yes i think it shood happen, especially if u get raped, i mean who wood want ur rapists child, but they shood allow it

^Read my post about 2 pages back...*sigh* All these people who make comments and don't know the facts.

1) Which of my statistics involve older orphans. If the 1.5 million people who had an abortion last year gave birth instead they would each have an infant on their hands. Considering noe of them want the babies all of these infants would be given up for adoption immediately. Therefore there would be 1.5 million infants available.
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/ab...ortionstats.htm

Currently 500,000 people are looking to adopt. This number includes people looking for children, and infants. http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/FactOverview.html

How do these numbers not equate.

Besides, there are plenty of infants available. What the people on the waiting list want are white blue eyed babies. If these people are so desperate to adopt then i'm sure africa could accomodate the demand.

2) Would having to carry a pregnancy to term be a deterent. Yes, i agree. But I believe education and prevention is a far better alternative than relying on reluctant parents learning their lesson after a few unwanted pregnancies. Spend the money on programs that reduce unwanted pregnancy by educating and convincing people to use protectiong. We are a rich and smart enough society that we shouldn't have any unwanted pregnancies. That's just my opinion.

3) Yes. Abortion used to be illegal. Family sizes were much larger. Women didn't mind (or weren't allowed) to work therefore stayed home to take care of the kids. And most parents were willing to spend their income on their children before they went out and purchased luxuries.

Can you really say the same of the potential parents who would have to raise their children instead of aborting them. Or are todays reluctant parents interested more on watching tv, buying cars, or doing drugs than spending money on their kids. I wish we could revert certain of societies moral perspective (obviously not forcing women to stay at home) overnight to what they were 50 years ago, but I believe this takes more time.

__________________
<B><font size=4 face="still time"><A href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/21stavenueproductions.htm">21st Ave Productions</A></font></b><font size=5> / </font><b><FONT face=gunplay size=4><a href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/knockoutzcru.htm">KnocKOuTz</a></FONT></SIZE></B>

<FONT face="bankgothic md bt" size=4> Exclusive Beats for Qualified MC's</FONT></SIZE>

^ I have no idea what point you are trying to make, but it really doesn't matter. The fact is that abortion is murder, plain and simple. If you support murder, then go ahead, support abortion. If you don't stop trying to say it isn't murder, because you yourself know that is bullshit. Really it doesn't matter how many children they have or if they can't afford it blah blah blah... if they cant afford the shit then don't fucking have sex. Its called responsibility. If you have sex, you had better be responsible for the child, not destroying it. That is the point that has been made by a few people in this thread including lethargic and myself. you phate just continue with the statistics that don't deal with abortions moral wrongness... your avoiding what abortion really is and going into why the population would be too high... which is only a side issue. stop avoiding it, abortion is murder and is therefore wrong.

The point i am trying to make is that there is always more to consider than what is morally right and morally wrong.

Is it wrong to kill? Yes.
Is it wrong to let kids die of aids and starvation in africa? Yes.
Is it wrong to let homeless people die of starvation? Yes.
Is it wrong for people to die because public health care can't pay for enough operations? Yes.
Could all of these morally wrong issues be solved with money? Probably yes.

Is throwing money at these problems always the best solution for the long-term? My opinion is no. Whatever, I just wanted to debate the issue a bit and it seemed no one was putting forth pro perspective, but obviously some people have very strong personal feelings so i'll drop it.

__________________
<B><font size=4 face="still time"><A href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/21stavenueproductions.htm">21st Ave Productions</A></font></b><font size=5> / </font><b><FONT face=gunplay size=4><a href="http://www.soundclick.com/bands/7/knockoutzcru.htm">KnocKOuTz</a></FONT></SIZE></B>

<FONT face="bankgothic md bt" size=4> Exclusive Beats for Qualified MC's</FONT></SIZE>

abortion is wrong..outright...not even in cases of rape..but that's a purely religious point...so if the decision is purely ethical, no to all cases except for rape..if religion is included no to all cases, period...

__________________


<center>HemiSphere
The Write Side Of Your Mind</center>

im pro-choice, that should explain everything.

I'm Pro Choice.....
Nuff Said...
Why Are People Writting Novels?

hmmm Peep a poetry peice done by Soft Focus it has some deep views and i think all of u should check it out....

__________________
Soft focus

Whats the point of living?

The voices in my head Feat. Rule

Unlikely Alias

More Comming soon!

Okay, if you want to get precise...then be precise. First off...the number was 1.37 million. Second, how do you know? Miscarriages happen all the time. I'm not absolutely sure,so don't quote me on it, but I believe it is 1 out of every 50 pregnancies is a miscarriage. This means that 27,400 of those pregnancies would be miscarriages. Thus, 1,342,600 babies would be a more accurate number. That's only if my estimate(1 in 50) is correct. I'd be willing to bet money the miscarriage rate is much higher. Also, let's look at another point. The reason many people get adoptions so early, is so they don't grow and emotional attachment to the baby. At least not one to the point that if they killed the baby it might possibly throw them into extreme depression. Why did clinics want this enforced? Here's why, 60% of mothers who take their pregnancy past 6 months decide to keep the baby instead of aborting, or giving it up for adoption. So...that leaves us with a little over 500,000 babies after the mother's reach that 6 month period....statistically at least. Oh but wait, there's more! We haven't included the statistics of women who were planning on adoption...and decide to keep it after it is born and they've seen it. Would you like to know the statistics on that one? I tell you what, I'll round down! Statistically, a whopping 70% of mothers decide to keep their baby after it is born! Let's see...what do we have for them Bob? That leaves us with approx. 150,000 babies being put up for adoption..not even close to fulfilling half of the list of waiters. See, these abortion sites just give you their numbers of how many babies are aborted. They conveniently forget to add in other statistics to show you the factual outcome of what the rate of adoption would have been like. Ain't that a bitch?



I just showed you.



This discussion is over the US. You're turning it into a world view. If you have to do that just to prove your point...that alone should be a signal that you might need to recheck your standpoint.



A FEW? hah. If people don't want the baby, they won't put up with a FEW unwanted pregnancies. That's like saying...well, after I got shot a few times, I realized I shouldn't go down that street anymore.



No argument there.



That's a generalization. Times have changed, I understand that. However, your point isn't accurate. I'll see where you're going with it though.



Again I agree. You had the same problems 50 years ago. It was just different types of luxuries....same drugs, but different luxuries. That's why they created the Social Services Department. If people would report people like they are supposed to, this wouldn't be a problem. I myself have reported 2 families in my lifetime. Did I feel good about it? No. However, you've got to do whatever you can to ensure a child's safety and potential for leading a fruitful life. There parents were druggy bastards that used to beat them. Well, now they dont' have that opportunity. You'll get that wherever you go...that happens to babies that were wanted..it's not just isolated to unwanted pregnancies.

^ Not really. You just brought morality into it yourself in the post above by lethargic...

but is abortion down to the female to decide? or should she consult the father of the would-be child?

see, what if they had different opinions? the mother has the right to abort her pregnancy, after all, she is carrying the baby, but what if she keeps it quiet and 'disposes' of it without consulting her partner?

OR, she could just not get fucked if she doesn't want a baby.

& By the way, whoever said something about population has no idea. Saying that aborting and killing all these babies is good for the population is like saying that 9/11 was good for America because we lost 4,000 people, yay. I don't have any key facts like Leth, but the fact is abortion is wrong. Their needs to be more research and safer sex possibilites. I doubt anybody's going to reffer to abstinence rather than taking their shots with a condom. And condoms break all the time. America needs more sex technology. The first time I bought condoms I felt embarrassed, and almost didn't go through with it. Many kids don't buy condoms because they're embarrased about doing so. However, it's also on us people in America to prevent it. You can't just point fingers at the government, because that's what everybody wants to do. Like I've been saying, if the effectiveness of condoms and birth control pills went up it would significantly reduce the amount of abortion/adoptions and pregnancies in general.

Just my 8 cents.

__________________
<center>Deja Vu

..Remember These Dope Kids?..

.................................................. .