First, you aren’t my friend if you are pro-life. Second, do you therefore wish to outlaw organ donation ? If the family of a brain dead person choose to withdraw life support, is it murder ? It’s the mind that makes us human, not the meat.
[QUOTE=Maureen]
[QUOTE=Updike]
If the federal government bans abortion, there’s a good possibility several societal problems will occur. Monstro outlined some of them. If those problems are created by banning abortion, then the federal government then becomes responsible for creating those problems.
Here’s a bigger font. Isn’t this fun. :rolleyes:
Unwanted pregnancies, and the problems that go along with them, are not created by the federal government.
Have we lost all sense of personal responsibility? The two people having sex are the ones who “broke” it, and they need to fix it. And I don’t mean by killing an innocent life.
Yes, I was waiting for that. “Keep your knees together.” Tell me, who was it who said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”? People aren’t going to stop fucking. Get over it. When you’re ready to leave moralistic lala land and join us in the real world let me know.
The problem here is, those “innocent lives” you’re trying so hard to protect? You’re turning them into a punishment. “You made your bed, you lie in it.” Because that’s the way a baby should be brought into the world, right? Not planned with love and welcomed, but as a punishment to the woman who had sex. How about going back to a nice, big A on her chest, too?
Oh, and while we’re at it, what is your proposal for paternal responsibility? Because you’re putting all the onus on the woman. She’s the one who will be punished, here. By forcing her through a pregnancy. Not to mention the time she loses from work, school, etc., even if she DOES give the child up for adoption (and that isn’t a punishment at all, either, is it? This person you’ve given birth to; the one you feel bonded to because of carrying it and hormonal changes…give it away and never worry about how it’s doing or where it is or if it’s being raised by people who are giving it a good life. Nah, that’s no punishment.)
Fuck, you really hate women, don’t you, Updike?
Speaking of reading up…
http://www.pregnancy.org/pregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.php
If you want to talk about actual developmental differences, those start at around six weeks (view Flash presentation). But of course, the production of male hormones is predicated upon the Y chromosome being present at fertilization…so the blueprint for development is present at fertilization, the actual hormone production starts around 6 weeks. Both somewhat earlier than the second trimester.
Of course most folks don’t view ultrasounds that indicate genitalia until the second semester…but that’s not the same thing as claiming “…fetuses don’t have gender til around the second trimester.”
You’re right, I apologize. I should have said “fetuses do not present male or female genitalia til around the second trimester.”
Better?
Yup 
You better adjust your reading glasses there, dearie. I said the onus was on the TWO PEOPLE who created the baby.
And whether or not said onus falls equally on the woman or the man, pregnancy is still not caused by the government.
I’ve been following this in the news for a while now–I grew up in South Dakota–and I’m sad to say I’m not surprised that the bill has gotten this far. South Dakota has always been a regressive state. The only thing that surprises me is that it took this long for it to happen.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned here is being discussed quite a bit among South Dakotans (current and recovering), and it’s earned the bill the nickname of “Rapist’s Rights.” Because here’s the thing: if a woman has a child as a result of rape or incest, the father will have the right to see (or maybe even get partial custody of) the child. So if the father gets to remain involved, doesn’t that mean he also can decide whether his victim gets to give up the child for adoption? AFAIK, there’s nothing in the bill preventing that level of involvement on the part of the father.
As to the abortion issue, I’m not going to try to change anyone’s mind because it just isn’t possible. But I’m vehemently pro-choice, and I find it particularly disgusting when men get on the pro-life bandwagon. Guys, do you know what it’s like to be pregnant? How it completely takes over your body? How terrifying it is? And do you have any idea how scary and painful it is to have an abortion? Of course you don’t, and you can’t. So don’t talk about how abortion is the “easy” or “irresponsible” way out. Once you’re pregnant, there’s no easy way for it to end.
And having an abortion when you’re 19, alone, and jobless isn’t irresponsible. Having a baby in the bathroom and leaving it in the trash is irresponsible. That’s the kind of thing that’s going to start happening in South Dakota now that one of the responsible options is being taken away.
[QUOTE=moonstarssun]
And having an abortion when you’re 19, alone, and jobless isn’t irresponsible.
[QUOTE]
Isn’t having sex when you’re 19, alone, and jobless irresponsible?
Not if you’re gay.
People like to fuck. It’s a thing. And yes, when you have sex, you risk pregnancy. So what? When you get in a car, you risk having a car accident. Does that mean that by definition it’s irresponsible to drive? After all, you’re more likely to get in a car accident while driving responsibly than you are likely to get pregnant by having sex responsibly.
If you use proper precautions, you’ve taken responsibility. Sometimes, those precautions fail. Life is like that.
No…it’s human. Updike, you are going to have to get your head around this concept:
People are going to have sex. Even when they aren’t even legally “allowed” to do so. Even when they aren’t married. Even when they aren’t even THINKING about getting married. That doesn’t make it irresponsible.
Not wearing a condom is irresponsible.
Having unprotected sex is irresponsible.
Your personal beliefs about it don’t even come into play here. It is irresponsible, criminally (should be) so, to ignore the simple fact that sex is going to happen, even if you don’t approve of it. Closing your eyes and pretending that telling people “don’t do it” is going to work is just plain stupid. Teach kids personal responsibility, absolutely. But make sure that education includes safe sex and birth control. Or all you’re doing is fiddling while Rome burns.
And for the second time: a child should not be an “onus” or a punishment. Ever.
[QUOTE=Updike]
[QUOTE=moonstarssun]
And having an abortion when you’re 19, alone, and jobless isn’t irresponsible.
In my case, yes, it was irresponsible. I was drinking heavily, using drugs, and sleeping with a drug dealer who was 12 years older than me, and I was usually not sober enough to know whether I was taking precautions. Stupid, you bet. But does compounding irresponsibility with another bad decision improve things? I would have made a terrible mother and the father made it clear he wouldn’t help with anything other than an abortion. I couldn’t afford medical care and I certainly wasn’t in any condition to have a healthy pregnancy.
I got a chance to change the direction my life was going, but it cost a potential person his/her chance to come into being. Believe me, it’s not a decision I made lightly and skipped away from thinking, “I’ll do this again the next time I have an unwanted pregnancy!” It was a high price to pay, so I’ve tried very hard to make sure that I haven’t wasted that second chance.
Updike and the raindog, how old are you two?
If neither of you have children, I want you to imagine for a minute that you do. You both have 12 year old daughters.
Your daughters are “average”, in the sense that they are A and B students, don’t get in trouble other than the occasional talking in class detention, that sort of thing. Ordinary, everyday pre-teens.
Despite all your teachings of abstinence, they decide they want to know what this “sex” thing is all about. They get pregnant. They confide this fact to you. What do you do?
What else? Force them to have it so they’ll learn their lesson that sex is bad and evil and be traumatized by it for the rest of their lives.
Thus their role of being a responsible father is fulfilled, and by God, that girl will learn!
[QUOTE=Updike]
[QUOTE=moonstarssun]
And having an abortion when you’re 19, alone, and jobless isn’t irresponsible.
There you have it! Sex is only for the elderly and the gainfully employed! Young single people must on no account have sex unless they’re doing it for money – preferably with some wealthy elderly person!
As much as i’m in disagreement with Updike on this issue, I suspect what he meant rather that sex is only responsible when you’re actually wanting a child, and are capable of looking after that child, rather than as a matter of age or employment specifically.
You misunderstand Catholic excommunication. When a Catholic is excommunicated, he or she is not considered an ex-Catholic by the Church; instead, the person is unable to receive the Eucharist and unable to particpate in other spiritual rituals. While strict, it’s not meant to be permanent; the goal is to get the Catholic back on the right track.
Those women are, indeed, Catholic.
No. If you get into a car accident, you’re expected to take responsibilty for the results. Like having the insurance that’s required by whatever state you live in. In any case, if you cause an accident, then you are responsible for the damages.
Why do you think that fucking should be exempt from responsibility?