Home - List All Discussions

The Problems With Pro-Life America

Abortion, Statutory Rape, Fear Tactics

by: MyChoice

I am now 18 years old. However when i was 16, my boyfriend was 20. That is against the law in my state. I am so sick of people talking about "underage girls should be protected from men" thus creating and abiding by the statutory rape laws. I was a 16 year old girl with a good head on my shoulders and i chose the 20 year old man, i wasn't "[blindly] seduced" into anything.

ProLife Activists along the laws of statutory rape have their heart in the right place. However, I do not appreciate being told what i can and cannot do becuase someone else (not even my own parent in some instances) want to "protect" me. Just becuse I am a girl does NOT mean i cannot make mature decisions on my own and need laws against my personal freedoms and personal engagements "to protect" me.

1st off, it is the parents responsiblity to educate and guide their children (or female children for the sake of this arguement) about sex and everything related to sex. Even though parents want to protect their innocent children (chaste daughters) from the knowledge of sexual matters, it WILL ONLY harm them. It will only harm young adults to not be aware of what is out there.

2nd off, it should not have to be that young ladies know about the sexual preditors and a man's nature (so to speak, I completely don't mean anything against ALL the men when i say that) that could hurt her. I dont have a solution, but it should be more the man's fault and problem. Young women shouldn't have to worry about it and be subjected to such awareness. People should stop accepting "a man's nature" (ehhh.... there it is again.... i cant find a better phrase) for what he is doing. (when it comes to 17 and younger girls and like 25(+) yr old men) Men should be targeted more for lecture on controlling their urges and have it drilled into THEIR head that it is not acceptable by any means.

Statutory Rape: Rape is Rape. Sexual relations between a 16 year old female and a 20 yr old male is acceptable. However, age is ONLY a number. Being 18 doesn't miraculously enable you to make adult decisions; being 16 doesn't automatically disable someone from making them either. I personally think that sex with a 13 yr old no matter gender or age of the individual (even another 13 yr old) is unacceptable. However, it is only my place to make sure my 13 yr old (if i had one) is educated and appropriatey guided into the facts of matters regarding sex, puberty, and the media's spin.

Sex is a natural, instictual aspect of being human. After puberty, it doesn not matter if youv'e got a college degree and a good job to obtain before having a family would work out for you. Once Puberty is hit, sexual hormones and urges/feelings began to surface. Let me just add this: Abstinence only education is a waste of effort and i have no idea who could have logically thought it would work. I lost my virginity at 17 (for information regarding my thoughts and post) I also hit puberty when i was 9. Most of my friends lost their virginity when they were 14/15 and to guys who were their age. I am a lucky case i guess.

The main problem i have with pro-life stances: When a woman does not have the means/education to support a child, it would cause an unhealty lifestyle for her and her child if she decided to (or was made to) keep the baby. I dont agree with a woman giving her child up for adoption. I dont agree with adoption being the alternative becuase if i'm going to go throught pregnancy and put that much into having the baby, im going to want to keep the baby.

-another: When two people have sex (assuming everything is legal and consentual) it is for mere pleasure (unless they are married or plan on being together- couples like this do not seek abortion) and when the woman accidentally gets pregnant (which should not be looked down upon and is acceptably normal-- if all educaters taught birth control methods, this might not happen in the first place) so recap: when 2 ppl have sex it is for pleasure and when the woman accidentally gets pregnant and seeks an abortion (it's obvioulsy the most advantagous choice -- i also feel that the expectant mother is looking out for her child, not killing it b/c of something abortion is made out to be) suppose u pro-lifers get what u want and abortion is outlawed. This woman must have a baby that she didnt plan for, doesn't have the money for, time for, and in order for americans to live decently, one must have the appropiate degrees and job... this opportunity is virtually out of reach for her now. Thus creating a lifestyle that isnt the best it could be for either mother or child. And what kind of burden is the father left with, while the mother's life is basically ruined?

-above all: Abortion is a matter of personal choice, period. If you dont believe in abortion, don't have abortions. It is not the government, churches, neighbors, even parents place to tell someone else what they can and cannot do with their bodies.

It is taking away my personal freedom and liberties if i dont have a choice to have an abortion. No woman (prolife or not) should allow/take part in the restrictions of liberties and rights of a woman's choice.

1 more thing: this home page of this site is rediculous. Planned parenthood isnt "allowing sex offenders to avoid the law" and they aren't "profiting" from cases like that. Its one thing to have a view point on an argument, but when things like that are said, you guys lose all the merits you might have had in the beginning.

reply from: domsmom

I just want to say that a child does not care whether or not their mom can afford Tommy Hilfiger for them. All a child wants from the parent is love and acceptance. Also that either murder is illegal or its not. Cant have it both ways. To hear that someone thinks that killing a baby is just fine, always makes me want to cry.

reply from: yoda

Children always think they are as mature and wise as adults, that's nothing new. It's up to adults to protect them even when they scream that they don't need protection.

But I agree with you, domsmom, it really is sad to see someone try to justify killing babies. And this one even goes so far as to say killing them is better than adopting them out. That's just plain bloodthirsty, IMO.

reply from: shan21

There is no such thing as an accidental pregnancy. Pregnancy is the outcome of sex and is the sole purpose of sex. Sex is not a game and is not for pleasure only. If it were for pleasure only then pregnancy would not be an outcome. If you are not mature enough to face the consequences of the action of sex which is motherhood, maybe you should consider not performing the act.

reply from: sarah

Good thing her mother didn't let her play in the street when she wanted to, or she wouldn't be here to have said such a hedious thing as it's better to kill a baby then adopt them out. It is the responsibility of the adult to protect the child, a concpet that is becoming more and more lost.

She's been spoon fed by the propoganda merchants of PP and the MSM. Sadly, she drank the kool-aide well. So, for that much we can't blame her all together. She had help.

reply from: bradensmommy

ummm....errr....

mychoice, that has to be the most REDICULOUS thing I have ever read, I just have nothing to say about your comments because it is too immature for me to chew. So I will just say to you that you need to grow up, do some research, and stop watching MTV.

That is all...

reply from: Tam

Oh, thanks braden's mommy! I had been unable to articulate (yes, can you believe it? LOL) my thoughts on this post, but you just summed them up perfectly!

reply from: AshMarie88

Oh, thanks braden's mommy! I had been unable to articulate (yes, can you believe it? LOL) my thoughts on this post, but you just summed them up perfectly!

I second that! Or 3rd?

reply from: MyChoice

domsmom: its the mothers body until the child is born with it's own.

shan21: No matter what people would like to believe, sex is RARELY practiced for reproduction. Even though pregnancy can only happen because of sex, it is not always the wanted outcome. And on some degree i agree with you: "If your not ready to face the consequences of sex, dont practice it." However, if you looked at it from the perspective I'm speaking about, its clear to see that you are gambling the health of child because it's mom doesnt have the means to support it. Just becuse someone gets pregnant, doesnt mean the child should be born.

Sarah: I truly did not mean that it's better to kill a child than adopt them out. It is not at all better. However, abortion is a choice, just like adoption, and parenthood. We have choices and we can use them.

Bradensmommy: I dont understand whats rediculous about my post. This is a learning process for me, and if you can't give me information on why I should not believe this, then you can't argue your own side. I don't watch MTV and i have done research. I don't appreciate the indirect statement that im ignorant. I understand it's a touchy subject but character bashing is what's rediculous.

FOR EVERYONE SO FAR: MY MAIN ARGUEMENT IS NOT WHETHER ABORTION IS RIGHT OR WRONG, BUT IT IS UNDOUBTINGLY A PERSONAL CHOICE MADE BY THE WOMAN IN THE SITUATION.

No one would terminate a pregnancy for no reason. These women who have them all have reasons. Here again, if it's not a situation that involves you, its not your place to judge or worry about what someone else is doing.

Please stop talking about how rediculous it is and educate me. Thanks!

reply from: MyChoice

Ok, this is all great for religous POVs, but can you see past religion and argue why it's wrong? What about the argument that it is a womans choice? What is the counter arguement for that rather than why abortion is wrong?

reply from: MyChoice

I can see your point about a child does not care whether or not their mom can afford tommy hilfiger for them. All a child want from the parent is love and acceptance. I see this arguement and i agree with it. But other kids do care if the childs mom can afford it. However, that is no reason to get an abortion.

Just because a woman has a child doesnt mean that child is going to get love and acceptance. Why bring a child into the world if you dont have the means or education to give it a healthy life?
I dont believe that killing a baby is just fine, but i do believe aborting a fetus rather than giving birth to a child into a lifetime of hardships without opportunity from day one is not a crazy idea.

I did not mean that i dont agree with a woman giving her child up for adoption (period). what i meant was that I dont agree with the prolife stance that it it must be adoption or parenting. Abortion is an option as well. Even though if i got pregnant i probably would not get an abortion, becuase i dont completely agree with it personally, adoption wouldnt be an option for me becuase i had already gone through pregnancy and labor and gotten to attached with my baby already.

I am arguing that abortion is a personal choice to be made. Nothing more.

reply from: domsmom

It IS the babies body. It's the babies body that is shreaded during the abortion. It's the baby who is trying like hell to dodge the suction tip. It's the babies heart who's rate doubles with panic. It's the baby who try's to scream but no one can hear it only because there's no air in the womb. ("The Silent Scream" video)

reply from: pray4em

domsmom, I agree, It's the baby's body.

Mychioce, you seem to be open minded, that's good. If you stay open minded I believe in the end you will see prolife people are fighting for the rights of the unborn. and not agaist women's rights. Just because it's a choice dosn't make it right.

reply from: Tam

Yeah, I agree, pray4em.

You see, MC, there is a terrible misconception about the reasons people are pro-life. It is assumed that we want to oppress women, control the bodies of other people, make other people's choices for them, and generally turn back the clock on family life in this country to about 1945.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. I am a feminist, and if you check the facts you will find that feminists were pro-life for most of the history of feminism, until the proabortion movement hijacked the feminist movement--and is now so entrenched that to say I am a pro-life feminist is considered laughable by many so-called feminists who are pro-choice.

I appreciate that you would rather be educated than called ridiculous. You must excuse me for offending you, if I did, because I am just pretty frustrated with the stuff you were saying, only because I've heard so many, many people say the same stuff--and most of it is nonsense in my opinion--but I can't exactly blame YOU for the fact that OTHER people also believe what you believe--I should just address you directly.

And that's all I have time to say about it right now but I will try to get back soon to respond to the statement you made in a bit more detail.

Welcome to the forum. It is really nice to have the occasional open-minded pro-choicer; most of the ones who come here are so closed-minded as to be unwilling to accept indisputable realities, preferring their euphemisms and rhetoric to facts. Anyone actually open to debate and willing to consider another POV, is always welcome here.

reply from: bradensmommy

I'd still like to know when the sex for pleasure only came about because if that is the case WHY the heck are we even discussing abortion??? I am pro-life and Wiccan, abortion doesn't really have to be about religious beliefs its about right and wrong. My parents taught me what right and wrong is, have yours? I know that I basically said that you were ignorant, well, reread your original post and see why I think that. There is nothing in your post stating any facts to your opinions. IMO if I knew my 16 year old daughter OR son was dating a 20 year old I would in fact get information as to why the 20 year old is even messing around with high schoolers. I would take action immediately as well.
You think its okay for a 16 year old and a 20 year old to have sexual relations? OMG, I hope that you never have a daughter because I in fact would be totally against that nonsense. Do you realize that most men who are over the age of 18 who mess with high schoolers only date them because 1) the high schoolers have low self-esteem and the men or women know that or 2) the high schooler thinks its "so cool" to date an 18+ guy or gal. Are you seeing my point?
If you want to know about me, I am 25 years old, married to my army soldier for almost 5 years, I have a 3 month old and didn't have sex til I was 18 years old and that was MY decision, not a decision that my peers had for me. I didn't go along with what my peers did and I think that makes you thier puppet when you do.
I think you have very immature points about your opinions yes. As I am going back over your original post it is making me think very low of you to be quite honest.
I'm going to start quoting you so you can see what I'm talking about:

"-another: When two people have sex (assuming everything is legal and consentual) it is for mere pleasure (unless they are married or plan on being together- couples like this do not seek abortion) and when the woman accidentally gets pregnant (which should not be looked down upon and is acceptably normal-- if all educaters taught birth control methods, this might not happen in the first place) so recap: when 2 ppl have sex it is for pleasure and when the woman accidentally gets pregnant and seeks an abortion (it's obvioulsy the most advantagous choice -- i also feel that the expectant mother is looking out for her child, not killing it b/c of something abortion is made out to be) suppose u pro-lifers get what u want and abortion is outlawed. This woman must have a baby that she didnt plan for, doesn't have the money for, time for, and in order for americans to live decently, one must have the appropiate degrees and job... this opportunity is virtually out of reach for her now. Thus creating a lifestyle that isnt the best it could be for either mother or child. And what kind of burden is the father left with, while the mother's life is basically ruined?"

Now, if you did your research like you said you did, you will know that most abortions are by women who are MARRIED and have 2+children and decide that they still want to kill thier children even though they know they have the option of vascectomy and getting tubes tied (and yes I know that sometimes that doesn't work, but its a darn good way of preventing more children) less than 1 percent of abortions are by women who were raped or by incest, which means some women who were raped and concieved still kept thier children, read about some adults who were kept by thier mothers who were raped victims and maybe you will change your mind about it.
I also believe that if you don't want children the ONLY possible way to prevent it is NOT having sex. Yes, I know when 2 people are married it is going to happen, but they should know the outcomes already and if they don't know that when you have sex it WILL produce a child then they don't need to be married in the first place.
You think that unwanted children ruin a woman? I never say an unplanned pregnancy is an accident. If you don't know that sex will produce a child (again I say this) don't have sex or maybe you should go back to sex ed. I myself had sex ed in high school, didn't really pay attention in it because I basically knew what there was to it because I had an open minded mother and to this day we still discuss sex, probably why I was much more mature about it than my peers.
So that is basically the information you are wanting to know right? If not please feel free to ask me more because I am an open book.

reply from: bradensmommy

Tam, I am a pro-life feminist as well, and was really suprised when I went to the feminists for life and was suprised to see that Patricia Heaton was one! It really opens your eyes when you actually see actresses to believe the same way and it made me know that feminists SHOULD be pro-life.

reply from: yoda

Logically, there is nothing wrong with that statement. Morally, it is meaningless. EVERY decision we make, good, bad, horrible, wonderful, or whatever....... IS A PERSONAL CHOICE TO BE MADE!

So really you are right, but your statement is meaningless. Unless you are willing to discuss and defend the morality of THAT PARTICULAR CHOICE........ then your statement has no meaning to me at all.

reply from: galen

So your logic goes.... If I make a Personal CHoice to have and abortion then it is not anyone's buisness to get in my way..... HMMMMMM
If I make a personal choice to cut off my ear, people will stop me..... Its considered a psychological problem to want to maime onesself.
If I make a personal choice to cut off YOUR ear.... well I could be arrested because to maime another is morally wrong.
If i make a personal choice to execute my son for bad behaviour then i could recieve the death penalty or life in prison.

Why is abortion OK and the other statements not? Because the abortion industry makes money off of the procedure... that IMO is the only real reason that abortion is still around at this time... It happens to be a huge industry and the people who lobby for it get paid a lot of money. $$$ are a big motivator in this country.

Choice has nothing to do with it, regardless of what your veiws on the viability of the baby, don't be fooled. You can make $$ off 10,000 or more Ab in the time it takes to carry 1 child to term and adopt it out. At $ 400 a pop that is still more $$ than you will get for the adoption fees.

M

reply from: sarah

Thank you for clearing up that point.



Abortion isn't anything at all like adoption. As soon as you become pregnant, you're a parent, the only difference will be if you're a parent of a dead baby or a live baby.

reply from: AshMarie88

The fetus is never the mother's actually body. If it was, it'd have the mother's DNA, the mother's organs, the mother's blood supply, etc...

reply from: mom5

Gosh, raise your hands pro-lifers if you have heard everything that MyChoice has said at least...oh, a million times...

Anyway, I want to comment on this specific "reason" for choice of abortion.

Oh, let's say, everything is fine and dandy in my life. Sweet husband just loves me to death...financially, well, let's say DH and I are doing rather well. All in the Family so to speak and wham!!!! That man turned into a piece of crap, left me for another women. Doesn't give me any support...oh, what hardship! Will it last a lifetime, it just might...why let my child that is already born suffer this hardship...oh, I wouldn't want my say, 5 yo to live in a hardship, so I should be able to choose to kill him/her just like I would be able to kill my unborn child growing in my womb whose father just left me...

Now, I tell you MyChoice...to kill an unborn child to me is JUST LIKE killing a 5 yo child.

You never know what life is going to give you...at a drop of the hat, we all can be thrown into a life of hardship. Most people are only a paycheck away from hardship. Really, that's not a good reason to support abortion, really, think about it!

reply from: bradensmommy

Thank you mom5, couldn't have said it better myself!!!

reply from: cali1981

MyChoice,

Welcome to the forum. We appreciate your being civil about your views!

You might not have been blindly seduced, and you are right that age is only a number, but it is the government's responsibility to lawfully prevent men from taking advantage of young women (minors) sexually. The only way to do this is to impose statutory rape laws. It is just like driving; some 16-year-olds are certainly not mature enough to drive and some children would probably be very responsible drivers at 15 or even 14. Everyone is not the same, but there has to be a standard - that's the only way the law can work. So, in your case you might not feel you were taken advantage of, but that is certainly not the case with everyone.

Who has told you what you can and cannot do, and with regard to what?

Who said that girls cannot make mature decisions on their own? The only thing anybody - including the law - has ever said is that men should be punished for taking advantage of young women sexually.

I completely agree and I would daresay that others on this forum agree as well.

I agree that men should be targeted and held responsible, but the rest of this paragraph seems to be contradicting what you said in the first paragraph. Should young women be educated about sexuality and men, or shouldn't they?

That is true, but that does not mean that people are unable to control those urges and use them appropriately and responsibly.

The idea that it's acceptable to kill someone because we think that they might eventually have a difficult life is just about the most vile perversion of "compassion" that I can possibly think of. Yes, life is difficult for many people, but we shouldn't be killing children to make their parents' lives easier, or because we think that death would be better than whatever life they might lead! That mentality is the very definition of evil, and nobody should have the right to decide that for someone else!

First of all, not everyone is going to feel the same way that you do. And second of all, if a woman (as you say above) anticipates a difficult lifestyle for her and her child, the most compassionate thing to do would be to give the child to someone who has the means to provide for him/her, NOT to kill the child! Adoption is not perfect, but it is certainly better than death for the child!

Whether you "feel" the mother is killing her child or not when she has an abortion is irrelevant. Medical science makes it clear that abortion DOES kill a child! There is something seriously wrong with the idea that a mother's killing her own child constitutes "looking out for" him/her.

First of all, having a child DOES NOT "ruin" one's life! My wife and I have a little one and we are still able to pursue our goals! My wife is currently working on her master's degree and we both have jobs! It is difficult, but we have a responsibility to our daughter - as ALL parents do to their children, whether they "planned" for them or not! And second of all, if abortion were outlawed, people would most likely be more careful about conceiving children that they don't want. Abortion being illegal would change everything. People are much more likely to use abortion as a backup plan when it is legal! And finally, I have no sympathy for the notion that one person's life should be sacrificed to another's LIFESTYLE. Tam said this very well in another thread. Just because you feel that someone is a burden on you, does not give you the right to KILL that person! They have a right to live and be happy!

It is certainly a matter of "personal choice." There are many things that are a matter of "personal choice." But that does not make them right, or off-limits to the law. I might say that killing my best friend is a matter of personal choice. But that choice affects somebody besides me, as abortion does, and that's why this particular "personal choice" is not acceptable by law!

Wow...that is certainly not true. Married women DO seek abortions! Many times they have decided that they have all the children they want! Look at Planned Parenthood's own statistics.

Don't worry, we won't. But for those who can't see how wrong they are to believe in killing their own children, it is the government's responsibility to prevent those people from doing it.

Abortion affects more than a woman's body. It affects the tiny child's body that is growing inside her. It is perfectly appropriate for a government to tell someone that they can't kill someone else; thus, it is perfectly appropriate for a government to restrict abortion. Indeed, the first and most basic laws that should be on the books are laws that prevent people from killing one another!

As for parents, it is perfectly right and appropriate for a parent of a minor to prevent their daughter from killing their grandson/granddaughter!

As for churches, many churches rightly recognize and proclaim that abortion is evil and wrong, but I have no record whatsoever of any church telling someone that they could or couldn't have an abortion. Nobody except the government has the right to decide what activities others may or may not engage in.

It should never be part of anyone's personal freedom to have the right to kill someone else. That is where our personal freedoms end - where the freedoms of others begin! Everyone has the right to live and none of us should have the right to take that away from someone else.

Sorry, but you're simply wrong. Having sex with minors IS against the law, and when Planned Parenthood shirks their duty to report such instances, they ARE allowing sex offenders to get away! And when someone with whom a lawbreaker has had sex has an abortion, that abortion is paid for, and PP DOES profit! Sorry, but those are the plain facts.

Ooh, I have quite a lot to say about this, most in the words of a person I greatly admire...

In the sixties, groups like Planned Parenthood began to promote a version of sex education in the public schools based on two fundamental concepts. First, it had to be what they called "value neutral" and second, it had to teach that pregnancy prevention is based on contraception rather than abstinence. They contended that the way to reduce the, then, relatively small teen pregnancy rate was to separate morality from sex and teach kids the mechanics of having sexual relationships without getting pregnant. Of course, as any rational human being could predict, if you teach teenagers about sex while leaving the morality component out, you are in effect telling them that there is no morality component to sex. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that such a message is guaranteed to increase the rate at which they are sexually active.

Planned Parenthood's sales pitch for leaving morality out of sex education is that teaching sexual morality is the responsibility of parents. However, Planned Parenthood originally sold America on the idea of sex education in the public schools by saying that parents don't talk to their kids about sex. The question is, If parents weren't talking to their kids about sex before it was taught in the schools, what was going to make them start doing so afterward? The other question is how this approach is viewed by children living in homes where the parents do talk about sexual morality. What kind of message is sent to those kids when their parents teach them that pre-marital sex is wrong, while their teachers are telling them that pre-marital sex is neither right nor wrong?

The there is the issue of contraception. Those who advocate the value-neutral, contraception-based approach say that if birth control was taught and adhered to, teen pregnancy would not be a problem. This flies in the face of real-world experience. Public schools began introducing this value-neutral, contraception-based experiment in the mid-sixties and it continues to this day. What we now know is that during this time a relatively small teen pregnancy problem exploded into an epidemic of promiscuity, teen pregnancy, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases. We're also seeing that children are having sex at much younger ages. Forty years ago, for an 11-year-old to be pregnant would have been front-page news. Today, it is not even unusual.

Amazingly, liberal social engineers continue to say that the solution to the problems created by value-neutral, contraception-based sex education is value-neutral, contraception-based sex education. To understand how absurd this is, imagine that during a president's term the American economy experienced a total meltdown. After four years, that person would be looking for a new job. Yet, proponents of value-neutral, contraception-based sex education have produced a meltdown that has lasted almost 40 years while expecting us to keep turning our children over to them.

It is time to stop this insanity. America is like a group of hikers who've discovered that they took a wrong trail. It is time to turn back. It may sound simplistic to say, but the only solution to the catalogue of problems caused by value-neutral, contraception-based sex education is abstinence. It is the only form of birth control and disease prevention that's guaranteed to be effective 100% of the time it's used.

Liberal social engineers claim that abstinence is unrealistic because teenagers are so overwhelmed by raging hormones that they are going to have sex no matter what we do. If that is true, imagine that a teenage girl tells her parents that she is not interested in having sex before marriage but that her boyfriend is really pressuring her to do so. Should her parents tell her that she is being unrealistic to expect him to be abstinent until they are married? Should they advise her to either jump in bed with him or just accept that he will go out and have sex with other girls? Or what if a teenage girl tearfully tells her mother that her boyfriend dumped her because she wouldn't have sex with him? Should the mom tell he that with her next boyfriend she should give in because it is unrealistic to expect boys to be abstinent? What about a teenage girl who says her boyfriend forced her to have sex, would her parents say that she was being unrealistic to expect him to be abstinent?

Obviously, no decent parent would say these things to their daughter. They would tell her that abstinence is entirely reasonable. So the question is, are abstinence-based programs unrealistic? They obviously are not. If it is realistic for a teenage boy to abstain because his girlfriend doesn't want to have sex, then it is just as realistic for him to abstain simply because he has been taught that it is the right thing to do. The argument that kids are going to have sex no matter what we do is a lie. The most that can be said is that some kids will have sex no matter what we do.

Today, many of these liberal social engineers recognize that they are caught between a rock and a hard place. They abhor the abstinence philosophy, but they also see it gaining popularity among parents who've recognized that value-neutral, contraception-based sex education has been a train wreck. Today, the liberal response to the abstinence threat is to push what they call "Abstinence Plus" or "Comprehensive Sex Education." They claim to support teaching abstinence, as long as it is an addition to value-neutral, contraception-based sex education instead of its replacement. In an effort to appear reasonable, some have even conceded that abstinence should be primary.

This is a scam. These people realize that when abstinence-based sex education and value-neutral, contraception-based sex education are combined, the effectiveness of teaching abstinence evaporates. That is because, with teenagers, mixed messages are always dangerous. For example, consider the consequences if parents said the following things to their teenagers:

"It is best that you don't drink and drive, but if you're going to, don't spill anything on the seats."

"You're not old enough to be smoking, but if you're going to, be sure to use filtered cigarettes."

"Your mom and I would prefer that you not take a gun to school, but if you do, all we ask is that you keep the safety on and not point it at anyone."

"We really don't want you using heroin, but if you are going to, just don't leave any needles lying around where your little brother can get them."

"Look, I'm telling you not to drive my new Corvette while I'm out of town, but if you do, be sure to replace the gas you use."

Every parent knows what would happen if they said these things to their children. But that is precisely what we're doing when we teach abstinence alongside value-neutral, contraception-based sex education. Some might argue that when the focues is solely on abstinence, kids who don't buy the abstinence message are at a higher risk for pregnancy, diseases, and abortion. There may be some validity to that argument. Unfortunately, solving social problems created by 40 years of value-neutral, contraception-based sex education is not going to be painless. This failed social experiment has put America in the position of having to make some really tough decisions. Our epidemic of teen pregnancy, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases was led by a dramatic increase in sexual activity among children, and all the condoms and birth control pills in the world will not turn that around. It is a matter of numbers. The only solution is to reduce the sexual activity of our children, and a mixed message will not do that any more than a mixed message will reduce the chances that a teenage boy will sneak off in his father's new Corvette.

For those who say that the abstinence-only message writes off those children who don't remain abstinent, think about this analogy. When laws requiring children to be strapped into child safety seats were being debated, it was already accepted that some children would be killed because they were in these seats. For example, when cars accidentally go into a river or lake, some children will drown when their parents panic and can't get them out of their car seats. Other children will die in car fires because their parents were rendered unconscious during the wreck and not available to get them out of the car seat. In some crashes, children who would have been thrown from cars and survived, will instead die because they were strapped into a car seat.

The people who wrote the laws requiring car seats for children knew of these risks. But when they voted for these laws, they were not saying, "We're just going to write off all those children who will die because they were in a car seat." Instead, they were simply people who recognized that child safety seats save more lives than they take. In a perfect world they would be able to pass a law to save every child who gets into a car wreck. Unfortunately, they don't live in such a world and so they had to pass a law that would save the most lives possible. Are children dead today who would have been alive if this legislation had not been passed? Absolutely. But far more are alive because of it. In other words, it was a matter of numbers.

That is the same dynamic at play for those of us who advocate abstinence-only sex education. Until we live in a perfect world, we too have to play the numbers. Abstinence-only sex education will not save every child, but it will save the most children. One thing we know for certain, the very definition of insanity is to think that the value-neutral, contraception-based sex education philosophy which got America into this mess will now get us out of it.

reply from: Tam

Wow, Cali, great post!

reply from: cali1981

Thanks! I'm thinking of putting it in a separate thread.

reply from: MyChoice

Domsmom, 11/10/2005 "The Silent Scream"

I don't know what to say in response to your post. I haven't seen this video, but it sounds awful. The reason why i said "It's the mothers body until the baby has its own" was because it has to have a mother's body to grow and stuff? I agree with you that the baby has a body of its own, but because it requires help, it is "part" of the mothers body as well. Therefore, the mother has a say in what happens... (Please read later posts....)

reply from: MyChoice

Pray4em and Tam, 11/10 :

Thank you for being so open minded youself. It is SO important for the people on here to know that it is NOT my intention to chose a side and win. It is PURELY my intention to learn about and understand the entire topic and all of it's views to make a wise decision about the argument of Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice. I honestly want the best for the world and the people brought into it.

Before i wrote my post:
1.) I was pro-choice
2.) My post was a response to a post that, i was, um, 9 months late for, so i decided to make it my own thread because i am interested in the subject. I feel like especially being a woman, it is something that affects me greatly and is something i need to be involved in for myself and for the rights of other women.
3.) If i didn't want the controversy i am recieving on this board, i would have written my thoughts on a pro-choice board. I chose to write on a pro-life board because i feel like, even though i thought you guys were a bunch of crazies, there had to be a legitimate reason why the arguement even exists if i am so sure my side is right.
4.) Becuase i thought you guys were a bunch of crazies, (and it was 4 in the morning and i needed desperately to go to bed) I didnt take the time to write my post the way i should have. I reread my post and to be completely honest, i see why there were some hateful responses to it. It is completely undeveloped and rash and had i known i would be discussing a topic so important to me with people that really do have logic on their side, (definitely not the crazies i expected pro-lifers to be), my post would not be as "crazy" as it seems. I read my original post and to be honest, I feel badly about some of the things i said becuase i guess i was just emotion-ridden and there could be some possible typos in there as well.

Please take the time to excuse my first post and allow me to redeem myself and my points through a response to cali's post.

Tam: I see you were a pro-choice activist in 1989 and changed to pro-life in 2005. I very well could follow in your footsteps.

Most of the points i have heard on this board have merit to them, but understand that this, once again is a learning process for me, i am not pro choice to the core and pro choice is right and the only way to be, I merely support pro choice for the information i have been subjected to so far. Also, considering that i have very strong veiws, i am not easily swayed, and i only believe/fight for things if i know and understand the issue, it is hard for me to believe that something i felt so strongly for may not be the right thing to fight for...

One more thing to the pro-lifers on this board: Coming to this forum as a pro-choicer, i can say that getting past the statements from emotional impulses, you REALLY have made me see another side of this argument that i never thought i would understand. I still have questions regarding the topic, but hopefully, with the open minded people on the forum, we can teach each other the views of the other side and then ultimately make the right decision for everybody.

reply from: bradensmommy

I think it is wonderful to see a post like yours! I know I thought you were being a bit ignorant and I hope that with more research you will understand why we are pro-life and why Tam decided to change her views about abortion. If only we could get many more pro-choicers to feel the way you do we'd have a much better hope on getting abortion restricted on some levels (I know it won't ever be totally outlawed, but it will be better to get some bans on it). I just wanted to say thank you for seeing how we felt and glad to see you back on and chattin!

reply from: MyChoice

Bradensmommy, 11/10:

"I'd still like to know when the sex for pleasure only came about because if that is the case WHY the heck are we even discussing abortion???"

Do you disagree that sex is practiced for pleasure? I say this becuase it is my experience and a well known fact in the world of youth. I know that when i engage in sexual relations, it isn't to produce a baby. (Just so everyone knows, I am not this honest about my perosonal life to anyone in real life, but i feel that its important to know where i am coming from and that is the only reason why i am making personal references.) On the contrary, even though i practice sex for pleasure, it is with this same guy that i made refrence to with the statutory rape thing. So to say that people should just go crazy and have sex becuase its pleasurable, i do not agree with. I have sex with one person and one person only, and even though it's not to produce a baby, it creates some kind of bond my boyfriend and I share. What are your thoughts on this?

"My parents taught me what right and wrong is, have yours?"

I have never been in trouble with the police. I don't steal or kill, i'm honest, and want the common good for everyone. When i find jewelry, wallets, or purses I give them to the lost and found. I want the best for the world. I don't agree with everything i am told. I like to find things out for myself. I do not blindly follow anything or anybody.
My parents encouraged me to wait until marraige for sex. I don't feel like this common "regulation" is fair in regards to women. I have no problem with women who want to wait, i think that if thats what they want to do then they are justified and no one should have anything to say about it. I think that women who wait becuase their parents or society told them to are ignorant.
I want to work for the UN and make sure that the rights of everyone are fair and educate people about corruption and tyranny. I think that some major religions "brainwash" some people. (I have written a well-developed essay ((my post on abortion was NOT well developed)) on Christianity and a little on Islam that i am very proud of if you are interested at all). I want to work for CPS to make sure parents are doing their jobs and to make sure children are in the best environment possible. I am so particular about children's well being that i have such a radical stance on abortion. I want to stop human trafficking and abuse of all kinds.
Does this answer your question, or are you looking for something else?

"I know that I basically said that you were ignorant, well, reread your original post and see why I think that. There is nothing in your post stating any facts to your opinions."

I responded to this in an earlier post. I think it was to Pray4em and Tam. Most of my opinions i stated are personal experiences, not statistical information.

"IMO if I knew my 16 year old daughter OR son was dating a 20 year old I would in fact get information as to why the 20 year old is even messing around with high schoolers."

I do see your point and most parents would agree, INCLUDING mine. My mom would say that four years is not that big of a deal, but when it came down to it, she wasn't just okay with it. However i hid my relationship with him for about a year. It might not have even been that the age was such a big deal, but the fact that i am white and he is black was the major problem.
My cousin is four years older than me and my family on my mom's side is very close. Close enough to where my aunts are second mothers and my cousins are kind of brothers and sisters. I grew up around my cousin and her friends. To this day, these friends of this "clique" are still my friends today. I had just as many friends who where seniors when i was a freshman as i had freshman friends. I have been described as more mature than the average person my age. Thanks to hitting puberty at a rediculously early age, physically more mature as well as mentally.
You are normal and smart to think in the way that you do with this quote. Anyone who thinks that it is okay for EVERY 16 year old to date ANY 20 year old would not be a very good parent. (I feel like im talking like a hypocrite, but i have already said that i would re-word and take back my original post for something more thought out if i could.) I, as a mature sixteen year old, was ready for a relationship with this guy who happened to be twenty. I met him while hanging out at an apartment belonging to a friend of the 18 year old girl i was with. He thought i was 18 at first and when i told him i was only 16, he was hesitant but becuase I am more mature than most of my peers, we continued to hang out. We began "seeing each other" casually (hanging out together as a potential couple) a couple months after our first encounter. When i turned 17, we had sex for the first time. It was completely up to me, I wasn't trying to be "cool", i had sex with him because that's what i wanted to do. I can't say it was love. We had normal rough patches and it wasn't a completely peachy relationship (if it was, that's when people should be alarmed)... We broke up a in August (birthdays in May) until the begining of November, and since then we have had a beautiful relationship.

"I would take action immediately as well. You think its okay for a 16 year old and a 20 year old to have sexual relations? OMG, I hope that you never have a daughter because I in fact would be totally against that nonsense. Do you realize that most men who are over the age of 18 who mess with high schoolers only date them because 1) the high schoolers have low self-esteem and the men or women know that or 2) the high schooler thinks its "so cool" to date an 18+ guy or gal. Are you seeing my point?"

I see your point completely, as i said in the past paragraph its not okay for everyone. And i dont know what im going to do when/if i have a daughter because there is no doubt in my mind that i will see it very closely to the way you do. However, I was not that girl with low self-esteem and i dated guys that were 18+ becuase thats where my mentality was. If there was a 16 year old guy that was on my level, that would have been just fine.

"I am 25 years old, married to my army soldier for almost 5 years, I have a 3 month old and didn't have sex til I was 18 years old and that was MY decision, not a decision that my peers had for me. I didn't go along with what my peers did and I think that makes you thier puppet when you do."

Congratulations on your success. I cannot agree with you more that it makes you their puppet when you go along with what your peers do. Absolutely.

"Now, if you did your research like you said you did, you will know that most abortions are by women who are MARRIED and have 2+children and decide that they still want to kill thier children even though they know they have the option of vascectomy and getting tubes tied (and yes I know that sometimes that doesn't work, but its a darn good way of preventing more children) less than 1 percent of abortions are by women who were raped or by incest, which means some women who were raped and concieved still kept thier children, read about some adults who were kept by thier mothers who were raped victims and maybe you will change your mind about it."

My research doesnt go that far. In fact, I did NOT know that most abortions are by women...still want to kill their children. (at the time of my original post) I think in the cases where the women are doing nothing about having children (birth control, vascencomies, and getting tubes tied) are abusing their right to an abortion. I do not agree with the availability of abortion in instances like that.
I agree with abortion in some instances where women who are unmarried and/or young feel like they will not be able to care for their child and do not want to go through pregnacny and labor. I dont think that abortion should be something that women fall back on as a method of "birth control". If at all, it should only be used as a last resort.
My mom had 2 abortions before she had me and when i think that i could have been aborted rather than being given the right to live, I question my stance. I really do. My life hasn't been comfortable at all, but i also feel like all the things that went wrong in my life make me the person i am today. I feel like a better person because of the hard things i had to go through. However i still feel that women in particular positions should still have the choice to abort. If that makes any sense at all...

"I also believe that if you don't want children the ONLY possible way to prevent it is NOT having sex. Yes, I know when 2 people are married it is going to happen, but they should know the outcomes already and if they don't know that when you have sex it WILL produce a child then they don't need to be married in the first place."

Thats a very logical solution for not having children, but like i said before, when i have sex with my boyfriend, i dont want to become pregnant. (i am taking birth control to help me not get pregnant). I understand what your saying and i might be being redundent for saying that marraige isnt all about having babies. When i get married, it will be because "In some cases, like Yin and Yang and good and bad, something has two separate parts that create a whole. Instead of the two parts just having their own qualities, they can work together to create harmony and have the best of both worlds; thus, they have it all. When, in my case, my husband, should be the other half of me. Not exactly opposite nor same, but completion. The man I marry will be treated as I treat myself - because for this person, they should be as trusted, as dependable, as loved, as cared for, as knowledgeable about myself as is myself, because after all, ideally, they are the other half of me. " Right now, i plan on marrying someone only after extremely careful review and do not accept divorce. Something else you might consider helpful to know about me when trying to decipher my ideas: I get "lost" and nervous when things in my life don't go as planned. I am pro choice because i have very important goals and a stern idea of how i want my life to go. I want to finish school and work into a career, it is unacceptable to me to have a baby before i can give it the absolute best i can. My absolute best means being married with financial stability. I grew up in a "broken home" with the wicked step mother and all, and i just don't want my child to have to go through that. I dont want to have a baby without being married. What do you think? To be completely honest, even though i don't want to bring a baby into the world when i can't care for it the way i would like to, I'm almost certain I, personally, couldn't have an abortion. But i would like to have the choice. Even though abortion is not right for me, and may not be right for you, i think women in certain situations should have a choice. Moreover, a choice without persuasion, but education.

"You think that unwanted children ruin a woman?"

Not really. The above paragraph replies to this question as well. I feel that if I, to say, were to get pregnant, it would change my whole planned out life. If I were to choose abortion, it would give me the ability to go about my life the way i wanted it to. I see that it may be more selfish to think that way than morally right. However, if i can't provide for myself the way i want to, i can't provide for my child. Also, sex is practiced for more reasons than having a baby. If your not practicing sex to get pregnant and your doing things to help you not get pregnant, then if you do accidentally get pregnant, abortion may be a solution for some people.

"I never say an unplanned pregnancy is an accident."

Our values of marraige and sex are different. That's the only thing i can say in these regards.

"If you don't know that sex will produce a child (again I say this) don't have sex or maybe you should go back to sex ed."

I, along with everyone else that may agree with my arguement, understand that sex could produce a child. However, at this time, i am not practicing sex to have children.

"I myself had sex ed in high school, didn't really pay attention in it because I basically knew what there was to it because I had an open minded mother and to this day we still discuss sex, probably why I was much more mature about it than my peers."

I think that the ability to discuss sex with one's parents definitely has an impact on one's sexual behavior and standards. I think that is the healthiest way to go about learning about sex. Some people's parents aren't open minded. Some parents, with girls, can't get passed not wanting their little girl to have sex. Which even though is somewhat normal, it only hurts them. There are so many other reasons why parents can't talk to their youth about sex. I think better education and community support for things like this would be a miraculous way to improve the sexual aspect of life.

"So that is basically the information you are wanting to know right? If not please feel free to ask me more because I am an open book."

I really appreciate your help and views. I appreciate your honesty, even if it's something i might not like to hear.

Even though i don't like to say it I do accept that i am young and may not understand these issues to the fullest because i havent been in these situations. One can only ask questions, share ideas, and learn.

Something else regarding my veiws and research:
I haven't completely researched it yet, but the part of my original post that talks about "planned parenthood isnt "allowing sex offenders to avoid the law" and they aren't "profiting" from cases like that."

I thought that planned parenthood was a positive community resouce that was helping in the modernization of sexual education and pregnancy resources. If it is true that the men who impregnate these innocent girls are "cients" of places like that then they are by all means evil.

reply from: MyChoice

*[Originally posted by MyChoice: I am arguing that abortion is a personal choice to be made. Nothing more.]*

"Logically, there is nothing wrong with that statement. Morally, it is meaningless."

How?


"EVERY decision we make, good, bad, horrible, wonderful, or whatever....... IS A PERSONAL CHOICE TO BE MADE!"

I agree. Whatever you believe, to have or not to have an abortion is a personal choice.

"Unless you are willing to discuss and defend the morality of THAT PARTICULAR CHOICE........ then your statement has no meaning to me at all."

Take a look at my most recent response to bradensmommy and see if that doesnt answer your question. I don't really understand what your wanting me to do. A personal choice and the morality of that choice varies with every person to whom the choice can be made. It would be stereotypical of me to discuss morality of a personal choice for everyone.

reply from: MyChoice

Galen 11/10:

"If I make a Personal Choice to have and abortion then it is not anyone's buisness to get in my way"

.... Yes?

"If I make a personal choice to cut off my ear, people will stop me.....
Its considered a psychological problem to want to maime onesself.

If I make a personal choice to cut off YOUR ear....
well I could be arrested because to maime another is morally wrong.

If i make a personal choice to execute my son for bad behaviour then i could recieve the death penalty or life in prison.

Why is abortion OK and the other statements not?"

You make a very logical and respectable argument. For the argument of being pro choice, becuase a pregnancy and a baby create such a derailing of one's life if not ready for the baby (keeping in mind what i consider to be abuse of one's right to have an abortion and legitimate situations for abortions), and becuase sometimes sex doesn't always mean getting pregnant, abortion is somehow different. It is a huge commitment, responsibility, and life-changing experience to have a baby in a situation where one's not ready.
There is nothing i can say to argue that abortion is morally acceptable. However, i feel that it could be considered a common good in some situations.


"Because the abortion industry makes money off of the procedure... that IMO is the only real reason that abortion is still around at this time... It happens to be a huge industry and the people who lobby for it get paid a lot of money. $$$ are a big motivator in this country."

I truly hope that that is not the reason why abortion is around today. I totally agree with you that money is a big motivator in this country. The reasons why i would ever support abortion is nothing more than the want of some kind of good. Money is absolutely not the issue with me. I can advocate for abortion, but i will also advocate for abortion with specific regulations; and keeping abortion around for money will not be acceptable.

"Choice has nothing to do with it, regardless of what your veiws on the viability of the baby, don't be fooled. You can make $$ off 10,000 or more Ab in the time it takes to carry 1 child to term and adopt it out. At $ 400 a pop that is still more $$ than you will get for the adoption fees."

Would you elaborate on this? I feel like you may be making a credible point, but i don't quite understand...

reply from: MyChoice

Sarah, 11/10:

"Abortion isn't anything at all like adoption. As soon as you become pregnant, you're a parent, the only difference will be if you're a parent of a dead baby or a live baby. "

That is an awesome statement.

reply from: MyChoice

Mom5, 11/10:

"Oh, let's say, everything is fine and dandy in my life. Sweet husband just loves me to death...financially, well, let's say DH and I are doing rather well. All in the Family so to speak and wham!!!! That man turned into a piece of crap, left me for another women. Doesn't give me any support...oh, what hardship! Will it last a lifetime, it just might...why let my child that is already born suffer this hardship...oh, I wouldn't want my say, 5 yo to live in a hardship, so I should be able to choose to kill him/her just like I would be able to kill my unborn child growing in my womb whose father just left me...

Now, I tell you MyChoice...to kill an unborn child to me is JUST LIKE killing a 5 yo child.

You never know what life is going to give you...at a drop of the hat, we all can be thrown into a life of hardship. Most people are only a paycheck away from hardship. Really, that's not a good reason to support abortion, really, think about it!"

You make an interesting point. I agree with you. Also, as i said in a previous response, i am the person i am today because of the things i have had to go through. I feel like i am in a better position because of the things i have gone through. My rational may be as ignorant as the rational for parents not wanting to talk to their children about sex because it may be taboo. Even though it's the simple impulse of just wanting to protect one's child from potential harm, it's not right.
Thank you

reply from: MyChoice

"oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!" --- Susan B. Anthony

Who is she referring to, and for exactly what?

reply from: MyChoice

Cali1981, 11/11:

Ah, finally i get to respond to your incredibly smart post and hopefully get my points across better than my orignal post!

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was a 16 year old girl with a good head on my shoulders and i chose the 20 year old man, i wasn't "[blindly] seduced" into anything....age is ONLY a number. Being 18 doesn't miraculously enable you to make adult decisions; being 16 doesn't automatically disable someone from making them either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"You might not have been blindly seduced, and you are right that age is only a number, but it is the government's responsibility to lawfully prevent men from taking advantage of young women (minors) sexually. The only way to do this is to impose statutory rape laws. It is just like driving; some 16-year-olds are certainly not mature enough to drive and some children would probably be very responsible drivers at 15 or even 14. Everyone is not the same, but there has to be a standard - that's the only way the law can work. So, in your case you might not feel you were taken advantage of, but that is certainly not the case with everyone."

I could not say it better myself. Needless to say, i completely agree with your statement. You seem to uderstand where i am coming from here, but thats what i didnt say in my original post (tried to say in my response to bradensmommy) about statutory rape. A girl emailed me about my post and when she asked me about it, i said that it might be possible to take things like this case by case? I say that because i dont think its okay to disagree with something if you dont have a better plan. I think that most relationships like the one i am talking about here are not healthy and innocent young women are taken advantage of. However, the situation i was in could have ended by him getting into big trouble, becuase of the law, when i am not that innocent young woman being taken advantage of.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, I do not appreciate being told what i can and cannot do becuase someone else (not even my own parent in some instances) want to "protect" me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just becuse I am a girl does NOT mean i cannot make mature decisions on my own and need laws against my personal freedoms and personal engagements "to protect" me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"Who has told you what you can and cannot do, and with regard to what?"

"Who said that girls cannot make mature decisions on their own? The only thing anybody - including the law - has ever said is that men should be punished for taking advantage of young women sexually."

As i said in an earlier post, my original post was in response to a post written like 9 months ago. This part of my post, i was responding to a man that said something along the lines of "we have to make laws protecting girls from older men (statutory rape laws) becuase young girls cant make decisions on their own" ..... something like that... i cant find the actual quote but this part of my post doesn't really make sense for this arguement.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd off, it should not have to be that young ladies know about the sexual preditors and a man's nature (so to speak, I completely don't mean anything against ALL the men when i say that) that could hurt her. I dont have a solution, but it should be more the man's fault and problem. Young women shouldn't have to worry about it and be subjected to such awareness. People should stop accepting "a man's nature" (ehhh.... there it is again.... i cant find a better phrase) for what he is doing. (when it comes to 17 and younger girls and like 25(+) yr old men) Men should be targeted more for lecture on controlling their urges and have it drilled into THEIR head that it is not acceptable by any means.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"I agree that men should be targeted and held responsible, but the rest of this paragraph seems to be contradicting what you said in the first paragraph. Should young women be educated about sexuality and men, or shouldn't they?"

I mean that it would be ignorant of parents to not teach their children (daughters) about sexuality and men. However, it seems that society kind of gives the "enevitable" sexual appetite of a man as an excuse for something that is wrong, when really, it's just a simple right and wrong. (taking advantage of a young woman). What im trying to say in the paragraph above is that society will drill and lecture female youth about men when even though men get in trouble for it, they have their excuse of the "sexual nature" of a man? On an even further note, Society goes so far as to say what a woman can wear to be considered modest or not because a man takes a cute/sexy outfit to be sexually appealing and acts on his impulses? do these comments make sense?

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sex is a natural, instictual aspect of being human. After puberty, it doesn not matter if youv'e got a college degree and a good job to obtain before having a family would work out for you. Once Puberty is hit, sexual hormones and urges/feelings began to surface.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"That is true, but that does not mean that people are unable to control those urges and use them appropriately and responsibly."

You are absolutely correct. Something that i've said before is that sex is not always practiced for reproduction, usually for pleasure. Do you think that it is irresponsible and inappropriate to have sex for reasons other than reproduction? I can't put it into words yet, but there is almost nothing anyone can say to completely satisfy my idea of this.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The main problem i have with pro-life stances: When a woman does not have the means/education to support a child, it would cause an unhealty lifestyle for her and her child if she decided to (or was made to) keep the baby.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"The idea that it's acceptable to kill someone because we think that they might eventually have a difficult life is just about the most vile perversion of "compassion" that I can possibly think of. Yes, life is difficult for many people, but we shouldn't be killing children to make their parents' lives easier, or because we think that death would be better than whatever life they might lead! That mentality is the very definition of evil, and nobody should have the right to decide that for someone else!"

You and Mom5 are right. It was a very immature and selfish statement i made. I felt like i was fighting for something right. I thought that i was being "compassionate", like you say, but i see the true meaning of what i said and I wasnt seeing the issue for the big picture.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont agree with a woman giving her child up for adoption. I dont agree with adoption being the alternative becuase if i'm going to go throught pregnancy and put that much into having the baby, im going to want to keep the baby.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"First of all, not everyone is going to feel the same way that you do. And second of all, if a woman (as you say above) anticipates a difficult lifestyle for her and her child, the most compassionate thing to do would be to give the child to someone who has the means to provide for him/her, NOT to kill the child! Adoption is not perfect, but it is certainly better than death for the child!"

Here again, this part of my post was not what i intended. I agree with your "if a woman (as you say above) anticipates a difficult lifestyle for her and her child, ... certainly better than death for the child!" But the pregnancy is an issue to me as well (for the arguement of pro choice). It would be just as selfish and crazy for me to say that pregnancy changes a woman physically (sometimes to a point that she can never have the same body again) and it makes your hormones go crazy, gives you mood swings, and sickness. If i am not having sex to get pregnant, and i accidentally get pregnant, even though i agree with what you said about giving the baby up for adoption, I dont want to go through with pregnancy. What do you think about those pills women can take regarding alternatives to abortion?

Are there two different pills? The Morning After Pill (which stops a pregnancy before it happens) and a pill that can terminate a pregnancy within a couple days (maybe weeks) of beginning? Or are they the same pill?

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
suppose u pro-lifers get what u want and abortion is outlawed. This woman must have a baby that she didnt plan for, doesn't have the money for, time for, and in order for americans to live decently, one must have the appropiate degrees and job... this opportunity is virtually out of reach for her now. Thus creating a lifestyle that isnt the best it could be for either mother or child. And what kind of burden is the father left with, while the mother's life is basically ruined?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"First of all, having a child DOES NOT "ruin" one's life! My wife and I have a little one and we are still able to pursue our goals! My wife is currently working on her master's degree and we both have jobs! It is difficult, but we have a responsibility to our daughter - as ALL parents do to their children, whether they "planned" for them or not!"

It does not ruin a life like yours and your wifes, but to a single woman who had a one night stand and got pregnant or to a woman who is not married and gets stuck with having the baby by herself, it can. I say this becuase I have goals and I want to go to finish school and I want to have a good career and i want to be married before i have a baby. Then, i know that the father of my child IS going to be there to help me, and it's not going to be that hard. Not planning for a baby when your single and not planning for a baby when your married is two completely different ball games. I congratulate you on taking up that responsibility for your daughter. She is a very, very lucky little girl.

"And second of all, if abortion were outlawed, people would most likely be more careful about conceiving children that they don't want. Abortion being illegal would change everything. People are much more likely to use abortion as a backup plan when it is legal!"

I do not want abortion to be legal so that people can just have sex and have an abortion if they get pregnant. As i said in an earlier post to someone else, i do not support abortion when it is used as anything other than a last resort, if at all. I do not support abortion as a back up plan.

"And finally, I have no sympathy for the notion that one person's life should be sacrificed to another's LIFESTYLE."

I said in an earlier post that if i can't take care of myself, how can i take care of a baby? My lifestyle isnt everything that's at stake. Its the rest of my life and the options and opportunities i have for myself and my baby. For further thinking, when a single woman gets pregnant, she is the one stuck with the pregnancy by herself, she is the one who has the baby by herself. Even though a man gets a woman pregnant, it isnt an obligation written in stone that he stays with and helps her and his baby; that he even takes care of his baby. How is that fair?

"Just because you feel that someone is a burden on you, does not give you the right to KILL that person! They have a right to live and be happy!"

I couldn't agree more. Thank you for clearing me up on that.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abortion is a matter of personal choice, period.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"It is certainly a matter of "personal choice." There are many things that are a matter of "personal choice." But that does not make them right, or off-limits to the law. I might say that killing my best friend is a matter of personal choice. But that choice affects somebody besides me, as abortion does, and that's why this particular "personal choice" is not acceptable by law!"

You make a fabulous point. All i needed was the education on the subject.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not the government, churches, neighbors, even parents place to tell someone else what they can and cannot do with their bodies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"Abortion affects more than a woman's body. It affects the tiny child's body that is growing inside her. It is perfectly appropriate for a government to tell someone that they can't kill someone else; thus, it is perfectly appropriate for a government to restrict abortion. Indeed, the first and most basic laws that should be on the books are laws that prevent people from killing one another!"

I agree with you to the fullest. However, I am still hung up on why i can't engage in intimate activity for pleasure without getting stuck with a child. Moreover, a man can. What is wrong with my thinking to this degree?

"As for parents, it is perfectly right and appropriate for a parent of a minor to prevent their daughter from killing their grandson/granddaughter!"

I can't say I agree with this. My stepmom said that if i ever got pregnant when i was younger that my punishment would be to have the baby. If the parents of the minor were willing to accept the child as a grandchild and not as a life to be toyed with to punish the mother for getting pregnant, then it might not be such a bad idea.

"As for churches, many churches rightly recognize and proclaim that abortion is evil and wrong, but I have no record whatsoever of any church telling someone that they could or couldn't have an abortion. Nobody except the government has the right to decide what activities others may or may not engage in."

It's not so much telling them the can or can't have an abortion literally, but they can exclude their members for doing so, and they make rules against it. Therefore, they are telling them they can't.

[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is taking away my personal freedom and liberties if i dont have a choice to have an abortion. No woman (prolife or not) should allow/take part in the restrictions of liberties and rights of a woman's choice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

"It should never be part of anyone's personal freedom to have the right to kill someone else. That is where our personal freedoms end - where the freedoms of others begin! Everyone has the right to live and none of us should have the right to take that away from someone else."

Here agian, I agree with you. But i have my hang ups about whether or not i MUST have the baby if i get pregnant, when i wasn't trying to get pregnant. Although, I totally see where you are coming from and agree with you. How do i get through that?



Maybe becuse i am not a parent yet, but I think a parent should educate their kids, not choose for them.

You definitly know your stuff, and for that i respect you and your opinions. The problem i have with your totally fine tuned logic, is that i cannot imagine my life without sex. As crude as that sounds, honesty is the only way to thoroughly understand a problem and find a solution. Despite what i said, sex isnt the most important thing in my life, either. Its just something that is very important to me. Perhaps if i hadn't experienced sex once, it wouldn't be as important to me. [Another thing to add: as much impact as the media has on sex today, that is really not the reason why i hold sex so high. It is purely a personal thing.] I do agree, though, that if people did wait to have sex until they were married, a lot of things would change for the better.

Absolutley not. If I was this teenage girl: I would stop a relationship with a guy who wasn't willing to respect my feelings; I wouldn't be involved with a guy for the pure reason of having sex; and if my boyfriend forced me to have sex, he would be put in jail.

Abstinence does not work for everyone, it may not be unrealistic for some. I agree with the last sentence of your statement.

You are a very smart man. I am definitely for the greater good and you have written an amazingly accurate and very logical view that i would be more than willing to try. America would benefit from trying as well.

reply from: yoda

That statement makes no sense. Newborn babies "require help". Five year old kids "require help". Does that mean they are still part of their mother's bodies? "Needing help" in no way blurs the physical line between the mother's and the baby's body.

reply from: yoda

No, that's just a copout. You have opinions on other things that you are willing to discuss, why not your moral opinion as to why killing babies is morally justified? Even if you adopt the position that all morality is subjective, that is no reason to avoid discussing it.

The killing of innocent babies should not be discussed in a moral vacuum. Unless you are willing to discuss why you accept abortion morally, this discussion has no meaning at all.

reply from: yoda

"Common good'? WHOM do you include in "common"???? Do you not recognize that as an innocent human being, the baby itself, the victim in abortion, must be a part of the "common"?

reply from: yoda

Your posts seem to have several common threads repeating in them, so I will try to condense them to the most often repeated claims:

If you can morally justify killing an unborn baby to preserve her "lifestyle", then the same moral justification would also apply to a woman killing her BORN children. Are you really THAT selfish?

Why do you contradict yourself? "Last resort", and "back up plan" mean precisely the SAME thing.

Those things ARE your "lifestyle"......... you contradict yourself again.

The only way to "get throught that" is to look at abortion through the baby's eyes, rather than your own. As long as you continue to think in selfish terms about killing a baby because you "didn't mean to get pregnant", the life of the baby will not enter into your moral reasoning. Unless you are willing to admit that killing an innocent baby because of what SOMEONE ELSE (including you) has done is WRONG, you cannot resolve that conflict.

reply from: bradensmommy

"I am pro choice because i have very important goals and a stern idea of how i want my life to go. I want to finish school and work into a career, it is unacceptable to me to have a baby before i can give it the absolute best i can. My absolute best means being married with financial stability. I grew up in a "broken home" with the wicked step mother and all, and i just don't want my child to have to go through that. I dont want to have a baby without being married. What do you think? To be completely honest, even though i don't want to bring a baby into the world when i can't care for it the way i would like to, I'm almost certain I, personally, couldn't have an abortion. But i would like to have the choice. Even though abortion is not right for me, and may not be right for you, i think women in certain situations should have a choice. Moreover, a choice without persuasion, but education

Guess what? LIFE HAPPENS!! When I was a teen in high school I vowed to not get married till I was out of college and at least 25-26 years old and not have kids til a couple years after that....

REALITY: I met my husband at 19, got married at 21, had my first baby at 25. That HAPPENED. A teenager who never wanted to have children til she was out of college had her first at 16. S*it happens, you MAY plan on your goals but 95 percent of the time they don't go as planned, that is life. It is not our decision to play God on who lives and who dies because it is "inconveniencing" our plans in life. If all of us actually do with what we want our goals in life, I would have never been born because I was a condom baby. I still want to accomplish my goals by finishing college though. My child was planned so he wasn't a suprise at all. My BC worked since I was 18 and I know my body and when I did ovulate which is why I got pregnant when I wanted to. Although after I had him I have to learn my body all over again because the dates are all different now, my period is a different date and my ovulation is a different date.

I know I am going on and off topic but this is how I am to get to my point, I like to talk about different views to get it across. I hope you see what we are trying to say and that way you can learn more about why we view the subject so strongly and so not for it.

My sister and I view abortion a little bit different. I think the only way a woman should have one is if it effects both lives. She however would die instead of her child. I believe that is a very non-selfless way of looking at it. I would never want her to die because of it, but that is her beliefs in her life.

My siggy at the bottom of my posts is a quote from Susan B. Anthony who was a pro-life feminist (yes it is possible). She was strongly against abortion and strongly against women hurting themselves by getting one. If you go to a pro-life feminist webpage you will see that there are alot more women who feel this way than one thought. Women deserve better than abortion, women should not go as low as to treat thier unborn or themselves as such. Do you realize that abortion makes a woman more of a victim to prostitution, rape, and incest? Its not right, and I don't believe that killing anything makes your life better. I hope you understand where I'm coming from and realize that women need to unite as one and educate other women on how morally wrong it is to dehumanize ourselves.

reply from: bradensmommy

"I am pro choice because i have very important goals and a stern idea of how i want my life to go. I want to finish school and work into a career, it is unacceptable to me to have a baby before i can give it the absolute best i can. My absolute best means being married with financial stability. I grew up in a "broken home" with the wicked step mother and all, and i just don't want my child to have to go through that. I dont want to have a baby without being married. What do you think? To be completely honest, even though i don't want to bring a baby into the world when i can't care for it the way i would like to, I'm almost certain I, personally, couldn't have an abortion. But i would like to have the choice. Even though abortion is not right for me, and may not be right for you, i think women in certain situations should have a choice. Moreover, a choice without persuasion, but education

Guess what? LIFE HAPPENS!! When I was a teen in high school I vowed to not get married till I was out of college and at least 25-26 years old and not have kids til a couple years after that....

REALITY: I met my husband at 19, got married at 21, had my first baby at 25. That HAPPENED. A teenager who never wanted to have children til she was out of college had her first at 16. S*it happens, you MAY plan on your goals but 95 percent of the time they don't go as planned, that is life. It is not our decision to play God on who lives and who dies because it is "inconveniencing" our plans in life. If all of us actually do with what we want our goals in life, I would have never been born because I was a condom baby. I still want to accomplish my goals by finishing college though. My child was planned so he wasn't a suprise at all. My BC worked since I was 18 and I know my body and when I did ovulate which is why I got pregnant when I wanted to. Although after I had him I have to learn my body all over again because the dates are all different now, my period is a different date and my ovulation is a different date.

I know I am going on and off topic but this is how I am to get to my point, I like to talk about different views to get it across. I hope you see what we are trying to say and that way you can learn more about why we view the subject so strongly and so not for it.

My sister and I view abortion a little bit different. I think the only way a woman should have one is if it effects both lives. She however would die instead of her child. I believe that is a very non-selfless way of looking at it. I would never want her to die because of it, but that is her beliefs in her life.

My siggy at the bottom of my posts is a quote from Susan B. Anthony who was a pro-life feminist (yes it is possible). She was strongly against abortion and strongly against women hurting themselves by getting one. If you go to a pro-life feminist webpage you will see that there are alot more women who feel this way than one thought. Women deserve better than abortion, women should not go as low as to treat thier unborn or themselves as such. Do you realize that abortion makes a woman more of a victim to prostitution, rape, and incest? Its not right, and I don't believe that killing anything makes your life better. I hope you understand where I'm coming from and realize that women need to unite as one and educate other women on how morally wrong it is to dehumanize ourselves.

reply from: bradensmommy

And to point out, just like Tam said (I believe) that when you are pregnant you are automatically a parent, you are either a parent to a dead baby or a live one. My friend who had a miscarriage at 6 months still considers herself as a parent, is that wrong? Absolutely not.

reply from: Tam

Cool.

There was a time that I thought that pro-life people were trying to control me, my body, and my choices. I definitely understand that the opinion of prochoicers about prolifers is that prolifers are religious fundamentalists whose main goal is to oppress women in various ways, only one of which is by controlling their reproductive choices and therefore forcing them to become breeding machines. LOL How odd to have learned eventually that it is almost unanimously true that prolife persons are prolife simply because we don't feel that a baby should be able to be legally killed on the day of his/her birth, or the day before that, or the day before that, all the way back to the very first day that the child existed. It's not such a bizarre concept, when approached from that perspective--doesn't seem so "crazy" after all, I know.

I realize pregnancy can be difficult and inconvenient for some women, but as much as I understand and sympathize with that, it really doesn't justify killing an innocent little child--and no matter how little the child is, I can't draw a line on his/her life and say "on this side of the line, you are a precious and irreplaceable baby, whose life is worth just as much as every other baby--and on the other side of this line, you are a piece of garbage, not even a real person, just a disposable possession of your mother with no more value than a dirty diaper." It just doesn't work that way, and I think anyone who tries to draw that line on the life of a child is kidding him/herself that it does.

The only line that makes sense, in my opinion and that of anyone genuinely pro-life, is the line that can be drawn at the point where that child comes into existence. Up until that point, any decision IS a reproductive decision and should be absolutely up to the woman with no government interference. But after reproduction has taken place--after a new human being has been created, unique and irreplaceable--I think it is really disgusting that our society allows some children--the "unwanted" (only by their mothers!) ones--to be killed in the womb. And one other very disturbing thing--many are killed in ways that can only be compared to being tortured to death. It is probable--but definitely not assured--that early on, the children die a painless death. That makes it, in my opinion, no less immoral, but at least they are not tortured to death.

A late term abortion is about the most disgusting thing that could exist on this planet. And once someone can acknowledge that a late term abortion is immoral, where else can one draw the line but at fertilization? Because everything else amounts to allowing to live a child who the day before had no right to exist. It is not up to the government or the mother to "allow" a child to live. Once a child exists--and s/he IS alive from the start--it is not up to anyone to say that that child doesn't have the "right" to continue to live--that his/her mom has the "right" to have him/her destroyed!

I don't have time today but I hope to get back to read your lengthy reply soon! For now I just wanted to reply to what you said to me.

It is almost exclusively a one-way migration, I've noticed. Aside from politicians changing their tunes to gain votes, I have noticed that almost every person who changes sides is changing from prochoice to prolife. I believe it is for the reason that I did--the prochoice position is incredibly specious. It seems plausible until you actually dissect it, and once dissected, I notice nothing in it that justifies abortion, because of what abortion IS. See, if abortion really were just destroying a lump of cells like a tumor, or a parasite, or a part of the woman's body, or something not even alive, or something replaceable, it would be a different story, wouldn't it? But abortion kills little children--innocent, alive, human beings, who have done nothing to deserve death and in fact are arguably the ones we should be protecting the most--the most vulnerable, most innocent, human beings on the planet--each one absolutely unique and irreplaceable. That our society treats them as disposable is so sad.

I hear that! I am extremely open-minded which is how I was able to see it--but it still took years from the first time I started to question the pro-choice dogma to the point where I finally acknowledged that none of the justifications for abortion promoted by that side held water with me anymore. After that, it was still years before I became active in opposing abortion.

I am still not particularly adamant about the whole criminalization issue. I don't think abortion on demand is the right answer, but I don't think outright and instant banning of abortion would solve the problem, either--obviously, it would go underground and be even more difficult to prevent in some ways than it is now. My goal is not to criminalize abortion, but to eradicate it completely. That would require a sea change in our society, but I am pretty sure that it will in fact come to pass over time. Just as in our culture no one would eat a kitten for lunch, thinking rightly that it is a disgusting thing to do, I think we will come to the place where the idea of dismembering a baby in the womb will be a despicable act no one would even consider.

Well, I'm so glad you are able to see past the emotions--yours and ours--to the heart of the matter. Although, there is nothing wrong with emotion. I think our society is very male-energy-oriented and tends to frown upon emotions as though they are a sign of weakness or irrationality. In fact, a lack of emotion is more disturbing to see in someone than a display of emotion, isn't it? Someone who could kill without feeling remorse is the most disturbing sort of person. But emotions are not bad, emotions are natural and healthy and necessary. So when we see pictures of babies killed by abortion and our response is an emotional response, that is normal and good. There are those who would say that anything based in emotion is to be disregarded, that we should be completely detached from any situation in order to be rational. But rationality does not require us to disconnect from our emotional selves, any moreso than it requires us to disconnect from our brains.

We are complex and wonderful beings, and our emotions serve a crucial purpose--they are a guide to help us navigate our lives. So when we feel fear, for example, rational fear, it is a sign that we probably need to act to protect or remove ourselves from a situation. Each of us has a conscience that helps us know what is right and what is wrong. There are variations, but we sometimes get together and make group decisions about what is right and wrong, and codify those into laws. I don't know what I think our group decision SHOULD be about abortion, but I do know that our current decision ("oh, go right ahead, whatever") isn't right. I don't think throwing in jail mothers in crisis pregnancies is the answer, but we need a much better answer than "go right ahead"!!

I tend to argue the moral position more than the legal, because laws take a long time to change, but hearts can change in an instant. To see a woman have a change of heart and decide NOT to have her child killed is one of the most beautiful transformations anyone can witness. I try to help create situations where women feel confident in choosing life rather than death. I also think that so much of the time so much energy is spent on arguing the legal issue, whereas if we all spent more time in sidewalk counseling reaching out to women in crisis pregnancies, we'd be stopping abortion without "restricting anyone's choice" to kill unborn children--and therefore removing the bone of contention among us.

Unfortunately, most prochoicers are really pro-abortion and react swiftly and fiercely to any suggestion that a single abortion be discouraged. Discouraging abortion and encouraging life is seen as anti-woman. What a crock! I am a feminist and a woman, and believe me, killing children is not something I see as pro-woman! Technically, "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" mean the same thing ("favoring legal access to abortion"), but I feel that the connotation differs slightly. Anyone who would work to make abortion rare, even if not wanting to criminalize abortion, is someone whose position on this issue I can respect. Unfortunately, it seems that the only ones who work to make abortion rare are pro-life. I know that as soon as I realized I wanted to make it rare--and why--I became pro-life, so maybe others have similar experiences.

I could write a book about this (I am sure) but for now I have to get back to work.

reply from: lynn

you know i couldnt even bring myself to read the majority of crap on this page. i find it funny how some of you call abortion selfish....have you ever been put intio a situation where you were faced with that decision...no...as a mother you look out for your children....sometimes abortion is looking out for their intrestes regardless of what some of you might see. what some of you see is a place to run your mouths off thinking you know every thing in the world its young people messing up to you...but guess what young people are not the only ones to have abortions. I had an abortion not to long ago july 12, 2005...18 years old...and anyone who wants to tell me it was murder or that it was wrong or that i duidnt love my child because it only displays how turly ignorant you are. I sat in the waiting room with a diverse set of people older and younger. the women who do to health risks couldnt have the baby...hmmm....if abortion was illegal where does that leave them...how does a baby live well with a dead mother. then there were the ones who had to many kids already..and the ones who just where there for a quick fix (those are the ones that are doing something wrong...when you have sex you take responsibility for what comes out..if you make the choice to have an abortion fine, but dont think that every time it happens you should just go out and make it disapear every single time..wrap it up well..double if you must.)I loved my child and alot of those women did too...and it broke our hearts what we had to do but we HAD to do it. I could not support my child financially i barley have the money to eat now, i have no steady home, and my childs father was a coward, and mentaly I couldnt do it. I couldnt watch my child suffer. you say selfish, who is the selfish one when those of you against it sit there and down everyone because YOU think something is wrong..who are you?
and as far as dating and relations go, everyone knows what they are doing when they do it, if someone wants to date an older guy let them, they are in right mind, just because you think we are stupid doesnt mean that they are....get over yourself..sometimes you are wrong older younger whatever...life is about choices and the freedom to make those choices for ourselves. If you dont agree with something hey that is you choice good. but dont sit there and try to convert everyone to it, you dont like it dont do it. worry about you not someone else. a choice thats right for you, may not be right for someone else.

reply from: galen

I feel for your pain... but did anyone ever mention going to a crisis pregnancy centre to you?
You stated you loved your child... but you killed him/her...How does this wash?
As for the medical reasons to have an abortion... there are legitamate OB/GYNs that will preform such a procedure in a hospital setting and not ask the mother to go to one of the mills.... it is even less expensive in some cases. I personally do not have a problem with these and find the whole situation heartbreaking for all concerned. i also recomed sterilization to these women if possible.
How can I judge.... I have been in your situation and so have several of my friends, we however made diffrent choices from you.
... with all the pressure out there for women to have an AB it seems to me that the people trying to controll a woman's choice and body are the same ones profitting from the AB mill industry.
I am an RN and in my experience there are very few legitamate reasons to kill a child in its mothers womb.
The pregnancy centres I mentioned above solve the needs of many unwed/ low income mothers, they can even help with the care of other children. I find that most of the time it is the ego suffering more than anything that makes someone feel she couldn't possibly go to " one of those places". .....But she could kill the life inside her??( Pennyroyale tea anyone??)
As far as watching the child suffer... well adoption.. even open ones mean that would not happen... maybe you can even give the child a better life.

When you mention dating.. well that's an OK statement for a consentual adult relationship, however no child is able to make a mature descision at the tender age of 13, and some adults still aren't, but we still allow them to have sex and they keep coming in for abortions. So we really do not have a good track record as a society with this one.

I do agree that a choice that's right for you may not be right for someone else but in the matter of abortion it certainly isn't right for the baby... and make no mistake about it , there was a baby there.

I do hope that you are able to work through the obvious pain you must feel regarding your experience, and come out better on the other side.

Mary

reply from: bradensmommy

One thing, the run on sentences don't make you look very intellegent, it was actually hard to interpret what you were getting across...

Second thing, I don't know about y'all, but I'm pretty darned sick of the excuses...
"I can't afford one"
---ya know if parents out there waited till they could afford children they never would have them in the first place, that is where food stamps and WIC comes in, swallow your d*mn pride and do it!

"I have a career and/or schooling still"
----I know several women that have done it, my mother had me at 20 years old and she went through college. No woman must have to choose between a career and a child, this is 2005, women are much more stronger than ever these days.

"I'm too young!"
----this is one I get so sick of hearing because you know what I say? If you think you are too young to be a parent, you are too young to have sex, period. Deal with your consequences, every action has one.

I do know that health risks are one of the MAIN reasons why abortions should be legal and that is it. My sister who thinks differently would die than have her child killed. Call her crazy, but in my eyes that is very unselfish on her child's part. I know that her child would be raised by someone else but that is her beliefs. I don't know what I would do if I had to risk me or my child's life, but I certainly would not risk my child's life just so I can finish my goals. As I said earlier in this thread, life happens, you deal with it as it comes. Why kill your own child just so it can be convenient for yourself?

I love Mother Teresa's quotes on abortion, one I use sometimes: "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so you may live as you wish" I think more people should consider this a great quote to go by. You may not agree with all of our beliefs about abortion but I do know that I would NEVER go out on a limb to kill my child just because it was inconveniencing my life ever.

I don't know where you go off saying that its wrong for us to think abortion is selfish because the majority of women who have abortions are married and have 2 plus children. I think it is time to get the ol' snip snip and any doc who refuses are also refusing your right to CHOOSE (HAHA there to the choicers, why don't they complain about that one?!?)

Anyways, to reply to some of your opinions (since it is still hard for me to read I will try to read slow) I think its funny that you think what we say is crap because the majority of pro-lifers on this page are pretty intellegent people. If you have time out of your busy life and read some things we have said maybe we wouldn't be talking "crap" as you put it.

....sometimes abortion is looking out for their intrestes regardless of what some of you might see.
What interests? The interest that noone will want them because thier mother thinks so? I don't know if you know this but the childless couples have to go to another country to adopt because of the abortion rate in this country.

I had an abortion not to long ago july 12, 2005

I'm sorry to hear that I hope that you know that abortion can affect you in the long run (if it hasn't by now). I pray for the child and I"m sure many other people on this thread are as well.

then there were the ones who had to many kids already
Exactly my point, tubal ligation is wonderful and so is a vasectomy!

and the ones who just where there for a quick fix (those are the ones that are doing something wrong...when you have sex you take responsibility for what comes out..if you make the choice to have an abortion fine, but dont think that every time it happens you should just go out and make it disapear every single time..wrap it up well..double if you must.

I agree, live up to your actions.

and it broke our hearts what we had to do but we HAD to do it. I could not support my child financially i barley have the money to eat now, i have no steady home, and my childs father was a coward, and mentaly I couldnt do it. I couldnt watch my child suffer. you say selfish, who is the selfish one when those of you against it sit there and down everyone because YOU think something is wrong..who are you?

Read above to my statements about finances. Also in Judge Judy's sayings "You make a baby with a loser, that is your own problem" Thats what I don't get, a woman who knows the guy is a creep still has sex with him, what exactly does that accomplish? A baby maybe? A guy who'll stay? I dunno, I never been in that situation because I know that I deserve better than a low-life jerk. We aren't downing anyone, we are trying to educate this girl about abortion and the facts.

and as far as dating and relations go, everyone knows what they are doing when they do it, if someone wants to date an older guy let them

Sooo, it should be okay for a 13 year old to date an 18 plus person?? ooookay, I hope you never have children.....

But anyway, I had time tonight to reply this lengthy response because I think what this poster is saying isn't right, maybe she thinks that an abortion was going to solve all her problems, maybe one day she'll realize that it wasn't right at all. I dunno....

reply from: cali1981

Lynn -

Abortion kills a child. There is no debate about that; it is scientific fact. I completely sympathize with parents who have a difficult time providing for their children, and I spend much of my life working to help people like that, but that does not mean I will ever think it's compassionate or a better solution to kill the child. Nobody should have the right to make a decision about whether someone else will live or die, whether it's because they believe that person's life will be bad or because that person will impose on THEIR life. That's why your "you dont like it dont do it" logic doesn't hold up. It's not good enough for abortion because abortion affects someone besides the one making the choice. It is as illogical as saying "you don't like slavery, then don't own slaves."

reply from: lynn

dont ever tell someone who has had an abortion that you feel their pain...you really dont.
yes i did "kill" my child.....and there is much grief with that...but dont ever mistake the fact that I made a choice and that i dont feel it was a wrong one. I respect other people veiws and i would never be all for somone going out and having an abortion until they review all possible methods to keep him?her. I did, thanks. pride had no play nor did ego in my situation.
as far as adoption..nno.. I am the childs mother no one else and you think about the fact not all parent who adopt are good ones...alot of my friends are adopted and they suffer day to day with parents who could care less about them tell they wish that they were dead....could you live with that? the way the world is abuse both verbal and physical is more comon than not. even with biological parents. so how could that be a better life and having that child grow thinking their real parents hate them too......?
you made different choice goodi am happy for you, but you are not me you are not other people, you are you.
as far as young 13 year old girls......well perhaps "society" should teach them better.

reply from: lynn

oh you are smooth! really.....
I get off the same place you do with your ignorant ravings. I love fiesty people. as far as mother Teresa and judge Judy..um...could care less. My child was doomed before I made the decision to have an abortion because of health risks not to me to him?her. My child wasnt getting what it needed form me and I was eating right..i had wic..I went to the clinics..he/she would have died regardless.I didnt do it because I wanted to live a certian way..or because it would hassel me. as far as the jerk thing my guy wasnt a jerk I simply bought into the well if you do get pregnant I will take care of you and we will find ways to work it out. he is a good guy as are most of the men you are reffering to, so dont lower yourself to believe that every man that decides his wife/girlfriend should have an abortion is a bad guy...they sometimes just dont know any better, no one ver tells them differently..their families always so quick to support them..and reffer to the girl as a "whore" and what not. some girls just find the need to believe that their are happy endings that a prince will come and usually that prince is the guy who tells her how much he loves her and never wants to let her go, sometimes the prince turns out to still be a frog. that is life. I never made any excuses, but I never had any help. most peopl like me dont. we turn to the methods that are so talked about..and they sometimes fail us. How can you educate someone by trying to push the perseption of there being only one way to go about things?

reply from: lynn

It kills I know. again what you think is fine ..for you...and for anyone else who sees it that way. I agree if you do it because it "imposes" on your life it is stupid. you can think what you will about it being or not being compassionate..because those of us who have had one or those of us who are going to are going to think it anyway. I respect the fact that peole on here are trying to educate young and old in some cases about abortion. I just dont think the whole method of well its wrong is what is right. you want education for those people tell tehm to ask someone who has had one....form a group not biasist, people relate better with peole who know what they are going through. I would gladly try to help someone, in this day most of us have no one to turn to no one to understand.It is alot harder to find help now you get turned away or put on hold until its to late. I think tht if you do really care about the subject and the ones who are faced with the decisions than you would surley be willing to put it out there the possibility rather than the means of it being deffinant ( and by that I mean: form a city by city support group where we can go and talk to people like us..that doesnt included ones hand picked to have the same beliefs as the sponsers....normal people who dont force feed a decision to you)...that is compassion and understanding and that is the only way to reach someone..who is other wise feeling as if they are the only one in the world.

reply from: domsmom

The argument that the baby needs the mother is rediculous. We need food that the planet grows. So basically we're parasites. Maybe we should be killed because we're sucking the earth dry. Rediculous huh? My point is every living thing NEEDS SOMETHING. If you tell me the earth is'nt a living thing I will crack up.
Sex is stricly for procreation. If you dont want to procreate, use something foolproof. Since there is NO SUCH THING, and if you dont want to risk creating a life DONT DO IT. Sex is pleasureable because if it wasnt there would be no reason to do it and hence no more human race. But now that we're smart enough to know what causes procreation, lets execute a little self control
MyChoice~ "Dont like murder? Dont do it then! But let me do what I want!" Is that your logic?

reply from: yoda

Your post is full of open hostility, and that puzzles me. You tell us how strongly you support abortion "rights", and yet you come to a forum called "Pro-life America" to tell us all how awful we are? Why did you come here if your mind is completely closed?

All I can say about your theory that killing one child benefits the others is not morally acceptable to me. I wonder if you would say the same about one of your born children? And if not, what's the difference?

reply from: yoda

Excuse my bluntness, but that sounds a lot like a rejected lover who kills his ex-girlfriend because "If he can't have her, no one else will either". Killing is never better than giving a child a chance at life, no matter how bad the odds of adoptive parents meeting your standards.

reply from: vjs

When I was a child, 17 years old, I became pregnant. I was desperate, alone, and had nobody to talk or go to. I definetley could not support a child, and could not face my parents. I was able to have an abortion without parental consent. The night before though, I confided in my Mother, who went with me and supported me in whatever I wanted to do. I regret that I put myself in that situation, however I will never regret my decision. The physical pain was worse than actual child-birth, and I had nothing to hold in the end, so the emotional pain makes it worse. However, I felt I had made the right decision, and still do.

Abortion has always, and will always exist, whether it be in a back alley or in a safe, sanitary doctor's office. As much as "Pro-Life" people may not like it. I hate the term "Pro-Life". Just because I am for a Woman's Right to choose does not mean I am "Pro-Death". But I am not here to change minds, because once a mind is made up, I don't believe it can be changed.

But instead of insulting women who have been in that situation, and trying to prove that abortion is wrong by killing the innocent doctors who perform them, why not try to enlighten our youth so that they never are put in that situation? Put your energy into education. Educate about birth control, and avoiding peer pressures. To be anti-birth control, I feel, is to be severely naive.

I now have a 4 year old daughter, and am expecting my second. I would never have an abortion again, only because I now have the means and the maturity to support a pregnancy and children. But I know if my daughter were ever in a position where she had to choose, I would not judge her, only encourage her to do what she feels is right in her heart.

I pray that a sound-minded person who knows the boundaries between Church & State is elected in 2008. Not a bigot who forgets what his objectives should be. My biggest fear is our country turning into a religious battle and ending our freedoms as we know it. Christians want God and religion taught in school-- as long as it is their God and religion-- nobody else's. "And please stop abortion! These babies could very well grow up to be our next soldiers to die in Iraq!"

reply from: cali1981

vjs -

I can sympathize with the situation that you were in when you were 17. My sister was in the same situation. It is difficult, no doubt. I spent a great deal of time and effort to help her through that time in her life. That is what family is for, and anyone in such a situation deserves whatever society has to give them.

However, no degree of difficulty in a situation will ever make it okay to kill a child. Maybe your life was easier because you did not have your son or daughter to contend with, but that did not make it okay to kill him/her. He/she had just as much right to live and be happy as you do and did.

I know that most pro-abortion people despise the term "pro-life," but I believe it is because it makes them uncomfortable. Pro-life is a perfectly accurate term for our position, because we believe that every human being has a right to LIVE, free from being killed by other human beings. If you call yourself pro-choice, that means that you find abortion (which is the DEATH of a child) to be an acceptable option if a woman feels she wants to do it. That means that you think death is an acceptable solution. Pro-death is actually a very accurate description of the pro-choice position: death as a possible solution.

The pro-life movement is very much in favor of education about sexuality. Please see my previous post in this thread, which was a reply to MyChoice, talking about the philosophy behind our advocated brand of sex education.

The most important point is that even with education, some children still might end up pregnant. And in that case, it will be no more okay to kill their child than it would be if they had not been educated.

God and religion have no necessary connection to the pro-life movement. I myself am an agnostic, certainly not a Christian. No reference to religion is necessary to find the murder of a child to be wrong, undemocratic, and un-American.

If someone "feels in their heart" that it is right to kill another human being, that feeling can never be right. Not everything can be relativistic and subjective; it is not possible in some cases for two different people's "feelings" to both be right. Finally, the pro-life movement does not judge women who submit to abortions. We try to stop them.

reply from: galen

Lynn
Please referr to the 1st line of my post... I stated that I feel for your pain, not that I felt your pain, and I do feel for you... you obviously have a world of hurt going on.
In regards to abuse... can you absolutely predict that the child would have been abused if it were adopted?
There have been studies done that show overall this is not the case.
You stated that in your 1st post that you could barely feed yourself...then in a subsequent post that you had WIC? Unless you have other small children ( that you have not mentioned ) it is one programme that you would not be eligible for.
It seems to me that your hostility has gotten the better of your story as it seems to change tone/ evidence at each post.
Believe me when I say that I was never hand picked by anyone, but came to my beliefs through 25 years in the medical industry.
I think I have a pretty good handle on when something is done for a stress reduction and when it is medically necessary. A woman's body is designed to protect her offspring and it will drain on her before it drains on the child... even during great famine there are healthy children born at the cost of thier mothers.
Maybe you should take a deep breath and read our responses with a calmer mind... you might actually find a few good answers there.

Mary

reply from: ForLife

You are wrong on many of your points; too numerous to detail. Suffice it to say, you are wrong.

I point to your statement "...whatever I wanted to do" as the beginning of the problems.

reply from: bradensmommy

Why do pro-choicers think that all abortion clinics are safe and sanitary? I have seen some stories that contradict that fact. I also know that when a woman has complications from a "safe and legal" abortion, the ambulance doesn't go out front, they have to drive around to the back with no sirens, funny eh?? I also sense alot of hostility from Miss Lynn who apparently thinks I'm stupid, I am looking forward to any stupidity from my comments she will tell me about later on in the thread. And its real nice to not care what Mother Teresa says since she was an amazing person with a kind heart, but I wouldn't really expect her to care about it in the first place seeming she is just so "outspoken". She sure doesn't have an open mind to the facts about abortion.

Maybe one day her and the rest of the choicers will come to realize that killing a child is wrong...

reply from: mom5

Many of those who have had abortions are hostile, yes. The hostility stems from letting society and other people in their life back them into a wall...AKA no other choice.

I personally think that Lynn may be examining her spirit. If the story is true...why come to a Pro-Life website and tell everyone here that caring for women and children is "crap"...

I truly feel sorry for women who submit to abortion. Yes, SUBMIT!

Lynn, I hope you find that answers you are looking for. You know that's why you came here...

I'm sure anyone would be willing to give you numbers, websites, etc for those in need of healing after an abortion. Funny...most of the folks who help women after abortions are Pro-Life...

Lynn, the sad part...while you where ending the life of your child on July 15, 2005..I was preparing to see my child come into the world...that makes me sad. I've lost two children naturally. I know the lost of a child and I couldn't imagine willingly ending their life though...I am sorry for your loss.

reply from: pray4em

I recently realize that abortion too is a death in the family that requires grieving.

reply from: mom5

Very much so!

The father, the grandparents, aunts/uncles, cousins...everyone is affected. Each member of the family has lost a loved one that they never knew. Seems like to me grieving is much harder when you NEVER knew the family member.

I often wonder about the children I lost. Were they boys or girls? My oldest would have been 8 this past July...actual due date July 11. Second child that I lost, due date Nov. 30. That's just around the corner and you know what...we light a candle on these days for them. I'll see them one day in heaven, but I know they will not ask me..."why?"

reply from: ForLife

I see you started a family by consumating the marital act and creating a child. The man is the head of the family and along with his authority he also receives responsibilities. The Bible says that if a man calling himself a Christian doesn't care for his family he is worse than an unbeliever. The father is responsible for the financial upkeep of the child. If he fails in that respect because he is off chasing other interests, he could not possibly be any more selfish. He would be considered a "low-lifer".

Ofentimes the woman is a rebel who refuses to submit to authority, God's, man's or familial government. If you were unwilling to fulfil any of your contracts, marriage, child, etc., you should not have been selfishly horsing around. Sounds like all you are good for is the scrap heap.

Life is not about the freedom to make choices for yourself. It's about responsibilities. And you don't like being responsible.

reply from: MADaboutTHIS

thank you!!!! most ppl like domsmom do think we are fighting against womens right and were not! i am a woman and have become a pro-lifer for the unborn. children should not be treated that way. i think they should have the child because their parents probably did not have that money for them either but had them anyway. children are born to continue the human race. not for adults to use as servents and toys. look at kelsey briggs. poor girl was beaten to death. but god wanted her to be born so he could take her not her parents. i am with you all the way...

reply from: yoda

So has murder always existed, and always will. What's your point?

Try telling the baby you killed that you aren't "pro-death".

Why?

reply from: MADaboutTHIS

ok yes i read this and agree even tho i am a pro-lifer. i understand not being able to support your chiled but why not choose adoption over abortion. you say you have no money but how much did you just go spend to have that abortion? how much would you have spent to give the child up for adoption? yes you would have morning sickness like you did and would be in a lot of pain, but you wouldnt be killing someone. and im not trying to convert anyone. just making sure ppl here what i have to say. i am 13 yrs old. i do not have children but do have a older sister that was adopted out as you might have read or will read in one of my other postings but just because i have not had childrendoes not mean i cant htink of things such as abortion at this age. i have disapproved of it since 9 yo. i understand like i said you not having money and having the child would be hard but, choose life. i want you to think about life if you had been aborted, even if it's hard look at the good things you had and the good times. look at the things you have done for ppl and will do for ppl. your child never got a chance to do that. your child could have just as well been the next bill gates or micheal jordan,lance armstrong. you wont get to see him excel, you wont hear his first words you wont get to experience anything like that. and you could have like i said adopted your child out. had a open adoption where you get to see your child and be apart of their life without being gone, being a mystery. you would get to hear first words see first steps watch them go to kindergarden, 1st grade etc. without having to pay for them or be afraid they would have to suffer. like i said i am only 13 and have decided at least after college to have kids. but if i were to get pregnat before hand yes that is my choice. but i would give it up for adoption if i did anything. and for all the women that had health problems, im not saying they should risk themselfs to death but they could try to go as long as they can then have the child early. and if the child was still born i would not be upset because they trie. if they managed to go for a while but the baby died i wouldnt be upset. think about it...

reply from: yoda

MAD, I just read something a while ago that your screen name reminds me of. A Pro-lifer named Juno says that he knows that some people are "upset" about the photos of aborted babies, and his reply is "Yes, I'm upset also. That's WHY I am showing them!"

reply from: MyChoice

ForLife: Maybe i should take a deep breath and chill out before i respond to you. However, your first post to vjs on 11/12/04 was completely useless and close minded. Your post to Lynn on 11/26/05 is the one that really gets me. Lets leave god out of this, first of all, becuase not everyone is Christian, and its a dead-end arguement for abortion.
I hope I'm getting the wrong impression, but your statements that a man is the head of a house hold who holds the authority and recieves the responsibilities is so chauvinistic it makes me sick. A little dramatic, but: who cares what the bible says. And to say that women are "rebels" if they refuse to "submit" to god, man, or familial government, its so unbelievable, i find it almost funny.
And im curious to know who you think you are telling people "you should not have been selfishly horsing around." and then to further add "Sounds like all you are good for is the scrap heap. "

Wow. Now that's something, but in order to keep my own dignity, i wont say it.

LIFE IS ABOUT THE FREEDOM TO MAKE CHOICES FOR YOURSELF. Therefore you have responsiblities and consequences.

reply from: Tam

MyChoice, there are some of us on here who are religious and some who are not. Of those who are religious, some are fundamentalist Christians. If you would like to have a debate about abortion that leaves God out of it, that is fine--but you should just say so, start a thread with that title (I'm interested, so I'll start it, actually), and I'm sure you'll get some responses from believers and nonbelievers alike. Don't make the mistake of thinking, as I once did, that all pro-life people are alike--and that they're all prolife because they want to control women and make other people's choices for them. That isn't what I'm about--and I'm pro-life.

reply from: Tam

Wait, I'm not starting a new thread--I just looked back through this one and realized you are already engaged in a great conversation with cali and others (including, i'd forgotten, myself!) about this issue. Don't get distracted by those whose religious beliefs differ from yours. If you want to talk about it in a nonreligious context, we can. For some people, there is no such context, and they are entitled to their opinions just as you are. This is a great thread and you and cali have a great dialogue going!

reply from: yoda

One way or another, we all have the "freedom" to act according to our consciences. The issue, to me, is making moral choices, not having "more rights".

reply from: MyChoice

yodavater, 11/21/05 :

Just for info, when i say lifestyle, im talking about poverty or not poverty, no education or education, opportunities or no opportunities, granted most of these you can work out of if you try hard enough, but why would anyone face these realities plus put their children in these conditions, if they didnt have to? I understand that abortion is killing a baby and you could never possibly see why anyone would be okay with that. However, you being a man, i truly dont believe that you will ever understand why a woman would choose to end her pregnancy. Furthermore, life is all around us. and just to point out this fact, though you guys might think im crazy: we kill on a daily basis. We kill animals at our discretion. Why is human life held in sooo much higher standing? I dont think i can get very far with that argument, but its something to consider.
Killing a fetus (an organism, as yet undeveloped, in the process of becoming a functional individual of a species) for the benefit of having the opportunity to create a better environment for your children when your ready to have children and to be stable/happy in your own life is not selfish at all. If a lady became pregnant and was not ready to have children and aborted her pregnancy within the first trimester at least, ASAP, i see nothing wrong with that. She needs to be taking birth control and using other methods to prevent pregnancy. Abortion, then, would be a consequence to her effect of accidentally getting pregnant.
I dont think abortion should be completely legal. It should only be allowed in cases of rape/incest, when the mothers health is endangered, and when completely level headed people who have sex for pleasure (oh my god) accidentally get pregnant - as long as its within the first trimester and hopefully as soon as they find out.

and what i was saying, also in my quote about the men who get these women pregnant... let me first of all say this: abortion is targeted to women and is a "womans problem" when there was a male involved, too. Men dont get ANY scolding for any part of the act at all. Its the woman who biologically has to carry the baby and therefore - she's the one with the problem, she's the one with the choice, and she's the one who might have to take care of the baby for 18 years while most likely living in poverty with no education. Where does the man fit into this?

i dont know if i even have to say this, but Last resort and back up plan kind of mean the same thing. I see last resort as an enevitable "action/choice" to a bad situation, whereas back up plan means people were saying "oh, if i get pregnant i can just have an abortion." Thats not right.



I see what you are saying. I admire your passion. However, people have sex for pleasure more often then to reproduce. Its a human instinct. Its a human right? There is absolutely nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure. In fact, that's why we do it. It just so happens that the outcome of a 99% effective pill and a broken condom might lead to a pregnancy. Having sex for pleasure is not wrong. I think there is too much emphasis and emotion put into the word "baby" and the fetus doesnt really know anything for the first 4 weeks. It is just an organism that will become a baby once it's fully developed. I dont know... we have different values. Thats the only thing i can say to you.

11/21, 6:34 :

I think i answered this in the previous paragraphs. ... um sorry, i didnt know i was avoiding anything...

reply from: MyChoice

Tam, 11/25 :

I dont necessarily mean people "shouldnt" talk about god, maybe? Hopefully im not being ignorant when i say this, but i think if you talk about the morality and issues that pertain to abortion without god in them, but purely relating to humans, you will reach everybody instead of just christians.



I see that now, thanks to your post earlier on.

I absolutely agree, but ForLifes post portraying women was offensive to me.
And just because you tickled my mind a little bit, if everyones entitled to their opinions [and views] why is there such a debate on abortion?

reply from: yoda

I do not accept the idea that it's okay for women to kill their babies, just because they are women. Killing a baby is just as wrong no matter who does it, it makes no sense to me to try to justify it by gender.

Killing for food or to protect yourself and your property has nothing to do with killing a baby of your own kid just for convenience. There is simply no comparison. Now, if you want to compare the fact that some people cruelly kill animals just for the pleasure of killing, I agree that is similar.

We do not become "fully developed" until about age 19 or 20. Should it be okay to kill teenagers? Yes, it is the ultimate act of selfishness to kill an innocent baby.

I understand that you approve of baby-killing, no need to repeat that. No, elective abortion is not a "consequence", it is the deliberate taking of an innocent human life for selfish reasons.

This has nothing to do with the morality of having sex. This has to do with the morality of killing your child before it is born. The word "baby" is perfectly applicable to any unborn child of any age or stage of development, and is the proper word of the vernacular to use. We are ALL "just organisms", and we don't become "fully developed" until about age 19 or 20, so development is not an excuse.

Yes, it is obvious that we have "different values". And I am very happy about that situation.

reply from: Tam

I dont necessarily mean people "shouldnt" talk about god, maybe? Hopefully im not being ignorant when i say this, but i think if you talk about the morality and issues that pertain to abortion without god in them, but purely relating to humans, you will reach everybody instead of just christians.

Several of us do take that approach, actually. Look particularly at cali's and yoda's posts--you will never see either of them using religion or God as their basis for making any point.

I see that now, thanks to your post earlier on.

Oh, good.

I absolutely agree, but ForLifes post portraying women was offensive to me.

Yeah, I hear that. I'm not into "submitting to the authority" of -- well, really, of anyone. I'm a feminist and an anarchist, so go figure. Probably most people claiming to be those things would not also call themselves pro-life. But the way I see it is, I don't like the idea that anyone has to "govern" me, and at the same time, I don't like the idea that people do awful things to one another, and I do feel that a community response to unacceptable behavior is justified. At this point, our community response is usually in the form of laws, but it sure doesn't have to be that way. But as long as we have laws--as long as laws are the way we decide as a community how we respond to things--I think the very first law on the books should be one outlawing the unconscionable practice of killing children, and that it should apply to children of any age, born or unborn. I don't discriminate based on age and location, and those are the only things separating unborn children from born ones. Anyway, back to the original point--the thing is, you don't have to submit to anyone's authority in order to know the difference between right and wrong. Sometimes it is really inconvenient and difficult to be a mother, but that doesn't mean we get to just kill our children to ease the burden. If the mom's health is being seriously compromised by the pregnancy, the only ethical thing to do is to remove the child from her womb--and try to save him/her! Depending on how old the child is, the technology available, etc, the child might not survive--but, there is no time at which the physician should switch gears from trying to save the life of a child to trying to end the life of that child. THAT is my feeling on the subject, and THAT is why I am pro-life. I believe it is wrong--very, very wrong--for a doctor to stop trying to save the life of a patient, and start trying to kill that patient. S/he ceases to be a "patient" at that point and becomes a victim. It is so wrong that I am ok with a law against it--but, more importantly, it is so wrong that I think regardless of whether or not it is handled by the government in a legal way, everyone of good conscience should be doing whatever s/he can to discourage and prevent it from happening! Even if you feel the woman shouldn't be punished legally for hiring someone to kill her unborn child, don't you agree that it should be discouraged? That we should do everything we can to make it possible for her to choose life?

Because although each of us is entitled to his/her own view, those views differ. So we discuss and debate them. It is a good question that you ask--why is there such a debate about this? Usually when the supreme court settles something, it doesn't spark decades of controversy. Usually legal things are not this controversial! You know what else was legal and yet extremely controversial? Slavery. It was legal because those who felt it was ok had more legal clout than those who felt it was immoral--just as is the case today with abortion. But both are wrong for the same exact reason: one human being can NEVER, EVER own another human being. It is obvious that one BORN human being can't own another BORN human being--but it wasn't always obvious! Many people thought that someone can own another person, as a slave. Many people had slaves. You must know how absolutely wrong slavery is. And you hopefully know that it still exists today--not legally in this country, but for example, there are apparently tens of thousands of child sex slaves in Cambodia. So there are places where it is NOT blatantly obvious to everyone that slavery is wrong--or that child abuse and child rape are wrong. Just as there are places where it is not blatantly obvious to everyone that killing little babies in the womb is wrong! I find it hard to believe that anyone could think it's okay to kill a child--but, since I once believed the slew of nonsense it is necessary to believe in order to hold such an opinion, I do understand it. Sigh...

reply from: Tam

I just thought I'd respond to this by saying not all pro-lifers are okay with killing animals. I am most emphatically opposed to killing animals for food, research, sport, fur, or just out of the sick pleasure some psychos get from killing. I thoroughly oppose killing of humans and animals alike.

Just my 2 cents!

reply from: bradensmommy

Just wondering on something, if you have sex, you can't "accidentally" get pregnant. If you learned in health class or the "birds and bees" talk with you parents you will know that sex brings about children. I cannot ever say that a child was an "accident". I'm so sick of that word. I am also sick of pro-choicers saying that sex is merely for pleasure because if it was how come there are so many people in the world and so many abortions? To this day I'm still trying to figure out why some people think that.

I think if more people developed brains maybe this world will have some morals and standards.

reply from: ForLife

No, you are not getting the wrong impression. I believe you understood me correctly. I stand behind my positions.

Your statement is, "Life is about the freedom to make choices for yourself".

Some of the choices people make include killing preborn children and men spreading diseases by engaging in sodomy, etc. Due to the destructive choices some people make, good and decent people need to stand up and object. Government must outlaw such destructive "choices".

reply from: galen

If freedom is about making choices and accepting the outcome of those choices, then how do you justify killing another, for that is taking away their right to make a choice?

When we subhumanise each other it does turn into a nasty spiral sometimes. Slavery is a good example, so are the atrocities that dictators such as Hitler and Pol-Pot were able to create. The problem wasearched by a very well known Psy. called Eric Erricson. Those who dislike Freud may know him as a man who spent a long time taking the first theories of psychiatry and the evolution of humans and their stages of development and really doing some in depth research as to why people act the way they do. he studied the population of Germany to determine why the Jews and others who were terrorised, allowed it to happen and why the rest of the country turned the other way. His conclusion was that after WWI the society was so devistated by the war and the flu that they stopped their normal development at the adolescent stage where they were most influenced by others and less likely to stand up for what was right. He also spent many years looking at other societies where similar things had occured, and in every one of them found that as society continued to proclaim the "right" of something, our children grow up to accept it on a fundamental level. In other words we end up with the story of the Emporers New Clothes.

The choices that we make are going to be passed on to our children, and make no mistake, if a child sees one part of the population being subhumanised, than they will continue to do so to other segments of society as a matter of course. Where do we want to be when we are in our dottage? Home with the ones who care about us, and can make our final years peaceful, with physicians who care about our welfare? or locked up in a nursing home untill we reach a level of dementia that others ( our children) consider us someone who no longer has potential and can be safely euthanised. ( don't get me wrong i am all about end of life choices.... but it is the person who is dying that should be able to make that choice)

If I told my children and family that it was OK to kill their baby sister because it was not a convienent time to have another child. Or that my mate and I had made a mistake, or the Bc didn't work corectly, what message am I sending them. If i tell them that I had a child out of wedlock but put it up for adoption, because I felt that every life was worth trying to live, what message did I send them?

When a woman is pregnant she carries inside her a seprate entity, that has its own DNA, immune system, brain ( see Tam's articles on fetal pain),and potential. What right do we have as women to decide that this one lives but this other one does not? Inconvienance,stress, mental anguish?

Remember this fable:
An old man lived with his son and his wife and the son's two children. The old man had become feeble and the family no longer fed him from a bowl with a spoon but instead had carved a crude wooden trough for him to eat out of. As he became more feeble they moved him to a small stool at the other end of the room because it had become too unplesant to watch him dribble his food or fumble his napkin. Everyone in the family took these actions as a matter of course, never questioning what was done. After some months the old man passed away and was burried in the cemetary with the usual ceremony.
When the family came home for the funeral meal, they were speaking with neighbors and friends, when the son came upon his own child carving a block of wood. " What are you making?" he asked his child.
" a Trough" his son replied. " what on earth for?" the father asked. " So I can have one ready for you when you get old. " was his own child's reply.

Mary

reply from: MyChoice

Yodavater:

Congratulations to you for what you think, but im jut gonna stop the "run-around" with you. From just about all your posts i feel an underlying blinkered mind-set becuase you would never see the other side for any reason whatsoever; you think that you are right, and there is no other way, and thats the end of it. congratulations on your beliefs, but you still havent changed mine - I'm sorry to break it to you, but my beliefs and reasons are just as important and worthy as yours.
When reading your posts, i feel like maybe you feel so strongly about what you believe?therefore, my reasons are unimaginable, so you kind of take a tone of ridicule, i guess.
I think your morals, values, and heart are in the right place, but i truly feel that as a man, you will never understand what I'm talking about, or the situation that lynn or vjs was in. I do have a strong foundation for my reasoning behind abortion (a woman with no want for a baby and no means to support it is cause for an abortion) and it really isn't just a bunch of selfish, crazy women who are rebeling against authority, lol. sorry. [she could have the baby and give it up for adoption. However, she shouldnt have to go through pregnancy and labor just because she got pregnant; if she doesnt want to.]
I really am trying to open my mind towards your way of thinking, but i cannot seem to get a solution to the problem im talking about that satisfies me.

Just for funsies: Do u support abortion when rape/incest or danger of the mothers health is involved? What about non-surgical procedures like that one pill used to terminate a pregnancy after unprotected sex?

reply from: MyChoice

bradensmommy, 12/2, 4:51:

Getting pregnant on accident is not literally getting pregnant on accident. Everyone knows that sex makes babies. What is accidental, i suppose, is a broken condom, missed pill, uneffective pill, some technicality (lol,maybe?) of having sex when not wanting a baby. People always have and always will engage in sex, not to have children, but becuase there is nothing like the feeling of sexual relations.

reply from: MyChoice

ForLife 12/2 6:19 :

I am sorry. I should have taken my own advice at the beginning of my post. However i didnt and i feel like what i said was kind of out of place. Your post seemed so rediculous to me (not that it is rediculous) and goes so far against EVERYTHING that i stand for and believe myself that i felt i absolutely had to say something.
I have a thesis on why i dont believe in god and i would love for you to read it and tell me what you think about it. And i promise, minus the childish outrages.

reply from: MyChoice

ForLife:

I feel like your seeing a lot of these problems in the wrong light. These "destructive" choices are personal choices (mostly) made by people with every right in the world (governmental or not) to make them. Im mostly talking about gays. Good and decent people dont necessarily mean you and "your kind". These things are not wrong for everybody and the government must NOT outlaw "choices". If you dont like the lifestyle of a gay man, dont be one. As i see it, thats as far as your rights, opinions, and actions can go with consideration of gays, or anyone else.

reply from: ForLife

Because Adam and Eve made their own "choices", they set up mens' government in defiance of God's Government. Therefore, I view our making our own "choices" as the worst of problems. You hold up "choices" as the highest and most noble of standards. I believe that I am a bond servant of Christ, meaning I don't do what I want, but serve the King by doing what He wants.

Yes, your position is the very antithesis of mine; the exact opposite.

When I was young and foolish I believed government was only for building our roads, then get out of the way, I'm going to do whatever I want. And I did do whatever I wanted. The result was so horrific I've changed my mind.

I should also add that I saw the results of people making their own "choices". 40% of Africans in one province are positive for HIV-Aids. Men who practice sodomy have a greatly reduced lifespan due to transmissable diseases. Unborn children are put to death as "accidents". But despite these consequences, people still prefer to make the deadly lifestyle "choices".

I might add that if sexual relations were limited to within a lifelong marriage commitment between a man and a woman, as required by the Bible, 40% of Africans would not be dying in the heavily affected HIV-aids area, men would be healthy, and there would not be a need to kill "accidents".

reply from: sarah

My Choice,
The government outlaws choices everyday. Since you donot want government doing such things, then do you advocate anarchy?

reply from: yoda

When you make it "all about the mother", and leave the baby out completely, you will always come to that conclusion. If treating an unborn baby as if it did not exist does not bother you, then I guess nothing will.

Nothing that I can say to you will ever satisfy your desire to have something you want at the expense of your baby's life, because I will never agree with killing a baby.

I do not support abortion at all. If a mother's life is truly threatened by a pregnancy, the baby can be delivered as early as necessary, and all possible efforts made to save it's life.

Any medication that "terminates a pregnancy" is an abortion. The only thing I accept in this regard is contracteption, done so that it only prevents fertilization.

reply from: pray4em

MyChoice,
I'm glad to see you make it back here again. I have a few remarks to make and hope you get back to see them.

1st off you mentioned growing up in a prochoice home. When I was about 40 yrs old my mother died, it felt like somone reached down into my soul and pulled a tree out by the roots, it wasn't till then that I realized the powerful influence parents have even after you leave home. My hope for you is maybe one day you'll say, Mom I respect you but I disagree withyou. Just like I can say, Mychoice I admire that you can come onto a prolife web site and be civil, but I don't respect some of your views.

In regard to your comments on religon. Socially the prolife movement needs to address politics and religon, but on a personal level the only belief required to be prolife is the belief that we are just as much human the day before we are born as the day after we are born.

One more comment. My oldest daughter is the result of casual sex. Her mother and I had already broken up when we found out. Six mounths after my daughter was born her mother and I decided to try and make things work. We are now approaching our 25th aniversary and are planning to renew our vows. By prochoice standards my daughter would be dead and my wife would be a stranger. I'm happy to be prolife and happier yet that my wife is.

reply from: dadserna

Hello Mychoice
Sorry to be so late to the party
I noticed that early on you seemed to advocate for the rights of 16 yr old girls. I assume this is because it is part of your recent past that you can identify with 16 yr olds. I'll also assume that you see them as every bit as deserving of society's respect as adults. Maybe not that they should have all the exact same rights as adults, but at least they should be regarded as valuable members of our society. I could not agree more. In fact , I think the recent legal cases in which the criminals have gotten soft sentences due to the victim being young are a horrible misuse of our justice system. When a girl of five or six yrs of age is victimized they should get the same protection of the law as an adult. Are we still in agreement?
Let's go one step further. Even (or especially) if the child is a 1yr old or younger she should be protected by the law. The pro-life position is that the very same little girl desrves our protection when she is still in her mothers womb. So we are protecting the rights of the same girl, we just start before you. At what point do you feel the child no longer deserves protection? Under current law it is when the baby not recognized as a "person". Anytime humans see other humans as less than "persons" bad things happen. Slavery in America, the holocaust in Germany, the Japanese slaughter of Chinese, Stalin's starvation of Ukrainians etc. You can put yourself on either side of this issue. You have that choice. You can be a modern version of the KKK, Hitler, Stalin or Hirohito. You decide!! It's YOUR CHOICE!!

Have you ever wondered why so many of the abortions performed are done in black neighborhoods? I haven't looked up the statistics in a while but I think it was about 1/4 of the black population in America has been wiped out. If it's okay to kill the offspring of the very poor: Why not the somewhat poor? Why not those from groups who are more likely to commit crimes? Why not those who are more likely to rely on welfare?
Because its murder! There is no good reason to decide someone is less than a person. If we do, we're really saying the KKK and Hitler might have been right. Afterall were doing the same thing to a different group of people.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

originally MyChoice:
-above all: Abortion is a matter of personal choice, period. If you dont believe in abortion, don't have abortions. It is not the government, churches, neighbors, even parents place to tell someone else what they can and cannot do with their bodies.

its not just ur bodies. ever heard the phrase "eatin' for two" and to prove my point, do u remember the story in late '99 about a baby grasping a doctor's hand? well, if not, go to michaelclancy.com/story u will learn a lot.

and as far as the "the woman's life is ruined" thing, i would love to just leave u w/ "life sucks, get over it" and go on w/ my life, but thats not good enough, not when lives r at stake. if u dont want kids, u dont wanna ruin ur life, DONT HAVE SEX!!!! its not as hard as ud think, get rid of the porn, the desire will subside, trust me, ive been there. yes, u still have hormones, but its easier to control b/c its not the only thing racing thru ur mind. as far as the rape goes, i believe the punishment for an empregnated rape victim should be death, let me simplify, cuz i barely understood what i just said, guy rapes girl, girl winds up pregnant, life minimum, any adverse effects on unborn child (rapist was a drunk, druggie) cuzing mental retardation, death, etc, or harm from the pregnancy to the woman, the guy gets the death penalty, and until he gets executed, let him get a taste of his own medicine from someone bigger than him in his cell. now, for the womans perspective(not a great choice of words, but im hurrying cuz i got a oral presentation due over this and im tired). that is selfish. it may not sound like much, ohh, selfish, who cares, right???? "no greater love hath any man, than that he lay down his life for his friends." what u said is completely self-centered, u cant see past the life ur losing, to see the life the baby is losing, what if ur going to give birth to the next president or the next mother theresa? what if? what if the virgin mary wouldve aborted b/c she wasnt married, what if ur parents wouldve aborted u???? what if mine had done the same???? the world is spinning out of control. it is death plain and simple, sooner or later, usually around nine months, that baby becomes a "human" by any standards period end of story. whether born or not, u r taking a life away from this world. God bless, i kno its early, but Merry Christmas,
josh

reply from: Tam

hi josh, welcome to the forum

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

for the record, i'm 18, and i'm at a community college, so, what i know isn't so much from the public education system. God bless,
josh

reply from: Samantha678

Well MyChoice, when you are a mother of a teen and get a grip on what life is really all about, then come back and tell all us parents out here what a crock we are for protecting our kids' little hides. You are 18, you think you know what the world is all about, but you don't.

reply from: MyChoice

Let me just say to everyone that I am 99 percent with you and i completely understand your perspective.

dadserna, 12/5, 10:46:

You make a compelling arguement!! What a great post!

reply from: MyChoice

dadserna, 12/5, 10:46:

What a great post!! You make a compelling argument!!

reply from: MyChoice

oops.... i wish there was delete/cancel post button lol.

fightinforthosethatcant, 12/6, 12:16:

It's not just the baby either.

It seems like so many people would like to leave such a situation at that. To add a little something: I feel like when a woman gets pregnant, she no longer matters. "life sucks, get over it" = "oh yea, your life is completely thrown off track, but hey, good luck getting anywhere in life!"
It's so easy to see abortion in black and white: kill or not kill; When you get pregnant because you and your boyfriend had sex (possibly even with protection), would it be okay with you to possibly have to throw your aspirations, goals, dreams, opportunities, etc. away to have/support a baby? And i really do hate to sound sexist, but men wouldn't ever be in that position, so it's especially easy for men to advocate prolife. I'm not saying a man's opinion isnt just as worthy as mine, but i dont think men could ever know the full extent of how having a baby affects a woman.

That is also easier said than done. Don't have sex? I dont know exactly how far your going with this... a)do not have sex until your ready for children.... b) dont ever have sex if you never want children....

a) i agree with the logic. However, people don't work that way.

a &b) I think the problem isn't when we should have sex, but the way society fuctions. Pregnancy is sometimes inconvenient and most of the time unwanted, but its natural. Becuase the desire to have sex is one of the strongest urges humans experience, many people get pregnant before they're ready. I dont have a solution, and it may be idealistic, but shouldnt natural things come before society? Why is it so hard for a female to have a child without a husband or when she is young, etc.? Society is set up in a way that doesnt plan for healthy lifestyles when it comes to having children before (the majority) you have a career and stability. Just something i was thinking about.

On the other end, The last four paragraphs of cali1981's post on pg 2, 11/11, 4:56 proposes a seemingly profitable solution to the root of (most) unwanted pregnancies. To sum it up scarcely, he says that "Our epidemic of teen pregnancy, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases was led by a dramatic increase in sexual activity... and all the condoms and birth control pills in the world will not turn that around. It is a matter of numbers. The only solution is to reduce the sexual activity of our children, and a mixed message (the teachings of abstinence and contraception-based sex-ed), [is confusing and contradicting]. .....It's a matter of numbers. [He uses a car-seat legislation to get his point across that Abstinence only education will work for more children than it will fail.]

Human sexuality:
Something i read while searching for information: I'm not sure if i would necessarily state it like this, but it's kinda interesting - "Humans, like all creatures, have urges which lead to reproduction. Our biological urge is to have sex, not to make babies. Our "instinct to breed" is the same as a squirrel's instinct to plant trees: the urge is to store food, trees are a natural result. If sex is an urge to procreate, then hunger's an urge to defecate." -- The human urge to have sex is instinctively for pleasure. The result is reproduction which keeps a species surviving.

"With Pleasure, by Paul R. Abramson (human sexuality scientist) argues that human reproduction occurs as a byproduct of pleasure--not the other way around--and that it is the strong drive for pleasure that makes people want to have sex." ---------------The authors' central argument is that sex is practiced for pleasure, (reproduction follows) , because it is usually pleasure that provides the motivating force for human sexual activity.--Scientific American"

If you didnt get my point from the novel i just wrote, lol......Sex is not something that we necessarily choose, it's a part of being human.




I'm sorry... please restate that. I am very, very lost. (i really do want to know what your trying to say)

When i said what exactly?

I completely believe in the quality of life, just for information.
If i, personally, was going to be a vegitable for the rest of my life, i would rather be "let go" than pursue a life of merely a pulse and breath.

Cali1981 wrote:

I see his POV and cannot say it is wrong.

Let me explain where i am coming from:
My mom and dad were never married, they didnt use protection, and i was a result. I vividly recall extreme violence between my parents when they would be together from my early childhood. From birth until about 3, i lived with my mom. About age 5, my dad married my stepmother. I started living there every other weekend. From age 5 until 16, i was the center of a nasty game played by my three parents(the ringmaster being my stepmom) constantly told ugly things about one parent by the other, constantly being manipulated into the molding by one parent in spite of the other, and being tossed about like a mindless toy. There is no one in the world that i hate (and hate is a strong word, but very mildly put here) than my stepmom. It really is a wonder why i am not in the loony bin thanks to her. I was the only one getting counseling when she was the one that needed it. Not only was I a victim of emotional abuse throughout my entire childhood, I was made out to be the bad attitude teenager. No one believed i was the victim, or at least to the degree that it was; I got myself throught that, no one helped me. What i am getting at here, is that because my parents were not ready to have a child, i have already been through hell and back. I feel like i am a lucky case in situations similar to this, becuase i took what i have been through and used it positively. So many youth are not so lucky.

Perhaps becuase of where i come from, certain things are very important to me. I will not have a child until i am married (i dont agree with divorce in most cases. I will be married to someone who i will share the rest of my life with. I dont plan on jumping into anything). I will not have a child until i have a stable home for my baby. These two things are very important to me because i feel like if i have a baby without being married, there is a chance that my baby will live some degree of my own childhood, and that is the last thing i would wish on anyone. [to make something clear: the guy i am with is my first and only "boyfriend". I have very strict standards for a mate. I dont accept anything less than that.] I don't want to have step-children and i don't want my child to be a step-child. Even if the step-mom wasn't the monster mine turned out to be, it wouldnt be a life i would intentionally bring into the world.

Education is very important to me. Life and happiness is important to me. Today, i am employeed at four places and am a full time college student. I already have a 30 hr schedule packed into a 24 hr day. I have no help from my parents; i have grown up on my own and i am surviving on my own. I do not depend on anyone, not even my man. I want to finish college and be started in a career before i have a child so i can provide for them the best way possible.
I do want to live my life to the fullest before i bring a life into the world. Not only becuase I want to be happy myself and do what i want to do, but i feel like i cannot devote my life to someone else before i have lived my life already. My "goals" or "checklist" could come from being to busy being an adult as a child and another mother to my half sister and step brother, and i could see where someone would call my POV as selfish.

If I was to get pregnant even now, (but moreso if i was still in high school) I truly feel that it would be a complete derailment of my life and I would never have the opportunities i do now. Ever. It would be extrememly hard to get the education i desire. Therefore, work in various positions of minimum wage or a little higher for the rest of my life. It would be a complete change of the world i am so focused on. I feel like if i dont do things as i plan them to happen, everything will fall apart. There is no use for life to me if i am not happy. If i had a baby right now, i would drown in a life of poverty and all my aspirations would, too. Not because im lazy, becuase it's too much.

So dont have sex, right? You already know i dont buy that. Sex is much more than procreation.

I validate abortion becuase i refuse to be so caught up in the black and white of abortion, that i dont do whats best for myself and the life i am responsible for. The way i see it, i would be forever giving up a life on the right track to success and 2 lives of hapiness later - to accept 2 lives of poverty against all odds in a cycle i might not be able to get out of. I dont think its right and i dont accept derailing a life that would make me happy and enable me to give my child a better life later on. I understand why someone in my position would go through with abortion.

Adoption is something to seriously consider, but after pregnancy and labor, your already in it.

Abortion is not right in all aspects, but under circumstance of rape, harm to the mothers health, and reasonable inability to care for the child, abortion should be a choice.

Welcome to the forum, Josh!

reply from: MyChoice

Yodavater, 12/4, 10:05 :

When you make it all about the baby (leaving the mother out completely), you will never see my pov.

reply from: ScreaminIke

Really? so if i get sterilized, i may no longer rationally choose to engage in sex? an what about your nice ad hominem? Meanie.

reply from: ScreaminIke

Horse laugh and genetic fallacy. next?

reply from: ScreaminIke

... You're going to burn in hell. Talk to a clergyman today.

reply from: ScreaminIke

I think that should be legal.
What if she is threatening your life? sicko.

innuendo

even so, if i was a girl, i don't want to feed a baby for 9 months, go to doctors appointments, and go through the pain (or elective sugery) of childbirth. why do i have to do that for a complete stranger?

reply from: galen

Screamin' why did you have sex with a stranger.....
?

Mary

reply from: MyChoice

so.... he's just being obnoxious right? He's not serious?

reply from: bradensmommy

I'm assuming he is a moron, but I highly doubt that is an assumption due to his snide remarks

reply from: yoda

Since I haven't addressed anything to you that would fall into that catetory, I will assume that you have simply stereotyped me and my positions. That's something we see routinely here.

There is a middle ground between the two positions you describe, one in which BOTH mother and baby are respected and ALLOWED TO LIVE.

Are you interested in the middle ground?

reply from: yoda

That sounds like a VERY STRANGE way to defend your life, Ike.

Then don't get pregnant in the first place, Ike. That's a MUCH BETTER solution than to kill an unborn child because you are selfish and greedy.

reply from: bradensmommy

OMG how horrible is it to go and do those things for another human being? I take it you weren't loved as a child? I had a very healthy 8 lb child and had epidural. Do you know that it is painful to have an abortion as well? Have you done your research on that? I don't think you have the right ammo to come into an intelligent forum with choice BS like that.

reply from: ScreaminIke

the stranger i'm talking about is the child with whom i would be pregnant

reply from: ScreaminIke

my choice, i am serious. very

reply from: ScreaminIke

ok. ignore the pain, bradensmommy. the doctors appointment, etc, is enough. i shouldn't be required by law to do that for anybody, including myself.

reply from: ScreaminIke

also, bradensmommy, can you retort without using an ad hominem?

reply from: bradensmommy

without using a WHAT?!? Are you making up more words as you go along? I have never heard of an "ad hominYM" By what terms am I using a hominYM in the first place?

reply from: ScreaminIke

an ad hominem is an attack to the person. it is a logical phallacy similar to a red herring in that it attempts to distract from the issue (abortion) to something non-cosequential (the character of the debater).
it est

is an ad hominem. does that affect the truth-value of my argument? no.

reply from: bradensmommy

The reason why I ask if you weren't loved as a child is because you act like a baby is lower than a human being with no feelings. You really need to stop making stuff up it is really annoying.

reply from: bradensmommy

Nevermind. But you still didn't answer my question.

reply from: MyChoice

screamin ike:

The reason i ask if you are just being obnoxious and questioning your seriousness was becuase of the comment you made to bradensmommy about her religion:



I really hope you were not serious and under no circumstance is a comment like that acceptable.
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE.

Its a little funny how you ask her to retort without using character slams after most of your beginning posts. lol. You do have a clown face after all and I mean if you are trying to be funny, its working, in an indirect kinda way.

reply from: bradensmommy

yeah, I noticed that! Glad he changed it to something he has in common with!

reply from: yoda

Touche!

reply from: ScreaminIke

ok. at no point did i intend to distract from the actual debate to her religion. sorry if that's the way it seems. with the EXCEPTION of that, though, i have entirely refrained from any fallacies. my worst crime is a bit of inconsistency, but i'm working on that.

anyway, i AM serious. she doesn't want her kids to know that she's burning in hell, after all, does she? (if you respond to this statement, know that i intend to drop her religion to focus on the actual issue, so you may have the last word.)

reply from: dadserna

Dear My choice
Sorry to take so long responding back. I know it makes for a less than smooth conversation. Thanks for sticking around.
You mentioned Paul Abramson and his claim that procreation was a result of our desire for pleasure. I think he neglects to answer the real question. "Why do we find sex pleasurable?" My belief is that we were made this way intentionally. I know that is a religious belief, and many people think I should check that at the door on matters of politics. Sorry, it's part of who I am, and it stays with me. Now if we were designed that way then procreation is the main purpose and pleasure then becomes an incentive for reaching that purpose. I also believe sex is a gift given to us so that we can share our love with one another. But, that again means that it has a specific purpose( sharing of love). This implies that we should follow the intention of he who gave use this gift. I'm not trying to preach to you. I just want you to know what my POV is and to understand why I disagree with your belief that abstinence is not realistic.

As far as the rapist being executed, Total agreement

Lastly, if someday you should ever face a situation (unwanted pregnancy or whatever) that makes you feel that your life is ruined. Know that a lot of people have felt that way too. Nine yrs ago my son was diagnosed as autistic. All my dreams of teaching him baseball ,ft ball &Bball were gone in an instant. I had to pull the car over because I couldn't see past the tears. Yet here we are today, life isn't easy but it is great. The adversity which at one time threatened to split my wife and I apart, now stregthens us. Raising one kid was so much fun we decided (yes decided) to have 2 more. Anyway my point is that the very thing that you think will ruin your life may actually give your life purpose and bring incredible joy. You never know.
Wishing you the best

reply from: Tam

Just a note about autism--if your son is still young enough, you might consider looking into the Son-Rise program at www.autismtreatmentcenter.org--I hear it's excellent.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

samantha, what u said after my last post about "you are 18 you don't know what the world is all about" thing, although i am completely pro-life, that dog wont hunt, im 18, and i know all of what the world is about, liberal pro-choice is what the world is all about, the world is cold, cruel, and unforgiving, thats what science, in large part, is. think about it, u go out to a bar, or where-ever, get "laid" scuz the language, after all i dont have a grip on the real world, u get pregnant, but ur not "ready" for whatever reason, the easiest way to not lose ur edge on sum1 at work(ex) is to surgically abort the baby, i could go on, blah blah blah, hope every1 gets where im goin, same w/ cancer, u smoke(foolish) when ur around 50ish, u get lung cancer, surgically, u fight it, we all naturally wish to be independent, thats who we are as carnal humans, to live w/o any control, for all of u "parents" who do have a grip on life, im sure u remember the 70's, 80's, and 90's, where u grew up, or maybe the 60's... the point im tryin to make is that until we submit to God we all try to further ourselves by ne means necessary. that way we dont need God, ive heard a story b4, a group of scientists have successfully cloned a human, so they go to God and tell them they dont need Him any more. He replies, "okay, how about a wager, we'll do it over, creation, we'll both start from the very beginning, we both make a man from the dusts of the earth, and a woman from his rib." the scientists confer, and agree to the deal. so they pick up some samples of dirt, and b4 they can even get the lid on the container, God interrupts, "huh-uhh, thats mine, u gotta make ur own." that is the world, trying to be independent. and as for those that say to leave God out of it, tough, you cant leave the Creator out of His creation, well, that is being challenged by those such as the aclu, atheists, etc. "but as for me and my house, we will serve the lord" joshua 24:15
ps. the reason i chose this to reply to is b/c the "ur only 18" card is bull, i could point out plenty of "old" ppl that still dont have a "grip" on life, the problem w/ that is: theyve had several more DECADES to figure it out. even tho i kno every1's gonna despise me, u have my prayers neways, God bless,
josh

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

mychoice-
sorry, its been awhile, so if theres nethin i dont go over, leme kno.
this is one of ur quotes (mychoice) yes, i do have an urge to have sex, no, it is not just like any other living creature, any other living creatures purpose in life is to survive and reproduce. we, however, have a higher calling, to have companionship w/ God, now i kno, b4 all the atheists start their lil tirade(sp) leme put it this way, when was the last time any animal built a skyscraper, or won the world series, or led missions deep into the heart of china, or held a benefit for hurricane katrina relief? ya, i didnt think there would be ne arguments, however, i gladly welcome one and all. oh, sidenote, how is a humans urge to reproduce and create another human anything like a squirrel reproducing and creating a tree? how is the urge to reproduce related to the urge to store food, for some reason, i wanna say that the author u quoted might have been a cannibal. (jokingly, of course, i dont wanna get sued). however, i see where his argument is, and yes, i agree, but that is the perverted version of what sex was created for. sex was a gift from God to married couples for three things pleasure, reproduction, and i cant remember what the other is, but i got that from sum expert that, coincidently, used to be atheist, until he set out to disprove the "theory" of God. huh, interesting.

i think u said sumn about rape victims, or mayb, i thought about it, cuz i found this blog as a result of doing research for a freshman comp oral report. and we had to discuss the major pros and cons. neways, basically, what im sayin, is that if a girl/woman, whatever, is raped, gets pregnant, and loses the baby, or is harmed herself, then the rapist, should get the death penalty. ya, like i said, i was tired, i just read it, and i didnt get it. uhh, any adverse affects to the baby or the mother, such as mental retardation, death, etc, the convicted rapist gets the death penalty automatically. and as far as the let him get a taste of his own medicine thing, i was sayin that while the rapist is waiting for his execution to be carried out, he should be in general housing(jail) w/ some guys that have "those urges" but dont have ne1 but him to share in those urges. ahmm, do u get what im sayin, im tryin to not make it uhh, really graphic, but still get my point across. and the womans perspective thing, i think i simply meant that it is selfish for a woman to only think of how her life will be messed up, and not, also, thinking of how the baby's life will not only be messed up, but wont even begin, so, therefore, the human does not have a choice to fade into socty just like the majority of his/her predecessors have or to stand out and do sumn special, to come from behind, to come out of nowhere, to make sumn out of nuthn, thats what abortion does is rob the world of its george washingtons, or abraham lincolns, fdr's, martin luther kings, michael jordans, frederick douglass's, since abortion was made legal, i believe it has ended 40 million existences, look me up and check, but if i heard and remember right, how many of tomorrows leaders were killed in the last 20 to 30 yrs?

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

haha, its been a while since ive been on here, i didnt kno we had a clown join the party, much pun intended. to quote a line from keanu reeves in speed, he's "crazy, not stupid." so he know latin, and knows whether or not he is commiting(sp, too many m's and t's, too late) fallacy, that does not validate(ohh, big word, grab the dictionary for those that dont kno what the root word is-valid) neways, that does not validate his argument. this point of view is even more self-centered than mychoice's "the mother's life is ruined" argument. r u kidding me(rhetorical), u cant be serious, "oh my gosh whimper whimper, tear tear, i had this "uncontrollable" "urge" to have sex w/ everything on two legs of the opposite sex, and now im pregnant, so i have to go to the doctor, and feed a baby for 9 mths(to me, eating extra is always a good thing, haha), (oh, my favorite): and i have to go thro pain and (heaven-forbid) labor."
1) u should be going to the doctor neways, this only means u go more, but then again, shouldnt u have insurance or do they only grant that to sane ppl who do not work in the circus?
2)overeating is a good thing, except for the added weight, which comes neways, so why not? unless ur referring to after birth, then heres this tidbit, buy some formula. wow, what an idea. hmm, who couldve thought of that?
3)cry me a river, life sucks, build a bridge and get over it. tear, a lil pain, ya, i kno pain too, ive split my head open four times, three were when i was under 5yrs old, once my mom held me down while the doctors sewed humpty-dumpty(haha) back together again, and another my dad did, and i can still remember him telling me it was gonna be okay, but he wasnt able to watch, he just held me down and looked into my eyes, oh and by the way i had no pain killers, no epidurals(i kno, theyre like waist down or sumn, but u get my pt). then in a mosh pit on a narrow bridge playin ctf, my at least 250lb coach pulled out of the pile and i hit a beam and split my head open, swole up the size of a golf ball because he fell on top of me to get my flag. neways, enough about my battle scars, pain is temporary, and u can take ne number of painkillers, bytheway, just a reminder, u denounced pain being a factor. i just felt like tellin a few of my battle scar stories.
ur entire argument is based on self-centered bull. ur argument is unjustified and pointless, i have no further need to expose u for the selfish fool that u have chosen to be.

to one and all, God bless,
josh

ps. the lyrics to a relient k song:
when u opened ur eyes, did u realize
that u would be my savior?

when ur first breath left ur lips
did u kno that it would change this world forever?

i celebrate the day that u were born to die,
so that i could one day pray for u to save my life,
pray for u to save my life,
pray for u to save my life.

Merry Christmas, God bless.

reply from: Skippy

Sure pain is temporary. That doesn't mean a woman (or anyone else) has an obligation to continue participating in a situation that will cause pain.

You choose to engage in - Well, I couldn't really tell what you were talking about. Some sort of sport? - even though you know pain is a very real possibility. Plenty of other people might eschew such an activity because they don't want to get hurt. That's their choice.

Similarly, not wanting to suffer the pain of child-birth is a perfectly valid reason to have an abortion. A woman's rationale behind her choice, whether that choice is to continue the pregnancy or not, doesn't have to make sense to anyone but her.

reply from: yoda

Using Skippy's logic, killing your born child to avoid the pain of separation when it leaves home is perfectly valid. Any old excuse to kill your child, right Skippy?

reply from: Tam

Right--if anyone has the potential you pain, just kill 'em! Good philosophy. People who engage in sex know that pregnancy is a "very real possibility." Not wanting to suffer POTENTIAL pain is not a valid reason to kill an innocent child. But of course Skippy doesn't think a woman's reasons for killing her child need to be valid to anyone but herself.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

well, im glad i know "God's" opinion, i was totally wrong in thinking that ending, even just the possibility, of life was just morally wrong, how foolish and stupid of me to think that, now that i kno "God's" stance on this issue i can kill the next pitcher that hits me w/ a baseball when im up to bat, and i can tell the judge not to give me the death penalty b/c skippy, sorry, God, said it was okay. haha, i wonder if they have high speed internet on death row? ne1 kno, if not, this could b my last post, of course that is, if i was to believe the god skippy. later, im bout to go to a track party for my sis, im so proud, tear, haha, later everybody, and if im not on here for the rest of the holidays, God bless, Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year,
josh

reply from: dadserna

Sure the pain is temporary. That doesn't mean a woman (or anyone else) has an obligation to continue participating in a situation that will cause pain.
Similarly, not wanting to suffer the pain of child-birth is a perfectly valid reason to have an abortion. a woman's rationale behind her choice, whether that choice is to continue the pregnancy or not, doesn't have to make sense to anyone but her.

Would you at least agree that she has an obligation to minimize or reduce the pain inflicted on the baby if it can be done through reasonable measures? You see, I don't think she has the right to inflict pain on the baby. Or more accurately to have a doctor inflict pain on the baby. I know that you probably don't agree with me on this , but if it can be minimized thru reasonable means why not? At least the doc should have to advise her about the various options.

reply from: Skippy

Actually, I do agree with you. I think anaesthetizing or euthanizing a fetus that has reached a point where it might feel physical pain during the abortion procedure is a good idea.

reply from: dignitarian

I have been away from this forum for a while and I have to admit I had a hard time finding any interesting discussion where I felt I could join in and make a contribution. Regrettably, I especially noticed the brainless exchanges involved with “ScreaminIke”. My advice; ignore him.

At any rate there appears to be some conversation about the justification of abortion as a simple matter of avoidance of pain. This is lame.

If we are talking about the killing of a human being, the only valid question is whether the human being in question should be legally considered a “person” deserving of the basic rights of human existence; i.e. life, liberty, and happiness. The fact is there are only two possibilities here.

1. If the human being in question is not to be considered such a “person,” no amount of pain at all would be necessary to justify such killing.

2. On the other hand, if the innocent human being is to be considered a “person,” no amount of pain can justify its killing.

Regards,

Dignitarian

reply from: ScreamingIke

i disagree, dignitarian. it is a person. we may kill it.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

whatsup dignitarian, ya, i got on a day or two ago and i think it was the clown started on about how abortion can be justified simply by pain. i hadnt been on in a couple of weeks, so, i was kinda lost. we had some meaningful debate, but this is so far left, its ridiculous.

clown, for the record, we are not debating whether or not u CAN, or CANNOT kill, obviously, u CAN kill an unborn baby. what we, those of us that are done playing w/ clowns, are discussing. ur "argument" only proves our point, this is simply murder, period, end of story.

oh, and dignatarian, just because u ignore a growth on your throat, it doesnt mean that ur throat cancer will heal itself. u either have to isolate it, or treat it. we cant ban him, so lets shoot down every argument he comes up w/ after all, we are, quite obviously, we are right.

God bless to all, and welcome back dignatarian.

josh

reply from: ScreamingIke

i contend that there are cicumstances where the killing of "innocents" is permissable.

reply from: dignitarian

To "fightinforthosethatcant":

Thanks for your response and the welcome. I have to admit I didn't read every single message the clown has entered thus far, but the ones I did read did not entice me to look for any others that actually might make some sense. In addition, the disgustingly shallow and de-humanizing "mantra" he leaves at the end of his messages, although it is very telling, is a sort of material that is not healthy to read over and over again and it certainly is a sort of material not healthy to write.

But since you mention it, I will agree to this much; hereafter, if the clown somehow formulates any statement that could even remotely be construed as a valid argument, I will respond (the mindless mantra notwithstanding).

I'll try to stay in touch over the next couple of weeks.

Regards,

Dignitarian



reply from: ScreamingIke

you can call me ike, dignitarian.

reply from: dignitarian

Alright Ike, I'll bite. I see you are on-line. So what do you bring to the table?

reply from: ScreamingIke

not in the mood any more.
see... i came here, and my first posts were so smart. they were so strong. and then people like bradensmommy just... said stupid things. eventually, my will to fight the subject got worn down entirely. now i ridicule. however, if i could have a forum free from petty insults, i would LOVE to discuss with cali. Yoda's not to shabby, either. but cali's my boy. we could circle each other forever....
anyway... you want a dead baby joke , just ask. if you want serious debate, ask the kiddies to keep their mouths shut while adults are talking.

reply from: dignitarian

Ike: I see you're still cooking up a response. Okay, I'm going to go out and ice skate out on the pond for a while, hope to see some indication of intelligent life when I return.

Regards,

Dignitarian

reply from: ScreamingIke

no... i meant what i said.

reply from: bradensmommy

Um, if you ever read my posts before your immature a** came in here you'd see I'm actually pretty smart. Its people like you that make me say sarcastic things to them. And don't single me out, I'm not the only one who has said things to you.

reply from: ScreamingIke

it IS you, bradensmommy. and domsmom. you both make personal attacks on me all the time. galen is actually becoming quite formidable. but that means there are 3 people here that can discuss intelligently with me. the mom squad is not among them.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

haha, i have already addressed the "sub-topic" of "justified killing." the only two ways that u can justify murder is while at war or in self-defense.

absolutely, dignatarian. its always good to kno there is another willing to fight the good fight. God bless.

oh, and clown, until u stop acting like 1 and writing foolish and childish statements, u will not be referred to as nethin more than that of what u r appearing as.

to the rest, Merry Christmas and God bless,

josh

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

haha, hate to break it to u clown, but this is what i do, if u cant consider me formiddable, ur in the company of the greatest minds in history, such as ronald reagan, fdr, the real ike, dwight david eisenhower, abraham lincoln, thomas jefferson, winston churchhill, just to name a few. course i wouldnt doubt at all if u looked up to marx, hitler, lenin, or stalin.

God bless, to all,

josh

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

why cant we be friends, why cant we be friends... everyone together, haha. sry, its late, and ive had way too much caffeine.

bradensmommy... i kno what ur sayin, its not just u, im makin him look like a**hole too, his pathetic excuses for arguments rnt interesting me, i need sum1 that puts up a fight, and then, on top of that, he makes an excuse "not in the mood anymore." i guess my sarcasm alone has offended him. which is why he is not acknowledging me. i think its hysterical, actually. here he is sayin theres only a few of us that r formiddable opponents, and yet, he does nuthn to prove he, himself, is formiddable for us. all he does is say that u can justify abortion by pain... least thats all ive gotten out of his posts, mayb im missin sumn, but this is gettin really borin really quick, so, instead of just comin in here to waste my time and others, if it doesnt get interestin soon, ill just find another forum.

aight, ill talk to u all later, hopefully, God bless,

josh

reply from: Jachin

Just as a matter of priciple... That's bunk. Ever heard of "Butterfly Kisses"? It's an organization directly analogue to "NAMBLA", consists of lesbian pedophiles and is situated in the netherlands. You can even visit their website if you want to. No, sorry, I just don't buy it. There are mothers who rape their children, women who misuse the advantages they are granted by law, and women who rape men, and women who beat their husbands up for fun. For most people it's next to impossible to imagine, because no one, especially not men, talk about it, but it's a fact, and I really do not like the way you want to put yourself in the "Victim By Nature"-position.

Sorry, but that's discriminating and sexist, no less so than it is racist saying that all blacks are by nature criminals because most inmates in state prisons are black (I'm not sure if this is even true, it's just meant to be an analogy, so please don't shout at me).

reply from: yoda

I see the pot is calling the kettle black again.........

reply from: bradensmommy

I agree with you Josh, although I think he likes me which is why he always likes to single me out.

reply from: Jessie

I agree - Sure it is your personal choice to do something wrong, but usually when a person chooses to to something wrong there are consequences.

If you kill a baby outside the womb, no one would accept it. Why does a baby in the womb have to be treated different? They are both babies in my mind.

reply from: dadserna

Skippy
I'm glad that we are able to find this small area of common ground. Whether a woman should have the right to kill her fetus or not can be debated. While we may not agree on many things, it does seem pretty clear that there is no potential positive thing that can come from the baby feeling pain. There are some potential negatives however. If the mother should later regret her decision, the pain inflicted on her fetus will add to her guilt. It makes sense to me that taking the babies pain into consideration is a reasonable measure.

OOps sorry I didn't see that a whole other page was started. This was in response to Skippy agreeing to take the baby's pain into consideration. Thank goodness we can edit.

reply from: dadserna

Earlier in this debate My choice was talking about a woman's PLEASURE.
Then it switched to a woman's PAIN
Intermittently Ike distracts with personal attacts.
We should keep in mind that their whole way of thinking is based on the ME ME ME way of life. Afterall, isn't that the whole basis for abortion? On the one hand he is at a distinct disadvantage since reality does not support his cause. On the other I wonder how many "Ikes or MY choices" change their mind. We may have the truth on our side, but are we winning anyone over? If any of us expects intelligent debate from the other side we will always be disappointed. Ike's childish rants at least maintain contact and hopefully some day if he is faced with this decision, our comments will have some influence.
Thanks
Jay

PS: Josh, if you leave doesn't that mean that in a practical sense he won?

reply from: ScreamingIke

i HATE marx. he was an idiot. he can't produce wealth. hitler was a mad-man. lenin and stalin were a combination of the other two.

and what personal attacks have i made, yoda? i think i may be able to count 5.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

by declaring that u dont admire marx, i have decided to refer to u as ike, however, this privilege can still be revoked. and i would certainly hope that u can count to 5.

i agree dad, but, it doesnt matter if he wins or loses, if i am not amused and nothing is being accomplished, why waist my time here, when i can be elsewhere and possibly persuading someone to chose life and not death, to chose hope and not gloom, to chose to take responsibility for their actions. i would rather let one babbling idiot think he won and save a life, rather than continue on debating with the afore mentioned idiot who will never change.

bradensmommy, thank you.

to all, a merry christmas, and a good night, or morning, whichever the case maybe. haha. later, God bless,

josh

reply from: yoda

Ike: rather than rehash all your condescention and disparaging remarks, why not just turn over a new leaf and stop doing it?

reply from: Tam

LMAO

Funny, I must be one of the "kiddies" today, because the only response I can think of to this post is that little dance grade-schoolers do where they wave their arms around like chicken wings and yell, "Chicken! Chicken! Bawk! Bawk! Bawk!"

You can pretend all you like that it is someone else's fault that you can't hold your own in a debate here, but it's pretty clear to everyone who is currently the most juvenile person on the forum, whose posts are all but worthless, and that person is you, Ike. (But if it would make you feel bigger, why don't you lob a cheap shot at me for pointing it out? That'd be a real switch. LOL)

reply from: ScreamingIke

*shakes head* i meant what i said.

reply from: Tam

You actually think that you started out "smart" and "strong" here?! You actually believe that you started out with intelligent, thoughtful posts, but were "worn down" by the inanity of others?

From someone whose first several posts here were ended with a signature something like "OMG! LOL! fag! 11! 11! rofl! 11!!!!!!!11!!!!1 lol!" ????

Please, refresh my memory about one single intelligent contribution to this forum you have made. Just one.

reply from: ScreamingIke

signatures with no bearing on the content of the post.

reply from: Tam

What was that insightful content again? I must have missed it.

reply from: ScreamingIke

seems to have been deleted. guess it's lost forever in the sea of censored material.

reply from: galen

uh oh a conspiracy bufff......let me know when Mulder and Scully come back from thier ship and proffer your evidence.

MAry

reply from: ScreamingIke

i am not a conspiracy buff. it was a joke. and an opportunity to "forget" what i posted in order to strengthen my argument.

reply from: yoda

Forgetting what you have posted seems like a beneficial activity, Ike.

reply from: MyChoice

I've got some thinking to do about these posts. I have a lot to say in response to just about everyone. However, i cannot word it right and get the right point across. (ive made that mistake once...)

I will say this to everyone:

This “debate” that the clown has started, for goodness sake, ignore his ignorant comments. Until he posts something credible or debatable, don’t play the game. I think he might just be trying to push buttons, anyways.

This is very serious to me. I am torn between pro-choice and pro-life and it IS a matter of life and death.

To the flippin’ clown:

playtime is over. Debate if you want, but read the posts, have something logical and credible to say, don’t be an idiot. I’m assuming your pro-choice, and the reason I assume is because with what your posting, all I see is craziness. If this is the “normal” pro-choicer, it’s no wonder why I got such the welcome I did when I started the topic. Ike, you are doing nothing but making it more obvious to pro-lifers that pro-choice stands on NOTHING. All your doing is making it easier for the pro-life argument. If you care about the debate, you will stop the nonsense and think about what you say after you have done research and have a reason to post anything. If you don’t care about the topic, don’t post. It is SO not funny that you want to play around with something so important as wheter or not a life should be sacrificed or not. You might as well get another icon becuase the clown just isn't funny AT ALL anymore.

reply from: yoda

Well said, MyChoice. Hopefully, the clown is gone for now.

reply from: galen

nice to see you back Mychoice.

Mary

reply from: Tam

MC, you remind me of myself. I mean that as a compliment What I mean is, there are two kinds of prochoicers. There are the ones like Ike--and as you can see, they give all of them a bad name--and there are the ones like you. I was like you, although I'm sure I said some pretty ridiculous and ignorant things, the way Ike does, I didn't act like a jerk the way he does. Neither do you--although you have said some pretty ignorant things, just as I did, you didn't say them in a jerky way, you were just trying to stand up for what's right. And that's good. One of the biggest revelations I've had about this issue is that prochoicers and prolifers are generally (ok, there are a few nuts in every barrel, but most of them) trying to stand up for what's right--it's just that they have different ideas about what's right. Prolifers are standing up for justice and truth--justice, for the unborn child who has committed no capital crime and has had no due process of law, and truth, about what abortion really is and its effects on everyone, from the unborn child, to his/her parents, to society at large. Prochoicers are fighting for good things, too--liberty and individual rights. They are fighting for women's freedom to make choices and for the rights of a person to control her own body. Those, too, are noble causes.

The problem is that although prolifers are fighting for truth and justice, prochoicers are not really fighting for individual rights and freedoms. They think they are, because they're standing up for women, but by ignoring the individual being killed in an abortion, they are neglecting to stand up for the rights of that individual, and the liberty of that individual. They forget the old adage that my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins. They want to draw a line on the life of a human being, a line that says, "on one side of this line, you are a person and we will stand up for your rights, but on the other side of this line, you exist as a non-person, who has no rights, not even the right to live, so we will not stand up for you then, but will fight for the right of your mother to have you killed if you pose the slightest inconvenience to her."

They try to talk about how "what if the life of the mother is at stake" but neglect to mention that there has never even been a law in any state of the US that prohibited abortion when the life of the mother is in danger, so that is just a red herring. The issue has nothing to do with life-or-death for the mother--her right to terminate a pregnancy that is threatening her life has never been enfringed upon and would not be impacted at all by the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The issue has nothing to do with the lives of women.

They also try to say that women were dying in droves from illegal abortions before Roe was passed. That, too, is a lie. Abortions were being performed illegally pre-Roe by the same people who performed them legally post-Roe. The "back-alley butchers" that we hear about, the bogey-men of the abortion issue, are still around, performing abortions legally and butchering women legally. Women are sterilized and killed in legal abortions, just as they were sterilized and killed in illegal ones. I'm sure fewer women would die during rapes if only rape were legal! But that is not a good reason to legalize rape--because rape is a despicable act that should be prohibited, not permitted, by a just society. The same is true of abortion.

I am glad you understand that it is a life-or-death issue and are taking it seriously. To be honest, I don't really care how you feel about the legality of abortion, I am more interested in inspiring people to work to discourage abortion and encourage life. Sure, that'd be easier with the help of law enforcement (imagine how hard it would be to prevent murder if it were legal!), but it's still possible to help save lives through efforts such as sidewalk counseling and crisis pregnancy centers.

I don't have time to write more today but just wanted to say I liked your comments.

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

haha, clown u lost ur privilege of being referred to as "ike," he was a much greater man than u can even comprehend.

glad to c that ur back mychoice, and also, glad to c ur at least on the fence and acknowledging the fact that it is life or death, not just "abortion clinic: you rape 'em, we scrape 'em." if it would change ur mind, i would log on to this forum everyday and put up w/ the clown, so long as u chose life. oh, and well said.

haha, mulder and scully, i like that. nice, galen.

clown, r u serious, or r u just tryin to 'push buttons" cuz u really have not made any intelligent remarks except for "i hate marx" however, that is besides the issue of this forum. so, i dont really feel like leavin nethin else, so merry christmas, and God bless,

josh

reply from: dignitarian

To "MyChoice"

Quote: "This is very serious to me. I am torn between pro-choice and pro-life and it is a matter of life and death."

In light of your statement, I offer the following three facts as concisely as I am able.

FACT 1: We (as a culture) have a choice.

We can choose to reserve the title of LEGAL PERSONHOOD for only the selected HUMAN BEINGS with certain qualities; such as degree of physical maturity, self-dependency, mental acuity, or even gender or race. Or we can choose to attach the title of LEGAL PERSONHOOD to every BEING OF HUMAN ORIGIN regardless of any such subjective qualification. Good or bad, this is a choice any society is free to make.

FACT 2: If we choose the former (to restrict LEGAL PERSONHOOD to only the specific human beings that qualify), we have just annihilated the most fundamental basis of civilized political philosophy; i.e. the fundamental rights of human existence are inalienable.

In the event this is a little confusing to you, I am referring to the notion that the basic rights of human existence (life, liberty, happiness) are granted by God and not government. Traditionally, we (Americans) have believed that these are the kinds of rights that cannot be legitimately granted nor removed by any man (Dred Scott and Roe v Wade not withstanding). Thus, in the classic American view, the legitimacy of a government simply reflects the degree to which that government either succeeds or fails in the protection of these rights.

If this leaves you scratching your head, you’re not alone nor are you to blame. This is a vastly important feature of our cultural inheritance that we simply have failed to pass on to our youth.



FACT 3: All instances of human tragedy throughout history, whether civil injustice, human slavery, or genocide; they all share a common thread. And that common thread is the separation of LEGAL PERSONHOOD from every BEING OF HUMAN ORIGIN.

We simply can never afford to separate LEGAL PERSONHOOD from every BEING OF HUMAN ORIGIN.

Regards,

Dignitarian

reply from: Tam

Wow, Dignitarian, excellent summary of the issue of legal personhood and its relationship to the abortion issue. Nice job.

reply from: yoda

Very well stated. This is the reason that I believe that many decades or perhaps centuries from now, our descendants will look back upon this time as one of extreme, horrible barbarism.

reply from: dadserna

My choice
Dig hit the nail on the head. Once we start denying legel personhood to one group of people, whats to stop society from doing the same to others? For example, say some one wants to remove the legal status of personhood from the terminally ill at the request of their family members. They would make arguements that taking care of the terminally ill cost to much, interupts the lives of others, may cause depression and financial hardships, etc. On the other hand killing Grandpa off early would allow the family to inherit the wealth he aquired without it being wasted on doctor bills. Before you know it we'd be killing off sick people left and right. Old people would be afraid to sneeze. LOL
Anyway the point is, once the line is crossed how do you decide where to stop. Some would allow killing of this group others would allow killing that group. Would you or I be part of those expendable groups? What is really different about your arguement for abortion as compared the the arguements for killing other groups?
Thanks
Jay Serna

reply from: galen

Well said Dignit.

Mary

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

very well said dignitarian. r u involved in govt, in any way? if not consider it, u get great benefits, and if u get elected president, u get secret service for life. unfortunately, we have to waste a few of them on bill clinton. but that is a different matter...

somethin i thought of at the beginning of "fact #1." this is directed towards mychoice, but ne1 is welcome. slavery, the ownership of another "human" that is treated or regarded as less than a "human." does that make slavery morally acceptable? no. obviously, not. abraham lincoln used it to use the "moral high ground" and make the south look bad. was it right, no, was it accepted, yes. and eventually it divided the country based on the different types of economy, and a terrible war that often pitted brother against brother was fought. now, dont take this as me saying that i believe a war will come, directly or indirectly, because of abortion. for the most part, americans are pretty much against abortion, at least partial birth's. i cant remember the numbers, but they r staggering. yet it is still an issue b/c it is accepted, we cannot allow it to become something that could cause hate and strife b/t americans. the same goes for gay marriage, i kno its off the subject, but i feel it needs to be said. gay marriage is morally unacceptable, period, end of story. we cannot allow it to become "accepted" or "tolerated" in america. if u wish to continue to have God's grace and favor, stand up and fight for whats right. i will not allow the land that i love to be taken out from under God's protection b/c "we arent supposed to judge others." judge to the extent that u will be judged. we need righteous leaders that can judge and lead our nation. we are a blessed and chosen people, and, to quote spiderman, with great power, comes great responsibility. God bless and merry Christmas,

josh burr

reply from: MyChoice

fightinforthosethatcant, 12/16, 2:44


The only reason why i brought up the "uncontrollable" "urge" to have sex was simply because I was trying to make sure everyone understood it. By no means do i think its an excuse to "have sex w/ everything on two legs of the opposite sex". I understand that the urges can be controlled and they very well SHOULD be. Lets try to be reasonable here. For those who lets just say have a steady relationship with someone and they aren't married yet, and are possibly in high school or even college, more than likely they are going to have sex at one point in time. Hopefully using protection, but are human and "in love" and young.... it's very, very rational to assume people in this situation are going to have sex before they are married and before they are ready/have the means to raise a child. That’s the problem. Pregnancy is a very real possibility. And pregnancy is not necessarily a choice, but a life-long, serious, expensive, top-priority commitment.

"And now im pregnant and have to go to the doctor and feed a baby for nine months, and go thru pain and heaven-forbid labor"
I don't feel that it's my OBLIGATION, to give birth to a child and everything that comes with it if that’s not what I want. Engaging in sex almost never means two people WANT to have a baby. I can only speak for myself and what I know from personal experience. In my situation, I have sex with my boyfriend on a regular basis and even though the biological outcome is pregnancy, that's not the reason we have sex. I am, however, on birth control because i don't want to get pregnant. It has worked for a yr and a half and hopefully until i need it to. (just to make it clear, i know it wasn't a personal attack, I’m just using myself as an example) But as far as me or anyone else having uncontrollable urges and being a whore (to be completely honest! and the term goes just as well for males as females) and ending up getting pregnant and wanting an abortion is not necessarily acceptable. That’s not the situation I am addressing here.

I do feel like sexual urges should definitely be (and are able to be) controlled. How many people on here can actually, honestly say they never had sex until they were ready for a baby? Is it just a matter of luck and educated choices?? A career, education, and the other things that are considered “lifestyle” when addressing abortion, are things YOU need to ultimately survive, and to be able to support your family later on. When those things are threatened (because of pregnancy), that’s where I come to abortion. If there was any other way (like perhaps removing the child from the womb and trying to save it, instead of killing it) then I would be all for it. I don’t necessarily support abortion, I just don’t have any other solution.


To have an abortion (with what im talking about) is not about the pain. The pain is not the real problem. It’s the life me and my baby have to live after having the baby, it’s the opportunities I no longer have or that are so much farther from reach than they used to be.

My whole thing with abortion isn’t about killing babies because they are “less of a person”. I have a problem with what pregnancy causes. This isn’t a feminist post and I don’t mean to make it seem like its about women‘s rights??, the following is just what might trigger an abortion to be considered and/or the crucial unfairness that makes pregnancy so awful for a single woman that is not ready for a baby. A woman can’t just walk away from a pregnancy. If two people have sex and get pregnant, the man is free to go, no strings attached. And regardless of whether either one of them wanted a baby or not, the woman is stuck with a baby, period. America/the govt?? is just now making child support somewhat of a big deal. It is detrimental to a woman’s life (not life/death, but pursuit of happiness, stability, options, education, just bout everything that could possibly affect someone’s life) if something like this happens. A man isn’t damaged in the least sense. He doesn’t have to walk around with a pregnant belly without a ring, or go through the nine months of pregnancy and everything that comes with it, or go through labor, or have a child dependant on you for 18 years while you kill yourself working at a dead end job for hopefully a little over $5.15 an hour because your not superwoman and can’t juggle a full-time dead end job, school, and a baby at once. That’s true life for a lot more women than I’m willing to accept. Besides the physical aspect, a man doesn’t have to have his life interrupted and derailed by the child he is just as responsible for. And furthermore, he doesn’t have to live with the guilt or the negativity associated with abortion because all he has to be a part of is the making of the baby, nothing else is written in stone. He’s allowed to simply walk away, when the woman’s only way of “walking away” from it, is abortion. It’s just not fair.

As far as rights of people, (my right to swing my arm ends when your nose begins), It’s not okay to impose on the rights of the human inside it’s mother, but at the same time, is the child not imposing on the mother?

I don’t think abortions right. I don’t think it should be okay to kill a child because it’s an inconvenience or any other reason. I just don’t have a solution for the problem.

Pro-choice to me isn’t as much about fighting for the rights of a woman to have control over her body as it is a woman having control over her future. It can be called selfish, but people have an obligation to their own life before they have an obligation to someone else’s. Moreover, and as much as I don’t want to, I’m going to bring it up again: A woman is selfish to “want to live her own life without the obligation of a child”, but when a man “wants to live his life without the obligation of a child”, nothing is said/done; just because he can simply walk away instead of having an abortion.

There are issues on both sides of abortion that could not ever come to a compromise. However, I think that if one makes the choice to have sex, if they "accidentally" get pregnant, it's just a consequence they are going to have to deal with. They should accept the set-back of carrying a child for 9 months and delivering it, and if they don't feel they can support it, give it up for adoption. The other option (abortion) is denying someone life. As unfair as the situation seems to me (im kinda between a rock and hard place) nothing is more valuable than a life.

I dont mean to start another 7 pages on gay marraige, but bc it was brought up...im just curious...

josh

[I totally don't mean to offend you and i don't want you to take this in the least bit as a personal attack]

I don't have a problem with you being religious, and it's not my place to "judge" you and religion, but what do you say to people who aren't christians?

Perhaps what you think is "right" is not what everyone accepts as right.

"american" does not mean/describe "christian" and i feel like you don't recognize that. America is made up of A LOT more than christians. The rights, values, and beliefs of everyone should be recognized and protected. The gov't should not sway one way or the other; there should not be a certain religion printed/exposed in american money, schools etc.

What do you mean by "chosen" and "god's favor"?

reply from: yoda

Whoever told you life was fair? Who said it was supposed to be? Men go off to die in wars and chasing criminals, and die early of heart disease, is that "fair"? I could quote a number of "unfair" things that happen to men, but what's the whole point? What does fairness (or a lack of it) between the genders have to do with killing babies??????? What has the baby ever (intentionally) done to you?

Here's a novel idea: If you can't think of a moral solution to the "problem", then don't do anything immoral. How's that?

NO obligation you may have gives you the RIGHT to take an innocent life!!

If you can't see that, then you are intentionally blind, and nothing anyone can say will open your eyes.

reply from: dignitarian

To "MyChoice"

Welcome to life. It's not a fairy tale with the perfect answers to every child's question.

Think about it a minute. Some years back you were born into this world and you had nothing to say about it, and one day you will leave this world and you will still likely have nothing to say about it. Do you really think you're the one in charge here?

It's wonderful for you to be asking all these questions, but you are missing all of the questions that could possibly give meaning to your life. You are completely overwhelmed by the issues that will impact your life in the next year or (at most) the next decade. What about asking the questions that will ultimately determine whether you will make a positive difference in this world? What about asking the questions that will make a positive difference generations from now? What about asking the kinds of questions that could impact eternity?

The only thing you have demonstrated to me thus far is just how amazingly immature, materialistic, and superficial the human being can be if left neglected. Don't you care whether any particular supposition you make is actually true or not? Don't you care to understand anything about love or goodness? Don't you care to understand what could truly make life beautiful? Don't you even care to wonder why you're here and why your life even exists in the first place?

To ask anything less is a devaluation of the gift of life. Open your eyes.

PS: I'm sorry if this might seem like ranting. Perhaps I grow impatient at times.

Regards,

Dignitarian

reply from: dignitarian

To Josh:

You asked whether I was involved with government at all.

Well, I don't mean to disappoint, but the closest I can come up with is that I work on one particular type of airplane (the E-3A) that is owned by the US Air Force.

What do you do?

Dignitarian

reply from: galen

Dear Dig,

It might help to remember that when a person ( and I may be wrong about this) is in a struggle for the basic necessities of life, that is what they tend to stay focused on. The greater questions may be pondered, but when you have to find your next meal, it tends to be very hard for you to stay focused on the spiritual side of life. It becomes even worse when you are responsible for someone else's care. Please take this into account. i am sure that you have the best of intentions, but when she says it is a matter of life and death to her to make these descisions, she may well be speaking the cold hard truth.

Mychoice, I hope that you are finding the help you need.... you can PM me if you think a private discussion might help the situation.

Mary
I'll follow you into the dark.

reply from: dignitarian

galen:

I appreciate your thoughts. Perhaps you are right and my reading of this situation is off significantly.

Dignitarian

reply from: dadserna

My choice
I can't help but wonder if you read your own posts? First you say that premarital sex is either practically unavoidable or at least acceptable despite the potential consequences. Then you go on to say that those consequences are so terrible and unfair to the woman. Maybe if more young girls focused on the consequences first they would find premarital sex easier to avoid.
Also, among the unfair things you said the mother must endure you did not list the following. Being ripped apart limb from limb. chemically burnt to death, skull crushed, injected with poison. I guess that's because these things only happen to her baby. Do you consider this FAIR? Whats worse if the baby happens to survive the procedure and still make it out alive, she is usually either set aside to die or killed. Ocassionally some inconsiderate babies manage to live. Of course there is another procedure where the baby is born and is outside of the mothers body except for the head. The base of the skull is punctured and vacuum is applied to suck out the brains and collapse the skull. It is then delivered the rest of the way. If you still want to whine about how life is unfair to the adult woman, then you are off the charts in selfishness. In which case Why should any of us care about your hardships? No matter what they are they don't compare. I'll save my sympathy for those who show it to others.
Lastly, why don't you picture yourself a dozen yrs from now with, let's say 2 kids. Do you really see yourself saying "wow I'm so glad I killed little johnny so that the rest of us could have a better life". Won't your other kids be so proud of you? Just think what kind of life you could have had if you had killed off one more. You would still have one. Boy, I hope the younger one doesn't resent his older sister being alive. It's probably because of her that he didn't get the latest playstation. What a rip off. I can hear him already, "Bobby got the playstation 10 and all I got was a big sister". You don't think he might grow up to be one of those guys that gets the girl pregnant then walks away do ya. Where could he have learned that from?
Jay

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

to mychoice-

in that entry i was only making a statement about ur argument, not towards u. i was merely referring to u, while showing the clown how simple-minded and selfish that his arguments(if u can define them as arguments) were. but since u commented on that subject, ill b glad to let u have my input.

ive been at work all day, i had like 3or4 hrs of sleep, and then i went christmas shoppin(after work, not sleep) so i am going to try to make this short...simply put, w/ few exceptions, all abortion comes down to, is selfish choices that lead to decisions to, again, b selfish and do away w/ the unborn baby, or to b "forced" (by fear of rejection, or simply not believin its right), to b "forced" to make self sacrifice and self*less* decisions. all this boils down to is life-life is choices and the consequences thereof. u choose to b "selfish," if i may b so blunt(sp). u choose to b selfish and have sex out of wedlock, for pleasure. so, u enjoy ur nite w/ ur bf or gf, and generally, (not including every1, ok, this is an example) so, generally, bf/gf relationships dont last very long, so, uve had ur fun w/ that person, but they piss u off and u move on. well, low and behold, u find out ur pregnant, condom broke, w/e...great right an adorable lil baby. but from the pov u presented, the womans life is ruined forever, right. well, u made ur choice, no pun intended, to have fun and make "love." so, now, w/o abortion as an option... u must take responsibility for ur actions and make selfless decisions and sacrifice, a lot. this is a quote from a poster that used to hang in our baseball locker room in hs: most trade what they want most, for what they want right now. and it applies to any area of life. think about it, dwell on it... the main objective of abortion is to simply get out of taking responsibility for ur actions.

oh, and i believe u said sumn about the term "whore" applying to guys as well, ur wrong, when guys have sex w/ many partners, they r referred to as "pimps." that is my understanding, and every young mans definition of it...a "man-whore" is a "good" thing, at least by societies standards. i hate to break it to u, but its scientifically proven, men crave sex, men need sex. why else r we such "a**holes" etc, simply b/c of guys that r only in a relationship for sex, whenever they get tired of her, they get rid of her. guys need sex, girls need a "commitment, relationship" w/e and when u dont look at it as anything more than that, there will always b tension, b/c a good relationship cannot be based on sex or an emotional attachment. hopefully, u agree that guys, usually, do the chasing, therefore, they r after sumn. duh, what else???? women have sumn precious and sacred, also sumn men desire greatly, therefore when women have sex w/ many partners, they r referred to as "whores." i personally do not refer to women like that, btw, even if she doesnt treat herself like anything more than that. oh, and when a girl is getting what she wants from a guy, he is referred to as "whipped." it is what it is, sry if its not fair, but thats life, r u tough enough to deal w/ it?

to dignatarian: with as well-spoken as u r, u should consider running for, at least, a local office. and i am 18, entering my 2 sem in college, and i work at an albertsons near my school. so, ya, pay sucks, every1 is getting clearance presents, haha.

i dont feel like reading ne other stuff, so i wont even continue the "gay" topic tonight.

good night all, God bless, and Merry Christmas

josh

reply from: dignitarian

Thanks for the encouraging responses a few of you pro-lifers sent in regarding my messages. I also thank you for your responses that took issue with some of the things I wrote. It's good to get the feedback.

One thing I have noticed though after submitting a significant number of detailed statements on the issue of abortion is this; thus far not once has a single "pro-choice" minded person responded to anything I have stated. Not once. It is true that I've only written about 50 messages, but most of these contain at least one significant contention with a substantial amount of backup rationale.

Ironically, I started contributing to this forum in order to arouse some argument from so-called pro-choicers (to "pick a fight" one could say) against clearly stated pro-life contentions. But thus far, no bites. The only direct responses I have received thus far include encouragement or friendly advice from pro-lifers.

My point is this; to all you pro-lifers, believe the truth is on your side. The challenge is to isolate and then to articulate the most fundamental aspects of the pro-life philosophy............and to pray.

Dignitarian

PS: To any "pro-choicers" out there; I'm still waiting.

reply from: MyChoice

josh, 12/23, 12:07

This has to be the smartest thing you have said on this board. That is the cold hard truth "abortion is to simply get out of taking responsibility for your actions". I have thought a lot about my situation and the what ifs... and although for me it would be more beneficial to have an abortion if i got pregnant, (it is selfish, but im trying to stick to casues and effects, not necessarily opinions of what it's called?? ... if that makes sense....) It was a choice i made, regardless of how much it would hurt my own life, i must deal with the consequences and either parent or choose adoption.



WWWWhatttt??? lol

No... its scientifically proven that humans crave sex, need sex..... not just men... women have the same sex drive as a man... we are just "socialized" not to.

and jachin, this is exactly what i mean when men are punished, but excused, might i say, for "rape" or "needing sex"... Its a mans "nature" to want sex ..... this whole paragraph written by fightnforthosewhocant sums it up with an excelent view from society for acceptable male behavior.

girls dont need a commitment or relationship (the same way "guys need sex") that is not "biological" or "factual"... if thats where you were going with that

come on now. beside the subject, thats chauvinistic.... and "therefor they r after sumthin" isnt a back up for the argument. women and men go after the ladies/guys they want for reasons they want something, but it doesnt always mean sex. (usually it is sexual attraction, but thats why males and females are attracted to each other in the first place)

it seems like everything you say comes from a religious stance, period. I understand that religion is very important to you, but i dont agree with a lot of anything from the bible.... the main messages- most of the 10 commandments- are good rules to live by, but nothing else do i accept as reality or "the way things should be". [ you need to know that to understand where im coming from, the same way i need to know that religion IS a part of you and thats why u say the things you say]

People are "socialized" to believe women have something precious and sacred... and women should have the same sexual freedom as men. ... the meaning behind whore goes for both male and female... men shouldnt be able to go and have sex with many partners while women are looked down upon for it. I dont think anyone should just go and have sex just to be having sex.. i think it should mean something to people... but regardless of how many agree with me on that, its merely an opinion and not everyone sees it that way.

why do people see the need to tell others what is acceptable and not when it doesnt have anything to do with them? (in general) (abortion, sexuality, marraige, etc)

lol.... why? ive heard it and everything, but thats simply a joke between guys and only for possesive females.... not in a relationship where two people care about each other....

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

dear dignitarian, thank u. continue to fight the good fight. God bless, merry Christmas, and a happy new year.

dear mychoice, u have no clue where im coming from on the guys r biologically made to need sex thing. so, lets drop that, its only a different view on life. which is why u have already had sex and i havent. b/c i believe it is a sacred gift from God to married couples. (im sry if u havnt had sex, i thought i had read that in 1 of ur posts.) so, lets stick to the argument at hand. yes, everything i am coming up w/ is based on a "religious" viewpoint, but i am not religious, ive seen those ppl fall. i try to make everything i do based on God's plan for my life, b/c w/o Him, my life would b screwed up like u cant imagine. i have a love and desire to please Him b/c of what He has done for me. (that lil sent His only begotten Son to die on the cross thing.) i pray that God will show Himself to u that in some way, shape, fashion, or form, has u as in awe as i was when i realized what ive been put here to do.

to one and all, may God bless and keep you, may He make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you, may He lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

merry Christmas and happy new year,

josh

reply from: dadserna

Josh
Stay pure brother. Wish I had. I didn't and now I can see the effects. My marriage is great but there has been a lot of pain that could have been avoided.
Jay

reply from: dadserna

originally from My Choice
women have the same sex drive as a man... we are just "socialized" not to.

That a load of feminist bull. The differences in the male and female sex drives are well documented. Do you really think that the multitude of hormones that the human body creates do not affect sex drives? Good grief why do you think teenagers are such a pain in the butt. Their hormones are raging. Now males and female produce some hormones the are different and some that are they same. However those that are common to both male and female are not produced in the same amounts. Furthermore hormones also require receptors to do their work. This a complex interaction. Your claim that we are the same smacks of dishonesty. Either you are being dishonest or you are simply parrotting the lies of the feminist movement. It would be more accurate to say that the average woman is every bit as capable of desiring sex as much as the average man. But the way that the desire is stirred is usually very different. Her hormones triggers are different than his hormone triggers. Her body's reactions to those hormones are different than his body's reactions to his hormones.
More importantly, as women become more sexually available outside of marriage what do you think happens to men's behavior. You must have seen or heard of guys that are real when they are chasing the girl but turn into jerks once they get her. Multiply that increase in the number of jerks and jerk like behaviour and you have a downward spiral. Thats why society has the right to get involved. It affects everyone.

it seems like everything you say comes from a religious stance, period. I understand that religion is very important to you, but i dont agree with a lot of anything from the bible.... the main messages- most of the 10 commandments- are good rules to live by, but nothing else do i accept as reality or "the way things should be".

I agreed with you 100%. Then I actually read and studied the Bible. Odd that I was able to disagree with something that I had never read. I think I actually disagreed with people who said they were christians. As I learned more I realized that some of them were better examples than others. None of us is a good representation of Christ. In an ideal situation, our earthly parents demonstrate godly behaviour and this gives us a little taste of what our relationship to God should be. A bad relationship makes it harder for us to see and accept God. So please consider the possibility that your view is clouded. The conventional way of thinking is that hardship gives you a broader perspective. In some ways I think it does , but it also obstructs in others ways.

why do people see the need to tell others what is acceptable and not when it doesnt have anything to do with them? (in general) (abortion, sexuality, marraige, etc)

Abortion----If we turn away from abortion, should we also turn away from murder, rape,etc.

Sexuality, marriage----You didn't say whether you meant the general devaluation of sexuality and marriage or if you were refering to homosexuality. Since you were general I will be also. The ones who suffer the most from any and all of this is the children. I mean were talking about whether or not to kill them. Whether or not they will grow up in home with both a father and a mother. I know that there are some great single parents out there, but were talking about how this effects society as a whole. These kids will be our future leaders of society. Is it in society's best interest to have the best police officers, teachers, doctors, etc? Of course it is. Then it is also our business how these children are raised.
Thanks
Jay

reply from: galen

MC,

from a medical standpoint on sexuality, Dadserna is correct. the male of the speciese is driven to preform more often and with more partners than is the female. females have a biological need for a 1 on 1 relationship with a male who will provide for her offspring. ( at least in primates) This however does not mean that the male she bred with is necessarily the male she habitates with , and that, i think, is where you and a great many others are confused. Nature figured out that with our species, having infants with brains that require such a lot of growth time, it is necessary for them to be attatched to thier mothers for a longer duration than for most other mammals. therefor the desire to see her offspring raised and protected is of longer duration for the females of the species. The males however have a drive to pass on thier biological material to as many offspring as possible. they do however, have the drive to take care of the ones they know are thiers ( or at least the ones they belive this to be so).the males however do not stay at it as long as the females. Humans are primates and as such these drives are encoded into our DNA. They are what we all must put up with as a species. We can socialise ourselves into diffrent forms of behaviour MOST of the time, but we each must grapple with what nature is lurking in the backs if our brains.

Mary

reply from: MyChoice

dadserna:

I got carried away saying "a females sex drive is the same as males". Your words are more accurate.

I did read the bible, not cover to cover, but i have read a significant amount. I think that Christianity is more of a good thing than bad. Even though i dont feel the need to buy into it, i think that there are too many people out there that, with out the fear of God, would do some pretty crazy stuff. I think that it's great for those people who have "seen" or "felt" god in their life and live for him because of thier own choice and discovery; similarly, the biggest problem i have with "christians" is the numerous people that only believe becuase they were told to and are afraid to question and truthfully believe so they go through life claiming christianity and blindly following a religion they narrowly understand. My boyfriend is a devout Christian and was upset by the fact that i didnt believe. thats when i took the time to reconsider my faith and in that month or so, I found even more disturbing facts that lead me even further from god.

Wow, what a great explaination!

reply from: MyChoice

dadsderna:

What im trying to say is complicated. I kinda feel like it's practically unavoidable just because of the hormones we have and we hit puberty at such an "undeveloped' age.... not so much to say that its unavoidable becuase we can't control our urges and we don't have brains (even though a lot of people act like that). Then i go on to say that those consequences are so terrible and unfair to the woman. Yes. Males and females hit puberty at "early" ages (referring to the fact that 9-11 yr old girls and (i dont know the ages for boys, really) [maybe] 14 yr old boys arent anywhere near adulthood and necesarily ready for adult decisions. However, with puberty comes more hormones, so to speak, and bla bla bla. We both have sexual desires/feelings. The "unfair and terrible" consequences could be changed becuase they are more social than biological. I really really dont mean to sound like a die-hard feminist... i truly want the best for everyone and i want equality. Possible causes for the unfair social consequences we are speaking of could be (and doesnt necesarily mean "on purpose", but merely "not taken into consideration") becuase the country is ran by a remarkable percent of men. To a man, these things arent in need of consideration (hopefully) just becuase men do not experience them; and furthermore, it's somewhat beneficial to him.

Even though I agree with you on some degree when you say "if girls were more focused on the consequences..." but instead of accepting "thats the way it is", look for a deeper reason and fight the problem at the root, instead of the bud that it becomes.

I dont. And i see now that it is not the answer. I thought abortion was right in the situation where a woman does not have the means/educaton to raise her child. I came to this conclusion, becuase i felt i had no other choice, when i see now that, all that does is exchange one life for the other; it doesnt fix the real problem. It actually fixes one's problem by creating a problem for someone else.

Somewhere beyond the raging attitudes and outraged posts there are messages that educate each other on why things are and gives someone a more rounded view of things they simply could not see before. When I came to this board, I was an eighteen year old girl who thought that abortion was acceptable in areas where i see now, that it shouldnt be. i think it's important to remember that there is nothing that can stand in your way to learn (age, etc.).

Things that i say and have said on this board are things that i honestly feel and believe (at that time) and without the information and discussion from people that have more experience than i do and do not believe the same way i do, I can't possibly know otherwise. Ideas and beliefs are changeable, you just have to be willing to accept that maybe you are wrong, have the will to become educated, and the courage to discuss. I would rather be called selfish and told I'm wrong than live that way and never know the difference.

reply from: dadserna

I would rather be called selfish and told I'm wrong than live that way and never know the difference.

My Choice
Wow!! Thats probably one of the most honest things I've read on this or any other forum. In my younger days I was prochoice and not well informed. I think you are miles ahead of where I was at 18. Please consider that much of what you hear and see is propaganda aimed at advancing the social or political agendas favored by the Hollyweird crowd. It's not a real world perspective. They have bombarded us with so much misinformation that it has become accepted as fact, by many. Keep your eyes open and you'll be able to spot the bs.
Thanks
Jay Serna

reply from: dadserna

original by my choice
[
similarly, the biggest problem i have with "christians" is the numerous people that only believe becuase they were told to and are afraid to question and truthfully believe so they go through life claiming christianity and blindly following a religion they narrowly understand.

I agree. We all need to have a stronger faith. I was not raised in the church, but if you had asked my parents if they were christians, they would have said "yes". If they were christians why didn't they bother to teach me? Instead, I grew up somewhere between hating God and not believing in him. I see a lot of people who grew up in the church and don't know the basics of christianity. It is sad. I hope their faith grows strong enough to get them through difficult times.

My boyfriend is a devout Christian and was upset by the fact that i didnt believe. thats when i took the time to reconsider my faith and in that month or so, I found even more disturbing facts that lead me even further from god.

You know what used push me away? When a pro athelete would score 4 touchdowns and at the end of the game when he was being interviewed he would say how he wanted to thank God for blessing him with the abilities he has. I thought , "this guy thinks he is so special that god is watching over him and making his life so great." Which also meant that god was not watching over me because my life stunk.
I think I could have been the poster boy for jealousy. Now I understand that these atheletes were just thankful for EVERYTHING they had. Like other christians they give God credit for everything good and thank him for getting them thru everything painful. I don't know what facts you found to be "even more disturbing" but continue to study and ask questions about it. You never know, it could be that, like me, you misunderstood something that seemed pretty obvious.
Thanks
Jay

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

thanks dad for the encouragement. when i say stuff like that around my peers, friends, and classmates all i ever get is like a "well, good for u" or "ya, thats good," i never get anytype of encouragement like u gave. thats great. thank you.

im not gonna read the rest of this stuff right now, although i did read sumn from galen, and i dont mean to tell u i told u so, but i did tell u so. haha, aight, im gonna go shower now, thank me later, God bless,

josh

reply from: fightinforthosethatcant

oh, and to mychoice, just a quick post: dont play the chauvinist card, its bull. its biologically proven, whether u believe in Christianity and the way God made things or not, that doesnt change the fact that God made it that way. did u ever stop to think that u r the one being "socialized." im the one w/ the clear outlook, b/c i try to c it thru God's eyes, metaphorically speaking of course.

and for the record, women deserve to b treated w/ the utmost respect possible, thats why i do. u dont hit a woman, u dont lie to a woman, u dont cheat on a woman, u dont cuss around women, u dont spit in front of women, u open the door for ur date, U PAY, u treat a woman better than she treats herself(which is sayin a lot hopefully, depending on how she treats herself.)

moral of the post boys and girls is that the chauvinist pig card wont fly around here. cows r the only thing that fly around here, not pigs. haha, hope someone got that, if not...uhh... ill just leave now.

later, God bless,

josh

reply from: yoda

My Choice
Wow!! Thats probably one of the most honest things I've read on this or any other forum.
I must agree. Would that I had been that wise at 18. Would that I could say for sure that I'm that wise now.

reply from: Tam

My Choice
Wow!! Thats probably one of the most honest things I've read on this or any other forum.
I must agree. Would that I had been that wise at 18. Would that I could say for sure that I'm that wise now.

Yeah, I agree. Wise and candid words. Thanks MC.

reply from: Tam

Wow . . . interesting insight. I wonder how much of that is really the case--especially with teenagers old enough to be well aware of abortion. It must exist. Kids telling siblings that mom should have aborted them, etc. How sad.

reply from: Tam

I agree, Jay. It's never too late to start fresh, but better to avoid making the painful mistakes in the first place. I, too, wish I had.

reply from: cali1981

There is so much good stuff being said on this thread.

reply from: galen

another good debate bumped...
mary

reply from: Shiprahagain

Just as an addendum, there are many sex slaves here, too, and the sex slavery that goes on in Cambodia is illegal there as well. Moreover, most sex tourists (those who go abroad to take advantage of sex slaves) are American -- which brings me to my point, so long after many Americans still see no problem in slave labor and if abortion ends, there are those who will still see no problem with it, have them in America, and go abroad to procure them, but that doesn't mean that the fact somethings cannot be completely irradicated or the fact that people will always have ways to do immoral things doesn't make it wrong.

reply from: Sigma

While of course whether many people believe the same thing doesn't make it right, when nearly half of abortions worldwide are done in countries that have restrictive abortion laws you won't likely eradicate it.

reply from: melissa1020

its so sad to see such a smart women say such awful things. first of all on the first topic you brought up, i was 16 when i got pregent by my 22 year old boy friend and i wish my mother would have stood up and put him in jail because i was to immuter to make a choice like that for my self older guys hide who they turely are to lure younge girls in . on your second topic a baby is not made of one person but two so what if the father wants the baby will take care of the baby and the women wouldnt have to have any thing to do with the baby if thats what she chose ,but she want thourgh with the abortion any way he lost his right to chose if she gets the right to chose shouldnt he since he made this baby to? and another thing is that its not only unmarried uncommited couples that have abortions its married women that think its not the right time in there lifes to have another child or there first so in that respect your missinformed. we view things the way we do because we fell an unborn baby is a person not a blob of tissue not cells but a person made up of two people not just one with its own dna. so please do so research on the things you support so you can fully understand them. on another note plane parenthood dose not tell the whole turth and the only one option of the 3 that they say any thing good about is abortion so its not fair to people that vist there site to see thats the only choice they support. please research this more and see the silent scream you just go to the web site www.silentscream.com.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics