PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Abortion Debates
     Statistics...
       Some women that get pregnant were using birth control..

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Das_denkmal

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I know I'm new here, but it seems as though on just about every thread I've read, everyone seems to think that all women that get pregnant and want to abort weren't using protection... at least, someone says something like "if they didn't want to get pregnant, they should have used protection!" and, from what I've read, no one negates it.

There are plenty of pregnancies that occur while the woman is using birth control properly. No form of birth control is 100% effective besides abstinence. In fact, condoms alone are only about 85-98% effective, depending on several factors. Hormonal birth control, when taken perfectly is 99% effective.

In July of 2007, the United States population was estimated at 301,139,947 (I'm going to use the United States population for my figuring because that's where I live and I'm a little more aware of the cultural beliefs on birth control). Lets say a third of those people are sexually-active fertile heterosexuals, that's 100,379,982 people. Half of those people are heterosexual females, that's 50,189,991 women. Now, lets say that a third of those women are using hormonal birth control, that's 16,729,997 women. Statistically, 1% of those women get pregnant each year from failed hormonal birth control, while taking it "perfectly"; that's 167,300 women. That's a rough estimate but it's still a lot of women that potentially get pregnant while using hormonal birth control.
 


Posts: 5 | Posted: 2:21 PM on April 23, 2008 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I know, don't have sex.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 01:52 AM on April 27, 2008 | IP
akrolsmir

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

One in three people are sexually active heterosexuals...? I find that somewhat hard to believe. There are children and elders who probably don't do it at all, and then not all single/coupled adults have sex on a constant basis.

Also, even if someone wants to get an abortion even though they were using protection, what does it change? The fact that they were having sex at all puts them liable for the child, since that's a known by-product of sex. So even if the women were responsibly having sex, the fact that they were having sex at all and not ready to deal with the resulting child proves them irresponsible.
 


Posts: 13 | Posted: 03:04 AM on March 12, 2009 | IP
punksoab

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dude I've seen three posts from you and I already don't like you at all. Not in the least bit. A "by-product" of driving a car is crashing into something. Doesn't mean it'll happen and it doesn't mean it'll be the person's fault when it happens. If a person is willing to have sex that is THEIR CHOICE and if they get pregnant that is HER CHOICE

It's not the guy's choice, it isn't the politician's choice, it isn't the church's choice, it damn well isn't YOUR choice. IT IS HER CHOICE


-------
A strong body with a weak mind is like a fort with no soldiers to protect it. A weak body with a strong mind is like a battalion out in the open. To solve all situations, one must moderate themselves.

Personal quote
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 11:38 PM on March 12, 2009 | IP
akrolsmir

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's all right. I'm not here to get people to like me. I don't care how much you love or hate me. I want you to prove me wrong so that I'll be better able to sharpen my own view of this controversial topic.

So driving a car can cause you to crash into something.  I agree, it "doesn't mean it'll happen". But what we're arguing about is that it could happen even if protection is used. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make a difference whether or not the girl used control, that shouldn't be taken into account into letting her kill her baby and she still should not be able to abort.

I know that "doesn't mean it'll be the person's fault", but again the fault can't be placed on the baby for forming ever, while occasionally the mother can be blamed.

It's her choice to get pregnant? Doesn't that contradict what you just said about it not being her fault? I don't understand what all this "her choice" is about. Could you clarify as to how that impacts against my my argument, which is saying that whether or not the girl used control is irrelevant in whether or not she should be granted an abortion?
 


Posts: 13 | Posted: 03:48 AM on March 13, 2009 | IP
punksoab

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Okay I'll break it down. It's her choice to have sex or not. It's her choice to live her life. It's her choice to have an abortion if she wants to. Some people choose to get pregnant, my parents have done it and it took them a hell of a while because apparently my dad was shooting off blanks for a while there until little'ol me popped in and back out. Think of it this way.

You buy a gun and buy blank bullets. But unfortunately one of the guys at the factory switched up the bullets and during a robbery you accidentally fire off the one specific shot that contained the lead. Should you be tried with first degree murder just because of another person's fault even though you accepted the gun?

Look at it this way. The factory worker is the guy, the gun is sex and the loaded round is the baby. You got the "gun" from the "worker" who accidentally put a "loaded round" into your "barrel" Who's at fault and who isn't?


-------
A strong body with a weak mind is like a fort with no soldiers to protect it. A weak body with a strong mind is like a battalion out in the open. To solve all situations, one must moderate themselves.

Personal quote
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 3:05 PM on March 14, 2009 | IP
akrolsmir

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, if you knew that 1% of all blanks are replaced by bullets, and then went off anyways to fire 100 blanks at a person, it'd be your fault  that the person got shot.

In the same way, the women who uses control other than abstinence, knowing that it is faulty, and has a child anyway is responsible for the birth of that child.

And if you want to talk about fault,  the people least at fault include the baby. Why does it have to be the one to suffer the death penalty, then?

Essentially, EVEN IF the mother is completely blameless, why does that allow her to kill the fetus? If a new person suddenly, out of neither his or your choice, appeared into your house and simply needed a home and food for 8 months or so, would you be justified in killing him? You might resent him, you might want to kick him out as soon as 8 months are up, but are you allowed to kill him?
 


Posts: 13 | Posted: 11:07 PM on March 16, 2009 | IP
punksoab

|       |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well seeing as how we're talking about kicking people out, I guess that's the same thing as an abortion. Using your terminology, an abortion is no more than an eviction. That's pretty much what an abortion is because there is still no proof that a child is living or that it suffers pain or that it has any sense of an emotional state. So it's in essence an eviction notice.

Also, if 1% of bullets are blanks then I should get in trouble only if I shot exactly 100 bullets and the last one I fire actually kills someone. I mean hey, 1% doesn't exactly mean that it's that last one. So it's at random. It's like playing Russian Roulette you don't know which one's gonna hit. And the baby isn't suffering the death penalty, it's just getting evacuated. That's why it's called an abortion and not a murder. Abortion means to abort something that is in the process of development. You can easily abort a project. You can even abort a mission. It doesn't mean you're killing it it means your not completing the process. I could abort my college education but I don't want to because it's beneficial to me. If a child is not beneficial you can abort it. Not murder it, but abort it. Murdering the child would be killing it when the 8-9 month lease has ended and it left the premises.  


-------
A strong body with a weak mind is like a fort with no soldiers to protect it. A weak body with a strong mind is like a battalion out in the open. To solve all situations, one must moderate themselves.

Personal quote
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 2:05 PM on March 17, 2009 | IP
akrolsmir

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Abortion is no more than an eviction"? While that may seem so, this particular eviction kills the child first, differentiating it from an unhappy landlord legally evicting a tenant. That's also like saying getting someone to shut up by shooting them is no more than pulling a trigger. While true in a vacuum, as soon as you look at the immediate consequences you can see that the situation is much more complicated. Similarly, while it looks like merely an eviction, the fact is that to have the eviction, you kill the fetus first.

About Russian Roulette: true, you don't know which one will hit. However, you know that some of the time it will hit. If you go ahead and have sex with protection anyways, you were in the know and thus partially at fault for the baby that occurs.

You're saying that as soon as the baby exits the womb, it is considered human and thus murder if killed. My question to you now is, why is the same baby inside the womb 5 months earlier any less real or human than the baby that has been born?
 


Posts: 13 | Posted: 12:35 AM on March 20, 2009 | IP
frank

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

regardless of the blah balh:
ABORTION MUST BE FREE AND GOVERNMENT FUNDED!!!

any two-bit politician hypocrat that is against abortion shoul dbe tossed out of office immediately!
we have billions to waste on idiotic wars whos only cause is to drive up the oil price but have NO money to fund abortions?
GET REAL!!!

as for the religiouse hypocrates that are against it:
wait until your grand daughter is pregnant after a party!
 


Posts: 12 | Posted: 5:46 PM on July 16, 2010 | IP
GabrielleElaineBiggs

|      |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I think if the fetus can't feel it or the Mother is in danger, it's fine.
 


Posts: 20 | Posted: 11:21 PM on January 17, 2013 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.