Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Mark Donnelly


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
132 replies to this topic

#121 morrissex95

morrissex95

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 21-March 12

Posted 05 June 2012 - 12:18 PM

Donnelly used a pregnancy hormone to lose a bunch of weight but yet he's against abortion. Where does he think these hormones come from, exactly?
Posted Image

#122 Matthew Lombardi 18

Matthew Lombardi 18

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,185 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 06

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:18 PM

What sort of situation would a women would be under to justify killing somebody else for her own benefit? If she can't raise the child, then she should put it up for adoption. If she is afraid that having a baby will kill her - killing the baby is certain, her own death is not.

Another issue is what makes the distinction between a fetus and a human? A day before birth and a day after birth the baby is the same - its only the perception of it that has changed [in the eyes of the law]. If the law changed, defining a baby as human after its 1st birthday, would you still agree?


I know this is a common example but - rape/incest? I believe the woman should have the option to keep or do-away fetuses as a result of rape/incest. But of course, some people will think rape is just the same as consensual sex for the woman and therefore needs to go through with it when pregnant. But I don't want to use 'rape' as the main argument against abortion.

A fetus, especially an early one, does not necessarily go into a baby. Many go into miscarriage. Some statistics need to be made regarding the success rate of baby fetuses. I imagine it is difficult and invasive. I just know that assuming a fetus will always result in a baby is wrong. A fetus is clearly not the same as a baby.

Furthermore, outlawing abortion will only result in women finding ways which COULD harm oneself (because they have no other choice). It doesn't mean that abortion will be completely wiped off the map. It is much more practical to control abortion rather than simply outlawing it.

What is the difference between contraception and abortion? It's merely before and after too, but I don't see as much outrage with it (unless we're talking about Catholics). We do know that a high amount of sperm do not survive the journey to the fallopian tubes.

Altering one's organs (i.e. burning fallopian tubes) prevents pregnancy even better than using a condom, but this is considered major surgery which involves risks and forcing people to undergo unnecessary surgery in order to have sex is wrong. If governments did this to control population, would this be acceptable to you? I think there are some similar parallels with this and trying to outlaw abortion.

I believe education is very important and should be readily available. I don't suggest fast ways to abort a baby be freely available over the counter. I think women should be given INFORMED decisions and I do not believe outside pressure is the right way of doing things.

Regarding a young woman who is clearly not ready to have a baby (financially and otherwise), sure she can give up the baby for adoption, but what about the fate of that baby? One cannot assume that baby will necessarily always be in good hands. Adoption centers are not always able to handle the large amount of unclaimed kids. If there is insufficient funding for education, what makes you think there is enough funding for these 'unwanted' kids?

Ultimately the very people you are trying to protect can get hurt in the process.

Perhaps there should be a restriction on abortion for late-stage fetuses. Early stage fetuses are not technically living.

Edited by Matthew Lombardi 18, 05 June 2012 - 05:21 PM.

Eklund said:

So we are officially in a bit of a silly season, and in general I stay away from the completely crazy rumors that persist on the internet, or in the case of the Leafs having interest in Nabokov or Turco I will occasionally debunk them...however, I have been getting inundated with emails, PMs, and questions on twitter regarding a few rumors that are out there...so here goes.. I will address the rumors and follow with what I have or haven't heard...If you all like this format, maybe Wacky Wednesdays could be a regular feature. I wouldn't do it more than once a week, because I am too busy talking to actual sources and attempting to provide you all with as much unique information as possible.

Too busy talking to actual sources? lolwut

Posted Image

Signature designed by Morrison_rocks7 - thanks!

#123 Down by the River

Down by the River

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,343 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:29 PM

I don't agree with Mark Donnelly's views. That is fine. I still want him to sing our anthem.

What I really don't agree with is the method in which the organization he supports is delivering their message.

CDC is lucky to have such brilliant scouts:

I think Virtanen was a terrible pick given that he's out for 6 months which will hinder his development. You don't pick someone at #6 under that circumstance, along with the fact that he was given a 3/5 IQ (aka he's dumb). 

God dammit Benning. WHY VIRTANEN? Terrible move.

Down by the River - Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young.


#124 Jaimito

Jaimito

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,817 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 03

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:33 PM

he's got like 8 kids. go figure.
Posted Image

#125 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:46 PM

he's got like 8 kids. go figure.


9, actually. See post #16 of this thread.

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#126 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 06 June 2012 - 09:32 AM

I know this is a common example but - rape/incest? I believe the woman should have the option to keep or do-away fetuses as a result of rape/incest. But of course, some people will think rape is just the same as consensual sex for the woman and therefore needs to go through with it when pregnant. But I don't want to use 'rape' as the main argument against abortion.

1) A fetus, especially an early one, does not necessarily go into a baby. Many go into miscarriage. 2) Some statistics need to be made regarding the success rate of baby fetuses. I imagine it is difficult and invasive. I just know that assuming a fetus will always result in a baby is wrong. A fetus is clearly not the same as a baby.

3) Furthermore, outlawing abortion will only result in women finding ways which COULD harm oneself (because they have no other choice). It doesn't mean that abortion will be completely wiped off the map. It is much more practical to control abortion rather than simply outlawing it.

4) What is the difference between contraception and abortion? It's merely before and after too, but I don't see as much outrage with it (unless we're talking about Catholics). We do know that a high amount of sperm do not survive the journey to the fallopian tubes.

Altering one's organs (i.e. burning fallopian tubes) prevents pregnancy even better than using a condom, but this is considered major surgery which involves risks and forcing people to undergo unnecessary surgery in order to have sex is wrong. If governments did this to control population, would this be acceptable to you? I think there are some similar parallels with this and trying to outlaw abortion.

I believe education is very important and should be readily available. I don't suggest fast ways to abort a baby be freely available over the counter. I think women should be given INFORMED decisions and 5) I do not believe outside pressure is the right way of doing things.

6) Regarding a young woman who is clearly not ready to have a baby (financially and otherwise), sure she can give up the baby for adoption, but what about the fate of that baby? One cannot assume that baby will necessarily always be in good hands. Adoption centers are not always able to handle the large amount of unclaimed kids. If there is insufficient funding for education, what makes you think there is enough funding for these 'unwanted' kids?

Ultimately the very people you are trying to protect can get hurt in the process.

Perhaps there should be a restriction on abortion for late-stage fetuses. Early stage fetuses are not technically living.


1) Your point about fetuses not turning into babies is flawed, the fact that it did not survive long enough to be born is not the same as "it sometimes turns into something else". A human fetus never turns into a dog, chicken or broccoli, it always turns into a human. I am not accusing you of thinking that it turns into something else, but your wording nearly implies it.

2) The statistic would have no value. It would be the same as compiling a statistic about how many fetuses live to be a hundred years old, only considering that amount as worthwhile, and disposing of the rest. We are also trying to set the value of when life(humanity, personage) starts, and the statistic of how many fetuses do not survive is arbitrary. I have no control over how many people die in a a day from accidents, I do however have control over how many people I kill in a day. The two are not related.

3) The fact that someone will do something because they are unable to do something else is a horrible way to govern problems. If I say "Doctor, if you do not give me a prescription for oxycontin, I will go buy morphine or heroin on the street", should the doctor write the scrip? If something is wrong, legalizing it does not make it right, just legal. And, just because it is legal does not necessarily make it right.

4) Oversimplified. What is the difference between abortion and murder? I equate conception with life. Contraception simply means to prevent conception, not to halt something that has been already started. Coitus does not necessarily equal conception, or there would be babies EVERYWHERE. In an earlier post I proposed that there was no measurable difference between a baby one day before birth and one day after. Consider this, you mentioned "early vs late" term abortions. What if you have the timing wrong? You have no data to measure the "humanity" vs "non-humanity" of a fetus. If you get it wrong, you are proposing murder.

5) Outside pressure is how we make people obey the law. It is the only way possible.

6) This is the part that sparked my attention. I was adopted. No funding. My adoptive parents got no funding from the government. I have no idea what you are referring to. Foster parents receive funding, but adopt a child, and you are and should be on your own. My parents could not have children naturally, so they adopted.

Have you looked at the adoption wait times?
http://www.canadaado...ic_public.shtml
http://www.childrens.../pages/faq.html
Just a simple google search. Used to be placement in 90 days or so. Now, 2 years or so. Why? Babies are not available. Why? Abortion rates are too high. Solution? Go overseas.

Cut back on abortion rates, adoption wait times go down, we stop going overseas and care for our own.

Edited by WL Canuck Fan, 06 June 2012 - 09:35 AM.

Sig too big.

#127 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 06 June 2012 - 10:21 AM

.
6) This is the part that sparked my attention. I was adopted. No funding. My adoptive parents got no funding from the government. I have no idea what you are referring to. Foster parents receive funding, but adopt a child, and you are and should be on your own. My parents could not have children naturally, so they adopted.

Have you looked at the adoption wait times?
http://www.canadaado...ic_public.shtml
http://www.childrens.../pages/faq.html
Just a simple google search. Used to be placement in 90 days or so. Now, 2 years or so. Why? Babies are not available. Why? Abortion rates are too high. Solution? Go overseas.

Cut back on abortion rates, adoption wait times go down, we stop going overseas and care for our own.


First......I am as vehemently pro-choice as it is possible to get.

Second - My brother is adopted, 3/4 of my cousins in one family alone are adopted and I've been with them right through their searches for their birth parents and eventual reunions so I do know something about adoption.

You have written a a fairly clear and concise response to ML18 but when it comes to flawed logic, you've managed to encompass it fully with the statement/opinion I've quoted above. You really think we should outlaw abortion so that more babies are available for adoption by those wishing to adopt because they cannot have children of their own? Or that abortion should be illegal so that adoption wait times will be shorter? This is all about supple and demand? :shock:

Crazy me, but I think that it's much better that babies and children are not floating around in the foster care system at all. That each child carried to term is wanted, eagerly awaited and will grow up in a loving home where they are a blessing and a joy to their parents. Indeed, perhaps we should be slowing down going overseas for babies and look after the older children still waiting for a family.

Simplistic? Perhaps so...and if prospective adoptive parents today really wanted to do the very best for a child in foster care or one currently up for adoption, perhaps they should be looking at the older children who are languishing in foster care homes without a family of their own to love and care for them. Our family waited 5 years for my brother and that was decades ago......... we are immensely grateful to his birth mother who decided to have him according to her personal beliefs........and when the man she was involved with, not my brother's birth father, decided he couldn't accept another man's child, she gave my brother to a family where she KNEW he'd be loved and cherished.

I've seen both sides of this coin......a pregnant teenager who's birth control failed, & elected to have an abortion then went on to graduate, have a career, marry and have two more children in a happy, secure environment; a homeless, schizophrenic and drug addicted 15 year old who is hospitalized on a regular basis and will never live on her own who used illegal drugs and prescription meds in early pregnancy; a pregnant teenager who gave up her baby and later went on to marry the birth dad and have 4 more children together; a drug addicted prostitute, pregnant by a john who then waited too long for an abortion while working her trade and passed down life long problems to her child who was born addicted to heroin....... to a birth mother who loved her child, couldn't look after him or give him the kind of home and life he deserved so ensured that her child would have a better life. A girl who was pregnant at 13 by a family member and had to have an abortion, a viciously and violently raped and brutalized 24 year old so traumatized by the attack that she couldn't even function in the basic daily needs of her life......you wouldn't really expect this 13 year old or rape victim to carry their attacker's child to term just so more babies would be available for adoption and wait times would be shorter, would you?

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 06 June 2012 - 10:49 AM.

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#128 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:53 AM

First......I am as vehemently pro-choice as it is possible to get.

Second - My brother is adopted, 3/4 of my cousins in one family alone are adopted and I've been with them right through their searches for their birth parents and eventual reunions so I do know something about adoption.

You have written a a fairly clear and concise response to ML18 but when it comes to flawed logic, you've managed to encompass it fully with the statement/opinion I've quoted above. You really think we should outlaw abortion so that more babies are available for adoption by those wishing to adopt because they cannot have children of their own? Or that abortion should be illegal so that adoption wait times will be shorter? This is all about supple and demand? :shock:

Crazy me, but I think that it's much better that babies and children are not floating around in the foster care system at all. That each child carried to term is wanted, eagerly awaited and will grow up in a loving home where they are a blessing and a joy to their parents. Indeed, perhaps we should be slowing down going overseas for babies and look after the older children still waiting for a family.

Simplistic? Perhaps so...and if prospective adoptive parents today really wanted to do the very best for a child in foster care or one currently up for adoption, perhaps they should be looking at the older children who are languishing in foster care homes without a family of their own to love and care for them. Our family waited 5 years for my brother and that was decades ago......... we are immensely grateful to his birth mother who decided to have him according to her personal beliefs........and when the man she was involved with, not my brother's birth father, decided he couldn't accept another man's child, she gave my brother to a family where she KNEW he'd be loved and cherished.

I've seen both sides of this coin......a pregnant teenager who's birth control failed, & elected to have an abortion then went on to graduate, have a career, marry and have two more children in a happy, secure environment; a homeless, schizophrenic and drug addicted 15 year old who is hospitalized on a regular basis and will never live on her own who used illegal drugs and prescription meds in early pregnancy; a pregnant teenager who gave up her baby and later went on to marry the birth dad and have 4 more children together; a drug addicted prostitute, pregnant by a john who then waited too long for an abortion while working her trade and passed down life long problems to her child who was born addicted to heroin....... to a birth mother who loved her child, couldn't look after him or give him the kind of home and life he deserved so ensured that her child would have a better life. A girl who was pregnant at 13 by a family member and had to have an abortion, a viciously and violently raped and brutalized 24 year old so traumatized by the attack that she couldn't even function in the basic daily needs of her life......you wouldn't really expect this 13 year old or rape victim to carry their attacker's child to term just so more babies would be available for adoption and wait times would be shorter, would you?


So, I acquiesce, my answer was simplistic. No, the goal is not to simply inflate adoption availability. It does however provide a reasonable alternative to abortion. Often the discussion turns her to statements like "I think women should be given INFORMED decisions " or "Abortion should be an option left for women when they feel they have explored all other options and cannot adequate provide for the future child"

sure she can give up the baby for adoption, but what about the fate of that baby? Adoption centers are not always able to handle the large amount of unclaimed kids. If there is insufficient funding for education, what makes you think there is enough funding for these 'unwanted' kids?


It was in response to the idea that there exists a funding problem or a lack of homes for these children. The wait time is an indicator that there are families willing and looking for children who have to often go overseas to fulfill their desire of having a child.

True, we cannot guarantee that a child that is adopted will be placed in a perfect environment, but the same is true of any other birth. And to say "I have explored all other options" while dismissing adoption is glossing over the truth. Adoption is a great alternative. I repeat, no guarantee, BUT, it is interesting that no stat to my knowledge has ever been compiled to show that a higher percentage of adopted children vs natural children have problems later in life. No stat to say a higher incidence of abuse, or any other social malady.
Now any one of us may know of an incident, or perhaps been personally affected by an adopted situation that has turned bad, but that in itself does not make it a stat. Truth be known, off the top of my head, the majority of situation in my personal experience where problems exist in the home or in the child, adoption is not part of the situation in either the parent, the grandparent or the child. Not a stat, just my personal observation.

Crazy me, but I think that it's much better that babies and children are not floating around in the foster care system at all.



But, BB, if we assign life and humanity to the unborn the same way we do to the born, the other Malthusian solution is to go through the system and "eliminate" the unwanted, unloved, undesired by their birth parents. Radical? Of course, and I speak facetiously, I would not attribute such an action to anyone, BUT relevant IF we assign person-hood and humanity to the unborn. To one who does so, the action seems the same.

You gave mostly extreme examples of why a person should have an abortion, which in my mind is a COMPLETELY different argument from "I got drunk on Saturday night and forgot to take my birth control" OR (from a guy) "I forgot to buy condoms, so I told her it would be ok, I would pull out".

Truth is, for the extreme examples you gave, we need a system to deal with those things. We have systems, but nothing that currently deals with those types of problems effectively. Raped by a family member and pregnant, who do you call? Social Services? Ministry of Family and Children? Effectively a joke.

However, for the "day to day" abortions, I clearly propose that it is immoral, unethical and should be illegal.

Now for these others, a blanket answer is nearly impossible. Taking the "pregnant by a family member situation", short answer, yes, she should carry it to term. The only way she will avoid the guilt of murdering her own unborn child IS to carry it to term. Keep it? No, certainly not advisable. But why make matters worse? Was being raped or taken advantage of traumatic? Yes, extremely, horrifically. But so is murder. Why ADD to the trauma she is already suffering from?

Just my opinion.

Edited by WL Canuck Fan, 06 June 2012 - 11:54 AM.

Sig too big.

#129 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:29 PM

Now for these others, a blanket answer is nearly impossible. Taking the "pregnant by a family member situation", short answer, yes, she should carry it to term. The only way she will avoid the guilt of murdering her own unborn child IS to carry it to term. Keep it? No, certainly not advisable. But why make matters worse? Was being raped or taken advantage of traumatic? Yes, extremely, horrifically. But so is murder. Why ADD to the trauma she is already suffering from?

Just my opinion.


:shock: You would expect a 13 year old girl to carry her abuser, her rapist's, child to term? I think, as a male, you don't quite understand the concept of 'guilt' in this situation if she has an abortion. I suggest that the majority of the 'guilt' she would feel would be from people like yourself and anti-abortionists foisting their archaic beliefs upon her. You know, those who do not have to live in her skin and in her brain...or live HER lilfe. You would make her spend the next 9 months, torturing her on a daily basis, on a minute by minute basis, with the fetus of a rapist growing inside her and you think THAT doesn't 'cause irreparable harm??? I'm flabbergasted you can be so cold, so unfeeling and so completely oblivious to the reality of the situation this girl would be placed in if forced to carry this pregnancy to term.


I cannot believe you would compound the trauma and brutality of child rape and incest or brutal violent rape by forcing the victim to carry the pregnancy to term, I just cannot believe it. Perhaps if it were your little sister, or your daughter, or your mother, or your wife.........your opinion would be very, very different.

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 06 June 2012 - 12:33 PM.

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#130 WL Canuck Fan

WL Canuck Fan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 09

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:44 PM

:shock: You would expect a 13 year old girl to carry her abuser, her rapist's, child to term? I think, as a male, you don't quite understand the concept of 'guilt' in this situation if she has an abortion. I suggest that the majority of the 'guilt' she would feel would be from people like yourself and anti-abortionists foisting their archaic beliefs upon her. You know, those who do not have to live in her skin and in her brain...or live HER lilfe. You would make her spend the next 9 months, torturing her on a daily basis, on a minute by minute basis, with the fetus of a rapist growing inside her and you think THAT doesn't 'cause irreparable harm??? I'm flabbergasted you can be so cold, so unfeeling and so completely oblivious to the reality of the situation this girl would be placed in if forced to carry this pregnancy to term.


I cannot believe you would compound the trauma and brutality of child rape and incest or brutal violent rape by forcing the victim to carry the pregnancy to term, I just cannot believe it. Perhaps if it were your little sister, or your daughter, or your mother, or your wife.........your opinion would be very, very different.


She will feel guilt on her own without any outside influence if she ascribes any humanity to the unborn child. She doesn't need to walk through some picket line to feel guilt, her conscience alone will torment her.

If there is no guilt associated with abortion, why do so many women feel guilty?

You used strong language in your denunciation of my position. In response:

I can't believe you would try to convince someone that the life they carry is not even human, it is just a lump of cells, a bio mass like a tumor that they can cut out of their body at will. I can't believe that you would try to convince a traumatized young person that even though things are bleak and bad, killing an innocent baby will make you feel better. I can't believe that you would counsel someone who was just raped to kill the life growing within them as some sort of sadistic way of evening things out or making the world better again.

Sad.

You did not however respond to :
However, for the "day to day" abortions, I clearly propose that it is immoral, unethical and should be illegal.
Sig too big.

#131 pianoman13

pianoman13

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 06

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:54 PM

:shock: You would expect a 13 year old girl to carry her abuser, her rapist's, child to term? I think, as a male, you don't quite understand the concept of 'guilt' in this situation if she has an abortion. I suggest that the majority of the 'guilt' she would feel would be from people like yourself and anti-abortionists foisting their archaic beliefs upon her. You know, those who do not have to live in her skin and in her brain...or live HER lilfe. You would make her spend the next 9 months, torturing her on a daily basis, on a minute by minute basis, with the fetus of a rapist growing inside her and you think THAT doesn't 'cause irreparable harm??? I'm flabbergasted you can be so cold, so unfeeling and so completely oblivious to the reality of the situation this girl would be placed in if forced to carry this pregnancy to term.


I cannot believe you would compound the trauma and brutality of child rape and incest or brutal violent rape by forcing the victim to carry the pregnancy to term, I just cannot believe it. Perhaps if it were your little sister, or your daughter, or your mother, or your wife.........your opinion would be very, very different.


Do you know how many abortions are a result of rape? less than .1 percent! Less than one in one thousand abortions. If people are using that to defend abortion then that is ridiculous. Its like using self defence to say that murder is ok. Well in some situations like self defence if you kill someone you are fine. You can't take one example and spread it over every circumstance

No videos in sig please. 


#132 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:55 PM

She will feel guilt on her own without any outside influence if she ascribes any humanity to the unborn child. She doesn't need to walk through some picket line to feel guilt, her conscience alone will torment her.

If there is no guilt associated with abortion, why do so many women feel guilty?

You used strong language in your denunciation of my position. In response:

I can't believe you would try to convince someone that the life they carry is not even human, it is just a lump of cells, a bio mass like a tumor that they can cut out of their body at will. I can't believe that you would try to convince a traumatized young person that even though things are bleak and bad, killing an innocent baby will make you feel better. I can't believe that you would counsel someone who was just raped to kill the life growing within them as some sort of sadistic way of evening things out or making the world better again.

Sad.


Simple answer to this ^^ - You. Just. Don't. Get. It.


And the saddest part is, you probably never will. I hate to ever play the gender card, but there it is. Until you are brutally raped or are the victim of incest and become pregnant by your attacker, you will never know or understand what the woman/girl is feeling or going through. Nor will you ever understand the barest hint of trying to hang on with your fingernails just to survive the next day, the next hour, the next minute. But no, you think there's some kind of redemption for all this by forcing the victim to carry her rapist's/abuser's child for the next nine months instead.

Post-abortion guilt? Hindsight is always 20/20 and these women are in a very, very different place in their lives when looking back at that decision they made which can't help but weigh in in her thought processes of today. It is often years of hindsight and the woman she is now is not the same person faced with a decision years before. One must remember to put that decision making into it's proper context and perspective. Also, you think every woman feels guilty for having an abortion? Not even remotely so.... and some of those women are the most loving of mothers today.

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 06 June 2012 - 12:58 PM.

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#133 pianoman13

pianoman13

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 06

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:55 PM

And just so everyone knows, Canada is the only country in the world along with North Korea and China that have no laws regarding abortion. Those are pretty good role models for us, I'm glad we are striving to be just like them.

No videos in sig please. 





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.