Using that logic, you could say that anytime a man and a woman have sex, they could create the next Beethoven-so they'd better have as many kids as they possibly can! BTW, what if Hitler had been aborted? Sorry, but the whole "we could've aborted Beethoven" thing makes no sense.
No, it isn't. You must have skipped sex education class, because you seem to forget about the fact that it takes a sperm donation from a male to have a baby, which will in fact share much of the same DNA information as that male. The Law seems to disagree with you as well, as they will require that a man pay child support money to a woman if he ever leaves a woman with a child.
I am no expert on this, but I have seen several reports that suggest a shortage of American's willing to adopt black babies. Also, many black babies and/or children are adopted by Canadians or Europeans. With the amount of black babies and children in foster care, and with many social workers insisting on placing children in families within the same race, black families would have to adopt 4 to 5 times the amount of children than whites.
Why the hell don't these people just adopt? There are shorter waiting lists to adopt black kids, but no actual shortage of adoptive parents. Here's just one example program, from the agency we used to adopt our second (part Latino) son: http://www.planlovingadoptions.org/hoping_to_adopt/Programs/domestic/us_mininfant.html
Hee hee hee hee hee! What gets me about these "rewards" given to these people who have litters is that if a family has 5 or 6 kids they have a hard time supporting, one at a time, people tell them they are being "irresponsible" yet if someone goes out of their way, and has 5 pr 6 at ONE TIME (more irresponsible, IMO as it really is dangerous for the babies mentally and physically) they gets told "it is a miracle" and get cars and money and even houses built for them. No logic to this. I ADORE babies, but I don't get all warm and fuzzy when yet an other womyn on the news gives birth to 5 kids at once, and is basically begging for corporate help, before the kids are even dry.
I completely agree! These people ALWAYS say "god blessed me with these children". . . when the reality is, Watson Pharmaceuticals blessed them! I think it is VERY irresponsible of ANY fertility doctor to allow a woman to have a litter of babies. The doctor should be more interested in the welfare of such children, as he or she is an integral part of their existence.
Like I said, I am NO expert on this. . . I did a quick "google", and it seems like the main problem is the unwillingness of some social workers to place black children with white families, even though many other organizations and the courts support it. The notion that adoptive parents are in short supply was only in a few anecdotes on a few websites.
Amen, brother! And the resistance to selective termination, when in many of these cases ALL the fetuses will die (and often times do, at a later age of developement than selective termination would have been) if not thinned out. "God gave us these babies." NO, God intended for you to not be biological parents, I guess.....(I hope I haven't offended anyone. I know it must be awful to be infertile, but having litters of children, who will have lifelong health problems, isn't the answer.)
http://www.nature.com/nm/wilma/v2n9.867695454.html Excerpt: "Clinical investigation of infertility, and the development of such techniques as in vitro fertilization were, in a sense, forced into the private sector and out of government purview. Fertility clinics have as a consequence been free to try new approaches to assisted or in vitro conception without having to bother with the ethical review boards or other institutional sanctions that govern federally funded biomedical research. In effect, the government, through its research arm, has failed to acknowledge that in vitro fertilization even takes place. And it follows, as night does day, that there is no need for laws or review boards to govern an activity that is not recognized -the disposal of frozen zygotes that are not implanted in the women who donated the egg." .
can i ask somthing? how is it possible for a woman to give birth to 5 or 6 babys at ONE time? wouldn't it be like realy hard for 6 babys to grow inside one human person? i apologise for my stupidty, they never went over THIS type of stuff in sex ed.
Quote: Originally Posted by Becknudefck pro choice. its a womans right, i dont care what anyone says. What about the child? It is still homo sapien, a human being, and it has certain rights, but it cant speak for itself. Like the Scott Peterson case, he got charged with murder of the woman and the baby, whats the difference from that and abortion? Babies have rights that should be protected. When you make a mistake of having un protected sex, there is consequences with them, whether it be an std, or a child. I think the adoption system should be better so it will be easier to put a child up for adoption and easier to get one. I am strongly pro life, and by pro life, I am against the death penalty and abortion, but when it comes down to it, I'd rather see a murdering son of a bitch who has had his chance in life and fucked it up be gassed to death than a innocent baby who hasnt had his/her chance in life yet, be sucked out because of some woman who doesnt want the responsibility of raising him/her.
I'm pro-choice all the way. A woman shouldn't be forced to have a child she doesn't want. And for those of you advocating for the "rights of the unborn fetus," I very much doubt that the unborn child is even aware of its own existence. In cases of rape: A woman should not be forced to have a child at all that is the result of a violent dehumanizing crime against her.
sorry but thats a bad analogy and works against prochoice because a famous musician thinks and has a whole concept of life and his existance. he has established family, friends, fans, who would all be disturbed if he died. an unborn baby? what is human? having the DNA of a human? no, because that would mean a piece of flesh was human. so it would really have to be, a fully functional human? with all the parts that make up a human. what is an actual human though? its an animal with a very weak and relatively useless body, and a mind thats capable of... concept... diverse logic... efficient learning... and diverse creativity. a baby has no concept, no logic, nothing to create from (your creativity needs to 'learn' from your surroundings. a baby that is not born yet, has, get this, a less developed brain than the animals we slaughter and eat all the time. a baby is also killed humanely. if you are pro-life, you are ignorant to what humans are if you then do not also oppose the killing of any relatively sophisticated animal, because a pig is more human than a baby in the first trimester, and perhaps even through the second. I mourn a PERSON's life. i mourn the death of a mind which is going to lose something. lose a whole life's worth of experience. an unborn baby has less experience than a newborn rat. there is nothing. personally, i dont see how people can value a baby's life over a young adult's life. but they do. its always seen as more shocking when a BABY is killed. omg how sad! but then when an adult dies, its nowhere near as severe. at any rate, a 'human' whos only life is respiration and perhaps some very basic perception (like on the same level as an animal) has no value above the millions of creatures we slaugther and often torture in the world. AT any rate, if ones oppinion is that as long as it thinks then its human, well, you must then allow babies in the firs tri,, since they 'think' less than insects. if you are pro-life, FEEL ASHAMED to eat meat. if your vegetarian, plants are alive as well, you know?
if you cant say when a person becomes human then why not keep going back to when the parts of the egg split and become egg and sperm youd have to ban mentruation wihtout conception, since youd be letting a potential born human life. youd have to ban masturbation and sexual intercourse, and revert to ivf. you could say a sperm or egg is definately not alive, its only half a cell? well its actuall a whole cell, which needs the other in order to live. but if you dont give an unborn baby an umbilical chord then it wont survive. the organism is not independant at any stage until it is born.
Does anybody here think that if abortions are banned that they'll actually stop? Because I certainly don't. Any woman who is desperate to get rid of the baby will find away, and if abortions become illegal, we'll have back-alley abortions all over the place, and that will be 100 times more dangerous than the current system, which is licensed professionals taking care of the woman. Banning abortions is not going to keep them from happening. It'll just make criminals of a lot of women and doctors, and far too many women will die needlessly.
and abortion wasn't legal in Iraq. Saddam Hussian's mother tried to abort him herself, and it didn't work. This logic works both ways. It proves nothing. Laura, what we are talking about having 5 or 6 babies at a time, it is almost alway a result of Reproductive Technology. Fertility "Therapy" drugs and procedures which can result in a previously sterile womyn to become pregnant with many fetuses at once. Almost all of these "technologies" result in fetal loss. Yet very few prolifers talk about this. And these parents are usually less able to provide for the litters they allowed to be born than most parents who didn't plan on having children right now.
haha but YOU are trying to srgue that this all comes froma womans right to control her body, and not her right to terminate the foetus. these are the same actions and so all your really doing is trying to argue the arguement by ignoring the fact that the two rights are exactly the same thing in this context. evidently, the arguement which abortionists have been using for such a long time is not working, or else the whole debate wouldnt still be an issue, duh
The abortion issue is NOT about abortion. The real issue is MALE FEAR OF THEIR SEXUAL INADEQUACY. The inadequate 'male' is forever insecure concerning Woman, and must control women's sexual and reproductive lives. The controlling inadequate 'male' is always revealed by their erection of Patriarchal Hierarchies; such as our Judeo-Christian Hierarchical Civilization. The abortion issue is simply a red-herring used to disquise our inadequacy and the humiliation of our insecure need to control the sexual and reproductive life of Woman. Insecure motivations that are entirely UNconscious, having been repressed by our ego from the awareness of our conscious minds. The more we cling to the abortion issue, the more we are expressing our repressed unconscious feelings of inadequacy.
