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.

 

Obama to Reverse Bush Abortion Regulation

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


Of course not.

But, it isn't an option that should be taken off the table, either.....or villified or demonized, for that matter.

[edit on 3/2/2009 by skeptic1]


Look, I don't want to repeat myself. I am aware of complex nature of this problem.

In most cases it is the social environment or living conditions that incite abortion. THAT is much more up to society and how it treats women in the first place.

If the proper solution is to be found, much effort should be invested into this aspect. Because people's behavior is largely conditioned by politics, social and cultural norms, which are not always in the best interests of people.

Deus ex machina type of solutions, like the one that makes the topic here, are probably the worst kind of approach.




posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
That is another issue. Not all fires are dangerous.


True, but if a person "accidentally" lights a fire, the responsible thing is to put it out.



Are you saying that all accidental conception should be treated by abortion?


No. I'm saying that any conception, whether accidental or not should be managed by the person who's pregnant.

Since you don't believe in accidents in this area, are you saying that only those who wish to procreate should have sex?



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





Since you don't believe in accidents in this area, are you saying that only those who wish to procreate should have sex?


No


I say: count on it and don't blame babies for god sake!



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I have never heard of anyone blaming a fetus for getting pregnant. Never!
Have you?



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I have never heard of anyone blaming a fetus for getting pregnant. Never!
Have you?


But they do get rid of them, don't they?



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Yes, but not because they blame them for anything.

I think your argument is falling apart.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


My argument is about responsibility, and if you think that it is responsible to eliminate fetuses, just because they're in the way, then you are most certainly right.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Absolutely. I have known people who got pregnant because the condom broke. I have even met one who was on the pill and got pregnant. Some rely on the rhythm method and made a mistake in calculation. That too was accidental.


The "accident" here relates to condom, not to conception.
It is not accident if a woman gets pregnant when the egg meets the sperm.
This is all twisted to suit your idea.


Ok, answer my question regarding the responsibility of those who force a fetus to first breath. Otherwise, I will take you as a troll, or someone with an agenda.

It IS an accident if the sperm meets egg when prevention of that has failed. Your comment is just twisted to suit YOUR idea.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Absolutely. I have known people who got pregnant because the condom broke. I have even met one who was on the pill and got pregnant. Some rely on the rhythm method and made a mistake in calculation. That too was accidental.


The "accident" here relates to condom, not to conception.
It is not accident if a woman gets pregnant when the egg meets the sperm.
This is all twisted to suit your idea.


Ok, answer my question regarding the responsibility of those who force a fetus to first breath. Otherwise, I will take you as a troll, or someone with an agenda.

It IS an accident if the sperm meets egg when prevention of that has failed. Your comment is just twisted to suit YOUR idea.


The consequence of an accident is the accident? Don't think so.

Conception is the effect of an ACCIDENT (condom failure), which has to be uncompassionately eliminated.

You are attacking the symptom, not the cause.

Sorry, but you are twisting things to suit your idea.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


My argument is about responsibility, and if you think that it is responsible to eliminate fetuses, just because they're in the way, then you are most certainly right.


It is very trollish to put words in others' mouths. BH never said a thing about removing them "just because they are in the way." Few women make the choice for that reason alone. Most look at the poverty they are in (or would be if they had a child), the lack of father, a drunk and mean father, the lack of desire to have children at all, and many other aspects, long before they look at whether the child would be in the way.

Yeah... I think I'm done with you.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


My argument is about responsibility, and if you think that it is responsible to eliminate fetuses, just because they're in the way, then you are most certainly right.


It is very trollish to put words in others' mouths. BH never said a thing about removing them "just because they are in the way." Few women make the choice for that reason alone. Most look at the poverty they are in (or would be if they had a child), the lack of father, a drunk and mean father, the lack of desire to have children at all, and many other aspects, long before they look at whether the child would be in the way.

Yeah... I think I'm done with you.





I have already addressed the problem of society treating women like victims, and I've already said that is the biggest cause and reason for existence of "unwanted fetuses". Please read my posts and let's get this thread where it should go: how to properly address the problem and eliminate Deus ex machina approach favored by politicians.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
From my earlier post:




In most cases it is the social environment or living conditions that incite abortion. THAT is much more up to society and how it treats women in the first place.

If the proper solution is to be found, much effort should be invested into this aspect. Because people's behavior is largely conditioned by politics, social and cultural norms, which are not always in the best interests of people.

Deus ex machina type of solutions, like the one that makes the topic here, are probably the worst kind of approach.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
I have a question to those who are pro choice.

Is it worth it to bring an unwanted child into the world that will more than likely grow up in a dysfunctional family, harm others on their way through life, and cause crime, worth it?

Yes, I know there are some kids that are adopted and grow up fine. "Many" do not. I do not have statistics, but it is obvious that the foster homes are filling up faster than adoptions take place.

Orphan Information

VERY short article. Consider the bottom.

It is about bettering society as a whole. Many orphans are lead into a world of hell.

Life is so great? What about the animals whose parents eat their own children? Something called animal instinct, and we are no exception. "Life" is wonderful, but it is not perfect, and should not be brought into the world unwillingly (by immature adults).

Even with the "pro-choice" option, not all fetuses would be gone and there will STILL be many kids who need to be adopted.

This whole argument is even with taking in the idea that fetuses are "people", which I still do not believe.

Like an egg to a chicken.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 





Like an egg to a chicken.


Hens protect their eggs.

First deal with society, and then this problem will cease to exist.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
Hens protect their eggs.


They do? Have you ever farmed chickens? I have. We are not chickens.




First deal with society, and then this problem will cease to exist.


In a perfect society, I agree, this problem would not exist, because everyone would be 100% educated, every contraceptive would work 100% of the time, condoms wouldn't break, teens wouldn't get pregnant, and only those who were willing to have a child would get pregnant.

But that's not reality.

In the meantime, when people who aren't ready to have children are forced to "face the consequences" of pregnancy, we have Caylee Anthony. If ever a person should have had an abortion simply because she wasn't ready to have a kid...



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





In the meantime, when people who aren't ready to have children are forced to "face the consequences" of pregnancy, we have Caylee Anthony. If ever a person should have had an abortion simply because she wasn't ready to have a kid...


Okay, so they are "forced" to do it. Why didn't you say so before?

I am insisting on this because I've noticed a conditioned aggressive reaction against those who try to question decisions, which are obviously imposed on them.

I say it is conditioned behavior and it is much better to stop and carefully examine what causes the phenomena and what PREVENTS us from positively resolving the problem.

And the first line of defense of the inappropriate society is exactly this conditioned reaction of the oppressed, which dooms them to helplessness.

Just that.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





Since you don't believe in accidents in this area, are you saying that only those who wish to procreate should have sex?


No


I say: count on it and don't blame babies for god sake!


Hmmmm abstinence, what a novel idea,heaven forbid this country would have some moral conscience.

And to think one should even be ashamed to suggest abstinence.

Millions of babies murdered and fatherless children are a much more desirable consequence of a immoral society.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:49 AM
link   


In the meantime, when people who aren't ready to have children are forced to "face the consequences" of pregnancy, we have Caylee Anthony. If ever a person should have had an abortion simply because she wasn't ready to have a kid...


I am stunned, that analogy is ridiculous and fatally flawed.

Who can judge who will be a good parent?

How do you foretell the future?



[edit on 073131p://bTuesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
The only real means of control in society is keeping people in ignorance.
Ignorant people are incapable of having a holistic view of the world and themselves as part of it.

Society treats women as trash, that is a fact. Despite all those "liberties" women have achieved, raped or beaten woman will rarely go to court, and if she goes to court, she will have to face a long and painful procedure to prove her point.

It all goes unspoken, and that is a shame.

The unspoken rules are much stronger than the written, official ones.

This (and this is just one among thousands examples) imposes a state of incommunicado between people. There is no understanding, no compassion, no qualified action can emerge from that.

Perfect way to keep people miserable and paralyzed, disabled in their pursue of happiness and what not else is proclaimed in the Constitution.

Sex, being just one of the many important "attractors" through which society is ruled, is perfectly manipulated by the PTB. People want it and like it very much, but there is a hidden danger in it...



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 






Is it worth it to bring an unwanted child into the world that will more than likely grow up in a dysfunctional family, harm others on their way through life, and cause crime, worth it?


It doesn't work that way, just because people come from a dysfunctional home doesn't mean they will be dysfunctional, and people who come from wonderful homes can become ax murderers,

You can't judge by this.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join