|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:00 pm
i read something in a readers digest about this humane society place that was overfilling, and a guy came in to help. they said that there were too many animals and they would have to kill some to make room.
the response, to paraphrase, was absolutely not. his reasoning- when killing animals [humans] is entirely out of the picture, you begin to think of hundreds of ways to compromise.
what this means to me is- all the choicers who say that millions of women will throw themselves of bridges and all the lakes that will turn to poison and the locusts that will plague the lands won't really happen- we will come up with solutions to the problems that make it easier for the mother without the death of a child. once abortion is not an option, many new compromises will arise!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:23 pm
   Not the same, though.
I mean, with animal shelters, you can always take them out of a place and put them somewhere else.
With a baby, you can't just take it out and put it into another woman. You can't get rid of the fattening. You can't get rid of the scars that might come. Pregnancy isn't something with as little affect on you as needing to raise more money and find more people who care. It directly affects a woman's body, and no matter how many other options there are (and I won't go into a diatribe about people who are supposed to be pro-choice blocking those options...that I shall do another time), women who are really desperate to end pregnancies will still do it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:05 pm
you're taking it too literally- it was the whole idea- once you eliminate the least favorable option, hundreds of other better ones take it's place. it is not the same situation, no, but the same idea of getting rid of abortion to make room for new, nonlethal compromise
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:52 pm
She's being the devil's advocate. Pro-Choicer's aren't going to say, "Oh well, abortions illegal, we should start looking for alternatives." They are going to gnash their teeth and say, "Make abortion legal again! We neeeeed it!" Just look at South Dakota. Did alternatives spring up? No. Pro-Choice groups looked for ways around the laws, like putting an abortion clinic on Indian reservations, or posting DIY abortion instructions on their blogs.
Many would rather just perform illegal abortions and point to the deaths occurring because of them as reasons abortion should be made legal again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:33 pm
then we need to follow evolution and let the immature die off and the mature think of new solutions.
i say we let them kill themselves wwith DIY abortions and coathangers. that will clear out the blatant imbeciles so those of us who are willing to work to make the world better can do so without their negativity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:41 pm
I'm sorry. That just offends me.
I'd rather women not die. Of course, I'd rather children not die too, but saying, "Too stupid to live," is rather...I don't know. I can definitely imagine the fear of being pregnant and not knowing what to do. Parents kicking you out, not being able to afford it, having that physical strain on your body, being fired from work, losing scholarships...it's scary. And abortion is the easiest solution right now.
It's all well and good to say, "Let's change that!" But the reality is, it won't be changed overnight. There will be a period of time when there's not much help at all for those women.
To look at this from a standpoint without any emotion whatsoever and pure logic:
Falsified deathcounts from illegal abortion were partially responsible for the legalization of abortion. Even if you don't give two shits about women who go against your moral standards and break the law because they don't want to be pregnant, it would be wise to want as many women alive as possible and to not have any of these women even attempting illegal abortions. Won't happen, but saying, "They'll weed themselves out," isn't a very good approach...especially since the survivors outnumber the dead in that procedure, so not only will they not weed themselves out, they'll serve as examples of how it succeeds; the failures can be written off as being done improperly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2007 4:43 am
I think it would be a better idea to find ways to reduce the amount of abortions. Yes, find ways to help the mother so that abortion doesn't look like the best option, but taking it away all in one go isn't going to help. We'll just be taking a step back to coathangers.
Desperation isn't stupid. Can you say you know what it feels like to be pregnant without planning on it? With an unsupportive family, no one to turn to, or your family is abusive, or your partner is abusive, or you're already homeless and in absolutely no position to care for a baby? Have you even found yourself pregnant and saw no way to continue college or university studies - or even school studies - and you think that a baby will mean the end of your journey to a better career? Do you know what it feels like if you've been raped, you're already emotionally and physically damaged by the ordeal, and to top it all, you find yourself pregnant? No, so don't go shooting your mouth off that girls who are so desperate as to abort illegally are 'stupid' and deserve to die for it.
Making abortion illegal again will only cause more problems, not solve existing ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2007 5:43 am
no, i do not know what it is like to be pregnant, and neither do women have to. they can just as easily choose to avoid sex, the cause of pregnancy. once again, this sounds like pregnancy is a malignacy that just pops up- it doesn't, as i am sure we all know.
the only person at fault for the pregnancy is the one who had sex. therefore, the person responsible for their death should they try to end that pregnancy illegally would be themselves.
admittedly,it was late when i wrote that. however, i stand by my conviction and i feel nothing for those who kill themselves in such a way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:31 am
divineseraph no, i do not know what it is like to be pregnant, and neither do women have to. they can just as easily choose to avoid sex, the cause of pregnancy. once again, this sounds like pregnancy is a malignacy that just pops up- it doesn't, as i am sure we all know. the only person at fault for the pregnancy is the one who had sex. therefore, the person responsible for their death should they try to end that pregnancy illegally would be themselves. admittedly,it was late when i wrote that. however, i stand by my conviction and i feel nothing for those who kill themselves in such a way. I supose you'll just never fully understand what it's like to be in that situation, so you'll never sympathise with women who are that desperate. What's better: both to die from an illegal abortion, or one to die from a legal abortion? That's what it will come down to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:00 am
  As much as I disagree with Divine...
The sheer numbers game tells us that if as much as 1 out of every 4 women who has an illegal abortion dies, it's the same amount as the death toll now, and that's assuming everyone who would have a legal abortion would also have an illegal abortion, which isn't the case.
I STILL would rather have both parties live. So would Divine. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:26 pm
i would rather have both live. but if the innocent one has to go either way, why not both of them?
may sound a bit heartless, because it is, honestly. you take a stupid risk like that, then i don't care if you bite the big one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:15 pm
divineseraph i would rather have both live. but if the innocent one has to go either way, why not both of them? may sound a bit heartless, because it is, honestly. you take a stupid risk like that, then i don't care if you bite the big one.
Lymelady's right, there would hardly be any illegal abortions, so overall the amount of fetuses that would be saved would turn into people, so there would be more people alive than not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:05 pm
hmm...maybe not deserve, true... but i still feel no sympathy. i don't WISH them to die, that is important for everyone to understand. i just don't care if they pull the short straw on their own risk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 7:16 pm
divineseraph hmm...maybe not deserve, true... but i still feel no sympathy. i don't WISH them to die, that is important for everyone to understand. i just don't care if they pull the short straw on their own risk
Anyway, you need to be careful of what you say... It gives people the wrong impression... they probably think you really laugh when people die. gonk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:46 am
Lorysa divineseraph i would rather have both live. but if the innocent one has to go either way, why not both of them? may sound a bit heartless, because it is, honestly. you take a stupid risk like that, then i don't care if you bite the big one.
Lymelady's right, there would hardly be any illegal abortions, so overall the amount of fetuses that would be saved would turn into people, so there would be more people alive than not. Right now there are hardly any illegal abortions. But if abortion were made illegal? How far would the numbers shoot up? You could look at previous numbers of deaths from illegal abortions, or people trying to make themselves miscarry, but this is a different time from then so the numbers will be different. In what way, who knows? Seraph, you really should be careful what you say. This 'I care about the baby dying but not the stupid risk-taking mother' crap is only reinforcing the image 'Choicers have of 'Lifers. 'Save the baby! The mum can go to Hell for all we care!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
