rhino 0 #101 April 19, 2004 QuoteDo the parents have the right to make the decision on care after the baby is born full-term? If so, why would they not have the right to make that decision early? What about the unborn childs rights... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #102 April 19, 2004 >This is IMPOSSIBLE to know No it's not. A child born without a brain or without lungs cannot survive outside the mother. Period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #103 April 19, 2004 >I'm not playing this reindeer game in an effort to not piss off billvon, > as I've apparently done already for reasons unbeknownst / > unfathomable to me. Calling someone arrogant and naive is a personal attack, no matter how cleverly you word the sentence. And it's a personal attack even if you believe they are arrogant and/or naive. See the post in "bonfire" for more info. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #104 April 19, 2004 QuoteA child born without a brain or without lungs cannot survive outside the mother. Period. For how much longer will this be true, though? I'd guess that advancing technology will make this "impossibility" possible long before laws currently on the books are repealed.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #105 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe Catholics that are believing as you say they are, are splitting from the Catholic Church just like all the Protestant faiths before them. True.. . So I shall call myself by a different name if it so pleases the people. That if a rose by any other name would smell as sweet..... good. because God doesnt care what name you use for yourself or him...names are for humans..____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #106 April 19, 2004 >For how much longer will this be true, though? Until we can clone replacements. Which is another whole ball of wax, and is a bit off in the future. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #107 April 19, 2004 Sorry to go back to this so far after the fact, but I went to sleep and missed the rest. If you consider that OCPs are about 98-99% effective, it's obvious that they pretty frequently do not suppress ovulation. It's in these cases (and I would imagine that that's quite a few pregnancies) that the pill works by blocking implantation of the embryo. QuoteQuoteOne of the actions of oral contraceptives is to create atrophic changes in the endometrium that are not conducive to implantation by the embryo. Do you support women using oral contraceptives? Lindsey The purpose is not really to prevent implantation but to supress ovulation. Rarely, the result is preventing implantation.-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bodyflight.Net 0 #108 April 19, 2004 QuoteWhat about the unborn childs rights I think the difficulty with that reasoning is It's impossible to ask a fetus what it wants It's hard to give rights to something that can't speak to us. It's also difficult to give rights to something that can't breathe in our atmosphere. When a woman becomes pregnant, our body begins to attack the fetus as if it were a foreign invader or virus... some of us have to get a shot in order to prevent that. What is your take on that? I mean if that is what our body does naturally... why should our perspective be any different that what happens naturally? My perspective changes drastically on this issue when the fetus becomes viable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #109 April 19, 2004 QuoteIt's impossible to ask a fetus what it wants It's hard to give rights to something that can't speak to us. Animals don't speak to us yet their are animals rights? The helpless can't speak so they don't have rights? Is that what I am hearing from you? QuoteIt's also difficult to give rights to something that can't breathe in our atmosphere. What in the hell does the atmosphere have to do with it? If you get in a car accident. Go in a Coma and can't breath in our atmosphere without help from a machine let's take away your rights.. After all. You can't speak and tell us what you think so you don't have rights.. Quotesome of us have to get a shot in order to prevent that. What is your take on that? My take is you knew what you were getting into when you started. If you go back on your decision you are in the wrong and have no right to be a parent to begin with. I believe SOME women get the GOD complex. It's my body and I will do what I want to.. Well.. Once again judgement day will come for all of us someday.. I wonder if God will emplant you in a woman that is hell bent on protecting her right to have an abortion and let you see what it is like. You know 4 months along, with feelings, a brain, a heart beat, feeling the comfort of your mother. Then suddenly the unthinkable happens.. The abortion process begins as youy little helpless lungs try and scream but they can't. You see the Doctor can't hear you scream. It's all in your head. But they don't care as they can't "hear" you. You are helpless. Scared to death and being pulled apart piece by piece and in pain. So innocent, so young, so helpless.. But who gives a fuck about you.. You aren't even born yet, you can't breath the free air, and you will never be given the chance because your mom wants to exercise her right to choose for you.. Your entry into this planet has been denied. You don't get to feel love.. The warmth of your mother or fathers touch. You don't get to experience the sunlight. Or a bed time lulliby. Nothing.. Because you couldn't speak for yourself. You have less rights than a dog.. Viability is irrelivant.. The act is the same.. In the case bill mentioned I'm not sure that without a brain a baby could feel pain or even has a soul.. I don't know that information.. Without lungs could still be saved. We have breathing machines and transplants. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #110 April 19, 2004 We already have so many people whining about not being able to find a job.. ===================================== Nannys would be in high demand.I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #111 April 19, 2004 Quote What in the hell does the atmosphere have to do with it? ....Viability is irrelivant..... The act is the same.. viability is completely relevant, without the host a fetus cannot survive in the environment it would spend the bulk of its existence in. Until it is capable of sustaining life on its own, without artificial means it has no life apart from that of the mother and therefore no rights apart from those the mother gives it as she gives it breath and nourishment. You are not taking away rights from a fetus, as it never possessed them in the first place. Modern medicine extends the potential for human life however that potential never has more weight than the actual independent life. the rest of your post is nice inflammatory fiction expressing your belief, but contains nothing backed by scientific fact or medical evidence.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #112 April 19, 2004 Just because a baby can't sustain life on it's own doesn't mean it isn't alive and functioning.. Viability is irrelevant. The act is the same. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #113 April 19, 2004 QuoteJust because a baby can't sustain life on it's own doesn't mean it isn't alive and functioning.. Viability is irrelevant. The act is the same. a wart is alive and functioning as well, but cannot grow without a host. self sustaining is what makes it independant and there for equal wieght and consideration to other life of the same species____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
misskriss 0 #114 April 19, 2004 Quotegood. because God doesnt care what name you use for yourself or him...names are for humans.. you are so absolutely right..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RoadRash 0 #115 April 19, 2004 QuoteNo I read it, but again, it offered nothing new on the subject and in fact misrepresented my original post. So no I didn't bother.. Then maybe you should reread it again... ...I shouldn't be alive, and neither should my mother, due to population control, among other things. QuoteAs if I set forth guidelines on who should be born and who shouldn't, I could tell by your first contribution that you were not willing to discuss the issue since you were not reading everything. You can read my comments to that here http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1039912#1039912 As far as I could tell, you were looking for opinions as to why abortion should be legal and listed a bunch of reasons, no offense, but I have heard that a thousand times, why should you post it here? I belonged to P.O.W.E.R. and even VOX for a little while and all I found was the same information that you provided and a bunch of skewed numbers...(your guestimates) QuoteIf you are saying that we would have more people in the world as a result of abortion becoming illegal, I think that was already well stipulated, don't you? Yes, there would be more people in the world, duh...If you don't flush a million or so humans down the toilet, then yes, there will be more humans in the world. QuoteThis is not about being for or against abortion, there have been a great many of those threads here already, I don't personally care which side of the issue you are on, anymore than you should care about what I feel about it to talk about this. We are discussing the possible reprocussions of such a law that would make the procedure illegal. Oh, but this is a thread that is very much debating the issue of abortion. If I "misrepresented" your original post, then it was an issue of sematics and word choice that somehow led me to believe that this was yet another pro-choice or pro-life debate, that started from another thread that I saw you post in. Maybe you should answer a question for me: If abortion had been legal, and my biological grandmother had been given the option of an abortion, do you think I would be here posting right now? Guess this wasn't the type of contribution you wanted either. I liked lawrocket's response: QuoteOdd. I think that, oh, I dunno, at least a few million of those could turn out to be scientists, police, skydivers, firemen, doctors, or even pro-abortion activists. Add in teacher and mother of two as well as a political nut...there ya go... If you should misunderstand my response, or choose to respond, e-mail me...at RoadRash@dropzone.com...'cause I think it would be better to step away now...while I am still calm, cool, and collected... ~R+R~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bodyflight.Net 0 #116 April 19, 2004 QuoteJust because a baby can't sustain life on it's own doesn't mean it isn't alive and functioning.. Viability is irrelevant. The act is the same. Rhino A virus (the flu, strep, staph, etc) is alive and functioning, shall we condem you for taking medications to kill an innocent virus or bacteria alive in your body? Viability IS relevant, Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bodyflight.Net 0 #117 April 19, 2004 QuoteAs far as I could tell, you were looking for opinions as to why abortion should be legal... My question was clearly stated: Suppose Abortion becomes illegal..what then? I'm sorry you missed that part. and no I will not engage you privately, thanks for the offer though.So far we have: 1. More single mothers would be out there high & dry 2. Pro-lifers and other such organizations would be out of work ( of course maybe they can then go care for the extra million kids each year) 3. Prevention would be worth a pound of cure 4. It is unlikely that we could handle the influx of children into the welfare system and other such agencies 5. Many more parents would be abandoning their newborn children at "safe havens" 6. Many couples willing to adopt would have no problem with a shortage 7. Some women would seek abortion illegally 8. Nannys would be in high demand do I hear a 9? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #118 April 19, 2004 What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #119 April 19, 2004 QuoteSorry to go back to this so far after the fact, but I went to sleep and missed the rest. If you consider that OCPs are about 98-99% effective, it's obvious that they pretty frequently do not suppress ovulation. It's in these cases (and I would imagine that that's quite a few pregnancies) that the pill works by blocking implantation of the embryo. That 98-99% effectiveness of the pill can be mostly attributed to user error, not taking it when you’re supposed to. I wouldn’t consider that a great frequency of ineffectiveness. The main mode of action for OC’s is to prevent ovulation. Two other scenarios could possibly occur. OC’s can thicken the cervical mucus which can obstruct or reduce sperm mobility. Also, in rare instances, the endometrial lining of the uterus can also thicken and this might prevent an implantation. However, as with IUD’s, prevention of implantation is very rare and is not the main mode of action of the contraceptive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #120 April 19, 2004 Quote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RoadRash 0 #121 April 19, 2004 Quote I'm sorry you missed that part. and no I will not engage you privately, thanks for the offer though. The offer wasn't just for you, and I understand your question, do you? ~R+R~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #122 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. until the fetus can support its own life functions it is absolutely 'her body'.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #123 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. It's none of your business either. By what "right" do you think you should be able to tell any woman what she can and can not do with her own body?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #124 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. until the fetus can support its own life functions it is absolutely 'her body'. That's your definition. You're a logical person Zennister and I think you're pretty intelligent. I fail to see how you can logically take your stance, however. Can you admit that you don't really know when the human life begins? Can you admit that nobody knows? I know what you think but you can't prove that it doesn't become a life worth saving or human enough to let live only when it becomes able to survive without the mother. My point is that, in the absence of knowing for sure, you might be killing a great number of human beings with the same potential in life as you or I. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #125 April 19, 2004 QuoteMy question was clearly stated: Suppose Abortion becomes illegal..what then? What then? A lot more babies get a chance at life. Quote1. More single mothers would be out there high & dry It's called personal responsibility. To immitate your snide remarks, don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Quote2. Pro-lifers and other such organizations would be out of work Oh, there's a horrible side effect, one less group of lobbyists in DC. Quote3. Prevention would be worth a pound of cure Prevention of life, yeah, that's a worthwhile goal (it might help to include the "an ounce of" in that one). Quote4. It is unlikely that we could handle the influx of children into the welfare system and other such agencies Maybe that means the system is broken, not the children that haven't had a shot yet. Quote5. Many more parents would be abandoning their newborn children at "safe havens" And this is worse than abortion how? You undermine your own argument by pointing out better alternatives. Quote6. Many couples willing to adopt would have no problem with a shortage Again, undermining your own argument. Quote7. Some women would seek abortion illegally What is that quote about giving someone enough rope.... Quote8. Nannys would be in high demand And this is detrimental to society because...?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next Page 5 of 13 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
RoadRash 0 #115 April 19, 2004 QuoteNo I read it, but again, it offered nothing new on the subject and in fact misrepresented my original post. So no I didn't bother.. Then maybe you should reread it again... ...I shouldn't be alive, and neither should my mother, due to population control, among other things. QuoteAs if I set forth guidelines on who should be born and who shouldn't, I could tell by your first contribution that you were not willing to discuss the issue since you were not reading everything. You can read my comments to that here http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1039912#1039912 As far as I could tell, you were looking for opinions as to why abortion should be legal and listed a bunch of reasons, no offense, but I have heard that a thousand times, why should you post it here? I belonged to P.O.W.E.R. and even VOX for a little while and all I found was the same information that you provided and a bunch of skewed numbers...(your guestimates) QuoteIf you are saying that we would have more people in the world as a result of abortion becoming illegal, I think that was already well stipulated, don't you? Yes, there would be more people in the world, duh...If you don't flush a million or so humans down the toilet, then yes, there will be more humans in the world. QuoteThis is not about being for or against abortion, there have been a great many of those threads here already, I don't personally care which side of the issue you are on, anymore than you should care about what I feel about it to talk about this. We are discussing the possible reprocussions of such a law that would make the procedure illegal. Oh, but this is a thread that is very much debating the issue of abortion. If I "misrepresented" your original post, then it was an issue of sematics and word choice that somehow led me to believe that this was yet another pro-choice or pro-life debate, that started from another thread that I saw you post in. Maybe you should answer a question for me: If abortion had been legal, and my biological grandmother had been given the option of an abortion, do you think I would be here posting right now? Guess this wasn't the type of contribution you wanted either. I liked lawrocket's response: QuoteOdd. I think that, oh, I dunno, at least a few million of those could turn out to be scientists, police, skydivers, firemen, doctors, or even pro-abortion activists. Add in teacher and mother of two as well as a political nut...there ya go... If you should misunderstand my response, or choose to respond, e-mail me...at RoadRash@dropzone.com...'cause I think it would be better to step away now...while I am still calm, cool, and collected... ~R+R~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bodyflight.Net 0 #116 April 19, 2004 QuoteJust because a baby can't sustain life on it's own doesn't mean it isn't alive and functioning.. Viability is irrelevant. The act is the same. Rhino A virus (the flu, strep, staph, etc) is alive and functioning, shall we condem you for taking medications to kill an innocent virus or bacteria alive in your body? Viability IS relevant, Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bodyflight.Net 0 #117 April 19, 2004 QuoteAs far as I could tell, you were looking for opinions as to why abortion should be legal... My question was clearly stated: Suppose Abortion becomes illegal..what then? I'm sorry you missed that part. and no I will not engage you privately, thanks for the offer though.So far we have: 1. More single mothers would be out there high & dry 2. Pro-lifers and other such organizations would be out of work ( of course maybe they can then go care for the extra million kids each year) 3. Prevention would be worth a pound of cure 4. It is unlikely that we could handle the influx of children into the welfare system and other such agencies 5. Many more parents would be abandoning their newborn children at "safe havens" 6. Many couples willing to adopt would have no problem with a shortage 7. Some women would seek abortion illegally 8. Nannys would be in high demand do I hear a 9? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #118 April 19, 2004 What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #119 April 19, 2004 QuoteSorry to go back to this so far after the fact, but I went to sleep and missed the rest. If you consider that OCPs are about 98-99% effective, it's obvious that they pretty frequently do not suppress ovulation. It's in these cases (and I would imagine that that's quite a few pregnancies) that the pill works by blocking implantation of the embryo. That 98-99% effectiveness of the pill can be mostly attributed to user error, not taking it when you’re supposed to. I wouldn’t consider that a great frequency of ineffectiveness. The main mode of action for OC’s is to prevent ovulation. Two other scenarios could possibly occur. OC’s can thicken the cervical mucus which can obstruct or reduce sperm mobility. Also, in rare instances, the endometrial lining of the uterus can also thicken and this might prevent an implantation. However, as with IUD’s, prevention of implantation is very rare and is not the main mode of action of the contraceptive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #120 April 19, 2004 Quote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoadRash 0 #121 April 19, 2004 Quote I'm sorry you missed that part. and no I will not engage you privately, thanks for the offer though. The offer wasn't just for you, and I understand your question, do you? ~R+R~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #122 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. until the fetus can support its own life functions it is absolutely 'her body'.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #123 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. It's none of your business either. By what "right" do you think you should be able to tell any woman what she can and can not do with her own body?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #124 April 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote What a woman does with her own body is not my business, and most certainly is not the Government's business. It's not just "her body." Review the pictures from post #5. until the fetus can support its own life functions it is absolutely 'her body'. That's your definition. You're a logical person Zennister and I think you're pretty intelligent. I fail to see how you can logically take your stance, however. Can you admit that you don't really know when the human life begins? Can you admit that nobody knows? I know what you think but you can't prove that it doesn't become a life worth saving or human enough to let live only when it becomes able to survive without the mother. My point is that, in the absence of knowing for sure, you might be killing a great number of human beings with the same potential in life as you or I. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #125 April 19, 2004 QuoteMy question was clearly stated: Suppose Abortion becomes illegal..what then? What then? A lot more babies get a chance at life. Quote1. More single mothers would be out there high & dry It's called personal responsibility. To immitate your snide remarks, don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Quote2. Pro-lifers and other such organizations would be out of work Oh, there's a horrible side effect, one less group of lobbyists in DC. Quote3. Prevention would be worth a pound of cure Prevention of life, yeah, that's a worthwhile goal (it might help to include the "an ounce of" in that one). Quote4. It is unlikely that we could handle the influx of children into the welfare system and other such agencies Maybe that means the system is broken, not the children that haven't had a shot yet. Quote5. Many more parents would be abandoning their newborn children at "safe havens" And this is worse than abortion how? You undermine your own argument by pointing out better alternatives. Quote6. Many couples willing to adopt would have no problem with a shortage Again, undermining your own argument. Quote7. Some women would seek abortion illegally What is that quote about giving someone enough rope.... Quote8. Nannys would be in high demand And this is detrimental to society because...?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
