But, abortion is a private issue between a woman and her conscience; this is why personal history is essential.
I know what I am talking about. Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. We do not have all cushy lives; for some of us it is very hard. The funny thing is that when I was a teenager I was pro-life until the situation became impossible for me to continue with a pregnancy.
As for Noah the magic word here is WE, you have a wife only 2 children, obviously some money; it is not like you are really having major problems.
When I was a child in my small village in Quebec women were literally forced to have children by the Church, I know it is hard now to understand but it happened every day, and there were families between 8 and 23 children. Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.
Yes there were hundred of thousand of clandestine abortions done every day in the 50's for example; some women died, some had extensive physical damage and some went to prison. I certainly do not want to go back then. Again when you are desperate you will do anything. I for one would have this clandestine abortion.
That kid was conceived in a less-than-optimal situation...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Speaking of less-than-optimal situations, I just posted in the "Spanking" thread about the crack baby who was a part of my life for too brief a period of time. The situation he came out of was 20 times worse than you can even imagine. IMO his mother was just about the biggest asshole who ever lived (she's probably dead now) but at least she didn't abort that little baby boy. He's happy and healthy now.
But, abortion is a private issue between a woman and her conscience; this is why personal history is essential.<hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I guess the baby doesn't count yet. After all it is just a mass of cells that cannot survive on its own.
[quote]I know what I am talking about. Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. We do not have all cushy lives; for some of us it is very hard. The funny thing is that when I was a teenager I was pro-life until the situation became impossible for me to continue with a pregnancy.<hr></blockquote>
You are placing your experiences on all women. Sorry, but your experiences are only part of the whole equation. Some have abortions because it is convenient. Some have them because they are desperate like you were. And some have them because of severe medical reasons involving the life of the mother.
[quote]As for Noah the magic word here is WE, you have a wife only 2 children, obviously some money; it is not like you are really having major problems.<hr></blockquote>
You do not know my situation any more than I know yours. You don't know how much money I have or if I am even telling the truth to you. The same is true of you, I only know what you say and nothing more.
[quote]When I was a child in my small village in Quebec women were literally forced to have children by the Church, I know it is hard now to understand but it happened every day, and there were families between 8 and 23 children. Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.<hr></blockquote>
So they forced them to have sex with their husbands? Forced them to conceive? The church cannot make you do anything. They can put forth a decree of what they beleive to be right but nobody was in the rooms with a clipboard making sure that thing happened. And what is up with this broad generalization that all men consider women to be baby factories? And who is making their decision for them? Certainly not me.
[quote]Yes there were hundred of thousand of clandestine abortions done every day in the 50's for example; some women died, some had extensive physical damage and some went to prison. I certainly do not want to go back then. Again when you are desperate you will do anything. I for one would have this clandestine abortion.<hr></blockquote>
Really, hundreds of thousands a day? How do you back that number up? Just pulled it out of mid air as far as I can see.
And I am suprised to hear that your health is not importnat enough to you that you would consider having a "clandestine abortion" rather than to have the child and then give it up for adoption. It seems that you would want to have an abortion at all costs, even that of your life? Why? <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
I'm sorry Noah, but you really sound like you don't even have a vested interest in the abortion debate. You're already married. Your kids will be perfect. What does it matter to you?
I suppose if it makes you feel morally better or something...
And what's with the talk of strawmen? That is a real life situation I described to you. What false choices?
Anyways, it seems like the only information you've taken in about this whole debate stems primarily from your church and probably a few slandered, biased and not very informative websites - like that weak Sun Tzu site. Not a very open minded approach.
Either way, you still haven't proven how making abortions illegal will stop them. Criminalizing abortions and the women who have them would be nothing more than a moral victory for right wing Christians. It wouldn't help, or stop, a thing.
Name one activity that has been banished because it was made illegal.
I don't like abortions any more than you do. But be realistic.
Eh, this thread probably will keep going in circles....
Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is such a ridiculous statement I can't believe I'm even responding to it. Just because a man is Pro-life DOES NOT mean he is trying to control a woman. Nor does it mean he thinks of her as a "factory to make children".
Irrational, broad generalizations like that weaken your arguments.
Eh, this thread probably will keep going in circles....
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Its true of any abortion debate. The same things are said over and over and over again. Everyone is guilty, pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
I haven't seen anything new from either side.
Imagine if the Pro-lifers took the money they spend on campaigns and protests, added it up with the money Pro-choicers spent on the same thing and put it towards sex education in schools. Especially under priviledged schools where the pregnancy rate is higher.
Over 1 million abortions a year is high no matter what side you're on. I think everyone can agree that we can lower that number by educating.
Too bad we probably couldn't shift this thread from "whats your opinion" to "what can you do to help?"
Its true of any abortion debate. The same things are said over and over and over again. Everyone is guilty, pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
I haven't seen anything new from either side.
Imagine if the Pro-lifers took the money they spend on campaigns and protests, added it up with the money Pro-choicers spent on the same thing and put it towards sex education in schools. Especially under priviledged schools where the pregnancy rate is higher.
Over 1 million abortions a year is high no matter what side you're on. I think everyone can agree that we can lower that number by educating.
Too bad we probably couldn't shift this thread from "whats your opinion" to "what can you do to help?"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, now that would actually be worthwhile! Wont happen.
I'd also like to see more money/time spent on educating people on adoptions - specifically open adoptions. Of course, some people have 8 kids, keep two adopt out six and still get an abortion or two (don't believe me read some of the stories at the adoptionboards). But still, for a lot of people who might learn from the first mistake, adoption is a much better, for everyone involved, choice. Though not exaclty easy - or even close to easy. It's a lot like a death in the family to go through an adoption actually. But I digress.
The abortion has existed since the beginning of our history in a time where it was bannish, and where the people who practice this was named sorceress.
In France before the law for abortion, there where more abortion than it is now. Many times it was practiced in so poor conditions that many women where obliged to go to hospital in order to cure them. Some of them die, others lost the ability to have others childrens in the future.
Simone Weil (ex minister of healthcare) made a law in order to make abortion legal. In order to have an adoption , women must have first an interview with one people , to try to see if there isn't any solution to his problem else than abortion (generally they won't listen, but it's important to expose every other alternative) and then there is advices concerning contraception. After one week of reflexion, the abortion can be made.
The major reason, why the number of abortions have decrease is the information about contraception and his massive access.
Concerning Church, you must know what was the Catholic point of vue in the early 50. My father was an army officer in a ship during the algerian war, a priest (catholic) give them advices concernings the Ogino's method in order to have sex only when the wife have chances to be pregnant ...
Yes it look like a joke, but the story is true , and my father has never forget this story.
In a personal point of vue, i am pro choice , but a word without abortion should be better, but it's an utopia and i prefer that abortion is legal.
I'm sorry Noah, but you really sound like you don't even have a vested interest in the abortion debate. You're already married. Your kids will be perfect. What does it matter to you?
I suppose if it makes you feel morally better or something...<hr></blockquote>
Sure, I am married. Yes, my kids are healthy so far. And if I had another one that had downs syndrome or something like that what should I do? Kill it? That is the recommendation that I gurantee I will hear from all the doctors. After all it will never be a productive member of society.
And asking what it matters to me, why do you post on here about any of the things you post about. Do you have a vested interest in all of those things? Did you know anyone in Iraq who were killed by Saddam while he was testing his biological weapons? Vested interest? I would doubt it. Do you say it was wrong of him? I would hope you do. Why do you care? Does it just make you feel morally better...?
[quote]And what's with the talk of strawmen? That is a real life situation I described to you. What false choices?
Anyways, it seems like the only information you've taken in about this whole debate stems primarily from your church and probably a few slandered, biased and not very informative websites - like that weak Sun Tzu site. Not a very open minded approach.<hr></blockquote>
I explained the strawman to you. Don't like it, then don't agree and talk to the point, don't pretend that I did not explain my POV.
As far as the Sun Tzu site, I found it interesting, and I had hoped it would spark a debate that was worthwhile. It seems to take some more controversial sites to get people talking. I guess nobody cared. Oh well. That has nothing to do with this thread though.
[quote]Either way, you still haven't proven how making abortions illegal will stop them. Criminalizing abortions and the women who have them would be nothing more than a moral victory for right wing Christians. It wouldn't help, or stop, a thing. <hr></blockquote>
Yeah, because only right wing Christians have a problem with abortion.
If you criminalize abortions you are not criminalizing the women by default. you criminalize the act, the women then makes a CHOICE to break the law thus making herself a criminal. So i guess pro-choice would still apply there as well...
[quote]Name one activity that has been banished because it was made illegal.
I don't like abortions any more than you do. But be realistic.<hr></blockquote>
You cannot banish activities thorugh law. The law is there to provide the stigma that makes it less desirable to do the action in question. Do you get the urge to go out and kill someone because it is illegal? Does it make you want to steal a car more because it is against the law? If it were legal I guarantee it would happen a lot more. (both murder and theft)
You cannot banish activities thorugh law. The law is there to provide the stigma that makes it less desirable to do the action in question. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly. And there are better ways to reduce the number of abortions than making it illegal. I would argue that France's (see powerdoc's post) way of allowing abortions helps more people than just making them illegal altogether. If you criminalized abortions, what amount of support, both financiall and through counselling, do you really think the government (or whoever) would provide for abortion candidates.You want to make it illegal, but then what?
Either way, I really don't feel like debating this anymore. It's proven rather pointless for both sides.
Exactly. And there are better ways to reduce the number of abortions than making it illegal. I would argue that France's (see powerdoc's post) way of allowing abortions helps more people than just making them illegal altogether. If you criminalized abortions, what amount of support, both financiall and through counselling, do you really think the government (or whoever) would provide for abortion candidates.You want to make it illegal, but then what?
Either way, I really don't feel like debating this anymore. It's proven rather pointless for both sides.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't know, the government pays money now for counseling and and other things for recovering drug addicts. And that is an illegal activity.
However, I agree that telling women of all their choices is a good thing when they are considering an abortion. It is sad the number of stories I have read where they have stated, they never told me of any choices, they just pushed the abortion as the only way. I hope that the stories are wrong. I really do.
I think everyone agrees that more education is needed, but there's probably even disagreement on WHAT education:
Abstinence? Condoms? The pill? Adoption?
My stance: Anti-stupidity/Pro-common sense
AFAIC, it's all nice and dandy to say that abortion is whatever it is, and adoption is whatever IT is. The only problem is that this would not be an issue if people weren't getting pregnant.
From what I understand, the way to get pregnant is to have sex. Period. If EVERYONE practiced abstinence who didn't want to get pregnant, there wouldn't be a problem.
What really irks me are these people who talk about the woman's choice. Guess what, any woman who's considering having an abortion made her choice when she had sex, whether protected or not (in most cases: rape and incest excluded).
Now, I understand that it's not so easy to say "stop having sex everybody!," but there ARE other ways to achieve what sex provides without putting yourself or mate at the risk of getting pregnant (see the thread in AppleOutsider entitled "Masturbation")
MY POINT: Take some responsibility, people! If you don't want to get pregnant or get your mate pregnant, find a way so that it won't be an option. Make the right choice from the beginning instead of making the wrong choice and paying for it with an unwanted pregnancy. Sometimes common sense isn't rocket science, and it certainly isn't here. In the entire history of humanity, most people have been able to figure this out and deal with it.
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but the rationalizing away of common sense is appalling to me.
From what I understand, the way to get pregnant is to have sex. Period. If EVERYONE practiced abstinence who didn't want to get pregnant, there wouldn't be a problem.
What are you talking about ? the Ogino method ?
The Ogino method (abstinence during the supposed period of fertility) does not work. The cycles of women does not have the stability recquired to work at 100 %. Forget it.
Condoms works , as sterilet (intra-uterin device : sorry i don't find the translation) and pills (different form).
<strong> Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. </strong><hr></blockquote>
No.
My long (academic) history of embattlement with feminism and women's studies began over this point: Abortion IS a convenience. I defy you to find another word to describe its utility. Convencience does not automatically make abortion good or bad any more than 24 hour instant tellers could be construed as good or bad simply because they are convenient, but they are 'convenient' -- that is the word that describes them best. What I think about the morality and legality involved matters not.
If one finds this branding objectionable, I ask why? To the abortionist, it is not a 'life worth birthing' (I'm trying to be precise here), that ought to make an abortion something easy to get, to do, to live with. Accessibility. They want it. That IS convenience.
Condoms works , as sterilet (intra-uterin device : sorry i don't find the translation) and pills (different form).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Condoms and the pill USUALLY work, but even they aren't fail safe. The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.
Condoms and the pill USUALLY work, but even they aren't fail safe. The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.
Like I said, it's common sense, folks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
you know, oddly enough i dated a few girls that i absolutly would not risk getting pregnant. know what i did, i didn't have sex with them. seemed to work pretty well.
then i met my (now) wife. it was a little tougher that time. didn't do as well as i'd hoped.
in any case, it's easy to say that if you don't have sex you won't get pregnant, and lo' and behold it's true.
just have to learn to keep your pecker in your pants, or have him keep his pecker in his pants. if he can't keep his pecker put away, find someone else.
<strong>The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.</strong><hr></blockquote>I brought this up earlier in this thread (like 3 months ago?) - a large percentage of unwed and pregnant teens had sex with an over-21 male. In many cases, that's technically rape.
The reason I bring this up is that you said it's a choice the woman has to make.
Maybe it's not rape in the usual sense, but if it's an older man taking advantage of a young girl (in many cases a minor), pressuring and manipulating her, is that still a black-and-white situation? I don't think so.
I don't think that 16-year old girls are these helpless creatures subject to the whims of any older man. But we all know that date rapes do occur - the woman isn't threatened with a knife, but she has heavy pressure put on her by a man whose goal in life is to get laid at all costs.
What if a large percent - say, a majority of teen pregnancies, like some studies suggest - occur in this type of scenario? How would you apply your simple common sense?
Comments
I know what I am talking about. Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. We do not have all cushy lives; for some of us it is very hard. The funny thing is that when I was a teenager I was pro-life until the situation became impossible for me to continue with a pregnancy.
As for Noah the magic word here is WE, you have a wife only 2 children, obviously some money; it is not like you are really having major problems.
When I was a child in my small village in Quebec women were literally forced to have children by the Church, I know it is hard now to understand but it happened every day, and there were families between 8 and 23 children. Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.
Yes there were hundred of thousand of clandestine abortions done every day in the 50's for example; some women died, some had extensive physical damage and some went to prison. I certainly do not want to go back then. Again when you are desperate you will do anything. I for one would have this clandestine abortion.
[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: Jane ]</p>
<strong>
That kid was conceived in a less-than-optimal situation...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Speaking of less-than-optimal situations, I just posted in the "Spanking" thread about the crack baby who was a part of my life for too brief a period of time. The situation he came out of was 20 times worse than you can even imagine. IMO his mother was just about the biggest asshole who ever lived (she's probably dead now) but at least she didn't abort that little baby boy. He's happy and healthy now.
But, abortion is a private issue between a woman and her conscience; this is why personal history is essential.<hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I guess the baby doesn't count yet. After all it is just a mass of cells that cannot survive on its own.
[quote]I know what I am talking about. Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. We do not have all cushy lives; for some of us it is very hard. The funny thing is that when I was a teenager I was pro-life until the situation became impossible for me to continue with a pregnancy.<hr></blockquote>
You are placing your experiences on all women. Sorry, but your experiences are only part of the whole equation. Some have abortions because it is convenient. Some have them because they are desperate like you were. And some have them because of severe medical reasons involving the life of the mother.
[quote]As for Noah the magic word here is WE, you have a wife only 2 children, obviously some money; it is not like you are really having major problems.<hr></blockquote>
You do not know my situation any more than I know yours. You don't know how much money I have or if I am even telling the truth to you. The same is true of you, I only know what you say and nothing more.
[quote]When I was a child in my small village in Quebec women were literally forced to have children by the Church, I know it is hard now to understand but it happened every day, and there were families between 8 and 23 children. Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.<hr></blockquote>
So they forced them to have sex with their husbands? Forced them to conceive? The church cannot make you do anything. They can put forth a decree of what they beleive to be right but nobody was in the rooms with a clipboard making sure that thing happened. And what is up with this broad generalization that all men consider women to be baby factories? And who is making their decision for them? Certainly not me.
[quote]Yes there were hundred of thousand of clandestine abortions done every day in the 50's for example; some women died, some had extensive physical damage and some went to prison. I certainly do not want to go back then. Again when you are desperate you will do anything. I for one would have this clandestine abortion.<hr></blockquote>
Really, hundreds of thousands a day? How do you back that number up? Just pulled it out of mid air as far as I can see.
And I am suprised to hear that your health is not importnat enough to you that you would consider having a "clandestine abortion" rather than to have the child and then give it up for adoption. It seems that you would want to have an abortion at all costs, even that of your life? Why? <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
And I was not talking about money. Obviously when you are two and in love everything is easier.
And it is true probably not every day but certainly every year.
I suppose if it makes you feel morally better or something...
And what's with the talk of strawmen? That is a real life situation I described to you. What false choices?
Anyways, it seems like the only information you've taken in about this whole debate stems primarily from your church and probably a few slandered, biased and not very informative websites - like that weak Sun Tzu site. Not a very open minded approach.
Try perusing some more real life stories:
<a href="http://www.adoptionboards.com"; target="_blank">www.adoptionboards.com</a>
Either way, you still haven't proven how making abortions illegal will stop them. Criminalizing abortions and the women who have them would be nothing more than a moral victory for right wing Christians. It wouldn't help, or stop, a thing.
Name one activity that has been banished because it was made illegal.
I don't like abortions any more than you do. But be realistic.
Eh, this thread probably will keep going in circles....
[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: seb ]</p>
<strong>
Isn't there a moment in your lives gentlemen when you consider a woman to be more than a factory to make children, deciding FOR THEM what to do because of course she cannot take the right decision for herself.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is such a ridiculous statement I can't believe I'm even responding to it. Just because a man is Pro-life DOES NOT mean he is trying to control a woman. Nor does it mean he thinks of her as a "factory to make children".
Irrational, broad generalizations like that weaken your arguments.
[QB]
Eh, this thread probably will keep going in circles....
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Its true of any abortion debate. The same things are said over and over and over again. Everyone is guilty, pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
I haven't seen anything new from either side.
Imagine if the Pro-lifers took the money they spend on campaigns and protests, added it up with the money Pro-choicers spent on the same thing and put it towards sex education in schools. Especially under priviledged schools where the pregnancy rate is higher.
Over 1 million abortions a year is high no matter what side you're on. I think everyone can agree that we can lower that number by educating.
Too bad we probably couldn't shift this thread from "whats your opinion" to "what can you do to help?"
<strong>
Its true of any abortion debate. The same things are said over and over and over again. Everyone is guilty, pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
I haven't seen anything new from either side.
Imagine if the Pro-lifers took the money they spend on campaigns and protests, added it up with the money Pro-choicers spent on the same thing and put it towards sex education in schools. Especially under priviledged schools where the pregnancy rate is higher.
Over 1 million abortions a year is high no matter what side you're on. I think everyone can agree that we can lower that number by educating.
Too bad we probably couldn't shift this thread from "whats your opinion" to "what can you do to help?"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, now that would actually be worthwhile! Wont happen.
I'd also like to see more money/time spent on educating people on adoptions - specifically open adoptions. Of course, some people have 8 kids, keep two adopt out six and still get an abortion or two (don't believe me read some of the stories at the adoptionboards). But still, for a lot of people who might learn from the first mistake, adoption is a much better, for everyone involved, choice. Though not exaclty easy - or even close to easy. It's a lot like a death in the family to go through an adoption actually. But I digress.
In France before the law for abortion, there where more abortion than it is now. Many times it was practiced in so poor conditions that many women where obliged to go to hospital in order to cure them. Some of them die, others lost the ability to have others childrens in the future.
Simone Weil (ex minister of healthcare) made a law in order to make abortion legal. In order to have an adoption , women must have first an interview with one people , to try to see if there isn't any solution to his problem else than abortion (generally they won't listen, but it's important to expose every other alternative) and then there is advices concerning contraception. After one week of reflexion, the abortion can be made.
The major reason, why the number of abortions have decrease is the information about contraception and his massive access.
Concerning Church, you must know what was the Catholic point of vue in the early 50. My father was an army officer in a ship during the algerian war, a priest (catholic) give them advices concernings the Ogino's method in order to have sex only when the wife have chances to be pregnant ...
Yes it look like a joke, but the story is true , and my father has never forget this story.
In a personal point of vue, i am pro choice , but a word without abortion should be better, but it's an utopia and i prefer that abortion is legal.
I'm sorry Noah, but you really sound like you don't even have a vested interest in the abortion debate. You're already married. Your kids will be perfect. What does it matter to you?
I suppose if it makes you feel morally better or something...<hr></blockquote>
Sure, I am married. Yes, my kids are healthy so far. And if I had another one that had downs syndrome or something like that what should I do? Kill it? That is the recommendation that I gurantee I will hear from all the doctors. After all it will never be a productive member of society.
And asking what it matters to me, why do you post on here about any of the things you post about. Do you have a vested interest in all of those things? Did you know anyone in Iraq who were killed by Saddam while he was testing his biological weapons? Vested interest? I would doubt it. Do you say it was wrong of him? I would hope you do. Why do you care? Does it just make you feel morally better...?
[quote]And what's with the talk of strawmen? That is a real life situation I described to you. What false choices?
Anyways, it seems like the only information you've taken in about this whole debate stems primarily from your church and probably a few slandered, biased and not very informative websites - like that weak Sun Tzu site. Not a very open minded approach.<hr></blockquote>
I explained the strawman to you. Don't like it, then don't agree and talk to the point, don't pretend that I did not explain my POV.
As far as the Sun Tzu site, I found it interesting, and I had hoped it would spark a debate that was worthwhile. It seems to take some more controversial sites to get people talking. I guess nobody cared. Oh well. That has nothing to do with this thread though.
[quote]Either way, you still haven't proven how making abortions illegal will stop them. Criminalizing abortions and the women who have them would be nothing more than a moral victory for right wing Christians. It wouldn't help, or stop, a thing. <hr></blockquote>
Yeah, because only right wing Christians have a problem with abortion.
If you criminalize abortions you are not criminalizing the women by default. you criminalize the act, the women then makes a CHOICE to break the law thus making herself a criminal. So i guess pro-choice would still apply there as well...
[quote]Name one activity that has been banished because it was made illegal.
I don't like abortions any more than you do. But be realistic.<hr></blockquote>
You cannot banish activities thorugh law. The law is there to provide the stigma that makes it less desirable to do the action in question. Do you get the urge to go out and kill someone because it is illegal? Does it make you want to steal a car more because it is against the law? If it were legal I guarantee it would happen a lot more. (both murder and theft)
<strong>
You cannot banish activities thorugh law. The law is there to provide the stigma that makes it less desirable to do the action in question. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly. And there are better ways to reduce the number of abortions than making it illegal. I would argue that France's (see powerdoc's post) way of allowing abortions helps more people than just making them illegal altogether. If you criminalized abortions, what amount of support, both financiall and through counselling, do you really think the government (or whoever) would provide for abortion candidates.You want to make it illegal, but then what?
Either way, I really don't feel like debating this anymore. It's proven rather pointless for both sides.
<strong>
Exactly. And there are better ways to reduce the number of abortions than making it illegal. I would argue that France's (see powerdoc's post) way of allowing abortions helps more people than just making them illegal altogether. If you criminalized abortions, what amount of support, both financiall and through counselling, do you really think the government (or whoever) would provide for abortion candidates.You want to make it illegal, but then what?
Either way, I really don't feel like debating this anymore. It's proven rather pointless for both sides.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't know, the government pays money now for counseling and and other things for recovering drug addicts. And that is an illegal activity.
However, I agree that telling women of all their choices is a good thing when they are considering an abortion. It is sad the number of stories I have read where they have stated, they never told me of any choices, they just pushed the abortion as the only way. I hope that the stories are wrong. I really do.
Abstinence? Condoms? The pill? Adoption?
My stance: Anti-stupidity/Pro-common sense
AFAIC, it's all nice and dandy to say that abortion is whatever it is, and adoption is whatever IT is. The only problem is that this would not be an issue if people weren't getting pregnant.
From what I understand, the way to get pregnant is to have sex. Period. If EVERYONE practiced abstinence who didn't want to get pregnant, there wouldn't be a problem.
What really irks me are these people who talk about the woman's choice. Guess what, any woman who's considering having an abortion made her choice when she had sex, whether protected or not (in most cases: rape and incest excluded).
Now, I understand that it's not so easy to say "stop having sex everybody!," but there ARE other ways to achieve what sex provides without putting yourself or mate at the risk of getting pregnant (see the thread in AppleOutsider entitled "Masturbation")
MY POINT: Take some responsibility, people! If you don't want to get pregnant or get your mate pregnant, find a way so that it won't be an option. Make the right choice from the beginning instead of making the wrong choice and paying for it with an unwanted pregnancy. Sometimes common sense isn't rocket science, and it certainly isn't here. In the entire history of humanity, most people have been able to figure this out and deal with it.
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but the rationalizing away of common sense is appalling to me.
[QB]
From what I understand, the way to get pregnant is to have sex. Period. If EVERYONE practiced abstinence who didn't want to get pregnant, there wouldn't be a problem.
What are you talking about ? the Ogino method ?
The Ogino method (abstinence during the supposed period of fertility) does not work. The cycles of women does not have the stability recquired to work at 100 %. Forget it.
Condoms works , as sterilet (intra-uterin device : sorry i don't find the translation) and pills (different form).
<strong> Women do not have abortions because it is convenient; they have them because they have no other choices. </strong><hr></blockquote>
No.
My long (academic) history of embattlement with feminism and women's studies began over this point: Abortion IS a convenience. I defy you to find another word to describe its utility. Convencience does not automatically make abortion good or bad any more than 24 hour instant tellers could be construed as good or bad simply because they are convenient, but they are 'convenient' -- that is the word that describes them best. What I think about the morality and legality involved matters not.
If one finds this branding objectionable, I ask why? To the abortionist, it is not a 'life worth birthing' (I'm trying to be precise here), that ought to make an abortion something easy to get, to do, to live with. Accessibility. They want it. That IS convenience.
Be honest about what it is you believe.
<strong>
Condoms works , as sterilet (intra-uterin device : sorry i don't find the translation) and pills (different form).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Condoms and the pill USUALLY work, but even they aren't fail safe. The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.
Like I said, it's common sense, folks.
<strong>
Condoms and the pill USUALLY work, but even they aren't fail safe. The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.
Like I said, it's common sense, folks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
are you a biggot ?
<strong>
are you a biggot ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you a giraffe?
No, I'm not a bigot. Why would you get that from what I wrote?
then i met my (now) wife. it was a little tougher that time. didn't do as well as i'd hoped.
in any case, it's easy to say that if you don't have sex you won't get pregnant, and lo' and behold it's true.
just have to learn to keep your pecker in your pants, or have him keep his pecker in his pants. if he can't keep his pecker put away, find someone else.
and know what? those choices really, really suck.
<strong>The ONLY guaranteed way not to get pregnant is abstinence. That's a choice that a woman has to make to unequivvicably protect herself from a pregnancy.</strong><hr></blockquote>I brought this up earlier in this thread (like 3 months ago?) - a large percentage of unwed and pregnant teens had sex with an over-21 male. In many cases, that's technically rape.
The reason I bring this up is that you said it's a choice the woman has to make.
Maybe it's not rape in the usual sense, but if it's an older man taking advantage of a young girl (in many cases a minor), pressuring and manipulating her, is that still a black-and-white situation? I don't think so.
I don't think that 16-year old girls are these helpless creatures subject to the whims of any older man. But we all know that date rapes do occur - the woman isn't threatened with a knife, but she has heavy pressure put on her by a man whose goal in life is to get laid at all costs.
What if a large percent - say, a majority of teen pregnancies, like some studies suggest - occur in this type of scenario? How would you apply your simple common sense?