Angelina Jolie plans to adopt Vietnamese child, officials confirm

[tracy]

I don't support international adoptions. As for the Chinese, the very fact virtually all of the adoptions concern girls should give any thinking person pause. Canada and Canadians should ask what the hell is going on. Obviously, many Chinese, in their one child per family society, are dumping daughters into orphanages and then hoping to have a son. And we're participants in this repugnant exercise?

So we should leave these girls in orphanages rather than provide them homes... and how does that stop the practice exactly?

 

[tracy]

Responsibility leads one to make choices in life. In other words, if you do not want to get pregnant, cease promiscuity. Abstinence until one is married and ready for a mature sexual relationship goes a long way to easing overpopulation. furthermore, Canada is hardly overpopulated.
Abortion is not a means of birth control.

You're assuming a lot. Promiscuity? Unplanned pregnancies occur in women who aren't promiscuous you know. Even married couples aren't always willing to have babies.

By definition abortion is a means of birth control, by the way (it is one way women can control the number of births they have). It may be one method you don't approve of, but it is what it is.

 

[tracy]

I don't know. There was no arragement with the family to pay bills expenses etc, the way it's sometimes done there, (you're in California right?) through private adoption or what have you. Perhaps that's also an option. Not in this case though.

It would be the same with Angelina Jolie. She's in California and RICH. Can you imagine what a target she'd be for an unscrupulous birth mother?

 

[westmanguy]

ABORTION

I don't know about Sanctus and the RC view on this, but I have no problem with any couple using birth control (patches, pills, etc.) or condoms in a relationship.

This (keyword) prevents a pregnancy.

Abortion (keyword) terminates a pregnancy.

I am pro-life, BTW.

Unless a woman has a preganancy forced upon her (rape, tampering with birth control), is at serious health risk if she has a baby, is mentally uncapable of consenting to sex or pregnancy (mentally challenged, girls; to be decided by guardian), or is under the age of 16 (thats the age I choose).

Then they can have the exception to that.

Thos are my common rational exceptions, but I believe a life under harsh circumstances is better then no life at all.

Tell me, WHO DISAGREES, I take this personally, Millions of babies dead due to "woman's rights":

DO YOU CHOOSE: NO LIFE AT ALL or A LIFE UNDER HARSH CIRCUMSTANCES.

I choose the latter one, and I want to know why you would choose No life at all, (those exceptions I listed are still in effect).

A woman can have the child and put it up for adoption, yes going into the system is not a great life, but its better than no life.

Foster children, who were given up by their parents have gone on to do great things.

I do not judge a unborn babies life, I give him the chance to live it.

Funny thing we can all agree on: We are all passionate about be pro-life or pro-choice.

(Side note: If abortion was illegal, I wouldn't consider it 1st degree murder, but an indictable offense with its own set punishment (say it were illegal, and a woman who didn't fit under those exceptions aborted, I would say 5-7 years in prison would be a fair punishment)

A woman who puts herself under the influence, gets drunk, or is in the heat of the moment and fogets safe-sex practise, should have the baby.

Period.

 

[tracy]

Actually, if you believe life begins at conception then birth control pills, patches, etc. are all causing abortions.

 

[westmanguy]

Condoms prevent the sperm from getting into the fallopian tube.

Birth Control manipulates the eggs from excepting sperm, or blocks the sperm off from enetering the fallopian tube.

I am positive Birth Control doesn't kill the zygote (the product when the egg + sperm unite).

You must be talking about 2 different forms of it.

The Morning After Pill terminates a pregancy, is that what you referred to?

 

[westmanguy]

Actually after further investigation. The pill is something you take daily. It stops the production of follicles in the ovary (which later turn into eggs).

BirthControl doesn't terminate the product of the egg + sperm, called the zygote.

Its like a hormone, that manipulates production of follicles in the ovary.

Are you think I am stupid, and will agree to you analysis?

 

[tracy]

Actually after further investigation. The pill is something you take daily. It stops the production of follicles in the ovary (which later turn into eggs).

BirthControl doesn't terminate the product of the egg + sperm, called the zygote.

Its like a hormone, that manipulates production of follicles in the ovary.

Are you think I am stupid, and will agree to you analysis?

I never said you were stupid.

The pill doesn't necessarily stop egg production. That's ONE of its possible mechanisms of action. It can and does also prevent implantation of fertilized eggs. That's why many churches won't allow their followers to use it. I'm willing to bet I've researched birth control more than most men, but I will find you a link anyways.

 

[tracy]

Here ya go: Even with perfect use at least 2% of women will still ovulate and perfect use is rare.

[edit] Prefertilization effects

The combined Pill primarily prevents pregnancy by preventing ovulation. In women who take the pills correctly, ovulation is prevented in 98-99% of cycles. Forgetting to take one or more pills increases ovulation rates; one study found skipping two pills in a row resulted in ovulation in 29% of cycles.[45] (In women not taking the Pill, pregnancy occurs in approximately 25% of ovulatory cycles.)[46]
In the event of breakthrough ovulation, secondary contraceptive mechanisms are believed to come into play. A proposed secondary mechanism prior to fertilization (creation of the embryo) is creation of an environment hostile to the embryo's implantation and survival. Proposed secondary mechanisms active before fertilization include thickening of cervical mucus, which can prevent or slow sperm entry into the uterus, and changes in tube transport inhibiting sperm migration to the fallopian tubes.[47]

[edit] Postfertilization effects

Mechanisms that act after fertilization are controversial; according to those who define pregnancy as beginning at fertilization such mechanisms make the method abortifacient. Postfertilization effects of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) could involve any 1 or more of the following 3 mechanisms of action:[47]

• Alteration of the endometrium, such that a embryo that reached the uterus was unable to successfully implant into the endometrial lining of the uterus.
• Alteration of the endometrium not sufficient to prevent implantation but unfavorable for maintenance of the pregnancy; a unattached embryo or embryo already implanted in the endometrial lining of the uterus would be unable to maintain itself long enough to result in a clinically recognized pregnancy. (Clinically recognized miscarriage rates are not higher in women who became pregnant while taking oral contraceptives.)[48]
• Slower transport of the embryo through the fallopian tube, preventing the embryo from implanting in the uterus; this could result either in the unrecognized loss of the embryo or in an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy if the embryo had slower tubal transport and ended up implanting in the fallopian tube.

 

[tracy]

Condoms prevent the sperm from getting into the fallopian tube.

Birth Control manipulates the eggs from excepting sperm, or blocks the sperm off from enetering the fallopian tube.

I am positive Birth Control doesn't kill the zygote (the product when the egg + sperm unite).

You must be talking about 2 different forms of it.

The Morning After Pill terminates a pregancy, is that what you referred to?

Nope. Depo, IUDs, the pill... they are all potential abortifacients if you define a zygote as life because they prevent zygotes from implanting.

 

[tamarin]

Tracy, the Chinese adoption situation should alarm anyone. It's hardly an economic backwater anymore or Third World redoubt. China is a nation with political and military clout and an amazing growth rate. Yet it's acting on some fronts as if it were caught in the dark ages. It should be called on its "export" of girls. Canadian adoptive parents, regardless of their difficulties in becoming the parents they wish to be, should wonder at the values of Chinese society and the complicity of its government in such a gender-specific practice. It's an issue wholly separate from the children themselves.

 

[TenPenny]

Did I even once mention the Church? We are, last time I checked the thread, talking about adapting the cultural mores of immigrants into the mainstream of Canadian culture.

Oh, settle down. You mention the Church constantly, stop trying to play innocent. Every day, you post another long winded blather about something related to THE CHURCH, tieing it into every thread if possible.

This thread isn't about adapting immigrants into mainstream culture, it's about certain posters who believe in white people keeping themselves white, and others using it as a forum to, yet again, rail on about abortion. You're getting yourself confused with the soccer thread, which is another chance for "good Christians" to rant about those dirty/ugly/confused muslims, and now Hindus, apparently.

Some people think that, by not adopting a girl from China, you will someone eliminate 2000 years of culture, and ensure that these girls have every educational and societal adavantage, and this will somehow happen overnight, and they won't end up on the street as prostitutes when they turn 12.
But then again, some people in God. Whatever delusion works for you, go with it.

And don't worry, Sanctimonious, every time I say something that you take offense to, I go into a little box and atone my sins to some guy in a fancy robe, so that makes it all better, doesn't it?