Abortion, expanded

Abortion

  • Pro-Choice til conception

    Votes: 6 15.4%
  • Pro-choice tli a given point of development

    Votes: 15 38.5%
  • Pro-Choice, but oppose abortion for sex selection

    Votes: 3 7.7%
  • Anti-abortion, always

    Votes: 3 7.7%
  • Abortion only for medical emergencies

    Votes: 3 7.7%
  • Abortion for medical emergencies and extreme defect/disease only

    Votes: 5 12.8%
  • other

    Votes: 4 10.3%

  • Total voters
    39
While I believe abortion should be illegal, I encourage Liberals to abort their fetuses while they still can. I agree with Liberals that the world would be a better place with a lower birth rate. A lower Liberal birth rate that is.

That is all.
 
The USA should start actually being the land of the free and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and whether you want to let them do that or not. That's why you're fighting in the middle east, ultimately, it's because you want everyone to live by your rules.
 
I'm probably a bigger fan of retroactive abortions than of prenatal ones, although I unswervingly believe that abortion is a matter that only the women can decide.

But there's certainly a few people (not many, but a few) I'll proform a retractiove abortion on if I ever get the opportunity.

No, I'm not a monster, nor do I think of myself as a tough guy.

But taking the people out I have in mind would constitute my doing this world a public service, believe me.
 
The USA should start actually being the land of the free and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and whether you want to let them do that or not. That's why you're fighting in the middle east, ultimately, it's because you want everyone to live by your rules.

To have true 100% freedom would be anarchy. Humanity needs to draw some lines in the sand.

How about we make the world a deal. The world stops asking the USA for help in ANY situation and leaves us to govern and worry only about ourselves and we will stop giving a rats ass about the problem areas of the world. We don't go do something we are demonized, we go do something we are demonized. Pick your poison and stick to it cause the back and forth is really getting old.
 
The USA should start actually being the land of the free and stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and whether you want to let them do that or not. That's why you're fighting in the middle east, ultimately, it's because you want everyone to live by your rules.

You're absolutely right. Damned nosey busybodies should mind their own business and stop worrying about whether or not I take out a huge insurance policy on you and then push you off a cliff to collect. What's it to THEM if I kill you? It's not THEIR life being affected. They're interfering with my freedom here!

Thanks for that little bit of illogic. I needed a laugh today.
 
The only illogicism was introduced by you Cecilie, equating being free to being free to kill. You sound like a frustrated republican NRA member.

Broke, I agree the US should just pull out of everywhere, South korea, Saudi Arabia, Irak, Afghanistan, Germany, Japan... and cut your military by 75%. Then the world would be a more peaceful place and you'd have enough money to fund universal healthcare instead of spending your money dropping bombs on people you don't know.
 
The only illogicism was introduced by you Cecilie, equating being free to being free to kill. You sound like a frustrated republican NRA member.

Broke, I agree the US should just pull out of everywhere, South korea, Saudi Arabia, Irak, Afghanistan, Germany, Japan... and cut your military by 75%. Then the world would be a more peaceful place and you'd have enough money to fund universal healthcare instead of spending your money dropping bombs on people you don't know.

The world wouldn't be more peaceful. North Korea will still be a bunch of asshats hell bent on bombing people to prove they have big.. umm.. sticks.. ;)

Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, they will all war till they destroy each other or the Islamic extremists will take over and head straight for us.

The world is a horrible place and for those of you who honestly think the US is responsible for this terror lets just use WW2 as an example. We didn't even want in on that fight, well the every day person didn't want in on it. Guess what, the fight came to us anyways.

Where are you from anyways? Because honestly universal healthcare is not really the answer. In England, there is a gentleman who has an eye condition, something very treatable right now. What sucks for him is that his country won't treat the condition until he looses sight in at least one eye because you only need one to be functional. He doesn't get the option of paying extra to keep both eyes, he gets no choice. How does that seem right? There is a reason people from Europe and Canada come to the US for medical treatment, because here they get the option.
 
The only illogicism was introduced by you Cecilie, equating being free to being free to kill. You sound like a frustrated republican NRA member.

Broke, I agree the US should just pull out of everywhere, South korea, Saudi Arabia, Irak, Afghanistan, Germany, Japan... and cut your military by 75%. Then the world would be a more peaceful place and you'd have enough money to fund universal healthcare instead of spending your money dropping bombs on people you don't know.

Dumbass, the topic is abortion, aka the killing of a fetus in utero. The issue being argued in the topic of abortion, the reason people are opposed to it, is because they view it as killing other human beings. When you try to argue the topic of abortion on the basis of "we should be a free country and stop minding other people's business", you are arguing that people should have the legal freedom to kill each other, and that it's nosy for anyone to think the government has the right to make laws governing and prohibiting killing people.

If you can't be bothered to know what the issues being debated are, you have no business commenting on them, and you should do us all the courtesy of shutting your back teeth on your ignorance and being proud of how willfully uninformed you are somewhere else.
 
What is the difference between option 1 and option 4, apart from the wording?

I'd think that Pro Choice till conception means the morning after pill is alright but anything outside of that is wrong and anti abortion always would be against even that.
 
Be honest...
My honest opinion is that you don't get to decide for someone else.

How liberally are you willing to apply that argument?

Good question. I guess you don't get to decide for someone else, but Obama does:

Obama’s answer to a question that a woman asked about her mother’s health care is incredibly illustrative as to the bullet the elderly dodged today:

Member of the audience. Jane Sturm: “My mother is now over 105. But at 100, the doctors said to her, ‘I can’t do anything more unless you have a pacemaker.’ I said, ‘Go for it.’ She said, ‘Go for it.’ But the specialist said, ‘No, she’s too old.’ But when the other specialist saw her and saw her joy of life, he said, ‘I’m going for it.’ That was over five years ago. My question to you is: Outside the medical criteria for prolonging life for somebody who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, a quality of life, or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age?”

Obama: “I don’t think that we can make judgments based on people’s ’spirit.’ Uh, that would be, uh, a pretty subjective decision to be making. I think we have to have rules that, uh, say that, uh, we are going to provide good quality care for all people. End-of-life care is one of the most difficult sets of decisions that we’re going to have to make. But understand that those decisions are already being made in one way or another. If they’re not being made under Medicare and Medicaid, they’re being made by private insurers. At least we can let doctors know — and your mom know — that you know what, maybe this isn’t going to help. Maybe you’re better off, uhh, not having the surgery, but, uhh, taking the painkiller.”


Who is the "we're", and why are they going to be making the decision and not the patient and their doctor? Now all of a sudden it's okay for the government to be making healthcare decisions for the patient. It should be interesting to hear how abortion advocates are going to try to hold both positions to keep the government out of what a woman does with her body due to the privacy she is entitled too between herself and her physician, yet try to stand behind socialized healthcare where the government is going to make your health decisions for you.

The rest of his statement is simply amazing in that he feels perfectly fine in allowing the government to tell your doctor what you're allowed and not allowed based on their criteria. At least now, even if your health insurance won't be paying for it, you still have the option to pay for it yourself whereas with Obama's health care, even that option will be taken away.
 
Last edited:
What is the difference between option 1 and option 4, apart from the wording?

I'd think that Pro Choice till conception means the morning after pill is alright but anything outside of that is wrong and anti abortion always would be against even that.

That is funny because I chose "Pro-choice til conception" and I took it to mean that you have the choice as to whether or not to bring a child into the world up until the point of conception. From that time on, the choice is made you cannot "backup and punt" so to speak.

I do not equate the "morning after pill" in that statement at all.

Immie
 
What is the difference between option 1 and option 4, apart from the wording?

I'd think that Pro Choice till conception means the morning after pill is alright but anything outside of that is wrong and anti abortion always would be against even that.

That is funny because I chose "Pro-choice til conception" and I took it to mean that you have the choice as to whether or not to bring a child into the world up until the point of conception. From that time on, the choice is made you cannot "backup and punt" so to speak.

I do not equate the "morning after pill" in that statement at all.

Immie

I interpretted it likewise, which is why I cannot fathom a material difference from this option and option 4 on the poll.
 
My honest opinion is that you don't get to decide for someone else.

How liberally are you willing to apply that argument?

Good question. I guess you don't get to decide for someone else, but Obama does:

Obama’s answer to a question that a woman asked about her mother’s health care is incredibly illustrative as to the bullet the elderly dodged today:

Member of the audience. Jane Sturm: “My mother is now over 105. But at 100, the doctors said to her, ‘I can’t do anything more unless you have a pacemaker.’ I said, ‘Go for it.’ She said, ‘Go for it.’ But the specialist said, ‘No, she’s too old.’ But when the other specialist saw her and saw her joy of life, he said, ‘I’m going for it.’ That was over five years ago. My question to you is: Outside the medical criteria for prolonging life for somebody who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, a quality of life, or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age?”

Obama: “I don’t think that we can make judgments based on people’s ’spirit.’ Uh, that would be, uh, a pretty subjective decision to be making. I think we have to have rules that, uh, say that, uh, we are going to provide good quality care for all people. End-of-life care is one of the most difficult sets of decisions that we’re going to have to make. But understand that those decisions are already being made in one way or another. If they’re not being made under Medicare and Medicaid, they’re being made by private insurers. At least we can let doctors know — and your mom know — that you know what, maybe this isn’t going to help. Maybe you’re better off, uhh, not having the surgery, but, uhh, taking the painkiller.”


Who is the "we're", and why are they going to be making the decision and not the patient and their doctor? Now all of a sudden it's okay for the government to be making healthcare decisions for the patient. It should be interesting to hear how abortion advocates are going to try to hold both positions to keep the government out of what a woman does with her body due to the privacy she is entitled too between herself and her physician, yet try to stand behind socialized healthcare where the government is going to make your health decisions for you.

The rest of his statement is simply amazing in that he feels perfectly fine in allowing the government to tell your doctor what you're allowed and not allowed based on their criteria. At least now, even if your health insurance won't be paying for it, you still have the option to pay for it yourself whereas with Obama's health care, even that option will be taken away.

Am I the only one who remembers the leftists bitching about medical decisions being made by insurance company bureaucrats instead of doctors and patients? But I guess that's okay if it's a GOVERNMENT bureaucrat.
 
Abortion is for people who aren't limited by an intellectual straight-jacket of random morality. It's just another human, there are 6 billion+ already and we're heading for 9 billion+ by mid-century. You folks have your heads screwed on wrong, save every last person but who cares how many other species go extinct? Time to get of the human ego trip of being such superior beings. We're a real danger to all the other species out there.
 
Abortion is for people who aren't limited by an intellectual straight-jacket of random morality. It's just another human, there are 6 billion+ already and we're heading for 9 billion+ by mid-century. You folks have your heads screwed on wrong, save every last person but who cares how many other species go extinct? Time to get of the human ego trip of being such superior beings. We're a real danger to all the other species out there.

Don't start with us, Eugenics Boy. YOU are "just another human" out of 6 billion+, and you of all people do NOT want to start encouraging anyone to think in terms of "let's do away with the surplus", if you catch my drift.
 
Pro-choice only for rape, incest, medical emergencies, high-risk pregnancies, and defects/disease. Otherwise, adopt the child out.
 
No abortion for sex selection? How are you going to determine the motives of people who get abortions?

Oh and you left out

Pro-life except for medical emergency, or rape.
 
Abortion is for people who aren't limited by an intellectual straight-jacket of random morality. It's just another human, there are 6 billion+ already and we're heading for 9 billion+ by mid-century. You folks have your heads screwed on wrong, save every last person but who cares how many other species go extinct? Time to get of the human ego trip of being such superior beings. We're a real danger to all the other species out there.

That is an utterly ridiculous and unfounded comment. What the heck makes you think we don't care about other species? Life is precious to me and I believe that abortion when used as it most often is used... as birth control because someone didn't want to bother with protection, is a terrible and senseless thing. That doesn't mean I don't care about the environment too.

Immie
 
Abortion is for people who aren't limited by an intellectual straight-jacket of random morality. It's just another human, there are 6 billion+ already and we're heading for 9 billion+ by mid-century. You folks have your heads screwed on wrong, save every last person but who cares how many other species go extinct? Time to get of the human ego trip of being such superior beings. We're a real danger to all the other species out there.

That is an utterly ridiculous and unfounded comment. What the heck makes you think we don't care about other species? Life is precious to me and I believe that abortion when used as it most often is used... as birth control because someone didn't want to bother with protection, is a terrible and senseless thing. That doesn't mean I don't care about the environment too.

Immie

Its ok Immie.. he is probably just a member of PETA.
 

Forum List

Back
Top