Pandora
Well-Known Member
in an incubator
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Abortion
- Thread starter palerider
- Start date
in an incubator
Werbung:
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Does that mean that YOUR KID is a living human being, but other people's kids are not and can be disposed off if they don't have the money to pay to "save" it?
Face it. . .you're either "pro-life" or you're not!
You can't be "pro-life if I can afford it, and I can only afford it if it is my kid!"
But, at least it brings you a little closer to understanding why some woman make the choice to terminate a pregnancy at an early stage BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD to be pregnant, to pay for the delivery, and certainly not to pay to raise the child alone.
You and I are among the lucky one. We have never been faced with those "decisions based on ability to pay!"
But, as long as "ability to pay" determine whether or not a child (or a fetus) should be "saved" no matter what its life expectancy and the quality of its life may be. . .it makes the "pro-life" issue hypocritical.
No, other people's kids are human beings as well...but it I cannot be expected to provide for everyone.
Being pro-life means you support life...it doesn't mean you have to foot the bill to make sure everyone gets to live the life they want.
Sure you can.
I would wager they could afford some form of birth control in many cases.
Do you support euthanasia?
Openmind
Well-Known Member
No, you can't. . .we cannot prevent every African child from starving in Africa. But as rich as our country is, as "exceptional" as our country is. . .I believe we do have a responsibility to treat people equaly, and that a child's life (whether a foetus or a new born, or an older child) shouldn't be dependent on how much money his parents have, but on what his/her potential to live a full life is! And I would think that people who are so certain that every fertilize egg should end up as a newborn child. . .and that anything else is "murder," they would have some sort of contengency of what to do if that "newborn" that they saved from abortion will survive!
.
No. . .not the life they "WANT," but at least to "live," rather than merely "survive!"
Well, thanks to Obama. . .EVERYONE (at least people with insurance!) will have access to birth control for free! That is the best step to reduce the number of abortion. . .just wish the "pro-life" people had thought of that!
But. . .what happen if birth control does fail? It does happen, you know?
?[/QUOTE]
Absolutely! That is, I support one person's right to decide when and how they will leave this world IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
I was actually thinking of this just yesterday, and wondering whether, if I knew I was at the beginning of the long journey to Alzheimer, or Dementia, I would choose to prepare to "exit" in a graceful, dignify way before I become a vegetable and a huge burden on my family. . . .and while I haven't come to a final decision yet (I don't need to as yet, thank God!), I will seriously consider the possibilities (and the mechanics) in the next few years.
There are actual cases of people surviving abortions...that aside, what does "potential to live a full life" mean...would you deny someone their life if they were going to get cancer and die at 15? They could still have 15 good years.
Well, who determines what it means to "live" rather than "survive"?
And the elusive "someone else" foots the bill again....
Birth control does indeed fail at times, but when used properly that becomes a rather rare thing.
I don't see how anyone would want that for themselves...for all we know Alzheimer's could be cured in 5 years.
Openmind
Well-Known Member
No. I told you about my background, about my work with people with severe developmental disabilities. . .many due to birth defect, premature birth, genetic defects or brain injuries at birth. That is the population I am referring to. While I love everyone of them, and I would NEVER allow anyone to hurt them, it was clear that for many families, and most of those people, a "non-birth" would have been kinder. And, there is NO WAY that anyone, but the most wealthy family could take the full burden of caring for those people throughout their life time.
Watching your child die slowly from a horrible genetic illness, watch their body become increasingly deformed, suffering constant pain, or never being able to ingest food through their mouth, and being kept alive through a feeding tube that risks to get infected every time you feed him/her. . .is hell for the family, and hell for the child.
Nature never intended for these children to survive. WE MAKE them survive!
I think I answered that question. You talk about "wants" as if what the mother wants for her child is a 2 bedroom apartement overlooking the ocean and a Harvard college education! What I am talking about is "survival needs," health care, food, affordable child care, so going to work doesn't cost her more in child care than she can make at work, an education that will give her child a chance to compete with "rich kids" whose parents can pay privately for an education, a safe home, where her child doesn't risk to fall victim of pedophile, drug users, gangs, or pimps.
Yes, poor, poor, big business for profit insurances! They will see their profit reduced by a few dollars per woman each month! They may even have to sell one of their jets!
Again. . .everyone doesn't have a 120 IQ or more. . .everyone is not a mature, educated woman! Many of those "accidental pregnancies" happened to young girls, to woman with an IQ well below 100.
.
Yes, maybe in 5 years, and maybe in 25 years, and maybe never. We all have to die. Dying with dignity should be a right.
As I said, I am doing some thinking on this issue. I haven't come to a conclusion yet.
What I do know for SURE, is that I prefer to have my dog euthanized when the quality of his life is gone, when I see him suffering, rather than to let him live for another 6 months in pain and in shame because he can't walk, he can't hold his bladder, he can't move without pain.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Have to ask for more than you will ultimately settle for.
yea but in the minds of most pro life people...your no better then me you godless baby killer!
I will be a tea party like person...I say we start at 10 years old...now you meet me half way right?
Gipper
Well-Known Member
The very words you are using are heinous. "Inconvenience" doesn't even begin to describe it. Let's take the most hated reason for abortion. That a woman does not want a child, either at that time or ever. No other threats to her own health, or a conception because of rape. She just does not want a child. She was not planning for one. The contraceptive measures she and her partner took failed. Why should she now be forced into a life-altering commitment that she does not want? Having a child and bringing it up is a monumental task that will change her life. If she knows she's not ready for this or that she does not want to take up parenthood or even putting her body through a pregnancy, why should she?
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
This thread was started 10 years ago, but it still remains current. For the mother it's a lose-lose situation. Anti-abortionists just don't understand the difficulties of poverty. This cartoon by Nick Anderson is worth a thousand words.
.
Werbung:
Jason76
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 10, 2015
- Messages
- 506
I see the humor - but at least the baby's alive! Anyway, sure big government will give you help - but it makes that help a burden (on the government) - so they (the government) like abortion.
Similar threads
