[ubermik]

Wont they just smell like pensioners then tho

Then again, washing uses water that then has to be repurified so its not very “green” being hygenic, so chances are they probably smell of piss anyway :lol: :lol:

[ubermik]

I suppose that WHEN or IF the delusional climate hippies start blowing things up and killing people they will then (I would hope) be treated just as EQUALLY with distrust as muslims

But until the irritating idiots organisation becomes as much of a threat to freedom and life as islam is I cant see why they would need to be watched and restricted in the same way really

[ubermik]

Isnt the point always the sharp bit on the end? 8)

[ubermik]

@smiley wrote:

I agree that each woman has the right to choice. So if she wants to have an abortion – it’s her body, it’s her baby, if she wants to abort then it’s her right to do so; whether we disagree with it or not.

Well in that case, if its her body and HER baby and therefore totally HER decision we really ought to then give blokes the right to decide if they want to pay for the little b’stard seeing as they dont have ANY say in whether its born or not really :lol: :lol: :lol:

Fairs fair and all that lol

Be interesting to see how many would magically change their mind and abort once they realised it wouldnt be a meal ticket

[ubermik]

“there would not be any slutty women if those slutty men did’nt have sex with them “

Ac tually thats nonsense really, if no women were slutty then the men whether slutty or not woldnt HAVE anyone to have sex with, well not human females at least lol

And as the alleged format is man chases woman >> woman DECIDES whether to give it up or not then the final decision lies with the womb transporter, and as womb transporters are the ONLY person capable of getting pregnant AND as that pregnancy can ONLY take place in THEIR body then this equal blame nonsense is quite idiotic really as the bulk of the responsibility for the decision lies with the woman and ALL of the responsibility for getting up the duff lies with the woman

So it takes two people to agree to have recreational sex, no dispute there but it ONLY takes one person to decide to breed and that person is ALWAYS female

[ubermik]

People who cling to the delusion of specific isolated narrow spectrum information or experience as having worth also deal in specifics

Someone being burgled as a for instance will have been through many of the same thoughts and feelings as someone who has been raped, but people speaking from a closed perspective will want to claim to be an expert and wont accept any similarity as being valid despite many scientific disciplines in psychology, advertising, criminology and others only being able to function BECAUSE of overlaps and similarities

“Having assembled one piece of flat pack furniture the expert carpenter does not make” :lol:

[ubermik]

I suppose you then have to quantify what “knowledge” is tho

A muslim taught by a fanatic will claim to have knowledge, but an alleged moderate muslim will disagree and claim THEY have knowledge

Someone who is an expert in the field of planetary climate will claim to have decades of irrefuteable proof about how our climate works and what affects it, but someone who reads the guardian will claim theyre a loon and that mankind causes it

Someone who has had fast track counselling for rape will claim to have knowledge even tho it completely contradicts the foundation of psychology and sexuality and the diversity of mankind

Someone who’s only exposure to aids is the media will claim its a disease and a virus, yet most of the worlds scientific community claim otherwise

So what exactly IS knowledge? Knowledge itself is most of the time just a view or agenda, experience is infact in more cases than not a limiting rather than a broadening thing

Having lived through cancer, rape or a heart op doesnt make someone an expert on the topic even tho most would claim it lifts their “knowledge”‘s worth above that of those who havent lived through them and will as you just did claim the person who hasnt been blinkered by the experience lacks “knowledge” by virtue of lacking experience

The value and worth of “informed” knowledge is only as worthy as the source and diversity it was gleaned from. Gaining knowledge and information from a closed minded blinkered source doesnt equate in any way to being “informed” on a general topic, merely on THAT persons view which is the antipathy of actually being informed

An informed view IMO on most topics seems to be closer to a wider more diverse exposure of many views from many different perspectives, not one heard from one or more sources that all sing the same tune, thats more akin to a religion than being informed

[ubermik]

Still not following

Demographics show that people dont stop having abortions just because they arent available, nearly half the abortions carried out in the world are done by people in countries where they arent legal or allowed

So restricting them wouldnt limit the amount of pregnancies, it would just divert the abortions elsewhere or mean more women would have more kids

Unless the lifestyle changed nothing else would change till their brood of unwanted kids left them so tired and busy they couldnt get laid anymore

But as we live in a society that rewards women for irresponsible breeding via the benefits system restricting abortions which is the only other option to having them on demand is unlikely to make the possible but small percentage of repeat offenders alter their lifestyle, which again comes back to the point of one pregnancy being more of a burden than several abortions

So even IF it was a method of birth control its still less of a burden to the NHS than additional pregnancies

So I’m sorry, but I still cant see why my responses arent connected to your original post which I didnt think was exactly hard to understand at all really

Not having abortions on demand is likely to not limit the amount of unwanted pregnancies but IS likely to increase the amount of births making it create a greater rather than lesser burden NEEDLESSLY

And as the same NHS is scaling down its family planning clinics the amount of unwanted pregnancies is more than likely going to increase proportionally

The fact women who would frequently get pregnant WOULD have an abortion each time is actually a good thing as far as the NHS is concerned, because if they didnt those children would be a huge burden as by the time abortion is discussed they already ARE pregnant so not having an on demand abortion available is like trying to lock the gate a few shags after the horse has bolted really

[ubermik]

As I said earlier the ONLY thing that can be responded to is whats written

So if “My concern was people using unrestricted abortions as a method of birth control, not one abortion but many per person and many people using it, therefore, causing the health system additional services that it does not need”

Isnt saying that them NOT having abortions would be less of an “additional” burden what IS it saying?

Because if they didnt have an abortion irrespective of whether its their first of 50th the child that wasnt aborted would be a much larger burden making the abortion the cheapest least burdenesque route all round

There is also no evidence anywhere in government figures that a mass of people have regular and multiple abortions as a method of birth control either, simply that a percentage have had an abortion before which says nothing at all about frequency or reasoning whatsoever so the conclusion is foundationless

Just claiming you have been missunderstood without providing a clearer version of what you did say is to say the least pointless and will appear like the witterings of someone who wasnt missunderstood but cant think of an effective spin on what they did say, so why not just explain what you ACTUALLY meant in a clearer way IF as you claim what was written wasnt what was meant?

Simpler surely than an endless but non clairifying series of “but you missunderstood me”‘s?

[ubermik]

Well if you didnt make a mistake rather than just claiming that why not actually show why you didnt?

You could start by showing how an NHS with limited funds wouldnt be “drained” of resources by “burdens” upon those resources as thats the only way you could show the two arent one and the same

Then you could go on to show how it would be less of a drain or burden to deny a simple abortion therefore having to deal with the full pregnancy and the life of the non aborted foetus thereafter

If you can show both of those things then yeah, I’d agree you didnt make a mistake, but simply claiming you didnt just dont cut it in the slightest

[Author]

Posts