Planned Parenthood leader among 64 arrested protesting North Carolina anti-abortion law

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Planned Parenthood leader among 64 arrested protesting North Carolina anti-abortion law
30
Wed, 07-10-2013 - 7:12am

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
To PSS: You seem to be saying that the presence of a particular organ must needs mean a purpose. What then of the appendix? Why does a woman still have a uterus after menopause? And if a woman's uterus is "built to have a parasite growing in it" then there are corollaries: Birth control defeats the purpose of the uterus and is not natural. Pain should not be ameliorated (nerve endings are presumably "built" for a specific purpose). The most extreme conclusion is that human body never should be tampered with since its "build" is without question or flaw. Just try selling your line to males with erectile dysfunction! ROFLMAO

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011

preschoolslave wrote:
<p>My definition is from an expert in the field of parasitology.</p><p><span style="color:#222222; font-family:Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif; font-size:15px; background-color:#fff9ee">A parasite is defined as an organism of <em><strong>one species</strong></em> living in or on an organism of <em><strong>another species</strong></em> (a hetero specific relationship) and deriving its nourishment from the host (is metabolically dependent on the host). (See Cheng, T.C., General Parasitology, p. 7, 1973.)</span></p><p><span style="color:#222222; font-family:Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif"><span style="font-size:15px">The only thing I find repugnant is that the pro-choice activists are trying to use  "the fetus is actually a parasite so it is ok to abort it" excuse.  </span></span></p>


Um, no, that's not quite how that came about.  Go back and reread.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Fetuses aren't parasites, but they are parasitic-like in that they cannot survive on their own. It is a woman's choice whether she chooses to use her uterus to carry a fetus to term or not, whether she chooses to use her body to provide life to another. Again, if you don't think a woman has a choice to do that, then you shouldn't have any problem with making someone donate something of themselves to provide life to another. If you do have a problem with that, then your logic is flawed.
Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
Well, the fact is a woman kills life when she aborts, You keep dancing around that. I suggest all girls/women be told the facts before they are told their options. Calling life before birth a parasite is just ignorance.

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
To JB3: I am assuming that your response is directed towards me. One of the many flaws of the current iVillage design is lack of accurate indication of who is replying to whom. My workaround involves putting that information in manually rather than relying on truly awful programming/website design. I am NOT dancing around a darn thing. There are a plenty of questions which were posed to you regarding a woman's rights and not one of them was answered. Instead, the old baby-killing image is invoked. Nor is it "ignorant" to point out that before it becomes viable for life outside the uterus, a blastocyst/embryo/fetus does have parasitical traits. Again, if you believe that abortion is murder, don't have one. But do not foist your BELIEFS on the bodies of others.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011

jamblessedthree wrote:
Well, the fact is a woman kills life when she aborts, You keep dancing around that. I suggest all girls/women be told the facts before they are told their options. Calling life before birth a parasite is just ignorance.


FFS.  Of course, women realize what they are doing when they have an abortion.  They do not want a child!  They realize that's what they'll have if they carry a pregnancy to term. 

...and still completely ignoring the fact that we don't force people to use their bodies to provide life to another. 

Avatar for jamblessedthree
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001

And you're ignoring the fact that all life begins somewhere. If a woman places herself in a situation where the end result becomes a pregnancy then the issue is nolonger about just her IMO. But I'll stop it there, this is a pretty hot button to both you and I, Don't drag links onto this debate board if you're insistence is to be right b/c you aren't.

 

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009

A woman who "places herself in a situation where the end result becomes a pregnancy then the issue is no longer about just her" has not necessarily knowingly or willingly acquiesced to becoming pregnant.  Birth control fails.  Men rape and seduce women.  Yet your statement seems to imply that the woman deserves an unwanted pregnancy as a punitive consequence.

I find that attitude underlying many of the so-called "right to lifers" statements.   They cannot possibly know the unique circumstances for each woman who becomes pregnant.  Yet they feel they have a moral right to make judgements about how she ought to respond--though she will be the one who ultimately lives with the choice.  Talk about "an insistence to be right" without personally experiencing the outcome! 

That's the "hot button" which keeps me from putting up and shutting up.  A woman's body is her own.  She and she alone has the right to make decisions which affect that body so intimately.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011

jamblessedthree wrote:
<p>And you're ignoring the fact that all life begins somewhere. If a woman places herself in a situation where the end result becomes a pregnancy then the issue is nolonger about just her IMO. But I'll stop it there, this is a pretty hot button to both you and I, Don't drag links onto this debate board if you're insistence is to be right b/c you aren't.</p><p> </p>


I have no idea what you mean about "don't drag links"...  

Anyway, I am right because a person's body belongs to them.  Period.  Supreme Court has ruled it that way, too. 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011

Excellent response, Jabberwocka.

Pages