Jump to content

Save the unborn babies


Recommended Posts

Feminism describes itself as being the champion of women's rights, which to many if not all feminists, means abortion on demand.  Those who believe in the sanctity of life are rejected by the majority of parliamentarians.  The PM has even gone so far as to ban any pro life person from becoming a Liberal candidate or MP.  To him there is no place in our Canadian parliament for anyone who opposes abortion. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

To him there is no place in our Canadian parliament for anyone who opposes abortion. 

No. To him there is no place for Liberal candidates who oppose abortion. There may be all sorts of place for the opposers of abortion in parliament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there are a certain number of Conservatives who are pro life.  I don't know the number.  I think the NDP is universally pro abortion or pro choice as they prefer to be called.  But with Trudeau's policy, almost every Liberal MP must be pro abortion.  Trudeau demonstrates his fanatical pro abortion views by making it a requirement for any Liberal member to be pro abortion.  There is no tolerance for an opposing view on this issue in Trudeau's worldview.  I am not sure where is he is coming from on this or why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Trudeau demonstrates his fanatical pro abortion views by making it a requirement for any Liberal member to be pro abortion. 

Pro choice is not pro abortion, that is just something you pro enslavement people try to pretend.

Yes, one of the principal policies of the Liberal party is to be pro choice. Every party has several principal policies and if you don't agree with them then don't join or support that party. That policy was developed at and voted on in a party convention, and is something the leader of the party just like any other member must adopt. This is about the party and not the leader, what part of democracy is hard to understand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"pro enslavement" is a new term I have never heard.  Trying to defend human life is not enslavement.  People need to show as much concern for the life of the unborn child as they do for women's rights. 

 

Thank you for clarifying it is a party policy.  Yes I understand that part of democracy.

It is a Canadian tragedy that government and courts endorse it.  All human life is sacred.

The Squid,

"I don't get to decide for everyone else".    We live in a parliamentary democracy where laws are enacted and courts rule on such issues, and we as citizens have a right to give our input to the decision-making process.  So we do in fact have a say on the issue.  As far as I am concerned, it is a responsibility for me to speak out for the unborn child who cannot speak for themselves.  If you asked the unborn child whether he or she wishes to be aborted, what do you think the answer would be?

 

Edited by blackbird
Reply to The Squid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

So voluntarily putting a penis in your vagina, letting said penis ejaculate in your vagina, and voluntarily not using proper birth control is now "enslavement"? Lol.

 

Women have been getting abortions for as long as they've been getting pregnant, laws against it will not stop that.   The main reason 'abortion' is frowned upon is because it reduces the control men have traditionally had over women.  

And for the most part, men are quite happy when women abort the babies the men don't want to be responsible for, whether the pregnancy resulted from a moment of carnal irresponsiblity or because birth control failed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dialamah,   there are several assumptions you make. First you say "laws against it will not stop that".  You gave no evidence to support that.  If abortion is illegal, it then becomes far more difficult to obtain. More importantly, it sends a message that society does not condone it and discourages it.  So the number of abortions, which is currently around 100,000 per year I believe in Canada, may drop drastically.  This could save tens of thousands of lives of unborn babies.

"it reduces the control men have traditionally had over women".  You lost me on that one.  It might be the other way around.  A man could be held responsible for child maintenance if he doesn't want to marry the woman.  If they are already married, there is no issue of control that I can see.  Having children is a natural function of human nature.  The idea that it is somehow contrary to human nature is incorrect.  Perhaps feminists have somehow been led to believe it is an undesirable burden, when in fact, for many couples, it is a happy event.

When you say "men are quite happy when women abort the babies", I would say that might be true in some cases but for many it is just part of life.  Men should take the assume the responsibility.  It is just as much theirs as the woman's.  If the woman doesn't want the baby, she should consider giving it up for adoption.  There are lots of couples looking for a newborn baby.  She may even feel better for doing that in the long run.  Society should give women all the support they need in such situations.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, we need to truly define parenthood in the western world. if a woman can consent to uinprotected sex, she is giving the man access to her reporuduction. This whole myth of women having full rights to decide whether or not to keep a child is bullshit. yes, abortion should still be an option here, but saying it's completely up to the woman is horseshit, That zygote is a unique mixture of both of their dna and the male donor should have as much say as the female in an consensual, safe and legal joining.

personally, I've always thought that freedom to reproduce was one of the great paradoxes of western civilization.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

You gave no evidence to support that.  If abortion is illegal, it then becomes far more difficult to obtain.  So the number of abortions, which is currently around 100,000 per year I believe in Canada, may drop drastically. 

 

Women have been getting abortions since pregnancy was invented.   We've used potions, spells, tools, deliberate physical injury, back alley butchers, all our savings or all our boyfriend's savings to rid ourselves of unwanted pregnancies.   Even knowing the risk of going to a secret abortion provider, because abortion is against the law, women will do that.  This is because society generally demands from women that they do not get pregnant -- unless a man wills it --- but if they do get pregnant against a man's desires, then they should be solely responsible for that baby, and also vilified for daring to get pregnant without permission.    

When abortion is outlawed, more women die and no more babies are saved.   

https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2009/11/facts-and-consequences-legality-incidence-and-safety-abortion-worldwide

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/women-in-countries-where-abortion-is-illegal-just-as-likely-to-have-one-as-countries-where-it-is-a7025671.html

For comprehensive information on abortion, read this site thoroughly:  https://www.guttmacher.org

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BillyBeaver said:

Lol, we need to truly define parenthood in the western world. if a woman can consent to uinprotected sex, she is giving the man access to her reporuduction. This whole myth of women having full rights to decide whether or not to keep a child is bullshit. yes, abortion should still be an option here, but saying it's completely up to the woman is horseshit, That zygote is a unique mixture of both of their dna and the male donor should have as much say as the female in an consensual, safe and legal joining.

personally, I've always thought that freedom to reproduce was one of the great paradoxes of western civilization.

 

Only if men can get pregnant too.  Then the couple could decide which one of them could go through with it. If only one person can get pregnant, that person gets to decide whether or not they are going to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bcsapper said:

Only if men can get pregnant too.  Then the couple could decide which one of them could go through with it. If only one person can get pregnant, that person gets to decide whether or not they are going to.  

 

My mother-in-law always said that if men had every second child, no family would have more than three children.   :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

Women have been getting abortions since pregnancy was invented.   We've used potions, spells, tools, deliberate physical injury, back alley butchers, all our savings or all our boyfriend's savings to rid ourselves of unwanted pregnancies.   Even knowing the risk of going to a secret abortion provider, because abortion is against the law, women will do that.  This is because society generally demands from women that they do not get pregnant -- unless a man wills it --- but if they do get pregnant against a man's desires, then they should be solely responsible for that baby, and also vilified for daring to get pregnant without permission.    

When abortion is outlawed, more women die and no more babies are saved.   

https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2009/11/facts-and-consequences-legality-incidence-and-safety-abortion-worldwide

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/women-in-countries-where-abortion-is-illegal-just-as-likely-to-have-one-as-countries-where-it-is-a7025671.html

For comprehensive information on abortion, read this site thoroughly:  https://www.guttmacher.org

 

 

I'd like to know the spells they used. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the act of consensual unprotected sex during a woman's window of opportunity should be recognized as consent to bear a child unless explicitly stated that the sex is recreational or protection is used. Just because you have all the womb doesn't mean you have all the control over my genetic property. Abortion as birth control is wasteful considering all the preventative measures we have. I think single men would be more conscious of who they were impregnating if they knew that they would be liable as fathers if unprotected sex was had. Same for women. We need to rebuild the family unit. Technology has us all isolated and in a state of anomie. Fuck tax breaks for single moms.

Edited by BillyBeaver
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BillyBeaver said:

No, the act of consensual unprotected sex during a woman's window of opportunity should be recognized as consent to bear a child unless explicitly stated that the sex is recreational or protection is used. Just because you have all the womb doesn't mean you have all the control over my genetic property. Abortion as birth control is wasteful considering all the preventative measures we have. I think single men would be more conscious of who they were impregnating if they knew that they would be liable as fathers if unprotected sex was had. Same for women. We need to rebuild the family unit. Technology has us all isolated and in a state of anomie.

 

Don't have sex with women, and you need not worry about your genetic property being used in a way you disapprove.   Or, if you really want to have sex without giving up your genetic property, use a condom - even if she swears she's on birth control - and take your property home with you.   This would be called "Taking responsibility for yourself" and also almost certainly means you won't be having either unwanted babies or having your babies aborted against your will.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dialamah,   "more women die and no more babies are saved".    That doesn't make much sense.   I would disagree that "no more babies are saved".  If it is illegal, abortion is not going to be nearly as frequent as it is now.  More resources could be put into supporting the pregnant mother and helping to adopt the baby out if that is what the woman wishes.  Thousands of unborn baby's lives could be saved if the emphasis and education was opposed to abortion.  Society has gone in a totally wrong direction.

If you look at Statistics Canada website, the caucasian race is actually in decline in some western countries.  I think to survive a race requires a minimum of 1.9 children per family to survive and not decline toward extinction.  In British Columbia I believe the reproduction rate for caucasians is below 1.9.  This is not mentioned on mainstream media because of politically correct considerations, but caucasians are in decline in some places.  Could this be partly because of high abortion rates?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BillyBeaver,   you make some good points.  "we need to rebuild the family unit".   Yes the family unit is under attack from many segments of society.   Oddly some non-caucasian races are reproducing at far greater rates than caucasians.  Caucasians are self-destructing.  This is not mentioned in the media.  It might be construed as racist, but it is not.  The decline and extinction is a legitimate concern.  Abortion may be closely linked to this phenomena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dia Exactly my point, if a women wanted to protect herself from pregnancy, she can take appropriate measures as well. Once the union is made and a zygote is produced, I submit that that unique entity has a right to grow as the joint act of coitus is designed to produce it. If not, then parents should have the right to jointly choose to terminate their children at any time. It's time to decide whether children are the genetic property of their parents or whether they are individual entities with individual rights. Our current system wants the best of both but the consequences of neither. having the womb-holder with 50% of the spawn's genetic property having 100% of the reproductive rights is unjust and shows a distinct gender bias based off of unchangeable biology

@blackbird it's not just the proliferation of abortion, it's a feminist agenda that's been co-opted by our enemies into reducing our reproduction and making us reliant on immigration. Europeans are assuredly under attack as imams have called for them to outbreed us and rape non-muslim women.

I think the islamic world never recovered from the mongols personally.

Edited by BillyBeaver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@blackbird  Clearly we are not on the same page and are not likely to be.  I don't care of the "caucasian" race declines because as far as I'm concerned we all "human" regardless of the color of our skin.   We  have much bigger problems if we hope to keep humans as a species, never mind what color those humans happen to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that natural selection isn't as prevalent as it was even as recently as 100 years ago due to medical advancements and abundance of food. Pakistanis are still marrying their first cousins and north africans/middle east have the lowest average IQs in the world. I don't want a bunch of knuckle draggers anchoring our social safety nets. I want healthy intelligent innovators with fresh ideas and perspectives and something to contribute to the prosperity of Canada.

Edited by BillyBeaver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dialamah,  "I don't care of the "caucasian' race declines"     I agree we are all human regardless of the colour of our skin.  But most races take pride in their own race.  Most people feel that.  I mention it because I think most people everything is going along as normal and caucasians will continue to exist as we know it.  But this does not appear to be the case.  There are countries in Europe, the UK being possibly one, and in Canada, B.C. being one, where the caucasian reproduction rate is declining or insufficent to maintain over time. Whether it is 50 years 75 or 100 years, there could be a big drop, especially as a percentage of population.  That is likely the case because of a number of factors.  But abortion could be a serious reason and it is something which is controllable.

BillyBeaver,  "it's time to decide whether children are the genetic property of their parents or whether they are individual entities with individual rights"

I would submit they (unborn babies) are individual people with the same rights as anybody else.  However, we would have to convince an awful lot of people of that I think.  Most people seem to be of the opinion that the unborn baby is not human and therefore has no rights.  This is be due to a supreme court ruling back around 1980 that declared unborn babies are fetus and not baby or human.  How society can accept a group of nine judges who don't likely know any more about it than the average man or woman on the street I don't understand.  That's the problem with our judicial system.  Too much power in the hands of a group of judges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...