I've been drifting back and forth on this issue. It's really been bugging me. A year ago I beleived that abortion was ok, but now I'm not sure. I mean, on the one hand, you've got people who's lives are going to be dramaticaly altered by having the baby, and a lot of the time they are teenagers. People my age. I have to wonder what I would do if I was in that situation. I can understand where those people are coming from. But at the same time, it's a human being. It's murdering a baby. I figure if you're an adult, the choice should be pretty clear-cut: carry it to term, and put it up for adoption if you're not ready to be a parent. But if you're a teenager...I just don't know. I mean it was their choice to have unprotected sex. And you shouldn't make the child suffer for your mistake. I just don't know. Somebody wanna help convice me one way or the other?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 16, 2004

Answers

i usually say only one thing to anti abortionists. i'm not reallly decided either way because i dont have any kids so i dont really care about this issue. is it better to kill the feoutus or to bring it up knowing that you wanted to kill it but werent allowed? everytime you look at that kid, you think that you didnt want it and were willing to kill it. which is morally right? killing the feoutus or raising an unwanted child?

-- -- -- (hmmm@hmm.com), August 17, 2004.

I usually try to leave my personal life out of this forum, but I will make this exception. When I was a teenager, I worked at a grocery store. I stocked shelves from 4am until noon. One day I was leaving work to go take care of some problems down at the courthouse, and my girlfriend was standing by my car with this strange look on her face. I thought maybe her dad beat her up again or something. She reached into her pocket and pulled out a pregnancy test. It read possitive. Now here I stood; a young hooligan, about to go try to plead self-defence for beating a kid's head against the sidewalk, making barely enough to support my own love for the whiteman's firewater, much less another human being. My girlfriend worked at the same grocery store, was going to university, and still lived at home with strict European parents. The easiest and seemingly most logical thing to do would be to head straight over to the clinic and get this over with. But I've always been a crazy son of a bitch, I've always loved kids, and I had already been planning on proposing to my girlfriend, so I vowed right then and there to do everything I could -rob, cheat, steal, whatever it took- to provide for her and our child. That's what I raised to believe that men do: take responsibility for their actions and put others before themselves. That was many years ago now. When I look at my son, I don't regret any of the time I spent living well below the poverty line, eating tuna fish, bananas, ramen noodles, and everything else that I could afford on a $5 per day food budget. I don't regret those times because his life is much more valuable to me than my own comfort. I made sure my wife graduated. I worked 13-hour days to get ahead, and when my wife got her degree, I supported her when she decided to stay home with our son. Because that is what I believe respectable humans do: take responsibility and put others before themselves. I worked my ass off for everything that I now have: my house, my business, my cars, my wife, and my kids. That is why I resent people who want to take the easy route, kill any child they deem inconvenient, collect welfare, and blame all their problems on someone else. Life is only 10% what happens to you; the other 90% is how you react. When I look at my kids, I cannot believe that anyone would be willing to look at them and say they didn't have a right to live. My son is one of the most loving and caring people I've ever known; when he was younger and my wife was pregnant with my daughter, he started learning about where babies come from. He was 3 and was very upset to learn that he could not bear children. This was poignant to me because so many people kill to not be mothers, and here was my son crying because he couldn't. I know he was just a naive kid, but so many people would kill to be able to have kids, and here are thousands of people literally killing not to have kids.

Review my questions in the other discussion: "At what point is a human a human? At what point may we or may we not murder that person? Should a person's convenience dictate whether or not they deserve to live? The sick and elderly are an inconvenience to the rest of society; should we kill them? Should a mother be allowed to kill her baby as long as she is breastfeeding? Or should we have the right to murder our children until they prove independant from us? At the very least, the mother owes the child she created 9 months of her time; after that, she can give the child up for adoption, and it may grow into a productive member of society instead of a lump of biological waste."

Ask yourself thses questions. Either a parent may or may not kill their children. The child's position in space in relation to the parent's body is insignificant, in my opinion. It's just easier to kill somebody if you haven't seen their face. I think that if abortion must be legal, the mother should still have to name the child and see its corpse. Morbid? Yes. Yes it is.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 17, 2004.

You know anti, a *lot* of people walking around today weren't exactly expected, but their lives turned out to be worthwhile anyhow. When my wife and I were first married, we were dirt poor students, and ate a lot of plain spaghetti, noodle and egg soup, etc. We survived though, and I couldn't imagine being without the kids.

I feel sorry for those people who think a new car is more important than their own child, and feel it's wrong to have the state allow a mother to murder her own child, not just for the act itself, but for the trickle-down effect that it has on society. If a mother is told that her care for her own child is unimportant, what do you think she WILL find is important?

Finally, there's a big difference in people before and after they have kids. Before, they think about the time involved, are afraid, etc., but for *most* people, once the child is actually born, some switch gets turned in their heads and they can't think of anything else but looking out for them. Abortion is really EVIL, anti.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 17, 2004.

I don’t think abortion is really evil. let me give you an example from my life, now before I go any further I've got to say I don’t have kids someday maybe but not just yet.

My girlfriend’s friend was seeing a guy, this is a few years back now, but it was not a true love type of situation since they had only just started seeing each other and were very young. The guy in question had an unfortunate genetic condition which meant that by thirty he would probably be in a wheel chair or worse. The girl knew about this and the first time they had sex he convinced her not to use any protection saying that he was infertile anyway due to his condition. Ok maybe not the most sensible thing to do regardless but as you have probably guessed she soon became pregnant. I can only guess at the guy’s motivation for not wanting to use protection but I can’t help think that it may have been his intention to get her pregnant as he knew that his chances of having children later in life were not great.

It’s a sad story and I think you have probably already guessed that she had an abortion, I for one stand behind her decision to do so. I would never abdicate killing a baby that IS really evil but we must make the distinction between a baby and a mass of undifferentiated cells regardless of their potential. After all unless you are a strict catholic most would not regard an egg and a sperm as a baby even though they have the same potential. In the case of this girl who apart from this one error of judgement is otherwise a bright intelligent girl and had yet to finish school let alone finish university (which she has now done) I think it would be absolutely wrong to force her to give birth to a baby she didn’t want, wreck her education and essentially force her into a life-long relationship with a man who I think tried to manipulate her into having his child.

Maybe if I had kids I would have a different opinion, maybe not but that’s just one case I’m sure everybody is familiar with the old question of is it morally correct for a rape victim to have an abortion. I would have to say a resounding YES I’m not saying it would be ok to kill the child after its born that’s different. I don’t want to give the impression that I don’t care about life that’s not true but at the end of the day a collection of cells does not constitute a person. At what time it becomes morally incorrect to abort the pregnancy, at what stage, is another question altogether.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 17, 2004.

Anyone got a nitting needle? Or a coat hanger? Stick it up there! That's it. Since abortion was made illegal,I thought to myself "Hey! why don't I give it a try myself! And now i'm rolling in greenbacks! It doesn't matter wether those high minded hipocrits in the church or the government think it's right or wrong; People are allways going to want abortions and if it's left to people like me to provide that scervice, then so be it. INFECTION! WHAT FUCKIN' INFECTION?! Excuse me.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 17, 2004.

Bromis,

Your friend could easily be dying of AIDS right now. It only takes once to get that too. As human beings we don't always get "do-overs", we have to be responsible for our actions. If she felt she was too incompetent to raise a child, at the very least she could have put it up for adoption. What would have been wrong with that? Using one immoral act does not justify another one, and who knows, perhaps once the baby was delivered she would NOT want to part with it and it would become the light of her life.

There are plenty of dirtbag guys out there, because of their biology, women need to be made of stronger stuff. That's just how it is. Next time it might not be "just" a baby, but AIDS. What will you tell her then?

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 17, 2004.

Your right she may have changed her mind after but why should anybody else dictate what she does with her body. Adoption is not without its difficulties it’s not an easy fix having clear consequences for the parents and children. She could be dying of AIDS but then so could anybody who has used the pill as a form of contraception without getting checked out first. Maybe you have always done this, but I'm afraid many of us take it on trust and use our common sense, not the correct attitude for a casual relationship I grant you but the point is no less valid. I'm not saying it was a wise thing to not use protection but young people do make mistakes at least this way she is not going to pay for it the rest of her life and there is one less unwanted kid out there.

Abortion is always regrettable but I really think that in some cases it’s the lesser of two evils. my name has a very good point, backstreet abortions will take place if professional abortions are banned, resulting in untold deaths.

I know that you wanted your child but you were not in this girls situation and just as i cant say she wouldnt have ended up wanting the kid you cannot say for sure that if you were in her position you would not have done exactly the same thing.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 17, 2004.

In my opinion, if a woman is so filled with rage and hate toward her own offspring that she will shove a coathanger into her vagina inorder to kill her child (who would only love her unconditionally, no matter her relationship with its father), I say she deserves to die from whatever infection she might get.

I know many girls who have been inpositions where they had to choose whether or not to have an abortion. Some of them did, and some didn't. I can honestly say that the girls who gave birth at 16 or 17 to babies (some of whose fathers were in jail, gangs, or just didn't care) are happier now than the ones who killed their children so they could graduate high school or college or buy that car a few years before the rest of us. In the county I am from, most blacks, mexicans, etc. live in government housing and most whites live in trailer parks. At the time, we had the highest preteen pregnancy rate in the state. Even among the harshest conditions, against seemingly insurmountable odds, I have seen "ghetto bastards" and "trailer bastards" grow into respectable people and productive members of society. If we all waited until we were ready or prepared to have kids, we'd be in depends by the time our kids graduated.

On a side note: As for rape, incest, health complications, etc., these make up a minisule fraction of a percent of the abortions in this country, and are not really valid in the debate of whether or not abortion for convenience is morally correct.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 17, 2004.

Bromis,

Your right she may have changed her mind after but why should anybody else dictate what she does with her body.

No one else dictated what she did with her body, SHE did when she decided to have sex with some yahoo. If she decided to get drunk, drive, and kill someone, we don't say, "oh, I understand, you're sorry, well go home and sleep it off", she goes to jail for manslaughter, at least. Regretting what you did is NOT an excuse for doing it in the first place.

Adoption is not without its difficulties it’s not an easy fix having clear consequences for the parents and children.

The only reason adoption is a problem is that the biological parents sometimes want their kids back. That's why people import Russian babies when they want to adopt. This could be corrected with a stronger law saying when you give up your baby, that's it.

She could be dying of AIDS but then so could anybody who has used the pill as a form of contraception without getting checked out first. Maybe you have always done this, but I'm afraid many of us take it on trust and use our common sense,

You can't tell by looking at someone if they are HIV+ or not! I've heard morons say that a girl looks "too pretty" to have AIDS. If you think like this you are really asking for it, and it's nobody's fault but (hers) if she ends up dead. Other than the religious one, there's a very good biological reason not to have sex outside of marriage. If you *and your partner* only have sex with each other, you have basically NO chance of getting any diseases. You sleep around, it's (her) fault what the consequences are.

at least this way she is not going to pay for it the rest of her life and there is one less unwanted kid out there.

The point is for most people who *have* their children, they are NOT unwanted, and don't have to "pay for it", but are glad they do have their children. Make no mistake, I'm not saying having kids is a breeze, there are ALWAYS problems to face and deal with, but they also give you reason to go home at the end of the day.

Abortion is always regrettable but I really think that in some cases it’s the lesser of two evils. my name has a very good point, backstreet abortions will take place if professional abortions are banned, resulting in untold deaths.

The trouble with this is one could just as easily switch it around, like so:

Back alley abortions are always regrettable but I really think that in some cases it’s the lesser of two evils. my name has a very good point, some abortions will take place regardless of the law, but there would be far less deaths than the untold deaths of babies that occured during legalized abortion.

Over 1 million babies die every year in abortion Bromis, I doubt if you can find a record of more than a few hundred people dying of "back alley abortions" prior to Roe vs. Wade in 73. What is worth more Bromis, 1 million people, or <1000?

I know that you wanted your child but you were not in this girls situation and just as i cant say she wouldnt have ended up wanting the kid you cannot say for sure that if you were in her position you would not have done exactly the same thing.

Actually, I can say that. I can also say that my wife and I have already discussed what to do if my daughter got pregnant, and if she didn't want to raise her child, we would. Life means something, it's a precious gift, and not to be treated as if it was a bother.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 17, 2004.

I'm sorry BJ you can never say what you would do if you were in her position. You’re wrong. Doesn’t matter which way you slice it, try a little empathy. And fuck me Joe. Yeah here's the voice of the humanitarian they deserve to die? Your argument just lost all credibility how can you pretend to care about life when you display such wanton disregard for it?

I'm not going to rebuff your comments one by one like you have done to mine, but let me just reiterate one point, a foetus is NOT a baby, an embryo is NOT a baby any more than a egg and sperm are a baby. No babies die in abortions this type of hysterical miss labelling in not helpful to anybody.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 18, 2004.

oh and you miss quoted the bit you wrote in bold BJ and sorry i got you mixed up with J Biscuits and his willingness to let people die.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 18, 2004.

oops no you didnt shit now i look foolish

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 18, 2004.

Bromis,

Could you maybe make a summary of what you mean that is supposed to be directed to me? I'd like to answer, but am scratching my head at what I'm supposed to be answering at this point.

BJ

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 18, 2004.

sorry, let me clarify

I'm sorry BJ you can never say what you would do if you were in her position. You’re wrong. Doesn’t matter which way you slice it, try a little empathy.

I'm not going to rebuff your comments one by one like you have done to mine, but let me just reiterate one point, a foetus is NOT a baby, an embryo is NOT a baby any more than a egg and sperm are a baby. No babies die in abortions this type of hysterical miss labelling in not helpful to anybody.

these parts of the post are relavent as an answer to your previous post.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 18, 2004.

at the end of the day it comes down to which you prefer. Would you rather live in a society that lets inderviduals decide on their own on questions of personal morality or would you rather live in one which imposes and enforces the choises of politicians and other people who dont know you?

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 18, 2004.

Bromis,

Saying "you're wrong" doesn't make me so. Try showing a little empathy for the > 1 million babies that are killed every year.

a foetus is NOT a baby, an embryo is NOT a baby any more than a egg and sperm are a baby.

Yes it is. "Baby" is not a technical term you know, I think what you mean to say is that a Neonate isn't a fetus. That would be true, but they BOTH are babies. An egg and a sperm are obviously not babies either, they are egg and sperm.

Would you rather live in a society that lets inderviduals decide on their own on questions of personal morality or would you rather live in one which imposes and enforces the choises of politicians and other people who dont know you?

When it comes to whether or not one person can kill another, I'd rather live in a society that protects the weak. Would YOU like to live in a society where an individual's morality dictated their conduct on all things? If you don't like your neighbor, kill them. If you want to light a theater on fire, go ahead. You probably don't want to live in THAT world, meaning you DO want to live in a world where society's values are dictated to the individual. I believe that NO value for society should be higher than the basic right to life. You apparently believe that anyone who is not useful or inconvenient should be killed at will. This is not a society I'd wish to live in.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 18, 2004.

Bromis,

I realize what I said sounds cold, but if a person risks their own life in order to murder their own child, I think they are the cold one who lacks empathy. At what point is a person a human? Are women who say they are "with child" sadly confused? When a pregnant woman says she felt her baby kick, what would you say it was that kicked her? What species is a fetus or embyo, if not homo sapiens? Is it a baby once the head is external to the mother's body? If so, a woman giving birth to a breech baby should be allowed to murder the child as long as the head is still within the birth canal. When is the child a human?

I never claimed to be a humanitarian. I am a cold-hearted son of a bitch, but at least I don't advocate murdering babies.

"Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like." --G. K. Chesterton

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 18, 2004.

Biscuits,

When a pregnant woman says she felt her baby kick, what would you say it was that kicked her?

An alien. If becomes a baby after it is switched at birth by aliens using some sort of time-halting technique. You see, the aliens themselves are sterile and so clone themselves in humans to reproduce. They then breed infants in vats and switch them at the last minute into the mothers. They could also do this with their OWN offspring, but it would be against their religion. They consider us animals, so they don't mind doing it to us. It's pretty simple, really, but that thing that kicks the mother is anything but a child.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 18, 2004.

Refer to my earlier posts I never said that abortion is ok at any stage of pregnancy. BJ you are wrong you can never know how you will react to an extream situation until you are in it you have never been in this girls situation so how can you possibly know how you would react? You can take a guess but neither you or I am aware of all the facts, you dont know if her pearents would have been supportive or wether they would have thrown her into the street at 15. I find your holier than thou attitude very frustrating and I canot except that you know what is best for everyone.

As for comparing abortion to killing a person, I'm going to say it once more; a mass of undifferentiated cells dividing rapidly does not consitute a person here are the basic differences: It cant feel pain, its not aware of itself or its surroundings, it has no dependants, if the mother is not willing to keep it you must assume it has nobody who loves it or will miss it, it cant survive by itself, it has no plans for the future, it has no clearly defined features, it cant experience any emotions, it does not have a desire to live (appart from a genetic push for survival which could be attributed to every living thing on the planet and even some non living things). In many ways an embrio in its early stages has more parallels with a tumor than a person ok that sounds cold too but its true.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 19, 2004.

Bromis,

A neonate is "not aware of itself or its surroundings, it has no dependants", "it cant survive by itself, it has no plans for the future", and "does not have a desire to live". Not too long ago, doctors believed that new-born infants could not register pain either. Most women are not aware that they are pregnant until 4 to 6 weeks after conception. By week 5, the baby has a heartbeat. How many tumors have heartbeats?

"if the mother is not willing to keep it you must assume it has nobody who loves it or will miss it"

When I was a teenager (actually, about 2 months before my son was conceived) I had a friend who found herself pregnant. She was afraid of what her parents would think, and opted for an abortion. I told her that I was willing to raise the child as my own, but she was too afraid of the moral judgement of her parents. After her abortion (she was 8 weeks pregnant, at which point the baby had a brain, gonads, and bones) I was sad for the child, and in a way, missed it. If an elderly person's family will no longer nurture it and it must be placed in an infirmary, should it be assumed that no one loves it or will miss it? Should we kill these burdens upon convenience?

You have yet to submit your definition of a human or what species you believe a fetus, embryo, or blastocyst is. At what point is the organism majically a human?

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 19, 2004.

I have few questions for the lamo pro choicers here. Feel free to answer anyone of them, I'm sure you will leave me just as equally unsuprised by answers as unsatisfied:

a.)How come if the Father wants it and the mother does not, it is not murder if she aborts it?

Now this is a nasty scenario, but we are talking about just as nasty a thing that happens in the millions every year in this nation: If she really wants it, and wants the father involved, but he doesn't he doesn't want it, is it muder if he decided to kick her tummy, or force an abortion on her? After all it takes two to make a baby, and half of it's chromozones come from the mother, not all.

In many states if anyone assaults a woman and causes her to lose the baby she is carrying, he can only be charged with assault on her personhood, and none on the baby. Despite how strongly she wanted to keep it, and how healthy they both were before the incident. And so it is not always her choice.

b)If you don't want an infection back alley abortion, don't have an abortion! You think you made a mistake fucking around without protection, why it again? If a stupid person decides to have a back alley abortion, because she is too selfish to wait a few months, why is something I should lose sleep over.

As far as when a teenage girl is pregnant, yes we are talking about a baby, one in her stomach. The girl has already lived at least 13 years, which is 13 more then the baby has had. Wasn't she doing "adult" things to get it. It is still the same killing.

c)What is the difference between partial birth abortion and infincide?

d) What is it about having an abortion to "save the life of a mother" that cannot be done by an operation such as a c section, and keep the baby?

e)Where in the hell does it say anything in the Constituion pertaining to abortion whatsoever?

-- (a@b.c), August 20, 2004.

J Biscuits

You are taking individual points out of context when you talk about killing the elderly. I know one thing if I myself couldn’t feel pain, couldn’t perceive the world around me, had no plans for the future, had nobody who would miss me, couldn’t experience emotions and couldn’t support my own life I would be glad to die (or at least I would be quite indifferent about it).

Ok your questions answered

a) I don’t make the laws I am merely subject to them. b) Why is any life worth losing sleep over? depends if you give a shit or not, hell I'm fairly poor maybe I should go out and stab someone to death and mug them, (ill be sure to find someone of bellow average intelligence so as not to offend your sensibilities). c) Don’t know what partial birth abortion is but I assume that it’s got something to do with the baby being born. d) I don’t give a flying fuck. I hope thats cleared things up for you.

Lastly JB about the human thing, can’t be bothered answering nonsense questions, sorry.

-- bromis (bromis@bioactive.org), August 20, 2004.

Wow! Watch out gang, this light bulb's on fire!

-- (a@b.c), August 20, 2004.

Watch out gang, that light bulb's smoking something awful!

-- (a@b.c), August 20, 2004.

Anti,

Has any of this helped? I am well aware of the fact that nothing I or Joe say will change bromis' mind and nothing bromis says will change ours, but I am hoping this discussion has brought up points and questions that you, as the originator of this thread, find helpful. If all this has proved futile or in vain, then I apologize.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 20, 2004.

I don't see how what Bromis says would change anyone's mind. The one eyed man may be king in some places, but we can all see the words here.

-- (a@b.c), August 20, 2004.

I don't see how what Bromedass says would change anyone's mind. The one eyed man may be king in some places, but we can all see the words here.

-- (a@b.c), August 20, 2004.

Bromis,

b) Why is any life worth losing sleep over? depends if you give a shit or not, hell I'm fairly poor maybe I should go out and stab someone to death and mug them, (ill be sure to find someone of bellow average intelligence so as not to offend your sensibilities).

That's exactly MY point Bromis! It's not right to kill the guy next to you, even if he doesn't "mean anything" to anyone. He's still a person and deserves at least the chance to live his life. The exact same argument is the best one AGAINST abortion: These are young lives that haven't done anything to anyone, but at least deserve the chance to live their lives without being murdered.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 20, 2004.

Biscuits and Joe, I have to say I think you guys have sold me on the pro-life side. You guys have made some really good points. I think you may have changed my mind on this one.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 20, 2004.

broomed ass,

These were rhetorical questions, and answers in themself to answer the some ridiculous points that have been made by the pro choice movment in the past. ie "If abortion is illegal, it will still continue unsafely."

You narcissistic pussy, I was not asking you personally how you felt about it, or it would affect your life personally. I was asking pro choicers to explain the logic they would expect anyone to follow to agree with them.

Next time don't tell me how you think it will effect you if you don't swith rags, or chose a different hand to wipe your ass with. And then share with us how it makes you feel. Just think, if you can't, which it definently appears like

DON'T WASTE MY TIME!! CUNT!!!

-- (a@b.c), August 21, 2004.

a@bc can't make any points without resorting to calling names and cursing. This person does NOT represent the pro-life people. He's only interested in hurting others because he has no life.

-- (not@telling you.com), August 26, 2004.

Thanks, Anti,

It's a tough issue for a lot of people, but most moral things are. For me, it really does seem like the most basic right, the right to life. What leaves me scratching my head is when people get all worked up about something like the fur industry because of cruelty to animals, but don't mind a mother deciding to end her own babies life?! What sense does THAT make, to worry about the amount of square feet a mink has to run around in, but not care about HUMAN life? I don't get it. Of course there is a snowball effect you have to watch out for, once you decide that you should be ethical towards the innocent, it affects your overall perspective in many ways...

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 26, 2004.

The other day I got a letter from NOW (I belong to a whole bunch of liberal groups, so I guess one of them gave my adress to NOW), and it was all about some protest (plus they wanted money) for "women's rights". I started wondering what they meant by that, so I read on. Apparently, the central point of the "women's rights" movement is abortion. They said that people all across the country needed to march for this "most fundamental right for women". And that kind of pissed me off. Their most fundamental right is the right to pss any responsibility for fucking up onto your unborn child? Where the hell do they get off saying something like that?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.

The women's rights movement in America took a wrong turn a while back and has now spun out of control. One of the first mistakes of the women's rights movement was wanting to have a large female population in the workforce. One problem: who's watching the kids? Schools? Oh, Christ, there's a great idea: let the government raise them. Day care? Yeah! I want to pay someone to pretend that they love my child. Real love is overrated anyhow. I have a better plan, ladies: let's kill our babies until we have well-established carriers.

In my mother and my wife's opinions, the movement should have been fighting for more respect for what has historically been established as "women's work". Cooking, cleaning, and caring for children is right up there with digging ditches in many American minds. I help my wife with her work: laundry, cooking, etc., but I know that she does it better and more efficiently than I. (Women's minds are set- up for more efficient multi-tasking involved with running a household.) I have the utmost respect for what she does and my mother did; it is hard work and should not be menialized by the chauvinist society of the 40s and 50s or the career-driven feminists of today.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 26, 2004.

Anti,

Exactly. How about marching to help people get the resources to care for their children, or to have options to stay home more? No, the only thing worth doing is killing your child so you can keep working and get that BMW. Why not try marching for women's rights that really ARE important, such as equal pay for doing the same job, and the right to be taken seriously by police when you say some deadbeat is beating your face in? No, the only thing that NOW is is a pro-abortion lobby.

Biscuits,

LOL, my wife awhile ago looked at me and said, "you know, you just can't do more than one thing at a time can you?" and I replied, "No, but at least the one thing that I DO do is done correctly!"

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 26, 2004.

My grandfather was a Knight of Columbus and had 9 kids; as Catholic as they come. He told me that he would support abortion if only it were 13 years retro-active.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), September 02, 2004.