Abortion

[deadpool 52]

How do feel on the subject? Please defend your beliefs.

[RedRevolutionary87]

women should have a choice, its simple freedom, and plus we are over populated as it is, all we need is more babies comming into the werld and even werse they are usualy unwanted(rape babies)

[red senator]

I am in favor of keeping abortion legal because a woman should have the right to do whatever she wants with her body and I think that women should take offense at the fact that old, rich, white males in washington want to legislate the uterus of every woman in the u.s.

(Edited by red senator at 3:25 am on April 13, 2002)

[Xvall]

I am not trying to sound racist or anything, but.. (And this is how it is in Amerikkka, or at least how politicians want it to be.).. Elderly white males have no right to tell a female what is right or wrong to do with her body. It is her chouce, and no one should have any sort of control over it. She can have an abortion if she wants..

- Drake Dracoli

[Valkyrie]

Hehe. What if the elderly white male is the child's biological father...

Anyway, I would personally never get one myself, but that is my own individual ethical choice. I wouldn't want to see the law repealed, as it is one of the few rights that women do have for themselves.. But, on the otherhand, I tbink the father should have more of a right in the decision then they have thus far been given. And in a third respect.. maybe the kid should have some input into it to. since it is their life. So, It's an issue that I can only speak subjective about.


(Edited by Paris at 4:56 am on April 13, 2002)

[RedCeltic]

I've argued this at great lengths several times on this board...

I'm a firm supporter of a woman's right to choose. However, one should always be reminded that it's not simply a fight to protect a woman's right to have an abortion, but a fight to protect women from undertrained butchers that perform illegal black market abortions.

Make abortion illegal and they won't stop... they will just become more dangerous again... like they where before Roe vs Wade.

Legalized abortion ensures an ample supply of properly trained doctors and is a protection of women's heath.

(Edited by RedCeltic at 11:13 pm on April 12, 2002)

[Zippy]

Pro-choice, see above for opinions and im in agreement with them. :)

Zippy.

[deadpool 52]

And definitely in cases of rape and incest there should be the choice, but either way there are huge impacts on the mother's life, if they decide to keep the baby, or not, so that there should be more education on the responsiblilities of sex.

[Guest]

the funny thing is you immedietly posit "old white males" as the most anti abortion group out there. Truth is african americans and latinos are far more conservative on the issue.

[Fires of History]

The question is: What decisions do the government have a right to make for your body?

I would say none.

Does the government own your body, or do you?

Most arguments against abortion, sadly, are based in religious beliefs. And the restriction of abortion rights is yet another aggression of religious fanaticism into mainstream politics to the detriment of women and their health.

That, and what RedCeltic already said. It IS A MAJOR WOMEN'S HEALTH ISSUE! People forget this. Why people think outlawing abortion will end abortion is beyond me. It will continue no matter what...

But that'll raise coat hanger stock, guess that's a good thing for the economy eh? lol lol lol

EDIT: 'Guest,' HA! HA! HA! Do you honestly believe that African-Americans and Latinos are making the laws? Are the one's lobbying for the Christian Coalition and others? Jeez...

(Edited by Fires of History at 3:20 pm on April 13, 2002)

[red senator]

Really Guest, the last time I checked, old white men were the majortity in washington.

[Anonymous]

I am against abortion, its legal killing. The mother should not have the choice to have an abortion, she is also getting the choice of killing the child, its wrong.

In cases such as rape, why not have the child and give it to an orphanage, why should the child lose his life just because his father was a rapist and asshole.

What if it were you, would you want your mother killing you coz it. No i doubt anyone would?

Now comrades dont kill me just coz i didnt agree with the majority of ye.

[flames of the flag]

I think that women should have the right do whatever they like with there bodies. The only thing that makes abortion any different from a tatto or a piercing is the death of an unborn child wich is just that-unborn. I think that life doesn't begin until the baby is born, while anti-abortionist think that is begins at conseption.
Meanwhile, the old white guys in washington can keep rambling on about their free country while they control what women can or cant do with their bodies? bullshit.
-flames

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Guest on 9:51 am on April 13, 2002
the funny thing is you immedietly posit "old white males" as the most anti abortion group out there. Truth is african americans and latinos are far more conservative on the issue.
Where did you read that? It goes against my own personal experiences. Although it wouldn't be surprising if Latinos were slightly more anti-abortion than caucasians because a higher percentage of them are Catholic.

Anyway, the race issue aside, I do not believe that abortion is murder. And I agree with RedCeltic . . . prohibition didn't make alcohol go away. The War on Drugs didn't make drugs go away. A war on abortion would put upper-middle class girls and women on flights to Europe and lower-middle class and working-class girls and women in the hands of largely untrained or unqualified butchers who would squeeze every last penny out of them. People who are anti-abortion should join me and many other people on this board in the fight to make sex education more useful, get insurance for the lower classes and get birth control covered by insurance. That is the best way to bring down abortion rates.

[Fires of History]

Quote: from irishguevara32 on 6:30 pm on April 13, 2002
The mother should not have the choice to have an abortion, she is also getting the choice of killing the child, its wrong.

You say "it's wrong." Well, why is it wrong?

You do realize that the vast majority of abortions are done within the first trimester, when the embryo isn't even recognizable as a fetus and no longer than 1-3 inches long? Is that your definition of a 'child'?

[Rob]

I'm pro-choice, and my argument has already been stated by others. In addition to previos arguments in favor of reproductive choice, no one has yet brought up that the majority of those aborted embryos who would be born would not have a good life ahead of them, and they shouldn't be subjected to that suffering. Especially if their mother was forced into having them. Also, irishguevara, i don't personally see embryos as unborn children. there is the potential for life, and there is also the potential for them not to live.

[RedRevolutionary87]

it doesnt matter, we dont need orphanage population, on eday we wont have any food to feed ourselves, and people will start dying from starvation, everyone will, we need to population comtroll. i dont believe anything is a child untill it starts breathing, and thinking.

[I Will Deny You]

One thing I forgot to mention that I haven't seen elsewhere in this thread is that a victory for the far right would only give them more power. George W. Bush's health leader when he was governor of Texas expressed the opinion of many right-wingers when he said that even if giving birth would seriously endanger a mother's life, he wouldn't let her have an abortion. The more abortion is regulated, the harder it will be for women to save themselves. I'm guessing (and hoping!) that even the pro-lifers would let a woman save her life if it meant aborting a one-to-three-inch long fetus.

[red senator]

Quote: from Rob on 11:05 pm on April 13, 2002
In addition to previos arguments in favor of reproductive choice, no one has yet brought up that the majority of those aborted embryos who would be born would not have a good life ahead of them, and they shouldn't be subjected to that suffering. Especially if their mother was forced into having them.


I was going to say that in my original argument, but I thought everyone would jump my ass because it sounds like saying that a child shouln't be able to live because they will be born into poverty.
More on that argument though, some people say women should just have the children and give them up for adoption because there are alot of parents waiting for children. If this is so, then why are orphanages over-run with children. (alot of people don't want other people's kids, thats why people who have trouble conceiving go through all that shit with speacialists doing artificial insemination)

[red senator]

Another thing, isn't an abortion better than throwing the baby in a dumpster and letting it either freeze to death or die of starvation.
There's been about three of those cases in my area in the past four months, and ("I will deny you" will love this) my state's official sex education program is abstenance. They have actually spent tax money from the hard working people of Louisiana by trying to replace sex education with abstenance lectures.

[Nickademus]

i am pro choice. i can tell you right now that if i had conceived by the man that raped me, i would have had an abortion. it was difficult enough to deal with the fact that i was raped. to have to carry the product of a rape inside me for 9 months would have sent me into a downward spiral. not only would i probably have abandoned the child after it was born but i probably wouldn't haven't been healthy and smart about it during the pregnancy resulting in a lot of problems for the poor child.

also thing of the case where a woman will have great health problems and possibly die from having a child....possibly resulting in the death of both the mother and the child. i think the woman has the right to choose between risking her life and the baby's life. its her decision....if she makes a decision she can't live with she will at least have the knowledge that she had the option. choice....freedom.....seem quite similar to me

[Anonymous]

It doesn't matter how young the baby is, life begins at conception, you mightened be killing a 'child' but you are killing the potential for a child, either way you are ending a life, what if it were che, he was killed shortly after conception, there would have been no revolution, probably not a successful one anyway, and none of us would have even been here at this site if that happened,

You dont know what the child could have been or what he could have achieved. I think it is killing even if the father was a rapist, who says the child would be one or a bad person at all.

[oconner]

I may be in the minority here, but I think it is wrong.
I am a big supporter of women's right's, I'm female myself, and in some countries I can understand that a child would cost so much that it would put the lives of the rest of the family at risk. However, shouldn't we blame the government of the country for that?
I think that the woman should give a valid reason for wanting an abortion. Some excuses aren't good enough.

[red senator]

Quote: from irishguevara32 on 12:19 pm on April 14, 2002
It doesn't matter how young the baby is, life begins at conception, you mightened be killing a 'child' but you are killing the potential for a child, either way you are ending a life,

Ok, so you are against it because it kills the potential for a child? Well then, are you against the use of condoms and other birth control because it kills the potential of te semen to ensiminate an egg? Isn't wasted semen or an unused egg as bad as abortion in your argument because it is wasting the same potential that a newly concieved fetus has?

[Anonymous]

Good Point but semen is just semen and an egg is just an egg, i said life begins at conception, thats when the child is born at least thats what i think ok, no bad feelings comrades

[Zippy]

Quote: from irishguevara32 on 4:38 pm on April 14, 2002
... but semen is just semen
There is an organisation around to stop people masturbating, because they beleive sperm to be classed as "alive" and are this being murdered when shot onto the bed clothes. I'll try and have a look around and see what its called ..... :)

Zippy.

[TheDerminator]

I agree with Zippy,

Life is life. U ought to take the logic to its natural conclusion. Seem has potential to become life. Stop wanking! Or maybe not, and maybe no maybe no maybe.

It is ludicrous to cry murder when a phoetus is not developed into a baby within the womb. The level of development is for doctors to decide in each case.

A potential cannot be realised, if there is no capacity, and underdeveloped phoetus has yet to develop the capacity to be classified as a child within the womb.

It is a medical classification that the doctor makes and as far as I am concerned that is the end of it.

Resistance is Futile!

derminated

[Nickademus]

Quote: from irishguevara32 on 12:19 pm on April 14, 2002
It doesn't matter how young the baby is, life begins at conception, you mightened be killing a 'child' but you are killing the potential for a child, either way you are ending a life, what if it were che, he was killed shortly after conception, there would have been no revolution, probably not a successful one anyway, and none of us would have even been here at this site if that happened,

You dont know what the child could have been or what he could have achieved. I think it is killing even if the father was a rapist, who says the child would be one or a bad person at all.


i never implied that a child who is the result of a rape would be 'bad' but it would remind me, ever second i look at my belly or the child, of that horrible incident......it would end in neglect (most likely).....is that really a decent life for a child? is that a decent life for the mohter?

and what if that embreyo were someone like che? but what if they were someone like jeffry daumer? you can never rule that possibility out.

it is a very difficult decision to choose an abortion and most women don't make it lightly. few do it for 'frivoulous' reasons. they should at least be able to choose.

if abortion were illegal women would still be having abortions, just not clean and safe ones. women will be having them on the kitchen tables by dirty doctors with dirty instruments. some will even try to give themelves abortions using a coathanger. this is a fact, its in our past. its kind oflike prostitution, you may not agree with it, but its going to happen and its a whole lot safer when its regulated by the state for a lot of people, then if it is not.

i suggest you watch the movie "if these walls could talk" it deals with this very issue.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Zippy on 11:44 am on April 14, 2002
There is an organisation around to stop people masturbating, because they beleive sperm to be classed as "alive" and are this being murdered when shot onto the bed clothes.
Next time I have my period, I'll send all of my used tampons to pro-lifers for safe keeping. After all, they seem to know a lot more about preserving life and the potential for life than I do!

[RedCeltic]

What attaches it's self to the uterian wall after the sperm enters the egg is a clump of cells, not even a multi-cellular life form, and definitely not a human.

Until the umbilical cord is detached at birth, an embryo is a dependant life form, not a human.

to say that having an abortion is somehow preventing great people from being born... well that's kin to saying that if a person never has children they are cheating the world by not furthering human existence.

They had abortions in the middle ages and will have abortions even in the most highly developed futuristic police state.

The goal is to provide quality gynecology for all women, not simply those who can afford a plane ticket to a more reasonable left thinking country.

[Zippy]

Quote: from RedCeltic on 6:33 pm on April 14, 2002
What attaches it's self to the uterian wall after the sperm enters the egg is a clump of cells, ... and definitely not a human.
I know a few people that have been born and have lived on this earth 20+ years, and its an hard job just to call them human. ;)


Next time I have my period, I'll send all of my used tampons to pro-lifers for safe keeping
Wont the postal service just love you?

Zippy.

[deadpool 52]

With this whole 'potential' arguement, if it is true, then we are all murderers:

We all limit each other potential, biological or otherwise, in some way or another.
It is a fact that if a human being smokes one puff of a cigarette, his/her life span will not proceed for a full two-minutes then it could have.
Using the 'potential' arguement then, I am killing someone when I throw them down on the ground, and make them smoke, I am their slayer.
And if someone else does that to the same person, then are they not killers of the same person also?

(Edited by deadpool 52 at 7:59 am on April 15, 2002)

[pastradamus]

look guys,let me give ye tha jist of the pro abortion case & the anti abortion soulitions in my view.
PRO
1)the pregnancy should be terminated if the mother is depressed & might commit suicide.
ANS=the mother should recieve psycoligical help,but if there is no other alternitiveafter help,to stop the mother killing herself or the child then green light for abortion.
2)if the mother is raped,then she should also recieve help psycologlocial help,but if no results come of it then the preg should be terminated.

If it were up to me,killing a human being is wrong,if you are in favor of abortion & things like the death sentance then you are no better than murderers themselves.
But i can make acceptions to rape in the case of abortion.But not when a couple wanna get 1 cuz they created the child through their own doing & are murdering sumthing that they are fully responsible for and just cuz they made a "mistake" they think killin sumthing is fair?!?

[RedCeltic]

I've noticed that you've ducked around (in my eyes) the most important arguments...

But... let me address the issue of if Abortion is Murder...

Is abortion murder?

No. Absolutely not.

It's not murder if it's not an independent person. One might argue, then, that it's not murder to end the life of any child before she reaches consciousness, but we don't know how long after birth personhood arrives for each new child, so it's completely logical to use their independence as the dividing line for when full rights are given to a new human being.

Using independence also solves the problem of dealing with premature babies. Although a preemie is obviously still only a potential person, by virtue of its independence from the mother, we give it the full rights of a conscious person. This saves us from setting some other arbitrary date of when we consider a new human being a full person. Older cultures used to set it at two years of age, or even older. Modern religious cultures want to set it at conception, which is simply wishful thinking on their part. As we've clearly demonstrated, a single-cell zygote is no more a person that a human hair follicle.

But that doesn't stop religious fanatics from dumping their judgements and their anger on top of women who choose to exercise the right to control their bodies. It's the ultimate irony that people who claim to represent a loving God resort to scare tactics and fear to support their mistaken beliefs.

It's even worse when you consider that most women who have an abortion have just made the most difficult decision of their life. No one thinks abortion is a wonderful thing. No one tries to get pregnant just so they can terminate it. Even though it's not murder, it still eliminates a potential person, a potential daughter, a potential son. It's hard enough as it is. Women certainly don't need others telling them it's a murder.

It's not. On the contrary, abortion is an absolutely moral choice for any woman wishing to control her body.



And please, leave your Bible out of politics.



(Edited by RedCeltic at 10:57 am on April 15, 2002)

[Nickademus]

RedCeltic.....as usual, i agree with you 100% (the bible part too)

[Zippy]

Quote: from pastradamus on 4:38 pm on April 15, 2002
If it were up to me,killing a human being is wrong,if you are in favor of abortion & things like the death sentance then you are no better than murderers themselves.
If it were up to me, ending the prospective life of an unborn featus is tolerable in certain circumstances, and if you are not in favour of abortion and wish to take away womens rights then you are no better than the oppressors themselves.

Zippy.

[Anonymous]

I like the way they do it in Eire, here they will only give it if its a young girl or maybe a rape. Good Arguements guys but i still think it is wrong.

I also think that men cant really understand this properly, coz we cant create a life and make it, know what i mean........

[Nickademus]

Quote: from irishguevara32 on 11:03 pm on April 15, 2002
I like the way they do it in Eire, here they will only give it if its a young girl or maybe a rape. Good Arguements guys but i still think it is wrong.

I also think that men cant really understand this properly, coz we cant create a life and make it, know what i mean........

i agree with the last part which is why, i , as a WOMAN, am pro choice...but i also think it needs to be closely regulated and not used as a form of birth control

[RedCeltic]

I also think that men cant really understand this properly, coz we cant create a life and make it, know what i mean........

Yea I know what you mean... it's a woman's choice to do what she wants with her own body, not the choice of a bunch of doting old fools in the government.

Anti-Choice is athoritarian, patriarchal, and opressive.

Oh By the way, contrary to what deep south fundementalists would say... Pro-Choice liberals/Socialists/etc... are not going door to door trying to promote the usage of abortion methods.

Rather the oposite actually... while "Right to life" people stand in front of family planning centers with horrific pictures and harrass people... any people... going into the building... (I know this because I once had a bank in the same building as a family planing center) ...

... Pro-Choice activists are out distributing provelactives, educating, helping to reduce the numbers of women in need of an abortion.

We also support the morning after pill that would greatly reduce the number of women in need of an abortion, however rejected by the religious right for the same reasons.... their common plee that somehow life begins at conception...

Somehow this goes against all common practice in Xtianity doesn't it? I mean the Xtians have us marking our day of existance on our "BIRTH DAY".. for me that woud be December 11, 1970.... now... on December 10,1970... what would I be?... Part of my mother!

However... we don't want to have women aborting babys that have come to full term... we only seek to protect the right for women to go through the proper channels, counceling etc.. to possibly abort a fetus that is less than ..uh 3-5 months...

The reactionaries may blow up as many clinics as they please... insult, harass us as they wish... yet the United States, as backwards as it may seem, will not turn back to the 1950's when women where buthered by untrained, blackmarket, doctors... it's bad enough that medicine is in the privite sector.




(Edited by RedCeltic at 11:22 pm on April 15, 2002)

[Angie]

My personal option re abortion is that it depends on the situation behind the conception. If the woman was raped, then yes - by all means. But no, if she's just loose and screws up by being stupid, then she's getting off lightly if she just aborts the pregnancy and goes back to the way she was before as if nothing has happened. Often being forced to look after a child can be the best way to settle a person down.

I honestly believe - I really do - that if someone cannot put a child's life before their own, then they do not deserve to have children. Such people's tubes may as well be tied, they'll be no positive addition to the gene pool. If we have a case of a "repeat offender" (which, incredibly sadly, happens a lot), then a harsher move should be taken - forced long-term Community Service or something, showing them the suffering of others, especially the suffering of children born into bad family arrangements.

Children come first. First and foremost. Without them, what future can any of us expect?

[Vladimir]

I agree with Angie, children must come first.

[FtWfTn]

I didn't read all the fourms so somone might have said this. . . . .What about the Biological father? Isn't the child his as well. And the problem is that since the women carry the children they have the choice to do as they please. But I know if my girlfriend wee to get pregnant I wouldn't want her to have an abortion. . .I'd love to bring a child into this world to educate him/her and show them love. Maybe teach what is right, right off the back. But it shouldn't be banned or what have you. . .Cause then I'd just be a hyocraite for what I believe freedom of choice is.

[guerrillaradio]

To me, it seems quite obvious. We had this debate not so long ago (and probably has come around millions of times before), but hey, I like repeating myself...

Aside from all the already posted arguments by all the pro-choicers, I think there's a whole new aspect to this, and that is the scientific viewpoint. It seems to me that we have the technology to perform such an operation, so why don't we?? It is inevitable that science will continue to progress as we as humans evolve, so why don't we let it better our lives?? Refusing to allow abortions is akin to putting your head in the sand. And it surprises me that anyone on this board, supposedly a left-wing one, could be anti-abortion. I'm probably one of the least left-wing people here, but I am still definitely pro-choice.

Angie - your argument doesn't hold water. As a punishment for one discretion, a woman should have to look after a child for the rest of her life?? Please, that is stupid. Does it not seem obvious that the woman will neglect or abandon the child?? And also, for those who advocate abortions only in the circumstances of rape, why should a court decide?? It seems obvious that often mistakes will be made in the court, and a rape will be deemed consensual, and vice versa, so injustices will happen. Isn't it much easier for everyone concerned to let abortions happen as and when they should??

[Nickademus]

Quote: from Angie on 12:17 pm on April 16, 2002
My personal option re abortion is that it depends on the situation behind the conception. If the woman was raped, then yes - by all means. But no, if she's just loose and screws up by being stupid, then she's getting off lightly if she just aborts the pregnancy and goes back to the way she was before as if nothing has happened. Often being forced to look after a child can be the best way to settle a person down.

I honestly believe - I really do - that if someone cannot put a child's life before their own, then they do not deserve to have children. Such people's tubes may as well be tied, they'll be no positive addition to the gene pool. If we have a case of a "repeat offender" (which, incredibly sadly, happens a lot), then a harsher move should be taken - forced long-term Community Service or something, showing them the suffering of others, especially the suffering of children born into bad family arrangements.

Children come first. First and foremost. Without them, what future can any of us expect?


angie, yuou make it sounds as if its an easy choice to ake tohave an abortion and that once done, people never have to deal with it again. it affects you for the rest of your life.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from FtWfTn on 1:00 pm on April 16, 2002
I didn't read all the fourms so somone might have said this. . . . .What about the Biological father? Isn't the child his as well. And the problem is that since the women carry the children they have the choice to do as they please. But I know if my girlfriend wee to get pregnant I wouldn't want her to have an abortion. . .I'd love to bring a child into this world to educate him/her and show them love. Maybe teach what is right, right off the back. But it shouldn't be banned or what have you. . .Cause then I'd just be a hyocraite for what I believe freedom of choice is.


i have some respect for the biological father (except in the case of rape and incest) but ultimately its the woman's body, its her choice. why should a man get to dictate what a woman does with her body for a minimum of 9 months? but, i would at least talk to the father and get his opinion and discuss it.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Angie on 7:17 am on April 16, 2002
Often being forced to look after a child can be the best way to settle a person down.
But often people who wanted to have abortions that were irresponsible before the fact don't settle down, and now you've got a dumb kid who can't afford heat and a starving, neglected child. Children shouldn't be seen as punishments or discipline devices for the parents. Children should only come into the world when they're wanted.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from I Will Deny You on 8:21 pm on April 16, 2002

Quote: from Angie on 7:17 am on April 16, 2002
Often being forced to look after a child can be the best way to settle a person down.
But often people who wanted to have abortions that were irresponsible before the fact don't settle down, and now you've got a dumb kid who can't afford heat and a starving, neglected child. Children shouldn't be seen as punishments or discipline devices for the parents. Children should only come into the world when they're wanted.

i agree with you. imposing children as a punishment results in a true punishment for the child, not themother

[CheGuevara]

Well, I've got an interesting one for you. I've already made up my opinion, but I'm interested in what you others think.

If a women gets pregnant(i.e. through consensual sex) and the man is willing to pay half the cost of the abortion, should he have to pay child support if she keeps the baby?

[Nickademus]

Quote: from CheGuevara on 10:44 pm on April 16, 2002
Well, I've got an interesting one for you. I've already made up my opinion, but I'm interested in what you others think.

If a women gets pregnant(i.e. through consensual sex) and the man is willing to pay half the cost of the abortion, should he have to pay child support if she keeps the baby?

YES he should. he is partially responsible for the child and should be responsible for it. to allow men to get out of their responsibility by offering to pay for an abortion would allow for carelessness. if the woman doesn't believe in abortion, he will have to accept the fact that he got a woman pregnant, and deal with the consequences

[El Che]

I have to say I disagree with the majority of opinions posted.

I`ve thought long and hard about this issue, its a tough one, but I think I am finaly ready to assume a position, though with some caution.

The babies life is his own. The mother should not, in my view, have life or death power of the baby. Thats what this is about, power. Think about it this way, if you were not yet born would you want ur biological mother to have the power to deny you life? I mean the deed is done, she gave you life, its done, you are not yet born but you already exsist, you have the right to live. So to me the real question is defining when your right to life starts. one week old? one month? three? that is the question every society needs to think long and hard about and come to a conclusion.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from El Che on 11:42 pm on April 16, 2002
I have to say I disagree with the majority of opinions posted.

I`ve thought long and hard about this issue, its a tough one, but I think I am finaly ready to assume a position, though with some caution.

The babies life is his own. The mother should not, in my view, have life or death power of the baby. Thats what this is about, power. Think about it this way, if you were not yet born would you want ur biological mother to have the power to deny you life? I mean the deed is done, she gave you life, its done, you are not yet born but you already exsist, you have the right to live. So to me the real question is defining when your right to life starts. one week old? one month? three? that is the question every society needs to think long and hard about and come to a conclusion.

but where does life begin? the first trimester? the second? conception? when the ambilical cord is cut? the whole debate revolves around when an embryo is considered a life

[Zippy]

Quote: from Angie on 12:17 pm on April 16, 2002
... if she's just loose and screws up by being stupid, then she's getting off lightly if she just aborts the pregnancy and goes back to the way she was before as if nothing has happened.
I doubt any person could abort their child and class it has "getting off lightly".

Zippy.

[Angie]

Zippy, you can if she's a slut who cares more about getting her 20 minute thrill with some horny bloke, than the life and health of a baby. Those sorts of people really do exist, as sad as it is to say it. Hiding the fact under the carpet helps no-one.

[Angie]

Using talking-marks instead of quotes because the code wasn't working before

guerrillaradio

"Angie - your argument doesn't hold water. As a punishment for one discretion, a woman should have to look after a child for the rest of her life??"

Yes. If I were stupid enough to fall pregnant after screwing around and not taking the proper precautions (not just having a partner wear a condom, but making sure it was used correctly, etc.) then Yes. I personally would take the child on and bring it up.

"Please, that is stupid. Does it not seem obvious that the woman will neglect or abandon the child??"

No, it is not stupid. I recommend you perhaps hunt down a couple of documentaries in relation to the subject, and hear the stories about women, especially young women, who fall pregnant accidentally and decide to keep the child. The sheer number of them which are sobered up by the mere fact of being up all night feeding and changing nappies (diapers) ... they don't have time for their previous lifestyle anymore. A lot of them even go so far as to say they find that instead of hunting around looking for a cheap fling with a stranger, to find some false and temporary sense of love, they now have a true, legitimate river of love coming from a child which relies on them.

Of course, that does not apply to all 100% of women who fall pregnant, but it does apply to a surprisingly high amount.

"And also, for those who advocate abortions only in the circumstances of rape, why should a court decide?? It seems obvious that often mistakes will be made in the court, and a rape will be deemed consensual, and vice versa, so injustices will happen. Isn't it much easier for everyone concerned to let abortions happen as and when they should??"

Why shouldn't the courts decide? As crazy as that comment sounded, yes even to me, there's two reasons for my stating it.

First: If getting an abortion were to mean you had to see a court first, then it could act as a discouragment from those women (not a large number, but large enough) who just want to have an abortion because a baby is "inconvenient" to them at that stage in their life. Personally, were I some easy woman who suddenly heard that getting an abortion was going to be harder than I thought, I'd take more steps to avoid getting pregnant. Doesn't apply to everyone, no, but it apples to a lot of people.

Second: Bringing the issue of abortion into the courts brings the issue of rape into the courts - most rape cases never get known because of the fact that the women are ashamed, they felt that somehow they were to blame for being raped, and especially because they don't believe that they'll be heard fairly. When the court is more focused on the issue, instead of just brushing it off (like it's been known to do many times over the year), then it will become more effective. People will begin to trust it more.

Just because it's not giving people what they currently want doesn't mean that they should discard it; On the contrary, it means they should be fighting harder to change it. As a Socialist, you are no doubt familiar with that concept, as are we all.

Nickademus

"angie, yuou make it sounds as if its an easy choice to ake tohave an abortion and that once done, people never have to deal with it again. it affects you for the rest of your life."

No, it effects a lot people for the rest of their lives. Not all of them. For some people, it literally is just an easy way out. It's a horrible thought, yes, but that's human nature in a capsule, I guess - we are not all perfect and wonderful and full of guilt. Some of us really just don't care.

I Will Deny You

"But often people who wanted to have abortions that were irresponsible before the fact don't settle down, and now you've got a dumb kid who can't afford heat and a starving, neglected child."

A dumb kid?! Charming.

There are always alternatives. If you don't think they can look after a child, put it up for adoption. The number of people who are so irresponsible that they cannot look after a child come into a category all of their own, not unlike the "repeat offenders" of my first post - and there numbers are relatively small (operative word: relatively), but they certainly exist. We cannot hide them, nor can we inflate their numbers more than they already are.

In fact, some of them ARE "repeat offenders", that cannot be denied. But that does mean that just because they cannot look after their children, that someone else could not. The children don't need to die because the parents are losers.

Children shouldn't be seen as punishments or discipline devices for the parents. Children should only come into the world when they're wanted."

Those bulk of people who keep their children find that the children are the best teachers there are. Therefore, it goes from being punishment/disciplinary action to being a gift. Children teach modesty, love, honour. Sure, they turn into brats about the age of 2, but by that stage, the parents have usually settled into the routine enough.

For those parents who cannot keep the children, for reasons of being far too reckless with their lives and the like, then adoption is a decent option. Their child can be taken in by someone else who desperately wants a family.

As for the people who passed the child on, they'd have Community Service ahead of them, as far as I'm concerned. I don't let people like that off the hook, I'm harsh and a long-term unforgiver in that respect - if you fuck around with society's basic moral fibre knowing full well that you cannot give as much as you take, then you face what's coming to you, and I uphold that with all my strength.

For the record

I myself am adopted. I spent my infancy in a foster home with a woman who absolutely adored me and spoilt me rotten. My experiences as an adopted child have, granted, not always been positive - but - I am grateful that I am alive and not dead. My birth mother could have just as easily said, "I'll just abort the baby", but she hadn't been raped and had enough intelligence to see that it was a fault of her own and my birth father's that I had been conceived and that since she was going to be unable to care for me financially, then she would try to find someone who could.

After that initial period within the foster home, I was presented to a couple, and they were two people who wanted children, but couldn't have them naturally.

IVF is a nice option, sure. But it's dodgy. And when there are children already being born who need parents, why not take the ones who have come into the world in less-than-perfect conditions, and give them a life, instead of taking it away?

In conclusion

I don't believe in the plight of the "Right For Life"-ers. I, as weird as it sounds, do not believe in the sanctity of all human life, as I feel that there are some specific cases where abortion or even murder is an option that should not be discarded. But my beliefs on the matter are very defined.

I believe that bringing death where it is not necessary is illogical. If a little rough treatment towards silly people can bring positive changes, then I'm ready to ruffle a few feathers in the process, and not a wave of guilt will pass through me.

(Edited by Angie at 10:49 pm on April 17, 2002)

[Vladimir]

Dammit Angie!! .............You are brilliant, u said what i was trying to say for the last 4 pages.......perfect.

Good Stuff, how can you pro choicers argue with that...........Abortion is killing.

[El Che]

>>>nickademos
"but where does life begin? the first trimester? the second? conception? when the ambilical cord is cut? the whole debate revolves around when an embryo is considered a life"

Ok I think that is the real question , and the best qualified to answer it are doctors. But doctors also have subjective opinions just like everybody else, so its also a question for society to debate. I think we should avoid "potential life" fundamentalisms though. But one must look for the ethical position here, and the right to life is thee fundamental right of every human being.

[guerrillaradio]

Quote: from Angie on 12:13 pm on April 17, 2002
I myself am adopted. I spent my infancy in a foster home with a woman who absolutely adored me and spoilt me rotten. My experiences as an adopted child have, granted, not always been positive - but - I am grateful that I am alive and not dead. My birth mother could have just as easily said, "I'll just abort the baby", but she hadn't been raped and had enough intelligence to see that it was a fault of her own and my birth father's that I had been conceived and that since she was going to be unable to care for me financially, then she would try to find someone who could.

OK, your opinion's gonna be affected by that fact. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree cos we're looking at it from ideologically different perspectives. I believe in freedom, you don't. I'm bored of this argument, I've had it so many times before...

[Valkyrie]

What about the PLANNED pregnancies between couples who are financially able but, terminate because genetic testing shows the child would be born with down syndrome or something? What do you all think of that?

[Ernest Everhard]

Quote: from red senator on 4:32 pm on April 13, 2002
Really Guest, the last time I checked, old white men were the majortity in washington.



Yeah you're right, but last time I checked, abortion was legal. So its pretty wrong, and probably racist to posit old white men as immediate reactionaries. Furthermore In response to FoH's statement about minorities making laws. African American voting blocs are highly influential and magnify the influence of representatives like charlie rangel uphere in harlem. The problem is that mr Rangel mismanages the large funds he gets from the fed govt. Minorities...we don't only make the laws, but we benefit greatly from supralegal institutions, just ask Jesse Jackson and his gang of criminals at PUSH.

by the way this is Augusto Sandino, had to get a new name cause i lost my password, so malte you should limit my restrictions to the socialism vs capitalism forum.

Later comrades.

[RedCeltic]

just ask Jesse Jackson and his gang of criminals at PUSH.

I see now I had been wrong in considering you to be moderately liberal Agusto... I see your true conservitive colors shine through now...

I'm not a big fan of the democrats, but I love Jessie, regadless of all the propaganda against him.

[Nateddi]

malte you should limit my restrictions to the socialism vs capitalism forum.

Later comrades.


I take it you cannot limit yourself to the SvC barn.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from Angie on 12:13 pm on April 17, 2002
Using talking-marks instead of quotes because the code wasn't working before

[quote]
guerrillaradio

"Angie - your argument doesn't hold water. As a punishment for one discretion, a woman should have to look after a child for the rest of her life??"

Yes. If I were stupid enough to fall pregnant after screwing around and not taking the proper precautions (not just having a partner wear a condom, but making sure it was used correctly, etc.) then Yes. I personally would take the child on and bring it up.

You can use a condom properly and still get pregnant. They do break. Quite frankly i've known people to get pregnant while using condoms and being on birth control. Its not always carelessness.



"Please, that is stupid. Does it not seem obvious that the woman will neglect or abandon the child??"

No, it is not stupid. I recommend you perhaps hunt down a couple of documentaries in relation to the subject, and hear the stories about women, especially young women, who fall pregnant accidentally and decide to keep the child. The sheer number of them which are sobered up by the mere fact of being up all night feeding and changing nappies (diapers) ... they don't have time for their previous lifestyle anymore. A lot of them even go so far as to say they find that instead of hunting around looking for a cheap fling with a stranger, to find some false and temporary sense of love, they now have a true, legitimate river of love coming from a child which relies on them.

Of course, that does not apply to all 100% of women who fall pregnant, but it does apply to a surprisingly high amount.

i'd like to know your source, because alot of the women i know that are pregnant by 'accident' are not sobered up by that fact. They still do the drugs and sleep around, they simply get mommy and daddy or auntie or grandma to take care of the kid while they are out partying.



"And also, for those who advocate abortions only in the circumstances of rape, why should a court decide?? It seems obvious that often mistakes will be made in the court, and a rape will be deemed consensual, and vice versa, so injustices will happen. Isn't it much easier for everyone concerned to let abortions happen as and when they should??"

Why shouldn't the courts decide? As crazy as that comment sounded, yes even to me, there's two reasons for my stating it.

First: If getting an abortion were to mean you had to see a court first, then it could act as a discouragment from those women (not a large number, but large enough) who just want to have an abortion because a baby is "inconvenient" to them at that stage in their life. Personally, were I some easy woman who suddenly heard that getting an abortion was going to be harder than I thought, I'd take more steps to avoid getting pregnant. Doesn't apply to everyone, no, but it apples to a lot of people.

Second: Bringing the issue of abortion into the courts brings the issue of rape into the courts - most rape cases never get known because of the fact that the women are ashamed, they felt that somehow they were to blame for being raped, and especially because they don't believe that they'll be heard fairly. When the court is more focused on the issue, instead of just brushing it off (like it's been known to do many times over the year), then it will become more effective. People will begin to trust it more.


right to have to go to the courts would simply encourage woman to get illlegal abortions. Trust me i know this part -- the courts almost everywhere are backlogged. cases take months to get to trial. even to get an injunction takes a bit of time. and its expensive. by the time they get to the courts the woman will be at least in the 2nd trimester and broke so they wont be able to afford the child. sorry, but that is not a solution.



Just because it's not giving people what they currently want doesn't mean that they should discard it; On the contrary, it means they should be fighting harder to change it. As a Socialist, you are no doubt familiar with that concept, as are we all.


could you clarify what you are trying to say here?



Nickademus

"angie, yuou make it sounds as if its an easy choice to ake tohave an abortion and that once done, people never have to deal with it again. it affects you for the rest of your life."

No, it effects a lot people for the rest of their lives. Not all of them. For some people, it literally is just an easy way out. It's a horrible thought, yes, but that's human nature in a capsule, I guess - we are not all perfect and wonderful and full of guilt. Some of us really just don't care.

again whats your source. i dont know any woman thats made that decision lightly.



I Will Deny You

"But often people who wanted to have abortions that were irresponsible before the fact don't settle down, and now you've got a dumb kid who can't afford heat and a starving, neglected child."

A dumb kid?! Charming.

There are always alternatives. If you don't think they can look after a child, put it up for adoption. The number of people who are so irresponsible that they cannot look after a child come into a category all of their own, not unlike the "repeat offenders" of my first post - and there numbers are relatively small (operative word: relatively), but they certainly exist. We cannot hide them, nor can we inflate their numbers more than they already are.

In fact, some of them ARE "repeat offenders", that cannot be denied. But that does mean that just because they cannot look after their children, that someone else could not. The children don't need to die because the parents are losers.

how does that help a person for the 9 months of their lives when they become emotionally unstable, dont eat properly, smoke, drink, sleep around? and not everyone knows the options or knows where to look for help



Children shouldn't be seen as punishments or discipline devices for the parents. Children should only come into the world when they're wanted."

Those bulk of people who keep their children find that the children are the best teachers there are. Therefore, it goes from being punishment/disciplinary action to being a gift. Children teach modesty, love, honour. Sure, they turn into brats about the age of 2, but by that stage, the parents have usually settled into the routine enough. [quote]

again,...sources? and simply because it may work out in the end, doesn't make it right to make children a punishment. there are those people who will see a child just as that and will therefore neglect it etc.

[quote]
For those parents who cannot keep the children, for reasons of being far too reckless with their lives and the like, then adoption is a decent option. Their child can be taken in by someone else who desperately wants a family.

true its an option, but not for everyone.



As for the people who passed the child on, they'd have Community Service ahead of them, as far as I'm concerned. I don't let people like that off the hook, I'm harsh and a long-term unforgiver in that respect - if you fuck around with society's basic moral fibre knowing full well that you cannot give as much as you take, then you face what's coming to you, and I uphold that with all my strength.

your statement here again shows that you are using the child as a form off punishment, so they don't get off the hook.



For the record

I myself am adopted. I spent my infancy in a foster home with a woman who absolutely adored me and spoilt me rotten. My experiences as an adopted child have, granted, not always been positive - but - I am grateful that I am alive and not dead. My birth mother could have just as easily said, "I'll just abort the baby", but she hadn't been raped and had enough intelligence to see that it was a fault of her own and my birth father's that I had been conceived and that since she was going to be unable to care for me financially, then she would try to find someone who could.

After that initial period within the foster home, I was presented to a couple, and they were two people who wanted children, but couldn't have them naturally.

IVF is a nice option, sure. But it's dodgy. And when there are children already being born who need parents, why not take the ones who have come into the world in less-than-perfect conditions, and give them a life, instead of taking it away?

In conclusion

I don't believe in the plight of the "Right For Life"-ers. I, as weird as it sounds, do not believe in the sanctity of all human life, as I feel that there are some specific cases where abortion or even murder is an option that should not be discarded. But my beliefs on the matter are very defined.

I believe that bringing death where it is not necessary is illogical. If a little rough treatment towards silly people can bring positive changes, then I'm ready to ruffle a few feathers in the process, and not a wave of guilt will pass through me.

(Edited by Angie at 10:49 pm on April 17, 2002)


guess this depends on your definition of necessity. if you view necessity as punishing the woman or the father then fine, but if you see necessity as saving 2 or 3 people from complete and utter dispair than abortion is a right choice. but who are we to decide what is necessary. we can't know the circumstances of every person who gets pregnant and trust me it is very difficult to get the facts out. i've gone to court with clients who give me new information at the trial. thus, we should let the woman decide, based on her circumstances, whether aborition is necessary for her or not.

[Nickademus]

irish guevara...i think i did just argue with that

paris....i believe that abortion because of genetic test results is wrong. BUT i believe that the woman should still have the choice to decide.

and i forgot to add to my post above...
when abortion is legal and regulated, it can be assured that every woman that walks through the doors knows their options so that they can make a well informed decision. but ultimately it is the woman's choice. its her body and its her life.

[Zippy]

Quote: from Angie on 11:44 am on April 17, 2002
Zippy, you can if she's a slut who cares more about getting her 20 minute thrill with some horny bloke, than the life and health of a baby.
Sexual promiscuity, or being a "slut" as you so wonderfully call it, is not always as easily diagnosable as as a thrill hunt. Promiscuity in a female is sometimes a sign of depression and sometimes a result of sexual abuse in their childhood. Just because a woman sleeps around, whatever her reasons, does not mean she is a bad heartless person.
You, my dear lady, have just generalised a large proportion of sexually active women as hearltess and im sure you can understand how insulting that is.


Quote: from Angie on 11:44 am on April 17, 2002
Those sorts of people really do exist, as sad as it is to say it. Hiding the fact under the carpet helps no-one.

Being 19 i am no expert on what happens in society, but i am no fool. I do not bury my head in sand and i do not hide things under carpets. Women sleep around, men sleep around, people get pregnant; it happens. Just because a women happens to get pregnant still does not mean that the abortion of her baby will be an easy thing to do, but it may be easier than raising it in a lifestyle that cant handle the burden of a child.

Zippy.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Angie on 7:13 am on April 17, 2002
I Will Deny You

"But often people who wanted to have abortions that were irresponsible before the fact don't settle down, and now you've got a dumb kid who can't afford heat and a starving, neglected child."

A dumb kid?! Charming.
The dumb kid I was referring to was the sixteen-year-old, not her baby. (I know that not all people who get pregnant are dumb, but you all get my drift.) Now that I've gotten that out of the way . . .

Basically, all that matters is the debate on when life begins. Women's rights, adoption (which, by the way, isn't so easy if you've got dark skin), etc. are secondary to whether or not life begins at conception. I don't believe that it does--two cells do not make a "life" in the sense that I normally think of life. When I think two cells, I think "Where's the anti-bacterial soap?"

Also, Angie, not everyone who gets pregnant is a slut. There are plenty of mature (for their age, at least) 15-year-olds who are in serious relationships with people that they love and have sex with. If I got pregnant when I was 15 I would have had an abortion (just like I'd have an abortion if I got pregnant now), but I can assure you that I was not a slut then and am not a slut now. Saying that a person should not have sex unless they're prepared to have a child is like saying a person should not drive a car unless they're ready to crash into a tree.

[Angie]

Thanks Irish, appreciate it. :)



*shrugs to others* c'est la vie. If you disagree, you disagree. Not my problem. I merely gave my opinion, if I'm suddenly public enemy number one because I apparently "don't believe in freedom" as guerrillaradio (sorry that we force you to face your issues all the time - perhaps there's a very strong reason for why they just keep flying back at you, you should look into it. Issue two - saying that I "don't believe in freedom" is one very sharp, insulting wrap that sounds all encompassing and highly irrational. Unless you seriously believe that I don't believe in freedom in every aspect of my life, I seriously suggest - and warn - that you do not attempt to be so blanketing with your statements again. You'll just cause unnecessary hassle for yourself) so lovely put it, then that's fine - I know my limits, and I don't believe in death that is, in my mind, unwarranted. I put across my beliefs, I gave allowances where I felt they were necessary. If that's still a problem for you, good for you. It's no skin off my nose, whatsoever.

[RedCeltic]

Hey Angie,

No hard fealings, you have a right to your opinion. For Americans, we are used to anti-choice arguments coming from the far religious right.

In America, the religious right wants to make having abortions illegal, yet at the same time want to cut welfare... which only means they want the woman to have the child but don't want to pay for it.

This isn't exactly a right left issue, it's rather a mater of athoriterian or libritarian.

[Zippy]

Quote: from Angie on 1:11 pm on April 18, 2002
... I seriously suggest - and warn - that you do not attempt to be so blanketing with your statements again. You'll just cause unnecessary hassle for yourself)
I'll say the same to you aswell, when you generalise all the women in the world who have ever had an abortion as "sluts".
Although sulking and shrugging your shoulders at us does not justify your opinion. I can respect an opinion that says "i wouldnt do it myself", but from what you have said it seems you want to stop other women having an abortion and that, in my humble opinion, is what "taking away freedom" is all about.

C'est la vie anyway ....
Zippy.

[Nickademus]

Yeah angie, no hard feelings. I'm not looking down on you because you have different views, i'm just trying to discuss it with you and figure out why you believe what you do.....its who i am, thats what i do.

i personally apologized if anything i ever said made it appear as though i think less of you

[Valkyrie]

. I can respect an opinion that says "i wouldnt do it myself", but from what you have said it seems you want to stop other women having an abortion and that, in my humble opinion, is what "taking away freedom" is all about.

----------------
I was one who said I would never get one; that is part of exercising choice. Remember the issue is not pro-abortion, it is pro-CHOICE and I think Angie might also be stating her choice here too, doesn't mean she is some stereo-typical bible-thumping rightwing.

[RedCeltic]

Well said Paris. That's exactly why we say "Pro-Choice" and not "Pro-Abortion"... it's not about how you personaly feal about it, as Paris said, that's your choice. However... "Pro-Life" means to restrict the freedoms of all women and make that choice for them.

[El Che]

Which takes precedence, the babies right to live or the morthers right to "choose"?

[RedCeltic]

We aren't talking about babies we are talking about a clump of cells.

[El Che]

Nop we are talking about babies, babies in development, babies that will become babies if allowed to. But if you choose not to answer my question I will do it on my behalf, and the babie`s right to life does indeed take precedence IMO.

[Zippy]

Quote: from Paris on 7:42 am on April 19, 2002
... doesn't mean she is some stereo-typical bible-thumping rightwing.
Never said she was.


Quote: from RedCeltic on 11:38 am on April 19, 2002
That's exactly why we say "Pro-Choice" and not "Pro-Abortion"...
Im pro-choice, i know what it means. Angie though seems to be anti-choice, unless she can prove me wrong and give me a better reply than, and i quote, "*shrugs to others* c'est la vie."

Zippy.

[El Che]

"Just because a women happens to get pregnant still does not mean that the abortion of her baby will be an easy thing to do, but it may be easier than raising it in a lifestyle that cant handle the burden of a child."

Is this your argument?

[RedCeltic]

A baby isn't a baby until it's born... before that... it's a zygote and then an embryo. Babies have human rights...embryos may become humans but so do sperm... and don't get rights of humans any more than your fingernail clippings, or hair cuttings.

The rights of the mother comes first.

[El Che]

So a 8 month old baby has no rights? is he not a human being? Say someone shoots a pregnant morther, will you not cry infanticied?

I agree with you on many things Red, but this isn`t one of em

[RedCeltic]

But no one is talking about giving abortions to women in the 8th month of pregnancy. Abortions are only legal for women in the early stages of pregnacy.

I would agree that late term abortions are wrong however think that women should have the right to have an abortion within the first trimester of pregnancy.

And I believe idealy that the morning after pill is the best, safest alternitive.

[Reuben]

Quote: from El Che on 12:07 pm on April 19, 2002
Nop we are talking about babies, babies in development, babies that will become babies if allowed to. But if you choose not to answer my question I will do it on my behalf, and the babie`s right to life does indeed take precedence IMO.


this argument could be applied to taking the morning after pill as that is stopping something developing into a baby. this in itse;f does does not constitute murder

[El Che]

Bottom line is this: I dont believe its the mothers choice, because for be the babie`s right to life takes precedence over all other considerations. This is an ethical stand, I respect everyones positions on the matter but I disagree.
Society must limit freedoms when these are prejudicial to others, we of all people, as Socialists, know that full well.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from El Che on 12:12 pm on April 19, 2002
"Just because a women happens to get pregnant still does not mean that the abortion of her baby will be an easy thing to do, but it may be easier than raising it in a lifestyle that cant handle the burden of a child."

Is this your argument?


maybe you should read the other 7 pages of posts. I think i've made my point very clear. That was just information to clarify a reason why.

and 8th month abortion? wow, do you even know when abortion is legal and illegal. then you would be able to contribute properly to this discussion.

[Nickademus]

El Che i'm sorry taht was a little harsh. i was just a little annoyed that you would think we were contemplating anything beyond 1st trimester abortion where they question of whether or not it is a human being is still up for debate.

[El Che]

Nickademus I can see this is a difficult subject for you, difficult in the sense that its something you feel strongly about. So I can perfectly accept that my position might irritate you.

In the first instance you qoute me in a response to zippy. The reason I ask that question, is because it seems to me there is a lot of confusion going on here. That argument is no argument what so ever. Its importante to keep focussed and not start discussing periferal and irrelevant issues, like if women are sluts or not. I will take no part in that type of discussion.

In the second instance I was repling to RedCeltic, because he said that before babies are born they have no rights. Maybe I was out of line there because I do know he didnt mean 8month old babies. But I did it to illustrate the fact that the baby is in development, and you people want to draw a line right through that development process, on one side of the line there is right to live on the other there is the arbitrary decision of the mother. I dont see that line, I see a human being at different stages of development and always with the same fundamental rights. That is the real question. It was this I said in my first post, but you are just addressing little portions of what I say.

These are my conclusions, this is my position.

[Zippy]

Quote: from El Che on 12:12 pm on April 19, 2002
Is this your argument?
No, and dont be so patronising. I was, as you so rightly point out, noting that not all women who have abortions are sluts.


Quote: from El Che on 12:12 pm on April 19, 2002
I will take no part in that type of discussion.
How big of you. Heaven forbid if its relevant, especially when some people are eager to note that all women who get pregnant and want abortions have loose sexual morals, and thus dont deserve the right for one.

Zippy.

(Edited by Zippy at 6:06 pm on April 19, 2002)

[RedCeltic]

Well in the United States and Canada as well I suppose "Pro-Life" is very much a far right Christian fundamentalist position. So maybe it's a bit harder for us who come from places where the battle lines are clearly drawn to be as objective about it as you clearly are El Che.

No I don't think a baby is a baby until birth... however I don't think abortions should be conducted after the first trimester. There are many reasons why that is wrong, not only is it wrong because the embryo is more developed, and therefore can be considered more human than non... but it's more unsafe for the mother to have a late term abortion.

If anti abortion activists where out promoting safe sex, the morning after pill, and sexual education rather than bombing family planning centers, assassinating doctors, and harassing people who seek counseling, I would be more able to be objective.

However, as I see it, it's those who support a highly restricted, limited legal first trimester abortion are the ones who are actually working to limit the number of people in need of one.

So in my mind, working to make abortions totally illegal is not where the fight is, but rather making them unnecessary to begin with.

You would think that in this day and age, people would be more educated about birth control, but they aren't. This is simply because the same people (at least in the US) that are against abortions, are also against birth control and sex ed.

So far, all I've heard from leftists on the anti abortion side are augments of why abortion is wrong and should be illegal. I would like to know from these same people, El Che, Angie, IrishG etc... How they stand as far as disruption of condoms in schools, and sex education at an early age.

I feel making condoms free, and available for everyone (epically teens) would greatly reduce risk of pregnancy and spread of STD (sexually transmitted Diseases)...




(Edited by RedCeltic at 12:29 pm on April 19, 2002)

[El Che]

>>>Zippy

Im not going to qualify poeple on the basis that they want to have an abortion. And I dont see how that is important to the debate nither.


>>>Red

Family planning, aint-contraceptive distribution, etc... Are very important inviciatives, and social interventions. They can help prevent a great deal of unwanted pregnancies. And you know who has the hardest time right? the poor. There is were the intervention must be stronger, to help prevent the problems we see every where. In my opinion this should be done by the government because it is a social responsibility. But law must prevent all contingencies and legislation on abortion remains a priority. I would say that your distinction, between when the fetus is a human being with rights and when he is not a human being and therefore has no rights, is highly subjective to say the least. I prefere to give the benifit of the doubt to the unborn child. Does an embryo have rights? I think so. Because you are either thinking of the mother or the baby, and I think the baby is more important here. The morther doesnt have to keep him, maybe he can even be encubated, and despite all these things if you give him a chance to live I bet he will be greatful later on. As it is your saying, "no lets spear him a life of misery" but you cant make that decision for him, can you?
Stop thinking about the mother and start thinking about what is more important here.

[Zippy]

Quote: from El Che on 11:25 am on April 20, 2002
Im not going to qualify poeple on the basis that they want to have an abortion.
Neither am i, but im not going to reject their request because they are "sluts"; Angie's point, not mine.


Quote: from El Che on 11:25 am on April 20, 2002
And I dont see how that is important to the debate nither.
Its important to the debate because a common opinion of women who have abortions is that they have loose sexual morals, as a few people have been saying on here. That is not always true, and i wish to destroy the stereotype.

I have made my point twice now, but i doubt anyone will be listening.

As for the reasons i have for being pro-choice, this thread is packed full of them, so i dont think i'll have to repeat them all.

Zippy.

[Vladimir]

RedCeltic, i am totally for the distribution of free condoms, coz i think that life begins at conception, before this there is no baby, now all the baby has to do is grow and i dont consider condoms wrong.

Sex Education is good and should be given to all and they should be taught about caring for a child and safe sex.

[RedRevolutionary87]

what if its a rape tho?

[Nickademus]

Quote: from El Che on 11:25 am on April 20, 2002
>>>Zippy

Im not going to qualify poeple on the basis that they want to have an abortion. And I dont see how that is important to the debate nither.


>>>Red

Family planning, aint-contraceptive distribution, etc... Are very important inviciatives, and social interventions. They can help prevent a great deal of unwanted pregnancies. And you know who has the hardest time right? the poor. There is were the intervention must be stronger, to help prevent the problems we see every where. In my opinion this should be done by the government because it is a social responsibility. But law must prevent all contingencies and legislation on abortion remains a priority. I would say that your distinction, between when the fetus is a human being with rights and when he is not a human being and therefore has no rights, is highly subjective to say the least. I prefere to give the benifit of the doubt to the unborn child. Does an embryo have rights? I think so. Because you are either thinking of the mother or the baby, and I think the baby is more important here. The morther doesnt have to keep him, maybe he can even be encubated, and despite all these things if you give him a chance to live I bet he will be greatful later on. As it is your saying, "no lets spear him a life of misery" but you cant make that decision for him, can you?
Stop thinking about the mother and start thinking about what is more important here.



that gets us into an intersting debate. To give a fetus a lot of rights is absolutely ridiculous. there have been actual cases where people have sued their mother because they ended up with a disease as a result of the mother's negligence during the pregnancy. they feel they would have been better off if they had never been born. (i'm sorry i can't remember any of the names of the cases btu there are a few and each one of themfailed miserably). if a child can say i would have been better off if i weren't born, why can't you accept that there are times where it may be better for BOTH society, the child and the mother to have an abortion.

[El Che]

"To give a fetus a lot of rights is absolutely ridiculous"

That is exactly where you and I disagree. As a result you must respect my views and I must respect yours, and which ever view is the majority within society so should the laws on abortion be made. That is to say I favor periodic referendums on the subject, say once every 10 years or so.

"there have been actual cases where people have sued their mother because they ended up with a disease as a result of the mother's negligence during the pregnancy. they feel they would have been better off if they had never been born. (i'm sorry i can't remember any of the names of the cases btu there are a few and each one of themfailed miserably). if a child can say i would have been better off if i weren't born, why can't you accept that there are times where it may be better for BOTH society, the child and the mother to have an abortion."

I can accept that some people would like to never have been born for any number of reasons, but what I can not accept is that you or anyone else make that decision for them. For example, I think eutanasia should be legalised.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Angie on 8:11 am on April 18, 2002
I merely gave my opinion, if I'm suddenly public enemy number one because I apparently "don't believe in freedom" as guerrillaradio (sorry that we force you to face your issues all the time - perhaps there's a very strong reason for why they just keep flying back at you, you should look into it.
Actually, as a member of the opposition I find it quite endearing that you're willing to say what you feel even when you're in the minority. I disagree with you, but I still respect you.


Quote: from El Che on 7:07 am on April 19, 2002
Nop we are talking about babies, babies in development, babies that will become babies if allowed to. But if you choose not to answer my question I will do it on my behalf, and the babie`s right to life does indeed take precedence IMO.
An egg will become a baby if given the chance. Maybe I'll send my used tampons to you. So will sperm . . . when's the last time you sent your dirty bedsheets to a lab after a night of hot sex so your semen could be frozen?

[El Che]

IWDY I dont want your tampons. However it seems to me that not only do you not have a point but your also avoiding the point.

[I Will Deny You]

Here's my point: When a person has an abortion, they are killing something that could become a baby, just like you said. So why not freeze every woman's eggs and every man's sperm, because that's what babies are made out of, anyway? Saying that people shouldn't be able to kill any potential life form is basically saying that nothing that could ever turn into a fetus should be preserved.

[RedCeltic]

IWDY: As our resident "Groucho-Marxist" I'm sure your familiar with the song Monty Python did in their movie, "The meaning of Life" called "Every Sperm is Sacred"... I always loved that part of that movie as it shows just how obsurd that notion is.

Here's the lyrics if you haven't seen the film...(you should rent it great stuff!)

*Note, this is only an atempt at humor, not bashing on anyone's beliefs here... :)


There are Jews in the world, there are Buddhists,
there are Hindus and Mormons and then
there are those that follow Mohammed -but-
I've never been one of them.
I am a Roman Catholic
and have been since before I was born,
and the one thing they say about Catholics is
they'll take you as soon as you're warm.
You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on, you're
a Catholic the moment dad came
...Because...
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Let the heathens spill theirs,
on the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
each sperm that can't be found.
Every sperm is wanted,
every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed,
in your neighborhood.
Hindu, Taoist, Mormon,
spill theirs just anywhere
but God loves those who treat their
semen with more care.
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is useful,
every sperm is fine.
God needs everybodies,
mine, and mine, and mine.
Let the pagans spill theirs
on mountain hill and plain.
God shall strike them down for
each sperm that's spilled in vain.
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is good,
every sperm is needed,
in your neighborhood,
Every sperm is sacred,
every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

[deadpool 52]

There are so many different situations a soon-to-be mother can face, that it is almost impossible to diagnose one certain rule saying that there should be not any more abortions; there should always be the option, it could be quite often needed.

[RGacky3]

Monty python rules

[Nickademus]

excellent analogy RC. no wonder we get along so well

[I Will Deny You]

Jesus Christ! I haven't seen Monty Python in ages. Is that song from the one that had the Trojan Rabbit in it?

For everyone here who can get NBC and likes Monty Python, you might want to tape reruns of SCTV that are on weekdays at around 2:30 am.

EDIT: I almost forgot. The best sperm ever in a movie was in Woody Allen's "Everything you Ever Wanted to Know About Sex*".

(Edited by I Will Deny You at 11:20 pm on April 21, 2002)

[Freedom Fighter]

Im pro choice - because i want people to be able to choose either way for themselves.

[RedCeltic]

Jesus Christ! I haven't seen Monty Python in ages. Is that song from the one that had the Trojan Rabbit in it?

IWDY: I think your thinking about their first movie "Quest for the holy Grail" that's the movie they had the killer rabbit which could only be killed by the holy hand granade of Antiaock.

"The meaning of Life" is their third and last movie... the "Everything you Wanted To know about Sex" by Woody Allen was also a good movie. Anyway you get the point.. :biggrin:

[RedCeltic]

For anyone interested... NOW the National Organisation of Women has a wealth of information on Roe vs Wade and the struggle to keep abortion legal in the United States.

http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/index.html

http://www.now.org/images/rounds/abortion-circle.gif

[El Che]

So lets follow the logic of IWDY`s argument... We all carry the potential to create life within us, so does this mean that it is ethicaly wrong to not fuck all day long? This makes no sense. But considering that we should not put an end to a life that already exists and that is developing does make all the sense in the world to me. Right into adulthood humans are in development, just because the stage of development that is in discussion here is the very incial stage of life, doesnt mean in my opinion,that it is justified to put an end to that life. Two different things, one being potential to become or create life that exists in some organic matterials and in all humans and animals,and another being a life that already exists.

[Valkyrie]

Indeed, a difficult issue in itself, and will surely always be. both sides belief in their positions fiercely. Well, the ironic and hyperbolic - "saving up eggs and sperms" in the case that potential life forms are contained within.... the difference there is that an abortion is being performed on an already fertilized egg, which I would have to agree with El Che, since it is fertilized the life form IS already contained within. Just as people who freeze their "stuff" in the event that they can have children later, are not given the guarantee that fertilization will come out of it during a process of invitro-fertilization. It is in fact so unsuccessful that they have to saturate multiple eggs with millions of sperm to try to get a successful take. And as we all know, that results in multiple births. Even so, many attempts at invitro are unsuccessful due to whatever reason natural fertilization didn't occur in the first place.

Also, just to propose a question - If a couple were to invite you over to dinner to tell you the good news -- that they are expecting a baby, and the women is one or two months pregnant - would you actually correct her and say that she only has a cluster of cells, a zygote, the potentiall of it becoming a human being,,, and so then, you will save the congratulations until it becomes a fetus?

Alas, I am pro-choice, with no kids. and just as I would not want to be forced to have an abortion, I would also not want anyone to be forced to have a kid. And I have witnessed the birth process first hand --- eeekkkk!!!!! completely amazing and repulsive. And when you're left their screaming your head off, because it's still too soon to take the pain killer, the hospital staff scoff and snicker and say "God, she acts likes she's being murdered. tsk. tsk."

[Fires of History]

The abortion debate, again? *sigh*

Love this commentary from Everlast's song What It's Like:

Mary got pregnant from a kid named Tom that said he was in love,
He said, "Don't worry about a thing, baby doll, I'm the man you've been dreaming of."
But three months later he says he won't date her or return her calls,
And she swear, "God damn, if I find that man I'm cuttin' off his balls."
And then she heads for the clinic and she gets some static walking through the door,
They call her a killer, and they call her a sinner and they call her a whore,
God forbid you ever had to walk a mile in her shoes,
Cause then you really might know what it's like to have to choose.

EDIT: P.S. I am strongly pro-choice. When was personal choice ever a bad thing?

(Edited by Fires of History at 11:50 pm on April 22, 2002)

[El Che]

Being the minority sucks!

[queen of diamonds]

i think we're all losing sight of a very important point here - making abortion illegal is in no way going to stop people having it done....and abortion's a hard decision to make, & there's absolutely no guarantee anyone's going to be mentally healthy after it - doesn't it make more sense to let women have it done somewhere that won't endanger their physical well being & where they can get help later, if they need it?

[Nickademus]

Quote: from queen of diamonds on 3:25 pm on April 23, 2002
i think we're all losing sight of a very important point here - making abortion illegal is in no way going to stop people having it done....and abortion's a hard decision to make, & there's absolutely no guarantee anyone's going to be mentally healthy after it - doesn't it make more sense to let women have it done somewhere that won't endanger their physical well being & where they can get help later, if they need it?


um actually these points were raised quite early on in the debate.

[queen of diamonds]

yeah, i read that part :)
what i'm saying is they seem to have gotten lost later on in the debate....
also that everyone talks about making abortion illegal pushing it underground, but so few people seem to worry about the psychological effects it has on women - that's also something we need to address, & we can't do that if the whole thing's underground, it's not just the physical part of it that we need to be worried about

[RedCeltic]

Your right queen of diamonds, That was a point I raised before but was ignored. One can speculate on if it is right or wrong however the fact remains that abortions existed before they where legal and will exist after. If you read law cases like Roe vs Wade and earlier you will see that the main reason why abortion was legalized was to protect women from the undertrained black market butcher.

Abortion wasn't legalized because anyone thought it was a wonderful operation. Abortion was legalized because women where being mutelated and even killed by these quacks.

[deadpool 52]

Exacty.
Who would you rather have, a doctor with tools of his own proffesion, or a junkie with a coat hangar?
Allowing that is barbaric.

[El Che]

So I guess we should make homicide legal, since some people are going to comite it anyway.

[Alejandro C]

I agree that it should be not be controlled by the government. I think that abortion carries its own punishment and deterent. Those people have to live the rest of their lives wondering if they would be happier and knowing that they murdered a child which is by nature innocent and pure. You can choose. It should be your right to choose to murder your OWN child.

[El Che]

"It should be your right to choose to murder your OWN child."

You have a way with words.

[Vladimir]

''You can choose. It should be your right to choose to murder your OWN child.''

Jesus!!, what are u on??
So if ure mother wanted to kill u, you would be ok with this? since youre hers?

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Alejandro C on 2:17 pm on April 24, 2002
It should be your right to choose to murder your OWN child.
It's not murder in the first place, comrade.


Quote: from El Che on 12:38 pm on April 24, 2002
So I guess we should make homicide legal, since some people are going to comite it anyway.
If we make homicide legal, how many lives will that save? None. But if we keep abortion legal, how many lives will it save? Plenty. Now that murder is legal, has it gone underground? Of course. But it's not a cultural phenomenon or much of a needed social service, and it's easy for the police to crack down on hit men. If we made abortion illegal, would law enforcement agencies have an easy time tracking down abortionists, or stopping abortion? No.

[Ho]

I think abortion should be legal for several reasons but mainly because of the death for bad done illegal abortions.

[Fires of History]

I also support abortion because we already have enough people already as it is...

1804- 1 Billion
1960- 3 Billion
2000- 6 Billion

That's right, keep having fucking kids people...

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Fires of History on 9:41 pm on April 24, 2002
That's right, keep having fucking kids people...Remind me to send your mom and dad a thank-you card for not using a rubber.

[Fires of History]

What do you mean by that? (???)

Well, in terms of my birth, I had no choice. It was my mother's choice, that's sorta my point. But if I had been aborted, I wouldn't have known about it nor cared at the time.

I do know that I am NOT having any children.

People who think that a serious overpopulation crisis isn't coming should just put their heads back in the sand.

1804- 1 Billion
1960- 3 Billion
2000- 6 Billion
2050- 8 (low) -12(high) Billion

People like to forget that population growth is exponential. And people think things suck NOW. Wars over food, water, what oil is left, etc, are sure to come when we hit 10 billion and on.

Overpopulation: What better way to make human life worthless?

[I Will Deny You]

I was joking.

[guerrillaradio]

This debate is really losing it...someone should open the pro-lifers' (what life??) eyes. I'm guessing you're all anti-euthanasia as well then??

[Vladimir]

[quote]Quote: from I Will Deny You on 12:10 am on April 25, 2002

But if we keep abortion legal, how many lives will it save? Plenty.

-------------------------------
What!, if we keep abortion legal then a life will die every time, ''life'' does not begin when u come out of your mother. Life begins at conception when both the women and man ''come together'' and make the life. I dont know why ye cant see this

[RedCeltic]

I found the following story from a pro-choice activist website... proof that abortion saves lives...



Do you ever stop to consider how precarious your life is? How many events in the universe had to line up perfectly to produce the exact, specific combination of genetic material from which you are made? Maybe if your mother had decided to stay in rather than go out one night, she would have never met your father. Maybe if your father had been 5 minutes later coming home from work one day, the sperm that carried half of your chromosomes would have never made it.

If your parents had done anything different, there is a possibility that you would have never been born.


Have you seen those bumper stickers that say, "Your MOTHER was pro-life!", as though that is some sort of profound statement? They make me laugh. My mother got pregnant before she met my father. The man who got her pregnant denied that it was his baby (it was) and wouldn't have anything to do with her. My mother could not tell her parents. So she had an abortion.


If she'd had that baby, she probably would have never met my father. I would have never been born, and neither would my sister. There seems to be a misconception that all women who have abortions are evil, heartless crack whores who can't keep their legs shut. My mother is none of these things. Many of the women who have these abortions go on later to raise families when they are ready. I am living proof of this.

[I Will Deny You]

If my sister never had an abortion, she never would have gone to South America to do work saving endangered plants that, among other things, cure cancer. She never would have met her boyfriend in South America, but because she did they've been together ever since and now they're considering having a child.

[kloes]

YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF MORALISTS FOOLS....GIVE ME A BREAK AND GIVE WOMAN A BREAK AS WELL.....WE HAVE LOTS OFF SPERM AND LOTS OF OVARIES SOOOOO WE HAVE LOTS OF OPTIONS TO MAKE BABYS OK?? BUT IF IS NOT THE TIME THEN WE DONT,,,,ALL YOU RATTER TAKE CARE OF THEM WHEN THERE BORN AND HAVE NO PARENTS LOVE OR CARE,,,,,,,,,,ANYWAYS THERES TO MUCH PEOPLE IN THIS FUCKEN WORLD TO SUFFER ALLREADY............

[Fabi]

When i was over in the US i always thought the whole 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice' thing was kinda funny.

LIFE means to CHOOSE.

to LIVE you have to make DECISIONS.

thus: if you're 'pro-life' then you're not pro life.



well, this wasnt all that original, but it always made the whole deal look sort of silly... ;-)

[RedCeltic]

Your right it does seem pritty silly, but is a big issue here in the US. The battle lines where drawn, and the war (picketing war) has been raging since 1973, before the ink was even dry on the Roe vs Wade decision.

In 1973, to counter venomous protest about the decision by the Catholic Church... my aunt (who also had an abortion when very young) joined a large "Pro Choice" Rally on the steps of St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City... headed be feminist and left wing organisations. Part of the protest was to carry coffins with girls pretending to be dead in them... in front of the cathedral.

[Fabi]

of course i do understand the importance the abortion issue has in the US. i am fully aware of its relevance and do agree with most of the mentioned opinions and arguments for abortion.
i had a lot of discussions about that topic when i was over in your lovely little country and although i am a little ignorant when it comes to politics i feel very much at home reading the topics here since my host brother was very much a leftist... we got along really well...

[Vladimir]

LIFE means LIFE, LIFE is meant to be LIVED not KILLED, Abortion is simple killing.

[Fires of History]

Could a fetus live on its own outside of its mother? NO. It is, therefore, NOT 'alive.'

[Fires of History]

Quote: from RedCeltic on 2:53 pm on April 27, 2002
Your right it does seem pritty silly, but is a big issue here in the US.


Yes, an overly huge issue in the U$. All part of the amerikkkan people's hopeless addiction to religion. And I say that because virtually all anti-abortion sentiment is steeped in religious propaganda. Most who argue against abortion are just spouting beliefs based on religious teaching. Sad...

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from Fires of History on 12:04 pm on April 27, 2002

Quote: from RedCeltic on 2:53 pm on April 27, 2002
Your right it does seem pritty silly, but is a big issue here in the US.


Yes, an overly huge issue in the U$. All part of the amerikkkan people's hopeless addiction to religion. And I say that because virtually all anti-abortion sentiment is steeped in religious propaganda. Most who argue against abortion are just spouting beliefs based on religious teaching. Sad...

Many Christian preachers spout their anti-abortion doctrine to their flock in their sermons. Not just in the ultra right Christian Fundamentalist churches and Catholic Churches, but even in some more moderate Churches. I know of someone who said they stopped going to church because their Lutheran pastor was preaching anti abortion messages more than the bible.

I think for the most part... those who are Pro-Choice are so because of personal beliefs and life experiences while many (not all mind you) are anti abortion because of religious doctrine drummed into their heads. Somehow being against a woman's right to choose makes them good Christians.


(Edited by RedCeltic at 1:00 pm on April 27, 2002)

[red senator]

All these christians want to make laws against homosexual marriages/adoptions and abortion, and the argument they use is that "it is in the bible, blah blah blah." Well the fundemental problem with that is that America is not the United Christian States of America, and the seperation of church and state is a core part of America so no law should be based on the teachings of some sacred book of a religion/cult. (unless enough senators and congressmen whore their votes out to the christian right and it does become the U.C.S.A.)

[RedCeltic]

Seperation of Church and State I think are one of the better things about the United States. Some Christians however think they are living in a Christian nation.

I've found a short little quiz I think is quite informitive about the subject of Church and State...

http://www.ffrf.org/quiz.html

[munkey soup]

Thanks for the link RedCeltic, greatly informative. (I got 11 outta 21, so ashamed! :( ) Even for all you U$ haters out there, it makes you gain that much more respect for the minds (not necesarilly the lives) of the "founding fathers." (Yes, I respect the writers of the constitution, even if a number of them owned slaves, their minds were far more advanced than many contemporary ones).

I especailly love this quote:
"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith . . . We need believing people."
I don't wanna give away a free answer, but this was said by none other than our favorite fascist nazi Adolf Hitler.

[Nateddi]

Wow, I got a 10 on that test. Failure!

[Fabi]

i got something like 9-11... (i didnt read two of the questions, so i answered them wrong)
but i'm not even american, so i dont think it is that bad... (not US-american.... well, not any other kind of american either...)