Jozrael

Ok, so here's my stance on abortions: I'm pro-choice in terms of legality because I don't feel that I have the right to impress my views on a situation that I'm not a part of and thus don't know the whole situation.

That being said, I think abortion -is- the killing of a future human, and thus equitable to murder.

My girlfriend and I have been sexually active in the past (she uses the pill for contraception). I don't like condoms, thus we didn't use them (we were both virgins before each other).

However, we are not in the position to raise a child nor even to carry a baby to completion. We're both still in college (she's a freshman). Thus, if we -did- conceive, we -would- abort the baby. (This is entirely her decision, and I support her in it). However, I can't help but feel that I would feel terrible about it since I would be committing an act I believe to be morally reprehensible.

This brings up the age-old question: Assume that you could earn x amount of money (or whatever reward you want) if you would merely take a gun and pull the trigger at someone's head. There is one bullet in the magazine, the rest are blanks. Thus there is a y chance of it actually happening. Also, you would not be prosecuted at all for the death if they died.

How big of a reward would there have to be before you were ok with pulling the trigger? Conversely, how small would the chance of death have to be before you were ok? 1 in 10? 1 in 10,000? 1 in six trillion?



So that's the dilemma I'm in. Currently my gf and I are sexually inactive, but every month that passes is another month we could be having wild, fulfilling sex to add to our relationship (and a sex life -does- add to our relationship. We're ok without it, we just miss it ;_. I'm not looking for you to answer this question for me but just provide some insight that perhaps I haven't thought of before.

jewels

If you're asking for me to equate an abortion with Russian roulette, ain't gonna happen. If you feel it's morally reprehensible, don't play the game.

It seems to me your dilemma is simply one of choice. Wouldn't using a condom simplify things? Maybe I just don't get it.

__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain

Manic_Skafe

I've read this three times already and I still don't understand the correlation between abortion, abstinence and russian roulette.

What's this thread about?

__________________
"Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian

Jozrael

I'm not asking -you- to equate the two, I'm just giving others an example they can more closely identify with. For me, the choice of abortion feels like killing someone. So introducing the Russian roulette example helps those who don't view it as murder to more closely identify with the choice I'm facing.

Using a condom will reduce the chances of conception, but not eliminate them. So using the Russian roulette example, it's making the chance of the bullet being in the chamber even more unlikely. My gf uses the pill absolutely -perfectly-, giving her the theoretical 99.9% chance of prevention from perfect use. So that's a 1/1000 chance (per year of sex!) that the bullet is in the chamber. Using a condom would make the chance much smaller...something on the order of 1/6666 chance.

However, it still doesn't eliminate the chance. So let me rephrase the question.

How small would the chance of the bullet being in the chamber (killing someone) have to be before it was acceptable for you to pull the trigger in exchange for a year of sex with your SO? Forget abortion when considering this if you don't consider it to be murder, just replace it with the Russian roulette so you can answer the question as if you were in my moral shoes.

@Manic_Skafe: For me, abortion is the killing of a child. Thus, conception will lead to its death since I will abort any child I have at this time. The act of having sex for a year = pulling the trigger for me. Thus, the act of conception = the bullet being in the chamber. Thus, abstinence is refusing to pull the trigger.

jewels

I'm not going to question the math, but I don't know of any weapon that holds 6666 bullets.

__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain

Jozrael

Haha xD. Imagine it though . It doesn't have to be a literal gun, just anything that has a chance of killing someone that is that low in orders of magnitude.

Daniel_

On a technical point, if it's a gun with a magazine, don't the bullets come out in the reverse order that you loaded them?

To look at the real question in the OP is "can we equate abortion of a foetus/baby with the shooting of an adult".

My own feeling is that a person is not truly a person until they are capable of an independent existence. This is a wishy washy answer, but equates to some point in the middle of a pregnancy when the foetus has developed sufficiently to survive outside the mother.

One thing that I find interesting in the American political situation is that people (such as McCain) feel comfortable saying a person is a person from the moment of conception, but nobody has enacted any laws to give a couple who have a very early miscarriage the same rights to time off for grieving and so on that you would gt if your one month old baby died.

In this country, a person is a person legally if they draw breath (I'm fairly sure that's still the law) so if you have a still birth, you are not given a birth certificate and no death is recorded, but if your baby is born and lives for 1 minute, you can register the birth and the death.

For all those who believe that "conception = independent personhood" (which is no more invalid than my "breathing = personhood", they are both pragmatic answers to the thorny issue of how can we mark the start of something that develops incrementally, and there is no RIGHT answer to that question); anyway - to those of you who so believe, how do you deal with statistics such as the one I was told at university that around 1/4 of all conceptions are naturally terminated by the body of the mother, failure to implant, some genetic abnormality that stops them growing at 16 cells, and so on?

I wonder if a better point to measure the start of a person might not be to look at cell differentiation - by the time it starts to grow bones and nerves the major hurdles are dealt with, biologically.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

inBOIL

How could you support her in an action that you believe is morally reprehensible? I could understand refusing to intervene, especially since doing so would be illegal, but there's a big difference between support and neutrality.

As far as your Russian roulette analogy, consider this: every time you get behind the wheel of a car, you're risking someone's life for the payoff of getting somewhere quickly. There's the possibility that, through your own inattention, or some other fault of yours, that you'll cause someone else's death. Is this acceptable? If so, at what leve of risk does it become unacceptable?

__________________
And you believe Bush and the liberals and divorced parents and gays and blacks and the Christian right and fossil fuels and Xbox are all to blame, meanwhile you yourselves create an ad where your kid hits you in the head with a baseball and you don't understand the message that the problem is you.

Daniel_

You are making a common misconception about probability.

If the pill is 99.9% reliable over a year of normal sexual activity, and condoms are 99.5% reliable over each year of normal sexual activity - the chace conception if you use both is 0.1% of 0.5% - i.e. it is 0.0005%, or 1 in 200,000. With those odds, you're more likely to kill her driving to dinner, than you are to have to face the risk of killing your foetus.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

curiousbear

isnt a cum shot hold millions of them?

For me abortion is wrong. And for some reason I dont like her taking internal medicine for birth control. So I always used condoms.

abaya

Why don't you use condoms while she is simultaneously on the pill?

Personally, I felt much the same way you did towards abortion (I am strongly pro-choice, but could not get through it myself)... my husband (boyfriend at the time) would have been fine aborting in the first year or so we were together, but he knew that I would not be. So we doubled up on protection, every time... and in fact, continued it for all of our first 2.5 years together, and additionally the first year of our marriage, because we felt that strongly about preventing any chance of pregnancy until we were absolutely ready for a "mistake," if it should happen.

So why don't you double up? It's very easy to do, and it will most likely put both of your minds totally at ease.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

ratbastid

This is an interesting question that's getting bogged down in mathematics and weapon design.

I'm kind of like you, Joz--I'm very much against telling anyone what to do, and if faced with the prospect of an unwanted pregnancy, I'd have very serious qualms about aborting. And my life situation is just a bit different from yours--people are asking me why the holdup in having children. If either of my girls found themselves pregnant, I'm sure we'd keep it.

I'll just say this: I'd be worried about somebody who could have an abortion and NOT be at least a little tortured by it. You should be. It's a big deal. I think it's important that people keep the freedom to choose it, but it's a big life choice, and not something that should get done lightly.

curiousbear

either???

Sometimes I think abortion is ok compared to have an unwanted child, neglected, not given good life/education/support etc.

little_tippler

Ok, despite the horrible analogy that it is, I will try and get through it.

The bullet is the chance of pregnancy and subsequent abortion (and to you, the murder of a person), the reward is well...sexual pleasure.

I think you have your answer, if that's how you see it. No amount of pleasure justifies taking a life (no matter how small the chance of death may be).

I don't see things this way. I am pro-choice, and I believe that we are not primitive as we once were and have the power to make choices. Hell we have sex most times for pleasure, that says it all about choice.

I do not believe that abortion, if done in the early stages of pregnancy, is as abhorrent as most people say. I do find women who use abortion as a form of contraception totally sick. You see there is a middle ground. Just because you have an abortion does not necessarily mean you have a disrespect for human life.

My main reservation when it comes to abortion, apart from perverse situations where women abuse that choice, is that psychologically it must be very traumatic for the woman. For myself, I don't believe I could have one. But I don't think that gives me the right to decide over the life of anyone else, mother or child.

I think you can have sex with a condom and the pill and you'll be fine. Stop being paranoid. If it happens, you can cross that bridge when you come to it. In the meantime, live your life as you want to live it - the way I see it, you only have one life to make the most of.

__________________
Whether we write or speak or do but look
We are ever unapparent. What we are
Cannot be transfused into word or book.
Our soul from us is infinitely far.
However much we give our thoughts the will
To be our soul and gesture it abroad,
Our hearts are incommunicable still.
In what we show ourselves we are ignored.
The abyss from soul to soul cannot be bridged
By any skill of thought or trick of seeming.
Unto our very selves we are abridged
When we would utter to our thought our being.
We are our dreams of ourselves, souls by gleams,
And each to each other dreams of others' dreams.

Fernando Pessoa, 1918

abaya

Just wanted to repeat what you said, for truth.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

james t kirk

First you create a thread on Homosexuality using "Conservapedia" as your reference, now you post on the morality of abortion.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...ervapedia.html

You're taking on the biggies in American politics aren't you.

Are you sure that you're not a member of the Christian Coalition or something equally as frightening?

ASU2003

I had to look up what Conservapedia said about abortion...
Abortion - Conservapedia

As for your Russian Roulette question, would I know the person? Would I have to take part as someone who could get shot? I couldn't do it if it was a cute girl, but if it was a guy I didn't know maybe $100 and I would pull the trigger. Yeah, there's probably some psychological issues there.

So, what would need to change in your life so you could handle an issue like a baby? Is it just the lack of money? Do you fear having to put college on hold for a few years? Do you just not know enough about parenting?

Jozrael

Wow, lot of replies. One by one:

@Daniel: That is exactly NOT the question I want answered. I don't care what you think of abortion: I didn't create this topic to debate the morality of it. I just wanted you to look at the situation through -my- eyes. Thus, if you didn't think it was wrong to abort a baby, I asked you to think of Russian Roulette instead (which I'm hoping you think of as wrong). I don't care whether or not you think it's wrong to abort a baby. In this question I'm posing to you, I wanted you to answer as -if- it was wrong. Totally selfish perhaps, but I didn't bring it up to debate the morality of abortion. That could be a separate topic

That being said, the reason I think killing a baby is wrong is because it's going to grow up into a person. I had a nice course in college that straightened all my beliefs on the right to life out. I don't think we're violating the fetuses intrinsic rights by killing it: it can't comprehend its own death. However, I feel that I am eliminating the rights of the future person to life. Hence why I believe that life begins at conception, not for any religious reasons.

@inBOIL: I support her because I wouldn't want my life or hers ruined either. Would it be utterly ruined? No. Derailed past a point I would like it to? Yes. Yes, I'm choosing my own selfish reasons above what I believe to be morally right. Hence the quandary I'm in. I don't pretend to be morally pure :P.

@Daniel again: I was using the 85% 'normal use' statistic with condoms, since I doubt we'd achieve perfect use with that. 15% of 'normal use' condom users (with that being the only method of conception) conceive every year. Scary. I'm fairly good at math, but thanks for the doublecheck.

@abaya: The whole point though is that it's still possible. While I'm not honestly concerned about it really happening (especially if I double up), there's still that tiny possibility that it could happen...and then I'd be forced to (in my eyes) commit murder. Again, not forced to, but that would be my choice in that scenario. Btw, my SO loves you right now because this is exactly the answer she's been saying :P.

@ratbastid: Now this is the most helpful answer to me so far. But I ask again...if knowing that I would abort it in the end, is it morally right for me to take the risk starting at the beginning?

@LT: To me, it's a pretty accurate analogy, and I'm glad that you took it that way. And is that really the answer? That there's no x and y great or small enough that it's worth it (if not morally right)? See...I would be using it as a form of contraception. Granted, a second (or THIRD) line of defense...but still there. But then your last sentence makes me feel better about it all again ^^.

@james: xD. To be honest, I was raised pretty fundamentalist, but I like to think I've broken away from that pretty cleanly . Again, the only reason I was even reading Conservapedia was willravel's link, and I like to keep an open mind. So while I took a heaping portion of salt with every article, I pondered the possibility that some of their research might be valid and just something I'd never heard before. Thanks to onesnowyowl, this was shown not to be so.

And I didn't mean for this to be about the morality of abortion. I meant it to be a discussion on the morality of Russian roulette for personal gain with large x and small y.

@ASU: I haven't even looked at the Conservapedia entry on abortion xD. No thanks xD.

And as for your answer, I don't think it's that bad. It's something many people do often. Google 'monkeysphere'.

And for the baby, it's money, time, and college largely. A baby is not in the cards for me right now, whether by abstinence or contraception coupled with abortion.

curiousbear

By intervening, eliminating the existence of a person, I dont think you had actually intervened with the rights of the person who never came to existence.

legally what is the permissible age of a fetus for abortion? what is the basis of this age? Has it got to do with any developmental stage of organs?

fetus, infant, baby, kid, youth, adult are all different levels of life of a person. They are all not necessarily same. Even a young baby can only suffer a death but cannot comprehend its death. That is still death. But I dont know I some how think a fetus's abortion is not same as a infant/baby's death.

In certain religions, they dont consume anything other than vegetables. no meat, no dairy, no roots (carrot, potatoe, etc - they are roots and hence they have life). And they eat only the very tender (young) vegetables. They wear mask to prevent very small life forms being swallowed or sucked. I think the clue here is the most tender vegetable has least level of life!

Makedde

First of all, you should be using as many forms of contraception as you can. Saying you 'don't like' condoms is not a good enough reason not to use them. The pill can fail, so using the pill with condoms makes the chances of a pregnancy even slimmer.

I would never kill a human being. You are trying to compare the killing of a sentient, aware human being, to the killing of a non sentient, non feeling, thinking, fetus. It doesn't work.
I do not care less about abortion - I support it fully - but I could never point a gun at someones head and risk ending their life, not even for all the money in the world.

If you and your girlfriend are not ready for children, that's fine. Just use as many forms of contraception as you can, and if she does fall pregnant, then you are going to have to sit down and discuss things together.

__________________
Sun flames and moons glow, timeless the tides will flow, what will I face, what will be mine, fortune and fate the other side...

abaya

Yeah, it's still possible... but for chrissake, man... I never thought I'd meet someone who was more paranoid about this topic than I was! If you are seriously worried about the chance of her getting pregnant while SHE is on hormonal BC (already 99.9% effective, with perfect use) and while YOU are using a condom (98% effective, with perfect use)... I mean, seriously. If that still bothers you, then I guess your only choice really is to abstain... and that's okay, and it's very responsible, actually. But it depends how important physical intimacy is to you and your girlfriend... because it could end up causing some problems between the two of you, if your values don't align on a topic like this.

I suppose I had the opposite problem from you. We were using double-up protection because we knew that if we got pregnant, I would NOT be able to abort it. And we both knew that it would ultimately be my choice--even if we broke up, ktsp would still have to be financially responsible for the kid. So it was clearly in both of our interests to use as much BC as possible until we were ready to deal with a mistake happening. Of course, the ideal would be that we have a kid when we WANT a kid... and that's still our plan. But we've now been together for 4.5 years, married for 2, and are coming up on 30 years old with jobs and degrees. A kid would no longer wreak total havoc on our lives, as it would have done 3-4 years ago.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

ratbastid

I think, Joz, the thing people aren't getting here (which I didn't get until your response to abaya) is the seriousness of the moral offense that abortion is to you. It's really at the same level as murder for you. It really would be like being backed into a corner and having to shoot someone--and not even for self-defense, but for the preservation of your lifestyle. So any risk at all that you'd be forced into committing that act is a very very serious risk.

I think our not getting that is what makes the russian roulette analogy seem so bizarre. But it's really like that for you, isn't it? I think that's the main difference between your position/belief and most of the rest of us who have commented.

In my belief system, I think it's morally ugly, but not anywhere near the level of murdering a fully formed air-breathing human. Is it a small human in there? Well, technically, sure, but I guess until I hear it cry, it's somehow not quite real as that for me yet. So I can sort of wash my hands of the moral stain that abortion would be. Not entirely--it wouldn't be an easy thing for me at all--but I could bring myself to do it. Perhaps my head is somewhat in the sand about it, but there it is.

So, given you're working with your belief system, you've really got to choose whether a slim chance of being forced to murder your child is worth your sexual self-expression. And I don't really think any of us can make that choice for you. I applaud the seriousness with which you're examining it, though.

Jozrael

Some more replies!

@curiousbear: That's rather interesting. I'd never heard of those religions. I knew that southeast asian religions swept the path in front of them to avoid walking on insects and breathed through masks to avoid breathing in insects, but I hadn't heard of their dietary restrictions. And in terms of violating future rights, that's the way I think of it. I imagine myself as a fetus...would I actually have cared at the time if I was aborted? Certainly not! I wasn't capable of such. Do I care -now- if my parents had aborted me! You bet! The concept of never being born and living the life I've led is frightening. Hence, I try to pay the same respects to a growing fetus.

@Makedde: I'm aware that not liking condoms isn't a good reason. To me honestly, there's not terribly much of a difference between 1/1000 of a chance and 1/6666 of a chance. I can't really comprehend it too well. Should I go back to being sexually active, though, I will probably use both.

In reference to your second comparison, I honestly don't care to debate the morality of abortion with you and whether or not it's murder in your eyes. You can have your own opinion! I just want to, for the sake of answering this question, you to use murder as the logical equivalent. I'm not trying to influence anyone's opinion on abortion with this thread. You, however, answer this in your very next sentence. Thank you. And it's not like we really need to discuss much of anything if she gets pregnant. We've already made our decisions in that eventuality.

I'd like to think that thinking over the possibilities in this much depth counts as being responsible, regardless of the choice to use a condom or not. Again, I don't see terribly much difference between 1/1000 and 1/6666 chances.

@abaya: It's not so much that I'm paranoid that it will happen...it's whether it's morally right to do so. Taking this thread as a whole, I think that I've learned something I'm going to post at the end. But it's really not that I think we'll really conceive, but whether it's morally right to take the risk.

@ratbastid: Thanks for your most helpful reply.

In light of this thread, I've realized that there is a very subtle difference with the russian roulette example. Let me restate it:

Instead of the reward being money, let's instead use the converse of this situation. If you choose NOT to pull the trigger, you must now pay a fee of x dollars (or whatever penalty you wish to use...in my case, it's a lack of intercourse). If you choose to shoot the gun, there is a y chance that the bullet is in it.

So now, it's not for a -reward- that you are pulling the trigger, but instead a lack of a penalty. Let's say that for every year you don't pull the trigger you lose 10 dollars. Would you be able to do it? Maybe not. Now let's say it was 10,000 dollars. Pulling the trigger (and you 99.99% won't even kill the person!) seems a bit more desirable? How about more?

I think it's a cross between a reward and a lack of a penalty for me. Also, as LT and abaya said: you've only got one life to live. Sure, I can go through it paralyzed by the moral repugnance of my lack of willingness to pull that trigger, but I'll experience a fuller relationship with my SO if I'm willing to take that risk. Even with (for me) the possibility of murder on the other end.

Perhaps I'm an ugly human due to my (eventual) willingness to concede that risk, but I guess I can live with that. Thanks for all of your help in making this a far more informed decision on my part.

Daniel_

Sorry - what is the source of your 85% statistic?

Just in case you didn't know, I am in a senior regulatory and quality assurance position in a condom company, and my data indicates that in normal use, condoms are around 99.5% reliable per year of normal use. I'd be keen to see a peer reviewed study that backs up your numbers.

I'm not sure if you've read "Freakonomics" and I can't quote the specific survey as I lent my copy out, but one of the interesting articles in it covers the fall in US crime rates in the generation following Roe vs Wade.

I think it far better to abort a foetus (sufficiently early and with good controls) than to condemn a child to an upbringing of poverty and disdain, followed by a life of higher likelihood of crime, ill health, social exclusion and so on.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

Willravel

Moral equations always end up being a mess. Did you ever see Star Trek 2 and 3? The lesson to be learned there is that moral equations (the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few) aren't necessarily correct, though they may seem logical, because morality isn't always logical. In fact, often morality is illogical. It's certainly not always pragmatic.

When I run into a moral wall, I imagine someone that I see as having good morals and ask myself what he or she would do. Is it a cop out? Probably, but it can help to add perspective. "What would ratbastid do?"

Jozrael

Here is my source. I didn't actually -have- a source, it's just a commonly quoted statistic, and that was the first link I found backing it up. Seems legit.

'Normal use' includes it falling off, breaking, etc. Most likely different qualification than you're using as a quality control person. You can't control how well your clients use your condom, just how it performs in its job.

Again, I'm not here to debate the morality of abortion :\. As I've mentioned repeatedly, if we conceive, we will abort. I'm just...nevermind. Read my previous posts xD. No offense.

And you bring up a good point Will.

Daniel_

I think my mistake was in thinking that a thread with the title "Quick question about abortion morality.", might be requesing a conversation about abortion morality.

I take no offense at all, and hope nobody else does.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

Jozrael

Believe me, if I could change the title, I would've done so on my second post ><. I realized I hadn't phrased the topic correctly quite quickly xD

Acetylene

Dude... Oral and anal! Seriously! There's a rich biblical tradition of anal sex as a substitute for vaginal when vaginal is not an option.

Furthermore.. Adoption is still alive and well as an option. Watch the movie "Juno" with your gf and see if she might be willing to adopt out your baby if worst comes to worst.

I agree that if adoption, abortion, AND keeping the baby are all unacceptable, then don't have sex, period. That's the decision I made with my early boyfriends, until I felt I was old enough to handle a pregnancy. There was a lot of "alternative sex" for a while there since simply going without is kind of a hard thing to demand.

__________________
There's no justice. There's just us.

Leto

yup... what Acetylene said. But to get back to your OP, even by your own words you refered to abortion as murder of a future human. That doesn't really fit with the definitioni. Perhaps you meant to say that abortion is the killing of the potential of a foetus to develop into a human, as everybody who has gone through pregnancy knows, it's still a chancey prospect.

But we get into semantics. No, by definition you cannot commit murder if the object of murder is not human (even if it is a question of timing, some people define an undeveloped foetus as human) but morality rarely takes a logical route.

You can support your moral convictions by abstaining from intercourse. I had a 2 year relationship with a girl who wanted to wait for marriage to have intercourse. But they were two years of wild and crazy sexual exploration that I think were more imaginative and sensual than the actual act of intercourse ended up being.

Go forth and play!

Poppinjay

Using multiple forms of BC is like playing Russian Roulette.

With a cap gun. There's always a chance a really strong wind might blow the gun through your head.

If you feel it's morally wrong, then take the precautions.

__________________
I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

Cynosure

Yeah, really. Kids, don't play Russian roulette with a magazine-loaded gun! Because even with only one bullet loaded in a magazine with a capacity of 30, the bullet will always be loaded at the top.

abaya

Nice. Thanks for the afternoon chuckle.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran