Would the anti abortion lot support this solution? or not?
Forcibly if nec but to all girls all over the world... reversibly sterilise (guys too) them so its physically impossible to get pregnant before puberty.
But allow all other processes to contine so they get oll the sexire, need for ssex and love enjoyment of it and personality... just no babies.
And take away 1/4 of the funds of the church and islam to irradicate all STDS from the planet...
With permission granted to all who want a baby only when over 24.
After having filled in forms daily for say 6 months in a stable relationship or older with exceptions if single.
Then its reversed. In other words wait till after then have lived somewhat, gained some life experience, hopefully finished education and bloody well sure.
So absolutely no danger of unwanted pregnancy or stds.
Oh and an active practicing single ex porn star/pole dancer lesbian made pope/head of islam.
a church ban on all homophobia
2007-06-01
04:35:18
·
19 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Islamic too. An end to all honour killings, stonings and any punishments for sex outside any marriage.
Therefore people are free to have any sex they like as long a it does not hurt others (ie peadophilia or rape).
And no consequences for unwanted pregnany or stds.
Oh and as soon as the couple does not want to conceive re reversible sterilisation.
Then only abortions for medical, rape etc.
How many anti abortionists would support that?
Or is the whole anti abortion thing nothing to do with thw wealfare of so called unborn kids and everything to do with its anti unmarried non procreations sexaul activity and freedom for felames to have a life?
2007-06-01
04:38:42 ·
update #1
*****************************************
Its saying the church pays to eradicate stds.
You utilise perfect contrceptives
And the church and islam has to show its ready to give up all repressive, anti sexuality, puritan type thinking.
Hence the least likly canditdate
a lesiban, single sexually active not married, working in sex industry person made rulers of the religions.
the price for cutting down massively on abortions by eliminating mistakes
2007-06-01
04:47:01 ·
update #2
*********************************************
Its not saying you cant date, fall in love etc... you are free to do anything but get pregnant till a suitable age and having established yourself and had the chance to travel and live a little and get an education
Common sense really.
Making people wait till a sensible age and also make them prove they are sure not simpy feeling broody with all the form filling ansd hastle
***********************
as for
God wants us to abstain from sex until marriage. That's as clear as it gets. If all would do this, you wouldn't have a problem with teenage pregnancy or STDs
THIS IS THE WHOLE POINT...
IM SAYING THE ANTI ABORTION LOT DONT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE WELL BEING OF KIDS OR FOETUSES OR EMBREYOS...
ALL THE KIDS HOME ABUSE SHOWS THIS.
NORE DO THEY CARE ABOUT THE WELL BEING OF THE FEMALE...
THIS IS ALL TO DO WITH THAT RELGIOUS ATTIUDES OF NOBNSEX BEFORE MARRIAGE AND NO NON PROCREATIONAL SEX WITH CONTRACPETION
2007-06-01
04:51:51 ·
update #3
AND SIMPLY WANTING TO MAKE PEOPLE GO FORTH AND MULTIPY...
ITS SAYING AS THEY DONT THIS , THE ONLY REAL REASON FOR THE ANTI ABORTION ATTIUDES IS LESS BABIES GET BORN AND AGIRLS HAVE CONTROL OVER THEIR LIVES.
2007-06-01
04:53:10 ·
update #4
THIS IS ACTUALLY CONNON SENSE
* Its saying no babies get born untill the mothers have had a fair chance to get educated, form a career, have a life, travel etc.
THATS COMMON SENSE
* Its saying no babies are born or girls get pregnant unless damn sure they want to be. Hence making it so much grief
THATS COMMON SENSE
its also saying anti abortionists put you money where your mouth is. and show that if this anti abortion stance was really about protection of foestuses etc...
show you would be prepared to give up on ALL purtian, anti sexaulity morlality codes and sexaul repression.
And end STDs and unwanted pregnancies so no resticions of sex for affection, love or pleasure.
But placing the church and islams most anti puritan figures in charge
THATS COMMON SENSE
1 second ago
Ending all stds and having perfect contraception
THATS COMMON SENSE
2007-06-01
04:59:23 ·
update #5
****************************
quote
And another issue...you think it makes sense to "force religion" to do anything? That's also stupid.
Relgion tries to force its attiudes on society so why not reverse it.
Im saying abortion has nothing to do with protecting people or unborn babies etc...
But is imposing relgious attitudes that hate sexualtiy on people taking away rights on control of bodies so saying ok put money where month is what you prepared to do, to prove you genuinely care
And since when has relgions cares about people rights
INQUISITION
http://members.lycos.co.uk/witchen/torchermethods.html
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1254780,00.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007130233,00.html
NASTY TREATMENT OF GIRLS
http://www.buzzpatrol.com/links/polish-high-school-student-expelled-for-playboy-shoot/
what about her rights?
2007-06-01
05:08:26 ·
update #6
'The Magdelen Sisters' should be in your video shop but the tv drama 'sinners' was more accurate if you can find it.
over 30,000 were involved up till 1996...how old were you at that time?
How many of your friends, you or your sister could have ended up here.
Abusing, raping, and ripping the babies from the arms of 30,000 girls up to just 10 years ago
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/drama/tv/sinners/index.shtml
http://www.thewildgeese.com/pages/magdalen.html
http://www.netreach.net/~steed/magdalen.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380703/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/drama/sinners/interviews/annemarie.shtml
orn theres
EXECUTING 13 YEAR OLDS GIRLS FOR HAVING SEX… DEATH BY STONING THE MOST VIOLENT, AGONISING AND SCARY WAY… SEE VIDEO AFTER LINK
http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/october/izadi_161004.shtml
DEFFINETELY SEE THIS ALL THE WAY THOUGH TO THE END
IMAGINE THE SCREAMS AND USE A STOPWATCH
Clear video stoning
2007-06-01
05:09:04 ·
update #7
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm
YOUNG TEEN GIRL BEING STONED TO DEATH WHICH LASTWED 30 MIN TILL SHE DIED
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/bisaba...
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/video-...
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/016.3g...
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/1.3gp....
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/2.3gp....
http://www.jebar.info/yazidivedio/3.3gp....
http://www.aina.org/news/20070425181603....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/ar...
http://www.ekurd.net/mismas/articles/mis...
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/st...
TREATMENT OF WOMEN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ateqeh_Rajabi
http://www.iranliberty.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=18&Itemid=63
GAYS BEING EXECTUTED
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1838222,00.html
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/009746.php
2007-06-01
05:10:28 ·
update #8
******************************************
Quote
The main problem with your entire little rant, is that you would vote for bigger government and tighter control and regulations over the people. You might as well redistribute all the wealth too.
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/factsheet/fsest.htm
http://www.nvsh.nl/english/index.htm
http://www.channel4.com/learning/microsites/L/lifestuff/content/up_close/letstalksex/index.html
http://www.channel4.com/learning/microsites/L/lifestuff/content/up_close/letstalksex/dutch.html
http://www.channel4.com/learning/microsites/L/lifestuff/content/up_close/letstalksex/findoutmore.html
http://www.rutgersnissogroep.nl/English
ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE UK.
OBSERVE EUROPE WHICH IS MOSTLY SOCILIST AND CLEARLY THEY HAVE THE RIGHT SYSTEM.
The US has the worst record on teen pregnancies and all the social problems it causes plus poor distribution of wealth causing high crime, homeless,gangs & ghettos no free health
2007-06-03
04:13:31 ·
update #9
The government protects people better. it should look after things like essentials like educationa nd health...
Leaving the lies of kit and walkman shops to the private sector.
Socialist societies teach people to look after each other.
your individual responsibility is fight everyone to survive causing more crime and gangs are the perfect example of this
2007-06-03
04:15:13 ·
update #10
No, I would not support any of what you just said. I would support some very good counseling for you though.
2007-06-01 04:40:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Last Ent Wife (RCIA) 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
i believe things happen for a reason, we as humans are not given more than we can handle,if you cant aford here are things and programs that can help you. Government assisted housing, WIC, Food Stamps, Medicaid , adoption is another idea to avoid having an abortion. anything is better than killing your own child. consider this are some reason against abortion 1. Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life 2. No civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different. 3. Adoption is a viable alternative to abortion and accomplishes the same result. And with 1.5 million American families wanting to adopt a child, there is no such thing as an unwanted child. 4. An abortion can result in medical complications later in life; the risk of ectopic pregnancies doubles, and the chance of a miscarriage and Pelvic Inflammatory Disease also increases. 5. In the instance of rape and incest, proper medical care can ensure that a woman will not get pregnant. Abortion punishes the unborn child who committed no crime; instead, it is the perpetrator who should be punished. 6. Abortion should not be used as another form of contraception. 7. For women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or, if that is not possible, through abstinence. 8. Many Americans who pay taxes are opposed to abortion, therefore it's morally wrong to use tax dollars to fund abortion. 9. Those who choose abortions are often minors or young women with insufficient life experience to understand fully what they are doing. Many have lifelong regrets afterwards. 10. Abortion frequently causes intense psychological pain and stress.
2016-05-18 05:53:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, that's a bit radical and really not helping the problem much. God wants us to abstain from sex until marriage. That's as clear as it gets. If all would do this, you wouldn't have a problem with teenage pregnancy or STDs. To make someone undergo a medical procedure is ethically wrong. My gosh, where would it end? And who would pay for all these procedures? Eventually we'd have robots walking around. Their bodies changed but not their minds, their behavior. Bad idea. Let go of it.
2007-06-01 04:43:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by VW 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Stopping the natural processes shall result in an overall catastrophical situations for human health just to avoid the dangers of unwanted pregnancies of the delinquent individuals.Will it not be better to stick to the moral codes which actually are meant to protect the individual and social health?
2007-06-04 19:46:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by shahinsaifullah2006 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your question is not only long but confusing. Life is a gift and any pregnancy should go full term. If you choose not to keep the baby it is called adoption not abortion. STD's are natural and will be around as long as man is around. Better choices are the only option. You can not blame religion for the ills of man, religion is of man not God. God asks that we worship him not a religion. So, what was God's answer to all your questions or did you bother to ask Him FIRST!
2007-06-09 03:47:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by TBAR 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Although your idea is probably impossible to impose, you've put quite a lot of thought into it, particularly regarding the issue of sex for pleasure as opposed to sex for procreation, not to mention the idea of pre-pubescent reversing of fertility. Can't blame you when you look at statistics, however God gave all of us free will, and that means taking personal responsibility. You can be in jail for a little while for say drink driving, and it might deter you from a career of crime - but you can't just be 'a little bit pregnant' (although abortion will make you pregnant no more) or 'murder someone a little bit'! Life and death are biggies. Abortion is just one of the many reasons why God's plan for us is to abstain and wait to have sex until we are within a loving marriage. God wants this for us, not to take our enjoyment of life away, but to protect us from experiencing all the physical and emotional suffering which can arise as a consequence of illicit sex. He sets out these moral guidelines for our own good because He loves us.
2007-06-05 00:39:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by sunny days are here 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
hell no.
this list is crazy...i mean...craaazzyyy
reproductive freedom is like, a basic right. There are laws that restrict certain age groups, but in reality anyone can have sex if it is consensual. The notion of restricting that freedom is not only wrong, but incredibly bizarre. You can't decide for someone how old they have to be to have a baby. You also can't say they have to be in some state-defined "stable relationship" because I have plenty of friends whom I LOVE and who are GOOD PEOPLE that are products of "unstable relationships"...
If there is one thing that pisses me off, it's people who think legislation is the answer for everything.
Educate people, use your common sense, and take on some damned personal responsibility. You would let the government take it all from you? That's stupid as hell.
And this plan has moral and ethical issues just as great as abortion is in the first place.
Added:
Even from a theoretical standpoint - you are attacking the basic human right of choice. As it stands, people have the CHOICE to have a baby, and they should LIVE WITH THEIR OWN DAMN CONSQUENCES.
And another issue...you think it makes sense to "force religion" to do anything? That's also stupid. You're now removing the freedom of religion and the seperation of church and state. You just destroyed half the ******* bill of rights. Do you seriously think this is ok? If so, get some help.
Added Again:
Great atrocities have occurred because of religion. Great atrocities have occurred for the pursuit of wealth and power. You missed my point completely. You are talking about removing personal responsibility. As it stands, we can choose to abstain from sex until we feel we are in a secure relationship. I enjoy my freedom. I am glad I can have consensual sex with whomever will agree to it...because I am EDUCATED, I can choose to employ safe sex practices and I don't need the government telling me what I can and cannot do in my personal life.
FYI - I am anti-abortion. Why? Because I think taking the life of a human is wrong and I believe that counts from the time the egg is fertilized. Does that mean I would vote for laws to outlaw abortion? no. It's not my job to legislate morality. If someone wants to be immoral (imo) and kill their baby, that is their choice. You are trying to take choice away and get rid of freedoms, not promote them. Of course society pressures people into doing things, and it will always be that way. No matter what laws you create.
BTW, I couldn't care less about people being persecuted because they are gay or because religion says they shouldn't have sex. In American, that's not the case. It just isn't. As a white protestant male, I'm as persecuted as everyone else - and hell if you're African American and homosexual - you've got affirmative action on your side! congratulations.
The main problem with your entire little rant, is that you would vote for bigger government and tighter control and regulations over the people. You might as well redistribute all the wealth too. America was based on individual freedom. If you want to forfeit that, leave America (assuming you live here). I am sure most people here will agree with me in saying that they would like LESS government control, not more.
Added once again:
Well I am capable of making my own health care choices, and my own choice to marry a person who is also anti-abortion. You can keep your public health care...I don't want to live in a socialist state.
"your individual responsibility is fight everyone to survive causing more crime and gangs are the perfect example of this"
Your whole problem is that you don't believe anyone else's beliefs really matter. "We'll just force religion to do this..." You are talking about altering something people are passionate about with disregard to the integrity of their faith and their culture. That is ASININE! You're a selfish bastard. And you're arrogant enough to think you (and the government) can make better decisions for people than themselves.
"The government protects people better. it should look after things like essentials like educationa nd health.."
I disagree wholeheartedly... the government is not interested in protecting peoples' ways of life. They are a financial institution based on giving power to the few and mediating the public to keep themselves in power. No one is in politics for the good of the nation - they are in it for personal benefit. If you think otherwise, you're living in la-la-land.
"Socialist societies teach people to look after each other."
You're wrong. There is just as much crime in the UK per capita as the US. I believe people should learn to care for each other from their families. In fact - I am quite certain that the degradation of the nuclear family is the main contribution to the degradation of society as a whole. And your "socialist" society is just as fucked as ours in that department.
2007-06-01 04:46:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by hellotman16 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can't make heads or tails out of this....
Temporary sterilization, until age 24 and a pornstar for a pope? Do I have that right???
2007-06-01 04:40:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Adam G 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Would YOU support all that if it would put an end to infanticide (the murder of babies between birth and one year of age)?
2007-06-01 04:47:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
WOW!!!! I am so impressed with your question? I have often wondered that very same thing. Believe it or not. I still stand firmly on my belief of "To each their own".
2007-06-09 02:52:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by Amy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋