ABORT! ABORT!! DANGER WILL ROBINSON! ABORT! ABORT!!!!
Amendment IX:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Amendment IX is inherantly a privacy act. You forgot to mention it when you mentioned Amendment X. This article does not mean that states must vote on every controversial issue. It is a protection clause for those who are a minority in power, like women. IMHO, unless the vote was for women only (which I, and probably you, will find ridiculous), I surely doubt the interests of the minority would be protected. Roe vs. Wade was construed from the constitutional right of confidentiality between woman and her doctor (based on the right to privacy).
Quote:
I also think it's pretty telling that a good deal of women end up regretting ending an unborn child's life (a little something called PAS or post-abortion syndrome).
I don't regret it.
When i said 85% i meant, you know...
Mothers who went to the Doctors said," I think I'm pregnant..."
The doctor says, let me have a look. "Well done, your going to have a very beautifull daighter..."
and the womans face goes red and she bellows;
"WHAT? A DAUGHTER!!! GET RID OF IT, I need a SON!"
Thats the story of thing that I would agree an aborion is just, no no no no no.
As i said, either your prepared to bring up a child or your not. If you are prepared to bring up A child, it shouldnt matter if its girl, boy, blonde, ginger, brunette, black, white, pink or even green, as long as it's theirs.
Craig:
As I've said REPEATEDLY, abortion is saved for only certain incidents.
stumbleina:
Mind telling us the circumstances behind the abortion then?
Quote:
stumbleina:
Mind telling us the circumstances behind the abortion then?
Um...no offense meant, but isn't that like, totally none of your business?
I think that if she wanted to go into something that personal she probably would have expanded on that comment more. I'm not Astrid though, so I cant say for sure. Just a thought.
I already have. Basically, I said 'properly maintain orphanages and foster homes, properly educate hopeful parents about adoption (because there are a lot of misconceptions about adoption), and try to have children adopted early'.
That's not a meaningful response to the issue, that's throwing money at it.
Besides, between cutting taxes to rich oil barons, cleaning up massive floods that shouldn't have happened, relocating those affected by said floods, and Iraq (etc.), where exactly is this money supposed to come from?
Quote:
Um...no offense meant, but isn't that like, totally none of your business?
I was only asking. If she doesn't want to answer, I won't ask again. Simple as that. I'm just curious about the circumstances that led to the decision to abort. That's all.
Quote:
That's not a meaningful response to the issue, that's throwing money at it.
Earlier, you agreed quite heartily with Jimro when he said 'spend more money on abortion education'. Just because I suggested the same with adoption education and the proper maintenance of the foster system, it's suddenly 'throwing money at it'?
Yes it is, Ultra. It's called something else because You're such an outstanding...republican? o.o
Earlier, you agreed quite heartily with Jimro when he said 'spend more money on abortion education'.
I agreed with spending more money on sex education and awareness, because it is a key component of harm reduction. By the way, "abortion education"? What the hell?
Increasing funding is not a meaningful answer. It's akin to asking a political candidate, "how are you going to fix the healthcare system in Canada", and getting the response, "we're going spend more money." Uh yeah, great job. A meaningful answer would sound something like "we're going to treat our physicians better so they don't take their skills to other countries, such as by offering to subsidize their education in exchange for a pledge to stay in the country for the first five years", or "we're going to go to a two-tier system to lighten the load on the public system", or "we're going to keep closer scrutiny on the way provinces spend money", or "we're going to break up the labour unions or take away their right to strike to reduce disruptions in service". I may not agree with all of them, but at least they're meaningful.
Quote:
By the way, "abortion education"? What the hell?
Jimro said more money on education. Given the subject matter, I figured he was referring to more education on what abortion is and its consequences.
And with all those suggestions of yours, add:
-Experiment with a more privatized foster care system. If there's a demand for better services for orphans - and, as a result, more people to buy stock - there will be competition for better services. Basic tenet of capitalism.
-Encourage people to adopt orphans while they're younger. The longer a child remains in an orphanage, the less likely they'll adapt to a home life successfully.
-Some orphanages are worse compared to others. Have inspectors (government, private, or otherwise) regularly inspect orphanages and foster homes, and provide a report to Child Services. Also, have the inspector offer ideas for improvements to the orphanage, particularly in making the facility feel more 'homely'.
-Give families that adopt children financial assistance or tax breaks. Have regular inspections by Child Services. If there's any evidence of child abuse, then all financial assistance will end, compounded with fines or charges of child abuse.
-A lower worker:child ratio in orphanages. The less children per worker, the easier it'll be for the worker to cope and care for the children, and the easier it'll be for children to bond. Naturally, this means the hiring of more workers.
-Screen applicants to orphanages with a trial period of one month (or more, depending on foster home). If they are to work at the orphanage, they must achieve a certain standard (kindness to children, tolerance of children that will obviously have some problems, and a willingness to work hard). Failure to meet this standard will immediately result in termination of employment and possible fines if any children were abused during the trial period.
...
*twitch*
I hate to quote an anime but its true. There really is no point in talking to people that don't want to hear you.
Stick to writing about RP erections Ultra, you're better at that. :p
Quote:
There really is no point in talking to people that don't want to hear you.
What was it about my post that indicates this? Cycle asked for meaningful suggestions in the vein of his suggestions, so I responded with my own. Is there a problem with that?
When you're talking about things that are already being done? Yes.
Ultra,
I was actually refering to more emphasis on BASIC Education, reading, writing, math and science. Kids who understand these concepts are being taught HOW to think, not WHAT to think. When they are presented with the any sex education program, whether abstinence oriented or not, they can engage the material with better reasoning and logic. Not only will this graduate a better educated individual, it will graduate empowered individuals.
The numbers are in, the quickest way to slow population growth is to raise the average education level of a nations WOMEN. It has proven true in Scandinavia and elsewhere.
People have sex for lots of reasons, many are healthy. Unfortunately there are not a lot of healthy reasons that teens have sex. Anyways, by empowering women with education we give them all sorts of options that allow them to avoid falling into a situation where abortion might seem like the only way out.
I don't believe in teaching people what to think, only arming them with critical thinking skills, creative reasoning skills, and giving them the freedom to make their own choices and suffer the consequences of those choices. I know that some of them will make choices that I don't agree with, but that is only par for the course. The only dumb mistake is the one you don't learn from.
Jimro
True. Knowledge is a powerful thing. After that, it all comes down to a person's wisdom.
Kkaayy. One thing.
This is a silly point, and I really, really hate putting words into other people's mouths. But no one takes pleasure out of the fact that so many babies die from abortion, it's just that you can't take that option away from women, and I don't feel that anyone who hasn't experienced child-birth under dire circumstances can really take a stand on the issue from the view-point of someone below the poverty line. (by the way, the mother's babies you spoke of, were probably not only born into established families, but also were probably planned for before they were even conceived. Though I obviously can't know for certain.
Having said that, I think Abortion should be something that is monitered, I don't think it should be a tool that can be used lightly. People are still going to do it, whether it's legal or not. But controlling it, and letting life be wasted for frivilous reasons (such as swift's sex (by that I mean gender) example.)
*Shrug*
Just my own personal observations and ideals.
I had a really fun post with lots of kicking, and punching, and calling people liberal gamers. But I can't remember it anymore. *Weep*
Forgive me for playing devils advocate, but I have to ask. What're your views on "The Morning After Pill"?
Me?
As I've said previously, let contraceptives be taught about in classrooms, with the knowledge that they're not foolproof.
Personally, I believe sexual reproduction is something that should be kept until after marriage...and be used only for the purpose of conceiving a child.
But hey, human nature and all that.
Even if the morning after pill IS used, if it doesn't work...then they shouldn't abort if they don't want the baby. If they didn't want to risk having a child, then they shouldn't have had intercourse in the first place.
So you view the morning after pill as a contraceptive rather than the termination of an egg/sperm which have successfully bonded.
Thank you, your imput has been very helpful.
Indeed.
Personally, I believe sexual reproduction is something that should be kept until after marriage...and be used only for the purpose of conceiving a child.
When you do get around to it -- and trust me, you will -- mark my words, you will regret not having done it sooner, just like everyone else.
that view is a lot like my parents. i've sort of been told that i'll be disowned should i get pregnant before i'm married.
very reassuring should that ever accidently happen to me, dispite all the precautions i've taken, mumsy.
Quote:
i've sort of been told that i'll be disowned should i get pregnant before i'm married.
Then that's outright stupid of them.
If any of my children had pre-marital sex, of course I'd be disappointed (mostly in myself for failing to instruct them correctly; otherwise, it wouldn't happen). Doesn't mean I'd disown them or stop loving them. Parental love is unconditional.
and what of those who don't believe in the institute of marriage? My dad was with my first step-mum longer than my biological one and raised a child with her. What makes the marriage anymore of a real relationship than the longer one without wedlock?
Hey, if people can make it work without going through the hoops of marriage, then that's their deal. Of course, for those who aren't married, the odds of children being raised by single parents are dramatically higher (this accounts for both divorced parents and people who don't believe in marriage at all).
HOWEVER, it can't be denied that those who are born out of wedlock - more often than not - are born into a considerably more unstable home environment than the traditional nuclear family. Child poverty numbers in the US remain quite high, because the traditional support structure of a married family isn't as prevalent as it once was.
This article brings to light what Jimro spoke of earlier: education empowers people.
It can be denied. My situation when mum and dad were married was total bollocks. They hated eachother and stayed together for money, comfort and a contract that my dad didn't have the balls to break without his sister forcing him through the divorce proceedings.
My second family life with dad and his girlfriend (and her daughter) was alot more comfortable and like a proper family, for those 6 years I was happy.
Like I said, more often than not. In your case, it turned out to be 'not'. However, it probably helps that your dad is wiser with relationships after the first marriage.
Craig (6:41 pm): Why did I corner Ultra into the point where I could have killed his arguement and let him slither away? o.o
Shifty Prowers (6:42 pm): o.o
Craig (6:43 pm): I had him admit that he believes there's a time between conception and life starting. All I had to do was push that the
law already defined that abortion cannot take place after the fetal growth had reached that stage of life and he would have been finished
...
Its amazing how all the questions I REALLY want answering in this tread never get adressed, instead I now know all about the adoption and mariage rights system in the USA... 
Brilliant */scarsm*
By that, did Craig mean:
Abortions cannot be done once the baby is born (which would then make it murder, infaticide, etcetera. Same thing.)?
Or...
Abortions cannot be done after the first trimester (Roe v. Wade, however, allows for an abortion through all nine months.)?
Quote:
Its amazing how all the questions I REALLY want answering in this tread never get adressed
Ask away. They might have already been answered.
Your against abortions because you believe an unborn baby is alive and abortion is paramount to murder...
You however dont believe life begins at conception, as your not against the morning after pill...
So, at WHAT point exactly do you class life to begin at?
Craig may or may not have an opinion WHEN the abortion should/shouldn't be done after a certain point, but we're all interested to hear yours.
IF life doesnt begin at conception but it does begin before borth, at what point would you make abortion illegal?
And would it be all right if it was before that point?
You said that the morning after pill counts as contraception, wether a concious or subconcious comment, it was what you said and thusly what you believe. However it flushes out an egg and sperm which have combined into a "potential life"
However you have, as many do, disregarded it as insubstantial enough to not care about. Thusly it can be determined that some weeks down the line it becomes a life that we can care about rather than the moment of conception.
There are already laws which saw that you cannot terminate a featus (retro-active abortion is it's own topic), after the brain has developed, which would be when life begins. I'm not sure what the general law is, I've heard anywhere between 12 and 23 weeks.
Regardless there IS a law which protects babies after they achieve what would be considered a human form, a brain and life.
By your comment, aside though it was, and the fact I asked you about it and you didn't withtract it until I made this arguement, you do consider that life doesn't begin instantly. Thusly, we can agree it forms during the featus stage.
Aborting a zygote, should be as much an issue as using drugs to trick your body into having a period and flushing out the egg/sperm.
My stance on the use of contraceptives depends on the circumstances involved (for instance, if a girl got drunk and slept with someone and woke up later finding out what she did was bad? I would have no problem with a contraceptive. If she willingly went sleeping while sober, than she has to deal with the consequences. Then again, flirting while drunk is usually a recipe for disaster, but that's another topic...). As I've said repeatedly, abortions should only be utilized for instances of rape or risk to a mother's health. Using a contraceptive to counteract a rape is tantamount to the same thing.
Personally, I believe life begins at conception. Nothing else to it.
Oh, and Craig, is that law in Britain? Because in the US, late-term abortions ARE legal (I think some states have restricted this, however).
Ignore
Dodging the question?
How much clearer than 'I believe life begins at conception' can I get?
I know, I editted the comment as you posted. I'll get back to you next time I get on my dad's machine, and I have a chance to differentiate what I learned in RE class as fact and debate. It's all about 7 years ago, so not fresh in my memory, but I swear it was either the teacher saying it SHOULD be illegal after 12-23 weeks (whichever it was) or it is.
Ah.
I do know however that partial-birth abortions in the US were banned in 2003. Also, the legality of third trimester abortions depends on the US state, as they can be either restricted or even condemned if the state government sees fit.
Quote:
If she willingly went sleeping while sober, than she has to deal with the consequences.
Serves the whore right for having sex. Having a child is a suitable punishment for her.
What about all those highly skilled and trained doctors/abortionists? They would be out of a job, think about all mass unemployment you could cause! You evil person you! *Shakes fist*
Ultra, what are your views on IVF then, since it often caused a disposal of large amounts of frozen fertilised eggs every year?
Cycle,
Not everyone regrets waiting until marriage. Many folks regret having premarital sex, I know I do.
Jimro
Like I said, more often than not. In your case, it turned out to be 'not'. However, it probably helps that your dad is wiser with relationships after the first marriage.
In my experience, it's really the contrapositive to your statement Ult, more people I know seem to have bad marriges then good ones. Many many people I know seem to have parents who suffer quite a bit of marital difficulty. I consider myself lucky to have parents who are still together, and for all predictions, wil take a kryptonian tug-o-war contest to split 'em up.
Humans are horney, monogamy is a risk.
(This post completely off topic, but I don't care ;P)
Quote:
Serves the whore right for having sex.
Actions beget consequences VCP. Considering the way you word it, you speak of the hypothetical woman in my post as a prostitute.
Interesting. I'd most certainly trade in a life of prostitution for a life of motherhood. It's not that hard to get on welfare.
Quote:
What about all those highly skilled and trained doctors/abortionists? They would be out of a job, think about all mass unemployment you could cause! You evil person you! *Shakes fist*
They're doctors. They can find a different line of work. Like working as a surgeon. All depends on their training.
Quote:
Ultra, what are your views on IVF then, since it often caused a disposal of large amounts of frozen fertilised eggs every year?
Honestly, I'm not quite sure. On one hand, it allows infertile women to give birth. On the other hand, there's numerous ethical issues involved. I'm leaning toward 'no', but as I said, I'm not quite sure. I'll need to give it some thought.
In any case, I'm sure adoption would be preferable to IVF.
Quote:
Humans are horney, monogamy is a risk.
Eh, I'm not so sure about that. Marriage is a test of willpower on both ends. Sure, my mom and dad divorced. Since then, they've remarried. They're both wiser, and knowing what they know now - as they've both told me - they would have done things differently back then.
Most of the people I know have happy marriages. *shrugs*
How much dumber than 'I believe life begins at conception' can I get?
I dunno, I guess you could start by believing in "Young Earth creationism".
How cute Cycle.
I try to be a non-violent person. But any arguement that ends with taking away womens rights or calling people unstable/weird/etc for being not being born into a perfect family makes me wanna take a bat and beat people. Or at least their pixels. Can I beat someones pixels? D:
It's better to go for the knee-caps, Rico.
The robot told you people to abort. But does anybody ever listen to the robot?
NOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooOOO.
Quote:
But any arguement that ends with taking away womens rights or calling people unstable/weird/etc for being not being born into a perfect family makes me wanna take a bat and beat people.
My pro-life stance alone qualifies me as someone who takes away women's rights in your eyes (not exactly sure how), but I'm curious as exactly where I called someone unstable/weird/etcetera for not being born in a perfect family (I assume you mean a traditional nuclear family).
And if you're going to beat somebody, make sure to bring some aspirin. After hitting them, you can give them aspirin to make the pain go away. And then you can hit them again for twice the effect. 😛
WHY aren't you against the morning after pill?
Dun Dun DUUUUUUNNNUNUNUNUNUN!
