| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Sweet. Let's git'er-done!  | ||
| Fahren |
City, that's funny. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The Catholic argument? Really? The Catholics ALSO seek no sex outside of marriage. Please cite your source for your assertion that the vast majority of these abortions are by Catholic women. 38% of the population of NY is Catholic. Could there be a small portion of the 38% population that is going against Catholic teaching and having abortions or out of wedlock sex or both? Sure. The greater likelihood is that both sex outside of marriage or abortions or both are happening by individuals not associated with the Catholic church in any way. What I DO find interesting is that among religious groups, Catholics rank at the bottom of the list of ALL people (including atheists and agnostics). General Social Survey Results The vast majority of women having abortions are unmarried (83% of all abortions). http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/wome n_who.html The NAF DOES say that 27% of abortions are by Catholic women. Although that is a national average, I think we can assume the percentage of saturation is consistent for NYC. So if 83% of abortions are by unmarried women, then only 4.6% of the abortions in NYC are by married catholic women. The remainder are by Catholic women who are unmarried AND having sex outside of marriage AND having abortions. Doesn't sound like to me that Catholic teachings are to blame. Sounds like the Catholic teachings are having more of a beneficial impact rather than a negative one. | ||
| Sifo |
Sadly, somehow as a society we have rationalized that it is morally acceptable to snuff out the unborn. That is the real problem behind this. Anyone want to take a shot on who's to blame for this? Personally I think Delta_one is pretty close to the bullseye. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
you know the cure to this right.... I am suprised the GLBT crew hasnt jumped on it yet..... you just outlaw hetrosexuality. YEP its now illegal to be 'straight' if the only approved sex is sex that doesnt produce children.... well hello sailor. plus look at waht it does for their membership ! oddly they are quite quiet on the issue... maybe they know they need the heathen hets to reproduce so they can 'adopt'...... damn I thought I was onto something there. alright continue on. | ||
| Kenm123t |
All you need see to understand my point about the destruction of the famiy is how fathers are depicted on the typical sitcom or commercial. There are many other examples. | ||
| Fahren |
Ken, I don't watch tv any more, so I'm kind of out of that loop. Could you explain a bit more, please? | ||
| Whisperstealth |
I am often curious at those who think abortion should be illegal, yet are strong supporters of the constitution. I know a lot of it has to do with whether you believe the unborn baby is a person with equal rights. Or an unborn fetus with out equal rights. It does come down to a religious belief. It's a very sad situation, and I truly wish so many women didn't find it the answer to their dilemma. I do believe in abstance first and foremost. But I also believe many are not going to choose that, even with education, and birth control is a realalistic necessity. That said, I do believe in the right of the woman to choose. I don't feel I have the right to tell/force someone to live according to religious beliefs. This is a country founded largely by Christian's, but with religious freedom in mind. As a Christian many fellow Christian's are surprised at my stance, but I will let God judge, not me. It's a debate that will never end, a really •••••• circle, that leaves everyone feeling shit on. | ||
| Sifo |
It does come down to a religious belief. I couldn't disagree more. It's simply a matter of when does a new life begin. At conception there is a living cell that starts replicating itself. That is life. It also has DNA unique to itself. It isn't the father or the mother, it's a completely new life. No religion necessary to see that it's wrong to snuff this new life. | ||
| Ezblast |
You think people would see that point - EZ | ||
| 86129squids |
"put a helmet on th' soldier before goin' into battle!" | ||
| Blake |
>>> I am often curious at those who think abortion should be illegal, yet are strong supporters of the constitution. Only because you apparently think that the constitution provides a right to kill unborn babies. It doesn't. If a person can be prosecuted for murder due to causing the unwanted death of an unborn baby, how is abortion not murder? | ||
| Cityxslicker |
ok, not to throw another monkey in the wrench..... but the numbers are off. by ALOT and I will tell you why. because an 'abortion' is only done second trimester..... A first trimester is called a drainage and curratage and it is a completely different code and is NOT considered abortion by CMS/DSHS/Planned Parenthood. they could outlaw abortions tomorrow....and they would still go on as D&C's third trimester babies are a different code too, but those are significantly more rare than second trimester.... and for the population control crowd, its not just the new borns, they want to get you once you are out too. The 'culling' is the term for it; it is the new ethnic clensing that the tin foil hat crew is coming to America, and the paranoia that surrounds the FEMA coffins http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_27 57.shtml having seen genocides up close and personal (4 in the last 15 years) anybody that can blasa talk about them like thinning livestock is indeed calculating your timely removal. | ||
| Whisperstealth |
>>> If a person can be prosecuted for murder due to causing the unwanted death of an unborn baby, how is abortion not murder? Good question. The rights/choice/what ever you choose to call it have been taken away from the mother. - A person with more clearly defined and enforced rights, is what I think the legal reason is. The law does seem to be a bit hypocritical in this way. Why did I join this conversation  I know better. What ever the reason, I'm going to pull myself out of the quicksand. Be Well. | ||
| 86129squids |
"It takes two to tango." Heck, I enjoy debating this stuff... So far, AFAIK, no XX chromosome opinions. Most of us are here by "accident"- in my case, my mom tricked my dad. Cool by me. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The question of what a woman can and can't do with her own body ended at the point she threw her legs in the air. There has only been one recorded case of spontaneous pregnancy. Once you become pregnant, you are responsible for the wellbeing of the new life. It's time we stopped allowing people to engage in behaviors without consequences. If you think you could become pregnant and that pregnancy will be unwanted, either don't engage in the activity that causes pregnancy or plan to carry the pregnancy to term and place the baby up for adoption. It ain't hard folks. | ||
| 86129squids |
Good to see you up & about, Ft... I once had a buddy ask me to help him out- he'd gotten in "trouble" with his GF... I said OK. Thought it over, changed my mind, didn't help him. Reality is subjective. Objectively, I didn't want to involve my mojo in his poor decision processes. I carry my own weight. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Reality is subjective. Only for liberals.
| ||
| 86129squids |
Have I been labeled? Not a liberal, although I once subscribed to Mother Jones and The Nation. Adding ice cubes to the espresso. Then some Irish cream, and a little fresh air. | ||
| 86129squids |
Blake- you're anti-abortion. Me too. We're human, correct? Let's be sure we're on the same page. | ||
| 86129squids |
Utne reader too. Fire away... I gave up Reader's Digest when I sensed its AARP bias... | ||
| Buellriderx |
I'm with CityxSlicker on this. No need to blame the Catholics or the girls' parents or the condom that didn't work. These are some arguements that I've heard on the topic. I'm against abortion or getting rid of a baby before birth at all costs but some pple need to open their eyes. It was the guys' and gals' (that gave in to their lust) fault. They should live up to their mistakes. Anybody objects to this I just couldn't care less. That's how I feel and that's that. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Not a liberal Then for goodness sake quit talking like one!  | ||
| R100rs |
Blake,i am heading out to a mass and rosary procession to a Washington,d.c. planned parenthood killing center.but i just had to post and thank you for stating the church's position so clearly.better than i could,sad to say.at mass several weeks ago,father mike said something i think is apropos.Gods judgement is his acceptance of our will. (Message edited by r100rs on January 08, 2011) (Message edited by r100rs on January 08, 2011) | ||
| Wolfridgerider |
| ||
| Teeps |
No good will come from this thread. There is no reason for discussion as, both sides of this issue are passionate and will never agree. so  If I'm out of line here, feel free to delete my post. | ||
| Seanp |
I'm curious what the solution is if abortion of any kind (first, second, third trimester) and any infliction (voluntary, rape, incestuous) with any consequence (normal birth, mother dies, baby is horribly disfigured) is outlawed. If every single time a sperm fertilizes an egg, the baby is carried to term, then how many more people would there be in this world? And how would we pay for them all? | ||
| Sifo |
I don't understand why a rational discussion can't be had on this subject. The right has been called anti-science on this issue. I say lets discuss the actual science and see where it leads. Right now we have scientists all excited about finding possible organic compounds on Mars. http://news.discovery.com/space/viking-mars-organi cs-experiment.html Rest assured that if they ever find living cells that replicate on another planet it will be huge news that we have found extraterrestrial life. That definition shouldn't be changed when the life is found in a woman's uterus. So if we examine that life in a woman's uterus, we will find that it contains human DNA. What is life with human DNA? The obvious answer is human life. That is what science tells us. The fact that science breaks life into various stages changes nothing about when that unique set of DNA started to replicate. It is the point of conception that is the single event that can be pointed to where a new unique life starts. The idea that life starts X weeks after conception is a political convention, not a scientific convention. So what does science then tell us when we abort an unborn life? Clearly we are killing a unique human life. There is no question about this. The only question at this point is, is it acceptable to continue to kill innocent human life in the womb. This is where morality comes into play. So when is it moral to kill a human life? That's what it's really about. | ||
| Blake |
When any "solution" involves the murder of the most innocent and helpless among us, it should be questioned. The solution is to promote morality and reject immoral, irresponsible behavior. Instead of glorifying promiscuous behavior, condemn it. Don't fall victim to the myths that humanity amounts to some kind of plague on the planet or that the planet's population is nearing unsustainable levels. That is complete and utter nonsense. Provably so. | ||
| Sifo |
And how would we pay for them all? Interesting question. So for each "horribly disfigured" disfigured baby that needs to be "paid" for how many will be productive citizens. The ratio should be much as it was before widespread abortions. I would think we would pay for them like we have for all the generations before us. Of course if abortion were proposed to only eliminate "defective" life then the argument would be very different from what we have from today's political argument. |
