How many men have no clue

a reply to: network dude

Wait, we already teach about contraception as early as 3rd grade! Along with how to masturbate, how to have sex, how to have gay sex, how to change one's sex, and how fun sex is.

How could that coerce a 3rd grader to have sex?[/sarcasm]

(You're absolutely right... we need to teach older children approaching puberty about reproduction and birth control... including abstinence, the only 100% sure method. But we need teachers who aren't perverts themselves to do the teaching. What we have now is doing the opposite of preventing pregnancies and abortions.)

TheRedneck

originally posted by: network dude
If no states currently ban abortion, then I'm having a hard time understanding the argument.

Me too since it was never my argument.

originally posted by: network dude
in a perfect world, there would be private support for things like this...

But it isn't a perfect world and broke ass states like South Carolina have no plan which means their citizens are on the hook for taking care of more poor people since the affluent ones will go out of state for abortions.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
in a perfect world, there would be private support for things like this...

But it isn't a perfect world and broke ass states like South Carolina have no plan which means their citizens are on the hook for taking care of more poor people since the affluent ones will go out of state for abortions.

But why would they go out of state? I thought no states currently banned abortions? See, this is why I'm confused.

originally posted by: network dude
But why would they go out of state? I thought no states currently banned abortions? See, this is why I'm confused.

They limit them after a certain time, like 6 weeks, when a woman/girl might not even know they are pregnant.

originally posted by: TheRedneck


(You're absolutely right... we need to teach older children approaching puberty about reproduction and birth control... including abstinence, the only 100% sure method. But we need teachers who aren't perverts themselves to do the teaching. What we have now is doing the opposite of preventing pregnancies and abortions.)

TheRedneck

when we were kids, the STD's were few and far between, now there is SUPER AIDS, and so many other horrible things out there. (south park reference) But joking aside, there are quite a few reasons to get kids to be careful, only one of them being getting prego.

a reply to: network dude

I act in accordance to facing my final judgement, so I don't rule over other's spiritual paths through life. But if given the opportunity I would certainly try to save life if I could, but not to bully or force someone to do what I thought was right for whatever reason. Everyone's soul's condition is their responsibility, everyone's experience is unique and it takes a lifetime of self-awareness and trial and error to find their light. Nobody else can presume to judge - nobody can ever walk a mile in their shoes.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
But why would they go out of state? I thought no states currently banned abortions? See, this is why I'm confused.

They limit them after a certain time, like 6 weeks, when a woman/girl might not even know they are pregnant.

how long does it take for a woman to know she's pregnant?

a reply to: network dude

All women's cycles are different, so the answer to your question is it depends on the woman.

a reply to: quintessentone

I disagree because this reeks with religious and political agendae.

Religion, for the umpteenth time, is not a prerequisite for believing that life of the innocent should be protected.

Why is it that it seems everyone who can't win an abortion argument always reverts to this failed excuse?

Science, nor religion, says the unborn child is alive and has always been alive even before it became an unborn child. Science says the unborn child is human and has always been human even before it became an unborn human child and it will always be human as long as it lives. Science says the unborn child becomes an individual human being, separate and distinct from the mother and father, at the moment of conception. There's not one religious argument in that.

According to that, the people who support laws against murdering innocent people are only doing it for religious reasons... do you want to legalize murder as well? The only difference between an adult human and a human zygote is the life stage it is undergoing at the time. Why the argument wanting gun control? Those mass murderers aren't doing anything wrong; it's only the religious zealots that want people to think that! This is the exact kind of bullying that I referred to earlier, and as long as it continues toward me, I will give it right back. Understand that if nothing else.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude

I act in accordance to facing my final judgement, so I don't rule over other's spiritual paths through life. But if given the opportunity I would certainly try to save life if I could, but not to bully or force someone to do what I thought was right for whatever reason. Everyone's soul's condition is their responsibility, everyone's experience is unique and it takes a lifetime of self-awareness and trial and error to find their light. Nobody else can presume to judge - nobody can ever walk a mile in their shoes.

lol, you and I are very close on this. I think it's murder, but it's not my place to tell others what to do, that's between them, their doctor, and God. It's hard to comprehend ending a life like that, once you have seen the miracle of birth first hand. And if it was an easy fix, it would have been fixed long ago. So I do get the opposition. But the arguments need to make sense. Long ago, it was supposed to be rare and safe. Now if you don't gleefully accept 8 month terminations, you are a religious nutter. The entire thing has been politicized and screwed up.

originally posted by: network dude
how long does it take for a woman to know she's pregnant?

Sometimes longer than 6 weeks, obviously. But if they found out at 5 weeks that they are pregnant and there is a 6 week ban and they can't get an appointment then it's out of state for the ones that can afford to.

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's why I also added in political agendae.

a reply to: quintessentone

Everyone's soul's condition is their responsibility

Unless they haven't been born yet. Then it's 100% someone else's decision.

Amirite?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude

All women's cycles are different, so the answer to your question is it depends on the woman.

My grandson was born over 2 months premature. He is still a person, still loved, and still worthy of being born. Do you think there should be some kind of cut off point, or can we kill any of them that irritate us? If so, Adam Schiff would be my candidate for a late term abortion.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
how long does it take for a woman to know she's pregnant?

Sometimes longer than 6 weeks, obviously. But if they found out at weeks they are pregnant and there is a 6 week ban and they can't get an appointment then it's out of state for the ones that can afford to.

and plenty of WOKE corporations are ponying up the $ to kill any and all that want killing. So it seems the private sector is stepping up.
www.cbsnews.com...

originally posted by: network dude
and plenty of WOKE corporations are ponying up the $ to kill any and all that want killing. So it seems the private sector is stepping up.

The broke ass states should send them all a fruit basket since they're saving them and their taxpayers money.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: TheRedneck

I disagree because this reeks with religious and political agendae.

Yes!
Stemming from Gus.
I have not mention religion or politics.
Gus, on the other hand, has.
When he says "people", "persons" and even "citizens", are human beings but embryos aren't, he moves the argument to that of philosophy and spiritualism.
He refuses to accept definitions. If he did so he would agree that abortion is the premeditated killing of one human being by another.

a reply to: quintessentone

But why bring up religion as well? I see that as a direct attack on me, on my freedom of religion, when it isn't even applicable to the debate. I see it that way because it's been used that way so much.

As for political agendas, my "political agenda" is to provide some sort of equity between a woman with child in need and the life of the child itself. Both are living human beings, according to very scientific analysis that exists. If you want to call such equity a "political agenda," so be it. Guilty as charged.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Well depends on who you talk to. A famous spirit channeller once told me that the soul chooses it's parents, but can flee the body once endangered.