Is it wrong to have sex for fun, knowing it might possibly lead to an abortion?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by SetiAlpha6, Feb 12, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,334
    Yes, a kidney is not a child. But a life is a life. So surely you would be willing to part with something you don't need to save a life? Perhaps even a child's life?

    I ask this question because I have spoken to many men who are against abortion - but get very queasy when asked if they would risk their _own_ health for someone else's life. It's a lot easier to be anti-abortion if you are never forced to carry a child to term.

    Personally I am also against abortion; it is usually the worst of several bad options. But it's not up to me. It's up to the person whose life is put at risk by carrying the child.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,226
    And there are also many feminists that are against abortion who have brought children to term as well.

    I am just saying, thinking that you already know that.

    They feel like feminism has been turned on it’s head, and that abortion is devestating to women, sometimes for the rest of their lives!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,138
    Potential human being

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,334
    ?? Of course. Why would that even be notable?
    Yep, that can happen. Just like drinking can be devastating to someone's life. But that decision is up to them, not you. Their life, their body, their decision.
     
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,138
    As a male midwife you get to observe the very best and the very worst of pregnancy from a different perspective than females

    Or perhaps not

    Honestly many females agreed with my views while others were, not exactly against, but puzzled why a male would choose midwifery

    Never had a rejection by a patient

    Personally I am also against abortion; it is usually the worst of several bad options

    So so true

    I could be wrong but I did get a sense of "if males had to alternate pregnancy with their partners there would be a large number of single child families and they would be those where the wife went first"

    If wife went first - no more

    Husband first - tries to talk wife into the second

    Just my thoughts

    I miss it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,046
    you make it sound soo clinical and depersonalised as if the mother has done nothing and has no emotion invested.

    why is that ?
    because you try and emotionally distance your religion from feminism ?
    gee i wonder.

    maybe thats also because your religion wants to take the childs birth away from the mother and own the entire process and label it all gods own doing.
    as if god was the one that was pregnant for 9 months and had to give birth.

    as if god did it all... and that voice of god being a man and no women allowed to be in power...

    check the date its 2019
    all you want to do is tell other women what they can and cant do with their own bodys and then claim to be the victim.
    while you victimize & emotionaly manipulate pregnant women and female children.
    thats all you are doing

    what a lovely person you are
    very caring
    soo considerate
    soo selfless

    uh-hu
     
  10. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,463
    I have 1 more justifiable reason:::

    The woman chooses to abort.!!!
     
  11. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,877
    That's the same as not consenting to bring to term.
     
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  12. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,877
    There's no particular reason why it should be. Maybe they need therapy. Maybe anti-choice advocates are the cause of unnecessary guilt.
     
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  13. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,463
    Ok... an i thank that the woman chooses to abort is the only reason needed... full stop.!!!
     
  14. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,046
    but since its a homophobic anti-sex chanting man wearing a dress waiving a bible about telling women what they need & want for their own bodys... its all perfectly moral and just.
    nothing like a bit of truth to be telling other peoples girls what they should and shouldn't be doing with their own bodys.

    its all soo fair and non discriminatory isnt it.
     
  15. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,226
    "Pro-choice" feminist Naomi Wolf, in a ground-breaking article in 1996, argued that the abortion-rights community should acknowledge the "fetus, in its full humanity" and that abortion causes "a real death."

    More recently, Kate Michelman, long-time president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, acknowledged that "technology has clearly helped to define how people think about a fetus as a full, breathing human being."

    Those who justify abortion by claiming that "no one knows when life begins" are not arguing science but rather their own brand of politics, philosophy, or even religion.

    Their argument is not about when life begins but about when, or whether, that life deserves legal acknowledgment and protection.

    Roe vs. Wade

    Most people perhaps do not really know what the Supreme Court decided on January 22, 1973. They assume that the Court made abortion legal in the first trimester of pregnancy only, and that it is subject to substantial limits and regulations today. But neither of these assumptions is true.

    The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade did not create a limited right to abortion but a virtually unlimited right to abortion throughout pregnancy.

    Here's how: The case involved an 1854 Texas law prohibiting abortion except "for the purpose of saving the life of the mother." The plaintiff, whose real name is Norma McCorvey, desired a purely elective abortion and filed suit claiming the Texas law deprived her of constitutional rights.

    Seven members of the Supreme Court agreed. While admitting that abortion is not in the text of the Constitution, they nevertheless ruled that a right to abortion was part of an implied "right to privacy" that the Court had fashioned in previous rulings regarding contraception regulations. ("Privacy" is not in the text of the Constitution either.) They also ruled that the word "person" in the Constitution did not include a fetus.

    The Court ruled that abortion must be permitted for any reason a woman chooses until the child becomes viable; after viability, an abortion must still be permitted if an abortion doctor deems the abortion necessary to protect a woman's "health," defined by the Court in another ruling issued the same day as "all factors--physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age--relevant to the well-being of the patient."

    In this way the Court created a right to abort a child at any time, even past the point of viability, for "emotional" reasons. Stated another way, the Supreme Court gave abortion doctors the power to override any abortion restriction merely by claiming that there are "emotional" reasons for the abortion.

    Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been critical of Roe, saying that it "ventured too far in the change it ordered and presented an incomplete justification for its action" and that the Roe decision was "not the way the courts generally work."

    No compassionate person wants a woman to suffer through the personal tragedy of abortion, whether legal or illegal.

    As Feminists for Life says, women deserve better than abortion. Establishing legal limits to the current "absolute right to abortion" will mean fewer abortions, and that is to the good of women, children, families, and society.

    In fact, hundreds of women have died from abortion since Roe v. Wade according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and this is likely only a fraction of the actual number in light of the fact that several states (including, significantly, California) have failed to report abortion data for many years and in light of the latitude given to doctors in reporting causes of death (e.g., "hemorrhage" rather than "induced abortion.")

    The experience of other countries shows that restricting abortion does not cause a rise in maternal deaths. Despite its tight abortion restrictions, Ireland has the lowest maternal mortality rate in the world, according to a study by several agencies at the United Nations.

    Malta also has substantial abortion limitations and yet has among the lowest maternal death rate world-wide, lower than the United States.

    Data compiled by Polish government agencies shows a marked decrease in maternal deaths once abortion was made illegal.

    The Supreme Court created a virtually unlimited right to abortion, a policy with which most Americans disagree. In fact, our country is not divided down the middle on abortion, most Americans are substantially against it.

    David Savage of the Los Angeles Times reported the truth about Roe, saying the Supreme Court created an "absolute right to abortion" under which "any abortion can be justified."

    This is why the recent New York laws were able to be created.
     
  16. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,046
    copy n pasting ...

    now your trying to distance yourself even further as you try and point at the young girls and women to make them feel bad and & the ones being subjected to judgement.
    when it is YOU who is creating the judgement.
    then you claim it is not you doing the judging and it is god being all judgemental ...

    thats psychopathic !
     
  17. Neddy Bate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,873
    Jan's postings are not so bad after all, by comparison.
     
    spidergoat likes this.
  18. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,463
    So you dont want the pregnant woman to have the choice... an woud you want the women who have abortions to be punished.???
     
  19. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,036
    And blah. The human brain is not fully developed till the age of twenty five.
     
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,046
  21. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,226
    WOW! You are judging me like crazy!!! NICE!!!
     
  22. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,226
    WOW!!! You are condemning and judging me, and you do not even know me!!! I will show my wife what you are saying, see what she thinks?
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
  23. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,226
    The way Americans self-identify has changed dramatically over the years. In the mid-1990s, "pro-life" was a distinct minority view.

    But in May 2009, for the first time, a significantly greater percentage of Americans self-identified as "pro-life" than "pro-choice."

    According to the polls, only a small minority of Americans agree with Roe:

    • 61% of Americans say abortion should be illegal after the fetal heartbeat has begun,which occurs in the first month of pregnancy.
    • 72% of Americans say abortion should be illegal after the first 3 months of pregnancy.
    • 86% of Americans say abortion should be illegal after the first 6 months of pregnancy.
    • Only 6% -17% of Americans (depending on how the question is asked and by whom) believe abortion should be legal at any time, in all circumstances.
    Another 2003 nationwide survey of women conducted by the Center for Gender Equality, run by former Planned Parenthood President Faye Wattleton, revealed that a slight majority of women (51%) believe abortion should either never be permitted or permitted only for rape, incest, or life endangerment.

    Rape/incest abortions account for only 1% of abortions every year according to the Guttmacher Institute, and life-saving abortions are similarly rare.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page