Abortion: Humane or not?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

ok anti life people comebacks that are stupid like punctuation and grammer are stupid
oh and google this process this will show you the truth

Curettage: Removal of tissue with a curette from the wall of a cavity or another surface. For example, curettage may be done to remove skin cancer. After a local anesthetic numbs the area, the skin cancer is scooped out with a curette. Curettage may also be done in the uterus; dilation and curettage (D&C) refers to the dilation (widening) of the cervical canal to permit curettage of the endometrium, the inner lining of the uterus.

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/ ... ekey=10985

Yes and you clearly don't know the purpose of curettage, do you?

[The 502nd SS]

To prevent abuse of abortion

There should be some kind of limit on the amount of abortions a women can.

so after a certain number of times she should be forced into having a baby? does forced breeding make more sense after you avoid it a few times?

if she is getting pregnant that many times and doesn't want the baby, maybe they should consider using protection

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Not really.

Now, I have moral and ethical issues with forced/pressured abortions (see China's one child policy) but I don't have an issue if it was the woman's choice.

While I'm against all abortions, since I can't win, I think there should be a limit at least.

Forced abortions are just as awful as forced pregnancies.

The woman's choice should be respected, it's her life the one that she has a right to handle, we don't have a right to manage her life.

[Udinia]

Do y'all think it should be illegal to have more than one abortion?

No.

Limiting patients to one abortion would be horrible. You can't predict any complications someone may have with pregnancy later in life.

[The Alma Mater]

...Why?

To prevent abuse of abortion

There should be some kind of limit on the amount of abortions a women can.

Is the unpleasantness of the procedure not prevention enough?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

so after a certain number of times she should be forced into having a baby? does forced breeding make more sense after you avoid it a few times?

if she is getting pregnant that many times and doesn't want the baby, maybe they should consider using protection

Do you really think women consider an abortion like they consider whether or not to go to a female soccer match?

[The 502nd SS]

While I'm against all abortions, since I can't win, I think there should be a limit at least.

Forced abortions are just as awful as forced pregnancies.

The woman's choice should be respected, it's her life the one that she has a right to handle, we don't have a right to manage her life.

Its not forced if she consented to having sex with a man

[Mavorpen]

Forced abortions are just as awful as forced pregnancies.

The woman's choice should be respected, it's her life the one that she has a right to handle, we don't have a right to manage her life.

Its not forced if she consented to having sex with a man

So if she consented to sex and the man started beating on her without her permission, she has to just take it, right?

After all, she consented.

[Ashmoria]

so after a certain number of times she should be forced into having a baby? does forced breeding make more sense after you avoid it a few times?

if she is getting pregnant that many times and doesn't want the baby, maybe they should consider using protection

maybe so. or maybe she has bad luck with birth control. that doesn't change my question, should she be forced to breed because she avoided it in the past?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Forced abortions are just as awful as forced pregnancies.

The woman's choice should be respected, it's her life the one that she has a right to handle, we don't have a right to manage her life.

Its not forced if she consented to having sex with a man

She consents to sex, but she doesn't have to accept the fact that she has to give up either her quality of life, future prospects, or even her own life due to draconian morals imposed unto her.

I can consent to test to see if I am a capable donor for a kidney, but I can revoke consent to be an actual kidney donor at any time before the procedure.

[Udinia]

Its not forced if she consented to having sex with a man

She consents to sex, but she doesn't have to accept the fact that she has to give up either her quality of life, future prospects, or even her own life due to draconian morals imposed unto her.

I can consent to test to see if I am a capable donor for a kidney, but I can revoke consent to be an actual kidney donor at any time before the procedure.

Then we should expect, for women that don't plan on being pregnant, for them to use contraception, correct? But you do have those couples that carelessly go bareback, and then expect not to get pregnant easily.

[Mavorpen]

She consents to sex, but she doesn't have to accept the fact that she has to give up either her quality of life, future prospects, or even her own life due to draconian morals imposed unto her.

I can consent to test to see if I am a capable donor for a kidney, but I can revoke consent to be an actual kidney donor at any time before the procedure.

Then we should expect, for women that don't plan on being pregnant, for them to use contraception, correct? But you do have those couples that carelessly go bareback, and then expect not to get pregnant easily.

And? We don't refuse people medical treatment if they don't wear a seat-belt and get into a car wreck.

Sorry, but just because people DO do stupid things, that doesn't mean they should be denied medical care.

[Ashmoria]

She consents to sex, but she doesn't have to accept the fact that she has to give up either her quality of life, future prospects, or even her own life due to draconian morals imposed unto her.

I can consent to test to see if I am a capable donor for a kidney, but I can revoke consent to be an actual kidney donor at any time before the procedure.

Then we should expect, for women that don't plan on being pregnant, for them to use contraception, correct? But you do have those couples that carelessly go bareback, and then expect not to get pregnant easily.

and that is one of the reasons why we must have safe, cheap and available abortions.

all children should be wanted. they shouldn't be the reason why their parents' lives turned to shit.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

She consents to sex, but she doesn't have to accept the fact that she has to give up either her quality of life, future prospects, or even her own life due to draconian morals imposed unto her.

I can consent to test to see if I am a capable donor for a kidney, but I can revoke consent to be an actual kidney donor at any time before the procedure.

Then we should expect, for women that don't plan on being pregnant, for them to use contraception, correct? But you do have those couples that carelessly go bareback, and then expect not to get pregnant easily.

In an ideal world, that would be a basic expectation and common sense.

As you have just proven, it's not because there's couples who go bareback carelessly. So, should they be forced to get to term too, regardless of how the pregnancy or the child's life after birth is going to be?

[Udinia]

Then we should expect, for women that don't plan on being pregnant, for them to use contraception, correct? But you do have those couples that carelessly go bareback, and then expect not to get pregnant easily.

And? We don't refuse people medical treatment if they don't wear a seat-belt and get into a car wreck.

Sorry, but just because people DO do stupid things, that doesn't mean they should be denied medical care.

I understand that, I was being facetious.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

No. If we don't believe it, it's on you to find a source. So, I'm just going to call bullshit on that.

Cal it bullshit. It was a very old documentary I don't remember.
I am not going to search the whole internet for the source, simply because an unknown person wants proof.

Good to know you fully state that nothing you say should be taken the least hit seriously.

[Dain II Ironfoot]

1) I'll let you know as soon as you know how to read.

So you DON'T understand the burden of proof after all.

2) Its very relevant, you just lack basic understanding, your problem, not mine.

And yet again you fail to grasp the burden of proof. Shouting "YES IT DOES!" is not an argument. I explained and proved this "health part bullshit" is irrelevant. You apparently can't explain one bit why it is. So I'll accept your concession.

3) Becouse you're to lazy to take responsibility for your actions.

No, if I were lazy and didn't want to take responsibility for my actions I would have the child and not take care of it nor give it up for adoption. THAT'S not taking responsibility. Giving birth and then neglecting the child is not taking responsibility. Recognizing a pregnancy would be a hinder on your life and health (all pregnancies and births have negative health effects, many permanent) and thus terminating it is no less taking responsibility than recognizing that a flu would hinder your daily activities and your health and taking a flu shot. That's the whole damn point of a medical procedure.

You don't even know what the words "lazy" or "responsibility" even mean. Stop using them like a random verbal tick.

4) Tell me.

I just did.

5) Its funny though how you accuse me of denying women their rights and that i would want to controll them, yet you only show that you want to do that exact thing to men.

No, I only want to do one of those things: take away the "right" of men to own women. And I don't see how that's funny. It's entirely consistent. We also don't let whites own blacks. The latter is bullshit. No men are being "controlled." Men have no physical stake in pregnancies.

Anyhow, its good what kind of person you are, makes it alot easier.

Yes, I'm the kind of person that hates the idea of being able to own women and treat them like livestock.

6) If you read properly, i never said that sentence. Once again you show that you cannot even read, yet you claim that you would be suitable for the decision between life and no life? Just pathetic.

HAHAHAHAHA. You REALLY don't want to go there:

2) Its very relevant, you just lack basic understanding, your problem, not mine.

3) Becouse you're to lazy to take responsibility for your actions.

5) Its funny though how you accuse me of denying women their rights and that i would want to controll them, yet you only show that you want to do that exact thing to men.

Anyhow, its good what kind of person you are, makes it alot easier.

So yes, I made a single error in misquoting. You, however, have continuously failed to follow basic rules of the English language. It's "too," not "to." It's "it's," not "its." It's "I," not "i." So allow me to post an amended version of your blatant attempt to dodge at giving an actual argument:

You show that you cannot even follow basic English grammatical rules, yet you claim that you would be suitable for the decision between life and no life? Just pathetic.

Actually, with an abortion they would take the easy road out.

EVERY medical procedure is taking the "easy road out." You get a third degree burn? You go to the hospital, which is taking the easy way out. You break your arm? You go to the hospital, which is taking the easy way out. That's the whole damn purpose of medical procedures. They're there to take the easy way out and avoid the worst possible consequences. That doesn't mean you're "irresponsible." It means you're not a fucking idiot.

1. I do, though i do not see the need of proving myself when you are to lazy to read anyways.
2. See above, knowing how to read is a great thing you know, try it out for a time.
3. Bulslhit.
4. No you did not.
5. We know it by now, you're one of those over-feminist women who can't even think clear anymore.
6. Wrong, you hate the idea of a man with thoughts of his own.
7. Did i ever said i could? English is my fourth language, something you wouldn't even be able to reach. You proved yourself over and over again not being able to read properly.
8. Once again you thrown in random words to defend yourself without actually taking on the subject. Once more i'm going to say "health", probably useless since you're ignorent but well, at least i tried.

Not your permission for that matter, though a man should have something to say about his child, its not like the man doesn't have anything to do with it.

It indeed has, but keeping it or removing it isn't a choice of "whats the best for my body"

Please show me, where did i said that?

It really is, Life is life, why would your life be more important then the life of a turtle for that matter?

Why should I have anything to say about it as a man? It's not my body, I could give a fuck less if she wants to use the umbilical cord as bungee rope for all I know. I have some say to it, yes, but only if my partner lets me have a say in it. You seem to not understand the fact I'm not the one who has to look out for my own interests in this. I lose nothing with an abortion because I never had the child or experienced him in my life to begin with. The woman's self-interest is to have a good life, and for that she has to make a much harder choice than I when it comes to keeping the baby because she has to consider multiple factors.

Keeping it or removing certainly is a choice of "what's the best for my body" sometimes even going as far as "what's the best for my quality of life" we're self-centered, and I appreciate that; which is why the decisions a woman makes is based on her own desires, not yours.

Why do you keep arguing women should take responsibility for their actions, then? And why do you keep arguing "I would not..." or that they are under some sort of moral imperative imposed to them by society to have children then, if you don't believe women should be talked to like children and we should protect them from themselves. We protect children from their own mistakes and make them follow our rules because we want them to grow up to be productive individuals. Women are adults, why should we interfere with what's best for them and impose morals on them, unless you are the kind of person who views women as children?

My life is more important than that of a turtle because it is my life. Of course I am going to value my life more, fuck the turtle. Or do you value an assassin's life the same if they were to try to kill you?

You're talking like there's such a huge difference. The only difference there is is that the woman carries the child. The father is still the father and should have a say in it.

Its not. And the "quality of life" matter is just being selfish, once again it ignores the point of taking responsibility.

Its not about children or adults here, everybody should take responsibility, period.

That's your opinion, i'd consider a turtles life equally as important as mine.
As for the assassin's thing, yes. Both mine as his/hers would be the same, though in this case its life A or life B, well obviously i wouldn't kill myself for him so i'd kill him instead. Aside from that, i'm probably younger then the assassin so i have (most likely) more years to go, which only adds up to the decision..

[Neutraligon]

Why should it be my prerogative whether she wants to keep the baby or not? In other words, what makes me as a man so special that she has to count with my permission to abort?

No, her making a choice whether she wants to go through a pregnancy or not does have to do with her body.

You are, because you're telling them we as men and as a society know better than the woman in question.

If life has no special meaning at all, then why would you want to keep women from aborting?

It's really not.

Not your permission for that matter, though a man should have something to say about his child, its not like the man doesn't have anything to do with it.

It indeed has, but keeping it or removing it isn't a choice of "whats the best for my body"

Please show me, where did i said that?

It really is, Life is life, why would your life be more important then the life of a turtle for that matter?

Okay, so then it doesn't. Let me know when you understand the burden of proof.

Enough with this irrelevant "health part" bullshit. You can entirely survive without a lung, a kidney, and a part of your liver missing. Are you admitting that "denying life" is NOT above preserving bodily sovereignty?

No shit, which is why if you were a woman and didn't want to abort, I'd be fine with that. I however, would abort.

Then why are you using a computer? Because you know that things were killed in order to manufacture that, right?

That's too bad, really. You don't own women. Get the hell over it.

Actually cattle life is of higher value than a fetus.

And humans aren't carnivores. Don't use words you don't understand please.

1) I'll let you know as soon as you know how to read.
2) Its very relevant, you just lack basic understanding, your problem, not mine.
3) Becouse you're to lazy to take responsibility for your actions.
4) Tell me.
5) Its funny though how you accuse me of denying women their rights and that i would want to controll them, yet you only show that you want to do that exact thing to men. Anyhow, its good what kind of person you are, makes it alot easier.
6) If you read properly, i never said that sentence. Once again you show that you cannot even read, yet you claim that you would be suitable for the decision between life and no life? Just pathetic.

Proper police doesn't always do proper work, and does improper work. Education doesn't come from a child all the time. Such thing as a religious family with a deficit of a funds and a refusal to go to public school exists | If you're going to ignore a proper argument, then I see little reason to continue this.

Not Always, but just 99.9999999999% of the time, which is more then enough. Children are educated faster, more and on a better way. Never said that education solely comes from a child. Meh, such private schools should be banned. Proper argument? You're spitting out random stuff all over the place that is completely irrelevant in this matter.

I'm pro choice and shit but try oral or anal.

Indeed.

They are taking responsibility by having an abortion.
And? how is that a double standard?

Why make those exceptions?

Actually, with an abortion they would take the easy road out. The easy road isn't Always the best road you know.
Two different views against eachother is what i call a double standard (not sure if in Eglish its callled the same, but over here it is called that way)
Different reasons, If the health would be in danger then i would allow it since health is all a person actually has in matter of fact. When she would be raped, its kinda sick to force her to keep the child, its a moral thing i suppose. When she's to poor, she can't offer the child a proper life, which isn't good for the child nor the woman (now ofcourse adoption should be an option here aswell i guess).

No it not. An abortion is taking responsibility. It isn't easy, especially with all the restrictions placed on it currently.

Double standard: a rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups.

It is sick to force a woman to keep a pregnancy against her will regardless of whether she was raped or not.

[Udinia]

Not your permission for that matter, though a man should have something to say about his child, its not like the man doesn't have anything to do with it.

It indeed has, but keeping it or removing it isn't a choice of "whats the best for my body"

Please show me, where did i said that?

It really is, Life is life, why would your life be more important then the life of a turtle for that matter?



1) I'll let you know as soon as you know how to read.
2) Its very relevant, you just lack basic understanding, your problem, not mine.
3) Becouse you're to lazy to take responsibility for your actions.
4) Tell me.
5) Its funny though how you accuse me of denying women their rights and that i would want to controll them, yet you only show that you want to do that exact thing to men. Anyhow, its good what kind of person you are, makes it alot easier.
6) If you read properly, i never said that sentence. Once again you show that you cannot even read, yet you claim that you would be suitable for the decision between life and no life? Just pathetic.


Not Always, but just 99.9999999999% of the time, which is more then enough. Children are educated faster, more and on a better way. Never said that education solely comes from a child. Meh, such private schools should be banned. Proper argument? You're spitting out random stuff all over the place that is completely irrelevant in this matter.



Indeed.



Actually, with an abortion they would take the easy road out. The easy road isn't Always the best road you know.
Two different views against eachother is what i call a double standard (not sure if in Eglish its callled the same, but over here it is called that way)
Different reasons, If the health would be in danger then i would allow it since health is all a person actually has in matter of fact. When she would be raped, its kinda sick to force her to keep the child, its a moral thing i suppose. When she's to poor, she can't offer the child a proper life, which isn't good for the child nor the woman (now ofcourse adoption should be an option here aswell i guess).

No it not. An abortion is taking responsibility. It isn't easy, especially with all the restrictions placed on it currently.

Double standard: a rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups.

It is sick to force a woman to keep a pregnancy against her will regardless of whether she was raped or not.

I still think it is questionable if the woman wasn't raped or has fatal pregnancy complications. I on the fence about that.

[Libronyscien]

...Why?

To prevent abuse of abortion

There should be some kind of limit on the amount of abortions a women can.

… why?

[Ashmoria]

I still think it is questionable if the woman wasn't raped or has fatal pregnancy complications. I on the fence about that.

once you are OK with those abortions what is the problem with acknowledging that the woman has more information and understanding of her situation than you ever will? isn't it best to let her make her own decision about her own life?

[Libronyscien]

Its not forced if she consented to having sex with a man

So if she consented to sex and the man started beating on her without her permission, she has to just take it, right?

After all, she consented.

Technically she consented to sex, but not the beating.

[Udinia]

I still think it is questionable if the woman wasn't raped or has fatal pregnancy complications. I on the fence about that.

once you are OK with those abortions what is the problem with acknowledging that the woman has more information and understanding of her situation than you ever will? isn't it best to let her make her own decision about her own life?

Eh.....I don’t suppose that I oppose it enough to make it illegal or anything. It's just a personal issue for me really, my faith in humanity, including pregnant women, is lacking.

[Ashmoria]

once you are OK with those abortions what is the problem with acknowledging that the woman has more information and understanding of her situation than you ever will? isn't it best to let her make her own decision about her own life?

Eh.....I don’t suppose that I oppose it enough to make it illegal or anything. It's just a personal issue for me really, my faith in humanity, including pregnant women, is lacking.

you don't have to have faith in humanity (its mostly a bad idea anyway) in order to understand that her decision is none of your business.

what IS your business is to live in a society where a woman isn't force to have or not to have an abortion. its also a good thing to want a society that doesn't add extra pressures for a woman to choose abortion (financial reasons, shame, lack of other kinds of support) there are a whole host of public policies you might want to support that lowers the abortion rate.

but in the end the number of women who cavalierly get abortions is miniscule. it makes no sense to make it harder on the vast majority of responsible women who are making the best decision for their own lives in order to keep the assholes in line. ... you can never keep the assholes in line.

[Mavorpen]

So you DON'T understand the burden of proof after all.

And yet again you fail to grasp the burden of proof. Shouting "YES IT DOES!" is not an argument. I explained and proved this "health part bullshit" is irrelevant. You apparently can't explain one bit why it is. So I'll accept your concession.

No, if I were lazy and didn't want to take responsibility for my actions I would have the child and not take care of it nor give it up for adoption. THAT'S not taking responsibility. Giving birth and then neglecting the child is not taking responsibility. Recognizing a pregnancy would be a hinder on your life and health (all pregnancies and births have negative health effects, many permanent) and thus terminating it is no less taking responsibility than recognizing that a flu would hinder your daily activities and your health and taking a flu shot. That's the whole damn point of a medical procedure.

You don't even know what the words "lazy" or "responsibility" even mean. Stop using them like a random verbal tick.

I just did.

No, I only want to do one of those things: take away the "right" of men to own women. And I don't see how that's funny. It's entirely consistent. We also don't let whites own blacks. The latter is bullshit. No men are being "controlled." Men have no physical stake in pregnancies.

Yes, I'm the kind of person that hates the idea of being able to own women and treat them like livestock.

HAHAHAHAHA. You REALLY don't want to go there:





So yes, I made a single error in misquoting. You, however, have continuously failed to follow basic rules of the English language. It's "too," not "to." It's "it's," not "its." It's "I," not "i." So allow me to post an amended version of your blatant attempt to dodge at giving an actual argument:

You show that you cannot even follow basic English grammatical rules, yet you claim that you would be suitable for the decision between life and no life? Just pathetic.

EVERY medical procedure is taking the "easy road out." You get a third degree burn? You go to the hospital, which is taking the easy way out. You break your arm? You go to the hospital, which is taking the easy way out. That's the whole damn purpose of medical procedures. They're there to take the easy way out and avoid the worst possible consequences. That doesn't mean you're "irresponsible." It means you're not a fucking idiot.

1. I do, though i do not see the need of proving myself when you are to lazy to read anyways.

So you DON'T have an argument. Got it.

2. See above, knowing how to read is a great thing you know, try it out for a time.

So again, no argument.

3. Bulslhit.

Still no argument?

4. No you did not.

So still no argument.

5. We know it by now, you're one of those over-feminist women who can't even think clear anymore.

Nah, I'm a black guy.

6. Wrong, you hate the idea of a man with thoughts of his own.

If you're implying that I hate you, you're wrong. That would require you to have thoughts of your own. So far you haven't been able to communicate a single coherent argument or rebuttal.

7. Did i ever said i could?

So then why are you on an English based forum?

English is my fourth language, something you wouldn't even be able to reach.

Why would I want to reach a lower level?

You proved yourself over and over again not being able to read properly.

Ah, I see what's going on here. You're projecting your own problem of not understanding basic English onto me. That definitely explains why you cannot formulate or present a single argument and can only shout and repeat the same things over and over: you don't actually understand what's being posted.

8. Once again you thrown in random words

No, what I posted is called a "sentence." Specifically, several sentences. You do know what a sentence is, correct?

to defend yourself without actually taking on the subject.

You claimed that women take the easy way out by getting an abortion. I refutes that bullshit by pointing out that every medical procedure including abortion is taking the easy way out. I addressed your claim. And you don't have an actual response to it. Let me know when you form a coherent argument.

Once more i'm going to say "health", probably useless since you're ignorent but well, at least i tried.

I get it, you have trouble reading. That doesn't give you an excuse to respond with the same word over and over with no explanation. If you don't understand English and by extension, my argument, just tell me. Bumbling around like 2 year old that only knows how to respond with one word is not an argument.