- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by MissShelli'd be interested to see the sates as well, i'd imagine that the western world tops the league by a long way.
would the population of the world change dramatically if every person stoped terminating?????
I wonder how many abortions are done per day??? does anyone work in this industry and has a clue to how many are completed on a annual basis....
why the sudden interest?
it's still illegal in ireland btw, even the north, which is a joke.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by zozozozowho's going to wipe you ass when your a senile old fart in a home somewhere if there's no more kids being born? ha, didn't think of that did you? 😏
No im not pro-choice. Im pro-abortion.....less irritating childs make the world a better place:p
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by zozozozoUsing potential unhappiness as a reason is idiotic.
Its better to kill a couple of cells in a belly, then letting a kid have an awfull life because his/her parents cant really take care of him/her.
The question can only be: At what point does a fetus become a human being?
Choosing birth may seem sensible, but it's also very ad-hoc when you think about it. The fetus itself does not change much in the seconds/minutes between pre and post birth.
Viability is appealing for a number of reasons, but the problem is that it then depends on where you are. In London the technological level may make it viable, but in more isolated places it may not be.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Palynkadid he mention 'happiness'?
Using potential unhappiness as a reason is idiotic.
his post was clearly talking about the economic situation of the potential parent or parents involved.
not being able to afford to fed or cloth a child is a pretty good reason not to have one.
15 Jul 09
2 edits
Originally posted by trev33No, he said better than "letting a kid have an awfull [sic] life" and he didn't mention anything about the economical situation.
did he mention 'happiness'?
his post was clearly talking about the economic situation of the potential parent or parents involved.
Clearly.
Edit - Either way, "poverty" is also an idiotic reason. The fetus/baby either has rights or it has not.
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by trev33A friends daughter asked me.... and I had no idea... I must be old....
i'd be interested to see the sates as well, i'd imagine that the western world tops the league by a long way.
why the sudden interest?
it's still illegal in ireland btw, even the north, which is a joke.
I told her to talk to her mum but know she is the same as me... My kids are getting big now and I am worried they are going to come home with the same questions...
The world has changed so much and how people percieve things too... Not sure wether to ask the question..... if a 15 year old is pregnant and what response I would give....
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by Palynkayou left out the most important quote "parents cant really take care of him/her"
No, he said better than "letting a kid have an awfull [sic] life" and he didn't mention anything about the economical situation.
Clearly.
could financial difficulties not to one of the reasons here? he didn't write it that that's what i presume he meant.
15 Jul 09
3 edits
Originally posted by trev33Well, I took it to be meaning that they don't want him. Could be wrong. Anyway, I also think it's not a good reason (see above).
you left out the most important quote "parents cant really take care of him/her"
could financial difficulties not to one of the reasons here? he didn't write it that that's what i presume he meant.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by Palynkafor someone who's pro choice you don't give a lot of choices.
No, he said better than "letting a kid have an awfull [sic] life" and he didn't mention anything about the economical situation.
Clearly.
Edit - Either way, "poverty" is also an idiotic reason. The fetus/baby either has rights or it has not.
shouldn't the welfare of the unborn child be the no.1 most important thing in deciding what the best thing to is?
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by trev33What do you mean? I am pro-choice, I just don't think that passing the vagina is the defining moment.
for someone who's pro choice you don't give a lot of choices.
shouldn't the welfare of the unborn child be the no.1 most important thing in deciding what the best thing to is?
Unhappiness/poverty/etc. are not reasons to kill someone. So it's pretty simple. At some point a fetus becomes human and has rights like every other human. If you think passing the vagina (or whatever method) is a fundamental change for the baby/fetus, I disagree.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16951
15 Jul 09
Originally posted by yo its mei'm just saying if the parents to be don't think they can cope with a child and give it everything that every child deserves, other than adoption what's a better solution than an abortion?
How can you evaluate someone's quality of life Trev? That'd be imposiable.