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.

 

One Simple Question Makes Pro Choice Activists visibly uncomfortable

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog




You did know Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with Federal or State ran programs , right ?


WRONG

Planned Parenthood is funded through Title X of the federal government, and supplemented through state medical repayment systems.

You're the one who was deflecting the perceived problems of woman's reproductive health back to a Democratic Congress. All the while, it's been well proven that Republicans, both on state and federal levels, are the ones proposing and supporting cut backs and clinic closures in the area of women's health needs, seeking to curtail women's rights to their own autonomy altogether.




posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: murphy22

ok soooo, we are animals that need sex so "keeping your knees together" is NOT an option. We will STILL have sex.

So we have to look at the responsibilities of what happens if or when the sperm makes it way to the egg...

There are many reasons to constitute abortion as a responsible choice.

Responsible choices may be bc the woman is too young, not mentally stable, accident... and so on...

If a woman is mature (mind and age) and her reason is simply "oh I just don't feel like it"...to me, that is NOT responsible.

However, she should still have the choice bc it is HER body.

If someone is on their second or third abortion...that person is NOT responsible...however, it is her body and she can be as irresponsible as she wants with herself.

See where I am going with this? There are a million reasons whey its considered responsible and probably another million that are not responsible...either way, it should be the womans choice, she can ruin her reputation, ruin her life, be as irresponsible as she wants.


edit on 15-3-2016 by veracity because: added responsible reasons to have an abortion



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: murphy22
a reply to: windword

No. "Responsible" would be, keeping your knees together. That's a good "choice". And? Just saying, No!


Abstinence has proven to be an unrealistic tactic in sex-ed. Besides, what about married women and women in committed relationships? Are they supposed to always "just say NO!" too?




edit on 15-3-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: KingKelson

I don't believe it is ever right to take a life. Even with rape is a result of a life.
I had a close friend whose sister was raped, because of their families beliefs they choose to keep the baby. This little girl was beautiful and the family loved her so much. She isn't looked at any differently because of the circumstances that happened. Yes, they were Christian and so am I.
So people abort babies because it's inconvenient, or an accident, or their too young. Hmmm, sounds selfish to me.
I've also seen the trauma and heart ache it causes women, the guilt they have to live with the rest of they're life for choosing to have an unborn baby ripped out of their bodies. I've loved and held women and young girls, crying because what they did. I just show them love, how can you bring back what's been thrown away?
10-27% of women have complications after abortions and end up hospitalized. There's chance of infection, infertility, convulsions, vomiting and other things.
If you choose to take a life at any stage, why do people who think it's morally wrong foot the bill?
Hence, taxpayers
afterabortion.org...



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113




if i had no kidneys, knocked you out, attached my blood stream to yours for a dialysis type system, are you not allowed to say i dont get to live off your body? am i allowed to use your body to live?

even if a fetus was a person, one person does not get special rights to live off another person because its a fetus. you are granting special rights to a fetus that aren't granted to regular adults.


What is this? Invasion of the body snatchers?

You are comparing a fetus to an adult. A fetus is a fetus, not an adult. It didn't climb into a womb on its own accord in order to gorge on nutrients. A fetus isn't an organ, it isn't a parasite, it isn't a tumor, it isn't a person—it is a fetus, a human fetus.

When does a fetus become a person in your eyes?

I'm pro-choice, but abortion is morally despicable given the preventability of pregnancy.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: shinethelight

I too think its selfish in a way, however, I still think that woman should have a choice to be selfish or not. I would not ever have an abortion, even if raped. That lil bean at 2 months old is as good as a baby to me (I am not Christian btw, just really feel), however, it is not my right, nor the governments right to make that choice for a woman.

Do you think that your choice should be everyone choice? Do you think the government should make those choices for women?

You can have your own feelings and not push them on others. And respecting peoples choices is a lot less stressful than hate and misery.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: shinethelight




So people abort babies because it's inconvenient, or an accident, or their too young. Hmmm, sounds selfish to me.


The only reasons people choose to have children are selfish reasons. They want a baby! They want a little clone of themselves running around, that will look up to them and love them, unconditionally. They want someone to love.

It's all selfish.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Maybe there is no escape from being selfish, we are all selfish, greedy, some more than others, but we all will walk all over anyone we can to get what we want.

Greed...the stank nasty glue that keeps us swarming around each other, getting what we want, and what we think we want as the world turns.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Fortunately, technology is catching up to compromise both sides of the argument.

Artificial wombs: The coming era of motherless births?

Soon, the government can extract the fetus, and keep it alive. I'm thinking something like the movie 'Universal Soldier'.

It's a win-win-win. The left gets their abortion, the right gets their life, and the government gets an army trained since birth to kill.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: vjr1113

so if i hook up my blood stream to my mother because i have no kidneys, is she allowed to say no?



If SHE hooks you up to her blood stream...then she should be responsible enough to accept the consequences. A fetus doesn't just attach itself to someone....

The point was raised that for some, abortion IS the responsible choice...but to me it's a rather blatant cop out.

Should there be circumstances where abortion is allowed? Absolutely.
Should there also be circumstances where abortion is NOT allowed? In my opinion, absolutely!

If there are women out there irresponsible enough to run around with their legs open and ignorant enough to not use protection...they should, IMHO, at least bear the 9 months of consequence for their ignorance. The fetus did not just "attach itself" to her....she made a conscious decision and was willing to accept the consequences...but when the consequences came, she chose not to accept them...and IMO this is become all too prevalent in our society.

Kids are maturing amid a culture in which people no longer own their choices, words or actions...a culture in which there's always someone to blame for why they do what they do. From sibling aggravations at home to classroom conflict at school, kids increasingly take less responsibility for their actions and find themselves growing into young adults who fail in the workplace or other areas of their personal life because they are unable to take correction...

If you're responsible enough to have sex...you should be responsible enough to face any "problems" that arise when you do....(and no, an abortion is more like running away from a problem instead of facing it...)

A2D

PS: I love what LM posted on this page as it echoes my thoughts precisely.

I'm pro-choice, but abortion is morally despicable given the preventability of pregnancy.

edit on 15-3-2016 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: jimmyx
"52nd trimester" ??...that's 13 years...."national 21 months" ??....that's almost 2 years....to answer your question, it's up to the mother....let me ask you.....what sort of internal surgery would you like, where other people decide if you get it or not, without your permission????
it's the woman's body, she decides....not a mythical god, not a bible, and not another person.


Except it's not just her. There is also the baby to consider.

At what point do you think a baby becomes a being we ought to consider in this equation?


if it's not born, it's not a baby yet....it's still a fetus, it's lungs are filled with liquid, and it's the mother's blood that supplies oxygen, food, water, along with the attached umbilical cord that also safely removes waste products from the fetus..... it's not a separate person.....why is this so hard to understand?


So, using this logic, would you support euthanizing any adult patient that was being kept alive solely by external life support?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Atsbhct
This is why it's pro "choice". No ones decision to abort, adopt away, or keep their child should be based on other people's opinions of what's okay/not okay.

Personally, I couldn't dream of choosing to abort a fetus that looked like baby, but that's on me. If someone wished to, that should be a private choice. I really don't think many women are choosing a "Cartmans Mom", aborting a fetus at 52 weeks, good reference though.

I think all people, including doctors, should be able to make their own private choice.

It should not be a choice when the baby is being delivered and you spike it's brain as it's being born. It's kind of disgusting anyone can justify that.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: jimmyx
"52nd trimester" ??...that's 13 years...."national 21 months" ??....that's almost 2 years....to answer your question, it's up to the mother....let me ask you.....what sort of internal surgery would you like, where other people decide if you get it or not, without your permission????
it's the woman's body, she decides....not a mythical god, not a bible, and not another person.


Except it's not just her. There is also the baby to consider.

At what point do you think a baby becomes a being we ought to consider in this equation?


if it's not born, it's not a baby yet....it's still a fetus, it's lungs are filled with liquid, and it's the mother's blood that supplies oxygen, food, water, along with the attached umbilical cord that also safely removes waste products from the fetus..... it's not a separate person.....why is this so hard to understand?


So, using this logic, would you support euthanizing any adult patient that was being kept alive solely by external life support?

Medical induced coma .. not a person anymore, might as well have the choice to kill it if you want.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: KingKelson

We are pretty accustomed to the 12 week cut off or 15 at the latest so why change it and why do people want to interfere in other people's lives so much?

Woman have the ultimate right to make this choice and its usually because of a man's mistake or could 't care less attitude. Leave them to it.

People forget that one of the problems in the third world (if you like that definition) is that people have too many kids they can't possibly afford to care for and its time people who wave the cultural flag for this problem got told a few home truths, in that they are cheekily expecting other people to support their kids and not themselves who are responsible ultimately for their own children. We have enough loafers in this country sitting claiming they work in helping their wives care for their kids, ha ha.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: superman2012
a reply to: KingKelson
Not sure about when an abortion should be legal but the one time it should not be allowed is if it is being used as birth control.



I'm confused with what you mean by saying that you aren't sure when abortion should be legal then say that it shouldn't be allowed as a means of birth control. So what is the difference between legality and "not allowed"?

I mean I'm not an expert on fetuses. I don't know anything about them. I am not a woman. I should have zero say on when and if an abortion should be legal.
My post was directly about women that get one time and again because they either can't afford the kids, don't want the burden of kids, or were too stupid to use any sort of birth control.


Well how are you planning on making that determination?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: matadoor
Yeah, I actually had the chance to sit and talk with an abortion supporter a couple of years ago. After one statement I changed her mind on the subject.

"The difference between a legal abortion and murder, is TIME."

Abort a baby at 3 months? Legal.

Purposely kill the baby as it emerges from the woman? Life in prison.

That statement can't be argued.



It is more viability than time,


If a foetus emerges in a natural way at 3, 4, 5 months it has no possibility of

survival.

If it emerges at 6 months, with care there is a good possibility of survival.

Although it is time that makes the difference .... the difference is more the ability

to survive, than that it is murder?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Agree2Disagree

It certainly IS taking responsibility to have an abortion. Not taking responsibility would be to just continue on with your life without going to the obstetrician for prenatal checkups. No taking responsibility would be to continue partying or drug taking or whatever and just letting the fetus stew until it's born with all kinds of health problems. Not taking responsibility would be to ignore the baby's cries when it's hungry because you couldn't be bothered. Not taking responsibility would be to throw the baby into the dumpster after its born to die slowly.

I've never had an abortion, but I know someone who did. It was an agonizing decision. It was not a pleasant experience - it's not exactly like going to the salon and getting your nails done. It took guts to make the appointment, to get through the humiliation of pre-abortion counseling, to walk past those harpies with their signs, screaming in her face how she was going to hell. It took guts going through the procedure. She went through all that because she knew it was the best decision for her, for her existing kids that she was already struggling to take care of, and for the unwanted child she was carrying. It was not an easy decision, but it was the most responsible one for her at that moment in her life.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: frostie

So if a pregnant woman is murdered, does one or two people die in your opinion?



If a woman is pregnant it must be assumed she has decided against abortion

and has decided to carry the foetus to a full term baby?


Therefor if she is murdered .... surely it will be two lives taken?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:32 AM
link   
I don't want to upset those people who can't have children but want them; as I am sure any offspring of theirs will be cherished and loved and you deserve to have what you crave because you would make awsome parents. So if you don't want to read what seems to be a very coldhearted point of view, don't read on. This is not meant for you.


To me it's simple. If nature does it, it's ok. There are many animals that have deliberate abortions. For reasons humans would be called callous if they used it as an explanation.
Viable fetuses are aborted deliberately before or during a harsh winter, or during time of stress, using certain plants.


The African Elephant in Kenya uses Boraginacinae, which leads to abortion [as there is no winter in Kenya, this is usually done for stress reasons or to keep a balanced population]

Chimps also abort deliberately for similar reasons:
goo.gl...


"Dr. Joan Garey from New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine has also observed these chimps eating leaves from certain Ziziphus (jujub) and Combretum species, which are used by the local women to induce abortions. Consequently, in a paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Primatologists in 1997, Garey speculated that the chimps may use these plants deliberately for the same purpose, as a means of reducing the size of the local chimp population if it has become too large." (Shuker 2001:214)


Does [Deer] are also know to abort before a harsh winter by eating certain plants.

Not only that but animals do even 'worse'. They eat their offspring for nutrition if they are starving and/or the parents are unable to feed them for one reason or another [harsh winters are again or stress].


In my opinion we are nature [as much as people want to be 'above it', LOL]. We are animals and therefore I accept when a mother doesn't want to or can't look after their babies, it is her right to do whatever she feels is best.
Remember that animal and human babies are also often killed after birth by their mothers, where contraception isn't an option.

There is always a reason for it.

Does this hold true for silly little girls getting pregnant because they 'can't be bovvered' to use contraception?
Well IMO, if they are that thick, I can only assume that their offspring will be just the same, so whatever floats their boat, it's their offspring.

The reason I can talk about this so 'callously' [I call it down to earth] is that babies are really not that special in nature.
They can be made in seconds by any fertile idiot who wishes to do so. They are not 'special' or 'precious' until they are adults and have developed a personality.
The reason we 'think' babies are special is so that those that are wanted survive. Human babies are absolutely helpless and rely on their parents to protect them, so nature makes [most] people feel that their offspring is the most special thing in the world but in the great scheme of things they are not.
[It's not that the human race is about to get extinct].

I also think that the most 'valuable' humans are people in their 50's who have established themselves and have gained knowledge or abilities that take many years of effort to gain. In a disaster, those should be rescued first as they are very hard to replace.


But Nature is Nature and if a woman wants to abort, for whatever reason, at whatever time, it's absolutely fine with me. Plus there is always a reason if you dig deeper. Be it mental illness or rape or whatever, the reasons are there and would impact negatively on the child and it's life.

Nature/ Mothers know best, nobody else should have a say in the matter.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Like I said, I was just voicing my opinion. I know there are those people out there who feel the same as you that think it IS the responsible choice, I just don't feel the same. This is the 21st century and pregnancy is highly preventable....granted, there are extenuating circumstances when I believe that abortion is a viable option, but in cases where ignorance or irresponsibility is the sole reason for the fetus in the first place, I don't think it should be considered an option.

What made your friend choose to abort rather than birthe and adopt out?

A2D




top topics



 
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join