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 Defends Sex-Selection Abortions

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by 00nunya00
 



de·fend/diˈfend/ Verb: Resist an attack made on (someone or something); protect from harm or danger: "we shall defend our country". Speak or write in favor of (an action or person); attempt to justify: "he defended his policy of imposing high taxes".


The democrats defended the attack on selective abortion by voting the bill down.


No, the democrats defended the thinly veiled attack on abortion in general by resisting the move to restrict it based on nonsense.




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   


The left is defending sex selection abortions


Another day, another lie. What a surprise.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I can't believe they are politically kicking this football around.
Assuming it passed, what's to keep the mother from getting an ultrasound then going to another dr. for the abortion? Nothing.
America sealed it's fate by making abortion legal, so why not have sex selective abortions? I guess so people can fence sit even more by being both for and against abortion at the same time to garner political approval.
fking disgusting.

Saw a video of an abortion in highschool, and I've been staunchly against it ever since.
"oh but what if you were in that position?"
I'm not because I don't have irresponsible sex. Crazy, I know.

I find it hard to believe that I agree with outkast's stance, but I'm glad this is a viewpoint we share.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   


America sealed it's fate by making abortion legal


Sealed it's fate?? Do you have any idea how much worse off we'd be right now if everyone was forced to have children???? If you think crime and unemployment are now just imagine how much worse it would be if every poor and ghetto person in America had been having endless babies for the last 40 years. I will never understand why republicans want to destroy themselves and every other person in America's lives so badly.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by CB328



America sealed it's fate by making abortion legal


Sealed it's fate?? Do you have any idea how much worse off we'd be right now if everyone was forced to have children???? If you think crime and unemployment are now just imagine how much worse it would be if every poor and ghetto person in America had been having endless babies for the last 40 years. I will never understand why republicans want to destroy themselves and every other person in America's lives so badly.


By your logic we would be far better off executing criminals.
But it's better to get them before they are born, right? Get em before you can see em, so it's not like you are actually killing a person.

You have to be a die-hard atheist to think a nation can destroy the innocent and be better off.

Edit: your logic being that murder is justified if it lowers the crime rate and unemployment
edit on 6/2/2012 by MeesterB because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/2/2012 by MeesterB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   
So now we're up to: those damn welfare queens keep having kids for more money, but I don't want to let them have the choice to abort OR support them with my tax dollars OR mandate safe sex education OR distribute free contraception with tax dollars OR let any non-abortion tax dollars go to any organization that might help increase contraception use if they have ever provided an abortion OR use tax dollars for programs that help young women better themselves so they don't have sex and get pregnant in the first place.

Jesus, what a plan. More solutions from Amerikan PolitProp.
edit on 2-6-2012 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


A loooong long time ago people had morals and treated sex with respect. If more women kept their legs shut then they wouldn't be having unwanted pregnancies. Harsh, I know, but that's the plain truth.

How long can you go without sex before you die from lack of sex? Quite a long time, so I don't think it's necessarily a human right to be able to have as much consequence-free sex as you want.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   
An abortion is an abortion regardless of the reasoning behind it. The mother could just say she wants a "normal" abortion even though the sex of the baby is why she is getting it done. This bill is pointless.

If the republicans in the house really cared about the abortion they wouldn't have rejected the bill.


edit on 2-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 


...........you do understand abortions have been performed for thousands of years, right?

Citation

ETA: wait, do people really think abortions didn't happen before Roe V Wade?
edit on 2-6-2012 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 


Believe me, it isn't a small issue for me...and the issue would hold more weight for my decision making process if I thought someone was serious about making it illegal.

Contrary to what some people believe...I do disagree with Obama and liberals on some things...this is one of them. I am strictly pro-life...I see it as murder and I see it as morally wrong. But the problem I have is seeing Republicans record on abortion...they have had chances to appoint justices that are pro-life that would have given them the ability to overturn Roe vs Wade, they have had opportunities when they had majorities in congress and the presidency to pass a law about abortion....each time they have an opportunity they take a pass on it.

So it comes down to this...I can control abortion in my own personal life. I married a women that I know is 100% pro-life just as me...when the time comes I will teach my children that abortion is murder and is morally wrong. That is all I can do. I don't feel any guilt not voting for someone who claims they are pro-life, because I understand the politics of it and I know nothing will be done about it. It is too big of a guaranteed vote getter for both sides.

I'm not saying you are wrong for using that issue to vote for someone...that is your right and your choice and I support your decision to stand by your beliefs on that issue. But I also think that some politicians also know there are many people like you that will use this as a litmus test...and so they are safe to say they are pro-life...and then not even attempt to do anything about abortion when elected.

Take Romney vs Obama...sure, Romney says he is pro-life now...but that wasn't the case years ago. So you are left with a hard decision it seems. Is Romney just saying these things to get your vote...or is he actually pro-life?



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I am personally against abortion but i won't judge others.
But it remains a fact if abortion is legal then gender based abortion should also be legal.
There is no excuse.....



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I usually disagree with your views but i applaud your thinkings on this subject.
Star for you.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Good Lord we already have so many rules and laws. We certainly don't need more regulations and threats where there is no crime done. In the USA it is not frowned on to have a female child and so the kind of discrimination you are referring to exists in other countries. It may occur here but I wouldn't call it a problem.
No more laws. There are people sitting on the sidelines just trying to think up laws and new ways to make man moral.

If someone wants to wait until the sex is evident to abort this would be evident to the woman's doctor and unethical.

The woman cannot know the fetal sex unless the doctor tells her and prior to that the doctor should be aware of the woman's intention. It would be against the doctors moral code/ oath of conduct, and he would be ethically obliged to refuse an abortion request made AFTER the babies sex was known.

To a certain extent, and until there are complaints made, we have to trust doctors to make judgement calls and do what they are trained to do.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Genocide has been around for thousands of years, so that makes it okay?
Just because it has been a tradition doesn't make it acceptable



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by MeesterB
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Genocide has been around for thousands of years, so that makes it okay?
Just because it has been a tradition doesn't make it acceptable


Maybe not, but you argued that there was a point in history where abortions were not an option for those more "respectable" people:




A loooong long time ago people had morals and treated sex with respect. If more women kept their legs shut then they wouldn't be having unwanted pregnancies. Harsh, I know, but that's the plain truth.


So how long ago are we talking, Mesopotamia? Cavemen? People have been having unprotected sex and aborting their children since there was something long and pointy enough to scrape them out. Harsh, I know, but it's the plain truth.
This "loooooong ago" that you speak of is not pre-Roe V Wade, it's not pre-hippies, it's not-pre-liberals. It's pre-tools.

I have a better idea: since men not only contribute 50% to the shameful, slutty sex, but are also---by design----responsible for the care of the family they create, why not hold them 50% responsible for treating sex with respect, hmm? If they could keep it in their pants, they wouldn't be fathering unwanted pregnancies that are often unwanted because the man won't stick around.

edit on 2-6-2012 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MeesterB
 




Get em before you can see em, so it's not like you are actually killing a person.


Actually, yes. Fetus is not a person, so no person is killed.

No cortical brainwaves, no mind, no person, no victim, no crime. Regardless of sex or reason behind abortion.


edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by 00nunya00
No one is defending gender-selection abortions, they're defending abortion *period* against shameless BS attacks on it based on ludicrous claims like gender selection being a significant influencing factor at all.

Those who killed the bill are indeed supporting gender-selection abortions.
All abortions .. at all times .. for any reason .. including gender selection
And if you had read the article, you'd see that gender selection abortions are on the rise.

I find it comical that those who support abortion on demand suddenly get all huffy when the fact is that they are supporting gender selection abortions. 'Defending abortion period' is indeed defending gender selecton abortions. It's not a 'shameless bs attack' ... it's just the truth of the matter. if you support abortion and that a woman can abort and it's none of our business why .. then you support their right to gender selection abortions.


Originally posted by Maslo
Pro-choice means pro-choice, and that includes sex-selection abortions. Of course they should be legal. Obama did well, IMHO.

There ya' go. An honest answer.


Originally posted by RealSpoke
The mother could just say she wants a "normal" abortion even though the sex of the baby is why she is getting it done. This bill is pointless.

Which is exactly what I said. The bill was unenforceable.


Originally posted by Maslo
Actually, yes. Fetus is not a person, so no person is killed.

Homicide does happen. A human heart is made to stop beating by another human being.

No cortical brainwaves, no mind, no person, no victim, no crime.

Unborn children sleep and wake. They suck their thumbs and play with their toes and the cord. They yawn and stretch. They feel pain when in-the-womb surgeries are performed so they need pain killers during surgery. You might want to rethink your position on a preborn baby not being a human being.


edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 




Homicide does happen. A human heart is made to stop beating by another human being.


Human heart does not make a person, its just a pump. Human mind makes a person.



Unborn children sleep and wake. They suck their thumbs and play with their toes and the cord. They yawn and stretch. They feel pain when in-the-womb surgeries are performed so they need pain killers during surgery.


Only after cortical brainwaves and thalamocortical connections develop. Cortical brain waves do not appear sooner than 20 weeks, and thalamocortical connections develop at 24 weeks.

Appearance of cortical brain waves is the point when a fetus turns into a person IMHO. Abortions before that should be allowed (for any reason), abortions after that should be banned (for any reason, except saving the life or health of the woman).


edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



EDIT: but I acknowledge that some of these sex-selection abortions are performed even near the end of second trimester because the sex may not be clearly visible before, and that may be a cause for concern. So because of this aspect, it is a little bit of a grey area for me, as I agree with ban on abortion after 5th month.
edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Those who killed the bill are indeed supporting gender-selection abortions.
[...]

I find it comical that those who support abortion on demand suddenly get all huffy when the fact is that they are supporting gender selection abortions. 'Defending abortion period' is indeed defending gender selecton abortions. It's not a 'shameless bs attack' ... it's just the truth of the matter. if you support abortion and that a woman can abort and it's none of our business why .. then you support their right to gender selection abortions.



Right on, then by your rationale, those who don't support legislation to allow TSA cavity searches are supporting terrorists killing innocent people. The fact is, terrorists are using body cavities of all sorts to try to hide bombs, and if you attack our attempt to make flying safer by checking everyone's butthole, you're attacking the safety of innocent travelers. Don't get all huffy and say it's different---it's not. "Liberty and privacy" allow terrorists to kill people all the time, so any attempt to protect liberty and privacy against safety is supporting terrorism.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Question to those of you whom are pretending indignation of this.

Would you support a pill that absolutely guaranteed a specific gender of a baby that you took around the time of conception?
A little pill you took maybe a few days before and after conception...there is no question about it..you will have either a boy or girl depending on the pill you took...



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join