|
|
Post by bolverk on Sept 25, 2008 14:07:13 GMT -5
Bolverk, illegal immigration is a entirely different topic. But since you bring it up, I don't think anchor babies should be granted citizenship, and their families shouldn't receive all of the benefits that go along with it. Personally, I think we should toughen up on illegal immigration and ICE raids should be supported. It is sad that people live in a countries that suffer, but I don't think coming to this country illegally is acceptable either. And by the way, I am not trying to rip babies out of the hands of adoptive parents, and I think if adoption was encouraged instead of abortion there would be a fair amount of babies for parents who desire a child. I would prefer to see young girls expand their education and build solid futures instead of going through the process of becoming pregnant and giving up their babies. Did you only read the one reply from me? Saw it after I replied to this one. I do not want young girls to get pregnant too soon. But, the greatest majority of abortions are from women in their 20's, so they are wholly responsible for that. Time they own up to that responsibility, and be given more alternatives then just throwing away a life they started by mistake. Who knows, they may even change their minds, keep the child and raise one of the best citizens to ever grace this country. My only point about illegal immigration is that it already increases our population, with only a minimum benefit to us, if any at all. These children, if born, would surely increase our population, but at the same time they would be nurtured and could become a real asset to this nation in the best of ways. |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Sept 25, 2008 14:19:30 GMT -5
Bolverk, maybe if those women had been taught appropriately in the first place they may not have placed themselves the position of becoming pregnant. Plus, once young women live away from home they can't afford to see a doctor and get the pill, or prenatal care etc. etc. I would love to see reform on many levels.
I have paid my dues as a parent and it is a tough job for sure, but also one of the most rewarding.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Sept 25, 2008 14:43:31 GMT -5
JMO:
You should know that the Alan Guttmacher Institute is the leading "think tank" promoting abortion in all it's forms.
I have yet to read anything from them that does not justify abortion on demand.
Not a whit more objective than Planned Holocau...uhh.. Parenthood.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Sept 25, 2008 15:15:19 GMT -5
Bolverk, maybe if those women had been taught appropriately in the first place they may not have placed themselves the position of becoming pregnant. Plus, once young women live away from home they can't afford to see a doctor and get the pill, or prenatal care etc. etc. I would love to see reform on many levels. I have paid my dues as a parent and it is a tough job for sure, but also one of the most rewarding. Though I agree with what you say, it does not address the problems. Birth control is a major issue, and abortion should not be a birth control option that is used more frequently then others. There in lies the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Sept 25, 2008 19:13:09 GMT -5
Subdjoe: "There are a number of clear biological facts which easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother’s body." Why don't men get pregnant then? Um.....because men and women are designed with different parts? Mink, your question makes NO sense at all. AND has nothing at all to do with what I posted. In fact, I have to ask: Did you even bother to read what I posted? Care to address the points one at a time? Dr. Subdjoe, I was being facetious as I don't see how your facts are relevant to the abortion issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Sept 25, 2008 19:49:09 GMT -5
That will work for some, but what about the illegal immigrants the country has no control of, the raped, victims of incest or a woman/girl whose life is threatened, children having children with no means of support who become emotionally attached to the newborn? There are too many variables to shut your mind off without thinking the other politcal party is "running the show". There is already one political party running the show. It is time to offer both alternatives, and not present only one possible solution. That is called deception, and I am tired of it. I'm sure both alternatives are offered, but it is the choice of some women that is offensive. It doesn't make it ethical, but it is her choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Sept 25, 2008 20:01:24 GMT -5
I taught my kids sex education at home, but one has to remember, responsible parents always have honest intentions, but are not professionals.Read to mean, the government is far better at teaching sex to children then the parents. Especially Democrats, because they are always screwing somebody, usually taxpayers. I suppose one can interpret it that way, but in reality, there are cases where parents, as well intentioned, either can't present the message, as did mine who just didn't talk about sex, (and made sure we were chaperoned), or they were stumped as to how to explain sex, in general or....whatever. Professionals who teach sex ed in schools will at least get some of their attention. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 25, 2008 20:19:36 GMT -5
Dr. Subdjoe, I was being facetious as I don't see how your facts are relevant to the abortion issue. Well Mink, it's like this. The pro-death faction claims that abortion is about a womans right to do what she wants with her own body, and that a fetus is a part of her body like the appendix or a tumor. What I posted, and what you chose to treat as a joke to be ignored, are verifiable facts showing that while a fetus may grow inside a womans body, it is NOT part of it. Now, care to address any or all of the points? Or are going to be a typical leftist and ignore or belittle any facts that may show your opinion to be wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Sept 25, 2008 20:57:57 GMT -5
Dr. Subdjoe, I was being facetious as I don't see how your facts are relevant to the abortion issue. Well Mink, it's like this. The pro-death faction claims that abortion is about a womans right to do what she wants with her own body, and that a fetus is a part of her body like the appendix or a tumor. What I posted, and what you chose to treat as a joke to be ignored, are verifiable facts showing that while a fetus may grow inside a womans body, it is NOT part of it. Now, care to address any or all of the points? Or are going to be a typical leftist and ignore or belittle any facts that may show your opinion to be wrong? Subdjoe, it seems the typical neocons do just what you accuse the leftists of doing, belittling any facts that may differ from their own.....yet you are safe because, technically you are registered a Leftist. You think you are right because you have scientific proof of separateness between mother and baby, but what you refuse to see is, it is her choice to abort, not yours. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 25, 2008 21:43:13 GMT -5
Evading again, Mink. The pro-death left claims that it is part of the womans body that is being killed and disposed of. Please address the points I posted. Refute those and prove that a fetus is a part of a womans body and not a seperate individual.
So, if it is as the left says, that it is just some tissue that is part of the womans body you should have no trouble doing what I'm asking. There should be a good body of scientific work to back you up.
Sounds as if my post has hit a nerve with you. Maybe having doubts about a fetus being part of a womans body?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Sept 25, 2008 22:24:48 GMT -5
Evading again, Mink. The pro-death left claims that it is part of the womans body that is being killed and disposed of. Please address the points I posted. Refute those and prove that a fetus is a part of a womans body and not a seperate individual. So, if it is as the left says, that it is just some tissue that is part of the womans body you should have no trouble doing what I'm asking. There should be a good body of scientific work to back you up. Sounds as if my post has hit a nerve with you. Maybe having doubts about a fetus being part of a womans body? I am not evading the issue you reference as "pro-death". I am giving you my opinion regardless of the scientific "reality facts" you want to support yours with. No, you have not hit a nerve. There is no doubt about a fetus being a part of the woman's body, otherwise men would have the same capability. We can have our opinions on the contraversial issue, but it doesn't change the fact that when men and women have sex, the baby grows in the woman's body. Ideally, having sex would be an act of love and the baby would thrive, but this isn't always the case. Adoption is the best solution, but not always the choice of the woman, the man or sometimes both. People have an issue with it because, A) they don't want to pay for it via taxes, or B) they really care about life. That said, if people really care about life, then who pays for it if the couple or single parent can't or won't deal with the birth responsibly? Answer? Taxes. This is our current issue. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 25, 2008 23:14:15 GMT -5
"There is no doubt about a fetus being a part of the woman's body, otherwise men would have the same capability."
Bullpucky Mink, pure, unadulterated bullpucky. And your second clause makes no sense at all. In case you haven't noticed men and women are built differently. We have different organs of generation. OH! Silly me! I forgot that the left teaches that everyone is exactly equal in all things. Yeah, I can swim like Phelps, have the good looks of Cary Grant, the intellect of Jefferson. Yeah.
"We can have our opinions on the contraversial issue, but it doesn't change the fact that when men and women have sex, the baby grows in the woman's body."
I've been saying that - the baby (fetus) grows in the womans body. BUT it is not part of it. Genetically it is a unique individual. If it is genetically unique, then it is not part of the womans body. If it really is a part of the womans body, and genetically the same (as it would need to be) then there would be no males, everyone would be female, everyone would be a twin or clone of whoever the orginal human female was (note - there would be some mutations and genetic anomolies due to natural radiation, exposure to chemicals, etc. but generally what I said is correct)
If, as you say " There is no doubt about a fetus being a part of the woman's body" why not post your evidence? Quit quoting the leftists party line and post some verifiable evidence. It must be out there.
|
|
