I managed to get some 3gp files onto my Windows 2000 machine, and RealPlayer One popped up asking to download some extra data from the web—so I hooked it up, let it load, and yet somehow it still claims it can't play 3gp files.
They are video files, plain and simple—but I'm stuck since I can't run anything except wmv or avi.
What specific software do I need to install to actually get these 3gp clips running?
As I recall, the US may have restricted abortion rights last year or the year before—previously, it was permitted up to 7 or 8 months, perhaps even right up until birth?! Now it’s been scaled back to maybe 6 months, or possibly even 5.
In the EU, legal abortion is generally only allowed up to about 2.5 months into the pregnancy.
So, what do you all think—is it somehow "better" to let teenagers make these calls entirely on their own, without any judgment if they choose an abortion?
After all, an embryo lacks a soul—it can't feel pain, nor can it hold a grudge over a mother's decision to terminate.
We should be looking much closer at established mothers who already have two or three children but still opt for an abortion; these individuals actually make up the largest demographic in American abortion statistics. We need a real analysis of this—the motives vary wildly: financial instability, failing marriages, paternity issues, or other factors. The middle class might be doing okay for now, but they remain obsessed with independence and avoiding financial strain at the expense of having children. To what end, and why?
The folks over at Charles Schwab were hounding me too—finally dragged me in just so they could start lecturing me. They hit me with questions about mortgages, then insurance, then investments, but I just shut it down by showing them my strategic financial plan. He looked it over, admitted it was solid, and called me smart—then he stopped bothering me entirely. So what’s the catch?
Is the whole game just that they get a kickback for every client they bring through the door?
There is no excuse—she isn't working, she’s old-school, and she lives in Greece. Why don't you just fly out to visit her one day and then tell us whether it's possible or not?
YOU CANNOT JUDGE PEOPLE YOU DON'T KNOW.
That’s the point—nobody truly knows anyone. You see someone on the street in Chicago, they look perfectly fine and composed, but you have no idea what they are actually going through or why.
Fine, then how can abortion be legal up to 75 days after the first period?! That’s nearly 60 days—give or take. By that point, a 56-day-old embryo has already transitioned deep into a fetal stage.
Megan Reed said:Excuse me, but in my book, that woman has zero excuse. An abortion once—fine. Twice is pushing it—but next time, I’d personally see to it she loses her ovaries and uterus. She should get a divorce. Or deal with contraception. Let her husband get sterilized. 😈
Allowing choice is one thing—it's quite another to allow it to be abused. 😠
I agree with that point—but you can clearly see we're looking at an alcoholic and a woman living in poverty. Everyone involved lacks basic education; they've likely never even heard of marriage counseling, and they'd probably find it humiliating to seek advice on contraception. Perhaps the woman feels too much shame to even visit a gynecologist. Essentially, there is a massive lack of awareness here. That's a mitigating factor—but we are also to blame, specifically the social workers. They ought to be warning them—pushing them toward being educated about birth control and making informed choices! How is it that no one bothered to explain the necessity of contraception to her?
Megan Reed said:For me, paying monthly for birth control is a much better investment $17 than gambling with my health, my future, or living with a guilty conscience. It’s simple math. $533. 😉
As for married couples... if they're already struggling financially but still want to avoid more kids, they should just save up enough cash to have the husband get sterilized once and for all. If they change their minds down the road, the procedure for men can be reversed.
That isn't true—it's not a guarantee. There's only about a 45% chance of success. You need to think LONG and hard before getting a vasectomy.
What happens when your contraception fails? If you've closed that door forever, what then?
I know a woman who underwent forty-five abortions. Why? Because her husband is an alcoholic—does whatever he wants without ever consulting her.
And now what? Most cases aren't like that—but you can't truly know their reasons since you aren't living in their kitchen or inside their heads.
In that specific scenario, I'd say the reasoning holds weight—though I feel nothing but sorrow for all of them. Even God will forgive them; they simply didn't know any better.
Jessica Perez93 said:Every medical site out there claims an embryo lasts up to 60 days. I didn't just make that up.🙂
I know you aren't making it up—but we really need to look at that ultrasound for a 56-day fetus. To me, it doesn't even look like an embryo. It’s gotta be some error on the website.
Megan Reed said:The main thing is that these eighteen-year-olds actually read the fine print... right? As if we’re all just heading straight to hell because we’re spineless enough to follow anyone who crosses our path. Give me a break. 😈 😈 😈
This is exactly why I can't stand these protesters!!! I was at the Holy Spirit cathedral a while back—saw two absolute lunatics. One girl, maybe nineteen, greasy hair, meticulously rearranging pictures of the Virgin Mary and various church brochures just to make sure everyone noticed. Then there was this twenty-five-year-old guy, looking rough, playing guitar in the corner. Just mindless strumming echoing through the hall. People were turning their heads in annoyance. It even made the local news—how they were distracting young women trying to focus on their confession.
Megan Reed said:So, when looking at total abortion numbers, teenagers only account for about 8%—they aren't the "culprits." The lion's share (66%) comes from women aged 30-39—who are mostly married and typically already have two kids.
Let's assume many of them are educated, employed, well-off, and even Catholic.
That means they are the ones who were active at 16—with their (?) husbands 😁—without considering the fallout. How does a mother of two then decide to kill a poor, unwanted third child? Ha? I'd love for someone to explain that logic to me.
Meanwhile, our dear moralizers lecture 18-year-olds who lack schooling, jobs, money, or support... it seems they are barking up the wrong tree.
These people would force even a 13-year-old victim to carry a pregnancy, so what is their stance on these mothers? 😠
There—those are the crushing facts.
This is exactly what I’ve been DRUMMING ON ABOUT!!!! I can somewhat grasp why certain girls choose abortion—there's usually a heavy justification for such an act. But what I am trying to wrap my head around are these mothers who already have two or three children and go for an abortion for "other" reasons. Someone claims it isn't a big deal because they just don't want more kids. It's possible they are finished having children, but how do they live with their conscience? I'm trying to understand. If they are struggling financially, maybe it makes sense. But if they are wealthy and educated, I fail to see a compelling reason among them. One woman claims her conscience is clear because she doesn't have time to dwell on it—she's too busy managing the household, the family, and raising the kids she already has. Is that actually possible...?
Look, if you want to dodge unnecessary discomfort and messy complications, an abortion should happen around the 6-week mark from the start of the last period. I know plenty of women don't track this closely since irregular cycles are common—but let’s say there’s no sign of anything after 40 days. You take a pregnancy test immediately; results are instant, giving you maybe a day or two—five at most—to process everything before proceeding with the procedure. At that stage, the embryo isn't even developed enough to be recognizable as looking like a human being.
Perhaps a more effective solution would be limiting abortion access to the 6-week mark—it’s simple logic. This would essentially force both women and their partners to stay proactive and make timely decisions regarding their choices.
They showed that movie at my high school during a religious studies class—well, my specific class didn't watch it, but some kid in the classroom next door nearly fainted from the shock. 🙄 😁
It just goes to show how the pro-life crowd will use any tactic imaginable to manipulate people into avoiding abortion. Personally, I find the whole approach deeply flawed. If these activists are truly as morally driven and uncompromising as they claim, then they should be the ones providing warm homes and financial lifelines to the women and mothers who choose to carry a pregnancy to term. They ought to be right there by their side through the entire pregnancy and for years afterward until the child reaches adulthood—showing them firsthand that the child was raised well and is ready for life.
The pro-life movement seems to specialize in creating guilt complexes and constant judgment, only to vanish when things get difficult—leaving young women and mothers to face isolation and social stigma alone after they decide to give birth. It makes it easy to see why some women ultimately choose abortion. For me, though, the moral weight remains—because what we see in that image isn't some trivial matter; you can't just casually decide to end a life.
Exactly—that’s the Nilsson guy. I remember seeing reports about how he captured those incredible shots showing the transition from an embryo to a fetus and eventually into a baby...
I recall hearing somewhere that the legal line is drawn at 2.5 months after conception—after which things change legally. Looking at that specific image, it looks halfway formed and doesn't even resemble a person yet. But now, looking at that 56-day shot, it actually looks human—so what's the point? What difference does it make?
Somewhere, our friend Septic posted a series of photos by that famous 3D artist—it’s clear the fetal shape is already well-developed by three months. Honestly, they probably drew that line at 2.5 months, right after which abortion becomes illegal. Logically speaking, before that arbitrary line is drawn, an embryo shouldn't look this much like a human being. This one from 56 days looks incredibly human—no sane person could just cut through a life like that.
The point is, protesters storm hospitals and shove photos of four-to-five-month-old fetuses in everyone's faces, trying to force the idea that a murder occurred. They even showed the film Silent Scream in a school to illustrate how abortions are performed on six-month fetuses here in the USA—basically implying that girls should never be allowed to seek an abortion.
But take a closer look at those embryo images from the 2-month mark; they're right up against that legal threshold. It’s starting to look undeniably human—how can anyone claim there's no heart in breaking that thin line of life? (Personally, that last photo feels off—I read on an official CDC website that a fetus doesn't truly start looking human until the third month. Is this 56-day one premature, or just some staged imagery?)
On the other hand, if they decide to go through with it, both partners need a total overhaul of their lifestyle and long-term planning. They have to commit fully to parenting so neither feels resentful—ensuring both individuals feel fulfilled in their own lives. Maybe we could all end up better off?!
Hannah Davis18 said:Don't try to play me for a fool—at least, not with my money.
Living too slow? — That would imply she needs to suffer through sleepless nights and a guilty conscience just to prove she’s actually making an impact—as if a lifetime of restlessness were some sort of prerequisite for a life well-lived.
That’s nonsense—the one who actually feels the sting won't even bother showing up, while the others have already handled their own business. It won't happen. And that—right there—is where the whole argument falls apart.
As for this—it’s hardly worth discussing—every man carries his own cross to bear.😳
I don't think that's quite right. If I were a woman in that position, I’d choose to have the child—my conscience would be clear. But if I were an eighteen-year-old facing a crisis right before high school graduation, I might still go through with it, even if I had no idea how to handle the fallout... or perhaps I'd view an abortion as the only logical way out. Either way, if I chose that path, I doubt I'd ever find peace of mind.
Several women on this forum have shared their experiences—though the rules clearly state I shouldn't name names here. One woman was incredibly blunt about her regret regarding that dark moment—she still carries the bitterness of it—and how much she mourns the loss of her child. She realized too late that love alone would have been enough; apparently, for a child, pure maternal affection outweighs any material gain or ulterior motive. In a way, I get where she's coming from—but then again, others argue there is no point in grieving something that simply no longer exists in any meaningful sense.