XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism
XPost: alt.religion.christian, alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion
XPost: talk.atheism, us.issues.abortion
From: webgiant@rocketmail.com
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 10:22:19 +0200,
Warnock wrote:
> ****** Man was created with freedom of
> choice, and must take the consequences
> for the choices made!
And thus you are arguing against "medically
necessary" abortions, since they are allowing
women to "avoid the possible consequences of
their actions".
Or is dying in childbirth *not* a possible
consequence of sex?
I await your proof of why dying in childbirth
is *not* a possible consequence of sex, and
thus a woman who makes the choice to have sex
does *not* have to face up to the possible
consequences of sex.
This is the primary dichotomy of the
majority anti-abortion movement: while women
"*should not* be allowed to avoid the possible
consequences of their actions through abortion,"
women who are facing a *possible consequence*
*of sex* in the form of *dying in childbirth*
"*should* be allowed to avoid the possible
consequences of their actions through abortion."
According to a Wirthlin poll posted by Papa Jack,
only 12% of anti-abortion folks think that women
"*should not* be allowed to avoid the possible
consequences of their actions through abortion."
They are the only *honest* anti-abortion folks
because they are the ones who want to ban *all*
abortions.
> A responsible person would not make
> unwise choices, which may lead to long
> term problems later.
Which is another argument, by you, that
women who are facing "dying in childbirth"
don't deserve an abortion because they "made
unwise choices [that] lead to long term
problems later."
By *your reasoning*, using abortion to avoid
*dying in childbirth* is an irresponsible act.
Go on digging yourself into your own hole.
> Abortion is an unwise choice,
But you argue that sometimes it *is*
a wise choice. A medically necessary
abortion, you argue, is sometimes a
wise choice for a woman to make.
Which is it? Are abortions unwise choices,
thus making the concept of "medically
necessary abortions" a falsehood? Or is
abortion sometimes a wise choice, a
medically necessary choice?
> it lowers the moral standards of
> society!!
Actually I think you'll find criminalizing
abortion lowers the morals of society.
Abortion kills an unconscious fetus, incapable
of feeling pain throughout most of the pregnancy.
The alternatives to abortion, as history shows,
are infanticide (kills a conscious baby),
adultery, and dying in childbirth.
The adultery option may seem like a stretch if
you haven't been studying sexual history, but
it makes perfect sense in a culture which has
banned all reproductive control methods other
than abstinence. If your husband insists on
having sex, and you don't want to have sex
and/or don't want to have any more children,
the only 100% perfect birth control method
available to the *wife*, is her husband's
*adultery*. Yes, his mistress may not have
any birth control, but the wife no longer has
to deal with more pregnancies from sex.
Chances are, the mistress probably has access
to black market birth control, so everyone is
happy, even though everyone is *immoral*.
When the Comstock laws in the U.S.A. banned
the use, instruction in, and importation of
contraceptive devices, adultery rates went
WAY up and wives ignored their husbands'
infidelity to control their own reproduction.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
