Political Crossfire Forums

[liford]

Conception.

[Hyde]

AllAmericanMan wrote: I can assure you here in America no such child would grow to look like this


http://earthhopenetwork.net/niger_starving_child.jpg

We are the wealthiest nation on the planet argueably and have no justification to kill the unborn in order to make our lives easier.

would u prefer a crystal meth addict mom to starve her child than allow her to kill it unborn. thats messed up.

[Hyde]

liford wrote: Conception.
please prove that an embryo can think and then i will agree with you.

[AllAmericanMan]

Hyde wrote: liford wrote: Conception.
please prove that an embryo can think and then i will agree with you. Thinking isnt in the definition for human anywhere.

[AllAmericanMan]

Hyde wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I can assure you here in America no such child would grow to look like this


http://earthhopenetwork.net/niger_starving_child.jpg

We are the wealthiest nation on the planet argueably and have no justification to kill the unborn in order to make our lives easier.

would u prefer a crystal meth addict mom to starve her child than allow her to kill it unborn. thats messed up.

Oh please the vast majority of abortions are done by mothers who just dont want to raise a kid. You think we have about 1.5 million abortions a year ALL due to crystal meth? Get real.

[JustDucky]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Oh please the vast majority of abortions are done by mothers who just dont want to raise a kid. You think we have about 1.5 million abortions a year ALL due to crystal meth? Get real. What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children?

[Plodder]

Quote: What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children? you might be surprised at the number of familes that want to adopt. availability is a major factor.plus we dont want forced childbirth the solution is just not to ohave sex its simple and easy.

[AllAmericanMan]

JustDucky wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Oh please the vast majority of abortions are done by mothers who just dont want to raise a kid. You think we have about 1.5 million abortions a year ALL due to crystal meth? Get real. What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children? No not at all. Adoption can not and never will be the solution to abortion. The solution is PREVENTING unawanted pregnancies instead of killing innocent humans.

[JustDucky]

Plodder wrote: Quote: What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children? you might be surprised at the number of familes that want to adopt. availability is a major factor.plus we dont want forced childbirth the solution is just not to ohave sex its simple and easy. Of course. Because telling people not to have sex has been such an effective tool against unwanted pregnancies thus far. :roll:

I think we need to deal with the fact that not all people are going to be responsible. Why do you want to force people who admittedly are not responsible to have children? I don't get that.....

[JustDucky]

AllAmericanMan wrote: JustDucky wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Oh please the vast majority of abortions are done by mothers who just dont want to raise a kid. You think we have about 1.5 million abortions a year ALL due to crystal meth? Get real. What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children? No not at all. Adoption can not and never will be the solution to abortion. The solution is PREVENTING unawanted pregnancies instead of killing innocent humans. I agree that prevention is of the utmost importance. We may just disagree on how to get there. I personally feel that 'absinence only' programs are unrealistic. I feel that young people should be given all the information and told of all forms of prevention, including abstinence. I tend to believe is human nature to be curious about sex and to have sex. Most young people will experiment, even knowing all the risks. What do we do with this fact? Because I don't think we're going to change it all that much....

[AllAmericanMan]

JustDucky wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: JustDucky wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Oh please the vast majority of abortions are done by mothers who just dont want to raise a kid. You think we have about 1.5 million abortions a year ALL due to crystal meth? Get real. What I don't understand is why do you want to force women who don't want children to have them? Can you cite a source that shows that there are 1.5 million more adoptive families out there waiting to care for all these unwanted children? Or do you just want to impose forced childbirth and not worry about who's going to care for the children? No not at all. Adoption can not and never will be the solution to abortion. The solution is PREVENTING unawanted pregnancies instead of killing innocent humans. I agree that prevention is of the utmost importance. We may just disagree on how to get there. I personally feel that 'absinence only' programs are unrealistic. I feel that young people should be given all the information and told of all forms of prevention, including abstinence. I tend to believe is human nature to be curious about sex and to have sex. Most young people will experiment, even knowing all the risks. What do we do with this fact? Because I don't think we're going to change it all that much....

I agree that abstinence will never take on any popularity ever. The key is massively widespread real tangible support for pregnant women country wide. Coupled with repetative education propgrams, and availability of controceptives, abortion can be reduced to health, rape, and incest only. Abortion as a form of birth control however is just plain wrong. It is ending human life at its most innocent and immature stages of development merely for the convenience of the parents. I believe roughly 95% of the million plus abortions every year are precisely that. Robbing individuals of their entire existence just so we who are born can go about our comfy irresponsible lives.

[~*Alex*~]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: That's your personal belief, some people share them, others do not.
How is it a personal belief and not fact?
Please demonstrate at what point human life begins.

The government decided that life begins at birth, as the constitution (esp. the 14th Amendment - citizens receive their rights at birth), and other legal document explicitly state.

It's a legal question, not a scientific one.

Regardless of biology, it would raise another sticky point - hierarchy of rights, who has more rights the women or the zygote/embryo/fetus that resides in her body.

[zelda]

AllAmericanMan wrote: zelda wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Saving lives is more important than guessing what the quality of that life may or may not be.
it's all about quantity,isn't it?... in my country i can still see the effects of such a politics where quantity was no1:
*thousands of orphanages with extremely poor living conditions ( many children starve to death or die sick of the most horrifing diseases possible because NO ONE cares about them)
*after turning 18, they are forced to leave these orphanages and go on the streets to beg, steal or kill to survive ( many of them go to jail or die on the streets and in the canals in extremely miserable conditions and NO ONE cares about them)
*many are victims of human traffic ( organs and prostitution), pedophilia, abuse and guess what...? NO ONE cares about them.

so saving lives you say....what for?

The key is to prevent unwanted pregnancies not end them.
ok, i agree. but if the woman is already pregnant and doesn't want the child, then what?

[WsTxRedRaider06]

~*Alex*~ wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: That's your personal belief, some people share them, others do not.
How is it a personal belief and not fact?
Please demonstrate at what point human life begins.

The government decided that life begins at birth, as the constitution (esp. the 14th Amendment - citizens receive their rights at birth), and other legal document explicitly state.

It's a legal question, not a scientific one.

Regardless of biology, it would raise another sticky point - hierarchy of rights, who has more rights the women or the zygote/embryo/fetus that resides in her body.

As far as the hierarchy of rights, youre dealing with two different rights. The right to exist, the right to live...vs...the right to convinience and lifestyle.....So which is more important....ones entire existance, or ones 9 months of living a convinient lifestyle.....

Our government can be changed and ammended. It was set up that way, and the abortion laws, Roe vs Wade, etc., are no where near set in stone.....Our government once said African Americans were not quite a full person....and Women shouldnt vote in our society....They were surely wrong about that....

[Plodder]

Quote: Of course. Because telling people not to have sex has been such an effective tool against unwanted pregnancies thus far.

I think we need to deal with the fact that not all people are going to be responsible. Why do you want to force people who admittedly are not responsible to have children? I don't get that..... thats because there are no consequences for not abstasining. In a country that does not sell condoms nor contraceptives nor permits abortions, the amount of pregnancies that occur in an undesirable situation is extremely low. You also misunderstand the post. Im arguing that with abstinence people that are irresponsible will not have sex because the cost for themselves might be very great.

[Hyde]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Hyde wrote: liford wrote: Conception.
please prove that an embryo can think and then i will agree with you. Thinking isnt in the definition for human anywhere.

if it doesnt think then it isnt a life.

[AllAmericanMan]

Hyde wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: Hyde wrote: liford wrote: Conception.
please prove that an embryo can think and then i will agree with you. Thinking isnt in the definition for human anywhere.

if it doesnt think then it isnt a life. Rrrright. Lets just throw all our biology textbooks out the window.

[JustDucky]

Plodder wrote: Quote: Of course. Because telling people not to have sex has been such an effective tool against unwanted pregnancies thus far.

I think we need to deal with the fact that not all people are going to be responsible. Why do you want to force people who admittedly are not responsible to have children? I don't get that..... thats because there are no consequences for not abstasining. In a country that does not sell condoms nor contraceptives nor permits abortions, the amount of pregnancies that occur in an undesirable situation is extremely low. You also misunderstand the post. Im arguing that with abstinence people that are irresponsible will not have sex because the cost for themselves might be very great. So you're proposing we not sell condoms or any other form of contraceptive, then punish women's lack of abstinence by forcing them to bear and raise a child they do not want nor have any desire to care for? Excellent plan. :roll:

Not.

[Plodder]

it would decrase the number of prenacies in undesirable situations would it not? Its basic. If people knew that their actions had significant consequences, then less people would commit those foolish actions. The women would be punishing themselves. For raped women support by the government is a good option and broader adoption services could be put into action. rewards for adopting children would cause people to adopt more. The entire situation is feasable, the only thing that is holding us back are evil organizations such as Planned Parenhood, NOW and the ACLU!

[Politics Mstr]

You make a beautiful point. In America, we should be grateful to healthily reproduce a prosperous child. There's no reason to have an abortion.