Harsh Words

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Harsh Words
58
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 3:37am

Just a quick thought on the whole "Pro-abortion" label that has been discussed numerous times on this board. The following is from a discussion taken place on this board called "Ways to reduce Abortion".

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2006
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 3:59am
Rather than picking

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2004
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 4:09am

Actually I did read the entire post and I welcome everyone to do so as well. (Thank you kindly by the way for posting that link on your message, I wasn't quite sure how to do that. I'm still a 2 finger typer so that tells you alot about my computer skills lol)

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2005
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 11:09am


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 11:46am

<>

Those are my words, and I'll stand by them. However, remember the context in which they were made. Someone is arguing that they do not want their tax dollars to fund elective abortions by choice. And I respond that I don't particularly like MY tax dollars paying for generational welfare recipients.And yes, in those cases I WOULD far rather pay for an abortion than for a woman to have 9 kids she cannot support and raises poorly and who grow up in a self-=perpetuating system. I would see those children removed from this system of ignorance a, laziness, and self-entitlement. And I believe the net effect WOULD be better birth control efforts in that class of people.

I am pro CHOICE, not pro ABORTOIN. I would never force a woman to either abort or gestate against her will. But I would not see society continue to support this system of abuse, and I'd like to see the kids in better upbringings. And yes, if you ask me if Miss Welfare Queen who's having her 8th kid while daughter number one is having her 3rd (true story) and of those 11 children, there have been NINE different fathers, none of whom are supporting this family- would I rather see 2 abortions or two more births? Yup= I'd rather pay for 2 more abortions than raise 2 more people in this system with these sorts of parents. BUT- it's not my choice to make, and I respect that.

<<"These types of women". What does that mean? There's only one type of woman.>>

Er, no. I can guarantee you that a vagina and uterus are about the only thing I have in common with the above[mentioned women. If it feels politically correct to say otherwise, you are certainly free to disagree, but I am a realist and I don't sugar-coat my opinions or views.

<<>

My PC views will uphold each woman's right to choose. But I can still think some of them are skanky idiots, and choose to support ways that do NOT perpetuate their support-systems at the expense of the taxpayers.

<<"My Body, My Choice", where does that apply in this particularly harsh statement. Forcing a woman to have an abortion, or taking her child away at birth simply because she's on social assistance.>>

It's called refusing to continue to pay people to breed when they have no means to support those children. That is LIFE. This is for repeat offenders that have corrupted what was a good and fair system. There SHOULD be social assistance for those who fall on hard times, widows while they get things together, unemployed, disabled- but it should be TEMPORARY for those who can recover, reg-group and re-enter society as contributing members. It's been abused and perverted until it's an art-form. And these kids are done a grave disservice. Putting them in homes where there are morals, values and resources would likely put them much further ahead than their mothers were willing to do.

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 11:48am

<>

ROFLMAO- I'm not pro-abortion, In fact, I've never HAD an abortion, have had 4 of my own children, never counseled anyone to HAVE an abortion, and would fight just as vigorously for each and every woman to give birth as to abort.

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 11:51am

<>

Complications? Were those not TERMINAL complications being discussed? Not Down Syndrome, spina bifida, etc., but TERMINAL conditions in which the fetus would die shortly after a painful life on artificial support?

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2005
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 12:42pm



No one can say for

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2005
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 12:44pm


As long as doing so would not put a financial burden on the insurance company, policy
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 1:00pm

<

The choice is being forced upon them. That is very similar to a situation in which a father could terminate his financial responsibility towards a child before birth. The mother would still have the right to choose to continue the pregnancy but knowing that the carrot on the stick has been removed(money from the father or the government), some feel that she is then forced to abort against her will. This has been discussed at length here and the common response from PCers is that the woman no longer has a choice and is being forced to abort.>>

Hmmm...let's look at my posts in depth before we jump to conclusions, shall we?

My words in that thread:
In http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psabortdeb&msg=4516.1&ctx=6

<>

In http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psabortdeb&msg=4516.1&ctx=22

<

Disabuse me of the notion that we were indeed discussing terminal cases in which the fetus would either die in utero or shortly after birth and being hooked up to life support and we can discuss other cases that are not terminal and likely my thoughts will change :-)>>

In http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psabortdeb&msg=4516.21&x=37

<They already do if they are uninsured and cannot pay for chemo and radiation therapy. I'd like to see those EXISTING children get the fundage for treatment instead of terminal fetuses that need extensive life support as they die. Resources, including the money for health care, is not an infinite resource, no matter what some think. And yes, I think lines will need to be drawn. It would be nice if people thought with their head and logic and saved those resources for those who would truly benefit form them.>>

In http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psabortdeb&msg=4516.21&x=40

<>

In http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-psabortdeb&msg=4516.41&x=42

<Is that any clearer?
It is a personal choice each parent must make- and one about which I will hold varied opinions.
I've never said she should not. I only opine about some of those chocis, as is my right- but I uphold her right to dos so- just as I may not agree with personal reasons for abortions- I'll uphold the right to have one.>>

NO WHERE did I say that insurance be denied. In EACH one I said it was my OPINION that the choice might be selfish or immoral. So no- I was';t being "pro-abortion", nor forcing a choice on a woman against her will, but rather expressing my opinion of some of those choices.

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Sun, 03-16-2008 - 1:01pm

<>

Really? And you would know that how? I can support something on a basis of rights even when I deplore it.

.
.
.

Pages