Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Officials: Obama to reverse abortion policy


  • Please log in to reply
166 replies to this topic

#31 Go To Girl

Go To Girl

    Huddle Mom

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 07:40 AM

Ah - so being pregnant and giving birth has nothing to do with a woman's body. Gotcha.

#32 N1kkadeemuz

N1kkadeemuz

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 07:45 AM

Ah - so being pregnant and giving birth has nothing to do with a woman's body. Gotcha.


No that's not what i'm saying, a baby is not temporary organ you grow for 9 months that you or any other woman once conceived should have the right to destroy.

Okay!:thumbsup:

Edited by N1kkadeemuz, 24 January 2009 - 07:51 AM.


#33 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,704 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:11 AM

I am with GotoGirl on this of course - and the funding release is not "for abortions" it is for organizations that do not necessarily prohibit them as a topic of discussion or course of action. The idea of people who can't wait to stream into poor countries and suck 7 month old fetuses out of the womb for fun and profit is laughable.

I understand that there will be people who will never see the difference between a collection of cells and a human being and I appreciate that. But the gist is, pro-choice measures in no way take from your personal views on the subject and how it relates to your life, while anti-choice does have that effect on people who have come to a different conclusion. Conservatives want less government involvement in their lives, but don't seem to have a problem with it imposing their views on others when it suits them.

#34 N1kkadeemuz

N1kkadeemuz

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:18 AM

I am with GotoGirl on this of course - and the funding release is not "for abortions" it is for organizations that do not necessarily prohibit them as a topic of discussion or course of action. The idea of people who can't wait to stream into poor countries and suck 7 month old fetuses out of the womb for fun and profit is laughable.

I understand that there will be people who will never see the difference between a collection of cells and a human being and I appreciate that. But the gist is, pro-choice measures in no way take from your personal views on the subject and how it relates to your life, while anti-choice does have that effect on people who have come to a different conclusion. Conservatives want less government involvement in their lives, but don't seem to have a problem with it imposing their views on others when it suits them.


Are you saying that because to me once a chick gets knocked up she's with child, while to you let's say what anywhere from 8 weeks on it becomes one, or do you subscribe to first breathology. I appreciate you appreciating me on my opinion, but to me if we as people know what that little thing in her belly is and will become a baby how all of a sudden do we demean and call it a clump of cells. If it becomes a kid, it's a damn kid.

#35 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 19,701 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:21 AM

No one wants abortions to happen. This is why Obama is trying to extend a hand across the isle to find a way to prevent more unwanted pregnancies from happening. I think we can all get behind that, no?

#36 N1kkadeemuz

N1kkadeemuz

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:27 AM

No one wants abortions to happen. This is why Obama is trying to extend a hand across the isle to find a way to prevent more unwanted pregnancies from happening. I think we can all get behind that, no?


I kind of jumped in head first on this one, when I hear abortion there's something in my brain that cuts on or off, (idk which), I guess that i'm so far against it anything that looks, talks, or walks like pro-abortion (pro-choice) pisses me off.

If Obama can end convinience abortions, he might actually make me smile.

psst..i'm conservative

By the way this is the first time i've talked to you Zod, hello.

#37 Go To Girl

Go To Girl

    Huddle Mom

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:27 AM

Apparently not if it involves even just discussing abortion as an option

#38 N1kkadeemuz

N1kkadeemuz

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:33 AM

Apparently not if it involves even just discussing abortion as an option


I got in right before your post so I didn't get a chance to read it, but having abortions freely because little Jane got popped at 13 isn't an excuse. That's where I stand, if a doctor tells you that your baby will seriously jeporadize your health during you preg/delivery then you should be able to consider it, however much I still don't like it, but that's between you and your other half or God if you follow that route.

I respect a woman's right to her body, but in the end like in previous posts, a baby day one born is also a baby at day one womb.

#39 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,704 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:34 AM

Are you saying that because to me once a chick gets knocked up she's with child, while to you let's say what anywhere from 8 weeks on it becomes one, or do you subscribe to first breathology. I appreciate you appreciating me on my opinion, but to me if we as people know what that little thing in her belly is and will become a baby how all of a sudden do we demean and call it a clump of cells. If it becomes a kid, it's a damn kid.


Every sperm I have has the potential to become a kid as well. Every egg a woman produces has that potential. Should we feel a moral obligation to try and use every single one for procreation? See? There is no "black and white" moment. There is a time when a fetus should be considered a separate life, but everyone on teh planet can have a different opinion about it. That's just the way it is. The Bible itself assigns less importance to the life of a fetus, and claims that life does not begin until breathing is started. I am a bit more conservative on that myself.

I don't know how you can demean a clump of cells. I mean, it is literally a clump of cells. A majority of fertilized eggs never attach to the uterus anyways, so if it makes you feel better about it, God himself is probably the biggest "abortionist" out there today.


And I am not trying to belittle you or anyone else. I am just pointing out the simple fact that this is only a judgement call, and one that one group has no right forcing on another. The law as defined in Roe vs. Wade is a good compromise for all parties, and is why it is, after all this time, still the law of the land.

#40 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • MFCEO
  • 19,701 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:36 AM

Every sperm I have has the potential to become a kid as well. Every egg a woman produces has that potential. Should we feel a moral obligation to try and use every single one for procreation?



I know I do.

This is why I have 32 jars of "Mayo" in my fridge.

#41 VaginalWartPuss

VaginalWartPuss

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 08:54 AM

the reaction of EVERY liberal after EVERY abotions is the same. see proof.



#42 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 15,640 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 24 January 2009 - 09:52 AM

Still dumbfounded by the people who don't understand the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion.


Me too. But the pro-choice people in this thread don't seem to realize that this is a pro-abortion move, not a pro-choice move.

You know, we've all had discussions before in here and almost all huddlers can agree, no matter what their opinion on abortion is, that abortion as a method of birth control is wrong.

And yet, this is exactly what many of these organizations offer and are encouraging.

Is it really choice if you have 4 starving kids and you got knocked up again?

Pro-choice people like to say that they're anti-abortion, but when I see you falling in line in support of something like this, I find it hard to believe.

And for the spokesperson for the population control organization to have the nerve to say that this move will reduce abortions tells me exactly how this move was motivated. Who has the real power in this country?

Fund education and contraception methods, not abortions. (If you're going to fund anything at all.)



I consider myself to be moderately pro-life. I believe that after about 3 weeks from conception, you have a separate life growing inside of you with differing DNA and differing growth rate from the mother, and that this entitles this life to human rights. I am aware that this is debatable, but by 7 weeks I believe that it becomes no longer debatable.

#43 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,144 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 10:40 AM

I consider myself to be moderately pro-life. I believe that after about 3 weeks from conception, you have a separate life growing inside of you with differing DNA and differing growth rate from the mother, and that this entitles this life to human rights. I am aware that this is debatable, but by 7 weeks I believe that it becomes no longer debatable.


so at 7 weeks you favor the government taking control of the woman's body, or can they just give the 7 week old embryo up for adoption and have it removed from her body?

#44 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 15,640 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 24 January 2009 - 10:45 AM

so at 7 weeks you favor the government taking control of the woman's body, or can they just give the 7 week old embryo up for adoption and have it removed from her body?


If only it were as simple as you are making it out to be.

You're a very black and white thinker.

Ah, the old "can it survive outside of the womb" argument. As if ability to survive on one's own is a precursor to have rights.

I suppose you feel the same about disabled people? If they can't survive on their own, they don't have a right to live! Kick them out on the streets and let them fend for themselves!

#45 Panthro

Panthro

    Bunned

  • Moderators
  • 22,250 posts

Posted 24 January 2009 - 10:47 AM

I suppose you feel the same about disabled people? If they can't survive on their own, they don't have a right to live! Kick them out on the streets and let them fend for themselves!


Hmmmmmm

I'd better beef up security at the twirlie hat and balloon animal factory


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.