Abortion

[roadrunner_0]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

Are you one of those people who believe that single parents are the lowest form of human? You should be ashamed of yourself. Single parents are one of the greatest miracles of life.

And NO we should not make abortion illegal. If abortion was made illegal, then the pregnant women who doesn't want to bear a child will resort to more dangerous, life-threatening ways of getting rid of the baby.

Adoption is an option, yes, but why bear a child and put it up for adoption months later, and who the hell knows what kind of life the kid will have on these adoption centers. Why do that? You're not only risking society for breeding monsters that will probably murder a family member of yours 17 years from now, but you are also accepting yourself as a failure.

without getting into the full abortion argument (im pro but under more restrictions than the govt. currently has, just so you know)
SOME single parents are good, some aren't, same as any other family, to generalise, single parents who scrounge off the dole and have 3 different chldren by 3 different fathers should be sterilised, in my mind there is no question about this.
single parents who work like bastards to provide for their children whilst having no life of their own because they simply havent the time should be given a lot more help and encouragement from the state, preferably by getting some extra payments from cuts introduced to the dole of scrounging bastards

[roadrunner_0]

Originally Posted by Dace

I would express my opinion on this subject but thanks to the Hyper-feminist girl who i work with and who is "always right ... no, no, no listen to me i'm right ... i'm right i tell you" my opinion has prolly got kinda squewed into a masculine kinda view point where the guy should get some input into the decision making process so just ignore me for this one post (but only this post mind you).

also what dace said about the guy having input, it may be the womans body, but the father should aways have some say in the matter

[Dace]

I TOLD YOU TO IGNORE ME FOR THAT POST!



*sheesh*

[roadrunner_0]

sorry mate, but i aint going to ignore something that i agree with

[Dace]

:)

[Knight Theamion]

the only one ever responsible, from my point of view, is the woman.

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

single parents who work like bastards to provide for their children whilst having no life of their own because they simply havent the time should be given a lot more help and encouragement from the state, preferably by getting some extra payments from cuts introduced to the dole of scrounging bastards

And so we do, State and Federal.

Oh and uhm, the Ste/W twins are arguing?? I've never seen that before.

[Ste]

Originally Posted by Stew

It's not as preferable to contraception, no. How long does it take an egg to get fertilised?

So as soon as the egg is fertilised it is living? And therefore you believe it's wrong to get rid of it?
Seriously - at what point do you believe the bundle of cells is alive? And just because it's "potentially" human doesn't make it actually human.

I agree that there is a point of no return. But an early abortion is no less morally wrong than a blown load into a tissue in my eyes.
An abortion isn't something I see as good. It's more something I see as sometimes necessary and I would rather it be able to be performed early in the pregnancy than later.
I also agree that the morning after pill isn't preferable, but it's a very useful form of contraception if something unexpected happens.

A pregnancy is a very life-changing event and I would prefer all births to be wanted but an unwanted birth can be damaging to the child as well as the parents.

I meant it implied a lot of things that are not true.

for example? I didn't mean that every adopted kid grows up badly. I know plenty of people who grew up in foster families and are fine. But adoption shouldn't be relied upon by any means.


This is qute topical for me actually as I know someone going for an abortion tomorrow...
and before anyone says anything, no - it's nothing to do with me.

Originally Posted by demiGOD

Oh and uhm, the Ste/W twins are arguing?? I've never seen that before.

[Knight Theamion]

I wonder if stew wanks ..... and if he does, does he ejeculate?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

the only one ever responsible, from my point of view, is the woman.

[It takes two to tango.]

[Zar]

Originally Posted by Structural Integrity

You're forgetting, 99% of this board is European... we DO agree with you

[Dace]

There was a catchphrase around here a little while ago and i feel it would be apt but i can't remember it ...

[lokken]

The key to this abortion argument is to do your level best to never get to the situation in the first place.

[Aryn]

i think that EVERY pro-life person/couple should adopt a kid. if the mother can't give it the life it deserves, and the pro-lifers want abortion to be illegal, then they should be able to look after the unwanted kids themselves.

[Demon Dave]

i believe abortion should be legal. If only for the mothers sake. Just because something's illegal, it doesn't stop people from doing it

[Dante Hicks]

There really is only one issue here and that is when the foetus gains a level of consciousness to be considered in moral calculations. The law basically recognises this point and it's already been said by Yahwe, Jonny, etc.

It makes no difference is something is "alive". This is why most people think it's OK to eat animals. If you are arguing some sort of sanctity of life point then you damn well better be some sort of ultra-vegan or something.

[Summanus]

ITT we kill things because they inconvenience us

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Ste

a blown load into a tissue in my eyes.

Why the hell do you have tissue in your eyes?

Originally Posted by Stew

Because humans have rights, and I consider a foetus to be a human.

Why do you consider a foetus to be human?

Originally Posted by Summanus

ITT we kill things because they inconvenience us

I don't see why that shouldn't apply everywhere.

[Ste]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Why the hell do you have tissue in your eyes?

that's where it needs to be to catch my load.
It's difficult being well-hung

[Radical Edward]

Originally Posted by Summanus

ITT we kill things because they inconvenience us

it is difficult enough determining whether a foetus is even alive. it is certainly only alive in a very parasitic sense.

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by Summanus

ITT we kill things because they inconvenience us

ignorance is no excuse for stupidity

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

[It takes two to tango.]

yes but it is the women giving birth and 'supporting' the whole kid, if the father doesn't want to have a baby, he would tell her and if she still would have it, he just doesn't acknowledge it as his kid.

[Demon Dave]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Why the hell do you have tissue in your eyes?

everybody has tissue in their eyes. eyes are made from tissue

[roadrunner_0]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

yes but it is the women giving birth and 'supporting' the whole kid, if the father doesn't want to have a baby, he would tell her and if she still would have it, he just doesn't acknowledge it as his kid.

welcome to the world where the CSA would eat you for breakfast

[Aryn]

Originally Posted by Summanus

ITT we kill things because they inconvenience us

I hope you're planning on adopting a kid because otherwise i will think of you as a hypocrite.

[Danae]

Originally Posted by Aryn

i think that EVERY pro-life person/couple should adopt a kid.

Do you know how difficult it is to adopt?

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

yes but it is the women giving birth and 'supporting' the whole kid, if the father doesn't want to have a baby, he would tell her and if she still would have it, he just doesn't acknowledge it as his kid.

Mom introduces Dad to a paternity suit.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Why do you consider a foetus to be human?

It's hard to explain, and when it comes down it it, 'I just do'. Like I say, I know I'm different to most on this subject, but meh. A foetus, left in it the state its meant to be in, i.e. inside a womb, will become a human, and thus I consider it to be one. I'm sure you can give 'similar' analogies which make this claim sound ridiculous, but never mind.

Originally Posted by Ste

So as soon as the egg is fertilised it is living?

Yes

Originally Posted by Ste

And therefore you believe it's wrong to get rid of it?]

In all but extreme cicumstances, yes.

Originally Posted by Ste

I also agree that the morning after pill isn't preferable, but it's a very useful form of contraception if something unexpected happens.

Originally Posted by Wiki

Emergency contraception's only proven mechanism of operation is preventing ovulation in the same way as the normal birth-control pill, so that fertilization never occurs.

Originally Posted by Ste

for example?

I thought there was a shortage of children to adopt, i.e. more people want them than there are avialable. Sure, there are people who can never find a steady home, the ones you hear about, and the ones who go from foster home to foster home, but these, I believe, are 'rare'.

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

I wonder if stew wanks ..... and if he does, does he ejeculate?

I really hope you don't.

Originally Posted by Dante

It makes no difference is something is "alive". This is why most people think it's OK to eat animals. If you are arguing some sort of sanctity of life point then you damn well better be some sort of ultra-vegan or something.

No, I eat, and enjoy meat. I am not a buddist, I see humans as 'above' animals.
Edit: I'm all for killing the scum of society, for they have made a choice to be that way.

[Vaio]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Maybe we should ask a doctor at what point foetuses start to show signs of intelligence and self-awareness sufficient to qualify them as human?

When they stop being teenagers

~Vaio~

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

welcome to the world where the CSA would eat you for breakfast

The following scenario:

Boy and girl have sex, boy says 'you on contraception?', girl says 'yes', boy says 'good, I do not want children, I think I am too young for that now' (etc). They have unprotected sex. Girl has a secret childwish. Girl lied, girl never was on the pill.
Girl gets pregnant.
Girl tells boy, boy says 'I do not want to get kids, I thought you were on the pill, if I were you I would get an abortion, if you chose to keep it, don't count on me'


As a man, you've done what you could (ofcourse you could've used a condom) but if a girl would do something like that to me, no way she would ever see any money for my offspring.

But then again, I only shag who I love and when this would happen I would support her 100%.

[Stew]

To be honest, if you're shagging a girl who is likely to do that to you, means you (typcially) don't know her that well, so I'd be boring and recommend using a condom.

[Phang]

Originally Posted by Stew

I thought there was a shortage of children to adopt, i.e. more people want them than there are avialable. Sure, there are people who can never find a steady home, the ones you hear about, and the ones who go from foster home to foster home, but these, I believe, are 'rare'.

I don't know how, and can't really be bothered, to substantiate this, but i thought it was completely the reverse: there are far too many unhoused children because there isn't enough demand for kids younger than eighteen months or older than about six, and becasue the vetting process puts many people off and takes a long time

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by Stew

To be honest, if you're shagging a girl who is likely to do that to you, means you (typcially) don't know her that well, so I'd be boring and recommend using a condom.

yeah

because if you know someone you can guarentee they'll never committ a crime against you ...

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by Stew

To be honest, if you're shagging a girl who is likely to do that to you, means you (typcially) don't know her that well, so I'd be boring and recommend using a condom.

But then again, I only shag who I love and when this would happen I would support her 100%.

[Stew]

Did you add that after?

If not, sorry

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by Stew

Did you add that after?

If not, sorry

it was already there, and you are forgiven, but in the end, I think the female always should have the chance to chose 'yes or no' regardless of what the male thinks, however, the male should be able to give his 'opinion' on this and if possible to 'abandon' the child.

I know this all sounds harsh, but in my opinion it covers all angles. The mother is boss over her own body (and whatever 'parasites' in it) and the father is in control over his responsibilities.

[Super]

I think abortion should be an option for unwanted pregnancies. However, there should be written consensus between the man and the woman on the issue.
These would be the possible situations:

1. M and F both want the baby: Whoopdy do.
2. F wants the baby, M doesn't: If the F still has the baby, then she waives all rights to support from the man.
3. M wants the baby, F doesn't: Tough - it's her body jackass.

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by Super

I think abortion should be an option for unwanted pregnancies. However, there should be written consensus between the man and the woman on the issue.
These would be the possible situations:

• M and F both want the baby: Whoopdy do.
• F wants the baby, M doesn't: If the F still has the baby, then she waives all rights to support from the man.
• M wants the baby, F doesn't: Tough - it's her body jackass.

:win:

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Super

.[*] F wants the baby, M doesn't: If the F still has the baby, then she waives all rights to support from the man.

Why should M not face the expense to something he partly caused (outside of the situation where F lied or failed to take adequate steps in contraception that were solely her responsibility)? It's still his child when its born, whether he wanted it or not. In this scenario you're effectively holding women to ransom to have an abortion out of fear they may not be able to support it on their own.

[Super]

Originally Posted by lokken

Why should M not face the expense to something he partly caused (outside of the situation where F lied or failed to take adequate steps in contraception that were solely her responsibility)? It's still his child when its born, whether he wanted it or not. In this scenario you're effectively holding women to ransom to have an abortion out of fear they may not be able to support it on their own.

I meant to say in the post that I would be assuming that they shared the cost of the abortion (if necessary).

I'm afraid I'm having trouble thinking up a situation where this would apply though. If they were reckless and didn't use contraception, and she became pregnant, it seems like she would be holding him to ransom by having it, as he'd have to support her until the baby is however many years old. If the woman is going to directly go against the other potential parents wishes, then I think she should be prepared to support herself.

[lokken]

One such situation is where the parties don't realise contraception has failed and there's an 'accident' so to speak, but F decides to keep it.

Personally where there's a willing mother i'd err on the side of encouraging life rather than rectifying misfortune, because everyone has crosses to bear. Don't expect you to agree with it, it's my ethical view. I don't deny it's harsh on the father, but i'd rather encourage life where it's wanted rather than risk destroying it.

[Super]

I guess that's where we differ. I tend to take a more 'cold' approach to these things.