-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Yet you deem it ok to kill a person is cases of
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Dubious unprovables
The guilty person; yes.
It's quite simple.
What's the pro-abortion stance?
The pro-abortion stance promotes the provision of absolutely unfettered access by the full age-range of impregnable females to the widest possible variety of abortion procedures without concern for parental or marital notifications, no questions asked.
A shroud of non-accountabilty is granted to protect and insulate the providers of such services from inquiry by the public which funds their activities.
I don't know about the American stance, but in Britain, there is no "unfettered access". Every woman stepping up to the plate, so to speak, has to go through three doctors and a councillor before she makes a decision, and even then it may be denyed to her. Don't think that decision is Ever taken lightly. The younger a woman is, the more questions are asked, and the more provisions are made for her aftercare, both physical and mental. There are only two possible abortion procedures, either surgical, where the operation is performed ,or medical, where the woman is given a pill for the procedure to happen at home, followed by a check up, if under 12 weeks. This is legal and accountable, both to the woman herself, and to the medical staff. Where's the "shroud of non-accountability."?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
The pro-abortion stance promotes the provision of absolutely unfettered access by the full age-range of impregnable females to the widest possible variety of abortion procedures without concern for parental or marital notifications, no questions asked.
A shroud of non-accountabilty is granted to protect and insulate the providers of such services from inquiry by the public which funds their activities.
I don't know about the American stance, but in Britain, there is no "unfettered access". Every woman stepping up to the plate, so to speak, has to go through three doctors and a councillor before she makes a decision, and even then it may be denyed to her. Don't think that decision is Ever taken lightly. The younger a woman is, the more questions are asked, and the more provisions are made for her aftercare, both physical and mental. There are only two possible abortion procedures, either surgical, where the operation is performed ,or medical, where the woman is given a pill for the procedure to happen at home, followed by a check up, if under 12 weeks. This is legal and accountable, both to the woman herself, and to the medical staff. Where's the "shroud of non-accountability."?
I don't know what he refers to either, Blight.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Blight?
All I'm saying is that he's using big words and stupidlt constructed sentences to try and detract from the point he's trying to make, which isn't even valid. What public enquiry is he talking about? Unless I've either missed a point, or it's something which pertains to America and not here.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Blight?
All I'm saying is that he's using big words and stupidlt constructed sentences to try and detract from the point he's trying to make, which isn't even valid.
I've known this for some time.:happy:
He'd fit right in as an American politician. Problem is this ain't Congress.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Blight?
All I'm saying is that he's using big words and stupidlt constructed sentences to try and detract from the point he's trying to make, which isn't even valid.
I've known this for sometimes.:happy:
He'd fit right in as an American politician. Problem is this ain't Congress.
It's really annoying when you read a non-argument disguised as a highly articulate point, that when deconstructed means very little. Either say what you mean, or get off the pot. Hiding weak arguments behind verbosity is the sign of an over-inflated, slighty insecure ego. :shifty:
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
I've known this for sometimes.:happy:
He'd fit right in as an American politician. Problem is this ain't Congress.
It's really annoying when you read a non-argument disguised as a highly articulate point, that when deconstructed means very little. Either say what you mean, or get off the pot. Hiding weak arguments behind verbosity is the sign of an over-inflated, slighty insecure ego. :shifty:
Post 22?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
The pro-abortion stance promotes the provision of absolutely unfettered access by the full age-range of impregnable females to the widest possible variety of abortion procedures without concern for parental or marital notifications, no questions asked.
A shroud of non-accountabilty is granted to protect and insulate the providers of such services from inquiry by the public which funds their activities.
Where's the contradiction?:ermm: I don't think there is one pro choice or pro life stance.
While I don't agree with the stance you laid out, it make more sense than your stance. The basic point of your stance is inconsistent. You aim is to protect the unborn 'cause it's a person yet would kill it either due to YOUR perceived inconvenience or ignorance of there being a killing when it has been proven that certain medicine does kill.
I assumed you would tumble to my reference to the "guilty" as the perpetrator of the rape or incest.
Back to my personal beliefs, then-
All life is precious, and all pregnant women should bear their children, even unto death.
However, reality intrudes, as well you know.
I trust that is satisfactory.
How about you?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Fair point.
Too many words. Hurt my poor girl eyes...Only one in 16 made sense, all I think about is sex and makeup, not the consequences of my actions.
However, there always should be provision for accidents occuring. Very few women use abortion as a contraceptive, or having got that far and gone through it once, will be very careful in terms of contraception from there on in. Accidents happen, and shouldn't be paid for in the ruination of lives, the womans, her childs, and if he is interested, the father's.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Blight?
All I'm saying is that he's using big words and stupidlt constructed sentences to try and detract from the point he's trying to make, which isn't even valid. What public enquiry is he talking about? Unless I've either missed a point, or it's something which pertains to America and not here.
It is something that applies here, but apparently not there.
Apparently the possiblility you'd missed something did not preclude your impertinence, eh?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Where's the contradiction?:ermm: I don't think there is one pro choice or pro life stance.
While I don't agree with the stance you laid out, it make more sense than your stance. The basic point of your stance is inconsistent. You aim is to protect the unborn 'cause it's a person yet would kill it either due to YOUR perceived inconvenience or ignorance of there being a killing when it has been proven that certain medicine does kill.
I assumed you would tumble to my reference to the "guilty" as the perpetrator of the rape or incest.
Back to my personal beliefs, then-
All life is precious, and all pregnant women should bear their children, even unto death.
However, reality intrudes, as well you know.
I trust that is satisfactory.
How about you?
Easy to say from the point of view of someone that will never happen to. There is no point in a pregnant woman who is not interested, or able, to have the welfare of her child at heart, in having that child. Women who undertake abortions know exactly what they are doing, and live with their decisions, but weigh them up with what the alternatives would be. It's easy to theorise and judge, but not so easy to empathise and listen.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Very few women use abortion as a contraceptive,.
Another presumptive impertinence.
The opposite is true here in the U.S.
I trust this post is not too wordy for your overtaxed facilities?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Blight?
All I'm saying is that he's using big words and stupidlt constructed sentences to try and detract from the point he's trying to make, which isn't even valid. What public enquiry is he talking about? Unless I've either missed a point, or it's something which pertains to America and not here.
It
is something that applies here, but apparently not there.
Apparently the possiblility you'd missed something did not preclude your impertinence, eh?
Your choice in calling me impertinent implies percieved superiority. That is not the case here. I stated I was aware I may have missed the full argument. I was pointing out your needless verbosity, which, if anything, detracts from your intellectuality.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Very few women use abortion as a contraceptive,.
Another presumptive impertinence.
The opposite is true here in the U.S.
I trust this post is not too wordy for your overtaxed facilities?
How exactly do you know my facilities are overtaxed hmm? I am neither presumptive, nor impertinent. Shall I paraphrase.. Very few women will use abortion as a contraceptive as it is a horrible and traumatic experience and those that find themselves there, will very rarely go there again, if indeed they have gone down the route of neglecting contraception.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
There is no point in a pregnant woman who is not interested, or able, to have the welfare of her child at heart, in having that child.
Granting accidents happen, there is even less point in an "unintended" pregnancy, isn't there?
Why do you assume I do not/have not listened and/or empathized?
Are you congenitally presumptive?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
There is no point in a pregnant woman who is not interested, or able, to have the welfare of her child at heart, in having that child.
Granting accidents happen, there is even less point in an "unintended" pregnancy, isn't there?
Why do you assume I do not/have not listened and/or empathized?
Are you congenitally presumptive?
Unintended pregnancies are exactly that. Unintended, resulting in the woman having to make a harsh decision as to whether she can or will provide adequate care for that child. If there was any point in an "unintended" pregnancy, it wouldn't be unintended would it?
Quote:
Why do you assume I do not/have not listened and/or empathized?
Because you either ignore the points other people make, or drown in your own convaluted overblown tormentation of the English language before you understand what other people are trying to say.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Very few women will use abortion as a contraceptive
If you know this to be true in the U.K. (I'll trust that you do), you can trust that I am correct as to what occurs here.
as it is a horrible and traumatic experience
Again, the "family-planning" movement here is geared to assuage any guilt or trauma which might otherwise attach.
and those that find themselves there, will very rarely go there again, if indeed they have gone down the route of neglecting contraception.
And over here the presumption is an inquisitive, precocious and irresponsible young lady who can't be expected to think of contraception before sex.
Do you wish to continue in this vein?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Unintended pregnancies are exactly that. Unintended, resulting in the woman having to make a harsh decision as to whether she can or will provide adequate care for that child. If there was any point in an "unintended" pregnancy, it wouldn't be unintended would it?
Then you put no stock in the idea that forethought as to consequence might be of even small benefit?
Quote:
Why do you assume I do not/have not listened and/or empathized?
Because you either ignore the points other people make, or drown in your own convaluted overblown tormentation of the English language before you understand what other people are trying to say.
Are you pregnant?
BTW-as one who apparently disdains largish words, your spelling of even small words really sucks.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Very few women will use abortion as a contraceptive
If you know this to be true in the U.K. (I'll trust that you do), you can trust that I am correct as to what occurs here.
as it is a horrible and traumatic experience
Again, the "family-planning" movement here is geared to assuage any guilt or trauma which might otherwise attach.
and those that find themselves there, will very rarely go there again, if indeed they have gone down the route of neglecting contraception.
And over here the presumption is an inquisitive, precocious and irresponsible young lady who can't be expected to think of contraception before sex.
Do you wish to continue in this vein?
Since when was a presumption the truth?
Do all men leave the toilet seat up? Are all women bitches?
Go to any abortion clinic. You will see women from all walks of life. Young ones form the minority, but are paying the price for their ignorance, unlike young men, who are not betrayed by biology. The majority of women attending will probably be women in their twenties to fifties, who have made a decision to pay the mental price for doing what they consider to be the right thing in terms of their unborn child.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Then you put no stock in the idea that forethought as to consequence might be of even small benefit?
Unintentional belies forethought.
Yes contraception should be in the forethought of anyone getting down and dirty, but there should be provision for mistakes. Or are you perfect?
Goodnight.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcinus
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
And over here the presumption is an inquisitive, precocious and irresponsible young lady who can't be expected to think of contraception before sex.
Do you wish to continue in this vein?
Since when was a presumption the truth?
Do all men leave the toilet seat up?
Not that I'm aware of.
Are all women bitches?
No; the few I know who'll admit to it are raher proud of it, though.
Go to any abortion clinic. You will see women from all walks of life. Young ones form the minority, but are paying the price for their ignorance, unlike young men, who are not betrayed by biology. The majority of women attending will probably be women in their twenties to fifties, who have made a decision to pay the mental price for doing what they consider to be the right thing in terms of their unborn child.
I have done, and I go by what I know.
If things are different there, fine, then I'm not talking about the U.K., and, in any case, Roe v. Wade is American, rather than U.K., law.
If I make a statement about how things are here, the lone fact you are female does not entitle you to dispute what I say.
You are entitled to advocate for women, as am I.
My objection is with a flawed system, and the fact of my manhood does not preclude my commenting on it.
We believe differently; of that there is no doubt.
The rest is socio-geographic.
I will unilaterally agree to disagree with you; sorry, but I'm an American, and you know how we are.
As to your spelling, I'm sure you don't remember your pointing out a mistake I made a few days ago; my compulsion to point out your mistake is nothing but another goose/gander thing.
I'm sure you understand.
Goodnight to you, too.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Where's the contradiction?:ermm: I don't think there is one pro choice or pro life stance.
While I don't agree with the stance you laid out, it make more sense than your stance. The basic point of your stance is inconsistent. You aim is to protect the unborn 'cause it's a person yet would kill it either due to YOUR perceived inconvenience or ignorance of there being a killing when it has been proven that certain medicine does kill.
I assumed you would tumble to my reference to the "guilty" as the perpetrator of the rape or incest.
Back to my personal beliefs, then-
All life is precious, and all pregnant women should bear their children, even unto death.
However, reality intrudes, as well you know.
I trust that is satisfactory.
How about you?
Eh? You said life is precious yet condone killing a child due to rape or incest and the possible killing with medication through no fault of the child.
That makes no sense, j2.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ava Estelle
Rock on South Dakota!
Babies 1, Murderers 0.
@ Busyman: Get a womb or get a life.
You don't read well, Billy.
Fed > State
Oh and Billy, suck ass.
The name's Nancy actually, and if sucking your ass, wherever it is situated, would save a single life, I would gladly oblige.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ava Estelle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
You don't read well, Billy.
Fed > State
Oh and Billy, suck ass.
The name's Nancy actually, and if sucking your ass, wherever it is situated, would save a single life, I would gladly oblige.
Whatever, Billy.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I assumed you would tumble to my reference to the "guilty" as the perpetrator of the rape or incest.
Back to my personal beliefs, then-
All life is precious, and all pregnant women should bear their children, even unto death.
However, reality intrudes, as well you know.
I trust that is satisfactory.
How about you?
Eh? You said life is precious yet condone killing a child due to rape or incest and the possible killing with medication through no fault of the child.
That makes no sense, j2.
On the other hand, turning a blind eye to abortion does?
Or excusing it by not defining it as killing?
You've witnessed how abortion can now be performed on a half-born baby...what's next, killing them in the crib, by way of continually expanding women's rights?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Eh? You said life is precious yet condone killing a child due to rape or incest and the possible killing with medication through no fault of the child.
That makes no sense, j2.
On the other hand, turning a blind eye to abortion does?
Or excusing it by not defining it as killing?
You've witnessed how abortion can now be performed on a half-born baby...what's next, killing them in the crib, by way of continually expanding women's rights?
Then focus on banning late-term abortions......
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Then focus on banning late-term abortions......
I agree, but it just shifts the argument to one of 'how late is late?' and i don't think there is a good answer to that.
Just out of interest j2 & jpaul, as the resident pro-lifers (or the closest thing we have) where do you stand on fertility clinics? I'm betting that neither of you having any big objection to them, despite the contradictions this presents.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilw
Quote:
Then focus on banning late-term abortions......
I agree, but it just shifts the argument to one of 'how late is late?' and i don't think there is a good answer to that.
Just out of interest j2 & jpaul, as the resident pro-lifers (or the closest thing we have) where do you stand on fertility clinics? I'm betting that neither of you having any big objection to them, despite the contradictions this presents.
You a betting man then, do you lose a lot.
It is my belief that a human being is a human being from the moment of conception. As such they have the human rights of every other human being. I do not believe that the mother or father has the right to take that life, because they will not be able to provide properly (in their opinion) for the child.
As such I consider it wrong to fertilize eggs then throw them away. Particularly if the only justification for it is a better hit rate.
Re your two year old v fertilized eggs scenario, I find it ridiculous. The two year old would be saved every time. For a myriad of reasons.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilw
I agree, but it just shifts the argument to one of 'how late is late?' and i don't think there is a good answer to that.
Just out of interest j2 & jpaul, as the resident pro-lifers (or the closest thing we have) where do you stand on fertility clinics? I'm betting that neither of you having any big objection to them, despite the contradictions this presents.
You a betting man then, do you lose a lot.
It is my belief that a human being is a human being from the moment of conception. As such they have the human rights of every other human being. I do not believe that the mother or father has the right to take that life, because they will not be able to provide properly (in their opinion) for the child.
As such I consider it wrong to fertilize eggs then throw them away. Particularly if the only justification for it is a better hit rate.
Re your two year old v fertilized eggs scenario, I find it ridiculous. The two year old would be saved every time. For a myriad of reasons.
What you said.
As to JPaul and myself, I am relatively confident that our views parallel each other closely where this issue pops up, and we both are possessed of a tolerance many in the pro-"choice" crowd lack.
We hold our views firmly, will argue unto death the rightness of our convictions, and, although we may judge, we condemn no one for believing differently.
I cannot dismiss others so easily.
The world embraces us all.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
What you said.
:dry:
Hmm I forgot about fertility clinics. Your beliefs still contradict a child's right to life even in a rape, incest, or "unproven gunshot in the dark".
It's like saying "moment of conception...oh wait".
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
What you said.
:dry:
Hmm I forgot about fertility clinics. Your beliefs still contradict a child's right to life even in a rape, incest, or "unproven gunshot in the dark".
It's like saying "moment of conception...oh wait".
I notice your own specific views are conspicuously missing.
Correct this oversight and we can see about you, then.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
:dry:
Hmm I forgot about fertility clinics. Your beliefs still contradict a child's right to life even in a rape, incest, or "unproven gunshot in the dark".
It's like saying "moment of conception...oh wait".
I notice your own specific views are conspicuously missing.
Correct this oversight and we can see about
you, then.
Oh I'm pro-choice. Ya heard.
Rape, incest, her own life threatened, unwanted child, morning after pill...those cases of abortion are the right of the mother. She will have to deal with any mental or physical consequences.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
What you said.
:dry:
Hmm I forgot about fertility clinics. Your beliefs still contradict a child's right to life even in a rape, incest, or "unproven gunshot in the dark".
It's like saying "moment of conception...oh wait".
No, the child's right to life is paramount.
However I can see instances where there is an argument to take that right away, much as I disagree with the argument I can see why people would make it. As you suggest, rape may be one such example.
That is to make the distinction between such a case and for example abortion as a matter of convenience (career /lifestyle), or cosmetics.
I can also see an examples where it is the better of two choices. If the mother will die if she carries on with the pregnancy, perhaps leaving other children and family behind.
Unfortunately it is not the straightforward issue you suggest.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I notice your own specific views are conspicuously missing.
Correct this oversight and we can see about you, then.
Oh I'm pro-choice. Ya heard.
Rape, incest, her own life threatened, unwanted child, morning after pill...those cases of abortion are the right of the mother. She will have to deal with any mental or physical consequences.
Late-term abortion; the works, I'm sure.
Should the man have a similar right to unilaterally withdraw from the situation once a prospective pregnancy becomes hard fact?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Oh I'm pro-choice. Ya heard.
Rape, incest, her own life threatened, unwanted child, morning after pill...those cases of abortion are the right of the mother. She will have to deal with any mental or physical consequences.
Late-term abortion; the works, I'm sure.
Should the man have a similar right to unilaterally withdraw from the situation once a prospective pregnancy becomes hard fact?
Define late-term abortion.
What's "the works"?
What's the difference between a man withdrawing from the situation and a man unilaterally withdrawing from the situtation?
What's the difference between a pregnancy and a prospective pregnancy?
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Late-term abortion; the works, I'm sure.
Should the man have a similar right to unilaterally withdraw from the situation once a prospective pregnancy becomes hard fact?
Define late-term abortion.
Partial-birth abortion.
What's "the works"?
Anything goes, in any and every circumstance; the decision belonging solely to the woman.
What's the difference between a man withdrawing from the situation and a man unilaterally withdrawing from the situtation?
As when a woman procures an abortion absent consultation with the father.
What's the difference between a pregnancy and a prospective pregnancy?
When a pregnancy has been medically confirmed, as opposed to merely suspected or stated.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Define late-term abortion.
Partial-birth abortion.
PBA is a made up term referring to a procedure. However you originally had "term". I don't know much about the procedure.
What's "the works"?
Anything goes, in any and every circumstance; the decision belonging solely to the woman.
You are too vague. Tell me what "goes".:huh:
What's the difference between a man withdrawing from the situation and a man unilaterally withdrawing from the situtation?
As when a woman procures an abortion absent consultation with the father.
Then your original question makes no sense. First off, you haven't explained the difference in his withdrawal versus his unilateral withdrawal. Second, what right does he have since he bears no burden in the actual carrying of the baby and it's birth? He of course has a domestic say but nothing should be legal.
What's the difference between a pregnancy and a prospective pregnancy?
When a pregnancy has been medically confirmed, as opposed to merely suspected or stated.
Oh ok, when she's pregnant then.:mellow:
Either way, the answer is above in red.
Btw, italicizing sentences within a quote is unnecessary. The quote tags do it for you.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
When a pregnancy has been medically confirmed, as opposed to merely suspected or stated.
Oh ok, when she's pregnant then.:mellow:
Either way, the answer is above in red.
Btw, italicizing sentences within a quote is unnecessary. The quote tags do it for you.
When the baby "crowns", it is being born, is it not?
At this point, the attending physician takes a sharp instrument (usually scissors) and plunges it through the soft aperture on top of the baby's head, and rummages around (much as you would, if you were trying with a knife to scrounge from a nearly empty jar of peanut butter), causing massive and fatal injury to the infant's brain.
That is what "PBA" is; the 'made-up procedure you know nothing of, apart from it's acronym.
As to your question about the "unilateral withdrawal" of the father from the event of a pregnancy:
I intended you to conclude the father copped out with notification to the mother, but without consultation as to her wishes; hence my use of the word, unilateral.
If I had used both terms ("withdrawal" as well as "unilateral withdrawal"), I might consider I owe you an explanation; however, I used the single formulation, which I'll continue with.
Back to the point:
The woman's decision to bear the child is hers alone, so you say.
Now, you, as a black man, and as an advocate for "choice", must purchase the idea of unqualified equality, correct?
Do you, as a male, abdicate the entire decision for yourself as well as the rest of the male population?
Oh, hell-here, read it yourself-
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...603090385/1005
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Oh ok, when she's pregnant then.:mellow:
Either way, the answer is above in red.
Btw, italicizing sentences within a quote is unnecessary. The quote tags do it for you.
When the baby "crowns", it is being
born, is it not?
At this point, the attending physician takes a sharp instrument (usually scissors) and plunges it through the soft aperture on top of the baby's head, and rummages around (much as
you would, if you were trying with a knife to scrounge from a nearly empty jar of peanut butter), causing massive and fatal injury to the infant's brain.
That is what "PBA" is; the 'made-up procedure you know nothing of, apart from it's acronym.
Sounds icky. At what stage of pregnancy is the procedure performed?
As to your question about the "unilateral withdrawal" of the father from the event of a pregnancy:
I intended you to conclude the father copped out with notification to the mother, but without consultation as to her wishes; hence my use of the word,
unilateral.
If
I had used both terms ("withdrawal" as well as "unilateral withdrawal"), I might consider I owe you an explanation; however, I used the single formulation, which I'll continue with.
Unilateral still makes no sense. He either withdraws or not.
Back to the point:
The woman's decision to bear the child is hers alone, so you say.
Now, you, as a black man, and as an advocate for "choice", must purchase the idea of unqualified equality, correct?
Do you, as a male, abdicate the entire decision for yourself as well as the rest of the male population?
Oh, hell-here, read it yourself-
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...603090385/1005
I just read the title and nothing else. He fucked her, he bears financial responsibility...how much is another story. Wear a condom.
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
[QUOTE=Busyman]
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
When the baby "crowns", it is being born, is it not?
At this point, the attending physician takes a sharp instrument (usually scissors) and plunges it through the soft aperture on top of the baby's head, and rummages around (much as you would, if you were trying with a knife to scrounge from a nearly empty jar of peanut butter), causing massive and fatal injury to the infant's brain.
That is what "PBA" is; the 'made-up procedure you know nothing of, apart from it's acronym.
Sounds icky. At what stage of pregnancy is the procedure performed?
And that last sentence demonstrates the intellectual engagement you normally practice, I see...
I just read the title and nothing else. He fucked her, he bears financial responsibility...how much is another story. Wear a condom.
She fucked him, too, right?
But she continues to fuck him, and he's decided (late, as women often do), he wants to say "NO".
That fits the definition of rape, seems to me...;)
-
Re: South Dakota Bans Abortion..Oh Wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
She fucked him, too, right?
But she continues to fuck him, and he's decided (late, as women often do), he wants to say "NO".
That fits the definition of rape, seems to me...;)
Nah the rape, in some cases, is how much he has to pay.
Last time I checked, the entire adult male populace knew that sex can produce babies and that people govern their own bodies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Sounds icky. At what stage of pregnancy is the procedure performed?
And that last sentence demonstrates the intellectual engagement you normally practice, I see...
At what stage of pregnancy is the procedure performed...oic.
