ABORTION PROS AND CONS

That is really a moot point Boston as she knew from the beginning that all 8 were implanted,she also knew she was very fertile.I still would have said NO to aborting some
of them unless the others were at risk

If I remember correctly, six were implanted and then two split creating eight. I could be wrong on that though.

I don't think so boston,I think there were 8 from the beginning and you know I am NEVER wrong

feathers wrote:

Igloosukka wrote:

feathers wrote:

Calling a baby a fetus makes it easier for you to kill it doesn't it ? All of my children born or not would be more important to me and I am stressing me here okay . I pass no judgment on other people for what they believe because we all have to live with what we believe is right or wrong .

Your opening line is indeed a judgment.

I call it a fetus because that is what it is.

I've never had an abortion. I probably would not choose that route, no that is not true there are circumstances I would choose that route and still sleep well at night. I will however fight for a woman's right to make that choice without being castigated a monster for doing so. Abortions should be free, accessible and safe and offered to those that need/want them.

No I wasn't trying to be judgmental I truly was trying to understand where D is coming from how she comes to her conclusion about her feelings on abortion .

It was indeed judgmental. Re-read what you wrote.

yorkiemom wrote:

I don't think so boston,I think there were 8 from the beginning and you know I am NEVER wrong

I'm going by what she said on Oprah.

yorkiemom wrote:

I don't think so boston,I think there were 8 from the beginning and you know I am NEVER wrong

Psst there was 6 .... And everyone knows I am always right!

Having spent several weeks in the neo natal unit. I would have cut 8 down to 2-3.

Multiples are always a risk to each other.

Igloosukka wrote:

Having spent several weeks in the neo natal unit. I would have cut 8 down to 2-3.

Multiples are always a risk to each other.

As would I.

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

Careful Yorkie may pull out the "naughty whip"

I mean shame on you two tsk tsk tsk

:lol:

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

Can I tell you to fuck off Yorkie? Pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :lol: :lol:
I save it for people I like.

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

I guess you are saving the infamous antagonistic for me. Yeah? Course you got your ass kicked at the same time so they just forgot to forward you the antagonistic form letter.

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

No

Igloosukka wrote:

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

Can I tell you to fuck off Yorkie? Pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :lol: :lol:
I save it for people I like.

*sigh You can't or else I'd have to hurt you.

I'm protective of my peeps

Epic D wrote:

Igloosukka wrote:

yorkiemom wrote:

Epic D and Boston I feel you have become disruptive on the forum along with argumentive
please cease and desist this action Thank You

Can I tell you to fuck off Yorkie? Pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! :lol: :lol:
I save it for people I like.

*sigh You can't or else I'd have to hurt you.

I'm protective of my peeps

Bwhahaha

Iggy wrote...


"That line makes no sense to me. If abortion is murder it is murder. Unless circumstances change the meaning for you."

I've never once called a woman who aborts a murderer. Canadian Law allows a woman to legally kill her own baby.

But I could always turn the table on you, Iggy. You state that a fetus isn't a human being. So why would you care whether or not fetuses are being aborted based on gender? I mean, it is after all, just a lump of nothing flesh in a woman's stomach isn't it?

It's a complicated issue with many conflicting viewpoints fer sure.

Slak Supafasst wrote:

Iggy wrote...


"That line makes no sense to me. If abortion is murder it is murder. Unless circumstances change the meaning for you."

I've never once called a woman who aborts a murderer. Canadian Law allows a woman to legally kill her own baby.

But I could always turn the table on you, Iggy. You state that a fetus isn't a human being. So why would you care whether or not fetuses are being aborted based on gender? I mean, it is after all, just a lump of nothing flesh in a woman's stomach isn't it?

It's a complicated issue with many conflicting viewpoints fer sure.

You could try and turn the tables if your argument made sense

And you may not have called them murders but you said they are worse than child abusers and had no right to comemnt on aprents abusing their children.

Male or female it is still a fetus. however if one is aborting based on gender one has to conclude if the gender were the preferred the pregnancy would be allowed to go to term.

I don't believe prospective parents should be able to abort based on whether or not the child will be blond haired or blued eyed either.

Gender and appearance to me are not valid reasons to end a pregnancy that a person would otherwise choose.

So what you are basically admitting now, for the first time, is that the fetus is actually a baby boy or baby girl, not just an inconvenient lump of flesh in a woman's stomach, and parents should not opt to abort based on gender. Am I wrong here?

Slak Supafasst wrote:

So what you are basically admitting now, for the first time, is that the fetus is actually a baby boy or baby girl, not just an inconvenient lump of flesh in a woman's stomach, and parents should not opt to abort based on gender. Am I wrong here?

Babies are technically neither (or both) gender(s) until it can be determined at about 16-20 weeks.

Kind of like Schrodinger's cat.

Most abortions take place before the first trimester is completed.

Epic D wrote:

Boston wrote:

Your feelings on Octo-mom as a whole. She already had six children (one with autism). Should she have had more? She stated that the reason she had all the eggs implanted was because she didn't want the unused fertilized eggs to be thrown out? Is that the same as abortion? If you believe life begins at conception how to you differentiate?

She now has 14 children. Do you think those children are getting quality care? Would they have been better off if she had reduced numbers?

People are ignoring this

Are you surprised?

Slak Supafasst wrote:

So what you are basically admitting now, for the first time, is that the fetus is actually a baby boy or baby girl, not just an inconvenient lump of flesh in a woman's stomach, and parents should not opt to abort based on gender. Am I wrong here?

?????

Call it whatever makes you feel better, seriously.

If a woman chooses not to have a child, her prerogative to abort. What I am saying is, follow along.... is the mother should not be given information on gender or traits as a reason to abort. Just like once a child is delivered I don;t think a parent should put it up for adoption because it is male or female or it turns out to have red hair instead of black.

HoodieCrow wrote:

Epic D wrote:

Boston wrote:

Your feelings on Octo-mom as a whole. She already had six children (one with autism). Should she have had more? She stated that the reason she had all the eggs implanted was because she didn't want the unused fertilized eggs to be thrown out? Is that the same as abortion? If you believe life begins at conception how to you differentiate?

She now has 14 children. Do you think those children are getting quality care? Would they have been better off if she had reduced numbers?

People are ignoring this

Are you surprised?

I didn't ignore it!

Igloosukka wrote:

HoodieCrow wrote:

Epic D wrote:

Boston wrote:

Your feelings on Octo-mom as a whole. She already had six children (one with autism). Should she have had more? She stated that the reason she had all the eggs implanted was because she didn't want the unused fertilized eggs to be thrown out? Is that the same as abortion? If you believe life begins at conception how to you differentiate?

She now has 14 children. Do you think those children are getting quality care? Would they have been better off if she had reduced numbers?

People are ignoring this

Are you surprised?

I didn't ignore it!

I know.

The people I assumed would ignore it, have. That's all.

HoodieCrow wrote:

Igloosukka wrote:

HoodieCrow wrote:

Epic D wrote:

Boston wrote:

Your feelings on Octo-mom as a whole. She already had six children (one with autism). Should she have had more? She stated that the reason she had all the eggs implanted was because she didn't want the unused fertilized eggs to be thrown out? Is that the same as abortion? If you believe life begins at conception how to you differentiate?

She now has 14 children. Do you think those children are getting quality care? Would they have been better off if she had reduced numbers?

People are ignoring this

Are you surprised?

I didn't ignore it!

I know.

The people I assumed would ignore it, have. That's all.

*Whew* wipes brow off

(had to double check if I ignored it or not, in which I didn't and if I did I would of blamed the cold medicine)

:lol:

I was hoping some of the people against abortion would respond with their thoughts. Unfortunately, the only one that addressed it was Yorkie.

Thanks Yorkie.