Social Question

Mariah's avatar

What are your thoughts on Paul Ryan's recent statement about his "no exceptions" pro-life stance?

Asked by Mariah (25876points) August 28th, 2012

The article is here.

When asked whether he would support abortion in cases of rape, Ryan said “I’m very proud of my pro-life record, and I’ve always adopted the idea that, the position that the method of conception doesn’t change the definition of life.”

Many people are taking great offense at Ryan referring to rape as a “method of conception.” Frankly I’ve stopped reacting with surprise to such statements. They are just unnervingly common these days.

Your thoughts?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

94 Answers

snowberry's avatar

Life is life is life. I always choose life. His choice of words were unfortunate, but I still choose life.

gailcalled's avatar

No sane person is anti-life; there is a big difference between that and pro-choice.

I cannot imagine being forced to carry an unwanted fetus to term under any circumstances and most particularly if I had been raped.

@snowberry; Will you be willing to raise a child, no matter its condition, if a woman chose or were forced to give birth and then hand it off to you? That is the only condition that allows you to have a say in the matter.

Would Akin and Ryan each take a child under similar conditions?

syz's avatar

Amazing how the GOP wants to protect a fetus (even two weeks before it exists), but says “F you” to children that are hungry or poor.

A woman’s right to choose is just that – a right. Paul Ryan doesn’t have a uterus, so Paul Ryan needs to STFU.

syz's avatar

@snowberry Really. You’re going to take all of the unwanted children that erasing a woman’s reproductive rights would produce?

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

I find it absurd that we are debating “pro-life” issues at the same time we are dropping bombs from remote control planes on Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Syria, etc.

The media is doing a great job(as usual) of side-tracking the issues, ignoring important one’s(in my eyes) like the devaluation of the dollar, never-ending wars, NDAA, Patriot Act, FISA, Libor Scandal, police state, US arming the world, hackable electronic voting machines, Bradley Manning, Bain Capital’s ownership of ClearChannel Communications, etc. and all of the other issues that only Ron Paul talks about, which is why I believe he was ignored just as much as these issues are.

Does anyone else notice how the media keeps jumping around to issues of little importance as to what is ACTUALLY effecting us like abortion, Chick-Fil-A, Prince Harry, Snooki, etc?

gailcalled's avatar

@SquirrelEStuff: Are you equating women’s reproductive rights with Snooki or Chik-Fil-A? Surely you are not serious.

tom_g's avatar

Ryan’s statement is a good example of how black-and-white thinking in a world full of gray doesn’t contribute anything worthwhile – especially to the discussion of ethics.

The strange thing is that I suspect/hope his opposition to legalized abortion is not as straightforward as he would like to think. It is my understanding that people who are are opposed to legalized abortion will differentiate between murder and “murder”. In other words, if a man murders a woman, there will be calls for the death penalty. I have yet to meet someone who against legalized abortion who would call for the death penalty for women who have abortions.
(I could be wrong. I hope not.)

elbanditoroso's avatar

He has backed himself into a corner with statements like these. On the one hand it gives him credibility with the religious right, but the flip side is that he has completely constrained himself from any sort of nuance or response other than his extremist one.

Now, he may believe this at one level – after all, he is catholic and that itself dictates how he must think. But on the level of compassion and humanity, he has left himself not one iota of wiggle room/ And for a politician, that is not good.

In this world there are precious few absolutely clear issues. Ryan has locked himself into a position that he may regret.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

Just out of curiosity does anyone know where he stands on the death penatly?

gailcalled's avatar

And consider his wife, Janna Ryan. She is a graduate of one of the most enlightened and progressive competitive colleges in the country…also traditionally a place that has attracted many Lesbians.

I find it impossible to believe that she can seriously buy into the party line.

SpatzieLover's avatar

He’s Catholic when it’s convenient for his party. He’s made that abundantly clear here in my/his home state.

I think it was a sound bite to get his name on TV & in newspapers.

Nullo's avatar

I’m glad that’s his position on it. Rape-babies are people too, you know.

The only time I consider abortion to be a valid option is in cases of medical necessity, where death-in-childbirth would be likely. Because then the scales are balanced: life and life, instead of life and convenience, or life and bonhomies.

@syz Have you considered that there is less of a disregard for the poor and more of an interest in finding solutions that work for everybody?
And no man of woman born can be said to not have any input on the matter of abortion – for he was in a uterus once himself.

woodcutter's avatar

He will never be the vice president anyway so let him spout. If he’s going to double down on dumb ass then he’s thrown away any wiggle room that politicians must have to get critical votes.
The republicans seem to be in a trend that turns veep candidates into torpedoes.


wonderingwhy's avatar

It’s nice he has an opinion, it’s unfortunate he seems to think it so grand that it should be forced upon everyone isn’t that one of the many things they love to chide Obama for doing, particularly when it comes to healthcare.

Otherwise, I’ve yet to hear any personally meaningful reason why it shouldn’t be a choice and fail to see how society or the woman/potential parents are harmed by ensuring that choice. There are plenty of arguments to go round but in my view that only speaks to why this choice should be preserved. Society is altogether undecided (perhaps “split across varying shades of grey” would be a better way to put it) on this therefore it’s the governments job to ensure the greatest freedom is preserved.

On what I would call the bright side of his stance I’m hoping his unyielding position will be unappealing to moderate undecided voters and even cost their ticket a few right-leaning votes.

Nullo's avatar

@wonderingwhy Imagine if “a woman’s right” was post-coital cannibalism, in the fashion of the black widow spider, and you had the ‘opinion’ that it’s wrong, not a right. Wouldn’t you try to force that upon everyone? Same stakes, you know.

gailcalled's avatar

^^^But a ludicrous scenario that adds nothing to the argument.

syz's avatar

^^As are most religious arguments that so often result in the infringement of rights.

tom_g's avatar

@Nullo: “Imagine if “a woman’s right” was post-coital cannibalism, in the fashion of the black widow spider, and you had the ‘opinion’ that it’s wrong, not a right. Wouldn’t you try to force that upon everyone? Same stakes, you know.”

I know (suspect) you are just in a silly mood or something, but would you be willing to elaborate on what the above statement has to do with anything we are talking about?

jerv's avatar

I wish he could have an ectopic pregnancy due to a rape.

This proves a few things, such as how ridiculous rigid thinking is, how out of touch with reality ideologues are sometimes, and how little compassion some people have.

It’s one thing to be pro-life, but like anything, it can be taken too far. It’s sad that many Muslim nations are far more enlightened, free, and respectful of women than the type of America that people like Ryan want. Less hypocritical too.

gailcalled's avatar

@jerv: I’d settle for a normal nine-month pregnancy but with natural childbirth.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@Nullo o.o Wow. Ok. Take a step back. Now another. And just one more big one. There. Now look around. You see that? That’s reality. Welcome back.

If you want to debate the moral value of lives in context that’s fine but it’s only part of the larger issue raised by the question and can be done without such dramatics.

snowberry's avatar

@syz I would take all the children that I possibly could. Seems some people are upset that I would. Oh well.

gailcalled's avatar

@snowberry: How many children have you already adopted?

KNOWITALL's avatar

Okay, I see both sides of this issue. My birthday is the date of Roe versus Wade and a family member is a member of the Pro-Life movement so I’m used to this discussion.

I know a guy who is a real ‘rape baby’, his mother was raped and chose to have him anyway. He is a nice guy, has kids of his own and it worked out.

My father wanted me aborted, my mom bravely chose to have me anyway, and I am happy.

My aunt was raped and got pregnant and chose to have an abortion and unfortunately was unable to get pregnant again ever.

I believe that all life is precious, whether it’s Down-Syndrome babies or the little bird in your yard. I eat meat so I’m not all black & white about it, but I also think that people who would make a 12 yr old have her daddy’s baby are sicko’s.

I will continue to be pro-life for myself while agreeing that everyone else should be able to make their own choices about whether they can or can’t have an abortion, and whether or not they can live with their decisions afterward. Once you’ve seen a fetus ripped apart in utero, you will never be the same person again, trust me on that.

snowberry's avatar

@gailcalled Does it matter? I don’t count them. I just love them. I have adopted many kids in various ways. Not all of them have lived in my house. Lots of my children’s friends also call me “mom” because their own parents are incapable of or unwilling to parent them.

FutureMemory's avatar

What are your thoughts on Paul Ryan’s recent statement about his “no exceptions” pro-life stance?

It makes me wonder about that old expression “Shoot the Vice President first”.

Does anyone know where that came from? It kind of applies here, imho.

Paradox25's avatar

This is somewhat odd to me, politicians such as Ryan that is, because personally I’m about as conservative as you can get, and yet family values politicians get on my nerves. Personally I’m not very optimistic about the thought of abortions, and a few other things, but yet it is not my place to force a woman to have a kid, especially a kid that was conceived through rape.

It also continues to amaze me how the religious ‘right’ seems to support policies that will make that unborn child’s life a living hell once born, especially if they weren’t born to well to do families. It is not the stances of conservative religionists which anger me by themselves, but rather the hypocrisy. Nevertheless I don’t agree with the religious right on all things despite my more conservative stances on some issues. The merging of neoliberal conservatives and the religious ‘right’ has to be one of the worst things that has ever happened in American history.

flutherother's avatar

I like the way they call themselves ‘pro lifers’ as if that makes the rest of us incline towards death instead. There is something unbalanced about their concern for the unborn and their lack of concern for the world they are so keen for them to live in. This concern that they feel so strongly seems to evaporate as soon as the child is born. I’m not going to pay for its health care, I’m not going to pay for its education and if it dies of hunger well that’s just how it is.

augustlan's avatar

@Nullo Your comparison only works if we all agree that a clump of cells in the uterus = a human being. Clearly, we don’t.

Also, [mod says] This is our Question of the Day!

Mariah's avatar

It also only works if we don’t recognize a difference between actively killing somebody for no reason, versus disallowing somebody to use our bodies in order to remain alive.

Thanks, Auggie!

Mariah's avatar

Oh, also – @SquirrelEStuff – I appreciate that abortion is far from the most important topic facing us these days. I’m just alarmed by the rapidity with which anti-woman ignorance is coming from the far right. This attitude, I think, represents a larger issue than just abortion, which is that apparently many politicians view women, consciously or not, as second class citizens. That’s all I can conclude, anyhow.

jerv's avatar

@flutherother Such is the power of rhetoric, and that dichotomy is why I cannot take many pro-life people seriously.

@Nullo While I respect your stance,i wonder if you are willing to pay to feed and educate all those children. Is a short life of poverty ending in starvation really a life? Sounds more like a punishment to me.

Nullo's avatar

@wonderingwhy Yes, I clearly must be delusional for not agreeing with you. Sorry, I’ll report back to the brainwashing center.~

@gailcalled Sorry, I was having trouble finding something just as heinous as murdering the unborn for convenience and profit.

@augustlan We all agree that you’re human when you pop out, right? And that no healthy person would dream of killing a newborn? What about five minutes before? Ten? A week? A month? We’re talking about the same organism, the exact same one. And it’s not like we come with a pop-up human-o-meter, either. Any point that you pick is purely arbitrary.

@flutherother It’s the same with “pro-choice,” as if the rest of us were trying to deprive a woman of free will. It is worth noting that the Associated Press Style Guide recommends the use of “pro-abortion” and “anti-abortion” to better maintain neutrality. I always thought that “pro-[unborn] life was a fair description of the cause.
People naturally gravitate to certain issues. There are enough of us, I think, going in enough directions that things balance out.

@jerv We’re talking about what, 1% of all abortions in the U.S.? That’s roughly 20,000 people. For the whole country. You are assuming that all abortion survivors have to look forward to is a short life in poverty ending in starvation, when that’s probably not the case.

@Mariah By disconnecting that person (and it’s not just disconnection, mind you, that they do) you are actively killing them. Your own flesh and blood. This reminds me of that scene in The Matrix, where the bald white guy is unplugging everybody. His right? In many practical ways, it was his ship.

@tom_g I’m just not the best person when it comes to relating analogies. My point: when you’re right about something being wrong, you don’t just sit on your butt about it, do you? Isn’t there something of an obligation, even in your secularist worldview, to act against injustice? And if you find it horribly unjust for people to be killing the unborn, shouldn’t you therefore try to keep it from happening via the avenues available to you? ‘Imposing,’ even, ‘your own “opinions” on others?’

nikipedia's avatar

@Nullo, if it’s the exact same organism at conception vs, at birth, we could just take the fertilized embryo out and plop it in a crib, right?

Because they’re exactly the same?

There’s no difference between them?

Can you think of maybe…one or two differences? Ok, just one. Do you think there might be one difference?

nikipedia's avatar

@Mariah, to answer your question, I am horrified, but not at all surprised. It is hard to imagine anything worse that could happen to this country than Romney and Ryan. Maybe a third Bush term. They are fascist, misogynistic, selfish fucking pigs and I am scraping together every fucking penny I can spare to send to the Obama campaign.

Everyone, mark your calendars, election day is November 6. Get out there and vote.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@Nullo I clearly must be delusional for not agreeing with you

Hardly the point, which I hope you realized without my needing to state as much. Your example simply seemed well off point and used for little more than dramatic effect rather than furthering your argument. As I said if you want to discuss the contextual value of human life – which certainly seemed to be where you were headed – that’s fine. Or drill down even further and debate the merits of determining when life begins, ok. But both are only a portion of the abortion argument the question gets at and neither requires such disparate tropes.

Oh, and for you and any others who might be interested, female black widows only rarely eat their mates. (1, 2, 3[pdf]) And it’s thought males are capable of distinguishing and selecting between hungry and sated females. (BBC)

nikipedia's avatar


Those of you who are adamantly pro-life—why focus your efforts on preventing abortion? Why don’t you get out there and campaign to have child support minimums increased, and child support orders enforced? Surely the men who get women pregnant should share exactly equally in the responsibility for raising them? Let’s put men in jail for not paying child support. If not paying child support increases the likelihood a woman will have an abortion, not paying child support is murder, right?

tom_g's avatar

@Nullo: ”@tom_g I’m just not the best person when it comes to relating analogies. My point: when you’re right about something being wrong, you don’t just sit on your butt about it, do you? Isn’t there something of an obligation, even in your secularist worldview, to act against injustice? And if you find it horribly unjust for people to be killing the unborn, shouldn’t you therefore try to keep it from happening via the avenues available to you? ‘Imposing,’ even, ‘your own “opinions” on others?’”

Ignoring the failed analogy for a moment, I agree that you should act when a wrong is being committed and you have control over it. But it comes back to what I keep saying – your concept of what is “wrong” has nothing to do with ethics or morality in the modern sense. That is, it’s been completely separated from cause and effect. It’s not a position that has been built on considering all of the variables involved. It’s merely rules following, which technically is amoral. Therefore, there is hardly anything that your position has to offer a modern society in the area of ethics. Since it’s merely following the orders of bronze age dudes, it’s not really contributing anything. You can’t parse the logic and have it make sense to someone who isn’t a Christian. And that’s the problem. We’re all not Christians, and your action (not just you, but many active Christians) have decided that we all should follow the rules from your novel and call it morality.

tom_g's avatar

@Nullo: ”@augustlan We all agree that you’re human when you pop out, right? And that no healthy person would dream of killing a newborn? What about five minutes before? Ten? A week? A month? We’re talking about the same organism, the exact same one. And it’s not like we come with a pop-up human-o-meter, either. Any point that you pick is purely arbitrary.”

Don’t pretend that you’re exercising your ethical muscles here. I would be happy to do so – but this is not the game that you are invested in, and frankly would go against your religion to do so. When people work out these questions, they are tough and involve a level of understanding of science and must take into consideration the entire picture. Many of us are willing to dive into this with you if you would like, but please don’t pretend that this is even an exercise that your are allowed to indulge in. This is the work that we are putting in on a daily basis. It has been abandoned by followers of dogma.

SuperMouse's avatar

I don’t think that Paul Ryan has any business telling anyone what they can and cannot do with their bodies – no matter the circumstances surrounding the conception. I will always maintain that, regardless of what anyone says, the “right to life” movement would be more accurately named the “control women” movement. Unless and until Mr. Paul Ryan is impregnated as a result of a violent vicious crime, he needs to keep his Bible off women’s bodies. This might not be pleasant to hear, but I really wonder how this misogynist’s opinion would change if Mrs. Ryan became pregnant as a result of being raped. I’ll bet he would have her at Planned Parenthood in a hot second.

I agree with @nikipedia there is too much at stake with this election for there even to be the remotest chance those two could end up in the White House. Vote, vote, vote!

jerv's avatar

@Nullo I am talking about all Pro-lifers collectively paying for 100% of them, actually; not just the ones due to rape/incest, but actually facing the financial consequences of the their actions. Note what income brackets many abortion recipients are in? Brackets that are inconsistent with surviving anywhere I have lived even without the added expenses of a child.

But most of the pro-lifers I hear from won’t even pay for the people who are already born, often won’t pay for the prevention of pregnancy in the first place (thus making sex a luxury that only the upper economic tiers have, just like healthcare, or the ability to have your income grow at least as fast as inflation), and generally espouse other selfish and short-sighted opinions. “Every life is sacred” applies to the already-born as well as the unborn, so I know that many who share your opinion are not pro-life because of a belief in the sanctity of life. Therefore, it must be a matter of control and subjugation.

BTW, have you ever seen what overpopulation can do? Look at India, China, and parts of Africa. Now imagine that here. We already have an issue with increasing poverty, so why make it worse?

Mariah's avatar

@Nullo, that may be true, but nobody has an innate right to use my body for anything, even if they are dependent on it for survival.

To use an analogy, say a man is dying of kidney failure, and for whatever reason, the only treatment that might help him is to hook his ureters up to my kidneys. The procedure could have side effects and comes with risks, but after nine months, he would be cured. Of course the most gracious thing to do would be to help him. But am I a murderer if I refuse? It’s not my fault he is not independent.

And this analogy is being generous, too, as it uses a living, feeling person as an example, as opposed to an embryo or fetus that doesn’t even have the ability to feel pain or understand life and death yet.

Oh, and if we’re talking about rape, say the doctors went ahead and hooked him up to me without my consent. Yeah.

Aethelflaed's avatar

Ryan is a misogynist. I’m not really surprised; the misogyny of the pro-life movement has always been there, though Republicans have been getting more and more bold in making this The issue and not simply a issue or even a big issue. In a way, I’m at least glad that they’re no longer hiding under this bullshit, patronizing rhetoric of “being good for the women” and are at least admitting that this is actually about them controlling women and women’s bodies.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Doesn’t it come down to the Republican philosophy of ‘personal responsiblity’ though? What I mean is that birth control or condoms being used for any sex, premarital or otherwise, responsibly.

So if I got pregnant, I personally would choose to have the baby because to me life is sacred and morally I find abortion offensive to my sensibilities. As I’m almost 40 yrs old and never got pregnant (intentionally) obviously I take that responsibilty very seriously.

All most pro-lifers are asking is that other people also take it seriously because not only are you terminating a life (if you believe life begins at conception) but you are also putting yourself at physical and mental risk.

I see a lot of statements in this forum that are blatently not true, such as that a fetus can’t feel pain. Learn the facts and make your own decisions, but don’t deny the actual facts.

And as a child who’s father wanted her aborted, I have to say, I’m awfully glad my mother chose to risk all to give me a chance. I’d rather have been poor, which I was, than dead.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@KNOWITALL – I want to call attention to your next to last sentence.

“My mother chose….” – that was a choice on her part.

Why does Ryan want to take the choice from women who might disagree with your mother’s choice, on their own behalf.

Mariah's avatar

@KNOWITALL, it is disagreed upon when fetuses begin to be able to feel pain, but it is largely agreed that it doesn’t begin until at least 5 months into pregnancy. That was the basis of my statement. Obviously some abortions occur after this threshold, which is less than ideal.

And because rape was the starting topic of this thread, I just want to point out that not everyone can avoid getting pregnant by just using birth control like you say.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@KNOWITALL But “personal responsibility” does not necessarily preclude abortion. It first frames personal responsibility as something the woman should have, and not the man. But it also sees abortion as irresponsible. If I have an abortion because I cannot afford the financial cost of a kid, or because I already have two kids and feel a duty to provide for them financially and emotionally in a way I could not with another kid in the mix, or because I would be emotionally negligent, I would call all of those responsible decisions.

You should also check your science. A safe and legal abortion is one of the safest procedures one can get. Abortion is safer than a tonsillectomy, an appendectomy, and a shot of penicillin.[1] Less than 0.3% of patients experience a complication severe enough to warrant hospitalization.(pages 11–22) Abortion is 14 times safer than giving birth, and people are far, far more likely to suffer from postpartum depression than mental health issues after an abortion. There is no link between abortion and breast cancer, something so conclusively proven by the scientic community that it is recognized by World Health Organization, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. (See page 23 for where this myth comes from). While women’s circumstances and reasons for abortion are diverse and complex, “the best scientific evidence published indicates that among adult women who have an unplanned pregnancy the relative risk of mental health problems is no greater if they have a single elective first-trimester abortion than if they deliver that pregnancy.” (See) Fetal pain is a slightly contested issue within the scientific community; while certain brain connections do tend to exist at week 24 (occasionally it takes a couple more weeks), many believe there are more connections needed that take longer to “feel pain”, and more than that, consciousness only comes after birth, so much like how we do not “feel” it when a surgeon cuts into us while we are under anesthesia, fetuses do not “feel” abortions.

1.pages 23–24, citing this and this.

KNOWITALL's avatar

See, that is exactly why there is so much antagonism between liberals and conservatives on this subject. No one listens to each other as this forum displays.

I understand that most of you are Pro-Choice but I also understand that most of my conservative friends believe that abortion is murder and is morally reprehensible. I once talked to a woman who had a Downs Syndrome child and she mistakenly thought I was condoning abortion for damaged fetuses, and she went off on me saying that her child deserved the chance to live and every smile was a gift from God.

Ryan is a conservative who is appealing to the religious conservatives that agree with that. In order to be endorsed by Right To Life you have to agree with that theory and trust me, they control a lot of votes.

Believe it or not, there are a LOT of people (some not particularly religious) who agree that abortion is wrong, dangerous and leaves permanent scars. Ryan’s just doing this to get votes, and once in will more than likely become more Pro-Choice like most candidates do.

BTW Aethelflaed – there are plenty of women who would tell you that not all of the risks are physical. Like my aunt who can never have a child due to her abortion….was it God or the procedure, who knows?

All I can say is do what you want to do after lots of thought. If you can’t prevent a pregnancy through birth control or abstinence, then you either have the child or kill it. You can’t sugarcoat the truth that you are simply ridding yourself of an unwanted fetus that will someday grow into a fully autonomous human being.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@KNOWITALL – I actually sort of agree with your last paragraph.

Abortion should be rare. It should be discouraged. It is not an easy answer. But it should be the mother’s choice, not the government’s. And it should be legal.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Most conservatives I know would rather have a judge hear abortion cases because here in the US we have the ‘morning after’ pill and Planned Parenthood who will abort the child even if the mother is underrage.

The reason this is becoming even more heated is because we are giving federal money to Planned Parenthood and the conservatives are VERY offended that they are forced to pay in to a system that condones abortion through federal funding. If PP didn’t get the money, people would quit pushing quite so hard.

Although a few hardliners will always be stalking abortion doctors for God.

nikipedia's avatar

@Aethelflaed, why aren’t you listening to her? You should listen to the points she’s making and respond to them.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL The Morning After pill is consisted emergency contraception. If the fertilized egg never implants itself in the uterus, it’s in the same league as other contraceptives. Is Depo-provera murder? That is where knowing the science matters, but some pro-life people feel condoms are murder, so reason doesn’t work with them.

And it doesn’t help that some people lie; for instance, 2% of PP money goes towards abortion, yet 2% becomes 90% when talking to many anti-abortion people. When 2=90, you are dealing with somebody who can only be charitably described as ignorant.

KNOWITALL's avatar

As I mentioned before, most Conservatives feel that the morning after pill is used as a form of birth control/ abortion, and in a way encourages women to be promiscuous and irresponsible.

I cannot stress Personal Responsibility and Abstinence enough, which are the only non-violent means of not having an unwanted pregnancy.

The main argument against PP is not the percentage, what you are failing to understand is that conservatives don’t want anything to do with abortions period. Their money is being used (even if 2% which I would debate but I’m not getting into all that, I’m tired now) against their will by the government for something they morally and some religiously object to.

Some would no doubt say that killing your unborn child because of your lack of planning or lack or moral is ignorance also, Jerv. Just ask the Catholics around the world. Peace.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@KNOWITALL My office is directly over our local Planned Parenthood office. I’m on the third floor, they’re on the second floor. (I really hope they don’t get bombed.) I get a lot of people at my door looking for PP and there are a lot of people using all kinds of services at PP. They need more federal funds not less. They save everyone a lot of money by preventative care and family planning.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL According to that sort of person, mammograms and pap smears are also irresponsible, so don’t be a female unless you are financially self-sufficient as well; a uterus is a privilege for the rich. Got it!

Aethelflaed's avatar

I always wondered why we can’t have nice things. Now I know – it’s me!

Aethelflaed's avatar

@KNOWITALL I’m sorry to hear that your aunt cannot have children. I am assuming you mean she is physically unable to get and stay pregnant, even though the sentence proceeding it initially led me to believe you were saying that she could not have children for mental reasons. Unsafe abortions can do horrible, horrible things; this is part of why I feel it is so imperative to have legal, safe, affordable, and accessible abortions to anyone who wants one.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Adirondack- there are other options in our city for sliding-scale healthcare for women that do not include the option of abortions. Many of the women I know that go to PP go for the healthcare alone, so I do understand that.

@Jerv- As someone who had pre-cancerous cells removed by burning half my uterous when I was only 21 and completely broke, I find your sarcasm offensive. This should be a mature discussion.

@Aethelflaed – My aunt was raped at night at a bus stop on her way to night college for nursing. She got pregnant from that rape and since she was a virgin and this was the 1950’s and he was black, she chose to abort the baby. She was never able to conceive after that and we’re not exactly sure why, or at least she hasn’t chose to share that with me.

Safe and accessible abortions/ health care is important to me, too, of course. I don’t want any of you to think I’m bashing my sisters who chose abortions. For me, it’s not something I could do, but I accept that in 2012 we should have the choice. I don’t agree with underrage abortions or the use of this procedure as birth control or a substitute for personal responsiblity. No child or fetus should pay the penalty for our decisions. BUT I know all about incest all too well (I’m from Missouri after all) and rape.

Anyone who chooses abortion should make sure they are pschologically prepared for the guilt and regret, or possible medical complications that do still happen. Thanks for most of you for being able to discuss this serious subject today. I appreciate your thoughts.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL No sarcasm intended, merely stating a truth. PP provides many other services, and in some places is the only place that offers them on a sliding scale; not all places are cities, our even within an hours drive of one, so for many, PP is the only affordable option for certain things.
Imagine if the only place you could have had those cells removed was PP. Are your objections to the fact that a small percentage of their money goes to abortions strong enough that you would rather have cancer, or are you willing to concede that PP does many good things as well?

KNOWITALL's avatar

I am completely willing to concede PP does many good things—- as well as provide abortion referrals to underrage girls. I personally am not willing to be a part of that.

jerv's avatar

Okay, there is a start. The willingness to engage in a little give-and-take means that we can actually discuss this; something few people seem willing to do these days.

Now, my take is that underage girls are going to have sex no matter how many rules/laws we have, so abstinence isn’t an option. That means teen pregnancy happens. So, what are the options? Yank them out of school for a while as they do the childbirth/parenthood thing? Burden the parents? Put the kid into an adoption/foster system that is questionable at best and will only decline if flooded with even more babies?

There are no easy solutions, but what is your proposal? What would you have PP do instead? And who would be hurt by your solution?

KNOWITALL's avatar

They can have the baby and give it to a couple who would love it. In most cases the adopting couple would pay all expenses if the girl wanted to have it ‘on vacation’, etc…. It’s the same thing that’s happened for a two hundred years or more.

Perhaps a family member would want to raise the child, it happens quite often.

Abortion is never the only answer.

Mariah's avatar

@KNOWITALL, just curious, how do you feel about cases where it is dangerous for the woman to bear the child? Your statement “abortion is never the only answer” got me thinking about what my options would be if I were to become pregnant. I have a fairly defective body and it would be terrifying to me to have a change like that introduced. I can’t picture my body being able to handle it at all. I don’t know what other “answers” I would have, honestly.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@KNOWITALL Are there other ways of ending a pregnancy that are not abortion? Because if not, then abortion is rather frequently the only option.

woodcutter's avatar

Conservatives dislike the idea that some of their extorted monies go toward things they dislike?
I think they just dislike the idea they pay any taxes at all.
But they are in favor of growing the budget in the defense area. That part they deal with easier?
So their tax dollars give them a better value as long as lazer guided bombs hit just a couple kids, again NOT their kids

So conception by rape is an accident but still a life none the less? So don’t end it? Especially if they are forced to pay the tab.
An errant lazer guided bomb kills some kids by accident .Do they get as pissed about that if they patriotically payed their taxes to the DOD.

Just want to get a Tee Peer’s take on all this.
Even on fluther there has to be a couple of them here.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL So, who pays the prenatal/delivery costs if there are no adoptive parents lined up? And can you absolutely guarantee that that kid will be adopted instead of warehoused? Look at Romania. Look at the foster parents who basically lock the kid in a room, sit back, and collect checks from the state for allegedly caring for these children.

While I personally actually share your views on the sanctity of life, I am strongly pro-choice because I am not a delusional idealist. Some people are better off unborn, so my position is based on compassion. If you feel life is so sacred that torture is preferable to a painless death while unaware, then you are a cruel, heartless person. And if you feel that every child is wanted, at least by somebody, then you are probably dangerously delusional as well. I could never wish that sort of harm on an innocent person, nor could I be so illogical as to increase the supply of something that has little demand; adopt every child in the system, then we’ll talk.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Hey I’m not an expert in third world countried adoption rates or anything, but here in the US there are adoptive parents advertising everywhere….and a lot even adopt from out of the country.

Call me cruel and heartless but I’m not aborting anyone. It’s our personal responsibility as men and women to protect ourselves from getting pregnant if we don’t want a child or if our bodies or minds don’t want to deal with the trauma associated with childbearing (in some women.) Sorry all but that is the conservative stance. If I were to be raped, i would risk my life for that child to live regardless of my personal choice not to have children, I’d make it work.

I pay plenty of taxes, more than most since in the US you get massive tax deduction, around $1k per child per year (here anyway.) Because I don’t have children I will probably never qualify for any govt help from any agency, which is the ‘price’ I willingly pay for my choice.

@Athel – Other than abortion, you can use the morning after pill, a lot of conservatives feel it’s as bad as abortion but an abortion literally rips the fetus apart, the morning after pill aborts the ‘cells’ immediately.

Like I’ve said before, I am a woman and a liberal conservative so I am Pro-Choice with a heavy emphasis on life, which means I would encourage my sisters around the world to think long and hard about their decision, but unlike some conservatives, I don’t judge, I sympathize with my sisters for the pain they go through whatever the choice it. For some of you, I would try to remember that carrying a child for 9 mos and letting it go forever is not easy, it’s the hardest and most unselfish act of love.

BTW- I’m not here to defend every single conservative stance for a week, I was simply trying to explain the way Ryan supporters think because I’m in an area of the States that is mostly conservative and religious. Peace out.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@KNOWITALL Abortion does not literally rip the fetus apart, while Plan B “aborts” the cells immediately. Plan B (the Morning After Pill) prevents the ovum from ever dropping down into the fallopian tubes and meeting up with the sperm; it prevents conception from ever taking place. If the ovum and the sperm have already come together and created a zygote, Plan B does jack shit. I realize that lots of conservatives see Plan B as the same as abortion, but this is because they are misinformed about what exactly Plan B does. Abortion, for that matter, does not always “literally rip the fetus apart”; medical abortions do no such thing, nor do the D&C or D&X surgical procedures. (Ironically, that is what a D&E does, but it’s D&X that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban gets rid of and not D&E.)

Nor are you an expert on the adoption industry. The international adoption industry is rather sadly a highly immoral industry that often basically steals children from parents and lies to both birth and adopting parents about the situtation. The US adoption industry has a long, long history of doing the exact same thing in the pre-Roe era. And while it is true that white, healthy, happy infants with good birth backgrounds usually get adopted rather quickly, the same is not true of babies who do not fit that model. Babies that are born addicted to drugs, or with health problems, who are not white, who’s fathers are rapists, who are known to come from a family with a history of mental illness, who are not bubbly and giggly and smiling – these babies linger in orphanages and in the foster system until they are no longer babies, and then no one will take them.

It does sound like you do judge women who get abortions. If they don’t think long enough, or hard enough (and you being the judge of what’s “enough), if they “use it like birth control” (whatever that means), if you don’t think they value life enough, if they aren’t “responsible” enough, etc. You might not want to legally ban abortion, I am not sure, but you sure as hell are shaming and judging of it’s morality. And I wouldn’t call you cruel and heartless for not choosing abortion for yourself, because you should do whatever you feel is best for you, but I would call you cruel and heartless for thinking I should be forced to be legally bound to my rapist for the rest of my life (as I would be, if I were to get pregnant from rape in this state and not be able to abort), for thinking that my life is so insignificant that I do not deserve to be happy and content and successful, for thinking that I do not have a right to bodily autonomy and for not seeing the immorality in forcing someone to loan out there body to another for several months and force someone to give birth,for trying to erase the pain so many birth mothers have by giving them some martyr award, and for trivializing the pain and even fatality that both poverty and abuse can have on children. I do not have some obligation to live my life as you think I should, to abstain from sex and have sex in the ways you approve of, to put things into my body because you approve of it and not because I want to, to fit your ideals of “responsibility”.

I really wish you would either stop talking about what “conservatives” (who are not exactly a monolithic block, btw) think, or clearly differentiate between what you think and what other conservatives think. It makes it seem like you want to argue what they think, without being held accountable for those being your actual views. I’m not asking you to defend every conservative view, just your own.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL That may be the Conservative stance, but is that truly your stance? While I may be liberal enough on enough issues to be labeled a Liberal, I disagree with the party line often enough that I cannot truly deserve that label. While I could digress on how Conservatives often subjugate their own opinions for the sake of staying in lockstep with the rest of the herd, but I don’t feel like wandering that far off topic. All I really want to know here is whether that is really your opinion, or just your party’s.
The reason I want to know is partly because I know a bit of the economics behind it; trust me, that tax break doesn’t offset the cost of even bearing (let alone raising) a child, and that isn’t even considering the macroeconomic costs, or the human costs. It strikes me as odd that anybody who claims to support fiscal responsibility could ignore those, and you seem intelligent enough to at least factor those into consideration.

BTW, you did a good job at explaining how Ryan supporters think, and it’s especially refreshing to hear alternative viewpoints discussed civilly.

glacial's avatar

@KNOWITALL “I will continue to be pro-life for myself while agreeing that everyone else should be able to make their own choices about whether they can or can’t have an abortion”

What you have actually stated here is that you are pro-choice, not pro-life as we have come to define these terms. I wish that more self-identified pro-life individuals could understand that being pro-choice does not mean being pro-abortion or anti-life.

jerv's avatar

@glacial Yes, it is possible to choose to say, “I won’t get an abortion because my personal morals say it is wrong.”. Pro-choice does not mean that one wants all pregnancies to be aborted, merely that one believes that women have the right to make their own decision based on their own code of ethics, and that that decision should not be made by the government, the church, or anybody else.
Sadly, the pro-life crowd has successfully painted their opposition as anti-baby by the term “pro-abortion”, thus implying that we actually do want to end all pregnancies.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@jerv @glacial I dunno. How people use pro-choice and pro-life varies a lot. I tend to be more restrictive with how I use pro-choice – if you think abortion should be legal lest women get them some coathangers, but that it’s highly immoral and constantly put forward arguments where pregnancy and children are used to punish women for being slutty, or that fetuses are worth more than women, I’m probably not going to see you as really pro-choice (though I would still call you whatever label you preferred simply for civility’s sake). And I’ve known a lot of people who refer to themselves as “pro-life”, but who are not just for legal abortions but a general destigmatization of abortion and don’t slut-shame and have a very “do whatever’s right for you, none of my business, I have no moral superiority over you” attitude. Once you get out of the extremes on the abortion issue, both labels have such wide usage as to be basically meaningless.

jerv's avatar

@Aethelflaed What I think the dividing line between the two groups is has nothing to so with children and everything to do with whether or not there should be a law making the decision for you or not. I use the term “pro-choice” as those who feel that that decision is not for legislature to make, and “pro-life” to denote those who feel that the rights of the unborn trump every other consideration and seek to abolish choice. Personally, I would call them “anti-choice”, but they have already labeled themselves.

Personally, I am pro-choice for much the same reason you are. I would prefer all pregnancies to end in a happy child even if that means adoption, but between distrust of the adoption/foster system (I know people who have reached adulthood without ever having a family) and back-alley abortions, I feel that legal abortions performed by medical professionals in a clean environment is something we need. I also feel I have no right to make such a decision for others; I am not God.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@jerv Oh, see, I’m actually super ok with abortion. If you don’t want to be pregnant, don’t be pregnant anymore. It’s too easy to get pregnant (even using contraceptives), and between the slut-shaming and the number of women I’ve known who have felt empowered by their abortion and like they were taking control of their life and body, I just can’t find it in me to have any moral outrage or judgment on abortion. Plus, I figure women are more than capable of feeling ashamed and/or stigmatized by the rest of society for their abortion choices, so me adding on won’t somehow make that situation better.

glacial's avatar

@Aethelflaed A person’s opinion of a pregnant woman is does not define that person’s position on whether or not abortion should be legal. The terms pro-choice and pro-life are opposite extremes of the legal question; they are yes/no, black/white, 0/1 positions. The question is: should a woman have the right to choose whether an abortion is right for her (pro-choice) or should the state prohibit that choice (pro-life)?

Within either camp, there is plenty of room for either judgment of or compassion for individual pregnant women – but if you choose one of these labels, it’s an either/or situation regarding the your position on the legality of abortion.

Your definition of the terms would make @KNOWITALL pro-life (I assume, based on what she has written here) – yet she believes that a pregnant woman should have the right to choose whether an abortion is appropriate for her. How can you reconcile this? It is exactly this question which I find baffling.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@glacial The terms really aren’t just about legalities, nor are they used that way. Usage varies widely. I think you would find that in basically any feminist group, if you said “I’m pro-choice, but women should learn to keep their legs together, and it disgusts me when they use abortion as birth control, and she just needs to grow up and take responsibility for her life”, that would get shut down very quickly, and exactly zero people would consider you pro-choice. None of the people who say “I’m pro-choice, but would never get an abortion myself” are answering from a framework of it being solely about legalities; ditto for the people who say “I’m pro-life, but support a woman’s right to chose”. When Gallup did their most recent abortion poll, those who used pro-choice was at 41% while those who chose pro-life was at 50%, but that basically didn’t at all correlate with percentages on the legality of abortion. If you use the labels within a strictly legal sense, then, bully for you, but that’s hardly the most common usage, much less the usage.

And mostly, I reconcile that by thinking that there’s a difference between not wanting there to be legal barriers to abortion, and not wanting there to be societal barriers to abortion. If I’m getting @KNOWITALL‘s stance correct (and who knows, since I am confused about what she believes vs what conservatives believe), she’s not for enacting legal barriers, but she would sure as hell lecture and shame the fuck out of any woman who chose abortion, and would perhaps be in favor of non-legal institutional barriers. The law means nothing if women can’t afford it, if they can’t find an abortionist in their area, if medical students can’t find a school that will train them to become abortionists, if being an abortionist means facing constant ostracization and having to lie about your job, if it’s too costly for ob/gyns to provide that service, if women will lose their jobs and friends and family and social support if word gets out they had an abortion, if there are too many legal restrictions (that do not actually ban abortion) on abortionists and patients designed to make it such a hassle to give and get abortions that everyone gives up and goes home. Other than legalities, in exactly what way is KNOWITALL supporting women’s choices?

syz's avatar

So here’s another Conservative conundrum: studies have repeatedly and markedly shown that sex education reduces the rate of unwanted pregnancies. And yet there’s a widespread push to teach only abstinence (which even more studies have repeatedly and markedly show not to reduce unwanted pregnancies). If any group of people wants to reduce the number of abortions (which is everyone, not just anti-choicers), then why the hell would you not take action to reduce those pregnancies in the first place?!? Just how ass-backwards do these people have to be?!?

Since when are ignorance and restrictions a better option than education, knowledge, and personal freedom?

Aethelflaed's avatar

@syz But it’s not about <3 for the behbehs. It’s about controlling women’s sexuality.

syz's avatar

@Aethelflaed Exactly my point. Just more bullshit hypocrisy.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I have clearly stated several times that I am a liberal Republican (Pro-Choice, Pro-SSM, Pro-gun rights, Pro-FREEDOM) and was trying to have an intelligent conversation about what I feel real conservatives think since I’m in the middle of the Bible Belt.

Also, I will disagree with Aethel that abortion does not literally rip a fetus apart.

As far as judging anyone, that is not my right or my job as a Christian or a human being. How dare you insinuate that without knowing me, Aethel….I have tried really hard in these forums to keep my temper and continue to explain even in the face of your Pro-Abortion tirades. Educate yourself on the statistics of depression and suicide or accidental death and then feel welcome to discuss the subject with me like adults are supposed to do. Watch a video of an actual abortion while you’re at it.

Telling our sisters it’s harmless is as deceptive as anything the conservatives have said in my personal opinion and from my experience in life.

@Syz – The conservatives I know are for keeping children children as long as possible. They, and I’ll include myself in this one since I have a 13 yr old niece, think it’s wrong to just throw condoms into the hands of hormonal teens and say ‘be careful’.

I had a health class in hs, freshman year, and showing a female a live childbirth is a great form of birth control. Now we have shows like Teen Mom showing the realities of getting pregnant early on a level my niece can understand. Abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent STD’s and pregnancy.

Her father will try to control her sexuality and circumstances she’s exposed to until she’s at a more mature age. The rest of us will encourage open discussion of the possiblities and also the repercussions of ‘choice’. That is not control in my opinion.

Mariah's avatar

@KNOWITALL, I know you’ve gathered by now that by talking about conservative views, you are very much representing a minority on Fluther. And this is going to mean that there are a lot of dissenters, which will make you feel ganged up on. My apologies for that. I appreciate your cordial debate.

That said, I’m still going to debate you. XD

I have a problem with many of your arguments because you are assuming correlation implies causation. You assume your relative’s infertility was caused by her abortion. You assume a higher rate of depression among women who have had abortions is due to the abortions. Keep in mind that this group also has a higher rate of rape, molestation, neglecful upbringing, etc than the general population as well, which will skew the depression percentage upwards. I’m not saying nobody gets depressed from an abortion. I just think “you will regret it” is an implicit way that pro-lifers try to force women away from abortion.

What is your niece’s father doing to “control her sexuality?” I expect he understands that anything less than keeping her locked in the house (which I don’t condone) is not going to guarantee that she doesn’t have sex. Teens rebel. And when they do, they don’t communicate with their parents about it. That is the problem I have with abstinence-only sex ed. Hopefully she has at least been educated on birth control so that in the event that she does have sex, it is safe sex.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Mariah – Yes, I’ve noticed it’s apparently a ‘liberal’ forum, which is fine I’m used to that.

I’m not assuming my aunt’s inability to have a child was because of a faulty abortion, as a matter of fact most conservatives would say it’s God’s punishment or karma. I’m not sure of the exact reason she hasn’t chosen to share that over the years. All I was told is that she could never have another child.

As far as ‘assuming’ anything about post-abortion statistics, it’s simply not true. I could link websites but I’ll let you research that on your own. “You will regret it” is a terrible thing to say to any woman, but statistically speaking, it is a probability for some. Fair enough?

My niece is at high risk for teen pregnancy because one parent is a drug user who shot up in front of her at age 7 (mommy takes vitamins with a needle), and her father was injured in an accident so he is unable to work, broken marriage, etc… We are using the reward tactic, which is: you get phone/tv privelages now, you will get a car at 16, you will get help with college, you get two Hope chests full of expensive stuff – if you’re a good girl. She is pretty materialistic so it’s working so far.

Her mother wanted to put her on IUD but her father declined saying it condoned sex. I don’t necessarily agree but I am not the parent so we do talk about it quite openly. She told me she doens’t want to be on welfare and when discussing Teen Mom, she said the guy always leaves and the mom’s never get to have fun.

Maintaining an open forum about drugs and sex and anything else in her life is my main priority as an aunt. If she were to get pregnant for any reason, I would raise her child more than likely. She has said she wouldn’t have an abortion ‘cause it’s not the baby’s fault.’ I’m pretty proud of her.

Mariah's avatar

@KNOWITALL To be clear, I’m not saying you assumed a faulty abortion, but to me “it’s God’s punishment for the abortion” is the same as saying the abortion was the cause of the infertility, which just isn’t known. I’m also not saying you were assuming anything about the statistics. Statistics are statistics. I’m saying that you’re assuming a causal relationship between the figures. You can tell me women who have abortions are 50% (or whatever) more likely to be depressed, that doesn’t mean the abortions caused the depression.

Thanks for answering my questions. I truly like hearing other perspectives that I disagree with. I know neither one of us will convince the other, and that’s not my goal. Just am filled with curiosity as to what’s going through the heads of the people on the “other side.”

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL I think the real problem you are running into isn’t so much that we are a Liberal forum so much as we are more analytical; we use our brains more than our feelings. By coincidence, studies show that the whole “head versus heart” thing is a key difference between the average Liberal and the average Conservative. Differences that even show up on a brain scan.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Mariah – I’m absolutely not assuming a faulty abortion nor blaming God, as I mentioned I do not know the actual medical cause for her inability to bear a child. One of our many freedoms is the right to express ourselves and I appreciate discussing with you, too.

@jerv – I try to use statistics and emotions both. I try to understand both sides of any equation as well. From what I’ve seen the last week in this forum is that people like to assume I am not familiar with facts or statistics because I simply refer to them without posting my links. I am here to discuss things, not to do research for everyone in these forums or any other.

When it comes to feeding the poor or giving access to healthcare to the poor, of course my heart and my emotions tell me that that is something we as a country should do. The fact is that it’s getting harder for a lot of us to help each other because we’re all trying to survive in this economic climate with less jobs available.


jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL Good to know. There are many people for whom statistics only use is confirmation bias, but you don’t seem to be that type.

One thing that gets me is how so many of the anti-abortion crowd have no interest in helping the poor; I feel that undermines any “sanctity of life” arguments as I see the already born as people too. Same thing with “innocents have rights”; that should apply to innocent people outside the womb as well.

Mariah's avatar

@KNOWITALL Oh okay, I guess I was just confused because you earlier said “there are plenty of women who would tell you that not all of the risks are physical. Like my aunt who can never have a child due to her abortion….was it God or the procedure, who knows?” Thanks for talking with me.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@jerv, Agreed. I honestly don’t think it’s helping the poor that is the problem as many conservatives believe in charity and the tax breaks you receive for charitable donations. What seems to keep coming up is the fraud perpetrated on the system that doesn’t have enough manpower to police itself.

There’s a few schools of thought on the problems of the US. What I hear from Dems is that we have a moral responsiblity as a superpower to help the less fortunate around the world. But on the other hand, they also want all the poor here taken care of, so with are trillions in debt, where should we as a country draw the line when it comes to helping the poor?

Most Reps tend to think that if the govt were ran appropriately, we could all support ourselves without handouts or ‘help’ from anyone. They tend to feel it’s our responsiblity to help via church donations or the above-mentioned donations that receive tax breaks. It’s one way for middle-class Americans to reap a tax break that has mainly benefitted the upper classes.

The point about personal responsiblity I am always trying to make with people of other parties is that Reps in my area feel that it’s our own responsibility to either procreate or not responsibly. If I, as a woman, don’t want children, I should be responsible enough to take birth control, abstain from sex or otherwise control my reproductive processes. Which seems plausible except in instances or forced rape or incest. A lot of feel that some women use abortion as a means of birth control, repeat abortions in other words. Or as a fall back plan for irresponsibility, which is not a good thing to teach our kids.
Anyway, this has been fun, I’ll check in later.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL Yes, a 13 year old in a school with abstinence-only sex ed will have the maturity and knowledge to act responsibly. And we can all support ourselves with rising unemployment and falling wages.

I think you already know why it’s hard to take that sort of person seriously. As for where to draw the line, I say draw it indirectly by at least slowing the growth of economic inequality instead of feeding it steroids and PCP. Let rising rides lift all boats and the problem will solve itself.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Jerv- I don’t understand your sarcasm. I was a virgin until I was over 18 yrs old. If you have mature and responsible people in your life guiding you it shouldn’t be a problem. I trust that if she has questions or feels like she needs birth control, she will talk to her mother or myself.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL That may be your situation, but look around. Not every child has mature, responsible parent figures. Not every child feels they can talk to whatever type of parents they have. Not all children outgrow their naivete and ignorance because they feel they have been properly guided and educated with everything they need to know. And many of them are no longer children; they are adults young enough for me to consider them children.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I know, that’s the problem with this entire country. It’s full of irresponsible people, that’s why we’re in the shape we’re in as a society and a country.

I can’t do much about everyone’s idiocy, but I’m trying to make d&$n sure my niece and people in my life that I influence aren’t part of the problem.

I’d say all of us who feel slightly reasonable, should reach out to every person (young & old) and develop a conversation.

One day at work on my lunch walk, I saw an old lady hyperventilating. I stopped and offered to give her a ride home (she was waiting for a city bus). After work I stopped back by to check on her and she told me the only reason she’d been out was she was out of food, the last bus stopped at 6pm in her neighborhood, so she had no other options. So after looking at her bare shelves I offered her a ride to the store. Three, yes three hours later, I got her home and turns out her ‘wonderful kids’ live out of state, never check on her except cards at holidays, and this old lady is desperately in need of attention/ a caregiver. So I didn’t just leave, I lectured this intelligent lady about the dangers of living alone – and just let her know where to get free transport (senior services), etc.. It was heartbreaking.

If everyone in this country gave a crap about anything other than themselves, THAT is when America will be great again imo. A whole country of narcissists, what a shame.

woodcutter's avatar

They are his thoughts. All politicians have a shit ton of them when they are preaching to the choir. They tend to adjust their tune or sing it less loudly when they get the position they seek, sometimes even before they get it ,when they realize they are talking to strangers.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther