Females: Do you feel your rights are being violated? (PBA BAN-VERY GRAPHIC)

[atlantabiolab]

What is the big deal? If there is a reason good enough to have it, then it should be done. Even if the reason is simply because they do not want it.

With your amazing rationale, can you please tell us why your argument cannot be used against people outside the womb? Maybe retarded kids or the homeless or "the poor". I mean isn't relieving them of their misery a "good reason"?

Most people who have posted have no qualms about repealing all welfare laws (basically starving kids to death because their parents are too inept to take care of them), but putting an unwanted child out of its potential misery is a tear-jerker?

You people need to stick to one line of thought. All of this hypocritical thinking is not healthy for the mind.

Damn, this coming from the most schizophrenic poster on EF.

Here's your reason: removing welfare from society does not equate to starvation, for man has choice, free-will. When his source of income is removed he WILL make a quick decision on how to remedy his situation, say get a job. And why does he do this? Because he wishes to LIVE. His primary urge in life is to extend his life to the next day and the next and so on.

Will all people accomplish this? No. But the lack of welfare does not prohibit him from living, for humans have compassion and there are organizations which deal with the needy.

I am sure you will say that this only applies to the adults and not the children, but as we all know, the parents are the care-takers of the children and their choice to care for the children is not based on their income so much as their love of their children, for even those who exist on our social support, every day kill their children in horrible manners. This goes for middle class and rich. As you stated, those "..too inept to take care of them." How does money aid them? If you don't care to take care of your children, what will money do? Buy you love? Many a poor person took care of their children and gave them a good upbringing, for social status does not make a good person or a good life.

Abortion on the other hand allows for no recourse of action for the child. Once you are dead, you don't get a second chance. Your end has been forced upon you with no ability to prevent this occurance. Starvation allows many opportunities for correction.

 

[Lumberg]

I just want to say that contrary to what some of you think I am learning and digesting and forming my own opinion by reading this thread.

I do not know all that much about abortions or PBAs and don't really have a strong opinion either way.

Which is not to say I will end up with one soon.

But I for one am glad this thread is not locked because I have never contemplated this issue deeply before.

 

[bunnymt]

But I for one am glad this thread is not locked because I have never contemplated this issue deeply before.

This is the point of threads like this one: To get people thinking about these important issues.

 

[velvett]

Threat to mother's life is a major argument used, and is perfectly reasonable, but I want more information regarding the specifics to make a fully reasoned judgement on this argument. If we are told that all cases are for essentially non-viable infants, then I must agree with the procedure. If we are told that a portion are for no better reasons than the mother does not want the child, then this is another story.

I don't believe (yet I'm no expert) that women that late in term are thinking "ou I can't stand the thought of having a child so I'm going to go to my local abortionist and kill it". Most women wouldn't even have the consideration as late term and partial birth abortions are just not done at whim to "get rid of an unwanted child".

If I can get my hands on the information you desire - I'll forward it to you.









Also in general it want to remind people that PBA's are not the same as the abortions that are done in the first trimester.

This is such a difficult topic because it is so hard to find information that is not put together to purposely sway one's decision for or against.

 

[Lumberg]

This is such a difficult topic because it is so hard to find information that is not put together to purposely sway one's decision for or against.

I have noticed that just from reading this thread.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Wonder what would happen if the doc always gave the abortion mom a special abortion tatoo on her abdomen so all future lovers would they were bagging an abortion chick.

 

[velvett]

Wonder what would happen if the doc always gave the abortion mom a special abortion tatoo on her abdomen so all future lovers would they were bagging an abortion chick.

LOL

Probably the same thing if a forehead tatoo went on every guy that date raped a girl (or tried) at one time or another.

 

[Testosterone boy]

LOL

Probably the same thing if a forehead tatoo went on every guy that date raped a girl (or tried) at one time or another.

Why does the guy get a forehead tatoo instead of an abdomen tatoo?

Otherwise the idea is good.

 

[velvett]

Why does the guy get a forehead tatoo instead of an abdomen tatoo?

Otherwise the idea is good.

To reduce the insult to injury.

Because if the guy had the forehead tatoo - some girl may not have the ab tatoo.




doh!

 

[danielson]

Why does the guy get a forehead tatoo instead of an abdomen tatoo?

Otherwise the idea is good.

because unlike men, women will actually look at a guys face when talking to them