Abortion Rights

It's a "solution" to matters that will never be completely fixed (like rape), but he thinks they can all be prevented (abortions). What am I missing?

Agreed pretty much none of those things can evervbr prevented or stopped. And I am not trying to speak for the dude but I'm pretty sure hehe wasn't saying they could be stopped either.

weirdly enough we live in this weird place called reality where you can't just "take care of" all the things you think happen to be wrong with the world.
you know what stops all this?
kill everyone on the planet.
that's how you'd put a stop to all that is bad and not well thought out in the world.
we don't live in a fantasy world where you can end all crime, death, and sickness and i doubt we will in the near future so just blankly stating that we need to "take care" of these issues really oversimplifies things. they've been problems for thousands of years and until we stop *** and killing each other they will be a problem in the future.

Was wondering when the next Excel thread was going to come along...

I don't think it's anyone's business what the mother decides, there are genuine reasons for getting abortions other than they just don't want the baby, if you ban it outright then you're putting peoples health, and even their lives on the line, if you try and regulate it then you get doctors who will provide a "viable reason" for the abortion for the right price.

I do have a question though, mostly for those who are against abortion, because I've seen most who are against it are for the death penalty. Do you not find it hypocritical to be against abortion, but the death penalty is legal? I mean one of the main arguments anti-abortionists use is we're not supposed to be playing God, and that it's murder, but the exact same can be said about the death penalty.

I'm not against the death penalty either.. I just think if you want to make someone suffer/punish them for horrendous crimes, you lock them up for the rest of their natural life. Life in prison is about as close to 'hell' as you're ever going to get.

the answer to that is simple... If you abort too many fetuses, who will be left behind to face the death penalty?

Shouldn't the father be put in the loop and have a say as well obviously not in rape faces but I'm taking consensual sex.

Us guys don't get a say cz we're not the ones pregnant, especially if they're not married to the girl in question.

There was a guy once I think his name was something Hitler and he had a "solution" to matters I think he called it the "final solution" in fact. If I remember correctly it involved cramming everyone he didn't like into giant ovens and baking them at 2400 degrees farenheit until they were chalky white ashes. He tried to cram my wife's grandfather into one but he escaped by jumping off a moving train. He called us "subhumans" and for some weird reason every time I hear people say unborn babies aren't really people either I get this weird sense of deja-vu.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that perhaps, just perhaps, any "solution" that involves randomly killing people, we might want to take another eyeball too and see if there might be some altenative.

Yes and no, it's hard for me to give an answer on that matter. Yes he should because it's his child.. But ultimately it's the woman who is going to suffer through the pain and troubles of pregnancy and child birth. I don't think the father should be able to say no she can't have an abortion if there are serious risks to her health. However, I think at the very least when the situation arises when a woman doesn't want the baby but the man does, that there should be something in place where the man can take full responsibility for the child after it is born.

It's a hard position to make 'fair' for all parties involved.

what about the people that are against both?
i'm pretty sure most abortion activists are remotely aware of an argument such as this so they've changed their displayed standards, if they had that standard on execution in the first place :P

taking it from the religious stand-point of course you have that concept.
but i'd imagine there are some out there that don't take it on a religious standpoint :/

i personally think death is part of life and has it's place in society(though as it is now it has been skewered further and further with living longer and overpopulation)...i don't know if i'd be able to make that hard decision to end my childs life if i were to be in a womans shoes.

I know there are plenty who are against both, however I live in the south, I live in the vicinity of where George Bush came from.. As you can imagine I've met many, many anti-abortionist-pro-death-penalty people down here.

I actually feel bad that you live there.

If I was part of the creation of the child, I don't want to be excluded when the decision comes to end its existence; life or no life. Call that selfish, but while the child may come out from of the woman and be a labor for her, that's still something that was created with my help. I don't believe parenthood, even the process of carrying the child, is a one-person road. Sure, it can be done, but if I get a woman pregnant (intentional or not) you can bet that I'm there, every step of the way, as much as I can be.

But I'm still trying to form my opinions on this subject, and I can't be sure if what I'm posting is just because of certain circumstances behind my being alive.

Connecticut? Or are you talking about SR.(in his case Massachusetts )

You have to get to the part where you make the child before any of that Sect :P

I think there is too much room for abuse for personal gain by the part of the father that makes some against the father having any part in the decision. Whether or not they ever will get a say will be determined by the legislatures' assessment of whether the benefits outweigh the risks. In cases of potentially fatal deliveries, I think the father should never have a say.

What I meant when I said came from is where he started his political career (and now calls home).. Not where he was born <.< my bad, shoulda been more clear.

dude, if you don't have a say in naming the kid, what makes you think you're gonna have a say in whether or not to kill it?

Sure, she'll LET you voice your opinion, but you might as well be talking to yourself. In the end, its the woman's choice, not her husband/boyfriend/rapist/drug dealer, not her parents, not even the priest (cz he wants all the little baby boys to grow into fine young sex toys altar boys).

I still feel bad for you

Alabama?
GW is a lot more tricky than you'd think :P

Right, so someone's condom breaks, girl gets preggers, isn't planned for, doesn't want it so aborts it. How do you "Take Care" of this problem? Make condoms a foot thick, invent a new pill that's 100% effective? People ***, end of, accidents happen, end of. You're oversimplifying and not taking into account a myriad of other reasons people may wish to abort, problems that simply can't be "taken care of".

Hard to tell them southern states apart sometimes :D

But GW started his political career in 'Bama :/

Well *** you ***. Did you even read the article? No. So you make conclusions with no evidence or fact. You're a trolling *** and nothing more.

nope.
he started it in 'bama.

link

:D

Most of this thread didn't read the article, I think. I didn't :D

Ugh yes Texas... And as far as I know (and I went and checked to Wiki to be sure) He first ran for a govt. office in Texas, but failed, then went on with his oil business, then tried for Texas Governor and won. The only thing Wiki says about him doing anything political in Alabama is helping campaign for someone else, I wouldn't call that his political career.