It really bothers me when you hear some christian right wing politician say something like "last year 400 children were killed in Nebraska, but if you count all the little children who were victims of abortion, that number rises to 1,200". lets not lie to ourselves, abortion isnt murder.

i think at the core of this issue for me is that i read the other day that if our current population explosion is sustained at the rate it is at today, there will be 3 billion more people on the earth by the end of the century. this will create a massively unmanageable logistics problem on a worldwide scale. famine, deforestation, ozone depletion, overcrowded hospitals and medical facilities, skyrocketing healthcare costs...etc. the bottom line is that humanity's ability to survive through artificial means (ie: the prolonging of life through hospice care and advances in medicine and technology) is userhing us into an era where we are going to BE FORCED to make choices about who lives or dies and when. we are going to have to decide when it is ok for ourselves to be taken off the respirator, we are going to have to control our reproduction, we are going to have to come to terms with the fact that death is a necessary part of life or life will become valueless and even worse, the repercussions could eventually result in the destruction of the environment and the earth itself and therefore humanity.

why is it that western culture places the ultimate importance on the preservation of unborn life, when (as sadistic as it may seem) some countries like China have been able to see that the preservation of what is already alive sometimes goes hand in hand with the destruction or prevention of that which has not yet come into being?

I see it as a function of the religious values that pervade our culture.
anyone want to comment?

PS. im sure that the people who post on here all the time will be like "weve already debated this a million times on here" well i havent and i dont feel like looking for the thread that started it all so humor me ok. thanks.

Or as one of my friends once said:

"I think abortion should be allowed until the kid has reached the age of 8-9, since it won't be able to survive himself before that anyways."

I don't know how he thought :P, and of course I don't agree. But it puts everything in a different light.. What's the different between a 1 month old baby and a '20 weeks to birth' baby?

On the other hand, I fully support abortion. I believe it's a human right to choose wheter or not to have a baby.

lets not lie to ourselves, abortion isnt murder.
Quite right.
A fetus is not a human yet, and therefore it isn't killing a human.
Even if it were, what's wrong with killing people? There's too many humans upon this wretched planet as it is.

Even if it were, what's wrong with killing people? There's too many humans upon this wretched planet as it is.
but killing makes me sad.

but killing makes me sad.
Boo-fucking-hoo. Sadness is obsolete.

If someone is against abortion for non religious reasons then their opinions have merit. If they are against it because of the ignorance of their religion, they should be ignored.

i think at the core of this issue for me is that i read the other day that if our current population explosion is sustained at the rate it is at today, there will be 3 billion more people on the earth by the end of the century. this will create a massively unmanageable logistics problem on a worldwide scale.

No, I don't think so. If mankind has to kill each other for population control, then mankind should die off.


famine, deforestation, ozone depletion, overcrowded hospitals and medical facilities, skyrocketing healthcare costs...etc.

If hospitals are overcrowded then we might do to build more. And if society hasn't enough doctors, then perhaps we oought to train those whom would otherwise be aborted to become doctors. But merely killing people to preserve some vague notion of quality of life is quite, well obsurd. And furthermore, who knows. Maybe some of those who were aborted would have otherwise found some medical cure or invention.


the bottom line is that humanity's ability to survive through artificial means (ie: the prolonging of life through hospice care and advances in medicine and technology) is userhing us into an era where we are going to BE FORCED to make choices about who lives or dies and when.

Humanity has survived despite having little or no hospital care.


why is it that western culture places the ultimate importance on the preservation of unborn life, when (as sadistic as it may seem) some countries like China have been able to see that the preservation of what is already alive sometimes goes hand in hand with the destruction or prevention of that which has not yet come into being?

An unborn fetus is alive and is a human being. These are all documented medical facts. For at birth we didn't suddenly become alive or into being. That, I think, would be quite a supernatural feat.

I think the real issue is when dose the child become sentient and I think the real answers is we don’t know. We have done a lot of research on the topic but what it comes down to is that we don’t know how to define our own conscious self so we can’t define what it should represent in others.

Lacking proof for either side it becomes a moral decision for the individual and one that I at least feel nobody has a right to infringe on. If you think there is such a thing as a soul and that a child has one from the moment of conception then don’t get an abortion. Other people, though, don’t agree and it would be rather intolerant to force them to follow decisions based on an unproven opinion.

c7,

but killing makes me sad. Then don't kill.

c7,

Then don't kill.

I don't, but others will..

I don't, but others will..
So? None of your fucking concern what others do. Mind your own damn business.

One thing I can say for sure is that no one will ever know how they really feel about abortion until they have one.

One thing I can say for sure is that no one will ever know how they really feel about abortion until they have one.
I knoew how I really feel, now.
For the first, last, and eternally final fuckin' time: It's the woman's child, it's the woman's choice. She is carrying it, she decides the fate.

lori: does this mean that it is impossible for someone male to know how they feel about abortion?

An argument against abortion based on science and law:

The defining characteristic of a distinct human being genetic individuality, or in the case of identical twins, seperate forms. A zygote is genetically distinct from both mother and father. A zygote, in the normal course of events, shall develop through the other stages of life until it eventually emerges from the womb, after which it will continue to grow to the stage of an infant, then to a toddler, to a child, to a pre-teen/pre-pubscent, to a teenager/adolescent, to an adult, at which the growth process towards a higher state is finished, and a degeneration into old age begins. Since, scientifically, a zygote is definitely human as mentioned above, and not to mention that a prepubscent is no less human than an eighty year old man, to add a "common sense" proof to this scientific reality, it becomes utterly ridiculous to state from any objective standpoint that even a zygote is not worthy of being considered a human being. Indeed, to state otherwise is to fall into a pseudo-religious belief, based on presumption and bias, which is not only non-scientific, but in fact, antiscientific. Therefore, since they are human beings, and abortion surely fits the definition of murder (homocide with malicious intent and forethought), the perpetrator, accomplice, and all other guilty parties ought to accountable infront of a court of law, charged with first-degree murder and other offenses.

the perpetrator, accomplice, and all other guilty parties ought to accountable infront of a court of law, charged with first-degree murder and other offenses.
So what? Even if it were murder, I see nothing wrong with it.
There are far too many humans on this planet, anyway. Spawning any more would be a crime against humanity...

What if having an abortion was what led me to Christ?

Then the 6 week long life of my child, inside the womb, would have served a much greater purpose than all of my thirty some odd years.

If you're a Christian, according to your own doctrine, the spirit of an aborted baby would go straight back up to heaven. While the probability occurs (as the path is narrow), that if the child had been born, they would have not received Christ and become born again, and so upon death would then go to hell. Sooooo what does that mean exactly?

To me, it all comes down to whether or not you believe that you have a right to take that life...and logically, that would have a great deal to do with whether or not you believe in God. When I had mine, I called myself an agnostic. I didn't know if God existed and didn't claim to. And honestly, didn't really want to know, though I would have never admitted that...even to myself. At that particular time, in light of my circumstance, and what I was doing, I would say that I had never wanted to not know more. But that changed over the years. Because of what I did, I eventually had to know. And now I do.

In my opinion, having an abortion is the most hideous and heinous thing I've ever done. And the same people who abhor and condemn the Christian God of the OT for his violence and judgement are pro-abortion...hypocrits.

But honestly what difference does it make if it's legal or not? I mean, if the only reason someone doesn't have an abortion is because it's illegal, then does it really matter that they're not having one? And so, is the fact that it is illegal to kill someone who has been born the only thing that's keeping this same someone from killing you or me? And what kind of parent is someone like this going to be do you think?

I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game.

I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game.

this is unfortunate. the entirety of your life is politics. understanding this is a first step into success at any given endeavour.

An argument against abortion based on science and law:
A zygote is genetically distinct from both mother and father. A zygote, in the normal course of events, shall develop through the other stages of life until it eventually emerges from the womb, after which it will continue to grow to the stage of an infant, then to...

...Since, scientifically, a zygote is definitely human as mentioned above, and not to mention that a prepubscent is no less human than an eighty year old man, to add a "common sense" proof to this scientific reality, it becomes utterly ridiculous to state from any objective standpoint that even a zygote is not worthy of being considered a human being....



The key part there is “as mentioned above” you are passing an opinion off as the scientific definition of humanity. I will agree that one aspect of humanity, and all life, is that we are unique, but I don’t see how it has any bearing on being alive.

lori: does this mean that it is impossible for someone male to know how they feel about abortion?

Just because the child is inside the woman's womb doesn't mean that it's not just as much the man's child or responsibility. She didn't make it and put it there herself. The man is the father...and the man is just as responsible, if not more.

When I spoke of having an abortion I wasn't referring to the procedure so much...I should have said "until you have a baby who was aborted", or "until you are responisble for an abortion". I mean, I refer to a man as "having a baby", though the mother is actually the one giving birth. I would also refer to a man as "having an abortion", even though the mother is the one experiencing the procedure.

I'm sure that a man would get a different perspective of the experience, not having to lay on the table while your baby is sucked out of you by some womb vacuum, chopped into pieces, and disposed of. But I think that ultimately, the man is held just as accountable as the woman if not moreso. Circumstances vary, and sometimes things, especially according to the law, are out of a man's control...well, when it gets to that point anyway. Because, of course, a man could always just keep his dick in his pants until he's ready to be a father. But the father of my aborted baby didn't know until after the fact.

I knoew how I really feel, now.
For the first, last, and eternally final fuckin' time: It's the woman's child, it's the woman's choice. She is carrying it, she decides the fate.

Pussy.

this is unfortunate. the entirety of your life is politics. understanding this is a first step into success at any given endeavour.

Speak for yourself. My life is the real deal. Fuck the campaign...no lies, no games, no more. The buck stops here.

Abortion is not murder. Abortion is compassion. If you disagree, I couldn't care less.

So many abortion debates are pointless, and it is for one reason: they focus on the wrong thing.

Some people seem to be forgetting that it is SEX that leads to pregnancy, and it is pregnancy that can end in abortion.

The abortion debate should be focusing on sex, and not on the fetus.

So many people basically believe that we are ENTITLED to consequence-free sex; that is, that we are entitled to having sex and not conceiving.
But we have no such right, this universe does not work that way.

In this universe, particular actions have particular consequences. We may affect the course of the consequences a bit, but we cannot change it. We cannot 100% prevent conception.


So the questions are:
Why do people have sex when they don't want to have children (and thus a child conceived in such sexual relations will be aborted)?
Is such sex justified?
Is sex for the sake of sex justified?
Is abortion an acceptable price to pay for the sexual pleasure?

Abortion is not murder. Abortion is compassion.

Compassion for WHOM? The woman?


If you disagree, I couldn't care less.

And you would say that your pregnant girlfriend, expecting her to have an aobrtion?

Some people seem to be forgetting that it is SEX that leads to pregnancy, and it is pregnancy that can end in abortion.What leads to SEX? Humanity.

The abortion debate should be focusing on sex, and not on the fetus.Focus: Humanity. Not sex.

So many people basically believe that we are ENTITLED to consequence-free sex;Who's to say we are not? You?

that is, that we are entitled to having sex and not conceiving.Only religious nuts are holding us back.
But we have no such right, this universe does not work that way.Your universe? Or mine?

In this universe, particular actions have particular consequences.According to you?

We may affect the course of the consequences a bit, but we cannot change it. We cannot 100% prevent conception.
Like hell we can't.

So the questions are:
Why do people have sex when they don't want to have children (and thus a child conceived in such sexual relations will be aborted)?
Humanity?

Is such sex justified?Not in your universe, obviously.
Is sex for the sake of sex justified?In my universe, who the fuck cares?!
Is abortion an acceptable price to pay for the sexual pleasure?Fuck yes. I wish I had been aborted. I wish I had not been born with such "immaculate" intelligence, and thus been subjected to a life with moronic fucks. :)

Compassion for WHOM? The woman?
For the fucking aborted fetus! Are you that deluded?
And you would say that your pregnant girlfriend, expecting her to have an aobrtion?Whatever floats her god-damned boat.

I think the real issue is when dose the child become sentient and I think the real answers is we don’t know. We have done a lot of research on the topic but what it comes down to is that we don’t know how to define our own conscious self so we can’t define what it should represent in others.

Lacking proof for either side it becomes a moral decision for the individual and one that I at least feel nobody has a right to infringe on. If you think there is such a thing as a soul and that a child has one from the moment of conception then don’t get an abortion. Other people, though, don’t agree and it would be rather intolerant to force them to follow decisions based on an unproven opinion.

Sabian_bel, assuming we have no way to tell if the unborn child is sentient and sentiency is the measure of our worth, why would us not knowing make us leave the decision to the individual. Take for instance the army. They don't use an area for target practices unless if they can be certain no one lives there. If they're unable to do so, they simply won't use such an area.


Lacking proof for either side it becomes a moral decision for the individual and one that I at least feel nobody has a right to infringe on. If you think there is such a thing as a soul and that a child has one from the moment of conception then don’t get an abortion. Other people, though, don’t agree and it would be rather intolerant to force them to follow decisions based on an unproven opinion.

Well, it's like saying I don't believe Jews have a soul but you do. And therefore, I will kill as many Jews as I want, and you, confident in them having a soul, won't stop me. .

Compassion for WHOM? The woman?
The Fetus.
Look at it this way: A kid is born in horrible surroundings. The kid slowly starves because the parent(s), though loving, can not afford food. The child dies or a disease from a weakened body, and weakened immune system, slowly, painfully, horribly.
Do you want a child to suffer such a fate?
No? Then take care of it before it becomes an actual human, while it's still in the embryo stage. Abort it.

Hapsburg:

So what? Even if it were murder, I see nothing wrong with it.
There are far too many humans on this planet, anyway. Spawning any more would be a crime against humanity...

Murder is unlawful, hence, abortion is wrong. That is my only point. MOreover, eugenics is a far better way to deal with over population whilst getting something out of it, rather then simply murdering children indiscriminately.

Lori_7:

If you're a Christian, according to your own doctrine, the spirit of an aborted baby would go straight back up to heaven. While the probability occurs (as the path is narrow), that if the child had been born, they would have not received Christ and become born again, and so upon death would then go to hell. Sooooo what does that mean exactly?

Actually, Christians (non-Catholics and perhaps Orthodox) claim that aborted babies go to Hell.

Sabian_bel:

The key part there is “as mentioned above” you are passing an opinion off as the scientific definition of humanity. I will agree that one aspect of humanity, and all life, is that we are unique, but I don’t see how it has any bearing on being alive.

An opinion? Try science. The genetic evidence and the fact that only that which is alive can grow is rooted in scientific fact. Unscientific bias is unworthy of being considered as anything remotely valid, and thus a definition not in accords with what science declares to be right, is simply, completely, and absolutely, wrong.

sometimes abortion is wrong.

we are entitled to having sex and not conceiving. But we have no such right, this universe does not work that way.

By whose authority, yours?

Why do people have sex when they don't want to have children

Obvioulsy, you've never had sex, if you did, you wouldn't be asking that question.

c7ityi_:

No, abortion is always wrong, as it is murder. There is no excuse for what is conceived as murder under the law of most societies throughout history.

Well, I like sex, but don't want a baby and never will. Yet the pope tells me I cant wear a condom. So either I don't have sex, or I don't commit the sin of using contraception. Then what if there is a pregnancy, I have been good to God by not making him cry tears all over his nice white gown by wearing a condom, but now I have a baby I don't want.

Or if I take the option of never having sex to please God... Sorry, but I'm having sex, and I'm using contraception, and if it fails and she goes pregnant, she better abort or I'm outta there.

Is anyone here against abortion who isn't a religious retard?

In my opinion, having an abortion is the most hideous and heinous thing I've ever done. And the same people who abhor and condemn the Christian God of the OT for his violence and judgement are pro-abortion...hypocrits.


Well I think you're all as bad as each other. There ya go, I'm not a hypocrite. I condemn your god for being the fuckhead the bible makes him out to be, and condemn you for, (kinda -though you're only a woman so pretty meaningless), being made in his image and acting just like he would.

It reminds me of you believers that have an issue with Hitler and claim him evil for killing some jews, when the very god you claim to love has killed 100 times as many jews and nobody even bats a fucking eyelid. That's hypocricy Lori.

Is anyone here against abortion who isn't a religious retard?

Yeah.

Even if it were, what's wrong with killing people? There's too many humans upon this wretched planet as it is.

So.. what gives you more right to life? From what I can tell, you're just a kid with a bad attitude and little else. What have you done that makes you have more rights than someone who is not yet big enough to talk for himself? If there's too many humans I can think of millions worth killing - and not one of those is an unborn child.

No, abortion is always wrong, as it is murder.
It's subjective and dependent circumstances. Ex: some people think it's ok to kill animals and eat them, so to them, it is ok, but there are others who feel bad about it, so to them, it would be wrong.

Many women think it's ok to make an abort, for example, if she had a baby by mistake or if she was raped.

Justice demands equal exchange of goods produced. You get what you earn, you take what rightfully belongs to you by virtue of the effort you put out. It is a crime against justice to take that which you have no right to take, even if you take it with the best intentions.

Murder is unlawful, hence, abortion is wrong. That is my only point
YOUR laws and YOUR morals say that murder is wrong. Do not assume that all think it is a wrong, and don't assume that I care about the law.
Fuck the Po-lice. Fuck the Po-lice.

KennyJC:

Is anyone here against abortion who isn't a religious retard?

See my argument from science and law.

c7ityi_:

It's subjective and dependent circumstances. Ex: some people think it's ok to kill animals and eat them, so to them, it is ok, but there are others who feel bad about it, so to them, it would be wrong.

Many women think it's ok to make an abort, for example, if she had a baby by mistake or if she was raped.

Subjective or not, what it is, as defined by science and the definition of murder in most societies, is just that: Murder.

Hapsburg:

Morals? No. It is not a moral issue. It is a matter of law basically down through in every civilization ever, as well as what science says even a zygote is. To speak of abortion not being murder, is to speak an absurdity as erroneous as "a square is a circle". Whether or not murder is right or wrong, however, I cannot tell you.

Subjective or not, what it is, as defined by science and the definition of murder in most societies, is just that: Murder.

I was talking about moral. I think moral is a part of the universe, even though it is "just" a human definition of a thing.

But if we talk about definitions, at what point does the sperm cell become a "human", so that it can be defined as "murder" if you make an abortion?

Morals? No. It is not a moral issue. It is a matter of law basically down through in every civilization ever, as well as what science says even a zygote is. To speak of abortion not being murder, is to speak an absurdity as erroneous as "a square is a circle". Whether or not murder is right or wrong, however, I cannot tell you.
Your law, not mine. Murder may be illegal to you, but it's all right by me.

There are dozens of examples and scenarios where it is necessary to abort a fetus, either for the sake of the parent(s) or the unborn child itself. ie. rape victims, down syndrome, poverty, etc.

One can't simply paint a broad brush of murder. Is every sperm sacred?

There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists,
There are Hindus and Mormons and then
There are those that follow Mohammad, but
I've never been one of them.

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six footer,
You don't have to have a great brain,
You don't have to have any clothes on,
You're a Catholic the moment Dad came, because

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs,
On the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

Every sperm is wanted,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Hindu, Taoist, Morman,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is useful,
Every sperm is fine,
God needs everybody's,
Mine, and mine, and mine.

Let the pagans spill theirs,
O'er mountain, hill and plain.
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

~Michael Palin and Terry Jones.

c7ityi_:

I was talking about moral. I think moral is a part of the universe, even though it is "just" a human definition of a thing.

But if we talk about definitions, at what point does the sperm cell become a "human", so that it can be defined as "murder" if you make an abortion?

How is moral part of the universe?

A sperm cell never becomes a human. A sperm cell is always simply a sperm cell. It is only when conception occurs, that is, when the zygote forms, when there is a genetically distinct entity, that a new human life exists.

Hapsburg:

Your law, not mine. Murder may be illegal to you, but it's all right by me.

I assume you live in a country that disagrees with you.

(Q):

There are dozens of examples and scenarios where it is necessary to abort a fetus, either for the sake of the parent(s) or the unborn child itself. ie. rape victims, down syndrome, poverty, etc.

One of the foundations of Western Law (specifically American) is that "the sins of the father are not for the child to endure". To murder a child because his father was a rapist is irrational. Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great.

You cannot murder something and have it benefit unless informed consent is given, something which no child in the womb is capable of giving. Furthermore, one cannot murder someone else for another's benefit legally, so the "parent's sake" is an irrational argument. Down-syndrome is not a death-sentence crime, nor is poverty, nor anything else.

I assume you live in a country that disagrees with you.

US. Yes. Why?
Doesn't mean I cannot think whatever the fuck I want.

One of the foundations of Western Law (specifically American) is that "the sins of the father are not for the child to endure". To murder a child because his father was a rapist is irrational.

Are we talking about a child or an unborn fetus? When does the concept of murder take place, the moment the father ejaculates or sometime later?

Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great.

You'd have to walk a mile in her shoes before passing judgment - sympathy means squat.

You cannot murder something and have it benefit unless informed consent is given, something which no child in the womb is capable of giving.

That is the decision of the parent(s). It's the same as if someone required life-saving surgery that had a very good chance of failing, but was unable to consent.

Furthermore, one cannot murder someone else for another's benefit legally, so the "parent's sake" is an irrational argument. Down-syndrome is not a death-sentence crime, nor is poverty, nor anything else.

So, in the case of poverty, should we allow the child to be born only to die a few years later of starvation, would that be better? Or, should we allow a down's child to be born only to have that child require substantial care and attention from parents who are now forced to do so, for the rest of their lives?

Where is the rationality in that?

It really bothers me when you hear some christian right wing politician say something like "last year 400 children were killed in Nebraska, but if you count all the little children who were victims of abortion, that number rises to 1,200". lets not lie to ourselves, abortion isnt murder.

I see it as a function of the religious values that pervade our culture.
anyone want to comment?

Strange that a man would want to pick a topic so sensitve to women.

This issue has already been settled. If you are a Christian, then the act is wrong. If you are not a Christian - well you have your own rules.

But speaking as a Christian - all sins can be forgiven except for sinning against The Holy Spirit - so in cases of rape especially, the pregnant mothers need to find an alone time and ask The Creator for HIS LOVE AND FORGIVENESS - remember The Creator is JUST and whatever sin you commit is between you and HIM alone.

I have to attend a class - i will be back in about an hour.

Thank you.

"Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great."

But she is not violating the law because abortion is legal, and it always will be as I doubt that even in America, religious extremism can't get any worse than it is now. The only way it will become illegal is if extremism becomes even more obscene, in which case the country will be fucked anyway.

Tell me... When is abortion murder? Is it anytime after the sperm enters the egg? Is it when or if the fetus feels pain?

It is totally cruel of you to tell a women that is pregnant out of rape that she can't 'murder' her unborn fetus. I would not want to be the son of a rapist or the product of rape. Nor would I wan't to be born with a debilitating illness. But yada yada... you think life is sacred, therefor your opinions on this have no credence with me.

ask The Creator for HIS LOVE AND FORGIVENESS - remember The Creator is JUST and whatever sin you commit is between you and HIM alone.
Bull.

I have to attend a class - i will be back in about an hour.
Cultist.

How is moral part of the universe?

Everything is a part of the universe. Moral is a sense of good and evil. It is a thought, a feeling... they are parts of the universe. Humans are part of the universe.

god, i hate christians and their deluded view of things.

god, i hate christians and their deluded view of things.

Be quiet Child.

Be quiet Child.

You think that is gonna work, father?

Hapsburg:

US. Yes. Why?
Doesn't mean I cannot think whatever the fuck I want.

Yes. To hold an a foolish subjective notion.

(Q):

Are we talking about a child or an unborn fetus? When does the concept of murder take place, the moment the father ejaculates or sometime later?

If you had bothered to read my post, I point towards life starting at conception, when a genetically unique entity has formed as the zygote.

Scientifically, there is no difference betwixt you and I and our zygote forms aside from our level of development.

You'd have to walk a mile in her shoes before passing judgment - sympathy means squat.

I can pass judgement just fine, thank you. It's irrational to blame the child for the father doing a thing wrong.

That is the decision of the parent(s). It's the same as if someone required life-saving surgery that had a very good chance of failing, but was unable to consent.

There is no right to murder given to parents or to anyone.

So, in the case of poverty, should we allow the child to be born only to die a few years later of starvation, would that be better? Or, should we allow a down's child to be born only to have that child require substantial care and attention from parents who are now forced to do so, for the rest of their lives?

Yes. We are not presciently aware and able to determine what shall occur in that child's life. Under your notion of poverty being an excuse for abortion, Abraham Lincoln would probably never have been born.

Angelic Being:

This issue has already been settled. If you are a Christian, then the act is wrong. If you are not a Christian - well you have your own rules.

This is not so. I'm making a wholely non-religious argument for this.

KennyJC:

But she is not violating the law because abortion is legal, and it always will be as I doubt that even in America, religious extremism can't get any worse than it is now. The only way it will become illegal is if extremism becomes even more obscene, in which case the country will be fucked anyway.

Hopefully you'll be proven wrong with the supreme court nominees of president Bush. But as abortion's legality is nonsensical, being non-scientific and abhorrent in all manners, I would still claim she is breaking the law of murder.

Tell me... When is abortion murder? Is it anytime after the sperm enters the egg? Is it when or if the fetus feels pain?

As I have -said- several times: Conception.

It is totally cruel of you to tell a women that is pregnant out of rape that she can't 'murder' her unborn fetus. I would not want to be the son of a rapist or the product of rape. Nor would I wan't to be born with a debilitating illness. But yada yada... you think life is sacred, therefor your opinions on this have no credence with me.

Cruel? What is murder but the ultimate cruelty?

c7ityi_:

Everything is a part of the universe. Moral is a sense of good and evil. It is a thought, a feeling... they are parts of the universe. Humans are part of the universe.

Understood.

You people are asking the wrong question.

Is a zygote a human being? Yes. It has a complete set of human genes, and it is alive, so it is human.

Next question: Does a zygote deserve to have all the rights of an adult human being, including the right not to be killed deliberately? Some people argue "yes"; others "no".

Let's hear some arguments on this question, and quit quibbling about whether a zygote or foetus is human. That's a silly argument which has an obvious answer.

okinrus

No, I don't think so. If mankind has to kill each other for population control, then mankind should die off.


If hospitals are overcrowded then we might do to build more. And if society hasn't enough doctors, then perhaps we oought to train those whom would otherwise be aborted to become doctors. But merely killing people to preserve some vague notion of quality of life is quite, well obsurd. And furthermore, who knows. Maybe some of those who were aborted would have otherwise found some medical cure or invention.


what youre basically doing here is speculating that the unborn have unlimited potential. well, so does every person who dies as a child of famine in ethiopia, so does every child in liberia who dies in a civil war, so does every child who died in the south pacific tsunami and the hurricane in new orleans. the fact of the matter is, that sometimes due to circumstances beyond our control, and sometimes due to circumstances that we can control but choose not to, people die. its a fact of life that not every single human can acheive their full possible potential. i guarantee you there is a child who could be the doctor that finds the cure for AIDS sitting in a ghetto in New York City that will become a drug dealer or a gas station attendant instead, the potential of the unborn is not the issue, the issue is what constitutes life and not at what point life becomes viable, but at what point it is valuable. and you or i may not live to see it, but how do you think the scenario will play out for mankind when there is no more space left on earth to build hospitals, or when people cant breathe anymore because the air has become poisonous because overpopulation has polluted it to the point of toxicity, or how about the even more real possibility of whole populations in 3rd world countries simply running out of water to drink? we here in the western world will just turn away and continue to pump our offspring into the world that has resources instead of controlling ourselves and giving resources to those who have none? your argument is foolish, im not talking about the short term here, im not talking about building more hospitals to take care of the sick, im talking about the point where we overwhelm the earth with our numbers, and if populations grow unchecked and we proceed to advance our technologies, it will happen. we will need to learn to control our populations and abortion will be a key aspect of managing it, unless you would prefer infanticide, the other part of it will be people in developed countries choosing to die instead of surviving indefinitely by artificial means. religious objections to these things will be nullified in the face of global destruction. either that or they will lead to global destruction.

Humanity has survived despite having little or no hospital care.

right, but i dont necessarily prefer to go back to 8th century medical standards do you?


An unborn fetus is alive and is a human being. These are all documented medical facts. For at birth we didn't suddenly become alive or into being. That, I think, would be quite a supernatural feat.

an unborn fetus has the potential to become a fully functional, independently viable human being. it cannot survive unaided, cannot emerge from the womb of its own volition, cannot even hold its own head up at birth. a person who needs to be kept alive using a feeding tube and a respirator is similarily "alive and a human being" but has no consciousness, quality of life, or independent survivability. might as well be dead. potential is the argument, not your so called "documented medical facts" which i disagree heartily with in premise anyway.

Be quiet Child.
Your probably younger than him.
Besisdes, age matters not. Only maturity. No matter how old you are, you have the mentality and maturity of a three-year-old.

Quote Lori:
"I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game."

* That seems about right, but I think organised religion falls into that category too.

Quote water:
“So many people basically believe that we are ENTITLED to consequence-free sex; that is, that we are entitled to having sex and not conceiving.”

* Ho hum.

Quote w:
“In this universe, particular actions have particular consequences. “

* Now you’re getting there.

Quote w:
“We cannot 100% prevent conception.”

* Then remain celibate.

Quote w:
“Why do people have sex when they don't want to have children”

* Because there is nothing like a good orgasm after Sunday lunch.

Quote w:
“Is such sex justified?”

* Choices eh?

Quote w:
“Is sex for the sake of sex justified?”

* Course not, our sex organs are just for show.

Quote w:
“Is abortion an acceptable price to pay for the sexual pleasure?”

* No. But then, not everyone who has sex, falls pregnant, OR has an abortion.

Well I think you're all as bad as each other. There ya go, I'm not a hypocrite. I condemn your god for being the fuckhead the bible makes him out to be, and condemn you for, (kinda -though you're only a woman so pretty meaningless), being made in his image and acting just like he would.

It reminds me of you believers that have an issue with Hitler and claim him evil for killing some jews, when the very god you claim to love has killed 100 times as many jews and nobody even bats a fucking eyelid. That's hypocricy Lori.

Snake,

God Himself, me, and all of the church people in the whole world put together could not possibly compare to your holier than thou hypocritical judgement. When ironically, it's your lack of humility that keeps you so idiotic.

Quote w:
“Is abortion an acceptable price to pay for the sexual pleasure?”

* No. But then, not everyone who has sex, falls pregnant, OR has an abortion.

You have it backwards.
"If I won't become pregnant, then I will have sex and enjoy it" -- this is how you think a woman thinks, or better, SHOULD think.

Sex, and the willingness to abort, is propagated by the media as the acceptable price of a man's love.

Girls and young women are facing a great burden. Not yet having developed personalities and a sense of their own will and rights, they will buy into whatever they get told. But it is *them* who pays the price, not the media.

There goes the pattern:
1. You must have a boyfriend, or you are a freak and a loser.
2. In order to keep the boyfriend, you must have sex with him, or he will leave you.
3. If you fall pregnant, be ready to abort because you can't afford a child; also, your boyfriend will most likely leave you if you decide to keep the child.
4. Accept it that your body is intrinsically flawed; it *should* not conceive, but it does. It is you and you alone who must make up for this flaw.

Stretched, would you like to be a woman, and thus facing such things?
Would you like to be a 17-year old girl with such a mindset, and seeing no other option?

Being "normal" comes above every other concern. Having a boyfriend or being married is still, by many people, considered as the standard of normalcy. No matter what the cost.


* * *



There are dozens of examples and scenarios where it is necessary to abort a fetus, either for the sake of the parent(s) or the unborn child itself. ie. rape victims, down syndrome, poverty, etc.

Those are actually side issues. The main one is that some people wish that abortion were treated as yet another regular contraceptive method. Meaning that men would be completely absolved from any responsibility whatsoever.

The more such a view of abortion is encouraged, the more women are viewed as having intrinsically flawed bodies (since they can conceive, which, in the context of sex for pleasure, is a bad thing).
The more women will hate themselves for it.
And we get one half of the world's population hating themselves for what they are.
Potentially one half of the world's population being self-hating, or mindless and indifferent creatures with a slit between their legs.

How many women do you know who are proud and happy of being female and able to conceive and bear children?

I hear what you are saying water. It`s a sad reflection on society. And parenting. But it will fundamentally be about choices.

I hear what you are saying water. It`s a sad reflection on society. And parenting. But it will fundamentally be about choices.

Of course it is about choices.

But it takes a lot of good parenting, or a lot of bad experiences, to realize it is about choices.

So many people get stuck in their teenage mind, full of frustrations and unresolved conflicts. And then they pass it on to their children and everyone whom they affect in any way.

I find it immature to expect from a teenager to make a conscious, responsible choice about their sexuality.
Surely, they may *appear* responsible, but upon further inspection, you'll see that they are just repeating a certain pattern they haven't thought through themselves.

* I agree, and yes I think it is unrealistic to expect teenagers to make mature or informed choices. But lets say there is an unwanted pregnancy. How does this same lack of experience in the university of life impact on the "abortion or not" choice? Many woman who had abortions as youngsters have to deal with a lot of regret and guilt later on in life. Where does one point this finger? Does one even have to point a finger?

Is a zygote a human being? Yes. It has a complete set of human genes, and it is alive, so it is human.

There is no difference between a zygote and an single-cell ameba or a follicle of hair.

Does a zygote deserve to have all the rights of an adult human being, including the right not to be killed deliberately?

Only if we offer the same rights to a single-cell ameba and the follicle of hair. As well, there are two separate entities occupying a single body during pregnancy, both cannot have equal rights.

How many women do you know who are proud and happy of being female and able to conceive and bear children?

All of them, what's your point?

* I agree, and yes I think it is unrealistic to expect teenagers to make mature or informed choices. But lets say there is an unwanted pregnancy. How does this same lack of experience in the university of life impact on the "abortion or not" choice?

What do you mean? From whose perspective are you viewing the matter?


Many woman who had abortions as youngsters have to deal with a lot of regret and guilt later on in life.

We'd have to ask them why.
I know some, but they refuse to talk about it. They just go silent and say something to the effect of "Such is life".

Men, on the other hand, like to say that women are "just being hysterical and neurotic" about abortion, when it is just a piece of meat being cut out.


But it is really stupid to complain about abortions: If sex is so great, then why not pay that price for it?!
Or?


Where does one point this finger? Does one even have to point a finger?

Why would there have to be any pointing of fingers?
The issue is only, is that same course of action that lead to the unwanted pregnancy something to stay on and repeat, or not?

But that it is only women who have to pay the price of sex for pleasure should make you think about it.

Think what you would think and feel like, if you were a woman, and knew that you cannot afford a child, but would engage in sex?

You'd have to make peace in your mind that abortion is okay, and that you will have it if you conceive. Contraceptives are a gamble after all; about one half of all pregnancies occur in women who were using some kind of contraceptives.

I suppose if you teach people that sex for pleasure is okay, then you also have to teach women that abortion is okay. Otherwise, you are just a hypocrite, telling only one part of the story.

How many women do you know who are proud and happy of being female and able to conceive and bear children?

All of them, what's your point?

I don't know one woman, not even one, who would be proud and happy to be female and be able to conceive and bear children.

Some of them are very negative about it, and consider it a curse.
Most of them have very mixed emotions about it.

My point is that many women don't feel comfortable about being able to conceive. It is a source of ongoing fear, and often misery.

I don't know one woman, not even one, who would be proud and happy to be female and be able to conceive and bear children. My point is that many women don't feel comfortable about being able to conceive. It is a source of ongoing fear, and often misery.

That has probably more to do with the religious, backwards country in which you live. I've been there and wouldn't want to be female either.

Sheesh! Your Minister of Education tried to ban teaching evolution from schools.

God Himself, me, and all of the church people in the whole world put together could not possibly compare to your holier than thou hypocritical judgement.

I'm sorry, where was the hypocricy? You made an unfounded assertion that non-believers are the ones condoning abortion while condemning the christian god. I told you I do not condone abortion and pointed out how on the revers you come across as hypocritical by using an example. You can't even manage that - you just sling some brainless tripe at me without putting a moments thought into it. I can understand the bitterness, but at least put some effort into it.

When ironically, it's your lack of humility that keeps you so idiotic.

I'm being called idiotic by some delusional little girl who believes a cloud is going to fulfill her desire to bonk a rock star, (like every teens fantasy), and who's own parents think she has a brain tumour? Ehehe.

I don't know one woman, not even one, who would be proud and happy to be female and be able to conceive and bear children. My point is that many women don't feel comfortable about being able to conceive. It is a source of ongoing fear, and often misery.

That has probably more to do with the religious, backwards country in which you live. I've been there and wouldn't want to be female either.

Sheesh! Your Minister of Education tried to ban teaching evolution from schools.

? What country are you talking about?

Scientifically, there is no difference betwixt you and I and our zygote forms aside from our level of development.

Or an ameba, or a follicle of hair.

There is no right to murder given to parents or to anyone.

How many single-celled living creatures have you murdered?

Under your notion of poverty being an excuse for abortion, Abraham Lincoln would probably never have been born.

One could say the same about mass-murderers, serial killers, dictators, etc.

? What country are you talking about?

Didn't you say you were Serbian?

? What country are you talking about?

Didn't you say you were Serbian?

No.

Also, most of the women I spoke to were atheists. Girls who believed they must have sex, or their boyfriend will leave them -- and there is nothing worse than being alone. If abortion is the price to pay for being with someone -- so be it.

So, you just speak Serbian, but are not Serbian? What then?

Sorry, but I'm having sex, and I'm using contraception, and if it fails and she goes pregnant, she better abort or I'm outta there.

Such is real life.

The price of a man's love is the woman's willingness to have abortions.
Or face being single and unloved.

So, you just speak Serbian, but are not Serbian? What then?

I speak 4 languages fluently, bits of a few more, and am to learn more.
By nationality, I am Slovene.
Slovenia is a wonderfully Western country with all the Western values adopted.

Those are actually side issues. The main one is that some people wish that abortion were treated as yet another regular contraceptive method. Meaning that men would be completely absolved from any responsibility whatsoever.

The more such a view of abortion is encouraged, the more women are viewed as having intrinsically flawed bodies (since they can conceive, which, in the context of sex for pleasure, is a bad thing).
The more women will hate themselves for it.
And we get one half of the world's population hating themselves for what they are.
Potentially one half of the world's population being self-hating, or mindless and indifferent creatures with a slit between their legs.

How many women do you know who are proud and happy of being female and able to conceive and bear children?


this statement makes no sense at all. you are doing a lot of generalizing and a lot of assuming. just because you perceive things this way doesnt mean they are that way. as far as my experience goes, one of the travesties of the abortion debate in the United States is that the opinion of men who would potentially be one half of the decision making apparatus of a would-be abortion is completely disregarded by the feminists and liberal women campaigning for greater control over their own bodies.

I think the problem isnt that men dont want the responsibility of getting a woman pregnant (although some may indeed want that), its that womean want to free themselves from what they see as a harsh consequence of being a woman and not being able to live as freely as they want to in a culture prizing independence and freedom of action. some may see the right to abort as a symbol of being able to slip out from under the yoke of patriarchal control, and choose whether or not to be pregnant and alter the course of their lives in that significant way.

its much less a matter of viewing womens bodies as flawed because they can conceive (which i dont agree with at all) and more of a matter of convenience for women who view themselves as in control of their own destiny. freedom to abort furthers the cause of personal control over one's body and environment, it doesnt make someone less independent.

i dont buy your theory that abortion is bad because of societal brainwashing.

i think there wasn't anything wrong with it until the church came along and made it a sin to do anything pleasurable (like have consequence free sex in even a safe and responsible manner). sex as viewed through the lens of christianity is a filthy act and if not done out of necessity, begets consequences that the church fathers are all to eager to point to as repercussions of leading a life out of the path to god. well thats some serious brainwashing. abortion has been around as long if not longer than religion. do you really think its going away any time soon?

I think the problem isnt that men dont want the responsibility of getting a woman pregnant (although some may indeed want that), its that womean want to free themselves from what they see as a harsh consequence of being a woman and not being able to live as freely as they want to in a culture prizing independence and freedom of action.

Yes.


some may see the right to abort as a symbol of being able to slip out from under the yoke of patriarchal control, and choose whether or not to be pregnant and alter the course of their lives in that significant way.

How many women enjoy having abortions?
If abortion is a RIGHT, why aren't women all cheerful and glad about, massively running into abortion clinics?


its much less a matter of viewing womens bodies as flawed because they can conceive (which i dont agree with at all) and more of a matter of convenience for women who view themselves as in control of their own destiny.

True. But the thing is that sex has been socially postulated as the condition for romantic love.


freedom to abort furthers the cause of personal control over one's body and environment, it doesnt make someone less independent.

Of course. But at what cost.


i dont buy your theory that abortion is bad because of societal brainwashing.

If you were a woman and have had several abortions, you'd think differently.


i think there wasn't anything wrong with it until the church came along and made it a sin to do anything pleasurable (like have consequence free sex in even a safe and responsible manner). sex as viewed through the lens of christianity is a filthy act and if not done out of necessity, begets consequences that the church fathers are all to eager to point to as repercussions of leading a life out of the path to god. well thats some serious brainwashing.

No. Well, some Christian churches may espouse such a view, esp. the totalitarian patriarchal ones. But not Christianity as a whole.


abortion has been around as long if not longer than religion. do you really think its going away any time soon?

The question is whether is should be regarded as "yet another regular contraceptive method".


Think you were a woman, and your boyfriend would tell you "... so what if you get pregnant? You can always have an abortion. But I really want to have sex now. ... I can always go somewhere else. It's your choice."

Propagating abortion as a "free choice" has the side effect of women being extorted for sex. (See Kenny's example.)
It also encourages irresponsible behaviour in women themselves, taking their bodies and their health very lightly.

I'm sorry, where was the hypocricy? You made an unfounded assertion that non-believers are the ones condoning abortion while condemning the christian god. I told you I do not condone abortion and pointed out how on the revers you come across as hypocritical by using an example. You can't even manage that - you just sling some brainless tripe at me without putting a moments thought into it. I can understand the bitterness, but at least put some effort into it.



I'm being called idiotic by some delusional little girl who believes a cloud is going to fulfill her desire to bonk a rock star, (like every teens fantasy), and who's own parents think she has a brain tumour? Ehehe.

Yes you are an absolute moron...blinded by your own arrogance and hate. Did you forget what you said in your post? How about your last umpteen posts?

"...you're all as bad as each other..."

How about "we're all as bad as each other"? Because you are no better. Circumstances may differ from person to person, but let me assure you that you are most definitely just as rotten to the core as everyone else. So get the fuck over yourself.

"I condemn your God...I condemn you..."

Condemn your damned self. You're worse than any church person I've ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot.

You're an idiot because you think you know it all already. You're an idiot because you spend your time and energy pointing fingers at others when you could be looking in the mirror. You're an idiot because you allow yourself to live in fear and hate. I suppose since that is your condition, the only relief you get is to direct your bitterness towards others, hoping that they will then become as miserable as you are.

The more we realize that we're in no position to judge each other, the more we're able to help each other to do the right thing.

My guess is that you're no help to anyone.

Yes you are an absolute moron...blinded by your own arrogance and hate. Did you forget what you said in your post? How about your last umpteen posts?

"...you're all as bad as each other..."

How about "we're all as bad as each other"? Because you are no better. Circumstances may differ from person to person, but let me assure you that you are most definitely just as rotten to the core as everyone else. So get the fuck over yourself.

"I condemn your God...I condemn you..."

Condemn your damned self. You're worse than any church person I've ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot.

You're an idiot because you think you know it all already. You're an idiot because you spend your time and energy pointing fingers at others when you could be looking in the mirror. You're an idiot because you allow yourself to live in fear and hate. I suppose since that is your condition, the only relief you get is to direct your bitterness towards others, hoping that they will then become as miserable as you are.

The more we realize that we're in no position to judge each other, the more we're able to help each other to do the right thing.

My guess is that you're no help to anyone.


you know, ironically, you seem to sound a lot like all of the things you dont like about him. maybe you should just drop it before your hypocrisy is revealed so completely that even you cant deny it.

Propagating abortion as a "free choice" has the side effect of women being extorted for sex. (See Kenny's example.)

For your information, the girl I am with hates children as much as I do, therefor we use two methods of contraception (depo and condoms), if even after that she fell pregnant, damn right we expect to have the right to abort.

Sex is good, and being the intelligent creatures we are, we discovered free sex, I'm sorry if God finds that upsetting, but he made it all possible did he not? :p

Oh and she enjoys free sex as much as I do :D

god's an unpleasant individual. i think he has some kind of complex.

this is for you WATER


How many women enjoy having abortions?
If abortion is a RIGHT, why aren't women all cheerful and glad about, massively running into abortion clinics?

actually according to the national right to life website there were approximately 1,293,000 abortions performed in the US last year (2004). thats a pretty big number. i wouldnt say theyre running to abortion clinics, but not all women need to get an abortion, some use the birth control pill, some require that their partner use a condom, others employ the myriad other methods of birth control available over the counter, and still even others (to the chagrin of radical christian pharmacists everywhere) have been able to use the "morning after" pill to prevent a pregnancy. women arent running to abortion clinics because for the most part they see abortion as a last resort in the chain of ways to prevent pregnancy, not only is it a costly medical procedure that is certainly not preferrable to just taking a pill, but thanks to the religious right, having an abortion now carries the stigma of immense guilt and the possibility of being harrassed outside of planned parenthood by a crowd of holy-rolling-do-gooders who have nothing better to do than stand around with pitcures of dead babies and make a hard decision even harder for an unfortunate woman who just wants to take advantage of modern technology in a free society. in addition to this, some states (particularily in the south and midwest) have attempted to minimize the number of abortion clinics that operate in their state so that women who might get an abortion will be encouraged not to because of lack of access.

so there is the answer, it is often easier to prevent a pregnancy than to abort one. taking all of that into consideration, over one an a quarter million abortions a year seems like a pretty big number doesnt it? maybe they are running to the clinics in spite of it all.



True. But the thing is that sex has been socially postulated as the condition for romantic love.

yeah, so what? whats wrong with that? the other option is that sex becomes disassociated with love and we start fucking each other indiscriminantly like animals in heat. which situation would you prefer. i kind of like sex when its linked to a notion of romantic love.



Of course. But at what cost.

at no additional cost then we currently endure and have endured for 2005 years of history at the least. what you should be pondering is at what cost do we give up our freedom to control what we do to and with our own bodies. that to me is a far darker possibility than the opposite of it.




If you were a woman and have had several abortions, you'd think differently.

well if i was a woman who had had several abortions i'd probably be on my way to the drugstore to get some birth control because i would surely have realized by now (although i should have realized it sooner) that i am way too fertile to be having unprotected and irresponsible sex. unless i was a prostitute, in which case im sure my mind and self esteem would have been damaged beyond repair years ago and so i wouldnt be worried about it at all.



No. Well, some Christian churches may espouse such a view, esp. the totalitarian patriarchal ones. But not Christianity as a whole.

what sect condones premarital sex with multiple partners even if its all done within serially monogamous relationships? maybe the unitarians. the catholics dont. im pretty sure most of the evangelical protestant sects sure dont. they pretty much make up the majority of christians in the west.




The question is whether is should be regarded as "yet another regular contraceptive method".

of course it shouldnt. and i dont think theres a big danger of that. its different than all other forms of contraception in that it requires the termination of a pregnancy that already exists and is being brought to term. even without the influence of religious ideology, this act will always represent a moral entanglement for some people, thats in its nature. just because its available doesnt mean its going to make it preferable.

Think you were a woman, and your boyfriend would tell you "... so what if you get pregnant? You can always have an abortion. But I really want to have sex now. ... I can always go somewhere else. It's your choice."

first of all, im not a woman, so lets not pretend that i know how to think like one. that being said, i have had sex with 11 women in my life, and never ever even once have i said to one of them, who cares if you get pregnant, you can always get an abortion. as a matter of fact if i think its a situation that will have a negative outcome, i choose not to have sex because i can control myself. not only that but i dont really know anyone that i think would say something like that to a woman either. maybe whats really at issue here is that a woman should know better than to have sex with a guy who is that selfish and insensitive, and if they consent anyway, its their own mess, having known what an asshole the guy is and how he is of a mindset that denegrates women and their role in sexual relationships. stupidity is not an excuse. if the woman consents to sex with a man that says that, then she is agreeing with his appraisal of the situation, if not in spirit, through her physical action. the words "i'll go have sex with someone else" arent a gun to a womans head, they are the opportunity to choose a course of action. if you make the wrong choice and blame someone else, you are just running away from the truth that you didnt have enough fortitude to stand up for yourself.


Propagating abortion as a "free choice" has the side effect of women being extorted for sex. (See Kenny's example.)
It also encourages irresponsible behaviour in women themselves, taking their bodies and their health very lightly.

i just dont think so. people who are irresponsible are irresponsible no matter how much you want them not to be or put precautions in place so that they dont do harm to themselves. for an example see everyone who smokes cigarettes despite overwhelming evidence that they cause cancer and heart disease. see everyone who doesnt wear a seatbelt when they drive their car (even though in many places its the law), see everyone who speeds, does heroin, has unprotected sex in any african nation, skydives, and commits suicide. some people just cant cope with being given free choice to begin with. they are, for the most part, in the minority. so you would rather punish us all for the possible misguided actions of a few?

no thank you.

you know, ironically, you seem to sound a lot like all of the things you dont like about him. maybe you should just drop it before your hypocrisy is revealed so completely that even you cant deny it.


I don't claim to be any better...that's the difference.

I came out here and shared a very personal experience in an extremely honest way, and his response is to say "I condemn you". You will never in a million fucking years here me say that to anyone. Fuck condemnation...it's good for nothing. And so like I said, Snake can take his good for nothing condemnation and shove it up his ass. :)

you're condemning him in deed if not in words.

Yes you are an absolute moron...blinded by your own arrogance and hate. Did you forget what you said in your post? How about your last umpteen posts?

"...you're all as bad as each other..."

How about "we're all as bad as each other"? Because you are no better. Circumstances may differ from person to person, but let me assure you that you are most definitely just as rotten to the core as everyone else. So get the fuck over yourself.

"I condemn your God...I condemn you..."

Condemn your damned self. You're worse than any church person I've ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot.

You're an idiot because you think you know it all already. You're an idiot because you spend your time and energy pointing fingers at others when you could be looking in the mirror. You're an idiot because you allow yourself to live in fear and hate. I suppose since that is your condition, the only relief you get is to direct your bitterness towards others, hoping that they will then become as miserable as you are.

The more we realize that we're in no position to judge each other, the more we're able to help each other to do the right thing.

My guess is that you're no help to anyone.

am i missing something here? did you or did you not pass judgement upon that guy's personality because of his posts on a message board? i mean that's what it looks like to me. whats amazing about it is that the whole time youre basically saying "i cant believe you would judge me like that" and then right afterward youre saying "you are a total moron and worse than what you judged me to be". so really what youre doing is telling him he's an asshole for thinking that you are one. right? right. amazzzzzzing how you rationalized that.

(Q):

Or an ameba, or a follicle of hair.

Incorrect. A zygote (when refering to a human zygote which we are) is a human being in its first stage of develoment, nothing at all like an amoeba or follicle of hair.

How many single-celled living creatures have you murdered?

Murder can only be committed betwixt humans and other humans. That is part of the definition.

One could say the same about mass-murderers, serial killers, dictators, etc.

Yes, but just pointing out that it is impossible to determine what that person shall aspire to, be it good or ill.

How's that exactly? By paraphrasing what he just said to me, and in response telling him to f off? No, that's not condemnation, that's observation and a logical and appropriate response.

The difference between conviction and condemnation is the "you're a bad person, or I'm better than you are" spin. Conviction is honest observation according to evidence and law. The Holy Spirit convicts me all the time.

Maybe Snake should offer up some different evidence if he doesn't want to be called out on being holier than thou...

"you're all as bad"
"I condemn you..."

What do you want me to say to that?

Fuck you, you holier than thou p.o.s....that's what I say to that. I mean, who in the hell does he think he is?

You know, he very well could have come out here and offered up something honestly and without comdemning anyone.

One thing I can say for sure is that no one will ever know how they really feel about abortion until they have one.

you know, here's another stupid point. i know how i feel about abortion because i can never have one. but a man gets a woman pregnant and so should be allowed at least some say in the decision to keep or abort a potential child. so i dont think you know what youre talking about, i know how i feel about being in a car accident before im in one, i know how i would feel about shooting an elephant before i do it. what you mean is that you dont know whether you will regret the decision or not until after youve made it. well, welcome to the real world.

How's that exactly? By paraphrasing what he just said to me, and in response telling him to f off? No, that's not condemnation, that's observation and a logical and appropriate response.

you're in denial.

Ok, then, you will never know what it's like to have your baby aborted until you do. That is what I meant by what I said, I just didn't say it very well, and if you had read on in the thread you would have surely been able to deduct that.

You don't know what it feels like to be in a car accident until you're in one, and you don't know what it feels like to shoot an elephant until you shoot one. And when I say "feels like", I mean dealing with the entire experience, what leads up to it, and the consequences of it, not just some temporary physical sensation that's attribtuted to it.

And I think that "it's a woman's right to choose" is bullshit. It should be both a man and a woman's right to choose. I think that what I did, by not disclosing the pregancy to the father, and having an abortion without his knowledge or input, was horribly selfish and wrong. And then to tell him about it afterwards? Good God, why? Why would I do that to him? What I did was horrible...the whole thing...just pathetic and horrifying.

And I am not in denial. I don't think that I'm any better of a person than Snake is.

the point i was making is this. say what you mean. mean what you say. thats it.

Kenny,


Good for you.



* * *


charles cure,



True. But the thing is that sex has been socially postulated as the condition for romantic love.

yeah, so what? whats wrong with that?

Along with it, the willingness to abort has also been postulated as the condition for romantic love. Is that fair, is that alright?


the other option is that sex becomes disassociated with love and we start fucking each other indiscriminantly like animals in heat.

Actually, this is what it often is like anyway.


i kind of like sex when its linked to a notion of romantic love.

Whatever, as long as you are not the one harming your health with pills or abortions, right?


at no additional cost then we currently endure and have endured for 2005 years of history at the least. what you should be pondering is at what cost do we give up our freedom to control what we do to and with our own bodies. that to me is a far darker possibility than the opposite of it.

If chasing fleeting pleasures is so important to you, then do so.


well if i was a woman who had had several abortions i'd probably be on my way to the drugstore to get some birth control because i would surely have realized by now (although i should have realized it sooner) that i am way too fertile to be having unprotected and irresponsible sex. unless i was a prostitute, in which case im sure my mind and self esteem would have been damaged beyond repair years ago and so i wouldnt be worried about it at all.

I think the preferred kind of woman these days in the modern world is the one with a mind and self-esteem damaged beyond repair years ago.
Ruin the woman, so she won't know what is happening to her ...


what sect condones premarital sex with multiple partners even if its all done within serially monogamous relationships? maybe the unitarians. the catholics dont. im pretty sure most of the evangelical protestant sects sure dont. they pretty much make up the majority of christians in the west.

You seem to be forgetting that it is people who have sex, not religious doctrines.
While the doctrine may say one thing, the people who (supposedly) adhere to it, will freely do something else.
From an inside Christians source, I learned that about 70 percent of all Christians have had premarital sex. In effect, they aren't any different from non-Christians.


The question is whether is should be regarded as "yet another regular contraceptive method".

of course it shouldnt. and i dont think theres a big danger of that.

And this is where you are wrong.
One of my grandmothers, she and her husband both devout Catholics, regularly had abortions. So many, she eventually got cancer which spread to her other organs. She refused operation and just wanted to die ...
The Catholic church officially is against contraceptives, but on an everyday life basis, it is not. Europe is notorius for Catholic monasteries where monks and nuns regularly performed abortions.


first of all, im not a woman, so lets not pretend that i know how to think like one. that being said, i have had sex with 11 women in my life, and never ever even once have i said to one of them, who cares if you get pregnant, you can always get an abortion. as a matter of fact if i think its a situation that will have a negative outcome, i choose not to have sex because i can control myself. not only that but i dont really know anyone that i think would say something like that to a woman either.

There are very polite ways to say such things.
Some men also take the "gentleman's way" and postopone making up their mind to the last, and then say they will "support the woman in her choice".


maybe whats really at issue here is that a woman should know better than to have sex with a guy who is that selfish and insensitive,

EXACTLY.
But the choice a woman in such a situation has to make is this: "Am I willing to risk and be alone, possibly for the rest of my life? Can I hope to find someone better, or do I have to settle for this man?"


and if they consent anyway, its their own mess, having known what an asshole the guy is and how he is of a mindset that denegrates women and their role in sexual relationships. stupidity is not an excuse. if the woman consents to sex with a man that says that, then she is agreeing with his appraisal of the situation, if not in spirit, through her physical action. the words "i'll go have sex with someone else" arent a gun to a womans head, they are the opportunity to choose a course of action. if you make the wrong choice and blame someone else, you are just running away from the truth that you didnt have enough fortitude to stand up for yourself.

Standing up for yourself means to make yourself unpopular with people, one is risking isolation.
How are girls to be taught that they shoud stand up for themselves?


Propagating abortion as a "free choice" has the side effect of women being extorted for sex. (See Kenny's example.)
It also encourages irresponsible behaviour in women themselves, taking their bodies and their health very lightly.

i just dont think so. people who are irresponsible are irresponsible no matter how much you want them not to be or put precautions in place so that they dont do harm to themselves.

True. The question is what is the responsibility of society, of all people. Are we to encourage a social environment where irresponsibility is allowed to thrive?


so you would rather punish us all for the possible misguided actions of a few?

What do you mean?
I am not against abortion. I am against irresponsible, exploitative and otherwise harmful attitudes and actions.

The truth is that as soon as people are given a freedom, they tend to abuse it. In this, negative behavioral patterns evolve, and those that were meant to be protected by that freedom, in fact fall short.

but a man gets a woman pregnant and so should be allowed at least some say in the decision to keep or abort a potential child.

Do you know any man who wants to have any say in this?
Do you know any man in a casual romantic relationship who would want to keep the child?

Do you know any man who wants to have any say in this?
Do you know any man in a casual romantic relationship who would want to keep the child?


i would want a say in it, and as it stands right now, although im not in the situation, i know the woman that i am dating would want an abortion, and i dont think i would want her to have one. so yeah i guess i do know someone then. you assume too much.

i would want a say in it, and as it stands right now, although im not in the situation, i know the woman that i am dating would want an abortion, and i dont think i would want her to have one. so yeah i guess i do know someone then.

How serious are the two of you about each other?
If she kept the child -- would you then move together or even marry -- for the sake of the child?!


you assume too much.

I'm not assuming, just asking.
I doubt that if a relationship is just casual, it is wise to keep the child. If the partners aren't sure whether they want a life together or not, they better not have children.

And leaving such important decisions -- like living together and having children -- to the fluke of coincidence (if the contraceptives fail), is irresponsible.
Or do you think it is wise to put off deciding about living together and having children until contraceptives fail?

blinded by your own arrogance and hate.

Hate is not blind, it's open and free. I happily and openly hate the people that I hate. No blindness needed or involved.

How about "we're all as bad as each other"? Because you are no better.

I never implied I was. You were having a pop at non-believers, and claiming them to be pro abortion. I said you're all as bad as each other, (yes I am a non-believer- although not pro abortion). I then pointed out the reverse of your argument that we're all hypocrites by showing just how you religious folk are also hypocrites, and if you're going to label non-believers as hypocrites, you might aswell point it out to yourself while you're there.

Thank you, have a nice day.

but let me assure you that you are most definitely just as rotten to the core as everyone else.

I'm not perfect if that's what you mean.. Am I supposed to be?

So get the fuck over yourself.

Why? I like myself the way I am.. Your personal opinions are entirely inconsequential However.....

You're worse than any church person I've ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot.

Woah.. why the needless insult to these church people that aren't even here to defend themselves? Is that not the condemnation you're seemingly condemning?

You obviously consider yourself as better than them, and as I am below them, you consider yourself better than me too... Why don't you get the fuck over yourself?

You're an idiot because you think you know it all already.

Wtf? You're the one claiming there's some loving big space daddy and you know where you're going when you're dead and so on and so forth.. It would seem you think you know it all. I'm still in the "would like some evidence please" phase, while you didn't even need any to be able to give the "absolute truth" (tm) answer.

What I do know is that you're two sandwiches short of a picnic. I get paid a lot of money to make that call.

You're an idiot because you spend your time and energy pointing fingers at others when you could be looking in the mirror.

If you spent some time going through forum history you will see that I have, on occasion, happily stated that I can be rude, abrupt, cold, sometimes overly harsh and many other similar things that I have no personal issues with. As for pointing fingers.. It wasn't me, Lori - it was you. You made the statement that us non christians condemn your god while being pro abortion. You then went on to call them hypocrites. Is that not finger pointing Lori? Perhaps, as this is relevant, we should get back to the word "hypocrite"?

Having made that statement, I then went on to explain that I am not pro abortion and that christians and religious people are just as hypocritical as everyone else. I put everyone in the same barrel, whereas you specifically pointed your finger at one group of people. You continually do it aswell.. Just a few sentences ago you pointed some massive finger at everyone that goes to church.

You're an idiot because you allow yourself to live in fear and hate.

I do not actually fear that much. I must admit I dread cancer, I'm not too fond of the existence of pubic lice and the possibility that there's a banjo playing werewolf in the garden sends the shits up my spine - but all in all I live pretty much without fear being present. On the other hand a christian must live with fear - so sayeth god a couple of hundred times in the bible.

As for hate.. sure, none of us live with a total absence of hate. I for instance absolutely detest coffee ice cream. Hell, we could look at god himself who is also not absent of hatred. We know from god's good book that the big cheese detests poofters, detests fortune tellers, dogs and anyone who hasn't chopped the end of their penis off. He makes it totally clear too.. One such example:

"You must not worship the lord your god in their way, because in worshipping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the lord hates".

See, even god hates - and being made in his image, it's only natural that I would hate too. As a result of that I hate coffee ice cream, TV programmes like Big Brother and religious folk.

the only relief you get is to direct your bitterness towards others, hoping that they will then become as miserable as you are.

That would be quite a cool statement if you didn't fuck up then ending. I'm an extremely happy man in want of nothing. I found and have my 'rock star', I live comfortably and I have good sex daily. Aside from those, I have my daughter - and that makes me happier than anyone could ever be.

I suppose the way forward is to go back to the source and find out where such bitterness has come from. In this particular thread I do believe it stemmed from your bitter comments regarding non-christians/believers and how they're hypocrites. I would say in this instance my bitterness is justified. How about yours? How about that bitterness towards non believers, and to church goers?

The more we realize that we're in no position to judge each other, the more we're able to help each other to do the right thing.

While it's a very nice sentence, it doesn't really sound as good as it could if it hadn't have come directly after an entire post of you judging me. Lol.

My guess is that you're no help to anyone.


Ah the worthlessness of guesses.

--------

Maybe Snake should offer up some different evidence if he doesn't want to be called out on being holier than thou...

Oooh, Mrs. Guess woman now asks for evidence. Quite amusing really, however - you will find I did just that. I provided evidence in support of my counter statement to your assertion that non believers are hypocrites and pro abortion. You can call me anything you want, it doesn't in any way change anything.

Fuck you, you holier than thou p.o.s....

Without your brain being at home, it would feel like rape - so no thank you. Call me once you've stopped talking to cloud fairies.

I mean, who in the hell does he think he is?

I thought we'd gone past the formal introductions? Do I for some reason have less right to voice my opinions, concerns and beliefs than you do? Hopefully that should answer your question.

You know, he very well could have come out here and offered up something honestly and without comdemning anyone.

I did offer up something honestly - in rebuttal to your assertions that non christians/believers were hypocrites and pro abortion. It seems you just chose to ignore it.

WATER





Along with it, the willingness to abort has also been postulated as the condition for romantic love. Is that fair, is that alright?

i disagree with that. the ability to abort isn't the only condition that allows for people to have sex freely and without fear of pregnancy. the problem here is that you are acting as though abortion would or has somehow become the sole or preferrable means of birth control, and i think thats a wrong assumption. sex isnt a condition of romantic love either, in the way that the word condition in this context is being used in the same way that the word symptom is used in relation to a disease. sex between two people (in its ideal state) is meant to be an EXPRESSION of romantic love. and in that way it is unrelated to abortion.




Actually, this is what it often is like anyway.

it is sometimes like that, but somewhere deep down the root of the act is still tied (if even on a subconsious level) to the idea of love. people, for example dont often go out of their way to have sex with people they hate (at least at the time of their coupling). animals have no concept of emotional attachment at all in terms of sex. theirs is sex for propagation of the species only. humanity, as far as we know, being the only species on the planet that has sex for its own pleasure, must have a rationale for the sexual act that does not result in reproductive success. that rational is love, or at least mutual like.


Whatever, as long as you are not the one harming your health with pills or abortions, right?

i would take a male version of the birth control pill,or use a condom, or have a vasectomy if i thought i didnt want to father any children in the future. my father and four of his friends had vasectomies at around the same time about 5 years ago. or have you conveniently forgotten that there are measures that men can and do take to prevent unwanted pregnancy as well, once again your assumptions are getting in the way of your point.



If chasing fleeting pleasures is so important to you, then do so.

everybody chases fleeting pleasures. it just so happens that sexual pleasure is only one of many.



I think the preferred kind of woman these days in the modern world is the one with a mind and self-esteem damaged beyond repair years ago.
Ruin the woman, so she won't know what is happening to her ...

it is possible that you have a worse opinion of women than anyone i have ever met, you portray them as emotionally fragile, incapable of independent thought and action, and prisoners of a conspiratorial male heirarchy. while i will acknowledge that there is still a great divide between the sexes in many areas of life, i do not share your opinion that men prefer women ruined in body mind and spirit. in fact i know a few women who are far more successful than their husbands in all the ways that our society measures success, and they appreciate it more because they have worked harder for it perhaps, but they dont resent men because of it either. my grandmother, for example is a multi-millionaire president of a business consulting firm who was a full -time mother while she went to college and got her masters degree. her mother was the editor in chief of a newspaper in a small city in upstate new york during the 1920's to the 1950's. both of them, having grown up in an arguably far more oppressive time for women managed to thrive and succeed without becoming soulless husks with shattered egos and self-loathing tendencies. what makes them so different than women today? is it that they were superhuman, or did they simply have the will to succeed where others did not? maybe the reason modern women have become so useless in your version of society is because they expect that you are just born with perfect self esteem and a beautiful complicated mind and utterly deserving of an ideal life. this is not so, not for women, not for anybody.


You seem to be forgetting that it is people who have sex, not religious doctrines.
While the doctrine may say one thing, the people who (supposedly) adhere to it, will freely do something else.
From an inside Christians source, I learned that about 70 percent of all Christians have had premarital sex. In effect, they aren't any different from non-Christians.

but we were talking about christians and their outward attitudes toward sex, which often do not reflect the moral attitudes that they apply to their own life and behavior. and are you also forgetting that people who consistently violate the rules and precepts of their religion arent usually good representatives of it? i mean what good would it be for me to say, yeah i believe in jesus and god and stuff, but who cares what he said, in the end i'll just do what i want and repent on my deathbed. doenst that sort of nullify my belief in any of the actual values of the religion. it becomes a nominal allegiance only. so why even bother?




And this is where you are wrong.
One of my grandmothers, she and her husband both devout Catholics, regularly had abortions. So many, she eventually got cancer which spread to her other organs. She refused operation and just wanted to die ...
The Catholic church officially is against contraceptives, but on an everyday life basis, it is not. Europe is notorius for Catholic monasteries where monks and nuns regularly performed abortions.

i'm going to go out on a limb here and say that birth control was not as readily available to your grandmother as it is to most young women today. and in addition to that, since she was catholic, that may have precluded her from using it anyway (although it didnt seem to stop her from aborting) so she seems to have been in a situation where she got to a point (repeatedly) where she found abortion to be her only choice for whatever reason. and i dont think that abortions cause cancer. actually,today, for a woman the procedure is statistically safer than having your tonsils removed. i dont really think youre right here.


There are very polite ways to say such things.
Some men also take the "gentleman's way" and postopone making up their mind to the last, and then say they will "support the woman in her choice".

just because you say something politely doesnt make it mean something different. maybe if its a concern for a woman she should attempt to ferret out her partners opinion on the subject before she finds herself in a situation where she needs to make an uncomfortable choice. or maybe she should just take the birth control pill and require her partner to use a condom so that she doesnt have to care what he thinks about it. the problem is when people get caught up in the moment and dont think of the consequences of their actions. thats a problem that crosses all racial, ethnic, and gender boundaries and is not restricted to sexual politics.



EXACTLY.
But the choice a woman in such a situation has to make is this: "Am I willing to risk and be alone, possibly for the rest of my life? Can I hope to find someone better, or do I have to settle for this man?"

if you are a person who settles for something they dont want instead of gritting your teeth and working hard to get the thing you do want, then no one can help you because youre already lost. there are plenty of men in the world (literally billions) i guarantee any woman can find at least one that she deems acceptable to have a relationship with if she tries hard enough. if shes too fragile to deal with being alone during that process, how is that anyone elses fault but her own?


Standing up for yourself means to make yourself unpopular with people, one is risking isolation.
How are girls to be taught that they shoud stand up for themselves?

in the same way that everyone else is taught to stand up for themselves. know your enemy, understand yourself. be prepared to take the unpopular road that leads to self-actualization and strong character, or back down and submit. those are the choices that are laid out for everyone in the civilized world. i dont see how women need to react to the variables any differently than men do.


True. The question is what is the responsibility of society, of all people. Are we to encourage a social environment where irresponsibility is allowed to thrive?

we already discourage irresponsibility as a society, through our system of laws and punishments. anyone whose irresponsible actions negatively effect other people in the innocent pursuit of their daily lives is subject to sanction under the law. there are injustices, of course, but people every day are working to correct them. a responsible society is by necessity made up of responsible people. for my part in it, all i may do is live my life according to my standards of responsibility, i cant physically force people to be more responsible, but i can try to encourage it at every turn, which for the most part our society does. you cannot however legislate standards of responsibility that are dictated to us out of a fantasy novel based on an unprovable source of ultimate authority, which is what religion attempts to do using the bible as its proof for establishing a standard of behavior.



What do you mean?
I am not against abortion. I am against irresponsible, exploitative and otherwise harmful attitudes and actions.

i think what i mean is that you assume certain forces to be at work as motivating factors behind these irresponsible, exploitative and harmful attitudes and actions. i feel as though you have oversimplified the issue greatly. it is a complex set of attitudes, experiences, and reactions that make a person behave in the way they do, not just the solitary influence of one opinion on one issue.

The truth is that as soon as people are given a freedom, they tend to abuse it. In this, negative behavioral patterns evolve, and those that were meant to be protected by that freedom, in fact fall short.

theres another of your faulty assumptions at work. no one gives people freedom, people are free by their intrinsic nature. free will and control of your own actions are the outward manifestations of freedom. the ability to choose is the consequence of freedom. when people are given power over the freedom and choices of others, they abuse it. freedom is just and desireable, power corrupts. power over yourself and your actions is by its very definition freedom. power over others is a restriction of freedom.
freedom does not act as a shield against the improper actions and abuses of power by others. what freedom does is allow you to choose whether or not you act to prevent the abuse or react to it when it occurs. freedom allows you to choose your actions. not to choose the actions of others.

How serious are the two of you about each other?
If she kept the child -- would you then move together or even marry -- for the sake of the child?!




I'm not assuming, just asking.
I doubt that if a relationship is just casual, it is wise to keep the child. If the partners aren't sure whether they want a life together or not, they better not have children.

And leaving such important decisions -- like living together and having children -- to the fluke of coincidence (if the contraceptives fail), is irresponsible.
Or do you think it is wise to put off deciding about living together and having children until contraceptives fail?

we already live together. but the relationship is not institutionalized in the way that a marriage is. in fact we have not dated for that long, maybe about a year. however, if something unexpected were to happen, i have enough confidence in my and her ability to make the right decision about it that i would do so without any regrets whatsoever.

Along with it, the willingness to abort has also been postulated as the condition for romantic love. Is that fair, is that alright?

i disagree with that. the ability to abort isn't the only condition that allows for people to have sex freely and without fear of pregnancy.

How is it not? If children are not wanted, and no contraceptive is 100% safe, then pregnancy is possible, and with it, abortion required, in said situation.


the problem here is that you are acting as though abortion would or has somehow become the sole or preferrable means of birth control, and i think thats a wrong assumption.

It is not a wrong assumption, I only thought things through.
If children are not wanted, and no contraceptive is 100% safe, then pregnancy is possible, and with it, abortion required, in said situation.
It is as simple as that.


sex isnt a condition of romantic love either, in the way that the word condition in this context is being used in the same way that the word symptom is used in relation to a disease. sex between two people (in its ideal state) is meant to be an EXPRESSION of romantic love. and in that way it is unrelated to abortion.

So the possible negative consequences of sex ... have nothing to do with it?


i would take a male version of the birth control pill,or use a condom, or have a vasectomy if i thought i didnt want to father any children in the future. my father and four of his friends had vasectomies at around the same time about 5 years ago. or have you conveniently forgotten that there are measures that men can and do take to prevent unwanted pregnancy as well, once again your assumptions are getting in the way of your point.

I have not forgotten about what men could do.
But most of them don't do anything, and consider it an infringement on their freedom and body.


If chasing fleeting pleasures is so important to you, then do so.

everybody chases fleeting pleasures.

Not everyone.


it is possible that you have a worse opinion of women than anyone i have ever met, you portray them as emotionally fragile, incapable of independent thought and action, and prisoners of a conspiratorial male heirarchy.

I don't portray them that way. I am saying what the preferred kind of woman seems to be, esp. in the West.

What man wants a strong woman?
What man wants a woman who also says no sometimes?


but we were talking about christians and their outward attitudes toward sex, which often do not reflect the moral attitudes that they apply to their own life and behavior. and are you also forgetting that people who consistently violate the rules and precepts of their religion arent usually good representatives of it? i mean what good would it be for me to say, yeah i believe in jesus and god and stuff, but who cares what he said, in the end i'll just do what i want and repent on my deathbed. doenst that sort of nullify my belief in any of the actual values of the religion. it becomes a nominal allegiance only. so why even bother?

What is your point?


i'm going to go out on a limb here and say that birth control was not as readily available to your grandmother as it is to most young women today. and in addition to that, since she was catholic, that may have precluded her from using it anyway (although it didnt seem to stop her from aborting) so she seems to have been in a situation where she got to a point (repeatedly) where she found abortion to be her only choice for whatever reason.

Her husband just did