This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#167040 by fisherman bob
Wed Mar 07, 2012 5:57 am
To argue that there is any "care" in "contraception care" is mind-numbing to me IF the health of the woman and/or fetus is NOT in danger. I heard a staggering statistic, don't know if it's true, that 60% of the pregnancies of African American women in New York City ended in abortions a few years back. I'm assuming that the majority of the abortions were paid for by taxpayers. Who was "cared" for? I can't fathom somebody being so brain-dead that they honestly believe there's any "care" in ending the pregnancy of somebody who most likely has the attitude that any dick will do. Frankly I'm astonished at some of the worthless sh*t we are paying for. You're going to get those people who say that the "psychological" health of a woman with an unwanted pregnancy may affect her physical health, thus she is receiving "contraceptive care." I say it's irrelevant. You screw around YOU pay for your own "contraceptive care." Case closed. AND QUIT CALLING IT CARE WHEN THERE IS NO CARE DAMMiT.

#167042 by PaperDog
Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:10 am
There is a silver lining in this argument for both sides of the issue...


Side A: Rampant abortion could be construed as genetic self destruction... Face it, some people should not breed at all ..Regardless of "rights" or "No rights",. Any woman who opts to end her pregnancy , simply because the pregnancy "inconvenienced" her, is probably genetically inferior .. One could say: "let her abort... Let her line go extinct..."

Side B: Rampant abortion could be construed as an example of social Self Destruction. ... One might argue that our government and current state of affairs are so egregious, that a smart mother knows better than to bring a child into such evil... Of course it leads to the possibility of extinction, but abortion may very well be the answer to circumventing future evil. We cant have evil governments if there are no people left...

#167045 by fisherman bob
Wed Mar 07, 2012 11:12 am
PaperDog wrote:There is a silver lining in this argument for both sides of the issue...


Side A: Rampant abortion could be construed as genetic self destruction... Face it, some people should not breed at all ..Regardless of "rights" or "No rights",. Any woman who opts to end her pregnancy , simply because the pregnancy "inconvenienced" her, is probably genetically inferior .. One could say: "let her abort... Let her line go extinct..."

Side B: Rampant abortion could be construed as an example of social Self Destruction. ... One might argue that our government and current state of affairs are so egregious, that a smart mother knows better than to bring a child into such evil... Of course it leads to the possibility of extinction, but abortion may very well be the answer to circumventing future evil. We cant have evil governments if there are no people left...
Joseph Stalin once said to a journalist "No people no problem". He was refering to the Industrialization and Collectivization in the Soviet Union when consevatively 10 million Russians were killed. There's been well over 50 million abortions in the USA since Roe v. Wade, no people no problem....

#167051 by jimmydanger
Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:50 pm
I'm confused Bob. Why do you keep talking about abortion? The issue is contraception. They really are two different issues.

#167069 by t-Roy and The Smoking Section
Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:11 pm
jimmydanger wrote:I'm confused Bob. Why do you keep talking about abortion? The issue is contraception. They really are two different issues.



Because in 99% of cases, abortion is used as a method of contraception. This is the goalpost that they will keep moving. If they can get contraception paid for by religious institutions, then they will change the meaning of abortion to be considered "contraception" or some way to make it fit under that heading.

Rape and incest account for less than 1% abortions, but it's the extreme example that is used to justify mass murder. And that doesn't account for the lifelong scars the woman has after being lied to by abortionists and their ignorant supporters.

Her chances of getting cervical and other kinds of cancers have now been multiplied.


.
Last edited by t-Roy and The Smoking Section on Wed Mar 07, 2012 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

#167090 by PaperDog
Wed Mar 07, 2012 5:33 pm
jimmydanger wrote:I'm confused Bob. Why do you keep talking about abortion? The issue is contraception. They really are two different issues.


Jimmy, think of it like a loop construct in programming,,, We have Sentries in the code that Pre-Test at the beginning of the loop (Contraception before block) and Post-test (Contraception after the block) . Ok its a whacky analogy but it works..Cause after its all said and done.., that block of logic ends with the same results... As such, I believe that the two are very closely related and qualify under the same issue.

#167107 by jimmydanger
Wed Mar 07, 2012 8:47 pm
Wacky is right. They are two separate issues whether or not you can admit it. Millions of women use contraception every day; a tiny fraction have abortions. Regardless, it's a woman's body and it's her choice so butt out!

#167113 by t-Roy and The Smoking Section
Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:49 pm
jimmydanger wrote:Millions of women use contraception every day; a tiny fraction have abortions.



Yes, but of those who have abortions, upwards of 99% of them use abortion as a "contraceptive" that works later. The "day after pill" is another example of a contraceptive that is dangerous to the mother and deadly to the child.



Regardless, it's a woman's body and it's her choice so butt out!



How can it be her body when it has a different blood type, a separate heart beat, and a completely different set of DNA? No, it's inside her body but it isn't her body.

That child has 2 parents. BOTH parents should have rights and be considered. Her choice is whether to have sex with someone whom she doesn't want a child with.

#167145 by MikeTalbot
Thu Mar 08, 2012 2:27 am
"The reason the world is f*cked up is missing fathers"

Quite right JimmieD...

Another contraception issue has come to my attention recently, and I'm not likeing it one bit. I'd not thought abouit this before but we pushed so many female hormones into the environment that young girls are reaching puberty as much as 4 years earlier than when I was coming up.

Talbot

#167153 by jimmydanger
Thu Mar 08, 2012 2:56 am
That explains my boobs Mike.

#167171 by gtZip
Thu Mar 08, 2012 4:09 am
All that shite is irrelevant.

The young that are raising the young 'right now', are woefully self centered, ignorant, poorly educated, and co dependent.

We have roughly 20 years people - then this country is OVER.
The U.S.A. will be a third-world mess.

(If you believe some dooms-dayers, we have less than a year left, so don't worry about it)

#167182 by PaperDog
Thu Mar 08, 2012 5:30 am
jimmydanger wrote:Wacky is right. They are two separate issues whether or not you can admit it. Millions of women use contraception every day; a tiny fraction have abortions. Regardless, it's a woman's body and it's her choice so butt out!



I will butt out....until she demands my hard earned cash to perform something I disagree with, then guess what, I'm in her face, and any other MF that robs me...

You want to talk about 'choice'?... Its apparently not MY FN' choice when these assholes rob me of my hard earned pay just so they can jerk each other off... and then dispense with their un-borns like a bunch of irresponsible barbarians...

Let me be clear, I'm not arguing against her 'choice' and her rights... I'm arguing 'for' MY RIGHTS and MY CHOICE...

I'm really sorry you don't see the connection in the Logic model I presented ... It is relevant whether you have the courage to face it or not.

Next thing you know, these freaks will insist on government sponsored monitoring (to justify the tax burden that evolves with the health care providers)

#167467 by fisherman bob
Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:11 am
jimmydanger wrote:I'm confused Bob. Why do you keep talking about abortion? The issue is contraception. They really are two different issues.
. Contraception and abortion ARE really one issue. Both are about preventing or flushing the unborn out to sea. I don't want ONE PENNY of my money paying for somebody's careless sexual behavior. I agree it IS a woman's choice and should be a woman's choice and I will also happily agree that should a woman choose either contraception or abortion SHE pay for it, ALL of it. I can't say enough (apparently) that "contraception care" isn't care at all and I don't care to pay for it at all....

#167534 by Starfish Scott
Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:34 pm
Yeah I don't know about all this but I do know that if they are going to have abortions, let them pay for it.

Whoever is making the children, should have to pay for the abortions.

I mean wasn't it like that in the past?

Make them available but don't federally fund them..

WTF, is liposuction going to be sponsored by the feds next or what?

#167580 by jimmydanger
Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:02 am
Scott you got sucked into the spinning vortex of ignorance and false reasoning. They are different issues, and substituting a more emotionally charged issue like abortion for one that is relatively benign (contraception) is an old trick. There is a huge difference between preventing pregnancy and ending pregnancy. And let's face it, it's a hell of a lot cheaper to prevent pregnancy than to add another unwanted person to the public assistance dole.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests