About Last Night (Arab Spring Texas Style)

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


They don't just perform abortions at these clinics. They also perform family planning and health screenings for women. In Texas many women use them for screenings because it's a lot easier to go to them than to go 100+ miles to a hospital for the same thing. Cheaper too in many cases. I've driven through Texas a lot, as well as having friends that live there, and in many areas hospitals are few and very far between.




posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 
Dear Charles,

If I recall correctly there have been a few court cases concerning both. I have a faint memory from years ago about a man trying to force his wife to have an abortion through the court process because it had been determined that trying to carry the baby to term would result in her death. There have been a few cases of men trying to prevent women from having abortions and force them to give birth and give them custody of the resulting children. I believe in all the cases it was ultimately decided that the women have sole discretion and control of what she does or does not do with her own body.

Respects, littled16



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Openeye
 


Babies have civil rights. Fetuses do not, nor should they. Fetuses have no identity or concept of self.

This argument boils down to control of women's bodies. That's the bottom line.

I happen to believe that women should have autonomy over their womb, while many people want to take that away.

But here's the thing - it doesn't matter why women evolved to carry a fetus in their womb. It's a matter of who has say about a fetus growing inside of an autonomous person. That's it.

Try as I might I can't wrap my mind around what gives people, or more likely than not, conservative men, the right to have the power to forbid what a woman can do with her womb. It reduces the role of a woman's biology to a plaything.

Abortion raises passionate reactions that politicians use to manipulate people.

And wherever heightened emotion exists there lives the potential to exert control.

Power seduces the person who possesses it. It's like a fire that demands fuel to maintain its existence. Dominated persons serve as the accelerant. Power intoxicates, and the Texas GOP majority is drunk with its power to limit the choices of women and hold dominion over the womb.

One day Texas women will say "enough." And maybe the long path to regaining control of their destiny was sparked last night.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
i'm glad that people are bothering to get involved, but i am in support of such a bill. abortion is appalling as it is, and i think it should only be available in extreme cases (such as a serious and legitimate health risk to the mother).

the above is a 20 week old unborn baby. yup, completely not murder.


Can it survive outside of the womb at 20 weeks? How can it be murder when it probably cannot survive outside of the womb?


So, let's say you're in intensive care for whatever reason. Can I murder you because you wouldn't survive without machines and tubes sticking out of every orifice? Is that really how you determine if abortion is murder?



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


Texans are just rich hillbillies. Austin isn't even a real Texas city. Texas will never be a blue state. They are dreaming in Austin. All of this energy needs to be focused on classes to teach masturbation and proper use of contraceptives, instead of puncturing your yolk.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Foreverseeking
 



Babies have civil rights. Fetuses do not, nor should they. Fetuses have no identity or concept of self.


Neither does a newborn, does that mean the mother should have the right to kill it while the umbilical is attached?


This argument boils down to control of women's bodies. That's the bottom line.


No its not only about that, its about universal human rights.


Try as I might I can't wrap my mind around what gives people, or more likely than not, conservative men, the right to have the power to forbid what a woman can do with her womb. It reduces the role of a woman's biology to a plaything.


And I cannot wrap my mind around how many advocates of late term abortions proclaim that a child 5 minutes outside the womb is so far different than it was 10 minutes before. It is still a human being.


Abortion raises passionate reactions that politicians use to manipulate people.


Yeah on both sides of the aisle, and on both sides of the issue.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyofGlass
 



There are different types of parasitic behavior. Please look up adelpho-parasite. An unwanted pregnancy resulting from sperm from a male would be considered adelpho-parasitism as the fetus is of the same species and uses the host to survive. Perhaps this makes people uncomfortable but it doesn't change the behavior of a fetus inside a woman's body. You can argue the point all day but people have a right to control their own bodies. If someone doesn't want to feed something living inside them they have the right not to.

wrong. adelpho parasites are nothing like human reproduction. they are usually in the same family or genus (not typically the same species), however in terms of functionality, one female of a species may lay eggs inside the living offspring of another.

if sperm was it's own fertilized egg that could develop into a human, then it was inserted into the born baby and used it's body to develop, then you'd have a case to argue that. it is nothing like human reproduction.

yes, i won't deny that killing children makes me uncomfortable. according to your definition, a parent may choose to not feed their child (even though they have the means) because it is their right and no one can tell them what to do with their body.

plenty of laws regard what you can and cannot do with your body. just because you have a body capable of performing an action doesn't guarantee that you have a right to that action.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



They don't just perform abortions at these clinics. They also perform family planning and health screenings for women. In Texas many women use them for screenings because it's a lot easier to go to them than to go 100+ miles to a hospital for the same thing. Cheaper too in many cases. I've driven through Texas a lot, as well as having friends that live there, and in many areas hospitals are few and very far between.

and this hurts my argument how? if these clinics are used for health screening (that does not relate to abortion), then they should be able to sustain themselves. they wouldn't close down.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


As much as I hate to say it, Austin should be surgically removed from the State of Texas. It's filled with University of Texas crap head liberals, that couldn't wipe their ass with both hands.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


They well close down because most of them use an income based system for payment. They don't bring in enough from the other services provided to survive. And if they raised their rates to where they could it would have the same effect as closing.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



They well close down because most of them use an income based system for payment. They don't bring in enough from the other services provided to survive. And if they raised their rates to where they could it would have the same effect as closing.

so they don't really do anything besides abortion, planning for abortion, and health checks for abortions. seems legit.

i wouldn't be sad to see them go at all.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Wrong post- sorry
edit on 27-6-2013 by tracehd1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


Right, so you're against women being able to get health screenings cheap. Got it.

Just because they don't make enough to survive from other services doesn't mean all they do is provide abortion. For some women these clinics are all they can afford, and the difference between losing an hour at work for a checkup and losing a day, which for some would be the difference between getting the check and not.

But by all means, just because they also provide abortions let's take that away from them.
edit on 6/27/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyofGlass
If a fetus cannot survive outside the womb then it's not an individual but rather an organism in a parasitic stage. Women have the right to their body, so at any time during a pregnancy if she chooses to no longer have a fetus feeding off her she should have the ability not to have it. If it's old enough to survive on it's own then so be it, create a law that requires that the fetus be removed and not aborted. If it's not able to survive outside of feeding off the woman's body then that means it is not an individual organism but still one still in a parasitic stage.
wow you sound and come across as warm and caring as an iceburg with that statement life is life when do you define life ? if a man told a woman to get rid of a child and she said no he has to support the child for the rest of its life .

but if a woman wants rid of a child what right has a man got none double standards
.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   
anybody who would refer to a human life as a parasite is a deplorable freak.

should be absolutely ashamed of yourself if you actually think that.

by your standards we can just kill off all the retarded, autistic, down syndrome, whatever mental challenged who "cant take care of themselves" too then right? since your definition of life is somebody who can take care of them self you sick freak?

my girlfriends dad was a quadriplegic for 19 years who required 24hour care, guess they should have just snipped his spine though according to you.

simply disgusting.

and they absolutely should shut down murder center abortion clinics. if you dont want to have to abort a baby, close your f'n legs or buy a condom. and dont give me this "affordable family planning" garbage. if you cant afford a few bucks for condoms then you shouldnt be having sex period. because if you cant scrape together $4 you probably arent ready for sex. and birth control pills are what, $5 at wal mart? again. if you cant afford that on your own, you probably shouldnt be having sex.


its truly amazing the disgusting ways people come up with to justify murdering babies.

claim women have a right to their baby, what about the part of the baby that was the fathers? or you know, what about THE FREAKIN BABY PART?? babies apparently dont have a right to not be cut in half. interesting concept?



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Maybe you guys should take your "is it or isn't it murder" debate to one of the many threads about such.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
I think it's awesome that people are starting to see the over extended arm of the Gov.

I am somewhat of a fence sitter on the actual issue. This is not an argument that will ever be won by either side. Hell most Gov officials are still stuck on the issue of when a fetus is considered alive much less what we should and should not be able to do as humans. A life is a life at any age, but if you outlaw abortion it turns back history to unofficial abortions. And in most cases it ends two lives. The mother and the child. I don't agree at all in taking the life of anyone. Unfortunately this day and age it's a matter of choosing the lesser of the two evils.

On a side note. Men don't have a say either way. Why are men even involved?



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 


You know, it really is a legitimate comparison......

Arabs take over and then act out in violence.

These people kill a bill which will then make it legal to kill more babies.

The comparison isn't complimentary, though.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
I'm not familiar with Texas politics. Is Austin about as "blue" as any place in the country? Something like Madison, WI?


Austin is pretty much an embarrassment to the rest of the state.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyofGlass
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


There are different types of parasitic behavior. Please look up adelpho-parasite. An unwanted pregnancy resulting from sperm from a male would be considered adelpho-parasitism as the fetus is of the same species and uses the host to survive. Perhaps this makes people uncomfortable but it doesn't change the behavior of a fetus inside a woman's body. You can argue the point all day but people have a right to control their own bodies. If someone doesn't want to feed something living inside them they have the right not to.


If you want to label people as parasites, perhaps you should take a look at some that might better fit the definition, instead of applying such a hate-filled label to helpless babies.

A BABY isn't a parasite. It's a human being, with its own DNA. Family planning isn't the same thing as KILLING unwanted children. If women don't want kids, they should keep their legs together.

Abortion is murder, no matter how you try to justify it.





new topics
top topics
 
25
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join