The Student Room Group

North Dakota has banned abortions

Scroll to see replies

Reply 120
Original post by Xiomara
...embarrassment to the rest of the US. It's 2013, for god's sake.


What happened to the potential life?
Original post by Ultimate1
People here are talking about pregnancies as if women just wake up one day and all of a sudden they're pregnant. Sex is not a god given right and all what this law is saying that if you don't want an unwanted pregnancy then simply don't have sex.


I don't want children, does that mean I should never, in my entire life, be allowed to have sex? Don't be so ridiculous.
Original post by jreid1994
No, I aggree, he don't but surely, I could say she has no right to his wallet because they had sex?

Posted from TSR Mobile


The child does. The money is for the kid.
Original post by jreid1994
No, I aggree, he don't but surely, I could say she has no right to his wallet because they had sex?

Posted from TSR Mobile


She doesnt. His offspring do though.
Original post by minimarshmallow
The child does. The money is for the kid.


No, because he didn't want the child in the first place! She did, he didn't and as its her body and her choice completely I could also say it's her complete responsibility!

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 125
Actually, it's best to get to the root of the problem (i.e. unplanned pregnancy): irresponsibility.

Backstreet abortions are dangerous, so it should be allowed in certain circumstances.

However, I am truly DISGUSTED by the lack of respect for the preborn, saying "it's 2013". Yes, well done. It doesn't take away its RIGHT TO LIFE. How the **** would you like it someone took away your potential before YOU WERE BORN? If your mother said, let's abort it? Your achievements, ambition, would amount to nothing.

If you can't do the time (i.e. a child), then don't do the crime (i.e. sex when you CANNOT DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
Original post by Iron Lady
What happened to the potential life?


I'll repeat what I said earlier:
If all you care about is children being born and not them being fed, clothed or looked after, you cannot call yourself pro-life.
Reply 127
Original post by minimarshmallow
I'll repeat what I said earlier:
If all you care about is children being born and not them being fed, clothed or looked after, you cannot call yourself pro-life.


One word: adoption.

Why can't those feckless parents take responsibility before "expressing their love", i.e. premarital and reckless sex.
Original post by Iron Lady
One word: adoption.

Why can't those feckless parents take responsibility before "expressing their love", i.e. premarital and reckless sex.


You say 'adoption' like we don't have children's homes overflowing with children that can't get homes.
My mum had an abortion when she fell pregnant on the pill while married. So did Caitlin Moran. It's not just teenagers having unprotected sex you know.
Reply 129
The 'Iron Lady' sounds like she desperately requires some 'iron' if you know what I'm implying.
Original post by minimarshmallow
Yeah, because of a difference between men and women.
We can't be treated equally in areas where we are different! If you don't like that, take it up with God/evolution.


Should I say that about women on the battle field, sports, police force, firefighters too? Going by your statement they should be paid less/banned from all these fields.

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 131
Original post by minimarshmallow
You say 'adoption' like we don't have children's homes overflowing with children that can't get homes.
My mum had an abortion when she fell pregnant on the pill while married. So did Caitlin Moran. It's not just teenagers having unprotected sex you know.


Yes, I'm aware of Caitlin Moran's abortion.

In the politest possible way: OMG. She had an abortion because of the sex of her child (male). Then she wrote in The Sunday Times publicizing it, even glamourising it. It really, really upset me. And my mother.

If the abortion is needed, then I'm more sympathetic. But if it's insensitive, saying "power to the women", I am bound to get angry. It's not a decision to be taken lightly, but if they gloat about it, my gloves are coming off.

SOMEONE'S GOT TO STAND UP FOR THE LITTLE GUY (I.E. THE PRE-BORN CHILD.
Original post by jreid1994
Should I say that about women on the battle field, sports, police force, firefighters too?

Posted from TSR Mobile


If a particular woman can't do the job then she shouldn't do it. But similarly if a particular man can't do the job then he shouldn't. If it turns out a woman isn't strong enough to serve in the army because she can't build enough muscle because she's a woman then she can't serve in the army. But if you have a woman like Jess Ennis who would almost certainly be strong enough then she should be able to.
I put a point about sports in one of my earlier posts, we're separated in sports because men have more muscle mass because they have more testosterone so the best woman would probably only be in the middle of the pack with the men (e.g. you can't compare Serena Williams to Novak Djokovic, therefore they don't play each other).

Edit: As for your edit about pay, I'll take tennis as an example (I did cover this earlier but I'll do it again). When both playing best of 3 sets they should be paid the same for winning and losing. If men are playing best of 5 then they should be paid more than women playing best of three (or they should just have women play best of five, they can all do it!)
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Iron Lady
Yes, I'm aware of Caitlin Moran's abortion.

In the politest possible way: OMG. She had an abortion because of the sex of her child (male). Then she wrote in The Sunday Times publicizing it, even glamourising it. It really, really upset me. And my mother.

If the abortion is needed, then I'm more sympathetic. But if it's insensitive, saying "power to the women", I am bound to get angry. It's not a decision to be taken lightly, but if they gloat about it, my gloves are coming off.

SOMEONE'S GOT TO STAND UP FOR THE LITTLE GUY (I.E. THE PRE-BORN CHILD.


In her book she said she had an abortion because her family wouldn't be able to take the strain of another child. Almost exactly the same situation as my mum.
Reply 134
Original post by rainbow.panda
I don't want children, does that mean I should never, in my entire life, be allowed to have sex? Don't be so ridiculous.


Well if I don't want to pay child support should I never, in my entire life, be allowed to have sex? Don't be so ridiculous.
Original post by Beowulf
Of course it's not a pleasant procedure, however the individual involved will have chosen to undergo it for whatever reason/s. If you would find it 'harrowing' and it would leave you with life long trauma then you can choose to not go ahead with it. Some people (I imagine most people who have had one) will understand that it was for the best and dealt with it perfectly well. I find it slightly irritating when you suggest it is 'disturbing' to find it normal. Demonising abortions as abnormal/unusual isn't helpful at all, and I hope that in due time they will be treated as a necessary medical procedure for many women across the world. (N.B Conforming to the standard? The standard of what exactly? Society? Well it's an accepted medical procedure in my society and thus normal. In backwards religious localities that may not be the case of course).


I'll address your NB first,
no I don't mean standard in the sense of a moral standard,
but if the majority of women don't have abortions, then this is the standard, and thus this is what's normal.

I think it's worse that you're saying they're normal.
For any woman, choosing to have an abortion is a decision not to be taken lightly and the woman will need support, be it from family, friends, her partner or even just the doctor or nurse.

An abortion, whether or not you agree that it's right or wrong, is a big deal.
Original post by Ultimate1
Well if I don't want to pay child support should I never, in my entire life, be allowed to have sex? Don't be so ridiculous.


This^^

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by minimarshmallow
If a particular woman can't do the job then she shouldn't do it. But similarly if a particular man can't do the job then he shouldn't. If it turns out a woman isn't strong enough to serve in the army because she can't build enough muscle because she's a woman then she can't serve in the army. But if you have a woman like Jess Ennis who would almost certainly be strong enough then she should be able to.
I put a point about sports in one of my earlier posts, we're separated in sports because men have more muscle mass because they have more testosterone so the best woman would probably only be in the middle of the pack with the men (e.g. you can't compare Serena Williams to Novak Djokovic, therefore they don't play each other).

Edit: As for your edit about pay, I'll take tennis as an example (I did cover this earlier but I'll do it again). When both playing best of 3 sets they should be paid the same for winning and losing. If men are playing best of 5 then they should be paid more than women playing best of three (or they should just have women play best of five, they can all do it!)


Yeah, but women have reduced physical requirements for all of them fields so why should they be paid the same?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Popppppy
I find it disturbing that you think abortions are "normal".


I'm not saying its normal to have a baby then think, "Should I have an abortion?" I'm saying that the procedure isn't unusual to occur, and doctors know exactly how to do it and the procedures required for it.
Original post by Popppppy
I'll address your NB first,
no I don't mean standard in the sense of a moral standard,
but if the majority of women don't have abortions, then this is the standard, and thus this is what's normal.

I think it's worse that you're saying they're normal.
For any woman, choosing to have an abortion is a decision not to be taken lightly and the woman will need support, be it from family, friends, her partner or even just the doctor or nurse.

An abortion, whether or not you agree that it's right or wrong, is a big deal.


The only things I can think of that would be normal medical procedures under this definition are blood tests and vaccinations for the general population (maybe x-rays, would have to check some stats) and smear tests for women specifically.
So the normality of a procedure is useless in this debate.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending