Life is not sacred, leave my womb alone!

[Into the never]

Liliahna

But what makes you in charge of the baby's life? Why should you be given the choice to stop it from happening? If the mother has no right to get rid of the baby, what right do you have to stop it? I'm only curious of your opinion.

[Avgvsto]

Why do I care about your opinion if your life isn't important?

[Steam Punk Adept]

Liliahna

1: Ok so i looked at YOUR link now... imnotsorry.net ? really? lol The link I chose was a site that allowed women if they regretted it or not to write about their experience of abortion. Out of the ones that i saw over 80% of them regretted what they have done.

2: Here is my way of thinking. What was wrong with using a condom in the first place? and if you think you made an oopsie why didn't they go to get the day after pill that stops the egg from implanting? and finally, why not ADOPTION?

3: there is ONE and ONLY ONE instance in which i think that abortion is needed and OK. That is when continuing with the pregnancy could result in the loss of the mothers life or the life of both the mother and the infant.

4: I stand against abortion as I watch my Aunt give up on bearing her own children, her eyes full of tears as she loses another baby. Her eyes filled with joy as she holds another woman's child. You know she would make a great mother. A horrible car accident in the past has made her body unable to carry to full term.

5: Its sad that this woman wishes horribly for a child and others are ripping them from their bodies piece by piece. Not only is it sad but also some of these babies are born alive! Born Alive Truth see for yourself and tell me that you would still want to get an abortion with the chance of your child being ripped from you, being alive and clinging to the life that was to be denied of them

1: I seriously doubt you did more than look at the URL. In any case, it proves you wrong in that not all women regret their abortions.

2: Prove to me that every woman who aborts did so because she wasn't using any form of birth control. Condoms break, the pill doesn't always prevent pregnancy, and short of a full hysterectomy, no form of sterilization is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy. Also, the morning after pill is only effective if you believe you are at risk of pregnancy. If a woman is on the birth control pill, she isn't expecting that it failed. As for adoption, that solves the issue of not wanting to be a parent, but does nothing to solve the problem of not wanting to be pregnant. Also, have you seen the state of adoption in America? Obviously not. Not every baby placed for adoption is adopted. Adoption is not the end-all solution. By the way, how many children have you or do you intend to adopt to prevent abortion?

3: Considering that complications resulting in death can often spring up without warning, and death can often occur within minutes or hours from these complications, waiting until one springs up is not a viable method of determining a person eligible for an abortion. Because of this, any pregnancy can result in the loss of the mother and/or the fetus. Therefore by your own logic, any abortion should be ok.

4: Your Aunt can then adopt so many of those children currently needing a home. But your anecdotal evidence means nothing here. I've already shown you a link to a site (you likely only looked at the title of) that proves that not all women regret abortion. I'm sorry your Aunt can't have her own children, but that's no reason to outlaw abortion. That mindset that because it's painful for one person to miscarry, it MUST be painful for all people to abort, is rather self-centered. There is a huge difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. The most glaring difference is viability of the fetus. The other is the woman's desire to actually procreate and carry a pregnancy to term.

5: Now you're just making sensational claims to tug at my emotional heartstrings. It won't work. You obviously don't know anything about the procedure of a typical abortion though, but rather you're spouting nonsense from Pro-Life propaganda sites that present the rarest type of abortion as the most common. Dilation and Extraction is a rare type of abortion, used most commonly when the fetus is already dead in the womb. Furthermore, please provide proof that some of these aborted fetuses are born alive (which in itself is laughable as ********, because most abortions occur WELL before fetal viability). By the way, that link you provided to "showcase" this? That's perhaps the most biased Pro-Life bullshit propaganda site I've ever seen. How about a reputable source? Sometyhing like BBC, ABC, or even Fox News. Can't find one? Didn't think so.

[RedFive478]

I am an Atheist. I personally believe that abortion is murder, but murder, in certain cases, is entirely justified. If I kill a criminal in self-defense (i.e. He is holding a gun to my head), I am justified in killing him, if it is necessary. If I kill a cashier because I don't want to pay for my groceries, I am not justified.

Similarly, were one to get an abortion because her life is at risk, that, in my opinion, is justified. Were one to get an abortion because having is inconvenient, that, in my opinion, is not justified.

All that said, I also believe it to be immoral to impress my own personal beliefs onto somebody else. A woman has as much right to get an abortion as I do to state my disagreement.

[Steam Punk Adept]

Dion Necurat

Steam Punk Adept

Dion Necurat

Mistress Lithia

Xiam

Life is sacred.

Prove that life is sacred.

You've yet to prove that life isn't sacred.

To prove that life is sacred, one must first prove that God exists. Without a deity, or religion in general, you can't have sacred objects or concepts.

Let us begin by applying 2 statements based on Christianity, that must be true in order for God to exist

arrow God is infallible
arrow The Bible is the true word of God

Now, let's start with Creation, God's "Greatest Act." Using genealogy as presented in the Bible, we can determine the relative age of the Earth, as presented in the Bible, to be between 6500 and 10,000 years old. Radiometric dating on the other hand, shows that the Earth is closer to 4.5 Billion years old. This number, 4.5 Billion, has remained consistent in both terrestrial (Earth based) and Lunar (moon based) samples. Error found

What about humans? If we go by the Bible, humans have only existed for 6500-10,000 years. However, the oldest known human fossil is closer in age to 1.3 million years old. This would mean, then, that humans had lived on Earth before God created humans or the Earth. In fact, depending on how much evidence you consider to be acceptable, and how you define us as a species, you could place humans at between 1.8 million and 130,000 years old. No one could sensibly claim that humans are less than 130,000 years old without ignoring science completely. Error found

Now then, let's look at a Great Event in Human History. The Great Flood. God decided to kill all humans, except for Noah and his family. Noah was instructed to save 2 of every animal on Earth. This sounds all well and good, until you realize that there are around 10 Million known species on Earth. That's a total of 20 million critters (assuming one male and one female of every species) and that's not counting unknown species. As per the Bible, the dimensions of Noah's Ark are 300 cubits long (137.16 m, 450 ft), 50 wide (22.86 m, 75 ft), and 30 high (13.716 m, 45 ft). Now, even if we assume that the Ark was stuffed like a clown car, there is no possible way for you to fit 20 million or more critters. Ok, so I admit, there were probably less than 20 million, because that would count sea creatures as well. But, even if we drop the number to a more reasonable 500,000 species (all of which are land bound, or birds) that's still 1 million critters. The Ark was not large enough to contain that many creatures. And the final bit? How did Noah regulate environmental factors on the Ark for the variations in creatures? A Penguin and a Scorpion cannot coexist in the same environment. Error found

And, it's common knowledge that the Bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies. The Bible is the only place that defines God, and God is defined as being infallible. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word. Given that God is all powerful, he surely would not have left an obviously inaccurate account of his greatest work go to press, or was that just another sign of his fallibility? Whatever answer you give to this question contradicts what we know about God. Either, God is not infallible, or the Bible is not the true word of God. Conclusion, the Christian God cannot exist and by that same argument, neither can Allah, or the Hebrew God.

Without God, then life cannot be sacred in the Christian faith.

The problem, of course, is the implication that your first two statements are, in fact, correct. The rest of the argument falls apart once those assumptions are taken out of the equation. And given it was man who wrote the bible, not an all-powerful deity, the faith cannot ascertain God's true intentions.

I'm simply disproving the claims many "faithful" make about their God. According to Christianity, my first two statements ARE fact and not assumptions. Sure, my argument falls apart once those are removed, but if those are removed, then so is Christianity. Context, my friend, context.

[Lord of the Vine]

Steam Punk Adept

Dion Necurat

Steam Punk Adept

Dion Necurat

Mistress Lithia

Xiam

Life is sacred.

Prove that life is sacred.

You've yet to prove that life isn't sacred.

To prove that life is sacred, one must first prove that God exists. Without a deity, or religion in general, you can't have sacred objects or concepts.

Let us begin by applying 2 statements based on Christianity, that must be true in order for God to exist

arrow God is infallible
arrow The Bible is the true word of God

Now, let's start with Creation, God's "Greatest Act." Using genealogy as presented in the Bible, we can determine the relative age of the Earth, as presented in the Bible, to be between 6500 and 10,000 years old. Radiometric dating on the other hand, shows that the Earth is closer to 4.5 Billion years old. This number, 4.5 Billion, has remained consistent in both terrestrial (Earth based) and Lunar (moon based) samples. Error found

What about humans? If we go by the Bible, humans have only existed for 6500-10,000 years. However, the oldest known human fossil is closer in age to 1.3 million years old. This would mean, then, that humans had lived on Earth before God created humans or the Earth. In fact, depending on how much evidence you consider to be acceptable, and how you define us as a species, you could place humans at between 1.8 million and 130,000 years old. No one could sensibly claim that humans are less than 130,000 years old without ignoring science completely. Error found

Now then, let's look at a Great Event in Human History. The Great Flood. God decided to kill all humans, except for Noah and his family. Noah was instructed to save 2 of every animal on Earth. This sounds all well and good, until you realize that there are around 10 Million known species on Earth. That's a total of 20 million critters (assuming one male and one female of every species) and that's not counting unknown species. As per the Bible, the dimensions of Noah's Ark are 300 cubits long (137.16 m, 450 ft), 50 wide (22.86 m, 75 ft), and 30 high (13.716 m, 45 ft). Now, even if we assume that the Ark was stuffed like a clown car, there is no possible way for you to fit 20 million or more critters. Ok, so I admit, there were probably less than 20 million, because that would count sea creatures as well. But, even if we drop the number to a more reasonable 500,000 species (all of which are land bound, or birds) that's still 1 million critters. The Ark was not large enough to contain that many creatures. And the final bit? How did Noah regulate environmental factors on the Ark for the variations in creatures? A Penguin and a Scorpion cannot coexist in the same environment. Error found

And, it's common knowledge that the Bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies. The Bible is the only place that defines God, and God is defined as being infallible. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word. Given that God is all powerful, he surely would not have left an obviously inaccurate account of his greatest work go to press, or was that just another sign of his fallibility? Whatever answer you give to this question contradicts what we know about God. Either, God is not infallible, or the Bible is not the true word of God. Conclusion, the Christian God cannot exist and by that same argument, neither can Allah, or the Hebrew God.

Without God, then life cannot be sacred in the Christian faith.

The problem, of course, is the implication that your first two statements are, in fact, correct. The rest of the argument falls apart once those assumptions are taken out of the equation. And given it was man who wrote the bible, not an all-powerful deity, the faith cannot ascertain God's true intentions.

I'm simply disproving the claims many "faithful" make about their God. According to Christianity, my first two statements ARE fact and not assumptions. Sure, my argument falls apart once those are removed, but if those are removed, then so is Christianity. Context, my friend, context.

Which then begs the next point: Context.

We're talking about writings that were around centuries ago, in a very different time from today. How is the expectation to live as Jews (and later Christians) did during those times, when we have a completely newfound world perspective? Take the Great Flood; to whomever recorded it, their world would be much smaller than ours.

[Liliahna]

everything burns to ashes

Liliahna

But what makes you in charge of the baby's life? Why should you be given the choice to stop it from happening? If the mother has no right to get rid of the baby, what right do you have to stop it? I'm only curious of your opinion.

What gives the others the right to tell us when we can hunt? Why can you drink alcohol only if you are 21+ or smoke tobacco at ages 18+? Why isn't Marijuana legal already when they have found that not only is hemp a useful resource in making paper and rope but that marijuana itself may cure cancer? We live in a world of laws, put there to keep the population in line. Human beings are malicious creatures. Without these laws we would destroy ourselves just as abortion destroys a being before it is even able to draw its first breath.

[Into the never]

Liliahna

You said humans are malicious and what if the baby turns out to be another one of those people because it's abandoned by it's mother, who didn't want to have it, and raised in an abusive foster home. It suffers for most of it's childhood and turns to violence and drugs. This happens surprisingly often or no one cares for the baby, it grows up in an orphanage and never gets adopted and lives it's life on the streets when it's old enough where it can't stay. I'm not refuting what your saying, because it's your opinion on the subject, but I'm just a curious person and I like asking questions.

[Liliahna]

Steam Punk Adept

1: I seriously doubt you did more than look at the URL. In any case, it proves you wrong in that not all women regret their abortions.

2: Prove to me that every woman who aborts did so because she wasn't using any form of birth control. Condoms break, the pill doesn't always prevent pregnancy, and short of a full hysterectomy, no form of sterilization is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy. Also, the morning after pill is only effective if you believe you are at risk of pregnancy. If a woman is on the birth control pill, she isn't expecting that it failed. As for adoption, that solves the issue of not wanting to be a parent, but does nothing to solve the problem of not wanting to be pregnant. Also, have you seen the state of adoption in America? Obviously not. Not every baby placed for adoption is adopted. Adoption is not the end-all solution. By the way, how many children have you or do you intend to adopt to prevent abortion?

3: Considering that complications resulting in death can often spring up without warning, and death can often occur within minutes or hours from these complications, waiting until one springs up is not a viable method of determining a person eligible for an abortion. Because of this, any pregnancy can result in the loss of the mother and/or the fetus. Therefore by your own logic, any abortion should be ok.

4: Your Aunt can then adopt so many of those children currently needing a home. But your anecdotal evidence means nothing here. I've already shown you a link to a site (you likely only looked at the title of) that proves that not all women regret abortion. I'm sorry your Aunt can't have her own children, but that's no reason to outlaw abortion. That mindset that because it's painful for one person to miscarry, it MUST be painful for all people to abort, is rather self-centered. There is a huge difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. The most glaring difference is viability of the fetus. The other is the woman's desire to actually procreate and carry a pregnancy to term.

5: Now you're just making sensational claims to tug at my emotional heartstrings. It won't work. You obviously don't know anything about the procedure of a typical abortion though, but rather you're spouting nonsense from Pro-Life propaganda sites that present the rarest type of abortion as the most common. Dilation and Extraction is a rare type of abortion, used most commonly when the fetus is already dead in the womb. Furthermore, please provide proof that some of these aborted fetuses are born alive (which in itself is laughable as ********, because most abortions occur WELL before fetal viability). By the way, that link you provided to "showcase" this? That's perhaps the most biased Pro-Life bullshit propaganda site I've ever seen. How about a reputable source? Sometyhing like BBC, ABC, or even Fox News. Can't find one? Didn't think so.

1. Your assumptions are once again incorrect. I read what I needed to read. Also, I did not say that all women regret their abortions. Read again, I said about 80% regret their choice.

2. My son is 4 years old now, i have been on birth control from the time of his birth. Guess what? It worked. Really don't want pregnancy, then DONT HAVE SEX. Also, I have always planned) from the time I thought about having children) to adopt a child but i would like one or two of my own as well. I am a student at the moment so it is out of the question.

3. Many of the complications that i spoke of can be predetermined now with the technology and knowledge that we have. Also, I do not appreciate you twisting my words in an attempt to push your beliefs upon me. I will believe what i want to believe and you can do the same.

4. "That mindset that because it's painful for one person to miscarry, it MUST be painful for all people to abort, is rather self-centered. There is a huge difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. The most glaring difference is viability of the fetus. The other is the woman's desire to actually procreate and carry a pregnancy to term" . I said nothing relating to this, again jumping to conclusions. What i was referring to is women throwing away the gift of a child, not batting a single eyelash of the idea while others struggle to carry to full term or even conceive. ALSO, adoption is a long and expensive process, I am sure in the future my Aunt and Uncle may make the decision to adopt but my family doesn't speak of such things. It is their business as a couple. I only know what i know because she chose to share it with me when seeking comfort.

5. The link you asked for ...mentions the doctor using scissors to cut the spinal cord to kill the child that was an attempted abortion. ... gruesome stuff. Also, If it doesn't happen then why is there now a law to ensure that babies born alive during abortions are protected and given health care? A law without a reason, I don't think so.


would you like more links? Probably
362 infants born alive
Another in florida
this one is even worse
Nurse quits abortion clinic after baby is born alive

[Liliahna]

everything burns to ashes

Liliahna

You said humans are malicious and what if the baby turns out to be another one of those people because it's abandoned by it's mother, who didn't want to have it, and raised in an abusive foster home. It suffers for most of it's childhood and turns to violence and drugs. This happens surprisingly often or no one cares for the baby, it grows up in an orphanage and never gets adopted and lives it's life on the streets when it's old enough where it can't stay. I'm not refuting what your saying, because it's your opinion on the subject, but I'm just a curious person and I like asking questions.

I recently found out that I have a half brother by my father, He is 26 years old, I am 24. This brother was born in prison, of a drug addict, and adopted out. My brother goes by his adopted name, lives in a town an hour from my family and is a perfectly normal human being (other than a few health issues from the drugs his mother shared with him while he was still in the womb).
Another example? I am friends with a girl name Glory. Glory grew up in a foster home and a group home. She is 19 at the moment, has her own apartment, graduated high school, has a job and is looking forward to her first semester at college after getting her life settled down.
I can keep on going since my little sister spent 4 years in a group home because of the abuse my mother endured by our x-stepfather. These eyes have seen much and at 24 years old i have lived on my own for 6 years fighting up the proverbial economic ladder and making a name for myself. I will not go into the stories of my childhood but i will say that they are not pleasant. Yet, I, myself am quite normal. A loving mother and wife, A Dean's list university student, and a part of a national honor society and yes at the moment I am just a simple receptionist hoping that an education will get her further in life.
Human's are malicious by nature just as all other creatures. Humans rage war, kill, rape, torture and this thread is one of the many things that proves this true. There are few of us who recognize it and try to make a difference. I see people every day that are starting to realize flaws and attempt to make a difference.

[CuAnnan]

Xiam

I wonder what the implication would be to consider everything sacred.

You would end up in one of two situations
1) A binary sacredness nothing is sacred because everything is sacred, similar to nothing is awesome if everything is awesome. We can only measure the sacredness of something compared to the sacredness of something else. If everything is 1 on the sacred scale the concept is meaningless.
2) A bounded scale between 0 (non inclusive) and 1 (inclusive) where 1 may or may not be attainable beyond a platonic or ontological form. This is what I tend to believe.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

Shpleck

I like how you say "different angle" like their really was one.
All life is sacred, all of it. If you want to come up with some stupid excuse to belittle the fact that you are ripping a human body out of your womb because you were too ******** selfish to have protection around, or take the ******** morning after pill, so be it. Go do what your selfish needs require. Yet we that don't agree still have to pay taxes that aid you in this senselessness? Yeah go ahead and tell people how they are restricting you. I say go for it, have that s**t on your conscience, but pay for it your self, out of your own pocket, and leave your fellow tax payers the ******** out of your lack of morality.

Actually, unless your state decides how to spend its funds differently, the Supreme Court has many times affirmed the federal and state government's authority to fund or not fund abortion. Last I checked, the federal government is not funding abortions, so, if any government funds are supporting it, its coming from your state.

In which case, you are free to vote or not vote for different politicians or positions.

You also seem to suggest you don't recognize the validity of abortions even to protect the life of the mother or in instances of rape. Is that the case?

[Steam Punk Adept]

Liliahna

1. Your assumptions are once again incorrect. I read what I needed to read. Also, I did not say that all women regret their abortions. Read again, I said about 80% regret their choice.

2. My son is 4 years old now, i have been on birth control from the time of his birth. Guess what? It worked. Really don't want pregnancy, then DONT HAVE SEX. Also, I have always planned) from the time I thought about having children) to adopt a child but i would like one or two of my own as well. I am a student at the moment so it is out of the question.

3. Many of the complications that i spoke of can be predetermined now with the technology and knowledge that we have. Also, I do not appreciate you twisting my words in an attempt to push your beliefs upon me. I will believe what i want to believe and you can do the same.

4. "That mindset that because it's painful for one person to miscarry, it MUST be painful for all people to abort, is rather self-centered. There is a huge difference between a miscarriage and an abortion. The most glaring difference is viability of the fetus. The other is the woman's desire to actually procreate and carry a pregnancy to term" . I said nothing relating to this, again jumping to conclusions. What i was referring to is women throwing away the gift of a child, not batting a single eyelash of the idea while others struggle to carry to full term or even conceive. ALSO, adoption is a long and expensive process, I am sure in the future my Aunt and Uncle may make the decision to adopt but my family doesn't speak of such things. It is their business as a couple. I only know what i know because she chose to share it with me when seeking comfort.

5. The link you asked for ...mentions the doctor using scissors to cut the spinal cord to kill the child that was an attempted abortion. ... gruesome stuff. Also, If it doesn't happen then why is there now a law to ensure that babies born alive during abortions are protected and given health care? A law without a reason, I don't think so.


would you like more links? Probably
362 infants born alive
Another in florida
this one is even worse
Nurse quits abortion clinic after baby is born alive

1: Where did you pull that 80% from? and while you may not have said it, you used a generalization that insinuated ALL. Nice to see you now backpedaling from your insinuation of all to an arbitrary number that you seem to have magically pulled out of your rear end. What reputable, non-pro-life biased source gave you that 80% number?

2: Good for you, your birth control is working. Guess what, it doesn't always work for everyone else. By the way, WHO in the nine ******** are you to tell me not to have sex with my partner? I've made a conscious choice to NEVER have children, but I'll be damned if some b***h on the internet will tell me that I am NEVER allowed to have sex because of it. If my partner gets pregnant, come Hell or high water, we are getting an abortion, legal or not, no matter how dangerous, because we NEVER want children.

Wanna talk sterilization? I'm 32 years old, I've been looking since I was 18 for a doctor to perform a vasectomy. I can't find one. The reason they repeatedly give me is because "What if you change your mind" which I won't, and "I'm not getting sued if your vasectomy is not reversible and you change your mind" which I won't. I've even offered to sign waivers stating that I have NO LEGAL RECOURSE should I be unable to have my vasectomy reversed. But, doctors still will not sterilize me because I have no children. It's even worse for many women seeking sterilization. I've even expressed interest in the fact that IF (which will never happen) I change my mind and want kids, I'll adopt. Most common retort to that, "But it's not the same as your own biological children." ******** that noise. I'm 32 and I don't want kids, and people question my choice every day, however, a 15-year old wanting to have kids by 16 is often lauded and seen as mature. Why is it that a 15-year old is capable of having her decision respected, but I, at 32, am seen as wishy-washy and prone to changing my mind on a whim. Who's more likely to regret their decision? And guess what, I'd MUCH rather regret not having kids than regret having them.

Oh, and by the way, the whole "Don't have sex" bullshit isn't even 100% effective. It fails. It's called rape. If you don't know about it, look it the ******** up, and stay the ******** out of my bedroom.

3: First off, I am not twisting your words. I'm presenting EXACTLY what you're giving me. Trying to claim that I'm twisting your words is like pissing in a bowl of cheerios and telling me it's milk. Second, yes, technology has improved, but it does NOT detect the sudden onset of pregnancy complications, and sometimes, by the time complications set in, it's too late to do anything about it. But, you don't appear to care. You're only focused on complications that have clear signs up front and actually offer time to treat them. It's quite convenient that you ignore complications that can, within an hour of occurring, kill a pregnant woman. Not all pregnancies are the same, and not all women have the same reactions to complications.

4: You call it jumping to conclusion, I call it the insinuation of your words and the only viable conclusion to be drawn from information you present. By the way, it's not my place to bring children into this world so that people who cannot have children can adopt. I am not a breeding stud, nor is my partner a broodmother, here solely to populate your orphanage so your sterile Aunt and Uncle can have their fancy new designer baby. They want kids but can't have them, that's not my problem, and I am under no obligation to procreate so that they can experience raising a child.

Furthermore, you're claiming that children are a gift. PROVE IT. Remember, one man's treasure is another man's garbage. Suppose, as an example, that I view human excrement as gold. Should I have the right to demand that you not flush your s**t down the toilet because I view it as valuable? That very idea is laughable as ********, isn't it? But guess what, that's exactly what you're trying to do. You're trying to ensure that someone suffers through something they view as a curse because you call it a gift. Kindly stop trying to force your views that s**t is gold onto me.

5: Your first link, Cybercast News Service, is a right-wing biased source. The Right wing bias is apparent, and their views are blatantly Pro-Life. Source is invalid. Even Fox News is more reputable, and I'd actually be willing to trust them as a source for this. But no, you had to go find a Pro-Life source because that's the ONLY kind of source you can find.

Your second source, American Center for Law & Justice, is a conservative Christian law firm. Guess what, also a Pro-Life bias. Not a valid source.

Your third source, World Net Daily, is an American web site that publishes news and associated content from the perspective of U.S. conservatives and the political right. I'm noticing a trend here. You can't find an unbiased source, so you stick you your bias.

Your fourth source, which doesn't even have a Wikipedia entry (which is incredibly laughable) is Lifenews, a site that even prides itself as a Pro-life news media outlet covering abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and stem cell research. Seriously? Pro-Life media outlet? Yeah, that's the most biased source you've offered yet. Still, you've given me no reputable sources, only sites with blatant Pro-Life bias.

and your final source? National Right to Life Committee, is the oldest and the largest national pro-life organization in the United States with affiliates in all 50 states and over 3,000 local chapters nationwide. The group works through legislation and education to work against induced abortion. Yeah, the bias there is so blatant I could see it without clicking the link. You've provided nothing reputable at all.

Seriously, I even threw you a bone with Fox News and their blatant Right-Wing, Pro-Life bias, and you can't even offer a single news story from there. Instead, the only "stories" you seem to be digging up are from Pro-Life mouthpieces that will spew any kind of bullshit half-truths, and falsified data to point a finger and say, "look, we were right, even though we're lying so hard you can see it from a mile away." Look, I'm not asking for much here. Just one reputable news source, something that doesn't try to push Pro-Life as the second coming of Jesus. But, you can't even do that. You haven't once, in any post, provided a source that wasn't a Pro-Life mouthpiece. Is that too difficult a task for you? Can you not find a reputable source to support your claims? Are your claims only valid because your blatantly biased sources say they are?

[Liliahna]

Steam Punk Adept

Wow, Angry much? ..... btw....what is a 32 year old doing on gaia? o.O. Oh, and you did twist my words by making assumptions and reshaping them into something that benefits your argument. Have your partner get the IUD because that is what worked for me. Don't go killing innocents due to your selfishness in wanting to live freely without such a "burden" as a child. Insinuating is the same as jumping to conclusions. ....and WHAT?! children are garbage?.. you want me to prove that they are a gift!?

If I had the same views as you this innocent GORGEOUS baby boy wouldn't be here today.My son is now 4

He is the sweetest little boy and I love him to death, I would give my life for him in an instant. He may be only 4 but he says please, thank you, may I, respects his elders and all living things, and doesn't throw fits. Children are gifts, bad parents are garbage.
Also, everyone is biased hmm? All 7 links that i gave you? Wow.
In the end, you are one messed up individual in my eyes and i wipe my hands clean of you. I will not be responding anymore. You enjoy getting off, getting pregnant, and throwing away life.

[s l i p p e r y d i c k]

I'm pro choice. I do have a friend that is pro life

She doesn't say she is pro life because some bible told her life is sacred. As a caring person, she hates the idea of killing what could potentially become a human being.


Me personally, I don't see the reason of forcing someone to have a child, the child will probably live a miserable life with that person or at an adoption center. We don't need more people in this world