GG Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Correlation does not equal causation, but the numbers suggest it. Wonder how many people arguing against abortion hav adopted kids? http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Correlation does not equal causation, but the numbers suggest it. Wonder how many people arguing against abortion hav adopted kids? http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ Personally, I'm wondering if people getting abortions would change their mind if a spot opened up in a foster home? Do they even know spots don't exist? Is every adoption agency in the world full to capacity, and turning children away to the streets? How many people who argue against abortion had the choice to get one and didn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Personally, I'm wondering if people getting abortions would change their mind if a spot opened up in a foster home? Do they even know spots don't exist? Is every adoption agency in the world full to capacity, and turning children away to the streets? How many people who argue against abortion had the choice to get one and didn't? Reality is that there isn't a good match between unwanted babies and adoptive parents. And that's with legal abortion. Now imagine a world with illegal abortion and a lot more supply of unwanted babies. Who is going to take them in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Reality is that there isn't a good match between unwanted babies and adoptive parents. And that's with legal abortion. Now imagine a world with illegal abortion and a lot more supply of unwanted babies. Who is going to take them in?Difficult problem. Still not a justification for murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Difficult problem. Still not a justification for murder. Take down your high horse a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I wonder whether the long term impact on a woman is greater when she chooses to have an abortion, or when she gives up her child to unknown caregivers. I understand the impact varies with the circumstances of the woman involved, but either choice is potentially damning over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Reality is that there isn't a good match between unwanted babies and adoptive parents. And that's with legal abortion. Now imagine a world with illegal abortion and a lot more supply of unwanted babies. Who is going to take them in? The State. Or the person who was going to have an abortion due to inconvenience actually decides to take responsibility for their actions and take care of the child. Edited July 16, 2015 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Take down your high horse a bit. I don't see how he's on a high horse of some kind. If he believes that a fetus is human life and no less human life than, say, a 2-year old child, how is his calling abortion murder any different than him calling the killing of said 2-year old murder? To see them as morally equivalent is not unreasonable nor is it uncommon, and his stubbornness on the matter is a credit to him if he truly does see it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 http://www.buzzfeed.com/h2/fbpt/danvergano/fetal-tissue-in-research?bffb=&utm_term=4ldqpgp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 http://www.buzzfeed.com/h2/fbpt/danvergano/fetal-tissue-in-research?bffb=&utm_term=4ldqpgp That article is full of crap. The PP doctor in that video was talking about how she knew to crush the upper and lower portions of the fetus for the purpose of leaving organs in tact so they could be sold. That article is about fetal stem cells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 That article is full of crap. The PP doctor in that video was talking about how she knew to crush the upper and lower portions of the fetus for the purpose of leaving organs in tact so they could be sold. That article is about fetal stem cells. Hey, what's a few crushed babies for research, amirite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 That article is full of crap. The PP doctor in that video was talking about how she knew to crush the upper and lower portions of the fetus for the purpose of leaving organs in tact so they could be sold. That article is about fetal stem cells. I was just about to make a similar point. The headline is extremely misleading, specially when it says they know the " true story" behind the Planned Parenthood fiasco. The headline implies they know the story of what happened in this particular instance, where in reality they don't know anything that others who've watched the video have seen. That article speaks to the benefits of fetal tissue for stem cell research purposes. I'm guessing who ever decided to put the title of that article was trained by someone from the NY Times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I was just about to make a similar point. The headline is extremely misleading, specially when it says they know the " true story" behind the Planned Parenthood fiasco. The headline implies they know the story of what happened in this particular instance, where in reality they don't know anything that others who've watched the video have seen. That article speaks to the benefits of fetal tissue for stem cell research purposes. I'm guessing who ever decided to put the title of that article was trained by someone from the NY Times. But people like The Dork took it hook, line, and sinker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I'm guessing who ever decided to put the title of that article was trained by someone from the NY Times. I suspect the idea of PP losing its funding is making a lot of people rush to their defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 That article is full of crap. The PP doctor in that video was talking about how she knew to crush the upper and lower portions of the fetus for the purpose of leaving organs in tact so they could be sold. That article is about fetal stem cells. The article does talk about stem cells, but also talks generally of fetal tissue. The PP doctor in the video needs some tact, but there's nothing outside of the norm otherwise. Fetal remains are given to scientists, costs are reimbursed. I have a feeling this whole thing is going to last a long time, and PP will be shut down, and abortions made even more difficult, if not made illegal though... So you guys will get what you want, more unwanted children that need government support and won't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 The article does talk about stem cells, but also talks generally of fetal tissue. The PP doctor in the video needs some tact, but there's nothing outside of the norm otherwise. Fetal remains are given to scientists, costs are reimbursed. I have a feeling this whole thing is going to last a long time, and PP will be shut down, and abortions made even more difficult, if not made illegal though... So you guys will get what you want, more unwanted children that need government support and won't get it. The smile's what clinched it for me, amirite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 There's a very basic disagreement on what constitutes a human life, so I probably shouldn't even bother participating, and using a smile/sarcasm was probably in bad form. Hey, what's a few crushed babies for research, amirite? If it advances medical research that saves more lives, then yes, by all means, use aborted fetuses for a net positive. If the option is, throw them in the trash, or use them for scientific good, then I'll choose the latter every single time. And I say that as someone who (along with his girlfriend) made a decision to abort last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 And I say that as someone who (along with his girlfriend) made a decision to abort last year. This brings up another issue. At least she included you in the decision (I'm assuming you'd been together long enough to know you were the biological father). I know a couple of guys who were blindsided by a decision like that (one of them was married to the woman, for heaven's sake). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 This brings up another issue. At least she included you in the decision (I'm assuming you'd been together long enough to know you were the biological father). I know a couple of guys who were blindsided by a decision like that (one of them was married to the woman, for heaven's sake). It's a tough situation, that. If that happened to me, I'd be frustrated... but in reality it's her body, so she gets to make the final call. I will say, it wasn't a fun decision to make. I have a hard time taking anyone seriously that thinks people get abortions all willy nilly instead of using birth control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) This brings up another issue. At least she included you in the decision (I'm assuming you'd been together long enough to know you were the biological father). I know a couple of guys who were blindsided by a decision like that (one of them was married to the woman, for heaven's sake). Another thing I take large exception to, is the double legal standard: For women, life and choice begin and end at birth. For men, life and choice begin at conception. A life only becomes a life when/if a woman says it does on a case by case basis; however a man loses his right to choice at conception. If you want truly equal protection under the law, men should have the right to refuse child support for any children they don't wish to be born, or if they aren't informed that they are being born. Edited July 16, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts