billvon 2,991 #51 June 9, 2009 >Or calling pro-choice anti-children or anti-life as you are ending a life of a child. OK. And we'll start calling the pro-life people "anti-women's-rights." Then everyone will be equally pissed off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #52 June 9, 2009 Quote>Or calling pro-choice anti-children or anti-life as you are ending a life of a child. OK. And we'll start calling the pro-life people "anti-women's-rights." Then everyone will be equally pissed off. because men should have NO SAY in the choice? edited to change a period to a question mark so the sarcasm is more evident. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #53 June 9, 2009 Quote Or calling pro-choice anti-children or anti-life as you are ending a life of a child. No, you're not. You're ending life of fetus - which is not the same thing as child, both in common sense and legal meanings. Acting as it was true you're no different than someone who would force everyone to do dinner prays just because he himself believes in Jesus.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #54 June 9, 2009 QuoteQuote Or calling pro-choice anti-life as you are ending a life of a child. No, you're not. You're ending life of fetus - which is not the same thing as child, both in common sense and legal meanings. Acting as it was true you're no different than someone who would force everyone to do dinner prays just because he himself believes in Jesus. OK, Just Anti Life then, because surely you admit that it is Alive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #55 June 9, 2009 Quote OK, Just Anti Life then, because surely you admit that it is Alive. No, anti-life assumes you would want or even encourage everyone to take their life. While, in fact, you only recognize their rights to do so, that's why it's called pro-choice. However making a choice regarding to life is done by a specific individual, and that's why supporting death penalty and wars is truly anti-life.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #56 June 9, 2009 >because men should have NO SAY in the choice? No, because the pro-lifers want to take away rights that women currently have. It makes as much sense as your "anti-life" example. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #57 June 9, 2009 Quote because men should have NO SAY in the choice? When you can carry the fetus in your body or when technology has evolved to a point where a woman doesn't have to carry a fetus for the fetus to survive, you can have a say. Until that point, as long as it's inside her body, it's her choice whether to continue to carry it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #58 June 9, 2009 Quote surely you admit that it is Alive. Of course a fetus is alive (so are bacteria). It's also human, given its DNA. Abortion really isn't a question of alive or not alive, human or not human. It's a question of whose rights trump whose, and at what point, if any, prior to birth, does a fetus have rights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #59 June 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteI used to be pro-life, with no exceptions, but that has definitely changed over the past few years. There are so many truly unwanted children in the world.... foster kids, neglected kids, abandoned kids, those kids that slip through the cracks, and many end up really hurting society by draining resources, eating up welfare money, etc. I'd much rather see the focus be on preventing the 'need' for abortion.... easy access to sterilization, birth control, education, foster care reform, more adoptions of older children to help break the cycle, etc. Solve the root problem (unwanted pregnancy) and the symptom (abortion) goes away. So why not start killing foster kids? No, that wouldn't be right......kill them before they are offically "kids". Did you even read what I wrote??? Prevent the PREGNANCY... no preggers, no abortion, fostering, anything. Instead of focusing on the symptom of the problem (abortion), pro life groups should be focusing on the root problem (unwanted pregnancies and the situations that lead to such). Oh, by the way, I'm in the middle of adopting a 15 year old boy out of foster care. I practice my beliefs every day. When his adoption is final, we'll begin the adoption process of another teenager. As one leaves the nest, we'll adopt another, and so on. I firmly believe in practicing my ideals. And to top it all off, I'm agnostic. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #60 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuote OK, Just Anti Life then, because surely you admit that it is Alive. No, anti-life assumes you would want or even encourage everyone to take their life. While, in fact, you only recognize their rights to do so, that's why it's called pro-choice. However making a choice regarding to life is done by a specific individual, and that's why supporting death penalty and wars is truly anti-life. What choice does the unborn child have? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #61 June 10, 2009 Quote What choice does the unborn child have? Do you have any proof that the unborn fetus is capable to have choices?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #62 June 10, 2009 So a woman has all the say, and it's the womans job to have the kid, and the man's job to finacially support the 2 for 18 years or loose his child to a "medical Procedure" and he should have no say in the matter. OK, I think I understand your point of view. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. Men should have no rights after the initial intercourse when it come to if their child lives to see day one or not. Sounds fair to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #63 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuote surely you admit that it is Alive. Of course a fetus is alive (so are bacteria). It's also human, given its DNA. Abortion really isn't a question of alive or not alive, human or not human. It's a question of whose rights trump whose, and at what point, if any, prior to birth, does a fetus have rights. Based on this arguement, and the fact that you believe women should have the right to abortions, do you think there is anything wrong with "abortion as birth control"? If it is just a medical procedure and not the "ending of a life" why don't "pro choice" people proudly claim "Pro Abortion" and support abortion as a valid form of birth control no matter how many times a woman wants to do it. Based on what you say, these is nothing wrong with a woman having 2 or 3 abortions a year. Is this how you feel? If not why is it ok to choose it once (or twice) in a womans life and not every month or two? Just trying to clear up where the "line" is with you. My line is at conception. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #64 June 10, 2009 > My line is at conception. So you believe that when an egg is fertilized (conception) but it does not implant, it is the same as if a child had died? Would you have a funeral for the embryo? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Caitlin89 0 #65 June 10, 2009 Quote Men should have no rights after the initial intercourse when it come to if their child lives to see day one or not. Sounds fair to me. While this has been said to you here, it appears as though you're not exactly comprehending. Until the age of viability (which is generally agreed upon at 22 weeks), the FETUS can NOT survive outside of the womb. So, therefore, NO, the man does not have any say in what happens, especially before this age of viability is reached. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #66 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI used to be pro-life, with no exceptions, but that has definitely changed over the past few years. There are so many truly unwanted children in the world.... foster kids, neglected kids, abandoned kids, those kids that slip through the cracks, and many end up really hurting society by draining resources, eating up welfare money, etc. I'd much rather see the focus be on preventing the 'need' for abortion.... easy access to sterilization, birth control, education, foster care reform, more adoptions of older children to help break the cycle, etc. Solve the root problem (unwanted pregnancy) and the symptom (abortion) goes away. So why not start killing foster kids? No, that wouldn't be right......kill them before they are offically "kids". Did you even read what I wrote??? Prevent the PREGNANCY... no preggers, no abortion, fostering, anything. Instead of focusing on the symptom of the problem (abortion), pro life groups should be focusing on the root problem (unwanted pregnancies and the situations that lead to such). Oh, by the way, I'm in the middle of adopting a 15 year old boy out of foster care. I practice my beliefs every day. When his adoption is final, we'll begin the adoption process of another teenager. As one leaves the nest, we'll adopt another, and so on. I firmly believe in practicing my ideals. And to top it all off, I'm agnostic. I appreciate your adoptions, and while it is not at the same level, I spent 2 years of my life looking after 12 DJJ kids 24 hours a day 5 (and sometimes 7) days a week at a wilderness facility. These were kids who's parents had abandoned them or didn't care enough about them to teach them how to be "decent human beings" so we spent between 9 months and 18 months teaching them how to be civilized. This was sleeping in a bug net in the middle of the everglades. So while I apperciate you saying you are "helping the problem" but my 2 years with 12 kids equals about 24 years looking after 1 foster kid. NOt trying to say you are not doing something, more so that I have also done my "trying to make the world a better place one kid at a time". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #67 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuote What choice does the unborn child have? Do you have any proof that the unborn fetus is capable to have choices? That's very clever. They have about as much as a newborn. Should we kill them too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #68 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuote What choice does the unborn child have? Do you have any proof that the unborn fetus is capable to have choices? What choice does any baby have? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #69 June 10, 2009 Quote> My line is at conception. So you believe that when an egg is fertilized (conception) but it does not implant, it is the same as if a child had died? Would you have a funeral for the embryo? Define a funeral. Funeral's are for the living, not the dead. If the parents feel a need (the same as if the child had died during the birth or within the first few days) to have a funeral, let them. If the dead is "unborn", 1 minute old, 2 years old, or 85 years old, dead people don't care about a funeral. only living people do. Are you saying a woman (and the father) that has a miscarrage does not have a right to greive however they see fit? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #70 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteOh, by the way, I'm in the middle of adopting a 15 year old boy out of foster care. I practice my beliefs every day. I appreciate your adoptions, and while it is not at the same level, I spent 2 years of my life looking after 12 DJJ kids 24 hours a day 5 (and sometimes 7) days a week at a wilderness facility. These were kids who's parents had abandoned them or didn't care enough about them to teach them how to be "decent human beings" so we spent between 9 months and 18 months teaching them how to be civilized. This was sleeping in a bug net in the middle of the everglades. So while I apperciate you saying you are "helping the problem" but my 2 years with 12 kids equals about 24 years looking after 1 foster kid. NOt trying to say you are not doing something, more so that I have also done my "trying to make the world a better place one kid at a time". I'm trying understand what you're saying here but it's NOT coming off how it should. It's rather confusing to read. Are you arguing against her beliefs or her acts? Or are you saying "ok, you help, but I do 'x'." This post really just makes you look rather ... rude (I guess would be the correct word) I might not always agree with perengrinerose about other things, but I'm having a VERY HARD TIME finding fault with her comments and even a harder time understanding if your post is an insult or a "me too." type statement. I guess I'm just trying to say: I think you might want to rephrase or rethink those comments. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #71 June 10, 2009 Quote That's very clever. They have about as much as a newborn. Would you please provide any proof to support your statement that a fetus (in any state, including just a fertilized egg, as you didn't seem to specify any restrictions) is as capable of making choices as a newborn? Once you have it done, could you please explain the proper way to ask the opinion of the fetus - or you want us all just ask you instead of fetus?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #72 June 10, 2009 QuoteWhat choice does any baby have? We're talking about abortion now. There is no baby yet.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #73 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteOh, by the way, I'm in the middle of adopting a 15 year old boy out of foster care. I practice my beliefs every day. I appreciate your adoptions, and while it is not at the same level, I spent 2 years of my life looking after 12 DJJ kids 24 hours a day 5 (and sometimes 7) days a week at a wilderness facility. These were kids who's parents had abandoned them or didn't care enough about them to teach them how to be "decent human beings" so we spent between 9 months and 18 months teaching them how to be civilized. This was sleeping in a bug net in the middle of the everglades. So while I apperciate you saying you are "helping the problem" but my 2 years with 12 kids equals about 24 years looking after 1 foster kid. NOt trying to say you are not doing something, more so that I have also done my "trying to make the world a better place one kid at a time". I'm trying understand what you're saying here but it's NOT coming off how it should. It's rather confusing to read. Are you arguing against her beliefs or her acts? Or are you saying "ok, you help, but I do 'x'." This post really just makes you look rather ... rude (I guess would be the correct word) I might not always agree with perengrinerose about other things, but I'm having a VERY HARD TIME finding fault with her comments and even a harder time understanding if your post is an insult or a "me too." type statement. I guess I'm just trying to say: I think you might want to rephrase or rethink those comments. I take her comment as saying "I am doing my part by adopting children.....what have you done" and I've spent 2 years of my live trying (24 hours a day 5 and sometimes 7 days a week) to make them better because most of them came from "families" that really didn't care about them. I appreciate what she has done, but if she is implying I don't do my share to "help with the problem, I figure it as 24 months with 12 kids says that arguement does not fly with me. I've done my part too. Sorry if it came off as if I were saying something else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 1 #74 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuote That's very clever. They have about as much as a newborn. Have a good night everyone, and Go Penguins (Sorry, I'm a hockey fan) Would you please provide any proof to support your statement that a fetus in any stage (in any state, including just a fertilized egg, as you didn't seem to specify any restrictions) is as capable of making choices as a newborn? Once you have it done, could you please explain the proper way to ask the opinion of the fetus - or you want us all just ask you instead of fetus? Are you saying that babies do not "express discomfort" while in a womans stomach. They do not just lie there and not move. Some react to spicey food, some to sudden motion. they don't just "float there". I'm off to bed. If I have time tomorrow I'll check back in. edited to move my response below yours. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #75 June 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhat choice does any baby have? We're talking about abortion now. There is no baby yet. Whatever makes you feel better. I'm not sure what it is kicking the inside of my friend's wife stomach. She should get that checked out, I guess. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
