- 53,478
- 21,058
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
Yeah gender can change to what someone identifies at but the female sex can still only get pregnant. So maybe change the terms to female instead of women or a more accurate term.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Interested to know how many people in here have children? Watching my wife grow, carry, and deliver our daughter.. I can say I do not believe a man has a right to choose. Her body will never be the same. Her internal organs will never be the same. Her body went through a lot during pregnancy and after birth. A LOT. It is not easy. A man will never understand what that is like. Not to mention being put on bed rest, being let go from her job because she couldn't walk and needed to be in bed...and the countless other things that will change in your life during the process.
I am pro choice. I believe every single abortion decision is a personal decision with thousands of surrounding health/environmental factors that a women has to weigh to make her decision. I think removing access to abortions is wrong.
I have a daughter and I was there during the process and agree with much of what you said. I think everyone (in here at least) is in agreement as it relates to any decision made for medical reasons. I agree making all abortions illegal is wrong. Full stop.
With that said, I would have been truly devastated if my wife aborted my daughter. That’s the piece of the discussion that is being missed (ignored?). At what point during a pregnancy is it too late to make an abortion decision barring exceptions for medical reasons, rape, or incest. Personally I think it’s the second trimester. I think it’s an extreme position to say that abortions should be okay at say 8 months even if there’s no medical concern, rape, or incest.
As a practical matter, I think every woman will be able to find a doctor that says there’s an underlying medical concern that justifies the abortion. Just like most folks can find a doctor that says there’s a need for medicinal marijuana and/or adderall. Late term abortions are also exceedingly rare, so I think the area people have the most disagreement on only accounts for about 4% of abortions.
And I think this is where its more or less people arguing about "personal belief" and that really has no right or wrong answer. Everyone can make up their own mind of when "too late" is. But its not cut and dry and every scenario is different.
As far as practicality of finding a doctor that would fabricate a medical condition to do an abortion to help some one out....idk about that. I don't think that is justification to ban abortion unless the woman has a medical condition. So you can then wipe your conscious clean by saying "ya know if they really wanted an abortion they could get some shady doctor to just make up a condition and get one"
You should be legally able to opt out of a child you didn’t agree on bringing in the world. Especially with a crazy chick.
Alotta these folks that wanna shut down abortions are the same ones who were crying over wearing masks cuz of “personal freedom” and “muh rights”
This is all dumb, let the ladies choose what they want do with their bodies…No abortions ain’t gon stop ppl from smashing and having unplanned/unwanted pregnancies, and This country ain’t gon care or look out for the children once their born
It’s super wild to me that the ones who want to get rid of abortions the most (conservatives/republicans) hate social programs and don’t want a spend money on anything that’s not related to big business…That and the hypocritical freedom thing they be yelling should be enough push back on this issue for anybody that’s not in that group or has some common sense
I come in peace, and there are two things I'm going to say about this:I'm just here to provide biblical accuracy, and this is incorrect.
The scripture you are referencing is Numbers 5:21-28, the test for adultry.
If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children. -Num 5:27-28 NIV
The italicized word is a mistranslation found ONLY, I believe, in the NIV. For example:
and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. - KJV
and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. -ESV
In the hebrew, says: יָרֵך נָפַל or yarek naphal - thigh fall away/fail/rot
It doesn't have anything to do with aborting a living child. Its a test of fidelity where if you are found unfaithful, it bares a curse where you become barren and cannot have children- hens rotting. But if you have remained faithful, then you can still have children. The context of the passage illustrates this. All other translations depict this accurately. One of the hebrew words for miscarry is nephel (which is from the root naphal), which is not found in the book of Numbers.
The ppl in charge trying to make it all or nothing and it just trickles down from there…Should just be left to an individual choice like it’s been and keep it moving but some folks really serious bout taking life back to 1940Why can’t it just be looked at on a case by case basis? Why everything gotta be all or nothing. I feel like the pro life vs pro choice and creationism vs evolution arguments are just made for “fun”?
i am a recent father like yourself and i 100% agreeInterested to know how many people in here have children? Watching my wife grow, carry, and deliver our daughter.. I can say I do not believe a man has a right to choose. Her body will never be the same. Her internal organs will never be the same. Her body went through a lot during pregnancy and after birth. A LOT. It is not easy. A man will never understand what that is like. Not to mention being put on bed rest, being let go from her job because she couldn't walk and needed to be in bed...and the countless other things that will change in your life during the process.
I am pro choice. I believe every single abortion decision is a personal decision with thousands of surrounding health/environmental factors that a women has to weigh to make her decision. I think removing access to abortions is wrong.
I think it should also be said that the SCOTUS opinion (at least the released draft) would not ban all abortions. From what I’ve read, it leaves it to the states.
I’d personally be against any state that does a full ban on abortions—and I’m probably as pro-life as you can get on NT. Are there any states actually proposing total bans on abortions? If not, much of the debate is about a nonissue.
And just to piggyback on this. Outlawing abortions doesn’t prevent abortions. They will still take place, only this time, they’ll put the woman’s life in serious danger.This is all dumb, let the ladies choose what they want do with their bodies…No abortions ain’t gon stop ppl from smashing and having unplanned/unwanted pregnancies
I think there is concern of states following Oklahoma for example that just put a post 6 week abortion ban into law. Women for the most part don't even know they are pregnant at 6 weeks. That is basically one missed period assuming your periods are regular. (you can also spot and still be pregnant) If a women is on birth control and only spotting infrequently they may not know for months. If they actively use condoms they could assume they are just late and if you take a test at 6 weeks and your pregnant?? Guess what the choice is made for you, you're keeping that kid.
I am not a fan of the "slippery slope" argument but I think this is very very real as far as red states trying to harshly limit access to abortion.
Because to those kinda religious folks a child is a “gift from god” , no questions asked…But they don’t want anything to do with it after they are actually born and need attending toyou know what’s absolutely wild to me? making women carry to term a baby that is the result of rape. my ****ing in-laws , as well as many evangelical christians, believe they should. be forced to. that completely blows my ****ing mind. what. the. ****.
I wasnt trying to engage in debate of one side or the other (which I can understand otherwise, given the topic and nature of this thread). I just want to make sure there is clarity on what the text says versus what its believed to say.I come in peace, and there are two things I'm going to say about this:
1/ I'm not going to argue about which interpretation of a dead language is correct because I don't have those tools. What I do know is that what gets printed is subject to deliberations, so if whichever group tasked with reviewing and approving the verse did so, it means that the interpretation you are challenging MAY have merit, and it's something that we will never have definitive proof of (until archeologists unearth some dictionary/thesaurus tablets written around that time that clarify the contextual use of biblical languages).
2/ the bible generally doesn't have a problem with killing (and killing children for that matter). In fact, there are plenty of verses in the OT that order Israelites to invade cities and kill pregnant women and their kids. And Christians must consider all of these contradictions between the writings in Kings and those in the Gospel to be true because that's the basis of the faith (the whole book is true).
Feel free to believe what brings you peace, but there are a lot of aspects about the bible that weaken the anti-abortion position based on biblical scripts.
This is all irrelevant as long as young voters don't vote. The reality that matters is voting in the real world, not posting in the virtual world. Yet, fewer than half of younger voters voted in the 2016 election.