|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-17-2011, 01:19 PM
Quote:
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
01-17-2011, 01:30 PM
I've always been on the fence with this subject, but based on my beliefs, I fit in with the "pro-choice" side, and just because I'm pro-choice, doesn't mean I'm "pro-abortion". I believe that the parties involved should make the decision on whether or not they should go through with an abortion. I would prefer it if the people didn't, but if they decide to do so, it's their business, not mine. I also can't judge those who do so either, because to for the woman, it's probably not only physical drain, but it has to be mentally and emotionally draining as well. I know for me, I'd rather go the adoption route if ever in the situation, but that's just me.
I only know of one abortion story in my family, and that's my grandmother. When my grandmother became pregnant with her oldest child, she wasn't married. Back in the 1950s, as most might know, it's looked down upon to be an unwed mother. Her mother (my great-grandmother) was urging her to get the abortion. My grandmother was about to go with it, on the table and everything, but at the last moment refused to go through with it. She ended up going to live with some other relatives. That's something else that was done a lot back then. If you got pregnant, you got "sent away". You leave by yourself, and come back with "cousin", that type of thing. My grandmother had my aunt, but had to put her up for adoption. My grandmother talked about how she always felt terrible that she had given up her oldest (yeah, she did reconcile with her later on when she was in her teens), but it was emotionally draining on her. She used to have bad dreams about it. Either way, abortion route or the adoption route, both are still emotionally draining situations.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-17-2011, 08:37 PM
Quote:
I mean: if life isn't sacred why should anyone bother with the situation of the orphans or the children living in poverty in any country. My problem with abortion is not that women have a choice, so they can decide whether they want the child or not(it's actually a life-saving decision many times), but that in certain situations they are told to do abort the fetus. Just like in the other thread you said the girl, who by the way was not forcing the boy to do anything, was acting selfish and stupid because she wanted to keep the child. Can you tell me what makes her decision less worthy than those who decide to do the abortion? You say abortion is the better choice, even if the woman against it... where is the truth in your words? No offense, but what you say is just unfair, and you do not support free-choice at all. The only thing which is missing, is the law which allows the father to make the decision whether he wants the child or not, males should have the same rights as females, and vice-versa, that's for sure... ----------------- The fact that someone in a specific thread about abortion won't speak about every human life which suffer from poverty and injustice doesn't mean s/he doesn't understand or support those who suffer if can or the opportunity is given, or that s/he's acting hypocritically. Life is sacred even if we don't have the power to protect everything and everyone and just by living we hurt and even kill many things around us. It is not decided or declared by ignorant human beings, it's a fact that exist, without life there is nothing, if life isn't sacred than the word 'sacred' is meaningless as it is. Or have you got something better than life to picture the meaning of 'sacred'? --------------- For those who cannot tell the difference between sperm and fetus: they should not speak at all, it's just ignorance and makes their argument really ridiculous. @SCIFFIX In my country women only allowed to do abortion if there is/are health or financial issues or the pregnancy is a cause of raping/ of any violent or illegal act. And even than, there is a time limit of it, which varies regarding of what the reason is - the longest time-limit is given when some kind of health issue occurs during the pregnancy, basically the mother's life is more valuable than the fetus and if there is a health problem with the child if it would born with an incurable disease the parents can decide not to keep it.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-17-2011, 09:17 PM
Some may think my words were cruel but whensomeone says thatlife is not sacred yet they have their own precious child. I do apologise though-- my comments were uncalled for.
when we look into a baby's face-- can we say to it-- oh I had thought it was best not to Keep you-- but Now I am so glad that I DID keep you. ANd GN I am glad that after so long that you do have a beautifiul daughter. By rights I should have been aborted-- so I don't know why I wasn't-- except it never used to be legal. At least your daughter was really wanted.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-18-2011, 06:31 AM
I perhaps was harsher in tone than intended. The point I was makeing is that I'm not to blame for whatever happens in Somalia, nor will me liveing a certain lifestyle change the evil men that run Somalia.
As a counter Gonative; Perhaps the western world doesn't care much about the ten's of thusands of poverty striken children dieing in the world today, because Abortion has taught them that life is no more precious than last years car model. The western world has become jaded.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-18-2011, 06:48 AM
I'm not so sure it's because we have become jaded as that would imply that once we did care which I'd also argue is not true. In fact I'd argue that our affluent lifestyles have only been possible due to suffering. Our economies depend on it. The US for instance was only able to rise to such prominence so quickly because of slavery. It's easy to get rich when you don't have to pay workers. The class systems in many western nations like the UK also helped with this. For people to get really rich you generally need others to be remain really poor. To maintain our affluent lifestyles it's not in our best interests to help poor nations improve their lot too much. Anyway again my point is that as we accept so much poverty, needless death and suffering all the time it's just a bit hypocritical to then single out abortion as somehow a bigger issue than say actually helping those who already have been born and are struggling to survive. To me abortion is just such an incredibly minor issue that makes little difference to our societies one way or the other.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
01-19-2011, 02:00 AM
Quote:
I think you're applying common rules for dog breeding onto human beings - and those two don't really work the same way. Miscarriage for humans doesn't necessarily mean that there's anything wrong with the mother. Nature DOES know best in my opinion. Many babies are born early. The earlier the child is born, the lower are its chances of survival. However, our technology is developed enough to keep a child born at 7 months alive - risks involved of course.. Quote:
We have legal abortions here up to the 12th-15th week I believe.. I'm not quite sure. But there's definitely a limit. [ ♥<-- Jordan's heart! \(Ò_ó)/ ]
Follow me on TUMBLR "Well if a chick has a problem with the way I conduct myself I'd draw the bitch a map to the nearest exit and stamp "fuck off" on her forehead." - Pot Roast
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-19-2011, 03:24 AM
The US didn't come to prominace because of Slavery, that's impossible. The South was an agrigarian culture that was no where near as industrialized as the North. Plus the US fought a devestateing civil war over it, wich left over 600,000 dead. The most Americans killed in any war they ever fought in.
While it's true we treated the local natives poorly, the US itself didn't become a world power until the Spanish American war in 1898, 30 years after slavery had been abolished. What made America powerful was the relentless drive and desire to live a better life than you were born with. The freedom to pursue those dreams, Plus the massive amounts of natural resources on a continant that we were able to unite. The US was going to become rich and powerful reguardless of what the rest of the world did, just because of the basic cultural attitudes of American's in general and the abundance of resources available tied with the ability to unite a continant twice the size of Europe as one nation. Not to mention the US gives more to charity and world food bank than all other nations combined. Many third world nations who were "taken advantage of" dureing the colonial period have been independant for over 60 years or longer...Japan built itself into an economic power after ww2 despite being devestated. What's the third worlds excuse for not matching Japan? Japan doesn't even have many natural resources compared with Africa. You can't blame the western world for many of these 3rd world nations problems today, the blame lies with them. It isn't the west wipeing out millions in Durfar, not the West that killed 800,000 in Rawanda, not the west that let thier population starve in Somalia. Abortion, in the US anyway, has claimed over 50 million. I would suggest that has made a huge difference on our cultural identity. That's 50 million people who never grew up, voted, got a job, discovered anything, invented anything or saved the third world from starvation. Wich perhaps they might have, had then been allowed to live.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-19-2011, 09:55 AM
nante ne
I object to you saying that I am comparing dog breeding to humans. Nature does usually know best any way. There usually is a reason for miscarriages. You seem to think you know best.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
01-20-2011, 03:51 AM
The influence we have in less developed nations would be better put to use if we just left them to thier own devices. Let them sink or swim on thier own. We need to stop helping them because it's just breeding resentment.
I would counter pro life being anti choice, with pro choice being pro death.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
