+88 Abortions should be legal if people don't have the money to fund their baby. Amirite?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Abortion is legal.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Or they could just give the baby up for adoption?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Or maybe you don't want your flesh and blood given to some random couple? It should shill be your choice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

oh yeah it would be crazy to just give it away to some random couple! lets just end its life like normal people.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So you would rather end an innocent life than give it to a couple who wants a child but does not have opportunity to have one themselves?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes. I don't feel comfortable with people having my stuff, what more my own children. There's not even any guarantee that it will survive gestation, my future wife and I would be inconvenienced for 9 months, for nothing. I;m selfish that way, but it's still my choice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not the same thing, and it's difficult to let a child of your own flesh and blood leave you forever, knowing that they won't know their biological parents.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Right, so they can either join the legions of unadopted children waiting for homes or become adopted and take the place of another child that could have gotten a home.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Legal does not mean mandatory.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Pregnancy and birth is expensive.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Prenatal care is really expensive. However, sometimes the adoptive family covers those expenses.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Abortion! Nice to see some fresh topics on the homepage.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You misspelled murder

by Anonymous 12 years ago

retard

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's //NOT// a baby..... It's a cluster of cells, people. How is this fetus's 'life' going to affect you in any way possible?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

slut

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Please explain how this makes me a slut? Seriously, if you're going to throw around words like slut and retard without having any reason, you're probably a huge cunt anyways....

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Fuck off, whore.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Explain how that makes her a slut and how you think you will get anywhere convincing her to change her mind by calling her one.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Thank you, that was very nice of you and I appreciate it!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No problem. Sure, I disagree with you, but that is no reason to go around calling other people names for no reason.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In my opinion saying it isn't a baby, it's a fetus is like saying a 3 year old isn't a child, it's a toddler. Who knows what ways it could affect you? You don't know until you give it a shot.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I thought children were considered toddlers until 2. Oh well, you learn something new everyday. However, a child and toddler are surviving outside the mother's womb, breathing, eating, and doing whatever it is toddlers/children do. A fetus, or baby if you prefer, is still living in the mother's womb. It's attached to her and she should have the right to keep going with the pregnancy or terminate it. But that's just me.... You are free to believe whatever you wish. Also, thanks for sticking up for me :)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oops, I didn't really know the official age, I just used the age that popped into my head. I still refer to my 3 year old cousin as a toddler. So by your standards, a baby in the womb isn't actually a baby until it is born. So an hour before a child is bore, it is not a baby? Since when does relying on something else for life, allow one any less of a claim to it? If there is an elderly lady who relies on an oxygen tank or a nurse on site to give her medications, is it the nurses option to keep her living by giving her necessary medications and nutrients or deserting her and therefore terminating her life?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No no, I don't know the official age either! "So by your standards, a baby in the womb isn't actually a baby until it is born." Yes, that is what I believe in. Others may believe differently, I know. "So an hour before a child is bore, it is not a baby?" In my views, yes. "Since when does relying on something else for life, allow one any less of a claim to it?" Interesting question. None of us are completely independent and I know that, but what I meant is that the fetus, or child if you wish for me to refer to it that way, is inside the mother, consuming part of the food and drink she eats/drinks, causing pain to her, and dwelling inside of her. The fetus/child doesn't have any means of independence whatsoever so it's basically in the mother's control. "If there is an elderly lady who relies on an oxygen tank or a nurse on site to give her medications, is it the nurses option to keep her living by giving her necessary medications and nutrients or deserting her and therefore terminating her life?" OH GOODNESS NO! The thought of that made me shudder. This elderly lady is(was?) a fully developed human being!!! Sorry I picked apart your comment, it was just more organized.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it has nothing to do with this you just look like one.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, do you realize you sound like an idiot and are giving pro-lifers a bad name?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yup....The black lipstick and the "I'm gonna stab you to death" face really screams that she gives free "fun time in the mouth"s and enjoys destroying relationships, doesn't it? I'm sure the middle finger and the MCR t-shirt really seal the deal too.... Can't you tell she's fuckin Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Raven Way? Don't be an idiot and stay off the internet. Also, there's a neat little thing known as the reply button.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

U MAY FINK IM SLUT BUT IM RELLY NUT..... Really, it was a halloween costume. You obviously haven't read My Immortal, have you?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh Rhea, you can't really expect people to get the reference. At least you changed your pic to this awesome one, though.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So you basically just said "We should hand out 'get our of jail free' cards to anyone who screws up and doesn't want to take the consequences, amirite" because obviously it was a mistake if you can't fund it...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not that simple. It's not like murder, rape, or even theft. It affect anyone but the wife, her family, and, assuming he's not an asshole, the groom and his. And it's not "get out of jail free", because it's legal (as it should be). It's more like a "we're not gonna arrest you for not breaking a law" free card.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The part that the person doesn't deserve isn't the legal thing, I don't care about legality. I think abortion should be legal is the woman was raped or if the child will have a suffering birth defect, or even if they used a failed contraceptive. But because the man and woman made a bad choice, most likely the woman? Hell no. All those things you mentioned about what the consequences entail, I understand ALL of those, and if the man and woman DIDN'T understand them, then too bad. Shoulda thought about that before you chose to practice non-safe sex. That's why they are called negative consequences, and why sex isn't just something you can play with. Just because the consequence is large doesn't mean it can be excused. This goes beyond abortion. I'm against pardoning criminals who deserve a life sentence, etc.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for punishing people who deserve it. But it's not just them. What good will bringing another troubled child with unfit parents do for anyone?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Through hard work and dedication, my parents made the same mistake and lived in poverty, and now they own their own company with 6 figure salaries each. I wasn't punished at all, but they had to make a lot of sacrifices in their 20's. That was the consequence. It's a consequence, not a punishment.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just because your parents did it doesn't mean everyone can. If someone is at a point in their life where they can barely support themselves, the vast majority of the time, the child they don't want gets the short end of the stick.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Ok then under that logic, who gets to decide what makes the parents unable to fund the baby? If the people get to make that call, then only the relatively wealthy will have children, and let me begin on how THAT won't affect birth rates at all...Not to mention, would you like me to name the enormous list of successful people that came from a very bad or poor childhood? If the government decides...well I'd rather have the government low on decisions they're making in my life.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The parents. If they don't think they have the money, but someone else says that they do, and they have to keep a baby they don't want because of it, then obviously they're going to resent that baby, and spend as little money on it as possible in order to maintain their own lifestyles. It's not like we're particularly short on people as it is. Besides, don't forget that abortion IS CURRENTLY LEGAL. People who don't think they can afford it are already getting abortions. If the people get to decide, and they're morally against it, they'll still be against it. Look, making a law saying "you can get rid of a baby you can't support" is NOT the same as making a law saying "you have to get rid of a baby you can't support." Would you like me to name some serial killers or people who shot up a school who came from a poor childhood?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Your list is shorter than mine, first off. And I understand, I already knew what the law that was mentioned meant. I knew they didn't have to. That's what worries me. I don't think people have the right to just say that they don't want to accept consequences of their actions. I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT ABORTION. I already mentioned the life sentence example. Regardless of who else is involved, my last statement is still what I'm sticking to.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Unproportionally, yet. Success of any happens more often than becoming a serial killer no matter what your upbringing, because one is legal and morally correct. However, if you were to compare cruel statistics, you'd come up short. But it's note just any action. They're having legal, consensual sex. Just because something could go wrong doesn't mean the act deserves punishment. And yes, and unwanted baby IS a punishment. That's like saying someone who goes outside and gets struck by lightning doesn't deserve to go to the hospital, because getting struck by lightning is a consequence of going outside. What the hell are you talking about? You're yet to use the words "life sentence". And no, this debate IS ABOUT ABORTION. Obviously people deserve the consequences when they do do something wrong, and the consequences don't make innocent people suffer. That's a completely different category from what we're talking about.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The post is about abortion. My comment wasn't about abortion only, scroll up. And the thing about lightening, the lightening is a freak accident. Which I DID mention. "I think abortion should be legal is the woman was raped or if the child will have a suffering birth defect, or even if they used a FAILED CONTRACEPTIVE." Actually, I think that people in that situation that have insufficient funding should be helped! They couldn't control it? That's what Red Cross, Swiss Army foundation, etc. is for when people have a freak accident like a lightening strike or a flood. However, if you accidentally destroy your home because you made a stupid choice (left a burner on and your house burns down, etc.) they will not, and should not, help you. Just because an action is legal doesn't mean it can't have bad consequences, i.e. burning your house down. It was LEGAL for him to leave the burner on. Just because something is legal and consensual doesn't make it consequence-less (that a word? lol). That doesn't mean he's going to be financially aided for his stupidity. Consequences of stupidity should be inevitable. Consequences of chance are not inevitable and can be helped.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And yes, I did say life sentence. "I'm against pardoning criminals who deserve a life sentence, etc." comment #1658935 Nice job trying to call me out though.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Your initial comment was about this post, since it wasn't in reply to anyone, and therefore must've been aimed at OP. And since all I've been talking about is abortion, obviously, this is about abortion. I don't know how you can expect me to take you seriously if you don't even know what we're talking about. So is an unwanted pregnancy. News flash; sex is fun, and sex drives DO exist. Why should anyone without a moral objection have to refrain from using what is basically just a more extreme contraceptive just because you disagree? And before you compare this to any other crime, please not that I'm also for the legalization of most drugs, and any other crime would have a victim outside of the people actively taking part in it, making it an entirely different case. Yes, if people want he kid, then we should be helping them, just like we should be helping all poor people. But keep in mind that they're already poor, so we should already be helping them. We only have a limited budget. It'd cost the people helping them more to keep a baby no one wants. These 2 cases are so different I almost can't even fathom why you'd compare them.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You know doctors profit from abortions. This isn’t about financial aid, because it’s them paying for it. Saying you shouldn’t be allowed to pay for your abortion is like saying “you burned down your house, so we won’t even sell you a new one.” My mistake, I’ll admit. Doesn’t really change the fact that, since I’ve already agreed that actual criminals should be punished, all we could even be talking about is abortion.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Pro-lifers: I can respect your ideals and even have an intelligent debate with you on the topic if you are capable do more than blindly spewing insults as those who disagree with you. That is all.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If they cant afford the child they could just not have sex and never get pregnant

by Anonymous 12 years ago

By your logic poor people should be advised not to have sex. People should be able to have sex even if they don't want/ can't afford kids. "Just don't have sex" is not a solution to anything.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it sure is a solution to abortion and if somebody cannot afford a child and they dont have sex no child to sped money on and not wasting money on an abortion

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'd just like to point out that from the moment of conception, the baby has DNA that is completely unique from that of the mother's. Secondly, if it isn't human, what is it? From a logical perspective, the mother is most likely not pregnant with a centaur. Statistically, in fact, almost 99.999% of all babies ever born have been human. CherryBlossom brought up a valid point, people don't feel guilty because the baby has no voice in the matter. Weirder yet, all people that currently support abortion have already been born. That's a fact. Finally, the simple solution to not getting pregnant if you can't afford it is to not have sex. Seems to work pretty well - the few people that managed to still get pregnant actually went down in history as very important people (personally, I'm a little bit skeptic about those incidence). So yeah, I don't really see an argument that validates the killing of an individual.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well, yeah, all people who support abortion have already been born. I don't really see any unborn babies participating in abortion debates. You cannot just tell people not to have sex. It does not work, and it never will. Take a look into a high school health classroom. The teacher's going on about abstinence but do you think anyone who hasn't already had the mindset to be abstinent before is just going to change what they desire because someone else told them to? People are going to do what their natural hormones drive them to do--have sex. So it's not that simple, you can't just tell people to stop having sex because no one will ever listen. Personally, I define a human being as being self-aware. You and I, being humans, know what we are, know what we want, and know our surroundings. A several week old fetus does not because its brain is still developing. Overall, because the fetus is still literally attached and fully dependent on the mother at that point, I do not consider it an individual. Therefore, it's up to the mother, who nourishes and "houses" the fetus, to decide what to do. No one is allowed to decide for a woman how many children she is to have.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

For the most part, I'm noticing in most pro-choice / pro-abortion arguments, they have some arbitrary definition of what a human being is. Most, if not all, have errors. "… I define a human being as being self-aware." What about a person in a vegetative state? Not human anymore? What if somebody in a car accident, your friend, became brain dead as a result of an injury? Weird how humanity can so quickly and definitively be lost by the loss of senses. Scientifically, this fetus IS an individual. They have their own unique DNA, unique from that of the mother's and the father's. In addition, the cells that they are composed of are clearly alive - that much we can agree on. I'm not saying that teaching abstinence is something that will work or something we should even try to do - I'm saying, let people know that pregnancy is a consequence of sex, that by having sex they are consenting to this possible consequence, and that killing another person is wrong.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

There are flaws to every definition of life. Yes, the cells that comprise the fetus are most certainly alive, but then again, so are the cells in my brain and the majority of cells in my body. Whether or not the fetus is a human, it's not disputable that it fully relies on the mother and has never spent one minute without being reliant. Therefore, I think that it isn't an individual. If it's in the mother's body, it's the mother's right to decide. Yes, pregnancy is a consequence to sex, but we have solutions. Abortion is one of those solutions, but people are pressured into not using it because morals get in the way. And, that's when I ask, why are we being ethical to a temporary inhabitant of a real human being who's just a cluster of cells that can not feel or think in that stage? An embryo becomes a baby in the future, and since the future isn't written in stone, neither is the fact that the embryo is a baby. Don't base your actions on what happens in the future because technically the future doesn't exist. Once again, all things aside, abortion is a personal choice between a woman and her doctor, not a debate between two strangers who think they're right.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Another abortion post? EVERYONE TAKE COVER.

by Anonymous 12 years ago