Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Well, I completely agree with you on that.



Yes, I will call a child that is growing within a woman who doesn't want it a parasite, because, to me that is what it is. Having to carry, forced to give nutrients, being sick, getting mood swings and much more is terrible if forced upon, no matter how sugar coated it is. "Miracle of life" and crap like that can't make up for those 9 months.



I agree with you again. While I will defend the right of woman not being forced to carry a child/parasite, (my words, their view of the situation), I won't defend those woman that constantly get pregnant and constantly get abortions, those are either stupid people making the same mistakes, or people who can't afford contraceptives and sex is what they do for fun, apart from maybe drugs, which is where their money is going.

What bothers me is that the people who advocate being against abortions are the people posting pictures of dead babies, blaming a lack of moral and such, yet, don't do squat about child abuse in general, I never see signs of abused and neglected children coming from them. I prefer taking care of the living children first.

Fun fact, death due to abuse in the united states is still on the rise, up to 5 children per day.

http://www.childhelp.org/pages/statistics

**edits - typos

ps: I am no child saving crusader, I just believe more stock should be put in helping the living children over the could be alive ones.

This is one of those "losing the language" moments. You can call the fetus/child whatever you want, of course, but as The Bard said, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," and what's problematic about your selection of terms is that it's scientifically inaccurate to describe offspring as parasitic and the only reason to use the term is to gloss over the ugly truth of what abortion actually entails by characterizing the fetus/child as a disease. It's not so great a leap from "parasite growing inside her that needs to be exterminated" to "beating the little parasites because they're sucking the life out of me." The same problematic language you use to excuse one reprehensible thing can just as easily be applied to another, even the one you're using as the basis of your either/or comparison regarding why we shouldn't really be concerned about abortion (or at least less concerned about abortion than the basis of your comparison).

Sometimes the world doesn't need a good man, sometimes what it really needs a bastard. Good men, like most of you, are going to recognize the value of a necessary evil for the greater good, but you're going to gloss over what it really is because deep-down your morality isn't going to let you accept that you're letting something atrocious happen even if leads to a positive outcome. I don't have that problem in this case. I know that abortion is a necessary evil, and I don't mind the evil and feel no need to sugar-coat what we are collectively endorsing. It saves me having to perform acts of conversational contortion, like calling human offspring "parasites," to support something that I know deep-down is absolutely vile. It's why, instead of addressing what is really wrong with abortion, especially in this case, you instead attempt to find something you hope is more despicable to focus upon instead so you can spare yourself the tough questions and then paint those who don't come along for the ride as terrible people and zealots. It's probably why we've never had a serious discussion among ourselves regarding child abuse/neglect on these forums outside of a thread about killing babies.

Your not the only one speaking in euphemisms, bro:

"We have consistently said that this is a horrifying and outrageous case, that Gosnell ran a criminal enterprise, not a health care facility, and that he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law."--Eric Ferrero, Planned Parenthood Federation of America

"What Gosnell was doing, at least as described by the grand jury report, was illegal from top to bottom under current state and federal law, so the fact that he was able to continue operating and particularly preying on poor women and women who felt they had no other options is indicative of what happens when you drive abortion underground and to back alley providers. We think the Gosnell case is exactly why we need to keep abortion safe and legal and accessible to all people. This is why we have to keep abortion practices available as medical procedures, so that they are safe and legal between a woman and her doctor."--Ilyse Hogue, NARAL Pro-Choice America

"Unfortunately, you do have rogue providers that prey on the most vulnerable of women, and regardless of a woman's income level they deserve access to high quality care. The fact that he wasn't providing care later and wasn't ensuring fetal demise and not operating under any established standards of care and outside of the law is the problem in this case, and not indicative of the high quality care available across the country."--Vicki Saporta, National Abortion Federation

The only one of those people from these pro-abortion groups who even came close to objecting to Gosnell's having routinely performed abortions beyond the 24-week legal limit was the NARAL spokesperson. None of them had anything to say about killing the babies after birth, the act that represents seven of the eight counts of murder with which Gosnell was being charged. This is not surprising given that back in March a Planned Parenthood lobbyist in FL said that "We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician," in response to a question about whether or not a child born due to a botched abortion should be terminated on the operating table:



I also found it amusing that all these spokespeople were piling on Gosnell as if he was some rogue operator and these patients weren't being referred to him by abortion providers who were playing the rules----but just bending them a smidge and ignoring all moral, ethical, and legal implications by sending women who were beyond the legally allowed point in their pregnancy for an abortion to an unqualified sawbones. What is really funny about setting Gosnell up as an example of what would happen if abortion were illegal is that he was already that example pre-Roe v. Wade. In 1972 he performed abortions on 15 women using an experimental "super coil procedure" which ended with 9 of the 15 women having serious complications. The guy had been butchering women since before I was born. It was so terrible that it came to be known as "The Mother's Day Massacre."

The euphemisms and sugar-coating phraseology hasn't done anything but make those who support abortion look like a bunch of monsters. You know, the sort of ghouls that would refer to a child as a "parasite?" It's making a necessary evil seem less necessary and more evil, and in the long run I don't think that's a good thing.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

It's not our place to decide what a woman does with her vagina.

No one is saying its, but it's a funny objection when you consider how many things some of you think we should be telling people they have to do or can't do regardless what kind of junk they have between their legs.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Then what is this thread about. o.o

...I know you can read, don't make me come over there.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

So people are arguing for the sake of arguing. Gotcha.

There is so much wrong with this thread, I can't even wrap my head around it...

*off to pick up my clump of cells/parasites from school*

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

Callysta of Reverence

Hence this thread.


Because I believe in a woman's right to have an abortion if she does not want, nor can she care for, the child if it is taken to term.
Because I believe that forcing poor unwed mothers to give birth to children they cannot care for is a larger problem for the system
Because I believe it's hypocritical for republicans to hate on any sort of welfare or aid for the poor, but they also want the poor to carry all their kids to term (and not have access to contraceptives)


Because of all this, I'm a monster?

That's what you're trying to imply. You're trying to imply that anyone who is "for abortion" is supportive of the horrors committed by this doctor.

Again, I cannot stress this enough:

the existence of that clinic is further proof that abortion needs to remain legal and we should increase funding for contraceptives (birth control / condoms / etc.) not decrease it

no one here is against abortion azelma, just late term and partial/post birth abortions. which are illegal and should remain so.

Question for you though: At what point should people be forced to pay for their own irresponsibility?

40 weeks is a looooong time. How someone doesn't have their mind made up after a few months boggles my mind.

Once that baby becomes legitimately able to survive outside of the womb (usually around 32ish weeks) you should go ahead and give birth and give it a shot on its own with an adoptive family. Partial birth abortion is almost identical to labor anyway. The difference being allowing the baby a chance with someone else.

That being said, I'm pro choice. Let people choose what is best for them.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

Callysta of Reverence

I agree, partial birth abortion is disgusting. I think it's not a "my mind isn't made up" - but it could be an issue of funds, circumstances, and any other number of things. I wonder if some of these women had been given access earlier, and had their options more clearly laid out...if they still would have waited as long.

Considering states that make women listen to the heart beat and look at it before any abortion...it's like they want to make it more agonizing. It's pretty cruel, really.



There's always this sentiment that giving a baby up for adoption is the magical solution. In reality, adoption in this country is bogged down with inefficiencies, hypocrisies, and other various issues.

I know for a fact the waiting list for an adoption is absurd, and it's not for a lack of adoptable babies. I know adoption is also INCREDIBLY expensive (for reasons I don't understand). I know that if a child is not adopted as a baby, then its chances of ever finding a home drop dramatically (far fewer people want young children). I know the foster care system in this country is broken. I know horrible things happen to many kids who were given up for adoption.

Ever wonder why adopting foreign born kids has become so common place? Yes, part is because Brad Pitt did it. But the other part is that it's in many ways EASIER than adopting an American child (depending on the country of course).

So yes, adoption is all well and good...but it's not the silver bullet many might claim it to be.




So, in your mind, is being forced to have the child making them "pay for their own irresponsibility"? Seems pretty bad to use a child to punish the mother. Surely not a good way to have a stable child growing up healthy... if it's being resented by its mother the whole time. That's one way to increase the number of criminals and drags on society. Force kids to grow up in broken homes to punish their mothers for being too loose. Or are you implying something else? I think late, partial birth abortions are abhorrent and disgusting. They should remain illegal. However, we need to make abortions more readily available to people earlier in term...and make contraceptives more available to prevent abortions being needed at all.


If you're saying "oh well people shouldn't be having sex then if they can't handle the baby or wrap it up" -- I agree with you. But here's the thing. We can't stop it. Society can't stop it. Abstinence education does NOT work. If you are poor and living in the hood, odds are you'll lose your virginity at a younger age than average. Odds are you won't be educated about birth control and safe sex, nor have the funds to afford such things (condoms are actually pretty expensive, birth control is absurd).

So what's the solution? Make it much easier to obtain. Let's reduce abortions by increasing funding for birth control. Not crying foul when we want to include it as part of insurance policies.

No, and in fact I think I said the reasons there's any sort of muddled thinking on this issue is precisely because most of you are good people. You know you're allowing...or maybe encouraging...something bad to happen because if it doesn't something much worse will, and rather than accept that some of you are twisting reality in your own mind to make it more acceptable. Children are "parasites" in the womb, or children are a "punishment." Instead of accepting that our necessary evil is both necessary and evil most of society, including some of you, have attempted to focus solely on the "necessary" part and gloss over the "evil" part. Focusing solely on the benefits, or the necessary, and wishing away the evil by redefining the negative consequences as something good and what were once considered positive things as something terrible. Referring to children as a disease that is meant to punish the mother isn't any different than Jerry Falwell saying AIDS was a punishment for homosexuals back in the 80s.



I didn't imply it, I said it directly, and it's not so much that you are or aren't supportive of what he did as that you, and the rest of us, are responsible for it. Our inability to regard abortion for what it is and talk about it honestly because we're afraid it will disappear if we do, or because we don't want to offend people who are farther along one side of the divide or the other, led to this. This guy was ignored by everyone that should have been keeping tabs on him because abortion is highly politicized and no one wanted to put their ass on the line by raising a stink. The problem is made all the more evident by how little attention these events have received. If 8 people had been killed at a gun show you wouldn't hear a word about anything else for months, but this guy can kill a woman and a few babies and it's somehow not worthy of coverage...and when it is covered it's spun as a "this is why we need legal abortion" story?

I call shenanigans.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Goddammit Jubber. I came in here expecting to do my usual /snorepolitics(repeating) thing, maybe have something useful to say. I get in here and there is vaginas. Just all over the fucking place. Haven't we hashed the majority of this crap out in group therapy already? Mind you I had skim at page 2, but vaginas everywhere. Stahp.
Ps <3. But stop.