Quantcast
So an Abortion limiting bill passed in my state, Texas

Forums - General Discussion - So an Abortion limiting bill passed in my state, Texas

Protect Women's access to healthcare.

So, unless abortion clinics are available women won't get medical care? Are they hoping for people to have the intelligence of grade schoolers or what? And since I am bringing up terminology, how in the hell does the act of using a vacuum to tear apart the child, or scrapping apart the child, or that whole saline poisoning thing where the skin literally dissolves off the child get to be wrapped up in the same category of breast exams and pap smears?

Wait, I think they are going through yet another renaming to try and confuse the general public. They're going by the name of, "Choice providers", so they can take away the stigma abortion has from the conversation. I always felt if you couldn't be fully upfront and honest about something, then maybe you're on the wrong side of the issue.

At least Texas is moving in the right direction.



Around the Network

I am not advocating that people just have babies and not take care of them.  People need to be responsible.  First they need to think about what they are doing.  Don't get in a serious relationship without being able to deal with tho consequences.  Second our society has been promoting irresponsiblity for too long.  Who ever said that recreational sex is not irresponsiblity is an idiot.  As for what you said about many kids in the system.  If it were not for immagration the United States population would be decreasing.  A society that destroys the family and promotes violence will not last.  For the one who said that owning a weapon is not morally wrong,  Jesus said turn the other cheek not blast him with a shot gun.



Love is whats most important.

 

Cubedramirez said:
Protect Women's access to healthcare.

So, unless abortion clinics are available women won't get medical care? Are they hoping for people to have the intelligence of grade schoolers or what? And since I am bringing up terminology, how in the hell does the act of using a vacuum to tear apart the child, or scrapping apart the child, or that whole saline poisoning thing where the skin literally dissolves off the child get to be wrapped up in the same category of breast exams and pap smears?

Wait, I think they are going through yet another renaming to try and confuse the general public. They're going by the name of, "Choice providers", so they can take away the stigma abortion has from the conversation. I always felt if you couldn't be fully upfront and honest about something, then maybe you're on the wrong side of the issue.

At least Texas is moving in the right direction.

If you're not being fully upfront and honest, like the shady legislative tactics that the Texas Republicans had to employ to try to pass this (including lying about the time-stamp on the bill to make its passage valid).

It's all in the same category because it all has to do with women's health. It's her body. And these are often low-cost clinics that do a lot of outreach work. How in the world can we make a straightfaced argument for a reduction in availability of health care?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Etech7 said:

I am not advocating that people just have babies and not take care of them.  People need to be responsible.  First they need to think about what they are doing.  Don't get in a serious relationship without being able to deal with tho consequences.  Second our society has been promoting irresponsiblity for too long.  Who ever said that recreational sex is not irresponsiblity is an idiot.  As for what you said about many kids in the system.  If it were not for immagration the United States population would be decreasing.  A society that destroys the family and promotes violence will not last.  For the one who said that owning a weapon is not morally wrong,  Jesus said turn the other cheek not blast him with a shot gun.

In a developed economy, a more liberal family-planning policy usually brings about higher birth-rates, because if we have a broader idea about how children can be brought up well, more men and women will be willing to bring them into the world, rather than ending pregnancies or just going heavy on birth-control pills. Japan is the bigger case here, for while they are actually quite liberal about abortion, they are conservative in almost every other respect of family-planning and have a hideously low birth rate.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Having worked in the healthcare industry in terms of billing/coding and claims I'll stand by my position of disgust in terms of placing abortion clinics in the same category of general practitioner services. The only people who repeat that lie are those who assume the word of organizations who profit from aborting children. No one ever checks their numbers because of the fear you'll be attacked as a misogynistic so and so who is screaming bible verses at everyone who crosses your path. The amount of preventive care conducted at abortion clinics is a fraction of what is put out into the media.

But if we continue down this road I am going to get frustrated and warned again so I'll end it with that point.



Around the Network
Mr Khan said:

In a developed economy, a more liberal family-planning policy usually brings about higher birth-rates, because if we have a broader idea about how children can be brought up well, more men and women will be willing to bring them into the world, rather than ending pregnancies or just going heavy on birth-control pills. Japan is the bigger case here, for while they are actually quite liberal about abortion, they are conservative in almost every other respect of family-planning and have a hideously low birth rate.

No.

No.

Dear lord no. 

I had this massive post to just flame the heck out of that statement and the incorrect causation/correlation who mentioned with Japan.  There has been so much research and data accumulated on this subject that it’s staggering to see such incorrect assertions passed off as fact. The Japanese government has conducted so many surveys and researched every possible avenue to understand why the birthrate is so abysmal and what can be done to address it that a simple Google search would enlighten someone to the actual reasons attributed to this crisis.  

Even using the National Abortion Federation statistics does one come to an alarming issue with our own fertility crisis. 1.3 million (Heavily disputed by the way) woman goes through an abortion annually. That doesn’t take into account abortions where they’re multiple children developing. The United States is at fertility below where we merely replace those who came before us; 1.89. We were at above 5.8% in the 70’s, completely dropped off the map before the 80’s, had a modest boost during a majority of the 80’s and right before the 90’s hit we were on the fast track to ghost town USA. On a side note a little case was ruled on in 1973 which had an impact on these numbers.

Now, take into account you stated having a more liberal family-planning policy brings about higher birthrates; not once in the history of mankind has that even become remotely close to being reality.  The United States has the most liberal laws regarding abortion outside of China’s congrats you have a boy and whoops we dropped the girl policy. Yet, no increase in fertility rates outside of the 80’s bump (pun intended). Now we’re in 2013 and the reality is we must import mass quantities of labor just to stay at a fertility rate where we replace those who passed, not growing.

So, how about all those aborted children? Looking the data through the eyes of an accountant one can merely ask has the loss of potential from those aborted children in terms of having families of their own and contributing to our economy and society put us in this position where we must import labor just to keep our heads above water? It’s a simple issue called compounding interest; we lost their multiplier effect, contribution to our culture and society, earning and purchasing potential and the X factor which is how many of those aborted could have beyond measure impacted the world? How many could have been another Babe Ruth or Willie Nelson? We can put a number on that cost because we’ll never know what could have been, the potential was snuffed out.

That's the true cost of an abortion. What could have been.



Cubedramirez said:
Mr Khan said:

In a developed economy, a more liberal family-planning policy usually brings about higher birth-rates, because if we have a broader idea about how children can be brought up well, more men and women will be willing to bring them into the world, rather than ending pregnancies or just going heavy on birth-control pills. Japan is the bigger case here, for while they are actually quite liberal about abortion, they are conservative in almost every other respect of family-planning and have a hideously low birth rate.

No.

No.

Dear lord no. 

I had this massive post to just flame the heck out of that statement and the incorrect causation/correlation who mentioned with Japan.  There has been so much research and data accumulated on this subject that it’s staggering to see such incorrect assertions passed off as fact. The Japanese government has conducted so many surveys and researched every possible avenue to understand why the birthrate is so abysmal and what can be done to address it that a simple Google search would enlighten someone to the actual reasons attributed to this crisis.  

Even using the National Abortion Federation statistics does one come to an alarming issue with our own fertility crisis. 1.3 million (Heavily disputed by the way) woman goes through an abortion annually. That doesn’t take into account abortions where they’re multiple children developing. The United States is at fertility below where we merely replace those who came before us; 1.89. We were at above 5.8% in the 70’s, completely dropped off the map before the 80’s, had a modest boost during a majority of the 80’s and right before the 90’s hit we were on the fast track to ghost town USA. On a side note a little case was ruled on in 1973 which had an impact on these numbers.

Now, take into account you stated having a more liberal family-planning policy brings about higher birthrates; not once in the history of mankind has that even become remotely close to being reality.  The United States has the most liberal laws regarding abortion outside of China’s congrats you have a boy and whoops we dropped the girl policy. Yet, no increase in fertility rates outside of the 80’s bump (pun intended). Now we’re in 2013 and the reality is we must import mass quantities of labor just to stay at a fertility rate where we replace those who passed, not growing.

So, how about all those aborted children? Looking the data through the eyes of an accountant one can merely ask has the loss of potential from those aborted children in terms of having families of their own and contributing to our economy and society put us in this position where we must import labor just to keep our heads above water? It’s a simple issue called compounding interest; we lost their multiplier effect, contribution to our culture and society, earning and purchasing potential and the X factor which is how many of those aborted could have beyond measure impacted the world? How many could have been another Babe Ruth or Willie Nelson? We can put a number on that cost because we’ll never know what could have been, the potential was snuffed out.

That's the true cost of an abortion. What could have been.

I meant "family planning" in the holistic sense, to tie back into the argument about why these clinics are good for more than just abortions. Planned Parenthood isn't some sort of cover to deceive, after all. The idea is that, when women in developed countries feel confident that they can have kids without it being a detriment to their lives as such, they are more likely to do so. This is the bigger issue in Japan, which needs to be addressed by the Diet in terms of amending the Koseki system and either incentivizing or forcing employers to do more to support working mothers, as well as vastly broadening kindergarten/daycare availability.

The support structure for expectant mothers needs to be there. A legit planned parenthood clinic could convince a woman to have that baby, by way of demonstrating the presence of supportive services.

In a world where women are aware of options other than "have sex -> get pregnant," they will take those options if they feel it is a non-ideal situation. The goal should be to create an infrastructure that is both caring and inclusive, and knocking down a bunch of these clinics for no good reason is not going to achieve that.

It's not particularly ingenuous to ask "what could have been," either. The next Babe Ruth, or the next Ted Bundy? More likely the latter, if the child was unwanted, being born into a broken home or an impoverished situation. Sure there's the possibility of greatness, but the odds are quite long on that one.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Our country is a disgrace to the modern world. That is all.



Mr Khan said:

I meant "family planning" in the holistic sense, to tie back into the argument about why these clinics are good for more than just abortions. Planned Parenthood isn't some sort of cover to deceive, after all. The idea is that, when women in developed countries feel confident that they can have kids without it being a detriment to their lives as such, they are more likely to do so. This is the bigger issue in Japan, which needs to be addressed by the Diet in terms of amending the Koseki system and either incentivizing or forcing employers to do more to support working mothers, as well as vastly broadening kindergarten/daycare availability.

The support structure for expectant mothers needs to be there. A legit planned parenthood clinic could convince a woman to have that baby, by way of demonstrating the presence of supportive services.

In a world where women are aware of options other than "have sex -> get pregnant," they will take those options if they feel it is a non-ideal situation. The goal should be to create an infrastructure that is both caring and inclusive, and knocking down a bunch of these clinics for no good reason is not going to achieve that.

It's not particularly ingenuous to ask "what could have been," either. The next Babe Ruth, or the next Ted Bundy? More likely the latter, if the child was unwanted, being born into a broken home or an impoverished situation. Sure there's the possibility of greatness, but the odds are quite long on that one.

 

Throughout history we have plenty of examples of children who were abandoned becoming extremely successful and improved the overall human condition through their contributions through art, science and technological advancements. We also have examples of the Ted Bundy’s of the world that create hell on earth and abortion supporters just by them being alive.

If out of a thousand unwanted children, if 2 become successful and embody what I stated was the extreme positive and 20 people hell on earth then it’s a net positive on humanities benefit. The impact of the positives would have a greater span then hundreds of those hells on earth monsters. More people will benefit from their contributions, their life would improve, a rippling effect would happen and you’d see an almost business and shareholder relationship between said wonder child and everyone who attached themselves either directly or indirectly to him.  The murder, rapist, sadist would have an extreme impact on a small group of people and their families. The impact would never reach the scope of the wonder boy and in terms of length of time either contributions/crimes would be impactful on society the hell raises actions will fall into obscurity rather quickly.

Considering those dynamics I will always choose the potential of life rather than snuffing it.



Runa216 said:

Depending on how you want to perceive things, you can assume jupiter was to blame for making someone a ginger.  Things happened in your favor, that's a coincidence, not divine intervention.  hell, even your assertion that "I replied, therefore I exist" could be faulty.  Who knows if I'm real.  Maybe I'm a false account.  for all you know I COULD be a clever spambot.  You don't know.  you don't know anything about me, I could be an 80 year old woman who once masturbated on a park bench in front of a bunch of doves.  You don't know!  you assume I'm an average-aged adult, 18-34, interested in gaming, but you don't KNOW! seriously.  

Your assertion that God talked to you simply means you have to make a series of crazy assumptions just to get to where you were already certain was the case.  This is a massive leap of logic and one of the primary reasons Religion is illogical. 


I think you lack a lot of intuition and logic.

If one action causes another action... we found the cause.

You could be many things yeah but your missing the simple point... I know you exist based on intuitive logic. I used that same intuitive logic to figure that if God response to my prayer... he must exist. He did... case closed.

The way you use the word assertion... you can call anything an assertion. I didn't just assume it was God. I prayed to God... God answered.... O.O How hard is it for you to understand that? It makes sense that I'd link the answered prayer to God being the one who answered it since;;; just before that I made a prayer for God to perform that specific something. I actually remember that I closed the door so it can be a private prayer in my own room.

(facepalm) This is not a massive leap of logic... wow, you know that face when you see something so wierd... that your face crunches up and your eyes narrow a bit... I made that face when I read your last sentence.

(sigh) Also, just so you know... this wasn't the last time God answered my prayer in such a way... and Im not the only one... I know family members and non-family members.



All gaming systems, consoles/PC, have thier perks... why fight over preferences? I like Coke and you like Pepsi, that's it, let's not fight over which toy we like best cause that's what they are. Is someone's preference in a toy important or is the relationship between you and your neighbor more important? Answer is obvious, but THE most important thing is your relationship with God almighty. God Bless you in Jesus's name.

I can communicate without talking... I can send a loved one money without actually sending money... and I can commit theft without the product disappearing, the point of theft is the point of theft not one of it's possible symptoms which is the product dissappearing. The thief wants to gain something without paying for it, that's the point of theft, the thief doesn't have to care or anybody else has to care if the product dissappears. The product dissappearing is just a possible symptom of theft. Gifts are sacrfices, in order to give a gift, it has to be a genuine sacrfice/gift, meaning a copy of the game isn't still in your PC. Piracy is theft and/or being a culprit of theft.