Obviously Alloran is here with a very powerful anti-abortion agenda. Chill, guys. 
Like my grandma would say, “Don’t let him know where your goat is tied.”
Whoops, sorry, you’re both wrong. Homo sapiens has had naturally occuring clones for thousands of years–they’re called “identical twins”. 
Okey-dokey.
A zygote–or a blastula, or an embryo–only has the “capacity for consciousness” in the sense of “potential to later develop consciousness”; it doesn’t have the “capacity for consciousness” in the sense that a person–even a sleeping person–does, namely the actual ability to be aware. I don’t think a potential person is a person, yet, and therefore I don’t think abortion–not the sort of early abortions which are the majority of all abortions in this country, at any rate–is anything like “murder”. It’s much more like contraception, preventing a person from ever coming into existence in the first place.
I tried so hard to resist this thread, but oh well . . .
I used to be prolife because I didn’t believe in violence. I still don’t. I get upset when people kill bugs around me, for christ’s sake! But I became pro-choice quite some while ago because I realized that the prolifers didn’t have arguments against abortion or viable options to abortion that stimulated me enough intellectually. To say that life begins at conception doesn’t mean anything to me. Last I heard you can’t hold a conversation with a fetus. I don’t think that you can interact in any kind of meaningful way with a fetus. It’s just a bunch of cells developing. Well, I’m sure people are going to have fun with those statements, but I just don’t see what kind of meaningful LIFE there is for a fetus outside the potential to GROW INTO a human being.
I’m prochoice because I don’t believe in violence, and I think to bring a child into the world and put it into such exceedingly problematic institutions like foster care, or to put it up for adoption, or to keep it and subject it to less than optimal family conditions is to commit the worst type of violence upon a child. I get upset everytime my friends who work with at-risk youth who have NOT been adopted, but rather have lived their lives moving from foster home to foster home–places where they learn to expect no stability, get little structure, and are most likely abused than not–tell me the latest tale about kid C. For example, I heard the story about a girl whose birth mother had her and kept her. This girl had been molested so many times and verbally and physically abused in any way you can imagine, and she is a mess. She’s so dependent on anti-depressants and other antipsychotics that she can’t make a meaningful contribution to society. I don’t think she’ll even get her high school diploma. She’s just a waste, and will probably be a drain on all those taxpayer funds people keep harping over having to pay, but that’s another issue. It would have been better if her mother had aborted her rather than carry her to term.
Some people are not meant to have kids, or they haven’t fully thought of what the implications of having kids are. Children, as I’m sure any of the parents who post to the SD can attest, are a 24-7 job. They need constant support, guidance, discipline, positive role models to structure themselves on and eventually distinguish themselves from, and unconditional love. There’s also the fact that they are expensive to clothe, feed, and educate. It doesn’t matter how old or young a woman is, if she and probably the male who fathered the child haven’t considered carefully what it will take to raise a child, or if she knows that she cannot financially support a child, then she should not carry a child to term.
Adoption is not the next best solution to abortion. The adoption system is fraught with problems too. The problem is that most kids are adopted as infants rather than as toddlers or children who’ve had a chance to get used to the idea that the people adopting them are not their natural parents, but that they are in every sense of the word their parents. My friend who is a parent thinks that perhaps parents should adopt kids who are a little older. They will have had a little more time to make peace with their absent birth mothers and to appreciate the home they will be adopted into. My friend and I wonder why there is no protocol in place to allow the mother closure with the child. Many children who are adopted as infants grow up wanting to search for their birth mothers because they need closure, or they are confused about what the difference is between the woman who gave birth to them and the adoptive mother who raised them. One thing that adoptive services could and should offer–I don’t know if this will work or if they do not already do this–is to let the birth mother write a letter addressed to her offspring explaining the reasons why she gave the child up and asking the child not to look for her if that is what she desires. She could address what may be some questions/concerns on the part of the adopted child and provide some means of closure with the birth parent.
In terms of the violation the prolife position perpetuates upon the female body, I’m sorry, but unless your name is celestina, no one has the right to tell me what I can and can’t do with my reproductive organs. Prolifers can’t order me to bring a child I don’t want and/or can’t support financially/emotionally to term–taking nine months out of my life, making me go through I can’t begin to imagine what kinds of emotional and hormonal changes (from what I hear, being pregnant is not fun) because frankly it’s none of their business. They don’t have to bear the responsibility of raising that child. I would. Get out of my womb!!!
I think a much more powerful statement prolifers can make would be the day when I see prolifers working more to PROVIDE SOLUTIONS to the problems in the adoption and foster care systems, rather than just going out and spouting empty rhetoric about when conception begins and other points of morality–oh please!–or picketing/destroying abortion centers, or pointing fingers at and condemning women who excercise their constitutional right to decide when and how they wish to reproduce.
Time for some adoption education…(this is a hijack - forgive me)
1st, several pages back, someone posted that women bond instantly at birth and thats why its important to sign away parental rights before birth. This is based on debunked research from the 1930s (although it still comes up in current research). Way back in the dark ages (like in the 1950s - and much later in parts of the country), the nurses would whisk away a baby being placed for adoption, and often the b-mom didn’t know the gender of the child. That has changed. Also, as far as I know, there isn’t a state left that lets you sign away rights before birth. Most don’t make the adoption final for several days to several months post birth - the birthmom has plenty of time to change her mind. I even know of b-moms who have nursed their babies during the hospital stay, then turn over their babies to the a-parents. The waiting period before signing away rights is one of the reasons you hear so many horror stories about adoptive parents “losing” their children after placement - b-mom has exercised her right to change her mind. This is a risk a-parents take with most US adoptions. This is the US only - other countries have different laws and systems in place, although the Hague convention and the UN have some very strict regulations about what can go on in international adoption to make sure babies aren’t being taken from unwilling birthmoms, babies aren’t being “sold” and children are not being stolen. The State Department’s web site has information on international adoption protocols. And I believe adoption.com has an outline of adoption laws by state (although I’m not too up on US adoption).
2nd - Children adopted as infants do overwhelmingly better in homes than children adopted as toddlers. There is a short development window for learning to attach. Children moved from foster home to foster home often don’t get this opportunity. Nor do children in institutions. The less “disruptions” in any child’s life, the better most social workers and child psychologist believe it is for the child. Toddler adoption is frought with problems (not insurmountable, but it is much more difficult). See a book called “The Weaver’s Craft” for more information on toddler adoption. And a book called “Launching a Baby’s Adoption” for information on bonding and disruptions. I know kids placed very young that have some attachment problems, but it is generally believed the younger the child is at placement, the better the adjustment and attachment will be.
3rd - There are plenty of protocols in place to allow b-mom closure. Most adoptions in the US are now open, often with regular communication between b-mom and adoptive parents, and sometimes visits. Even international adoptions are occationally “open” now, although this is easier in some cultures than in others. Open adoptions are generally seen as best for everyone - allowing b-mom contact, closure and peace, giving the child a sense of who they are and some answers, and giving parents the opportunity to have some of the hard questions answered.
In my case, my son is Korean. He arrived in our home at 6 1/2 months. We do not have contact with his b-mom - although I know her name. I send regular letters to his Korean agency giving status, and the file is open to her (as well as my son’s foster mother) should she wish to see it. The file will be available to my son when he turns 18, and is available and open to us at any time (we have copies of most of the records).
Amen!!! I don’t think there is any problem in this world with people who think they shouldn’t have a kid but really should…The problem is with people who think they should have a kid but really shouldn’t! All the poor, abused, neglected, undernourished children suffering in this world…Now there is a useful issue that pro-lifers could be addressing!
Will anyone else be glad when this thread hits the 6 page limit and disappears?
alloran is 12. I can’t believe I defended the little punk in another thread. He’s not worth the time yet. Throw him back in…he’ll be big enough to fight with in a few years.
Well, you have at least one person that supports your proposal (that being me of course).
It shouldn’t. In fact, this unfounded idea that life is sacred is a large part of the problem. If all non-human life is not sacred (and I think most people would agree on that) then what makes human life sacred? As far as I can judge the only possible answers are large brains or the mythical beings (such as the Christian God) that are the basis for religions.
I feel that knowing you are adopted is one of those things that you are better off not knowing. In some cases, ignorance truly is bliss. There are obviously situations when the child is going to figure it out (like when certain physical characteristics are substantially different between the parents and the child), and in those cases the truth is necessary. But there are some cases where the truth causes nothing but hurt. This is one of them (there are others but I don’t want to get any further off topic).
This reminds me of a quote from the great George Carlin:
“Pro-life. You don’t see many of these white anti-abortion women volunteering to have any black fetuses transplanted into the uteruses, do you? No. You don’t see them adopting a whole lot of crack babies, do you? Nooo. That might be something Christ would do.” (Last sentence said in a sarcastic tone).
They really do that? That is most disappointing. The fact that a debate has become quite popular is no reason to delete it, but I suppose they just conclude that a 6 page debate is unresolvable. Most debates are unresolvable though, so that doesn’t seem to be a good reason.
The mods/admins don’t delete threads once they reach a certain length, it just becomes beyond the capacity of the server to cope with them; and as with any thread not being actively posted to, the threads disappear off the front page fairly quickly.
As you can see, two other abortion threads are already active, and will no doubt continue once this one reaches maximum capacity.
As a search for the keyword “abortion” reveals, there have been many, many debates on this issue (some better than others) in the past, and there will no doubt be many more in the future.
The OP in this particular thread, however, was unable/unwilling to defend his opinion that life is sacred and therefore abortion is morally wrong, let alone sustain the argument that actions judged morally wrong shouldn’t be allowed. He was also unable to provide empirical evidence supporting his contention that terminating a pregnancy is inherently damaging to the emotional wellbeing/mental health of the woman concerned.
Rest assured, there will be many opportunities in the future to participate in further debates on the issue of abortion, and some of them will be initiated by well constructed OPs.
See, MEBuckner – I told you it’s a slippery slope. When Procacious becomes the despotic ruler of a small European nation, don’t come crying to me!
My nation would be great. Natural evolution at its finest. Anyway, if I can kill bacteria, fungi, carrots, trees, and cows without any problems, why can’t I kill humans? The idea that humans are their own property and the killing of one would be the destruction of private property I can accept. But the idea that there is some magical quality that makes them unkillable (morally speaking) has yet to be proven and thus does not hold up.
A fundie of the tender age of twelve is in here preaching at us heathens? Amazing. Truly amazing. I distinctly remember some other fundie raising holy <ahem> about the LDS ordaining deacons at that age and how “unbiblical” it was (to the fundie, mind you) to have someone at the age of twelve preaching to other folks.
Make no mistake, folks. That’s exactly what alloran is doing here: preaching. Now, “preaching to me” I don’t usually mind. But this is just more of the “preaching at me” malarkey we’ve all come to know and despise.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say, if alloran is 12, I’ll give away all my Pearl Jam CDs to charity.
He’s good, though. He almost had me convinced. Twice.
As I thought - I guessed straight off that your SN JET was a reference to PJ. Particularly apt given your debut in the high school killer thread.
I’d be less willing to give away those prize assets just yet if I were you though. The three alloran threads we’ve seen so far seem more than consistent with a twelve year-old worldview to me.
pan
Well, emulating a child is not hard to do if you’re smart enough. All it takes is strict adherence to a set of stylistic rules, a carefully plotted methodology, special attention to detail, and the hope that nobody will spend all night carefully analyzing your posts for inconsistencies.
Oh, and a motive. Which, in hindsight, is the part I forgot, considering the mystery has been solved in this thread.
Guess I know why I never win in Vegas. :rolleyes: Shit.