Abortion Penalty

[evilbau]

Devek, what on earth are you talking about? Real women don't need directions, because real women use google maps? A woman is only a real woman if she has babies? Men are either 100% equally represented in all aspects of childbirth from conception to birth or 100% blameless and faultless in all aspects of childbirth from conception to birth?

I'm not even gonna touch on that "real woman" garbage, because it's a bunch of misogynist garbage.

The fact of the matter is, however, that men are not an equal part of carrying children and giving birth. Between the time of conception and the time of childbirth, a father plays no role in the development of a baby. Their role is limited to support of the mother, which is important and appreciated, but is obviously not necessary for a baby to thrive in the womb, or we'd have significantly less children being raised by a single parent. That is why the choice ultimately does and should rest with women about whether or not they want to have a child. It's not just about the baby, although that it the primary concern. It is also, to some degree, about her body, which is why we have abortions in the case of rape/incest/health risks. Yes, it can be a selfish choice, but very very few women opt for the emotional ramifications of an abortion just because they don't want to lose their figure.

No one points a gun to your head and forces you to live, but you get to make that choice. Tons of people come from hard background and grow up to be happy and well adjusted. I think they would be pissed if someone was presumptions enough to assume their life wasn't worth living in the first place because their parents didn't buy them a pony.

You are trivializing being raised in an abusive home just as much as you have trivialized childbirth earlier in this thread. How many stories do we read daily about people who have criminally neglected their children, leading to undernourishment, physical and psychological developmental problems, and sometimes death? Can we honestly say that it's better for a child to be born and microwaved to death, or shaken to death, or smothered to death in an abusive fit by a parent just trying to make them stop crying? That shit is fucking terrible, and those are just a handful of things that parents do to children that would cause the children to be removed from their care by child protective services or death. A lifetime of physical, emotional, and/or sexual abuse in my opinion is not something that a child should be subjected to just because it made someone that they don't know feel icky. Something like 1 in 5 female children and 1 in 10 male children are sexually abused, and more often than not it is by someone who is a part of their family or very close to their family. It happens more often than it should, more often than you would expect, and it does continue to affect people and their emotional well-being into adulthood.

I don't think that you were raised in an abusive household, or you wouldn't trivialize the effects and severity of child abuse. It's not about children being raised in a home where they don't get everything they want; it's about children being raised in an environment where they don't get everything they need for their physical and emotional development.

I wasn't really going to get involved in this one but i agree with ivve and wanted to say something. being pro-choice is not pro-death or pro-murder. It is simply giving the right to choose. The majority of americans are pro-choice, and I'm willing to bet that an overwhelming majority of THAT group (like me) believes there are too many abortions going on. They don't want more abortions, or abortions as a form of birth control (like some have implied or outright stated), they want to simply secure the right of women to choose.

And about the abusive households, these are root causes. These are the situations and circumstances that create the people that people so quickly say 'oh they are a waste of space' when something fucked up they do shows up in the news. These can be the same people who are getting the axe in the capital punishment thread that some are so quick to condemn (which is ironic in itself).

It seems silly to me that you would punish someone who makes a mistake, recognizes it, realizes they aren't ready for the responsibility, and wants to fix it. You are taking the right away from women who have made the decision (and i'm sure it is a hard one for most) that they would rather live with the guilt and save one life than condemn two. Pro-lifers are pushing their values on what is an obviously contentious issue, onto the majority. And the case law that protects that right isn't going anywhere soon.

This thread is all over the place. I hope I put forth some cogent thoughts in this obviously pro-life slanted argument. (I said way more than i intended haha really just wanted to agree with ivve there)

[Andarvi]

One with a CPU that is a neural net processor, aka a learning computer.

You owe it to yourself to click it.

I have made many calls and answered countless telemarketers using those soundboards. http://www.celebrityprankcalling.com has a lot of great ones.

And on topic, if you are against abortion and not the morning after pill, im going to lollerskate to bed right now. Good night.

[Devek]

Black, meet white.

You assume that the only reason a baby is aborted is because its a burden to the mother. Decisions are made for a plethora of reasons, and focusing on any single one (especially the most superficial, least influential part) is going to be terribly, terribly skewed.

If you can't concede that pregnancy is a good enough reason to abort a child all your points fall with it.

Any other factor that that decision would be made would equally apply to the father just as much (possible more, considering a mother can sever her financial responsibility via adoption). But all factors being equal of the father wanting the child and the mother not wanting the child the only thing the mother has to do that the father doesn't is actually carry the child to term.

You want to have it both ways. You can't say that a father has no rights because of "the most superficial, least influential part" while at the same time allowing "the most superficial, least influential part" to be a good enough reason to get an abortion. Man says, "I am ready and willing to raise this child.", woman says "I don't want to get fat." the child dies. Of course it is terribly, terribly, skewed.. against the father!

It seems silly to me that you would punish someone who makes a mistake, recognizes it, realizes they aren't ready for the responsibility, and wants to fix it. You are taking the right away from women who have made the decision (and i'm sure it is a hard one for most) that they would rather live with the guilt and save one life than condemn two. Pro-lifers are pushing their values on what is an obviously contentious issue, onto the majority. And the case law that protects that right isn't going anywhere soon.

You're a little late in the thread to be forgetting about adoption. Mothers if nothing else have the ability to 100% sever their relationship with their kid and don't have to worry about anything in the end. They can get back to doing whatever the fuck they want to do after paying their dues with a few months of service.

[Jodwahh]

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...bysandwich.jpg

Problem solved.

I keed i keed

[ertyu]

Sorry Devek I had respected you on this forum for a long time but really you're acting like a retard now. There's no possible way you can just brush off being pregnant as "being a little fat and being a little sick" there is so much more to it...

[Devek]

Sorry Devek I had respected you on this forum for a long time but really you're acting like a retard now. There's no possible way you can just brush off being pregnant as "being a little fat and being a little sick" there is so much more to it...

Enough to kill a child over?

[Xavier]

Apparently yes, or it wouldn't happen.

And theres no use explaining it to you, because you suffer from horrible tunnel vision.

[Jujubie]

....Also it would really suck for me, as I like to sleep on my stomach - and I'd be forced to sleep on my back. Nothx

Can't even sleep on your back after the 1st trimester. It can slow bloodflow to the baby. So, have to sleep on your side (preferably the left as it increases the bloodflow to the baby) and then you have to sleep with like 6 pillows some to support your belly, between your knees so your hips aren't sore and more to keep you from rolling over on your back!

[divisortheory]

Sorry Devek I had respected you on this forum for a long time but really you're acting like a retard now. There's no possible way you can just brush off being pregnant as "being a little fat and being a little sick" there is so much more to it...

Enough to kill a child over?

Who's talking about killing children? Thought we were talking about abortions.

[Correction]

In Devek's world, women would have zero rights over the child growing inside their bodies.

At least until men are given 100% decision-making over that child growing inside their bodies.

He must live in Saudi Arabia.

[SassiAsura]

... I love sleeping on my left side...
My left arm however doesn't.
One time my neck cracked too.

[Khamsin]

Sorry Devek I had respected you on this forum for a long time but really you're acting like a retard now. There's no possible way you can just brush off being pregnant as "being a little fat and being a little sick" there is so much more to it...

Enough to kill a child over?

Who's talking about killing children? Thought we were talking about abortions.

For some reason, now I'm envisioning some anti-choice ad where some pregnant woman is walking along the street, background buildings blurred...

Prego: "My high school reunion is in two weeks, and look at me! I'd KILL not to be pregnant right now."

*poof*

Devil : "Reeeeallly. Well, step right on in, and we'll see what we can do for you."

*background buildings come into focus as the foreground blurs, they're standing outside an abortion clinic*


Come to think of it... why don't we ever see any anti-choice or anti-life ads? We see them all the time for smoking. You'd think there'd be some anti-choice activist group out there, somewhere. Then again, there's no big anti-life multibillion dollar company funding them through lawsuits and settlements.

[SassiAsura]

Smoking is so pre1990s

[Correction]

Come to think of it... why don't we ever see any anti-choice or anti-life ads? We see them all the time for smoking. You'd think there'd be some anti-choice activist group out there, somewhere. Then again, there's no big anti-life multibillion dollar company funding them through lawsuits and settlements.

There's a reason you don't see TV ads against abortion: They simply don't work. It's impossible to tailor a good message that works for everyone in a single state, let alone the nation. What you will see is what's call Direct Mail in these days. If you just google for it you'll find some examples of leaflets they mail to a local list of targets: Unmobilized conservative voters and of course doctors. Some grisly shit gets sent through the mail in the name of the anti-abortion movement. I almost don't want to link the crap I found after 30 seconds of searching. This stuff is broken down to the finest demographic level, usually a congressional district.

http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_In ... tion_Mail/ (NSFW images in the two 'example links') *BIG BOLD LETTERS FINAL WARNING DEAD FETUS PICTURES TWO CLICKS AWAY*

Mind you Direct Mail is far and away the most repulsive 'advertising' in existence, but it is extremely effective because they can tailor the message in a way that would never fly on national TV. And it's cheaper by far. But believe me this stuff is everywhere.

[Khamsin]

There's a reason you don't see TV ads against abortion: They simply don't work. It's impossible to tailor a good message that works for everyone in a single state, let alone the nation.

You could say the same about smoking. Smoking isn't illegal, and everyone in every part of the nation has varying views on the acceptability of smoking. Some places you're looked down upon for it and people act like you'll give them the plague if you come anywhere near them with a cigarette. In other areas, everyone does it and raise their kids in a smoking household. There's probably even some guys somewhere that give their son a cigar for his 18th birthday.

No single anti-smoking message will reach everyone in the nation with the same amount of effectiveness, but they do it anyway.

[Correction]

No single anti-smoking message will reach everyone in the nation with the same amount of effectiveness, but they do it anyway.

The difference here is funding. Those anti-smoking ads are paid for by the tobacco companies themselves. So they see a lot of airtime because it's free money for the networks. At least in California, all that money was part of a huge settlement to resolve the lawsuits threatening to destroy all business in California for the tobacco industry. Rather than be shut out of the most populous state in the Union, they played ball. I doubt anybody thinks those ads contribute much to the decrease in smoking. It's the law, not the ads.

[Beckwin]

Man says, "I am ready and willing to raise this child.", woman says "I don't want to get fat." the child dies.

Highlights Devek's misogyny that gives him tunnel vision on the issue. He probably thinks every abortion is caused by some vain slut and there's always a good, caring, ready-to-be-a-father man around that gets screwed. Spoilers: that's not how it usually is.

[Ivve]

They can get back to doing whatever the fuck they want to do after paying their dues with a few months of service.

I see, so in the case where a mother decides to give her child up for adoption because she feels she cannot raise it on her own and there is no support from the father, then she needs to pay dues for an act that both of them participated in, but he has no responsibility whatsoever? The father gets off scot-free and completely blameless, but a woman has dues to pay? How is that fair in any way at all?

Let's even go so far as to say that hypothetically, men do get equal rights over abortion. She doesn't want to have the baby, but he does. However, he doesn't have the desire or the means to raise the baby; he simply wants her to have it because he believes that abortion is murder. In a situation like that, what "dues" does the man pay? He is not financially obligated to support the baby, he is not obligated to emotionally support the mother, he is not obligated to carry a child for nine months. How is that fair?

Your argument is for equality between men and women to make things fair. Giving men equal rights doesn't make things any more fair. It only provides a loophole for unwilling fathers to wash their hands of any responsibility for their child.

[evilbau]

It seems silly to me that you would punish someone who makes a mistake, recognizes it, realizes they aren't ready for the responsibility, and wants to fix it. You are taking the right away from women who have made the decision (and i'm sure it is a hard one for most) that they would rather live with the guilt and save one life than condemn two. Pro-lifers are pushing their values on what is an obviously contentious issue, onto the majority. And the case law that protects that right isn't going anywhere soon.

You're a little late in the thread to be forgetting about adoption. Mothers if nothing else have the ability to 100% sever their relationship with their kid and don't have to worry about anything in the end. They can get back to doing whatever the fuck they want to do after paying their dues with a few months of service.

i didn't forget it, i didn't mention it explicitly but maybe you glossed over the section where I talked about abusive households? And that is a pretty callous way of describing adoption.

[archibaldcrane]

Are morning after pills murder?

Devek?

I honestly don't know.

Its basically an abortion except the day after conception instead of a couple months later. So its murder right?

...

I'm like two pages late and I still have to correct this?

The primary function of a morning after pill is to prevent the release of an egg from the ovary. Since sperm can stay alive for days inside the uterus and fallopian tubes, often the fertalizable egg isn't present at the time of sex, but happens to pop out shortly after into a semen filled cavity, and voila pregnancy. Prevent the egg from popping out, prevent the fertalization, prevent the pregnancy.

However, each type of morning-after pill works differently. Some, like RU-486, are abortifacients - meaning they kill a fertilized, implanted embryo. However, the popular "plan-B" pill that most think of when they think "morning after pill" does not.

Hormonal progestin-only and combined estrogen-progestin emergency contraceptives such as Yuzpe regimen or Plan B are different from the anti-hormonal drug mifepristone (also known as Mifeprex and RU-486), an abortifacient which can induce abortion if taken after implantation. Yuzpe and progestin-only emergency contraception will have no effect if taken after implantation.

So ladies, no matter how retarded you are, how drunk you were when you had sex, how many cocks you've taken in the past 24 hours, how many condoms you broke, you do know what a pharmacy is, right?

Go there, and get the plan-b pill. It's not an abortion, it's like birth control pills on steriods. It's your last chance if you're against abortion. And if you're a guy in this situation, don't ask, tell her that she's getting in your car and you're taking a little trip. Walgreens really isn't that scary a place.