Atheism or agnosticism?Follow

Oh, in that case hell no. I have enough trouble with one one year old, and a daughter at that. He's kind of like an alcoholic dad. Usually loving and all, but when he's on the sauce he'll destroy you for so much as coughing. Its weird on the subject. Like ... Lot, from Sodom and Gomorrah was spared from the punishment of perversion in Sodom and Gomorrah, rallying against incestuous marriage, and engaging in incest in the closest of genetic relationships. Then he has sons with his daughters (though he was drunk during the acts). I don't remember, nor can I find, any punishment for the acts. I go back to my "Alcoholic Dad" reference.Neither, but since you don't actually do any fact checking or reading ... So is pulling out, condoms and the pill. Sinner. Murderer.

Aside from the 75 intervening years, anyway.

Stick to word-vomiting ideological politics. Theology doesn't suit you.

That'd be one reason. Also for giving free will and turning around and punishing you for exercising it.

You do know what the word "insinuating" means, right?

So this hypothetical man. Can he afford the third child? If not I'd say he's being responsible, rather than a deadbeat.


Your argument was stupid. The primary reasons for abortion are health issues, or financial issues. While you may have some kind of point as far as financial issues would entail the thought "I can't afford a child", aborting the child you can't afford is more responsible than carrying it to term and subjecting it to abject poverty. Understand?

Sure, some do. But its a much smaller portion than you think do. Why would you change the laws based on a fairly small group?

Btw, that's pretty much the definition of making decisions based off of emotion.

Please quote me saying that or STFU.



If you're referring to the guy from work in the story that I told Belkira, of course. He's a "Single" Captain, with two children. He just doesn't WANT to pay the extra money. He has to pay $900 per child. If the guy weren't a complete idiot, he would have just married one of the baby mammas. Instead, he pushed the abortion topic and tried to turn it around on her. She's even keeping the option open for him to step up until the birth of the child, so she can take him to court.



Financial reasons? That's why we have social programs to assist people who fall in those categories. In any case, I can accept legitimate "financial reasons", not "aww man, things going to be too tight".

Health issues? Really? Do you honestly believe that? Do you think most of the U.S would even care about abortions if the main reasons were health reasons?









Should I keep going or will you admit that you're just making stuff up?

The argument I was addressing was essentially asking why god would create life only to allow it to die. It seems valid to point out that this isn't unique to just life which is gestating.

I doubt very much any woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy is "simple". That being said, yes, in the circumstances where you do not want it or can not afford it, abortion is a sensible and responsible thing to do. That's what I said.

Forgotten what your argument is already?

Again, it's not what you said, it's what you have been implying, though.

Again, your perception is that its significant, but you're (and this is human nature) focusing on the bad and turning a blind eye to those who don't. Its your emotions that's clouding that and keeping you from seeing the bigger picture, where its not nearly as rampant as you beleive it to be. We're talking about something that involves money and money people into degenerate scum when they feel they're owed it, or feel another is not owed it. You're going to see the bad more than the good because its going to be far more vocal.

No, I'm not wrong.

That was easy!

And you do understand that the amount of work is pretty much tied to the welfare of the child... right?



Of course it does. It's ridiculous that you can't see how. Not really surprising, though. You are sort of dim.



I don't like women and children because I think a woman should have control over her body, and children should be taken care of...? And you're the guy insinuating that a woman should have to bear a child if the couple aren't in agreement that an abortion is their choice, and if the woman wants the kid and the father doesn't, the kid is sh*t out of luck...? Or maybe you're saying that if a man doesn't want the kid, the woman should abort it, or suffer the consequences. That's another take on your little "two options, take'em or leave'em" argument.



True. The woman should, of course, listen to what the man tells her to do with her body. Either have the kid the man wants, or get rid of it so he doesn't have to be burdened with a monthly payment for the kid to eat. Man, I see the light now, Alma! /sarcasm off



More emotion. Pathetic, really.



Like I said, it sucks, but that's the way it is. Suck it up. Put on your big boy pants and live in the real world.



What sort of welfare do you think a kid's doing to have in a household where the parents don't want it, genius? My feelings are first and foremost for the woman, because she's the one who's body is being hijacked. Once the decision is made to keep that kid, though, the welfare of the baby becomes the primary focus.

Sorry the world isn't black and white for you, sweetcakes.




You believing it's so doesn't make you right, either. Na na na na boo boo to you, too.



Oh no, friend. I don't think so. You want to find it, go look for it.



You're talking about abortion. That's about as far AFTER sex as it gets.



No expansion necessary. It's not like buying a video game. A woman ends up pregnant and it's a life changing decision to carry to term or terminate the pregnancy. There's no returns, no store credits. Either way, her life is changed forever. Simply "not wanting it" is a perfectly acceptable reason to terminate a pregnancy.

Now, don't pretend this translates to me saying, "Abortion is a WONDERFUL form of birth control!!" because I don't think it should be used that way. I think that's terrible, and really, it's not used that way. But I really have no right to tell a woman not to use her body that way. That's her decision, not mine. It's not one I would make for myself, but then, neither is piercing my labia or tattoing a guy's name on my body. If they want to do those things, that's their business.



[/quote]

Look at scenario two, dimwit. How do you think that plays out?? Pretty much what it comes down to is this:

Option one, a woman can decide to have an abortion, or the man can take the opportunity to leave the child unsupported, or she can be forced to have an abortion because she can't support a kid on her own.

Option two, both the man and the woman have to mutually decide that an abortion is right for them, or the woman is forced to carry to term.

That's how EVERYONE reads your sh*t options, Alma. And I honestly see no other way to read them. You have yet to address what should happen if the man wants the kid and the woman doesn't.

Edited, May 2nd 2011 7:24pm by Belkira

Edited, May 2nd 2011 7:26pm by Belkira

How many of Zam's pro-life posters adopt?

So.. Alma says, "You can't force the father to support his own kid!! Get all of AMERICA to support it, but not the FATHER! That's not fair!!!"