Why Can't The So-Called Pro-Life Crowd Be Honest?

[Anguille]

Besides. Aliie your coathanger analogy is lame.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

 

[RDD_1210]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Jesus with a dinosaur? That sounds like a funny image.

 

[Spoonman]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

but what percentage are the first two? like less than 1 %.

 

[Immanuel]

That's nice, Immie. But wrong. Abortion numbers would go down if abortion was illegal. Most people are law abiding citizens. However, they will take advantage of laws that make life more convenient for them, even if they don't approve of the general premise.

Many, many women who will get abortions when they're legal will NOT get them when they're illegal. It's that simple.

I'm law abiding... but I have a lead foot. I even have a couple of speeding tickets to my name to prove that.

I know a lot of people that would never park in a handicapped parking space but will smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes.

I know you and I disagree on this and unfortunately, I don't think either one of us will ever be able to prove our beliefs with actual real life events. I think your belief that abortion numbers sky-rocketed with the legalization of abortion is incorrect as is your belief that making it illegal would reverse that trend. There were most likely just as many abortions the year before legalization as there were the year after, it is simply that it was legal to admit to an abortion after whereas before it would have gotten both the woman and, if she had someone else help her, that other person in trouble.

Because abortion is seen to be socially acceptable in these days and times, even making it illegal will not make it rare.

Immie

I agree. Also add the the fact that there is more reporting in the news about children mistreated by adoptive or foster parents and that this probably leads some women who haves qualms about having an abortion to decide the lesser of what they believe to be two evils.

Good point, but then the mistreatment itself needs to be dealt with and there are laws protecting children from such mistreatment. That being said, adoption should still be promoted as a viable and even preferred option. Then again, it seems to me that the abortion industry talks down adoption as an alternative.

Immie

 

[AllieBaba]

Pure supposition. Times have changed.

Women are more likely to break the law now?

What horse crap.

There's not much to argue abut when one side refuses to accept reality.

This imaginary vast number of abortions performed illegally in the past is just that...IMAGINARY. The few stats that we DO have now far exceed the numbers of abortions performed in the past. How do we know that? We know that because of the fact that the only way the pro-abortionists get any numbers at ALL for that fact is when they include ALL miscarriages, ALL fetal and maternal deaths, in the numbers they lump together for pre-Roe v Wade "abortions".

We know this because there are more women now, and because of those women, more are sexually active.

This pretense that a million illegal abortions took place each year before Roe v. Wade is complete smoke and mirrors. It's dishonest. There's absolutely no evidence that it's true.

There is, however, evidence that abortions have climbed steadily....not just since R v W was first passed (since you want to quibble over the reliability of the numbers prior to that) but for every year subsequent to that. The numbers kept climbing, and climbing and climbing. They hiccupped in the 90s, then declined around 2005 I think...and now they're holding steady.

The fact that they climbed steadily AFTER we started getting some numbers is as much proof as anyone is ever going to get, and it clearly indicates that the more abortions is pushed, the more clinics that are open, the more people get abortions. The slight decreases happen at the same time that funding was reduced and clinics closed. Go figure. So...if they aren't available women won't, by and large, get them.

Or are you going to honestly insist that the numbers don't really decrease, women just use coathangers instead?

Your guess is as good as mine, Allie.

I only say that to be diplomatic. My guess is more accurate.

Nah. My guess actually has some numbers behind it. They aren't necessarily 100 percent accurate, but numbers never are. They're the numbers Planned Parenthood are touting, and the numbers the CDC are touting....both reputable, according to your side, so you either accept them or admit to the inherent dishonesty in the great abortion machine.

Do you believe Planned Parenthood...or do you not? How about the CDC?

 

[Immanuel]

I agree I'd like to see far less abortions. Personally I think sex education and availability of birth control are 2 big ways to decrease it, but often times (maybe not with you) those 2 things are looked down upon by the same pro-life crowd.

I think abstinence education is a joke, when I was 16 and probably most other guys I wanted to hump everything, you can't teach people out of their natural hormones.

I do not think abstinence education is a joke. I think abstinence-only education is a joke. I think abstinence should be taught as the only 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy. As long as abstinence is practiced there will be no unwanted pregnancy. Unfortunately, reality must be taken into account and our very liberal views on sex and teen-age sex play a part in the effectiveness of abstinence.

I, too was one of those 16 year old boys, but, don't tell anyone, I made it through high school with my virginity... unfortunately... part of that was because my girl friend was part Cherokee Indian with a mom that would literally take her husband apart for any mistake on his part... I was not about to get on my girlfriend's mom's bad side. Also, they owned a wolf that hated teen-aged boys. If I so much as held my girlfriend's hand while "dog" was present, I was taking my life into my own hands.

I am not opposed to sex education or birth control. I am opposed to schools giving out condoms. In my opinion, it is not the place of the school districts to promote teen-aged sex.

Immie

Good point, I guess I have no issue with it being a part of sex-ed but I don't think people with a lot of opportunities would really take it serious. But if some did and it saved a potential unwanted pregnancy even once it'd be worth it.

Yeah personally I think handing out condoms in public schools is weird too, high school kids know where they can buy condoms I don't think they don't buy them because they don't know where to get them. I think many don't use them because they don't take the potential consequences seriously, like having an unwanted pregnancy or an STD.

Luckily I was and am still scared to death of both of those things.

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

I'm law abiding... but I have a lead foot. I even have a couple of speeding tickets to my name to prove that.

I know a lot of people that would never park in a handicapped parking space but will smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes.

I know you and I disagree on this and unfortunately, I don't think either one of us will ever be able to prove our beliefs with actual real life events. I think your belief that abortion numbers sky-rocketed with the legalization of abortion is incorrect as is your belief that making it illegal would reverse that trend. There were most likely just as many abortions the year before legalization as there were the year after, it is simply that it was legal to admit to an abortion after whereas before it would have gotten both the woman and, if she had someone else help her, that other person in trouble.

Because abortion is seen to be socially acceptable in these days and times, even making it illegal will not make it rare.

Immie

I agree. Also add the the fact that there is more reporting in the news about children mistreated by adoptive or foster parents and that this probably leads some women who haves qualms about having an abortion to decide the lesser of what they believe to be two evils.

Good point, but then the mistreatment itself needs to be dealt with and their are laws protecting children from such mistreatment. That being said, adoption should still be promoted as a viable and even preferred option. Then again, it seems to me that the abortion industry talks down adoption as an alternative.

Immie

It seems to me that the adoption industry maligns abortion for the obvious reason that it limits supply. My cousin and her husband adopted their children and is a fantastic mother. They did so for genetic reasons. I'm glad they got to be parents but I would still never give a child of mine up for adoption. I think to do so is irresponsible and even selfish for those who do it so they won't go to hell. I grant that there are some mothers who have honestly miscalculated their ability to care for and raise a child and that is a terrible situation all around. But it seems to me that most infants up for adoption are there because some poor kid was brainwashed or is getting paid to do it. The two birth mothers of my cousins kids certainly were. They were all offered the opportunity to remain in their children's lives to some degree but none took up the offer. Well, one did but she dropped out of sight soon after the birth. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps it was just too painful to be reminded of how they gave up their child. People do make mistakes. Especially teenagers.

I think it's horrible the way some organisations entrap vulnerable young girls and convince them they should go through with a pregnancy they don't want. Your life is never the sasme after giving birth. No matter if you keep the baby or not.

 

[Anguille]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

And what about those women who did chose to have protected sex and their birth control failed?

As for not being able to afford to have a child, is that really fair to limit the joy of becoming a mother to those who can afford it?

 

[R.D.]

It's about the child’s life. Not a difficult concept for an honest person.

I agree. And Abortion is illegal!

Wait...what?

Is there a point or is this just a lame attempt at humor?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

A fair point. So, if this is about pro-life, shouldnt that also encompass the quality of said life? What is the percentage of people procreating into poverty? I think if you dug around, you would find that the poorer people are, the more children they tend to have. Education has a lot to do with this. Procreating into poverty only continues that spiral.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

And what about those women who did chose to have protected sex and their birth control failed?

As for not being able to afford to have a child, is that really fair to limit the joy of becoming a mother to those who can afford it?

I'm not syaing anyone should be limited in their choice. That's the point here. The choice to have a child or not while its still in the early stages of development. The prolife folks want to remove the right to abort an unwanted pregnancy.

 

[Immanuel]

I agree. Also add the the fact that there is more reporting in the news about children mistreated by adoptive or foster parents and that this probably leads some women who haves qualms about having an abortion to decide the lesser of what they believe to be two evils.

Good point, but then the mistreatment itself needs to be dealt with and their are laws protecting children from such mistreatment. That being said, adoption should still be promoted as a viable and even preferred option. Then again, it seems to me that the abortion industry talks down adoption as an alternative.

Immie

It seems to me that the adoption industry maligns abortion for the obvious reason that it limits supply. My cousin and her husband adopted their children and is a fantastic mother. They did so for genetic reasons. I'm glad they got to be parents but I would still never give a child of mine up for adoption. I think to do so is irresponsible and even selfish for those who do it so they won't go to hell. I grant that there are some mothers who have honestly miscalculated their ability to care for and raise a child and that is a terrible situation all around. But it seems to me that most infants up for adoption are there because some poor kid was brainwashed or is getting paid to do it. The two birth mothers of my cousins kids certainly were. They were all offered the opportunity to remain in their children's lives to some degree but none took up the offer. Well, one did but she dropped out of sight soon after the birth. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps it was just too painful to be reminded of how they gave up their child. People do make mistakes. Especially teenagers.

I think it's horrible the way some organisations entrap vulnerable young girls and convince them they should go through with a pregnancy they don't want. Your life is never the sasme after giving birth. No matter if you keep the baby or not.

Man Anguille, don't take this wrong but that is just plain messed up. What you are saying here is kill the child because of selfish reasons of the mother. I cannot think of anything else to say than that is just plain messed up.

I think we should all be talking down the abortion industry. No one should "promote" the snuffing out of life for any reason.

I think it's horrible the way some organizations entrap vulnerable young girls and convince them they should snuff out the life within them for simply selfish reasons.

Immie

 

[DaGoose]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

And what about those women who did chose to have protected sex and their birth control failed?

As for not being able to afford to have a child, is that really fair to limit the joy of becoming a mother to those who can afford it?

That's a fair question. The "morally superiors" will march, scream, chant and kill doctors to FORCE a woman to bear a child. But if that child goes to bed hungry or is born with disabilities they look down their nose and mumble, "It's not MY problem".

.

 

[Immanuel]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

And what about those women who did chose to have protected sex and their birth control failed?

As for not being able to afford to have a child, is that really fair to limit the joy of becoming a mother to those who can afford it?

And what percentage of abortions is that? Clearly, if that were given as the primary reason, it would have been discussed by Guttmacher. I would guess that falls in the "Other 4%" category and is most likely less than the incidence of rape.

I don't know, it was a person who appears to be on the pro-choice side that suggested terminating the life of the baby because the mother could not afford it.

Immie

 

[TakeAStepBack]

A fair point. So, if this is about pro-life, shouldnt that also encompass the quality of said life? What is the percentage of people procreating into poverty? I think if you dug around, you would find that the poorer people are, the more children they tend to have. Education has a lot to do with this. Procreating into poverty only continues that spiral.

 

[Anguille]

Good point, but then the mistreatment itself needs to be dealt with and their are laws protecting children from such mistreatment. That being said, adoption should still be promoted as a viable and even preferred option. Then again, it seems to me that the abortion industry talks down adoption as an alternative.

Immie

It seems to me that the adoption industry maligns abortion for the obvious reason that it limits supply. My cousin and her husband adopted their children and is a fantastic mother. They did so for genetic reasons. I'm glad they got to be parents but I would still never give a child of mine up for adoption. I think to do so is irresponsible and even selfish for those who do it so they won't go to hell. I grant that there are some mothers who have honestly miscalculated their ability to care for and raise a child and that is a terrible situation all around. But it seems to me that most infants up for adoption are there because some poor kid was brainwashed or is getting paid to do it. The two birth mothers of my cousins kids certainly were. They were all offered the opportunity to remain in their children's lives to some degree but none took up the offer. Well, one did but she dropped out of sight soon after the birth. To give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps it was just too painful to be reminded of how they gave up their child. People do make mistakes. Especially teenagers.

I think it's horrible the way some organisations entrap vulnerable young girls and convince them they should go through with a pregnancy they don't want. Your life is never the sasme after giving birth. No matter if you keep the baby or not.

Man Anguille, don't take this wrong but that is just plain messed up. What you are saying here is kill the child because of selfish reasons of the mother. I cannot think of anything else to say than that is just plain messed up.

I think we should all be talking down the abortion industry. No one should "promote" the snuffing out of life for any reason.

I think it's horrible the way some organizations entrap vulnerable young girls and convince them they should snuff out the life within them for simply selfish reasons.

Immie

Try to stay on topic.

I'm beginning to think that you regard women who want any
thing other in life than to make babies as selfish.

Regardless if a woman's reasons can be considered selfish or not, it's her business and no one else's.

I happen to think popping out babies and tossing them to off to money grubbing baby brokers is the ultimate in selfishness. I wish I could think of some ethical way to stop them from from doing that, because I think the growing population is a grave danger to society and the environment, but I can't think of one so I have to say I agree with a woman's right to give birth as well as her right to end a pregnancy.

 

[Anguille]

And what percentage of abortions is that? Clearly, if that were given as the primary reason, it would have been discussed by Guttmacher. I would guess that falls in the "Other 4%" category and is most likely less than the incidence of rape.

That doesn't answer my question.

 

[Immanuel]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Actually that has been pointed out many times. But do you realize that according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an arm of Planned Parenthood, that only 7% of all abortions are primarily performed for the reasons of fetal abnormalities, health of the mother, rape or incest?

As for the idea that it is not smart for a woman who cannot afford to bring a child into this world, she already made her choice when she chose to have unprotected sex. Unless of course she was raped which happens in, according to Guttmacher, about 1% of the cases of abortion.

Welcome to USMB. Glad you're here.

Immie

A fair point. So, if this is about pro-life, shouldnt that also encompass the quality of said life? What is the percentage of people procreating into poverty? I think if you dug around, you would find that the poorer people are, the more children they tend to have. Education has a lot to do with this. Procreating into poverty only continues that spiral.

I don't know the percentage, but, being wealthy is not all about having money. A family that would be considered poverty stricken may in fact be the most wealthy people in the world depending on their view of things.

Life is not always easy. I would personally prefer never to discuss abortion again. I actually hate that my side, the pro-life side, is seen as being so anti-woman. I believe in doing everything we can to help women in a crisis pregnancies both before giving birth and after. I don't have all the answers, but one thing I am certain of, taking the life of the unborn child is one of the worst answers imaginable.

I believe that most people that are "pro-choice" see things much as I do except that they view the role of government differently than I do. I can accept their view. I am definitely willing to discuss all options that would reduce the number of abortions. Unfortunately, I don't think either political party wants us discussing that. Both of them, use this issue to divide us.

Immie