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.

 

The Utter Insanity of Pro-Choice

page: 7
25
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by MR BOB
I seriously think that if you are perfectly healthy, then you are pure evil to have an abortion.


This is ridiculous. Apart from the fact that having a baby can be dangerous even if you are perfectly healthy, what about a child being born that is completely unwanted? On top of that we are talking about something that is not conscious. It has no intelligence, no thought patterns, nothing. Why don't you turn your attention to issues like children dying in the third world, real, breathing, thinking, feeling children. Why is abortion the issue you centre on?

Pro-life people (another stupid label, everyone is pro life) are short sighted, if abortion were banned then all that will happen is abortion will be conducted secretly and in far more dangerous conditions which will result in the deaths of thousands of women along with the fetus you seem so concerned with protecting.




posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by kingofmd
No. My argument was NOT that people shouldn't be killed.

My point is that some of us need to stop sugar coating what is actually taking place during an abortion. Some have brainwashed themselves in to thinking that it is just a lifeless lump of tissue. I was addressing the fact that it is living, and is in fact being killed/murdered.


Tissue is of course alive, do you get upset when you exfoliate your skin cells? You are aware that some of those cells are living and you are killing them, how dare you!

Look it's a fetus, it is not a thinking being, it doesn't understand, or care, or anything else. Are you also a meat eater? I only ask because if you are then you are supporting the death of animals which have more brain power than a baby in the womb does at 6 months.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   
I'm sorry if I may have missed a post if this was brought up before...but I've yet to see anyone make an exemption for women who are NOT consentually impregnated.

If abortion (in every application of the term) were made illegal across the board, you'd basically be declaring women's bodies mere property of the State in cases of rape or incest or any other pregnancy resulting from a criminal act...until the child was born.

And what then? Could a rapist (even a Date-rapist where the lines of legality are blurred) come forward and claim parental rights then? Would this be in the interest of Justice? Or would passage of such a law merely be a means for all the good little conservative Christians (who hold NO personal stake in the lives of the women involved) to sleep better at night?

Very broad, very controversial topic here. One with a great MANY facets to consider and one with a great many exceptions. I don't see there ever being a One-size-fits-all way to pacify everyone where abortion is concerned...



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Oh I get it.. if she is thinking about aborting it she's holding his child to ransom.. but if she considers keeping it she's just doing so to extort money from him.


No it's not fair women get the final say.. periods and painful child birth aren't fair either. So some men want equal say over pregnancy? What if he wants her to abort and she says no.. does she then get a forced abortion to make things "fair" for him? What if she wants to have an abortion and he says no.. imprisoning her would be the only way to really stop her so should she be locked up till she gives birth? Would that be more fair?

OP.. do you want equal say or final say?

[edit on 15-4-2010 by riley]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Don't ya just love how the holier-then-thou self righteous almost always resort to name calling and insults?

If you believe its wrong - then don't do it.

But accidents do happen. May the self-righteous "hold" to their belief in such an incident.

Always reminds me how Reagan was against stem cell - - until it was on his own "porch". Granted it was his wife and son who fought for stem cells - still same "porch".



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
funny also how we don't see many guys who are pro-choice.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by MR BOB
funny also how we don't see many guys who are pro-choice.


I have read this thread and where does it show that males should not have this right too. Your arguments against males having this choice too are wrong as far as i am concerned.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Monts
 


This is a very complicated matter. I do understand what you are trying to say. Maybe the main question should not be: what to do when pregnant, but rather how to avoid a pregnancy when there is no desire to become a parent? Ofcourse, accidents do happen as sometimes birthcontrol fails, but most of the time I think it is safe to say pregnancy can be avoided.
When it happens despite taking precautions, the potential parents should be able to disuss what to do. it is not fair or logical to exlude the future father in this decision making. However, since the woman is the one carrying the child, I do believe she should have the final saying in the matter. Nine months of pregnancy is not an easy task, after all.
Also, I would like to point out that there are enough future fathers who walk out the minute they find out their girlfriend is pregnant, leaving her alone with the consequences. Also, I' ve heard of future fathers forcing their girlfriends in having an abortion.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
To all of the people saying the guy doesn't do anything: The guy takes care of the woman during pregnancy. Unless they're deadbeat dads, they should have some sort of say in it, but then again, I'm not sure how you would determine whether or not the person was actually a deadbeat.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I think it is sad that fathers do not have much of a voice in the matter. Granted fathers don't have to go through the physical strain of pregnancy, but their desire to bring a child into this world should still count. It is not only the mother that goes through the pregnancy ordeal. The decision of the mother has potentially enormous emotional (and financial) implications for the father. It seems only fair that the father's wishes carry some weight in the mother's decision.

I support Pro-Choice, but only when the mutual interests of both parties have been considered and discussed.

[edit on 15/4/2010 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MR BOB
funny also how we don't see many guys who are pro-choice.



I'm a guy and i'm pro choice, would you care to provide figures for your statement? Ahh of course you can't because you just pulled that statement from thin air.

Women should have the final say on whether they want to continue with a pregnancy, it is their body and they should not be forced into having it used by another being. I would point out again that if you make abortion illegal then all that will happen is abortions will be performed in dangerous conditions by people who don't know what they're doing. This will result in the deaths of not only many unborn children that you are so eager to protect, but also the deaths of the pregnant women.

Having said all of that, if a guy doesn't want a child and the women goes ahead anyway then i don't think that man should be financially culpable. He gets no choice but is forced to pay, seems wrong.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
IMHO
IF females don't want to deal with pro-life or pro-choice decisions...
then don't have sex.
Women do have the right to THEIR body, but NOT to a living fetus.
A living fetus begins @ 6 weeks > its called: brain waves.

Here's the end of the "abortion" debate.

If a woman terminates a bunch of cells BEFORE 6 weeks, no harm done.
If a woman terminates a living fetus AFTER 6 weeks, it murder.

It's that simple...
Ladies > (imho) IF you don't want to deal with getting pregnant, DON'T have sex.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by theGrandSmithWizard
IMHO
IF females don't want to deal with pro-life or pro-choice decisions...
then don't have sex.
Women do have the right to THEIR body, but NOT to a living fetus.
A living fetus begins @ 6 weeks > its called: brain waves.

Here's the end of the "abortion" debate.


If we are using brain waves as the start and finish of sentient life then we should stop killing cows, chickens, pigs and any other animal species you can think of. Brain waves don't make you a conscious, thinking, caring being. At 6 weeks your brain isn't even the size of a ping pong ball. At 6 months a babies brain is around 2 cubic inches, maximum. This is smaller than a cows brain. Using brain waves and brain size are not good arguments. So i'm afraid your argument is completely baseless.

As for not having sex, you do understand that people do need sex right? Most normal humans will find some way of satisfying their sexual urge and not doing so can cause psychological problems. What if someone is in a loving relationship, are you honestly saying they shouldn't have sex simply for fear of pregnancy? Have you heard of condoms, IUD's, the pill etc? Why should a woman who has taken sensible precautions be forced to have a child she didn't want to begin with?

There are many couples out there who don't want children, ever, are you honestly suggesting two people should be together for the rest of their lives but not have sex?

What planet do you live on.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by PennyQ
 


How about the mans right to decide that he does not want to bring someone into this rotten world?

Things are more complicated.

Males should have the right to make a women abort, if he wants to if abortion is legal.

Males should have the right to decide.

Men DO have that choice, arent you so glad to find this out? And it is not complicated at all, it is easy and simple!

If you as a man do not want to bring life into this cruel world, DONT put your SEED into a woman. Period.

Thats an easy noncomplicated solution!

And men do have the right to DECIDE....most of them decide to spill that seed anyway right into a woman, and BAM. The choice has been made, your part in the decision making is OVER.

It will be over my dead body that a man ever decides what I will do with MY REPRODUCTIVE system.



Maybe another way to put it, the women needs to quit spreading her legs, allowing the man to put his seed into her.

If both parties cannot help themselves they need to use protection. What about that option, it's not all the man's fault, and it's not all the women's fault either. It take two to tango.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
I think it is sad that fathers do not have much of a voice in the matter. Granted fathers don't have to go through the physical strain of pregnancy, but their desire to bring a child into this world should still count. It is not only the mother that goes through the pregnancy ordeal. The decision of the mother has potentially enormous emotional (and financial) implications for the father. It seems only fair that the father's wishes carry some weight in the mother's decision.

I support Pro-Choice, but only when the mutual interests of both parties have been considered and discussed.

[edit on 15/4/2010 by Dark Ghost]
the decision of the mother regarding abortion comes after the fact and has no bearing on the man. If he wishes to avoid potentially enormous emotional and financial implications of HIS own actions he needs to take precautions to prevent this.

There is one surefire way to avoid the implications of sex if you fear facing them and all their outcomes.

Don't have sex.

I am so tired of these lame arguments men concoct regarding their 'rights' re: abortion.

You (men) have all the power to prevent being implicated in these dire situations, but it seems to me none of the men want to own their own sexuality and be responsible for where the seed goes.

That is the choice men get.

From the responses in this thread from men it is clear abstaining is far from an option yet men still think after the fact they should have a say.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysticalzoe

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by PennyQ
 


How about the mans right to decide that he does not want to bring someone into this rotten world?

Things are more complicated.

Males should have the right to make a women abort, if he wants to if abortion is legal.

Males should have the right to decide.

Men DO have that choice, arent you so glad to find this out? And it is not complicated at all, it is easy and simple!

If you as a man do not want to bring life into this cruel world, DONT put your SEED into a woman. Period.

Thats an easy noncomplicated solution!

And men do have the right to DECIDE....most of them decide to spill that seed anyway right into a woman, and BAM. The choice has been made, your part in the decision making is OVER.

It will be over my dead body that a man ever decides what I will do with MY REPRODUCTIVE system.



Maybe another way to put it, the women needs to quit spreading her legs, allowing the man to put his seed into her.

If both parties cannot help themselves they need to use protection. What about that option, it's not all the man's fault, and it's not all the women's fault either. It take two to tango.
Considering abortion and morning after pills are available and legal, women don't have to worry about spreading like men do. Fortunately we have several reproductive options.

What does both parties can't help themselves refer to?

Getting preganat isn't an at fault situation.

It is a biological medical condition, and there are several remedies for pregnancy available to women, none for men.

It may take two to tango but only one gets pregnant, and the choice to abort belongs to her.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
The emotional issues people who are for mens rights in abortion use are not an issue in the bottom line. If a woman wants to abort, her body her choice.


Fair enough, but her "choices" should stop with her body and she shouldn't be able to force a man to support a child he doesn't want.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Having said all of that, if a guy doesn't want a child and the women goes ahead anyway then i don't think that man should be financially culpable. He gets no choice but is forced to pay, seems wrong.

So that means she would have to factor that into her decision.. if he is not financially culpable she may be forced into having an abortion and do as he wishes anyway. Nice and fair that is. aka. "have this baby and you are on your own". I'm sure deadbeat fathers everywhere agree with you.


After the baby is born.. why should he not financially support it? It does not magically become not his just because he didn't want it.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by riley]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by InSpiteOf

Originally posted by Anamnesis
You're completely over looking the fact that people make the decision to have sex, the consequences of sex w/out contraception is possible pregnancy. The "Bodily Autonomy" argument is invalid and a logical falacy. The right to control your own body also applies to the decison to have sex (unless it's a case of rape) and those involved should be held responsible for the consequences.

"Bodily Autonomy", as you call it, is a rediculous argument....



That doesnt change the fact that a woman still has the right to control what happens to her, and ultimately, the unborn fetus growing inside her. Claiming the argument to be a logical fallacy because her and her partnet already choose to have sex is ancilary. Regardless of the concequences, it remains her choice. The state, and the other party, have no say in what she can and cannot do with her body.


Of course a woman has the right to decide what happens to her but she also has the responsibilty to accept the consequences of her own actions. The act of having sex, consentually can sometimes lead to pregnancy if no contraception is used. The decision to have sex unprotected is a decision to risk the consequence of pregnancy. How hard is that to understand????



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join