16 Comments

  1. parrillaturi on January 9, 2016 at 7:36 pm

    Hmm.

  2. violetwisp on January 10, 2016 at 7:14 am

    Why don’t you include the number of miscarriages in there too? That’s the number of ‘human beings’ you believe your god created only to destroy them before they saw the light of day. It’s the only relevant like for like comparison. More relevant still would be the number of animals we murder (actual sentient beings) after keeping them in foul conditions, just so they can satisfy our greed for unnecessary protein sources. Saying that, the rate of abortion is nothing to boast about – we definitely need improved access to affordable birth control and better sex education, learning from countries that keep the numbers low.

    • quinersdiner on January 10, 2016 at 1:51 pm

      Do you honestly not see the difference, Violet? Aborted people are killed violently by Man because they are inconvenient. Miscarried persons die naturals deaths.

    • John R. Hugo on January 10, 2016 at 6:40 pm

      Violet; you and others with your outlook on this subject are what is sick in America.
      God help you.

      • violetwisp on January 11, 2016 at 8:44 am

        I’m not in America. But thanks for sharing your opinion. Would you prefer a situation where women and their undeveloped offspring were butchered in dangerous back alley abortions, as happens in every country in the world where abortion is illegal? Or do you simply prefer it if woman are forced to go through traumatic pregnancies to bring a sentient being they don’t want into existence? Perhaps you want to pretend that accidental pregnancies never occur in societies where sex is kept behind closed doors, like they used to in Ireland. Discussions about abortion need to be kept real. What are the options seriously? Several billion more adults forced into existence, brought up by parents that didn’t want them? That sounds kind of sick to me.

    • lburleso on January 11, 2016 at 2:34 pm

      Why do you say that the rate of abortion is nothing to boast about?

      • violetwisp on January 12, 2016 at 4:51 am

        Because an unintended pregnancy is the result of ignorance, disrespect, force or poor judgement. An abortion is an invasive/unpleasant procedure that can result in physical or emotional harm to a woman. However, attempting to force unwilling women to carry a developing fetus to term is often more dangerous, for both the woman and the potential child.

      • lburleso on January 13, 2016 at 10:28 am

        Violet – Would you please clarify what you were referring to as more dangerous to the mother: the attempt, the forcing itself, or the carrying [to term].

        I was also confused with the reference to “potential child”, for two reasons: 1. Abortion seems obviously more dangerous due to its intent of directly killing it. 2. If child=person I understand why you would include “potential”, but if not, the word should have been left out since “child” is another way to refer to offspring, which it is at every stage.

      • violetwisp on January 14, 2016 at 10:35 am

        Violet – Would you please clarify what you were referring to as more dangerous to the mother: the attempt, the forcing itself, or the carrying [to term].

        In terms of countries that try to force women to carry all pregnancies to term by outlawing abortion:
        “Some 68,000 women die of unsafe abortion annually, making it one of the leading causes of maternal mortality (13%). Of the women who survive unsafe abortion, 5 million will suffer long-term health complications.” (Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Spring; 2(2): 122–126y)

        I was also confused with the reference to “potential child”, for two reasons: 1. Abortion seems obviously more dangerous due to its intent of directly killing it. 2. If child=person I understand why you would include “potential”, but if not, the word should have been left out since “child” is another way to refer to offspring, which it is at every stage.

        Yes, technically you’re probably right. I think this has been drawn to my attention before. I’m trying to avoid using emotive language, to keep the definitions grounded in reality. While we could say ‘child’ for both stages, they are obviously distinct, and to use them without qualification is misleading. A child in the womb isn’t a potentially separate entity from the mother until past when 99% of abortions occur, and it’s not approaching sentience until at the very least 24 weeks. To say ‘child’ evokes notions of both a separate entity and sentience.

      • lburleso on January 14, 2016 at 2:32 pm

        Illegal abortion and risk for women: it’s true that depending on the country, outlawing abortion may result in additional injuries to women caused by facilities being underground. But I’m challenged to think of other laws that reversed illegality just because so many people were committing the crime. So arguing about abortion risks doesn’t further the discussion in my eyes; it only begs the question about the nature of the pre-born.

        In your second paragraph, you seem to be hinting at viability as a determining factor for abortion rights. Is this your belief? If not, what is your measure? (You also mentioned sentience)

  3. John R. Hugo on January 10, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    This is sick and unacceptable.
    WAKE UP AMERICA AND BE RESPONSIBLE.

  4. parrillaturi on January 11, 2016 at 8:12 pm

    Violet. Are you happy with your life, or do you wish you had been aborted?

    • violetwisp on January 12, 2016 at 4:54 am

      If my parents had had sex five minutes later I wouldn’t have been born, and it would be the same as if I’d been aborted – who I currently am would never have had any awareness of life. Were you sad you were dead in 1902?

      • parrillaturi on January 12, 2016 at 11:35 am

        I just love it when libs dodge question so skillfully. They don’t make sense, but it makes for a good laugh. Read my question, digest it, mull it around, and then, if you think you might have a sensible answer. please do so. Blessings.

        • violetwisp on January 13, 2016 at 6:49 am

          I was trying to help you consider what it would be like not to be born, completely relevant to your question. I’m happy with my life and I don’t wish I’d been aborted. But if I had, I’d be none the wiser (in the same way as 1902 passed without my presence) and perhaps another, lovelier human being would have been conceived in the following six months I occupied my mother’s womb. Who knows, world peace could already have been achieved! I’d be happy for the world if that were case and glad I was never conscious to realise how much my lack of existence could mean.

  5. abortion – what do you want? | violetwisp on January 12, 2016 at 8:57 am

    […] Violet; you and others with your outlook on this subject are what is sick in America. God help you. (John R. Hugo on Quiner’s Diner) […]

Leave a Comment