Parenthood USA

[Minor Axis]

Newsweek: War of the Wombs profiles the organization "Personhood USA" a Pro-Life group whose stated goals is to pass a law stating that all fetuses will be regarded as federally constitutional people. This is one of the craziest things I've ever heard.

I'm sorry but cell clusters should not be granted the rights of people primarily because they are not physically independent viable individuals. You can't give the fetus full rights without taking away the rights of the mother. It's a flawed premise that illustrates how dangerous religion and religious beliefs can become.

 

[Dana]

I think these people need to keep there personal views to themselves. You're pro life? Good don't murder your children LOL. But don't tell someone what to do with a fetus that isn't a fully developed human who needs a host to survive.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

I'm picking that Dana has never carried a fetus either.:24:

 

[Tuffdisc]

But how can you say that cluster of cells is not a life? It may not have a mind of its own....yet, but how can we as humans decide what is life and what isn't? What's to live and what is to die just because its is a cluster of cells?

 

[Tuffdisc]

I think these people need to keep there personal views to themselves. You're pro life? Good don't murder your children LOL. But don't tell someone what to do with a fetus that isn't a fully developed human who needs a host to survive.

The baby doesn't get fully developed in the womb

 

[Minor Axis]

But how can you say that cluster of cells is not a life? It may not have a mind of its own....yet, but how can we as humans decide what is life and what isn't? What's to live and what is to die just because its is a cluster of cells?

Clusters of cells are life, but they have not yet developed where they deserve the rights of a born human being. As they develop, they do gain rights not to be aborted, but even that does not give them the rights of human beings, that is until the extremists succeed in changing the law. IMO, fetuses rights under no circumstances exceeds those of the mother unless the mother voluntarily gives up her rights. An example would be to give her life to allow the baby to be born.

The baby doesn't get fully developed in the womb

It develops to a point where it can survive without specialized equipment outside the womb. Yes it still needs to be looked after, kept warm and fed, but this is different than the technology required to keep a cell cluster or even a very young fetus going.

 

[Tuffdisc]

Clusters of cells are life, but they have not yet developed where they deserve the rights of a born human being. As they develop, they do gain rights not to be aborted, but even that does not give them the rights of human beings, that is until the extremists succeed in changing the law. IMO, fetuses rights under no circumstances exceeds those of the mother unless the mother voluntarily gives up her rights. An example would be to give her life to allow the baby to be born.



It develops to a point where it can survive without specialized equipment outside the womb. Yes it still needs to be looked after, kept warm and fed, but this is different than the technology required to keep a cell cluster or even a very young fetus going.

They deserve no right as a human being? Sheesh, please, the foetus can't defend itself who is anyone to take away that right just because it is unborn? It is a life, full stop.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

It is a life, full stop.

So was that fly that you just swatted. So is that kitten that you'd never dream of mashing into a pile of bloody entrails.

What matters is not where you define a life to exist, but where on the scale of lovability you choose to place it.

 

[Tuffdisc]

So was that fly that you just swatted. So is that kitten that you'd never dream of mashing into a pile of bloody entrails.

What matters is not where you define a life to exist, but where on the scale of lovability you choose to place it.

Did I swat a fly today? Maybe it was years ago, but that doesn't mean abortion is right

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

It means that you are prepared to end a life if it is deemed socially acceptable to do so.

 

[The Man]

Newsweek: War of the Wombs profiles the organization "Personhood USA" a Pro-Life group whose stated goals is to pass a law stating that all fetuses will be regarded as federally constitutional people. This is one of the craziest things I've ever heard.

I'm sorry but cell clusters should not be granted the rights of people primarily because they are not physically independent viable individuals. You can't give the fetus full rights without taking away the rights of the mother. It's a flawed premise that illustrates how dangerous religion and religious beliefs can become.

you are a cluster of cells

 

[Tuffdisc]

It means that you are prepared to end a life if it is deemed socially acceptable to do so.

Mate, that was years ago...gah....don't we eat animals for food....boy, I don't want them alive when I am cooking them :24:

 

[Minor Axis]

They deserve no right as a human being? Sheesh, please, the foetus can't defend itself who is anyone to take away that right just because it is unborn? It is a life, full stop.

I'm telling you how reasonable people have viewed this issue for centuries up to modern times. Yes it's a moral standard, it's peoples opinions what is reasonable, usually determined by the majority.

How is a mother being silly, not paying attention, falling down a flight of stairs and losing her baby any different than a teenager being silly with his friends in the car and running over a pedestrian in a crosswalk? Do we try the mother for manslaughter too?

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

My point exactly. Socially acceptable.


Let's work on facts rather than simplistic emotion.

• Nearly half of all pregnancies among American women are unintended, and four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]
• About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly one-third will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]
• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate remained stagnant between 1994 and 2006, but unintended pregnancy increased 50% among poor women, while decreasing 29% among higher-income women.[1]
• Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]
• Some 1.21 million abortions were performed in 2008, down from 1.31 million abortions in 2000.[4]

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/abortion-US/statsandfacts.html

I'd argue that these figures confirm that if one in three women chooses to have an abortion at some stage in their life, it is socially acceptable within that demographic. Compare it with smoking, for instance.

Percent of adults 18 years of age and over who currently smoke cigarettes: 19.3%

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/smoking.htm/

19% of Americans choose to smoke. 33% of women choose to abort.

Which is more likely to be socially acceptable? In your world, the male world, probably the smoking. Among the demographic that faces the decisision to carry, deliver, and nuture an unwanted pregnancy, the choice is is probably different.

You and I will never have to face the decision as to whether we want an unplanned pregnancy to continue inside of us.It's a tough enough decision for women to make without ignorant men trying to force one moral code onto a million different circumstances.

​

 

[Minor Axis]

My point exactly. Socially acceptable.


Let's work on facts rather than simplistic emotion.

• Nearly half of all pregnancies among American women are unintended, and four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly one-third will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate remained stagnant between 1994 and 2006, but unintended pregnancy increased 50% among poor women, while decreasing 29% among higher-income women.[1]• Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]• Some 1.21 million abortions were performed in 2008, down from 1.31 million abortions in 2000.[4]

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/abortion-US/statsandfacts.html


​

Especially poor people should be the ones to get free sex education/access to birth control. They are most in need of making intelligent decisions about having kids. But then our society must not make it advantageous for poor parents to view having kids as a viable way to increase their income. It's a messy situation. In Minnesota I like state program that insures poor children are fed and get medical coverage.

To emphasis cultural differences, it's one of those Scandinavian countries Sweden or Norway that have an incredibly high rate of pregnancy of unwed mothers. But I don't know how many of them choose to abort versus have the baby and live with their significant others or on their own. It just goes to show that marriage is not a requirement for successful society. It might not be what Christians view as desirable but that is besides my point.

 

[Tuffdisc]

My point exactly. Socially acceptable.


Let's work on facts rather than simplistic emotion.

• Nearly half of all pregnancies among American women are unintended, and four in 10 of these end in abortion.[1]• About half of American women will have an unintended pregnancy, [2] and nearly one-third will have an abortion, by age 45.[3]• The overall U.S. unintended pregnancy rate remained stagnant between 1994 and 2006, but unintended pregnancy increased 50% among poor women, while decreasing 29% among higher-income women.[1]• Overall, the abortion rate decreased 8% between 2000 and 2008, but abortion increased 18% among poor women, while decreasing 28% among higher-income women.[3]• Some 1.21 million abortions were performed in 2008, down from 1.31 million abortions in 2000.[4]

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/abortion-US/statsandfacts.html


​

Unintended pregnancies? I can understand if the pregnancy was due to a rape case, but don't these teenagers understand where babies come from? Of course they do. Do they care where they come from? I doubt it, cause if they did, they would of done something to stop themselves getting pregnant i.e. either abstaining from sex or using preventive measures not to get pregnant.

 

[Zorak]

Unintended pregnancies? I can understand if the pregnancy was due to a rape case, but don't these teenagers understand where babies come from? Of course they do. Do they care where they come from? I doubt it, cause if they did, they would of done something to stop themselves getting pregnant i.e. either abstaining from sex or using preventive measures not to get pregnant.

Shit tuffy, I thought contraception was pointless because it wasn't 100% perfect. You;ve changed your tune

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Unintended pregnancies? I can understand if the pregnancy was due to a rape case, but don't these teenagers understand where babies come from?

You're letting your prejudices override the data there, Tuffdisc. Nowhere in the stats does the term teenager appear, in fact, the main focus of the stats is the under 45 demographic. Does it surprise you to know that married couples have unexpected pregnancies too?

 

[Tuffdisc]

You're letting your prejudices override the data there, Tuffdisc. Nowhere in the stats does the term teenager appear, in fact, the main focus of the stats is the under 45 demographic. Does it surprise you to know that married couples have unexpected pregnancies too?

Oh come on, please stop this little childish talk get in. Do you understand anything about human nature that people lie about things, gosh, I think you are living in a fantasy land

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Oh come on, please stop this little childish talk get in. Do you understand anything about human nature that people lie about things, gosh, I think you are living in a fantasy land

Well thanks for that.