Abortion: Putting A Face On The Issue

A true master of unintentional irony.

yes, yes, avoid and deflect.

Prove you know anything about my commitment to children.

I can imagine what you have seen that makes abortion seem like a Disney film.

I bet you think death is better than suffering. Why don't you start a "Kill the starving children" fund to show your support for ending suffering.

night ..rika

Here is the low down on why Fundamentalist want to stop abortions.

1. Fundamentalist have noticed that their numbers in their churches are way way down, only 1/3 go to fundamentalist churches than 30 years ago.

2. Translation... Less People = Less Money to go to Europe for that Vacation.

3. So what the Fundamentalist do is find a scape goat to blaim their sinking numbers on.

4. Abortions they believe, are removing children from the world

5. Less Children = less people in churches = less money to take that vacation.

Ergo... The reason Fundamentalist want to stop Abortions is because they think it will bring more people back into churches, thus more money.

Bottom line... The Fundamentalist hate for abortions is about money

And Only Money

And nothing else But Money.

You do know that abortion was legal before it was criminalized, don't you?

Lets pretend you are a doctor.

Twin babies come into ER, both with the same deadly condition. You have diagnosed the problem, but are still unsure of whether or not the two treatment options you have available will cure them. Further research is not an option and you have just enough time to decide which treatment you will use. Their condition will currently cause them both to die in the time it takes to see the result of the treatment as to whether or not it was effective. So you don't have time to try it on one, get lucky and then repeat such on the other, the other would be dead and you might have picked the wrong treatment (leading the first one to be also dead).

1. Do you choose to give them both the same treatment? (they could both die)

2. Do you choose to give neither of them any treatment? (they will both die)

3. Do you choose to give them both different treatments? (one will die)

How does any of that prove you know anything about my commitment to children?

So was bank robbery.

Feel free to give the history of abortion laws.

Did you know that it was legal prior to being illegal?

When was bank robbery legal?

Before there was a law created to make it illegal.

*yawn*

Oh dear, at it again are you? Nothing like waking up to week-old red herring.

please cite for me the day this law was passed.

Another morning.....

Same argument....err herring

wonder if tequila would make it any better... waitaminute, that's how I got pregnant the first time!

(ok, ok, not really, but talk about no inhibitions )

You still havn't commented on my comments......

Yeah, if I see a post that requires a response, I will comment.

hehe

Are you saying I need to be enebriated to read this thread?

*giggles* Most likely... I think it's safe to say that one should probably also be fairly schnockered to expect some people to follow their own rules...

hehe, ok, I think this thread has veered off-topic, and needs to be moved to off-topic!

Hmmm guess I shouldn't have poured tequila on my cheerios this morning...

Sounds like the Breakfast of Champions to me

In reviewing the title of this thread, I've decided that if one did indeed put their face on the issue rather than genital to genital intercourse, one would have no need for an abortion.

Say yes to Oral Sex.

Blow jobs as birth control? An Idea whose time has come.

We still need to establish what you will do concerning children in various situations. If you won't answer questions, we can't prove anything about your commitment to children. For all I know, you want more children to be born because you like to consume their newborn flesh. I'll add some more questions so we can get a more realistic picture about your commitment to children.

1. Lets pretend you are a doctor.

Twin babies come into ER, both with the same deadly condition. You have diagnosed the problem, but are still unsure of whether or not the two treatment options you have available will cure them. Further research is not an option and you have just enough time to decide which treatment you will use. Their condition will currently cause them both to die in the time it takes to see the result of the treatment as to whether or not it was effective. So you don't have time to try it on one, get lucky and then repeat such on the other, the other would be dead and you might have picked the wrong treatment (leading the first one to be also dead).

a. Do you choose to give them both the same treatment? (they could both die)

b. Do you choose to give neither of them any treatment? (they will both die)

c. Or do you choose to give them both different treatments? (one will die)


2. Lets pretend you are a judge.

A pregnant woman has comes into ER in a coma. She is slowly dying from a deadly incurable disease. However she may possibly live for decades yet. On the other hand, she will absolutely bleed out if she carries the child to term. Also the baby has been tested as having the same disease, it's genetic. She has no next of kin or living will and stands to be in the coma for the next year. This means all her medical decisions fall to the court.

a. Do you sign the order to abort the baby to prolong her life? (the mother will live)

b. Do you not sign the order to abort baby, as it can be carried to term? (the baby might live)

c. Or is a decision, as a judge, you feel you cannot decide? (possibly both will live or die at the hands of the doctor)


3. Lets pretend you are a woman.

You are clinically sterile and unable to carry to term. You want children and your husband has agreed to adopting. The only children available anywhere, for some odd reason, all have serious medical or societal issues. You have been screened and tested for adoption previously and now all you have to do is pick one.

a. Do you pick the infant who may only be adopted along with all her siblings? (their parents died in a car crash, the oldest is 6)

b. Do you pick the three year old with cistic fibrosis? (a very nasty disease)

c. Do you pick the newborn AIDS baby? (you'll need some gloves for when you change it)

d. Do you pick the 3 year old asian baby? (your child will grow up looking vastly different from her family)

e. Or do you adopt no one, realizing that adoption is not for you?


4. Lets pretend you're a Cadet on Star Trek.

It's the new Kobiashi-maru test. A planet with billions of people on it is endanger from Klingons (really mean aliens). They are at war with the Federation (the people you work for) and all the ships are currently engaged in that war in other sectors. Meanwhile the Kobiashi-maru (a colonial transport carrying millions of people and children) is in danger from a hostile alien entity that has crippled their ship leaving them with only a few hours of life support. If you leave now for the planet, you will get there in time to fight off the Klingons. If you leave now you will be able to get to the Kobiashi-maru in time to try to save it. Spock also tells you that you may be able to go back in time in order to attempt to save both. However, he also tells you that going back in time could potentially destroy the ship. He is also unsure of how far back you might be able to go.

a. Do you leave now for the planet?

b. Do you leave now for the Kobiashi-maru?

c. Or do you attempt to go back in time?


Okay that's enough questions for now.

I'm not avoiding or deflecting anything. I am a real man who says what he believes and has the balls to back it up.

I don't know anything about your commitment to children. However, your silence on the issue speaks volumes about your lack of commitment to children.

If you have to imagine, you don't know what I've seen. Your Cliffs Notes version of child survival tells me that. Honestly, I don't think you could handle the reality of the world.

Do I think death is better than suffering. Sometimes, yes. That is a hard statement to make but it is true nonetheless. Do you think it was easy to quarantine people people and help them die from smallpox to erradicate it from the planet? Do you think people enjoyed it? It was necessary and it was done and you live each day reaping the benefits of it.

You joke about a "kill the starving children fund" but Bush's removal of all US funding for UNFPA does just exactly that.

I know for a fact that you have never held a child without hope in this world. I know it as sure as I know the sun came up today.

Hmph, what about cunnilingus? You men just thing about yourselves