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.

 

Right To Life Historic Measure (that includes protection of every person from the time of fertilizat

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Well Nighthawk, let's put it this way:
If you have a varied population, which you have learned from history and news reports, is capable of almost anything (be it good or evil or somewhere inbetween), the potential that something like that could happen is not beyond possibility. It may not be the norm, but that does not mean it doesn't happen anywhere, ever.




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 





What would you rather have, women on kitchen tables with a coat hanger stuck inside them, or safe and legal abortions for those that feel they need them?


mwahaha, forced sterilization of males sounds good to me!
if they can't behave with that most creative and deadly of devices, they can just have the danger part removed.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Probably covered up during the Clinton administration, along with a LOT of other stuff about partial birth abortion.
Hillary's most generous contributions came from her friends in the abortion racket from what I read in the 90's.

Most women Don't care about planned parenthood until they are ALREADY pregnant.
MOST all women who are associated with them after that have an abortion.
Read the statistics. I don't have them right now.

Most of these women are not stupid, they know what birth control is.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Notice how we have this huge population of unwanted children, all over the world? Wonder how that happens? And ohmygosh the amount of children with only a mom because the dad was just doing his thang and didn't really want kids!! (followed by 20 more exclamation points) Who is the problem here?
They don't want to raise children but stil want to sow the wild oats. Hmmm, sounds like a split personality problem.

Solution, just fix that bugger!

Then you can sow and sow and not actually give birth to anything, thereby not forcing some hapless female to have to make horrible and life threatening decisions. Ya bastiges!




[edit on 31-5-2008 by undo]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
Well now, I agree with you on this, but that's from our "democratic" perspective. Because they aren't democratic, doesn't mean they are repressed. It just means they aren't democratic. I agree that a republic democracy seems superior to communism, the problem basically boils down to cultural values. But, if you look at their society and its order, they are a well-oiled machine considering how many people they have. You should scan the Google Earth images of their cities and countryside. Not a technologically or civilly backward country by any stretch of the imagination. I think "politically repressive" is a better way of saying it. Culturally repressive gives the impression that they are living in the dark ages and that is definitely not the case.


To some degree you are correct. However, the fact is China also actively suppresses a number of sub-cultures such as Buddhists (especially in Tibet) and the Uygurs. Beijing's policy has been to invade other territories and treat their peoples as second-class citizens. Also, I would assert that "political repression" IS cultural repression, as politics and the system of government that exist in a society are an integral part of that society's culture. American culture as we know it would not exist were this not a democratically-elected representative republic. China's culture is stagnant due the the suppression of new ideas and information among the People. In my mind this certainly counts as repression of culture.

But, again, that's neither here nor there. We cannot change China in any meaningful way; whatever change happens must and eventually will come from within China itself. It also has little to do at this point in the abortion debate here in the States.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
mwahaha, forced sterilization of males sounds good to me!
if they can't behave with that most creative and deadly of devices, they can just have the danger part removed.



Despite the joking tone, you seem to be relying on the State to impose the moral norm. My position is that the State has no right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body. As such, if I was female, and I became pregnant and wished to have an abortion, the state can cram it with walnuts if it doesn't like my choice.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by InSpiteOf]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Well Nighthawk, let's put it this way:
If you have a varied population, which you have learned from history and news reports, is capable of almost anything (be it good or evil or somewhere inbetween), the potential that something like that could happen is not beyond possibility. It may not be the norm, but that does not mean it doesn't happen anywhere, ever.


But you cannot base sweeping changes in public policy on the wildest of "what if's".

Can you prove it is happening or not?

If you cannot, then the debate is over, at least in terms of basing your position on hazy fears of some kind of demon worship.

If you can prove isolated instances then there are mechanisms in place already to remove offenders from society and punish them, and no changes need to be made to the law.

If, as you and the good Reverend suggest, there is a provable conspiracy of Satan worship and ritual fetal sacrifice among the whole of the medical profession, then we have bigger problems than abortion.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 


I'm not talkign about the state. I'm talking about a cultural norm, enforced by popular opinion. Example, a guy and a gal on their first date at a restaurant:

gal: "Dude, you fertile?"
guy: "Umm, yeah."
gal: "See ya." (gets up from dinner table and calls her sister or something to bring her home)

Make it unpopular for men to presume to date if they are a loaded weapon



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   
But NOOOO, instead we have to put the ownus on women, who have to make even worse decisions because NOW the conception is started.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


I see, sorry for the misconception. But before we go into the realm of creating a new cultural norm, cant we simply try and practice responsibility? Or try and re-enforce a cultural norm of responsibility?

Of course, if you see this happening in the future, I suggest you buy stock in a sperm bank or two, Im sure their clientèle list will skyrocket.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by InSpiteOf]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Every time that I see news on topics like suppressing abortion or at least trying to go around the bushes to suppress abortion, makes me laugh.

Its certain groups of radical religious some just like muslin radicals that wants to change the face of our nations religious views hiding behind names like pro-life groups and high moral groups.

What this people are after if the right to control the reproductive parts of women bodies because they see our nation falling into corruption and immorality due to the sins of women, after all it was Eve the one that succumbed to the devil in the garden of eden as by creation myth.

Woman reproductive parts are not spare parts or interchangeable parts, that the church or the state issues with licences, they are the property of the women in our human species.

You can no legislate body parts because that will bring a rage of more dangerous complications.

Now I see no groups trying to control the male genitalia that can be use as a deadly weapon, in rape, and forcing women into sexual acts without their consent.

Why because is after all a male dominated society.

But read my lips, is not going to happen



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 


Well at least for non-married people ya know?
Once you have two people dedicated to each other and who want
children, there's no reason to worry. Rather than traditional sterilization, I'm sure there's some procedure that could make it temporary that's more secure than prophylactics (did i spell that right?)! Why does all the responsbility have to be on the female? And if it is all on the female and she has no choice, then who in the hell's idea was it to encourage women to be sexually free? What kind of freedom is it when you stand to lose your life because some guy only wanted a one night stand or a relationship he could use to make his girlfriend jealous or about a hundred other potential less than noble reasons?



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
Probably covered up during the Clinton administration, along with a LOT of other stuff about partial birth abortion.


Truth about "Partial-Birth Abortion"

More

The Basic facts in Overview

"Partial-Birth Abortion" is essentially a load of feces, a politically-charged term created to scare the American public.


Hillary's most generous contributions came from her friends in the abortion racket from what I read in the 90's.


"Abortion Racket"?? Could you please quantify this statement? And also, please provide a bibliography of what you read so I can look it over for myself.


Most women Don't care about planned parenthood until they are ALREADY pregnant.
MOST all women who are associated with them after that have an abortion.
Read the statistics. I don't have them right now.

Most of these women are not stupid, they know what birth control is.


And many of them do not use it because they get conflicting info from people who would rather they remain ignorant, or because their local subculture (such as their religion) frowns upon it. For some it's because they're raped. And for others it's because they thought the relationship they were in would last forever and that their partner would stick around, only to dump her when her bump started showing. How any of this is the fault of a "Satanic medical community" or part of any "racket" or "conspiracy" is beyond me.

Here's a question: Do you consider birth control, including the Morning After Pill, to be just as bad as abortion?

[edit on 5/31/2008 by The Nighthawk]

[edit on 5/31/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
God, Guns, Abortion, and Gay Rights... all topics are USED by the GOP during major elections to bring out the voters. It starts in the Churches with religious leaders telling their flock that the GOP is all that stands between them and DFL Satanists. Fear mongering at it's best...

This is just a political ploy by the GOP who has no qualms about using The Religious Right to get more votes... then they go murder the children of other nations for OIL.

I am all for a discussion, or laws that concern the will of the people. Just keep these initiatives off of the Presidential Ballot!!!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
To paraphrase the great Carlin, ever notice how the pro life people want nothing to do with that life once it is born untill it turns 18 and can then go to war to die? And another thing, why is it all the public speakers against abortion the least likely to get pregnant cause there is not enough booze out there? Furthermore, to everyone praising the reverand(all two of you) he makes you look incredibly dumb when you praise him and he has obviously done all this as a ruse. Why do I know that? Because no one is dumb enough to believe that abortion is a massive conspiracy by satan in order to get baby fetus to a wearhouse in california for some supposed fallen angel that is an owl and a fire god all at once(by the way, is it fire god or fallen angel? can't be both)



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Finn1916
 


Well let's backdate it to the sexual revolution, which ended up causing even more problems than it fixed.

The descending order of insanity it caused:

1. Millions of unwanted pregnancies
2. Millions of abortions
3. The opportunity to abuse your dates by screwing them and then telling them when they are pregnant that you don't want it and they should abort it.
4. A huge population of children with only a female parent, who grow up with no dad and/or a string of males who date the mom and try to be their dad, when their real dad should be doing the job but doesn't cause the whole flippin' thing has been placed on the woman's shoulders and she's been disarmed by putting social pressure on sexual promiscuity!
5. The onset of sexually transmitted diseases that not only make you ill but kill you dead!
6. Dead teenage females who bought the whole sexual freedom concept, got pregnant and died in childbirth due to complications, for a guy who wasn't even serious in the first place!

This all happened nearly simultaneously!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Woman reproductive parts are not spare parts or interchangeable parts, that the church or the state issues with licences, they are the property of the women in our human species.

You can no legislate body parts because that will bring a rage of more dangerous complications.


I don't think many people are opposed to abortion if the woman's life is in danger but...

Is this a procedure taking out "body parts" that belong to the woman?




Dang you should see the real pictures of these, as you say "body parts". It truly is amazing that a "body part" can have a brain, feel pain, and has a beating heart.

In the United States, a woman can have a baby and drop themoff at a hospital or fire station with no questions asked. There are thousands of couples in the United States that are willing to adopt a baby and provide a good life.

There are two reasons why a woman has an abortion. Either their life is in danger or they are selfish. Destroying a baby because of selfishness is not a valid reason since they can just give the baby away without worry.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
Rather than traditional sterilization, I'm sure there's some procedure that could make it temporary that's more secure than prophylactics (did i spell that right?)!


Actually I read a while back about a temporary form of male birth control invented by some doctor in India. It involved a silicon plug or some such thing, and it woud last for many years. It could easily be removed.

The U.S. pharma and contraception companies had no interest in it, and it has never been approved by the FDA even though apparently it has been used successfully for quite a few years. There is not much money in it, better to have women buy birth control pills, or diaphrams, or men buy condoms. Now if the pharma companies can come up with a form of male birthcontrol that works (and of course requires ongoing treatment and money) they will no doubt try to market it.

Edit actually it seems to me the Anti-Abortion people should be all about pushing for that form of temporary male birth control! Just think of all the murder they could prevent!!

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Sonya610]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I dunno about the op but for me, this has nothing to do with politics. It has everythign to do with being female.

My niece, a beautiful native american female, died during childbirth during a c-section, which relaeased amniotic fluid into her bloodstream giving her a massive case of septocemia that killed her in less than 24 hours. The father of the child didn't want his own child. It was a one night stand!

This all happened because it's considered "correct" to try on the shoe before you buy it. But they don't mention that you might actually destroy the shoe in the process!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
The truth is anti-abortionists are usually the biggest liars and hypocrits on the planet. If they cared about unborn children being killed they would be a the FOR FRONT ADVOCATING BIRTH CONTROL AND EDUCATION.

They care about controlling the behavior women far more than preventing the slaughter of fetuses. If they truly wanted to stop abortion they would focus on preventing unwanted pregnancies by EVERY means possible.

They make me sick.




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join