Jump to content

Women's Right to Choose

Nurses   (19,015 Views | 382 Replies)

River&MountainRN has 5 years experience as a ADN, RN and specializes in Primary Care, LTC, Private Duty.

2,285 Profile Views; 222 Posts

You are reading page 20 of Women's Right to Choose. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

1 Follower; 6,981 Posts; 32,686 Profile Views

8 hours ago, Scrunchkin78 said:

I wasn’t going by their views on other topics... but I guess you needed to discredit them somehow right?  I was referencing as a summary - but feel free to google Sanger and Hitler... there are plenty of pages on the subject.  However, I can just go and pull her quotes directly from her writings if it will make you feel any better.  I mean, come on, she said specifically that it was best to abort poor minorities and the disabled... SHE SAID THAT.  You can try and slant that anyway you want but it’s still eugenics.  

Yes or no.  Is it okay to abort a girl because you want a boy?

lol, Sanger was anti abortion.  pro family planning.  yes she had opinions on eugenics, it was common at the time.  and quotes out of context mean nothing.  what little I have read of her work, she was very blunt in voicing her opinion.  many quotes are taken out of context and really make her look arrogant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 Posts; 121 Profile Views

26 minutes ago, morte said:

you have been reported for your lying.

Ooooh I’m so scared. 🙄 troll on troll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Follower; 6,981 Posts; 32,686 Profile Views

8 minutes ago, Scrunchkin78 said:

Ooooh I’m so scared. 🙄 troll on troll

no threat, just statement of fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JadedCPN has 13 years experience as a BSN, RN and specializes in Pediatrics, Pediatric Float, PICU, NICU.

1 Follower; 835 Posts; 7,940 Profile Views

For what it is worth, this was for the most part a very civil and respectful disagreement amongst both sides until Scrunchkin78 came along. I really enjoyed reading other people’s respectful viewpoints and it was nice to be able to have such a discussion on a sensitive subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Persephone Paige has 15 years experience as a ADN.

4 Followers; 1 Article; 691 Posts; 3,985 Profile Views

On 5/23/2019 at 8:46 PM, sarolarn said:

Okay, so the people like who, who are "pro-life" will crowd fund the expenses that this child will incur? The medical expenses that mom will have? Schooling? Food? Adequate housing? Will your crowd fund get the time back that mom had to take off from school or work? Will your crowd fund also pay for maternity leave? What about a surrogate fee so that the baby can be adopted to an infertile couple? 

I have stated my 'opinion' which was what the OP asked for. I haven't said that abortion should be outlawed, I have said, 'keep it legal.' So, the option is out there. Drugs aren't legal, but people still find a way to acquire and afford them. So, it should be no problem to afford something that is legal, but costs money. People find ways to pay for things that are important to them. The problem is, what's important to you, isn't important to them. The citizens of this country seem to have no problem paying for things that are outlawed, such as drugs. But they will cry poor mouth when it comes to taking responsibility for any consequence for an action: rehabs, abortions, etc... 

The problem is that pro-choicers not only want it legal (which is fine by me) but they want taxpayer dollars to pay for it. That's why we are where we are. When you force others to work for your values, when they don't share your beliefs, you get extreme push back. This is what this is. It's the result of Liberals having absolute contempt for the values and beliefs of another, then telling that 'other' that they must fund what they don't believe in. In a few words, 'you pro-lifers are stupid, judgmental... now gimme your money.' This is the fallout. 

As for me, I'm doing my part in raising one 'unwanted' child and doing everything I  can to help with two more. Money and time is a pretty decent way to live my convictions, especially at my age. And it's so worth it, what gifts they've been in so many lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 Posts; 578 Profile Views

I'm signing off of this "discussion" because there is very little truly respectful consideration and exchange of ideas.  Too many of us are blasting each other with falsehoods portrayed as absolute truth, personal opinions, and stereotypes that sound a lot like distrust and hatred of women to me.  I teach my students that effective communication is accomplished by 1 part talking and 2 parts listening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tachyallday has 10 years experience as a BSN and specializes in ED/ Adult ICU/ PICU/ Acute Peds.

30 Posts; 548 Profile Views

On 5/22/2019 at 7:00 PM, LilPeanut said:

Take the fetus out intact, what happens?

I'm not here to argue this^^^ I just presented both sides as I understand them. I'm tired of each side demonizing the other. Pro-lifers aren't out to subjugate women, and turn the US into that Hulu show that is so well-done that I can't even remember the name. Pro-choicers aren't on a mission to kill babies - they feel they are protecting mothers, babies that are already here, and potential babies that will lead a terrible existence. Each truly believes it is doing a moral, ethical action.

No matter where you fall on this issue, demonizing isn't the way to change hearts or minds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 Followers; 5,600 Posts; 27,338 Profile Views

On 5/20/2019 at 10:35 AM, sarolarn said:

This is something i think most can probably agree on 💯

I don't think that is actually true. Often the same people who are pro life are also the same ones standing in the way of free or at least extremely easy to access birth control and sex education. Because, you know, SEX. And they don't want their tax dollars being spent on making it more likely for people to, you know, have SEX. There has been legal action taken to make sure that health insurance isn't required to cover birth control because that is asking people to pay for others' decisions to have sex. They especially don't want young people to have access to birth control or sex education because they believe that making these things difficult to impossible for teens to access will result in them not having sex. Many pro-lifers work actively to promote the idea of abstinence only education because they believe that making birth control affordable for all encourages sex outside of marriage. There are even factions of pro lifers who believe that any kind of birth control is morally wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

127 Posts; 580 Profile Views

Just now, Horseshoe said:

I don't think that is actually true. Often the same people who are pro life are also the same ones standing in the way of free or at least extremely easy to access birth control and sex education. Because, you know, SEX. And they don't want their tax dollars being spent on making it more likely for people to, you know, have SEX. There has been legal action taken to make sure that health insurance isn't required to cover birth control because that is asking people to pay for others' decisions to have sex. They especially don't want young people to have access to birth control or sex education because they believe that making these things difficult to impossible for teens to access will result in them not having sex. Many pro-lifers work actively to promote the idea of abstinence only education because they believe that making birth control affordable for all encourages sex outside of marriage. There are even factions of pro lifers who believe that any kind of birth control is morally wrong.

Adding on to this and probably a big part of why I'm even more passionate about this issue, is that currently the orange thing in the white house is trying to pass legislation that allows health care providers to refuse care based on their religious beliefs, which includes abortion and denying transgender individuals like myself from accessing any healthcare. Which is why I can't understand how so many people on here have used their religious beliefs to support these laws. If these pass, I could go to the dentist to have a tooth fixed and if the dentist feels that being transgender or gay is against their religion, I could be denied care. Being in favor of these anti-abortion LAWS (not whether you support abortion or not), is one step closer to allowing more discrimination based on religion. In case you all forgot, the US was once under rule of England and fought for our independence to be free from religious persecution, let's not go back to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 Followers; 5,600 Posts; 27,338 Profile Views

On 5/20/2019 at 10:35 AM, sarolarn said:

This is something i think most can probably agree on 💯

I don't think that is actually true. Often the same people who are pro life are also the same ones standing in the way of free or at least extremely easy to access birth control and sex education. Because, you know, SEX. And they don't want their tax dollars being spent on making it more likely for people to, you know, have SEX. There has been legal action taken to make sure that health insurance isn't required to cover birth control because that is asking people to pay for others' decisions to have sex. They especially don't want young people to have access to birth control or sex education because they believe that making these things difficult to impossible for teens to access will result in them not having sex. Many pro-lifers work actively to promote the idea of abstinence only education because they believe that making birth control affordable for all encourages sex outside of marriage. There are even factions of pro lifers who believe that any kind of birth control is morally wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 Followers; 5,600 Posts; 27,338 Profile Views

It's disturbing to me how religion is being used as a rationale for passing laws that affect all of us, even though all of us do not practice the same religion or any religion at all. That is why the Constitution explicitly states that there will be separation of church and state. 

But there is a movement now which seeks to get around this by claiming that giving certain religious people the right to impose their beliefs on others is protecting their "religious freedom." This is something that should actually scare all of us, no matter what our religious beliefs may be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 Followers; 5,600 Posts; 27,338 Profile Views

14 hours ago, Scrunchkin78 said:

If you view the Bible as a work of fiction then please do not proceed any further into nursing.  Tolerance and respect for the spirituality and religion of patients is a requirement... one you clearly don’t meet.

One can believe that the Bible is a work of fiction and still be a great nurse. There is no requirement that one must believe in the Bible in order to have the ability to respect their patients’ right to their religious beliefs and provide compassionate care. I know many nurses who are atheists, who think the entire concept of a God is absurd, yet do not inflict that belief on others or treat their religious partients any differently than their non religious patients.

Edited by Horseshoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×

This site uses cookies. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Read our Privacy, Cookies, and Terms of Service Policies to learn more.