| mrstickball said: Murdering a baby should never be an option. Just because she does not get an abortion does not mean the kid has to live a bad life by a bad mother - she can always give the baby up for adoption, and be adopted by able, loving parents. I am pro-life to the nth degree. I plan on having no natural kids in favor of adopting as many kids as possible for that said reason. All pro-lifers should live by that mantra, and adopt as many kids as possible. 90%+ of all abortions are done not for health, but the fact the kid is unwanted. Pro-lifers need to work to change adoption laws, and destroy abortion by making it the most illogical choice by ensuring the baby is wanted - even if not by it's natural mother. At one time in history, blacks were considered less than humans too - property - just like unborn babies. This argument is one in the same. Cut it any way you want, but when your terminating life that can exist outside the womb, your still killing a human. And it's also a shame that in hospitals (as well as everywhere), so much respect is placed on the expecting mother - warnings are posted everywhere to ensure that no ill effects are transferred on the baby. Despite this, we still murder them if the mother has a change of heart. Babies aren't property. They're people. |
Do you have any idea how poorly run the adoption and foster care system is? Its just plain pathetic. I'd almost rather be aborted myself than have to go through what some of those kids do.
At least you plan on adopting kids, so you are sticking to your guns. You are practicing what you preach, so I can't fault you for that.
I don't think the argument that blacks and fetuses don't have constitutionally protected rights is anything the same...one is based on racism and pseudo-science whereas the other is based on personal choice and a person's due process rights. We don't prosecute people for drinking alcohol while they are pregnant and doing whatever else they want to their body, even if it causes a miscarriage. How is abortion any different?
I also don't see why people think that science is necessarily on their side either who are pro-life. I mean scientifically speaking, life doesn't begin at conception. The egg and the sperm were both alive already. There was no magical transformation from living to dead. Its just two cells that turn into a glob of cells that will grow into a larger organism. Development begins at conception, but life doesn't begin at conception.
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
