How is abortion not murder?

[hipster_19]

[/QUOTE] AH, but you ARE promoting a "right to breed". WHY SHOULD THERE BE ANY COMPENSATION EVEN FOR THE FIRST CHILD, if the parents are so incompetent they cannot afford to raise offspring? Go back again to Message #93 and read what an "ecological niche" is. ANY Welfare payment that helps incompent people have kids is just an invitation for incompetent people to pass on their genes-for-incompetence. Welfare should ONLY AND STRICTLY be used to help the distressed. (Like the father of a family dies in an industrial accident; he WAS able to support the kids he had, and the mother can't, alone ...should she have another kid? NOT UNTIL SHE CAN AFFORD IT.) Next, where are you going to PUT those kids you take away from their incompetent parents? After the meaning of "incompetent parents passing on genes-for-incompetence" sinks in, how many potential adopters will line up? How is raising them in an orphanage for 18 years less a bite into your tax dollars than abortion?[/QUOTE]

Thank you!!! Give em hell! Its nice to know there are some other people who think rationally on this site!

 

[easyt65]

AH, but you ARE promoting a "right to breed". WHY SHOULD THERE BE ANY COMPENSATION EVEN FOR THE FIRST CHILD, if the parents are so incompetent they cannot afford to raise offspring?

I didn't say I approved of it, just that I would (be able to) go along with it because the bleeding-heart, I'm-a-victim Libs would say, "How horrible! Everyone makes mistakes, and you are just plain cruel and evil!" I do think people make mistakes, but having 3 kids, as in my scenario, is NOT a mistake. I also didn't say I would give the unwed mom with 1 or 2 kids a free ride. I will agree to give her a check to ensure she feeds and takes care of the child, but I am also going to expect her get a job, get an education, etc. Faith-based organizations and FAMILY are better at helping with that than the Federal govt! Again, I am not promoting breeding, but I am promoting that people be held accountable instead of treated like victims for their own choices and given a free ride!

And I can understand how you would be upset about being called Pro-Abortionists, but that is exactly what you are. When you really get down to it, I am NOT an anit-abortioist. I am for a choice, as well, but my choice is LIFE, responsibility, accountability not simply killing a kid because 'I' was irresponsible and am now faced with an inconvenience!

I read, I believe - sorry if I am wrong - Stace say that she thought the baby in the womb is nothing but a clump of cells at the time of abortion. During many abortions, like late term abortion, that 'lump of cells' has well-defined fingers, toes, a heartbeat, and other features....but many Pro-abortionists find it easier to disregard that fact, to refer to it as nothing more than a 'lump' of cells...helps ease the conscience and make the choice/act easier to deal with.

 

[hipster_19]

I didn't say I approved of it, just that I would (be able to) go along with it because the bleeding-heart, I'm-a-victim Libs would say, "How horrible! Everyone makes mistakes, and you are just plain cruel and evil!" I do think people make mistakes, but having 3 kids, as in my scenario, is NOT a mistake.

For some people, a couple of their kids could have been a mistake. But, we-know-all Conservatives think that is a mistake that should be lived with the rest of a person's life. Is it better to raise a child in a **** poor environment with a screwed up family, who may or may not abuse them because they were not wanted in the first place? I've volunteered at an orphanage before, and the lives these children have lived is something that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy! Is that a better solution?!

And I can understand how you would be upset about being called Pro-Abortionists, but that is exactly what you are. When you really get down to it, I am NOT an anit-abortioist. I am for a choice, as well, but my choice is LIFE, responsibility, accountability not simply killing a kid because 'I' was irresponsible and am now faced with an inconvenience!

We are not, under any circumstances, pro-abortionists. And, as I said, its ignorant to think so! I am not happy about abortions, but it is something that is going to happen in this society whether you or I like it or not. So, I'm not so much pro-abortion as I am 'pro-let the woman make up her own damn mind'!!

 

[easyt65]

We are not, under any circumstances, pro-abortionists. And, as I said, its ignorant to think so! I am not happy about abortions, but it is something that is going to happen in this society whether you or I like it or not. So, I'm not so much pro-abortion as I am 'pro-let the woman make up her own damn mind'!!

YOU personally may not be a Pro-Abortionist, but anyone who is willing to allow Late-term Abortions for anyother reasonthan the safey of the mother or some other medical emergency IS! This procedure, as I have pointed out over and over, has been outlawed by numerous countries due to its barbaric nature. the procedure is (often) performed on viable fetus, babies inside the womb that could live outside the womb! The PRO-ABORTIONISTS are the ones so rabid that they feel if they give in and give up this type of abortion that it will only open up the door to lose more, much like the NRA demands the right for gun owners to own armor piercing shells, believing if they give 1 inch they will end up losing a mile. What a STUPID reason to continue this procedure! I am actually shocked that THESE people don't insist that when the baby is first born, until it takes its 1st breath, it is not alive and can be 'terminated' on the delivery room table if the mother decides at that moment she doesn't want the baby!

Also, anyone so rabidly for abortions that they advocate the federal goverment stepping in, stripping away parents' rights, and having strangers take our kids to have abortions without notifying us is a PRO-ABORTIONIST! A minor can't even get an aspirin in a hospital without parental concent but they can have this medical procedure to end the life growing inside them without even notifying the parents let alone their consent?! THAT is NUTS! They have no concern about the girl's health, mental or physical, after the abortion, the support that she will need - support that her family will not be able to give because they have been shut out of what's going on. that isn't doing the child any favors!

For some people, a couple of their kids could have been a mistake. But, we-know-all Conservatives think that is a mistake that should be lived with the rest of a person's life.

I hate to tell you, pal, but there are many mistakes in life that are forever whether you like it or not! HIV/AIDS is one of them! Who do you blame when these same women go out and have unprotected sex and get HIV? Yeah, I know - the 'it's not my fault' generation: you blame the guy! It takes two, as I have been told, though! 1 mistake,and you have HIV for the rest of your life. Instead of selling our kids that nothing is our fault, we SHOULD be teaching them that there are consequences, thar we do have to be responsible, and that we do have to make choices...that there are consequences to our choices/actions! I don't think it is expecting to much from others to be responsible and to try to THINK before they act.

you better believe, especially with what's out there today, I tell my kids to make smart choices because sometimes you only get 1 shot, that some - SOME - mistakes are forever!

 

[hipster_19]

YOU personally may not be a Pro-Abortionist, but anyone who is willing to allow Late-term Abortions for anyother reasonthan the safey of the mother or some other medical emergency IS! This procedure, as I have pointed out over and over, has been outlawed by numerous countries due to its barbaric nature. the procedure is (often) performed on viable fetus, babies inside the womb that could live outside the womb! The PRO-ABORTIONISTS are the ones so rabid that they feel if they give in and give up this type of abortion that it will only open up the door to lose more, much like the NRA demands the right for gun owners to own armor piercing shells, believing if they give 1 inch they will end up losing a mile. What a STUPID reason to continue this procedure! I am actually shocked that THESE people don't insist that when the baby is first born, until it takes its 1st breath, it is not alive and can be 'terminated' on the delivery room table if the mother decides at that moment she doesn't want the baby!

You know whats barbaric....meeting a child who cannot walk or speak because their mother decided that the best way to 'terminate' a pregnancy was by burning her child alive! You don't think that if a mother's right to choose whether or not she keeps a fetus that is growing inside her is taken away, that the government will not realize that maybe they can get away with a little more?! I do not approve of abortions and would never have one myself, but who am I to tell someone that they must carry something inside them for 9 months, no matter what the conditions or whether or not she even wants it there in the first place. I think that most people that have an abortion for any reason other than to protect the health of the mother, or in situations of rape or incest, are selfish, but that is their right, and theirs alone.

Also, anyone so rabidly for abortions that they advocate the federal goverment stepping in, stripping away parents' rights, and having strangers take our kids to have abortions without notifying us is a PRO-ABORTIONIST! A minor can't even get an aspirin in a hospital without parental concent but they can have this medical procedure to end the life growing inside them without even notifying the parents let alone their consent?! THAT is NUTS! They have no concern about the girl's health, mental or physical, after the abortion, the support that she will need - support that her family will not be able to give because they have been shut out of what's going on. that isn't doing the child any favors!

I do not advocate having strangers take young people to have abortions. But, if those kids have no other option, what do they do? There's obviously a reason that they are not telling their parents, whether it be fear, or that they are afraid their parents will judge them or something if they want to have the pregnancy aborted. There should be places that young adults can go to be counseled as to their options and how to best tell their parents about the situation. But, if you were a child and had an avidly religious parent, or a parent that is so against abortions, wouldn't you be afraid to go to them with the idea that you don't want to have the baby?!

 

[hipster_19]

I hate to tell you, pal, but there are many mistakes in life that are forever whether you like it or not! HIV/AIDS is one of them! Who do you blame when these same women go out and have unprotected sex and get HIV? Yeah, I know - the 'it's not my fault' generation: you blame the guy! It takes two, as I have been told, though! 1 mistake,and you have HIV for the rest of your life. Instead of selling our kids that nothing is our fault, we SHOULD be teaching them that there are consequences, thar we do have to be responsible, and that we do have to make choices...that there are consequences to our choices/actions! I don't think it is expecting to much from others to be responsible and to try to THINK before they act.

I hate to tell YOU pal, but if someone contracted AIDS, I would totally blame them, as well as their partner. They chose to have unprotected sex with someone that obviously wasn't loyal to just them, or for whatever other reason! And I'm not sure where the 'it's not my fault' generation comes into play, but I believe I'm from the same generation as you. So, you would force a young woman who has no job, no education, and no source of income, to have a baby just to teach her a lesson?! Thats a pretty crappy reason to force someone to have child. There's gotta be a better explanation than that!

 

[easyt65]

You know whats barbaric....meeting a child who cannot walk or speak because their mother decided that the best way to 'terminate' a pregnancy was by burning her child alive!

OMG, it sounds like you are saying that abortions are needed because otherwise women would be setting fire to their babies! What a crock of a justification! A mother setting her child on fire is a totally seperate issue, and that freak will be punished to the full extent of the law. anyone who sets a child onfire has bigger issue than that she simply wanted an abortion and couldn't get one!

There should be places that young adults can go to be counseled as to their options and how to best tell their parents about the situation.

Absolutely, but the goverment should NOT be counseling my daughter and avising her to hide things from and lie to her parents- sounds like an indoctrination into politics! I want my goverment to support not undermine the American family structure and certainly not assault my rights as a parent and try to strip those rights from me!

 

[hipster_19]

OMG, it sounds like you are saying that abortions are needed because otherwise women would be setting fire to their babies! What a crock of a justification! A mother setting her child on fire is a totally seperate issue, and that freak will be punished to the full extent of the law. anyone who sets a child onfire has bigger issue than that she simply wanted an abortion and couldn't get one!

Thats not what I'm saying. I am saying that a woman that is an unfit parent, who has no job, no education, no way of caring for a child, should not be forced to have a child! I'm saying that it should be her own decision, and to hell with everyone else! It should be her decision and hers alone, end of discussion!

Absolutely, but the goverment should NOT be counseling my daughter and avising her to hide things from and lie to her parents- sounds like an indoctrination into politics! I want my goverment to support not undermine the American family structure and certainly not assault my rights as a parent and try to strip those rights from me!

Places like Planned Parenthood have very good counseling opportunities for young women, and young men, to talk about their issues and find the best way to deal with those issues. I do not support someone taking a young woman to a clinic and allowing her to get an abortion. To me, anyone under the age of 18 should have sufficient counseling with a parent or guardian prior to any procedure. But, in the end, it is her decision because she will have to live with it the rest of her life. And to assume that these evil organizations are brainwashing your children into lying to their parents and not listening to their parents is stupid! In the end, its the child's decision not to tell their parent, for whatever reason!

 

[easyt65]

And to assume that these evil organizations are brainwashing your children into lying to their parents and not listening to their parents is stupid!

Legislation/law is currently on the books today, thanks to Pro-Abortionists, that give strangers the right to take our/my children to get abortions without consent and knowledge - that is a fact! Any organizationwho does do that, encourages it, or even advocates it as a possibility is 'evil' - wrong! Glad to hear you disapprove of that practice.

 

[FutureIncoming]

{Due to shortage of time, I will only address part of Message #102 here. Later, though...}

easyt65 wrote: "I can understand how you would be upset about being called Pro-Abortionists"

It depends on the way "pro" is meant. If it is short for "promote" as in "push" then that is WRONG. Most pro-choicers merely want abortion to be an option, and that don't automatically push it as a solution. But if "pro" means "in favor of", that is different. One can be in favor of the existence of trees without planting trees on Arbor Day. I suspect most pro-lifers INTEND "pro-abortionists" to mean "those who promote abortion". I DO choose to object to that! SO, because the phrase can be falsely used and can be incorrectly interpreted, best it not be used at all.




easyt65 wrote: "Stace {may have said} the baby in the womb is nothing but a clump of cells at the time of abortion. During many abortions, like late term abortion, that 'lump of cells' has well-defined fingers, toes, a heartbeat, and other features..."

There are both facts and errors there. Let's start at the beginning. The just-fertilized egg is called a zygote; it is a single cell. Next, as soon as it starts dividing, it can be called a "clump of cells" or a "bunch of cells" or a "blastocyst", and this is quite true. At that stage all or nearly all the cells are of the undifferentiated "stem cell" type. Next, when the cells of the blastocyst starts differentiating into different types, such as skin, muscle, bone, etc, that is the "embryo" stage. This stage starts a little before implantation into a womb (it needs SOME specialized cells in order to implant), and proceeds for several weeks. According to this link:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fetu.htm
the fetal stage is (probably arbitrarily) declared to begin at 10 weeks. Around here you may see the shorthand ZEF or ZBEF to indicate all the stages, lumped together, of an unborn human organism. Note that even before the fetal stage begins, the embryo can fairly well resemble the normal human form. AND a large percentage of abortions are performed right around that time. BUT WHY SHOULD THE PHYSICAL STRUCTURE OF THE ORGANISM BE IMPORTANT??? Biologically, the organism is IN MEASURABLE FACT just a mindless animal. To declare it to be "special" is just to announce prejudice over all other equally mindless animals. To the extent that any human really IS special, compared to ordinary animals, that extent is a result of human mental ability, not physical structure. But NO unborn human has ANY mental ability more than ordinary animals, though. So, why be prejudiced? Because you were told lies from birth, as is true of most other prejudices?

 

[hipster_19]

Legislation/law is currently on the books today, thanks to Pro-Abortionists, that give strangers the right to take our/my children to get abortions without consent and knowledge - that is a fact! Any organizationwho does do that, encourages it, or even advocates it as a possibility is 'evil' - wrong! Glad to hear you disapprove of that practice.

I do advocate the fact that young adults should get counseling before doing anything rash, but it is ultimately their decision. But, with proper counseling and information, they should be able to make the right decision, whatever that may be.

 

[easyt65]

I do advocate the fact that young adults should get counseling before doing anything rash, but it is ultimately their decision. But, with proper counseling and information, they should be able to make the right decision, whatever that may be.

In the case of an under-aged person - a child, I think that is a FAMILY decision. Not yours, a stranger from the outside with different values and (obviously) opinions. The child should have a definite voice, but that decision and what happens should remain within the family! Again, I am not allowed to step into your family and demand that your child be allowed to pray, sacrifice, chickens, or any other religeous belief that I believe in, so you should have NO right to dictate what my family HAS to do. I already know you disagree and know you believe that the girl, even at an immature and in-experienced 13, should be given the right to do anything she wants.

funny, in America, you can get an abortion at 11-12-13, start driving at 15, get your liscence at 16, vote at 18, go to war and kill a man or die for your country at 18, but you can't have a drink until you're 21! Does that make any sense? You can be expecyed to kill or die at 18 for your country - be in charge of multi-million dollar equipment, but you can't have a beer? :shock: :roll:

Anyway, I digress......

 

[hipster_19]

In the case of an under-aged person - a child, I think that is a FAMILY decision. Not yours, a stranger from the outside with different values and (obviously) opinions. The child should have a definite voice, but that decision and what happens should remain within the family! Again, I am not allowed to step into your family and demand that your child be allowed to pray, sacrifice, chickens, or any other religeous belief that I believe in, so you should have NO right to dictate what my family HAS to do. I already know you disagree and know you believe that the girl, even at an immature and in-experienced 13, should be given the right to do anything she wants.

The person that is taking them to have an abortion is not necessarily forcing them to do it. I think it should be talked about with parents, but sometimes that is not an option with parents who force their ideas on their children and do not allow them to have a mind of their own. I do not think that strangers should be allowed to take a young adult to have an abortion, but, as I said, it is ultimately their decision. I don't necessarily believe that a 13 year old should be allowed to do whatever she wants, but if the child got pregnant in the first place, how well are they really being parented?!

funny, in America, you can get an abortion at 11-12-13, start driving at 15, get your liscence at 16, vote at 18, go to war and kill a man or die for your country at 18, but you can't have a drink until you're 21! Does that make any sense? You can be expecyed to kill or die at 18 for your country - be in charge of multi-million dollar equipment, but you can't have a beer? :shock: :roll:

And yes, I think it is very stupid that you can go to war and operate a motor vehicle, but can't drink! I wish I could have a beer right now!!!

 

[easyt65]

I think it should be talked about with parents, but sometimes that is not an option...

And there is where we disagree. I don't think it is up to you at all to decide what is or what is not an option in my family or decide when it is OK for a child to lie and hide things from their parents, thereby teaching my children unethical/immoral/'deviant' behavior.

(Going overboard here for a second with an obviously ridiculous statement for effect If you really want to take over the parental responsibilities of my children, then you can feed them, clothe them, and pay for their college, too. Its not a buffet or a choice of just what choices the goverment gets to make by intervening in my family - its all or nothing. If i can not be trusted to handle my own daughter's pregnance, i probably can be assessed as not responsible enough to HAVE kids and care for them. So, the goverment, as long as it is stepping in to make the decisions I am obviously too irresponsible to make, they might as well just take the kids and raise them themselves!

 

[Stace]

I read, I believe - sorry if I am wrong - Stace say that she thought the baby in the womb is nothing but a clump of cells at the time of abortion. During many abortions, like late term abortion, that 'lump of cells' has well-defined fingers, toes, a heartbeat, and other features....but many Pro-abortionists find it easier to disregard that fact, to refer to it as nothing more than a 'lump' of cells...helps ease the conscience and make the choice/act easier to deal with.

Just to clear this up.....I don't think it's nothing more than a clump of cells, not past the beginning stages, anyhow. Many abortions are performed within the first couple of weeks after the woman finds out she is pregnant, and within those first few weeks, the embryo is certainly not very recognizable as having distinct features.

Then again, us here on the boards are not the ones going out and having abortions. Most of us think that it's not necessarily the best route to take, but we support a woman's choice to take that route if she feels it is best for her. And if she doesn't want to be pregnant, it most likely is nothing but a clump of cells, or a parasite, to her.

 

[Stace]

I think it should be talked about with parents, but sometimes that is not an option...

And there is where we disagree. I don't think it is up to you at all to decide what is or what is not an option in my family or decide when it is OK for a child to lie and hide things from their parents, thereby teaching my children unethical/immoral/'deviant' behavior.

(Going overboard here for a second with an obviously ridiculous statement for effect If you really want to take over the parental responsibilities of my children, then you can feed them, clothe them, and pay for their college, too. Its not a buffet or a choice of just what choices the goverment gets to make by intervening in my family - its all or nothing. If i can not be trusted to handle my own daughter's pregnance, i probably can be assessed as not responsible enough to HAVE kids and care for them. So, the goverment, as long as it is stepping in to make the decisions I am obviously too irresponsible to make, they might as well just take the kids and raise them themselves!

Hipster wasn't saying that it's ok for anyone else to decide what is or isn't an option for YOUR family......She was saying that many parents are extremely religious, or perhaps just set in their ways, and these children have had it drilled into their heads that abortion is wrong, or something, and they don't feel that they can talk to their parents because they know their parents won't approve and feel that their parents won't help them make the right choice. Believe me, I've seen families where kids can't talk to their parents about something or another because the parents are so set in their ways, they wouldn't listen to a thing their child was saying.

 

[hipster_19]

And there is where we disagree. I don't think it is up to you at all to decide what is or what is not an option in my family or decide when it is OK for a child to lie and hide things from their parents, thereby teaching my children unethical/immoral/'deviant' behavior.

(Going overboard here for a second with an obviously ridiculous statement for effect If you really want to take over the parental responsibilities of my children, then you can feed them, clothe them, and pay for their college, too. Its not a buffet or a choice of just what choices the goverment gets to make by intervening in my family - its all or nothing. If i can not be trusted to handle my own daughter's pregnance, i probably can be assessed as not responsible enough to HAVE kids and care for them. So, the goverment, as long as it is stepping in to make the decisions I am obviously too irresponsible to make, they might as well just take the kids and raise them themselves!

Stace took the words right out of my mouth! I do not, under any circumstances, want the responsibility of taking care of your family. But, if I was your daughter, hypothetically speaking, and I became pregnant, I think I would have a real problem speaking to you about it because of your obvious disgust with abortions. So now, I'm left with no one to talk to because I'm afraid that you would totally disregard my feelings. Now, I'm not saying thats the case, because you may be very understanding with your child, but you don't think that thought is running through a child's mind when they have to talk about anything serious with their parents?!
I have been blessed with parents that I can talk about anything with and that allow me to think for myself, which in turn makes me deal with my own consequences, should there be any. I'm not saying that you cannot deal with your own daughter's pregnancy, I'm saying that your daughter might think that you don't want to listen to what she has to say because you are the parent and know more than she does!

 

[easyt65]

But, if I was your daughter, hypothetically speaking, and I became pregnant, I think I would have a real problem speaking to you about it because of your obvious disgust with abortions. So now, I'm left with no one to talk to because I'm afraid that you would totally disregard my feelings.

Therein lies the problem - from a few short posts from some board, you already profess/assume to know me, how open the relationship between me and my family is at home, how tolerant or supportive I am, and thus pass judgement on me, thinking YOU know better about my family than I do! At least we have had a few posts between us on this board for you to jump to that wild @ssed conclussion whereas a principal, according to the legislation on the books, doesn't have to know me from Adam in order to decide what is best for my daughter and take her to have that abortion without consulting me if he chooses!

Thank you for helping me to make my point of how many pro-abortionist and goverment officals generalize and justify their enacting this legislation that strips parents of their rights as parents!

Fr your information, we have a very open and supportive family, and my kids can and do come to my wife and i about anything they have going on. I do not dictate what they should or should not do. I do try to instill MY values and morals - not yours or any politicians, but I give them the freedom to make many decisions on their own....and we don't need you making wrong assumptions or passing judgement on us as you just did. If this was a 'real' situation I would be telling you at this point that you don't have the 1st clue about me or my family, this isn't any of your concern, and to butt the h@ll out!

 

[steen]

hipster_19 wrote: "Would you people seriously stop referring to pro-choicers as 'pro-abortionists'!!! That is just ignorant!"

Heh, on the other hand, calling the "pro-life" crowd "anti-abortionists IS correct, because they are NOT all actually "pro-life". Why some of the most verbal among them promoted (and still promote) a recent war!

It has also become clear by now that they really are "pro-fault," that the "right to life" that they claim to exist, this right only apply if there is somebody else at fault and not taking responsibility for that fault.

 

[steen]

YOU personally may not be a Pro-Abortionist, but anyone who is willing to allow Late-term Abortions for anyother reasonthan the safey of the mother or some other medical emergency IS! This procedure, as I have pointed out over and over, has been outlawed by numerous countries due to its barbaric nature. the procedure is (often) performed on viable fetus, babies inside the womb that could live outside the womb!

And here you are presumably refering to the medical procedure that anti-choicers refer to as "partial birth" abortion, then your description is an outright lie.

 

[FutureIncoming]

I see easyt65 did not respond to Message #110, but I also see that only part of that warranted a reply. I will start this message off with that part, before getting to the rest of my reply to Message #102.
+++
Note that even before the fetal stage begins, the embryo can fairly well resemble the normal human form. AND a large percentage of abortions are performed right around that time. BUT WHY SHOULD THE PHYSICAL STRUCTURE OF THE ORGANISM BE IMPORTANT??? Biologically, the organism is IN MEASURABLE FACT just a mindless animal. To declare it to be "special" is just to announce prejudice over all other equally mindless animals. To the extent that any human really IS special, compared to ordinary animals, that extent is a result of human mental ability, not physical structure. But NO unborn human has ANY mental ability more than ordinary animals. So, why be prejudiced? Because you were told lies from birth, as is true of most other prejudices?
+++



In Message #102, easyt65 quoted: "WHY SHOULD THERE BE ANY COMPENSATION EVEN FOR THE FIRST CHILD, if the parents are so incompetent they cannot afford to raise offspring?"

--and wrote: "I didn't say I approved of it, just that I would (be able to) go along with it because the bleeding-heart, I'm-a-victim Libs would say, "How horrible! Everyone makes mistakes, and you are just plain cruel and evil!"

Is NATURE cruel and evil? But in Nature, any life-form that cannot support its offspring until they become self-supporting is going to see those offspring die. And humans are NOT superior to Mother Nature. What we DO have is a "social factor" greater than any other non-herbivore. (Can you imagine 100,000 lions per square mile getting along with each other, like there are humans in Manhattan at noon?) Social animals stick together because it tends to increase the chances of survival for individuals. Humans can and do use their superior mental abilities to offer superior social support, over the Natural variety. The governments of some nations are called "Socialist" for a reason! HOWEVER, we have plenty of evidence that too much of a good thing is ALWAYS a bad thing. That's why I mentioned the "ecological niche" problem, with respect to the social support thing called "Welfare". It is a fact of life that just because you might want something, that does not mean you can automatically have it. Why should there be an exception where the wanting of offspring is concerned? Sure, Nature makes it relatively easy to obtain offspring, but Nature also exacts a price that must be paid, in terms of support. Or else you won't be keeping what you wanted, as already mentioned. Someone taking advantage of the ecological niche of Welfare to breed is essentially someone slapping your face with, "I'm going to pass my genes on and YOU are going to pay the bills!" I'm not sure how many bleeding-heart liberals will accept such a decision, if its factual essence is explained in this way. {{ARE there any such liberals reading this, who might respond??}}



easyt65 also wrote: "I do think people make mistakes, but having 3 kids, as in my scenario, is NOT a mistake".

If you can support them, I agree. If you cannot support them, in a society that penalizes, say, "neglect" of those offspring (not unlike Nature, that), then having more than you can care for (even if only one) IS CERTAINLY a mistake. On what grounds can you disagree?



easyt65 also wrote: "I am not promoting breeding, but I am promoting that people be held accountable instead of treated like victims for their own choices and given a free ride!"

A fair number of Welfare recipients actually ARE victims of circumstances that they had no part in choosing. Consider an average large town or small city, where a lot of people are born and raised and don't really think about choosing EITHER to stay or to leave. Then a tornado rips through. ... and Welfare sign-ups will occur for perfectly valid reasons. Meanwhile, of course, fraudsters will also try to take advantage of this should-be-for-emergencies-only support system. So, all in all, I tend to think that the only real solution to the ecological niche problem is to forbid breeding while on Welfare. Fraudsters and incompetents and abjectly poor would not pass their problems onto another generation. (If it only were as easy to enforce as to declare!!! Which is why I mentioned research into reversible sterilization in another posting here.) Consider the forbidding of offspring to be inducement to leave that support system; the drive to reproduce IS a fairly powerful drive.

 

[StacStang89]

And Stace, in regards to your comment:
If you don't like abortion, don't have one.

If you want to have an abortion, YOU pay for it YOURSELF - stop taking my tax dollars for an elective surgery used as a post-sex contraceptive. (I have no problem with funding the procedure in regards to the safety/health of a mother, but most of abortions are NOT for that reason! You asked me how it affects me earlier. Due to my faith, values, and beliefs, I do not condone the majority of abortions being conducted. And if I can not force my values, beliefs, or religeon on anyone else by bowing my head to pray silently in a school, the federal govt. should not be able to stick their hands in my pocket and demand I pay for some immature/stupid girl who went out and had unprotected sex without thinking and ended up pregnant to get an abortion, something I feel is unethical/immoral/against my faith and beliefs! You can't have it both ways!)

Whoa. I believe this was directed at me.
What tax dollars are you talking about? I have the understanding that over 95% of the abortions performed are paid for by the person having it.
Even if that was case, you would rather pay for an unwanted child, on all other forms of assistance, for these immature stupid girls?
As for your response about religion, I am not even going to comment, considering it doesn't make any sense.

 

[vergiss]

In the case of an under-aged person - a child, I think that is a FAMILY decision. Not yours, a stranger from the outside with different values and (obviously) opinions. The child should have a definite voice, but that decision and what happens should remain within the family! Again, I am not allowed to step into your family and demand that your child be allowed to pray, sacrifice, chickens, or any other religeous belief that I believe in, so you should have NO right to dictate what my family HAS to do. I already know you disagree and know you believe that the girl, even at an immature and in-experienced 13, should be given the right to do anything she wants.

Are you honestly saying that a child who supposedly isn't mature enough to make her own decision about whether or not to have an abortion is mature enough to give birth?! :shock:

 

[hipster_19]

Therein lies the problem - from a few short posts from some board, you already profess/assume to know me, how open the relationship between me and my family is at home, how tolerant or supportive I am, and thus pass judgement on me, thinking YOU know better about my family than I do! At least we have had a few posts between us on this board for you to jump to that wild @ssed conclussion whereas a principal, according to the legislation on the books, doesn't have to know me from Adam in order to decide what is best for my daughter and take her to have that abortion without consulting me if he chooses!

Thank you for helping me to make my point of how many pro-abortionist and goverment officals generalize and justify their enacting this legislation that strips parents of their rights as parents!

Oh please! I know, its all the big bad government's fault! Lets not blame anything that our children in this country do on their parents, because thats just not logical! Lets blame the government, with its evil laws and immoral legilation! Because THATS the real reason why our children are having sex so early, getting pregnant, and then having to decide what to do next. It couldn't possibly be bad parenting! ****, maybe its that damn rock music! Thats definitely it! If your child wants to have an abortion, she can do so without your consent. Deal with it. If you don't like it, tough. Maybe you should teach your daughter not to give it up so easy next time and use a little common sense and have a little responsibility for herself. If a child has enough responsibility to have sex, they should have enough responsibility to deal with the consequences.

 

[tecoyah]

Oh please! I know, its all the big bad government's fault! Lets not blame anything that our children in this country do on their parents, because thats just not logical! Lets blame the government, with its evil laws and immoral legilation! Because THATS the real reason why our children are having sex so early, getting pregnant, and then having to decide what to do next. It couldn't possibly be bad parenting! ****, maybe its that damn rock music! Thats definitely it! If your child wants to have an abortion, she can do so without your consent. Deal with it. If you don't like it, tough. Maybe you should teach your daughter not to give it up so easy next time and use a little common sense and have a little responsibility for herself. If a child has enough responsibility to have sex, they should have enough responsibility to deal with the consequences.

While I understand the point, and to a certain extent agree with the sentiment, you are also....going to the extreme edge in your argument.
As a parent I certainly hope my skills, and communication are enough to prevent an unwanted pregnancy from ruining the lives of my daughters....but, neither I, nor they are perfect. To arbitrarily imply that Children will make no mistakes, and Parents will be infallible is to bypass reality....in short...."Sh!t Happens".
I do realize your post was heavily laden with sarcasm, and may have been purposefully extreme to set a point, but, this issue has many shades of Gray....and will never be dealt with in a Black & White world.