jefferiah

"It my right to do this" This is one thing "Its my right that you condone it and pay for it." This is a whole other thing.

Amazing isn't that some people actually think their "beliefs" trump other peoples actual rights?--Catch Me Our belief is not trumping what you see as a right---abortion is legal. Your belief that everyone should pay for it when not all cases are essential (and its already paid for in cases where a doctor does consider it medically essential) is trumping our right to self determine whether we want to fund it. "when of course that is what they want you to mean because of their poorly educated belief patterns"---Catch Me Is there no end to your snobbery and lack of respect? You claim to be such an "esoteric" person, there are "red necks" who have never even seen the word that are more esoteric than you.

Are you drunk? This doesn't make any sense. If women are putting them up for adoption I am guessing they for the most part did not want abortions right. So------the "unwanted kids" will still be there.

I notice from myself and other guys as well, that when walking through a shopping mall our heads turn a lot more than those of females.

Mustapha Mond can exile me to Greenland.

Given the conditions in the original post, I would not want to live there.

Thats pretty elaborate.

Well to be honest, it is true BC chick. But thats our own fault.

I was in a laughing mood today.

The point is if these unwanted children are for the most part not children of people who even wanted abortions then the only way to use this as a support for abortion, would be as population control in which you are telling women to go get abortions. Thats why we said your point was bad. If these unwanted children are mostly the children of women who dont want abortions but choose to give them up for adoption, they will still be there, unless you start setting abortion quotas in which a woman is being told what to do with her body. Otherwise your unwanted children argument is useless.

I watched the show tonight I didnt find it offensive to conservatives at all. I dont think it was a great show, but it didnt insult me in anyway. That bit about where the girl comes out in a belly shirt and the old Muslim guy says you look like a "Protestant" and she goes "You mean prostitute." And he says "No Protestant". That was kind of funny. I dont think its fair to say that it makes jokes about Conservative Christians and makes none about Muslims. From what I saw the show was making more of a funny view of the Islamic family, the same way that Jewish people make fun of their own culture in TV shows or like "My Big Fat Greek Wedding". That bit about the Protestant/Prostitute------thats actually making fun of the guy who said it. Like Archie Bunker.

I disagree with their arguments above. I think the examples given are foolish and poor. You are correct to question them. I do not think you are a bigot either. Mad Max..............Thank You!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Once the doctor actually determines she is pregnant, it is between the women and her medical practitioner. Anything else is NOYB. I am not stopping the woman from having an abortion. I am saying that in the charter there is allowance for publically funded abortion when it is determined necessary. If a woman wants to have an abortion, I believe it is wrong, but you are right (NOMB) I can't stop her. I am not trying to. Why cant I say NOYB if I dont support it.

Oh, I know it is absolutely mind boggling, and all it is is uneducated and irrational blathering. You are quite correct, when you say that these children will be born to teen moms, single moms and women who are not ready to emotionally and financially to support a child and in your commentary where they will end up. Here is just 1 study on poverty and crime rates, and google shows over a million hits about it, not that they will ever actually read it and inform themselves, as they want to hold their false doctrine close to their hearts even when proven wrong over and over again. Just a quick google on adoption stats in Canada showed that there are approximately 134,000 children in foster care in Canada waiting for adoption and that there is another 22k or so in orphanages also waiting. Another google search showed me that it costs 40k per year to keep a child in foster care. Now don't get me wrong, I am certainly not advocating abortions as a cost savings to the taxpayer. I am merely pointing out the sheer nonsense, and hypocrisy of those who want to wage a war against a woman’s right to self determine based upon tax savings, and saying that all children are wanted and/or there is no way to prove how many born children are unwanted. Likening any talk of associated costs to caring for an unwanted child to Nazi philosophy is beyond reprehensible, as they were the ones who were trying to frame the debate around cost savings to the tax payer in the first place. A woman's right to self determine and to have equal access to universal health care are unquestionable rights. Those who would seek to erode individual and human rights, based upon personal beliefs and mythology must be disregarded from having any input, just have they have been historically in regards to the same said reluctance to abolish slavery, and to stop denoting woman and non-whites as not being human or should not have the right to vote. I must point out Catch Me that once again you are using the wrong statistic for your argument. How many of those poor kids had parents who wanted to abort them? A statistic about poor kids and crime has nothing to do with it? I asked for a statistic about kids who were unwanted. Even adoption cases wouldnt do because most of those would not be ones where the mother wanted to abort. You are basing an argument on kids who are already alive, not knowing whether abortion was even considered by the mother. I was never suggesting that abortion was too costly, I was suggesting that its immoral to me and I want nothing to do with it. What do you mean individual rights and freedoms. Your whole premise is against individual rights and freedoms and in support of socialism. Abortion is legal. So if you think it is a right there is no one stopping you from having one. I have an individual right and freedom to be a conscientious objector. That is not infringing on anyones rights to have an abortion.

How many of these cases were from women who wanted abortions but could not afford them? How many of this projected 100, 000 a year will be from women who want abortions but cant afford them. If you think this number is too many, and with the availability of abortion already, I think it is safe to say that relatively few of them would be from cases where an abortion was opted for but there was no access. Then are you suggesting we should abort after the fact? Or that we should start telling women who dont even opt for abortion that they must abort?

The foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of man. I decline to accpet your view of things. I have my own, thank you.

ok, i get it... cool! but there is more to it ya know, i havent just 'broke free.' i AM free, my thoughts are very wild and speratic, as i said: possibilities are endless: hence my choice for that freedom, the bible is a trap to very few, but it seems to pull in good feeling making hopes and dreames in good men and women, and falsifying morals: like the 'cut off hand, stoning children, and men are dominint' bull crap. all these things in reality are wrong, that comes from me, not a book, and i think the west and east are too proud to think, "what if we are wrong" and then the best of them all, "whats the meaning of all this?" the answers in science, if it confuses, then take the time to gain understanding of it, it is indeed past what you may have mystisized or fantisized, and in the fact that most is not know, science is the only clearifier and light, besides philosiphy. images of the mind, feelings in the soul, even your own sight cannot be trusted! so sit... look... and see what is around you, once you can define it, it seems to work together in beauty and grace, not in the name of an unproven faith, history is what we knew, what we were, and no proof of a god is present, nor is their of the 7-fold path, nirvana, or anything not proven by humankind, does that mean they are not there? no, it just means do not become zelous and mind-set, its unhealthy. if you want knoledge of origin: look everywhere none stop! be smart by gaining it! wither by religion, science, philosiphy, you name the knoledge and it has to do with origin! but never look down a narrow door way and say you see past closed doors: no one can, and the will to downfall is from any pettiness that is, in essence, condesended beyond reason. atheism is not the way to go nither, i picked it because of the 'blank' it gave me on stubbroness, it was the most stong in tolerance and change. search everywhere always be sceptical, take everything into acount, observe the match and drop between bad and good morals, search for tangible evidence, deduct which is most true based on images, tools, findings, theories, facts, observations, crack ravings, and human psyci. prove it to be 100% possitive. ominipresents is impossible: about 65% positive evolution is so: 85% positive defined religion comes from the past: 100% possitive science has found knoledge pertaining to origin: 95% positive Religion has had almost the same theory of origin then before: 99% positive religion has found proof of origin: 1% possitive (adding to above) but as histrical origin: 99% possitive science is truth: 95% possitive religion is truth: 50% possitive existance did not start here, so us humans want no dooms day, and would like to see in fun and good time: how everything came to exist. i do all this every day, if you think "i know what it is" all the time, eventually you stop learning. and you'll get depressed and seem outcast (though that never changes) as well as begin to get more and more stubbern. but i broke the cycle! all i'm saying is be smart about it, most religous peolpe know nothing of science: are you one of them? if so that is ignorance, or just lazy, i can admit i am lazy most of the time. but please look into scientific origin, the big bang, as well as the red-blue shift pics taken showing you how they figured this out. (by deducting and tracking the expansion of galaxies and stars from a central location using rotational observations and ionized trails picked up on ultra-violite and also by tetermining the temp in spots of space to see long dead solar systems that may shed light on systems that we cannot see now.) i beg you do this, and would love to see you develope your own understanding of science. and please seperate religion and science if it is hard to combind them, it seems hard for me. this is all i can give you... now what should i do? by your wisdoms? I never once said men were dominant. I never once said people should have their hands cut off.

ok, i get it... cool! but there is more to it ya know, i havent just 'broke free.' i AM free, my thoughts are very wild and speratic, as i said: possibilities are endless: hence my choice for that freedom, the bible is a trap to very few, but it seems to pull in good feeling making hopes and dreames in good men and women, and falsifying morals: like the 'cut off hand, stoning children, and men are dominint' bull crap. all these things in reality are wrong, that comes from me, not a book, and i think the west and east are too proud to think, "what if we are wrong" and then the best of them all, "whats the meaning of all this?" the answers in science, if it confuses, then take the time to gain understanding of it, it is indeed past what you may have mystisized or fantisized, and in the fact that most is not know, science is the only clearifier and light, besides philosiphy. images of the mind, feelings in the soul, even your own sight cannot be trusted! so sit... look... and see what is around you, once you can define it, it seems to work together in beauty and grace, not in the name of an unproven faith, history is what we knew, what we were, and no proof of a god is present, nor is their of the 7-fold path, nirvana, or anything not proven by humankind, does that mean they are not there? no, it just means do not become zelous and mind-set, its unhealthy. if you want knoledge of origin: look everywhere none stop! be smart by gaining it! wither by religion, science, philosiphy, you name the knoledge and it has to do with origin! but never look down a narrow door way and say you see past closed doors: no one can, and the will to downfall is from any pettiness that is, in essence, condesended beyond reason. atheism is not the way to go nither, i picked it because of the 'blank' it gave me on stubbroness, it was the most stong in tolerance and change. search everywhere always be sceptical, take everything into acount, observe the match and drop between bad and good morals, search for tangible evidence, deduct which is most true based on images, tools, findings, theories, facts, observations, crack ravings, and human psyci. prove it to be 100% possitive. ominipresents is impossible: about 65% positive evolution is so: 85% positive defined religion comes from the past: 100% possitive science has found knoledge pertaining to origin: 95% positive Religion has had almost the same theory of origin then before: 99% positive religion has found proof of origin: 1% possitive (adding to above) but as histrical origin: 99% possitive science is truth: 95% possitive religion is truth: 50% possitive existance did not start here, so us humans want no dooms day, and would like to see in fun and good time: how everything came to exist. i do all this every day, if you think "i know what it is" all the time, eventually you stop learning. and you'll get depressed and seem outcast (though that never changes) as well as begin to get more and more stubbern. but i broke the cycle! all i'm saying is be smart about it, most religous peolpe know nothing of science: are you one of them? if so that is ignorance, or just lazy, i can admit i am lazy most of the time. but please look into scientific origin, the big bang, as well as the red-blue shift pics taken showing you how they figured this out. (by deducting and tracking the expansion of galaxies and stars from a central location using rotational observations and ionized trails picked up on ultra-violite and also by tetermining the temp in spots of space to see long dead solar systems that may shed light on systems that we cannot see now.) i beg you do this, and would love to see you develope your own understanding of science. and please seperate religion and science if it is hard to combind them, it seems hard for me. this is all i can give you... now what should i do? by your wisdoms? I never once said men were dominant. I never once said people should have their hands cut off.

Dark Angel I ask that you forgive me for the cult assertion. You do understand that like everyone else I sometimes get a little heated when I am in debate. Also I want you to forgive me for my inconsiderate behaviour in not congratulating you on your surgery. I hope everything went well.

If a woman reads my words and decides they are present a reasonable argument, then is that a problem? Is that totalitarian?

I feel I must post again, since Margrace you made a great point. A very very admirable point which shows you are an understanding person. I agree with it totally. Radical views can stem from bad experience, and there is no way that I could say I would definitely be immune to such views of the "radical" feminists had I been a woman who may have undergone something that they went through. I know that most women do not even identify with these radical views or would ever say something like "a man can benefit from being unjustly accused of rape." However perhaps some of these women led very tortured lives which led them to such hatred of men, because it was men who did it and men who did nothing about it. But I still must say that some of these views are unfair, while I can fully sympathize with these women. A woman who was raped for instance sometimes becomes distrustful of the whole male gender. While I can sympathize with this, am I not also to sympathize with an innocent man in the event that a tortured woman sought to treat him unfairly. Once again, I remind you that I am fully aware that most women are not like that. If I may ask your opinion....not on the personal matter of subsidizing all abortion whether you think I am a crazy unfair person for having this position? Does my opinion warrant the term mysogynist in your opinion? The fact that I am vocal about my moral concern over abortion, does this mean I am forcing women what to do with their bodies? Is there not a difference between voicing a concern, an opinion and forcing a woman to do something. My opinion cannot stop women from having abortions. I cannot stop the government from funding them. So is the mere fact that I have an opinion totalitarian. Or is it more totalitarian to say that I have no right to have this opinion?

That is sad Margrace. But I must also point out that the second situation occured yesterday. Do you think that if those girls reported it yesterday they would have the same reaction they got in the 1940s? And of course I acknowledge that "radical" feminism probably has its roots in women who may have undergone some trauma. I certainly understand that, but even so I must resist their movement.

"Kids raised in poor households and especially unwanted children are very likely to end up involved in crime and in jail." Saturn This combined with Catch Me's sentiments about giving fatties necessary health care. Hmmmmmm.......I am a bigot for saying a disagree with funding all abortion. But yet these ideas are not far from those of the Nazis.

Ah...you are putting words in my mouth. I never said abortions were too costly. I said people object to funding them, and that they have a good argument to defend that right, since as I pointed out the vast majority of abortions cannot be said to be necessary due to a medical condition, and probably a minute amount of the the already small amount of women who die from pregnancy wanted an abortion in the first place. The issue of cost is Catch Me's concern since she feels it so unfair that she has to pay for a "fatty" to have necessary surgery. I feel it is unfair and an insult to people who are pro-life to have the government say you must fund all abortion (even those which are unneccessary). Now teen moms can abort remember. But if the situation is not necessary then I say they should fund it. And also they can put the child up for adoption. Now I find it interesing that you would say unwanted children will very likely end up in crime or in jail. I dont think you are basing this on anything at all except your own prideful attempt to grasp at straws in this argument. For instance show me a statistic that shows unwanted kids are likely to end up in jail. Any statistic you show is likely to be from a questionable source since I highly doubt there is any criteria out there to judge what is an unwanted kid. Show me a statistic that says how many kids are unwanted.

"And you have no way to say they are not medical emergencies, you have no way to know what one will do when faced with the prospect of an unwanted prgnacy, it could be suicide, dumping babies in garbage cans, self inflicted abortions, on top of any physical condition. Just who made you think you know what goes on in the mind of one facing pregnacy that is not wanted, mental issues are medical problems in case you never realized it." Catch Me You have no way to say they are medical emergencies. Before one can get free chemotherapy for cancer it must be determined that one actually has Cancer. I do not know what goes on in the mind of a pregnant woman. If she does not want her pregnanacy she has a legal right to go to a private clinic. If I want to get my teeth capped of my own assessment on the necessity of it, I cant get public funding for it. And be reasonable again what percentage of women are out there committing suicide because they got pregnant, dumping babies in garbage cans, etc. You make this sound as if women everywhere are forced to do this. People who have gambling debts, and other problems often face the temptation of suicide. I know many people who suffer from the harsh realities of life, and feel suicidal. I live in rural New Brunswick. If I have a heart attack today I must be transported to a hospital which is a 45 minute drive. Chances are that hospital will send me on to Moncton which is another hour and a half---or in some cases Fredericton or St. John which is even farther. This is a reality of life. This is not the governments fault. I dont go around stamping my feet saying that the government should build fully equipped hospitals closer to me, calling people bigots. Now most pregnancies cannot be compared to a heart attack. Most pregnancies are not a health condition. To say that it can cause depression or fear or distress and that I dont understand it well-----alot of things cause this. You don't understand what other people go through. You can't even objectively say that a woman goes through more mental anguish than a man.