Friendly Star Trek Discussions Sun Nov 24, 2024 5:56 am  
  SearchSearch   FAQFAQ   Log inLog in   
Abortion Issues Return to Supreme Court
View: previous topic :: next topic

stv-archives.com Forum Index -> World News This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.   This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.
Author Message
Birdy
Socialist


Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 1:39 pm    

Glad you understand my point. [/sarcasm]

If you're pregnant (or the father), you have something to say about the child's life because it's yours.
I'm sorry you can't respond seriously to my post.



-------signature-------

Nosce te ipsum

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
LightningBoy
Commodore


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 1:43 pm    

No human owns another. That's SLAVERY.

The parents are the Caretakers, and the Teachers; NOT the owners.

And stow the 'tude. It's called sarcastic rhetoric; and it was a serious response. I'm sorry you can't accept a legitimate rebuttal.


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
Birdy
Socialist


Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 1:48 pm    

Right, whatever.
I didn't say anything about owning.

You saying something about homeless is a totally different subject.

I'm just trying to also see your side; I think I do now, but I don't get the feeling anyone who's anti-abortion is trying to see my point of view.
Guess that'll never change.



-------signature-------

Nosce te ipsum

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
LightningBoy
Commodore


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 1:52 pm    

My point with the homeless is that if you're arguing that a child should not be born, because they'd live in poverty, then maybe we should eliminate the homeless so they don't live in poverty either.

I know your point was that the parent should have a say in how the kid's life (or lack there of) goes; but my point is that nobody should be allowed to choose between life and death. A crummy life beats a no life any day; at least then you can decide for youself if you want to live.


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
Birdy
Socialist


Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 2:06 pm    

Yeah, well, ok, you can see that, I see it differently.

I understand that you think of life as a sacred thing. I think however that everyone should have the choice to decide for him/herself what to do with that choice. If you don't want to do that, that's fine, if you want to, it can be done in a legal way. I think if you make it illegal people do it in backalley's and illegal, and that only causes more trouble. But that's a different discussion.
True, baby's can't decide for themselves. I understand your point, but don't agree.



-------signature-------

Nosce te ipsum

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Puck
The Texan


Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596

PostSat Dec 03, 2005 2:45 pm    

Birdy wrote:

True, baby's can't decide for themselves. I understand your point, but don't agree.


True. So yeah, basically, who cares? Many mentally handicapped people can't make decisions for themselves, yet many of them lead happy lives. But hey, who really cares right? I mean, I chose to have sex after all, and even though I realized I wasn't ready to have a baby, I did anyways. But forget all that, since the baby can't talk, and I don't really want it anyways (I am in the middle of my education right now after all!), I guess that makes it just fine.
Quote:

I think more of the future of the child, the quality of life it will have, and not quantity. For instance; if I were to get pregnant, at this point, I don't think I can give it the love and support it needs, because I'm in the middle of school. I would have to quit school, and try to take care of it.


Notice all the "I"s in that paragraph. To me, this doesn't really sound at all like it has to do with the quality of life the baby would have. Because, seriously, it probably could have a very good life. What that sounds more like to me is that you wouldn't want to quit school to take care of a baby. And my thought on that is, if you don't want to quit school to take care of a baby, don't have sex, or, if that is too difficult, be safe (but since safety is not 100% effective, that is still risky).

Quote:

If I would abort it, I would continue with school, finish my education, I would get a job, and when I'm ready for it, I can give it much more love and support at that point.


More "I"s. Again, not sounding like this is about how bad the baby's life would be, but how having a baby would complicate your life.

Quote:
Of course, there's no way to predict what life the child would have, but to put the quantity of life before quality, and I get the impression that some people on this forum do, isn't a good thing imo. If you, as a mother (and father) think that this isn't the right time, that you can't give it as much love as you think it needs, I can't imagine you would be forced to keep it.
Especially when you're like 12 years old.


Well if the mother and father knows it is not a good time to have a child, then don't get pregnant in the first place? Birth control, condemns, family planning, abstinence, etc.... Those all provide you with ways of not to even get pregnant in the first place. Abortion is not a form of birth control though, it's pretty much murder.

Plus, 12 year olds shouldn't be having sex period.


Quote:
I'm just trying to also see your side; I think I do now, but I don't get the feeling anyone who's anti-abortion is trying to see my point of view.
Guess that'll never change.


Well, I don't speak for others, but I do see your point of view, and I follow your logic. The thing is though, I don't agree with that at all, nor do I like it or feel that it has any shred of morals buried anywhere within it.


View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Birdy
Socialist


Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.

PostSun Dec 04, 2005 4:25 pm    

Puck wrote:
True. So yeah, basically, who cares? Many mentally handicapped people can't make decisions for themselves, yet many of them lead happy lives. But hey, who really cares right? I mean, I chose to have sex after all, and even though I realized I wasn't ready to have a baby, I did anyways. But forget all that, since the baby can't talk, and I don't really want it anyways (I am in the middle of my education right now after all!), I guess that makes it just fine.

Yeah, it does, imo. That's my opinion.

Quote:
Notice all the "I"s in that paragraph.

That's because I'd like to speak for myself, and not for others.

Quote:
To me, this doesn't really sound at all like it has to do with the quality of life the baby would have. Because, seriously, it probably could have a very good life. What that sounds more like to me is that you wouldn't want to quit school to take care of a baby. And my thought on that is, if you don't want to quit school to take care of a baby, don't have sex, or, if that is too difficult, be safe (but since safety is not 100% effective, that is still risky).

Course, it could have a good life, you're right, I won't know that. But it also couldn't. You don't know that either. And because I'm working in health care, I see a lot of situations where kids don't turn out very good in life, because they didn't have the best childhood. That's why.
You're right, I don't want to quit school to take care of my baby.
Yeah, that's your opinion. You can have it. I have mine.

Quote:
More "I"s. Again, not sounding like this is about how bad the baby's life would be, but how having a baby would complicate your life.

Exactly. That's how I feel about it.

Quote:
Well if the mother and father knows it is not a good time to have a child, then don't get pregnant in the first place? Birth control, condemns, family planning, abstinence, etc.... Those all provide you with ways of not to even get pregnant in the first place. Abortion is not a form of birth control though, it's pretty much murder.
Plus, 12 year olds shouldn't be having sex period.

Well, I'm on birthcontrolpills, if you must know. I'm planning not to get pregnant now. I don't think of abortion as a form of birthcontrol, did I gave you that impression? Sorry for that.
Your opinion, yet not really realistic. A lot of teens have sex at 12, and I think more than you know, even in the states. But that's another discussion.

Quote:
Well, I don't speak for others, but I do see your point of view, and I follow your logic. The thing is though, I don't agree with that at all, nor do I like it or feel that it has any shred of morals buried anywhere within it.


Ok, nice to know you can see my point of view too
Of course, you don't have to agree with me.
Right, well... I'd like to think I have morals. So do you.
And everyone lives happily ever after?



-------signature-------

Nosce te ipsum

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative


Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified

PostSun Dec 04, 2005 4:43 pm    

Birdy wrote:
Quote:
Notice all the "I"s in that paragraph.

That's because I'd like to speak for myself, and not for others.

What he meant, I'm sure, is that you're giving "I," "I," "I," and yet aren't considering the baby at all. He can probably clarify that himself better, though.


Quote:
Course, it could have a good life, you're right, I won't know that. But it also couldn't. You don't know that either. And because I'm working in health care, I see a lot of situations where kids don't turn out very good in life, because they didn't have the best childhood. That's why.
You're right, I don't want to quit school to take care of my baby.
Yeah, that's your opinion. You can have it. I have mine.


Should we not be airing on the side that the baby WOULD have a good life, hmm? Yes, we should, exactly.


Birdy wrote:
And everyone lives happily ever after?

Not the baby.



-------signature-------

"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews

View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
Birdy
Socialist


Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.

PostMon Dec 05, 2005 2:40 pm    

Republican_Man wrote:
What he meant, I'm sure, is that you're giving "I," "I," "I," and yet aren't considering the baby at all. He can probably clarify that himself better, though.

I know I am. I'm choosing for myself, and not for the baby, I know.

Quote:
Should we not be airing on the side that the baby WOULD have a good life, hmm? Yes, we should, exactly.

If you choose the baby's side, yes, you would. I wouldn't.

Quote:
Not the baby.

I guess we'll never know if the baby lives happily, or not.

Anyway, I think I've made my opinion clear now...



-------signature-------

Nosce te ipsum

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
WeAz
Commodore


Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't

PostMon Dec 05, 2005 9:06 pm    

i want abortion, but not without limits. i don't want to be able to get an abortion just because i want a girl instead of a boy, that kind of abortion should be illegal. but if the life of the mother or the child is in danger, or the child has a fatal genetic diesease or mental disability, then they should get abortions.

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative


Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified

PostMon Dec 05, 2005 9:08 pm    

Uh, do you not mean extreme mental disabilities, because I submit to you that most disabled kids--particularly those with Down's Syndrome--have better lives and better outlooks on life than most normal people.


-------signature-------

"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews

View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel


Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 5:09 am    

I know I am not allowed to post in this topic but, I am taking a chance. Charlie you can yell at me later.

Janeway_74656,

You said if the woman's life was in danger?

I was in danger and I didn't abort my baby. People are just too selfish. And think of themselves and not the baby.


View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
magenta
Commander


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 404
Location: AUSTRALIA

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 8:01 am    

When I was 18,I had an abortion.I am now 36yrs old and a mother to 2 beautiful kids,2 and 4!At the time I was wild,out of control,using various drugs,the father wasnt interested in becoming a parent.I had no regrets with MY desicion to end the pregnancy.
It was MY body and MY right to choose to end it!I was in no mental,emotional,financial or physical state to raise or give birth to a child that quite possibly would have had a disability of some kind.
I was taking birth control pills,but forgot 2 out of the month,being a low dose pill,fate dealt its hand.
To this day I know it was the right thing for me to do at the time.If I were to fall pregnant at my age again,I would keep it.But if I were 40 or over I would review that desicion,too old to be a mother!
A woman is the 'owner' of her body,its her right to make life changing desicions that will affect it.There are too many young{teenagers]or younger having kids,I have seen first hand what happens to these kids when raised by immature irresponsible 'kids'.
Kids having kids,thats what it boils down to.All schools in the world should have a program with those take home baby like dolls.They would find out first hand just how hard it is to raise a baby.Middle of the night feeds,crying for hours,no sleep,no social life-no more fun teenager stuff!
When you have lived a lot more years,seen the world,worked for a living,saved money.Maybe you gain some knowledge/wisdom to give to your child,with no regrets of what might of been.
Well thats my 2cents worth to the subject,my opinion.


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
Reply with quote Back to top
Puck
The Texan


Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 8:20 am    

Leo Wyatt wrote:
I know I am not allowed to post in this topic but, I am taking a chance. Charlie you can yell at me later.

Janeway_74656,

You said if the woman's life was in danger?

I was in danger and I didn't abort my baby. People are just too selfish. And think of themselves and not the baby.


Perhaps, but in some circumstances such as that, the woman may already have one or more healthy children. So, is it right to risk denying those child(ren) a future mother and risk having a baby, or is it right for the mother to get an abortion so that the kids she already has can have a mother, and so that the father won't have to be a single parent? I don't know the answer to that question, and hopefully, I won't ever have to. I think in a situation like that, you just have to trust that the person is doing what they think is right, and let them choose.


View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel


Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 am    

Being a single father is not so bad, ask my uncle. If he was a member I am sure he would give his views. Would you rather have a dead baby? oh wait, I already know the answer. Everybody loves killing innocent babies.

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 3:31 pm    

Don't put words into other people's mouths. If you can't do that, then I suggest you not post in this topic anymore.



Anyway, I don't think that it would be right for me or anybody else to tell a woman that they should have to die for another life. In that case, they should be able to make the choice.



-------signature-------

"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."

-Wuthering Heights

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel


Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 4:18 pm    

That was not my intention . It just went out the wrong way. Everyone make mistakes

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
LightningBoy
Commodore


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 4:21 pm    

Again, what's wrong with sarcastic rhetoric? It's a better was to get your opponent to better explain their case.

View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel


Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 4:29 pm    

Who are you talking to LB, me or the guy above? Or am I too sleepy to think?

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
LightningBoy
Commodore


Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 4:56 pm    

Anyone. People are taking arguments too personally; a lot of it is just sarcasm, which is a good argument technique.

View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy


Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 5:30 pm    

If I had gotten dangerously ill while pregnant (second time around), it would have most likely been before 24 weeks, therefore the baby would most likely wouldn't be viable. However, it could have killed me (and the baby) and Samantha wouldn't have had a mother because I was too selfish to go through all the turmoil of getting an abortion. It wasn't easy, in fact, it's the hardest decision I've ever had to make. I think I made the right one though.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York

PostTue Dec 06, 2005 7:02 pm    

LightningBoy wrote:
Again, what's wrong with sarcastic rhetoric? It's a better was to get your opponent to better explain their case.



Over something like abortion it isn't appropriate.



-------signature-------

"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."

-Wuthering Heights

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger 
Reply with quote Back to top
WeAz
Commodore


Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't

PostWed Dec 07, 2005 6:56 pm    

Leo Wyatt wrote:
I know I am not allowed to post in this topic but, I am taking a chance. Charlie you can yell at me later.

Janeway_74656,

You said if the woman's life was in danger?

I was in danger and I didn't abort my baby. People are just too selfish. And think of themselves and not the baby.

I didn't mean to offend you, but would you abort a child if their was a big chance that they would die during birth?



-------signature-------

At Least In Vietnam, Bush Had An Exit Strategy

It was Bush, not Clinton, who ignored the warning signs for 9/11.

View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Goto Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.   This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.



Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com