₦airaland Forum

Bastage:
Not if their mothers don't want them. They tend to be the sort of children who cost the state.
The vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are to single teenage mothers. They cost the state a fortune.

There is no iota of evidence that the products of unwanted pregnancies are a net economic burden. Not one.

The most one can say is that they are not as productive to society as the rest.

Because the majority of Irish women who want abortions travel to the UK to get it done. Are US women who don't want their babies going to travel to Mexico to get an abortion?

Firstly,before Roe v Wade, a woman who wanted abortion in Georgia but couldn't get it,could simply head up to New York and get it. That is how it should be,it's not for city liberals to force down the entire nation's throats their ideas about the issue.

As for Ireland,if the premise that unwanted babies are nuisances is correct,Ireland should be an economic basket case or at the very least,it should be worse off than the UK were babies are aborted willy-nilly.

Ibime:
even in Anambra State, abortion is legal. . . .I am sure 95% of Anambrans are anti-abortion. . . . but the other 5% are their relatives, cousins and sisters. . . . .I am sure they will complain, but sure enough, it is not a campaign issue.

Ibime, The Destroyer of Facts. No fact is an obstacle in making a point.

Ibime:
The truth is that abortion is not and should not be high on the political agenda.

[b]I am still waiting for the Republicans to tell me who would pay for all their unwanted babies since they are already unhappy with the amount of public spending.

The answer is simple;American babies are not an economic burden,to the contrary,they are an economic blessing. America,like the rest of the Western world, suffers from a demographic crisis. You have an aging society with workers having to support an ageing populace with their pension and inevitable health needs. The proportion of workers to retirees is shrinking.

At the moment, the problem is solved through immigration but immigration presents it's own challenges. In a few decades time,many parts of Europe will become an extension of Arabia.

America will deal with the consequences of pro-life policies the same way Ireland has dealt with it. Ireland today enjoys a better standard of living than most European countries,including Britain,notwithstanding the presence of "unwanted babies".

Ibime:
This is a complete fallacy. The Republicans are way more obsessed with abortion than the Dems and they are the ones who always bring it to the political table. Many European governments policies mirror the Democratic parties policies and you will never see that abortion (or even National Security) is a talking point come election time. We don't buy that crap for one second.

You make categorical claims that you can't justify. There is virtually no way of measuring who is more obsessed than the other but one thing no knowledgeable person can claim is that the issue of abortion is a flash point solely for Republicans.

If abortion doesn't figure in Democrats' thinking,why don't they ever nominate pro-lifers to run for President?

Smuggle what. . . . something that is widely practiced in Europe?. . . . it wasn't smuggled in, it was written in after a long court case. . . . some may not agree with it but those who wrote it knew it was best for the country. . . . people were already doing it illegally anyway. . . . just like alchohol in the prohibition. . . . what is the point of fighting it?

Before Roe v Wade,each state had the right to legislate on whether abortion is legal or not. What the the Supreme Court did was accord the right to abort standing along with other constitutional rights. Tell me which provision in the constitution that can be interpreted to include the right to abort.

One day some US Justices will accord themselves the right to smuggle in things in accordance with their political beliefs;incest,gay marriages and even Sharia.

davidylan:
its not very hard to do a diligent search you know.

I say McCain doesn't ''oppose renewable renewable energy'',prove me wrong. If I tell you today that Margaret Thatcher is a man,it wouldn't make sense to ask you to do "a diligent search".

The democrats also have drilling on the table, unlike the republicans however they think renewable energy is a more long term policy to pursue.
simple.

That is why US Federal subsidies for renewable energy have increased tremendously under Bush? Removing the prohibitions on drilling will cost the US zilch financially and the extra revenue can be ploughed back into renewables. A sensible energy policy will be one in which all viable energy sources are utilised

davidylan:
2. What renewables are on the table? - McCain OPPOSES renewable energy and has consistently voted against it. There is evidence . . . just google it please.

This one must be nominated for the Nairaland Surreality Award. It's one of those statements you see regularly on Nairaland which don't have even the slightest connection with reality.

3. We have not said drilling is NO solution, we have simply asked . . . how does it solve the energy crisis? America has only 3% of the world's fossil fuel reserves and consumes 25% of the world's energy output . . . you do the maths.

I don't know anywhere in the world or any time in history a supply shortage is solved by limiting supply. The US has abundant energy resources yet it has placed prohibitions on energy exploration in large swathes of it's territory in exchange for buying oil from the Arabs.

Ibime:
Please, Roe vs Wade is not a central political talking point. . . . only in a neanderthal country like America is it high on the agenda. . . . George Bush has been in power for 8 years, yet Roe vs Wade still stands. . . . so let people vote on what they can change, not what they cannot change. . . .it is very low on the agenda, although the Republicans try to make out that it is a central issue so they can garner Christian votes. . . . the truth is, even if they had the power to change it, they wouldnt - because they are already concerned about public spending, talkless of all the millions of unwanted babies the state would have to care for, not to mention the inevitable rise in crime 20 years down the line.

Firstly,Roe v Wade is an issue that obsesses the pro-choice camp as much as the pro-life camp .You are either being disingenuous or merely ignorant of the facts. There are just as many people who vote on the basis of their pro-choice beliefs as vice-versa.

In reality,Roe v Wade represents the left's obsession with the issue. If you recall,the decision in Roe v Wade effectively means that women have a constitutional right to abortion. No analysis of the constitution  can justify this. To smuggle such a "right" into the constitution is absurd.

Queenisha:
Can you now imagine a woman trying to cut it off at the 103rd minute?

In reality,it's the one-minute men that have the most reasons to worry. A man who has the self-control to last 103 minutes should have the self-control to stop when his woman says so.

Queenisha:
ROFL
Isn't that funmi's theory.
That most of all y'all land the same time it takes to cook a minute rice
I'mjust going by average figures dear

A woman's job is to raise her legs up while wailing like a deranged primate. Women should count themselves lucky that sex often lasts up to 2 minutes.

@Debo

Carry your jealousy comot here! Is it our fault that Inkler rejected your club? I heard Wenger invited a group of Indian footballers to the Emirates

While other serious clubs were running around strengthening already strong squads,your manager was AWOL. . . . rumors suggest he was seen booking a hotel room with a group of teenage Indian boys.

Queenisha:
If she says No before penetration and he continues that is rape.
If she says No after penetration,that is no rape in my books, perhaps a mistake

Haba,you don become even more hardline. Few minutes ago,you drew the line at where the man is a couple of minutes from coming,now you are suggesting the commencement of penetration. Unless you are implying that the usual duration of intercourse-from penetration to ejaculation-is 2 minutes.  

Queenisha:
Udi n'eke udi!
wait till your madam shouts no in the middle after saying yes
any man can withdraw and come down, I'm certain he was never at attention in the first place.

Personally,any little sign that the woman isn't into the act squelches my sexual desire instantly.

KarmaMod:
Depends on the lawyer  

The prosecutor will be a state lawyer and state lawyers are not exactly the best. Meanwhile the defendant has probably lined up a lawyer who could have gotten Hitler off the hook.

That is usually why rape complaints leading to convictions are abysmally low. . . .probably between 5-10% . The burden of proof is substantial because it's often a case of "he says,she says".

KarmaMod:
No what often happens is the guy has the girl drink more than she can handle where as he's still stable.

Quite frankly,once the Police check their alcohol blood level and its broadly similar,it probably won't suffice to claim that men can handle a drink better than women.

KarmaMod:
How is that a grey area. I've yet to hear of a case of the victim being drunk or mentally slow and the perpetrator isnt charged.

Btw date rapes USUALLY involves sedatives so how is it the girl's fault again? For not drinking water? I'm confused here.

It's a grey area if,as often happens,the man is also intoxicated. Where a man uses sedatives without the consent of the woman with the intent to procure intercourse,that is clearly rape.

Geniall:
And in such a case it cannot be rightly called rape until it is established that consent was not given.

Perhaps,but there are moves to place the burden of establishing consent on the man in such contexts. Effectively,a man having sex with a drunken woman would be deemed to have raped her unless he can prove that she gave a valid consent.

Queenisha:
Of course that is rape.
no questions asked.

You are confused. Incongruity between your old fashioned Onitsha mentality and the sheer horror of rape.    

Queenisha:
I hate it when people just jump into a thread  after several pages without taking time to read the thread.
In this particular case,we're talking of a woman that willingly goes with a man in a secluded area,they turn each other on, he brings out his koboko, sshe maybe even puts it in, then at some point in the act, she remembers she's a choir member and asks him to stop when he's just a couple of minutes from landing.
If he hangs in for arrival, my brother I wouldn't blame him.
She asked for it.
They had reached a point of no return,sghe ought to deal with it
That is my point

So a woman has no right to deny access to her body at any time she chooses because the man has no self-control?

I don't think any sane person in Govt in the civilised world still debates whether rape has occurred where a woman has communicated her lack of consent irrespective of the circumstances.

The only grey area is what happens where the woman is not in a position to give consent for reasons of intoxication or mental incapacity.

@Cristalz

We are so far ahead of the competition that I don't see the point in coming here to rub it in for these hapless pretenders .Imagine Dayo who never watches the Bundesliga live coming here to yarn nonsense. A league with only 2 representatives in the UCL.

Queenisha:
Gbam!!
Women ought to start taking responsibility.
And stop playing victim in cases where they obviously contributed
they are more likely to get STD's from a man than a man is to get it from them.
They end up with the unwanted pregnancies and often end up alone raising the kids and cursing the man.
Isn't it just simple common sense that the ought to guard their "Jerusalems" more jealosly?

What exactly is your point? If a woman's behavior contributed to her rape,are you suggesting the rapist should be let off or given a lighter sentence?

Geniall:
My point is, once it's called "rape", it becomes criminal. So the topic is kind of begging the question.
As to your point, what if the guy says a brisk no, even after penetration, isn't he being raped? 

That is being pedantic .Of course,in the strict sense of the word,rape is by definition criminal.

For me rape, in the pedestrian sense of the word, arises at anytime consent to penetration is denied to the knowledge of the man irrespective of the surrounding circumstances.

At worst,we can blame the woman for not taking necessary care in avoiding the rape but can't deny that rape occurred merely on account of a woman's unguardedness. If a man was to walk down the streets of Onitsha Main market clutching a transparent bag full of $100 dollar notes and was to be robbed as a result. His bone-headedness wouldn't change the fact that a robbery has occurred. Same applies to rape.

How long before someone opens a Man City fans thread while telling everyone that they have always supported Man City?

@Dayokanu

Where is your club in all this transfer mayhem? One drunk journalist suggested a few days ago that Bayern were putting in a bid.

I didn't want Berbatov,Hunterlaar or Benzema would have been better,but Berbatov would still be a great addition. I wish we could meet Bayern in the 2nd round so we can shut some people up for once.

@Ibime

Hitch writes for the Daily Mail? How can you confuse an intellectual colossus like Christopher Hitchens with his far less cerebral brother,Peter Hitchens? It's like confusing Rio Ferdinand with Anton Ferdinand;Xabi Alonso with Mikel Alonso. No insult a Balliolian o.

I'll reply the rest of your post when I'm off work.

@Sisikill

Lets do a bet. $1000 on whether the story is true or false. 

When people complain Obama is smeared by the right,they act like they haven't seen the left's smear machine at work. http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/article20065.ece

@Sean

Hope you have a totally flat tummy,lest someone will publish pictures of your ''pregnancy''.

@Eziachi

I think I saw you ask the question in the Ekiti politics thread. He seemed to be trying to use satellite photos to determine whether the elections were rigged. I think he is probably just having a laugh.

Christopher Hitchens used to say that the biggest achievement the Austrians ever attained was convincing the general public that Hitler is German.

I have to say that the biggest achievement of the left is dumping Nazism on the right,never mind the frequent reference to every racist crackpot as ''far-right''. I have always asked myself,what is right-wing in the views propounded by these crackpots?

Again,with the exception of nationalism(hardly a rightist preserve),there is nothing in the principles of the Nazis that qualifies as rightist. Since when did the right support centralization and public control of resources? Since when did the right espouse secular anti-Christian rhetoric? Since when did the right start describing themselves as socialists?

Strangely,much of the literature in the late 30s and early 40s described the Nazis for what they are,however,once the horrors of the Holocaust and the general evil of Nazism dawned on everyone,Nazism metamorphosed into a right wing organisation.  

Even more bizarrely,there have been attempts to dump Communism,given that Stalin/Mao killed far more than Hitler,on the right. Alas,such attempts at historical revisionism have been negated by the compelling force of reality.

History tells us that racists abound in both ideological divides. In reality, the right/left divide is an arbitrary divide originating from the seating arrangements in the French parliament after the French revolution. However,to the extent that this imprecise divide exist,no honest analysis of the National Socialists' philosophy would place them in the right's camp. I'm yet to meet any person who actually can justify why the Nazis are described as right-wing. Like any meme,it follows the saying that if you tell a lie often enough,it becomes the "truth".

Right,Nigeria1. . . . . is it only me or is this dude a bit of a nutter? What the hell are his photos for ?

No matter the topic at hand,he uploads the same load of BS. I just want to get to the bottom of this,that's all. I just want to know whether this is some sort of unique mental disorder.

tope2000:
please dnt  
don't corrupt me oo

My little brother is corrupting?  

@tope2000

How are you doing? Maybe we should hang out some time . . . . .I should introduce you to Little 4Play some day.

If he wants a virgin, he should go find one. You women have to put up with such bullshit. . . . it's absolutely brilliant being a man.

michelin89:
Oh dear. I already have a boo!  

Spot on . . . . and he is on his way from London. I'm already auctioning my things on Ebay to fund my relocation to Italy.

onyinye2:
You see i have better things to do then be a sex slave. Once is a enough for me. . . and him. Otherwise. . . TOO BAD.

Once? Wetin you dey do with only once,are you a grandma?

tope2000:
HA
sex hungry men dey Nairaland
doyin, david,agaba, 4play to list a few  

No put me on any list with Doyin,please. Even if it's a list of people who have won the lottery. . .I will reject it. Thank you.

michelin89:
Well I may be bad at cooking egusi but I do know what is good for me!  

This is my future wife in whom I am well please. . . .1 one-way ticket from Alitalia being bought already.