The day dudes can will their sperm to not swim up the fallopian tubes, this will be a valid argument.
Between vasectomies, the pill, condoms, simple abstinence mixed with pornography, blow jobs, hand jobs and an assortment of fetishes I dare not mention, what sort of extra assistance do you require to not put semen in a vagina?
A complete rework of the male brain? Sex ed that doesn't suck? I'm not talking for me, though I do admit, I get a bit nervous every time my fiancee is a bit late for her period.
Put on a fucking condom. This isn't brain surgery.
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
Life starts when you can be airdropped into the jungle and make it out alive.
Can't cut it? Too bad.
Battle Royale is the strongest argument against abortion.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
This will always come down to a line in the sand argument anyway as to when a person is a person.
I agree. Since the answer can't really be proven objectively, isn't it our responsibility to err on the side of caution and go with the most conservative line with even a shred of reasonability?
Why is it our responsibility at all?
the wook on
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
The day dudes can will their sperm to not swim up the fallopian tubes, this will be a valid argument.
Between vasectomies, the pill, condoms, simple abstinence mixed with pornography, blow jobs, hand jobs and an assortment of fetishes I dare not mention, what sort of extra assistance do you require to not put semen in a vagina?
A complete rework of the male brain? Sex ed that doesn't suck? I'm not talking for me, though I do admit, I get a bit nervous every time my fiancee is a bit late for her period.
Put on a fucking condom. This isn't brain surgery.
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
Why is it out of the question? If you make people legally liable for the children they bear then you can dramatically increase abstinence. With DNA testing it's also rather feasible.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
The day dudes can will their sperm to not swim up the fallopian tubes, this will be a valid argument.
Between vasectomies, the pill, condoms, simple abstinence mixed with pornography, blow jobs, hand jobs and an assortment of fetishes I dare not mention, what sort of extra assistance do you require to not put semen in a vagina?
A complete rework of the male brain? Sex ed that doesn't suck? I'm not talking for me, though I do admit, I get a bit nervous every time my fiancee is a bit late for her period.
Put on a fucking condom. This isn't brain surgery.
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
Why is it out of the question? If you make people legally liable for the children they bear then you can dramatically increase abstinence. With DNA testing it's also rather feasible.
people are legally liable for the children they bear. they're also human beings with hundreds of thousands of years of biological imperative written into their DNA. if that weren't the case, this wouldn't be an issue at all.
the wook on
0
Options
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
Life starts when you can be airdropped into the jungle and make it out alive.
Can't cut it? Too bad.
Battle Royale is the strongest argument against abortion.
Did I stumble on a reference?
yeah it's this japanese movie where to combat overpopuation they take groups of teenagers, put them on an island, give them weapons, and only one of them survives because "you know, two or three" doesn't sound as dramatic.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
This will always come down to a line in the sand argument anyway as to when a person is a person.
I agree. Since the answer can't really be proven objectively, isn't it our responsibility to err on the side of caution and go with the most conservative line with even a shred of reasonability?
Why is it our responsibility at all?
Are you seriously asking if it is our responsibility to protect basic human rights.
This will always come down to a line in the sand argument anyway as to when a person is a person.
I agree. Since the answer can't really be proven objectively, isn't it our responsibility to err on the side of caution and go with the most conservative line with even a shred of reasonability?
Why is it our responsibility at all?
Are you seriously asking if it is our responsibility to protect basic human rights.
seriously
i'm asking why it's our responsibility to not let mothers get abortions. why is it on us?
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
They do have a high failure rate if you put them on your fucking head, yeah.
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
While women are responsible for the children they birth you would have a hard time convincing me the same of men. Legally responsible, sure, but there are rather limited ways of bringing that obligation to bear.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
People are more than capable of controlling their urges so long as they are taught it's their responsibility.
I remember the talk with my old man. "I can't tell you what to do all the time but you knock a girl up you better believe you're the one that's going to provide for the kid."
Also, condoms have a like 98% success rate, dummy.
While women are responsible for the children they birth you would have a hard time convincing me the same of men. Legally responsible, sure, but there are rather limited ways of bringing that obligation to bear.
While women are responsible for the children they birth you would have a hard time convincing me the same of men. Legally responsible, sure, but there are rather limited ways of bringing that obligation to bear.
Tossrock your work warmed a secret place deep within my heart.
I'd be remiss if I didn't point out, however, that the citation request had nothing to do with congress.
Butters said to limit it to congresspeople
If you're gonna make a comment like "the party of rich white men" I think that it's important to look at who's representing them. Then you see they are both pretty much the party of rich white men.
Abortions shouldn't be encouraged, and sex-ed in this country should be changed/improved so we can reduce the number, however it shouldn't be a procedure made illegal by the government. The last thing we need are desperate girls resorting to the messy DIY scenarios that would happen before abortion was made legal and thus regulated etc etc.
Yes it's not birth control, no that doesn't mean we should legally take control away from womens' bodies.
Abortions shouldn't be encouraged, and sex-ed in this country should be changed/improved so we can reduce the number, however it shouldn't be a procedure made illegal by the government. The last thing we need are desperate girls resorting to the messy DIY scenarios that would happen before abortion was made legal and thus regulated etc etc.
Yes it's not birth control, no that doesn't mean we should legally take control away from womens' bodies.
You know the back-alley rusty coat hanger thing is a god damn myth, right? Former pro-choice leaders have openly admitted to making up statistics on that.
Abortions shouldn't be encouraged, and sex-ed in this country should be changed/improved so we can reduce the number, however it shouldn't be a procedure made illegal by the government. The last thing we need are desperate girls resorting to the messy DIY scenarios that would happen before abortion was made legal and thus regulated etc etc.
Yes it's not birth control, no that doesn't mean we should legally take control away from womens' bodies.
You know the back-alley rusty coat hanger thing is a god damn myth, right? Former pro-choice leaders have openly admitted to making up statistics on that.
So you are saying that teenagers who are having enough sex to get pregnant would be against intentionally getting high in unadvisable ways to effect an abortion?
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
He's saying that the rusty-coat hanger/back-alley abortion paradigm is one that is greatly blown out of proportion. It is one that pro-choice advocates have completely made up statistics on in the past. That is what he is saying.
Abortions shouldn't be encouraged, and sex-ed in this country should be changed/improved so we can reduce the number, however it shouldn't be a procedure made illegal by the government. The last thing we need are desperate girls resorting to the messy DIY scenarios that would happen before abortion was made legal and thus regulated etc etc.
Yes it's not birth control, no that doesn't mean we should legally take control away from womens' bodies.
You know the back-alley rusty coat hanger thing is a god damn myth, right? Former pro-choice leaders have openly admitted to making up statistics on that.
So you are saying that teenagers who are having enough sex to get pregnant would be against intentionally getting high in unadvisable ways to effect an abortion?
Are you saying they're automatically in favor of it? And no my post means exactly what it says.
ZoelI suppose... I'd put it onRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
Well, I thought it was pretty obvious from the way I phrased it but uh yes butters that is precisely what I'm saying.
The incidence numbers on abortion versus the number of people having sex or getting pregnant, particularly before majority don't really add up. It seems pretty likely that large numbers of DIY abortions already take place.
Obviously any specific number on DIY abortions is going to be made up because that's probably not getting self reported or checked into a hospital or otherwise. But that doesn't really matter unless someone quoted specific statistics about the number of people getting DIY abortions and I missed it.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
Care to add any authority to your assertions or are you just going to make them and then immunize them with "well they aren't reported so I don't have to prove it but it seems likely so..."
If we're going to protect little viral fetuses then we should protect dogs with the same rules too.
A fetus can't learn to high five, for example.
Sure it can, give it five or six years.
At that point it's not a fetus anymore.
Oh so we shouldn't give infants any legal protections, by the time they can think and speak they're no longer infants after all! Great counter bro.
Yes, this is exactly the strawman I was attempting to create. Thank you for doing it for me. Because, as we all know, a fetus a few weeks after implantation is just the same as a toddler.
You have failed to point out any actual difference that should result in killing one being treated as murder and killing the other being treated as a personal right.
Women aren't the same as men. Blacks aren't the same as whites. Doesn't mean that they should have different civil rights, especially to the degree of it being illegal to kill one but a personal right to kill the other.
The day dudes can will their sperm to not swim up the fallopian tubes, this will be a valid argument.
What? What I said was "you have yet to show how there's a difference."
Because it's the best we can do with what we have for stopping unwanted pregnancy. I'm hardly a fan, but I understand the need for it.
I'm not arguing for or against it. I'm saying that you need to make an explicit point.
Are you seriously asking if it is our responsibility to protect basic human rights.
seriously
i'm asking why it's our responsibility to not let mothers get abortions. why is it on us?
Yeah why is it on us to stop slavery or stamp out things like domestic violence.
well if you don't want to actually answer the question i suppose that's fine.
"We" are responsible for these things because "we" are making laws in this context. The people who make laws undeniably have the ethical burden of protecting the people.
14% miscarriage rate is part of it and you have to ask yourself well does that number really make sense?
The miscarriage rate on average, although you have to tease it out of this is around 18% for people between 35-40, who should have a much higher miscarriage rate than teenagers. 14% seems like a really reasonable number, doesn't it?
But really ok so almost half of all 15 to 19 year olds have had sex at least once
1/4th of those women are having unprotected sex
And yet only 2.4% of them are having abortions
so ok a fourth of a half is an eighth, and half an eighth (a little bit more than half of them bringing it to term) is a sixteenth
Hey a Sixteenth is 6.25%
So uhhhh where did the other ~3% of these babies go, other than my rounding errors
Forgetting about the gut feeling and just taking peoples word for it, what does that BIG OLD FAKE NUMBER translate into when someone uses the fake math they learned with a PHD in statistics?
Of course that includes Europe, Canada, etc. so it's not terribly useful for the specific point I was making, but it seems reasonable to expect that the incidence would grow to some extent if you outlawed abortion.
Actually on second thought it doesn't mean that at all, since the reason you have unsafe abortions in the first place probably has a lot to do with cost. Canada and Mexico aren't that far away if you can already afford one.
Zoel on
A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Posts
High failure rate=wut. Also, stop acting like you're talking to one of us here, you know, reasonable people. We all know we are speaking for primarily poor (though not always), undereducated teens in the heat of the moment. They need more than brain surgery and we all know it because that is when people are at their least reasonable.
And telling people to not have sex is out of the question.
Battle Royale is the strongest argument against abortion.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Why is it our responsibility at all?
Why is it out of the question? If you make people legally liable for the children they bear then you can dramatically increase abstinence. With DNA testing it's also rather feasible.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Did I stumble on a reference?
people are legally liable for the children they bear. they're also human beings with hundreds of thousands of years of biological imperative written into their DNA. if that weren't the case, this wouldn't be an issue at all.
yeah it's this japanese movie where to combat overpopuation they take groups of teenagers, put them on an island, give them weapons, and only one of them survives because "you know, two or three" doesn't sound as dramatic.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
battle royale
Are you seriously asking if it is our responsibility to protect basic human rights.
seriously
i'm asking why it's our responsibility to not let mothers get abortions. why is it on us?
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
People are more than capable of controlling their urges so long as they are taught it's their responsibility.
I remember the talk with my old man. "I can't tell you what to do all the time but you knock a girl up you better believe you're the one that's going to provide for the kid."
Also, condoms have a like 98% success rate, dummy.
Butters said to limit it to congresspeople
84% or so in actual use. Plus, 2% is still pretty fucking awful.
EDIT: yes I realize people are retarded.
Ahahahaha.
If you're gonna make a comment like "the party of rich white men" I think that it's important to look at who's representing them. Then you see they are both pretty much the party of rich white men.
Yes it's not birth control, no that doesn't mean we should legally take control away from womens' bodies.
sometimes women need a good deep dickin'. you should know that PI
Yeah why is it on us to stop slavery or stamp out things like domestic violence.
well if you don't want to actually answer the question i suppose that's fine.
i've heard otherwise
You know the back-alley rusty coat hanger thing is a god damn myth, right? Former pro-choice leaders have openly admitted to making up statistics on that.
So you are saying that teenagers who are having enough sex to get pregnant would be against intentionally getting high in unadvisable ways to effect an abortion?
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Are you saying they're automatically in favor of it? And no my post means exactly what it says.
The incidence numbers on abortion versus the number of people having sex or getting pregnant, particularly before majority don't really add up. It seems pretty likely that large numbers of DIY abortions already take place.
Obviously any specific number on DIY abortions is going to be made up because that's probably not getting self reported or checked into a hospital or otherwise. But that doesn't really matter unless someone quoted specific statistics about the number of people getting DIY abortions and I missed it.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
I'm not arguing for or against it. I'm saying that you need to make an explicit point.
What Penguin does in the privacy of my mouth is none of your business
"We" are responsible for these things because "we" are making laws in this context. The people who make laws undeniably have the ethical burden of protecting the people.
Teen abortions
Teen pregnancy / sexual intercourse
14% miscarriage rate is part of it and you have to ask yourself well does that number really make sense?
The miscarriage rate on average, although you have to tease it out of this is around 18% for people between 35-40, who should have a much higher miscarriage rate than teenagers. 14% seems like a really reasonable number, doesn't it?
But really ok so almost half of all 15 to 19 year olds have had sex at least once
1/4th of those women are having unprotected sex
And yet only 2.4% of them are having abortions
so ok a fourth of a half is an eighth, and half an eighth (a little bit more than half of them bringing it to term) is a sixteenth
Hey a Sixteenth is 6.25%
So uhhhh where did the other ~3% of these babies go, other than my rounding errors
Forgetting about the gut feeling and just taking peoples word for it, what does that BIG OLD FAKE NUMBER translate into when someone uses the fake math they learned with a PHD in statistics?
About one in twenty five abortions in developed countries are considered of the "unsafe" variety.
Of course that includes Europe, Canada, etc. so it's not terribly useful for the specific point I was making, but it seems reasonable to expect that the incidence would grow to some extent if you outlawed abortion.
Actually on second thought it doesn't mean that at all, since the reason you have unsafe abortions in the first place probably has a lot to do with cost. Canada and Mexico aren't that far away if you can already afford one.
However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
Lexis Nexis fo lyfe.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562