Skip to main content

What would happen to our society if we didn't have legal abortions? What is the worse that could you think would happen? Would civilization end as we know it?

Would young women die from self performed abortions as in the past? Or would they put them up for adoption as in the past or maybe work harder to keep from getting pregnant in the first place?

Are people fighting to save the right to legal abortions for the greater good of society or because we are caught up in the "us vs. them" game and mentality that politics bring about?
_______________________ "Morality cannot be legislated but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart but they can restrain the heartless." Martin Luther King.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The worst thing that could happen is the flaw and contradiction in being anti-abortion and anti-social safety nets will be exposed. While the majority of Black folk who are anti-abortion are for the most part pro-social safety nets, white folk are anti-abortion and anti-social safety nets that helps the poor with the raising of children.

I an not pro-choice but I believe it to be insane to force a woman to have a child, and then remove all the social safety nets that would help her with child care, feeding her children and providing for them in general and then blame the very condition created by the removal of those social safety nets as the reason for Black povery and criminality.
Statistically poor white women are the highest group supported by these "safety net" programs. So, white people would be doing a great disservice to their own people if they did no abortion AND no support.

The question is if ROWE V WADE was overturned, not programs like WICK and medicaid.

I am anti-abortion 100%. Lets see if any jerks want to ask me what about rape, without getting too personal, I WOULD NEVER ABORT~

If "RAPE" victims are a major reason abortion should stay, then how about we try to laws that keep rapist behind bars for more than a max of 7 years.
quote:
Originally posted by Texas Star:
I am anti-abortion 100%. Lets see if any jerks want to ask me what about rape, without getting too personal, I WOULD NEVER ABORT~

Now, is there any practical reason that your choice about your body should overshadow someone else's choice over their body?

quote:
If "RAPE" victims are a major reason abortion should stay, then how about we try to laws that keep rapist behind bars for more than a max of 7 years.

Rape victims are not the major reason. The major reason is that everyone derserves the final say over what happens to their own body. Period.

Also, let's not forget what we're talking about here. Rowe vs. Wade is not about abortion, it's about abortion law. Abortion is not going anywhere, regardless of what is decided about the law.
Black Viking:

Hummm, rowe v wade is not about abortion, its about abortion law.. What?

I said I AM AGAINST it, I could care less what other people do with their bodies, I AM AGAINST IT, I WOULD NEVER DO IT. And I could care less if ROWE V Wade was over turned. I think abortion is a scape goat, and its promoted. Too many abortions kills the womb anyway.

I said if rape victims are A major reason, and yes rape victims are a major reason for the debate. NOT THE ONLY REASON, I said A MAJOR REASON...

If everyone deserves the final say on what happens to their body, my point again, we should have laws that put rapists behind bars for more than 7 years. So, they cannot continue to rape women/boys.

And the CHILD does not have the right to say what happens to their body in the womb.... So, what about that part???
quote:
Originally posted by Sweetwuzzy:
Mass vacations to Canada and Mexico. Most likely botched up abortion procedures. Huge uproar and protest. Rise of feminist issues in the media.


And, don't forget about a bunch of angry white men.

See, in the past, Travis gets Becky pregnant. Becky tells Travis, who adamently denies responsibility and kicks Becky to the curb; But not before trashing her in the community by floating rumors that Becky is a tramp and a slut. For good measure, Travis has his friends co-sign her slutdom by say they also slept with her, or knew someone who knew someone who did. Realizing that Travis is an A$$ and she is alone dealing with this, Becky just went and got an abortion and Travis was off the hook.

Travis depended on Becky's inability to definitively prove Travis' paternity to force her to get an abortion.

But now, Travis has real problems. Becky can't just go out and get an abortion, but she now has DNA testing to definitively establish paternity.

And it gets worse for Travis' century old dodge, for the past decade, child support enforcement agencies have sharpened their tools [ranging from attaching paychecks, suspending driver's licenses to sending deadbeats to jail] for collecting child support. In fact, a cottage industry has grown up based on finding deadbeats and attaching paychecks.
quote:
Originally posted by Texas Star:
Statistically poor white women are the highest group supported by these "safety net" programs. So, white people would be doing a great disservice to their own people if they did no abortion AND no support.



And what does that prove? for example, if four out of ten white folk use a particular social safety net and three out of ten Black folk use the same social safety net, then it is true more white folk use it when counting the number of users, however when you talk about usage based on population than it would be clear since white folk out number us one to five (possibly higher) that we are disproportionately affected by the cutting of these programs based on our population, the wealth gap, income gap and every other gap resulting from our life here in America.

I couldn't careless if one is pro or anti abortion, if you think you can force a woman to have a child because you think abortion is wrong than you sure as hell better be ready to help her care for that child as long as the child is in need of care. But we know you anti-abortion types are not like that, you simply want to force a woman to have the child and then later on lock her child up to feed the Prison Industrial Complex and say of her she was and is an unfit parent when she knew that from the start. One monster feeds the other.
quote:
What would happen to our society if we didn't have legal abortions? What is the worse that could you think would happen? Would civilization end as we know it?

Would young women die from self performed abortions as in the past? Or would they put them up for adoption as in the past or maybe work harder to keep from getting pregnant in the first place?

Are people fighting to save the right to legal abortions for the greater good of society or because we are caught up in the "us vs. them" game and mentality that politics bring about?


If R v W is overturned, it will not be the end of civilization as we know it. And as Black Viking commented, overturning Roe will not end abortions. People will continue to have them, maybe in less safe/sanitary circumstances, but none the less, they will continue.

I am Pro-Choice. More specifically, Pro-Choice for women to have control over their bodies. But more specifically, I am Anti-government invading the sanctity of anyone's bedroom or doctor's office to declare what anyone can or cannot do with their bodies.

My sentiments are best summed up by a bumper sticker I saw: "You are Anti-abortion. Great. Don't have one."
quote:
Originally posted by Texas Star:
Black Viking:

Hummm, rowe v wade is not about abortion, its about abortion law.. What?

You do understand the difference between an action, and the laws that govern that action. Don't you?

The point is that abortions will not stop just because Rowe vs. Wade is overturned.

quote:
I said I AM AGAINST it, I could care less what other people do with their bodies, I AM AGAINST IT, I WOULD NEVER DO IT.

That's good. Everyone should have that choice.

quote:
I said if rape victims are A major reason, and yes rape victims are a major reason for the debate. NOT THE ONLY REASON, I said A MAJOR REASON...

I also said major reason. I never said "only".

quote:
And the CHILD does not have the right to say what happens to their body in the womb.... So, what about that part???

The child is still a part of the woman's body when it's in the womb. It is incapable of independant life. It's like a finger, or a hand. Is it alive? Yes. But, if you cut it off it quickly dies. A fetus is no different.
Okay black viking, I see how your trying to make a point. But you said ROWE vs WADE was not about abortion. Is reparations not about slavery?.. Its entirely about abortion, AND the laws around it. How is ROWE v WADE even a topic if its only about the right to choose. COME ON...That's like saying the Amber alert isn't about kidnapping, its just about ways to prevent kidnapping.. COME ON.... Your right abortion won't stop b/c ROWE v WADE was overturned. We have laws against murder, and that hasn't stopped people from killing. It just doesn't promote or support the idea in any way. I think abortion should be illegal. I could care less if people do alot of illegal things, like smoke crack. If this is about choice, then the woman should choose to be more responsible. I mean, most women know how not to get pregnant. For the most part, if you don't want to get pregnant you won't. There are only about 5 fertile days in the month out of the entire month that most woman are able to even get pregnant.

"The child is still a part of the woman's body when it's in the womb. It is incapable of independant life. It's like a finger, or a hand. Is it alive? Yes. But, if you cut it off it quickly dies. A fetus is no different."

Are you f-ing serious????? A fetus is like a finger? I have control over my finger.. I don't have control over what the baby is doing in my body. Have you EVER seen a fetus in the womb? Have you ever had the joy of seeing a baby during a sonogram? Its nothing like a damn finger. I really hope your a man. Because Im assuming you want to continue raw doggin it, and just pay 500 bucks to take care of that extra finger that comes along after that sort of irresponsibility.: )

Sorry, I see your trying to debate here, but your points are not being taken.
quote:
Originally posted by Texas Star:
Are you f-ing serious????? A fetus is like a finger?

Yes. I'm f-ing serious.

quote:
I have control over my finger.. I don't have control over what the baby is doing in my body.

You don't have control over what you heart, or liver, or kidneys are doing inside of your body. Are they any less a part of your body? Manual control is not the point.

quote:
Have you EVER seen a fetus in the womb? Have you ever had the joy of seeing a baby during a sonogram?

Yes and yes.

quote:
I really hope your a man.

Yes, I am.

quote:
Because Im assuming you want to continue raw doggin it, and just pay 500 bucks to take care of that extra finger that comes along after that sort of irresponsibility.: )

That's purely ridiculus. Sexual responsibility is an issue that I take very seriously. But, like most anti-abortionists, you've assumed that pro-chice equals pro-abortion. Pro-choice equals pro-choice.
quote:
Originally posted by Texas Star:
Okay black viking, I see how your trying to make a point. But you said ROWE vs WADE was not about abortion. Is reparations not about slavery?.. Its entirely about abortion, AND the laws around ...


The way I see it is that there are a number of situations in life that involve decisions that might result in death. Do we or do we not go to war? ... Do we or do we not favor capital punishment?... etc.

These issues, even though they involve death, are not entirely about killing people. Just because you think that a country has a right to go to war under certain circumstances does NOT mean you're pro-death. But you favor that right because of the greater evils that might result were it not for having that prerogative.

So it is I believe to be the case with Roe vs. Wade. Yes you can be pro-choice without being pro-abortion. And you're pro-choice not because you think it's such a great thing but because of the greater evils that might result were it not for having that prerogative.

The pro-life position, though I understand and sympathize with it, can only be maintained by having sentimental and unrealistic ideas about life. The fact is: Life involves death. Death is a part of it. As unpleasant as that might be there's no getting around it. And few people (soldiers in war or convicted death row inmates or anyone else for that matter) die willingly or have much of a say in the manner of their death.
Last edited {1}
The great irony:

Insofar as men disproportionately hold positions of power and influence, all too frequently men are given the power to decide life or death.

Women, on the other hand, who are the source of all life, are now being threatened with the loss of this power in the one domain in which they've been able to exercise it: that of their own bodies. Men are expanding the sphere of power in which they decide life or death to the very source of life.
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:
I couldn't careless if one is pro or anti abortion, if you think you can force a woman to have a child because you think abortion is wrong than you sure as hell better be ready to help her care for that child as long as the child is in need of care.


Don't Have Children That You Cannot Afford To Take Care Of

First of all it is not mine or anyone else's responsibility to care for a child that someone else brings into the world. If someone does not want to have a child, then like most intelligent people, that person should take precautions to prevent pregnancy by utilizing the birth control that's available. But abortion should never be used a method of birth control. If you don't want kids, then wrap it up, and be consistent about it. Don't get pregnant, then later decide "oh, having babies ain't for me." I am truly disgusted by today's casual attitudes towards having children and relationships. No one seems to be taking anything seriously. People bring innocent children into the mess they call their life, and once they realize they haven't prepared themselves to be responsible parents, they either ignore their responsibilities as fathers or they get rid of the baby like it's last night's trash.

If you don't want children, then for God's sake take precautions to prevent pregnancy so that you don't have to put yourself and innocents in traumatic and fatal predicaments. Perhaps if Rowe vs. Wade were overtuned, people would make much better decisions about how and with whom they have sex and perhaps even be a lot less abortion dependent and "accident prone." This issue is really about accountability, and children should not have to suffer because some of us refuse to acknowledge it.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by MidLifeMan:
What would happen to our society if we didn't have legal abortions? What is the worse that could you think would happen? Would civilization end as we know it?

Would young women die from self performed abortions as in the past? Or would they put them up for adoption as in the past or maybe work harder to keep from getting pregnant in the first place?

Are people fighting to save the right to legal abortions for the greater good of society or because we are caught up in the "us vs. them" game and mentality that politics bring about?


women would do want they always did - go to backyard operators and risk their health.

Or pay lots of money and still risk their health.

Less women would today put their children up for adoption. Most did only under pressure from others, not from choice.
.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, most American women will still have no problem having access to legal abortions.

Roe says that its unconstitutional to ban abortions. Overturning Roe will be saying that states CAN, if they choose, ban abortions. And while some states will, most states won't. And the ones that won't make up the vast majority of the population. So the majority of women will not have to travel to Canada or to another state to have an abortion.

As for those women who live in states that won't ban abortion, if the right means that much to them, they're over 50% of the population. Let them vote in new state legislatures and repeal the bans. If they choose not to, then let it be on them.

As for a federal ban, the issue is too contentious, and the country is too split, for a federal ban to succeed, or to last for long unrepealed. The anti-choicers don't have enough of a mandate to make that happen.
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:
I couldn't careless if one is pro or anti abortion, if you think you can force a woman to have a child because you think abortion is wrong than you sure as hell better be ready to help her care for that child as long as the child is in need of care.


Don't Have Children That You Cannot Afford To Take Care Of

First of all it is not mine or anyone else's responsibility to care for a child that someone else brings into the world. If someone does not want to have a child, then like most intelligent people, that person should take precautions to prevent pregnancy by utilizing the birth control that's available. But abortion should never be used a method of birth control. If you don't want kids, then wrap it up, and be consistent about it. Don't get pregnant, then later decide "oh, having babies ain't for me." I am truly disgusted by today's casual attitudes towards having children and relationships. No one seems to be taking anything seriously. People bring innocent children into the mess they call their life, and once they realize they haven't prepared themselves to be responsible parents, they either ignore their responsibilities as fathers or they get rid of the baby like it's last night's trash.

If you don't want children, then for God's sake take precautions to prevent pregnancy so that you don't have to put yourself and innocents in traumatic and fatal predicaments. Perhaps if Rowe vs. Wade were overtuned, people would make much better decisions about how and with whom they have sex and perhaps even be a lot less abortion dependent and "accident prone." This issue is really about accountability, and children should not have to suffer because some of us refuse to acknowledge it.


You see, this is the kind of foolishness I am talking about right here. The first thing the anti-abortionist yell when confronted with the idea that if they want to force a person to have a child then they sure as hell better be ready to help support that child is; it is not there responsibility to care for some else's child, however these same individuals have taken it upon themselves to take responsibility and action in many cases as to rather or not this person has the child but upon birth they remove themselves after injecting themselves into the lives of other folk. Then they get on their self righteous high horse and say if you don't want a child take precautions, use birth control, use condoms.

It is my belief that if you want to deny women abortions than you and those like you should be prepared to help care for the children that will be born and make sure they will be cared for or allow those responsible for the child to take responsibility for their actions by killing the child in the womb. The pro-choice crowd need to stop the foolishness as well and admit that abortion is the killing of a child, the stopping of life in the womb and that it is being done for what ever reason be it the mother and father believe they are unfit or not ready to be parents but please stop trying to redefine life as it begins in the womb of a woman.

I am not pro-choice or anti-abortion as defined by those who describe themselves as these things but I have an opinion and it is that if I am unwilling to help care for a child then I will not inject myself in the lives of others by way of forcing them to have a child they believe they are unable to care for. It is they who will have to deal with the end results of their actions and how it is viewed in the eyes of the God they believe in.

Lastly, any arguments about precautions is irrelevant when talking about abortion, being that for an abortion to happen pregnancy will have to be the reality we are dealing with, and thus taking precaution is no longer on the table because the woman is pregnant. It makes little sense to say to a pregnant woman, take precaution so that you will not get pregnant. Women who take precaution don't get pregnant in most cases.

Maybe if an when Rowe V. Wade is overturned, women that have babies they would have otherwise aborted will start dropping their children off at the political headquarters and homes of the anti-abortionist and say to them, here is the child you so wanted me to have, take responsibility for your actions. sck
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:
You see, this is the kind of foolishness I am talking about right here. The first thing the anti-abortionist yell when confronted with the idea that if they want to force a person to have a child then they sure as hell better be ready to help support that child is; it is not there responsibility to care for some else's child, however these same individuals have taken it upon themselves to take responsibility and action in many cases as to rather or not this person has the child but upon birth they remove themselves after injecting themselves into the lives of other folk. Then they get on their self righteous high horse and say if you don't want a child take precautions, use birth control, use condoms.

It is my belief that if you want to deny women abortions than you and those like you should be prepared to help care for the children that will be born and make sure they will be cared for or allow those responsible for the child to take responsibility for their actions by killing the child in the womb. The pro-choice crowd need to stop the foolishness as well and admit that abortion is the killing of a child, the stopping of life in the womb and that it is being done for what ever reason be it the mother and father believe they are unfit or not ready to be parents but please stop trying to redefine life as it begins in the womb of a woman.

I am not pro-choice or anti-abortion as defined by those who describe themselves as these things but I have an opinion and it is that if I am unwilling to help care for a child then I will not inject myself in the lives of others by way of forcing them to have a child they believe they are unable to care for. It is they who will have to deal with the end results of their actions and how it is viewed in the eyes of the God they believe in.

Lastly, any arguments about precautions is irrelevant when talking about abortion, being that for an abortion to happen pregnancy will have to be the reality we are dealing with, and thus taking precaution is no longer on the table because the woman is pregnant. It makes little sense to say to a pregnant woman, take precaution so that you will not get pregnant. Women who take precaution don't get pregnant in most cases.

Maybe if an when Rowe V. Wade is overturned, women that have babies they would have otherwise aborted will start dropping their children off at the political headquarters and homes of the anti-abortionist and say to them, here is the child you so wanted me to have, take responsibility for your actions. sck


yeah appl appl tfro hat tfro yeah
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:

I an not pro-choice but I believe it to be insane to force a woman to have a child, and then remove all the social safety nets that would help her with child care, feeding her children and providing for them in general and then blame the very condition created by the removal of those social safety nets as the reason for Black povery and criminality.


The powerful mind of the Brainwashed Kneegrow never fails to amaze me.

Faheem IF this is the hardship that a child will eventually face WHAT DO YOU PLACE UPON THE BACKS OF THE MOTHER and the FELLA that will have sex with her as to the CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS?

I keep trying to feel out you and your running buddy Noah. You all are NOT naturalists. You are not inclined to be seen at reggae concerts chewing on a root conversing with a measure of spirituality about you.

You both are classical LIBERALS.

You operate off of your ideology than you pay attention to the END RESULTS of what you believe.

When are you going to start CHERISHING that Black baby that God has created for the couple who has pro-created? When are you going to see that ONLY THE DEFENSE OF THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THIS GIFT WAS CREATED IS GOING TO DELIVER US A "KING" TO LEAD THE MASSES FORWARD?

Instead you IMMEDIATELY talk about how THE DAMNED GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRED TO FEED SOMEBODY'S KID.

If the God-verment fails to do it's job WHERE ARE YOU AND THE REST OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY TO STEP IN AND TAKE OVER?

Why do you look to the same government that ENSLAVED YOU to now FEED YOUR DAMNED KIDS?
quote:
Originally posted by Faheem:
However these same individuals have taken it upon themselves to take responsibility and action in many cases as to rather [whether] or not this person has the child but upon birth they remove themselves after injecting themselves into the lives of other folk.


Honestly, I don't care if Rowe vs. Wade gets overtuned, and I would never take actions to prevent someone from having an abortion. I consider myself a preventionist, and what I've emphasized here is prevention. People need to understand that everything you do has consequences. And if do not want to find yourself in a jam, then there are precautions that you can take so that you won't have find yourself having to deal with this problem in the first place.

quote:
Any arguments about precautions is irrelevant when talking about abortion. It makes little sense to say to a pregnant woman, take precaution so that you will not get pregnant. Women who take precaution don't get pregnant in most cases.


I expected this response, and I strongly disagree with it. Have you not considered those young men and women who have yet to have children? Educating teens and young adults, for example, about how very important it is to take precautions when participating in sexual activity outside of marriage can deter some of them from turning in abortion-dependent adults. And what of those men and women who consistently find themselves pregnant with babies they cannot afford? Shouldn't something be done to control this irresponsible behavior, which ultimately impacts us all?
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
Honestly I don't care if Rowe vs. Wade gets overtuned. And I would never take actions to prevent someone from having an abortion. What I've emphasized here is prevention. People need to understand that everything you do has consequences and if do not want to find yourself in a jam, then there are precautions that you can take so that you won't have find yourself having to deal with this problem in the first place.


Rowe, I hear what you're saying... I don't favor irresponsible sex or using abortion as "contraception" either... But no form of contraception is perfect... And life happens... People lose jobs... situations arise which make it difficult to contemplate bringing a child into the world... Things are not black and white ... Where's your sense of mercy?.... How can you not care if Rowe vs. Wade is overturned?
And how can you not care especially when the people making these laws say things like

"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."

?????????????????


Many of the anti-Roe legislators are the same people chipping away at Civil Rights for goodness sake... There's a lot more at stake than old fashion sexual morality and "personal responsibility"
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
And what of those men and women who consistently have children that they cannot afford? Shouldn't something be done to control this irresponsible behavior, which ultimately impacts us all?

yeahThis is one of the reasons that I so stress the importance of sexual responsibility.

quote:
Educating teens and young adults, for example, about how very important it is to take precautions when participating in sexual activity can deter some folks from turning in abortion-dependent adults

No, Sister Rowe. Who are these "abortion-dependent adults"? Every woman that I have ever known that has had an abortion, has said that they would do anything to avoid having to do it again. Abortion is a physically, mentally, and emotionally painfull experience. The entire concept that abortion is used as a method of birth control, IMO, is generated by people who have never had one... typically men!
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Rowe, I hear what you're saying... I don't favor irresponsible sex or using abortion as "contraception" either... But no form of contraception is perfect... And life happens... People lose jobs... situations arise which make it difficult to contemplate bringing a child into the world... Things are not black and white ... Where's your sense of mercy?.... How can you not care if Rowe vs. Wade is overturned?


Contraception may not be perfect Honestbrother, but it's better than using none at all. And yes, life does happen, but I don't think that the life of a person should be treated like an afterthought. It's not as if you're changing wedding plans or rescheduling a lunch date. And I don't think the overtuning of Rowe vs. Wade will matter because people will do whatever the hell they want to do with themselves, regardless of a law. If someone really wants to get rid of a baby, then they're going to do that. That is I why I am a strong advocate for PREVENTION.
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Rowe, I hear what you're saying... I don't favor irresponsible sex or using abortion as "contraception" either... But no form of contraception is perfect... And life happens... People lose jobs... situations arise which make it difficult to contemplate bringing a child into the world... Things are not black and white ... Where's your sense of mercy?.... How can you not care if Rowe vs. Wade is overturned?


Contraception may not be perfect Honestbrother, but it's better than using none at all. And yes, life does happen, but I don't think that the life of person should be treated as an afterthought. It's not as if you're changing wedding plans or rescheduling a lunch date. And I don't care if Rowe vs. Wade gets tossed because I know that people will do whatever the hell they want to do regardless of a law. If someone really wants to get rid of a baby, then they're going to do it. That is I why I am a strong advocate for PREVENTION.



Who said anything about using no contraception at all? And yes, people will do what they want.. but there is quite of a but difference between doing something that, if caught, risks being penalized by the state and doing something that is within one's right to do...

Hell, if you really want to murder your ex-boyfriend's new lover then you can do it if you want... You mean to say it makes no difference whether the act is illegal or not?
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
I expected this response, and I strongly disagree with it. Have you not considered those young men and women who have yet to have children? Educating teens and young adults, for example, about how very important it is to take precautions when participating in sexual activity can deter some folks from turning in abortion-dependent adults. And what of those men and women who consistently have children that they cannot afford? Shouldn't something be done to control this irresponsible behavior, which ultimately impacts us all?


I hear what you're saying too, Rowe. And I completely agree. We should be educating our teens and young adults and something should definitely be done about those who continue to have multiple children. We definitely need to get that under control.

But the fact is that we don't have our teens under control and too many of our young adults -- men and women -- are producing childen left and right with multiple partners at a rathe alarming rate. So, what do you do with those children, now, that are coming into that environment and are not wanted or unable to be cared for? You cannot force a parent to take care of their child. And if they (or no one else) does, that child is a person in this world who has to go into the system to be cared for.

I'm neither here nor there on the subject, either. But the choice between whether the mother chooses to have or not the child is one thing. Taking away one of the choices is another. And the consequences of what happens when there is no choice is what is at stake. Because we're talking about a child here. An irreversible occurance. And unless and until our teens areeducated and stop having babies after babies at the rate they are having them, having more than one choice may not necessarily be a bad thing.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."


I realize that this is a sensitive issue for many folks; however, American women are not the first women to have been raped, and consequently, have had to bear children. And I wish I had some statistics ready that showed how many abortions can be attributed to rape versus sexual irresponsibility. I'm willing to bet that most abortions can be attributed to sexual irresponsibility, not rape.
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."


I realize that this is a sensitive issue for many folks; however, American women are not the first women to have been raped and have had to bear children. And I wish I had some statistics ready that showed how many abortions can be attributed to raped versus just being sexually irresponsible. I'm willing to bet that most abortions are the result of sexual irresponsibility, not rape.


Does it matter? Who are you to say I shouldn't have the option if I just happened to be a virgin until age 28, I had sex one time, and the condom broke?

Who are you to be making those judgements?
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Hell, if you really want to murder your ex-boyfriend's new lover then you can do it if you want... You mean to say it makes no difference whether the act is illegal or not?


No it doesn't make a difference because "laws" do not deter crime. If it did, we wouldn't have so many hard-headed recidivists committing crimes and being wharehoused in jails over and over again. Therefore, again, if someone really wanted and felt that they desparately needed to get an abortion, they will do it--either themselves or someplace where abortion is legal. This is why education about prevention is no necessary and important.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Hell, if you really want to murder your ex-boyfriend's new lover then you can do it if you want... You mean to say it makes no difference whether the act is illegal or not?


No it doesn't make a difference because "laws" do not deter crime. If it did, we wouldn't have some many folks wharehoused in jails. Therefore, again, if someone really wanted and felt that they desparately needed to get an abortion, they will do it--either themselves or someplace where abortion is legal.


??????

I believe we have so many folks warehoused in jail primarily because of the "War on Drugs."

And it does make a difference to somebody's life outcomes whether the act they commit is classed as a "crime" or not.

The law may not prevent the act. But the law can punish it if it's a crime.

Overturning Roe is going to lead to criminalizing black folk at an even steeper rate than we have at the present.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
The fact is that we don't have our teens under control and too many of our young adults -- men and women -- are producing childen left and right with multiple partners at a rathe alarming rate. So, what do you do with those children, now, that are coming into that environment and are not wanted or unable to be cared for? You cannot force a parent to take care of their child. And if they (or no one else) does, that child is a person in this world who has to go into the system to be cared for.

I'm neither here nor there on the subject, either. But the choice between whether the mother chooses to have or not the child is one thing. Taking away one of the choices is another. And the consequences of what happens when there is no choice is what is at stake. Because we're talking about a child here. An irreversible occurance. And unless and until our teens are educated and stop having babies after babies at the rate they are having them, having more than one choice may not necessarily be a bad thing.


Ok, I can agree with this.
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."


I realize that this is a sensitive issue for many folks; however, American women are not the first women to have been raped and have had to bear children. And I wish I had some statistics ready that showed how many abortions can be attributed to raped versus just being sexually irresponsible. I'm willing to bet that most abortions are the result of sexual irresponsibility, not rape.


Does it matter? Who are you to say I shouldn't have the option if I just happened to be a virgin until age 28, I had sex one time, and the condom broke?

Who are you to be making those judgements?


The point is, Brother Honestbrother, is that whenever the issue of abortion arises, people always try to solicit sympathy from folks by discussing the circumstances of "rape victims" and "abused women" as if being raped and abused are the two main reasons for why most women get abortions, and they are not. Most women probably (and I'm merely assuming here because I didn't come prepared with statistics) get abortions because they were sexually irresponsible. They "were drunk," had "an accident," "made a mistake," "got lazy," or whatever the case may be, and now, they want to resist facing consequences by terminating someone else's life, and I think that's pretty darn irresponsible, about as irresponsible as anyone can be.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."


By the way, the above quote was from South Dakota state senator Bill Napoli who was describing who he thought should be exempted from the new law banning abortion. He has some pretty sick ideas if you ask me..

I was trying to illustrate the mentality of the anti-Roe legislators...
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by Rowe:
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
"A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."


I realize that this is a sensitive issue for many folks; however, American women are not the first women to have been raped and have had to bear children. And I wish I had some statistics ready that showed how many abortions can be attributed to raped versus just being sexually irresponsible. I'm willing to bet that most abortions are the result of sexual irresponsibility, not rape.


Does it matter? Who are you to say I shouldn't have the option if I just happened to be a virgin until age 28, I had sex one time, and the condom broke?

Who are you to be making those judgements?


The point is, brother Honestbrother, is that whenever the issue of abortion arises, people always try to solicit sympathy from folks by discussing the circumstances of "rape victims" and "abused women" as if being raped and abused are the two main reasons for why most women get abortions, and they are not. Most women probably (and I'm merely assuming here because I didn't come prepared with statistics) get abortions because they were sexually irresponsible. They "were drunk," had "an accident," "made a mistake," "got lazy," or whatever the case may be, and now, they want to resist facing consequences by terminating someone else's life. And I think that's pretty darn irresponsible, about as irresponsible as anyone can be.


I don't care about arousing your sympathy ... I also don't care about what the number one reason for abortion is.... my point is that, in any case, a general prohibition on abortion still covers TOO many cases - "sympathetic" or not - AND it's not your place to make other people face the "consequences" of their "actions"...
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
AND it's not your place to make other people face the "consequences" of their "actions"...


It is my responsibility when I have to teach a growing number of abandoned foster kids in my classroom. It is my responsibility when members of a community are terrorized by some knucklehead whose never known his father. It is my responsibility when I, you, and all of us for that matter must deal with the expanding problem of HIV AIDS in this country. And it is my responsibility as a human being to make certain that some vestige of civilization is maintained in our society. Finally, as a proponent of "laws," you of all people should understand the importance of making sure people face consequences for their actions.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
Overturning Rowe is going to lead to criminalizing black folk at an even steeper rate than we have at the present.


If (emphasis on IF because I remember reading somewhere that there are more WHITE women having abortions than Black women) this is true, then what does that tell us "Black folks" need to do? Less baby-making and more educating perhaps? It's worth considering.
quote:
Originally posted by Black Viking:
No, Sister Rowe. Who are these "abortion-dependent adults"? Every woman that I have ever known that has had an abortion, has said that they would do anything to avoid having to do it again. Abortion is a physically, mentally, and emotionally painfull experience. The entire concept that abortion is used as a method of birth control, IMO, is generated by people who have never had one... typically men!


My apologies Brother Viking, I didn't mean to overlook your statement. I realize having an abortion is a very traumatic and painful experience for most men and women. However, when I use the term "abortion-dependent," I'm referring to those individuals who have irresponsible sex knowing they can "always have that trusty abortion" to rid themselves of "the problem." Perhaps if having an abortion were illegal, people would exercise a lot more care and responsibility when having sexual relations. The way things are now, however, people have some pretty casual attitudes about with whom they have children. It's not uncommon for two people to be unmarried and have two, three, and four children with someone they're just "dating."

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×