quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance

Ghost, Im extremely responsible, im on a 99.7 percent effective birthcontrol, I use condoms every single time..

Its not about not being responsible or not being safe..

Its a fact of life accidents happen....

The truth is, a fetus cant exist outside of the womb until nearly 30 some weeks... Until then its a parasite, it will die if its removed from the host..

Im pro choice because i believe in living if i get knocked up by an underwhelming act of chance I prefer that my actual substainable existance is more important then a parasites...

Underwhelming act of chance? Overcoming condoms and 99.7 percent effective birthcontrol is underwellming? Not to mention the probability of sperm even getting there in the first place? and I quote "It will die". If something is not living it cannot die. The act of taking life is killing. Killing humans is illegal and morally reprehensable. A human baby, without a human adult to feed it, cannot survive even 1 week. Is it still a parasite because it relies upon a host?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

Murder is also illegal but done by back ally means. So...Murder would be safer if it was legal? Come now, we can do better than "it is safer to kill them this way".

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

the provision of excellent sex education to teenagers

Abstinence-Only Sex Education Statistics � Final Nail in the Coffin

Now a third study, this by Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, revealed some of the most troubling data of all. A national longitudinal study of adolescents, specifically 934 high school students, examined one of the factors used as a measurement of success for abstinence-only education programs, the virginity pledge.

Final Nail in the Coffin
In the most recent study, researchers compared teens who had taken the virginity pledge to those who had not taken a pledge. The researchers found results similar to the aforementioned studies.

First, the rate of the teens taking part in sex was the same. Those taking the virginity pledge were just as likely to have intercourse. The only positive, statistically small, was that those taking the pledge had 0.1 fewer sex partners over the five year study than did those who did not take such a pledge.

However, two other findings were most damning. First, those taking the virginity pledge were less likely to protect themselves. Pledge takers were found to be less frequent users of condoms and other forms of birth control.

Therefore, those youngsters who took the virginity pledge were not only just as likely to have intercourse, they ultimately were more likely to take part in sex in an unsafe manner. This has led experts to conclude that the lessons students take from their abstinence-only education programs is a negative and/or faulty view of contraception.

Second, and most importantly, virginity pledges are one of the measurement tools for determining if the abstinence education program is effective. For these federal funded programs, the government has counted pledges as data that the program is effective.

Rosenbaum summarizes the data succinctly, “Abstinence-only education is required to give inaccurate information. Teens are savvy consumers of information and know what they are getting.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

Murder is also illegal but done by back ally means. So...Murder would be safer if it was legal? Come now, we can do better than "it is safer to kill them this way".

Its safer to the woman in question, would you not agree?

If you are going to address my post, please address the whole post. Nit picking an argument... really?

quote:

The rest of your post, pretaining to the fault of miscarriages is laughable. Honestly, death happens. If a doctor absolutely, for a womans health must induce labor then he or she has done everything required of them to save a life. One or the other. If that doctor skips steps in the proceedure then yes, they are guilty of involuntary manslaughter. It does not matter if it is safer to her. If she willingly decides to engauge in an illegal activity she can rue the consequences as all people who partake in back ally transactions do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

What I am saying is that if he can absolutely do nothing other than operate in such a situation he MUST protect the life that is already established. I have stated this. However, he must go through all steps to make sure that he cannot do anything else to save the baby. However, he MUST go through those steps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance

So a woman who has no health insurance, should be required to go through expensive tests and medical procedures and get in debt.... because her body is rejecting the fetus.....

Yuppers It make so much sense... Ill leave it to Tazzy to fight this logic for me, (sorry Tazzy you've just got much more tact then i do today)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

All established steps and proceedures in a pregnency. I am not a doctor. As for health insurance and a lack of funding I must say if you can't pay, don't play. The same as buying a car in that instance. A fact of life my friends.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

That is what second opinions are for. I respect each of your opinions and I do apologize for the targeted comments. They were uncalled for. However, I cannot agree with this pro-choice just because it may lead to other problems. It could be just that an unaborted baby cures cancer. Far fetched, but possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

All established steps and proceedures in a pregnency. I am not a doctor. As for health insurance and a lack of funding I must say if you can't pay, don't play. The same as buying a car in that instance. A fact of life my friends.

And thats the problem. You arent a Doctor, you arent in the health care field. You dont know those steps, but you want to force a Doctor to do whatever he can to prevent something even though you have no idea what it takes, or how much it costs, to prevent what will happen.

Now, the death rate of women who found their way to a back street abortion is in the 10's or thousands a year before abortions became legal.

Cant pay, dont play? Will you say that to the incest victims? To the rape victims? To the woman who has 4 kids and on birth control, religiously, yet takes an antibiotic and gets pregnant because the two dont mix?

It takes two to play. Why dont men just go out and get a vasectomy and end the complications?

quote:

It is not my problem if people want to engauge in idiocy because they don't want a child. I suggest the idiot woman who continues to mix antibiotics and birth control get her damn tubes tied. Men do get vasectomies. However, that does not stop abortions. That is not an end. As for rape and unwilling incest that is not a cause for what I believe to be murder

quote:

ORIGINAL: ghostraven

That argument is foolish, and I will not engauge in Reductio Ad Absurdum. The issue here is willing abortion not miscarriages. I already told you that if one life is likely to end, then I believe you have to protect the woman because she already can survive on her own.