Pro Life Dogma Reveals Its Immorality

[Oleg Bach]

The hair colour ? What are you a lawyer...She had an affair with a dark haired man - under a ruse she maniplulated me out of the house hold and had this guy move into a small apartment within the home - years later it became known that she met this person where she was employed and it was learned that she crawled into his bed on occassion - The abortion took place exactly after this time once I had slowly re-instated myself back into the family - she was a silly woman with dis-inhibited judgement and from a family where loyality and honesty were strictly superfical...lets forget about this one ..

On to the body thing - you state that I can not bring children into the world - hate to break it to you but if it was not for the product of my body (sperm) that is just as relevant as ovum...my children would not exist in their present form ---

It takes two and both should have equal rights ---

Now lets go on to why this attitude against men having no reproductive rights....I can imagine how this propoganda was started - some crack pot feminist eccentric - propogated that the male was mindless and driven by his penis and the chemical pleasures produced by stimulation - that he was just a tap and a tank of fertilzer...That as he mounted the woman he was like some sort of bull mindless pig of an animal and it meant nothing to him - to what he ejaculated in. This is like calling a woman a bitch or the C word - a pair of legs that were nothing but supports for a walking vagina - not all men and woman are this base - but I suppose you are right - that most are - so I really have no more to say - all I know - Is I should have the same rights as a woman when it comes to life in general and the creation of more life - It is my body! ALSO.

[WIP]

The hair colour ? What are you a lawyer...She had an affair with a dark haired man - under a ruse she maniplulated me out of the house hold and had this guy move into a small apartment within the home - years later it became known that she met this person where she was employed and it was learned that she crawled into his bed on occassion - The abortion took place exactly after this time once I had slowly re-instated myself back into the family - she was a silly woman with dis-inhibited judgement and from a family where loyality and honesty were strictly superfical...lets forget about this one ..

Fine by me!

On to the body thing - you state that I can not bring children into the world - hate to break it to you but if it was not for the product of my body (sperm) that is just as relevant as ovum...my children would not exist in their present form ---

But once we get a woman pregnant, all we have to do is wait for it to come out of the oven! You don't have to go through morning sickness, waddle around watching your belly getting bigger and bigger as the due date approaches....it can be trying for a man who's wife is going through a difficult pregnancy, and worrying about what is going to happen in the delivery room....is she going to be okay....is the baby going to be allright......but the most a man can do is to provide support and encouragement, and try to make it easier for his wife.....the actual trials of pregnancy and birth are not something that a man experiences, so if I was a woman, I would consider it an insult if any man claimed his role was just as important, and he should have a say over whether she has an abortion or has to deliver his baby!

It takes two and both should have equal rights ---

Get yourself pregnant, deliver a baby, and then you can claim equal rights!

Now lets go on to why this attitude against men having no reproductive rights....I can imagine how this propoganda was started - some crack pot feminist eccentric - propogated that the male was mindless and driven by his penis and the chemical pleasures produced by stimulation - that he was just a tap and a tank of fertilzer...That as he mounted the woman he was like some sort of bull mindless pig of an animal and it meant nothing to him - to what he ejaculated in. This is like calling a woman a bitch or the C word - a pair of legs that were nothing but supports for a walking vagina - not all men and woman are this base - but I suppose you are right - that most are - so I really have no more to say - all I know - Is I should have the same rights as a woman when it comes to life in general and the creation of more life - It is my body! ALSO.

I can imagine that if you were really looking forward to having a child, you could not accept that your wife would have an abortion instead and that would likely be enough to end a marriage; nevertheless if it happened to me, I might have felt like ending my marriage if I felt my wife was having an abortion out of spite, but I still would not support a policy of forcing a woman to have the baby because the husband (and soon to be ex-husband) wanted a baby. This argument has been tested in court and lost because of that simple fact of whose body is hosting a developing baby......contributing sperm is not enough to override the desires of the woman unless we go back to the old ways when women had few, if any rights.

[sharkman]

I can help you with that one. Or rather, the nature did. Can your severed finger survive on its own, in isolation from your body? Can aborted human fetus? There you go.

So may be rather than worry about all the potential life that can be gotten from spoiled condoms, sheets, or even, in some near future, presumed to be dead cut fingernails, this huge instition could take a look around and perceive all the problems that actual, already in existence, life has on this planet? Just curious.

Actually, an aborted fetus can survive on its own at a certain stage, and a finger, assuming the person would want their finger back, can be saved, it happens all the time.

I am not worried about potential life with condoms (and what a strange stream of thought you had there), but only life in an actual womb.

I'd like to address your final thought, but I'm not sure what you were saying, I don't recognize the word 'instition' or what the rest of the sentence means.

[myata]

Actually, an aborted fetus can survive on its own at a certain stage,

Really? Are you making a scientific discovery here? Bother to back it with some evidence maybe?

and a finger, assuming the person would want their finger back, can be saved, it happens all the time.

Really? You cut your finger, put it away for a couple of months, and find it alive and well. You seem to be a fountain of knowledge unbeknownst to modern science... or maybe having probliems with interpretaion of simple notions, like "on its own"?

I am not worried about potential life with condoms (and what a strange stream of thought you had there), but only life in an actual womb.

And a good question to ask would be why? Why aren't you (and people like you) bothered about one kind of life, but not another? What criteria, logic, notions do they use in determining what kind of life would merit sanctity and protection, and which - wouldn't?

I'd like to address your final thought, but I'm not sure what you were saying, I don't recognize the word 'instition' or what the rest of the sentence means.

According to a recent study (check e.g. here: http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/01...sed_wdors.html), the ability to recognise misspelt words (for which I btw apologise - must be that sticking key on my laptop) is normal for a normally functioning brain. I sure it's nothing serious, no reason to be concerned.

[Molly]

Oleg, the day that men have a right to an equal say in abortion rights will arrive the day men risk death in childbirth.

'Til then, your opinions will be 'taken under advisement'.

[Oleg Bach]

Oleg, the day that men have a right to an equal say in abortion rights will arrive the day men risk death in childbirth.

'Til then, your opinions will be 'taken under advisement'.

I have no idea what under advisement means....and your wild and dramatic rhetorical "risk of death" is almost convincing - but I will not relent or have you absolve all males of the responsiblity of being part of the reporduction process that has been going on for thousands of years - I know for a fact that some men have more materal instincts than some woman...and if you want to toss death into the mix go head - but listen to this - It is a death for some men when their offspring is lost - I have a friend who's wife and child were killed by a drunk driver - I would say that the world as it is aborted not just his child but his mate...as for you - I don't want anything to do with abortion - I am a natural man - and I want no say in abortion - You and those like you can abort all you want - in fact the more you do the better - those without the genetic where with all - to survive should slowly de-breed themselves out of existance.....I will say it again - The feminist movement of our modern culture - has put male human beings into a seperate catagory and RACE- man hate is racism - and I smell hate here ------rarely are my senses wrong...abortion is not civilized - and nasty MEN control who aborts and most woman are dupes - who allow themselves to be treated like barn yard animals..

[sharkman]

Really? Are you making a scientific discovery here? Bother to back it with some evidence maybe?

Are you unaware of this?(I'd give you the link, but for some reason any graphics or buttons are showing up as "?" on this forum and I can't make a link this morning, but if you go to Wikipedia and type in fetus, you can find this info).

During the past several decades, neonatal care has improved with advances in medical science, and therefore the limit of viability has moved earlier.[39] As of 2006, the two youngest children to survive premature birth are thought to be James Elgin Gill (born on 20 May 1987 in Ottawa, Canada, at 21 weeks and 5 days gestational age),[40][41] and Amillia Taylor (born on 24 October 2006 in Miami, Florida, at 21 weeks and 6 days gestational age).[42][43] Both children were born just under 20 weeks from fertilization, or a few days past the midpoint of an average full-term pregnancy. Despite their premature births, both developed into healthy children.

Really? You cut your finger, put it away for a couple of months, and find it alive and well. You seem to be a fountain of knowledge unbeknownst to modern science... or maybe having probliems with interpretaion of simple notions, like "on its own"?

Again, you misunderstand. I'm talking about reattaching the finger immediately since a person who would want to keep it would not put it away for a couple of months. Even a 5 yr old child would die if you put it away for a couple of months, and you'd be charged with murder. The point is the finger example is a lousy one.

And a good question to ask would be why? Why aren't you (and people like you) bothered about one kind of life, but not another? What criteria, logic, notions do they use in determining what kind of life would merit sanctity and protection, and which - wouldn't?

Because it's not a fetus yet. I'm not bothered about the menstrual cycle either. You really don't seem interested in a serious discussion.

According to a recent study (check e.g. here: http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/01...sed_wdors.html), the ability to recognise misspelt words (for which I btw apologise - must be that sticking key on my laptop) is normal for a normally functioning brain. I sure it's nothing serious, no reason to be concerned.

You never bothered to explain what the meaning of your final thought was. Perhaps if you flesh out the thought before you type it, it would become more apparent.

Edited March 14, 2009 by sharkman

[WIP]

Oleg, the day that men have a right to an equal say in abortion rights will arrive the day men risk death in childbirth.

'Til then, your opinions will be 'taken under advisement'.

Nice! I was struggling yesterday to get that point across.

[WIP]

Are you unaware of this?(I'd give you the link, but for some reason any graphics or buttons are showing up as "?" on this forum and I can't make a link this morning, but if you go to Wikipedia and type in fetus, you can find this info).

During the past several decades, neonatal care has improved with advances in medical science, and therefore the limit of viability has moved earlier.[39] As of 2006, the two youngest children to survive premature birth are thought to be James Elgin Gill (born on 20 May 1987 in Ottawa, Canada, at 21 weeks and 5 days gestational age),[40][41] and Amillia Taylor (born on 24 October 2006 in Miami, Florida, at 21 weeks and 6 days gestational age).[42][43] Both children were born just under 20 weeks from fertilization, or a few days past the midpoint of an average full-term pregnancy. Despite their premature births, both developed into healthy children.

Speaking of people who aren't interested in discussion.....I am nevertheless going to hold your feet to the fire when you present one-sided information. This is from the hospital

factsheet referenced in your quote from the Wikipedia article:

Amillia was breathing without assistance at birth and even made several attempts to cry.

Due to this level of fetal development, doctors believed that she was closer to 23 weeks

in gestational age when she was born. Because Amillia was conceived by in vitro

fertilization, it was possible to pinpoint her exact gestational age. It was only after

reviewing the mother's in vitro fertilization records, that doctors learned that Amillia was

in fact a "miracle baby."

• A full-term pregnancy is 37-40 weeks. The American Association of Pediatrics indicates

that babies born at less than 23 weeks of age and 400 grams in weight are not considered

viable. The mortality rate for infants born at 23 weeks is 70 percent, according to the

National Institutes of Health. There is no known baby born at less than 23 weeks in

gestational age that has ever survived. About 500,000 infants are born prematurely each

year.

• "It may be that we need to reconsider our standard for viability in light of Amillia's case.

Over the years, the technology that we have available to save these premature babies has

improved dramatically. Today, we can save babies that would have never survived 10

years ago," said William Smalling, M.D., neonatologist at Baptist Children's Hospital.

That first point, that doctors at the hospital estimated that her "gestational" age as at 23 weeks highlights a point that is rarely mentioned on this topic: fetal development takes place at

different rates of development; so a 21 week old fetus may be equivalent in development to an average 23 week old fetus. And it's possible that a 25 or 26 week old fetus may still not be viable outside the womb. And that's why you can't set fixed cutoff lines.

And this is beside the point anyway, since a fetus at this stage is already into the 3rd trimester of development, making abortion much more difficult legally and more risky physically to obtain. This issue of whether a fetus can survive outside the womb has no bearing on the abortion debate regarding the majority of abortions that are performed at clinics, and occur at much earlier periods of gestation. So, this whole point here is a red herring!

Also noted in the article, are the high odds against survival of a fetus that is this premature; as noted above, less than 30% will survive, and it's almost a given that there will be complications and/or defects do deal with. It's not exactly like everything is going to be okay afterward.

[myata]

OhMeGod.... before venturing into lofty domains, maybe we should spend a little time on our simple regular everyday concepts. Such as "on its own"; unassisted; separate?

Or, indeed, just saying a word makes everything nice and clear? Like, it's a yada, so it deserves special rights.. Why? Because it's a yada. See, nice and clear. Whatever had to be proved.

But wait a sec. With advances of modern science, virtually any cell from your body can be kept alive for a long time (note: that does not signify that it can survive on it's own; i.e. unassisted). Even now, or if not, then in a very near future, virtually any cell from your body could be used to create a new life. New individual, who, when born, would have exactly the same body, abilities and intellect as everybody else. So think, and answer, what exactly makes cells in a fetus, that is ready to unassisted life about as much as a severed finger (btw: unlike surviving fetuses, or fingers, examples of human children surviving in the wild, outside of human society, are known in history), special and deserving special rights? If a fetus can have special rights, separate and independent from the rights of the mother, shouldn't her finger (and by extension, any part of body) have them too? Shouldn't one be required, and failing to, made, to keep their body healthy and happy? Including consuming adequate amounts of appropriate nutrients, and not consuming inappropriate ones? We can go so very far, looking after each other's bodies!

I think this debate signifies very clearly the root cause of problems the church faces in modern times. It still tries to lead by decree. From top, telling them lowly and downcast, what they should do for their salvation. All the while, everybody has already moved on.

[sharkman]

Myata, your statement about the church leading by decree may have merit, but you have not supported it with any evidence. Since you can't see the difference between a severed finger and a fetus, I will leave you to your opinions.

[Oleg Bach]

Nice! I was struggling yesterday to get that point across.

Must have hurt as much a child birth. Breach birth of a cone head perhaps? Molly is a great defender of the - not so much right of the woman but the dignity of the woman. My approach was about individual human dignity and I as a male, am a bit tired of 30 years of being marginalized in the reporductional area.... Hate being looked at as some brute with a penis and a sperm making factory on legs...why do they assume that mothers and fathers are different? Some mothers are fathers and some fathers are mothers at times. It's just the whole thought of abortion that bugs me - its...so --- so ----...how will I say - a messy bloody affair.

I watched as my silly sister, when she was a young and upcoming excecutive type ...a very nice man got her pregnant...she had already had about 3 abortions - It would have been the stero-typical mothers dream to have her be with this guy...He was a good natured doctor and buisnessman...she caught him with a few drinks in him at a party kissing another woman - she dashed to New York and had an abortion - Just to punish him. To hurt him,.to show that she had some power - He was disappointed...so there are many reasons other than health for aborting - spite - revenge - illicit affairs by married woman as I mentioned earlier.

The mother is here first - the baby arrives though her second..If the child who to me is fully human is going to kill the mother in child birth - the mother has the right to execute that child to save her self - she comes first! She was not born to die so others can live...nor was I - or you.