• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Men not being involved in the abortion debate

year2late said:
Can you show me all this accessible public housing? There are application processes....does not mean you get anything in the next 5 years.

There are waiting lists for shelters let alone homes.

And no insurance which would translate into eventually Medicaid - if I had that for my prenatal care - I probably would be on dialysis or dead.

By the way, a lot of these subsidies you speak of....pro-life Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to severely limit.

But go ahead and tell me how easy it is to get into public housing or section 8.
Click to expand...

Lursa said:
Dream on.

For one thing, you cant discredit an opinion.

And you have yet to disprove a single fact that I've posted.
Click to expand...


Again, as I told Lursa, these are legitimate issues, however separate issues from the actual aborting of a baby.

I appreciate your response year2late. You seem much more of a critical thinker and someone capable of expanding their mind. Much more so than Lursa who is an ideologue.

Lursa believes in a society where a person can buy an ar15 and abort her child. She believes in a society where kids can do those things, something I do not agree with. My biggest problem with Lursa is that she distorts other people's opinion and twists facts around. The gall of this poster to say I value life cheaply is out of line. I found it offensive that she would claim poor people on welfare do not have much to live for in life. That was despicable.

Back to the topic at hand. One of my good friends lives in Sweden. Here are some interesting facts:

Most abortions in Sweden are performed on women aged 20–24 years old, followed by the age group 25–30 years old, and teenage abortions (15–19 years old) constitute the third largest group. Before the age of thirty most women have not established a family life and abortion is more common amongst this age group, with multiple sex partners in the younger age groups parenthood is less desired and abortion more likely.[6] The fact that most women in the younger age groups are still studying, combined with them being new on the labour market, influences the choice to perform abortion.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Sweden

But here are Sweden's laws:

FACT:

College is FREE for students in Sweden

The Swedes get up to 16 months of paid leave after the birth of a newborn, extra tax credits to defray the cost of child-rearing, plus access to regulated, subsidized day care facilities that stay open from 6:30 in the morning until 6:30 at night.
Click to expand...

https://newrepublic.com/article/118294/us-should-copy-sweden-and-denmarks-work-family-policies

Sweden pays parents for having kids — and it reaps huge benefits. Why doesn't the US?
Click to expand...

https://www.vox.com/2016/5/23/11440638/child-benefit-child-allowance

So essentially the government incentivizes young women to have children. You receive money for having a baby yet women still have abortions despite the free money, education, and 16-month paid leave.

So the majority of women of Sweden have abortions, not because they can't afford it, but because they feel a child would interfere with their active sex lives.

Now, we are talking about a socialist country. They have very undemocratic laws - You need explicit consent before having sex. They want to legalize incest and necrophilia.

But Sweden proves the reasons for women having abortions are misguided and wrong. Do you find it acceptable to have an abortion on the basis of wanting to maintain a promiscuous sex life???
 
Bucky said:
Again, as I told Lursa, these are legitimate issues, however separate issues from the actual aborting of a baby.

I appreciate your response year2late. You seem much more of a critical thinker and someone capable of expanding their mind. Much more so than Lursa who is an ideologue.

Lursa believes in a society where a person can buy an ar15 and abort her child. She believes in a society where kids can do those things, something I do not agree with. My biggest problem with Lursa is that she distorts other people's opinion and twists facts around. The gall of this poster to say I value life cheaply is out of line. I found it offensive that she would claim poor people on welfare do not have much to live for in life. That was despicable.

Back to the topic at hand. One of my good friends lives in Sweden. Here are some interesting facts:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Sweden

But here are Sweden's laws:

FACT:

College is FREE for students in Sweden



https://newrepublic.com/article/118294/us-should-copy-sweden-and-denmarks-work-family-policies



https://www.vox.com/2016/5/23/11440638/child-benefit-child-allowance

So essentially the government incentivizes young women to have children. You receive money for having a baby yet women still have abortion despite the free money, education, and 16-month paid leave.

So the majority of women of Sweden have abortions, not because they can't afford it, but because they feel a child would interfere with their active sex lives.

Now, we are talking about a socialist country. They have very undemocratic laws - You need explicit consent before having sex. They want to legalize incest and necrophilia.

But Sweden proves the reasons for women having abortions are misguided and wrong. Do you find it acceptable to have an abortion on the basis of wanting to maintain a promiscuous sex life???
Click to expand...

talking about me instead of to me? Because you are unable to make any refutations in the information I provide.

I post reality. Look at my sig and see what you post. Or when you talk about feeling pain in the womb, or make up things like most pregnancies are unplanned. Time after time you post bull****...and then dodge providing sources. You cheapen life by claiming things like education, safety, paying your own way, etc are 'conveniences.'

You think 'more' unwanted infants are better than a good quality of life for women and the children they already have. :doh
 
Lursa said:
talking about me instead of to me? Because you are unable to make any refutations in the information I provide.

I post reality. Look at my sig and see what you post. Or when you talk about feeling pain in the womb, or make up things like most pregnancies are unplanned. Time after time you post bull****...and then dodge providing sources. You cheapen life by claiming things like education, safety, paying your own way, etc are 'conveniences.'

You think 'more' unwanted infants are better than a good quality of life for women and the children they already have. :doh
Click to expand...

Women in Sweden have abortions because they choose multiple sex partners over motherhood.

Is that what the feminist movement is all about? Sounds to me that is a cheapening of life!
 
Bucky said:
Women in Sweden have abortions because they choose multiple sex partners over motherhood.

Is that what the feminist movement is all about? Sounds to me that is a cheapening of life!
Click to expand...

So? That's not America.
 
Bucky said:
Again, as I told Lursa, these are legitimate issues, however separate issues from the actual aborting of a baby.
Click to expand...

No, they are not separate. Not if you are the woman that has to deal with the pregnancy and then a kid, and making a living and not being in poverty, not taking $ from the state unnecessarily, not neglecting the kids you already have, not missing out on an education or developing the skills for a career.

These are all huge sacrifices and if a woman doesnt want to make them, she doesnt have to.

It's incredibly selfish and cruel to demand that of strangers...esp when you arent the one that will be paying the consequences. Thank God that you do not have the power to do so.
 
Last edited:
Lursa said:
No, they are not. Not if you are the woman that has to deal with the pregnancy and then a kid, and making a living and not being in poverty, not taking $ from the state unnecessarily, not neglecting the kids you already have, not missing out on an education or developing the skills for a career.

These are all huge sacrifices and if a woman doesnt want to make them, she doesnt have to.

It's incredibly selfish and cruel to demand that of strangers...esp when you arent the one that will be paying the consequences. Thank God that you do not have the power to do so.
Click to expand...

I am getting tired of these circular/no-logicial arguments you present. I am getting very dizzy and confused.

I presented some excellent points on women in Sweden and you failed to respond in an educated manner.
 
I'm not interested in women in Sweden. As far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with women here in the US. Why should I be bothered?

It's not my fault you had to go overseas to find women that you felt you could more legitimately judge for their behavior after Y2Y and I made you realize that American women have very legitimate life-altering reasons for having abortions.
 
Bucky said:
... separate issues from the actual aborting of a baby.
Click to expand...
STILL BLATHERING YOUR STUPID LIE, YOU ARE. When will you stop lying about the actual status of an unborn human?

Bucky said:
... who is an ideologue.
Click to expand...
OH, IS THAT HOW YOU JUSTIFY LYING ABOUT THE ACTUAL STATUS OF AN UNBORN HUMAN? By being an "ideologue"? Tsk, tsk!
 
Bucky said:
I am getting tired of these circular/no-logicial arguments
Click to expand...
THEN WHY DO YOU KEEP BLATHERING THEM? Facts are Facts, and the Truth is very straightforward:
(1) The Universe does not consider human life to be any more special than bacterial life. The next giant asteroid to hit Earth won't care in the least what life-forms it makes extinct.
(2) Humans have the power to lie to themselves, and therefore can Deny Fact and claim "inherent" superiority over other types of life.
(3) The lies that humans tell themselves includes the lie that endless numbers of humans is always a good thing.
(4) To be able to demonstrate at least some type of superiority over other types of life is a function of brainpower that ordinary animals (including unborn humans) simply don't have.
(5) Abortion is perfectly Natural, and typically claims about 2/3 of all human conceptions.
(6) The numbers of women who want to be pregnant and have offspring is plenty sufficient to prevent the extinction of the human species from too-low a birth rate.
(7) Women who don't want offspring (or additional offspring) are likely to seek abortions. Abortion opponents cannot offer even one Objectively Valid rationale, relative to this day-and-age, why those women should be disallowed to obtain abortions.

Bucky said:
I am getting very dizzy and confused.
Click to expand...
THAT'S YOUR OWN FAULT. You might be able, like Alice in Wonderland, to believe six impossible things at once, but that doesn't mean it is always a smart thing to do.

Bucky said:
I presented some excellent points on women in Sweden
Click to expand...
YOU STILL BLATHERED IDIOCY --that somehow your opinions of women's choices and actions is superior to their own.
 
Bucky said:
Women in Sweden have abortions because they choose multiple sex partners over motherhood.

.....
Click to expand...

Bucky,

You brought up the number #1 reason woman in USA gave for seeking an abortion was economic .

They said they could not afford to have/raise a baby.

Sweden is not in the United States and Women have much better safety nets in Sweden.

I showed you study that proved they were they right.

The women who had abortion at that point fared better economily than those denied an abortion even the small safety net the US has.

Denial of abortion leads to economic hardships for low income women. They are right.

But if you want to compare Sweden to the USA than the USA had 4 percent fewer abortions per 100 pregnancies in 2013 than Sweden did in 2014.

Percentage of pregnancies aborted by country (listed by percentage)
 
Last edited:
Bucky said:
You should ask your mom.
Click to expand...

My mother died. What is your point?

I again ask...what is your what is your source for your statement that "most pregnancies are unwanted"?
 
minnie616 said:
Bucky,

You brought up the number #1 reason woman in USA gave for seeking an abortion was economic .

They said they could not afford to have/raise a baby.

Sweden is not in the United States and Women have much better safety nets in Sweden.

I showed you study that proved they were they right.

The women who had abortion at that point fared better economily than those denied an abortion even the small safety net the US has.

Denial of abortion leads to economic hardships for low income women. They are right.

But if you want to compare Sweden to the USA than the USA had 4 percent fewer abortions per 100 pregnancies in 2013 than Sweden did in 2014.

Percentage of pregnancies aborted by country (listed by percentage)
Click to expand...

Thanks minnie.

I think my point was made. Why is it that Sweden has more abortions per 100 pregnancies compared to the United States despite Sweden having a better safety net for women?

It kind of get's to the bigger isssue about the need to ban abortions.
 
Bucky said:
Again, as I told Lursa, these are legitimate issues, however separate issues from the actual aborting of a baby.

I appreciate your response year2late. You seem much more of a critical thinker and someone capable of expanding their mind. Much more so than Lursa who is an ideologue.

Lursa believes in a society where a person can buy an ar15 and abort her child. She believes in a society where kids can do those things, something I do not agree with. My biggest problem with Lursa is that she distorts other people's opinion and twists facts around. The gall of this poster to say I value life cheaply is out of line. I found it offensive that she would claim poor people on welfare do not have much to live for in life. That was despicable.

Back to the topic at hand. One of my good friends lives in Sweden. Here are some interesting facts:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Sweden

But here are Sweden's laws:

FACT:

College is FREE for students in Sweden



https://newrepublic.com/article/118294/us-should-copy-sweden-and-denmarks-work-family-policies



https://www.vox.com/2016/5/23/11440638/child-benefit-child-allowance

So essentially the government incentivizes young women to have children. You receive money for having a baby yet women still have abortions despite the free money, education, and 16-month paid leave.

So the majority of women of Sweden have abortions, not because they can't afford it, but because they feel a child would interfere with their active sex lives.

Now, we are talking about a socialist country. They have very undemocratic laws - You need explicit consent before having sex. They want to legalize incest and necrophilia.

But Sweden proves the reasons for women having abortions are misguided and wrong. Do you find it acceptable to have an abortion on the basis of wanting to maintain a promiscuous sex life???
Click to expand...

They are absolutely NOT separate issues.

You state that we have a safety net and so things get better for the woman if they remain pregnant.

I am asking for you to back up this safety net thing. I am here to tell you that in many (if not most) areas there are long waiting lists that can take years for housing Hell, homeless shelters may not even be an easy get - particularly safe one.

Part of the safety net is Medicaid. Try to find a doctor on Medicaid. Frequent relegation to clinics with long waits, inadequate resources. A clinic might be closed to new patients and be sent to a clinic many miles away. Does that inspire confidence in you? Perhaps you believe that pregnancy complications are mere nuisances and women should just stop whining about their medical issues with pregnancy?

No not separate issues.
 
year2late said:
They are absolutely NOT separate issues.

You state that we have a safety net and so things get better for the woman if they remain pregnant.

I am asking for you to back up this safety net thing. I am here to tell you that in many (if not most) areas there are long waiting lists that can take years for housing Hell, homeless shelters may not even be an easy get - particularly safe one.

Part of the safety net is Medicaid. Try to find a doctor on Medicaid. Frequent relegation to clinics with long waits, inadequate resources. A clinic might be closed to new patients and be sent to a clinic many miles away. Does that inspire confidence in you? Perhaps you believe that pregnancy complications are mere nuisances and women should just stop whining about their medical issues with pregnancy?

No not separate issues.
Click to expand...

As shown in Sweden. Improving those safety nets will not decrease abortions, in fact, it would more likely increase abortions in this country.

Republicans have no incentive to expand social programs if Democrats insist on backing these extreme abortion positions where a pregnant mother can have an abortion even a day before due date.

Start restricting abortion rights and Republicans will gladly increase money towards social welfare programs.

Liberal extremists are spiting themselves. They care more about abortions (which only helps a minority of women) rather than these social programs (which effects many more people).

It makes you think, abortion isn't a women's right issue. It is a population control issue.
 
Last edited:
Bucky said:
As shown in Sweden. Improving those safety nets will not decrease abortions, in fact, it would more likely increase abortions in this country.

Republicans have no incentive to expand social programs if Democrats insist on backing these extreme abortion positions where a pregnant mother can have an abortion even a day before due date.

Start restricting abortion rights and Republicans will gladly increase money towards social welfare programs.

Liberal extremists are spiting themselves. They care more about abortions (which only helps a minority of women) rather than these social programs (which effects many more people).

It makes you think, abortion isn't a women's right issue. It is a population control issue.
Click to expand...


What the hell are you talking about now? (concerning the bolded)

By the way, you still have not shown where you got the information "most pregnancies are unwanted". A simple link to a reliable source would be nice.
 
Bucky said:
Thanks minnie.

I think my point was made. Why is it that Sweden has more abortions per 100 pregnancies compared to the United States despite Sweden having a better safety net for women?

It kind of get's to the bigger isssue about the need to ban abortions.
Click to expand...

The rate of pregnancies aborted in the USA have fallen greatly over the last several years because more than 65 percent of American women of child bearing years are using artifical birth control consistanly. And as more and more women use long term birth control it will continue to fall much sharper.

Too bad that long term birth control is very expensive. The out of pocket expensive for those who do not have birth control coverage is about $800 to $1000 . If long term birth control were more affordable imagine the numbers of unwanted pregnancies the USA would no longer have.

Women do not abort planned pregnancies unless there is a medical reason.
 
Bucky said:
I think my point was made.
Click to expand...
NOPE. You haven't made any point that matters yet.

Bucky said:
Why is it that Sweden has more abortions ...
Click to expand...
WHY DOES THAT MATTER? This is the issue you are refusing to address, despite all your blatherings in a whole lot of recent messages here. In other words:

STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO SHOW WHY YOUR OPINION IS BETTER THAN THAT OF WOMEN WHO SEEK ABORTIONS.
 
Bucky said:
As shown in Sweden. Improving those safety nets will not decrease abortions, in fact, it would more likely increase abortions in this country.

Republicans have no incentive to expand social programs if Democrats insist on backing these extreme abortion positions where a pregnant mother can have an abortion even a day before due date.

Start restricting abortion rights and Republicans will gladly increase money towards social welfare programs.

Liberal extremists are spiting themselves. They care more about abortions (which only helps a minority of women) rather than these social programs (which effects many more people).

It makes you think, abortion isn't a women's right issue. It is a population control issue.
Click to expand...

False.

The USA is not Sweden.

Our cultures are very different.
 
Removable Mind said:
If Im not mistaken, technically, women aren’t now. The Equal Rights Amendment failed to be ratified - 3 States short.
Click to expand...

What Rights under the Constitution are women denied?
 
Bucky said:
I agree. I also have a distaste for manslaughter as well.

The fact is the majority of Americans have a personal distaste for abortion as well.
Click to expand...

The majority of people have distates for any number of things that they accept and want legal. You have a poor argument.
 
Lursa said:
I cant think of any way that we would legally be prevented that didnt violate our rights.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I was just seeking clarification to what (the way I read it) was a muddled up sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom