Abortion -The poll is not based upon Religious belief - It is based ethics

[gerryh]

Quit being a drama queen G. The procedure of cutting up a fetus is a thing of the past from when abortion was performed very late in a pregnancy. Most nowadays are done within the first 16 weeks when you can fit the entire fetus through a drinkng straw. As usual with those against abortion you wish to portray the most visceral graphic images of late-term abortions as the norm when in fact they are rare, almost extinct in North America.

wrong, if you want pics I can supply those also.

Methods | Abortion in Canada

Yes, other forms such as abortion. Do I need to quote your endless anti abortion posts?

abortion is not a form of birth control. The VAST majority of Canadians are against using abortion as a form of birth control. So try again little man.

 

[BornRuff]

abortion is not a form of birth control. The VAST majority of Canadians are against using abortion as a form of birth control. So try again little man.

There really isn't anything to argue here. Abortion is unquestionably a form of "birth control".

Nobody has claimed that it should be a primary method. "Mores" aside, obviously an invasive surgical procedure is not something you would chose when there are much easier methods.

The fact is that it is an important option to have available if other methods fail.

 

[JLM]

Yes, other forms such as abortion. Do I need to quote your endless anti abortion posts?



Why would you have to do that when we have another option?

Because sometimes the "other option" harms another human being?

 

[Sal]

Sal there are quite a few on this Forum that realize how single mothers are treated, like dirt. How low income cannot afford proper nutritional foods from social assistance to the working poor.
How our Govt managed foster care at times is a disgrace.

Goob I hear ya and there are

But this forum is a miniscule microcosm and

on this very forum, s luts, w hores, low-lifes

misogyny...and most on here brighter than average...

read through this thread alone

to me pro-lifers have the misconception that a clump of cells is a baby and therefore sacred, therefore they have not only the right, but the god given mandate to force that woman if pregnant to give birth...then she can either give the child to a broken system and hope for the best or be supported by a broken system that is barely life sustainable or try to support that child by working it out the best she can...

anything twisted and wrong with this picture, I say yes

not even to bring up rights of human beings to determine their direction so putting that aside for a moment

we do not have the social programs or safety nets to force a woman to give birth and then support her, so the child suffers later in a multitude of ways, not to even mention that woman gets cast aside...I'm seeing zero compassion here for the woman...so once that child grows up and is in the same position as mum currently is....screw her too, we only support clumps of cells....

there is something most grievously wrong with this approach

this is not an ethical approach to life, it is misguided, and while the intention may be good, it is not a good outcome

also: I am aware not all pro-lifers want social programs cut to the bone and taxes cut but since the system is already in a shambles burdening it further without first fixing it is to me akin to sentencing these kids to a life of struggle to salve their conscience

I can not support that.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Is anyone else grateful their mother was a mother and not a murderer?

More "logic" from our alleged scientist. His argument boils down to "if you wouldn't like it if it was done to you, it must never be done to anybody anywhere anytime."

I haven't had my appendix removed. I'm pretty happy about that. That must mean no appendix should ever be removed.

 

[pgs]

Quit being a drama queen G. The procedure of cutting up a fetus is a thing of the past from when abortion was performed very late in a pregnancy. Most nowadays are done within the first 16 weeks when you can fit the entire fetus through a drinkng straw. As usual with those against abortion you wish to portray the most visceral graphic images of late-term abortions as the norm when in fact they are rare, almost extinct in North America.

Did you ever read about Gosnell and his clinic ?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Did you ever read about Gosnell and his clinic ?

Right-wing logic. Gosnell was a hideous murderer, therefore all abortion should be outlawed.

Yet somehow, when you turn that logic to guns, all the hideous murders in the world JUST AREN'T THE FAULT of letting any unstable imbecile buy an arsenal.

 

[pgs]

Right-wing logic. Gosnell was a hideous murderer, therefore all abortion should be outlawed.

Yet somehow, when you turn that logic to guns, all the hideous murders in the world JUST AREN'T THE FAULT of letting any unstable imbecile buy an arsenal.

Ummm he ran an abortion clinic .

 

[mentalfloss]

Ummm he ran an abortion clinic .

And Colpy owns an arsenal of guns.

 

[JLM]

More "logic" from our alleged scientist. His argument boils down to "if you wouldn't like it if it was done to you, it must never be done to anybody anywhere anytime."

He's mostly right with that one although I must concede there is an exception to every rule! The exception in this case is where the mother's life is in real danger.

 

[mentalfloss]

He's mostly right with that one although I must concede there is an exception to every rule! The exception in this case is where the mother's life is in real danger.

Mostly right?

No, most people would realize it's a morally ambiguous question.

 

[taxslave]

Then you would support a law prohibiting late term abortions aside from the reasons you have mentioned. As they do not occur you would clearly support such a restriction.
Would that be correct or am I missing something, some other point?

WHy would you want to pass a redundant law? WE already have far too many of them on the books now. It also might just become the thin edge of the wedge in forcing even more repressive laws on us.

 

[gerryh]

There really isn't anything to argue here. Abortion is unquestionably a form of "birth control".

Ya, it is. For those unwilling to take responsibility for their decisions and actions.

 

[Tonington]

Ummm he ran an abortion clinic .

Correct, but PN was saying that late term abortions are rare, and not the norm. Do you think that Gosnell's actions are the norm for an abortion clinic? If so, why? If not, then mentioning Gosnell is not really a relevant response to what PN said.

 

[taxslave]

Ya, it is. For those unwilling to take responsibility for their decisions and actions.

Too bad men couldn't get pregnant. Then they might just be a little more cautious in their actions.

 

[gerryh]

Too bad men couldn't get pregnant. Then they might just be a little more cautious in their actions.

It takes 2. Both need to take responsibility. Ultimately though, she is the one that can get pregnant so it falls on her to decide if she wants to take the chance or not. That is when the choice should be made. When that choice effects her only. Not after the fact and her "choice" effects more than just her.

 

[Twila]

Condoms and male birth control are not 100% effective and I've been told that I am naive, unreasonable, and now, pushing my morals on others, for suggesting abstinence is a viable option. Obviously, those that support abortion don't feel that abstinence is a viable option.

Abstinence for the man who does not want any of his potential offspring aborted is his only recourse then since the man has often times absolutely no say once he has allowed the sperm to leave his body.

Goob I hear ya and there are

But this forum is a miniscule microcosm and

on this very forum, s luts, w hores, low-lifes

misogyny...and most on here brighter than average...

read through this thread alone

to me pro-lifers have the misconception that a clump of cells is a baby and therefore sacred, therefore they have not only the right, but the god given mandate to force that woman if pregnant to give birth...then she can either give the child to a broken system and hope for the best or be supported by a broken system that is barely life sustainable or try to support that child by working it out the best she can...

anything twisted and wrong with this picture, I say yes

not even to bring up rights of human beings to determine their direction so putting that aside for a moment

we do not have the social programs or safety nets to force a woman to give birth and then support her, so the child suffers later in a multitude of ways, not to even mention that woman gets cast aside...I'm seeing zero compassion here for the woman...so once that child grows up and is in the same position as mum currently is....screw her too, we only support clumps of cells....

there is something most grievously wrong with this approach

this is not an ethical approach to life, it is misguided, and while the intention may be good, it is not a good outcome

also: I am aware not all pro-lifers want social programs cut to the bone and taxes cut but since the system is already in a shambles burdening it further without first fixing it is to me akin to sentencing these kids to a life of struggle to salve their conscience

I can not support that.

It's odd that life is only held sacred before birth, eh? Many of the people who believe abortion should be legal do not support programs that help people who have been given up or taken away from parents who are unable to properly care for them.

I think you hit the nail squarely on the head with your post: What about the child AFTER birth? What about the adult the child will become. Animals know not to bring offspring into the world when life is precarious. They abort. Too bad humans lost the knowledge on how to do that without medical help.

 

[gerryh]

It's odd that life is only held sacred before birth, eh? Many of the people who believe abortion should be legal do not support programs that help people who have been given up or taken away from parents who are unable to properly care for them.

Sure your brush is wide enough?

I think you hit the nail squarely on the head with your post: What about the child AFTER birth? What about the adult the child will become. Animals know not to bring offspring into the world when life is precarious. They abort. Too bad humans lost the knowledge on how to do that without medical help.

Oh ya baby, then you could kill completely unencumbered. How about we go back to the time when a kid wasn't considered human until their first birthday? Then you could kill em legally even after they were born.

 

[Twila]

The example I gave was Alberta, and those I know for a fact.

You actually posted:

Single women in Canada treated poorly? Not afford proper nutritional foods? Do you realize what a single mother on welfare get's in BC and Alberta?( I can't speak to the other provinces as I have no experience with them)

To which I typed out what my experience as a single mom on welfare in BC was like.

Sure your brush is wide enough?

Yep, how about yours?

Oh ya baby, then you could kill completely unencumbered. How about we go back to the time when a kid wasn't considered human until their first birthday? Then you could kill em legally even after they were born.

You have the option of not having sex with a woman who would "kill completely unencumbered". If you're not going to take responsibility for your actions, don't expect the other party to fall in line with your demands after.

 

[gerryh]

To which I typed out what my experience as a single mom on welfare in BC was like.

To which I typed out what a single Mother I know in Alberta was getting.

You have the option of not having sex with a woman who would "kill completely unencumbered". If you're not going to take responsibility for your actions, don't expect the other party to fall in line with your demands after.

Who said "I" wouldn't? I have no problem taking responsibility for my actions. Obviously, since you feel killing the child is A-OK, you don't feel the same way. Responsibility is not in your vocabulary.

My wife and I have offered to take the baby's of those that were aborting. The answer was still no, they didn't want to go through the "hassle" of pregnancy. They didn't want to get the "stretch marks". So, because of the inconvenience of their actions, they killed the result. Another human being. Just so they wouldn't be inconvenienced.