Stop having so many damn kids; population control, anyone?

[*susan* 1,709]

Just my thoughts on a few issues that have been talked about in this thread:

1) I personally would never have an abortion. I could never live with myself. However, I do not feel it is my right to tell someone else what to do if they are faced with that situation.

2) I think this may be an unpopular stand based on the posts I have read, but I do believe 100% the father should have a say in the matter. If the father is absent or does not care, that is one thing. But if he is present and does not want the baby to be aborted, then his feelings and wishes need to be taken into consideration as well. He is not just a sperm-donor, he is the father of the child. It is not his fault that he does not have the ability to carry the child in his body for 9 months. Just because the female is the one who carries the child should not give her the right to make the decision to abort the child without the consent of the father.

3) I am sick and tired of hearing people blame their behavior on their upbringing. Ok, so you were abused as a child. That is a horrible thing to have to deal with. However, if you grow up to be an abuser yourself, don't use the fact that you were abused as a child as your excuse. That is a cop out. You knew it was wrong when your parents or whoever was abusing you and you know it is wrong for you to do so as an adult. The abuser needs to be held accountable for their actions, not their parents or their upbringing.

[Carlene 12]

OK, if CHOICE is sooooo horrible, then what about birth control and sex education? Like I said before, outlawing all choice will NOT stop people from having NON procreational sex. Unfortunately, non procreational sex is in our society to stay.

No one said anything about outlawing recreational sex, birth control, or sex ed. No one is trying to stop people from having sex.

Maybe if we outlaw all abortions, then how about all strip clubs and ALL adult entertainment period (not something I'm really into anyway). In this male dominated society, we know that the 'adult' enterainment industry will NEVER be outlawed and the online porn industry is supposidly a multi BILLION dollar business. Hmmmm ponder that one.....

That's an absurd comparison. Again...it's not about preventing the abortion; it's about saving the baby. Perhaps someday there will be a way to take a newly conceived fetus from its mother's womb and put it into another environment to finish developing. Maybe then, everyone would be happy.

[Sunta 5]

Oh, BTW Sunta, did you ever think your post would be so popular?

Ooooh, well, not to this extent, but I knew it would definitely make some people mad, which I'm fine with.

I've always been the rabble-rouser. At Catholic school I would get into screaming fights during religion class over Gay rights, divorce, and other issues. Kids called me a "heretic" and said I would go to hell.

Going to Catholic school with all of its repression and wacky rituals (I still remember four hours of Stations of the Cross and the incense that would make my classmates faint from the stench) probably made me the loudmouth liberal I am today.

[Carlene 12]

Ok, picture yourself in Utopia. No abortions whatsoever, and I mean EVER. To what extent should society as a whole $pay$ for social services for these unwanted children?

I have a news flash for you...poor, uneducated, under-employed people who already have more children than they can support are not the ones having most of the abortions. The less people have, the more they value their ability to reproduce. I know this defies logic, but it's true. I worked in social services for 15 years.

[Carlene 12]

Going to Catholic school with all of its repression and wacky rituals (I still remember four hours of Stations of the Cross and the incense that would make my classmates faint from the stench) probably made me the loudmouth liberal I am today.

I miss the incense. They don't use it much any more.

[Sunta 5]

So are some humans/souls less valuable than others? Is a child conceived through consentual incest an inherently lesser person or devalued soul because of it?

quote]

According to the beginning of this post, only those who are 'dumb', 'idiots', 'less intellectual' or 'too poor'

I would like to state that the beginning of the thread had absolutely nothing to do with abortion, people being lesser, or devaluing anyone.

The words "idiot", and "dumb" were in reference to a specific thing, which is people not being educated about the environmental concerns we are facing.

Why is it that some people on this thread seem absolutely unable to seperate this thought? I was not calling every single religious person "dumb" or "uneducated", I was saying that people who have mass amounts of children are not educated regarding the environment.

Now how has that been twisted into "the beginning of this thread says that people who are "dumb", "idiots" and "less educated" are devalued and are lesser people?

It's amazing how thoughts and words can be twisted and used completely and utterly out of context!

[Sunta 5]

Carlene,

Maybe it's mean of me, but every time I think about Michelle Lameroux fainting and Sister Cathleen rushing over with her little bottle of smelling salts dangling from her nun belt, it makes me laugh so hard.

A couple of the girls would faint, and one time even a boy. They said the smell made them dizzy and sick.

As for me, it didn't bother me that much, I can recall the smell vividly.

I also remember I never laughed so hard as when my classmates and I would make fun of Father Gallagher and the hair sprouting out of his ears.

I've always been such a bad, naughty girl!

[dotofoz 0]

I have a news flash for you...poor, uneducated, under-employed people who already have more children than they can support are not the ones having most of the abortions. The less people have, the more they value their ability to reproduce. I know this defies logic, but it's true. I worked in social services for 15 years.

OH, so all these unwanted babies will have insurance and guaranteed all the care they'd ever need. NOW I get it!

[dotofoz 0]

That's an absurd comparison. Again...it's not about preventing the abortion; it's about saving the baby. Perhaps someday there will be a way to take a newly conceived fetus from its mother's womb and put it into another environment to finish developing. Maybe then, everyone would be happy.

No, is should be about preventing the unwanted pregnancy!

[dotofoz 0]

[/b][/color]

No one said anything about outlawing recreational sex, birth control, or sex ed. No one is trying to stop people from having sex.

That's an absurd comparison. Again...it's not about preventing the abortion; it's about saving the baby. Perhaps someday there will be a way to take a newly conceived fetus from its mother's womb and put it into another environment to finish developing. Maybe then, everyone would be happy.

Forget it.....:deadhorse:

[Wheetsin 714]

The less people have, the more they value their ability to reproduce. I know this defies logic, but it's true. I worked in social services for 15 years.

Well - perhaps, I have nothing but my guesses to argue that with, but I would have to question why the ability is so valued - beyond the obvious of people wanting children, and it being perhaps the one thing (as of now) no one can take away from them. I'm not going to say a majority, or even guess at a percentage, but a lot of people value their ability to reproduce because they see it as a way to get more. I have family that works in various branches of DFS and they estimate that 1 in 6 of their clientele truly and "legitimately" needs the help, whereas the other 5 are either taking advantage of the system, or intentionally put themselves into their position (including having children they knowingly can't care for), in order to reap the benefits, so to speak.

Is it logical, is it just, is it ethical - I'm not trying to judge the actions. I'm just saying that there is more than a small population of people who value their ability to reproduce because babies mean money.

[skyeblu79 0]

[/b][/color]

No one said anything about outlawing recreational sex, birth control, or sex ed. No one is trying to stop people from having sex.

:phanvan That's an absurd comparison. Again...it's not about preventing the abortion; it's about saving the baby. Perhaps someday there will be a way to take a newly conceived fetus from its mother's womb and put it into another environment to finish developing. Maybe then, everyone would be happy.

It's not...If everyone prevented the abortion would we even be having this decision. If there was no baby, then there would be nothing for you to save.:grouphug:

[dotofoz 0]

It's not...If everyone prevented the abortion would we even be having this decision. If there was no baby, then there would be nothing for you to save.:grouphug:

Thank you! :clap2:

[sweethot143 2]

Ok, so after all these pages and pages of post, has anyone changed their position???

I know I haven't, the arguments have actually made me more pro-life!

A new topic now maybe???

Affirmative Action? That's controversial. I'm against most forms of it. Any thoughts?

[wavydaby 1]

I know I have posted this before and most people just seem to ignore it... however, im going there AGIAN:

All birth control, except the condom/diaphram works by preventing implantation of the fertilized egg in to the uterine lining. The pill has the lovely dual capasity to TRY to prevent the egg from develop in to something that can be fertilized, but it also prevents the uterine lining from developing correctly so the egg can implant.

IUD: irritates the lining of the uterus so that the egg can not implant.

Whats that spell?? A basic abortion in the technical terms.

So, no BC for you but barrier methods.

Oh and that 14 yr old that threw her kid out the window, I bet she did not have access to an abortion or even knowledge that she was pregnant till probably late 2nd trimester.

Happy Holidaze.