So [those who blather on about protecting life], would you support abortion in cases where the mother’s life is endangered by continuing the pregancy? Hint: that’s ALL cases; in most, the danger is very small, but it’s never gone. If a foetus is a person, then it’s a person that engages in a relentless, life-threatening assault on the mother for nine months - in any other context, the phrase “self-defense” would be at the top of the discussion. Sure it has no other option to survive, but should the mother, in the name of protecting life, be required to endanger her own?

In the clash between the rights of a potential person, not yet a viable organism, and a real living person, my sympathies lie with the latter.

Likewise, what about massively multiple pregancy? A few years ago in the UK, there was a case of octuplets in which all the doctors agreed that attempting to continue the pregancy would result in all eight dying - while aborting some of them would give some of the others a chance of survival. Britain’s so-called pro-life groups were up in arms about it (including threats to the mother’s life) - even those who agreed with the medical diagnosis advocated pursuing a course that they acknowledged would result in more foetal deaths than the abortions would. She continued the pregnancy. All eight died. Which course of action was really pro-life?

See there’s no such thing as “pro-abortion” - pro-choice is the correct term, because the only position consistent to its members is that women should have sovreignty over their bodies, and who gets to use them.
The only position consistent to the “anti abortion” side is that women should be denied such sovreignty (heck, even anti-abortionism isn’t consistent in the wake of Pat Robertson’s statements about forced abortion in China) - so the correct term for them is “pro-coercion.”

I myself gave birth to a stillborn son at 32 weeks gestation. My son was issued a ‘Certificate of Fetal Death’ He didn’t get a birth certificate, as he was not delivered live, a requirement for a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’. At the time, the hospital staff mentioned a mythical ‘Certificate of Creation’ that was to be issued by the state. Apparently, I was supposed to make a political contribution in order to recieve the document, as it never materialized.

Reading this blog I was curious, so I did some research and found this…. the federal Vital Statistic forms reporting fetal death do not include those deaths caused by abortion, except in the case of induced abortion of an already dead fetus. The statistics on death by abortion are gathered separately in a slew of different forms that vary by and are governed by the individual state. Partially because of this lack of standard, the abortion ’statistics’ that are quoted are often wildly inaccurate. I won’t say it’s a conspiracy, but it’s always possible to manipulate statistics, even more so when they’re dodgy to begin with.

It is a bit out of date, but I found this article to be quite well written and informative.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3024498.html

“if you’re not willing to use condoms, you don’t have a right to demand the woman use birth control, so either don’t have sex with her or get your own birth control.”

Excuse me, but what woman in her right mind would sleep with a man who refused to use condoms but demanded she use birth control.

Not only would she only encourage his wretched behavior, they might actually breed.

Women, for the good of all of us, DO NOT BREED WITH ASSHOLES. We’ll selectively breed the asshats out of existence.

It was a necessary evil since I didn’t trust a girl that I didn’t know that well when she said she was on the pill. -Self-styled “millionaire” on condom use

That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve read all day, and I just read another dumb flame war over at Sadly,No!

Dude- if you don’t trust a woman to tell the truth about whether she’s on the pill or not, how do you trust her when she says she doesn’t have an STD?

I can just imagine the thought process that takes place:
Girl #1, whom you’re trying to fuck: “I’m on the pill.”

Your thoughts: “She’s lying. I’d better get a vasectomy so I won’t fall prey to all the lying bitches I seem to attract with my bragging about my wealth.”

Girl #2: “I’m totally clean and healthy.”
Your thoughts: “Cool! I’m gonna get laid! Without a condom!”

Here’s a whacky idea: fuck nobody you don’t trust. This may mean you don’t get laid as often, but it’s so much better when there’s trust involved. Trust me on this.

You have a huge problem with trusting a woman you “don’t know that well.” Naturally, you have no problem fucking her.

Oh, and by the way: if you think that you are attracting the sort of gold-digger who’d try to entrap you with a pregnancy (and yes, it does happen), then maybe you should try NOT introducing yourself to strangers as a millionaire.

That sort of thing tends to repel people who don’t give a shit about your money, and it attracts people who will try to take your money.

Do you often describe yourself, apropos of nothing and to complete strangers, as a millionaire all the time? If it’s intended to impress anyone positively, you should examine your people-skills.

I’ve met a lot of rich people over the years, especially back when I was a Porsche mechanic. A few of them were not complete assholes. Very few. None of the few ever made a point of reminding strangers of their wealth. To do so is assholery of the highest order.

Also, do you have any idea which social paradigm is to blame for the belief held by some women that the best way for a woman to become a millionaire is to be impregnated by one? Or for your apparent belief that anyone, especially here, is impressed by your claim to money/status/power/fuckability? Take a wild guess.