Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30
  1.    #1  
    On this 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, I would like to share my views on the issue of abortion.

    Life begins at the point of conception. No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue. What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death. Would these very same people agree that a similiar choice should have been made about their own existence? Abortion today is used primarily as a birth control of convenience because people are too self-centered to take precautions. They prefer their own pleasurable self-indulgence over the care and sanctity of the life they created. What ever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions in this country? Is it too much to ask a woman who has conceived to place the child into adoption? Nine months of discomfort is nothing compared to life in prison for voluntary manslaughter! Does the father of the child have a say in this? And what about the constitution of the United States? Are not all people conceived in this country deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I believe abortion is a crime against humanity and should be outlawed. We need to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and get back to cherishing life in this country. For a country that murders it's children cannot be far from self destruction.
  2. #2  
    I don't know, this topic has been confusing for me.

    One side of me says, if the child will not have a better chance of surviving (i.e.: health and financial) why bother bringing the baby up in this world?

    Another side me says: if the financially capable people aren't so greedy, there enough for everyone in this world. I have every right to bring my own child in this world regardless if I am poor or not.

    Pro-abortion people defines life begins outside the womb. Inside the womb, it is nothing more than like a foreign body that can be disposed off at anytime. I bet if everyone follows this literally, we would have less babies all over the world. Let the babies be born, lay them outsite for about a week or so and see 'it' survives.
  3. #3  
    No one can deny that after a human being is conceived it will develop into the very same being as those debating this issue
    Are you aware of the millions of children not born each year due to natural abortions. The embryo COULD grow into an adult, but much more likely will never pass th early stages of pregnancy.

    After you ban abortion, are you going to ban contraception next? You dont want any more POTENTIAL babies to die, do you?

    Surur
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK View Post
    ...and get back to cherishing life in...
    The "cherishing" has always been the wrong starting point. There may be other vaild resons for banning abortion, but this isn't it.

    Like everything else, once it is banned, it will be driven underground, which is worse.
  5. #5  
    It would be nice if this debate was reframed with reason instead of emotion.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6. #6  
    Governments medling in the private and personal desicions made by an individual and their medical practitioner is unreasonably intrusive, regardless of the procedure being discussed. We allow congress to ban one medical desicion, dont fool yourself that it wont snowball into another and another.

    Should abortion be dissuaded? Yes! But leave that up to family, friends, clergy, etc. Allowing government to take away your freedon to choose is much worse then any abortion procedure.
    CGordonn
    SPCS Treo 700p
    Virginia Beach, VA but home will
    always be Honolulu, HI
  7. #7  
    I don't know how you could frame with an issue like this that has impact to humans without emotion. The very topic itself is a very emotional issue.

    It includes women making decisions as to what they need to do during pregnancies (unexpected or not) as well as the corresponding male partner who should also be entitled to make a decision if the child should be brought up or not. Unfortunately, most of the decisions are left to the women as they are the one who goes through the physical changes during the pregnancy, although some women are forced to chose otherwise be it political, religion or parental decisions (if the one involved is a minor).

    The decision making itself is very emotional.

    Can anyone specifically state in one sentence in simple layman's terms what the Row vs Wade abortion law is about?
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by ronbo2000 View Post
    The decision making itself is very emotional.

    Can anyone specifically state in one sentence in simple layman's terms what the Row vs Wade abortion law is about?
    I think the most contentious part of it for me was that it made it a federally protected right for a woman. I'd prefer it to be decided by each state. That said, it is an issue emotionally charged because of religion IMO. e.g. the soul enters the body at the moment of conception, life begins at the moment of conception, etc. I maintain that there can be middle ground in this but extremes from both sides - left and right - cannot see gray, but only black or white.

    If only the moderates from the left and right could find common ground. For instance, what if the government defined "life" as that which is viable outside the womb without extreme medical intervention to sustain it? What if abortions - other than in cases of rape, incest, or mother's life being in endangered - were legal only until "life" began according to the laws of a state which respects the separation of church and state and defines life according to science and medical viability rather than religious dogma? What if each state could then decide the methods and/or if they wanted to support abortions within the constraints set forth by the government? What if the deeply religious spent more time in the pews preaching morality rather than attempting to legislate it upon the rest of the country? What if the government and society accepted that religious organizations can play an important role in educating and reducing abortions through true moral leadership in the community and church families?

    There can be middle ground. There can be compromise. But sadly the extremes in this country and the superficial media that laps up the sensational differences between the two sides won't let that happen anytime soon. And so long as politicians can use the subject as a wedge issue to drive voters to the booths and gain power so that they can protect their oil buddy's $40 billion dollar profits while they're banging a prostitute or page boy, I fear we'll continue to be a divided nation.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by ronbo2000 View Post
    Can anyone specifically state in one sentence in simple layman's terms what the Row vs Wade abortion law is about?
    Basically, the Supreme Court ruled that banning abortion violated a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. One of the contraversies of this decision is that this "right to privacy" is a very long stretch to include a woman's right to choose whether or not she aborts the unborn. The debate has raged now for 35 years as to whether or not this Supreme Court decision is constitutional or another example of judge-made law from the bench, ignoring the legislative branch.
    Palm since Palm Professional --- Treo 650 (2 yrs), iPhone since 6/29/07
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by ronbo2000 View Post
    I don't know how you could frame with an issue like this that has impact to humans without emotion. The very topic itself is a very emotional issue.
    That may be where the decision to have one or not is concerned. However, when one is lobbying for the government intervening, reason should always be the primary basis for making such argument. Let's start with something simple. Who should be sanctioned for the event? Should it be a felony or a misdemeanor, or are we debating that it should be a federal crime? What should the sanction be?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    [...] For instance, what if the government defined "life" as that which is viable outside the womb without extreme medical intervention to sustain it?
    The question then just shifts to what is 'extreme'. What is common now may have been extreme 10, 20, or 30 years ago. What is extreme now may be child's play in 20 years. Let's say that an artificial womb was created tomorrow where natural gestation could be replaced. How would that change the debate?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12. #12  
    Abortion has resulted in a generation of unborn people in this country, especially those of Afro-American decent. I also support it as a state's right issue, not a federal issue. In addition, I do not believe the government should pay for an abortion unless a crime is involved and only if insurance does not cover it. We are unfortunately at the stage were our society is moving toward a "feel good" attitude in everything. No longer do we stress moral and personal responsibility. Everything is fine if you want it to be fine and frankly, that is so wrong.

    Ben
  13. #13  
    That is spot on, ben. I agree.
  14. #14  
    I agree too. Society was much better off when back alley abortions were standard procedures.

    How about we as a nation place a little more emphasis on sex ed., birth control, etc.

    There was plenty of feeling good back in the "good old days". People just feigned purity more often than we do in these morally corrupt times.
    Visor-->Visor Phone-->Treo 180-->Treo 270-->Treo 600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700P-->Treo 755P-->Centro-->Pre+-->Pre 2
  15. #15  
    Ben, are you really saying the world would have been better of if these by definition unwanted children were born into poor socio-economic conditions? Somehow I think not.

    Surur
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by JOEBIALEK View Post
    What astounds me is that those who favor abortion went through an identical development stage as the being they are condemning to death.
    I don't think that people necessarily support abortions (at least, you make it sound like people with a viewpoint opposite from "make abortions illegal" are murders or criminals, which of course can lead an argument in a personal direction, and I take offense to). I myself favor a woman's right to choose.

    The one thing that angers me with most RvW debates is that people base their beliefs for not supporting a certain viewpoint onf religion. I do not see religion as a valid argument in any case. The problem that I see with using religion as an argument is that, it isn't you ("you" referring to the individual that uses religion as an argument) that we are talking about. Now, if the person that was in a situation that involved getting an abortion or not chose not to get the abortion based on religious reasons then I would completely support their reasoning. In this case they asserted their beliefs on themselves, and thus they have to live with their actions in any event. But, to be frank, I don't appreciate it when others assert their religious beliefs upon others (especially people in power asserting their beliefs into preventative laws, religion can shape a person, but it cannot shape other people).

    My thought is that a woman's right to choose should be a federal responsibility, for the sole reason of writing support for it into the Constitution. The actual decision for an abortion is really the woman's right/responsibility (or, more or less the mutual responsibility between the father and mother, if the father exists) and nobody else's. As for the arguments of "what about the unborn fetus's rights?"; well, there is no person better to make that decision than the fetus's biological parents.

    Of course, the argument about making abortions illegal but keeping them legal for a few select reasons is highly ignorant and subject to many misinterpretations of the reasons and, of course, many people asserting their beliefs into the reasons.
    Did you know:

    webOS ran on a Treo 800 during initial development.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by dkirker View Post
    [...] As for the arguments of "what about the unborn fetus's rights?"; well, there is no person better to make that decision than the fetus's biological parents. [...]
    Why should contact with the air be the determining factor?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  18. #18  
    I wonder why American women deserve less rights than women in most of the rest of the west.

    Surur
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I wonder why American women deserve less rights than women in most of the rest of the west.
    Way to keep emotion out of it. By that token, why don't parents have the right to end their children's life at any point?

    "I brought you into this world. I'll take you out, too. Doesn't matter to me. I'll make another one that looks just like you." - Bill Cosby
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Way to keep emotion out of it.
    I think its a serious question. I am wondering watch social disaster the pro-life advocates want to prevent. Other countries in the world are chugging a long fine, so whats causing this bee in their bonnet.

    By just considering this issue in the American context people start conflating Democrats vs republicans and the jurisdiction of the court etc with what is really a real woman's rights issue.

    So the question remains - why should American woman have less rights than women in UK or France or Germany etc? Because some people here clearly want to take away their right to have an abortion.

    Surur
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions