Posted on 05/07/2022 11:04:16 AM PDT by grundle
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
May 7, 2022
The Los Angeles Times recently published this article, which the paper seemed to think was a good argument in favor of abortion.
But I read the entire article, and I don’t think it’s a good argument in favor of abortion. Instead, I think it’s a good argument against having casual, unprotected sex with irresponsible men.
Another think that I dislike about this article is that it makes no mention whatsoever of the father(s) of the three children that this single woman had already given birth to before aborting her fourth child.
So this unmarried woman has three children out of wedlock.
Then she has unprotected sex, with an irresponsible man whom she considers to be the exact opposite of father material, gets pregnant, and has an abortion.
Nothing in this article is a good argument for abortion.
Instead, the article is a good argument against having casual, unprotected sex with irresponsible men.
But...how else am I supposed to get the fresh human blood that I need....? They always get suspicious if I ask them if they want to get some coffee or see a movie.
unprotected sex with irresponsible men and women.
2 “fatherless” kids on welfare and you get your tubes tied… mandatory. Of course the rats want a population of stupid, government dependent voters.
I am willing to bet that her four children (including the child she aborted) had four different fathers.
“Instead, the article is a good argument against having casual, unprotected sex with irresponsible men.”
And for tying the tubes of both the women and the men who bring to life a child they can’t support, and to give that child up for adoption.
What we do instead is give them more money for every child they create and can’t support. And then we praise them for being single parents as a result of irresponsible behavior.
We used to shame that sort of thing.., and that got better results.
Okay, you made me read that vile article again, just to verify my memory. I remembered correctly: there is no mention of “unprotected” sex in the article. Condoms are only 85% effective. You don’t have to get very far into the pro-abort case before you understand that they consider abortion as an essential backup if birth control fails. They will continue to make that case successfully as long as people think they problem is “sex without a condom” instead of “sex outside a loving, committed marriage”.
You're a blogger.
You would know more about that than most folks.
Why are people looking at pregnancy as a medical problem that needs to be "solved" with contraception methods and abortion? The female body is DESIGNED to get pregnant as a result of sexual intercourse. Pregnancy is a feature, not a bug.
The problem here is that our culture accepts sexual activity among unmarried people as a right that must not be infringed on in any way. It is a culture that actually frowns on sex in marriage only, marriage between one man and one woman.
Plenty of posts here seem to support the idea of casual, recreational sex between unmarried people and the conceived child is seen as a mistake, an intrusion. "Oh, if only they'd used a condom." "Oh, if only she'd been responsible and been on the Pill."
There was another thread on what "dating" means these days. It's become a degraded activity. Men expect women to automatically be on contraception of some sort.
Men are fundamentally the same as they’ve been for 10,000 years, they’ll have sex with anything that will let them. What has changed is that women, who have always been the gatekeepers of sex, now ignore societal norms that were designed to keep them from becoming unwed mothers and thus confining themselves and their children to lives of destitution.
If you want to point fingers then point them at this woman who has chosen to be a whore. Keep your legs closed, it’s a time proven way to avoid getting pregnant.
Exactly. Women are the ones who pick these men and are too irresponsible to use contraception.
OTOH there’s rape and incest and usually it’s the woman who’s blamed for bringing that on her.
Geez, does anyone still read the LA Times?
I remember a time when ALL driveways in the neighborhood had a copy of the Times in the early morning. I remember delivering the LA Times with a friend’s older brother and the paper went on 90+% of the driveways.
Now, when I walk my dogs in the morning, I see NO driveways with copies of the Times.
The LA Times has spent decades insulting their readers with woe-is-me stories of illegal aliens who couldn’t catch a break or were treated poorly by the “racist” citizens of the community.
But there's no mention of her using birth control either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.