Why is everyone debating this issue anyway? It's been how long since Roe v. Wade? And have you pro-lifers gotten it overturned yet?

Although if we're going to be overturning Supreme Court cases my vote goes to F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation.

I was almost aborted...

I was incorrectly diagnosed with spina bifida whilst still in the womb, and from what I've been told (by my parents) the doctor's advice was that I should be terminated.

The only reason that I'm alive today is because my mother was scared shitless of the abortion-tools and didn't want them anywhere near her.

And yet, I still believe that abortion should remain legal, albeit with slightly tighter controls.

Get laid whenever you want but use protection! It is widely available, so there is no excuse. If people choose not to use protection, therefore making a stupid decision, they deserve to suffer the consequences and therefore learn from there mistakes.

But fuck the baby, right? Who cares if the mother can't take care of it? That mother needs to be taught a lesson! Or you could always give it up for adoption, along with the other thousand kids that don't have a home (or parents).

Get laid whenever you want but use protection! It is widely available, so there is no excuse. If people choose not to use protection, therefore making a stupid decision, they deserve to suffer the consequences and therefore learn from there mistakes.

Yup! Because contraception is 100% effective with no chance of failure.

Is there some sort of way to solve this problem with castration and potatoes?

At 10/23/08 04:56 AM, Ynek wrote: Yup! Because contraception is 100% effective with no chance of failure.

Well its better then not using them and abstinance doesnt work.

It would seem that a large number of the anti-abortion people don't know what they are talking about and I would guess statements like- "the woman didnt get raped but had sex because she wanted to be pleased and got pregnant" Indicate a high concentration of 12-14 year olds.

Seriously, Its easy not to get pregnant, but in the 1% condom failure chance, you shouldn't be stuck with a baby, and in many cases a baby is inconvenient.

Abortion is a woman's right.

I'm pro-choice but I also think the man should have a say in the matter in stead of it being completely the Woman's choice without consulting him. It takes two people to make a baby.

At 10/10/08 06:38 AM, Ben-Fox wrote: Under an outright abortion ban, the uterus of the woman becomes, in effect, property of the State, the woman herself being rendered insignificant, a mere housing for the State's property.

How do you feel about child support?
Currently a man has to pay child support if he has fathered a child.
It doesn't matter if he did it willingly, because he was drunk, because whatever contraception was used failed, or if he was somehow raped by a woman.

In many places child support payments will even be subtracted from unemployment benefits.
The father is effectively enslaved to the mother, because she chooses to have the child, with absolutely no say in whether or not that child is brought into the world.

Do you agree with me that forcing men to pay child support is dehumanising?

i think that if ur raped, it's incest you shouldhave right to abort, if ur a retarded teen having unprotected sex, then u should get a Moron-Medal and you'll should be obligated to keep the baby, unless there is a risk that u can die or the baby is already sick

Abortion isn't right,

But if we do cure cancer it'll save more lives in the long run

It is murder, and that is why I support abortions.

I only wish there was mandatory abortions.

I think people should be allowed to choose.
Personally, I don't remember anything from when I was a fetus, therefore, I can assume that a fetus isn't conscious.

I believe that if someone wants to have an abortion it is the girls right... It is her body, her life and her responsibility while it is in her body.

Therefore technically she is killing a part of herself... I personally wouldn't be happy if my girlfriend decided to have an abortion but at the same time at this point in my life I am not going to be able to look after it, this is not going to stop me having sex with my girlfriend...

It's all very well saying well if you don't want it give it up for abortion but the girl is still the ONLY one who HAS to look after that baby for 9 months... no one else... So it's not really a topic a man before or after having children could ever understand...

It's there body not ours...

At 10/9/08 02:49 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 10/8/08 05:14 PM, Silenthobo1234 wrote:

1=if your dumb

Sorry man I have to stop you there and just acknowledge teh irnoy right there. Carry on.

1=if your dumb enough to not use a condom why should the chid be the one to pay for your lack of thought to the consequences?

1. man, I mean, I guess it's a good thing condoms work 100% of the time. Phew.
2. If they're just SOOOOOO stupid, why do we actually *want8 them to give birth.

Oh yeah... and this is the probably the best response yet.

Something I didn't get to touch on before I am not going to stop having sex with my girlfriend but I can't guarantee we are never going to get pregnant... condoms are not 100% says so on the packet... Am I right in thinking you are endorsing no sex not only before marriage but until you are ready to have a baby? Ummm yeah, fine if it's your belief but don't force it on others...

At 11/9/08 05:02 PM, maxiimo wrote: i think that if ur raped, it's incest you shouldhave right to abort, if ur a retarded teen having unprotected sex, then u should get a Moron-Medal and you'll should be obligated to keep the baby, unless there is a risk that u can die or the baby is already sick

Your logic fails temendously.

If they're "retareded teen morons", why do you actually want to FORCE them to keep their inevitably moronic offspring alive in a world already crowded by idiots?

Personally my view on the womans right or murder is that its ok I honestly don't care however I do believe the abortion is a good form of population control even though there is some other options but oh well.

I might as well bring this up (sorry if this has been repeated if it is) Why is it whenever a woman doesn't want to take care of a child she is "making a choice" however whenever a man doens't want to mtake care of the child he is an "evil satanic hellspawn who god hates" and other crap.

My thought on this is that women do have their right to do this. Some families are not ready for children in the way that they do not have enough money or some personal reasons. You can't always blame it on the people having sex because even if you use protection, condoms have been proven to fail occasionally. Plus not only are we helping confused teenagers by doing this but using a fetus in stem cell research is beneficial to people who have diseases that we have yet to find a cure for. Patients who have parkinsons for instance.

At 11/13/08 06:49 PM, Masterzakk wrote: Personally my view on the womans right or murder is that its ok I honestly don't care however I do believe the abortion is a good form of population control even though there is some other options but oh well.

I might as well bring this up (sorry if this has been repeated if it is) Why is it whenever a woman doesn't want to take care of a child she is "making a choice" however whenever a man doens't want to mtake care of the child he is an "evil satanic hellspawn who god hates" and other crap.

Following on from this, why has the constitutionality of forced child support payments not been challenged yet?
Many of the concerns in Roe Vs Wade apply equally to the father of an unwanted child when it's born, such as the economic impact and the social stigma associated with being a "dead-beat dad".

Yet this has not been challenged in a court of law.

At 9/4/08 12:03 PM, Brick-top wrote: My opinion for abortion stays fairly neutral.

However what pisses me off is pro-choicers and pro-lifers always argue and never try to discover a solution that benifits all.

Yeah, make it legal for everyone who believes it should be legal and illegal for those who don't ... that way those nutjob 'pro-lifers' wont have the option to be a hypocrite.

At 11/19/08 08:35 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:14 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:05 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:02 PM, Phratt wrote: I'm pro obama but I beleive the child being aborted deserves a choice on whether he/she should die or not.

Great idea, let's ask them.

Omg, you can't ask them, so we should kill them all right?

Is it even classified as murder?

Legally no, but it is scientifically a stage of human life. Gametes are not stages of human life, but Zygotes are, embryos are, and the stages succeeding those. Any stage of life is susceptible to murder if the victim is considered abiotic because they cannot respond, oppose or disagree at the current moment.

My 1 year old son can't talk, so I should kill him!

Age/Gender: 15, Male

You're not a dad. And obviously you haven't heard a baby in 3 at the morning.

Examples are examples. For an excessively sarcastic douchebag, you can't recognize sarcasm?

My mom is sleeping, she can't talk either, lets kill her!

Mine talks in her sleep. She can live.

But mine can't, so she isn't alive til dawn eh?

Just because one is at the stage in life where they are unable to communitcate, does not justify killing them.

You're right. Let's keep asking.

Or how about we wait until they are competent enough to voice their opinion? Sounds the most logical to me.

EDIT, I meant to say that it was wrong to say that any victim that can't do those, is susceptible to murder.

I personally don't like the idea of having retarded teenagers pissing in teh shallow end of the gene pool.

ie. Fuck yeah abortion.

At 11/19/08 08:42 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:35 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:14 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:05 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:02 PM, Phratt wrote: I'm pro obama but I beleive the child being aborted deserves a choice on whether he/she should die or not.

Great idea, let's ask them.

Omg, you can't ask them, so we should kill them all right?

Is it even classified as murder?

Legally no

There you go.

Examples are examples. For an excessively sarcastic douchebag, you can't recognize sarcasm?

You can't recognize that a 1 year old isn't scilent.

But mine can't, so she isn't alive til dawn eh?

Poke it with a stick. Then slice it's head off.

Or how about we wait until they are competent enough to voice their opinion? Sounds the most logical to me.

Okay, then what happens?

At 11/19/08 09:01 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:42 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:35 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:14 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:05 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:02 PM, Phratt wrote: I'm pro obama but I beleive the child being aborted deserves a choice on whether he/she should die or not.

Great idea, let's ask them.

Omg, you can't ask them, so we should kill them all right?

Is it even classified as murder?

Legally no

There you go.

Legally Native americans weren't humans but savage inferior beasts, was that right?

Examples are examples. For an excessively sarcastic douchebag, you can't recognize sarcasm?

You can't recognize that a 1 year old isn't scilent.

Can they say "No, don't kill me!" , Not they can't. A One year old can't even comprehend the concept of death.

But mine can't, so she isn't alive til dawn eh?

Poke it with a stick. Then slice it's head off.

Or how about we wait until they are competent enough to voice their opinion? Sounds the most logical to me.

Okay, then what happens?

The now fully competent person can decide if life is worth living on their own and commit suicide if they think life sucks that bad.

At 11/19/08 09:25 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 09:01 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:42 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:35 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:14 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:05 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:02 PM, Phratt wrote: I'm pro obama but I beleive the child being aborted deserves a choice on whether he/she should die or not.

Great idea, let's ask them.

Omg, you can't ask them, so we should kill them all right?

Is it even classified as murder?

Legally no

There you go.

Legally Native americans weren't humans but savage inferior beasts, was that right?

What century are you in? We're talking about the now and you're discussing Native Americans.

Examples are examples. For an excessively sarcastic douchebag, you can't recognize sarcasm?

You can't recognize that a 1 year old isn't scilent.

Can they say "No, don't kill me!" , Not they can't. A One year old can't even comprehend the concept of death.

No, you said they couldn't talk. I said they made noise whether or not that can be allowed as talking is debatable.

But mine can't, so she isn't alive til dawn eh?

Poke it with a stick. Then slice it's head off.

Or how about we wait until they are competent enough to voice their opinion? Sounds the most logical to me.

Okay, then what happens?

The now fully competent person can decide if life is worth living on their own and commit suicide if they think life sucks that bad.

And what happens if this person who is old enough to understand life and death (probably a very young child) is going to do afterwards?

I tend to avoid arguments like this because they don't stay on topic (like your native american argument) and they end up with dirty tactics so the person can win.

At 11/19/08 09:44 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 09:25 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 09:01 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:42 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:35 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:14 PM, Phratt wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:05 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 11/19/08 08:02 PM, Phratt wrote: I'm pro obama but I beleive the child being aborted deserves a choice on whether he/she should die or not.

Great idea, let's ask them.

Omg, you can't ask them, so we should kill them all right?

Is it even classified as murder?

Legally no

There you go.

Legally Native americans weren't humans but savage inferior beasts, was that right?

What century are you in? We're talking about the now and you're discussing Native Americans.

Just because I proved that the legal system is no infallible, means I'm irrelevant? Stop trying to leeway out of my proposals and arguments.

Examples are examples. For an excessively sarcastic douchebag, you can't recognize sarcasm?

You can't recognize that a 1 year old isn't scilent.

Can they say "No, don't kill me!" , Not they can't. A One year old can't even comprehend the concept of death.

No, you said they couldn't talk. I said they made noise whether or not that can be allowed as talking is debatable.

If thats the case, then abortion should be illegal because Embryos do make sounds. And that can be considered as a form of communication.

But mine can't, so she isn't alive til dawn eh?

Poke it with a stick. Then slice it's head off.

Or how about we wait until they are competent enough to voice their opinion? Sounds the most logical to me.

Okay, then what happens?

The now fully competent person can decide if life is worth living on their own and commit suicide if they think life sucks that bad.

And what happens if this person who is old enough to understand life and death (probably a very young child) is going to do afterwards?

What do you plan to do? What do I plan to do?

LIVE! They'll make their own choices with their own lives, like nature intended.

I tend to avoid arguments like this because they don't stay on topic (like your native american argument) and they end up with dirty tactics so the person can win.

So you're sarcasm, and implications that I'm irrelevant and therefore wrong aren't dirty?

At 11/19/08 09:55 PM, Phratt wrote: Just because I proved that the legal system is no infallible, means I'm irrelevant? Stop trying to leeway out of my proposals and arguments.

I'm not. And I never said the legal system is infallible. But what gives you the right to pick and choose laws that you don't like? It's wise to criticise but just plainly disagree with would open the flood gates to disagree with all laws.

If thats the case, then abortion should be illegal because Embryos do make sounds. And that can be considered as a form of communication.

Which sounds do they make that can be heard by the naked ear?

What do you plan to do? What do I plan to do?

You never answered my question. Let's say hypothetically a girl is pregnant and doesn't want the child. But you come along and say wait 5-10 years for the child to make the decision of life and death for itself.

What happens after the child chooses life and the girl still doesn't want him?

LIVE! They'll make their own choices with their own lives, like nature intended.

With hospitals, doctors, medications etc like nature intended....

...oh wait!

So you're sarcasm, and implications that I'm irrelevant and therefore wrong aren't dirty?

If your quote mine digs any deeper you'll eventually find Gold. I'm talking about debates because 95% of the time that's all these debates consist of.

*oh looks a dead fetus covered in blood!*

*Oh look a kid in a korean orphanage!!*

It happens all the time. And it'll eventually happen in THIS debate.

Hey guyz u dont need to quote their ten previous posts when you're replying to somebody u kno lol

they were killed by untrained abortionists, because in many states abortion is illegal and so no doctors have actual MDs. That's why abortion should be allowed.

At 11/20/08 04:37 PM, Truejolet wrote: they were killed by untrained abortionists, because in many states abortion is illegal and so no doctors have actual MDs. That's why abortion should be allowed.

O hai, you must be new here.

I don't know how they do it over in general, but around here we only respect well-reasoned arguments. Come back when you have something constructive to contribute to the topic(s) at hand.