Abortion

[Anna]

Raising the humanity of fetal life at the expense of the humanity of women is sexist discrimination.

And that says it all right there.  You're not interested in holding a meaningful discussion.  You just want to spew your feminist garbage, and anyone who disagrees with you or tries to bring you back on topic is a sexist woman-hater.  You believe that some forms of human life have more value than others.  You refuse to acknowledge the concepts of consequences and responsibility, instead calling them "punishment" for "being a woman."

You know what? Having a kid sucks if you're not prepared for it.  I'll be the first to admit that.  And you know what? Maybe having a kid unexpectedly when you're a teenager WILL ruin your life.  Maybe you should ****ing wait until you're ready to have kids before you have sex!

Is being pregnant a punishment?  Maybe so.  Maybe it's your punishment for being a ****ing idiot.  There are other ways to have sex besides intercourse, but there are no other ways to have a child.  That means, no matter what you say, no matter what feminist bull**** you have rattling around in your head, that YOU KNEW WHAT COULD HAPPEN AND YOU DID IT ANYWAY.  "Hey, everyone, let's play Russian Roulette!"  "Isn't that risky?" "Nah, there's over an 80% chance that I'll be fine."  And he ****ing blows himself away.  Is anyone going to be sorry for that guy?  No.  He knew the risks, and he disregarded them.  "Ow, I was poking a bee and got stung! Now my finger is swollen! How dare that bee violate my rights as a woman!"  Yeah, great excuse, idiot.

No matter what the circumstances, you have the duty and the responsibility to protect and nurture that baby.  "Hey Mom, did you know that Tommy couldn't swim? I pushed him into the lake and he drowned."  "You didn't save him?" "Screw that! It would have been an exertion on my body, and my rights as a man protect me from having to do that." "So you knew what would happen, but you pushed him in anyway?" "Oh, I was having fun at the time.  I didn't think about the rest of it."

If Billy ****ing pushes his brother into the lake, it's his responsibility to save him.  If you get yourself pregnant, it's your responsibility to save the baby.  It doesn't matter how much "punishment" you have to go through.  A life is put into your hands, and throwing it out is NOT an option.

You continue to confuse the value of the fetus with the woman's obligation to be responsible for her actions.

P.S. No need to get so worked up about it.

[a-4-year-old]

getting pregnant and saying the baby infringes your rights is almost like me masturbating and saying I somehow raped myself.

[Smegma]

If you can't accept the risk, don't do the fucking deed.

[SirJamesaford]

What about rape victims who are impregnated?  Should they be able to abort it?

[Smegma]

What about rape victims who are impregnated?  Should they be able to abort it?

I never said I was against abortion or said it should be restricted. You just thought the risk implied was that you will have a kid.

[SirJamesaford]

That question wasnt directed at you or anyone really...i was just throwing it out there.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

You continue to confuse the value of the fetus with the woman's obligation to be responsible for her actions.

No confusion.  The only way that the woman is held responsible for her actions is by having and raising the child.  The only reason she's responsible for that is because the fetus has value.  You can't have one without the other.

[Smegma]

That question wasnt directed at you or anyone really...i was just throwing it out there.

Same with me, I just like to quote people. Like now.

[Anna]

You continue to confuse the value of the fetus with the woman's obligation to be responsible for her actions.

No confusion.  The only way that the woman is held responsible for her actions is by having and raising the child. The only reason she's responsible for that is because the fetus has value.  You can't have one without the other.

Hahaha. What about rape victims? Holding a woman responsible for her actions does not apply to cases where the woman did not consent to sex. Therefore you can indeed have one without the other. They aren't remotely related.

[SirJamesaford]

You continue to confuse the value of the fetus with the woman's obligation to be responsible for her actions.

No confusion.  The only way that the woman is held responsible for her actions is by having and raising the child. The only reason she's responsible for that is because the fetus has value.  You can't have one without the other.

Hahaha. What about rape victims? Holding a woman responsible for her actions does not apply to cases where the woman did not consent to sex. Therefore you can indeed have one without the other. They aren't remotely related.

Glad i could help lol.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Hahaha. What about rape victims? Holding a woman responsible for her actions does not apply to cases where the woman did not consent to sex. Therefore you can indeed have one without the other. They aren't remotely related.

Then, unfortunately, she has to be responsible for someone else's actions.  That's how it always is with crime.  If you're an arsonist, you should be responsible for the damage you cause.  But who stops the fire? Someone else.  If you rob a store, someone else gets the shaft, because they are no longer able to purchase that item.

Let's say that we're back in the 1800s, and you saw a group of slaves.  You tell them, "This isn't right, what's happening to you.  Now you have to suffer for someone else's actions.  But here, take this gun.  The next time you see the slaver, kill him.  You'll be free to live your life the way you want."  Is this an attractive offer? Sure.  Is it ethical? No.

The same is true with rape.  You may not like what happened to you, but unfortunately, you're now a mother, and it's your responsibility, not through your actions, but through someone else's, to take care of your child.

If it's consensual, you have to take responsibility for your actions.  If it's rape, you have to take responsibility for someone else's actions.  But either way, a baby is a responsibility, BECAUSE it has value.

[ThunderPantz]

A good solution would be to abort all the retard babies.

Where would you draw the line between 'worthy to live' and 'not worthy to live'?

ADD/ADHD -------  Perfectly normal
Cancer-------------
lost limb----------
brain problems---------
Deaf,blind,mute,crip,--------

[Anna]

Hahaha. What about rape victims? Holding a woman responsible for her actions does not apply to cases where the woman did not consent to sex. Therefore you can indeed have one without the other. They aren't remotely related.

Then, unfortunately, she has to be responsible for someone else's actions.  That's how it always is with crime.  If you're an arsonist, you should be responsible for the damage you cause.  But who stops the fire? Someone else.  If you rob a store, someone else gets the shaft, because they are no longer able to purchase that item.

Let's say that we're back in the 1800s, and you saw a group of slaves.  You tell them, "This isn't right, what's happening to you.  Now you have to suffer for someone else's actions.  But here, take this gun.  The next time you see the slaver, kill him.  You'll be free to live your life the way you want."  Is this an attractive offer? Sure.  Is it ethical? No.

The same is true with rape.  You may not like what happened to you, but unfortunately, you're now a mother, and it's your responsibility, not through your actions, but through someone else's, to take care of your child.

If it's consensual, you have to take responsibility for your actions.  If it's rape, you have to take responsibility for someone else's actions.  But either way, a baby is a responsibility, BECAUSE it has value.

Now you've dropped the "for your actions" part of the "taking responsibility" argument. It's turned into "take responsibility for the life of the fetus" which has a different meaning from "take responsibility for your actions." You can't use that as an argument against abortion since not all pregnancies are the result of the woman's actions. All it does is reinforce the idea that consent to sex == consent to pregnancy, which is false. Consent to sex does not imply consent to pregnancy any more than consent to crossing the street implies consent to be hit by a car.

[Smegma]

Consent to sex does not imply consent to pregnancy any more than consent to crossing the street implies consent to be hit by a car.

But you still get fucked up.

[Anna]

Consent to sex does not imply consent to pregnancy any more than consent to crossing the street implies consent to be hit by a car.

But you still get ****ed up.

Yeah, but nobody says "if you didn't want to get hit by a car, you shouldn't have crossed the street."

[SirJamesaford]

Consent to sex does not imply consent to pregnancy any more than consent to crossing the street implies consent to be hit by a car.

But you still get ****ed up.

Yeah, but nobody says "if you didn't want to get hit by a car, you shouldn't have crossed the street."

I like that....great line!

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

[SNIP]

The same is true with rape.  You may not like what happened to you, but unfortunately, you're now a mother, and it's your responsibility, not through your actions, but through someone else's, to take care of your child.

If it's consensual, you have to take responsibility for your actions.  If it's rape, you have to take responsibility for someone else's actions.  But either way, a baby is a responsibility, BECAUSE it has value.

Now you've dropped the "for your actions" part of the "taking responsibility" argument.

Note the highlighted part.  I didn't drop anything.

[Smegma]

Consent to sex does not imply consent to pregnancy any more than consent to crossing the street implies consent to be hit by a car.

But you still get ****ed up.

Yeah, but nobody says "if you didn't want to get hit by a car, you shouldn't have crossed the street."

I do.

[BondJamesBond]

I don't know if anyone mentioned what happens to the child.. if the child is born to an unwilling parent - a parent unwilling to care of the child. Did you consider that, or did you just get lost on whose fault it is when a woman gets pregnant.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Yeah, but nobody says "if you didn't want to get hit by a car, you shouldn't have crossed the street."

But they do say (analogous to consensual sex), "You should have been watching, you should have been paying attention."  Or (analogous to rape), "That driver was out of control.  There was nothing you could have done."

Date Posted: August 07, 2007, 04:05:44 PM

I don't know if anyone mentioned what happens to the child.. if the child is born to an unwilling parent - a parent unwilling to care of the child. Did you consider that, or did you just get lost on whose fault it is when a woman gets pregnant.

Didn't get lost at all.  It's called adoption.  And even if the child has lousy parents, they are still capable of accomplishing great things.  For example, the man who performed the first heart transplant (I forget his name) came from a less-than-spectacular community.  But he applied himself and didn't let his poor childhood experience hold him back.