Debate Now Are you pro-life, or pro-choice?

[Gracie]

Pro Choice. Why? Because it's her body. BUT....she has a time limit.

 

[candycorn]

PRO CHOICE

Each woman decides for herself. The idea that it’s the women’s responsibility throughout is comical; as if a man wouldn’t lie to get “him some” and say that he is going to be around forever and alleviate the financial worries, the social worries, and yes, even the ever-present future concerns.

I saw the word, “convenience” from the OP. Never has it been more vivid that some people are not qualified to have this discussion.

DIdn’t watch the videos. They wouldn’t move me from the principle regardless.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I saw the word, “convenience” from the OP. Never has it been more vivid that some people are not qualified to have this discussion.

Thus the video citing an OB-GYN who performed over 1200 abortions. If not from me, take it from him. Or is his opinion no longer relevant because he holds a pro life position? Aren't you being dishonest?

 

[candycorn]

I saw the word, “convenience” from the OP. Never has it been more vivid that some people are not qualified to have this discussion.

Thus the video citing an OBG-YN who performed over 1200 abortions. If not from me, take it from him. Or is his opinion no longer relevant because he hold a pro life position? Aren't you being dishonest?

Not sure what the context was, what the demographics are of the patients, etc… Just your comment. You’re disqualified because of it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Not sure what the context was, what the demographics are of the patients, etc… Just your comment. You’re disqualified because of it.

Hardly. Anyone who isn't honest enough to watch the video is also not able to issue a cogent/relevant opinion as a result. So, who is disqualified again?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Pro Choice. Why? Because it's her body. BUT....she has a time limit.

"Time limit"

Elaborate.

 

[candycorn]

Not sure what the context was, what the demographics are of the patients, etc… Just your comment. You’re disqualified because of it.

Hardly. Anyone who isn't honest enough to watch the video is also not able to issue a cogent/relevant opinion as a result. So, who is disqualified again?

You, for thinking it is ever a matter of “convenience”.

A cherry picked video by some yahoo on a message board shouldn’t change the mind of anyone.

Would any video make you vote for HRC or take a different stance on the 2nd Amendment? You can say “no” now or lie to us all. Your choice.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“The only time I will advocate for an abortion is when the mother's life is in immediate danger, or if she is raped, and/or a victim of incest.”

From which we can infer one of two things:

You would express your opinion in the context of private society only, seeking not to ‘ban’ abortion in violation of the right to privacy.

Or,

You would compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law, in violation of her right to privacy and the Constitution, increasing the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.

If the former then there’s no issue, as you’re at liberty to express your opinion as a private citizen.

If the latter, however, we now have a civil rights issue, as you would seek to violate a woman’s protected liberty of choice and her fundamental right to make personal, private decisions absent unwarranted interference from government.

The genius of privacy rights jurisprudence is that it allows citizens of good faith to make such decisions in accordance with their own good conscience, personal beliefs, and values – consistent with the original understanding and intent of the Founding Generation.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Just as an aside, this is what I feel like right now, doing this thread here.

 

[Gracie]

Not sure what the context was, what the demographics are of the patients, etc… Just your comment. You’re disqualified because of it.

Hardly. Anyone who isn't honest enough to watch the video is also not able to issue a cogent/relevant opinion as a result. So, who is disqualified again?

I didn't watch it. I don't need to. I stand firm on pro choice. NOBODY controls my body or any other womans body. Period. End of story.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Would any video make you vote for HRC or take a different stance on the 2nd Amendment?

She would have to have the power change my mind for me, first. Then I would consider supporting her stances. The 2nd Amendment is irrelevant to this discussion. So is Hillary Clinton. Dismissed.

 

[Blackrook]

Men are not faraway observers in this issue. When my girlfriend got pregnant, we both understood that it was OUR CHILD, not HERS ALONE, and that we would raise her together, as a couple. We never even considered abortion, but I know that if my girlfriend had aborted our child, I would remain in mourning for the death of my child until my last dying day. I really wanted to have children that much, and now we have three, and we have raised them to be good, law-abiding adults, and this is the one accomplishment I am most proud of. My career accomplishments mean nothing to me compared to my children.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I didn't watch it. I don't need to. I stand firm on pro choice. NOBODY controls my body or any other womans body. Period. End of story.

I knew when I made this thread that there would be people who wouldn't change their minds either way. However, I didn't expect people to just issue arbitrary statements without even considering the points made in the video. That makes it hard for me to engage anyone in a meaningful discussion on the subject.

Perhaps this was a mistake...

 

[TemplarKormac]

You would express your opinion in the context of private society only, seeking not to ‘ban’ abortion in violation of the right to privacy.

Huh? What exactly are you getting at here?

 

[candycorn]

Would any video make you vote for HRC or take a different stance on the 2nd Amendment?

She would have to have the power change my mind for me, first. Then I would consider supporting her stances. The 2nd Amendment is irrelevant to this discussion. So is Hillary Clinton. Dismissed.

And there you have it; wholesale dishonesty.

No video will change your mind and no video will change my mind about a woman’s right to privacy.

At least I’m honest about it.

Again, anyone who characterizes the choice to abort a fetus in terms of “convenience” is disqualified from the discussion. Does it happen? I’m sure it does. Is it the frequent? No.

 

[Gracie]

Pro Choice. Why? Because it's her body. BUT....she has a time limit.

"Time limit"

Elaborate.

Depends on the situation, the health of the mother, etc. If she has carried it 7 months then decides nah, don't want to any more... well tough shit. Waited too long. Carried it 7 months, 2 more won't hurt. Then give it up for adoption after the birth. IF she is healthy enough to continue the pregnancy.

 

[Gracie]

Back in my day, we didn't have a magic pill to take if raped, to get rid of what was planted that was not asked to be planted..but FORCED on the woman. Soon as she finds out she is pregnant back then....she gets the abortion. Nothing wrong with that at all. She didn't ask to be a incubator for an asshole. Its her right to say "get that thing out of my body" and it be done. Period. But it usually took missing a period..which means a month or two after the rape.

Today, things are different.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And there you have it; wholesale dishonesty.

No video will change your mind and no video will change my mind about a woman’s right to privacy.

First of all, am I being called dishonest because I don't agree with Hillary's 2nd Amendment views?

Secondly, my mind can be changed. I've had it changed many times. There are simply some people (like you for instance) that are too firmly entrenched in their stances to give the other side a fair hearing. EVER. Yet here I am, dismissing my own religious objections against abortion to give everyone else's views fair consideration.

And you're still calling me dishonest? I beg to differ.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Remember also that citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so.

And such is the case with the right to privacy.

For example, it’s not ‘incumbent’ upon a woman to ‘prove’ when an embryo becomes a ‘person,’ or to ‘explain’ to anyone why she has decided to have an abortion – the state in particular.

Her decision to do so for whatever reason or reasons is more than sufficient, her right to privacy immune from attack by the state, where the right to exercise one’s right to privacy cannot be subject to an undue burden by government (see Planned Parenthood v. Casey).

 

[TemplarKormac]

Back in my day, we didn't have a magic pill to take if raped, to get rid of what was planted that was not asked to be planted..but FORCED on the woman. Soon as she finds out she is pregnant back then....she gets the abortion. Nothing wrong with that at all. She didn't ask to be a incubator for an asshole. Its her right to say "get that thing out of my body" and it be done. Period.

Like I've already made clear, I have no problem with that. I see that as a case where her choice has most certainly been robbed of her.