[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I don’t agree with this analogy.
I will always believe that women have the right to choose their fate. And a government run by mostly old white males should not have a say in what a woman can do regarding pregnancy. Especially in cases of rape or incest.
This world isn’t black and white like the right wants to think. [/quote]
Thank you.
[quote]gojira wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I don’t agree with this analogy.
I will always believe that women have the right to choose their fate. And a government run by mostly old white males should not have a say in what a woman can do regarding pregnancy. Especially in cases of rape or incest.
This world isn’t black and white like the right wants to think.
Thank you.[/quote]
Yes
Thank you—for not even once considering the one killed/terminated/whatever term you wish to input here. Because it’s all about the woman and how old white guys decided her fate.
There were numerous steps that could have been taken to stop or severely lessen the chances of an unwanted pregnancy.
So of course, the only logical next step is eliminating the inconvenience.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Good for South Dakota!
We need less abortions in this country. And if it is illegal there will be less abortions.
I agree. But what prevents abortions is sexual awareness and education. Not banning it.
Those who think that it will happen anyway might want to look at our other laws.
If Driving under the influence were legal there would be more not less, but no it does not stop it from happening.
THINK
I don’t agree with this analogy.
I will always believe that women have the right to choose their fate. And a government run by mostly old white males should not have a say in what a woman can do regarding pregnancy. Especially in cases of rape or incest.
This world isn’t black and white like the right wants to think. [/quote]
dont they have a say when they spread their legs? Obviously this is not the case in rape…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Since murdering inconvenient people is acceptable, let’s go into old folks homes and into mental hospitals and murder those inconvenient people too! How dare they have the temerity to overpopulate our world! And now here comes this baby to add to our burdens! How absolutely unacceptable!
As a bonus, we could fix our Social Security dilemma overnight with this logic. Problem ended!!
Yes, I hope the USSC overules this ban, so we can get back to our meaningful lives.
[/quote]
Wow, I’m agreeing with the Ann Coulter fan. I’m not sure whether to be depressed or impressed.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
If Driving under the influence were legal there would be more not less, but no it does not stop it from happening.
THINK[/quote]
that’s for sure ZEB…
I recall reading that there are more people that die every year from vehicle/UI related incidence than all the US soldiers that died in the entire vietnam war…
unfortunately, alot of people don’t spend any time thinking…
[quote]DPH wrote:
ZEB wrote:
If Driving under the influence were legal there would be more not less, but no it does not stop it from happening.
THINK
that’s for sure ZEB…
I recall reading that there are more people that die every year from vehicle/UI related incidence than all the US soldiers that died in the entire vietnam war…
unfortunately, alot of people don’t spend any time thinking…[/quote]
16,000 people a year—don’t make it home
One of you republicans explain to me why getting a first trimester abortion after being raped makes you a bad person. I just want to see your view on this.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I agree. But what prevents abortions is sexual awareness and education. Not banning it.
[/quote]
Allowing abortions is a kind of sex education. It educates children that choices have no consequences, one can always change one’s mind, and responsibility is an antiquated concept.
But we’re so obsessed with convenience and never having to pay for mistakes that this is seen as OK in this society.
[quote]danmaftei wrote:
One of you republicans explain to me why getting a first trimester abortion after being raped makes you a bad person. I just want to see your view on this.[/quote]
I do wonder why they left out the rape/incest provision. In general, I would say that the morning after pill (which I assume would not be banned by this law, but I don’t know) would take care of the majority of these cases.
Perhaps the lawmakers worry that any woman who wanted an abortion would cry rape if the provision were left in.
How the hell can you tell me that getting an abortion teaches girls that they don’t have to pay for their actions? You think it’s all “la-dee-da I didn’t use birth control three weeks ago doctor, zap the little shit out of me” like it’s a walk in the park?
Do you know how psychologically damaging getting an abortion is? Not even counting the humiliation of someone finding out, or having to deal with the majority of people around you disapproving of it.
I’m not for or against abortions, we men have very little to say on the matter, it’s juvenile and preposterous to think that we understand what pregnancy and childbirth is about. But I am against stupidity, and you sir, have said a pretty stupid thing.
Well, if taking a morning-after pill is OK to do, at what point are you killing the baby? Don’t many of you guys argue that life begins the instant you stick your dick inside?
[quote]nephorm wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I agree. But what prevents abortions is sexual awareness and education. Not banning it.
Allowing abortions is a kind of sex education. It educates children that choices have no consequences, one can always change one’s mind, and responsibility is an antiquated concept.
But we’re so obsessed with convenience and never having to pay for mistakes that this is seen as OK in this society.[/quote]
Right. So you’re saying that there’s no pyschological effect on a woman when she has an abortion? That its about equal to crushing an ant? Are you kidding?
Funny, because I learned that there aren’t consequences for your actions when I was 11, and OJ got acquitted for murder.
What hurts kids more- watching mafiosos get caught with kilos of coke and being out on bail the same day? Or watching rapists or murderers get off on technicalities? You know it happens…and that’s in the papers alot more than abortions. Watching people with the right lawyer get away with everything doesn’t have more of an effect on kids?
Its easy to debate these things being a guy. But none of us will know what any part of being pregnant is like, especially in those cases of rape or incest. Women have a lot more self- confidence issues then men, and their situation is infinitly more complicated then ours.
Either way, I don’t believe the government should be able to legislate this.
Without getting into a pissing match, you have to realize that different people have different opinions about whether or not the unborn have rights.
Historically, this was not the case. They have not been recognized as people, or citizens, or as having any special status under the law.
Personally, I think differences in time are important in determining the rights of the unborn. The more capability they have to think, feel and live outside the womb, the more their life should be protected.
If you have a small set of undifferentiated cells, it is far different than having brains, fingers, eyes, nerves and so on.
Again, I do understand people have different beliefs in this and that some people feel very strongly about it. If your opinion is based on religion, don’t imagine it holds anymore weight than anyone elses opinion. However, the exact same is true for those that are not religious.
It remains important to respect other people and their right to different beliefs.
This is going to be between the majority in a democracy with a big religious push and the protections of the constitution. This play has been in the works for a long long time.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
16,000 people a year—don’t make it home[/quote]
yep, you’re right…
I couldn’t find what I was reading before but I did find this article that claims 75,766 deaths a year are attributed to alcohol…pretty sad statistic:
I agree with Irish. It should be much harder for criminals to get off on technicalities, and we should enact much harsher punishments.
Good post, vroom. It definitely seems like 2-day old fetus doesn’t have any rights while a baby 2-days away from delivery has almost as many rights as a newly born. And I don’t think we’ll ever be able to pinpoint that transition point - it’s grey area.
I have a question for those who are against abortions and at the same time think that it’s acceptable in case of rape/incest. It seems to me that the main point stressed is not the rights of a fetus, but personal responsibility of a mother and her punishment for “spreading her legs”.
The best way to teach personal responsibility and reduce number of abortions/unwanted pregnacies is to educated people about contraception options. Abortions come at quite a high price to a woman to think that ANY woman would use it as a main form of birth control.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Without getting into a pissing match, you have to realize that different people have different opinions about whether or not the unborn have rights.
Historically, this was not the case. They have not been recognized as people, or citizens, or as having any special status under the law.
Personally, I think differences in time are important in determining the rights of the unborn. The more capability they have to think, feel and live outside the womb, the more their life should be protected.
If you have a small set of undifferentiated cells, it is far different than having brains, fingers, eyes, nerves and so on.
Again, I do understand people have different beliefs in this and that some people feel very strongly about it. If your opinion is based on religion, don’t imagine it holds anymore weight than anyone elses opinion. However, the exact same is true for those that are not religious.
It remains important to respect other people and their right to different beliefs.
This is going to be between the majority in a democracy with a big religious push and the protections of the constitution. This play has been in the works for a long long time.[/quote]
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
I agree with Irish. It should be much harder for criminals to get off on technicalities, and we should enact much harsher punishments. [/quote]
You being a lawyer, you probably hear about this shit all the time. Disgusting.
I advise you guys to watch the Boondock Saints. We can have a good discussion about morality on that movie.
[quote]skor wrote:
Abortions come at quite a high price to a woman to think that ANY woman would use it as a main form of birth control.
[/quote]
I knew a girl at the UW that told me she had four abortions by the time she was twenty-two…
as much as it would be nice to think that all women have hearts of gold, the sad truth is that there are a good few VERY fucked up women out there…
well, it used to be that abortion was never condoned…even for rape/incest.
why should the kid suffer for something he didnt do?
its not punishment, but women act like they’re helpless and as if they had no say in becoming pregnant. They took a risk having sex. If they arent prepared to mother a baby, then they shouldn’t have sex.
“Choose Life”
Thank God there is a governor with the guts to stand up for the most weak and vulnerable of us all – the unborn.
May the High Court strike down the ridiculous and baseless “Roe v. Wade” ruling and put this right back to where it constitutionally belongs, and that is to the “states or to the people.”
Bravo South Dakota!