07-01-2003, 11:36 AM
|
#108 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
|
Quote:
Originally posted by svt
Not all. By the way,lets leave religion out. This is a morality issue.
|
Religion plays a key roll in why you think it is moral or not.
Quote:
|
This statement is totally false and made in ignorance. You are classifying Chrisitians as /conservative/repulicans when infact a majority of Christians consider themselves democrats(especially catholics). And just to let you know, often times those women who are poor and come from the ghetto have kids PURPOSELY to get more welfare, not because she didn't use a condom or because she didn't have an abortion. Unfortunately it's very hard for those who come from the ghetto to get out, which means most stay their a majority of their lives, having children happens in all neighborhoods, it just happens to be a hell of a lot tougher when you are brought up in the ghetto.
|
Please show me a statistic on this to prove my ignorance. I live in a highly Christian area and they are all right wing republican conservatives. I call bullshit. I also was brought up in what you would consider the hood. Women do not have kids to stay on welfare. That is the stupidest most bigoted thing I have heard in a long time. You think they like not having enough money to feed their kids? Do you really think welfare pays enough to make it worth it? HELL NO it doesn't! Take that silver spoon out of your mouth and go introduce yourself to some "ghetto" people and then make your remarks. You may find that they are not trying to get over on the system like you think they are.
Quote:
|
Nobody knows biologically when life begins and that's why abortions at all levels are wrong. Since a baby is usually the outcome from the sperm meeting the egg Christians say that's when life begins. People who are advocates of abortion say first and second trimester abortions are cool, however, third trimester abortions aren't. Why is this? Let me ask you this, what is the difference between a baby the day its born and the day before its born?.. Nothing. So with this logic, it would be ok for the mother to kill her child between the ages of 1 and 3 but at the age of 4 it's illegal. That's crap. Humans are always growing, always, until the day you die. The logic behind "well the baby hasn't fully grown and therefore it's life can be terminated" is utter stupidity. Even you are still growing/developing. Would it be ok for me to terminate you? I guess it should be legal to terminate women before menopause, after all they aren't fully grown.
|
I am not dependent on my mother’s womb anymore so no; it would not be ok to terminate me. Your logic is flawed and not worth a response other than this.
Quote:
|
Again, this is false. Foster parents pay TONS of money to adopt children. Not Tax money. State system do use tax money but a majority of those kids are there whose parents neglected them or because all their family is dead or their parents went to jail. Adoption can be an expensive process depending on how you go about it, especially if the child is adopted from overseas.
|
Foster parents pay nothing for foster kids. They are paid for foster kids, which is why they do it. Most of the time the home is crappy and full of kids with little supervision. Which is why most kids are ported from foster home to foster home. I think you are thinking of adoption. With the adoption laws the way they are now adoption rate is low. If we had an increase in babies up for adoption we would have an increase in kids in government run homes and foster families, which indeed get paid more than the mother on welfare.
Quote:
|
I'm sorry, it still takes a man to conceive. Unless the woman is asexual a man should have part of the choice, after all it is half his biologically . Women know that they carry the baby should they become pregnant, if they don't want a kid, do what it takes not to have one.
|
Yeah, the man sticks in his penis. Woot way to contribute! While she carries around the extra wait and goes through the pain. Maybe men should have their nuts cut off if they get a woman pregnant and she doesn't want to be. Since she has to go through the labor you get to lose your sack.
Quote:
|
We all know rape is an infinetly horrible thing. Nobody is arguing this point. Women can have c-sections to get the baby out rather than go through labor, its quicker and easier. If shes under sedation she won't even see the baby. The child in a rape case is an unfortunate outcome,however don't take its life, it didnt ask to be brought into the world. It deserves the right to life. Rather than taking life we can give it, giving the child a chance to become somebody, not just another abortion statistic. If the mother is going to die giving birth than have an operation to remove the child but still try to sustain its life. This is the worst case scenario. If the doctors know a woman can't go through labor they won't make her, she'll have a simple procedure to remove the child through c-section.
|
Oh yeah c-sections are the answer! Please. Let me slice your stomach open. Let me give you a piece of advice. Women are not your property. They are not meat and not something you can just slice up or force birth on. Maybe in your next life you can be a "ghetto" mom with 10 kids so you can see what the other side is like. |
|
|