Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health Counting abortion as a woman’s right to choose offends against the moral principle which prescribes the sanctity of human life. I tolerate abortion as a necessary evil, the same way I tolerate the deaths of soldiers in war as a necessary evil. However, I do not in any way acknowledge abortion as a woman’s right. A woman does indeed have the right to do with her own body as she chooses, but she has no rights over the life of another human being, even when that life is growing inside her. It revolts me that anyone can speak of terminating the life of an unborn human being as a right without any other reservations about the wrongness of claiming killing as a right – that would trouble the mind of someone with a conscience. Do these people think they can play the role of some type of God? That they can claim the power of life and death over another living human as a right?
Abortion is not a right, it is a wrong. It is a crime against the unborn that bloodies all our hands because we all consent to it even though we know that it could so easily be avoided. It is a morally indefensible practice which is just as cruel, barbaric, and unnecessary as circumcision. There is no medical need for any healthy person with normal genitalia to be circumcised and there is no medical need for any healthy pregnancy to be terminated. If you know you don’t want a child – then simply don’t get pregnant. Abortion is wrong, but we do it because not doing it might create a whole new set of problems – that is what abortion is, it is not a right. The only right a woman has in this context is the right not to get pregnant. Once you become pregnant and decide you want an abortion, your abortion should only be granted at the discretion of society at large, not as an automatic right to an individual who has proven themselves to be incapable of acting responsibly. Society stands as the protector of the rights of the unborn child. It is the duty of every decent man and woman alive to ensure that human life is treated with the utmost respect, no matter what stage of development that life is at. That respect should start with decent people demanding an end to rhetoric that speaks of abortion as a right. They must remind people that abortion is not a right – it is an evil we permit for the convenience of those who recklessly create life only to destroy it. We must not allow mad women to redefine human life as non-human so they can justify the routine destruction of millions of human embryos and foetuses. To do anything less will take us somewhere none of us want to go.
The proper way is to tell people that, when destroying an unborn life, they are committing an abhorrent act, which we as a society condemn in the strongest terms. We must argue for the end of the misuse of language and semantics which defines abortion as a right and argue against the abuse of abortion, which is justified on the ground that it is a woman’s right. We have the right to express our disgust at the casual disregard for human life that has brought us to the point where we have abortion on demand and abortion as a contraceptive of first resort. We should not allow ourselves to be emotionally blackmailed into silence on this issue by wildly exaggerated claims that abortion is a traumatic experience for abortionists. If abortion is so traumatic, then why do the number of abortions performed increase every year? And why do the numbers of women having multiple abortions increase every year? It can’t be as traumatic as they claim. What kinds of fools want to put themselves through the same awful trauma multiple times? Furthermore, when does the aborter become away that she doesn’t want to get pregnant? Do you suddenly decide you don’t want to become pregnant upon discovering that you are pregnant? No, you don’t. Women know before pregnancy whether or not they want to become pregnant. They also know beforehand whether or not they have the resources to provide for a child – which means the onus is on women to take every step to avoid putting themselves through this so-called traumatic experience. However it isn’t really traumatic -- for the woman anyway. The only party suffering trauma is the person growing inside the woman, which is either poisoned to death or dismembered and sucked out of the womb alive -- and to compound the insult, either thrown out in the trash or used as raw material for in laboratories.
If you know you don’t want to have a child at any given point in your life, it is your responsibility to not get pregnant. There are over a dozen very reliable contraceptive methods that a woman may resort to – the most reliable among them being abstinence. But no, they want to fuck and then hide their fuck ups behind the claim that abortion is a traumatic experience – as if that somehow washes away the callous recklessness that created a life and the crime of destroying that same life. I’m not buying it. Abortion is no traumatic experience for the woman. Many past sexual partners of mine have had multiple abortions. At worst, some of them have described their abortions to me as unpleasant experiences which must be endured for the ulterior goal of avoiding the responsibility of raising the child. Once it is over, they simply forget about it and move on with their lives. That’s right – women who get abortions are the ultimate deadbeats; deadbeats who avoid their responsibility simply by eliminating it. And yet, these women are the same dogs who are the loudest critics of deadbeat fathers. These women don’t deserve sympathy, understanding or counselling to get them through this so-called traumatic experience anymore than men deserve the same for abandoning their families. They deserve shame and condemnation to punish them for their recklessness and to deter the other loosed-moral sluts who would treat abortion as nothing more than birth control.
For those of you who didn’t exactly major in physiology, an embryo or a fetus is a living organism with human DNA which in the overwhelming majority of cases will grow into a fully-formed human just like yourself. Let’s not forget that is what we all were before we were born. If we were to force women to terminate wanted pregnancies, it would be called genocide. However, when a slovenly whore wants to abort her unborn child we call it “my body, my choice”.
Now some hypocrisies and double standards, we have to live with because we haven’t found a way to resolve them intellectually or philosophically. However, this is one is a hypocrisy too far. If it’s wrong to harm an unborn child when the pregnancy is desired, then it’s wrong to harm it when it is not desired. You can’t have it both ways and expect decent people to join you on the “my body, my choice” parade.
Now to those women who do not want to accept sole and full responsibility for the existence of the barbaric and medieval practice known as abortion – too bad. You and you alone are to blame for it. Deadbeat women are the only reason abortion clinics are able to exist at all. Abortion clinics are no different from any other business in the principle of being a business. They provide a service for a fee. There are women who want abortions and clinics who will provide them. It’s elementary supply and demand. For those of you women who still refuse to accept the fault, let me explain further. You’re not going to pull the “I didn’t make myself pregnant” card. According to these women, it’s “my body, my choice”, or in other words, it’s their right to choose whether they keep or dispose of a pregnancy. But abortion is men’s fault because men have sex with women and men get women pregnant.
Now how dumb is that? How dumb would that argument sound coming from a deadbeat dad? Well, let’s see: “I’m not the one who had the baby, so how come I’m the deadbeat? The mom must be a deadbeat too because I didn’t make this baby by myself.” Now why doesn’t that argument work? Because men are not labelled deadbeats for having sex or fathering children. Men are labelled deadbeats because of their failure to support their children – a choice men make on their own, independently of the child’s mother. And the same goes for deadbeat women who get abortions. Pro-Abortionists or “pro-choice” women are not being attacked for having sex or getting pregnant. They’re being attacked for avoiding their responsibility by destroying it – a choice they make on their own.
Now, isn’t it interesting that deadbeat fathers don’t go around screaming “My money, my choice”? Men don’t go around bellowing that it’s their right not to take responsibility for children they create. Yet, we tolerate this nonsense from women. Men are jailed for not paying child support while women have absolutely zero legal ramifications following an abortion. And we say we live in a “civilized” society.
We don’t blame women for creating deadbeat dads, so we’re not going to blame men for abortion. The decision to get an abortion is made by a woman and by a woman alone – so no man can be blamed even partially for it. Male input is not required for an abortion. On the contrary, any attempt by a man to influence a woman to keep or abort a child against her wishes would be regarded as some kind of abuse towards women. So that one’s not going to fly. The woman is the one asking society to remedy a situation she finds herself in, not the man. The man’s point of view is irrelevant to the staff of the clinics where abortions are performed – which leaves us looking only at women.
Now, the smart women who accept that the above argument is irrefutable, will then cling on to the very last straw-man argument that they have heard from others. That being, “Abortion isn’t murder, it’s not a human.” This argument is so childish, I don’t even know where to begin.
The dictionary definition of murder follows:
1. To kill another human unlawfully.
2. To kill brutally or inhumanly
Since the fetuses are innocent and haven’t broken any laws, it’s pretty unlawful to kill them. And, I’d really like anyone to show me an abortion procedure that is humane.
The legal definition of murder follows:
“The person who causes the death of a human being, means to cause his death, or means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death.
Murder is the unlawful killing, by any person of sound memory and discretion, of any person, with malice aforethought either express or implied by law.”
The law specifically states that murder is the intentional killing of a human being or a fetus with malice aforethought. That is exactly what an abortion is. Abortion fits the description of first degree murder.
Recently, a man in California kicked his girlfriend in the stomach with the intent of causing her to miscarry the fetus. Previously, there was no "or a fetus" clause in the California Criminal Penal Code, but was added after a landmark case in which the man only faced battery charges after he kicked his pregnant girlfriend with the intention of causing a miscarriage, but the girlfriend wanted to keep the baby.
So what it boils down to here is whether or not the act of ending a person’s life is murder hinges upon the woman’s decision. If she chooses to abort, it’s not murder it’s her choice. If she doesn’t want an abortion, but gets one anyway, it’s called murder.
That is a complete refutation of the “it’s not a person” argument.
And lastly, even in the rare case of a deadbeat woman carrying her pregnancy to term, she can still give up her child for adoption after the child is born, cutting off all legal and financial responsibilities to that child without the man’s consent. On the contrary, a man can not do the same without a woman’s consent.
Now, I’ve fought very dirty in this article and I make no apologies for that because we’re up against people for whom the rules of logic, ethics, reason, fair play, and the simple doctrine of “judge not lest ye not be judged” mean nothing. I’ve judged them by the same standards that they expect others to meet – and they fail miserably to come within even limping distance of it. I’ve had enough of the never-ending man-bashing from these disgusting slags who are far from the virtue they make themselves out to be. Every fucking day it’s “men are violent, men are abusive, men keep women down, male-dominated society” -- it goes on and on. Yet the whores pointing the finger are every bit as corrupt as those they dare to judge. I’m not going to let some stinking whore label me negatively. Not as long as I have the brains, the knowledge, and the unbending will to tell them about their putrid selves. So this article will hit them like flying debris in the hurricane of man-bashing that they worked up.
+1 y
Women's Right to Choose
KillerrMike Xper 3
2 4
What Girls & Guys Said
72 112Best part: "A fetus is not a separate individual, it lives in a pregnant woman and depends on her for its growth. In fact, the biological definition of "parasite" fits the fetal mode of growth precisely, especially since pregnancy causes a major upset to a woman's body, like a parasite does to its host. the parasitic relationship of a fetus to a woman means that its continued existence requires her consent. if she continues the pregnancy unwillingly, her rights and bodily integrity are violated.
I love that article. Seriously, though, I'm so grateful that the people in power are smart enough to realize that women (and everyone, really) should be able to control their own bodies.
The fact that you include so many derogatory comments about women in your post, makes things very clear for me. I'm not a man-basher. I wholeheartedly believe a father is an important as a mother, and I KNOW all men aren't bad. However, your post is sexist, stereotypical, and clearly ignorant.
"(In response, anti-choicers say that being pregnant is not the same as being a Good Samaritan, because the woman chose to have sex, voluntarily accepting the risk of pregnancy8. But sex is not a contract for pregnancy people have a right to non-procreative sex9. Their argument is also sexist and puritanical because it punishes women, not men, for their sexual behaviour.) "
"Even if a fetus can be said to have a right to life, this does not include the right to use the body of another human being. For example, the state cannot force people to donate organs or blood, even to save someone's life. We are not obligated by law to risk our lives jumping into a river to save a drowning victim, noble as that might be. Therefore, even if a fetus has a right to life, a pregnant woman is not required to save it by loaning out her body for nine months against her will."
"Anybody can take care of a newborn infant (or disabled person), but only that pregnant woman can nurture her fetus. She can?t hire someone else to do it. Another key difference is that a fetus doesn't just depend on a woman's body for survival, it actually resides inside her body. Human beings must, by definition, be separate individuals. They do not gain the status of human being by virtue of living inside the body of another human being the thought is inherently ridiculous, even offensive."
Not my words: "Fetuses are uniquely different from born human beings in major ways, which casts doubt on the claim that they can be classified as human beings. The most fundamental difference is that a fetus is totally dependent on a woman's body to survive. Anti-choicers might argue that born human beings can be entirely dependent on other people too, but the crucial difference is that they are not dependent on one, specific person to the exclusion of all others. "
Definition of AUTONOMOUS
1: of, relating to, or marked by autonomy
2a : having the right or power of self-government
3a : existing or capable of existing independently - b : responding, reacting, or developing independently of the whole
4: controlled by the autonomic nervous system
Can a fetus exist without a woman? NO. Can a 3-year-old? YES.
They can breathe on their own, reproduce...that makes them people. Also, 3-year-olds are also different because they CAN breathe on their own as well. These examples are as stupid as your blacks/women examples.
Also, there is MUCH scientific evidence to back up my statements. That's the reason abortions are legal and not considered murder. Your entire post reeks of ignorance. "Man-bashing", "whores"... typical words from another bitter guy who lacks real intelligence.
The argument is that you can't kill a fetus because it's a "person". A person is an autonomous being. It doesn't need to be attached to your body to survive. Therefore a fetus cannot be considered a "person" and can't be granted the rights given to "people". A "murder" only occurs when you kill an autonomous being.
By saying it shuld be illegal for women to have abortions, you're basically saying women shouldn't have the right to control their own bodies. If something is living INSIDE me and needs me to survive, it is NOT an autonomous "person". It's a part of me. Denying this is denying plain, straight-forward scientific fact.
"Most of the pathetics arguments used here to justify the lie that a fetus is not a person are similar to those used when denying black people personhood. Same thing with women. In my country, women weren't considered "persons" until about 85 years ago."
The case of women and blacks IS different. Women and blacks are able to survive on their own. They don't need to be attached to your body. You say the argument that a fetus isn't a "person" is silly. It's fact. Your argument is what's silly.
The reasons why abortions occur are NOT irrelevant. If you consider it murder, the reasons why someone is choosing to "commit murder" are of primary importance. If society could solve these problems (the reasons, or some of them) fewer abortions or "murders" would occur.
Secondly, a child is not a child until it is born. Without the mother, the fetus wouldn't be able to survive, so how could you possibly argue it's a person? A "person" is a living thing that is able to breathe, etc. itself.
We need to find out why women have abortions in the first place and fix those problems. Simply saying no abortions for anyone would only create more problems.
Also, ending abortions would only contribute to other problems. An example: look at the "Octomom". People complain that she's raising her kids on their money. If she had chosen to abort her kids, people would complain about her "mudering babies". So, she can't use society's resources, and she also can't have an abortion. Let's say she ends up homeless without taxpayers' money and her kids are sent to foster homes. Some are OK, others runaway, turn to drugs, become teen parents, etc.
I love how people rant on and on about women "murdering" babies and NEVER once look into WHY abortions occur. First of all, an abortion puts a woman's life at risk. It has many psychological effects. Many women that have abortions are in dire financial circumstances. Families with single mothers are the most likely to be in poverty. People need to look into issues like pay differences between men and women, make financial support from BOTH parents the law, etc. Look at the big picture.
Hopefully, people like you will be extinct some time in the future...
Do you really believe the instant that sperm jucies connects that a baby is made that is fully human...because if you do then most pills and forms of birth control is abortion.
Well lets hope you never have to choose between your ideals and "convenience." Its one thing to proclaim this from your soap box, its another to have to deal with an unplanned pregnancy yourself. But regardless, lets work together to kick these dems out of office come november.
Cant believe you ranted for this long. As a conservative I agree with you but I really think you're thinking too black and white. We give liberals crap all the time about not being open minded to someone elses opinions etc. You need to be open minded to the parties involved and know its not a decision many women take lightly, and many suffer emotionally for the rest of their lives, granted its better than death, but try to put yourself in someone elses shoes.
Agree with killermike...abortion=murder...potential scient*ts,geniuses etcs have all been killed by idiots who can't take responsibility...as for rape victims,the foetus didn't rape you and is totally innocent,and is just a product of some idiotic rapist,its not enough though to murder someone who had no say in anything at all...