|
I agree. Abortion should be for the sole purpose of insuring and guranteeing their ticket into
heaven without facing the sins of the world. It would suck for the new born to be born a muslim or
atheist or Buddhist. They lose all hopes of getting into the Christian heaven. :) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree. And they should start doing it as soon as those who use the argument that abortion is
killing children start financing the needs of all children who are born into life's that are not
conducive to children. This of course would include providing for the needs of many mothers. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Like Grenache, I've never argued that abortion is necessary to keep the population down. I argue
for a women's right to choose because I believe a woman SHOULD have a right to choose.
You, dlmiller, sound like a redneck with no education. Most people do not use overpopulation as
their only argument against taking the choice away from a woman who is not ready or able to care for
a child. There are enough neglected, abused and uncared for children in this world already. Why
make more suffer because you feel they should be a punishment for someone having unprotected sex?
Beyond that, taking away the right to choose will not stop abortions. It will make them illegal and
unregulated, raising the partial birth abortions later on in pregnancies.
This argument will go nowhere because there are people in this world with much more foresight than
you. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I'm sure when they use it as an argument it is but among many of the other reasons used for their
excuses.
Although it is not a very good reason, it is plausible for people to come to that conclusion. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Actually the reason I personally think it is imperative to maintain the right to choose is because
the thought of people like you deciding what happens for all these women terrifies and disgusts me.
By the way you know the reason why we need so many abortions is because the rest of us are having
unprotected sex constantly without you, right? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't use the population control argument, it's unnecessary, because defending the woman's right
to choose is sufficient.
But I will flip your argument around on you and say that people who swear all life is so sacred that
we cannot abort should all be going out and adopting as many kids as they can from orphanages and
such. If you insist these kids be brought into the world then you share a responsibility to raise
them and give them a future. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
People who use over population as a point in an argument to support abortion are retarded.
People who recognize other arguments to support abortion, such as the fact which undoubtedly
dictates that the early form of a fetus is an emotionless mindless group of cells equivalent to a
viral organism, as comparable in reason and validation to the overpopulation argument are
substantially and exceedingly more retarded than those who use the overpopulation argument.
People who label a fetus as a child are retarded.
People who would willingly propose that an individual human being should commit suicide because
they used the overpopulation argument are retarded. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No because quite obviously there is a difference between a person putting a gun to their head and a
person getting rid of a few parasitic cells that don't resemble human in any way shape or form. It
is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that because someone uses this argument against abortion should
kill themselves. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
01 Sep 2009 08:06
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
