...what do you say.??? "Sen. Marco Rubio said Saturday that he doesn’t believe a pregnant woman infected with the Zika virus should have the right to an abortion — even if she had reason to believe the child would be born with severe microcephaly." http://www.politico.com/states/flor...o-no-abortions-for-zika-infected-women-104555
I'm with Sarah Palin on this. I would council for life, but think the government should stay the hell out of women's bodies. We've had thousands of years of population increase, and are now experiencing decreases in most industrialized "modern" countries. It would seem that women's insecurity, birth control, and abortion are key players in this. The question obtains: Are these just natural population trends playing out? (collective unconscious and all that) I would think that there is a natural balance that should stabilize the world population. Meanwhile Rubio sux.
Rubio sux, definitely. As do all those self-righteous bullies through the ages who don't have the babies, don't care for the children and don't take responsibility for the welfare of children they directly and indirectly cause. Forbidding stuff is easy. Living with the consequences is hard.
A unique sperm joins a unique egg and produces a unique life of which we know very little at that stage of development. If you abort, are you aborting a rare individual who could make of this shared co-evolutionary biom a better place? Or, just another of the average? Or something best discarded? Not knowing is not the best place to start a terminal action. I would rather wait and see. Also-----------NOT MY DECISION. Not knowing(the child nor the potential mother) also means that I would not impose my will founded in ignorance on another fellow human being.
When you said "I would rather wait and see"... what is it you woud wait to see befor startin a terminal action.???
Perhaps Meanwhile I keep correcting your typos. (on a personal note I've known 3 women who had had abortions------all 3 regretted it---2 remained childless---I ain't sure about the third---does that mean that a broader extrapolation to the entire population would be justified?)
That rather depends on the woman involved. Her choice, and her's alone. I would not poke my nose in where it doesn't belong.
Other than council for life::: "A unique sperm joins a unique egg and produces a unique life of which we know very little at that stage of development. If you abort, are you aborting a rare individual who could make of this shared co-evolutionary biom a better place? Or, just another of the average? Or something best discarded? Not knowing is not the best place to start a terminal action. I would rather wait and see."
If I were to council for life ---that means on a personal level---then I become obligated to help with that life. Free babysitting, etc... It cannot be just words. A hollow shell is a thing that encapsulates nothing. I ain't no politician, words still have meaning for me. .........................
On the whole, I would prefer to avoid abortions, too. I'm a big fan of well-informed, cheap, effective, readily-available contraception, and a huge fan of nobody forcing or coercing or manipulating anybody into sex they don't engage in knowingly, willingly and happily, so that the need for abortion never comes up. I would prefer conceiving only planned, wanted, loved children. I would prefer a society that takes care of all its citizens, old and new. But the way things currently stand, abortion is sometimes the less bad alternative.
We know it isn't a human being yet. It's a single cell. We also know that it is inside the body of an actual human being. Not really - she favors allowing considerable governmental interference, by law, at the whim of the local voter. She also favors arranging the composition of the Supreme Court to abet it.
Woud you still tell her you'r council-for-life ideas (might screw up the world if she chooses abortion) after she just told you that she was pregnant and had decided on an abortion.???
Her body her choice. Really depends on the woman. If she solicited my advice(seems likely if she confided her choice to me), then I would voice my opinion. I would not want to "guilt trip her" (that decision is traumatic enough all by it's self) so would choose my words carefully. Not screw up the world---we cannot know this. She will make a choice that she will have to live with. Her life, her choice. Who is the father, has he been informed, does he support her decision? Sarah is pro life, and pro states rights which could indicate, or lead to a conflict. Abortion should never be illegal. When it was, bad things happened. Prohibition never works, and always encourages criminal activity. Would any sane compassionate person sic a criminal or a dog on a woman wanting to abort? Better done in a hospital in case of complications. There are also horror stories of botched abortions done in poorly equipped and staffed abortion clinics which are not well regulated. Pre-legal abortion were sometimes done as d and c -----one woman I knew had one done as an abortion when she was 16 but it was botched and scarred her uterine wall. Ergo her regret all she had after that were miscarriages. The choice is not risk free, neither medically nor psychologically. Raising children well ain't easy nor cheap.
So you woudnt guilt trip a woman who confided her choice an asked you'r advice... but under what circumstances woud you ask a woman this queston::: "If you abort, are you aborting a rare individual who could make of this shared co-evolutionary biom a better place?" I say its the womans choice... an she dont need to name the father... tell him or inquire about his opinion.!!! Botom line... "Her life, her choice".!!!
