» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 12:37 a.m.

I saw on the news that today is the 30th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.  Some groups are trying to have it repealed.  Others are saying "No Way!!"  What are your thoughts?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: SamRice Gamgee on 01/22/03 at 12:42 a.m.

Nuts, I knew one of you was going to do this...grrr.

Alright.  I think abortion is the woman's choice.  She is the one who makes the commitment to suffer back pains, morning sickness, crazy cramps, bloating, hormonal rage and labor over a nine-month span.  I find it difficult to justify a man's position in this unless A) He is the father and B) he actually cares about the baby.  I think the caring father has a say in it, but ultimately I believe it's the woman's decision and I can't fault her for it.

As for the courts...the Supreme Court does listen to public opinion.  So if you want abortion to continue to be legal (to an extent, mind you.  I believe once it has a beating heart you've reached the point of no return), you'd better start the protests.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80sRocked on 01/22/03 at 12:43 a.m.

oh no, 80s_cheerleader I have a feeling you just opened the pandora's box to the great abortion debate.

:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: SamRice Gamgee on 01/22/03 at 12:44 a.m.


Quoting:
oh no, 80s_cheerleader I have a feeling you just opened the pandora's box the the great abortion debate. :o End Quote


Seriously.  Let the mudslinging begin ::)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/22/03 at 12:52 a.m.


Quoting:
Nuts, I knew one of you was going to do this...grrr.

Alright.  I think abortion is the woman's choice.  She is the one who makes the commitment to suffer back pains, morning sickness, crazy cramps, bloating, hormonal rage and labor over a nine-month span.  I find it difficult to justify a man's position in this unless A) He is the father and B) he actually cares about the baby.  I think the caring father has a say in it, but ultimately I believe it's the woman's decision and I can't fault her for it.

As for the courts...the Supreme Court does listen to public opinion.  So if you want abortion to continue to be legal (to an extent, mind you.  I believe once it has a beating heart you've reached the point of no return), you'd better start the protests.End Quote



I agree. (Man, you saved me a lot of typing too! ;D ;))

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 12:52 a.m.

Well, since I brought it up, here are my views...

Personally, I am against abortion.  However, I don't think it's my place to try to tell another woman what she should/should not do with her body.  If a friend of mine came to me for advice, I would try to persuade her not to do it (in most cases), but if she did, I wouldn't think of her as a killer and most definitely wouldn't stop being friends with her.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/22/03 at 01:29 p.m.

Bend Over!  Here comes the a$$ whuppin'!
I Vote - Right to Choose.  
Unfortunately I have to state that I only look at it superficially and avoid any thought of it as more than a simple day-surgical procedure.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/22/03 at 02:11 p.m.

Trolls,

Don't bother posting senseless un-intelligent garbage because your posts will be deleted.

Have A Nice Day!  :)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 02:22 p.m.

Thanx Hairspray!!!

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/22/03 at 02:33 p.m.


Quoting:
So, how do YOU feel about it, hairspray?End Quote



If you can follow the Forum Guidelines while posting and discuss the issue with intelligent statements as opposed to one-liner dribble, your posts may remain.

http://www.inthe80s.com/rules.shtml

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: RockandRollFan on 01/22/03 at 02:35 p.m.

Please remember this is just my opinion:
I am Pro-life not Pro death....from the time a baby is "Concieved" it is a creation of GOD...nobody has the "Right" to kill it.  Again...Just my opinion ;)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/22/03 at 02:39 p.m.

Abortion rate continues to slide

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

As America enters its fourth decade of legalized abortion, the U.S. Senate is girding for another go-round on the late-term pregnancy-ending procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion. Although the outcome, regrettably, is likely to be different this time, courtesy of the newly enshrined GOP trifecta in the White House and Congress, the debate is still much ado about very little.

The meaningful developments on the abortion front, a saga sadly without end in this country, have not taken place in the Capitol or Oval Office and, most assuredly, they do not involve the exceedingly rare procedure technically known as dilation and extraction, which, granted, makes even the most fervent abortion proponents queasy.

What everyone with a stake in this debate should take satisfaction in -- as some celebrate and others mourn today's 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- is the abortion rate's continued slide. For 2000, the last year for which credible statistics are available, the rate fell to its lowest level since 1974. The total 1.31 million abortions in 2000 translate to a rate of 21.3 per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44. That's a meaningful decrease from the peak years of 1980 and 1981, when the rate was 29.3. Legal as abortions should forever be, the fewer of them the better for all concerned.

Although no one can say with any certainty why the rate keeps going down, the most likely reasons are 1) more and better forms of contraception, most notably the "morning-after" pill and 2) greater abstinence among teenagers, who have abortions at a rate disproportionate to all other age groups.

Moreover, a less invasive form of abortion, the chemical kind formerly known as RU-486, shows signs of supplanting the surgical form in the first trimester of pregnancy. Researchers at the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a source abortion proponents and opponents rely on, report that in the first six months that the drugs mifepristone and methotrexate were available in the United States, the drugs were responsible for 6 percent of overall abortions. That's a heartening trend.

Not only is the procedure less medically complicated and psychologically traumatic, its growing acceptance, Guttmacher researchers suggest, "raises the possibility that the decrease in surgical abortion providers may be offset by an increase in the number of providers that offer medical abortion." Upwards of 85 percent of all U.S. counties lack abortion providers, and many young doctors decline to be trained in the procedure for fear of harassment from anti-abortion groups.

So while Congress debates anew an abortion procedure hardly ever used -- and overwhelmingly on fetuses that are tragically deformed -- medical researchers persevere at perfecting new and less onerous ways to end unintended pregnancies or, better yet, prevent them from occurring. That's something the polar-opposite groups in the abortion debate, and everyone trapped in between, should applaud on this momentous day

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: RockandRollFan on 01/22/03 at 02:43 p.m.

Quoting:
Abortion rate continues to slide

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD...End Quote



I'll always applaud the "Choice" of LIFE over the "Choice" of DEATH

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/22/03 at 02:45 p.m.

An opinion that has much merit and I think difficult to argue.

Quoting:
Please remember this is just my opinion:
I am Pro-life not Pro death....from the time a baby is "Concieved" it is a creation of GOD...nobody has the "Right" to kill it.  Again...Just my opinion ;)
End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/22/03 at 02:53 p.m.


Quoting:
An opinion that has much merit and I think difficult to argue.

End Quote



Well...

Leaving religion out of it for a moment...

Pregnancy is a result of two people engaging in the very normal and natural interaction we call sex, the consequence of a totally physical and biological action.

But I will not argue.  ;D

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 03:05 p.m.


Quoting:
Please remember this is just my opinion:
I am Pro-life not Pro death....from the time a baby is "Concieved" it is a creation of GOD...nobody has the "Right" to kill it.  Again...Just my opinion ;)
End Quote



What if you don't believe in God?  I am also Pro-Life, but nobody has the "right" to tell someone else what they can or cannot do because they have different beliefs.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: RockandRollFan on 01/22/03 at 03:25 p.m.


Quoting:


What if you don't believe in God?  I am also Pro-Life, but nobody has the "right" to tell someone else what they can or cannot do because they have different beliefs.
End Quote

I KNEW I shouldn't have brought GOD into it....okay..I'll just say that what Bill Mahar referred to as "Goo"....I believe is a LIFE...therefore if one destroys it, it's the victim that didn't get the "Choice"

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: dagwood on 01/22/03 at 05:36 p.m.

I am anti-abortion.  I believe that life begins at conception so it would be murder.  Of course there are times that it could be called for...incest, rape...It is a tough decision.  I wouldn't slam anyone for having one, though, it is just would not be my choice.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Screwball54 on 01/22/03 at 05:47 p.m.

I am anti-abortion.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 06:04 p.m.

So, for those of you who are anti-abortion, do you think it should be overturned and abortions outlawed?

If so, what about cases where the life of the mother/child is at a high risk of ending?  Would it be justified in those cases?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/22/03 at 06:05 p.m.


Quoting:
So, for those of you who are anti-abortion, do you think it should be overturned and abortions outlawed?

If so, what about cases where the life of the mother/child is at a high risk of ending?  Would it be justified in those cases?
End Quote



Remember, hun, YOU ASKED FOR IT ;)  ;D   :o

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: dagwood on 01/22/03 at 06:10 p.m.


Quoting:
So, for those of you who are anti-abortion, do you think it should be overturned and abortions outlawed?

If so, what about cases where the life of the mother/child is at a high risk of ending?  Would it be justified in those cases?
End Quote



Ok...like I said in my post, In the case of rape or incest and what you said...where the life of the mother and child are in danger.  

As for the law being overturned?  I don't know.  That is a difficult question, where it is legal now people get them in a medical facility that is sterile.  If it were illegal some women would go to back alley butchers...so I guess I say keep it legal.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/22/03 at 06:19 p.m.


Quoting:
Please remember this is just my opinion:
I am Pro-life not Pro death....from the time a baby is "Concieved" it is a creation of GOD...nobody has the "Right" to kill it.  Again...Just my opinion ;)
End Quote



I am going to keep my opinion as simple as possible and not get emotional on this as I usually do. I agree with RNRF. My reason: I have witnessed what abortion is. And what it does to both parties involved.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: spoilzsport on 01/22/03 at 06:52 p.m.


Quoting:


What if you don't believe in God?  I am also Pro-Life, but nobody has the "right" to tell someone else what they can or cannot do because they have different beliefs.
End Quote



They why are you questioning the comments that someone else said? I believe that noone has the "right" to shove their opinion down someone else's throat. ::) I have noted that you tend to do this in other threads as well. ::) ::) If you don't want an opinion, why did you ask?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/22/03 at 07:10 p.m.

Abortion has been around since the beginning of time. Unfortunately, women who have had abortions before Roe v. Wade, faced many obsticles-I am not just talking about the law. I am talking about finding abortions clinics in back alleys done by men with butcher knives in dirty back rooms. IF the woman survived the proceedure, she may have had many infections, and even not been able to have kids at a time when it was right for her to do so.  With the legalization of abortion, the proceedure is safe (except from fanatics who stand in front of clinics). If Roe v. Wade were to be reverse, women would once again head for the back alleys, in unsafe places. For that reason alone, I think we should keep abortion legal.

However, I personally think it is a woman's choice one way or the other.





Cat

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 08:18 p.m.


Quoting:


They why are you questioning the comments that someone else said? I believe that noone has the "right" to shove their opinion down someone else's throat. ::) I have noted that you tend to do this in other threads as well. ::) ::) If you don't want an opinion, why did you ask?
End Quote



I forgot to put the words "I just feel that" before the statement "nobody has the "right" to tell someone else what they can or cannot do because they have different beliefs."  If you had read the ENTIRE statement, you would have seen the words "I am pro-life" and in an earlier thread,  "Personally, I am against abortion. "  I am AGREEING with them! How can I be shoving MY opinion down their throats if it is the same opinion!?  

The question

Quoting:So, for those of you who are anti-abortion, do you think it should be overturned and abortions outlawed?End Quote

was to get it back to the original discussion of whether or not they think Roe v. Wade should be repealed.  

Just to set the record straight, then I won't say anything else that someone might get offended at:
I believe in God.  I also believe that life begins at conception.  I do not believe that abortion is right.  I do believe in freedom of choice.

My sincerest apologies to those that I have offended in this thread and others.    From now on, I will try to keep my opinions to myself so I don't rock the boat. :-X

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/22/03 at 08:20 p.m.


Quoting:
My sincerest apologies to those that I have offended in this thread and others.    From now on, I will try to keep my opinions to myself so I don't rock the boat. :-X
End Quote



Bullcrap.  Your opinion is important, as is everyone else's opinion on this board.

That guy was just being trollish and confrontational.  I understood what you said, and I think you should stick by your guns so long as you have the stuff to back up your words :)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/22/03 at 08:53 p.m.


Quoting:


Bullcrap.  Your opinion is important, as is everyone else's opinion on this board.

That guy was just being trollish and confrontational.  I understood what you said, and I think you should stick by your guns so long as you have the stuff to back up your words :)
End Quote




I agree with Rice.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/22/03 at 09:22 p.m.


Quoting:
Abortion has been around since the beginning of time. Unfortunately, women who have had abortions before Roe v. Wade, faced many obsticles-I am not just talking about the law. I am talking about finding abortions clinics in back alleys done by men with butcher knives in dirty back rooms. IF the woman survived the proceedure, she may have had many infections, and even not been able to have kids at a time when it was right for her to do so.  With the legalization of abortion, the proceedure is safe (except from fanatics who stand in front of clinics). If Roe v. Wade were to be reverse, women would once again head for the back alleys, in unsafe places. For that reason alone, I think we should keep abortion legal.

However, I personally think it is a woman's choice one way or the other.

CatEnd Quote



I agree with this statement as well.

For the record...

It should be kept legal, in my opinion.

I do have a problem with it being done later in the pregnancy, however. In my opinion, the only time it should even be a consideration at those late stages is if it becomes a medical issue in terms of life risk and/or if it is discovered that the fetus has a debilitating/significant birth defect.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/22/03 at 09:50 p.m.

Me too!

Quoting:



I agree with Rice.
End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/22/03 at 10:22 p.m.

Thanks y'all ;)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Gecko on 01/23/03 at 00:51 a.m.

I personally don't believe in abortion. I could never go through one myself.  However, this is only my opinion - I don't think it should be illegal for the reasons already discussed (the safety of the women involved).  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/23/03 at 09:40 a.m.

This may sound weird, but what about more "compassionate" reasons?

For example, what if, after giving birth, the woman is unable to care adequately for the child?  Of course, she could unload it (hmmm, that sounded bad) on a foster home or orphanage, but who is to guarantee that the baby will be taken care of any better there?

So I think this issue is more than meets your eye :-/

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/23/03 at 10:57 a.m.

You raise a good point, the difficult thing is that many people that can not provide a good home for infants are often the ones that have them.  I was involved in socail services in my early 20s.  It was a group home for Adolescents with Behavioral Problems, and it was coed.  So basically teens in trouble.  It was expected that 95% of all males that went through these programs would end up in jail after turning 18 and 95% females would end of pregnant.  Pregnacny was a safety net, the thought was a baby was something that would provide love that they didn't have enough of, and of course govermental assistance.  I'm so glad I got out of that field.

Quoting:
This may sound weird, but what about more "compassionate" reasons?

For example, what if, after giving birth, the woman is unable to care adequately for the child?  Of course, she could unload it (hmmm, that sounded bad) on a foster home or orphanage, but who is to guarantee that the baby will be taken care of any better there?

So I think this issue is more than meets your eye :-/
End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/23/03 at 12:13 a.m.

Maybe if there were more sexual responsibility practiced this would not be an issue. :(

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/23/03 at 12:32 a.m.

Sexual responsibility had nothing to do with that populations choices.  They wanted the children, unfortunately for the wrong reasons.  

Quoting:
Maybe if there were more sexual responsibility practiced this would not be an issue. :(
End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/23/03 at 12:57 a.m.

I can see your point Race, but mine is this:

responsibility:
Ability or necessity to answer for or be responsible for one's conduct.

I have worked in the health insurance field for years, and I cannot count (literally) how many times I have had to give benefit information or claim status on abortion simply because of sexual indiscretion. The cases that anger me most are the repeat aborters that are using the procedure as a means of contraception. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, I will not debate that, but this confuses me: People complain about this being a "disposable" society. It is a crime that we just use and use and use and throw away, yet disposing human life is not supposed to be wrong? Something wrong with the logic. I hope I have not offended anyone with this post and I am sure to get flamed but this is my opinion and it isn't going to change.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/23/03 at 01:18 p.m.

Point taken and not argued.  Abortion as a birth control is wrong and can't be healthy for a person physically.  Abortion rates have fallen and I think alot of that is due to the availabilty of birth control options.  When I was a teen rubbers weren't as easy to come by, now you can get them for free at a number of events and agencies, at least in Seattle.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: resinchaser on 01/23/03 at 01:20 p.m.

I don't know which side of the fence i'm on. On one side, I would never want my girlfriend to have an abortion, so in that aspect i'm against abortion. On the other side I would never tell someone else what they can and can't do to their own body.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: dagwood on 01/23/03 at 05:51 p.m.


Quoting:
This may sound weird, but what about more "compassionate" reasons?

For example, what if, after giving birth, the woman is unable to care adequately for the child?  Of course, she could unload it (hmmm, that sounded bad) on a foster home or orphanage, but who is to guarantee that the baby will be taken care of any better there?

So I think this issue is more than meets your eye :-/
End Quote



Ok...soapbox time.

I think that this reason is full of holes.  You can't give your baby up but you can kill it?  It doesn't work for me.  I have heard this excuse and I just roll my eyes.  Trust me...I gave a baby up for adoption 13 years ago.  As much as it hurt, there is no way I could have aborted.  It just seemed wrong...of course this is just my opinion....

Ok..off the soapbox waiting for all the rotten fruit to be hurled at me.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/23/03 at 05:53 p.m.


Quoting:


Ok...soapbox time.

I think that this reason is full of holes.  You can't give your baby up but you can kill it?  It doesn't work for me.  I have heard this excuse and I just roll my eyes.  Trust me...I gave a baby up for adoption 13 years ago.  As much as it hurt, there is no way I could have aborted.  It just seemed wrong...of course this is just my opinion....

Ok..off the soapbox waiting for all the rotten fruit to be hurled at me.
End Quote



S'alright.  No fruit from me.  This was just a reason off the top of my head, but I see why you'd find it invalid.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/24/03 at 11:54 p.m.


Quoting:
Alright.  I think abortion is the woman's choice.  She is the one who makes the commitment to suffer back pains, morning sickness, crazy cramps, bloating, hormonal rage and labor over a nine-month span.  I find it difficult to justify a man's position in this unless A) He is the father and B) he actually cares about the baby.  I think the caring father has a say in it, but ultimately I believe it's the woman's decision and I can't fault her for it.
End Quote



There is a third person involved, the unborn child. I can not understand why a woman would want to let her unborn child die :'(. To say the child would be better off dead, rather than having a hard life due to being unwanted, does not make sence to me. What if some highschool kid said they wanted to commit suicide because life sucked. People would want to stop him/her. Life is valuable. I hope women who are making this decision do not make it quickly or lightly. I hope they try and look for services to help them first. Once the abortion is done, there is no bringing the kid back to life.

If people complain that the foster care/ child welfare systems are not working then we should fix them. There are kids who would benifit today from a better system. Even if abortion contines to be legal, we should help kids who need support today.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Eli_Sheol on 01/25/03 at 02:57 p.m.


Quoting:





From now on, I will try to keep my opinions to myself so I don't rock the boat. :-X
End Quote


Hey, don't worry about it. There's no way you can say what you truly believe without making some people angry.
Like I said in another thread. Interesting discussions usually get heated.
No one has the right to stifle someone elses belief, and no one should lash out against someone else for stating their belief.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: SuperFreak on 01/25/03 at 03:31 p.m.


Quoting:

Hey, don't worry about it. There's no way you can say what you truly believe without making some people angry.
Like I said in another thread. Interesting discussions usually get heated.
No one has the right to stifle someone elses belief, and no one should lash out against someone else for stating their belief.
End Quote

I like the way you think, Eli_Sheol ;)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Eli_Sheol on 01/25/03 at 03:47 p.m.

OK, I'm basically a live and  let live kind of guy. I don't like the idea of abortion. But, who am I to tell someone they can't have one? Do I, for any reason have that right?
If I'm the father, I believe I do. But then again, shouldn't I have done enough research into the beliefs of my girlfriend to find out whether or not she was the kind of person who would terminate a pregnancy she didn't want?

If a woman is so intent on getting an abortion that she is willing to go to a back alley butcher to get one, isn't that her choice?

Fear of what's going to happen to people that are that desperate shouldn't cloud our judgement when we decide what should be legal and what should be illegal in the country we live in.

Legalizing abortion tells the average woman that the society she lives in thinks it's OK if she decides to kill her unborn child.

Legalizing any act that was once against the law removes the social stigma. People who would never have considered the act before, because it was against the law and society frowned upon it, now have the option to openly engage in that act without being looked down on.

What we've done in this country is told every female that if she finds herself pregnant, for whatever reason, and she doesn't want to carry that baby for nine months, for whatever reason, that it's OK with us for her to kill it.

If my wife might die if she tried to give birth to a child, I would not think twice about aborting that child and I think that should be a totally legal option.

If my wife was raped and got pregnant, I would council her to carry the child and give it up for adoption. The child had nothing to do with the actions of the father. Why should it be punished? And who knows, after the birth, my wife and I might decide to keep the child and raise it.
No one on this planet knows the future. But I do not think it should be against the law for a woman to decide that she does not want to give birth to the child of a man who raped her.

However, I do not think it's right for our society to tell every female that we think it's OK for her to terminate a pregnancy just because she doesn't want to be pregnant.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think, in my most humble opinion that abortion should be against the law except in cases of rape or incest or if the life of the mother is in danger. Simply because we as a society should not tell every female that we think it's OK for her to kill her unborn child simply because she doesn't want to be pregnant right now.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Eli_Sheol on 01/25/03 at 03:49 p.m.


Quoting:

I like the way you think, Eli_Sheol ;)
End Quote


Well, I hope you still like the way I think after reading my post on my opinion of the legality of abortion.
But hey, thanks.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/25/03 at 07:15 p.m.

It's definately well stated in a way that I hadn't heard before.  I don't completely agree that legal abortions removes the social stigma, I think that comes more from their socio group and family that forms those values more than the law.
Abortion rates have fallen the past 10 years so clearly the law isn't a factor in the deduction of it's frequencey today. Two factors that have affected abortion rates are HIV and other STD's and that women are having their children at a later point in life.

Quoting:

Well, I hope you still like the way I think after reading my post on my opinion of the legality of abortion.
But hey, thanks.
End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Steve_H on 01/25/03 at 08:29 p.m.

Is anyone else besides me against both abortion and capital punishment?
Simply put, I believe the aborted fetus is a human being.  I don't buy the trimester argument, the viability argument.  As soon as sperm meets egg, that cluster of cells is on its way to becoming a person.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80sdude on 01/25/03 at 08:44 p.m.


Quoting:As soon as sperm meets egg, that cluster of cells is on its way to becoming a person.  

End Quote



Exactly!

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/25/03 at 09:28 p.m.

Good to see that your consistant Steve, that was always something that confused me about liberal and concervatives, the Libs being pro-abortian anti-death penalty and the Conservatives being anti-abortion and pro death penalty.  

Quoting:
Is anyone else besides me against both abortion and capital punishment?
Simply put, I believe the aborted fetus is a human being.  I don't buy the trimester argument, the viability argument.  As soon as sperm meets egg, that cluster of cells is on its way to becoming a person.  

End Quote

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/25/03 at 09:29 p.m.


Quoting:
Good to see that your consistant Steve, that was always something that confused me about liberal and concervatives, the Libs being pro-abortian anti-death penalty and the Conservatives being anti-abortion and pro death penalty.  

End Quote



That's because he's an independent thinker, not a Sheeple ;)

I'm pro-abortion, pro-death penalty and pro-assisted suicide.  Chew on that.  ;)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/25/03 at 09:31 p.m.

Then I guess I am anti- abortion, unsure-death penalty and pro-assisted suicide. Hmm....strange.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Steve_H on 01/25/03 at 09:33 p.m.


Quoting:
Good to see that your consistant Steve, that was always something that confused me about liberal and concervatives, the Libs being pro-abortian anti-death penalty and the Conservatives being anti-abortion and pro death penalty.  

End Quote



Me too, Race.  Although I don't think many people would say they support abortion as the contraception of choice.  I'm not coming at it from a religious angle, but I've always kind of admired the Catholic Church's consistent opposition to both abortion and the death penalty.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/25/03 at 09:33 p.m.


Quoting:
It's definately well stated in a way that I hadn't heard before.  I don't completely agree that legal abortions removes the social stigma, I think that comes more from their socio group and family that forms those values more than the law.
Abortion rates have fallen the past 10 years so clearly the law isn't a factor in the deduction of it's frequencey today. Two factors that have affected abortion rates are HIV and other STD's and that women are having their children at a later point in life.


End Quote



I agree.  There is still a social stigma associated with abortions.  I think the reason they need to stay legal is mostly a safety issue.  The problem I have with putting limits on the legality of it is this:  I had a friend who was date-raped, but did not report it to police.  She DID become pregnant from this and had an abortion.  She also contracted a sexually transmitted disease during the rape which would not have endangered her life, but most likely would have caused her child to be born with serious health issues that would have made it's life hell.  I also knew of a girl (18 years old) who thought she might be pregnant by her boyfriend, who her parents didn't know about.  But, after having sex with the boyfriend, in order to keep her parents from finding out about him and the sex, came home and said she had been raped at a party.  They immediately called the police, took her to the hospital, where it was found that she WAS pregnant.  Her parents took her to have an abortion, then, during the rape investigation, she admitted that she had never been raped.  So, I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think we should put limits on the legality of abortion.  I realize the latter case probably wouldn't happen any more than it does now, but what about cases like my friend?  Her child would have been alive, but would not have had a 'life'.  Like I said before, I think abortion is wrong, but who am I to tell someone else what they can or cannot do?  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Steve_H on 01/25/03 at 09:38 p.m.


Quoting:


That's because he's an independent thinker, not a Sheeple ;)

I'm pro-abortion, pro-death penalty and pro-assisted suicide.  Chew on that.  ;)
End Quote



Hmmm... I haven't even thought about assisted suicide.  I've heard physicians are no longer regularly taking the Hippocratic Oath.  Here's the classical version off the PBS website:

I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it - without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else.

I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.

Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.

What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.

If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/25/03 at 09:45 p.m.


Quoting:


I agree.  There is still a social stigma associated with abortions.  I think the reason they need to stay legal is mostly a safety issue.  The problem I have with putting limits on the legality of it is this:  I had a friend who was date-raped, but did not report it to police.  She DID become pregnant from this and had an abortion.  She also contracted a sexually transmitted disease during the rape which would not have endangered her life, but most likely would have caused her child to be born with serious health issues that would have made it's life hell.  I also knew of a girl (18 years old) who thought she might be pregnant by her boyfriend, who her parents didn't know about.  But, after having sex with the boyfriend, in order to keep her parents from finding out about him and the sex, came home and said she had been raped at a party.  They immediately called the police, took her to the hospital, where it was found that she WAS pregnant.  Her parents took her to have an abortion, then, during the rape investigation, she admitted that she had never been raped.  So, I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think we should put limits on the legality of abortion.  I realize the latter case probably wouldn't happen any more than it does now, but what about cases like my friend?  Her child would have been alive, but would not have had a 'life'.  Like I said before, I think abortion is wrong, but who am I to tell someone else what they can or cannot do?  
End Quote



I can understand and respect your viewpoint and your friends situations Cheerleader...but let me throw another example out here....in 1978 my stepmother had a child born with down syndrome. This girl was the sweetest, most wonderful ray of sunshine that could have come into our lives. She died in 1980, not of that disease, but heart problems. Now, by using the logic that some do of stating "the child would not have a life", my sister Stephanie, whom we all loved so very much and who loved us back, should have been aborted? I think not. Just as some say "Who am I to judge on how to tell someone to live?" I say "Who am I to judge on who shouldn't be born?"....just different viewpoints I guess. This is not an attack, just a different point of view. I used to be "pro-choice" before a very dear friend of mine went through an abortion, and as I stated before, I have seen what it does to the mother and the child. I was horrified from that moment on to ever think I was pro choice. But then, that is my opinion.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Davester on 01/25/03 at 09:50 p.m.


Quoting:
Good to see that your consistant Steve, that was always something that confused me about liberal and concervatives, the Libs being pro-abortian anti-death penalty and the Conservatives being anti-abortion and pro death penalty.  

End Quote



   Well, maybe not that consistent.  If I understand Steve's position correctly, he supports an unjust war in which an innocent civillian population will inevitably be in the line of fire (Iraqi-Bush War).  Now, if two all volunteer armies want to gather way out in the middle of nowhere and pound the shite out of each other, that would be fine by me, no moral dilemma or inconsistency.  But, I digress...

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/25/03 at 09:52 p.m.


Quoting:


   Well, maybe not that consistent.  If I understand Steve's position correctly, he supports an unjust war in which an innocent civillian population will inevitably be in the line of fire (Iraqi-Bush War).  Now, if two all volunteer armies want to gather way out in the middle of nowhere and pound the shite out of each other, that would be fine by me, no moral dilemma or inconsistency.  But, I digress...
End Quote



The innocent civilian population is there because they are the puppets of the Iraqi government as human shields.  Take that somewhere else, please.  Not that I have anything against you, Davester, this is just not the forum to be picking a fight.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Steve_H on 01/25/03 at 09:56 p.m.


Quoting:


   Well, maybe not that consistent.  If I understand Steve's position correctly, he supports an unjust war in which an innocent civillian population will inevitably be in the line of fire (Iraqi-Bush War).  Now, if two all volunteer armies want to gather way out in the middle of nowhere and pound the shite out of each other, that would be fine by me, no moral dilemma or inconsistency.  But, I digress...
End Quote



Dave is right in that I'm not opposed to war, which at its root is state sanctioned murder.  We disagree on the imminent Iraqi war, which I thought was on a different thread http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Davester on 01/25/03 at 09:58 p.m.

  But I was only speaking to the issue of consistency  brought-up by someone else...to get myself back on topic and minus the rhetoric, pro-choice.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/25/03 at 10:13 p.m.

How would you decide if it were a case where the child was severely deformed in the womb and was going to be born incapable of living unless hooked-up to machines, in pain and bedridden?

Then what?

Would that be an acceptable reason to abort?

What is your opinion?

Abortion should be kept legal, if for no other reason, to keep from reverting back to darker times when women would go to back alley butchers, under unsanitized conditions to do them illegally and get mutilated or killed in the process. I believe someone else brought-up this point earlier in the thread.

In my opinion, there are reasonable circumstances in which I think abortion may be necessary for a woman. Medical reasons and rape are the first two that come to mind.

This is just my opinion, of course.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/25/03 at 10:47 p.m.


Quoting:
Abortion should be kept legal, if for no other reason, to keep from reverting back to darker times when women would go to back alley butchers, under unsanitized conditions to do them illegally and get mutilated or killed in the process. End Quote



Using the fact that non-legal abortions may happen in less than desirable settings is not a good reason to keep abortion. If you are concerned with the health of the mom, why not extend that same concern to the kid?  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Indy Gent on 01/25/03 at 10:57 p.m.

I am in that belief that abortion should only be used if a mother's health is endangered. Unlike the Catholic Church I used to believe in, I feel that a woman shouldn't have to be in a position to sacrifice her own life to save an unborn child. Jesus forgives everybody. On the other hand, only about 2% of all abortions are for saving the mother's life.  :(

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/25/03 at 10:59 p.m.


Quoting:


Using the fact that non-legal abortions may happen in less than desirable settings is not a good reason to keep abortion. If you are concerned with the health of the mom, why not extend that same concern to the kid?  
End Quote



So what's your opinion on the scenario up there?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/25/03 at 11:01 p.m.

There is one other thought which crossed my mind. What if the child killed would have turned out to be the next Einstien or Fermi or Locke? Lots of very important thinkers had horrible lives in childhood, but they contributed to all of us. What they discovered is now used to make life better for everyone. Every life is valuable.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/25/03 at 11:07 p.m.


Quoting:


So what's your opinion on the scenario up there?
End Quote


There are some decisions which I thank god I do not have to make. I would try my best to help the child, to find the best doctors, to work as hard as I could to save the child. I would read every book written on their disease. Medicine is not always 100% right, and miricales do happen.

Do any of you watch the St. Jude research hospital fund raisers? You see some very sick kids, with horrible diseases like cancer, but they still LOVE life. They still try and joke and play and want to be touched and to give love. Would you pull the plug on one of them if you knew they would end up with lukemea?

This reminds me it is time for me to give blood again. I am healthy and must help others.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: goldie on 01/25/03 at 11:11 p.m.


Quoting:
How would you decide if it were a case where the child was severely deformed in the womb and was going to be born incapable of living unless hooked-up to machines, in pain and bedridden?
End Quote



Speaking from experience as a neonatal nurse for the last 14 years, there is no way medically that any parent can be totally sure that their baby will end up like this until after delivery. There has been more than one occasion that parents have been told some senario like this to find out after they have the baby that the dr. was incorrect. Life begins at conception and abortion is ending that life.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/26/03 at 00:08 a.m.

Steve, thanks for the oath posting, I've never looked at the before.  What is the status of that thing, is it a requirement?  Truth is it seems very outdated, and with close to 1/2 of our Drs. now being female, very fraternal.  
I haven't thought much about assisted suicide, I think I would feel better about it if Dr. Kevorkian wasn't so creepy, shallow yes but he gives me the heebee jeebee's.  Oregon was getting pretty close to allowing it, I belive it was voted in but deemed illegal with the federal laws.  WIth the rising amounts of "Loving Wills" being done now days I don't there would be that much resistance to allowing it, or if now allowing then simply not prosecuting assisted suicide.  

Isn't it funny how as a Christian society we think the hereafter is the greatest thing since sliced bread, yet we as a  nations our so resistant to death? I am friends with a longtime a nurse and he said that he has seen many people die from many different backgrounds and the Anglos are the ones fighting and denying it to the end and many others accept it and welcome it's time to come.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/26/03 at 06:54 p.m.

I want to make it clear that I am not pro-abortion. I am PRO-CHOICE meaning that I think it is up to the woman to choose as she feels is the best decision. As a woman, I do not like the idea of some guys in Washington taking away my choices.




Cat

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/27/03 at 00:36 a.m.


Quoting:
I want to make it clear that I am not pro-abortion. I am PRO-CHOICE meaning that I think it is up to the woman to choose as she feels is the best decision. As a woman, I do not like the idea of some guys in Washington taking away my choices.




Cat
End Quote



Shouldn't there be some voice for the unborn? One of the most common wants that all animals have is the desperate want to survive. So I think if the unborn has a choice, it would chose to live.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/27/03 at 07:41 a.m.


Quoting:


Shouldn't there be some voice for the unborn? One of the most common wants that all animals have is the desperate want to survive. So I think if the unborn has a choice, it would chose to live.
End Quote




Should a fetus have more rights than a woman?




Cat

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: RockandRollFan on 01/27/03 at 08:50 a.m.


Quoting:



Should a fetus have more rights than a woman?




Cat
End Quote

The woman has the "Choice" to either murder something that is concieved and therefore exists....or she can make the decision to have the baby and give it up for adoption, as there are MANY people who want children that are not able to have them...IMHO, THAT would be the "Right Choice" ;)

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/27/03 at 09:14 a.m.

The argument is whether a "fetus" is a human being or not. Some feel no and others yes. I am a yes person, therefore my point of view is that a "person" is being murdered by the one person who they should be able to trust above all others. Someone else might see it as a lump of tissue and not a human being, therefore they see it as a "surgical procedure to remove unwanted tissue", and they see it as their right to do so. So, one side will never agree with the other. And, it appears that since one persons opinion does not matter more than another in our society, then both opinions have equal weight and not superior to each other. We can argue until the end of time but we we will never come to an agreement.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/27/03 at 01:11 p.m.


Quoting:



Should a fetus have more rights than a woman?




Cat
End Quote



Even a fetus with only a few cells is still alive. It has all of the features you would find in any living thing- from a nuclues to a membrane to mitchondria to DNA. A fetus cell has the same make up as a developed human's cells. It is just too weak to survive on its own without the mom.

I think abortion is a bad place to argue about rights. It is about a human life. If a person needs to let a child die to "have rights" then I am speechless.

I think it is just as important to offer services to moms who are pregnant. We should provide them with care regardless of ability to pay, and we should have better adoption programs available. Moms should never feel like they have no other option than to abort a life.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: ayhab on 01/27/03 at 02:15 p.m.

Well, I'll weigh in with my opinion - usually considered cold and callous - but I believe in pro-choice anytime for any reason. Humans have children, raise children to be responsible, independent humans themselves, and then those humans make the same decision when it's their turn.

I believe the choice to bring a life into the world entails nurturing and raising the life you create.  If you can't do that, or just don't want to do that, then I say don't bring the child into the world.  Adoption as an alternative is always the first suggestion in these discussions, but unless it's a perfectly healthy white child with good family medical history, the success rate in finding homes just doesn't support the "just have the baby and put it up for adoption and we'll all live happily ever after" theory.

And the "mom-helping" programs, where it was just suggested that we put more money into making sure all the accidental pregnancies become living, breathing human beings that we will THEN have to support with welfare (since most of these abortions are by women who don't want a child specifically because of the lack of ability to support a kid with their high school or less education) well, that's just ludicrous.

Mom-helping programs sounds sweet, but the point is, no one has made a conscious decision to be a mom in these scenarios, only a conscious decision to go with the hormones and have unprotected sex.

Our tax monies already support all the welfare children whose mothers REALLY wanted to have the kids, THOUGHT they'd be able to take care of them, and NOW find they were wrong.  

We'd multiply that problem exponentially if we now try to push, prod, or embarrass the women who DON'T want to be mothers, never wanted to be mothers, or know they are not in a financial or mental state to be mothers yet - into a decision that would assure a substandard state-supported childhood with inept parenting resulting in the type of human beings we'll be discussing in the capital punishment thread later.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Hairspray on 01/28/03 at 12:23 a.m.


Quoting:
Well, I'll weigh in with my opinion - usually considered cold and callous - but I believe in pro-choice anytime for any reason. Humans have children, raise children to be responsible, independent humans themselves, and then those humans make the same decision when it's their turn.

I believe the choice to bring a life into the world entails nurturing and raising the life you create.  If you can't do that, or just don't want to do that, then I say don't bring the child into the world.  Adoption as an alternative is always the first suggestion in these discussions, but unless it's a perfectly healthy white child with good family medical history, the success rate in finding homes just doesn't support the "just have the baby and put it up for adoption and we'll all live happily ever after" theory.

And the "mom-helping" programs, where it was just suggested that we put more money into making sure all the accidental pregnancies become living, breathing human beings that we will THEN have to support with welfare (since most of these abortions are by women who don't want a child specifically because of the lack of ability to support a kid with their high school or less education) well, that's just ludicrous.

Mom-helping programs sounds sweet, but the point is, no one has made a conscious decision to be a mom in these scenarios, only a conscious decision to go with the hormones and have unprotected sex.

Our tax monies already support all the welfare children whose mothers REALLY wanted to have the kids, THOUGHT they'd be able to take care of them, and NOW find they were wrong.  

We'd multiply that problem exponentially if we now try to push, prod, or embarrass the women who DON'T want to be mothers, never wanted to be mothers, or know they are not in a financial or mental state to be mothers yet - into a decision that would assure a substandard state-supported childhood with inept parenting resulting in the type of human beings we'll be discussing in the capital punishment thread later.End Quote



I think your post is well thought out. I'll be a bit surprised to see a rebuttal.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/28/03 at 05:42 p.m.


Quoting:
I believe in pro-choice anytime for any reason.End Quote


You want abortion to be on demand, as a method of birth control? Don't you care about the unborn child at all?

Quoting:
unless it's a perfectly healthy white child with good family medical history, the success rate in finding homes just doesn't support the "just have the baby and put it up for adoption and we'll all live happily ever after" theory.
End Quote


What? If the kid is white it will have a better chance at a good life? Bull. Most people do not have a dream life, but it is better than death.

Quoting:
And the "mom-helping" programs, where it was just suggested that we put more money into making sure all the accidental pregnancies become living, breathing human beings that we will THEN have to support with welfare
End Quote


You are wrong. I know people who were adopted, and they have good lives with good jobs. They are moral and decent people and they are glad to be alive.

Quoting:
We'd multiply that problem exponentially if we now try to push, prod, or embarrass the women who DON'T want to be mothers, never wanted to be mothers, or know they are not in a financial or mental state to be mothers yet - into a decision that would assure a substandard state-supported childhood with inept parenting resulting in the type of human beings we'll be discussing in the capital punishment thread later.
End Quote


Your whole post is based on myths and stereotypes. Adopted kids do succeed. Black kids do succeed. They need love and caring people to help them as children, as everyone needs. Even if they do not have a perfect childhood, they still know how to give love and be thankful.

And how do you know that one of them may not be the next Einstien, or person who will make a medical discovery, or great author?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Rice Cube on 01/28/03 at 05:54 p.m.

What I'm about to say is viciously insensitive.  View at your own risk.

Quoting:

You want abortion to be on demand, as a method of birth control? Don't you care about the unborn child at all?

End Quote



The mother was there first, and if she feels unable or unwilling to take care of the baby, no one should force her to do it.  The unborn child is a mass of cells.

Quoting:
What? If the kid is white it will have a better chance at a good life? Bull. Most people do not have a dream life, but it is better than death.
You are wrong. I know people who were adopted, and they have good lives with good jobs. They are moral and decent people and they are glad to be alive.End Quote



You described SOME of the people who were adopted.  Others are not so lucky.  You accuse Ayhab of stereotyping, but the stories that you hear in the news about abused adoptees and runaways, I'm fairly sure they're true too.

Quoting:
Your whole post is based on myths and stereotypes. Adopted kids do succeed. Black kids do succeed. They need love and caring people to help them as children, as everyone needs. Even if they do not have a perfect childhood, they still know how to give love and be thankful. End Quote



You're right.  They do need love and caring people.  But some of them don't get that and become criminals and axe-murderers and drug addicts.  I'd rather a mother abort than treat their kid like sh!t, or throw their kid into a foster home where they're treated like sh!t, and have them become the next Hitler or Ted Bundy.

Quoting:
And how do you know that one of them may not be the next Einstien, or person who will make a medical discovery, or great author?
End Quote



Or the next Unabomber, or the next McVeigh...etc. etc.

If you're going to have a free country, sometimes you're going to have to trust the individual's ability to choose.  I support abortion not because I like butchering fetuses, but because I believe that ultimately people can make the right choice.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/28/03 at 06:03 p.m.


Quoting:

Your whole post is based on myths and stereotypes. Adopted kids do succeed. Black kids do succeed. They need love and caring people to help them as children, as everyone needs. Even if they do not have a perfect childhood, they still know how to give love and be thankful.

And how do you know that one of them may not be the next Einstien, or person who will make a medical discovery, or great author?
End Quote



I agree that adopted kids and black kids do succeed.  However, he does have a point about the healthy white male child.  If you look at adoption statistics, the number of white children that are adopted outnumbers the number of minority children 4 to 1.  I don't think he was saying that white male children have better lives, just that they have a MUCH better chance of being adopted, any healthy white child does.

BTW, I agree 100% with Catwoman.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: CatwomanofV on 01/28/03 at 06:10 p.m.


Quoting:

BTW, I agree 100% with Catwoman.  
End Quote






Thank you.




Cat

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/28/03 at 06:12 p.m.


Quoting:
The mother was there first, and if she feels unable or unwilling to take care of the baby, no one should force her to do it.  The unborn child is a mass of cells.
End Quote


The unborn child is alive, it has life. Just because someone else was "here first" should not be enough to allow such a serious choice to be made so easily. There should be a very good reason to why she wants to kill the unborn child.

Quoting:
You described SOME of the people who were adopted.  Others are not so lucky.  You accuse Ayhab of stereotyping, but the stories that you hear in the news about abused adoptees and runaways, I'm fairly sure they're true too.
End Quote


What about the ones who did succeed? Should they have their lives ended because others failed? According to this logic, we should look in prisons to find the group most represented, then stop that race from repoducing. That way there will be less of them. Just because one adopted child becomes bad should not be a reason to kill all of them.

Quoting:
You're right.  They do need love and caring people.  But some of them don't get that and become criminals and axe-murderers and drug addicts.  I'd rather a mother abort than treat their kid like sh!t, or throw their kid into a foster home where they're treated like sh!t, and have them become the next Hitler or Ted Bundy.
End Quote


You may rather the mother abort, but the kid would probably pick life, even a sh!tty one at the begenning.

Quoting:
If you're going to have a free country, sometimes you're going to have to trust the individual's ability to choose.  I support abortion not because I like butchering fetuses, but because I believe that ultimately people can make the right choice.
End Quote


How is killing a child the right choice? There must be a better option. At the very least, we should improve the foster care system and give moms more choices.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/28/03 at 07:32 p.m.


Quoting:

What about the ones who did succeed? Should they have their lives ended because others failed? According to this logic, we should look in prisons to find the group most represented, then stop that race from repoducing. That way there will be less of them. Just because one adopted child becomes bad should not be a reason to kill all of them.End Quote



I don't think he's saying that ALL adopted children should not be here.  How does the issue of some adopted children being bad 'logically' become a race issue?   I don't follow...

Quoting:You may rather the mother abort, but the kid would probably pick life, even a sh!tty one at the begenning. End Quote


You said it, probably...we don't know.  I'm sure the ones who have been beaten and abused would beg to differ.


Quoting: There must be a better option. At the very least, we should improve the foster care system and give moms more choices.
End Quote



As long as that 'choice' doesn't include abortion, right?  And, improving the foster care system in this country is a pipe dream.  People have been trying to improve that and the welfare system for years and as we can all see, it is sooo much better.   Just think of what it would be like if we added a million more kids into it...

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: goldie on 01/28/03 at 10:44 p.m.

I think that there have been alot of good points raised but I think that we are all overlooking one major point. There are several means of birth control that can be used to stop unwanted pregnancies. It is so easy to go to the free clinics and get birth control pills and condoms. If used correctly, these can be very effective in the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Abortion isn't meant to be a form of birth control. Not only does it kill the fetus, it can harm the woman's uterus and cervix so badly if not done correctly, that it can prevent her from having children later on when she may want to.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/28/03 at 10:46 p.m.


Quoting:
You said it, probably...we don't know.  I'm sure the ones who have been beaten and abused would beg to differ.
End Quote


So, if 90% of these kids would chose life, and the other 10% would want suicide, you would kill them all? Come on, these are lives we are talking about. This is not a choice like picking what to have for dinner.

Quoting:
As long as that 'choice' doesn't include abortion, right?  And, improving the foster care system in this country is a pipe dream.  People have been trying to improve that and the welfare system for years and as we can all see, it is sooo much better.   Just think of what it would be like if we added a million more kids into it...
End Quote


I do not get pro-abortion people sometimes. What is wrong with improving foster care. You say it is broken and can not be fixed. Sometimes I wonder if that is the position pro-abortion supporters take to scare women into killing their unborn child.

I never said, not once in any post I wrote that abortion should be made a crime. All that I have been posting is my beliefe that all life is valuable, and that there should be good alternatives available. If you really want choice, then why not have good choices available?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: ? on 01/28/03 at 10:48 p.m.

Does anyone agree with having more sex education and family planning courses beginning in the 6th grade and birth control widely available on demand by the time kids reach high school? It could help lessen the amount of abortions on that end. Maybe? No? Anybody? Has it ever been tried?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/28/03 at 10:50 p.m.

Goldie has a good point there too, birth control is readily available and we have to remind ourselves that abortion is down to the lowest level since it was legalized. Birth Control options, Aids, STD's, and education are part of the reasons.  Since Aids and STD's are going to be around awhile, the best thing we can do is educate and continue to make BC accessable to people.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: goldie on 01/28/03 at 10:51 p.m.

Well, I for one think that kids should be taught safe sex but giving out birth control in the school might not help much. Today's kids have to understand that there is more out there than just an unwanted pregnancy. There are STDs now that are not just cured by a dose of penicillin.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/28/03 at 10:59 p.m.


Quoting:
Well, I for one think that kids should be taught safe sex but giving out birth control in the school might not help much. Today's kids have to understand that there is more out there than just an unwanted pregnancy. There are STDs now that are not just cured by a dose of penicillin.
End Quote



I would not give out condoms in middle school! I would even have problems with them given out in high school. Wouldn't this help the kids have sex by encouraging them to try new things. I think sex education is a good thing, and that would help. I believe they must be honest with kids. Maybe show a video of an abortion so they see what happens. Perhaps there are women who have given abortions who regret their choice, and they can talk to the kids too.

The whole point is to make the kids think about the consequences of their choices. If everything kids do is about fun and good times, they will be suprised when the party ends and there is a price to pay. We should better prepare them to make wise desicions and be responsible.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: goldie on 01/28/03 at 11:04 p.m.

I didn't say to hand out condoms. That isn't the only form of safe sex that should be taught. There is a thing called abstinence that children should be taught about too. I have a 14 and a 12 y/o, both boys and they have been taught about both. You have to give them all of the options, not just one side.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: ? on 01/28/03 at 11:21 p.m.


Quoting:


I would not give out condoms in middle school! I would even have problems with them given out in high school. Wouldn't this help the kids have sex by encouraging them to try new things. I think sex education is a good thing, and that would help. I believe they must be honest with kids. Maybe show a video of an abortion so they see what happens. Perhaps there are women who have given abortions who regret their choice, and they can talk to the kids too.

The whole point is to make the kids think about the consequences of their choices. If everything kids do is about fun and good times, they will be suprised when the party ends and there is a price to pay. We should better prepare them to make wise desicions and be responsible.
End Quote



If this is the case then, as much as I may not like the idea of it, I too am pro-choice. Ideally, we all want to learn from the past mistakes of others, but if there's one thing in life that has taught me well is that people do irrational things; they participate in dangerous activities - even with the ability of forethought. It should be worth a try, at least, to have contraceptives and condoms readily available in high school. Open communication can only go so far. I don't knock it, but the alternative would be having to make the difficult decision to abort or not (we don't tell everything to our parents and friends, do we?). I just thought it could be a feasible precautionary measure for teen moms and teens who choose to have abortions. There's no easy solution to the entire problem and a lot of us may not like the societal remedies, but it's better than debating and judging others' values. We need a proactive, realistic solution (reality is something that is seldom fun and entertaining). This sounds like something to be tackled locally...

On a side note. VDs are bad too (some are lethal). I was just referring to the topic of abortion. I haven't thought on the subject of VD. Should this be addressed as well?

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Erica on 01/28/03 at 11:47 p.m.

I have a question, and I am wondering if someone can give me the statistics on this... I may be wrong, and if I am please let me know... ?

It is my understanding that the majority of unwed, young, poor, teenage mothers who are least suited to have and care for children, are choosing to have and keep their babies, rather than to abort or adopt.

Whereas the major procurors of abortions today are white, middle class women in their 20s and 30s who are able both emotionally and finacially to raise a child, but choose not to....?

Anyone have the demographics on this?

If this is true than many of the pro-choice arguments above about abuse, welfare, etc. would be moot...

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/29/03 at 00:03 a.m.

Here' is something from the Wahington Times.  Rates have fallen amongst all categories except the poorest.

Abortion rates decline in late 1990s
By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


    The U.S. abortion rate fell steadily during the latter half of the 1990s, with the steepest decline occurring among high-school-age girls, says a report released yesterday by a leading research group on abortion statistics. Top Stories
    Declines in abortions were also seen among women with high incomes, women with college degrees and nonreligious women, said the study by Rachel K. Jones, Jacqueline E. Darroch and Stanley K. Henshaw of the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which based its report on data from 10,000 women who sought abortions.
    However, poor women — especially those on Medicaid — saw abortion rates rise.
    Other groups of women cited in the study who were likely to get abortions are those ages 20 to 30, as well as those who are unmarried, black or Hispanic, already mothers, or Protestant.
    Abortion remains a common experience among U.S. women, AGI researchers said, noting that there were 1.31 million abortions in 2000, 1.42 million in 1994 and 1.56 million in 1987.
    Still, overall abortion rates have dipped since the 1980s and have steadily declined since the early 1990s, Ms. Jones said.
    From 1994 to 2000, the abortion rate dropped 11 percent, from 24 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 1994 to 21 abortions per 1,000 women.
    Abortion rates for teenagers from 15 to 17 saw the biggest decline, falling 39 percent from 1994 to 2000. The rate dropped to 15 abortions per 1,000 teens in 2000 from 24 abortions per 1,000 teens in 1994.
    Ms. Jones said the survey didn't capture explanations for these and other trends, although some answers should be forthcoming next year in the federal government's National Survey of Family Growth.
    Laura Echevarria, spokeswoman for the National Right to Life Committee, said laws requiring parental consent or notification before teens can have abortions played a role in lowering both teen pregnancy rates and abortion rates.
    "There's also been a concerted effort over the last few years by pro-life groups, health departments and others to encourage teens to really think about the consequences of engaging in early sexual activity, and I think it has helped teens pay attention" to these situations, she said.
    In addition, advances in ultrasound and imaging technology are allowing teens to see the development of the unborn child, Mrs. Echevarria said, which persuades some against abortion. In 1994 it wasn't common for teens to know about sonograms, she said. "Now I wonder what impact the commercials about the sonogram are going to have" on abortion numbers in upcoming years.
    Other researchers, including those with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which funds AGI, have linked the reductions in abortions to cuts in abortion funding, restricted access to clinics and a lack of trained doctors.
    The AGI study found that abortion rates declined among many groups of women, including significant drops for women with middle-class or higher incomes, women who graduated from college and women who are not affiliated with any particular religion.
    But the researchers found that abortion rates rose among the poorest women — 25 percent for those with the lowest incomes and 23 percent for those whose income is slightly above the federal poverty line.
    "This wasn't a finding we expected to see and certainly not on this scale," Ms. Jones said, suggesting that poor women have less access to contraception.
    It's a "tale of two nations," said Elizabeth Cavendish, legal director of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. "We're seeing the results of policies that don't afford equal access to contraception."
    "I think we are seeing the effects of the coercive welfare legislation passed in 1996 that allowed states to deny benefits to children born to women receiving welfare," said the Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, president and chief executive of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
    "As we said in 1996, when women face the prospect of literally having to take food out of another child's mouth in order to continue with a pregnancy, some will feel forced to choose abortion over deepened poverty," he said. "Let this be a lesson that punishing women and families is bad public policy."
    Roughly half the states have this kind of "family cap" welfare policy, which is optional under the law.
    Among the study's other findings for 2000:
    •Women who identified themselves as Protestant had the highest proportion of abortions (43 percent), followed by Catholic women (27 percent), women of no affiliation (22 percent) and women of another religion (8 percent).
    •Never-married women were far more likely to get abortions, accounting for 67 percent of abortions.
    •Nearly 90 percent of abortions were performed on women who live in metropolitan areas, where abortion clinics are much more common than in rural areas.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/29/03 at 00:10 a.m.

That study can't be right.  :'( Every 2 out of 100 women have had an abortion? That is so sad.


Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/29/03 at 00:13 a.m.

Take a look at the rates per state.  The most interesting one is Washington DC, maybe all those interns? ;)  
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005099.html

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: Race_Bannon on 01/29/03 at 00:18 a.m.

My last posting on this for tonight.
• 56% of U.S. women who obtain abortions are in their 20s;
• 67% have never married;
• 61% have one or more children;
• 88% live in a metropolitan area;
• 57% are economically disadvantaged (living below 200% of poverty); and
• 78% report a religious affiliation (43% Protestant, 27% Catholic and 8% other religions).

Adolescents. Declines in abortion rates were especially steep among adolescents, particularly 15-17-year-olds. The rate for this group fell to 15 abortions per 1,000 women in 2000 from 24 abortions per 1,000 women in 1994, a decline of 39%. Both abortion rates and birth rates for adolescents have been declining since the early 1990s, reflecting that fewer teens are becoming pregnant. However, the proportion of adolescent pregnancies ending in abortion remained stable from 1994 to 2000. An AGI analysis examining reasons for declining teen pregnancy rates between 1988 and 1995 found that three-quarters of the decrease was due to improved contraceptive use, while one-quarter was due to delayed sexual activity.

Women with low incomes. Although abortion rates have declined for most women, they have increased among the economically disadvantaged. High levels of abortion among economically disadvantaged women reflect that these women have high pregnancy rates, as well as a greater likelihood than women with higher incomes of ending a pregnancy in abortion. Overall, women who are better-off have lower pregnancy and abortion rates than poor and low-income women. As a result of the increase in abortion rates among economically disadvantaged women and a decline among middle- and higher-income women, the gap in abortion rates has widened and abortion has become more concentrated among economically disadvantaged women.

One good way to look at this is that the teens that have been part of the declining rate through contraception and delaying sex are the future women in thier 20's.  Now lets keep the teens to be informed and protected

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: ayhab on 01/29/03 at 01:17 a.m.

Hmm, guess everyone's on a different schedule than I am.

Anyway, most of my thoughts have been echoed.

White only means bigger chance of adoption - there was no racism there, only the facts.

JS, I can tell you do something that I and many others just will never do.  You think with your heart.  You see the statistics, you know enough about money to see the problems, you read about the crime and the psychology of unwanted and untended children - and that direct relationship with less-than-humane humans who prey on the rest of us, but you're heart won't let you see anything but hope.  Unfortunately, what follows is rather unrealistic idealism.

I'm not complaining, by any means.  Naive or not, you are at least a caring member of our species who will never be raping my daughters, killing my friends, or stealing from our houses.  That makes you A number one as a human.  I wouldn't, however, elect you to spend my tax money or solve any of these problems we speak about.  Hearts are for loving.  Brains are for thinking and decision making. The only successful mix of the two HAS to be more brain than emotion.

Also, I have yet to meet a heart-thinker who actually acts on those opinions other than to try and use other peoples monies and affect other peoples lives to achieve those ideals.  How many ethnic children with health problems stemming from the biological mothers drug problem have you adopted to date? Or how many of those unwanted children do you plan to adopt in the future?  That's exactly what you're asking of us.  Adopt them with our hard-earned money - through the pregnancy and beyond.

If, currently, a welfare mother gets 3K per year per child from welfare - I'm already the leading breadwinner for 6 or 7 children I don't know and who, statiscally, will have a more than 50/50 chance of becoming an inmate I support in the future - (if they don't kill me in a drive-by and lose my tax support).

Rather depressing.  What the hell.  Let's just try your way.  No condoms, just tell them to abstain, and make sure if they don't abstain all of them take the babies to full term.  I can handle it, just cleaned out my car and found a lot of spare change.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/29/03 at 01:41 a.m.


Quoting:
Also, I have yet to meet a heart-thinker who actually acts on those opinions other than to try and use other peoples monies and affect other peoples lives to achieve those ideals.  How many ethnic children with health problems stemming from the biological mothers drug problem have you adopted to date? Or how many of those unwanted children do you plan to adopt in the future?
End Quote


I have two anwsers to this question. First, the personal anwser. I volonteer at a local high school. I help kids with math and science and computers. You would be suprised how much these kids learn when they get interested in something. For example, I was showing some of the kids how apache works and HTML. They were really into it, from wanting to write their own homepages to musicpages. They were like sponges sucking up information. Now give them a dull class with a less than caring teacher, and I doubt they would get as much out of it. As for adopting a kid, I would like to do that sometime in the future. Nothing would give me more pride than helping someone succeed that everyone wrote off as a failure. My second anwser to your question is there are some things which government can do better than individuals. When was the last time you saw 30 private citizens people show up in a field to build a highway. Government has the ability to help children by supporting programs which show a return on the investment.

Quoting:
Rather depressing.  What the hell.  Let's just try your way.  No condoms, just tell them to abstain, and make sure if they don't abstain all of them take the babies to full term.  I can handle it, just cleaned out my car and found a lot of spare change.
End Quote


What you posted above is not what I said, at least not what I meant. Maybe condoms will work. I just do not feel comfortable passing them out to kids. But if the numbers are there to show it works, then pass them out. Likewise, I could never let myself lose a kid to abortion but I have never posted that I would take that right away from women. I just believe that abortion should be the very last option after all other possible choices have been considered. Why not spend an extra week looking into possibilities, who is in a hurry. There is only one kind of abortion that should be outlawed immediatley and that is the partial birth abortion, where health babys have a tube shoved in their skull and the brain is sucked out so they die at birth. That is just wrong.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/29/03 at 06:37 a.m.


Quoting:

So, if 90% of these kids would chose life, and the other 10% would want suicide, you would kill them all? Come on, these are lives we are talking about. This is not a choice like picking what to have for dinner.  I do not get pro-abortion people sometimes. What is wrong with improving foster care. You say it is broken and can not be fixed. Sometimes I wonder if that is the position pro-abortion supporters take to scare women into killing their unborn child.End Quote


Why are people who are pro-choice automatically pro-abortion?  I have stated many times that I think abortion is WRONG!  My oldest son was not planned and my (now)hubby and I talked about our options.  He has had girlfriends in the past have abortions, without his knowledge, and that option never came up in our discussions.   But, the reason I am pro-choice is that I don't feel that it is anyone's right to tell a woman what they can or cannot do with their body.   Have you ever been to a Planned Parenthood or an abortion clinic?  Before they do anything, you are counseled and asked if you have considered all the options, adoption, keeping the baby, etc.  They do not try to "scare" anyone into having an abortion.  I did not say that the foster system in this country couldn't be fixed.  It should, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.  

Quoting:I never said, not once in any post I wrote that abortion should be made a crime. All that I have been posting is my beliefe that all life is valuable, and that there should be good alternatives available. If you really want choice, then why not have good choices available?
End Quote


I agree with the belief that all life is valuable, but there ARE good alternatives available already.  I don't think that most women who have had an abortion go into it lightly, some do, but most don't.  They have weighed all of their other options and feel that it is the best choice for them.  Many have seen the foster/welfare systems and don't want that for their children.  

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: shazzaah on 01/29/03 at 08:20 a.m.


Pro Choice is Pro Abortion. This stance is stating that a woman has the right to abort. What some call a choice I call wholesale murder, and someone can reason about it and justify it in any manner but it is still the taking of a human life. I have learned over the years that a person will hold onto their beliefs, however misguided they might be, and I am not asking anyone to change their mind,only to be completely aware of what they are supporting, and own up to it.A person feels the way a person feels (or thinks, rather) and no one can change that, certainly not a post on a message board. But at least call it what it is, and stop hiding behind all the propaganda. Because the optionfor destroying a child, a human life is what a "pro-choicer" is supporting at the end of the day, even if it is made more palatable by medical terms such as "fetus" and "procedure". That leads to my next question: how many people here have witnessed an abortion or partial birth abortion? Actually knows what is involved? :-/ I am certainly not going to describe it , and I am not going to go to this thread again in the fear that someone else will describe it in all of it's disgusting, revolting details. But if you have not witnessed it (I don't mean reading about it but seeing it!) then really....how can you honestly say you have made your opinion without viewing the cold hard truths? I challenge anyone who is "pro-choice" and has not seen abortion performed to view it, then come back and say you are "pro-abortion option".

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/29/03 at 08:41 a.m.

Yes, I have seen an abortion (not live, but on videotape) and I agree, it is disgusting.  However, I have also seen what happens to babies that are born to people who didn't want them.  I would much rather see a baby killed before it was born, than see one who is born addicted to crack/alcohol or see a small child abused and killed by the parents who did give it life or the foster care system, which treats most wards like animals.  I have seen too many kids who have been abused/neglected by their parents to count.  If that seems cold-hearted, then so be it.  I would much rather see people take responsibility for their actions, but, unfortunately, that just doesn't happen anymore. :(

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: John_Seminal on 01/29/03 at 11:32 a.m.


Quoting:
Yes, I have seen an abortion (not live, but on videotape) and I agree, it is disgusting.  However, I have also seen what happens to babies that are born to people who didn't want them.  I would much rather see a baby killed before it was born, than see one who is born addicted to crack/alcohol or see a small child abused and killed by the parents who did give it life or the foster care system, which treats most wards like animals.  I have seen too many kids who have been abused/neglected by their parents to count.  If that seems cold-hearted, then so be it.  I would much rather see people take responsibility for their actions, but, unfortunately, that just doesn't happen anymore. :(
End Quote



I can not understand you saying that death for a child is better than a fighting chance. Even if life is bad, it can get better. There are people who care and want to help. There are good teachers and people in the community. If parents are abusive, then lock them up. And you would rather kill a child than give it a chance? What if you were aborted? How would you like it if your mom decided to kill you rather than let you live? Is that her choice? And what about doctor assisted suicide. Following your example, if a 8 year old is having a tough time with life and is unhappy, why not get some doctor help him to die? If you are for the killing of life, then you can not just limit yourself to an unborn child. The morals are the same. Killing is murder.

Subject: Re: 30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 01/29/03 at 12:33 a.m.


Quoting:


I can not understand you saying that death for a child is better than a fighting chance. Even if life is bad, it can get better. There are people who care and want to help. There are good teachers and people in the community. If parents are abusive, then lock them up. And you would rather kill a child than give it a chance? What if you were aborted? How would you like it if your mom decided to kill you rather than let you live? Is that her choice? And what about doctor assisted suicide. Following your example, if a 8 year old is having a tough time with life and is unhappy, why not get some doctor help him to die? If you are for the killing of life, then you can not just limit yourself to an unborn child. The morals are the same. Killing is murder.
End Quote


Unfortunately, there are not enough people who care and want to help most of these children.  You say that life can get better, but what if it doesn't?  I am very lucky in the fact that my parents wanted me and gave me a good life.  The plain truth is that there are many parents out there who don't.  If I had lived my entire life full of neglect and abuse, then I probably wouldn't want to be here.  These children grow up knowing that they were never wanted.  In turn, they don't value their own lives, much less someone else's.  I have seen it happen.  Sometimes counseling works, but sometimes it doesn't.  Children learn by example.  If they are abused, chances are, they will become an abuser.
As far as your comment on Dr. assisted suicide, that is an entirely different situation.  I don't think a dr should help someone die unless they are in severe physical pain or have no quality of life left.  If I were suffering from some terrible degenerative disease, I would want someone to help me die.  Just because someone is unhappy is no reason for it.  That's just ludicrous!  
Just because I am pro-choice, doesn't mean that I think abortion is the only answer.  I don't!  In a perfect world, I would like to see all children being born and adopted into loving families, like my oldest brother was.  The truth is, we don't live in a perfect world.