Social and cultural upheaval

Teacher Terry said:
Abortion is a medical decision between a woman and her doctor period end of discussion. Making it illegal is another way for men to control women. No one has the right to tell a woman what she has to do with her body.
Click to expand...
She also has the right to use contraceptives and avoid the issue in the first place, but many won't bother. Yes, you will dwell on the rape or medical necessity abortions and such, but they are only a small percentage of them. The "control" factor being used only one sided to use for argument. Sad, that.
 

gruntlabor said:
By legalizing an unsafe drug.
Click to expand...

But it's a very safe drug. There isn't a drug on the market that is 100% safe, as I've said, even Aspirin. Heck, water isn't 100% safe, you can drown, or even die by drinking too much (look up the Ashley Summers story, she was from Indiana). Do you believe only a small number of people who take the drug have side effects, or do you think it's a huge problem?

gruntlabor said:
No, I do not believe congress is qualified to answer so deep a philosophical question as abortion. They should leave the question alone. Which would empower the mother to make the decision? Or not? I don't know. As long as government stays out of it.
Click to expand...

I see. I am pro-life, I want all pregnancies to end in the healthy, happy, birth of a child that is nurtured, cared for, and loved. Which is why I'm actually pro-choice.
 
gruntlabor said:
Indeed she did NOT respect the woman's right to choose. Under the pretext of medical care the patient was admitted to the clinic and counseled with a clear bias toward an abortion. Sanger's good works should have ended with her own body.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's where I have to say, context is everything. You have to remember, when she was campaigning, there was a law against contraception. As I said, she watched her mother die, largely through an unhealthy - what can you call it - regime of pregnancy. Women were, in effect, forced to give birth if they became pregnant. This is what she was fighting against, she wanted choice. In that context, the only choice that was missing from law was the choice to NOT have the child. So in the context of the times - yes, he clinics represented the alternative of the social norm.

If her works had stayed with her own body, then societal change may not have come, and who knows where we would be now. Personally, I think you're being very harsh, an opinion to which you're very much entitled. I'd just say that when change happens, it's often done fighting one extreme with another. Over time, if the change is implemented, things smooth out.
 

Blaze Duskdreamer said:
Margaret Sanger was an eugenicist and her motive was actually to decrease the black race. So stated in her own writings. I used to believe she was a hero - then I read her writings. I suggest you do so. She wanted this earth rid of non-whites, especially blacks.
Click to expand...

I won't claim to have read all her writings, nor do I want this thread to be a thread all about her works. I'll link to an article though - one of many - that gives context to her beliefs. She lived in different times, and the language was different, and some of the ideas espoused at the time are alien to us now. But she did have the support of Martin Luther King, for example. Still, I'll simply link to an article, and let those interested enough to read it for themselves. As I say, it's only one of many.

I also don't know if I'd use the word "hero", but she did bring about incredibly important change during a time when blacks were still prevented from voting, despite an earlier constitutional change. Again, context is important I think.

What Margaret Sanger Really Said About Eugenics and Race
 
Blaze Duskdreamer said:
It doesn't give the unborn a choice. Murder is wrong. Plain and simple and an unborn fetus is a growing human no matter how ardently it is denied.

Yes, it's tragic for rape victims but I daresay the rape itself causes mental health issues that are sometimes blamed on having to carry rapist's baby and sometimes having to carry baby adds to those but that alone does not justify infanticide. It ain't the baby's fault and she can give the baby up for adoption.

SCOTUS was chicken sh*t returning it to the States and shame on them for being such cowards. It should not be up to any state to decide if an innocent baby has the right to live or die.

Mental health services should be more available to victims of rape and incest but they should not be allowed to murder the baby. I also daresay there are times when guilt over having murdered their child also exacerbates their mental health issues and trauma.
Click to expand...

It's an emotive subject. I can only speak for myself - but depending on the stage of pregnancy, an unborn child is not a person. As such, it's not murder. An unborn fetus may have the potential to be fully a human being, but that's a different thing.

I won't comment on your views about rape victims. I find them very insensitive, and inflammatory.

Fundamentally, I do not think abortion is murder. People in need of Mental Health Services can't get it, so how are pregnant women supposed to? Who is going to pay for it? And what kind of mental health service is going to solve the ills of having to look into their rapists eyes every day of their lives?

And finally, the US is ranked fifth in the world for executions. So, even if I did believe abortion is murder, I'd have to accept that some States in the republic do it, and do it every single year. State sponsored murder is, apparently, acceptable.
 
oldaunt said:
She also has the right to use contraceptives and avoid the issue in the first place, but many won't bother. Yes, you will dwell on the rape or medical necessity abortions and such, but they are only a small percentage of them. The "control" factor being used only one sided to use for argument. Sad, that.
Click to expand...

Indeed, though various religions would like them not to be able to do so. I would love a world where there were no "accidental" pregnancies. But it's not the real world. We all make mistakes in our lives, but few are as problematic as forcing a life into the world that isn't wanted. We don't have to like, or even agree, with what people do with their bodies. I do believe individuals should have a choice though. You own you. I own me.
 
I wouldn't waste my time discussing abortion with that radical nutcase. I ignore such hideous people. Only sad, pathetic losers try to control others. If the shoe fits.....
 
oldaunt said:
She also has the right to use contraceptives and avoid the issue in the first place, but many won't bother. Yes, you will dwell on the rape or medical necessity abortions and such, but they are only a small percentage of them. The "control" factor being used only one sided to use for argument. Sad, that.
Click to expand...
The real problem is that too many men don't take responsibility and use contraceptives. It should not always be on the women.
 
spectratg said:
The real problem is that too many men don't take responsibility and use contraceptives. It should not always be on the women.
Click to expand...
I disagree, unless there is a committed relationship. It should ALWAYS be on the woman. If she is a smart woman, that is.
 
gruntlabor said:
History of oral contraceptive drugs and their use worldwide - PubMed.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. It's common for medications to evolve over time. There comes a time in the development of drugs where you have to get a large a sample size, and that can only be done over time and long term use. Has the birth control pill improved? Yes, of course. Was it introduced for nefarious reasons? No, absolutely not. Was it introduced with in sufficient testing? Well, I don't think so.

I think we have to accept that everything has a risk attached. Overall, it's given women a lot more freedom to enjoy their life as they see fit. I caught a glimpse of a stat in that link that states "the mean global percentage using contraception in women who are married or in union was 62.7%." That's impressive.
 
spectratg said:
The real problem is that too many men don't take responsibility and use contraceptives. It should not always be on the women.
Click to expand...
As long as "my body, my choice" is the mantra, why should it not? Why would ANY woman expect someone else to protect her body? I do agree men should take some responsibility, but no woman should just expect it and not take precautions of her own.
 
gruntlabor said:
:) That is what we all want, of course. Personally, and without rancor, I believe your head is in the clouds, your ideals unrealistic. No offense.
Click to expand...

None taken. I'm not talking absolutes. The point of that statement is really, I recognize there is an ideal, but I don't think the ideal exists, and therefore, the only right choice is to give the woman an option to not give birth. I think that's realistic. I don't think I have any right to tell a woman what they do with their bodies. In a country (the US) where personal freedoms are held in high regard, it seems hypocritical to ban abortion. The Right have tried to sell it as a "a life is a life", but for me it just isn't.

As medicine progresses, it may one day be possible to have egg fertilized outside the body, and brought to self-sufficiency by machines. I suppose that could change the argument somewhat. But even then, we don't own our own DNA?

It's a little bizarre that a country that allows the death penalty for adults, where you can't tell someone they can't own a gun, where sex change via surgery/drugs happens, where divorce is accepted, where 11 million kids live in poverty, and half a million kids are removed from their homes by authorities every year (10 million over 20 years), where 400,00 children live in foster homes, and 118,000 have to wait to be adopted...... that with all that, people draw the line at the cessation of a pregnancy. I guess personal freedom does have its limits, and extends to multi-cell organisms inside us, but not to animals which we slaughter for food.
 
oldaunt said:
As long as "my body, my choice" is the mantra, why should it not? Why would ANY woman expect someone else to protect her body? I do agree men should take some responsibility, but no woman should just expect it and not take precautions of her own.
Click to expand...

Look, an "accidental" pregnant is usually caused by someone not doing something they should have. A bad decision. I think we can all accept that. By definition (other than medical cases), a lady wanting an abortion doesn't want, or didn't want, to be pregnant. The question is, when it happens, what options should the mother have? I strongly suspect - and I have no evidence to support it - that if the world was as it is today, but with the exception that MEN carried the child, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There would be groups of men furiously telling others that no-one has the right to impinge on their personal freedom. It's only because women had to fight for many rights in relative times, that it's even still debated.
 
Teacher Terry said:
Abortion is a medical decision between a woman and her doctor period end of discussion. Making it illegal is another way for men to control women. No one has the right to tell a woman what she has to do with her body.
Click to expand...

Ideally. As a woman I would advise other women that ultimately a pregnancy is the woman's problem. It isn't the unborn baby's father's, their parents' or anyone else. It's hers alone because she will bear and raise that child alone if there are no other options available. This is just a sad fact.
 
VaughanJB said:
It's an emotive subject. I can only speak for myself - but depending on the stage of pregnancy, an unborn child is not a person. As such, it's not murder. An unborn fetus may have the potential to be fully a human being, but that's a different thing.

I won't comment on your views about rape victims. I find them very insensitive, and inflammatory.

Fundamentally, I do not think abortion is murder. People in need of Mental Health Services can't get it, so how are pregnant women supposed to? Who is going to pay for it? And what kind of mental health service is going to solve the ills of having to look into their rapists eyes every day of their lives?

And finally, the US is ranked fifth in the world for executions. So, even if I did believe abortion is murder, I'd have to accept that some States in the republic do it, and do it every single year. State sponsored murder is, apparently, acceptable.
Click to expand...
Wow, there is so much wrong here that I'm fairly shocked.

It's growing and it's human. The DNA is already different from its mother's. That's like claiming a new born isn't human because it's not a fully developed adult - something the pro-choice people now argue btw as they go for abortion aka infanticide up to term and even post-birth.

Looking into your baby's eyes is not looking into its father's. To claim that looking into that baby's eyes is looking into the rapist's is sick and twisted and, of course, the mother doesn't even have to but can give it up for adoption without even looking at it.

Wtf on your last paragraph? You're actually arguing that it's okay to execute the innocent. I do believe in the death penalty. I think it should be the punishment for murder, rape and child molestation. After conviction of a heinous crime. Not innocent babies being killed for their father's alledged crimes. Note in those cases I do advocate for the rapist's deaths - after its been proven. I do not just take a woman's claim that it's rape. It has to be proven.

I'll also point out that the what about rape and incest BS is a strawman. It doesn't really matter. Either life starts at conception - it does IMO as it's not just a clump of cells, it a living, growing HUMAN (no matter how much you want to deny it for your own convenience) - or it doesn't. If it does, it's murder. Babies should not be murdered because the pregnancy is inconvenient to the mother. Not even if she's pregnant through no fault of her own but those cases are a tiny, tiny fraction of the murder of the unborn.
 
A medicial decision to murder a growing human. It should be a crime. And no I don't care if it will bring back back alley abortions. If you're going to murder your baby because it's inconvenient to have it, you deserve to risk the hanger.
 
Blaze Duskdreamer said:
A medicial decision to murder a growing human. It should be a crime. And no I don't care if it will bring back back alley abortions. If you're going to murder your baby because it's inconvenient to have it, you deserve to risk the hanger.
Click to expand...
I bet you have no children. Just a guess.
 
Time quoting The Washington Post! You want me to take either of those rags seriously? But even so, they're only backup to that is a letter she wrote after she got backlash for wishing them exterminated. It was just to cover her butt and save her poltiical career and get support of black leaders. Frankly, I'm embarassed for King that he fell for that happy horsesh*t.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top