we'd be better off with 100 million more unwanted kids?

30 million abortions and 70 (or 140 ) million births prevented by birth control. cause the SAME "logic" against abortion leads to anti-birth control "thinking", too. We've got 50 million people on food stamps, it's getting worse every day,and you want 3x as many messed up people?

 

Choicers keep repeating this over and over again, always neglecting to mention the important fact that it is only some of these children who will be unwanted.
It depends on the type of baby that comes out. There is a desperate shortage of certain categories of babies on the adoption market.
How can abortion supporters say a baby will be unwanted when there is a loving family available, waiting and hoping for a baby just like the one being aborted?

 

Just so long as they are good old white Amercian bred children that is .. nothing wrong in that at all

 

Nothing wrong with killing little unborn babies that have good loving homes waiting for them either, eh?
We should let them all be killed because we don't want to discriminate, is that it?

 

do you really think that attempting to respond to me in a way you hope won't be noticed does you any favours?

There is nothing wrong with abortion full stop regardless of your attempts to project. The fact you readily admit to your own racist agenda renders you irrelevant (which most of us knew anyway), add to this that you are on record as stating you want to kill some disabled newborns, your advocating for pro-life so called values is hypocrisy of the highest order.

 

Regarding Anders "racism" the fact that he had a Stormfront account doesnt mean that he only cares about white people.

 

Never said it did, never even mentioned that site .. so why are you?

 

Personally, I think it would be wonderful if we could prevent all babies from being aborted (provided they are healthy and normal). However, I do believe a practical cut-off date should be different depending on other factors. This is not to say that a "less in demand" fetus is somehow less human at 14 weeks than a fetus in the in-demand category. But there are further reasons why the abortion should not be carried out. I believe it "tips the scales" a little bit with regard to when the legal cut off point should be.

 

What I am trying to say is that, if the woman is allowed an abortion, there should be a multitude of compelling reasons which come together as to why the abortion should be allowed. We should not just give women blanket license to abort whenever they feel like it.

If there's a good loving family on a long waiting list, hoping and praying for a baby just like the one who is going to get aborted, that definitely affects the balance as to whether or not that abortion is truly justified.

 

There should be compelling reasons to restrict women from abortions, and you don't have one.

Wrong, no woman should be forced to produce children for others.

 

The deal is, how many of those kids would want the parents?

 

Really, there's so many prospective parents that these kids (in the in-demand category) could be selective and picky. If they don't like their first family, they could shop around. At 3 years old, there's still plenty of families looking to adopt.

She is not just producing children for the sake of another family.
She is securing the life of her unborn child. The woman's body acts like a life support machine.

 

But you said if there was another family who wanted a child, her abortion could not be justified. Did you not? Precisely in these words:

Obviously she doesn't believe it is a "child."

A woman is not a machine for supporting life. Try to understand, she is not an object.

 

She is during pregnancy– a living life support machine. What do you think the uterus is there for?

That's right, she is a sentient being who is accountable for her own prior choices.

Obviously she is choosing to see the life within her through a fog of denial and a lens of willful ignorance.

 

I've known from some of your first posts that you believe women are nothing more than broodstock. Too bad reality is such a bitter pill for you

 

And I've known for some time that fetuses are just an inconvenience in the life of choicers, to simply be disposed of and discarded as the mother sees fit.

 

YUP!!!!!! There's that bitter pill

 

Whatever your opinion about this might be, at some point in the pregnancy we have to recognize that it's too late, that the child is already there, and it's no longer all just about preventing the child from coming into being.

Like when the ultrasound screen looks like this:

 

No, she is never a machine. Her uterus is hers to do with as she chooses.

She isn't accountable to you...

This from someone who thinks a woman is a machine and her abortion is not justifiable if someone else wants her to gestate and birth a baby for them.

 

A woman kind of is a machine. Her role and job is to give birth to the life she created.

 

Why not, you are given a blanket license to defend yourself against non-consented injuries yet you don't want a woman to have the same right.

So you are advocating that women should become brood mares for other people .. how nice.

 

Because thats her job as a good Samaritan (im using your terminology)

 

As the uterus belongs to the woman it is for what she wants it to be there for, you don't get to decide and force a woman to use her uterus in anyway she does not consent to.

Certainly a sentient being but in no way accountable for a non-consented intrusion and the injuries that causes.

That would be your failures not a womans.

- - - Updated - - -

and as we know you really know nothing.

 

What a complete load of BS, her role is what ever she wants it to be .. you don't get to assign roles to other people, where do you people get off on trying to force people to bend to your wants and desires.