ilovefuzz.com

Bassus Sanguinis wrote:As a method of birth control, abortion isn't a good choice compared to the pre-conception birth control like, say, condoms. Condoms, pills, and pessary are easier on the womans body and hormonal balance, too, than abortion after the fourth month.

Right, take the fucking pill, use a condom! I'm definitely pro choice and abortion needs to be legal in order to remain "safe" because they'll be performed regardless. Might as well be in a professional medical facility as opposed to a motel room.

Still, I think it's a pretty selfish move (baring a rape/assault), but if you were a dumbass who took zero precautions which resulted in a pregnancy, seems pretty shitty to just "flush" that poor kid...

Also think there needs to be a "Legal Limit" on abortions, as I've seen a couple girls who get 'em like they're getting their hair done, just another appointment in their day.

dubkitty wrote:sorry: there's contraception now in addition to free will. if a woman becomes pregnant in the 21st century it's nobody's fault but hers and should be nobody else's responsibility, especially in cases where the male has no "choice" .

as far as abortion: nobody but sophists and ideologues denies that abortion takes a human life. if people want that on their karma, mazel tov, but i think it should be legally structured in a way that reflects the reality of the situation: if you want an abortion, you should have to go to court and plead no contest to voluntary manslaughter and have it show on your permanent record as the taking of a life. if you're a male and agreed to it, ditto. and i say this as one who was complicit in killing my child in 1974.

you want "rights"...fine. accept the moral responsibilities that come with them; do so in a way that indicates daily and to the society as a whole that you have done so.

Not sure what you mean by the Man having no "choice" you mean in the abortion or in the actual act?

I wonder what Spunkie and Sammie's baby is gonna look like.

whether to keep the child or not. it doesn't seem like the height of fairness for someone to suck 20 years of child support out of a guy for a child he didn't want, and not infrequently was tricked into fathering. i knew a guy like this...got married, wife got pregnant, immediately disposed of him proclaiming that her whole intent had been in fact to get a baby and a sucker with a good job she could milk.

dubkitty wrote:whether to keep the child or not. it doesn't seem like the height of fairness for someone to suck 20 years of child support out of a guy for a child he didn't want, and not infrequently was tricked into fathering. i knew a guy like this...got married, wife got pregnant, immediately disposed of him proclaiming that her whole intent had been in fact to get a baby and a sucker with a good job she could milk.

OK that makes more sense, is Child support up to 20 years?
that sucks

It is startling how many choices we DON'T actually have.

Caesar wrote:I wonder what Spunkie and Sammie's baby is gonna look like.

me too, I heard they have booked him three sold out nights already opening for Nirvana, the Doors, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin.

Bassus Sanguinis wrote:

Caesar wrote:I wonder what Spunkie and Sammie's baby is gonna look like.

me too, I heard they have booked him three sold out nights already opening for Nirvana, the Doors, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin.

dubkitty wrote:sorry: there's contraception now in addition to free will. if a woman becomes pregnant in the 21st century it's nobody's fault but hers and should be nobody else's responsibility, especially in cases where the male has no "choice" .

as far as abortion: nobody but sophists and ideologues denies that abortion takes a human life. if people want that on their karma, mazel tov, but i think it should be legally structured in a way that reflects the reality of the situation: if you want an abortion, you should have to go to court and plead no contest to voluntary manslaughter and have it show on your permanent record as the taking of a life. if you're a male and agreed to it, ditto. and i say this as one who was complicit in killing my child in 1974.

you want "rights"...fine. accept the moral responsibilities that come with them; do so in a way that indicates daily and to the society as a whole that you have done so.

I agree. And I think a woman that falls and subsequently has a miscarriage should have to plea guilty for involuntary manslaughter.

^^ If she wasn't paying attention to where she was going and fell, it would be negligent homicide.

I'm not going to get into the moral arguments for or against, of abortion itself. However I will say this.

If abortion is to be accepted, it should to be the equal choice of both mother and father - except if the pregnancy is the result of rape, obviously. Having a say in what happens cannot be taken away from either person. If there cannot be agreement, then the person that wishes to keep the child should be able to. The only argument I can see against this is if the man wants the child and the woman doesn't is it fair that she still has to carry it for 9 months? The answer is yes, because it is part of taking responsibility for choices you made. Fairness isn't always agreeable to everyone. In fact fairness often leaves the majority of people with what seems like the raw deal. Also, how does 9 months weigh against the other person taking care of the child for the better part of the next 2 decades - give or take? They are different consequences to be sure, but that doesn't make one less or more - or at least not in a way one can definitively say I should think. I believe this to be the best approximation of fairness.

SPACERITUAL wrote:I disagree for completely different reasons that anyone ive ever spoken to considers. I really believe that if an accident happens and the women still chooses to go through with the birth, the male should be consulted, and should he object, there should be some kind of legal hand washing allowed where he eschews any legal claim or responsibility to the child. If its YOUR baby and YOUR body, pay for it YOURSELF.

This also makes logical sense.

I want to once again mention I'm not taking a for or against stance here. I don't want to get drawn into this. Regardless of what I think, I don't think an internet debate on this will sway anyone one way or the other, and the debate will eventually degenerate into a bunch of children throwing mud at eachother. Or in this case, fuzz pedals.

i want to see fuzz pedals throwing mud at each other. NAOW.

culturejam wrote:^^ If she wasn't paying attention to where she was going and fell, it would be negligent homicide.

....

Well fuck.

no; it'd only be involuntary manslaughter if there was gross negligence.

AH HAH! My point still stands.


BTW, I'm kinda bummed nobody got the reference in the title.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJcebIEOkhY[/youtube]

McSpunckle wrote:BTW, I'm kinda bummed nobody got the reference in the title.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJcebIEOkhY[/youtube]

That is a shame, went right over my head...and I love Bill Hicks. I think the combo of ILF and an abortion thread side tracked my brain.