Mississippi voting on whether fertilized eggs are 'persons'
jeff744 @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:45 am
andyt andyt:
Good for you, Jeff. Doesn't answer my question tho.
Yes, they should carry it, I have seen too many women that pretty well have abortion clinics on speed dial, every time they get pregnant they get another abortion and continue the cycle. The few people I know that have had kids early in life stopped acting in ways that got them into that situation in the first place after they had a kid.
andyt @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:46 am
Brenda Brenda:
andyt andyt:
stokes stokes:
As far as I am concerned nothing is living until it can survive on its own, by that I mean a mature baby out of the womb with the ability to breath and eat a "normal" diet.
While I am sure there are many who disagree with me, I prefer the way we were 60 years ago where we didnt try to rationalize every little thing we did and just enjoyed living, and accepting loss was part of living.
While I am sure there are many who disagree with me, I prefer the way we were 60 years ago where we didnt try to rationalize every little thing we did and just enjoyed living, and accepting loss was part of living.
Holy shit - so as long as the baby is breastfeeding, killing it would still be an abortion? To me you sound as nuts as the Mississippians, just in the other direction.
Breastmilk is a normal diet for a baby. I don't see him say a baby has to sit up straight and eat with knife and fork.
So why bring up the diet thing at all? Blood is the normal diet of a baby in the womb, for that matter.
Do you agree with what he wrote? Do you agree with partial birth abortions, which he certainly supports?
Brenda @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:46 am
jeff744 jeff744:
andyt andyt:
jeff744 jeff744:
I never really understood the need for large scale abortion in the first place. With the rare exceptions of rape or endangering the life of the mother all of them can easily be prevented by simply not having sex until ready to deal with the consequences or using the proper protection.
That's certainly the ideal. But contraception fails, and people do get careless. So what do you want to do, force women in those cases to carry the child to term?
It is not that hard to make a conscious choice to not have sex until you found a person you have decided to stay with, I made that choice long ago and have stuck to it.
When you're 15 with raging hormones? Yeah, it is.
When you're drunk? Yeah , it is.
When you're just being a young human being? Yeah, it is.
When you are a mature adult, I agree with you. Not many mature adults would choose abortion. But to have the option is awesome. I am 40 years old. There is no way I am going to start over again, so if I got pregnant now, there is no way I would keep it. You are saying I should not have sex, regardless of my knowledge and active use of contraception?
andyt @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:48 am
jeff744 jeff744:
andyt andyt:
Good for you, Jeff. Doesn't answer my question tho.
Yes, they should carry it, I have seen too many women that pretty well have abortion clinics on speed dial, every time they get pregnant they get another abortion and continue the cycle. The few people I know that have had kids early in life stopped acting in ways that got them into that situation in the first place after they had a kid.
Yes, there are irresponsible women out there. But I don't think making them carry a baby they don't want is doing anybody any good. I would agree with restricting abortions to the first 3 months unless there's a medical reason for them.
Brenda @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:50 am
stokes stokes:
As far as I am concerned nothing is living until it can survive on its own, by that I mean a mature baby out of the womb with the ability to breath and eat a "normal" diet.
While I am sure there are many who disagree with me, I prefer the way we were 60 years ago where we didnt try to rationalize every little thing we did and just enjoyed living, and accepting loss was part of living.
While I am sure there are many who disagree with me, I prefer the way we were 60 years ago where we didnt try to rationalize every little thing we did and just enjoyed living, and accepting loss was part of living.
andyt andyt:
Brenda Brenda:
andyt andyt:
Holy shit - so as long as the baby is breastfeeding, killing it would still be an abortion? To me you sound as nuts as the Mississippians, just in the other direction.
Breastmilk is a normal diet for a baby. I don't see him say a baby has to sit up straight and eat with knife and fork.
So why bring up the diet thing at all? Blood is the normal diet of a baby in the womb, for that matter.
Do you agree with what he wrote? Do you agree with partial birth abortions, which he certainly supports?
I don't think he is saying that at all.
I think that what he is saying that as long as a baby cannot survive on it's own outside the womb, it is not a living being. Which means till around week 22 of pregnancy.
peck420 @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:55 am
Brenda,
If you are 100% certain that you do not want any more children, why not do the responsible thing and make having children impossible (tubectomy)?
Thread in general,
My generalisation of the day:
I understand the want for abortion clinics, I have yet to see the actual need for abortion clinincs...unless of course we need to avoid the consequences of our actions.
For the record, I was very young when my first was born. She made a man out of me.
Brenda @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:02 am
peck420 peck420:
Brenda,
If you are 100% certain that you do not want any more children, why not do the responsible thing and make having children impossible (tubectomy)?
Thread in general,
My generalisation of the day:
I understand the want for abortion clinics, I have yet to see the actual need for abortion clinincs...unless of course we need to avoid the consequences of our actions.
For the record, I was very young when my first was born. She made a man out of me.
If you are 100% certain that you do not want any more children, why not do the responsible thing and make having children impossible (tubectomy)?
Thread in general,
My generalisation of the day:
I understand the want for abortion clinics, I have yet to see the actual need for abortion clinincs...unless of course we need to avoid the consequences of our actions.
For the record, I was very young when my first was born. She made a man out of me.
Those are not 100% certain either. I have an IUD, which is just as pregnancy-proof as a tubectomy.
As for your generalization: I can understand the WANT to cure all illnesses, but I still have to see the NEED for it. Close hospitals all together now?
(I mean, we, as a society, can not afford to have everybody live till 100...)
andyt @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:07 am
Brenda Brenda:
I don't think he is saying that at all.
I think that what he is saying that as long as a baby cannot survive on it's own outside the womb, it is not a living being. Which means till around week 22 of pregnancy.
Well we don't know for sure. So his way of having an abortion would be to do a cesearean and see if the fetus survives or not. Are we able to assist preemies with breathing under this scheme or not.
If he's saying abortions until 22 weeks, why not just say that? Personally I would make that 12 weeks unless medically necessary.
DrCaleb @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:11 am
Brenda Brenda:
I have an IUD, which is just as pregnancy-proof as a tubectomy.
Holy crap Bren! Aren't you afraid of that thing going off and taking out a busload of people?
Lemmy @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:31 am
peck420 peck420:
My generalisation of the day:
I understand the want for abortion clinics, I have yet to see the actual need for abortion clinincs...unless of course we need to avoid the consequences of our actions.
I understand the want for abortion clinics, I have yet to see the actual need for abortion clinincs...unless of course we need to avoid the consequences of our actions.
The need for abortion clinics comes from the alternative to them, which was unsafe, unsanitary, back-alley abortions, performed by quacks for cash, putting teenaged girls' health in peril.
Brenda @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:38 am
andyt andyt:
If he's saying abortions until 22 weeks, why not just say that? Personally I would make that 12 weeks unless medically necessary.
I agree with you on that one.
Brenda @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:39 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Brenda Brenda:
I have an IUD, which is just as pregnancy-proof as a tubectomy.
Holy crap Bren! Aren't you afraid of that thing going off and taking out a busload of people?
At least then we all can not procreate anymore, or have abortions! You might be on to something!
Lemmy @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:42 am
And the good news is that this proposition was defeated. It's never a good idea when a scientific matter is voted on as a political one.
DrCaleb @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:50 am
Brenda Brenda:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Brenda Brenda:
I have an IUD, which is just as pregnancy-proof as a tubectomy.
Holy crap Bren! Aren't you afraid of that thing going off and taking out a busload of people?
At least then we all can not procreate anymore, or have abortions! You might be on to something!
Sorry, got IUD and IED confused again.
fifeboy @ Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:59 am
Brenda Brenda:
When you're 15 with raging hormones? Yeah, it is.
When you're drunk? Yeah , it is.
When you're just being a young human being? Yeah, it is.
When you are a mature adult, I agree with you. Not many mature adults would choose abortion. But to have the option is awesome. I am 40 years old. There is no way I am going to start over again, so if I got pregnant now, there is no way I would keep it. You are saying I should not have sex, regardless of my knowledge and active use of contraception?
