RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this?

RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TheHeretic -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:36:48 AM)
I don't care how big the numbers are, or how many ultrasound videos we have. This ultimately comes down to sovereignty over ones own body, and I support abortion rights all the way up until we can just adopt out a preemie.

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:44:02 AM)
I support the right to choose. What i may choose for myself, another may not. Back when Roe hit, husbands could still legally rape their wives and Dr's would not sterilize until a woman had x amount of kids and the husband approved. Currently, the legal age of sterilization is 18 for both sexes. But Drs dont have to sterilize and can make their own determinations as to when its appropriate. Birth control is not fullproof. And, lets face it, men and women will not abstain forever. We are sexual creatures. The law has basically come down on the side of viability. The youngest premie born and survived was 22 weeks. If someone wishes to use that as the hall mark of abortion, then most abortions are performed way before that mark.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:50:14 AM)
quote: How many abortions are performed during the second trimester? Don't know. Don't care. One that was not performed as a necessity to protect the life of the mother is one too many imo. 24 weeks.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:52:05 AM)
quote: This ultimately comes down to sovereignty over ones own body The government recognizes no such thing. So far as i know, no society recognizes this. It's just bullshit created and repeated in defense of killing unwanted babies.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:54:44 AM)
quote: The law has basically come down on the side of viability. Absolutely not. The law is that any woman can get an abortion at any stage for any reason. Or no reason. Of course, if you can inform me of a SCOTU-approved law placing restrictions on abortion, I would deeply appreciate it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:57:20 AM)
Not knowing or not caring when stating you are passionate about this issue shows your narrow minded about this issue. Gest. week Percent <9 weeks 60.6% 9-10 17.1% 11-12 9.1% 13-15 6.3% 16-20 3.8% > 21 1.3% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_abortion_by_gestational_age_2004_histogram.svg In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 10:59:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: The law has basically come down on the side of viability. Absolutely not. The law is that any woman can get an abortion at any stage for any reason. Or no reason. Of course, if you can inform me of a SCOTU-approved law placing restrictions on abortion, I would deeply appreciate it. Certainly. In addition, the Supreme Court in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart ruled that Congress may ban certain late-term abortion techniques, "both previability and postviability". All[17] of the 36 state bans are believed by pro-choice organizations to be unconstitutional.[18][19] The Supreme Court has held that bans must include exceptions for threats to the woman's life, physical health, and mental health, but four states allow late-term abortions only when the woman's life is at risk; four allow them when the woman's life or physical health is at risk, but use a definition of health that pro-choice organizations believe is impermissibly narrow.[16] Assuming that one of these state bans is constitutionally flawed, then that does not necessarily mean that the entire ban would be struck down: "invalidating the statute entirely is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief."[20] Also, 13 states prohibit abortion after a certain number of weeks' gestation (usually 24 weeks).[16] The U.S. Supreme Court held in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services that a statute may create "a presumption of viability" after a certain number of weeks, in which case the physician must be given an opportunity to rebut the presumption by performing tests.[21] Therefore, those 13 states must provide that opportunity. Because this provision is not explicitly written into these 13 laws, as it was in the Missouri law examined in Webster, pro-choice organizations believe that such a state law is unconstitutional, but only "to the extent that it prohibits pre-viability abortions".[18] Ten states require a second physician to approve.[16] The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a requirement of "confirmation by two other physicians" (rather than one other physician) because "acquiescence by co-practitioners has no rational connection with a patient's needs and unduly infringes on the physician's right to practice".[22] Pro-choice organizations such as the Guttmacher Institute therefore interpret some of these state laws to be unconstitutional, based on these and other Supreme Court rulings, at least to the extent that these state laws require approval of a second or third physician.[16] Nine states have laws that require a second physician to be present during late-term abortion procedures in order to treat a fetus if born alive.[16] The Court has held that a doctor's right to practice is not infringed by requiring a second physician to be present at abortions performed after viability in order to assist in saving the life of the fetus.[23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion

domiguy -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:05:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: This analogy of yours falls apart for two reasons. 1. Childbirth isn't guaranteed to produce life 2. The early stages of life can't be personified as either being guilty or innocent, nobody can detect that. That's just desperation. The first is meaningless distraction, the second is a real wtf?? Let me use an analogy...truckinslave is sitting in a meadow. All of the towns people gather and stone him to death. Because he is a douche.

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:05:56 AM)
LOL cant believe im saying this.. but i have missed you Domi!

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:16:37 AM)
quote: In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[14] I volunteered that I am more thn just a little closed-minded on the issue, TG. As an accusation... pfffft. 1,032 per year is 1,032 too many. And don't give me any "life of the mother" crap that is anything less than a case-by-case description of the exact medical condition of every woman for whom such a claim is made. I have heard abortionists say that they could and would declare the life of any and every pregnant woman to be at risk from the pregnancy.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:21:30 AM)
Gonzales placed no restrictions on abortion beyond outlawing one very specific procedure. The laws restricting abortion so carefully listed in your wiki citation are, as the article says, "believed by pro-choice organizations to be unconstitutional". Certainly most of them are enjoined and otherwise being litigated against. I specifically asked for SCOTUS-approved restrictions on abortion. Sadly, I see none.

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:28:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[14] I volunteered that I am more thn just a little closed-minded on the issue, TG. As an accusation... pfffft. 1,032 per year is 1,032 too many. And don't give me any "life of the mother" crap that is anything less than a case-by-case description of the exact medical condition of every woman for whom such a claim is made. I have heard abortionists say that they could and would declare the life of any and every pregnant woman to be at risk from the pregnancy. There3 are extremists on every issue. I have heard pro-lifers declare a woman should die than get an abortion that would save her life. Are you in agreement with this?

tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:32:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Gonzales placed no restrictions on abortion beyond outlawing one very specific procedure. The laws restricting abortion so carefully listed in your wiki citation are, as the article says, "believed by pro-choice organizations to be unconstitutional". Certainly most of them are enjoined and otherwise being litigated against. I specifically asked for SCOTUS-approved restrictions on abortion. Sadly, I see none. You said... quote: Of course, if you can inform me of a SCOTU-approved law placing restrictions on abortion, I would deeply appreciate it. This is approved by the SCOTU. Its placed on abortions. You didnt specify which, and now you want to try and narrow your objective. Im sorry, you should have thought about that before deciding you knew enough to come to this discussion. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the Court that the respondents had failed to show that Congress lacked authority to ban this abortion procedure. Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Antonin Scalia agreed with the Court's judgment, joining Kennedy's opinion. And the medical community believes this... The New England Journal of Medicine criticized the intrusion of politicians into medical decision-making, writing: Until this opinion, the Court recognized the importance of not interfering with medical judgments made by physicians to protect a patient's interest. For the first time, the Court permits congressional judgment to replace medical judgment.[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Carhart

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 11:48:39 AM)
quote: This is approved by the SCOTU. Its placed on abortions. You didnt specify which, and now you want to try and narrow your objective. Not at all; there is much more than a semantical difference between a SCOTUS-approved restriction on abortion and a SCOTUS-approved restriction on an abortion procedure. If you fail to grasp the difference, let me spell it out for you. The former- excuse me, the first one- would stop abortionists from killing babies; the second one merely restricts how they can kill them. Really. You should have read the post before you decided you knew enough to get snarky with me. I say again, and possibly for the last time (the snark bores me, frankly): I see no SCOTUS-approved restrictions on abortion.

GotSteel -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 3:16:38 PM)
This isn't a baby: [image]local://upfiles/566126/EF913FFC7972493896CB42E6501A1F7D.jpg[/image]

TheHeretic -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 3:20:48 PM)
That is entirely up to the mother, Gots.

CynthiaWVirginia -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 4:11:14 PM)
~~~~~~~fast reply~~~~~~ truckinslave, sorry to hear that you had such a hard time trying to save the life of your premature baby. As for my own two cents tossed into this thread, I am pro-choice because of what I have seen in my life. I was raised to be anti-abortion, was even shown movies when I was 6 years old that had aborted fetuses in trash cans. Anyone who shows little kids gruesome stuff like that needs to have a beating, IMHO. What did I see that changed my mind? I knew girls that were literally thrown out of their homes over unwanted pregnancies so they wouldn't be a corruptive influence to younger siblings. Shunned...treated as dead to the family and never forgiven or pardoned. I read our family's geneology and found out that some families...had...even 24 natural born children. A man's wife would have to be replaced when she died from being a baby machine and he would start all over again with the next, cranking out one after another. I wondered how many children died from illnesses that escalated because of malnutrition, because there were too many children to feed properly. I learned that my grandmother had had to marry her own rapist. (I cannot state how young she was or it would be a TOS violation.) By the time she was 21 she had given him 5 children...eventually she had eight. The pregnancy that was my mother came at a horrible time in grandma's life and she tried her best to abort it, including resorting to flinging herself down the stairs. Grandma never loved my mother, can you imagine that? Mom is in her seventies and the emotional scars remain. This was during the Great Depression, and one time when my grandma was working full time as a waitress in some greasy spoon, the welfare snapped up her kids and put them into foster homes and orphanages because the babysitter phoned them and said she refused to watch them anymore and yet my grandma had dropped them on her anyway. There were no openings for my 5 year old mother, so they dumped her into juvenile hall! Force women to have children that they absolutely don't want or cannot afford? More of this will happen, and worse. Have you read books that document child abuse cases? We need to add more fuel to these flames? Birth control is never 100%. How many people actually read the fine print on condom packages to hear that the yearly failure rate among people who use it exactly right each time...is 20% of these condom using couples having a pregnancy during that year. I got preggies with condoms and while on the pill. My sister was in the army and bad batches of the pill were sold, so she got preggies too. My mother was trying her best not to get pregnant, was using a diaphragm and spermicidal cream and yet got preggies with me. Mom had to marry dad, on his terms. She had found out what an evil rat bastard he was but had to do right by her child and married him anyway. My sister was planning to divorce her physically abusive hubby, but the pregnancy ended that. After the kid was born, he said he would run off with it if she tried to leave him and she would never see her daughter again. Having a baby changes everything, and I believe that women should have a choice in whether or not they change their lives forever by having a baby. Some of us could not give a child up for adoption even if both of us were dragged into hell-on-earth, because the bond is so strong. There is one way to go back to a normal life, to abort. I had counseling. (The counselor thought it best if I put everything behind me and abort.) If anyone had tried to force me to bring my child into the world, it would have damaged our relationship severely. This had to be my decision, not something forced on me because of someone else's religious beliefs or because...there is a shortage of caucasian babies and people have been on waiting lists for years hoping to adopt. Unfortunate circumstances should not force some women into being free babymaking machines cranking out a needed marketable product. Before my son, and afterward, I had a lot of miscarriages. With each pregnancy I'd wake up every morning wondering if that would be the day my baby died. I got very angry with God for a while because of this, I couldn't understand why each of my unborn babies never had a chance to LIVE. Why put a soul in there at the moment of conception if it was doomed from the start never to be born? My ex-husband is Druse and says that his people believes that God puts the soul in with the first breath a baby takes. (I don't know if he knows what he's talking about since I have never studied anything about the Druse faith.) I don't know when the soul is put into the fetus, but I have to believe it's something God decides. I don't believe that a sex act creates a soul, merely the body that the soul can live inside. This is my consolation over the deaths of my unborn children...that they were possibilities that didn't receive the gift of life. I grieved their loss, but I have also made peace with this. Equating a doctor who has the mercy to abort a fetus...to a man with a gun shooting at children seems psychotic...but at the same time, in a horrible way I can understand that you cannot see a difference between the two. I have a cousin like that...she has given birth to 8 children...and puts her money where her mouth is by helping others. Her church group gives counseling and help to unwed mothers and others, not condemnation, and my cousin has taken in children for a while to keep them out of the foster care system until their mother is out of jail or has finished with chemo or some surgery. Support groups, not condemnation/punishment, and helping with families to get them over rough patches...are much better than murdering doctors and terrorizing their families. My friend Steve talked a woman we both know out of having an abortion. It was her fourth kid...and her birth control had slipped again. Funny how many doctors give out antibiotics without warning that it will cancel out the Pill. Anyway, Steve was never her lover but had been a part time babysitter. He promised her that if she didn't abort he would babysit for free all of her kids whenever she needed him to. (He also promised to stop all babysitting and to never talk with her again if she got an abortion.) The girl is 11 years old now, and he is firmly established as Uncle to all of her kids...he is a good man and has none of his own...and takes his role of Uncle very seriously. He watches them several times per week, brings food when they are running low, gives birthday and Christmas gifts to them and takes them on outings. They are his family, it's a win-win situation. He is a rigid pro-lifer and handled it this way, not by turning vigilante and terrorizing the little children of doctors, or by murdering their daddies. I think that if someone is against abortion for Christian reasons...they need to handle this in a way that their Master and King would want. They are supposed to be followers of Christ. Hate to say it but...What would Jesus do? He wouldn't be blowing up abortion clinics.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 4:23:58 PM)
quote: and I support abortion rights all the way up until we can just adopt out a preemie. In many states you've been able to just leave them at the hospital for some time now.

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 4:36:23 PM)
Thank you for your concern about our baby, who is now 13, ac tive and healthy and happy. I wish you could see the terrible irony in: "Some of us could not give a child up for adoption even if both of us were dragged into hell-on-earth, because the bond is so strong. There is one way to go back to a normal life, to abort. " The idea that there is less pain in killing the baby than giving it away is incomprehensible to me.

Lucylastic -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 5:07:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: This ultimately comes down to sovereignty over ones own body The government recognizes no such thing. So far as i know, no society recognizes this. 11.17.05 - New York, NY-Today, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) decided its first abortion case, KL v. Peru. The decision establishes that denying access to legal abortion violates women's most basic human rights. This is the first time an international human rights body has held a government accountable for failing to ensure access to legal abortion services. The Human Rights Committee monitors countries' compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. http://www.hrw.org/en/node/88013/section/8 International human rights law and relevant jurisprudence support the conclusion that decisions about abortion belong to a pregnant woman alone, without interference by the state or third parties. Any restrictions on abortion that unreasonably interfere with a woman’s exercise of her full range of human rights should be rejected. UN bodies and conferences have recognized that firmly established human rights are jeopardized and prejudiced by restrictive and punitive abortion laws and practices. Oh and theres more information on UN abortion rights the fact that the US will not ratify this says so much but yes lots of places have abortion rights for women ..

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875