Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Roe V. Wade violates the equal protection clause since it doesn't extend its protections to men as well as women. As someone said previously, if the chick gets knocked up, it's her choice one way or the other, but if she decides to keep the child, the man doesn't get the same ability to opt out.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Since god gave us a choice, according to you're logic that would justify abortion.

They also generally think it is murder, saying life begins at conception.

I am THE man.
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee15 ... 171424.jpg

On Abortion:

My wife is pregnant now. I saw a heart beat at 7 weeks when the baby was only 7mm large. It started taking the shape of a human soon after and thats when I could hear the heart beat. She had her sonogram two days ago - I saw my son moving inside her; flexing his hands, hiccuping, stretching, rolling over, opening his mouth, etc. My son is very much alive and he, and others like him, should be afforded the opportunity of life like the rest of us.

Many people will argue that a baby isn't protected until it's been birthed because, at this point, the baby couldn't survive without the mother. I don't like this argument for the following reason: A six-month old child couldn't survive, either. We charge a mother with murder if she neglects her born baby yet we turn a blind eye when she terminates the child growing inside her? At which point do you define a child as living and by what standards? For me, it's soon after conception when the zygote is implanted into the endometrium. I guess that's why the morning after pill and birth control pills are fine with me since they prevent the implanting.

Growing up an atheist I believed a pregnancy should be a womans choice but, sometime in college, I realized most pregnancies are the result of voluntary sexual actions. Whether or not the mother meant to get pregnant is, in my eyes, irrelevant because by the time she realizes she's pregnant, she has a child growing. I hate seeing women terminate their children by choice or as some form of birth control; adult actions come with adult consequences - live with it.

Weena said it best...


On Free-will (A non-christian's understanding of it):

I think you're abusing the wording of pro-choice; if I choose to get a hamburger at dinner instead of soup does that mean I'm pro-choice in terms of abortion? They're apples and oranges.

Anyways, free will applies to the period between birth and death since your birth and death are predetermined. Since you have free will you can do almost whatever you want. To enter the kingdom of Heaven you must abide by certain guidelines; commandments, accept Jesus as Lord and savior, etc. If you abort a child you're killing a life so you're violating one of the commandments. So, back to my first analogy, God isn't pro-choice on abortion since it violates his commandments.

[/quote]

This.

But, back to my aforementioned thing about morons and people, who have no business procreating, having kids......keep abortion legal.

Only way to keep future criminals off the streets for sure.

As for me personally though, no way.

Also, I like the laws that require mothers to look at an ultrasound before they go through with an abortion. Simply because I think people like to not think of a fetus as human at all.



Sort of a rationalization thing people like to do so they don't feel like murderers. I find the fact that pro-choice people get so up in arms about these laws to be hilarious.

If the fetus isn't a human, if it's not a child, if it is simply a "thing" then it should be no problem for a mother to see the "thing" with a heartbeat etc and give the thumbs down sign, then the doctor can go to sucking the "things" brains out.

The fact that pro-choice people don't want the ultrasound to happen shows that they don't want people to think about what they are actually doing.

As a father I am all for what Eturnal said. You make your bed you lie in it. You don't want the child fine, put it up for adoption. There are thousands of couples who cannot have children that would love to give that deserving life a good home.

To those who say it is the woman's decision, I have always/will always disagree that she should get the ultimate choice. Yes she gives up her life for 10 months but if I help make that baby it is just as much my choice as hers. And if I got my wife pregnant and she wanted to abort it regardless of my decision I would probably lose my mind.

If I could carry the child I would. There is nothing better in life than seeing your baby open it's eyes for the first time, the first cry the first laugh, smile, cough, sneeze etc. (You get the point)

Life is the ultimate gift, not all cherish it and for those people I pity them for what they have destroyed and have missed/will miss out on.

85 Mage Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 LOLKnight Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 Shaman Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......

I would think its because they dont want said woman with 10 kids living in a slum to get an abortion, see the heartbeat, hormones kick in and make her "love" it and not give it up.

It also could be cruel to force someone with no choice but to abort to have to go through such a thing.

I am THE man.
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee15 ... 171424.jpg

True. I'd hope they would make amendments for cases of incest/rape.

As for 10 kids in a slum...I can see that too.

I guess I'm just thinking of the selfish people who get abortions because they are stupid and can't keep their pants on. Basically, those who use it as a form of birth control (which people do). They deserve to see the fetus before the kill it because of their own ego-centric thinking.

She could always put her children up for adoption because, like stated earlier, plenty of people would love to care for that child if they could. Killing it is selfish.

The vast majprity of children in state care never get adopted and end up repeating the cycle. Why bring a life to this world tp subject it to hardship and poverty?

after baby shoots out of you, hormones kick in and you cant give it up.

I am THE man.
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee15 ... 171424.jpg

that is one of the very basic premises of most religions, including christianity. it is the theme of the story of the garden of eden. adam and eve were given a choice by god himself (he put the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden and then told them not to eat the fruit).

the religious point being that god does not want slaves, he wants followers. doing the right thing because it's the only possible thing is meaningless, but choosing to do the right thing is not.

so yes, that would make god pro-choice, but one choice would be fundamentally wrong and damning.



ps - i'm pro-choice and an agnostic atheist myself, but was raised southern baptist and had to study scriptures a lot when i was growing up.

Akina: bitch I will stab you in the face

Bad reasoning. We all face hardships and our economic standing isn't set in stone. A child born to rich parents could face more hard times than one born to a mother of the ghetto. Also, economic standing doesn't determine the love of a mother or the success of a child. Regardless, that child should be given the chance to forge their own future and endure their own hardships. Who are you [the mother] to take that from them? Would a judge side with you on the logic, "I killed my two-year-old son because the world is a hard place and I'm poor."


Wrong. You can still give up your child to someone else after you birth them.

i would also add after glancing over some of the thread that a lot of abortions (especially late term abortions) are not a girl who got pregnant and doesn't want to carry the child, but are medically necessary for the mother or a situation where the child is not going to live or is already pretty much dead.

sure, there is a moral argument to be had over voluntary, unnecessary abortions, but one of the most horrific things that has happened in that debate is that all nuance is quickly lost.

if you completely ban late term abortions, for example, in many cases you will not be saving the child but will in fact be killing the mother.

Akina: bitch I will stab you in the face

its much harder, didnt mean its 100% no go, just not as likely.

I am THE man.
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee15 ... 171424.jpg

While that case happens, and I think abortion should be legal for it. The fact remains that this only occurs in around 1% of abortion cases. I've been digging around trying to find numbers, I'm seeing anything from as low as .04% of abortions, but nothing more than 1%. The point is, the "save mother's life" coupled with the "incest/rape" argument is a huge pro-choice talking point. But the fact remains that well over 90% of all abortions are not the result of either of these things, which is why they should be exceptions, but not used as a reason that all abortions are A-OK.

http://www.spuc.org.uk/students/abortion/mothers

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/04/the-abortion-issue/

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009 ... can-help-0

In any case, we can all agree that the trick here is to reduce unwanted pregnancies. That can only be done through education and available contraceptives.

One thing, condoms are too damn expensive. At this CVS I go to, they are locked behind a glass door because people kept stealing them (because they are so damn expensive).

I am very torn on this issue, as i've said...but I see these stupid guys and girls, basically taking a "mulligan" with the life of a child...and I think, how can this be right? Religion aside, how can a good person think it's perfectly fine? Then you add in atrocities like partial birth abortions (where they crush the baby's head) and it just makes me very torn. I would do everything in my power to make sure the girl I knocked up kept that baby...it's a shame that in the end, I would be truly powerless.