|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:41 am
divineseraph Quote: I supose I'm just tired of seeing adoption in particular be played off as a simple solution, but from what I've heard, it's not. When I think of giving birth to a baby and giving it away to someone I don't even know - well, I couldn't do that, not in full conscience. i was actually referring to this part. adoption isn't morally right... but as we've heard, she thinks that abortion is acceptable at times... so... She didn't say she'd abort rather than adopt. She just said she wouldn't be able to adopt out. Neither would I, nor would I be able to abort. It is not the logical conclusion that, "Well she won't adopt out so she'd abort! Well she doesn't think it's moral to adopt out so she thinks it's moral to abort!" I support the right to abort in certain circumstances. I wouldn't be able to place my kids in the adoption system. Oh look, I must be pro-choice!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:11 pm
...have you ever listened to a thing she has said? she is pro-life personal, pro-choice political.
therefore, she is for elective abortion.
how can she be for elective abortion but not adoption? hell, she defends abortion, even late term, more than adoption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:51 pm
divineseraph ...have you ever listened to a thing she has said? she is pro-life personal, pro-choice political. therefore, she is for elective abortion. how can she be for elective abortion but not adoption? hell, she defends abortion, even late term, more than adoption. Yes I have. And if she really was pro-life personal, pro-choice political, she wouldn't be posting in the main forum. She is on the fence. There's a big difference. That is completely off the point though. The point is, her statement had NOTHING to do with supporting abortion over adoption. In fact, she also said that people on the prochoice side were the same way with abortion that we are with adoption. Another thing, why the heck would she NEED to defend adoption to us? Well, except for a few people, including me, but honestly, I've never seen her defend abortion. I have seen her defend women who have had abortions, I've seen her urge us to consider their views, I've seen her say she's not sure at which point in pregnancy she feels a fetus should be protected, but she is in this guild just like you are, and everyone in this guild deserves respect and deserves not to have their posts taken out of context or turned into something they aren't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:20 pm
it goes beyond that, and she herself has celled herself pro-choice political in the debate thread.
i hope you will start noticing eventually. look for one thing positive she has said the entire time in this guild, i challenge you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:39 pm
divineseraph it goes beyond that, and she herself has celled herself pro-choice political in the debate thread. i hope you will start noticing eventually. look for one thing positive she has said the entire time in this guild, i challenge you. That doesn't give you the right to take everything she says and turn it into something it isn't. It's not like I turn a blind eye to what anyone says. I'm sure you've seen me get into quite a few arguments with people, including Scribblemouse. But you're attacking something she hasn't even said. It makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:21 pm
I haven't defended adoption as such because no one's attacked it. I don't think adoption is a bad thing; I would actually like to adopt someday. It seems a greater good than having a child of my own. I would feel the same for an adopted child as one I had given birth to.
It's the system I don't like what I hear about. From what I've heard and read, you go through every test imaginable, your private life delved into, this that and the next thing, and they can say no at any point, for the smallest thing. The process can take years. Now I'm not saying children should be handed out to just anyone; I can understand that they want to take every precaution. It just seems like such a double-standard since such care goes into choosing adoptive families, but you hear of abusive foster families, the rumour of children being taken out of their homes to meet some adoption quota (just a rumour as far as I've read, but I understand it's being investigated).
Then there's some people's mentality in adopting a child. Personally, I wouldn't care what race the child was, or age, and as for special needs, I wouldn't mind as long as it was something I could handle and/or would get help with. Other people aren't like that and can be very choosy, which annoys me personally because . . . well, you can't 'choose' a baby if you give birth naturally, so why do you feel you have to choose now? But that's just me.
Anyway, what I was saying in the first place is that adoption and abortion both don't seem to be taken seriously. Not everyone will be like this - I've seen people on the Pro-Choice side say that abortion shouldn't be handled as flippantly as it is, and I'm sure that not everyone here is of the opinion that adoption is an easy choice to make.
As for women who have abortions, I don't believe they should be attacked, so that's why I have been known to defend them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:34 pm
lymelady Scribblemouse lymelady Scribblemouse MiNdCaNdY And that justifies killing it. *watches the train of logic de-rail* No, but giving birth and adoption aren't such easy options as people would have us believe. Same with abortion; sometime's it's played out to be very easy, but it's not. It's not a question of what's easy. Obviously, what's easiest isn't always right and shouldn't always be legally condoned. Afterall, it would be easiest for me to get that set of plates I love by just taking it. This would harm another person, however, and there exists a way to obtain the plates without hurting the person, it's just harder. That's an extremely simplified example. On the other end of the scale, it's easier for me to get those plates if I kill off my parents, inherit their money, and use it to buy the plates. Sorry I used plates, I just really, really love these plates xd Alright, um....say it would be easier for me to afford a very expensive item if I killed them to gain their money. People have killed for just this reason before. However, there is a way to obtain this item without killing anyone...I can work to earn the money myself. It would be harder, but no one would be hurt. Adoption is a hard process. No one is saying it's easy to give up your baby, not knowing how he or she will be treated. But it logical that because it is hard to adopt out, it is alright to kill that baby? I'm not saying that the path of least resistance, or easiest path, is the one to take. I'm just saying that things like abortion and adoption are usually played out as 'easy ways out'. People can be a bit flippant about them; 'Oh, just get an abortion' or ' Just have it and give it up for adoption, problem solved' - but both can have long-term problems that aren't usually discussed, as far as I've seen. I supose I'm just tired of seeing adoption in particular be played off as a simple solution, but from what I've heard, it's not. When I think of giving birth to a baby and giving it away to someone I don't even know - well, I couldn't do that, not in full conscience. Sorry I misunderstood sweatdrop I forgot how frustrating it can get seeing people say, "Just use adoption!" Somewhere here I have a thread where I just flipped out and said, Adoption does NOT work, or something like that. My opinion? People on both sides need to focus on fixing up the adoption system and helping women who want to adopt out but are afraid of what it entails. People who have never had to give their children away have no right to say, "Oh it's so easy!" I agree it's better than killing your child, but you're right, some people seem to think it's much easier than it really is. As for the medical reason, kikikeke...sometimes there's a thing called encephalitis, which means the head swells to huge proportions, and even a C-section won't be able to safely remove the baby. Also, C-sections can be very dangerous to some women, as can giving birth. There are women with medical conditions that would make a C-Section just as risky. Sorry for double-posting - just saw this. Hey, no problem misunderstanding - I misunderstand things a lot ^_^ I don't think abortion is better than abortion, nothing like that. Ignoring abortion for a moment, if I may; adoption brings problems of its own. A lot of people have regretted putting their children up for adoption, then they can't get them back. They may put their child up for adoption thinking at the time that it's the best thing to do, but later they have second thoughts. They may put the child up for adoption, it really being the best solution, then the child finds them later in life, and suddenly they have to explain to this child why they gave them away. I haven't been in such a situation, but I imagine it would be a difficult one. I can't think of any other examples of problems of adoption, but there probably are more; I just don't know about them. Long ramble short: adoption isn't 'easy'. Vague bit of info comes to mind that c-section isn't too great in itself - usually because the baby is born premature this way, and I think I've had a big rant about premature babies already sweatdrop - so . . . I would like to add that c-section isn't an 'easy' option either. Of course, this would depend on a slew of circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:27 pm
right, and i think we all agree, but all we're saying is saying something isn't 'easy' is not a valid excuse for killing someone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:16 am
MiNdCaNdY right, and i think we all agree, but all we're saying is saying something isn't 'easy' is not a valid excuse for killing someone. No, it's not, and I never said it was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 8:15 am
in context though, it really seems like that's what you were going for, or at the very least sympathizing with.
To me, that's like saying it's understandable that people would want to keep slaves because to them, it's easier then giving them up. As if the ease of one decision makes it permissible to violate someone else's rights. I understand neither decision is easy, but i have no sympathy for one who would decide to kill another human being rather then give it up because, for them, it's 'easier'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 10:09 am
MiNdCaNdY in context though, it really seems like that's what you were going for, or at the very least sympathizing with. To me, that's like saying it's understandable that people would want to keep slaves because to them, it's easier then giving them up. As if the ease of one decision makes it permissible to violate someone else's rights. I understand neither decision is easy, but i have no sympathy for one who would decide to kill another human being rather then give it up because, for them, it's 'easier' That's not what I thought. I thought it was a reaction to how easily the OP threw out the term adoption. In any case, this is getting way off topic. Scribblemouse has explained herself several times, so why pick at it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
