Save the unborn babies

[PIK]

14 hours ago, dialamah said:

Hey, I just read very similar stuff on that alt-right Radix Journal site!  Imagine - you and they saying almost exactly the same kind of thing!

I'm gobsmacked!

 

The old lefty trick . Call someone a racist or bigot if the disagree with you. 

[-TSS-]

What really puzzles me about this topic is how is it even possible in this day and age of contraceptives to have so many unwanted pregnancies that abortions are needed. For example in Finland, a country of 5.5 million people, the annual birth-rate is about 50,000 people and the annual abortion-rate is about 10,000 abortions, which means that 1/6 pregnancies are terminated.

That is probably one of the best ratios in the world in the positive sense as in many eastern-European countries even half or more pregnancies are terminated. Probably 1/6-rate is the best one can hope for.

However, unless we are talking about very young teenagers who may not understand consequences following actions I just can't understand how people have not noticed yet that contraceptives were invented in the 60's.

[blackbird]

36 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Which is exactly why we need to take the supremacy of God out of the Constitution. To stop fanatical Christians and Muslims (and others) from dictating the laws of society based on scriptures written thousands of years ago by men.

 

Hmmm,   Depends what you believe doesn't it.   I haven't checked lately, but I think God is mentioned in the Constitution.  But if you take him out of it, what does that change?  We also have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, which formally gives people fundamental freedoms that allows everyone to believe what they want.  Nothing fanatical about believing in the sanctity of human life.  I believe our centuries old laws are based on Judeo-christian teachings.  Laws exist to protect everyone from bad things, correct?  Without that, what would we have?  Don't forget non-christians, other religions, agnostics, and atheists  also have beliefs.  Whose beliefs would you accept to determine what laws and rights we should have?  Who should decide?

[Guest]

Just now, blackbird said:

Hmmm,   Depends what you believe doesn't it.   I haven't checked lately, but I think God is mentioned in the Constitution.  But if you take him out of it, what does that change?  We also have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, which formally gives people fundamental freedoms that allows everyone to believe what they want.  Nothing fanatical about believing in the sanctity of human life.  I believe our centuries old laws are based on Judeo-christian teachings.  Laws exist to protect everyone from bad things, correct?  Without that, what would we have?  Don't forget non-christians, other religions, agnostics, and atheists  also have beliefs.  Whose beliefs would you accept to determine what laws and rights we should have?  Who should decide?

It doesn't matter, as long there is no supernatural element to it whatsoever.

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Nobody said abortions are mandatory.  Paying for them through taxes for the public health care system is mandatory for all taxpayers.

It wouldn't bother me if people who could afford it had to pay for their own.  Just so long as they are available to everyone, and those who can't afford one can get one free.

Edited March 9, 2017 by bcsapper

[?Impact]

21 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

What really puzzles me about this topic is how is it even possible in this day and age of contraceptives to have so many unwanted pregnancies that abortions are needed.

Contraceptives are not all equal in effectiveness, and some of the ones you might think are effective don't turn out to be in actual use. Generally the most effective ones also have the biggest side effects (other than pregnancy). So far I believe none approaches abstention (99.999998%), but even that one failed - once.

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I believe our centuries old laws are based on Judeo-christian teachings.

 Maybe your beliefs in the supernatural are no better than your beliefs in history, for example the jury system we so cherish is based on the Islamic lafif.

Edited March 9, 2017 by ?Impact

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

It doesn't matter, as long there is no supernatural element to it whatsoever.

Why do you want to exclude the supernatural from it.  It usually boils down to that debate doesn't it.  I would encourage you to continue to look deeply into all points of view, not just the one-sided view.  Man has believed in God or gods since the beginning, thousands of years.  Almost everything happening in the world is somehow related to the question of God.  The Bible assumes his existence.  It tells us in Genesis that God created everything out of nothing.  He created us and is in complete control of the universe.  What happens is only because he permits it for his greater purposes.  I admit I have great struggles personally in life and don't have the answers to many things. 

[Guest]

Just now, blackbird said:

Why do you want to exclude the supernatural from it.  It usually boils down to that debate doesn't it.  I would encourage you to continue to look deeply into all points of view, not just the one-sided view.  Man has believed in God or gods since the beginning, thousands of years.  Almost everything happening in the world is somehow related to the question of God.  The Bible assumes his existence.  It tells us in Genesis that God created everything out of nothing.  He created us and is in complete control of the universe.  What happens is only because he permits it for his greater purposes.  I admit I have great struggles personally in life and don't have the answers to many things. 

I would be okay with Odin in charge, but that's about it.

Maybe Jupiter.

[blackbird]

4 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Contraceptives are not all equal in effectiveness, and some of the ones you might think are effective don't turn out to be in actual use. Generally the most effective ones also have the biggest side effects (other than pregnancy). So far I believe none approaches abstention (99.999998%), but even that one failed - once.

 Maybe your beliefs in the supernatural are no better than your beliefs in history, for example the jury system we so cherish is based on the Islamic lafif.

What is the Islamic Iafif?    I am not a follower of Islam.  What I've heard of it, I would disagree with.  But the Islamic world has contributed things to mankind.  Apparently they invented Algebra.  Did they invent the decimal system?

[?Impact]

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What is the Islamic Iafif?    I am not a follower of Islam.  What I've heard of it, I would disagree with.

It is a group of 12 of your peers that is charged with rendering a verdict to settle a case between different people. They must reach unanimous agreement, and their decision is binding upon the judge. Certainly there are some differences in how a judge charges the jury and the role of the bailiff in the proceedings, but it is essentially the same as our modern [English] jury system.

There are a lot of cultural practices in Muslim majority countries that I disagree with. The question however is that Islam, or is that a corruption of Islam. There is certainly a lot of disagreement within the Muslim world what constitutes Islam, but there is some agreement as well. Much better to discuss these in the other threads, so as not to stray too far the intent of this one.

[blackbird]

The belief in the sanctity of life, including the sanctity of life of unborn babies, was unquestioned in days gone by I believe.  What happened to change all that?  We pride ourselves on becoming a developed nation compared with the rest of the world.  We think we have come a long way in the pursuit of knowledge, technologies, medical advances, transportation systems, etc.  But on the fundamental issue of the meaning of life and respect for life, we seem to have gone downhill.  It's difficult to figure this out and the reasons why.  One thing I notice is our political leaders always tell us of the greatness of Canada because of it's diversity and multiculturalism.  Trudeau advances this idea with a lot of energy.  But have all these various cultures with their different religious backgrounds weakened the historic judeo-christian roots that Canada was built on?  Or it is the slow rise of humanism in the last 150 years and since Darwin's theory of evolution that is the major contributing factor? Does this have something to do with the lower view of the value of human life?  I tend to believe it is the rise of secular humanism in the world that is the major factor.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The belief in the sanctity of life, including the sanctity of life of unborn babies, was unquestioned in days gone by I believe.  What happened to change all that? 

Science?  Overpopulation?  An understanding that an individual's rights trump anyone else's religious beliefs?

Generally speaking, progress.

[?Impact]

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The belief in the sanctity of life, including the sanctity of life of unborn babies, was unquestioned in days gone by I believe.

Selective memory? 

[Rue]

38 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

What really puzzles me about this topic is how is it even possible in this day and age of contraceptives to have so many unwanted pregnancies that abortions are needed. For example in Finland, a country of 5.5 million people, the annual birth-rate is about 50,000 people and the annual abortion-rate is about 10,000 abortions, which means that 1/6 pregnancies are terminated.

That is probably one of the best ratios in the world in the positive sense as in many eastern-European countries even half or more pregnancies are terminated. Probably 1/6-rate is the best one can hope for.

However, unless we are talking about very young teenagers who may not understand consequences following actions I just can't understand how people have not noticed yet that contraceptives were invented in the 60's.

Bang on TSS-the issue is a suprising ignorance as to sexual behaviour in North America. You will find in North America TSS the attitude about sexuality, and for that matter teaching about sexuality and sexual behaviour is quite different than in Scandinavia, Finland, Western Europe and we have a long way to go. We still are quite stupid and puroe when it comes to dealing with sexuality. eaching adolescents and adults about sexual procreation and behaviour is an up-hill battle. Many parents want to pull their children from sex education classes and anything to do with sexual education.  Then we have prevalent attitudes of adolescents very much influenced by a culture that teaches them sex is a casual exercise and young girls should put out. Its also hard not to miss the racist image the American black man so tied up in being defined by how sexually aggressive he is with women who are portrayed as butt vibrating penis parking lots. Its deeply rooted in this North American sub-conscious that still defines black men as slaves whose worth was  based on how many  babies they could procreate, thus the number of women they had sex with. Its a hard racist image to break. In North America all relationships, let alone intimate ones have been likened and defined the way we do material values, as disposable, i.e., instant feel good exercises that are thrown away with no thought when the feel good they offer is used up..

We go through relationships like we do material commodities, we treat them as disposable quick fixes and then out they go as trash..

Spiritually developed societies tend to deal with sexuality in a more stable and sedate manner as anthropology shows. However societies where religions teach sex is dirty and needs to be repressed and in our case in the West also mixes it with being one and the same as disposable material values  sends out  the prevalent attitude that leads to unwanted pregnancy. Pregnancy like sexually transmitted diseases is a direct result of ignorance, of people living in the feel good, self indulging moment.

If you work with teenagers and have seen how and what goes on in Family Court here , the level of sexual ignorance would shock you. The peer group pressure to have sex. and for young women now as young as 9 to have sex is there. Sky rocketing rates of syphilis and gonorrhea in the throat have arisen now in not just high school but elementary school because children are being told oral sex doesn't create pregnancies.

Teaching young girls their value is not defined by who they allow to have sex with them is not something believe it or not parents spend much time with. Neither for that matter do parents even if they are at home talk to their children because most like their children are on the cell phone avoiding conversation Sexual ignorance is tied deeply to sexual violence and sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted children, yes but its also tied to lack of parental role models talking honestly, candoidly and non judgementally about sexuality. It is still prevalent that men assume women should take the pill and its the woman's individual responsibility not to get pregnant  and once pregnant to be subordinate to what others say she should do with her body.

For me when I hear people call all abortions  murder or refer to embryos as unborn babies, I don't spend too much time on what they say.  The fact they call an embryo or a fetus  a baby shows they lack a basic level of awareness as to the stages of development in the womb.

Now  I say this to you, if my daughters are raped and impregnated how dare anyone presume to tell them they must come to term. Women make decisions each day. Some have been raped by their fathers, brothers, other relatives, etc. Some have serious illnesses that may mean they risk giving birth to a child with severe defects or for that matter threaten their own lives. Those are not easy issues to deal with and judgemental by-standards with archaic and puritanical rigid morality systems annoy the snot out of me.

We have technology today that can reveal when an embryo is dead or when its being born without vital organs  or such severe deformities it should be terminated very early before it develops.  If the very God these religious fanatics quote did not want us to have such knowledge he would not have given us free thought and the ability to have our medical technology that offers us alternative approaches. Yah tell that to these religious geniues.

Bottom line, If people want to come on this form and refer to cells smaller than the eye of a pin as unborn babies and presume to judge in the name of God and tell people how to behave,  I can' stop them but I sure as hell ignore them.

All I say is the free choice I believe should be be made in private with the doctor, the woman and/or her loved ones, not anyone on this forum or me who presumes to speak for God or life. Proper counselling explains all the alternatives including coming to full term and adoption yes. Me personally I would of course hate to see someone give up a chilld for adoption or terminate a pregnancy if it was not done by free choice. I just don't see the issue as a black and white one. I see it as one clouded in morality and implications as to when and how we intervene with someone's right to exercise free choice and thought. I just don't see this as the government's role but I do see it as a role of the individual and her loved ones and her physician(s) and if she chooses her spiritual advisor, but ultimately the choice must be the woman's-it's her body.

In our country TSS we have many religious prophets who declare what's good for other people. They often are men like me. Thank's but a woman's body is not for me to control. Not interested. I have enough problems with my own prostate thank you.

Here this should not surprise you:

http://www.alternet.org/story/155396/why_are_american_teens_so_ignorant_about_sex_and_birth_control

 

 

 

 

[Rue]

31 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The belief in the sanctity of life, including the sanctity of life of unborn babies, was unquestioned in days gone by I believe.  What happened to change all that?  We pride ourselves on becoming a developed nation compared with the rest of the world.  We think we have come a long way in the pursuit of knowledge, technologies, medical advances, transportation systems, etc.  But on the fundamental issue of the meaning of life and respect for life, we seem to have gone downhill.  It's difficult to figure this out and the reasons why.  One thing I notice is our political leaders always tell us of the greatness of Canada because of it's diversity and multiculturalism.  Trudeau advances this idea with a lot of energy.  But have all these various cultures with their different religious backgrounds weakened the historic judeo-christian roots that Canada was built on?  Or it is the slow rise of humanism in the last 150 years and since Darwin's theory of evolution that is the major contributing factor? Does this have something to do with the lower view of the value of human life?  I tend to believe it is the rise of secular humanism in the world that is the major factor.

Embryos or fetuses are not unborn babies. That has always been the case and will always be the case and its been known since women started having babies. Spontaneous termination of  pregnancies at early stages, called miscarriage taught  women so did their own frequent birth rates in the past. Mid wifery is as old as my sperm so to speak and that is very old man,.

The fact you think life starts at the moment the sperm and egg cell inter-connect does not mean others in the past or even today call or have ever believed fetuses or embryos are immediately unborn babies once the sperm penetrates the cell Your calling them unborn babies reflects a deep ignorance as to the developmental stages of a fetus.

I can not stand people passing off late stage embryonic development as being one and the same with early fetal growth where the entity is not yet hman and formed.

Also you should note Trudeau is a Catholic and still practices Catholicism and would never have aborted any of his children and he welcomes people of fundamentalist faiths into Canada who define women as not having any say as to their bodies and are defined as subordinates to men,

Stop portraying him as progressive. This is someone who plays lip service to feminism while embracing archaic fascist religions.

He fools no one but you. His need to be called a feminist in fact reflects his own unresolved sexual conflicts with men and feeling safer being the only man in a group of women at any given time. There's nothing feminist about him, When he's with women he demands their undivided fawning attention. He has a classic  1950's marriage with his air head wife that idolizes him like he is some sort of messiah.

He's a putz. The only one with balls in his cabinet is his Justice Minister.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Rue

[Moonlight Graham]

18 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I think the enslavement bit is forcing a person to use their body as an incubator and undergo medical procedures when they really don't want to. 

Crazy idea but maybe think of that before letting a guy ejaculate inside your vagina without using proper birth control????  Women have rights but they also have responsibilities.  Children can't have babies for a reason...because adults are supposed to be the ones who are able to make responsible & reasoned decisions about their reproductive organs which have consequences including bringing a human life into this world.

Making a baby because you were an irresponsible damned idiot and then calling it "enslavement" because you made really stupid decisions you now regret is just damned BS, and ppl need to grow up.  OWN YOUR DAMNED S**T PEOPLE.  Choice starts with having sex ( with proper protection) in the first place

Edited March 9, 2017 by Moonlight Graham

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Crazy idea but maybe think of that before letting a guy ejaculate inside your vagina without using proper birth control????  Women have rights but they also have responsibilities.  Children can't have babies for a reason...because adults are supposed to be the ones who are able to make responsible & reasoned decisions about their reproductive organs which have consequences including bringing a human life into this world.

Making a baby because you were an irresponsible damned idiot and then calling it "enslavement" because you made really stupid decisions you now regret is just damned BS, and ppl need to grow up.  OWN YOUR DAMNED S**T PEOPLE.  Choice starts with having sex ( with proper protection) in the first place

Sure, I agree with everything you say.  It's not like I go around slapping women on the back and saying "good job" when they get pregnant and decide to have an abortion.  I just think that regardless of events, they can't be forced to go through with it. 

And it doesn't necessarily have to be a mistake.  Women get abortions if the pregnancy is planned too.  The relationship with the father might sour.  Perhaps a defect is detected in the fetus.  Maybe it is the wrong sex.  There are more reasons than just having forgotten birth control.

[-TSS-]

Has banning abortions proved to be a very succesful policy anywhere in the civilised world and you can interpret the concept of a civilised world anyway you like?

[?Impact]

21 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Choice starts with having sex ( with proper protection) in the first place

What is your idea of proper protection? Do you realize that most forms of birth control are far from perfect. Yes they are many times better than leaving it to chance, but failure of birth control is very common. Top that with the massive campaign against birth control, including from very powerful institutions like the Catholic Church, and it is not surprising that there are many unwanted pregnancies. The Church is adamant that birth control to prevent pregnancies is forbidden, although they have opened the door ever so slightly to using condoms to prevent the spread of disease. 

[Moonlight Graham]

24 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

What is your idea of proper protection? Do you realize that most forms of birth control are far from perfect. Yes they are many times better than leaving it to chance, but failure of birth control is very common. Top that with the massive campaign against birth control, including from very powerful institutions like the Catholic Church, and it is not surprising that there are many unwanted pregnancies. The Church is adamant that birth control to prevent pregnancies is forbidden, although they have opened the door ever so slightly to using condoms to prevent the spread of disease. 

Copper IUD + birth control pill + condom + spermicide + pull-out method = 100% effectiveness against pregnancy.

[BillyBeaver]

3 hours ago, -TSS- said:

What really puzzles me about this topic is how is it even possible in this day and age of contraceptives to have so many unwanted pregnancies that abortions are needed. For example in Finland, a country of 5.5 million people, the annual birth-rate is about 50,000 people and the annual abortion-rate is about 10,000 abortions, which means that 1/6 pregnancies are terminated.

That is probably one of the best ratios in the world in the positive sense as in many eastern-European countries even half or more pregnancies are terminated. Probably 1/6-rate is the best one can hope for.

However, unless we are talking about very young teenagers who may not understand consequences following actions I just can't understand how people have not noticed yet that contraceptives were invented in the 60's.

IKR, I used the rhythm method for years with various gfs and you can still have unprotected sex directly after the period.  Using abortions as birth control is for stupids. At most you should get one, I knew girls that had multiple abortions in junior high. Deplorable.

[-TSS-]

In many Eastern-European countries more than half of the pregancies are terminated. Even in Poland but they must travel to Germany to do that.

In my opinion 1/6 is quite an acceptable rate even though the most vehement pro-lifers think it must be zero.

[?Impact]

11 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Copper IUD + birth control pill + condom + spermicide + pull-out method = 100% effectiveness against pregnancy.

1-((1-.992)*(1-.92)*(1-85)*(1-.71)*(1-.73))= 99.99925% 

Fairly close, not quite as effective as total abstention but getting there. Of course with all those methods combined it would certainly kill the mood.

Note that the Copper IUD is the reason for the above high total, the other 4 combined are 99.91% effective.

23 minutes ago, BillyBeaver said:

IKR, I used the rhythm method for years with various gfs and you can still have unprotected sex directly after the period.

In practice the rhythm method is only 75% effective. 

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Crazy idea but maybe think of that before letting a guy ejaculate inside your vagina without using proper birth control???? 

 

A family member got pregnant while using birth control and breast-feeding.   Breast- feeding is supposed to inhibit pregnancy, and the doc said that and a 'light' birth control pill would work.   Perhaps it does 99% of the time, but in this case it did not.   Birth control pills can be rendered ineffective when anti-biotics are used and some docs/pharmacists fail to mention that little fact to women.   

Crazy idea, but maybe a guy should *also* be willing to put that condom on even if she is using birth control.   Can't be too safe, eh?

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

A family member got pregnant while using birth control and breast-feeding.   Breast- feeding is supposed to inhibit pregnancy, and the doc said that and a 'light' birth control pill would work.   Perhaps it does 99% of the time, but in this case it did not.   Birth control pills can be rendered ineffective when anti-biotics are used and some docs/pharmacists fail to mention that little fact to women.   

Crazy idea, but maybe a guy should *also* be willing to put that condom on even if she is using birth control.   Can't be too safe, eh?

 

Exactly.  I used condoms for about twenty years, from the birth of our last child, to my wife's menopause.  We decided that was better than her having to take a pill for twenty years. 

It's just not that difficult.