Politics

saintfan · 08-20-2004, 04:52 PM

What I\'m trying to do ScottyRo is figure out how it is that people think they have the right to make this sort of decision on behalf of someone else. Someone they don\'t know. Someone who\'s circumstances they are totally unaware of, simply because they think they\'re right. The law doesn\'t give you that right. Society has told you that you don\'t have that right, and yet you\'re still at it, and I wonder why?

You responded to Elvis and made fun of the cow, but you didn\'t answer the question I most wanted you to answer. WHY do you feel this way? Why is killing the cow for veal so much different than killing the baby to save the mothers life or because SHE made the personal decision to abort it? YOU tell ME where\'s the difference, and tell me WHY you feel that way, and then explain to me how come you\'re right and I\'m wrong.

Dude, it\'s not about a worst case scenario. You don\'t care about the scenario. That\'s my whole point. You just think you\'re right...period. You can\'t see past it.

The ropes must be nawing into your back pretty badly, if you\'re really gonna use a worst case scenario argument on me. I\'ve stated many times that there are more difficult questions buried in this debate that we should not really go into because the length of the simple debate is so long.

You\'re right there man. This gets REALLY deep. It\'s your opinion versus someone elses versus someone elses. Now, if you\'re not propping yourself up with religion and the \"Good book\" then what is it? It is my opinion that when you recognize that everyone doesn\'t think the way you think or think way you think they should think then you\'ll understand. But not until then. You\'ll still think abortion is wrong, but you\'ll have faith in the fact that you\'re not in control (nor should you be) of what a woman does in that situation.

Do you show up at abortion clinics and councel women about to have the procedure?

Do you show up at prisons prior to an execution and councel the executioner?

Do you protest War?

Do you go to inner city neighborhoods and council folks there in crack houses before they go bust a cap in somebody for their next blow?

No? Why not? Because the fetus doesn\'t have a voice? Please! Why have you chosen the abortion issue when I\'d bet good money you don\'t do any of these other things. What gives man? Whether or not that baby (or whatever it is) is alive at point \"a\" or \"b\", why not spend all that energy on people that are living minus the debate about whether or not they are? I wonder.

ScottyRo · 08-20-2004, 04:31 PM

Yes. Admit it man. You DO mean to sound condescending here are you\'re doing a really good job at it. Why else would you refer to an aborted fetus as \"Medical Waste\"? It\'s a common practice of the anti-abortionist. They wanna make it sound as dirty and inhumane and as sickening as possible. Why? Ya\'ll think MOST women have abortions like they\'re ordering a cheesburger?

What is an aborted fetus then? Are we gonna call it a \"dead baby that didn\'t deserve to live\"? That sounds more enciting than medical waste. I actually thought medical waste was going to be a pretty neutral term. You tell me what to call it and I\'ll use that term, but it must be a truthful term that doesn\'t simply brush the truth of what it is under the rug so you don\'t have to hear yourself say \"dead baby\".

The idea of relating abortion to taking your own life is pointless. The laws against taking your own life (as you know very well) are entirely unrelated. Why bring this up? I\'m guessing because not being able to force what you think on someone else is frustrating. I respect your opinion, but your opinion is just that...yours.

They are vastly different but I used it for a vastly different purpose than you suggest. I was not comparing the two. I was showing how individual liberties are not absolute by pointing out what would happen if you threatened to kill yourself. That\'s all. Grrlscout kept analogizing the two.

Yes, ScottyRo, it can be so stated...in as much as it can be stated otherwise since we\'re dealing with OPINIONS and not FACTS. Who\'s to say? You think you are. Where your family is concerned maybe you are, but not necessarilly where someone else\'s family is concerned.

Well, yeah, I probably did overstate my opinion as fact. I\'ll admit that although the law in certain personal injury cases on the subject agrees with my view. However, I\'d bet dollars to donuts that psychiatric professionals would label a person with some sort of \"insane\" moniker if that person were to state that he would have been better off having never been born, truly meaning it.

Have you ever stepped down off the anit-abortion soap box long enough to think that you might be out of line in thinking that YOU have the right to tell a woman that she must have a baby who\'s kidneys don\'t work and has no chance to survive?

The ropes must be nawing into your back pretty badly, if you\'re really gonna use a worst case scenario argument on me. I\'ve stated many times that there are more difficult questions buried in this debate that we should not really go into because the length of the simple debate is so long.

As Elvis once sang: \"Clean up your own backyard. You tend to your business...I\'ll tend to mine.\"

Another cop-out argument made as if we have absolute freedoms and nobody ever looks over anybody else\'s shoulder. Take the blindres off, man, and get into the REAL U.S.

Do you eat steak? Was killin that cow wrong? Why not? Because it doesn\'t have a spirit? Who says? God? Did he say that? According to whom? Prove it.

Can you really be this contradictory? You tell me that we shouldn\'t even compare suicide and abortion and you want to bring in the cow versus baby argument? If I don\'t see another thing posted on this board til the start of the season, I want to see you admit that you\'re wrong here.

saintfan · 08-20-2004, 04:30 PM

So, in other words, it doesn\'t matter why. There should be no abortion because there are already laws in place that restrict what people do. ahhhh, ok.

And it doesn\'t have anything to do with \"when life begins\" either. Because we don\'t know that do we. For all you or ANYONE else knows, it could start at conception.

Then what, exactly does it have to do with? Your opinion? The laws we have in place that restrict our activity are there generally to keep us from affecting other people with our actions. You\'re not required to wear a seat belt in Texas because the state of Texas gives a damn about whether you live or die. You have to wear a seat belt here (or anywhere else now) because insurance companies are that powerful. Beleive it baby.

It has everything in the world to do with the debate over when life begins as well as how much power YOU have over SOMEONE ELSE\'S body. Beleive that too, and note what the law says too.

What about the death penalty?
What about War?
What that poor cow in my previous post?

Don\'t get me wrong Billy. I\'m all about takin responsibility too. I\'m not arguing whether abortion is right or wrong. I\'m arguing a womans right to choose, or more specifically your lack of a right to tell a complete stranger whos circumstances you are totally unfamiliar with what she should do.

It\'s just not as simple as saying, \"well, it\'s wrong, obviously, so it shouldn\'t be allowed\". It\'s nowhere NEAR that simple, and if you or anyone else can\'t see past that then I have to think you\'re not trying very hard.

GumboBC · 08-20-2004, 03:23 PM

So, the question is whether or not anyone has a right to tell a woman what to do?

You\'ve got to be kidding me !!!

Dude, there are so many laws that tell us that to do. You know how those became law? Take a wild guess. It was because enough people thought it was something wrong enough to make it against the law.

You have no more right to say a \"woman has the right to choose\" than me saying they shouldn\'t have the right to choose.

Forcing something on someone has NOTHING to do with it. We get sh!t forced on us ALL the time. I\'d like to have 3 wives. But, I can\'t do it. Well, I could, but I\'d go to jail.

I\'d like to not pay taxes. But you would have to visit me in the jail house!!

And it doesn\'t have anything to do with \"when life begins\" either. Because we don\'t know that do we. For all you or ANYONE else knows, it could start at conception. I\'ve always thought it\'s better to err on the side of caution. But let\'s play Russiam Roulette. Let\'s say: \"well, we don\'t know when life begins, so let\'s take a chance.

But the woman had her chance NOT to get pregnant. But she chose to \"take a chance.\" She lost !!! Plain and simple.

People need to take some responsibility for their mistakes and quit taking the EASY way out.

That\'s what\'s wrong with this country today.

saintfan · 08-20-2004, 12:21 PM

I shouldn\'t jump in here again, but man this thread just won\'t die.

Yes, they should carry the child to prove the point that life, especially all human life, is precious. You ask about the costs to the parents and family. I have to say it\'s apparent that you don\'t know any families that have children born with these difficulties.

I know families of this type. I know of a newly married couple who recently had to make such a decision, and dude I\'m glad to know that neither you nor I forced them to do something they didn\'t want to do. It was THEIR decision. That you think you have the right to make such a decision for someone else, to me, is insane man. Live like you wanna live...and let other people make the decisions that directly effect THEIR lives for THEMSELVES.

The idea of relating abortion to taking your own life is pointless. The laws against taking your own life (as you know very well) are entirely unrelated. Why bring this up? I\'m guessing because not being able to force what you think on someone else is frustrating. I respect your opinion, but your opinion is just that...yours.

Also, if the child is never adopted and had to live a sad life, not even with foster parents, but always in an orphan center, that is still preferable to death. It cannot be truthfully stated that one would have been better off having never been born.

Yes, ScottyRo, it can be so stated...in as much as it can be stated otherwise since we\'re dealing with OPINIONS and not FACTS. Who\'s to say? You think you are. Where your family is concerned maybe you are, but not necessarilly where someone else\'s family is concerned.

What I am coming to understand about pro-abortionists is that it seems, simply, that your priorites are out of line. I don\'t mean to sound condescending here...

Yes. Admit it man. You DO mean to sound condescending here are you\'re doing a really good job at it. Why else would you refer to an aborted fetus as \"Medical Waste\"? It\'s a common practice of the anti-abortionist. They wanna make it sound as dirty and inhumane and as sickening as possible. Why? Ya\'ll think MOST women have abortions like they\'re ordering a cheesburger?

Perhaps it\'s you with the out of line priorities. Have you ever stepped down off the anit-abortion soap box long enough to think that you might be out of line in thinking that YOU have the right to tell a woman that she must have a baby who\'s kidneys don\'t work and has no chance to survive? Perhaps she\'s been told that her life is at risk? Maybe you\'ve just never been close enough to the situation (the woman in question) to have an accurate understanding. Maybe you\'ve been through this yourself. I don\'t claim to know. But I would LOVE to know why you\'re so convinced that you\'re right and everyone else is wrong. I\'d really like to know why you feel that way. Is it a religion thing? Is it a political thing? Did you find all these truths under that same rock Joseph Smith found his?

I don\'t mean to sound so abrasive I swear, and as I said before I can respect your opinion, but that doesn\'t stop me from wanting to know why you think the way you do. For what it\'s worth I\'m arguing the right or wrong of abortion with you, I\'m arguing with you the fact that you think you should have this power of decision. You can try and hold it next to this or that and compare the legality of some other thing against it, but abortion is unlike other things. It\'s personal, and quite frankly you should stay out of the business of other folks.

As Elvis once sang: \"Clean up your own backyard. You tend to your business...I\'ll tend to mine.\"

Right or wrong it\'s the Creator\'s job to deal with, not yours.

Do you eat steak? Was killin that cow wrong? Why not? Because it doesn\'t have a spirit? Who says? God? Did he say that? According to whom? Prove it.

GumboBC · 08-20-2004, 12:18 PM

A woman\'s right to choose.... Is that what this is about?

Well, the woman made her decision the moment she ... how can I put this. hmm.. spread her womanhood!!

After that, it\'s two people involved in the decision. The mother and the baby. Ask the baby what his/her decision is.

In case of a tie between the mother and the baby....... The baby wins ... hands down.

You know, anything can be justified. I guess it just comes down to what folks morals are??

ScottyRo · 08-20-2004, 11:29 AM

First off, welcome to the boards Grrlscout. Second, your post was very well though out and nicely written. I disagree with your sentiment and logic, but still, well done. I hope you post on some Saints issues comments as thoroughly worked through as this one.

I\'m going to argue my points from the basis that the unborn child is a life at conception since none of your arguments seem to rely on the allegation that it is not.

It boils down to control over your own body. A woman, as a human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to being an unwilling incubator...

No doubt that the woman\'s body is greatly effected here, but the control is also over another individual\'s body as well. You\'ll never hear me say that pregnancy is easy, but does that difficulty demand the death of the unborn? Not in most people\'s minds since they do carry full term.

A child, as an unborn human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to a pile of medical waste just because its life may cause the unwilling parent difficulty.

Are you saying that somehow a pregnant woman, no matter what stage of pregnancy she is in, is somehow in some different category of humanity than she would be otherwise? In other words, because she is pregnant, she loses her ability and right to make decisions about both herself and the fetus she carries, and in many ways, her own destiny as well? At what point does she regain the integrity of her rights as a person?

Yes. While pregant, she is exceptionally changed from an individual human being to a human being that is the sole life support system for another. Obviously, this is a vastly different existence for her than the life she\'ll lead otherwise.

Yes, she loses the right to make decisions for herself and the fetus in many situations. The right to make decisions even for yourself when not pregnant is not absolute. You can test this by calling the police and making a serious threat to kill yourself. You\'ll find that your ability to commit suicide will be severely curtailed by the government. You could accomplish it by keeping it a secret but that doesn\'t mean you had the right to do it.

She\'ll regain her rights as an individual person when she delivers the child or the pregnancy naturally aborts.

Do you think it would be right or advisable to remove the option of legal, safe abortion for that girl if she\'d chosen that route?

Safe? It is deadly to one and injurious many times for the other. The rest of the paragraph that preceded the above quote is tragic. However, consider all the people that made mistakes in that scenario. The dad. The boyfriend. The pregnant girl. The peeple who allowed prejudices to affect their decisions about adopting a child. At what point do all of these bad decisions reasonably condemn the only innocent party involved to death?

Also, if the child is never adopted and had to live a sad life, not even with foster parents, but always in an orphan center, that is still preferable to death. It cannot be truthfully stated that one would have been better off having never been born.

if a married couple in their third pregnancy was told that the fetus likely had significant health issues via amnio, would you force them to carry the child to term? To prove what point? At what cost, to them, to their family, to that child?

Yes, they should carry the child to prove the point that life, especially all human life, is precious. You ask about the costs to the parents and family. I have to say it\'s apparent that you don\'t know any families that have children born with these difficulties. Certainly, it is a dificult thing to handle, but you\'re on the cusp of saying here that even without the test if the child is born with these difficulties the parents should be allowed to kill it then to avoid the challenges of raising this child.

What is the cost to the child? I have a good friend that was born with spina bifida. I have only known her for about 3 years (she is now 25), but I do know that she has struggled her entire life with the difficulties brought on by her problems. In fact, this entire week she has been in the hospital with these problems.

I can\'t speak for her entirely, but I think I know her well enough to say that she is much happier simply being alive than the alternative. I\'m equally sure she would say that she\'d accept these struggles and more again in order to live.

You are one who seems to ignore that abortion is not some medical procedure to rid the female\'s body of some tumor or cancer. The abortion is the killing of a human. It deprives the child of something I\'d bet you hold as the most precious thing you have...life. Where is the human dignity in that?

What I am coming to understand about pro-abortionists is that it seems, simply, that your priorites are out of line. I don\'t mean to sound condescending here, but I think, if you were asked to rank the importance of life against things such as choice issues and sickness issues, you\'d always rank life first in any other discussion except abortion.

Would you fight to save the habitat of some extinction-threatened species? Would you call the humane society on a neighbor who shot or severely beat his dog because it p\'d on the floor? Yet you won\'t back the protection of unborn children.

CheramieIII · 08-19-2004, 09:46 PM

Hey Girlscout, you damn sure don\'t talk like one and don\'t get too bent out of shape about some of the debates on our board. Everyone here is very passionate and has to be, we are all Saint\'s Fans.

I don\'t believe in abortion, but that is my personal belief. I do believe a person has the right to kill themself, if they wish when they are of legal age. My separation on both of these issues is, I believe the child doesn\'t have a choice and I believe it is a child at the time of conception.

Only my opinion and I guess that makes me no demcrate.

Grrlscout · 08-19-2004, 01:37 AM

Er, I\'m new to this board, and have been scrolling through the topics to check it out. Just thought I\'d add my two cents here while I wait for the season to start in earnest...

I think what you\'re all missing is the idea of human dignity. It spans both the abortion and euthanasia arguments, and applies equally to both. I am unabashedly pro-choice, as I am pro-euthanasia, for many of the same reasons. It boils down to control over your own body. A woman, as a human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to being an unwilling incubator, any more than a terminal patient should be reduced to being a guinea pig or the victim of a risk management policy by a hospital. Are you saying that somehow a pregnant woman, no matter what stage of pregnancy she is in, is somehow in some different category of humanity than she would be otherwise? In other words, because she is pregnant, she loses her ability and right to make decisions about both herself and the fetus she carries, and in many ways, her own destiny as well? At what point does she regain the integrity of her rights as a person?

It\'s a sad situation, no doubt about it. But the reality is that there are some women out there who should never be mothers, especially if they aren\'t going into it willingly. I don\'t think it does the sum of human dignity any good to have a child raised by a mother who sees its existence as ruining hers. I\'ve heard enough stories about abuse and neglect from friends and family members who work in hospitals to make me strongly convinced that no child should be dealt that particular hand.

Carrying a pregnancy to term isn\'t as easy as a lot of the \"adoption option\" advocates want to pretend it is. I knew a girl who was pregnant in high school - twas a big shock and scandal in my home town, even in the 80\'s. When her father found out, he beat her and kicked her out of the house - 16, pregnant, no job, while pregnant she had no prospects of getting one. She wound up hundreds of miles away at a shelter for teenage mothers, and gave her child up for adoption. My understanding was that there were problems finding a family interested in adopting her child due to its race (not all races are equally adoptable - she is Filipina, the father is white) and the health problems it had due to having a very young mother. She moved back home and had to try and get her life back into gear - go back and finish school, try to move on - with her parents still not supporting or speaking to her. Do you think it would be right or advisable to remove the option of legal, safe abortion for that girl if she\'d chosen that route?

The argument over choice seems to be muddied with the morality of abortion. Personally, I feel that it\'s wrong to create an environment where a woman is forced (by law or coersion) to carry a pregnancy to term when she clearly is in no position to raise a child. I think y\'all have beaten the \"legal does not always mean morally correct\" view to death - there is often a gap between the two. Even in Nevada, you have a personal moral choice to make about prostitution, the legality aside. Oftentimes, women who seek abortion do so not because they really want to, but because they are forced to by circumstance or medical reasons. Having an abortion isn\'t exactly a skip through the park. You don\'t flip a coin and decide to have an abortion one afternoon because there\'s nothing on TV - it isn\'t that simple a decision. Put it this way - if a married couple in their third pregnancy was told that the fetus likely had significant health issues via amnio, would you force them to carry the child to term? To prove what point? At what cost, to them, to their family, to that child?

GumboBC · 08-20-2004, 06:44 PM

I\'m not saying her right to choose is greater than the childs right to life. I\'m saying I don\'t have the right to make that decision for her. Neither do you man.

Me, myself alone doesn\'t have the right to choose for her. No sir!! But, WE the MAJORITY of the people of the United States does !!

saintfan --

If a woman is raped, or the child is going to be born with some kind of birth defect, then abortion should be an option.

If a woman goes out and gets pregnent because SHE chose to be careless, then that\'s WRONG !! Spin it however you want, but a human life is THE BIGGEST price to pay that you could possibly think of.

Believe it or not, saintfan, the woman had all kind of options before she got pregnent. She could have not had sex. She could have used protection. She could have done all kinds of things. You know who had no choice in this matter? The baby !!

So who deserves to pay the price? The mother or the baby?

Get back to me on that and NO SPIN!!

08-20-2004, 04:52 PM	#1
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Politics What I\'m trying to do ScottyRo is figure out how it is that people think they have the right to make this sort of decision on behalf of someone else. Someone they don\'t know. Someone who\'s circumstances they are totally unaware of, simply because they think they\'re right. The law doesn\'t give you that right. Society has told you that you don\'t have that right, and yet you\'re still at it, and I wonder why? You responded to Elvis and made fun of the cow, but you didn\'t answer the question I most wanted you to answer. WHY do you feel this way? Why is killing the cow for veal so much different than killing the baby to save the mothers life or because SHE made the personal decision to abort it? YOU tell ME where\'s the difference, and tell me WHY you feel that way, and then explain to me how come you\'re right and I\'m wrong. Dude, it\'s not about a worst case scenario. You don\'t care about the scenario. That\'s my whole point. You just think you\'re right...period. You can\'t see past it. The ropes must be nawing into your back pretty badly, if you\'re really gonna use a worst case scenario argument on me. I\'ve stated many times that there are more difficult questions buried in this debate that we should not really go into because the length of the simple debate is so long. You\'re right there man. This gets REALLY deep. It\'s your opinion versus someone elses versus someone elses. Now, if you\'re not propping yourself up with religion and the \"Good book\" then what is it? It is my opinion that when you recognize that everyone doesn\'t think the way you think or think way you think they should think then you\'ll understand. But not until then. You\'ll still think abortion is wrong, but you\'ll have faith in the fact that you\'re not in control (nor should you be) of what a woman does in that situation. Do you show up at abortion clinics and councel women about to have the procedure? Do you show up at prisons prior to an execution and councel the executioner? Do you protest War? Do you go to inner city neighborhoods and council folks there in crack houses before they go bust a cap in somebody for their next blow? No? Why not? Because the fetus doesn\'t have a voice? Please! Why have you chosen the abortion issue when I\'d bet good money you don\'t do any of these other things. What gives man? Whether or not that baby (or whatever it is) is alive at point \"a\" or \"b\", why not spend all that energy on people that are living minus the debate about whether or not they are? I wonder.
	C'mon Man...

08-20-2004, 04:31 PM	#2
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics Yes. Admit it man. You DO mean to sound condescending here are you\'re doing a really good job at it. Why else would you refer to an aborted fetus as \"Medical Waste\"? It\'s a common practice of the anti-abortionist. They wanna make it sound as dirty and inhumane and as sickening as possible. Why? Ya\'ll think MOST women have abortions like they\'re ordering a cheesburger? What is an aborted fetus then? Are we gonna call it a \"dead baby that didn\'t deserve to live\"? That sounds more enciting than medical waste. I actually thought medical waste was going to be a pretty neutral term. You tell me what to call it and I\'ll use that term, but it must be a truthful term that doesn\'t simply brush the truth of what it is under the rug so you don\'t have to hear yourself say \"dead baby\". The idea of relating abortion to taking your own life is pointless. The laws against taking your own life (as you know very well) are entirely unrelated. Why bring this up? I\'m guessing because not being able to force what you think on someone else is frustrating. I respect your opinion, but your opinion is just that...yours. They are vastly different but I used it for a vastly different purpose than you suggest. I was not comparing the two. I was showing how individual liberties are not absolute by pointing out what would happen if you threatened to kill yourself. That\'s all. Grrlscout kept analogizing the two. Yes, ScottyRo, it can be so stated...in as much as it can be stated otherwise since we\'re dealing with OPINIONS and not FACTS. Who\'s to say? You think you are. Where your family is concerned maybe you are, but not necessarilly where someone else\'s family is concerned. Well, yeah, I probably did overstate my opinion as fact. I\'ll admit that although the law in certain personal injury cases on the subject agrees with my view. However, I\'d bet dollars to donuts that psychiatric professionals would label a person with some sort of \"insane\" moniker if that person were to state that he would have been better off having never been born, truly meaning it. Have you ever stepped down off the anit-abortion soap box long enough to think that you might be out of line in thinking that YOU have the right to tell a woman that she must have a baby who\'s kidneys don\'t work and has no chance to survive? The ropes must be nawing into your back pretty badly, if you\'re really gonna use a worst case scenario argument on me. I\'ve stated many times that there are more difficult questions buried in this debate that we should not really go into because the length of the simple debate is so long. As Elvis once sang: \"Clean up your own backyard. You tend to your business...I\'ll tend to mine.\" Another cop-out argument made as if we have absolute freedoms and nobody ever looks over anybody else\'s shoulder. Take the blindres off, man, and get into the REAL U.S. Do you eat steak? Was killin that cow wrong? Why not? Because it doesn\'t have a spirit? Who says? God? Did he say that? According to whom? Prove it. Can you really be this contradictory? You tell me that we shouldn\'t even compare suicide and abortion and you want to bring in the cow versus baby argument? If I don\'t see another thing posted on this board til the start of the season, I want to see you admit that you\'re wrong here.

08-20-2004, 04:30 PM	#3
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Politics So, in other words, it doesn\'t matter why. There should be no abortion because there are already laws in place that restrict what people do. ahhhh, ok. And it doesn\'t have anything to do with \"when life begins\" either. Because we don\'t know that do we. For all you or ANYONE else knows, it could start at conception. Then what, exactly does it have to do with? Your opinion? The laws we have in place that restrict our activity are there generally to keep us from affecting other people with our actions. You\'re not required to wear a seat belt in Texas because the state of Texas gives a damn about whether you live or die. You have to wear a seat belt here (or anywhere else now) because insurance companies are that powerful. Beleive it baby. It has everything in the world to do with the debate over when life begins as well as how much power YOU have over SOMEONE ELSE\'S body. Beleive that too, and note what the law says too. What about the death penalty? What about War? What that poor cow in my previous post? Don\'t get me wrong Billy. I\'m all about takin responsibility too. I\'m not arguing whether abortion is right or wrong. I\'m arguing a womans right to choose, or more specifically your lack of a right to tell a complete stranger whos circumstances you are totally unfamiliar with what she should do. It\'s just not as simple as saying, \"well, it\'s wrong, obviously, so it shouldn\'t be allowed\". It\'s nowhere NEAR that simple, and if you or anyone else can\'t see past that then I have to think you\'re not trying very hard.
	C'mon Man...

08-20-2004, 03:23 PM	#4
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Politics So, the question is whether or not anyone has a right to tell a woman what to do? You\'ve got to be kidding me !!! Dude, there are so many laws that tell us that to do. You know how those became law? Take a wild guess. It was because enough people thought it was something wrong enough to make it against the law. You have no more right to say a \"woman has the right to choose\" than me saying they shouldn\'t have the right to choose. Forcing something on someone has NOTHING to do with it. We get sh!t forced on us ALL the time. I\'d like to have 3 wives. But, I can\'t do it. Well, I could, but I\'d go to jail. I\'d like to not pay taxes. But you would have to visit me in the jail house!! And it doesn\'t have anything to do with \"when life begins\" either. Because we don\'t know that do we. For all you or ANYONE else knows, it could start at conception. I\'ve always thought it\'s better to err on the side of caution. But let\'s play Russiam Roulette. Let\'s say: \"well, we don\'t know when life begins, so let\'s take a chance. But the woman had her chance NOT to get pregnant. But she chose to \"take a chance.\" She lost !!! Plain and simple. People need to take some responsibility for their mistakes and quit taking the EASY way out. That\'s what\'s wrong with this country today.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

08-20-2004, 12:21 PM	#5
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Politics I shouldn\'t jump in here again, but man this thread just won\'t die. Yes, they should carry the child to prove the point that life, especially all human life, is precious. You ask about the costs to the parents and family. I have to say it\'s apparent that you don\'t know any families that have children born with these difficulties. I know families of this type. I know of a newly married couple who recently had to make such a decision, and dude I\'m glad to know that neither you nor I forced them to do something they didn\'t want to do. It was THEIR decision. That you think you have the right to make such a decision for someone else, to me, is insane man. Live like you wanna live...and let other people make the decisions that directly effect THEIR lives for THEMSELVES. The idea of relating abortion to taking your own life is pointless. The laws against taking your own life (as you know very well) are entirely unrelated. Why bring this up? I\'m guessing because not being able to force what you think on someone else is frustrating. I respect your opinion, but your opinion is just that...yours. Also, if the child is never adopted and had to live a sad life, not even with foster parents, but always in an orphan center, that is still preferable to death. It cannot be truthfully stated that one would have been better off having never been born. Yes, ScottyRo, it can be so stated...in as much as it can be stated otherwise since we\'re dealing with OPINIONS and not FACTS. Who\'s to say? You think you are. Where your family is concerned maybe you are, but not necessarilly where someone else\'s family is concerned. What I am coming to understand about pro-abortionists is that it seems, simply, that your priorites are out of line. I don\'t mean to sound condescending here... Yes. Admit it man. You DO mean to sound condescending here are you\'re doing a really good job at it. Why else would you refer to an aborted fetus as \"Medical Waste\"? It\'s a common practice of the anti-abortionist. They wanna make it sound as dirty and inhumane and as sickening as possible. Why? Ya\'ll think MOST women have abortions like they\'re ordering a cheesburger? Perhaps it\'s you with the out of line priorities. Have you ever stepped down off the anit-abortion soap box long enough to think that you might be out of line in thinking that YOU have the right to tell a woman that she must have a baby who\'s kidneys don\'t work and has no chance to survive? Perhaps she\'s been told that her life is at risk? Maybe you\'ve just never been close enough to the situation (the woman in question) to have an accurate understanding. Maybe you\'ve been through this yourself. I don\'t claim to know. But I would LOVE to know why you\'re so convinced that you\'re right and everyone else is wrong. I\'d really like to know why you feel that way. Is it a religion thing? Is it a political thing? Did you find all these truths under that same rock Joseph Smith found his? I don\'t mean to sound so abrasive I swear, and as I said before I can respect your opinion, but that doesn\'t stop me from wanting to know why you think the way you do. For what it\'s worth I\'m arguing the right or wrong of abortion with you, I\'m arguing with you the fact that you think you should have this power of decision. You can try and hold it next to this or that and compare the legality of some other thing against it, but abortion is unlike other things. It\'s personal, and quite frankly you should stay out of the business of other folks. As Elvis once sang: \"Clean up your own backyard. You tend to your business...I\'ll tend to mine.\" Right or wrong it\'s the Creator\'s job to deal with, not yours. Do you eat steak? Was killin that cow wrong? Why not? Because it doesn\'t have a spirit? Who says? God? Did he say that? According to whom? Prove it.
	C'mon Man...

08-20-2004, 12:18 PM	#6
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Politics A woman\'s right to choose.... Is that what this is about? Well, the woman made her decision the moment she ... how can I put this. hmm.. spread her womanhood!! After that, it\'s two people involved in the decision. The mother and the baby. Ask the baby what his/her decision is. In case of a tie between the mother and the baby....... The baby wins ... hands down. You know, anything can be justified. I guess it just comes down to what folks morals are??
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

08-20-2004, 11:29 AM	#7
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Politics First off, welcome to the boards Grrlscout. Second, your post was very well though out and nicely written. I disagree with your sentiment and logic, but still, well done. I hope you post on some Saints issues comments as thoroughly worked through as this one. I\'m going to argue my points from the basis that the unborn child is a life at conception since none of your arguments seem to rely on the allegation that it is not. It boils down to control over your own body. A woman, as a human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to being an unwilling incubator... No doubt that the woman\'s body is greatly effected here, but the control is also over another individual\'s body as well. You\'ll never hear me say that pregnancy is easy, but does that difficulty demand the death of the unborn? Not in most people\'s minds since they do carry full term. A child, as an unborn human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to a pile of medical waste just because its life may cause the unwilling parent difficulty. Are you saying that somehow a pregnant woman, no matter what stage of pregnancy she is in, is somehow in some different category of humanity than she would be otherwise? In other words, because she is pregnant, she loses her ability and right to make decisions about both herself and the fetus she carries, and in many ways, her own destiny as well? At what point does she regain the integrity of her rights as a person? Yes. While pregant, she is exceptionally changed from an individual human being to a human being that is the sole life support system for another. Obviously, this is a vastly different existence for her than the life she\'ll lead otherwise. Yes, she loses the right to make decisions for herself and the fetus in many situations. The right to make decisions even for yourself when not pregnant is not absolute. You can test this by calling the police and making a serious threat to kill yourself. You\'ll find that your ability to commit suicide will be severely curtailed by the government. You could accomplish it by keeping it a secret but that doesn\'t mean you had the right to do it. She\'ll regain her rights as an individual person when she delivers the child or the pregnancy naturally aborts. Do you think it would be right or advisable to remove the option of legal, safe abortion for that girl if she\'d chosen that route? Safe? It is deadly to one and injurious many times for the other. The rest of the paragraph that preceded the above quote is tragic. However, consider all the people that made mistakes in that scenario. The dad. The boyfriend. The pregnant girl. The peeple who allowed prejudices to affect their decisions about adopting a child. At what point do all of these bad decisions reasonably condemn the only innocent party involved to death? Also, if the child is never adopted and had to live a sad life, not even with foster parents, but always in an orphan center, that is still preferable to death. It cannot be truthfully stated that one would have been better off having never been born. if a married couple in their third pregnancy was told that the fetus likely had significant health issues via amnio, would you force them to carry the child to term? To prove what point? At what cost, to them, to their family, to that child? Yes, they should carry the child to prove the point that life, especially all human life, is precious. You ask about the costs to the parents and family. I have to say it\'s apparent that you don\'t know any families that have children born with these difficulties. Certainly, it is a dificult thing to handle, but you\'re on the cusp of saying here that even without the test if the child is born with these difficulties the parents should be allowed to kill it then to avoid the challenges of raising this child. What is the cost to the child? I have a good friend that was born with spina bifida. I have only known her for about 3 years (she is now 25), but I do know that she has struggled her entire life with the difficulties brought on by her problems. In fact, this entire week she has been in the hospital with these problems. I can\'t speak for her entirely, but I think I know her well enough to say that she is much happier simply being alive than the alternative. I\'m equally sure she would say that she\'d accept these struggles and more again in order to live. You are one who seems to ignore that abortion is not some medical procedure to rid the female\'s body of some tumor or cancer. The abortion is the killing of a human. It deprives the child of something I\'d bet you hold as the most precious thing you have...life. Where is the human dignity in that? What I am coming to understand about pro-abortionists is that it seems, simply, that your priorites are out of line. I don\'t mean to sound condescending here, but I think, if you were asked to rank the importance of life against things such as choice issues and sickness issues, you\'d always rank life first in any other discussion except abortion. Would you fight to save the habitat of some extinction-threatened species? Would you call the humane society on a neighbor who shot or severely beat his dog because it p\'d on the floor? Yet you won\'t back the protection of unborn children.

08-19-2004, 09:46 PM	#8
CheramieIII Fan Since 1967 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Nomad Posts: 7,497 Blog Entries: 3	Politics Hey Girlscout, you damn sure don\'t talk like one and don\'t get too bent out of shape about some of the debates on our board. Everyone here is very passionate and has to be, we are all Saint\'s Fans. I don\'t believe in abortion, but that is my personal belief. I do believe a person has the right to kill themself, if they wish when they are of legal age. My separation on both of these issues is, I believe the child doesn\'t have a choice and I believe it is a child at the time of conception. Only my opinion and I guess that makes me no demcrate.
	Golf and sex are about the only things you can enjoy without being good at them. Jimmy Demaret

08-19-2004, 01:37 AM	#9
Grrlscout Rookie Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2	Politics Er, I\'m new to this board, and have been scrolling through the topics to check it out. Just thought I\'d add my two cents here while I wait for the season to start in earnest... I think what you\'re all missing is the idea of human dignity. It spans both the abortion and euthanasia arguments, and applies equally to both. I am unabashedly pro-choice, as I am pro-euthanasia, for many of the same reasons. It boils down to control over your own body. A woman, as a human being, shouldn\'t be reduced to being an unwilling incubator, any more than a terminal patient should be reduced to being a guinea pig or the victim of a risk management policy by a hospital. Are you saying that somehow a pregnant woman, no matter what stage of pregnancy she is in, is somehow in some different category of humanity than she would be otherwise? In other words, because she is pregnant, she loses her ability and right to make decisions about both herself and the fetus she carries, and in many ways, her own destiny as well? At what point does she regain the integrity of her rights as a person? It\'s a sad situation, no doubt about it. But the reality is that there are some women out there who should never be mothers, especially if they aren\'t going into it willingly. I don\'t think it does the sum of human dignity any good to have a child raised by a mother who sees its existence as ruining hers. I\'ve heard enough stories about abuse and neglect from friends and family members who work in hospitals to make me strongly convinced that no child should be dealt that particular hand. Carrying a pregnancy to term isn\'t as easy as a lot of the \"adoption option\" advocates want to pretend it is. I knew a girl who was pregnant in high school - twas a big shock and scandal in my home town, even in the 80\'s. When her father found out, he beat her and kicked her out of the house - 16, pregnant, no job, while pregnant she had no prospects of getting one. She wound up hundreds of miles away at a shelter for teenage mothers, and gave her child up for adoption. My understanding was that there were problems finding a family interested in adopting her child due to its race (not all races are equally adoptable - she is Filipina, the father is white) and the health problems it had due to having a very young mother. She moved back home and had to try and get her life back into gear - go back and finish school, try to move on - with her parents still not supporting or speaking to her. Do you think it would be right or advisable to remove the option of legal, safe abortion for that girl if she\'d chosen that route? The argument over choice seems to be muddied with the morality of abortion. Personally, I feel that it\'s wrong to create an environment where a woman is forced (by law or coersion) to carry a pregnancy to term when she clearly is in no position to raise a child. I think y\'all have beaten the \"legal does not always mean morally correct\" view to death - there is often a gap between the two. Even in Nevada, you have a personal moral choice to make about prostitution, the legality aside. Oftentimes, women who seek abortion do so not because they really want to, but because they are forced to by circumstance or medical reasons. Having an abortion isn\'t exactly a skip through the park. You don\'t flip a coin and decide to have an abortion one afternoon because there\'s nothing on TV - it isn\'t that simple a decision. Put it this way - if a married couple in their third pregnancy was told that the fetus likely had significant health issues via amnio, would you force them to carry the child to term? To prove what point? At what cost, to them, to their family, to that child?
	Life is like a mirror. Smile and it will smile back at you.

08-20-2004, 06:44 PM	#10
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Politics I\'m not saying her right to choose is greater than the childs right to life. I\'m saying I don\'t have the right to make that decision for her. Neither do you man. Me, myself alone doesn\'t have the right to choose for her. No sir!! But, WE the MAJORITY of the people of the United States does !! saintfan -- If a woman is raped, or the child is going to be born with some kind of birth defect, then abortion should be an option. If a woman goes out and gets pregnent because SHE chose to be careless, then that\'s WRONG !! Spin it however you want, but a human life is THE BIGGEST price to pay that you could possibly think of. Believe it or not, saintfan, the woman had all kind of options before she got pregnent. She could have not had sex. She could have used protection. She could have done all kinds of things. You know who had no choice in this matter? The baby !! So who deserves to pay the price? The mother or the baby? Get back to me on that and NO SPIN!!
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616