shewolfnm wrote:OK.
So let me get this straight.
A lesbian, is saying that abortion is wrong?
And you .. dearest lesbian, are going to say it is sinful, murderous, and wrong? YOU dearest lesbian who is going against all natural sexual instincts by sleeping with someone of the same sex.
You oh lesbian who will lay back and scream that people are judging you for your 'personal' choices.
You oh lesbian who wont be accepted in churches because even THEY think you are wrong...
Have the audacity to stand up and tell people you don't even know that they are wrong for having an abortion?
Why don't you get your pompous head out of your ass ?
If you are in deed telling the truth, and you are a lesbian, I wish you luck in having that baby.
I wish you luck when society mocks you lickety split after child birth for being the butch or the bitch in your relationship.
I wish you the best when you try to take your child to school and other people hold their children away so they don't catch your Gay gene..
I hope others treat you with such close minded idiocy as you are treating other women right now.
Get off your high horse darling because it has a penis.
You might want to know that not everyone who is a lesbian agrees with your position on abortion.
Check out the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians
http://www.plagal.org/index.html
It doesn't matter someones sexual preference.
Not everyone agrees on abortion, period.
there are lesbian/ pro life and pro choice
christian pro life/ pro choice
atheist pro life/ pro choice
You name it. The combination is out there.
It all boils down to the individual. Wich is beyond sexual preference or religious beliefs.
real life wrote:This is probably the most common tactic to be used by those who support abortion:
Slam, smear and otherwise make the person who has a pro-life position to be the issue discussed, instead of discussing abortion itself.
The utter lack of substance of the pro-abortion position was never more apparent than now.
Real life...you are making an utter fool of yourself...
Might I suggest you figure out what side of the fence the poster is on before you commence with the diahrrea of the mouth.
In fact, I am not pro-abortion.
I would challenge you to find anywhere on this site (or anywhere else) where I have ever advocated abortion.
Actually, I'm 99.99% sure I've never even posted in a thread re abortion.
Also, if you would take the time to read a post before jumping off the bridge, you'd notice I didn't even bring up the subject of abortion.
I was bringing up the fact that prettyrussian is some nutcase that obviously has no idea what's she's talking about, as far as the medical world.
She's not a doctor for pity's sake.
Do a search on her other posts.
It's probably Roxxxxxane or someone trying to jerk someone chain, and she got a good grip around yours.
some people are just so damn gullible.
prettyrussian wrote:I'M not ths same russian who is on this site.I just post using her username.We are all a member of a club for Russian lesbians.We take it in turns to post on this website now and again.As I thought no-one on here is able to even start tyo give me any argumant for abortion which makes mr realise I am right.Abortion is wrong.Before you ask no I am not anorexic and I doubt my friend would apreciate you bringing her up on this thread.
Oh christ, this is really rich....I hope prussian doesn't go away...it's much too entertaining.
I'm picturing a russian-lesbian soical club...they meet in the basement apartment of Natasha, the russian lesbian engineer who is forced to work at a shoneys busing tables, because her paperwork isn't in order.
She is the only one who owns a computer, and the rest of the russian lesbians come by for their turn to post on A2K.
They probably drew straws to see which on would go first.....body dysmorphia russian lesbian won the honor of first thread. Now, it's time for physician russian lesbian to throw her hat into the ring. Her specialty is proctology, but it's just too horrible to go into detail.
Who next.....Barbie russian lesbian?
Chai Tea wrote:real life wrote:This is probably the most common tactic to be used by those who support abortion:
Slam, smear and otherwise make the person who has a pro-life position to be the issue discussed, instead of discussing abortion itself.
The utter lack of substance of the pro-abortion position was never more apparent than now.
Real life...you are making an utter fool of yourself...
Might I suggest you figure out what side of the fence the poster is on before you commence with the diahrrea of the mouth.
In fact, I am not pro-abortion.
I would challenge you to find anywhere on this site (or anywhere else) where I have ever advocated abortion.
Actually, I'm 99.99% sure I've never even posted in a thread re abortion.
Also, if you would take the time to read a post before jumping off the bridge, you'd notice I didn't even bring up the subject of abortion.
I was bringing up the fact that prettyrussian is some nutcase that obviously has no idea what's she's talking about, as far as the medical world.
She's not a doctor for pity's sake.
Do a search on her other posts.
It's probably Roxxxxxane or someone trying to jerk someone chain, and she got a good grip around yours.
some people are just so damn gullible.
Would you agree that Pretty's personal idiosyncrasies (actual or imagined) are irrelevant to the topic of abortion?
You're being silly, real life, to suggest you nothing in America has changed but Roe v. Wade in the last 35 years! You can't base the argument with only that pivot. Laws regarding child abuse, reporting such abuse and what to do about such abuse changed dramatically in the 1980s. That's when people decided it really wasn't okay to let parents neglect their kids to (literal) death.
But even that is beside the point.
The point is that nearly a million kids are aborted in America each and every year.
The people who have these abortions don't have the means or the minds or the desire to care for the child once it gets here.
If these women are forced to carry these kids to term SOMEONE is going to have to take care of them.
I suppose we could open orphanages again and it would at least look like there were less kids in foster care.
prettyrussion, there are numerous threads throughout A2K that deal with the topic of abortion. To help you answer your question of what people think, I suggest you look at some of the existing threads. There are two threads here on S&R. The first post of the current one (Abortion II) contains a link to the original thread with an additional 398 pages of discussion of what people here think regarding abortion.
Here is the link to the beginning of the current thread
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1949882#1949882.
With over 400 pages of discussion on the forum alone and many others in other threads, I think you can get a pretty good understanding of what people think on this topic.
<please, god, don't make us go through it all again>
boomerang wrote:You're being silly, real life, to suggest you nothing in America has changed but Roe v. Wade in the last 35 years! You can't base the argument with only that pivot. Laws regarding child abuse, reporting such abuse and what to do about such abuse changed dramatically in the 1980s. That's when people decided it really wasn't okay to let parents neglect their kids to (literal) death.
But even that is beside the point.
The point is that nearly a million kids are aborted in America each and every year.
The people who have these abortions don't have the means or the minds or the desire to care for the child once it gets here.
If these women are forced to carry these kids to term SOMEONE is going to have to take care of them.
I suppose we could open orphanages again and it would at least look like there were less kids in foster care.
If the 80's brought such a change, then show that Roe v Wade produced an immediate and dramatic reduction in foster care kids in the 70's. Should be easy if your theory is correct.
(Hint: It's not.)
You keep saying 'if women are forced to.......' as if it is inevitable that the same number of pregnancies will continue if abortion is restricted.
Show that the total number of pregnancies did not significantly increase after Roe v. Wade.
(Hint: You can't.)
Hint: I'm not going to bother even trying to look it up because it absolutely make no difference except, I expect, that it helps you feel like you're off the hook for doing anything for these kids you care so much about.
real life wrote:Chai Tea wrote:real life wrote:This is probably the most common tactic to be used by those who support abortion:
Slam, smear and otherwise make the person who has a pro-life position to be the issue discussed, instead of discussing abortion itself.
The utter lack of substance of the pro-abortion position was never more apparent than now.
Real life...you are making an utter fool of yourself...
Might I suggest you figure out what side of the fence the poster is on before you commence with the diahrrea of the mouth.
In fact, I am not pro-abortion.
I would challenge you to find anywhere on this site (or anywhere else) where I have ever advocated abortion.
Actually, I'm 99.99% sure I've never even posted in a thread re abortion.
Also, if you would take the time to read a post before jumping off the bridge, you'd notice I didn't even bring up the subject of abortion.
I was bringing up the fact that prettyrussian is some nutcase that obviously has no idea what's she's talking about, as far as the medical world.
She's not a doctor for pity's sake.
Do a search on her other posts.
It's probably Roxxxxxane or someone trying to jerk someone chain, and she got a good grip around yours.
some people are just so damn gullible.
Would you agree that Pretty's personal idiosyncrasies (actual or imagined) are irrelevant to the topic of abortion?
I wouldn't agree to anything....A poster who so blatantly lies and is so stupid to boot doesn't have any reason to be starting a thread which isn't based on reality.
Getting back to the slamming....I suppose you don't think it appropriate to acknowledge that wasn't what was going on, in light of the fact of my feelings on abortion.
I can't take it when people put their foot in their mouths and then try to worm their way out of it instead of fessing up and moving on.
This thread needs an abortion.
Excellent. I'll sharpen my uterus-scraping devices.
boomerang wrote:Hint: I'm not going to bother even trying to look it up because it absolutely make no difference except, I expect, that it helps you feel like you're off the hook for doing anything for these kids you care so much about.
It wouldn't make any difference......except to show whether or not your theory is based on fact, or on 'let's pretend...'
I'll wager the latter.
Yes I care enough about kids to keep them alive. I don't think they deserve a death sentence even if they do have a screwball for a parent. How 'bout you?
I'll not pretend I can fix every problem in the world, but I know for sure that killing them is not the answer.
Do you think they are better off dead? Is that why you are pro-abortion?
Chai Tea wrote:real life wrote:Chai Tea wrote:real life wrote:This is probably the most common tactic to be used by those who support abortion:
Slam, smear and otherwise make the person who has a pro-life position to be the issue discussed, instead of discussing abortion itself.
The utter lack of substance of the pro-abortion position was never more apparent than now.
Real life...you are making an utter fool of yourself...
Might I suggest you figure out what side of the fence the poster is on before you commence with the diahrrea of the mouth.
In fact, I am not pro-abortion.
I would challenge you to find anywhere on this site (or anywhere else) where I have ever advocated abortion.
Actually, I'm 99.99% sure I've never even posted in a thread re abortion.
Also, if you would take the time to read a post before jumping off the bridge, you'd notice I didn't even bring up the subject of abortion.
I was bringing up the fact that prettyrussian is some nutcase that obviously has no idea what's she's talking about, as far as the medical world.
She's not a doctor for pity's sake.
Do a search on her other posts.
It's probably Roxxxxxane or someone trying to jerk someone chain, and she got a good grip around yours.
some people are just so damn gullible.
Would you agree that Pretty's personal idiosyncrasies (actual or imagined) are irrelevant to the topic of abortion?
I wouldn't agree to anything....A poster who so blatantly lies and is so stupid to boot doesn't have any reason to be starting a thread which isn't based on reality.
Getting back to the slamming....I suppose you don't think it appropriate to acknowledge that wasn't what was going on, in light of the fact of my feelings on abortion.
I can't take it when people put their foot in their mouths and then try to worm their way out of it instead of fessing up and moving on.
It's not for me to say who should and shouldn't start a thread. I'm not the post police.
Whether there are several people using one username and causing confusion, or not is beyond my ability to determine.
The OP asked a question about abortion to start the thread. It's a good topic, but it was almost immediately sidetracked into a discussion of the OP herself. Not by you.
Yeah, I still see your comments about Pretty as slamming and, more to my point, irrelevant to the topic.
You asked if she was the same one, etc.........so it seems that, right off the bat, you perhaps weren't even sure if there was more than one person using the name or not, but you plowed ahead and piled on anyway.
I may be all wet about this, but you asked and I'm telling you the way I see it.
Wouldn't be the first time if I was wrong about this, but I hope you can see where I'm coming from even if you disagree. You normally seem to try to do so.
As for your feelings about abortion, I don't know what your feelings or your position are.
You stated you are not pro-abortion.
Good, however many 'pro-choice' folks make the same claim, so I still don't know your position.
I would hope you oppose abortion and wish to see it restricted.
Have a good night, Chai.
The judgment of the author of this thread is very much at issue. If one again reads the opening post, one finds that the author identifies herself as being pregnant. In another thread this member (or, with a cynical and disbelieving tip of the hat to a later post, someone using this member account) stated that she is a lesbian who has been impregnated by artificial insemination. Subsequently, the member denies being the author of the other thread, and asserts that she is someone else. In that case, we are dealing with two Russian lesbians who assert that they are pregnant by virtue of artificial insemination. I feel confident, "real life," that even you can understand how that stretches credulity. The post in which this member (or another person using the same user account) denies being the author of the other thread, then, strongly suggests that this member, or those using this member account, are not averse to practicing deception. Either the substance of the post in which the author of this thread denies being the author of the other thread is true, and therefore constitutes undeniable evidence of deceit with intent, or, that post is false, in which case the member is patently practicing deception. The original post makes no appeal to the sort of convoluted and self-righteously convenient appeal to theistic morality which characterizes so many members of the "right to life" movement in the United States. The original post simply brands women who get abortions as evil, following a statement of the joy the member experiences from her own pregnancy. Therefore, the basis upon which a member whose "contributions" to this site posits anything is questionable, given the strong evidence that said member (or multiple users of the same account) casually practice deceit. With so little credibility attributable to the member (or multiple users) in question, there is little to no reason to believe what the member claims, and no reason to believe the basis upon which the member offers criticism of abortions. That's the first consideration.
************************************************
I am old enough to remember what life in this country was like before Roe versus Wade. I had been in the United States Army Medical Corps for more than two and one half years when Roe versus Wade became law in this nation. At that time, i knew a woman who had suffered a botched abortion. The clumsy would-be abortionist had so badly done the job, that he had not in fact succeeded in effectively performing a dilation and curetage. Four days later, when she had not ceased to bleed, she sought reliable medical attention. The damage to her upper vagina was so bad, it was necessary to perform a skillful dilation and curetage in a sterile field, in a procedure which could be called debridement. That is defined at Answers-dot-com as: "Surgical excision of dead, devitalized, or contaminated tissue and removal of foreign matter from a wound." In effect, the botched abortion was become a traumatic injury of critical nature. In the detritus removed from the "wound," tissue was identified as possibly being a blastocyst--therefore, in order to repair the damage of the failed and clumsy abortion, the surgeon was obliged to incidently perform an effective abortion. The woman in question was thereafter in hospital for nearly two weeks as her body and antibiotics fought the infection which threatened to kill her. She survived, but only after a second surgery, in which significant portions of the uterus were excised as dead and infected. She likely was never able thereafter to conceive. But she was lucky.
While i was in the Army Medical Corps, "d & c's" were common. We all knew what was going on, but no one discussed these procedures as abortions. I'm sure you'll be properly outraged to think that government money went for abortions. When i was overseas, we got as a patient a dependent wife, a Vietnamese woman who had married a G.I. She had gone to a back street abortionist because she feared her husbands wrath if she were pregnant, and she feared his wrath if he knew she had gone to an American hospital for an abortion (she told us this before she died). The ham-handed butcher who did the abortion succeeded in performing an effective abortion in performing the d & c--he also perforated the uterus and the small bowel. Fecal matter contaminated the wound, but due to her terror, she only came to us when she was in constant agony, from the peritonitis which was killing her. She came too late. She was with us for three days before she died. The process of her death was one of excruciating agony, which the administration of a quarter grain of morphine every two hours could not sufficiently abate. (The surgeons knew she was dying, and that they couldn't save her, so they mercifully gave her far too heavy a dosage of morphine routinely to attempt to abate that agony as much as possible.) This was a surgical hospital, and i assure you these surgeons knew when circumstance had defeated them. Constant antibiotics from an IV drip could not defeat the infection, which was by then rampant throughout her thorax. The morphine only dulled her pain for a few minutes before she began to scream again. That's right, we listened to her screaming almonst constantly night and day for two days. On the third day, she stopped screaming--her nervous system had likely shut down by then, and she was too exhausted and weak to scream any longer. She died on the third day.
*********************************************
I am cynically amused, in a black humor sort of way, by the right to lifers who are so concerned to save "the unborn," but don't care what the quality of life of the mother and child will be if they succeed in an intervention; and at the thought that they are so concerned with the life of "the unborn," but don't give a tinkers damn at the thought of the women who would die in botched illegal abortions if they succeed in outlawing abortion. All you can do is prevent legal abortions--you cannot prevent abortions entirely. I'm a little cynically amused--but more than that, i'm disgusted at the smug self-righteousness of the religious wingnuts who don't want a blastocyst scraped from a uterus, but don't give a damn if a woman dies in an alley somewhere.
Thank God there are a few sensible people on this site!I asked a question about abortion wanting to know people's views and I just got a loAd of immature and angry idiots replying with absolute rubbish!If you want to disagree with me than give me proper arguments against me.For your information we do not have an official group where we all take it in turns to use the computer.We are all just friends anyway and we are all Russian lesbians so when I joined this site with the username prettyrussian they thought they might as well use the same user name as well because it is the same for them.We have made an agreement though never to read each others threads and I have stuck to that.I hope you don't treat evryone with this suspicion.Sorry nice people this does not apply to you.I was not trying to start an argument.
You know, actually, I think this is KittKatt bar....Roxxxxx would have told us to pound sand by this time.
plus, it more exhibits the ramblings of KK....
Plus, "real life" must be a computer boot, who just rambles about the
subject he's programmed for, otherwise he would for once address the
real issues that lead up to abortion.
Most pro lifers are also promoting abstinence, are against sex education
in school, and have no plan for the hundred of thousands of teenagers
and young adults who in fact don't practice abstinence and have no idea
about contraception.
If pro life advocats would only spend some time volunteering in the foster care system, they for once could be taken seriously. Ranting solely about religious doctrines on a Sunday afternoon when it is raining outside, is
something everyone can do.
Wy wrote:
p.s. to Boomer -- we could assign foster kids to anti-abortion demonstraters, whether they were willing or no. "Put yer money where yer picket signs are!"
I was thinking about this a bit last night. The poetic justice of it all. Then I started thinking about these kids growing up in homes where they would grow up being told "Your mother was going to kill you but I saved you and blahblahblah" and I just couldn't bear it.
I'm so with CJane here - if the "pro lifers" would actually DO something pro life I might could be convince to at least put a toe in their boat. If instead of whining and gnashing their teeth they would join the ranks of foster carers, if they would work to make it easier for people to adopt, if they would embrace sex education and contraception as a way to prevent abortion, if they would work to ensure that every woman received prenatal care, if they would aim for affordable and safe childcare so young parents could go to work, if a million other things they could do they actually would do then I might stop to listen.
Believe it or not women are still stigmatized for putting their children up for adoption! Why don't they work to change that little bitty thing fercryingoutloud.
Excellent post, Setanta, both horrifying and enlightening.
real life wrote:so I still don't know your position.
Well, quite. You
dont know for sure, and you
definitely didnt know before.
And yet you just jumped in with all kinds of assumptions anyway, responding that
real life wrote:This is probably the most common tactic to be used by those who support abortion [..]
The utter lack of substance of the pro-abortion position was never more apparent than now.
Yeah, you just went ahead making assumptions anyway. Now it turns out it looks like they were wrong, but you wont even
acknowledge it. Yet you keep lecturing others about posting mores.
Chai Tea wrote:I can't take it when people put their foot in their mouths and then try to worm their way out of it instead of fessing up and moving on.
Yeah. This is one of the things I've found most baffling/disappointing about webforums like this, actually. I would never have thought that people could find it so hard to ever say "sorry" or "hey, looks like I got that wrong" or the like. Seems like a physical impossibility for many. And I'm still totally nonplussed about why this might be so. We all make mistakes right, whats the big deal?
