who supports right to choose

[gadgetlady 4]

Sadly too, we can't "un-kill" - whatever that means:confused:

It means exactly what it says. Once you have taken a life, you can't get it back. Saying that there are Hitlers and Stalins is not a good argument for abortion, otherwise we'd have to abort everyone in the hopes that we get all the Hitlers and Stalins.

[j_war06 0]

Jodie,

I'm just really confused as I'm sure others are. You say your boyfriend in essence repeatedly raped you and underminded you (hiding your pills) yet in recent previous posts you have said he's a great guy, you love him very much and planned on marrying him. Also, you have said he is irresponsible and an alcoholic so how do you expect to be able to depend on him for money? Further, it sounds like it's a matter of time before he'll wind up in prison since he's an habitual felony-commiting criminal. It's probably not a real good idea to count on him for any kind of support--financially, emotionally or morally. In fact, it's not a good idea to even have him around your baby ever..period.

You have to look at the date of the posts, especially if they are in other threads. Its my fault for telling you guys that hes such a great guy, however, I guess I wanted it to be true...and in previous posts (before September 14ish) I may have been typing around him where he could see the screen or access my account on the computer...PLUS many of those posts where before I knew some information...I learn something new about him almost every week (through my own investigation). I dont necessarily count on him for any support, but when he does do well, he does very well! For some reason when hes down is down, and when hes up hes soaring...as in he goes from broke to having good money all the time. So when he is making money I will get a cut and get some of his tax return. As well as if the lucky ba***** every wins the lottery I will get a good portion of that too. TRUST ME he will be nothing but a check for this baby, he will have no rights to the child as far as visitation goes...ESPECIALLY since I am opting to be the paralegal for my own case. So I have made special requests to my attorney so that he will have to go through a hell of a lot of actions to see the child. such as:

1. Random Drug Testing and BAC Screening

2. Mental Counseling (and the information given in the sessions be recorded well, and may be used against him)

3. Payment of Support (ofcourse)

4. Payment of past damages

5. If ALL of this is met (which it wont be) he will be allowed ONE supervised visit (in which myself and an officer of the law is present), where as it is in a public place and he can not bring his current girlfriend or any other persons to the visit. He also MUST come to my hometown, unless I am actually in Corpus at time of said scheduled visit, where as the same rules apply. The visit may only last for a certain amount of time, at which point he must try no further contact with me or the child other than the visits. ABSOLUTELY ALL negotiations and conversations and attempts to contact me must be done so through my attorney ONLY.

*basically if I put his name on the birth certificate, and I ask for child support, then I have to allow some form of visitation as long as he's not considered mentally insane by the state and he hasnt committed crimes against children AND he isnt in jail and so forth....so Im just going to make it the hardest thing in the world just to see his child.

P.S. I also didnt tell the whole truth at first, because I wanted to tell you guys that I was pregnant, but I didnt want you guys to rant and rave on me for the poor choice of "sperm donor"

[SlimTarnishedDiva 1]

I was speaking hypothetically about the advances of medical technology (artificial placentas already being worked on) in the future. You are right -- life doesn't begin at 10 weeks. That's a rather arbitrary time, and was the whole point of my question. LIFE begins at conception. There is no other logical time to pinpoint. You can't count back from birth to any other time and say life exists here but not one moment before. You can argue about the VALUE of that life, but there is no question but that the life is in existence from conception.

If life really started at conception..the US Government would issue SSN'S after the first Doctors appointment, and the bearer would be able to start a life insurance policy on the unborn fetus!! The view and belief is flawed...

[SlimTarnishedDiva 1]

ABSOLUTELY INTERESTING!!

You have to look at the date of the posts, especially if they are in other threads. Its my fault for telling you guys that hes such a great guy, however, I guess I wanted it to be true...and in previous posts (before September 14ish) I may have been typing around him where he could see the screen or access my account on the computer...PLUS many of those posts where before I knew some information...I learn something new about him almost every week (through my own investigation). I dont necessarily count on him for any support, but when he does do well, he does very well! For some reason when hes down is down, and when hes up hes soaring...as in he goes from broke to having good money all the time. So when he is making money I will get a cut and get some of his tax return. As well as if the lucky ba***** every wins the lottery I will get a good portion of that too. TRUST ME he will be nothing but a check for this baby, he will have no rights to the child as far as visitation goes...ESPECIALLY since I am opting to be the paralegal for my own case. So I have made special requests to my attorney so that he will have to go through a hell of a lot of actions to see the child. such as:

1. Random Drug Testing and BAC Screening

2. Mental Counseling (and the information given in the sessions be recorded well, and may be used against him)

3. Payment of Support (ofcourse)

4. Payment of past damages

5. If ALL of this is met (which it wont be) he will be allowed ONE supervised visit (in which myself and an officer of the law is present), where as it is in a public place and he can not bring his current girlfriend or any other persons to the visit. He also MUST come to my hometown, unless I am actually in Corpus at time of said scheduled visit, where as the same rules apply. The visit may only last for a certain amount of time, at which point he must try no further contact with me or the child other than the visits. ABSOLUTELY ALL negotiations and conversations and attempts to contact me must be done so through my attorney ONLY.

*basically if I put his name on the birth certificate, and I ask for child support, then I have to allow some form of visitation as long as he's not considered mentally insane by the state and he hasnt committed crimes against children AND he isnt in jail and so forth....so Im just going to make it the hardest thing in the world just to see his child.

P.S. I also didnt tell the whole truth at first, because I wanted to tell you guys that I was pregnant, but I didnt want you guys to rant and rave on me for the poor choice of "sperm donor"

[j_war06 0]

here's a thought for you guys that dont believe that a baby is not a life until the 2nd trimester....

Some of the definitions of alive:

1. having life; living; existing; not dead or lifeless (trust me from experience the baby is not lifeless before the 2nd trimester, my sonogram proves that)

2. in a state of action (trust me the baby is moving, and growing, so therefore it is in action)

3. alert or sensitive to (trust me, when I perform certain actions, I know the baby is there, even this early)

Some definitions of life are:

1. the animate existence or period of animate existence of an individual (trust me the baby is animated)

2.a corresponding state, existence, or principle of existence conceived of as belonging to the soul. (if you believe in souls, then the potential for life constitutes as having a soul)

Just something that I thot was interesting...

[gadgetlady 4]

If life really started at conception..the US Government would issue SSN'S after the first Doctors appointment, and the bearer would be able to start a life insurance policy on the unborn fetus!! The view and belief is flawed...

That's a ridiculous argument. Kids don't always get SS#'s at birth. I didn't get one until I was about 4 years old. Many kids don't get them until much later. Does that mean they're not alive until then?

What about when doctors operate on the unborn baby to fix a fetal anomoly. Who's the patient?

[gadgetlady 4]

***Go to Pregnancy.org > First Trimester Fetal Development - week 1 through week 14 and scroll down to 9 and 10 weeks (I wish I could post the photos here but I can't get it to work). That doesn't look like a butter bean to me, and the arms and legs are well defined. After all, at 11 weeks, the baby is getting FINGERNAILS -- he couldn't do that without FINGERS.****

Gadget - they are talking about weeks POST CONCEPTION!!! If you read the text they describe week 1 as the moment of implantation, pregnancies are always described using the GESTATIONAL age which adds on 2 weeks, basicaly add 2 weeks onto the pictures to see what gestational age you have to be at to see that.

My apologies for overlooking gestational vs. fetal age.

My apologies AGAIN, Nina -- I was actually wrong to apologize / agree without going back and looking at it. That's what I get for not doing proper research. I happened upon the page again today and they WERE talking about gestational age. The top of the chart says "Weeks from Last Menstrual Period", and the development is gestational, not fetal. The description in "Weeks One through Four" starts with ovulation, but they've just omitted the first two weeks' description because there's nothing developmental going on with the unborn. Looking at the development in depth, with the heartbeat starting on their chart at week five, that's a gestational measure. The fetal measure is week three.

[j_war06 0]

BTW, if you want to see what life looks like at 7-8 weeks, check out my sonogram in my signiture, that definately looks like a baby not a cluster of cells

[SlimTarnishedDiva 1]

SSN'S

Ultrasounds from Implantation-13weeks

[j_war06 0]

SSN'S

Ultrasounds from Implantation-13weeks

IDK? what the ultrasounds from implantation was supposed to prove??? however I have a whole book of pics (very high-resolution), and at atleast 8weeks they baby LOOKS like a baby. That was when my last sonogram was done (theres a huge, and uncomfortable, diff between and sonogram and an ultrasound btw). When that baby popped up on the screen i was surprised myself...I was really scared that it wouldnt look like a baby, that I would be looking at pics all throughout the pregnancy and never really realize that it was a baby...but my Dr has GREAT technology, and her pics are very clear! I admit that at some point in the beginning, it doesnt look like a baby at all, but remember all things have a beginning....

OH...and so it technically has to LOOK like a baby to be alive?? Is that the argument made??

And SSN arent issued during the pregnancy AT ALL, so therefore that argument cant stand...

[BJean 16]

Sorry I haven't been around for the past few days. I REALLY am. won't go into the details, but you'd be surprised about what is going on in my life. Posting here takes a backseat, big time.

gadget you're badgering me to supply names of early feminists who were not pro-life, but you're the one who made the statement that ALL early feminists were pro-life. It is up to you to provide proof of that. You have not provided proof of that by naming some names. It is not incumbent upon me to furnish you names of early feminists who were not pro-life. I just know that you don't have any proof of what you claim. No studies have been established or background done to prove what you say about all early feminists being pro-life. We don't even know who ALL the early feminists were. Consequently as I have suspected all along, much of what you say is wishful thinking on your part. As I have seen in the past, many of the sources you cite here are from extreme and biased origins. Which is fine by me. That's your perrogative to post such things to make your point. But I hope you don't think that all of us fail to understand what you're doing.

Jodie- as when we exhanged talking points previously, I feel very sorry for you. I know you will become defensive and outraged because I said that. But I can't help feeling sorry for you and way you describe your life and your baby's father and the way your child was conceived. When you have full-time, total and complete responsibility for a small human being who looks to you for its' very survival, 24/7, being so sure of yourself could certainly come in handy. But I just think there will be many times when you'll be wondering what the heck you were thinking when you became pregnant.

I'm shocked to see your sonogram that you say was made at 6-7 weeks gestation (was it?). My daughter just had a sonogram at 8 weeks gestation and the baby is nowhere near that developed.

Listen you all, it's easy to understand... a fertilized egg is a living growing thing which is fully a part of its' mother-host. It is not an individual no matter how much you want that to be true. You need to just go with your instincts and beliefs and forget trying to convince people that a tiny fetus is a baby, in and of itself. It cannot be an individual human being until it IS an individual human being.

Be that as it may, a million people (or whatever the number you toss out there) cannot make reproductive decisions for the other millions of people in the world. It is impossible. It has never worked that way and it never will. Telling everyone else what you believe to be true just doesn't make it true to everyone else. I don't expect you to give up your "fight" for "all human life" but I expect you to respect the right of all of the other people to believe differently than you.

[gadgetlady 4]

gadget you're badgering me to supply names of early feminists who were not pro-life, but you're the one who made the statement that ALL early feminists were pro-life. It is up to you to provide proof of that. You have not provided proof of that by naming some names. It is not incumbent upon me to furnish you names of early feminists who were not pro-life.

I'll take that to mean you can't find any.

"All marbles are blue."

"No they're not."

"Show me one that isn't."

"No, you have to search the world and find every single marble that exists or existed in pictures and parade them all before me to demonstrate that they're all blue."

Uh, wouldn't it be a bit easier to just come up with a green one? Unless, of course, you can't.

[gadgetlady 4]

On second thought, never mind. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time, as do I. Suffice it to say, I've researched this topic and in all of my research of both pro-life and pro-abortion organizations, I have never seen evidence of any early feminists who supported abortion. Pro-abortion organizations have tried to spin the writings of early feminists to say they would be pro-abortion in the modern day, but the statements of the feminists themselves belie that claim. I would think, if there was an early feminist who was also pro-abortion, she would have been well-touted in organizations that want abortion to remain legal.

[gadgetlady 4]

a million people (or whatever the number you toss out there) cannot make reproductive decisions for the other millions of people in the world.

Reproductive decisions come before the reproducing has already happened. Reproductive decisions are birth control, sterilization, NFP, abstinence, and the like. Abortion is not a reproductive decision, because the parents have already reproduced; they have produced another being.

[marjon9 6]

On second thought, never mind. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time, as do I. Suffice it to say, I've researched this topic and in all of my research of both pro-life and pro-abortion organizations, I have never seen evidence of any early feminists who supported abortion. Pro-abortion organizations have tried to spin the writings of early feminists to say they would be pro-abortion in the modern day, but the statements of the feminists themselves belie that claim. I would think, if there was an early feminist who was also pro-abortion, she would have been well-touted in organizations that want abortion to remain legal.

Wow, that is the weakest argument I've seen from you, and that's saying a lot. You claim that early feminists were pro life because if any early feminist was pro-choice, she would be well-touted, so therefore there must not be any. That is your support for the argument that all early feminists were pro-life?

It is totally anti-intuitive, and virtually inconceivable, to think that any feminist, early or otherwise, would support turning over decisions about her life to other people. A feminist, almost by definition, would support the maximum of choice and personal control and freedom in her own life. If you are really asserting that "early" feminists advocated less freedom and less choice and less independence concerning their own lives, you really should offer some sort of proof other than, "if there were any who supported personal freedom and independence, we'd know about it."