RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body"

RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (Full Version)

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

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:13:59 AM)
Well the continuing "study program" is what led to the tack I took with my son,though he was not at the time aware of my activities(I am in no way a complete pot head)I knew sooner or later a bright young man like himself would tumble on to the fact that Dear Old Dad....sparked up on occasion.So I needed an argument that would not leave me open to charges of hypocrisy...the fact that I firmly believed everything I was telling him was most important...You mentioned laziness as a byproduct of pot use....I would agree with that wholeheartedly but would add that the mind gets lazy too...it just doesn't process new information quite so readily.Hence my asking him to "grow-up prior to lighting up" [:)] I would also suggest that a drinker who feels the need for a drink before going to work would be just as unproductive. Quick story....went to a friends house to pick him up for a round of golf.His wife is also an old friend...a major league pot head,he offered me a cup of coffee...she asked if I cared to "wake and bake"...lol,I had not previously heard this phrase,but knowing her I knew what she meant..I declined.....waking up and having a drink is not something I would do...why wake up and spark up?Seems awful silly to me.

HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:15:02 AM)
quote: I dont buy into the gateway theory as a whole. Many people stop at pot. and some don't start with pot. i have known at least one heroin addict who never smoked any pot (she thought smoking anything was bad for her health...go figure). <we agree on something again, what do you know, there's hope for us yet [:)]> hannah lynn

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:18:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: I pointed out to him that my generation ,and those preceding ,had conducted all of the tests....and the results were in....lol quote: Yeah,well I'm still running certain tests...I feel the need to make sure all of the information available is collected and collated properly....I hate to leave an experiment unfinished.....lol. ok, i know that both these remarks ( especially the 2nd) were made somewhat in jest, but don't they point out a certain hypocrisy? a "my drug of choice is ok, but yours is not" attitude? from what you have posted, it's apparent you have tried/used various drugs, and yet you would deny that same freedom to experiment to others. why is that? hannah lynn Where did I say I would deny anyone anything....I think a closer approximation of my stance would be that....if you wish to try the things I have tried.....than do so under the same conditions I did .Hell even when I was doing Coke eight ball by eight ball I never assumed just because I wanted to do it ...that society should roll over and make it legal.I simply took my chances...no hypocrisy at all ...you are as free to do these things as I was...hopefully you will be as lucky as I was and never pay too large a price for having made a conscious decision to ignore the law of the land [:)] Edited to add...The first quote of mine was not said in jest...I was deadly serious with my son when I said it.

HannahLynHeather -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:29:48 AM)
quote: you are as free to do these things as I was so you agree i have the right to do so? that's good enough.[:)] the rest, all the societal bullshit isn't really important anyway. hannah lynn

Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:40:10 AM)
I've read through this thread (a MAJOR undertaking) and while the OP is deliberately provocative, the basic premise is correct. If a woman can have an abortion based on the assumption that it is her body and she has the right to control it, then by extension she also has the right to ingest whatever she wants. Like Panda (good to see you back every now and then dude), I’m basically in agreement with Hannah Lynn. Society really doesn’t have the right to regulate what one does to him or her self. It can, however regulate the consequences of those actions. And lighten up tazzy babe, it’s just a forum discussion…sheeesh! Maybe sparking one up is in order.

kdsub -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:41:27 AM)
There is a difference between being free to do something and having the right... don't ya think Butch

kdsub -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:43:04 AM)
quote: If a woman can have an abortion based on the assumption that it is her body and she has the right to control it, then by extension she also has the right to ingest whatever she wants. Even if she is carrying the baby at the time? Butch

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:45:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: If a woman can have an abortion based on the assumption that it is her body and she has the right to control it, then by extension she also has the right to ingest whatever she wants. Even if she is carrying the baby at the time? Butch Now you went and done it Butch...that is whole 'nother kettle of fish ,isn't it?

kdsub -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:47:30 AM)
I like bursting bubbles

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:54:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: you are as free to do these things as I was so you agree i have the right to do so? that's good enough.[:)] the rest, all the societal bullshit isn't really important anyway. hannah lynn I'm sorry I failed to make that distinction clearer in the first place.Society's laws have their place,my argument with you was your insistence that the laws needed changing in order to more closely reflect your own values. Take laws as simple as the local speed limit....I for one often think they are ridiculously too low....and at times drive accordingly.Now I am a very good driver,and my driving record reflects this...it also reflects my,at times disdain for the local ordinance...I have received my fair share of tickets. Still all in all I recognize both the need for,and the right of society to set the limit....some folks shouldn't be allowed to take a car out of park....and it is best that they do so only carefully. When I receive the ticket I do not argue to the judge that I believe I have a right to set my own personal limit...I merely pay the fine and move on....it is a function of my having exercised my own little risk/reward evaluation.Nothing more,nothing less.Society has their function...I ,as an individual have my own...I don't feel this makes me any less moral than the next guy or any more so.....just perhaps a little more honest in how I look at things.

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:56:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I like bursting bubbles Butch that was a rather "ugly", though perhaps unintended pun....lol.

Arpig -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 9:57:33 AM)
quote: Even if she is carrying the baby at the time? If we accept the basic premise that a woman has the right to control her own body, then yes, even if she is carrying the baby at the time. Assuming the right to abort, the fetus doesn't enter into the question of rights. If she has the right to kill the fetus, then surely she has the right to damage the fetus. It sounds harsh, and it is. But it is also the logical conclusion to the assumption of the right to control one's body.

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 10:03:22 AM)
I.personally can not take the idea of personal freedom that far Arpig,the knowledge of babies born with addictions is just too painful to take that particular leap.The current hell they are born into...the continuing health issues they are cosigned to suffer is, once again ,for me just a "bridge too far".

tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 10:04:01 AM)
quote: And lighten up tazzy babe, it’s just a forum discussion…sheeesh! Maybe sparking one up is in order. ~blows ya a kiss Sparking one up is not how I get my highs these days, Arpig. [;)]

tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 10:05:54 AM)
quote: If we accept the basic premise that a woman has the right to control her own body, The operative word is bolded. Who is in control .. the addict or the drug?

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 10:19:06 AM)
Nah,tazzy that is beside the point on this matter...if the woman in question is carrying the baby to term...than there must be some sense of responsibility for that baby....and this must,has to absolutely somewhat abridge any claim of "it's my body I will do what I want with it,damage to the fetus inside me be dammed" attitude. Personal freedoms has to ,of necessity,go hand in hand with personal responsibility....somewhere in that responsibility must be care for the as yet unborn life.

lockedaway -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 10:28:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: Abortion is still murder. In that aspect, a woman does not have the right to do what she wants to someone else's body as long as its physically attached to me and contained within me its part of my body. just as surely as my gall bladder. you're moral position is admirable, but your assumption that your personal ethical position should be forced on the rest of us is not. tell you what, the next time YOU get pregnant, you can have it, but kindly allow the rest of us who actually might get pregnant to make that decision for themselves. either that or start supporting those unwanted children. just how many have you adopted? hannah lynn Abortion IS murder, there is no doubt about it. When a woman conceives, she is not conceiving what will turn out to be a door knob or a puppy, it is, in every case, a child. But...should a woman have the right to abort that child while the child is not viable and exists entirely because of that woman's body? Yes. I believe all of that stops with viability unless there is some overwhelming evidence to suggest that the child that is to be born is horribly deformed and I don't mean a cleft palate. I was thrilled when Bush banned partial birth abortions but I support the trimester system set forth in Roe v. Wade. ABORTION is an ugly liberty. But so is screaming across the street from a funeral that your glad some woman's son or daughter died on a field of battle. The fact is that there are dozens of ugly liberties in any "free" society. But none of those ugly liberties should be funded by tax payer dollars. You want to smoke cigarettes irrespective of the warning on the side of the package, go right ahead and the consequences you suffer are your own. You should not be able to beseech the government to carve out an area of law on your behalf. You want to sit on the front porch and drink and do drugs rather than work and earn enough money to buy food or pay rent? Go right ahead, don't look to your fellow taxpayers to take up your slack. You want to eat McDonald's big Macs at every meal and consider your supersized order of french fries to be your serving of vegetables because they are made out of potatos? Go right ahead, again, you bear the risk and so you bear the consequences. Many societies, especially western societies, have gotten into the habit of indemnifying people against their own actions. That is coming to an end. Will it come to an end in a dejure manner or a defacto manner? Hopefully dejure but no one seems to have the stomach for it so it will be defacto.

tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 11:01:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Nah,tazzy that is beside the point on this matter...if the woman in question is carrying the baby to term...than there must be some sense of responsibility for that baby....and this must,has to absolutely somewhat abridge any claim of "it's my body I will do what I want with it,damage to the fetus inside me be dammed" attitude. Personal freedoms has to ,of necessity,go hand in hand with personal responsibility....somewhere in that responsibility must be care for the as yet unborn life. Women used to be drug tested in OBGYN offices and hospitals, mike, for the protection of the unborn and the evidence, if any were found, turned over to the police. The SC overturned those laws with Ferguson v. Charleston (No. 99-936) In its ruling, the Court decided that... hospital workers cannot constitutionally test maternity patients for illegal drug use without their consent for the purpose of alerting the police to a crime. While I agree with the drug testing, I never agreed with the police involvement. It merely ran women away from prenatal care of any kind. In this case, detection with treatment works far better than detection and prosecution.

slvemike4u -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 11:14:48 AM)
Wholeheartedly agree tazz...incarceration is,in my opinion,the last thing any addict needs...or truthfully deserves.It is a failed policy in all aspects,and at all levels of the so called"was on drugs".Perhaps my dim views of any woman who would knowingly ingest drugs while carrying a baby to term are not so easily dealt with on a practical level.I have no doubt what my opinion would be of such a woman.....but as to what to do about such occurrences.....I don't rightly know.Certainly just stating it is her body and she can do what she wants with it isn't enough.[8\|]

tazzygirl -> RE: "A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body" (4/18/2011 11:19:26 AM)
quote: Abortion IS murder, there is no doubt about it. When a woman conceives, she is not conceiving what will turn out to be a door knob or a puppy, it is, in every case, a child. But...should a woman have the right to abort that child while the child is not viable and exists entirely because of that woman's body? Yes. I believe all of that stops with viability unless there is some overwhelming evidence to suggest that the child that is to be born is horribly deformed and I don't mean a cleft palate. I was thrilled when Bush banned partial birth abortions but I support the trimester system set forth in Roe v. Wade. The bolded part I completely agree with. As far as "partial birth abortions"... quote: This statute prohibits a method of abortion in the United States that it names "partial birth abortion". The procedure described in the statute is usually used in the second trimester,[3] from 15 to 26 weeks, some of which occur before and some of which occur after viability. The law itself contains no reference to gestational age or viability. The present statute is directed only at a method of abortion, rather than at preventing any woman from obtaining an abortion.[4] The statute includes two findings of Congress: “ (1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion... is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited. (2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses Despite its finding that "partial-birth abortion ... is ... unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother", the statute includes the following provision: “ A defendant accused of an offense under this section may seek a hearing before the State Medical Board on whether the physician's conduct was necessary to save the life of the mother whose life was endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act All true. Very few Drs will perform this procedure... extremely few. 0.17% (2,232 of 1,313,000) of all abortions in the United States in the year 2000.

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875