Topic: USA Bans the right to abortion (Read 884 times)

The law that will be given concerning terminating of pregnancy will reduce the length of people who intend to have sex without protection and also have sex with someone they don't want to. So i think using protection is the best thing  of nstead of  having raw sex because i believe that abortion is now everywhere and people don't respect their self for abortion.

What a way to actually make you see reason and accept the facts. Puts it to you what is true (Your obviously pregnant and have just kicked start the baby formation process) and viewing abortion for a choice is actually getting rid of a baby on the way and not going to cure malaria or something.

Then again, you ought to realise that, the population of the world has gone extreme and have to go by some control measures. China some time ago and even more functional still enact laws to ensure population decline and America with this no abortion rule is just a step towards over population. There is no use creating the problem and then try to solve it. Let the couple make their choices.

Except that most children have values imposed onto them by their teachers and schools. The issue needs to be solved by reforming the education system to prevent what can only reasonably be described as very sick teachers from imposing values onto young children.

It's wrong to have that law in the first place, abortion is killing. If you don't want to give birth to a child then don't have sex.

Use protection if u must have sex and stop the complain about abortion law.

Possibly the biggest variable is this...

Joe and Pete are farmer friends who live a small distance from each other. There is private wooded land where they live, and both of them like to go hunting in deer hunting season.

One Saturday Joe was up early and out hunting in the woods. Pete slept in, but when he woke up around noon, he decided to get out and hunt for a while.

Joe was frustrated. He hadn't seen any deer all morning, and he was on edge, ready to shoot something. Suddenly there was rustling in the bushes, and Joe didn't think to wait. He simply shot. How surprised he was when he realized he killed his buddy Pete.


When you find out for sure that the fertilized egg isn't a person, and how long after fertilization it isn't a person, and how we can tell for sure if it's the same for every new life, show the rest of us your proof... not your guesses. Until then, back off on shooting. Don't be a Joe.

That is an interesting take.  I'm not sure how true it will become, but I like seeing interesting predictions about the future.  If I could also add a variable you may have not taken into account.  A lot of unwanted pregnancies that don't get aborted end up with the babies being sent to foster care to be adopted.  They might have difficult lives and think that they would have been better off having been aborted.  Maybe that leads them to become pro-abortion. 

Anyway, I guess my point is that there are so many variables here, it can't be broken down so simply.

If Mommy really wanted an abortion, and especially if she was a big pusher for abortions in general, maybe it's good that her kids get aborted. After all, if her kids come into this world alive, who will train them? Mother (and maybe father), of course. So, they will get trained to abort their offspring when they get old enough to have some.

So, it works out well, even though it is unfair to the aborted kids. At least those aborted kids won't grow up to become abortionists/murderers... because they don't exist, having been aborted. That's one way to limit abortions.

But the pro-lifers will let their children live. And they will teach them that abortion is wrong. And if they do a good enough job of it, their kids won't have abortions, but will teach their kids against abortion, as well.

So, gradually, the abortionists will murder abortion out of existence.

At times, the problem of humanity is that we've become so wise that we don't know when we might have done the best for ourselves. Yeah, abortion might seem immoral and shits like that but, of what use is it bringing in a child that you can't train. We have a lot of under privileged children in the world, more are coming and we would get even more out of this ban.
I think every individual should be left with the right todecide what to do with there body or not. You can't force me to have a child that I don't want and that's period. We've got test tube babies and should they be so concerned they should put in facilities that would grow and provide for the child all through life.

We kill animals every day, we kill fish, birds. You boil an egg = you kill a chicken. So, the question here is, at what point the egg becomes a child? Is your sperm a child? Is terminating a pregnancy in the first month a murder?

I fell like we should give women some freedom of choice. Sure, if you terminate a healthy pregnancy in the 9th month it can be considered murder because at that point the child feels, hears, has all its organs developed and is able to function outside of mother's body. That said, we shouldn't put this in black or white terms. What if a woman finds out she's missing her period for the first time, so she takes a pill that assures her she won't have to bring an unwanted child into this world, long before this child begins to develop? That IMO is not the government's job to regulate.

He actually makes a pretty compelling argument against legalizing abortion in my opinion. He says he is pro-choice, but his stated reason for allowing abortion are weak.

His stated reason for legalizing abortion is that there are "too many" people in the world (something that is not scientifically sound). I would note that Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was a believer in eugenics, and she founded Planned Parenthood in order to control/reduce the population of black people. So if anyone has any question about why democrats are so in favor of abortion, that is why.

Condenming abortion is good and at the same time it's bad because if the population of the people is too much,it will cause problem and chaos in the society,and there will be insufficient job for people to do,and as we all know that when the people do not feed properly,or have something doing in order for them to see food,there will be people that will go against the law of the land by robbing people of their possessions.

Where as,abortion is bad in some areas that they have experienced war and have lost so many lifes.In places like that,I don't see any reason why they will want to abort when they don't have people enough in that area.

From what i observe concerning abortion. It's something i know quite well that many people disguise and some cultures dont permit that. Condemning and abolishing the methods of abortions across the society, it's a something that you don't commit every time. I believe that many people across the nation is condemning the act of abortions not only US. The way I'm seeing everything. I don't know if people will agree with me that doctors are doing bad thing to continue doing illegal abortion to the young female adults. If I'm president i will not agree people especially the health sector to accept something like abortion.

Okey dokey, I just figured you wanted a discussion or something. My bad! LOL

For your own benefit, don't make your murdering, criminal mindset a thing that is directed against any one person who you name. Then it becomes a threat that can be prosecuted in court, as though you were going to carry out your threat.

Oh, and thanks for your comment.

You are comparing a cowardly neighbor with (apparent) mental issues who has proven to be a threat to society by maliciously killing a friend of his who has been born for over ~35 years (OK maybe ~38 lol), to a female (or couple) making a decision about her (and/or the father's) unborn baby.. and you think both should carry the consequence of death by human?  

If your motivation stems from a completely humanitarian perspective (i.e. no murder for anyone is right) then it makes 0 sense why you would want to execute people based on some criteria you have, as you would then be committing murder yourself, then the next guy that thinks like you (with his own criteria) will want to murder you.. when does it end?  For this group, making murder OK via any criteria should lead to failure. Based on your execution comments, I assume this isn't you.

You appear to believe in God.. so why would you think you, or any human, have the authority to determine when God's children come and go, no matter what crime you say they've committed?  I obviously wasn't there, but I'd guess it was humans with this line of thinking that got Jesus nailed to the cross. Why would a God need your help killing people?

For those who don't believe in God, I'll assume we can agree there is a difference as to what effects society would encounter with the forcing of unwanted babies to be born. Forcing a baby to be born isn't always going to be positive for society. What odds would you give on whether the baby grows up to be positive to society or destructive to it?  Many, many factors ultimately go into that, but it generally starts with the people raising that baby. And if those future parents already do not want or cannot handle the baby, for whatever reason, you are now trying to force that baby into a bad start in life, which one could argue isn't fair to the unborn child either.

But really, none of us should be speculating on what the baby will or will not become and trying to decide, we should really just be allowing the potential parents (and potentially their God) to come to the conclusion for their unborn baby, and allow them to accept whatever natural consequences may or may not come from it.

I like Bill Burr’s cake analogy with regards to abortion. If you haven’t seen it, then I highly suggest watching. I’ll try to find it and link below. It is both hilarious and spot on. I agree with his take on pretty much everything and think he does a good job presenting things comedically. He’s definitely one of the greats and he’s pro-choice.

Best link I could find at the moment.
https://youtu.be/oLPxtoIEek0

Moses allowed people of almost any nation to become Israelites if they wanted. All they had to do was live in Israel and follow Israeli customs and laws. They were to be treated as though they had always been part of Israel, even if it took 4 generations before their family was totally accepted.

Welfare plans will always have success with governing leaders. The more the leaders can control the money, the more successful will the welfare plan be.

A classic example is 'immigration' in the U.S..  The left-wing position back a couple decades ago (if that) was it was a scam by the corporations to reduce labor costs, and I thought they were dead-on.  Because back in those days the 'liberals' actually did have some degree of humanity, a consensus was that 'we' should do what we could to help raise up the 'developing world'.

Of course there probably were dark forces that were aware of and planning for the Kalergi Plan type stuff, but they didn't poke their heads out of the shadows all that much.  Likewise the Cloward-Piven types, but their methods were so odious and inhumane that they didn't talk openly about them except probably at special dinner parties and such.

If you take a look at a cross section of liberals and conservatives, especially if you go back a hundred years in your observations, you will find that they flip-flopped on all kinds of ideas depending what they wanted at the time. Most of the flip-flopping was brought about by leaders who talked a good talk. The ignorant youth didn't have enough experience to see how ideals would really affect their lives in reality.

Everything was and is done by the talking heads who are controlled by some jokers, probably Bilderberg, or the Bohemian Grove people. But there are a lot of people who see through them and the evil they are promoting.

If the libs adopted classical liberalism or any definition of liberalism from the 18th century, they wouldn't have so much trouble with the base becoming so far radical on social and economic issues. Political groups moving far to the extremes insofar political dynamics are concerned, the liberals keep going towards authoritarianism, known as "progressivism." Progress being quite the misnomer. Some have resisted this change but it's difficult to stop the ground from moving, or even notice it's happening. The last two decades have been a bit accelerated so it's been more noticeable.