Do they believe that every female belongs to the state?

It's this kind of thing that makes me think it's not worth the effort to discuss any serious subject here. Cons seem to me to have such tunnel vision - they can only see one object - one outcome - and no extenuating circumstances that would ever apply. I find it odd that they don't appear to have had any experience of knowing anybody who's ever had a problem with a pregnancy and appear to think ONLY LIBERAL WOMEN HAVE THEM and ONLY LIBERAL WOMEN ARE PRO-CHOICE. Of course, it seems to be the Conservative men who believe this.

 

But they do have selective reading, hearing and learning down pat, so they do have some talents. It makes life easier when they get to ignore half the facts and label everyone. It must be tough to live in a balck and white world, I prefer color in my world, but it does take small amount of effort to see it

 

Again as you said miscarriages are an unknown element, but the technical details of that are not that germane, I am referring to policy from the anti abortionists. They claim to care about life as their platform, yet they say and do nothing about miscarriages, which seems to me it should be important to them.

 

The comment on this article is completely irrelevant to the article. What is wrong with requiring these clinics to have adequate facilities? I thought libs love regulations....or perhaps they prefer back alley ways and coat hangers?

 

CONTRA-CEPTION..is something altogether DIFFERENT than POST-CONCEPTION...

- - - Updated - - -

Why shouldn't ABORTION MILLS have to adhere to the SAME safety/sanitation regulations as ANY OTHER SURGICAL FACILITY?

 

Most forms of contraception don't stop all conception. They cause the body to flush fertilized eggs. That means they are causing abortions. This includes most forms of hormonal birth control.

Because taking a pill isn't surgery.

 

Oh, I'm sorry. Is the state forcing you to have sex against your will? Or are you just mad that you're being held accountable for your own choices?

You see, this is why feminism is such a joke. You claim that women are responsible enough to make their own decisions and then you want laws that prevent them from being held accountable for the decisions that they make. What kind of childish garbage is that?

I've got news for you. With equal rights comes equal responsibility. If you're responsible enough to have sex, then you're responsible enough to take care of the child you produce. Turning yourself into a victim over something you voluntarily chose to do is both petty and dishonest.

The law should be protecting the innocent. Not the irresponsible. And not all women are irresponsible with their sexual habits. Because many are mature adults. So marketing abortion as a "women's issue" is dishonest. In truth, the "war on women" is ultimately nothing more than a war on irresponsibility. But I guess that doesn't sound as sexy, does it? It doesn't strike enough fear into the hearts of the voters. You've got to scare them into supporting the selfish people's legally sanctioned ability to kill their own children.

Sickening. There's a special place in hell reserved for the people at Planned Parenthood.

 

I guess a lot of right wingers are against regulation until it serves their agenda.

 

Meh, I think it's important to remember that we're not anarchists. I think too many people confuse small government with no government.

 

of course we understand the terrible inconvenience that having children places upon people. It's horrible having to be home at 7:30pm for bed time.

Cooking for 3,4,5 and more people can also be quite a challenge and it's just not fair

here's a thought

go get yourself aborted and come back and tell us how wonderful it was.............................................oops, now coming back would not be possible, would it?

 

Total anti-abortion BS. A few models of IUD, while primarily discouraging sperm, do make implantation problematic, although implantation IS the definition of when pregnancy begins!

About 50% of ALL fertilized eggs fail to implant in general, so apparently God likes abortion too

But even heavily Right Wing anti-abortion Focus on the Family will NOT dare say (in 1998 AND 2011) that hormonal birth control pills and implants cause implanted eggs to fail to implant!. http://www.focusonthefamily.com/top...ol_Pills_and_Other_Hormonal_Contraception.pdf

But the so-called "Right to Life " organizations continue to spew this propaganda to guilt-trip and force women to to "behave" according to their OWN sick "morality" and cruelty, and to press for their fascist laws to control women's bodies and lives.

 

Be it a fetus, a baby, sunburn skin, toenails, or your liver, I won;t eat it.

So does your comment mean EVERYTHING I won't eat is a "human"?

OK, eating a anchovy is MURDER, and I want a law against it RIGHT NOW!

 

The same way it is a CRIME to cut off her arm or leg.

You are welcome to decide the fate of ANY FETUS growing and is an integral part of YOUR BODY!

Until then, (*)(*)(*)(*)!

 

I don't think your bodies are the issue, but the bodies of the unborn children. Once you have helped create a new life, decisions to terminate that life extend beyond your own body.

No. A bit hyperbolic don't you think?

None of the issues you mention change the facts of what is actually being discussed.

What is the "plight of women" exactly? As it stands they have 100% control in this issue and the men have none. Could you elaborate on this "plight"?

It seems worth mentioning that Norma Leah McCorvey (the "Roe" in Roe v Wade) is now pro-life and has tried to have the decision overturned. It isn't just old republican men who are against abortion any more than it is only young democratic welfare queens having them.

Maybe the "epic assault" on men's rights that has already taken place has numbed them to it. The woman has 100% control over whether to make a man a father against his will, or take fatherhood from him against his will. If the child isn't a person but simply a part of a woman's body, over which she has total control, then shouldn't the responsibility to pay for the abortion or to pay for raising the child fall solely on her?

Women no more belong to the state than unborn babies belong exclusively to women.

 

I am pro choice. I am all for giving the baby the choice to live or be killed. It is you and your ilk who do not want to give the choice of life to the babies

 

What about a fetus liver? with onions?

Its not a baby, its just a lump of cells...

 

Well, you probably don't hear as much about it simply because it's not something you can control. I can assure you that it is very important to this anti abortionist, and I hope we can find out ways to eliminate them. The thing is though, again, they arent controllable like a yes or no to legalized abortion...and of course there is no stigma associated with someone who had a miscarriage as they didnt go to a corner shop specializing in miscarriages seeking one out.

I just dont find them to be very relatable IMO, others may disagree.

 

I have often wondered, if abortion is "murder"....why is it no prominent "pro-lifer" calls for the execution of women who take RU-486???

- - - Updated - - -

Can't answer my question?

Why is it you guys who are "pro-life"....don't ever do anything to try to save the RICH "babies" from being aborted???

 

Fair enough Rich, I just don't see or I am not aware of any effort from the anti abortionist side, on that matter.

 

Being of libertarian mind, I don't understand why government needs to be involved in this decision. I'll be perfectly honest, as I believe most folks should be honest if we're to have a serious discussion over this, since the birth of my two children, I'm pro-life. I used to be pro-choice and believed it was up to the individual to decide on the best path. However, before anyone clicks that 'Reply With Quote' button and try to run me under the bus, I don't believe it's any persons decision to tell another person what to do. I can disagree with it, just like I disagree with folks smoking cigarettes, I don't believe we should impose any will onto the other person because of ones beliefs.

What I do believe is folks need to take responsibility for their own actions. If two parties lay down together and the woman ends up being pregnant, don't automatically write the child off because the child had nothing to do with that decision. We can call it cells, yolk, egg, sack, or any other organism you wish to state, the fact remains it's a baby, in some form or fashion. Then, when it comes to aborting the child, I don't believe the public at large should pay for it (15 states still cover it until Medicaid: http://www.fundabortionnow.org/get-help/medicaid. As much as Planned Parenthood says they don't cover abortions, funny that most of their clinics are growing in the abortion sector than all of their educational programs: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/22/planned-parenthood-anti-abortion-bills/1854831/).

Obviously there are areas where I know it's a hard choice (IE: Rape or threatening woman's life), so I don't have any issues with that. It's when two willing parties decide to lay down together and a baby is created, you have to take responsibility for your own actions. I understand the 'needs' of a man and a woman, there's contraception & condoms, both not guaranteed to work separately but together they can be a bit more effective. If the percentage of getting pregnant is too high for some folks, a IUD (Intrauterine Device: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/us-women-pill-condom-idUSBRE83Q11Q20120427) can be used that is a lot more effective than both. If folks do get pregnant, folks can still try to get someone to adopt their child from them. My beliefs are they should cover the costs of the adoption, but that's for a different thread altogether.

 

In other words, 'Plan B'. Considering I consider myself a pro-life advocate, I figured I'd answer this, although I don't particularly think anyone should dictate what someone should/shouldn't do. I don't call for the 'execution' of any woman or man that suggests taking this. I think folks should be more responsible in their decisions, then there wouldn't be any need for this type of thing.

However, here's a great heavy metal song titled 'RU486', love it.

[video=youtube;pxgiGGnX0Io]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxgiGGnX0Io[/video]

Again, be responsible. Not anyone's place to tell someone what they should/shouldn't do.

However, I think these questions are more so directed at those who wish to pass legislation to forbid it. I figured I'd answer it anyway

 

Who mentioned killing babies? We're talking about ending early-term pregnancies here, that means killing fetuses.

 

Sure, but regulation set into place to serve an agenda rather than actually promoting something like medical safety is pretty unethical.

It would be one thing if these requirements actually had a valid purpose, but they're pretty transparent in their real purpose.

 

you must have posted in the wrong thread. This thread is about denying babies their right to life

 

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) I love killing babies. It's been a long work week without any babies to kill
Sec, I will be thinking of you while I have unprotected sex with unemployed women this weekend. With any luck, I'll have killed another baby by the next time we speak.