Angry of tactics by anti-abortion activists

so is it only unbiased and logical if it agrees with your stance? What about the over population of the earth by those of lesser genetic superiority? I may not be one of those but then again I am not a breeder. What about the proliferation of disease due to high density population of humans? Is it then ok to kill animals for the same reason but not control the human populus? Are we so much better or superior? As far as I am concerned we do far more to harm the earth than any other species and we still think that we have the right to populate the earth and create more than the earth can support....that is not only assinine but selfish as far as I am concerned

If you believe that then tell doctors to stop curing diseases, killing before life begins is not fair, from then on if you want to control population, put everyone on their own.


And no it is not only logical and unbiased if it agrees with me, if you really read that post you would realize it was balanced on both sides of the issue.

JV

LOL then follow this advice when it comes to the truck, leave them the f alone don't look if it bothers you.

thats not really the advice i'd give but you are the one that said why not just do whats right for you and leave everyone else the f alone.

JV

You know what i really hate about the whole abortion debate, is the illogical stance taken.

First of all its claimed that the man has no rights to his child because anyone can produce a baby, all he did was insert sperm, but when a child is actually born is the same statement is not followed.

Now he had an integral role in producing the child and must support the child.

So he has no right or choice in the decision to keep the child he helped produce, but he has an obligation if the woman decides to keep the child!?!?!

Look at it this way, the woman now has a choice if she doesn't feel ready to have a kid to abort it, but lets say the man doesn't feel ready to have a kid and doesn't want it, but the woman does, ITS HER CHOICE AND NOW HE IS OBLIGATED TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.

Basically the man has no choice over taking responsiblity for his actions while the woman does!!! It makes no sense.

JV

Wow, sorry but I didn't read all of this huge thread. Few comments though:

Overpopulation is not a justification for abortion. Besides the fact that justifying it like this is a little mind boggling, overpopulation is not a problem here, it's a problem in less developed countries. Not that it would really be more justified in those countries...

Anti-abortion people do NOT have to be "Christian" or even religious. It's entirely possible to be against abortion simply because you feel killing is wrong.

Limiting this discussion to women and leaving men out is a strange thing to say. Couldn't a similar argument be used to stop *everyone* from having a say in what a woman does? It seems to me that saying this is like saying we didn't have the right to judge Nazi Germany reguarding the holocaust, because we aren't directly effected by it and we aren't Germans. Point is: I don't think a law has to effect you to be judged right or wrong.

Certainly women have a "right to choose" what they do with their body, but I think the problem with this reasoning is that at some point an unborn child becomes a separate "body". At some point an infant has "rights" as well. I can't say when this happens, it's such a controversial topic. Is partial birth abortion ok? A line needs to be drawn somewhere...but no, you don't have the "right" to kill your unborn offspring. (I don't know where to draw this line honestly.)

However I think (for the same reasons that Janet Jackson and Howard Stern are being critisized) the graphic displays talked about here sound like they're crossing a line of decency, mostly for the same reasons.

I don't really feel strongly on this issue...well maybe it's better for me to say that I'm torn on this issue (how could you not feel strongly about something involving life/death and human rights?), and since I sympathize with both sides it's hard to choose one.

For the record I AM pro-choice (although not pro partial-birth), but I don't feel the need to go through the reasons abortion shouldn't be made illegal on this forum.

I'm not by any means opposed to abortion; I think that for eugenic reasons some people probably ought to be prevented from reproducing, but too often it is the route of convenience after a less than well thought out evening. Many women think that it is something good for them and it's not; I've never known a woman who looked forward to or enjoyed having an abortion. Abortion is just another way to make it easy for men to act like irresponsible pigs, and it's a shame that they can't share the experience of having one.

If you don't want the responsibility of raising a child then the logical thing would be to keep it in your trousers or use a condom; nothing irresponsible about those two choices.

WHOA,


Stop right there, you seem to be under the impression that only men enjoy sex are are out there being sexually active.

This is not true anymore. There are PLENTY of women that go out just for one night stands, just to have fun, you know... In fact just the other night this girl basically begged me to have sex with her, and i said no because i don't like one night stands.

Saying that abortion is a way for men to act like irresponsible pigs is horrible, its away for both sexes to do that. And not all those that have abortion have been irresponsible.

JV

But doesn't the woman have that same responsibility, to keep her trousers on?


Why does a baby happening always get pinned on the guy. It takes two to tango.

JV

Y'know, we've been having a similar debate going on at my University (SUNY-Albany[not worried about being stalked, try and find me in a pop of 14k ])
There's been a pro-life group (G.A.P - Genocide awareness project) who has been coming to campus and putting up exhibits of gigantic 10 to 20 foot tall posters of images of part-term fetuses (oddly enough, not aborted but miscarreid fetuses) and compare the "genocide" going on with the fetuses to September 11th, the holocaust, southern lynchings, etc. Needless to say, being in the capital of NY andf one of the big schools of the SUNY system, we've had pro-choice, september 11th survivors, jewish groups, and other semi-affected parties protesting this exhibit which manages to get on every semester.
Now, my initial response is that of revoltion, as the poictures are pretty graphic. But then again, I support heart transplants and can't watch open heart surgery. Something about it makes me want to lose my lunch. However, they have every right tobe there. My response to the protestors is to not protest that they are there, but protest the content, pooint out the innaccuracies, dispell myths, don't demand them to leave. All that does is raise curiosity and advocates for their side.

Anywho, I've rambled. I havn't seen any vans yet, but I have seen the pictures. I think it's a bit over the line, but whtacha gonna do?

--B.Livingston

Ahh, there's the million dollar question. Too many laws = bad, but letting idiots do whatever they want also = bad.

Kill the idiots, and eat them. Problem solved.