^ You're right. Adoption is so emotional. Imagine carrying a child inside you for 9 months, having it be so close to you for so long, and then letting someone else raise it. The bond between a mother and child is so strong, I can't imagine how tough it must be to but a baby up for adoption. It's such a selfless act, because you are 100% putting your baby's needs above your own.
Just because it's difficult doesn't make abortion right, just the easy way.
^ You're right. Adoption is so emotional. Imagine carrying a child inside you for 9 months, having it be so close to you for so long, and then letting someone else raise it. The bond between a mother and child is so strong, I can't imagine how tough it must be to but a baby up for adoption. It's such a selfless act, because you are 100% putting your baby's needs above your own.
Partially agree.
It's also one of the worst things you can do for a child, considering the lives many children face when put up for adoption, going from home to home and in and out of care etc...
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 14th, 2008 at 08:36pm
I have several friends who are adopted, and my goddaughter's adopted, too. They're all living very happy lives. Are you thinking of foster care, not adoption? Because usually once you get adopted, you don't switch families - they become your family.
I have several friends who are adopted, and my goddaughter's adopted, too. They're all living very happy lives. Are you thinking of foster care, not adoption? Because usually once you get adopted, you don't switch families - they become your family.
These things don't always work out.
And even if they do, it sure as hell can fuck a person up when they are told the truth. All I'm saying is, adoption is not the miracle cure pro-lifers assume it is.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 14th, 2008 at 08:41pm
No, I know. You can easily be put with a bad family as easily as you can be put with a great family. I was just saying, all my experiences with adoption have been positive. I plan to adopt - I think it's a great thing.
I'm pro-choice, by the way. A woman 110% has a right to do whatever she wants with her body.
^ You're right. Adoption is so emotional. Imagine carrying a child inside you for 9 months, having it be so close to you for so long, and then letting someone else raise it. The bond between a mother and child is so strong, I can't imagine how tough it must be to but a baby up for adoption. It's such a selfless act, because you are 100% putting your baby's needs above your own.
I can't say I like that argument.
Imagine carrying a child and then killing it. That's got to be emotional too. Either way would be hard.
a 13 or 14 year old, I would say has the right to abort
Even 13 and 14 year olds should take responsibility for their actions. They shouldn't open their legs if they're not ready for all possible outcomes.
I was talking rape really, how many 13 or 14 year olds do you know who would want to have a baby? I thought acne was enough. And ok so I suppose everybody has the right to abort, but in some cases it just seems like a real selfish thing to do.
I doubt it's about wanting to have a baby.
I'm going to guess anyone who knows how to have sex is also aware that sex produces babies.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 25th, 2008 at 01:04pm
I completely support the mother's right to do whatever she wants with her body. If you get an abortion, you may be saving a child from a terrible life that he or she doesn't deserve.
I 100% disagree that abortion is killing. They don't let you abort a child after a certain period of time - you do it before it even has time to develop. And you know what? It's legal. They do a hospital procedure that is perfectly safe and approved by doctors and the law. I know many who oppose abortion are very religious, but to me, religion has no business butting in to what women do with they're body.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
March 25th, 2008 at 03:01pm
Poette:
I completely support the mother's right to do whatever she wants with her body. If you get an abortion, you may be saving a child from a terrible life that he or she doesn't deserve.
I 100% disagree that abortion is killing. They don't let you abort a child after a certain period of time - you do it before it even has time to develop. And you know what? It's legal. They do a hospital procedure that is perfectly safe and approved by doctors and the law. I know many who oppose abortion are very religious, but to me, religion has no business butting in to what women do with they're body.
Then what is it?
I think people are just sugar-coating that term tbh. That abortion is killing, to me, is quite clear. You can kill cancer cells with chemotherapy, so why not kill embryonic cells with abortion? I know, killing has the obvious connotations of murder and violence. But that doesn't always make it a bad thing. Really, euthanasia is killing too, but I support that. Abortion stops a baby, a bunch of cells, whatever your morals see fit to term it, from continuing to live. It therefore ceases to exist. That seems like killing to me.
Not that I'm really judging abortion here. This is merely semantics.
And of the statement 'they don't let you abort a child after a certain period of time - you do it before it even has time to develop', I would beg to differ. The abortion cut-off is 24 weeks in the United Kingdom, and premature babies have been known to survive as early as 22 weeks, if not earlier. Then again, I'm just being pedantic.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 25th, 2008 at 03:51pm
I think abortion is, well, hence the term, aborting something.
Definition of abort:to stop in the early stages
In all the definition of abort, it says nothing of killing, it just says to stop something or terminate something.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
March 25th, 2008 at 05:48pm
Poette:
I think abortion is, well, hence the term, aborting something.
Definition of abort:to stop in the early stages
In all the definition of abort, it says nothing of killing, it just says to stop something or terminate something.
Yeah, but 'something' isn't just 'something' when we're talking about human life. An abortion is a termination of human life, and when we normally talk about terminating human life, we mean killing.
Definition of kill:to deprive of life in any manner
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kill
But that means nothing. I can't just base my argument on the definition of a word in black and white terms, the english language is far too diverse for that. What I can see happening here is a bid on the part of the 'pro-choice' people to create an image of abortion being a clinical, emotionless procedure. The very terms used suggest it; abort, terminate, it sounds like a computer program or something.
And in my view, we can't just hide behind bloodless and cold phrases to shield from the harsh reality of what abortion really is. Killing cells. Killing a foetus. Killing a baby. Whichever people prefer to call it. At the end of the day, this is a life and death issue, not merely a scientific procedure.
But I've long thought that the entire abortion debate sadly revolves around a ridiculous degree of sugar coating and euphemism.
Yeah, but 'something' isn't just 'something' when we're talking about human life. An abortion is a termination of human life, and when we normally talk about terminating human life, we mean killing.
Definition of kill:to deprive of life in any manner
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kill
But that means nothing. I can't just base my argument on the definition of a word in black and white terms, the english language is far too diverse for that. What I can see happening here is a bid on the part of the 'pro-choice' people to create an image of abortion being a clinical, emotionless procedure. The very terms used suggest it; abort, terminate, it sounds like a computer program or something.
And in my view, we can't just hide behind bloodless and cold phrases to shield from the harsh reality of what abortion really is. Killing cells. Killing a foetus. Killing a baby. Whichever people prefer to call it. At the end of the day, this is a life and death issue, not merely a scientific procedure.
But I've long thought that the entire abortion debate sadly revolves around a ridiculous degree of sugar coating and euphemism.
The euphemisms come from both sides though.
I get sick and tired of hearing the 'pro-life' argument that women abort to opt out of the 'inconvenience' of carrying a baby. Inconvenience? I don't think I need to point out the glaring understatement here, not to mention the gross inconsistencies within the very terms.
'Pro-life' I think not- what about the life of the mother? Not important, neither, it seems, is that of the child [i]after[/b] it is born. So-called 'pro-lifers' are only concerned with the quantity of the child's life, not the quality. Furthermore, the emotional and physical devastation that a woman endures carrying and raising a child she did not plan and does not want, is simply ignored.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 25th, 2008 at 09:03pm
Electric Pussycat:
Bloodraine:
Yeah, but 'something' isn't just 'something' when we're talking about human life. An abortion is a termination of human life, and when we normally talk about terminating human life, we mean killing.
Definition of kill:to deprive of life in any manner
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kill
But that means nothing. I can't just base my argument on the definition of a word in black and white terms, the english language is far too diverse for that. What I can see happening here is a bid on the part of the 'pro-choice' people to create an image of abortion being a clinical, emotionless procedure. The very terms used suggest it; abort, terminate, it sounds like a computer program or something.
And in my view, we can't just hide behind bloodless and cold phrases to shield from the harsh reality of what abortion really is. Killing cells. Killing a foetus. Killing a baby. Whichever people prefer to call it. At the end of the day, this is a life and death issue, not merely a scientific procedure.
But I've long thought that the entire abortion debate sadly revolves around a ridiculous degree of sugar coating and euphemism.
The euphemisms come from both sides though.
I get sick and tired of hearing the 'pro-life' argument that women abort to opt out of the 'inconvenience' of carrying a baby. Inconvenience? I don't think I need to point out the glaring understatement here, not to mention the gross inconsistencies within the very terms.
'Pro-life' I think not- what about the life of the mother? Not important, neither, it seems, is that of the child [i]after[/b] it is born. So-called 'pro-lifers' are only concerned with the quantity of the child's life, not the quality. Furthermore, the emotional and physical devastation that a woman endures carrying and raising a child she did not plan and does not want, is simply ignored.
You just said everything I feel. The "pro-life" people aren't thinking of the awful life an unwanted and unexpected child may have. They also don't think at all of how a child effects the mother. It's not emotionless - I know that. I'm sure no one actually wants an abortion - but the mother has to do what's right for her situation. I don't think people have a right to judge mothers on what they decide to do with their bodies. In many cases, I think its doing the responsible thing, to be honest.
Let's make a little example... say... Amy Winehouse got pregnant. Would the child be better off being aborted or living with it's mother? Think about that.
it just says to stop something or terminate something.
That something you're stopping are living cells. By stopping them, you make them dead cells, meaning you killed them. If you think that killing is justified you're allowed to,but to claim that abortion doesn't kill is quite ridiculous.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
March 26th, 2008 at 03:27pm
Electric Pussycat:
The euphemisms come from both sides though.
Which is why I said 'but I've long thought that the entire abortion debate sadly revolves around a ridiculous degree of sugar coating and euphemism.'
Billie's Willie Moderator Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 46473
March 26th, 2008 at 07:56pm
Poette:
the awful life an unwanted and unexpected child may have.
A child will ALWAYS be wanted. If not by the biological parents, then it will be wanted by a couple that perhaps can't even conceive a child.
Quote
the mother has to do what's right for her situation.
That's rather selfish, to be quite honest. Once you have a potential child inside of you..you need to start thinking about that life as well as your own.
Quote
Let's make a little example... say... Amy Winehouse got pregnant. Would the child be better off being aborted or living with it's mother? Think about that.
How do you know what kind of a mother she would be? In some cases a child can seriously straighten a person up. Also..just because you're a celebrity doesn't mean you can't give a child up for adoption. She wouldn't actually have to be a mother other than biologically if she didn't want to.
Rocker Chic King For A Couple Of Days Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 2001
March 27th, 2008 at 08:27pm
Billie's Willie:
Poette:
the awful life an unwanted and unexpected child may have.
A child will ALWAYS be wanted. If not by the biological parents, then it will be wanted by a couple that perhaps can't even conceive a child.
Quote
the mother has to do what's right for her situation.
That's rather selfish, to be quite honest. Once you have a potential child inside of you..you need to start thinking about that life as well as your own.
Quote
Let's make a little example... say... Amy Winehouse got pregnant. Would the child be better off being aborted or living with it's mother? Think about that.
How do you know what kind of a mother she would be? In some cases a child can seriously straighten a person up. Also..just because you're a celebrity doesn't mean you can't give a child up for adoption. She wouldn't actually have to be a mother other than biologically if she didn't want to.
I think, personally, that adoption is, in fact, the best choice if the mother can't raise her child. Adoption is fantastic. But I also think that a woman has a right to terminate her pregnancy as well, if she feels that's what's best. No one has the right to judge what a woman does with her body.
And no, I have no clue what kind of mother Amy Winehouse would be. I was just saying, if the child had a drug addicted/ alcoholic mother raising them, the child most likely wouldn't have a good life. That's all. Even if a mother gave the baby up for adoption, the child still may be physically effected because of what their mother did (drugs, drinking) while pregnant. It wouldn't effect them only if their mother decided to keep them.
Misanthropist Post Whore Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 23279
April 18th, 2008 at 07:57pm
So what does everyone think of that chick Aliza Shvarts who is using her abortions as art? some say it is an elaborate hoax but she is denying that.
I plan to adopt - I think it's a great thing.
And ok so I suppose everybody has the right to abort, but in some cases it just seems like a real selfish thing to do.