FireFoxAssassin
Full Member
Posts: 268
Likes: 151
Country: United Kingdom
Region: Wales
Religion: N/A (Atheism)
Age: 17
|
Post by FireFoxAssassin on Aug 31, 2018 16:31:37 GMT
Just wondering how many people think of each and their reasons for it.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 2, 2018 23:01:23 GMT
Preeclampsia is one. From semi personal experience I can tell you that I would've lost my aunt, if she didn't abort her child. She wasn't fond with it coz she hoped the medication would help with time, but it didn't. If she kept waiting, both she and the baby would've died. Pro-life people don't take many things into consideration. The only thing they care about is not "killing" the fetus/baby. What kind of danger? What are you referring to? That's what the doctor told my friend too. That both would die and she'd not give birth. But....doctors were wrong and I'm glad she didn't listen to them. She refused the abortion. Had a healthy pregnancy and gave birth to a baby girl. The daughter died some time later but the mom and dad were glad to have her and take care of her still. Then afterwards she and her husband had 3 other kids. But doctors were wrong is my point. And mother was always healthy and didn't die like they told her she'd die. But their are lots of stories like that when people didn't abort and ignored the doctors and were still fine and mother and child lived full normal lives.
|
|
ainsley
New Member
Posts: 47
Likes: 10
|
Post by ainsley on Sept 2, 2018 23:38:51 GMT
Didn't mention this, idk what the illness she had, but it was something where she would bleed heavily and reach a level where it was fatal. She didn't even reach the point where she was about to give birth, it was a few months before. She definitely couldn't have survived it, because she was constantly bleeding heavily. Preeclampsia is one. From semi personal experience I can tell you that I would've lost my aunt, if she didn't abort her child. She wasn't fond with it coz she hoped the medication would help with time, but it didn't. If she kept waiting, both she and the baby would've died. Pro-life people don't take many things into consideration. The only thing they care about is not "killing" the fetus/baby. That's what the doctor told my friend too. That both would die and she'd not give birth. But....doctors were wrong and I'm glad she didn't listen to them. She refused the abortion. Had a healthy pregnancy and gave birth to a baby girl. The daughter died some time later but the mom and dad were glad to have her and take care of her still. Then afterwards she and her husband had 3 other kids. But doctors were wrong is my point. And mother was always healthy and didn't die like they told her she'd die. But their are lots of stories like that when people didn't abort and ignored the doctors and were still fine and mother and child lived full normal lives.
|
|
|
Post by just10sp on Sept 3, 2018 0:51:43 GMT
Pro-Life! But... I never heard of it before but I sort of agree with Romeo's home country law, if the baby is not going to survive, there is no point going through months of holding a baby that isn't going to make it. That would cause a lot of emotional pain. Also if it would endanger the mother's life.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Sept 3, 2018 0:58:48 GMT
Pro life. I think that it is unconscionable to take innocent human life and that is what abortion is no matter which way you swing it. Would the woman be obligated to bear the fetus/child if it puts her in great danger? You've literally just stated the only exception in my opinion where someone should be allowed to have an abortion. I think that if the woman's child being carried to term threatens her life or will severely brain damage her the woman should be given a choice between sacrificing herself for the sake of her child, or sacrificing her child for the sake of her and her family. In such a case, it is an awful decision to have to make because either way someone dies but I think that the woman should have the option to save her life in such a situation.
|
|
ainsley
New Member
Posts: 47
Likes: 10
|
Post by ainsley on Sept 3, 2018 1:57:20 GMT
Would the woman be obligated to bear the fetus/child if it puts her in great danger? You've literally just stated the only exception in my opinion where someone should be allowed to have an abortion. I think that if the woman's child being carried to term threatens her life or will severely brain damage her the woman should be given a choice between sacrificing herself for the sake of her child, or sacrificing her child for the sake of her and her family. In such a case, it is an awful decision to have to make because either way someone dies but I think that the woman should have the option to save her life in such a situation. Glad we agree on it in this aspect, but do things really have to be this extreme, before this woman is "allowed" to abort this child? Bearing a child in general can be very unhealthy for the woman, so does she have to put up with all this if she doesn't even want the child? This is about consent. Why do others have to make the choice of women? Aren't they allowed to make their own choices when it's their lives on the line? The child might not even be a threat, but the woman should still not be obligated to bear a child for so long, potentially putting her own health to risk, and mentally damaging her, just because others have decided for her that she has no say and the baby has to live? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. One thing tho, where I live (in Europe) you can't abort after the fetus is 12 weeks old. Then you would need special permission and a very good explanation. Ofc it's wrong to abort a baby that about ready to pop out....
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Sept 3, 2018 2:56:29 GMT
You've literally just stated the only exception in my opinion where someone should be allowed to have an abortion. I think that if the woman's child being carried to term threatens her life or will severely brain damage her the woman should be given a choice between sacrificing herself for the sake of her child, or sacrificing her child for the sake of her and her family. In such a case, it is an awful decision to have to make because either way someone dies but I think that the woman should have the option to save her life in such a situation. Glad we agree on it in this aspect, but do things really have to be this extreme, before this woman is "allowed" to abort this child? Bearing a child in general can be very unhealthy for the woman, so does she have to put up with all this if she doesn't even want the child? This is about consent. Why do others have to make the choice of women? Aren't they allowed to make their own choices when it's their lives on the line? The child might not even be a threat, but the woman should still not be obligated to bear a child for so long, potentially putting her own health to risk, and mentally damaging her, just because others have decided for her that she has no say and the baby has to live? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. One thing tho, where I live (in Europe) you can't abort after the fetus is 12 weeks old. Then you would need special permission and a very good explanation. Ofc it's wrong to abort a baby that about ready to pop out.... Yes, it does need to be that extreme. The reason is because the baby growing inside of her is a human life and you don't get to kill people because they inconvenience you. THAT is what is ridiculous; murdering your own offspring because you don't want to suffer the consequences of your actions.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 3, 2018 4:26:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 3, 2018 4:39:22 GMT
Yup, those babies fight for their life but no one cares at all. It's too cruel to kill such a tiny being. I can't even imagine it. Least you can do is give the baby away if you hate it that much. Sad
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 3, 2018 4:49:15 GMT
WARNING, this video is graphic.
Hey pro-choicers... THIS IS WHAT YOU SUPPORT!
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 3, 2018 5:12:39 GMT
^Wow they just cut up that baby into pieces. Unbelievable. Those tiny little hands and legs just lay in a pile of blood. How can a parent do that? Geez..
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 3, 2018 5:42:32 GMT
^Wow they just cut up that baby into pieces. Unbelievable. Those tiny little hands and legs just lay in a pile of blood. How can a parent do that? Geez.. I don't know :( ... it's very depressing and infuriating(for me at least) seeing that, I couldn't even finish watching the video. Since Roe v Wade has been implemented(1973), there have been 60,692,428 abortions in the US. That's 3695 abortions a day since 1973. I wouldn't call this anything but mass murder. www.numberofabortions.com/
|
|
ainsley
New Member
Posts: 47
Likes: 10
|
Post by ainsley on Sept 3, 2018 10:08:53 GMT
Glad we agree on it in this aspect, but do things really have to be this extreme, before this woman is "allowed" to abort this child? Bearing a child in general can be very unhealthy for the woman, so does she have to put up with all this if she doesn't even want the child? This is about consent. Why do others have to make the choice of women? Aren't they allowed to make their own choices when it's their lives on the line? The child might not even be a threat, but the woman should still not be obligated to bear a child for so long, potentially putting her own health to risk, and mentally damaging her, just because others have decided for her that she has no say and the baby has to live? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. One thing tho, where I live (in Europe) you can't abort after the fetus is 12 weeks old. Then you would need special permission and a very good explanation. Ofc it's wrong to abort a baby that about ready to pop out.... Yes, it does need to be that extreme. The reason is because the baby growing inside of her is a human life and you don't get to kill people because they inconvenience you. THAT is what is ridiculous; murdering your own offspring because you don't want to suffer the consequences of your actions. Excuse me, but who are you to make decisions for others? First of all it's a major risk for the women's health. Second of all it can affect the most important parts of their lives, it disrupts education, it disrupts work and so on. This is not about 'killing a baby' because it's no big deal and super fun!? But this is often (if not mostly) not even an ultimatum, because the person bearing the child knows what they're gonna go through, and how it's gonna fuck their lives. It disgusts me that pro-life people want to be in charge of other people and decide what they can do with their bodies and life and can't do! With a law that allows abortions, people who don't wanna abort can simply just not do it. If you guys wanna be so fucking Christian and ultra conservative about this topic then why aren't you guys for banning men masturbating? Men are daily wasting potential babies. Disgusting. Masturbating should be illegal. Give me a break.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 3, 2018 15:54:20 GMT
Yes, it does need to be that extreme. The reason is because the baby growing inside of her is a human life and you don't get to kill people because they inconvenience you. THAT is what is ridiculous; murdering your own offspring because you don't want to suffer the consequences of your actions. Excuse me, but who are you to make decisions for others? First of all it's a major risk for the women's health. Second of all it can affect the most important parts of their lives, it disrupts education, it disrupts work and so on. This is not about 'killing a baby' because it's no big deal and super fun!? But this is often (if not mostly) not even an ultimatum, because the person bearing the child knows what they're gonna go through, and how it's gonna fuck their lives. It disgusts me that pro-life people want to be in charge of other people and decide what they can do with their bodies and life and can't do! With a law that allows abortions, people who don't wanna abort can simply just not do it. If you guys wanna be so fucking Christian and ultra conservative about this topic then why aren't you guys for banning men masturbating? Men are daily wasting potential babies. Disgusting. Masturbating should be illegal. Give me a break. What? Sperm from a man are not human beings facepalm youâve been watching too much Carl Sagan. No Christians donât want to be in charge of others bodies, we want people to take responsibility for their actions. If two people canât be smart enough to have protected sex or not have sex at all, then they had better be ready for the consequences of their negligence. Itâs like if I get in a car accident because I ran a stop sign and my leg was broken in the accident, I donât blame my broken leg for why my life is going to suck for the next 6 months, I blame myself for running the stop sign. Essentially what youâre doing is blaming the broken leg, the result, or in the case of an unwanted pregnancy, youâre blaming the baby for why the persons life is going to suck; youâre using it as a scapegoat so they can continue running stop signs and not take responsibility for their actions. We could even take it further and say someone who ran a stop sign killed someone; are you going to say the person that was the victim of that action shouldnât have been in the way? Because thatâs exactly what a person does when they get an abortion for their own convenience; âthe person I killed in running the stop sign was just in my wayâ...âthe baby I aborted after having irresponsible sex was just in my wayâ. I have to ask you, what makes you, as a pro-choice advocate, think people have a right to end the life of another? When does that life that is being ended get a choice? Truth is it never had a choice and youâre depriving that life of the very idea you support. Itâs called a double standard. The real problem is people think sex is a recreational activity when it isnât, itâs meant for procreation; itâs an absolute failure within society.
|
|
Bigbufyboy85
Junior Member
I am a young Christian conservative trying to find a balance with my political, and religious views.
Posts: 68
Likes: 52
Country: United States
Religion: Christian
Age: Young
Member Admiration & Reason: Elizabeth for her KIND HEART â„ FIERCE MIND â„ BRAVE SPIRIT â„ UNBREAKABLE STRENGTH â„ ENDLESS FIGHTER
|
Post by Bigbufyboy85 on Sept 3, 2018 16:03:05 GMT
Yes, it does need to be that extreme. The reason is because the baby growing inside of her is a human life and you don't get to kill people because they inconvenience you. THAT is what is ridiculous; murdering your own offspring because you don't want to suffer the consequences of your actions. Excuse me, but who are you to make decisions for others? First of all it's a major risk for the women's health. Second of all it can affect the most important parts of their lives, it disrupts education, it disrupts work and so on. This is not about 'killing a baby' because it's no big deal and super fun!? But this is often (if not mostly) not even an ultimatum, because the person bearing the child knows what they're gonna go through, and how it's gonna fuck their lives. It disgusts me that pro-life people want to be in charge of other people and decide what they can do with their bodies and life and can't do! With a law that allows abortions, people who don't wanna abort can simply just not do it. If you guys wanna be so fucking Christian and ultra conservative about this topic then why aren't you guys for banning men masturbating? Men are daily wasting potential babies. Disgusting. Masturbating should be illegal. Give me a break. It isn't about deciding for the mother. It is about speaking out for the child that has no voice. A child inside of a mother is NOT HER BODY. I have no problem with birth contraception, there is no baby there to abort. I understand if people don't want to have children. Killing a fetus is not an extricate for poor decisions.
|
|
ainsley
New Member
Posts: 47
Likes: 10
|
Post by ainsley on Sept 3, 2018 18:22:24 GMT
The sperm thing was a joke.... As you mentioned, it takes two to make a baby, but how come the guy never face any kind of consequences? Is it fair that the woman has to bear the burden, and the guy doesn't have to worry about anything? Your example with the car crash is very misleading (and obviously only targeted towards women). The outcome of irresponsible/unprotected sex and losing a leg from a car accident is very incomparable. But let me try to work this out with your example anyways. First I need to get these two things out of the way: 1. Running over a stop sign, or some sort is against the law. You don't only put your own life in danger, you put other lives in danger. 2. Having unprotected sex is not a violation of the law. You don't harm anyone, even tho unprotected sex is stupid, you've done nothing wrong! Back to the car accident. - In case of a woman being raped, it's like she was driving by the law, and some asshole didn't, which resulted in her getting hurt, because of someone who was irresponsible. - In case of sex with consent, it's like a guy and a girl in the same car driving irresponsibly. No matter whom driving nor how many times they get into an accident, it's always the girl getting hurt. Another flaw in your example (as I mentioned with the incomparable outcomes): Losing a leg is not a choice, whether it was your own fault or someone else's, you have to live with the sad truth that you just won't get your leg back. Onthr other hand; when pregnant you actually have a choice whether you want to keep the baby or not. And your example with killing someone just doesn't make sense, sorry. I already explained that one thing is in violation of the law and the other ting isn't. Also the person you kill in an accident is an individual contributing to the society, the fetus isn't. It's not about ending a life of a baby, it's about forcing women to remain pregnant without their consents. Let me give you an example: If you're somehow (whether doing it purposely or unpurposely) responsible for damaging my kidneys, lets say it'll take 9 months for them to heal, am I by law allowed to hook you up with me and force you to be my human blood filter for the next 9 months? - wouldn't that violate your right to YOUR body? By your definition won't have a say, you need to face the consequences of your actions, now you're forced to lie on a hospital bed with me for 9 months. Excuse me, but who are you to make decisions for others? First of all it's a major risk for the women's health. Second of all it can affect the most important parts of their lives, it disrupts education, it disrupts work and so on. This is not about 'killing a baby' because it's no big deal and super fun!? But this is often (if not mostly) not even an ultimatum, because the person bearing the child knows what they're gonna go through, and how it's gonna fuck their lives. It disgusts me that pro-life people want to be in charge of other people and decide what they can do with their bodies and life and can't do! With a law that allows abortions, people who don't wanna abort can simply just not do it. If you guys wanna be so fucking Christian and ultra conservative about this topic then why aren't you guys for banning men masturbating? Men are daily wasting potential babies. Disgusting. Masturbating should be illegal. Give me a break. What? Sperm from a man are not human beings facepalm youâve been watching too much Carl Sagan. No Christians donât want to be in charge of others bodies, we want people to take responsibility for their actions. If two people canât be smart enough to have protected sex or not have sex at all, then they had better be ready for the consequences of their negligence. Itâs like if I get in a car accident because I ran a stop sign and my leg was broken in the accident, I donât blame my broken leg for why my life is going to suck for the next 6 months, I blame myself for running the stop sign. Essentially what youâre doing is blaming the broken leg, the result, or in the case of an unwanted pregnancy, youâre blaming the baby for why the persons life is going to suck; youâre using it as a scapegoat so they can continue running stop signs and not take responsibility for their actions. We could even take it further and say someone who ran a stop sign killed someone; are you going to say the person that was the victim of that action shouldnât have been in the way? Because thatâs exactly what a person does when they get an abortion for their own convenience; âthe person I killed in running the stop sign was just in my wayâ...âthe baby I aborted after having irresponsible sex was just in my wayâ. I have to ask you, what makes you, as a pro-choice advocate, think people have a right to end the life of another? When does that life that is being ended get a choice? Truth is it never had a choice and youâre depriving that life of the very idea you support. Itâs called a double standard. The real problem is people think sex is a recreational activity when it isnât, itâs meant for procreation; itâs an absolute failure within society.
|
|