Yikes! The Uterus Police!

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Obviously you didn't get the point that termination of a pregnancy is to kill an unborn, so you want that right, but you want to control whether a woman smokes during pregnancy.

Care to explain how the right to terminate a pregnancy implies right to damage your child and then bring it into this world? I dont see any contradiction there (if you are pro-choice, so fetus is not a person for you, but born child obviously is).

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by JewelFlip

 

Exactly... Your post reminds me of where the USA is headed.

People - you want to see where your future is?

Watch this movie.

Chosen women for mothers, chosen women for breeders and those who are breeders, controlled like cattle.

Link to Movie from 1-10

peace

edit on 22-2-2011 by silo13 because: add new link

I was thinking the exact same thing!! That movie scares the living hell out of me! "The Handmaid's Tale" book by Margaret Atwood is even more terrifying than the movie. I read the book shortly before the movie came out in 1990. I consider it as important as Orwell's "1984," and Huxley's "Brave New World". It's making me truly ill just thinking about these kinds of political theologies. I don't know whether to cry or to vomit. The U.S. is absolutely headed in that direction if this kind of idealogy gets more deeply injected into the mainstream. I. Love. This. Country, but if it ever gets to that or even comes close, I am heading north as I'm sure many others would. And then nuts like Bobby Franklin can have it all to themselves to do whatever they want with it while we expats watch and weep from across the border.

****Leaves ATS site to google "immigrating to canada"****

"The bible says"...he should be removed from American politics immediately, there is no room for the bible in legislation, it has done enough damage and runs counter to a free society. In fact, all attempts to legislate morality should be seen as attempts to create a theocracy where minority rights are infringed upon by a religious majority/democracy.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Obviously you didn't get the point that termination of a pregnancy is to kill an unborn, so you want that right, but you want to control whether a woman smokes during pregnancy.

Care to explain how the right to terminate a pregnancy implies right to damage your child and then bring it into this world? I dont see any contradiction there (if you are pro-choice, so fetus is not a person for you, but born child obviously is).

First, I didn't say there was a right to damage a child. I was merely pointing out the obvious hypocrisy in your thinking. See my latest post about healthy lifestyles and education please.

reply to post by daryllyn


I can assure you that unless they lived very sheltered lives, such kinds of injuries are very much "natural occurrences" for many boys (and tomboyish girls alike). My point is, *something* happens. In both cases, you're presented with a fact for which "natural" explanations can be offered. But there's also the possibility that the cause was of an entirely different nature. Are you going to leave it at that and do nothing? Indifference comes at a price...

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Obviously you didn't get the point that termination of a pregnancy is to kill an unborn, so you want that right, but you want to control whether a woman smokes during pregnancy.

Care to explain how the right to terminate a pregnancy implies right to damage your child and then bring it into this world? I dont see any contradiction there (if you are pro-choice, so fetus is not a person for you, but born child obviously is).

No, I am very pro-life. I thought that your demand to have right to an abortion made you the pro-choice one here.

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
"The bible says"...he should be removed from American politics immediately, there is no room for the bible in legislation, it has done enough damage and runs counter to a free society. In fact, all attempts to legislate morality should be seen as attempts to create a theocracy where minority rights are infringed upon by a religious majority/democracy.

edit on 22-2-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

I hope you say this when we start hearing liberal polticians sporting Sharia Law. They are already doing it in the UK, so think clearly about what you want.

Yes it's pretty stupid, but hey somebody voted/got him in to his position that he is at, in the first place. And what are the chances that there were some women who voted for him?

But anyways due to all these female miscarriages that are going on, they should at the least test the miscarried fetuses to see what's up with them, or for any traces of chemicals that are there, and shouldn't be there. Just to get a clearer picture on what could be causing miscarriages in the first place if its all just DNA rejection or anything or everything they can think of.

Plus there was some thread on ATS and other sites on the web, but cant find them now. Were supposedly there is a whole black market type thing going on with these fetuses both aborted and miscarried, which are used for more then stem cell research, and supposedly there is some big money involved, or so they postulated in that conspiracy.

I didn't read the whole bill, to much writing ain't gonna read all that #, and it just seemed unnecessary, but this is from the link that the op put up.

1 To amend the Official Code of Georgia Annotated so as to provide that prenatal murder shall
2 be unlawful in all events and to remove numerous references to such procedures; to amend
3 Title 16, relating to crimes and offenses, so as to make certain findings of fact; to define
4 certain terms; to provide that any prenatal murder shall be unlawful; to provide a penalty; to
5 repeal certain exceptions to certain offenses; to provide for severability; to provide an
6 effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

They don't even know what is causing these miscarriages or abortions in the first place and it is most definitely not one singular thing in particular. It can go from, chemicals, to abuse, to chemical abuse, to financial troubles, to anything and everything in between, so how can you say it's prenatal murder? If anything it's just the fact that our society is not on the very efficient end, or things aren't all like in the movies and always work out without a scratch, or are as simple, and nature has a habit of doing things you cant grasp or you don't know about concerning this subject. After all I don't think females are deliberately having miscarriages for the fun, or gain of it.

And I really don't like agreeing with females, since they are moody and bossy, and annoying. But yes they are right on this bill, it seems to do nothing in addressing any problem that might occur or is occurring, it just seems to base that it is a murder in the first place, and sets a stigma and penalty on it. When if fact this thing might be bigger then all the writing in that whole bill, supposedly according to this site on the bottom. 50% of known miscarriages are presumed to be caused by chromosomal abnormality. And they don't even test for such things unless you had a first miscarriage in the first place, so it's not all as simple as it seems, it's more far reaching it seems. So at least if its due to chemicals its some strong and really complex stuff that can change your chromosomes. And I don't think smoking and drinking cuts it, as being that potent, but who knows really? Apparently no one really knows for sure.
www.suite101.com...

Wow! As if Losing a baby wasn't hard enough for a woman, or family, etc. Now you have to go rub it in and really drive it home to her by sending in the UTERUS POLICE?! They really are putting chemicals in the air!

reply to post by pikappa


A parasitic "stage" is nothing more then semantics. parasite is a parasite is a parasite. The chance that it will become a child at a latter point only means that you must remove it before it is a child or take care of 100% from the instant it is a parasite.

And similar wording to other topics is redundent and generally an evasive tactic for political folks, so streer clear for credibility sake. This isnt about rape its about control.

" You seem to be missing the point entirely. That man is not the enemy, not to women anyway." As u say but you still fail to specify (continued evidence of logical failing perhaps? Even not so, its evidence you are a less then ideal canidate for the progation of your ideas) what the precise point is. Use of "Bla bla bla."? Really? Can we please all aproach this topic as educated adults?
How about the use of "Bla bla bla."? Really? Can we please all aproach this topic as educated adults?

And for those women then believe this man is dramatically oversteping is moral authority to demand they explain in an interogation room how they has a miscarage while they are already incredibly traumatised, then yes he absolutly is the enemy.

Traumatised woman+religously idealisted moral pusher and interigator= woman with an enemy.

In referance to claiming its the same idea with abused children is offensive bordering on obscene. Children get bruises on their knees, cuts on their cheeks, maybe a broken arm on the play toys. But abused children show rows of bruises a history of breaks and its often known to others before hand.
A fetus isnt a child, children dont "typically" just die off (Im not sure of specific instances but its concievable so i cant just rule it out) but if 70% of fetus miscarrige then its not just common its "usually".

This sounds great to me. A would be criminal may go behind bars because of it.

Originally posted by Hefficide

And things like this are when I start scrambling and trying to minimize my association with my home state. I love north Georgia. It's one of the most beautiful places I have ever been. We have so much to offer the world and yet, for some reason, all we seem to export any awareness of is gangsta rappers, crime, and idiot right wing politicians with insane ideas.

The one bright side to this story is implied by it... This bill, or one like it, is introduced every year. And every year it fails. Thus at least the voters of this beautiful state are a bit more wise than our representation tends to act. But, hey, we are the state that just elected a corrupt Congressman as our Governor.

Did I mention that north Georgia is absolutely gorgeous?

the only problem with your way of thinking about the people being more wise is that they elected this small minded, woman hating, holy roller to office. that is how we the people have our say in a "democracy" not by actually influencing the legislative act in any real way. once we put these people into office then (for the most part) the only time they are listening to our concerns is around election time...

~Heff

Originally posted by pikappa


. That sounds a lot like "not all men are rapists but all rapists are men" (which isn't true by the way).

Don't be asinine! Of course all rapists are men. How can a woman possibly rape a man? It's simply not physically possible.
Don't give me any rubbish about "oh she can persuade a man to have sex with her when he doesn't want to". If that's so, it's his choice, and if he doesn't want to, she can't make him! A man who doesn't want sex can't get an erection.
Fact.
Vicky

reply to post by ~Lucidity


Too tired to read it all, but if all it is is a certificate of death, why is that bad?

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
reply to post by pikappa

 

A parasitic "stage" is nothing more then semantics. parasite is a parasite is a parasite. The chance that it will become a child at a latter point only means that you must remove it before it is a child or take care of 100% from the instant it is a parasite.

A parasite is "an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species". ANOTHER SPECIES. Are you still in middle school or what? You heard your teacher use the word "semantics" and thought "cool, can't wait to reuse that". Shame on you.

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
And similar wording to other topics is redundent and generally an evasive tactic for political folks, so streer clear for credibility sake. This isnt about rape its about control.

It's not my fault your lexicon is so limited. If you can't understand the difference between a parasite and a parasitic stage, you have only yourself to blame. The difference is substantial, and relevant to the topic at hand.

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
" You seem to be missing the point entirely. That man is not the enemy, not to women anyway." As u say but you still fail to specify (continued evidence of logical failing perhaps? Even not so, its evidence you are a less then ideal canidate for the progation of your ideas) what the precise point is.

Err, the point is there for everyone to read. Are you blind or what?

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
Use of "Bla bla bla."? Really? Can we please all aproach this topic as educated adults?
How about the use of "Bla bla bla."? Really? Can we please all aproach this topic as educated adults?

I am, but I simply don't have time to refute every single inane argument of yours, so I have to make a selection. Write less and think more, and I won't have to disregard some of your arguments.

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
And for those women then believe this man is dramatically oversteping is moral authority to demand they explain in an interogation room how they has a miscarage while they are already incredibly traumatised, then yes he absolutly is the enemy.

If my girlfriend were to be found dead in her room with a knife still stuck in her back, I'd probably be questioned about it, regardless of the fact that I'd be just as traumatized. When there's legitimate reason to suspect foul play, people's feelings come second. It's not nice, but it's a reality that we accept because we want justice to be made. Why should women receive special treatment? Equality goes both ways.

Originally posted by swolleneyeball
In referance to claiming its the same idea with abused children is offensive bordering on obscene. Children get bruises on their knees, cuts on their cheeks, maybe a broken arm on the play toys. But abused children show rows of bruises a history of breaks and its often known to others before hand.
A fetus isnt a child, children dont "typically" just die off (Im not sure of specific instances but its concievable so i cant just rule it out) but if 70% of fetus miscarrige then its not just common its "usually".

Are you kidding me? It's extremely easy for children to get bruises just from playing "rough". At any moment in my childhood, my arms and shoulders were full of bruises and scratches and even a few bite marks here and there, courtesy of my sister. It's entirely possible for "war wounds" to be mistaken for signs of abuse, and viceversa. A fetus isn't a child... well that's just your opinion. Also statistics mean next to nothing when it comes to such important matters, so you can leave them out. People aren't numbers.

For the record, I am pro-life and pro-choice.

If you are going to have a baby, I am thrilled for your success and planned effort.

If you are going to abort, I would caution you to think it over extensively and get it done appropriately.

I have a "Modest Proposal" for a solution to all of these problems concerning the behavior of pregnant women. Obviously, many women cannot be trusted to carry a fetus in their uterus. But it would be nearly impossible to adequately police pregnant women's behavior with drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes, not to mention making sure they eat properly, take care of themselves, steer clear of the cat's litter box, wear flat-heeled shoes (high-heels are liable to cause tripping and falling accidents!), etc. And it would also be nearly impossible to figure out the cause of every miscarriage to make sure it wasn't somehow the mother's fault.

To solve these problems, doctors and scientists need to immediately get to work creating an artificial uterus capable of carrying a human fetus from conception right on up through birth. Of course, we would have to outlaw and ban the natural human gestation of all fetuses (maybe we could surgically remove female uteruses as soon as a young female begins ovulating?), but it would be a small price to pay in exchange for being absolutely sure there was no misbehavior by pregnant women. Eliminate the women from the gestation equation all together and then we could really control what happens to the fetus in utero!

( I actually made myself sick with this one!)