's life).


And I'm okay with that...I'm not a fan of laws that protect the harming of other people.



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
A goldfish is sentient. A 2nd trimester human isn't. Pretty easy distinction there.


A 2nd trimester is a human, though, and murder laws generally (I haven't read the specifications in every state) don't make exceptions for your claimed "non-sentient beings."

Someone on artificial life support and a feeding tube isn't exactly a sentient being, but you can't just go and dismember them and toss them in the trash.

If you're going to use a terrible comment to try and justify the killing of a human being, at least do so intelligently and with some sort of respect for human life.



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey




There is no "right" to having an abortion.


Incorrect.


The (Supreme) Court deemed abortion a fundamental right under the United States Constitution, thereby subjecting all laws attempting to restrict it to the standard of strict scrutiny.
en.wikipedia.org...




And I'm okay with that...I'm not a fan of laws that protect the harming of other people.


Embryos and fetuses aren't people.


edit on 9-4-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey


His vomitous reply demonstrates how muddled his understanding of human life is.

Is sentience now the qualification for what constitutes human life, or the distinction between when an infant can be hacked apart and when it can't?

He can't even anticipate what answering those questions mean, or if there is any demonstrable answer to those questions.

Vomit.

I projectile vomit on these people.



posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

Embryos and fetuses aren't people.





Incorrect.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join