It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

I Hate the Abortion Issue

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:18 AM
a reply to: MteWamp

Ah yes, abstinence. Let me just welcome you to the real world... that isn't going to happen. Abstinence is not real, not for the bulk of society anyway. Our teen years (and beyond) just aren't wired that way. Hormones are real. In case you don't remember... sex is one of those magical things in life that feels infinitely amazing, and when you're a teenager everything in you is telling you to want it. The fact that our prudish country makes it a taboo thing to talk about and constantly attempts to remove sex education from schools isn't helping either.

posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 03:51 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

Right there with you.

I personally am very against abortion and believe life starts before heart beats and the like, I believe it's wrong and made sure to marry someone with the same views.

On the other side, if I were a law maker, I would vote pro-choice. I believe in a person's right to medical care, which abortion is a part of, and also privacy. I'd be against asking why they are aborting unless it was third term, in which case the baby is undeniably a person just as much as you or I, and can exist outside the mother.

It causes a dilemma, but I try to be reasonable and logical, and use the Constitution as support, as you seem to do

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 10:11 AM
Sounds like you have too much free time on your hands. I'm sure your state has several hundred- if not thousands- of children available for adoption through CPS!

Let's get all them taken care of before we start worrying about what-might-be in someone else's body.

PS I'm currently pregnant. Totally planned. Totally wanted. But if I were to go in for an ultrasound and find a serious deformity- not conducive to life- or any quality of life- I would have an abortion in a heartbeat. And you have no right to tell me I HAVE to carry to term, and risk my own life going through delivery of a fetus with no chance of an even relatively normal life. And if you think you have the right to tell me what I should or shouldn't do....well, go back to my original suggestion. Maybe if you had a couple of bed ridden, non verbal 8 year olds and you had all those diapers and feeding tubes to deal with- you wouldn't have so much time to worry about what everyone else is doing.

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 10:30 AM
a reply to: MrsNonSpecific

Bingo education is the answer to so much. Plus funding to sex education programs for adults. The last thing women need in the usa is PP to be shut down.
Sorry, PP?
How much is birth control in the US? and do you get as much choice as in the UK? Or more cos it's private?
1. Combi pill (various brands)
2. Progesterone Only pill (various brands)
3. Diaphragm
4. Implant
5. Coil
6. Injection
All free.
Except the morning after pill which if you are 25 is £20!!

PP stands for planned parenthood. It is a low cost clinic that has locations all over the country. All the conservatives are throwing a hissy fit because of the undercover 'sting' videos (shot and edited by pro-life folks) that supposedly show a director haggling over fetus body parts with a research company person 'purchasing' said parts.

Fact: Nothing was bought or sold. The mothers getting the abortions sign a consent to donate the resulting tissue to research. PP charges handling and shipping fees (live tissue- not cheap). No laws were broken.

Now all these Republicans want to shut down ALL the PP clinics......but offer nothing in return! PP are easy to find, easily recognizable, you get quality care, same day service and all at a heck of a lot cheaper than ANY where else. 97% of their services have nothing to do with abortions. In fact, I went to PP all through college, and even once I got older and had insurance- I still went there for the short wait times and it was STILL cheaper. I had no idea until recently that PP even did abortions. And even the clinics that DO, charge $400 to the person getting it. I don't know WHO thinks the government is paying for all these abortions. It's the people receiving them. And since A LOT of women choose to have an abortion because the 'loving father' turns out to be a psycho deadbeat- it's not even the 'fathers' paying for them. The women with no help and no means to take care of herself has to scrape together that fee.

There's all sorts of programs that will help a pregnant woman make it through the they can SELL the baby for $30,000 a pop! Talk about baby brokering! There is no program that I've ever heard of that helps a pregnant woman keep her baby.

Anyway, PP is essential to the healthcare of poor to middle class women all over the country. Shutting it down would be an absolute travesty, there is NOTHING in place whatsoever that is remotely comparable.

Pelvic exam (needed for birth control) $80 at PP
$140 regular OBGYN

The pill $30/month at PP $30 + depending on the brand through regular pharmacy

IUD (quasi long term BC) $500-$1000 for the IUD itself plus $300 for insertion/removal
I think even PP has to charge $400 for an IUD, and probably less for the 'service' but that's still a buttload of money!

Morning after pill $50 Through PP- $30-$60

edit on 4-12-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: format

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 10:39 AM

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: olaru12

At TWENTY wow, I know of one friend who did this at 25..

This topic makes me scratch my head the most when I see and hear from women who are on the 5th plus abortion, I think they need to make it harder for these people to get pregnant, when clearly they are more concerned with partying and thinking later.

Makes me want a vasectomy, and everyone I know has considered them a lot, ahhh it is sad that society just blazes along and thinks this is a nice viable solution that needs to be at the forefront.

5th plus abortion? REALLY? I want some juicy details on that one, cuz it seems like that statistic came right out your butt!

Of the way-less-than-1% of women who get abortions (plural) and have a frequent flier card punched full....don't you think that's exactly who should NOT be having a baby?

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 01:33 PM
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

OMG! It is scandalous how women's reproductive organ maintenance can cost so much.

In the UK I think you only go to a OBGYN if you are pregnant or lady downstairs issues. Most sexual health isn't even dealt with by a Dr. now the nurses do it.

PP Is such an important service and it is not something that should be stinted on.

Thank you for your info UK/US differences on these things fascinate me.

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:53 PM
a reply to: MrsNonSpecific

Yeah, when I read your list: A, B, C, D....all free in the UK I about wet myself with giddy laughter! Bwahahahaha! Free?! Whoo hoo! That's a riot!

And even $30 doesn't SOUND like much, but when you're a struggling college student like I was $30 a month was A LOT. There was a burger joint around the corner and I would literally spend $1.25 on this huge thing of french fries they had...and THAT was my meal for the day.

Poor women are literally having to scrape pennies together to pay for a yeast infection treatment and all these ya hoos want to shut down all the clinics that make it anywhere near affordable??? And- like I said- offer NO substitute for the definite void it would leave in basic care for MILLIONS of women.

Pro life!

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:50 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

My question for the "pro-life" people is..... how many of these forced pregnancy children are you going to adopt? Usually "pro-lifers" are also anti-welfare. Are you gonna force these women to have children and then turn your backs on them once they're born?

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:36 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

The key to a solution is recognizing the fetus is actually a human being. If someone has a miscarriage they lost a baby. If they have an abortion they sucked out an annoying fetus. Then you look at will. Can a being born to humans make a choice while in the womb. No. But the human who crated it can. Therefore the human that destroys a baby is a selfish prick. End of story and no need to sweat over the difference.

If those who say they don't want a baby, fine, have protected sex, or give birth and give it way. It would be better with another human than a selfish one like you anyway.

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:54 PM
a reply to: millert25

Do you understand the emotional and physical toll carrying a child to term can be? It's not as simple as handing over a business card and walking away. You are birthing a child through your own body, not to mention the aftermath of your body still thinking you have a child to nurse, then the physical scars, stretch marks, surgical scars and the mental trauma.

Yes, I think the limits of when you have a termination are a little long, and towards to end of the legal limits you will be giving birth to a child, not just, sorry gents, a period.

It is a huge huge HUGE life altering decision, and those of us who are possibly never going to be faced with it, should not judge.

It is not our life, our circumstances, nor our bodies.

Preventatives as you suggest are available, but at ridiculous costs. If the USA are serious about women's health and the majority of Republicans don't like abortions maybe they should consider making contraception free!!

Commy I hear you shout, it's a POV and a solution which are wholly juxtaposed against each other. So either push contraception and sex ed or put up and shut up about abortions.

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 07:46 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

"pro-lifers" are the most uneducated small simple-minded selfish people on the planet.

Some facts below:

1: Preventing abortions causes multiple people elsewhere to die. This is 2015 not 1401, abortions actually save lives these days.

2: The world is overpopulated and there is not enough food / water / room for our current population. Bringing in more mouths to feed especially in 1st world countries causes multiple people to die in third world countries because there is not enough resources.

3: Many "pro-lifers" are overweight or morbidly obese. They have eaten the food that would have sustained the lives of many others out there with no food. They could have shared but instead they ate it all and those other people died because they had no food to eat.. because "pro-life".

4: Many "pro-lifers" are responsible for harming and killing innocent babies and children in that they are against vaccines and modern medicine. Easily preventable deadly diseases are then spread due to their ignorant uneducated selfishness to the most vulnerable and defeceless, usually babies. But wait.. I thought they were "pro-life"? Seems they just want the babies to be born so they can watch them die in person??

5: Tissues used from the aborted fetus often are used to save the lives of multiple suffering babies / children that were born with problems, and without that available fetal tissue these babies who have already been born would die. "pro-life" once again here right? Forcing an unwanted baby to be born at the cost of multiple lives of already born and living babies that need help.

6: "pro-lifers" have created videos full of lies and propoganda for personal selfish reasons and released them. Then other "pro-lifers" saw it and at least one of them went out and murdered people at a womans health center. Why, because "pro-life"

7: Almost all "pro-lifers" are Christian. They say Christianity has great morals and is against such things. In Canada where I live Christianity has murdered, tortured, abused, kidnapped, brainwashed and genocided tens of thousands+ of our First Nations peoples children and babies. This happened in the last 150 years and only ended in 1980's. Don't believe me just use google and you'll find out.

8: Many "pro-lifers" say that there is never a case ever for an abortion under any circumstance. So that means the baby who was recently born pregnant with twins (((Yes you read that right, a baby was recently born already pregnant with twins inside their uterus and were developing normally - a very very rare thing but it does happen))). These "pro-lifers" would have let the baby literally rip apart and die from this affliction, because "pro-life" So "pro-life" that they would let 3 babies die so no abortion would happen.


posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:31 PM
As a long time convert to prolife I do relate to your rant
The line between so called free will and ethics is hard to walk.

My favorite bumper sticker is "It is hard to be pro choice when you are the one being killed"

I will not condemn but I will stand up for the right to exist. It is a slippery path.

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 10:02 PM
Why do you need to resolve it? Just don't get an abortion yourself. You don't need to "have a position" on abortion. If someone asks you just tell them that you think abortion is at worst, a form of murder, and at best a terrible tragedy, but that you don't actively seek changes in legislation to address this.

Here's my point: our government is out their killing innocent people everyday and using money you and I provided them to do it. More to the point, they are killing people and starting wars so that US corporations can become more profitable.

posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 12:49 PM

originally posted by: millert25
a reply to: Metallicus

My question for the "pro-life" people is..... how many of these forced pregnancy children are you going to adopt? Usually "pro-lifers" are also anti-welfare. Are you gonna force these women to have children and then turn your backs on them once they're born?

When I had my son I paid $3500 for a midwife, but signed up for pregnancy Medicaid- in case of emergency. I ended up with an emergency c-section, which was covered. Yay! And my son was covered until he turned one. Dr visits, checkups, vaccines, etc. The minute he turned ONE they kicked his a$$ off! Now I make $200 too much to qualify for CHIP or Medicaid, and Obamacare wants to charge me $200 per month for a plan with a $12,000 deductible (basically- keep paying for everything out of pocket, like I'm already doing, but pay them $200 TOO).

So.... fetus= yay! save the fetus
1 yo baby= get a job, ya effin mooch

Dr visit = minimum $95
dr visit + single vaccine = $140-$160
1 ER visit for my daughter (3 breathing treatments no diagnosis)= $10,000 -still paying on this one
eye exam and glasses for my daughter = $460

I could go on, but you get the picture. 'Eff babies and small children, we just want to have a strong moral stance on hypothetical babies.'
edit on 5-12-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 03:49 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Metallicus

I believe your problem is that you may believe too much of the pro-life rhetoric that always tries to equate pro-choice to being pro-abortion. But there is a reason pro-choice is labeled the way it is, because people like you exist.

Why when this guy states what HE feels PERSONALLY do you feel a need to come into a thread where people are actually discussing the topic and blame it on some other group of people? How about leaving the finger pointing for a thread where someone is attacking your team?

You tend to try to change discussion into arguments. I doubt that is welcome.

posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 03:53 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

I've been in the same state of confusion for sometime now...for most of the same reasons. I've had family members that had to make such decisions and I see it like this. Even with my own personal beliefs that it is killing, I can justify that based upon the outcome. Is the result of an abortion more beneficial than having the baby? Sometimes are not the right time, age, etc. Other times it would damage more than just the child's life if the child was born.

While it may not be an answer...logical justification of which choice causes the least damage is acceptable. At least for me.
edit on 12/5/2015 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 03:54 PM
edit on 12/5/2015 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 08:51 PM
First of all, let me state that I am Catholic. So I think with this my stance on abortion is clear to every one.
But even for those who are libertarian, it is not difficult to be against abortion without resorting to any religious argument. A libertarian will have to admit there are limits to individual liberties, and that one can't perform any action that causes harm to others. A fetus and an embryo are not part of a woman's body, it has a different genetic code and therefore is another human being: there isn't justification for a pregnant woman to kill her baby in the womb, just like she can't kill him after birth. What is the difference? Some argue that a fetus depends on her mother to live, and therefore is not a human being because doesn't have an independent existence. But can newborn babies live on their own? Can 3 year old children live on their own, without assistance of grown ups? No, they need constant help. Arguments in favor of abortion can just as easily be used to support the killing of babies, young childs, handicapped and elderly people, and Pope Francis is correct when he talks about the "throw-away culture" that contaminated modern society.

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 03:29 AM
a reply to: Romanov

Before a foetus is viable there is only ONE person in the whole

world that can develop that foetus to viability.

After viability there are millions in a position to care for the

resulting baby.

So despite the DNA not being the same the existence is entirely

dependent ONE person .... woman / host / mother.

Doesn't every one's body belong to them alone and not the state?

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 12:30 PM
a reply to: eletheia

True. But the dependency during pregnancy is purely biological, and hardly makes any extra demand on the woman besides some discomforts, carrying an extra weight in the final months, and avoiding some harmful habits (smoking, drinking). Taking care of a newborn is more demanding, and of a 2-3 years old is even more so (at least this is my personal experience - my 3 years old son is unstoppable). So if a woman doesn't want the child, just bear with these 9 months and give the baby in adoption after birth, and she will avoid the huge compromise and labor of growing up a child, which is the truly hardest part. Way better to do this than killing another person.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in