<p>hotpiece101:
"are people really "anti-life." i think you mean pro-choice... "</p>
<p>No, I meant anti-life. Plus, anti-life goes better with anti-war than pro-choice with anti-war.</p>
<p>~7_dust~:</p>
<p>I know what you mean. The sheer number of annual abortion statistics is simply astounding.</p>
<p>Here are some sources. Sorry for not posting them earlier.
There are 1.37 MILLION American abortions each year and over 40 MILLION abortions worldwide!</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, I meant anti-life. Plus, anti-life goes better with anti-war than pro-choice with anti-war
[/quote]
i understand the parallel structure and all, but for my clarification, the "anti-life" people you speak of are not necessarily "pro-choice," right?</p>
<p>hotpiece101:</p>
<p>When I posted anti-life, I was indeed referring mostly to pro-choice individuals.</p>
<p>~7_dust~:
You should check out the second link that I posted. It has great statistics.</p>
<p>Did you know that 47 percent of women who have abortions already had one or more abortions before?</p>
<p>Did you know that there are 126,000 abortions every day or 5,250 abortions every hour or 88 abortions every minute?</p>
<p>WOW!</p>
<p>I am also against abortions in the case of rape.</p>
<p>I prefer the term 'pro-death', it sounds much more positive</p>
<p>everkingly...</p>
<p>Anti-life is a terrible way to describe being pro-choice. I am pro-choice, and in my opinion, I think that abortions will happen anyways regardless of whether it is legal or not. They have happened throughout history. It is our responsibility to make sure that society a) lets women control their own bodies and b) ensures that they can have medical procedures to do so so they won't have to result to self-mutilation or other dangerous procedures. I am also not pro-choice to the extent that I think every abortion is justified... it needs to be before a certain time in pregnancy and only in circumstances where other options have been considered and aren't viable. I also do think that people having unprotected sex should deal with the consequences, but not if it will result in having a baby who is subject to a life where they are not wanted and the parents are not ready to support them.Why not provide better education on contraception? Also, while adoption is also an option, how many babies are really adopted into loving homes? I don't have any stats on hand, but I'm sure that a good number of these babies fall through the cracks. </p>
<p>I don't think abortions are casualties in any sense of the word, but let's not get into the "are fetuses people?" debate. I don't believe that "life" begins until the fetus would be able to survive outside the womb. </p>
<p>Think about it:
Pro-life: every life has value (with the definition of "lives" being extended to include fetuses)
Pro-war: the opposing side's lives aren't as valuable? let's send our children to die? </p>
<p>Even in peace-keeping missions there is a double standard. The US refused to send troops to Rwanda during the height of the genocide because they felt it would not be worth it after seeing some of their own fall in Somalia. To quote general Dallaire: "An American officer felt no shame as he informed me that the lives of 800,000 Rwandans were only worth risking the lives of ten American troops." </p>
<p>This is what gets me - peacekeeping (and essentially the American argument for the war in Iraq) is based on protecting human rights such as freedom, liberty, etc., and the basis of having "human rights" means that we should all be equal before the law. Why are some lives worth more than others?</p>
<p>Abortion is moral cuz the mother is a living thing and dat fetus has a potential to life. I am sure everkingly and I had a chat about this in "How many of you believe in God". Please refer to those posts instead of starting this over again.</p>
<p>W1cked:
"Abortion is moral cuz the mother is a living thing and dat fetus has a potential to life. I am sure everkingly and I had a chat about this in "How many of you believe in God". Please refer to those posts instead of starting this over again."</p>
<p>Abortion is immoral because NO ONE has the right to end another person's life. A fetus HAS LIFE because a fetus meets all of the biological defintions of life. We did have quite a chat in "How many of you believe in God" and unlike you I am more than willing to present my views on abortion in any discussion thread.</p>
<p>All the anti-abortionists on here need to check out Freakonomics at their local library and read his argument of why the crime rate took a dive during the late nineties and still is at a very low rate. Guess what? Abortion can do some good things for society. Like keeping unwanted children out of the world, because more often than not unwanted children grow up to be criminals.</p>
<p>cowgirlatheart:</p>
<p>"Anti-life is a terrible way to describe being pro-choice."</p>
<p>First of all, I frankly don't care whether or not you approve of my vocabulary. Secondly, anti-life is a perfect way to describe the supporters of a MURDEROUS practice. Let's face it, pro-choice advocates are anti-life. Wow, you political correctness types get on my last nerve.</p>
<p>"I am pro-choice, and in my opinion, I think that abortions will happen anyways regardless of whether it is legal or not."</p>
<p>I agree that abortions will occur whether or not abortion is illegal. But if we were to implement your logic then there would be no laws outlawing theft, rape and murder. These crimes still happen even though there are laws against them. So, in essence, you are advocating the entire demolition of the legal system of America. Are you insane?</p>
<p>"It is our responsibility to make sure that society a) lets women control their own bodies and b) ensures that they can have medical procedures to do so so they won't have to result to self-mutilation or other dangerous procedures."</p>
<p>NO, NO and NO! It is not my responsibility to help women who can't appreciate their own flesh and blood. Oh really. Well did you know that suicide and drug usage (marijuana, cocaine, etc.) are illegal. So are you for suicide and for drug usage because you are arguing that a person can do whatever she wants to her body?</p>
<p>"Why not provide better education on contraception?"</p>
<p>I'm all for it. I never said that there should not be better education on contraceptives. But why stop there. There should also be more programs on abstinence.</p>
<p>"I also do think that people having unprotected sex should deal with the consequences, but not if it will result in having a baby who is subject to a life where they are not wanted and the parents are not ready to support them."</p>
<p>It's people like you that makes me sick. Since when have you been a psychic? How can you or anyone else predict what will happen to a child with complete certainty. In addition, you are essentially arguing that anyone who can't afford a child shouldn't have one. So maybe poor people should be banned from having children. That way only parents who can afford children will have children.</p>
<p>"I don't think abortions are casualties in any sense of the word, but let's not get into the "are fetuses people?" debate. I don't believe that "life" begins until the fetus would be able to survive outside the womb."</p>
<p>What a hypocrite! First, you say that an abortion should happen during a certain time in pregnancy. And then you write that life doesn't begin until after birth. Wow, listen to yourself!</p>
<p>"Think about it:
Pro-life: every life has value (with the definition of "lives" being extended to include fetuses)
Pro-war: the opposing side's lives aren't as valuable? let's send our children to die?"</p>
<p>Did I ever mention that I am also anti-war? So your comment falls flat on its face. But then again you have to keep in mind that if you added up all of the casualties of the wars over the last 60 years that number would still be less than the 46 MILLION lives killed in abortions around the world each year.</p>
<p>"Even in peace-keeping missions there is a double standard. The US refused to send troops to Rwanda during the height of the genocide because they felt it would not be worth it after seeing some of their own fall in Somalia. To quote general Dallaire: "An American officer felt no shame as he informed me that the lives of 800,000 Rwandans were only worth risking the lives of ten American troops." </p>
<p>I agree that there is a double standard in peace-keeping missions but how does that apply to this decision. Now you are just going on a much overused tirrade.</p>
<p>"This is what gets me - peacekeeping (and essentially the American argument for the war in Iraq) is based on protecting human rights such as freedom, liberty, etc., and the basis of having "human rights" means that we should all be equal before the law. Why are some lives worth more than others?"</p>
<p>Just because some unknown general said that American lives are more important than Rwandans doesn't make it alright to bash all peace-keeping missions.</p>
<p>311Griff:
"All the anti-abortionists on here need to check out Freakonomics at their local library and read his argument of why the crime rate took a dive during the late nineties and still is at a very low rate. Guess what? Abortion can do some good things for society. Like keeping unwanted children out of the world, because more often than not unwanted children grow up to be criminals."</p>
<p>I have to admit that I have not written Freakonomics and will try to get my hands on a copy soon. Did you also know that the abortion rate declined during the late nineties and is still declining to this day and yet the crime rate is still declining? Maybe there are other reasons for the decline in the crime rate. In addition, maybe we should just make it illegal for criminals and poor people to have children because they usually give birth to underprivileged children who go on to become criminals. Your argument is ridiculous.</p>
<p>
[quote]
First of all, I frankly don't care whether or not you approve of my vocabulary. Secondly, anti-life is a perfect way to describe the supporters of a MURDEROUS practice. Let's face it, pro-choice advocates are anti-life. Wow, you political correctness types get on my last nerve.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Would it be better for someone who doesn't want a child to have the child and raise it abusively/neglectively so that the child grows up with much anger and lashes out at the world, doing car bombs, schoolhouse shootings, selling drugs, abusing women, etc... or to terminate the child before birth and avoid such possibilities?</p>
<p>If we are going to play the make generalizations and point fingers game, then If you are "anti-death of fetus", then you are supporting all the social ills that occur when an unprepared mother brings an unwanted child into the world, aren't you? Oh, unless you are prepared to adopt and feed and support all those unwanted children and make sure they aren't void of attention and proper upbringing. So, I ask, are you prepared, mr./ms./mrs. "anti-death of fetus."???</p>
<p>311Griff:
"Would it be better for someone who doesn't want a child to have the child and raise it abusively/neglectively so that the child grows up with much anger and lashes out at the world, doing car bombs, schoolhouse shootings, selling drugs, abusing women, etc... or to terminate the child before birth and avoid such possibilities?"</p>
<p>What a psychic! Wow, are you like Mrs. Cleo? Can you tell me what I am going to eat for breakfast tomorrow? How can you or anyone else accurately predict a person's future?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Did you also know that the abortion rate declined during the late nineties and is still declining to this day and yet the crime rate is still declining?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, there are also much more ways of protecting one's self from getting pregnant... did you factor that into the equation? Girls can now get patches, and take morning after pills (free from their local planned parenthood office), etc. So my logical mind tells me, "Hmmmm, less pregnancies just might cause less abortions. what a concept!" Ofcourse, if you have a better reason for lowered crime rates, please state it.</p>
<p>311Griff:
"If we are going to play the make generalizations and point fingers game, then If you are "anti-death of fetus", then you are supporting all the social ills that occur when an unprepared mother brings an unwanted child into the world, aren't you?"</p>
<p>Wow, you are blaming for social ills because I am against murder!</p>
<p>311Griff:
"Uh, there are also much more ways of protecting one's self from getting pregnant... did you factor that into the equation? Girls can now get patches, and take morning after pills (free from their local planned parenthood office), etc. So my logical mind tells me, "Hmmmm, less pregnancies just might cause less abortions. what a concept!" Ofcourse, if you have a better reason for lowered crime rates, please state it."</p>
<p>Well I guess you and the author of Freakonomics didn't take that into account either, did you?</p>
<p>Dang you just got owned.......LOL!</p>