let the battle begin...

[o_legacy]

She'd be lying to you! The more worrying thing is you have no control over whether she keeps it or not. Do you think she should be allowed to do this over and over again though? (Lets not include the risk to her body)Maybe just because she see's this as another form of contraception? I think theres a point where you have to say no and make her face the consequences.

Ive actually had the same thing happen to me and luckily she had the morning after pill aswell. If she hadn't I'd have went with her to get it. My point was that, you cant just keep letting people have abortions if they're not going to practice some self control and use contraception and I know its not just down to the lady to make sure its happening.

Theres still too much of a taboo around the subject, so teaching the use of contraception to kids early on isnt going to be an easy task. Then there will always be those who are against practicing safe sex and im not talking about people practicing a faith.
At present, by the time kids do receive some type of sex advice they're already doing the naughty anyway. Can't say I actually got any and i'm only 22. If we do plan on giving them some type of slap about the head, it needs to be done early on and instilled by their parents.

Personally I think abortions are acceptable, although it has to be within a certain timeframe, something less than the current 3 months would be good. Not like its hard to determine you're pregnant now days, I keep seeing these early warning pregnancy test kits on TV!

[o_puppychow]

i think you missed what i was trying to say....birth control is not 100% failsafe....i have known people who have gotten preg while using the pill ad a condom. it happens!

[o_tennovan]

There was recently an article about all this in our University paper. I believe they said birth control was 98% effective and condoms were 92% effective. They also said if you throw in another couple methods and you still get a chick knocked up, your kid is destined to cure cancer or something. Haha

Anyways, I find it amazing that they're still teaching abstinence in school. In that article I talked about earlier, it had interviews from differnet students and all said that by the time their parents got around to "having the talk", they already knew about sex. I don't know about anyone else but we started hearing about it on the 3rd grade play ground. Our first SexEd class wasn't until 11th grade.

Rather than tell us not to have sex (which means we will because we do what we aren't supposed to), why not tell us not to have sex and then teach us about several options for safe sex if we decide to. Americans are too "hush hush" about sex anyways, such talk makes almost any grown woman blush.

My point is, teaching safe sex will not only help lower the alarmingly high rate of STD's in this country, it will also stop a shitload of unnecessary pregnancies which will, in turn, decrease the need for abortions. I'm pro-choice but it makes me mad that many young women and men are thinking "if i get her pregnant, she can just get an abortion". Hell, I was one of them for a couple years (my younger days). It shouldn't be that easy though.

[o_uber]

that 8% (really about 2%) deficiency is due to improper use. When a condom is used properly, its effectiveness nears 100%.

Now yes, when the egg is fertilized, there becomes a seperate DNA. Yes, the cells differ from the mother's. Babies are made up of sperate cells at that point. So are rats. Mice. Trees. They all have unique cells, DNA, properties, etc. that seperate themselves from everything else. However, the real question is at what point is this trivial. Shall we not cut down trees because it has a unique set of cells? Shall we not kill mice to conduct important experiments, becuase they have a unique set of DNA? And shall we not abort a baby for the same reasons? The point at which the benefits outweigh the costs is what should be examined. The benefit of lumber outweighs the cost of logging when done appropiately. Same goes for mice expiriments, and abortions.

Society will benefit more if a mother can choose to have an abortion, done under apropiate circumstances.

[o_broodingdude]

Nezumi thinks that rape victims should be forced to carry the subsequent child.

For shame.

[o_vampiricus]

Count from one to ten. That's how long it would take Chuck Norris to kill you...Fourty seven times.

[o_geokill----->]

Well I remember there was a time in California where mother began killing their children and those children would be found in trash cans, trash bags etc.
Then they pass the law where you could drop your baby at the hospital, hopefully this is possible in SD.

Right now I say that I'm pro-life b/c it seem wrong but at the same time I'm pro-abortion, because if I was in that situation I would go for abortion (I'm 17) but it also sounds like an easy way out. I just don't know what I would do in a sittuation like this if I had to deccide. I think the most honorable thing to do is to not abort it, get a job and and deal with the chick you got pregnant and to love and care for the baby but this also means drop out of school and get a full time job. I just hope I don't get in this sittuation anytime soon.

Originally Posted by YoMamasHouse

Ya it would be neat if you could impotate people to the point where only the injection of a certain hormone would repotate them, and only liscenced doctors could have that stuff.

You should read Brave New World where birth is under control

Also it may go nation wide

http://www.nrlc.org/press_releases_n...ase022106.html

[o_frenchtoast]

AHem. I think everyone is pro-life and pro-choice. Everyone wants to be alive and everyone wants to make their own decisions.

THus, these people need some better terms for their arguments.

[o_yomamashouse]

Fine it's Stupid-blubbering-dipshits VS People-who-dont-want-to-run-aspects-of-other-peoples
-lives-that-dont-affect-them-in-any-way.

Fuck those 'pro life' bitches.

Fuck Ya, moralists ruin everything. You have to be one hell of a pussy to see/think of a few month old fetus being removed and be upset. Those facists are out to make life a bitch for everyone except small clumps of fetus flesh.

[o_ivaqual]

You have GOT to be fucking kidding us, YoMamasHouse. Seriously.

[o_nezumi]

Originally Posted by broodingdude

Nezumi thinks that rape victims should be forced to carry the subsequent child.

No I don't, you liar. I said " things are a bit different under certain circumstances, like rape". I hope you were kidding.

Originally Posted by uBeR

Now yes, when the egg is fertilized, there becomes a seperate DNA. Yes, the cells differ from the mother's. Babies are made up of sperate cells at that point. So are rats. Mice. Trees. They all have unique cells, DNA, properties, etc. that seperate themselves from everything else. However, the real question is at what point is this trivial. Shall we not cut down trees because it has a unique set of cells? Shall we not kill mice to conduct important experiments, becuase they have a unique set of DNA? And shall we not abort a baby for the same reasons? The point at which the benefits outweigh the costs is what should be examined. The benefit of lumber outweighs the cost of logging when done appropiately. Same goes for mice expiriments, and abortions.

Something having it's own distinct set of DNA stops being trivial when it's a human, defined as a human by their DNA. My point wasn't that a fetus/embryo shouldn't be aborted because it had it's own DNA, but that it shouldn't be aborted because it's as fully defined as a human being as any other human being. (And no, a liver cell or whatever isn't a human being just because it has a set of DNA because it isn't potentially possible for it to develop into a human. Only a zygote can.)

[o_yomamashouse]

Originally Posted by uber

However, the real question is at what point is this trivial. Shall we not cut down trees because it has a unique set of cells? Shall we not kill mice to conduct important experiments, becuase they have a unique set of DNA? And shall we not abort a baby for the same reasons?

Don't Mind us humans, were just... better than everything else, despite being the only creatures that are going to kill themselves off in a brutal and horriffic way. All that matters is we never EVER kill another human for never ever never ever forever, ever.

[o_|404|innoc-tpf-]

Originally Posted by Circuitous

Crazy hypothesis time begins.

Wouldn't it be nifty keen if there were a reversable way to make people chemically infertile? That way they can't have children until they're ready to. No more stupid kids getting knocked up. No more stupid adults getting knocked up, if they can't prove they're ready.

Crazy hypothesis time ends.

The problem is that the human body is pretty complex and the danger is stopping one action in the body has a domino effect in other parts and can cause other problems.

Guys...abortion is another one of those highly charged issues that rarely has people on the fence. I don't think that Gov't should have laws for or against it nor do I think it should aid in making it happen. Personally I don't like it. ymmv

[Circuitous]

I know Innoc. That's why it was crazy hypothesis time.

[o_broodingdude]

Originally Posted by Nezumi

No I don't, you liar. I said " things are a bit different under certain circumstances, like rape". I hope you were kidding.

Oh good. I didn't see that particular sentence in your previous posts.
I apologize.

[o_|404|innoc-tpf-]

Originally Posted by Circuitous

I know Innoc. That's why it was crazy hypothesis time.

It would be nice. On the brightside the male solution to permanent contraception does appear to be mostly side effect free and, other than freak occurences, is 100% effective.

[o_puppychow]

im so gonna do that as soon as i have kids. (the big V)

[o_nezumi]

I was just about to ask if you guys know what a vasectomy was...