What the Hell...Let's Chat Abortion!

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: SBMcG

Federal taxpayer funds should never be used for that purpose.

Per the 10th Amendment, if the people of a state decide they want to use state-collected funds to pay for abortion procedures, they are perfectly within their rights to do so.

Philosophically, I wish the practice of abortion didn't exist. I wish there were no need for it. But it does exist, and it's not up to me or anyone else per the Constitution to tell a woman she can't have an abortion.

It is probably less costly for a woman to have a legal abortion than to

repair/or save the life of a woman who has gone through a *back street

abortion*.

That's what private charities are for.

Leftists need to stop demanding everyone else suspend their own values just so liberals can impose theirs.

Sorry we are at cross purposes here .....

two different countries? different systems!

My cousin is a pediatrician in Ireland. My dad was from Sligo, I am a dual citizen, and I travel from my home on the West Coast of the U.S. (Washington) to western Ireland once or twice a year. I am very familiar with that healthcare system.

Apologies if I misread your post...

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

There are exceptions to every rule.

In this case, they made a law based on the exceptions, and used/abused by everyone else.

originally posted by: Zerodoublehero
a reply to: Missmissie173

Sense we are on the subject why does the father not have any right to this choice?

It's his child as much as it is hers.

Lets start with...they should! The "Father" (note the quotes) should have nearly as many rights as the "Mother" (quotes again). This isn't the 1950s anymore...sadly. The "Father" may only be a fling, a sperm supplier or worse yet...a negative or no-longer-available. The "Mother" doesn't have a choice. If the "Father" is there and a willing and WELCOME participant, the "Mother" should have to share the decisions with the "Father". But ultimately...it is the woman that bears, carries and raises the child. The "Father" contributes, but isn't required after the procreation. And sorry to say...far too many "Fathers" are happy with that.

A "Father" isn't a man if he doesn't accept the responsibility of being a "Father". Yeah!!!! My quote

a reply to: Zerodoublehero

If the two people involved have an ongoing relationship, of course the father should have input, but the father is not the one physically impacted by the situation.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

There are exceptions to every rule.

In this case, they made a law based on the exceptions, and used/abused by everyone else.

Ohhhhh...I misunderstood. The LAW (dun-dun-dun-dun). Yeah...since when does a government, nation or country decide what any person does with their own body, issues, problems, etc.?

I said I think I kind of know you...I think you kind of know me (from posts). I don't have a "God". I don't need a "God". While I hope there is a "God" I can tell you for sure, 100% it is not a group of "rulers" that sit in big buildings, take my money, tell me how to live and act while they screw every law that has been written.

There should be no national laws. That could be handled at a state level but should be handled at a personal level. What I decide for me is the best choice for me...even if it is the wrong choice.

MAGA!

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

We should all be our own captains of our own destinies.

I have to say ATS...I think this thread has been something special. No...not my topic, but our demeanor on a very sensitive topic. I APPLAUD YOU ALL. Hell...I applaud me

Thank you for letting me express my view...thank you for not crucifying me...and thank you for ALL your opinions.

We are not really all that different...we are not always opposition. I've got an early morning so I'm signing off but want to offer this observation:

It is not our opinions or views that make us adversaries...it is "your" intellect conflicting with "their" emotions. Typing text doesn't allow for a true expression of either. Often THAT is our only difference.

Good night!

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

We should all be our own captains of our own destinies.

Sorry...I have to.

We should all be our own God. If we were to all aspire to that...the possibilities are endless. And so would we be.

DAMN! I should write t-shirts...or bumper stickers

These threads just aren't the same without Buzzywigs and Reldra to chime in.

originally posted by: Missmissie173
a reply to: Zerodoublehero

If the two people involved have an ongoing relationship, of course the father should have input, but the father is not the one physically impacted by the situation.

They are says almost every single court in the states.

originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE


Its between a woman and her conscience ..... and nobody else's business.

Not in this leftist world..you wait they are almost all the way around to the other side.

If abortion had been legal 40 years agaio in 1973 there would be quite a fewer post here today .
It could have been you aborted it could have been me 1965 Moms a nut case )
probably would have been me and my two sisters one she killed at 8 weeks .
If any women should not have gotten preggers and got a abortion it was that one but she did and couldn't abort me here I am 51 was marred had 3 boys ones a father him self .
My thoughts are how about making 95 % unneeded by teaching our children to be responsible ?
See 3 boys were my own but when i met her she had 3 that were babies already so raised 6 out of them one and only one is responsible enough to have had a child my 3 year old grandson.
out of the 6 he is the only one who had a child the others alest know they are irresponsible and are careful not to get a women preggers .
drugs in-between jobs constantly just want to party likes its 2017 for ever and yet unlike all the other wasted lives of there age group they have no kids maybe not as stupid as the appire hu? or maybe some of my be responsible stuck what you think ?
and if i could teach mine being a complete loser in most of your books then whats stopping any one else who seams to feal they are so much better .
I say make it so the only time its even needed is in rape cases or saving moms life or baby is so sick it would be a living hell for it .
That is sensible and acccutly solves problems

originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE


Its between a woman and her conscience ..... and nobody else's business.

^^ THIS. Typically I do not play the sexism card, but being female, and having seen how little a fetus means to a LOT of men (not all, but a lot), and how much they fuss over how it's going to affect their wallet in regard to child support, there are a million really sad reasons why a woman would make this choice.

This is always a difficult decision. We can go with the philosophical "It's a life" road, but I'm not going to go there.

It is between a woman and God, between a woman and her conscience, and it is NEVER easy. EVER. Most women will always think in terms of "my baby would be such and so years old now" and the pain emotionally is hard indeed.

Let me just say that, once upon a time when I was around 2 months along with my daughter, I worked with the Mormons as they were going through every small town and city, going through every record in city halls, mortuaries, hospitals, etc. I had a temp job at an old mortuary in town, getting the old records out and laying them flat so they could be microfilmed.

There were a LOT of death records of young teen girls and young childbearing-aged women, particularly during World War I, World War II, and the Korean War. They died of sepsis (blood poisoning) as a result of botched, back alley abortions. Their deaths were horrific, painful, and the families disowned them from shame, so often there was no funeral and the graves were often pauper's graves. I can see it now: "C'mon baby....I might die over there...." So they did, and it cost them their lives when the shame of being an unwed mother was upon them. The family may have said, "She died from a burst appendix" or whatever, but most, I'm sure, felt it was God's punishment visited upon a fornicator.

Dealing with unwanted pregnancies has been an issue since the dawn of Man, so.......if you disagree with it, don't have one. If you're a man, use a dang condom or keep it in your pants. If you're a woman, hold a nickel between your legs, or make him use a condom. If that fails, have the baby. Or not. I don't have to answer for your choices, you do.

Once you strike a match you make a flame....once you bring together a sperm and an egg under the perfect electric environment a "spark" is made......maybe you define it as a life at that moment maybe you define it as a spark....but the fact remains that SOME THING is CREATED by combining two ingredients and electricity of two human bodies.

We must establish if life begins the nano-second after the spark....or if it begins after a brainstem or a heart or a brain is formed inutero...this is the crux of current legalesse on the topic IMHO.

Taking the life of another with or by the direction of our own hand is always a possible choice...for everyone....but we must apply morality to the dynamic by defining life properly so we can apply accountability properly.......morally legally and emotionally....if you are snuffing out a life by your own choice and hand you should simply admit so.....and go from there....IMHO post-spark is LIFE......snuffing that spark is called killing to me......take it from there.

a reply to: one4all

What are you going to do to a woman who finds out she's pregnant and wants to terminate the pregnancy -- force her to carry the child to full term?

Then what, force her to raise it?

We can have these philosophical arguments about when life begins until St. Swithun's Day, but the question is always going to be this: are we as a society willing to force a woman to go through a pregnancy that she does not want.

originally posted by: SBMcG
a reply to: one4all

What are you going to do to a woman who finds out she's pregnant and wants to terminate the pregnancy -- force her to carry the child to full term?

Then what, force her to raise it?

We can have these philosophical arguments about when life begins until St. Swithun's Day, but the question is always going to be this: are we as a society willing to force a woman to go through a pregnancy that she does not want.

No forcing anything...just defining life so we may define the taking of a life.......what a woman does is her free will...she doesnt need permission to act on her intentions.

If society has issues with a man or womans behaviours then that is a societal issue....

If you kill or murder....just say so.....if its your own life inside your body to define and you kill it then you have godlike powers....you are acting like a god...you can OWN a life.

Are you a woman or a god?......a woman co-creates carries and births human life...a god does anything it wants.

originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE


Its between a woman and her conscience ..... and nobody else's business.

That stands repeating.

A 'fetus' cannot survive on it's own and is therefore completely dependent on the mother. It is not a sufficient human being.

It is only life in the sense that a bateria or virus is life - but pro-lifers are not anti-anti-bacterial nor anti-anti-virial.

So the only argument is a cherry-picked religious one and has no place in a modern secular society.

If you don't want to have (or be party to) an abortion, you don't have to be - you have the freedom to make that choice. I assume you are very careful with your birth control method. But you cannot force your religious values onto others in a secular society.

Legal - medical abortions save lives. Women's lives.

Women will always seek abortions when a child is unwanted and making abortion illegal (or impossible for the poor to obtain) doesn't cut the number of abortions.

Easy access to birth control and abortion is about limiting the power of women.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE


Its between a woman and her conscience ..... and nobody else's business.

That stands repeating.

A 'fetus' cannot survive on it's own and is therefore completely dependent on the mother. It is not a sufficient human being.

It is only life in the sense that a bateria or virus is life - but pro-lifers are not anti-anti-bacterial nor anti-anti-virial.

So the only argument is a cherry-picked religious one and has no place in a modern secular society.

If you don't want to have (or be party to) an abortion, you don't have to be - you have the freedom to make that choice. I assume you are very careful with your birth control method. But you cannot force your religious values onto others in a secular society.

Legal - medical abortions save lives. Women's lives.

Women will always seek abortions when a child is unwanted and making abortion illegal (or impossible for the poor to obtain) doesn't cut the number of abortions.

Easy access to birth control and abortion is about limiting the power of women.

A "fetus" must be defined as alive or not.....and a "fetus" CAN survive without the mother...basic logic says if we can make test-tube babies we can support ANY STAGE OF LIFE BEYONE THE SPARK OF CONCEPTION......oh yes...that "fetus" can LIVE without its mother after she hs co-created it.

a reply to: one4all

as far as I know, the only thing "test tube" about test tube babies is the they are conceived out side of the womb! once conceived, they are implanted into a women's womb..
as far as I know, there isn't a way to remove that fetus from the womb it once it has implanted itself on the uterus and transfer is to either an artificial womb or another human female womb with any amount of success that would make it a viable option.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: one4all

as far as I know, the only thing "test tube" about test tube babies is the they are conceived out side of the womb! once conceived, they are implanted into a women's womb..
as far as I know, there isn't a way to remove that fetus from the womb it once it has implanted itself on the uterus and transfer is to either an artificial womb or another human female womb with any amount of success that would make it a viable option.

It might be safe to assume in a generic manner that if we can clone an animal we can re-create identical conditions to those found in a womb of any type.....considering current levels of technology and knowldge it is not an unfair expectation to demand this perfect environment be re-created artificially...and numbers are an aside...if even one fetus can live external to its mother with artificial assistance then ALL can live if dynamics are optimally managed.

Viability reality accountabilty morality deniability ...... the location of life not withstanding....does a woman have a right to kill a life.....inside or outside of her body...of course she does...she also has the right to run you over with her SUV ....because she has a right to free-will action.....the societal dynamic comes into play post-action.......no life can be created with only a sperm or an egg.....the conception is co-creation....the self-sustainability of this co-creation is called LIFE....the environment given it is optimal dictates the concieved LIFE CAN AND WILL SELF-SUSTAIN BY FEEDING.....inside or outside a womans body this self-sustaining feeding action can occur....depriving the LIFE of this optimal environment is KILLING IT.

I am simply saying to any woman killing a life....admit what you are doing....I am not saying to prohibit people from making free-will actions of their own accords....no one can do that....just dont play word games and diminish the value of a human life to support your personal decisions be they right or wrong.

If you are going to kill something then kil it....dont kill it then say it was never alive.....lol...own it if you think you really own it.