I don't mean any offense to
you and your child, but that looks nothing
like a baby nevermind human to me. If a
bunch of those came down from the sky,
we'd all be crying aliens, not "oh look,
more humans!".
There was a very similar plot in Dr. Who
recently -- the one with the Adipose,
where humans were being used to incubate
these little baby aliens. Actually, the
little baby aliens were a lot cuter than a
human fetus!
Joined: 02 Jan 2005 Posts: 360 Location: Ontario, Canada
Thanks: 4
Thanked:1
Posted: 05-27-08 00:19am
Darkmoon
wrote:
Uh, msrosie, when did
Nightangel give information concerning her
age on this thread, and how do you know
what her personal financial situation
is?
Where did I say anything about her age or
financial situation?
|
Moo
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 1066 Location: London
Thanks: 21
Thanked:111
Posted: 05-27-08 06:19am
nightangel73
wrote:
I'm 7 weeks pregnant, a time
when a lot of women are having their
abortions ..
this is how my baby should be looking
now..
Can't imagine killing this at your own
will..
the difference is that you want to
be pregnant, you want to have A baby, it
makes a huge difference to how you see a
5week old embryo
|
Dannzibelle
Supporter
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 Posts: 3775 Location: South East, England
Thanks: 27
Thanked:11
Posted: 05-28-08 14:07pm
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
|
Dannzibelle
Supporter
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 Posts: 3775 Location: South East, England
Thanks: 27
Thanked:11
Posted: 05-28-08 14:07pm
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3966 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 05-28-08 14:38pm
Dannzibelle
wrote:
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
mrosie, there are always exceptions. I'd
like you to meet Danni.
nightangel74
wrote:
Can't imagine killing this
at your own
will.
I know we are never going to agree, but I
had an abortion at six weeks, and have
never regretted it. It is possible.
|
aochriss
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 456
Thanks: 73
Thanked:124
Posted: 05-28-08 22:20pm
Dannzibelle
wrote:
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
Do you think minors should be having sex
and also having babies?
|
aochriss
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 456
Thanks: 73
Thanked:124
Posted: 05-28-08 22:21pm
Birch
wrote:
Dannzibelle
wrote:
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
mrosie, there are always exceptions. I'd
like you to meet Danni.
nightangel74
wrote:
Can't imagine killing this
at your own
will.
I know we are never going to agree, but I
had an abortion at six weeks, and have
never regretted it. It is possible.
Ditto to all of that.
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3173 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 74
Thanked:104
Posted: 05-29-08 08:18am
aochriss
wrote:
Dannzibelle
wrote:
msrosie
wrote:
Nightangel, your picture
doesn't sway me one iota. I think any
minor that gets knocked up should either
abort or place for adoption. Minors
shouldn't even be having sex, let along be
parents.
Makes me an aweful mother then i guess
Do you think minors should be having sex
and also having
babies?
I dont think it should be promoted but
there are some minors who are extremely
independant. I find alot of them living
off welfare or their parents the rest of
their life, so were paying tax money to
support them, when there is people who
really need it and are refused.
Considering I got preggo at 19 I already
had a good job and a house, my
circumstances were different but being a
teenager didnt harm anything, just miss
some pieces of my life. I dont think alot
of them can handle it emotional or
financially.
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 05-29-08 16:25pm
Minors should really not be having sex and
absolutely should not be having children
because the female especially has a very
high dangerous physical risk for pregnancy
and birth.
Sex is for two ADULTS who love each other
- that's how I'll teach sex to my child.
When that child becomes an adult, if they
decide they want more promiscuous sex then
that is their choice.
|
Dannzibelle
Supporter
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 Posts: 3775 Location: South East, England
Thanks: 27
Thanked:11
Posted: 05-30-08 15:07pm
For the record i was never promiscuous,
i've only even slept with the father of my
daughter.No i don't think all teenagers
should be having sex and having babies but
i do think that there are some out there
who are perfectly capeable of being
responsible enough to raise a child.
I have nothing but complete respect for
every woman who has an abortion because
it's something i could never have the
strength to do just like i hope that those
women who have had abortions have respect
for me and the way i amliving my life and
raising my daughter
|
amino65
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Apr 2006 Posts: 263
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 05-30-08 19:07pm
Danni,
I've always thought you were a wonderful
mother, you are very mature, and your
daughter is flourishing under you care,
you shouldn't have to explain yourself,
although I understand that sweeping
generalizations can be frustrating. You
have all my respect.
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 05-30-08 19:31pm
Responsible vs Physically Capable...
Someone could be the most responsible teen
on the planet, but that doesn't change the
fact that she's only 13 and incapable of
truly giving birth.
Older teens may be capable of vaginal
birth, but are often not responsible
enough. The earliest anyone should really
be giving birth if they have unusual high
responsibility and are physically capable
is around 16 years old.
|
aochriss
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 456
Thanks: 73
Thanked:124
Posted: 06-05-08 23:48pm
cmyked
wrote:
Responsible vs Physically
Capable... Someone could be the most
responsible teen on the planet, but that
doesn't change the fact that she's only 13
and incapable of truly giving birth.
Older teens may be capable of vaginal
birth, but are often not responsible
enough. The earliest anyone should really
be giving birth if they have unusual high
responsibility and are physically capable
is around 16 years
old.
I agree but I'd also add that I don't
think people should be having sex and
having children unless they can
financially support themselves.
Responsible vs Physically
Capable... Someone could be the most
responsible teen on the planet, but that
doesn't change the fact that she's only 13
and incapable of truly giving birth.
Older teens may be capable of vaginal
birth, but are often not responsible
enough. The earliest anyone should really
be giving birth if they have unusual high
responsibility and are physically capable
is around 16 years
old.
I agree but I'd also add that I don't
think people should be having sex and
having children unless they can
financially support
themselves.
Well I agree, and that's why I said "high
responsibility", because that would
include and income.
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3966 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 129
Thanked:12
Posted: 06-06-08 13:12pm
Not to sidetrack, but I just read this
article about this family with 19 kids,
expecting #20.
For many couples, one perfect child is
enough. For others, two or three is ideal.
But no matter what the number is, most
American parents reach a point at which
they say “Enough!”
Not Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar. The
Arkansas couple just welcomed their 17th
natural child and still aren’t ready to
declare their family complete.
“I’d like to have more,” Michelle
told TODAY co-host Matt Lauer Monday from
the family’s 7,000-square-foot home in
Tontitown, Ark. Next to Michelle sat her
husband of 23 years, Jim Bob Duggar, and
arrayed around and behind them were 16 of
their children. The newest member of the
family, Jennifer, born last Thursday,
slept peacefully in her mother’s arms.
The family gets a lot of comments when
others see them for the first time, but
most of them boil down to a few themes,
said Jim Bob.
“They always ask, ‘Don’t you know
what causes this? Are you Catholic or
Mormon? Are they all yours? Are you a
school group?’”
The Duggars are none of the above. They
are members of an evangelical Christian
movement called Quiverful, which holds
that children are a blessing from God and
that husbands and wives should gladly
accept all the children they are given.
Couples in the movement also believe that
the husband is the head of the household
and the wife is submissive to him, while
the children are submissive to both. The
girls wear long dresses or skirts and
tops, while the boys wear slacks and polo
shirts.
When the Duggars were married in 1984 (she
was 17 and he was 19), they didn’t want
children immediately, feeling they could
not afford them. After four years,
Michelle stopped taking birth control
pills to have their first child, then went
back on birth control after giving birth.
[more at the link]
|
amino65
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 10 Apr 2006 Posts: 263
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 06-06-08 13:59pm
That article was interesting. The woman
must really enjoy having children to do it
17 times! Good for her that she is
providing the financial and emotion
support to all her children.
I did find that bit about Quiverful (is
that how you spell it) and how the woman
is supposed to be submissive to the
husband a little out there, and how the
men wear slacks and polos and the women
are supposed to wear dresses or skirts.
And I wasn't sure what to think about the
couple believing that they themselves took
the "life of their child" even if they
miscarried which they believe was due to
her taking birth control.
And wow, two sets of natural twins?
|
aochriss
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 456
Thanks: 73
Thanked:124
Posted: 06-06-08 20:06pm
cmyked
wrote:
Quote:
I agree but I'd also add that I don't
think people should be having sex and
having children unless they can
financially support
themselves.
Well I agree, and that's why I said "high
responsibility", because that would
include and
income.
Oh.ok. I understand now. Sorry about
missing that.
|
aochriss
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 456
Thanks: 73
Thanked:124
Posted: 06-06-08 20:18pm
Quote:
When she got
pregnant anyway only to suffer a
miscarriage, which they attribute to the
birth control pills, the couple felt that
they had taken a child’s life. They
prayed for forgiveness and for as many
children as God decided to give
them.
The ignorance in this statement is
astounding. They killed a lot more
embryos while they were conceiving their
17 kids than when she was on the pill.
The average rate of implantation failures
and miscarriages is over 80%, so for every
successful birth, many fertilized eggs and
embryos died.
When she was on the pill she didn't
ovulate, so there were no eggs to get
fertilized and therefor no fertilized eggs
failing to implant.
Here is the saddest part of this family:
Quote:
With so many children, there is a sign-up
list in the kitchen for children who feel
they need one-on-one time with a
parent.
I wonder how many children can tell when
they need one on one time?
|
cmyked
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Posts: 294
Thanks: 50
Thanked:4
Posted: 06-06-08 21:49pm
aochriss
wrote:
Quote:
When she got
pregnant anyway only to suffer a
miscarriage, which they attribute to the
birth control pills, the couple felt that
they had taken a child’s life. They
prayed for forgiveness and for as many
children as God decided to give
them.
The ignorance in this statement is
astounding. They killed a lot more
embryos while they were conceiving their
17 kids than when she was on the
pill.
It's not common knowledge that attempts to
conceive cause the death of embryos, but
it is common myth that birth control kills
them. You can't honestly be angry at them
for not knowing something that isn't
commonly told.
Quote:
The average rate
of implantation failures and miscarriages
is over 80%, so for every successful
birth, many fertilized eggs and embryos
died.
When she was on the pill she didn't
ovulate, so there were no eggs to get
fertilized and therefor no fertilized eggs
failing to implant.
Here is the saddest part of this
family:
