Feminism

[Rathlord]

 

 

  - Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%        - Feels she can't afford baby 23%        - Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%        - Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%        - Feels she isn't mature enough 7%        - Interference with education/career plans 4%

How are these not completely valid reasons for not having a child? 

 

They are completely valid reasons for NOT HAVING A CHILD. Not having a child ≠ having an abortion and those two things should never, ever be confused.

 

And as for this:

 

 

as the others such as those with interference with educational plans could have just not had sex knowing it has potential to make a baby or put a condom on or If you knew you didn't want any more kids then, as I have said before, get the procedure done so you don't have any more.

A woman can change her mind about having children and shouldn't have to go through procedures. What about the 18 year olds in college? Should they  do the procedures as well just in case their birth control or condoms doesn't work? 

 

OR they could just not have sex if they aren't willing to deal with the possible ramifications. That's like saying "I want to jump off a cliff, but I don't want to bother with a parachute! It's inconvenient!"

 

And about that source you posted about condoms was kinda garbage. It didn't cite anything and when I looked up the author of the article I needed to sign in to a website to see his profile.

 

 

 

that rate of efficiency isn't even including if a women takes birth control.

My Mother had both my sister and I on birth control. My Step Father had all 4 of his children on it as well. Shit fails sometimes, man.

 

This sounds like a certain lie. The chance of birth control failing once is small. The chance of it failing 4x in a row with one person is infinitesimally small. And on that note, do you think your mother and step father should have just not had kids? Aren't you happy that they decided to keep you, even though it might have been inconvenient and unplanned?

 

Oh, hey. My 100th post. toot toot.

 

[Brandon354]

 

 

They aren't valid reasons because below I cited how effective contraceptives are when used and how often they aren't used meaning most of them didn't use them and it is irresponsible to say well i'm not mature enough to have a baby, should have thought of that before you decided to have sex and forgo a condom and birth control which really aren't that expensive.

 

 

 

 

This is the exact opposite of the majority of people don't use contraceptives: "Among those who don’t, 31% are pregnant, trying to get pregnant, postpartum, sterile or not sexually active. The other 7% take their chances. "

 

 

Enigma where I am it is late so I am getting kind of tired so could you reword this in an easier to understand way? if not then no problem I will look at it tomorrow.

[Rathlord]

The thing that really scares me is that some people have absolutely no respect for what is possible. I mean, no one can say for certain that a fetus doesn't have a soul, or isn't a person. It's all conjecture, really. And some people are willing to just so casually say "Ya, sure have an abortion. It would suck to have to put your job on hold for a few months. That must be rough, so let's killing something that may well be a sentient being." At least have some understanding that it's possible and that at the least it shouldn't be done casually 'cuz we can't be bothered.

[Pixel Bombs]

I'm going to call BS on 6 children.

lol why would I lie about this? I feel strongly about my stance but not enough to lie about.

 

 

you not wanting to sign in doesn't invalidate anything. 

You're right. The article not citing its sources does.

 

 

 

They aren't valid reasons because below I cited how effective contraceptives are when used and how often they aren't used meaning most of them didn't use them and it is irresponsible to say well i'm not mature enough to have a baby, should have thought of that before you decided to have sex and forgo a condom and birth control which really aren't that expensive.

But your source DIDNT have ANY citations. It was written but some guy that I have to sign up on to a website to find more information about.

[EnigmaGrey]

The thing that really scares me is that some people have absolutely no respect for what is possible. I mean, no one can say for certain that a fetus doesn't have a soul, or isn't a person. It's all conjecture, really. And some people are willing to just so casually say "Ya, sure have an abortion. It would suck to have to put your job on hold for a few months. That must be rough, so let's killing something that may well be a sentient being." At least have some understanding that it's possible and that at the least it shouldn't be done casually 'cuz we can't be bothered.

I can't say I don't have soul either, seeing as how I have no way of measuring a soul and am not a religious individual.

 

All I know if if someone receives head trauma and it changes who they are, the brain must surely be pretty darn important to what it means to be human, and if a fetus doesn't have a brain, or even the basic structures of a brain . . .

But if it's a matter of faith for you, then I'll just let it go.

[Brandon354]

 

I'm going to call BS on 6 children.

lol why would I lie about this? I feel strongly about my stance but not enough to lie about.

 

 

you not wanting to sign in doesn't invalidate anything. 

You're right. The article not citing its sources does.

 

 

 

They aren't valid reasons because below I cited how effective contraceptives are when used and how often they aren't used meaning most of them didn't use them and it is irresponsible to say well i'm not mature enough to have a baby, should have thought of that before you decided to have sex and forgo a condom and birth control which really aren't that expensive.

But your source DIDNT have ANY citations. It was written but some guy that I have to sign up on to a website to find more information about.

 

You didn't get the sources or knowledge of whether or not he does studies in that area because you didn't sign in and if he didn't have sources  it has to happen down some point in the line, each person can't cite another forever, at some point it comes down to being active in a poll, study, etc. and I have yet to see your sources protecting your stance.

[Brandon354]

 

The thing that really scares me is that some people have absolutely no respect for what is possible. I mean, no one can say for certain that a fetus doesn't have a soul, or isn't a person. It's all conjecture, really. And some people are willing to just so casually say "Ya, sure have an abortion. It would suck to have to put your job on hold for a few months. That must be rough, so let's killing something that may well be a sentient being." At least have some understanding that it's possible and that at the least it shouldn't be done casually 'cuz we can't be bothered.

I can't say I don't have soul either, seeing as how I have no way of measuring a soul and am not a religious individual.

 

All I know if if someone receives head trauma and it changes who they are, the brain must surely be pretty darn important to what it means to be human, and if a fetus doesn't have a brain, or even the basic structures of a brain . . .

But if it's a matter of faith for you, then I'll just let it go.

 

It is a matter of morality, thinking things through, and possibility. Who is to say that a fetus that someone just aborted would never become a great scientist, philosopher, inventor, etc. Who should have the right to deny a potential human life because they don't want to take responsibility for what they did or because it is an inconvenience.

[EnigmaGrey]

It doesn't matter, past a point, whether they have the possibility to be Hitler or Jesus reincarnated. It doesn't make them a thinking person the moment a sperm and ovum meet.

[Pixel Bombs]

You didn't get the sources because you didn't sign in and if he didn't have sources  it has to happen down some point in the line, each person can't cite another forever, at some point it comes down to being active in a poll, study, etc. and I have yet to see your sources protecting your stance.

 

 

Then that article is completely worthless. How do you expect me to believe this if there is no study or facts to go with it? And what sources do you want from me?

[Brandon354]

 

You didn't get the sources because you didn't sign in and if he didn't have sources  it has to happen down some point in the line, each person can't cite another forever, at some point it comes down to being active in a poll, study, etc. and I have yet to see your sources protecting your stance.

 

 

Then that article is completely worthless. How do you expect me to believe this if there is no study or facts to go with it? And what sources do you want from me?

 

You seem to think that most people get abortions because they were raped or have health problems not because they were irresponsible, back this up.

 

If that article is worthless so is every other on the web because each site has to cite another and somewhere down the line people can no longer cite anything because they went out and actually did it or studied it but how do I know that they really did do it or study it or that they are who they say they are? Since you find those rates to be incorrect show me a good site with correct rates.

[Pixel Bombs]

 This sounds like a certain lie. The chance of birth control failing once is small. The chance of it failing 4x in a row with one person is infinitesimally small. And on that note, do you think your mother and step father should have just not had kids? Aren't you happy that they decided to keep you, even though it might have been inconvenient and unplanned?

Again, why in the hell would I lie about that? And as for your other comment, my mother did have an abortion before. She got pregnant WAY to young and was in no way able to take care of the child. When she got pregnant with my sister and me she was married, had a job and felt like she was ready. So yeah, I guess I'm happy but I'm also happy she felt ready when she had my sister and I.

[EnigmaGrey]

Well, we can always use the Wikipedia's source: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.pdf

Shows 8% of women never use contraception and that about half of all pregnancies resulting in abortion involved some form of contraception.

Mind, I'm cherry-picking a bit -- go forth and read it.

[Pixel Bombs]

You seem to think that most people get abortions because they were raped or have health problems not because they were irresponsible, back this up.

Wrong. I think women have the right to an abortion if they so desire. Their reasons are irrelevant. It is their body. But like I said 2 months is a good cut off date. Its enough time to think whether they want the child or not and the fetus stays essentially a ball of cells. 

[Brandon354]

 

You seem to think that most people get abortions because they were raped or have health problems not because they were irresponsible, back this up.

Wrong. I think women have the right to an abortion if they so desire. Their reasons are irrelevant. It is their body. But like I said 2 months is a good cut off date. Its enough time to think whether they want the child or not and the fetus stays essentially a ball of cells. 

 

The baby has a body too, whether or not it is perfectly formed is irrelevant, see how the exact opposite can be said? The difference between that ball of cells is in will be a person given the chance where as compared to a clump of skin cells on my arm will never be more than just that, skin. I'm getting off for the night.

[Pixel Bombs]

The baby has a body too

A baby? Yes. A fetus? No. A fetus does not have a functioning body and cannot sustain and grow itself without the mother. 

[DrummerKidJack]

I'm rather enjoying all this, just by the way.

[Pixel Bombs]

TBH this is going no where. This subject is just to subjective. What I see as a lump in someones stomach can be the next possible Neil Armstrong to another. 

CIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRCLESSSSSzzzzzz

[Dr. Strangelove]

On the subject of rape, in my former occupation I dealt with handling a lot of court evidence and supervising meetings between inmates and their lawyers. I had to work around a ton of rapists, murderers, and other lovely folks. In my experience, there are two clear kinds of rapists.

1. The guys who are natural-born rapists. They'd rape a man, woman, child, cat, dog, anything. To them, it's a control/dominance thing or just an impulse they can't evene explain themselves. This is the type of scum people think of when they state that rape has no component of lust or sexual desire involved. For these folks, that's pretty much correct.

2. People with a lack of empathy towards others and low inhibitions combined with a strong desire. "The ends justify the means" is their standard operating procedure. A lot of the cases of date-rape and people raping blackout drunk girls at parties are committed by this type. These are the folks that shoot people for their Air Jordans or to nick their wallet to pay for a video game.
 

 

 

The baby has a body too

A baby? Yes. A fetus? No. A fetus does not have a functioning body and cannot sustain and grow itself without the mother. 

 

In my opinion, a fetus is but an earlier stage of human development. An infant is no less human than a toddler, than a child, than a teenager, and so on. It's a unique entity separate from mother, being a new creation composed of a mixture of her DNA and the father's. I'd probably still be pro-choice if more supporters of that movement acknowledged that it is killing, but argued that the taking of human life was outweighed by other factors; as we do in war.

[Brandon354]

 

The baby has a body too

A baby? Yes. A fetus? No. A fetus does not have a functioning body and cannot sustain and grow itself without the mother. 

 

functioning or not a body is a body and I am sure you are smart enough to know what I was talking about.

[EnigmaGrey]

 

 

The baby has a body too

A baby? Yes. A fetus? No. A fetus does not have a functioning body and cannot sustain and grow itself without the mother. 

 

functioning or not a body is a body and I am sure you are smart enough to know what I was talking about.

There's a difference between a corpse (which has a body) and a living human, too.

I'm sure you're smart enough to know what I'm talking about.

[Rathlord]

 

 

There's a difference between a corpse (which has a body) and a living human, too.

I'm sure you're smart enough to know what I'm talking about. 

 

 

You've both just used utterly meaningless semantics to try to disprove his point.

[Ontogenesis]

Essentially, all abortion debates boil down to the stage at which a foetus is considered to be a human being - purely subjective depending on the definition you use. There is no middle ground on this definition, and thus no general outcome. However, as I suspect as religion becomes a less consensual truth (the main driving force for anti-abortion), rights will lean towards libertarianism.

 

My personal view is abortion before a feotus can survive a birth is fine - roughly the rules they are now in the UK.

 

A more interesting debate is when there's a conflict between the mother and father on abortion wishes...

[EnigmaGrey]

 

 

 

There's a difference between a corpse (which has a body) and a living human, too.

I'm sure you're smart enough to know what I'm talking about. 

 

 

You've both just used utterly meaningless semantics to try to disprove his point.

 

I was being patently absurd, arbitrary-and-semantical one.

[DrummerKidJack]

Semantics are fun aren't they? They always manage to derail a decent argument.

[EnigmaGrey]

Semantics are fun aren't they? They always manage to derail a decent argument.

Stop being meta!