Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:40 pm to the808bass
quote:
If it was their body, it would have the same gender and DNA makeup as their body. It doesn't. So the claim that it's just them doing what they want "with their body" isn't exactly correct.
If you say so. If it can't live outside of the host body, it's a leech. If a woman doesn't want to carry it to term, and it's cannot survive outside of her body, she shouldn't be forced to do so.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:41 pm to CatFan81
quote:
What's archaic is men telling adult women what to do with their bodies. We're not living in Medieval Europe. Women aren't property.
We tell men and women what substances they can and cannot put into their bodies every day. We tell people that they dont have the right to end their own lives even during a terminal illness. We tell women they cant have abortions after a certain point. We tell athletes that they cant use performance enhancers. We tell people under 21 they cant use alcohol. We tell people under 18 they cant us tobacco. And on and on and on.
We have no issue with telling people what to do with their bodies in every other aspect of life. This reasoning rings hollow.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:41 pm to the808bass
quote:
I have. I didn't shoot them to put them out of their misery.
Of course you didn't. That would be murder, as the crack baby was a breathing person, no matter how miserable their life is.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:42 pm to CatFan81
quote:
Those millions live in a bubble and have never seen a crack baby.
Ive seen far worse than crack babies end up with pretty good qualities of life.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:44 pm to CatFan81
Maybe said woman should be a little more responsible and she wouldn't find herself having to make these decisions anyway
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:44 pm to CatFan81
quote:
If it can't live outside of the host body, it's a leech. If a woman doesn't want to carry it to term, and it's cannot survive outside of her body, she shouldn't be forced to do so.
If a baby is left to its own devices, 100 out of 100 will die.
And the general viability cutoff is 24 weeks of pregnancy. I assume you'd be ok with restricting abortions to prior to 24 weeks based upon your reasoning above.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:44 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
We have no issue with telling people what to do with their bodies in every other aspect of life. This reasoning rings hollow.
Well, I don't think that we have the right to tell any of those groups that they shouldn't be able to do any of those things, sans the athletes, as those rules are regulated by their employer.
Terminal patients should be able to end their lives. People should be able to use whatever substances they want as long as they aren't harming others. The drinking age should be the same as it is in Europe. The age to use tobacco is dumb too, if you want to be gross and smell like crap.
Just a lot of the government trying to control the lives of it's people.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:45 pm to sorantable
So who's paying for the drug testing? Seems like a billion bucks of public waste....
Who's the big advocate for this farce Labcorp & Quest?
Who's the big advocate for this farce Labcorp & Quest?
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:46 pm to CatFan81
quote:
Of course you didn't. That would be murder, as the crack baby was a breathing person, no matter how miserable their life is.
We have saved children as young as 21 weeks outside the womb, and 24 week old babies have a 20% chance of survival. At the rate we're going by 2025 more babies born at 24 weeks will survive than not. Yet many would prefer women still have the option to abort at 24 weeks.
If you have an abortion at 20-something weeks, you might as well gave the baby and then shoot it. It is definitely murder if we're going by your standard.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:46 pm to the808bass
quote:
And the general viability cutoff is 24 weeks of pregnancy. I assume you'd be ok with restricting abortions to prior to 24 weeks based upon your reasoning above.
Viability is 21 weeks today.
If a baby is brought to term, it's safe to assume that most of the mothers didn't want to abort. Most of these children will be taken care of.
It's different.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:47 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
If you have an abortion at 20-something weeks, you might as well gave the baby and then shoot it. It is definitely murder if we're going by your standard.
Not my standard. I'm only ok with abortion as long as the fetus isn't viable.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:49 pm to BarberitosDawg
quote:
So who's paying for the drug testing? Seems like a billion bucks of public waste....
I can't speak for everyone else's OB/GYN but mine always does a urine test at checkups (i.e. testing for pregnancy, infections, etc). And it's covered by insurance. I'm pretty sure the cost would be minimal and quite frankly worth it if it prevents some common birth defects that go along with drug use while pregnant.
I'd rather my tax dollars pay for the tests now that are used to deter pregnant women from drug use then to pay for the disability check the child will receive later for having a disability brought on by the drug use.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:51 pm to Manzielathon
quote:
Maybe said woman should be a little more responsible and she wouldn't find herself having to make these decisions anyway
This is a big part of my objection. The vast majority of abortions are not performed for medical reasons or rape/incest but out if convenience. Its largely used as a form of birth control and promotes irresponsibility. As an example, women who gave had at least one abortion are 4 times as likely to have or have had an STD in the past and 8 times as likely to have another abortion compared to someone who has never had one. The minimal data we have on abortions vs drug use strongly suggests women who have abortions are far more likely to be abusing drugs as well.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:52 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Its largely used as a form of birth control and promotes irresponsibility
That's a pretty damned expensive form of birth control.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:53 pm to Manzielathon
quote:
Maybe said woman should be a little more responsible and she wouldn't find herself having to make these decisions anyway
Men could be a little more responsible as well. It takes two.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:54 pm to Roger Klarvin
Yup. abortion to save a womans life, sure.
Abortion because you're a dumbfrick and don't wanna deal with it?
The widespread shirking of personal responsibility is what's killing this country.
Abortion because you're a dumbfrick and don't wanna deal with it?
The widespread shirking of personal responsibility is what's killing this country.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:55 pm to Manzielathon
quote:
Yup. abortion to save a womans life, sure.
Abortion because you're a dumbfrick and don't wanna deal with it?
The widespread shirking of personal responsibility is what's killing this country.
When a woman is forced to have a child that she doesn't want because abortion isn't available of she's scared of being scorned for her decisions... well, she's likely going to resent the child. You can't resent a child and be a good parent.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:56 pm to CatFan81
quote:
Men could be a little more responsible as well. It takes two.
Holding all parties responsible just makes too much damn sense.
Posted on 4/12/14 at 1:56 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
Holding all parties responsible just makes too much damn sense.
Clearly.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News