JapanForum.com

JapanForum.com (https://www.japanforum.com/forum/)
-   General Discussion (https://www.japanforum.com/forum/general-discussion/)
-   -   Re Abortions (https://www.japanforum.com/forum/general-discussion/35590-re-abortions.html)

GoNative 01-17-2011 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsbody70 (Post 846965)
You have your own child. Are you glad that he/she was not aborted?

Although ronin's post sums up the only worthy response to this little bit of ridiculousness I'll answer anyway. My wife and I planned to have our daughter. It took nearly 3 years of trying but we finally got pregnant and I couldn't be happier. But if it had have been 15 or so years ago when I wasn't married and the last thing in the world I would have wanted was a baby then I would have been overjoyed if whatever girl I got pregnant decided to have an abortion. I have no moral issues with abortion. This world is already full of neglected and unwanted children. No need to bring more into it.

SSJup81 01-17-2011 01:30 PM

I've always been on the fence with this subject, but based on my beliefs, I fit in with the "pro-choice" side, and just because I'm pro-choice, doesn't mean I'm "pro-abortion". I believe that the parties involved should make the decision on whether or not they should go through with an abortion. I would prefer it if the people didn't, but if they decide to do so, it's their business, not mine. I also can't judge those who do so either, because to for the woman, it's probably not only physical drain, but it has to be mentally and emotionally draining as well. I know for me, I'd rather go the adoption route if ever in the situation, but that's just me.

I only know of one abortion story in my family, and that's my grandmother. When my grandmother became pregnant with her oldest child, she wasn't married. Back in the 1950s, as most might know, it's looked down upon to be an unwed mother. Her mother (my great-grandmother) was urging her to get the abortion. My grandmother was about to go with it, on the table and everything, but at the last moment refused to go through with it.

She ended up going to live with some other relatives. That's something else that was done a lot back then. If you got pregnant, you got "sent away". You leave by yourself, and come back with "cousin", that type of thing. My grandmother had my aunt, but had to put her up for adoption. My grandmother talked about how she always felt terrible that she had given up her oldest (yeah, she did reconcile with her later on when she was in her teens), but it was emotionally draining on her. She used to have bad dreams about it.

Either way, abortion route or the adoption route, both are still emotionally draining situations.

File0 01-17-2011 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoNative (Post 846928)
The point I was making wasn't to debate the reasons why some countries are less fortunate than others but was to point out in practice we do not value all human life. One of the big arguments by those against abortion is that all life is sacred. But demonstrably all life is not sacred. Those of us in developed, wealthy nations continue to allow extreme poverty to thrive around the world and in places like the US within their own countries. We all allow incredible amounts of suffering and death to occur purely because of poverty because we don't value all human life. So it's kind of ridiculous to put abortion on some sort of pedastal as though the act of giving birth is somehow more sacred than actually caring about those who are already alive. In reality in this world life is very, very cheap. No reason to get all precous about abortion when we allow so much other death to occur all the time.

If I accepted that life wasn't sacred because, you're right, there are so many unfairness in this world; that wouldn't make things better.
I mean: if life isn't sacred why should anyone bother with the situation of the orphans or the children living in poverty in any country.
My problem with abortion is not that women have a choice, so they can decide whether they want the child or not(it's actually a life-saving decision many times), but that in certain situations they are told to do abort the fetus. Just like in the other thread you said the girl, who by the way was not forcing the boy to do anything, was acting selfish and stupid because she wanted to keep the child. Can you tell me what makes her decision less worthy than those who decide to do the abortion? You say abortion is the better choice, even if the woman against it... where is the truth in your words? No offense, but what you say is just unfair, and you do not support free-choice at all.
The only thing which is missing, is the law which allows the father to make the decision whether he wants the child or not, males should have the same rights as females, and vice-versa, that's for sure...
-----------------
The fact that someone in a specific thread about abortion won't speak about every human life which suffer from poverty and injustice doesn't mean s/he doesn't understand or support those who suffer if can or the opportunity is given, or that s/he's acting hypocritically.
Life is sacred even if we don't have the power to protect everything and everyone and just by living we hurt and even kill many things around us. It is not decided or declared by ignorant human beings, it's a fact that exist, without life there is nothing, if life isn't sacred than the word 'sacred' is meaningless as it is. Or have you got something better than life to picture the meaning of 'sacred'?
---------------
For those who cannot tell the difference between sperm and fetus: they should not speak at all, it's just ignorance and makes their argument really ridiculous.

@SCIFFIX
In my country women only allowed to do abortion if there is/are health or financial issues or the pregnancy is a cause of raping/ of any violent or illegal act. And even than, there is a time limit of it, which varies regarding of what the reason is - the longest time-limit is given when some kind of health issue occurs during the pregnancy, basically the mother's life is more valuable than the fetus and if there is a health problem with the child if it would born with an incurable disease the parents can decide not to keep it.

dogsbody70 01-17-2011 09:17 PM

Some may think my words were cruel but whensomeone says thatlife is not sacred yet they have their own precious child. I do apologise though-- my comments were uncalled for.
when we look into a baby's face-- can we say to it-- oh I had thought it was best not to Keep you-- but Now I am so glad that I DID keep you.

ANd GN I am glad that after so long that you do have a beautifiul daughter. By rights I should have been aborted-- so I don't know why I wasn't-- except it never used to be legal. At least your daughter was really wanted.

Ryzorian 01-18-2011 06:31 AM

I perhaps was harsher in tone than intended. The point I was makeing is that I'm not to blame for whatever happens in Somalia, nor will me liveing a certain lifestyle change the evil men that run Somalia.

As a counter Gonative; Perhaps the western world doesn't care much about the ten's of thusands of poverty striken children dieing in the world today, because Abortion has taught them that life is no more precious than last years car model. The western world has become jaded.

GoNative 01-18-2011 06:48 AM

I'm not so sure it's because we have become jaded as that would imply that once we did care which I'd also argue is not true. In fact I'd argue that our affluent lifestyles have only been possible due to suffering. Our economies depend on it. The US for instance was only able to rise to such prominence so quickly because of slavery. It's easy to get rich when you don't have to pay workers. The class systems in many western nations like the UK also helped with this. For people to get really rich you generally need others to be remain really poor. To maintain our affluent lifestyles it's not in our best interests to help poor nations improve their lot too much. Anyway again my point is that as we accept so much poverty, needless death and suffering all the time it's just a bit hypocritical to then single out abortion as somehow a bigger issue than say actually helping those who already have been born and are struggling to survive. To me abortion is just such an incredibly minor issue that makes little difference to our societies one way or the other.

NanteNa 01-19-2011 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsbody70 (Post 846537)
often when a woman has a miscarriage there is something wrong with the foetus or baby or she cannot contain it for some reason.

Nature is supposed to know best-- what about the babies that are born prematurely? Many can be kept alive from very early stages these days

5 points to the clever one. As mentioned, it's VERY common for women to have a miscarriage the first time they're pregnant. However, they manage to pull through a completely normal pregnancy the second time - I don't think there's any particularly logical explanation to it, except maybe the body needs prepping time? My own mother lost her first baby, had my older brother, had me, lost her 4th baby and then had my younger brother.

I think you're applying common rules for dog breeding onto human beings - and those two don't really work the same way. Miscarriage for humans doesn't necessarily mean that there's anything wrong with the mother.

Nature DOES know best in my opinion. Many babies are born early. The earlier the child is born, the lower are its chances of survival. However, our technology is developed enough to keep a child born at 7 months alive - risks involved of course..


Quote:

Originally Posted by SCIFFIX (Post 846535)
hahahaha bad Mother Nature

So for you a abortion commited by Mother Nature is the same as an abortion commited by a normal woman...

I'm not defending pro-abortion neither anti-abortion. In most cases people defending anti-abortion or pro-abortion presents very weak arguments to prove what they believe, I just want to know in a deeper way the opnion of the people here.

And what about the abortion in the country of people here :
is it proibited?
If not, in what kind of case the mother can use this resource?
If is proibited, why is proibited?
what are the requirements to get an abortion according with your country law?

Anyone know a woman who decided to abort?
Why she decided to abort?

It's obviously not the same thing. But generally ''Mother Nature'' decides FOR the parents and baby that the baby is not capable of 'life' as it is. Be it a condition carried by the mother, a process of the whole meiosis thing. Sometimes the chemical processes that are active during the 'making' of the baby fuck up - it happens. There are various reasons as to why women lose their child naturally / cause of Mother Nature.

We have legal abortions here up to the 12th-15th week I believe.. I'm not quite sure. But there's definitely a limit.

Ryzorian 01-19-2011 03:24 AM

The US didn't come to prominace because of Slavery, that's impossible. The South was an agrigarian culture that was no where near as industrialized as the North. Plus the US fought a devestateing civil war over it, wich left over 600,000 dead. The most Americans killed in any war they ever fought in.

While it's true we treated the local natives poorly, the US itself didn't become a world power until the Spanish American war in 1898, 30 years after slavery had been abolished. What made America powerful was the relentless drive and desire to live a better life than you were born with. The freedom to pursue those dreams, Plus the massive amounts of natural resources on a continant that we were able to unite.

The US was going to become rich and powerful reguardless of what the rest of the world did, just because of the basic cultural attitudes of American's in general and the abundance of resources available tied with the ability to unite a continant twice the size of Europe as one nation. Not to mention the US gives more to charity and world food bank than all other nations combined.

Many third world nations who were "taken advantage of" dureing the colonial period have been independant for over 60 years or longer...Japan built itself into an economic power after ww2 despite being devestated. What's the third worlds excuse for not matching Japan? Japan doesn't even have many natural resources compared with Africa.

You can't blame the western world for many of these 3rd world nations problems today, the blame lies with them. It isn't the west wipeing out millions in Durfar, not the West that killed 800,000 in Rawanda, not the west that let thier population starve in Somalia.


Abortion, in the US anyway, has claimed over 50 million. I would suggest that has made a huge difference on our cultural identity. That's 50 million people who never grew up, voted, got a job, discovered anything, invented anything or saved the third world from starvation. Wich perhaps they might have, had then been allowed to live.

dogsbody70 01-19-2011 09:55 AM

nante ne

I object to you saying that I am comparing dog breeding to humans.


Nature does usually know best any way. There usually is a reason for miscarriages.


You seem to think you know best.

Ryzorian 01-20-2011 03:51 AM

The influence we have in less developed nations would be better put to use if we just left them to thier own devices. Let them sink or swim on thier own. We need to stop helping them because it's just breeding resentment.

I would counter pro life being anti choice, with pro choice being pro death.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:15 PM.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6