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.

 

Sweden rules 'gender-based' abortion legal

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
So the woman in the OP has already had two abortions for gender. Can you imagine how hard that is on her body? Can't they separate the sperm and fertilize her egg in a petri dish. Wouldn't that be a better alternative to multiple abortions?




posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ScreamtheDance
 


Im not religious either, but I still believe everyone has a soul.
I believe that once a child is made, that is that. Yes it is still a fetus, and yes it is still in its developmental stage, but when do we not stop developing? Hell you still arent fully developed yet, can we abort you?

btw- sorry it took me so long to reply, I didnt see you respond and I was duking it out with someone else.

Abortion is a sensitive subject, and everyone has their beliefs on the issue, but I think that when it comes down to it, we need to be respectful of each others opinions and try to find some common ground on the terms of abortion.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I’ve always been pro-choice.
It’s not my right to tell another woman what her rights are.
But this just pushes my gag buttons to no end.
Maybe I was wrong all along.

peace



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ScreamtheDance
 


Well the oft cited presumption that pro-life people are concerned with women's wombs instead of the poor etc. really does a diservice to all involved. I know I personally have a concern for the poor and alleviating the sufferings of the many who are deprived in our world - on a moral, if not active level, my pre-emptive concern would be for those deprived of life: be that in war, starvation, euthenasia, abortion or the many ways that people's quality of life is diminished in the modern world.

As for "child" v "fetus" - I accept that fetus is the correct medical term for the human life in the womb, "child" the normal word for human life in the early years outside the womb. My point is that on either side of the birth canal it is (without appealing to emotion, religion or any other numinous quality) a human life.

The pro-choice lobby does make and enable a fundamental choice for the human life in the womb "you are to be terminated according to the choice of another." Neither can it be claimed that pro-choice lobbying is ammoral, it is of course moral by inisisting upon the "right" to choose.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   
lol. no way- everything to extremes! -blake

found this
"For men the age is generally 25, for women it's 21. It occurs shortly after puberty. It is possible to continue growing until age 25 for women and 27-30 for men"

(when we stop growing- unless your talking about cognative ability which i think is suppossed to peak at 26 (in so far as "quick mind" etc-)

unless your talking about experience, reaction, and souls which are not measurable and probably more self -delusion

many old people find religion- as they are near death- not sure it is "wisdom" that leads them there. more like fear.

but i change my mind and i am for the anti-abortion people now.
Stupid females murdering babies all over the place. we should make them suffer! (someone mentioned they should at least feel guilt! -even tho we can't actually get into their heads and see we must assume we know their feelings. We can call them witches that are sacrificing babies and they are exactly like members of the national socialist party in 1934 germany as well. viva la anti-abortionists , heros of our time. lol


[edit on 13-5-2009 by ScreamtheDance]

[edit on 13-5-2009 by ScreamtheDance]

[edit on 13-5-2009 by ScreamtheDance]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Everything is so polarized in the US over abortion. You're either for it, without restrictions or concern for the development stage of the human in utero or completely opposed. Your supreme court judges have ruled that until you can breathe pretty well, you're not a human being, this inspite of advanced science and fetal development unraveled, exposed. There are preemies being born at 20 weeks! Development of fetus is taken into account in Canada. Abortions are free, and done in the first trimester, with an attempt to get it as close to the 6 week mark as possible.

Women aren't witches, or villains. Pregnancies ruin lives and sentence people to abject poverty, without equalizing income based on family size, which if you have to have money should have been done long ago. I don't blame women, but the system!

As to the gender issue, a balance of male and female is required urgently in this world, not only at birth, but in terms of policies.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Just a thought, are there are any actual women taking part in this debate, or is it the usual deal of men discussing the issue?

Perhaps we should let them have an opinion too.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 


I think at least two contributors are female - though assuming someone's gender from there avatar has had me in trouble before - but I think secretstash and mystiq may be ladies.

As for the implication that this is a "women's issue" in which the masculine should not have much say that does resurrect an important aspect of this whole thread. Who will speak up for the female lives being terminated disproportionately to male? Should I, as a man, cease advocating equal pay for women?

Abortion may be a feminist question in a more startling manner than we ever imagined or as it has been presented to us so far. I'm happy, always have been, to be a "feminist" - inequality effects the oppresser as much as the oppressed.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Yes, this may be sick in a way (or multiple ways)...

..but maybe, from a pragmatic point of view, we need to have a grey area in which we ourselves decide what the background for our decision is. Please stick with me as I describe a mental experiment:

Imagine we would like to decline requests based on gender. We would have to test, for each request to abortion, what the motivation is (searching for gender-based motivation). This may sound simple, but beware - you can't read people's minds. If they know their request will be declined if their motivation is gender-based, they won't be honest about it. Instead, they would just say "we can't support another child in our life at the moment" or any other politically correct statement, and that would be that. So obviously you can't get the information out of them if you're just asking.
In order to filter all requests for 'sick' reasons, you'd still need that information (from each request). You can't get it with a simple question.. so you'd have to grill everyone. Some degree of grilling might be very reasonable to start with, but considering how incredibly easy it would be to supply an 'alternate' motivation, you'd have to put the flames on level 11 to get some trustworthy answers.

When you start grilling people for abortion requests, all weird kind of interaction effects start taking place. For instance, insecure pregnant teenagers might avoid the grilling to start with, and simply end up having a baby a decade or so too early in life.


P.S. In no way do I advocate gender-based abortion - I just think it's not a bad decision.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Supercertari
 


Men should absolutely be involved, but they always seems to be the ones MOST involved.

Just strikes me as ironic.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Yes, I'm a female.
I agree we need more feminine energy into this discussion.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Yes, I am female and I do think that the father should have some say in the situation. The baby his responsibility as well. I don't really care about all that crap of "Well, I have to carry it and deliver it."

Get over it. If the father wants to raise the baby then you can deliver it.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Just an off the cuff question:

Why don't men scream as loud about "murdering a child" when the father refuses to pay child support? Isn't child neglect despicable itself? Where is the outrage? Where is the holier than thou attitude about that?

Used to work in payroll, and the amount of men I had to deduct child support for was appalling. Why did they just not pay it on their own? Because they were trying to avoid their responsiblity.

Better yet, if we are going into morals, why did the man not do the right thing and marry and support the child? Because maybe he did not like the female he impregnated that much, therefore did not want to be reminded or responsible for the one nite stand or whatever that led to the pregnancy?

Hey, maybe that is why the woman wanted an abortion, because she did not want to be reminded of the jerk who got her pregnant. But because society looks so down on abortion, she has the baby and her life is turned upside down from one mistake, while the father does whatever the heck he wants and has "moved on."

Plenty of times the men, once found out by CPS where they work, would then look for another job and just quit, hoping time was on their side.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Food for thought:

This IS a conspiracy site after all


Notice how the original news article did not mention if the woman was married or any mention of a male partner at all and what his opinion is?

Could it be that this is the entryway to kill off unborn females so that males are dominated in the gender realm? (joke to the prior male poster)

Now, we don't know the whole story here, but some simple facts are:

Men abuse (either physically/emotionally/or mentally) women far more then vice versa. Don't have time to look up the numbers now, but come on, you all know this is true.

People (NOT MEN IN GENERAL) can be stupid.

Therefore, did this woman become threatened and coerced from a male who falsely believes it is HER fault that she is having yet again a baby girl?

Maybe she is doing what she can to protect her two daughters and herself from a crazed man. Remember, there are many pieces to a puzzle and with the OP article we were only given a vague outline.

Cheers



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   
Once you agree with abortion you agree with any reason for it. It does not matter why.

"I have no money to raise the child" is a better reason then ? Sure , in this sick world we measure a life by money. Like we as a society could not raise enough for that child so an abortion for that reason is perfectly acceptable...

I do not agree or agree with abortion. Leave the mother to chose, her freedom about this. I myself say no, but that is only for myself, and I am a man...

I also say "give the mothers who don't want the child the option to just leave him immediately after birth , to some another family, with no more rights on the child after that"



[edit on 14-5-2009 by pai mei]



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
I don't think people are understanding what is going on here. In Asian countries, if you have boys, you have a retirement income. If girls, it goes to the boys parents. No income for you. It is not simply dislikeing females, it is dislikeing poverty. What needs to change is the societal norms. And having one or two children also does not qualify for a retirement income. Maybe seven or eight. Or a good 501k...pre depression.


[edit on 14-5-2009 by Gregarious]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join