Author Topic: Three kids are too many - I'll abort two (Read 1495 times)

straffo · « **Reply #15 on:** July 22, 2004, 03:36:21 PM »

she would be better retro-aborted after the birth of the 3.

Pongo · « **Reply #16 on:** July 22, 2004, 03:41:48 PM »

I dont believe the story.

Its too inflamitory. What human being would kill two of thier kids, recount it so clinicaly then start to think of having more. Its just too far fetched. When a story is too good to be true ..I think its probably not true. And as support for anti abortionists..this story is too good to be true.

But asside from that. Maybe you hotshots should start dealing with your > 30% child poverty and then tackle the evil of abortion.

X2Lee · « **Reply #17 on:** July 22, 2004, 03:42:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ra
So clean and efficient.

Partial Birth Abortion

Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps.

The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.

The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.

The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.

Fact is stranger than fiction.

mietla · « **Reply #18 on:** July 22, 2004, 03:59:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MrLars

I'm from the 'left' and find her disgusting and her want to destroy two of three babies barbaric and reprehensible.

But you still would allow it and leave it to mother's discretion, right?

mietla · « **Reply #19 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:02:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo

But asside from that. Maybe you hotshots should start dealing with your > 30% child poverty and then tackle the evil of abortion.

Better dead than poor. We are actually doing those kids a favor saving them from poverty.

If this is your justification, ALL children in India, Afganistan and man more placed should be killed.

Trell · « **Reply #20 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:08:11 PM »

Yes I would still alow her to make this choice, the same as i alow anyone to make a choice i dont like. It is still legal, and i still think abortion should be legal no mater how evil i think it is I think it is more evil to force my morals on someone else, While the child is in the body of the women, I would feel it is more immoral, to take control of her live and force her to do what i think is moraly right.

Trell · « **Reply #21 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:13:30 PM »

Abortion is the lesser of 2 evils. abortion of the child, or slavery of the mother untill the child is born, Well slavery could give a whole new role to prision offecers or a new reason to open mential institution as places to send women, Untill there moral job is done.

JB73 · « **Reply #22 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:16:05 PM »

story makes me sick.

some "humans" just have no soul. not just a "parent to be" but a doctor who willingly would learn to do such a procedure, just for birth control.

mietla · « **Reply #23 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:17:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Trell
I think it is more evil to force my morals on someone else,

what's your position on murder, robbery or theft

Trell · « **Reply #24 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:20:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mietla
what's your position on murder, robbery or theft

Whats your position on smoking guncontrol and the enviroment

JB73 · « **Reply #25 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:21:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mietla
She would not feel good with three kids

so "hurting peoples feelings" is worse than physical harm?

there is a morning radio show that has been swearing that for 5 years now, i have always agreed, but never seen someone actually state it that way.

WTF is wrong with people?!?!?!

mietla · « **Reply #26 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:30:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Trell
Whats your position on smoking guncontrol and the enviroment

get the government out of it.

You've left my question unanswered.

Trell · « **Reply #27 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:32:26 PM »

So you are against the govement saving people becasue of smoking, guns, and poluting the enviroment, but for them saving a fetus by inslaving women?

Weavling · « **Reply #28 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:36:13 PM »

I think convenience should never become a factor when determining to abort a child. Sure, the pregnency might make life difficult for the woman, but that's for 9 months(the pregnency). If she feels that she won't be able to raise them due to certain circumstances, there is always the option of putting them up for adoption. It may be hard, but it's better than having to kill.

It's discusting that to save some trouble and inconvenience, people are willing to take away a life of one who is completly helpless.

Another thing that disturbs me about abortion is no one knows who the child aborted may grow up to be. Possibly an Olympic athlete, a great scientist, a future president? If you looked at the circumstances of Beetoven's birth, many today might say it would be best to abort his birth due to the high possiblility of him having a hard life. But look at what he has contributed to humanity. To think all that might not have existed today if abortion was possible and as available during his times.

Trell · « **Reply #29 on:** July 22, 2004, 04:42:15 PM »

murder, robbery or theft are all moraly and legaly wrong, they are against someone else.

Abortion is against the women her self, She will have to live with it for the rest of her life. Trying to say it is not her choice
is like saying the women is a slave to the people. might as well chain all women up as soon as pregncy has been astablished. to save the child from what the women may do.