dead babies or womens rights? [Archive]

Psy

19th March 2007, 15:17

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 01:14 pm
I like to say I support the right for a woman to choose... but when I see those pictures of dead babies.. some up to 7 months.. I don't know guys. it just seems fucked up. so what am I supporting the right to kill what a human being could had been?

I don't like the damn republicans and the church making this their business either... I dont think of my self as a person who supports killing babies. but sometimes I feel that thats what it is. how is it different from capital punishment?

and how do you guys feel.. those of you who are pro-choice when you see pictures of aborted babies?

:(
In a true communist society, communities would be better equipped to take on the responsibility of unwanted children and mothers would know they can get help from the community in raising the kid.

bloody_capitalist_sham

19th March 2007, 15:39

I'm not sure legal abortions are able to be done at 7 months, it is kinda messed up if that's true.

Seems far too late.

Since people have given premature birth at 7 months.

However, RPAS. Right-wing propaganda is always going to shove shocking images into your face to make you think abortion is bad.

But, you just got to remember, women have the sole right here. And, they dont abort babies, they abort foetuses.

R_P_A_S

19th March 2007, 15:59

fetus, embryo whatever.. it was supposed to be a human being.. right?
and besides YES thats their choice.. and I dont think people should judge them on it.
But I feel the circumstances have to be favorable...

for example I had a friend who at 23 had already 3 abortion. thats fucked up. keep your damn legs closed!!

R_P_A_S

19th March 2007, 16:21

and i just want you guys to know that I am all for womens rights and for them to choose. Yes some of the images some anti-abortion groups show you can be fucked up. I feel we and they are misunderstood(the women) we support freedom of choice. and not "killing babies" thats where they got us twisted!

Psy

19th March 2007, 16:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 02:59 pm
fetus, embryo whatever.. it was supposed to be a human being.. right?
and besides YES thats their choice.. and I dont think people should judge them on it.
But I feel the circumstances have to be favorable...

for example I had a friend who at 23 had already 3 abortion. thats fucked up. keep your damn legs closed!!
No, I think your friend should look into contraceptions to reduce the risk of being impregnated and look into other forms of sexual pleasure that don't involve the risk of impregnation.

manic expression

19th March 2007, 17:30

"Economic freedom means sexual freedom, and sexual freedom means birth control"

-John Reed (from "Reds")

Ihavenoidea

19th March 2007, 18:04

Guy fucks her and then he is GONE. It is sad how many girls alternatives programes we have in victoria, some girls as young as 15 having to worry about babies, and never being able to reach their potantial.. it is so sad...

I support abortion. 100%... Those pictures shock me not. Just another reason for me to say "Fuck off propaganda and climb back into the ass of the cappie you came from!!!"

Her body her choise.. I hate when guys say that they should have a say in it.. Push a bowling ball out your hole and have to work triple time and loose education and respect in society because of the bowling ball... and then we can fucking talk about you having a choise.

Stop talking about womens responsiblity to contriseptives, men will stick their things anywhere condom or no condom, I find it that guys are the ones who press on and say "nothing bad will happen without one!" not the girls. You have to have goddamn responcibility. Sex is an act of responcibility. Unfortunatly, it is usually only 1 party that has to pay the consiquences, while the other party goes around and causes more trouble.

My advise for contraseptives?

KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS UNLESS YOU ARE FOLLOWING UP, BOYS!

Tower of Bebel

19th March 2007, 18:05

Originally posted by Psy+March 19, 2007 02:17 pm--> (Psy @ March 19, 2007 02:17 pm)
[email protected] 19, 2007 01:14 pm
I like to say I support the right for a woman to choose... but when I see those pictures of dead babies.. some up to 7 months.. I don't know guys. it just seems fucked up. so what am I supporting the right to kill what a human being could had been?

I don't like the damn republicans and the church making this their business either... I dont think of my self as a person who supports killing babies. but sometimes I feel that thats what it is. how is it different from capital punishment?

and how do you guys feel.. those of you who are pro-choice when you see pictures of aborted babies?

:(
In a true communist society, communities would be better equipped to take on the responsibility of unwanted children and mothers would know they can get help from the community in raising the kid. [/b]
Yes, it's all about the system. Today another 100 women are raped. This world is madnes!

CodeAires

19th March 2007, 18:15

manic expression

19th March 2007, 18:20

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 05:15 pm
I have mixed views on abortion. If a woman is raped, too sick to carry the child, or the child will be born seriously deformed, then I think abortion is fine, but if it's just to get rid of a child you don't want, then it's inhumane. Give the child up for adoption, don't kill it before it ever has a chance to live.
A fetus is a child? By that logic, sperm is also deserving of being called a "child".

Also, a person has control over their body, that is undeniable. A pregnant woman needs to make decisions about her body before anyone else.

You may disagree with aborting unwanted fetuses, and that is fine, but mandating anything is certainly not.

Ihavenoidea

19th March 2007, 18:29

HELL YEAH.

But you see, luvly, the menses are trying to tell the women that it takes two to tango and therefor the menses thoughts should be apart of diciding the abortion... Meanwhile he is more interested in doin the boom boom and getting the chaching- chaching if ya'll know what I mean...

men trying to dicide the fate of womens body is another form of passive sexism. EXTREME passive sexism. Another way of men trying to assert their dominance over women... disgustin.

Yall get cho little 'thing' out o here!

bloody_capitalist_sham

19th March 2007, 18:34

Unfortunatly, it is usually only 1 party that has to pay the consiquences, while the other party goes around and causes more trouble.

My advise for contraseptives?

KEEP IT IN YOUR PANTS UNLESS YOU ARE FOLLOWING UP, BOYS!

Do you hate men or something?

Goatse

19th March 2007, 19:25

I'm opposed to abortion being used just cause the kid is a boy instead of the girl the parents wanted or stuff like that, but I respect the right for the woman to choose... I think the solution to this is better sex education (for example, in the Netherlands, sex education is good, and as a result abortion is completely legal but happens less than in the UK) and readily available contraception. Of course this isn't foolproof, but it's better than the current way.

RedAnarchist

19th March 2007, 20:44

I'm all for abortion. A foetus is only a parasite, it is not guaranteed to become a baby (ie miscarriages etc) and woman should have the right to remove the parasite if they so wish. It is only when it is fully devloped that it becomes a human. I mean, do you call an egg a chicken?

Fawkes

19th March 2007, 22:35

Originally posted by R P A S
fetus, embryo whatever.. it was supposed to be a human being.. right?
By that logic, masturbating is bad because those sperm were supposed to become human beings.

A fetus is solely dependent on the mother during the time that it is in her uterus, thus making it a parasite like TAKN said. Due to the fact that the mother is the only being that can keep the fetus alive, she should have the right to terminate it because she should not be obliged to keep feeding a parasite inside of her own body.

I think that the woman should definitely take the opinion of the man into consideration when debating getting an abortion but there is absolutely no way to regulate this or enforce this in any way and the final call should most definitely be made by the woman.

P.S. Ihavenoidea: Sexism can go both ways you know. Now fuck off with your anti-male feminism and join S.C.U.M. if you think that all guys "stick their things anywhere" regardless of condoms.

grove street

22nd March 2007, 10:54

Aborition is important in a society were having a baby out of wedlock or left abondend by the father to be is both an economic struggle as well as a social struggle.

The majority of women having abortions are not crazed liberal feminists who beleive in doing what ever they want with their bodies beyond the point of common sense. They are mostly women of poor economic/social backgrounds who have been placed in a terrible position. The majority of women find the aborition a difficult descion to make, because with alternatives like adoption, people forget to take into account the expenses involved in being pregenant and the social stigma that many of these women would face from family and peers.

Many of these women are sadden by their aborition and many regret it, but they also know that they didn't have the financial and social support to raise the child let alone make it through pregnance.

In a communist society were every human been is promised and given a decent life, aborition will probably be very rare and will mostly be due to medical reasons rather then economic reasons.

EnragÃ©

23rd March 2007, 00:23

abortion is the consequence of a society who makes it so that if you have a baby you're basicly fucked (certainly as a woman) in you're career in society.
You need to work till you drop, you cant do that if you have a kid at home.

The solution is the complete abolishment of the current "family" unit into collectives/communes, everyone is your mother/father/brother/sister, the burden is shared.
Now in such a society, why would anyone have an abortion?

Cryotank Screams

23rd March 2007, 00:42

I support abortion, all the way up until even 7 months or so, it's not killing anything, because for it to be murder, it would have to be alive, and to be alive, you have to be born, and be able to maintain life independently, which the fœtus can't do, not to mention tapeworms, and other parasites are living things to, that live inside the body, would it also be murder, to neutralize them?

I also don't see why people are so concerned about things that are not even alive, while completely ignoring the life of a completely continent, thinking, living being, i.e. the mother, who is being forced to live with this, because society, has been corrupted by metaphysical bullshit, do you not care about her? Do you not care that it's destroying her life?

Pro-choice, pro-women's rights, all the way here!

redcannon

23rd March 2007, 03:22

those pics they show you are bullshit. i mean, yeah, they're real, but those fetuses cant think, they don't have emotions. they do not have thought, and so they do not have the thing that makes us human. Just because it has human organs and looks human doesn't make it human. At that point it really is just a sack of cells. And besides, i would rather have an aborted fetus then a child being abused by parents that didn't want it. On top of that, i'll be damned if i'm going to tell someone what they can or can't do with [B]their[I] uterus.

Demogorgon

23rd March 2007, 04:06

The bottom line is it is up to each individual woman to choose what to do with her body. Nobody else, least of all us men, can tell her what to do.

That being said these images are not nice, I suggest you don't look. Really though, I would like to see less abortion. COntraception should be encouraged to a much greater extent than it is currently. And adoption procedures should be improved for unwanted babies.

grove street

23rd March 2007, 07:26

Abortion is not some thing we should be clapping our hands about. Yes I do support abortion and a womens right to choose, but women mostly do not have aboritions because they love the fact that they can do what they want with their bodies. They have abortions as a result of an uncarring society that would rather find ways to exploit women and children rather then help them.

I guess this is the main difference between the economic left (Marxists) and the cultural left ( Anarchists, Liberals ect). We the economic left release that abortion is caused by materialist reasons more then just choice alone and that if the materialist reasons change for the better the aborition rate would most likely decline.

The cultural left as usual are so caught up in the emotion of the abortion debate that they totaly overlook the fact that pro choice alone is not enough. We have to change the material conditions of society so women don't feel pressured to have an abortion out of economic and social reasons.

23rd March 2007, 07:32

I have mixed views on abortion. If a woman is raped, too sick to carry the child, or the child will be born seriously deformed, then I think abortion is fine, but if it's just to get rid of a child you don't want, then it's inhumane. Give the child up for adoption, don't kill it before it ever has a chance to live.

Adoption?! Are you fucking kidding me? Adoption's like the worst thing to do nowadays; the adoption system is overflowing with too many adoptees and not enough adopters. Adoption is probably one of the worst things to do to a kid and it's probably also one of the most damaging systems to society today.

BobKKKindle$

23rd March 2007, 11:40

It could be argued that fetuses are alive in the biological sense in that they carry many of the characteristics that we associate with living organisms; they respond to stimuli, they grow and develop over time, for example. THis is true even of the lowest level of an organism's development; when the organism is supply a series of reproducing and dividing cells. However, the key question in the abortion debate is whether fetuses are alive in the ethical sense; whether we would attribute to fetuses the same rights that we would provide to other organisms, one of which would be the right to life.

The answer to this question is clearly no, especially in cases where the gestation period has only been ongoing for a very short period of time. Those that are most likely to be hurt by not having access to a free and legal abortion are the proletariat who cannot access private medical treatement and who are least able to manage the extra cost of an additional family member. As leftists we have a duty to advance woman's reproductive freedom across the world, including the right of abortion. Those supporting the imposition of restrictions on abortion are often unable to relate to the challenges faced by young (and, when the father does not take responsibility fo his actions) single mothers.

Incidentally, I was restricted for questioning the right of a woman to abortion a few month's ago (needless to say, my views have since changed). Many of the views that members have expressed are far more reactionary than the arguments I put forward prior to my restriction.

Tower of Bebel

23rd March 2007, 12:00

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 01:14 pm
I like to say I support the right for a woman to choose... but when I see those pictures of dead babies.. some up to 7 months.. I don't know guys. it just seems fucked up. so what am I supporting the right to kill what a human being could had been?

I don't like the damn republicans and the church making this their business either... I dont think of my self as a person who supports killing babies. but sometimes I feel that thats what it is. how is it different from capital punishment?

and how do you guys feel.. those of you who are pro-choice when you see pictures of aborted babies?

:(
'babies' up to 7 months old can not be aborted in Belgium.

Black Dagger

23rd March 2007, 12:00

Originally posted by grove [email protected] 23, 2007 04:26 pm
I guess this is the main difference between the economic left (Marxists) and the cultural left ( Anarchists, Liberals ect). We the economic left release that abortion is caused by materialist reasons more then just choice alone and that if the materialist reasons change for the better the aborition rate would most likely decline.

The cultural left as usual are so caught up in the emotion of the abortion debate that they totaly overlook the fact that pro choice alone is not enough. We have to change the material conditions of society so women don't feel pressured to have an abortion out of economic and social reasons.
Care to back up your sectarian point-scoring with evidence? Or should we just accept how you define the totality of the worlds politics based on your word alone?

I.E.

'marxists' = rational

anarchists/liberals (thanks for lumping the two together) = irrational/emotional

Fawkes

23rd March 2007, 18:45

Originally posted by grove [email protected] 23, 2007 01:26 am
Abortion is not some thing we should be clapping our hands about. Yes I do support abortion and a womens right to choose, but women mostly do not have aboritions because they love the fact that they can do what they want with their bodies. They have abortions as a result of an uncarring society that would rather find ways to exploit women and children rather then help them.

I guess this is the main difference between the economic left (Marxists) and the cultural left ( Anarchists, Liberals ect). We the economic left release that abortion is caused by materialist reasons more then just choice alone and that if the materialist reasons change for the better the aborition rate would most likely decline.

The cultural left as usual are so caught up in the emotion of the abortion debate that they totaly overlook the fact that pro choice alone is not enough. We have to change the material conditions of society so women don't feel pressured to have an abortion out of economic and social reasons.
Oh fuck off dickhead. You think I, an anarchist, don't realize that the material conditions one is living in influences their decisions regarding abortion? If you do think that, you are incredibly wrong. Of course I realize that the material conditions that cause women to feel the need to get an abortion need to be changed dramatically and when I argue in favor of women having the choice of getting an abortion, I in no way allow my emotions to dictate my argument(s).

I can't believe that people here actually think that the anarchists are the most sectarian ones... :rolleyes:

Lenin II

23rd March 2007, 21:24

I like abortion. Had we aborted a lot of motherfuckers we wouldn’t have to use guns the way we are. I think the entire world population should take a 20-year break off of having kids.

Furthermore, I don’t believe that most pro-lifers are sincere about life or really give a damn about the life of the baby. I say this because these same people are not the least bit interested in the welfare of the child after it’s born. What this is really all about is that they see sex as a sin and pregnancy as God’s way of punishing women for being sluts. They believe that if you take away abortion and birth control that the fear of pregnancy will either force women to not have sex, or allow God to punish them through pregnancy.

If we outlaw even certain kinds of abortion, we are giving in to their sick agenda. It will only give them more power over us. Give them an inch and they’ll take a foot. It’s the Christian way.

freakazoid

24th March 2007, 08:20

R_P_A_S

24th March 2007, 08:30

im confused.. how do you abort a child thats halfway out? LOL :P

RASHskins

24th March 2007, 08:44

With a knife.

A Womans Body is jsut that her OWN body. NO religious groups or anyone else should be able to tell her what to do with her fetus. A fetus is a parasite and since it is her body that fetus is also her property.

Cryotank Screams

24th March 2007, 15:54

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 03:20 am
What in the world are you talking about? We don't see sex as a sin.
As long as sex is within marriage, non-homosexual, and doesn't become more important than your devotion towards god, and for catholics, sex is only for procreation, so no condoms, or masturbation, add that on to the previous list.

OneBrickOneVoice

24th March 2007, 16:05

Are you saying that it would be alright to abort a child that is already halfway out?

when has that ever happened?

Black Dagger

24th March 2007, 16:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 05:20 pm
Are you saying that it would be alright to abort a child that is already halfway out?
Who cares? :huh:

Coggeh

24th March 2007, 17:00

I used have very mixed views on this because i was very willing to believe the pro-choice right wing propaganda mainly because of the idealism factor but simply if abortion wasn't legal then you would have back street abortions and the womans life would be at risk . Also foetus is not a baby .People say why kill something before it gets the chance to live , well why ruin 2lifes by bringing in an unwanted baby ? its simply the womans choice but then again if your going to be having an abortion more than once its your own damn fault that your pregnant . Point being use contraception and don't be stupid :)

Jazzratt

24th March 2007, 17:10

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 07:20 am

If we outlaw even certain kinds of abortion, we are giving in to their sick agenda.

Are you saying that it would be alright to abort a child that is already halfway out?
What the fuck is this ridiculous strawman?

Just in case the OP is still about, I'd just like to point out
Foetus != Baby.

As for the ridiculous attack on anarchists by grove street I would like to make it clear that most anarchists do not operate in the same way as liberals and most of them are not nearly as emotional as his absurd post suggests.

freakazoid

24th March 2007, 17:16

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 09:05 am

Are you saying that it would be alright to abort a child that is already halfway out?

when has that ever happened?
Not saying that it has. But I was replying to AndrewG saying that any and all abortions are ok. I am just finding out if he think that that would also be alright.

im confused.. how do you abort a child thats halfway out? LOL tongue.gif

Many ways, knife, hammer, take a gun to its head and blow its brains out, etc. Why not, there shouldn't be any restrictions, <_< *sigh

What is a strawman?

ExpansiveThought

24th March 2007, 19:53

One of the things that disgusts me the most about society is a whole is the widespread legal denial of an individual;s sovereignty over their own physical body. This applies to gay marriage, abortion, drugs( to a certain extent) and also the right to defend oneself from an attacker.

Do the religious right want us to think that our bodies belong to God? They cetainly want us to think that its more of a sin to hav an abortion then to deliver a child into a sqaulid poverse hell of a life. The adoption system is often one of the main ways that people 'slip through the cracks' of social services, and i think the general paradigm held by such authoritarian thinkers as christian fundamentalists is that 'the invisible hand' will steward these poor children.

dannthraxxx

24th March 2007, 22:12

I'm pro-life basically. However, I do think all should have the right to choose, so it's complicated for me.

I think people should have the responsibility and know how to plan parenthood if they are going to go at it like rabbits. In the case of rape, I'm not sure, there is always adoption and it's still a life they're taking.

Lenin II

24th March 2007, 22:13

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 07:20 am

I like abortion. Had we aborted a lot of motherfuckers we wouldn’t have to use guns the way we are. I think the entire world population should take a 20-year break off of having kids.

Furthermore, I don’t believe that most pro-lifers are sincere about life or really give a damn about the life of the baby. I say this because these same people are not the least bit interested in the welfare of the child after it’s born. What this is really all about is that they see sex as a sin and pregnancy as God’s way of punishing women for being sluts. They believe that if you take away abortion and birth control that the fear of pregnancy will either force women to not have sex, or allow God to punish them through pregnancy.

If we outlaw even certain kinds of abortion, we are giving in to their sick agenda. It will only give them more power over us. Give them an inch and they’ll take a foot. It’s the Christian way.

What in the world are you talking about? We don't see sex as a sin.

If we outlaw even certain kinds of abortion, we are giving in to their sick agenda.

Are you saying that it would be alright to abort a child that is already halfway out?
Firstly, are you saying that you are a Christian? And if so, isn't lust one of your seven “deadly” sins? Deadly as in death? Seems pretty severe to me. And didn't Jesus himself supposedly preach that people who even thought about premarital sex would burn forever? What's up with that? How did our privates become so very public? Why do Christians seem obsessed with the politics of sex? This is especially maddening because our world is NOT being torn apart right now because people are having too much or the wrong kind of sex. War and terrorism have nothing to do with sex, and EVERYTHING to do with religion.
And yet conservative Christians not only fail to speak out against war and violence, they honor and profess their admiration for those who do it. If a Christian soldier goes to Iraq and is court-martialed for shooting civilians, I think it doubtful the pastor of his church would utter the meekest peep about the sin of wrath. If a Christian happens to be attracted to people of his or her same gender however, then they can pretty much expect to be treated--with total official sanction and participation--as shit.
For them, ANY form of emotional outflow, which sex would certainly classify as, is to be shunned, for it would probably result in one’s bogus “spirituality” seeming moot next to something as truly awesome as sex.

Secondly, we are talking about abortion. That is, the removal of the fetus from the womb of the mother. We are not “killing” anything. You kill far more cells scratching your nose than you do aborting a fetus. In fact, abortion laws are already in place that forbid the removal of a fetus after its nervous system start developing, because then it seen as capable of thought and capable of feeling pain. Don’t even start with the whole “potential” human being argument, because as Fawkes said, by that logic it should be illegal to masturbate because of the killing of millions of sperm. After all, the sperm cells are “alive” even before conception. Furthermore, if we outlaw abortion, women will just use the coat hanger trick or have people punch them in the stomach. Don’t tell me that doesn’t happen. I’ve SEEN it. Conclusion: forgive me for quoting a Democrat, but Clinton once said: “Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.”

Lenin II

24th March 2007, 22:19

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 09:12 pm
I'm pro-life basically. However, I do think all should have the right to choose, so it's complicated for me.

I think people should have the responsibility and know how to plan parenthood if they are going to go at it like rabbits. In the case of rape, I'm not sure, there is always adoption and it's still a life they're taking.
Should a 13 year-old girl be required to deliver the child of incestuous rape? You would volunteer to tell her personally that she must?

dannthraxxx

24th March 2007, 22:28

Originally posted by AndrewG+March 24, 2007 09:19 pm--> (AndrewG @ March 24, 2007 09:19 pm)
[email protected] 24, 2007 09:12 pm
I'm pro-life basically. However, I do think all should have the right to choose, so it's complicated for me.

I think people should have the responsibility and know how to plan parenthood if they are going to go at it like rabbits. In the case of rape, I'm not sure, there is always adoption and it's still a life they're taking.
Should a 13 year-old girl be required to deliver the child of incestuous rape? You would volunteer to tell her personally that she must? [/b]
Stop throwing around assumptions asshole. I never said that. I said "I WASNT SURE."

In the case of rape, I mostly believe in Abortion.

Then again, what does it matter if she is a 13 year old girl? I know 13 year old girls who have 1 or 2 children and they actually raise them fine and go to school as well.

What does it matter if it's incestuous or just a normal rape, it's rape anyway around.
I also know girls who've been raped and they raise their children fine. It's all the womans choice.

If she cant handle it, abort it. If she wants the child and feels it is still a part of herself, have it, raise it, deal.

I shouldn't have said adoption, I'd never adopt out a child.

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 04:32

Firstly, are you saying that you are a Christian?

:o My goodness man, where have you been? I suppose that you don't visit the religious section much, :P

And if so, isn't lust one of your seven “deadly” sins? Deadly as in death?

We all die.

And didn't Jesus himself supposedly preach that people who even thought about premarital sex would burn forever?

No.

Why do Christians seem obsessed with the politics of sex? This is especially maddening because our world is NOT being torn apart right now because people are having too much or the wrong kind of sex. War and terrorism have nothing to do with sex, and EVERYTHING to do with religion.

So very true, :(. It seems that most Christians are focusing on the wrong things. Instead of helping people they blame and cast judgment. :( Of course not all are like that, just the most vocals are.

seeming moot next to something as truly awesome as sex.

lol, is it really that good? :P

And yet conservative Christians not only fail to speak out against war and violence, they honor and profess their admiration for those who do it. If a Christian soldier goes to Iraq and is court-martialed for shooting civilians, I think it doubtful the pastor of his church would utter the meekest peep about the sin of wrath. If a Christian happens to be attracted to people of his or her same gender however, then they can pretty much expect to be treated--with total official sanction and participation--as shit.

This is also sadly true, :( all for the same reasons as above.

Don’t even start with the whole “potential” human being argument, because as Fawkes said, by that logic it should be illegal to masturbate because of the killing of millions of sperm.

True. But I personally see it as already a child. What is the main thought amongst doctors and scientists about when it is truly a human being?

Furthermore, if we outlaw abortion, women will just use the coat hanger trick or have people punch them in the stomach.

I have heard about the coat hanger thing but not the punching, do people actually do that?

Conclusion: forgive me for quoting a Democrat, but Clinton once said: “Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.”

Then you are forgiven comrade, :P

Should a 13 year-old girl be required to deliver the child of incestuous rape? You would volunteer to tell her personally that she must?

Good question. I would never dictate to anyone what they must do, I am after all an anarchist. Also, why do you people consider rape "wrong"? After all it is only sex, in a way" Not saying that I don't consider it wrong, just a question. The main problem, like others have said, is that they do not have the means or help to raise the child, it should not be this way. If a woman can't raise it then it should be a community involvement to help raise the child. Damn capitalist system!! /me shakes his fist in the air, "I'll get you."

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 05:22

Originally posted by freakzoid+--> (freakzoid)Also, why do you people consider rape "wrong"? After all it is only sex, in a way" Not saying that I don't consider it wrong, just a question.[/b]

Because it's non-consensual.

freakzoid
The main problem, like others have said, is that they do not have the means or help to raise the child, it should not be this way. If a woman can't raise it then it should be a community involvement to help raise the child. Damn capitalist system!! /me shakes his fist in the air, "I'll get you."

I completetly disagree; at the moment the world doesnt really need MORE people, as such abortion is an effective back-up for condoms and other contraceptive devices that prevent unncessary and unwanted population growth. When a woman gets pregnant and does not wish to carry the pregnancy to term abortion should always be an option, regardless of whether she is living in a capitalist or non-capitalist society - because increased population growth is not inherently desireable for the human species at the moment.

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 05:32

Because it's non-consensual.

Perhaps, but it is not like he, or she, is taken the persons life. Seems to me that this would be more of a moral thing. discuss.

I completelty disagree; at the moment the world doesnt really need MORE people, as such abortion is an effective back-up for condoms and other contraceptive devices that prevent unncessary and unwanted population growth. When a woman gets pregnant and does not wish to carry the pregnancy to term abortion should always be an option, regardless of whether she is living in a capitalist or non-capitalist society - because increased population growth is not inherently desireable for the human species at the moment.

There is a lot of room on this planet for people and growth.

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 05:37

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)Not saying that it has.[/b]

Well late-term abortions are rare, and of the late-term abortions that are conducted none are so late to as to be conducted on a foetus that has been half-birthed :unsure:

That is why your question was a 'strawman' - you were trying to prove a point by posing a question that clearly fallacious and not representative of the reality of abortion practices... thus regardless of someones response to your question it will have no bearing on the abortion debate itself, its essentially an irrelevant hypothetical.

But in response, it doesnt matter - if that is required it should be done, simple as that.

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)
But I was replying to AndrewG saying that any and all abortions are ok. [/b]

Well in that case your reply was completely fallacious - as it is completely unrepresentative of normal abortion practices, a hypothetical designed explicitly to corner someone unfairly into agreeing with your proposition.

But ive said many times already, why does it matter? If you are pro-choice it shouldnt matter when an abortion is conducted, merely that the choice to abort or not abort the foetus was the decision of the woman concerned.

[email protected]
Many ways, knife, hammer, take a gun to its head and blow its brains out, etc.

More fallacy.

Obviously abortion procedures are not carried in a callous, murderous fashion with knifes, guns and hammers.

Abortion is a medical procedure and is conducted with the same tools and precision as standard surgery.

freakazoid

Why not, there shouldn't be any restrictions, dry.gif *sigh

Of course there should be, surgeons dont usually operate with guns, knifes and hammers, so why should abortion procedures be conducted in such a crude and dangerous manner?

You're deliberately misrepresenting the way abortions are conducted, as well as the pro-choice position - all to serve an anti-abortion, anti-choice agenda - that's bollocks.

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 05:44

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)Perhaps, but it is not like he, or she, is taken the persons life.[/b]

What does 'taking a persons life' have to do with rape? I'll answer that, absolutely nothing, you appear to be trying to make some kind of fallacious link between rape and abortion? :unsure:

The answer to your question about rape is simple, and i gave you it - any non-consensual sexual act is viewed negatively by society (for obvious reasons) - its not a 'perhaps' issue, that is the reason why rape is not 'ok' - and can NEVER be 'ok' - end of story. Unfortunately many consensual acts of sex are also viewed negatively by society - that's fucked up and those are views that must be challenged always - but consent in matters of sex is not something that is or should ever be 'up for debate'.

freakazoid

Seems to me that this would be more of a moral thing. discuss.

Morals (whatever you're using that term to mean?) have NOTHING to do with whether or not rape is viewed negatively - non-consensual sex should be viewed negatively, just like assault and murder should be viewed negatively, for obvious reasons - no abstract value system or theological framework is necessary to understand or justify viewing these things as negatives in human society.

Lenin II

25th March 2007, 05:48

Are there no women on this site? I hear no female point of view.

Lenin II

25th March 2007, 05:59

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 03:32 am

Furthermore, if we outlaw abortion, women will just use the coat hanger trick or have people punch them in the stomach.

I have heard about the coat hanger thing but not the punching, do people actually do that?

Should a 13 year-old girl be required to deliver the child of incestuous rape? You would volunteer to tell her personally that she must?

Good question. I would never dictate to anyone what they must do, I am after all an anarchist. Also, why do you people consider rape "wrong"? After all it is only sex, in a way" Not saying that I don't consider it wrong, just a question. The main problem, like others have said, is that they do not have the means or help to raise the child, it should not be this way. If a woman can't raise it then it should be a community involvement to help raise the child. Damn capitalist system!! /me shakes his fist in the air, "I'll get you."
1)
Yeah, dude. It does happen. There was a pregnant high school girl I knew who went around and asked people to punch her in the stomach.

2)
(GIRL:) can you kindly tell freakazoid to shut the fuck up with his "nothing wrong with rape" shit because EVERYTHING is wrong with it in the real world. You're being violated and you can get really fucked up in the head when raped so tell him that.
Tell him to just shut the fuck up.
Also say it has nothing to do with morals and if he believes a woman should do whatever she wants with her body then someone taking advantage of her is completely defeating the purpose. Ask him how he'd feel if his mother was raped? Or girlfriend or sister.

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 06:06

That is why your question was a 'strawman' - you were trying to prove a point by posing a question that clearly fallacious and not representative of the reality of abortion practices... thus regardless of someones response to your question it will have no bearing on the abortion debate itself, its essentially an irrelevant hypothetical.

Thanks for the definition, :D. So it would kind of be like when someone asks about toothbrushes in a communist society. Almost definitaly not a real problem, but still important kind of.

Well late-term abortions are rare, and of the late-term abortions that are conducted none are so late to as to be conducted on a foetus that has been half-birthed unsure.gif

True, but it could happen.

Well in that case your reply was completely fallacious - as it is completely unrepresentative of normal abortion practices, a hypothetical designed explicitly to corner someone unfairly into agreeing with your proposition.

Using coat hangers isn't exactly normal practice either. :(

Obviously abortion procedures are not carried in a callous, murderous fashion with knifes, guns and hammers.

Umm... coat hangers, punching the stomach, putting hot rocks on the stomach?

Abortion is a medical procedure and is conducted with the same tools and precision as standard surgery.

The knife is a surgeons tool.

Of course there should be, surgeons usually operate with guns, knifes and hammers, so why should abortion procedures be conducted in such a crude and dangerous manner?

You're deliberately misrepresenting the way abortions are conducted, as well as the pro-choice position - all to serve an anti-abortion, anti-choice agenda - that's bollocks.

Not really, although the gun part was more for shock value, :P, http://www.careconfidential.com/WhatAboutAbortion.aspx http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/dx.htm

1. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. 2. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
3. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.
4. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.
5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The baby's brains are then sucked out and the head is removed from the womb, completing the procedure.

:o I guess I wasn't that far off with the whole thing about the baby being only half way out and blowing its brains out, :*(

edit - oops, typo

edit edit - lol another typo

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 07:18

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)True, but it could happen.[/b]

So what? A lot of things 'could happen', that doesnt make every remote possibility and beyond worth mentioning, let alone as a proposition in a serious argument.

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)Using coat hangers isn't exactly normal practice either.[/b]

What's your point? Doctors dont use coat-hangers; 'coat hanger' abortions are only performed when people cant legally or materially access abortion. If abortions are legal, widely available and un-stigmatised 'coat hangers' (and other equivalents) will be essentially non-existant.

Now, the kind of fallacious scare tactics that you've employed thus far are exactly what leads to the stigmatisation of abortion, and in turn, the endangerment of women everywhere.

Originally posted by freakazoid
Umm... coat hangers, punching the stomach, putting hot rocks on the stomach?

Yes, these are all methods used when abortions are not legal, widely available and unstigmatised - they have nothing at all to do with the question of whether abortions should be conducted, if late term abortions are acceptable etc.

You're making very little sense. You're attempting to use the consequences of anti-abortion advocacy to prove that abortion procedures are carried out in a 'callous, murderous fashion'. Well no, that's complete rubbish, despite crude and often unsafe tools and procedures, backyard abortions are not 'callous' or 'murderous' acts - they are as ethical as ANY abortion, but as a result of the moralising of anti-choice activists - are necessarily carried out in a less safe, less sterile enviroment.

Again, if abortions were legal, widely available and not stigmatised these problems would be resolved.

Originally posted by freakazoid
The knife is a surgeons tool.

No, its not - surgeons use specifically designed tools (like scapels), not 'knifes' (which could really mean anything from a bread 'knife' to a butchers 'knife').

Originally posted by freakazoid
1. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. 2. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
3. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.
4. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.
5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The baby's brains are then sucked out and the head is removed from the womb, completing the procedure.

This paragraph is describing a 'partial birth' abortion - these are hardly common, but so what if they were? I dont support a womans right to choose because i find abortions to be fun spectacles, it's a matter of womens autonomy.

Most medical procedures are not pleasant things, im not really sure why you expect abortions to reach some sort of standard of pleasantness?

The only reason you could really have for dwelling so much on what is a standard medical procedure is some kind of appeal to emotions - im meant to be like 'awwwwww, that's so horrible! Poor little baby!'

No thanks - I'm not going to be emotionally manipulated into supporting reactionary politics

[email protected]
I guess I wasn't that far off with the whole thing about the baby being only half way out

Well of course, parital-birth abortions exist, but why is that significant? It's not as if i support a womens right to choose until the foetus reaches some magical stage.

freakazoid

and blowing its brains out, :*(

Yeah, coz surgically removing a foetus' (not a 'baby') organs is exactly like shooting a baby in the head with a gun :rolleyes:

R_P_A_S

25th March 2007, 07:43

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 07:44 am
With a knife.

A Womans Body is jsut that her OWN body. NO religious groups or anyone else should be able to tell her what to do with her fetus. A fetus is a parasite and since it is her body that fetus is also her property.
how is a fetus a parasite??? you make it seem like its a disease or something. im confused

R_P_A_S

25th March 2007, 07:47

what if i got my girl pregnant and Im looking forward to being a father and raising our child BUT SHE DON'T WANT A KID.... what about my rights? don't i have a say also.. since I'm the one who impregnated her? THATS MAH SEED~!~!!!!!!!

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 07:48

Morals (whatever you're using that term to mean?) have NOTHING to do with whether or not rape is viewed negatively

Your views on negitavely/positivaly = right/wrong = your morals

can you kindly tell freakazoid to shut the fuck up with his "nothing wrong with rape" shit because EVERYTHING is wrong with it in the real world.

I did not say that nothing is wrong with rape!

Ask him how he'd feel if his mother was raped?

Frankly, I'd shoot the guy.

What's your point? Doctors dont use coat-hangers; 'coat hanger' abortions are only performed when people cant legally or materially access abortion. If abortions are legal, widely available and un-stigmatised 'coat hangers' (and other equivalents) will be essentially non-existant.

I see your point. But the thing was is that some abortions, as of now, do happen that way. But I still see your point.

No, its not - surgeons use specifically designed tools (like scapels), not 'knifes' (which could really mean anything from a bread 'knife' to a butchers 'knife').

But they are knives.

This paragraph is describing a 'partial birth' abortion - these are hardly common, but so what if they were?

That was in responce to the part about being half way out.

Yeah, coz surgically removing a foetus' (not a 'baby') organs is exactly like shooting a baby in the head with a gun rolleyes.gif

Kind of, both are removing the brain, one sucks it out. The other blows it out.

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 07:49

how is a fetus a parasite??? you make it seem like its a disease or something. im confused

Because it is using the mother as a host to feed itself

Mujer Libre

25th March 2007, 07:50

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+March 25, 2007 06:43 am--> (R_P_A_S @ March 25, 2007 06:43 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 07:44 am
With a knife.

A Womans Body is jsut that her OWN body. NO religious groups or anyone else should be able to tell her what to do with her fetus. A fetus is a parasite and since it is her body that fetus is also her property.
how is a fetus a parasite??? you make it seem like its a disease or something. im confused [/b]
A foetus is a parasite because it lives on resources provided by another living creature (ie the pregnant woman).

It's a value-neutral term, in its scientific usage and also doesn't imply pathology.

RPAS
what if i got my girl pregnant and Im looking forward to being a father and raising our child BUT SHE DON'T WANT A KID.... what about my rights? don't i have a say also.. since I'm the one who impregnated her? THATS MAH SEED~!~!!!!!!!

Well, it might be your "seed" but it's her body, so ultimately it's up to "your girl"- whether you like it or not.

R_P_A_S

25th March 2007, 07:53

interesting. thanks for the info.. hmm

grove street

25th March 2007, 08:45

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 06:53 pm
One of the things that disgusts me the most about society is a whole is the widespread legal denial of an individual;s sovereignty over their own physical body. This applies to gay marriage, abortion, drugs( to a certain extent) and also the right to defend oneself from an attacker.

Do the religious right want us to think that our bodies belong to God? They cetainly want us to think that its more of a sin to hav an abortion then to deliver a child into a sqaulid poverse hell of a life. The adoption system is often one of the main ways that people 'slip through the cracks' of social services, and i think the general paradigm held by such authoritarian thinkers as christian fundamentalists is that 'the invisible hand' will steward these poor children.
So according to your logic you support suicide and self mutalation?

The fact is that fetus in more ways then others still remains a parasite even once it's born :P

grove street

25th March 2007, 08:56

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 05:04 pm

I support abortion. 100%... Those pictures shock me not. Just another reason for me to say "Fuck off propaganda and climb back into the ass of the cappie you came from!!!"

Abortion is practised in many Captalist countries and is supported by many Captalists.

Who does being a Captalist have to do with where ever you support abortion or not?

A true Captalist would see setting up an abortion clinic as a perfect business opportunity :P

Sure Christian conservatives are mostly right-wingers, but that doesn't change the fact that Jesus lived a mostly Socialist life.

Brekisonphilous

25th March 2007, 09:01

Adoption is the worst option imo. the child is better off not coming into the world if he or she is unwanted in the first place. it is best they never develop a consciousness.
Until the fetus is outside of the womb, is not a human being in society deserving rights. It is inside of the womb and knows nothing of the ouside world, it is dead to the world, it's existence does not influence society. It is dependent upton its mother the host for survival.

Contraceptives and a less repressive attitude towards sexuality is the best method, however. But society needs to lose the idea that adoptions are evil practices. sometimes they are necessary, and why over-populate the world just because of emotional constraints.

Tower of Bebel

25th March 2007, 13:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 06:47 am
what if i got my girl pregnant and Im looking forward to being a father and raising our child BUT SHE DON'T WANT A KID.... what about my rights? don't i have a say also.. since I'm the one who impregnated her? THATS MAH SEED~!~!!!!!!!
Yean your seed, but you do not have to wear the baby! If both of you intended to make a baby then you have the right to argue with her and decide with her what to do with the baby. But if there was no intention to have a baby then the girl has the last word I guess.

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 15:02

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)Your views on negitavely/positivaly = right/wrong = your morals[/b]

No, don't force your conception of the world onto me.

I dont oppose rape, assault or murder because of a pseudo-religous judgement, or the edict of a super-being - it's not about sins - or other abstract religous concepts.

Rape, assault, murder these are all viewed negatively because they impinge upon the basic freedom of people; essentially everyone agrees that getting murdered etc. is undesireable, that's logic - that is the basis of my views - i part from people with 'moral frameworks' when driven by religious belief they attempt to stigmatise behaviour for abstract (read: moral) reasons... say... that sex between men is 'sinful' - it's not a decision driven by logic, but by theological moralism/social conservativism - i'm driven by the idea that as long as both (or more) people consent, there's no such thing as morally 'good' or 'bad' sexual behaviour - im not adding any additional (and imo illogical and in practice authoritarian) judgement beyond the social constructs of freedom and autonomy.

Originally posted by freakazoid+--> (freakazoid)I see your point. But the thing was is that some abortions, as of now, do happen that way. But I still see your point.[/b]

Ok, some abortions are performed with coathangers... so what? What are you trying to say? That coat-hanger abortions are bad? Well, yeah, compared to abortions with sterile tools and a sterile environment, using a coat-hanger is pretty shit, but what would you have a woman do? Its the kind of POV that you're advocating which leads to the stigmatisation of abortion, restrictions on its availability, and thus to the endagerment of women.

If all the 'anti-abortion' activists fucked off backyard abortions would be a relic of the past.

Originally posted by freakazoid
But they are knives.
You're wrong, but so what? What if they are knives? Would you have doctors use sharpened sticks to perform surgery? You have no meaningful point at all - anywhere.

[email protected]
That was in responce to the part about being half way out.

Ok? So partial birth abortion exists? Why is that of any significance to the broad issue we're discussing?

frekazoid
Kind of, both are removing the brain, one sucks it out. The other blows it out.

I cant believe you're comparing a trained doctor peforming a standard medical procedure with someone getting shot in the head... that's beyond ridiculous :wacko:

Black Dagger

25th March 2007, 15:06

Originally posted by grove street
Sure Christian conservatives are mostly right-wingers, but that doesn't change the fact that Jesus lived a mostly Socialist life.

That's an anachronism, i.e. complete bullshit.

RevMARKSman

25th March 2007, 16:47

Originally posted by grove street+March 25, 2007 02:45 am--> (grove street @ March 25, 2007 02:45 am)
[email protected] 24, 2007 06:53 pm
One of the things that disgusts me the most about society is a whole is the widespread legal denial of an individual;s sovereignty over their own physical body. This applies to gay marriage, abortion, drugs( to a certain extent) and also the right to defend oneself from an attacker.

Do the religious right want us to think that our bodies belong to God? They cetainly want us to think that its more of a sin to hav an abortion then to deliver a child into a sqaulid poverse hell of a life. The adoption system is often one of the main ways that people 'slip through the cracks' of social services, and i think the general paradigm held by such authoritarian thinkers as christian fundamentalists is that 'the invisible hand' will steward these poor children.
So according to your logic you support suicide and self mutalation?

The fact is that fetus in more ways then others still remains a parasite even once it's born :P [/b]
Yeah. If the suicidal person lives they're going to be a danger to everyone around them, and probably not be useful either.

The fact is that fetus in more ways then others still remains a parasite even once it's born :P

As I have said a couple times in the CC (i'm pretty sure I'm allowed to quote myself with my own consent):

Our pro-choice position is not clearly defined, and say someone came in and said they support abortion on demand and infanticide within x amount of time if abortion is not available. How would we deal with such a person?

Fawkes

25th March 2007, 16:54

The fact is that fetus in more ways then others still remains a parasite even once it's born
No, once the baby is born, it is not solely dependent on the mother in the same way that it is before birth. A baby can be raised post-birth without its mother, it cannot however be raised pre-birth without the help of the mother.

ExpansiveThought

25th March 2007, 19:30

You bring up an excellent point grove street. I do support suicide if the suicidee is in to much suffering to enjoy their life, they serve no purpose to society and have no desire to live, who are we to FORCE them to live in hell. The point here is that YOUR body is YOURS and no one can tell you what to do with it, not man, God, or law.

yulives

25th March 2007, 19:47

Well, as far as dead babies vs. womens rights go, I cant really decide, but one thing that I can decide on is the freedom of choice. I really cant stand this right-winged talk about having to bann abortions. Wheter or not abortion is a murder is highly debatable, and all people dont have the same opinion on the matter. The right of a woman to make an abortion is just that; a right, while some people talk about it like if it was a duty. If a woman doesnt want to make an abortion for any of the reasons, she doesnt have to. But choice must ofered to everybody, imo. What if, for example, a woman is raped?

freakazoid

25th March 2007, 19:54

No, don't force your conception of the world onto me.

I dont oppose rape, assault or murder because of a pseudo-religous judgement, or the edict of a super-being - it's not about sins - or other abstract religous concepts.

It's not about religion. What you believe to be right and wrong make up your morals.

You're wrong, but so what?

Actually I am not wrong. And the thing with the knives was because of this question, "im confused.. how do you abort a child thats halfway out? LOL tongue.gif" I gave some examples of how. Not saying that they are what a professional would actually use, except for the knife, just giving examples of possible ways.

Ok? So partial birth abortion exists? Why is that of any significance to the broad issue we're discussing?

It was brought up because of the question of how could they be aborted if halfway out, which then the part about the knives and such was brought up. It was a side argument.

I cant believe you're comparing a trained doctor peforming a standard medical procedure with someone getting shot in the head... that's beyond ridiculous wacko.gif

I am not saying that they are one and the same. Are you purposefully misinterpreting what I am trying to say? :( It was in response to your sarcastic response saying that removing a fetuses organs is exactly like shooting it in the head. And then I gave an example of one type of abortion practice, out of many, where they remove the brain to kill it. And I said that one sucks out the brain and the other blows it out, showing that they both give the same result, dead fetus with its brains removed.

it cannot however be raised pre-birth without the help of the mother.

I wonder how long until this isn't even true, that we have the technology to create an artificial womb for the fetus.

The big controversy is whether it is murder or not. And this depends on whether or not it is a human being. You think that it is alright because it isn't human, therefore it isn't murder. I believe that it is human therefore it is murder. But I do not think that it should be dictated onto the mother whether or not she can do it!!

Jazzratt

25th March 2007, 20:26

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 05:06 am

Well late-term abortions are rare, and of the late-term abortions that are conducted none are so late to as to be conducted on a foetus that has been half-birthed unsure.gif

True, but it could happen.
No it couldn't. Be logical for a second, prick, and realise that no one is going to have "second thoughts" about having a baby mid way through giving birth. For fuck's sake.

Well in that case your reply was completely fallacious - as it is completely unrepresentative of normal abortion practices, a hypothetical designed explicitly to corner someone unfairly into agreeing with your proposition.

Using coat hangers isn't exactly normal practice either. :(
No, and it's only used when people are prevented from getting abortions through professionals by christian nutfucks like yourself.

Obviously abortion procedures are not carried in a callous, murderous fashion with knifes, guns and hammers.

Umm... coat hangers, punching the stomach, putting hot rocks on the stomach?
See above. If people can get free abortions readily they will not need to resort to that shit.

Abortion is a medical procedure and is conducted with the same tools and precision as standard surgery.

The knife is a surgeons tool.
It's called a scalpel and it's designed for precision. Knives on the other hand are just simply cutting edges.

Of course there should be, surgeons usually operate with guns, knifes and hammers, so why should abortion procedures be conducted in such a crude and dangerous manner?

You're deliberately misrepresenting the way abortions are conducted, as well as the pro-choice position - all to serve an anti-abortion, anti-choice agenda - that's bollocks.

Not really, although the gun part was more for shock value, :P, http://www.careconfidential.com/WhatAboutAbortion.aspx http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/dx.htm

1. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. 2. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
3. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.
4. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.
5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The baby's brains are then sucked out and the head is removed from the womb, completing the procedure.
:lol: Foetus gets OWNED!

:o I guess I wasn't that far off with the whole thing about the baby being only half way out and blowing its brains out, :*(
Foetus =/= Baby. Keep that in mind.

YSR

26th March 2007, 00:27

To be honest, all this obsession over whether a fetus is a human or not is just falling into the hands of the Right.

It doesn't matter if it's a baby, it doesn't matter if it's a "parasite," it doesn't matter if it's a space alien. The question is which is more important: the rights of something which does not function yet or a woman? Does society only value women as a means of reproduction or understand them as fully-formed human beings with their own subjectivities?

In bourgeois society, working class women are valued as simply a means to continue producing workers. This is easy to see, for instance, in the history of abortion in the U.S. Upper class women were able to get expensive, illegal abortions before Roe vs. Wade. Proletarian women did not have the same resources and therefore had to rely on dangerous, back alley abortions. Since this choice often literally meant death for the woman, most poor women who wanted to get abortions had to instead bring the child to term.

This process continue today, with the rolling back of abortion access under Medicaid, the near illegalization in many places, etc.

In answer to the topic's reasonably well-worded question: women's rights, without a second thought.

Ihavenoidea

26th March 2007, 16:10

In 2006, a "free abortion" woman campaigner of the early 1970s declared: "We fought for the right to be a woman without being a mother. And you can't say that today."

Like that ^

There are so many excuses as to why the women shouldnt be able too.. its crazy that it is even a debate.

Sand Castle

26th March 2007, 17:13

I believe that women should have the right to an abortion if they have been raped. Denying them that right, in my mind, is the equivilant of being a rapist. If they have not been raped, but still want/need an abortion and you take away their right to have one then (again in my mind) you are a rapist. I hope nobody has said all this already, I want to play the debate game too.

Ihavenoidea

27th March 2007, 23:14

Originally posted by grove street+March 25, 2007 07:56 am--> (grove street @ March 25, 2007 07:56 am)
[email protected] 19, 2007 05:04 pm

I support abortion. 100%... Those pictures shock me not. Just another reason for me to say "Fuck off propaganda and climb back into the ass of the cappie you came from!!!"

Abortion is practised in many Captalist countries and is supported by many Captalists.

Who does being a Captalist have to do with where ever you support abortion or not?

A true Captalist would see setting up an abortion clinic as a perfect business opportunity :P

Sure Christian conservatives are mostly right-wingers, but that doesn't change the fact that Jesus lived a mostly Socialist life. [/b]
hahahah true. Business lol.

I was in Sask and all I could see was anti-abortion posteres supported by the church and Sask is a mostly conservative and liberal province.

A lot of conservatives are religious fanatics and that is where I was going.

They use disgusting propaganda to win support for their own agenda. Making women who want to abort seem like the DEVIL. Just like they demonize communism.

Its a womans choice. Period. If men could have babies they would be doing the exact same thing right now. lol. That is, fighting for their rights to not have the baby.

All this shit men put out about the baby being half of them or their seed and all this is absolute bullshit. Dont step in it on your way out the door.

If it wasnt about controlling a women then they [men] would let them dicide what they wanted to do with their bodies. Men have no right to control what we do with them. Its sad how limited our rights are, and this limitation is always supported byt the government and religion.

And that abortion shit they do in the room... fuck.. when women go to have abortions some clinics actually show the baby and have pictures of children all over the palce happy with their families and crap to make them feel bad. Time did an artical about these people who were trying to get women to stop the abortion by showing them their baby and making them listen to the heartbeat and crap.... in hopes they would stop the abortion. Annoying.

And there were anti-abortion COMMERCIALS on tv just a while ago when the conservatives were running for Parliament.

http://www.abortionisprolife.com/index.htm

WONDERFUL SITE - everything from audio essays to FAQ.. I encourage everyone to read everything on this site. ESPECIALLY the ones who are anti-abortion or confused about it.

Sand Castle

29th March 2007, 04:41

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 10:14 pm

All this shit men put out about the baby being half of them or their seed and all this is absolute bullshit. Dont step in it on your way out the door.

I think you got a little too biased there. The baby IS made up of half of the father's genetics and half of the mother's genetics. Without sperm (a male product) women would not be able to have babies, meaning no humans. You're right, however, in saying that having the baby is the woman's choice. For men it is simply plug and go, for women it is an entire to-do list....
1. get injected with sperm
2. carry a developing human inside of you for 9 months (sometimes more or less).
3. over the above course of time you must endure ankle swelling, puking, back pain, and other agitating things
4. go into labor and have the baby.
Having a child can have a positive or negative effect on a woman's entire life, depending on the woman's circumstances and whether or not she wants the baby.
I'm sure you already knew all of that, but I felt a little too much heat there.

ComradeR

29th March 2007, 10:09

And that abortion shit they do in the room... fuck.. when women go to have abortions some clinics actually show the baby and have pictures of children all over the palce happy with their families and crap to make them feel bad. Time did an artical about these people who were trying to get women to stop the abortion by showing them their baby and making them listen to the heartbeat and crap.... in hopes they would stop the abortion. Annoying.
Yeah i remember reading about those fake clinics that the pro-lifers have set up in order to use gulit, and failing that, fear (by making all this shit up about how dangerous and painful abortion is) to prevent women from getting an abortion.
Not to mention those christian fanatics who bomb real abortion clinics, threaten the people who work at the clinics and even kill them.

Sand Castle

30th March 2007, 04:12

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 09:09 am
Yeah i remember reading about those fake clinics that the pro-lifers have set up in order to use gulit, and failing that, fear (by making all this shit up about how dangerous and painful abortion is) to prevent women from getting an abortion.
Not to mention those christian fanatics who bomb real abortion clinics, threaten the people who work at the clinics and even kill them.
Maralyn Manson wrote a song about how hypocritical pro-lifers can be. You can't kill people and be pro-life. Anti-abortionist would make a better term for those assholes. BTW, I'm not a big music fan, I just heard about that song when I was reading Manson's response to Columbine.