It is certainly true that those who support abortion are monsters...

[Cecilie1200]

I do, thank you!

Do you have unprotected sex every time you see one? Who has the problem here?

Never mind. You could never get pregnant by the normal route. One look at you would cause impotence.

Have a nice day!

I have been married for more than a few decades. LOL. That should answer your question.

More than half of the women who have abortions in any given month are married or in a long term committed relationship. Are you seriously suggesting that married couples should forego sex unless they are prepared to give birth to a child they cannot afford to raise?

You don’t want people to have children they can’t afford. You don’t want to pay for income supports for poor families, or for their health care, or to educate their children.

You don’t want poor women to have job security if they become pregnant, nor do you want them to have maternity leave or subsidized health care.

But should a poor woman get pregnant with another child she cannot afford to raise, you want to make damn good and sure she pays dearly for having had sex, or having her birth control fail because she had a choice. She coulda kept her legs closed.

Lol
Not getting pregnant is extremely easy to do, it’s called responsibility. Most abortions are not a product of responsibility. No one should ever have to pay for someone else’s responsibility. So shut the fuck up

What does a MAN know about getting pregnant or not getting pregnant. Is your period regular, do YOU tolerate strong hormones well? Do you have any allergies to latex, or the chemicals used in spermicides? Are you willing to take drugs which increase your risk of heart attack or cancer?

Go home Russian troll.

It's useless to talk about this subject with people who can't get pregnant and usually don't use any form of birth control.

You're right. Nothing's perfect. All forms of birth control have a failure rate. Mostly because we humans make mistakes.

Or things like doctors who don't tell their patients that the antibiotic they just prescribed them will make the pill ineffective. I know someone who got pregnant that way.

Even having a your tubes tied or a vasectomy isn't 100%.

When my oldest sister was doing her OB residency she had a patient who had her tubes tied. Her husband had a vasectomy. She ended up pregnant.

I had an assistant who had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

An old boyfriend of mine sister in law had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

Nothing is perfect. However something is better than nothing. Use birth control if you don't want to be pregnant.

I just worry about women. Women are going to end up dying and in prison. Women are going to have to endure investigations into a miscarriage. In just ectopic pregnancy alone, over 65 thousand American women would die a year if they're denied that abortion. No woman ever survives an ectopic pregnancy without an abortion. Whether it's done before the woman's life is put in jeopardy or when the woman is in an ER fighting for her life because she was denied that life saving abortion. No woman should have to die because her pregnancy went wrong and no woman should ever have to justify a miscarriage.

Well, lucky for you that I'M here, then, isn't it? Been pregnant three times, used hormonal birth control methods, and actually got pregnant with my last child not only while I was on the birth control, but also on the weekend that my menstrual period started. I was also 39 at the time, so I'm not sure the odds could have been longer for that pregnancy starting without duplicating the Virgin Birth. So whatcha got that's just too specific for everyone to understand?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

I just heard, "Look, over there!" *point left* "Squirrel!" *point right* "Up there! A distraction!" *points up*

I don't even recall the last time I saw that much goalpost moving in one post. You're gonna give yourself a hernia.

How the hell am I moving goal posts.?? I am trying to cut through the bullshit, the rhetoric the hysteria, the lies and misinformation. I am trying to focus the issue on facts and logic, something that you and certain others here seem to be incapable of. To bleat and blather about how those who are in favor of CHOICE is useless and stupid.

No, you are trying to change the subject, and make the abortion debate about every damned thing under the sun EXCEPT abortion. I have no interest in the "facts and logic" of deflecting, thank you very much. Unlike you, I don't have to be afraid or ashamed of what I'm advocating.

Holy shit! Thank you!! You admit that that you have no interest in facts and logic! That is astounding, and explains so much!! Thank you! My work is done here.

 

[sakinago]

One again, your “alternative facts” get in the way.

Birth Control Effectiveness: How Risky is Your Birth Control?

If birth control in the real world, world as well as it did in controlled experiments, then 1/4 of all women in the US wouldn’t be getting abortions would they?

Oh this is rich, my “ alternative facts”? So, are you saying that if you don’t take your medication as prescribed, it’s not going to work as prescribed? That’s outrageous. I guess you learn something new everyday. “Typical use” is just code for people who don’t take their meds as prescribed. It’s a pill a day, whatever time of the day you want, whatever works for you. If you can’t handle that massive responsibility, get mirena. One gyno visit every 5 years and you’re good. I don’t know what to tell you other than duh on this one.

And no, 1/4 of all women are not getting abortions, we already went over this. There can be repeat abortions, you’re not limited to just one. And even if that were the case, that 1/4 of all women are not all on birth control. According to your own article, only 8% of them would be getting pregnant while SELF REPORTING that they use birth control. That would be the 8% who can’t handle taking a single pill a day.

So where exactly are my alternative facts? Your own article admits that yes BC is 99.9% effective. If you take an aspirin, rub it on your skin, guess what, that’s not going to have it’s drsired effect. That doesn’t mean aspirin doesn’t work. Why am I having to explain this?

Stop telling me what statistics put out by pharmaceutical companies tell us and start realizing that there is nothing about your campaign that is “pro-life”. Banning abortion isn’t “pro-life”. It’s anti-abortion and it has never worked in the history of the world.

In every jurisdiction where abortion is banned, women who have natural miscarriages are treated as “suspects” and instead of getting support and treatment, they’re treated badly.

Banning abortion doesn’t end abortion. It just drives it underground. Women end up bleeding out in hospital emergency rooms. And you do end up with orphanages full of children. Just look at what happened in Romania under communism.

Being pro-choice allows you to choose to follow your religious beliefs and carry the child to term. It doesn’t affect YOU. YOU can do what you deem right.

Again I say that jurisdictions with universal health care, mandated paid maternity leave, government funded daycare for low income families, and job security for pregnant women have half the abortion rate of the US.

Right wingers refuse to address the causes of poor women aborting their unborn children, and instead try to promote a false image of who is having an abortion and why, in order to continue to have fools like you support their war on the rights of women.

What on earth are you talking about? Give me the stats on these claims of women in countries where abortion is illegal, winding up bleeding to death in hospitals from “underground” abortions. Y’all watch too much dirty dancing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

I just heard, "Look, over there!" *point left* "Squirrel!" *point right* "Up there! A distraction!" *points up*

I don't even recall the last time I saw that much goalpost moving in one post. You're gonna give yourself a hernia.

How the hell am I moving goal posts.?? I am trying to cut through the bullshit, the rhetoric the hysteria, the lies and misinformation. I am trying to focus the issue on facts and logic, something that you and certain others here seem to be incapable of. To bleat and blather about how those who are in favor of CHOICE is useless and stupid.

No, you are trying to change the subject, and make the abortion debate about every damned thing under the sun EXCEPT abortion. I have no interest in the "facts and logic" of deflecting, thank you very much. Unlike you, I don't have to be afraid or ashamed of what I'm advocating.

Holy shit! Thank you!! You admit that that you have no interest in facts and logic! That is astounding, and explains so much!! Thank you! My work is done here.

"Holy shit! I'm going to pretend you said what I wanted to hear, so I don't have to address what you said! That is astounding, although I do it every damn time I open my mouth! Now that I have declared a victory I am too dickless to win honestly, I will run away!"

Call me when you sack up, litte man.

 

[Montrovant]

I just don't like when the argument is put so simply as whether or not a fetus is alive.

Why, precisely, given that that IS the actual point of contention here?

That is not a point of contention. I doubt even the most ardent pro-choice advocate would argue that a fetus is not alive (or at least part of a living being). Instead, I think the points of contention would be whether a fetus is a person, or whether it is a separate being from the mother.

I would guess that the fetus being a separate living being is the point you are saying is in contention.

What else is it if it isn’t a separate living being? There’s no magic going on here, it’s living, it’s human, it’s separate. There’s no magical benchmark of “oh, exactly 22 weeks since conception, it’s now a living separate being.” We all know what happens, well, most should and those who don’t are willfully blind. It meets every threshold of the scientific definition of life. It’s not it’s mother, it’s not a tumor, it’s not an extra bag of skin, it has its own unique DNA. It’s not a fly, it’s not a horse, it’s not a sock, it’s not anything that’s not a human.

Person is an abstract term. What constitutes a “person”? Why are we basing what is and isn’t life on these abstract terms when we’ve had a functioning scientific definition of human life, and life in general, a long ass time ago?

Some argue that until a certain point of development, a fetus is still a part of the mother. At least, that is the impression I have gotten from a number of people in these sorts of arguments.

As far as what is a person, it is important in a Constitutional sense. The Constitution grants various rights and protections to persons, so determining what constitutes a person can be a very important consideration.

I don't want to argue the pros or cons of abortion. I'm trying to limit myself to very specific details; in this case, the idea that the important question is whether a fetus is alive. That is just an over-simplification of the question IMO. I prefer it to be clearer, as I don't think the vast majority of people, regardless of their opinions about abortion, would say that a fetus is made up of anything but living tissue. As I said, the argument would be whether the fetus is separate from the mother, or whether the fetus constitutes a person, and at what time those things occur.

I'm trying to have the question put forth as clearly as possible, I'm not answering the question. Abortion arguments almost inevitably go nowhere.

Anyone who argues that a fetus is still part of his mother at ANY point is decades out-of-date scientifically, and should educate himself.

The Constitution doesn't actually have a damned thing to do with this, and never did. The REAL Constitution, that is, not the invented "living" Constitution that sprouts new "emanations" and "penumbras" every time you turn your back on it.

Why are you in a thread about abortion if you don't want to discuss the topic of abortion?

The question of whether or not a fetus is alive is not an over-simplification. It's the basic starting point that has to be established and acknowledged before you can discuss anything else. Abortion advocates always want to gloss past it so they don't ever have to state right out that they were wrong/lying on this subject since forever. Trying to "be clearer" without definitively answering that first question is nothing more than trying to AVOID that question and change the subject. I mean, look at you. You're trying to make it about this, that, and the other thing that allows you to slide right on by that fundamental question.

But okay, I can also answer all your other issues. A fetus is made up of living tissue, but that's a deflection, because "living tissue" is not the point. He is made up of living tissue, because he IS A LIVING ORGANISM, separate and distinct from all other living organisms, and all living organisms are made up - by definition - of living tissue. I am, you are, presumably even Cecile Richards is.

Not only is a fetus a living organism, distinct from the OTHER living organism which is his mother, he is a separate living organism from the moment of conception. There is no other point in time to which you can point with any level of scientific evidence and accuracy and say, "There. That is the moment when he became a separate organism, because XYZ."

"Personhood" is a bullshit, made-up concept which has no basis in scientific, medical fact. It is all about "feelz". There are hyper-emotional, hypo-intelligent dunderheads out there who will insist, with great passion, that their pets are "people". I can tell you that all three of my children were persons the whole time I carried them in my uterus, and with just as much conviction - although probably NOT the same level of desperation - as a woman heading into a Planned Parenthood will insist that her unborn offspring is NOT a person. Unless you have a scientific definition of "person", it all gets us exactly nowhere useful.

Abortion arguments almost inevitably go nowhere because, like you, people refuse to answer the question so we can move forward on the same, settled footing together.

You are arguing with yourself. I haven't said that a fetus is not alive, nor that it is not a separate being. I've pointed out that the question "Is a fetus alive?" is different from the question "Is a fetus a separate living being?", just as it is different from the question "Is a fetus a person?". You may not see a distinction between the question of if a fetus is alive and if a fetus is a separate living being, but it exists. I think a subject as contentious as abortion would be best discussed or argued with very clearly defined points.

The Constitution doesn't have anything to do with the abortion debate? OK....

I can discuss abortion without arguing my position about it. Besides, I'll join in any thread I care to.

Of course personhood is not a scientific term. So what? Do you think the abortion debate is based solely on scientific knowledge?

I'm not trying to make anything about "this, that, and the other thing that allows (me) to slide right on by." I'm pointing out that JC456's comment that "there is but one question, is a fetus alive?" is not the only, or even an especially accurate, question. It's a minor point, but as I said, with an issue this contentious, clearly defined phrasing seems best.

I haven't refused to answer anything. I don't recall you actually asking me if a fetus is alive, but if you've been unable to figure it out from my posts, yes, I readily accept that it is.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

I just heard, "Look, over there!" *point left* "Squirrel!" *point right* "Up there! A distraction!" *points up*

I don't even recall the last time I saw that much goalpost moving in one post. You're gonna give yourself a hernia.

How the hell am I moving goal posts.?? I am trying to cut through the bullshit, the rhetoric the hysteria, the lies and misinformation. I am trying to focus the issue on facts and logic, something that you and certain others here seem to be incapable of. To bleat and blather about how those who are in favor of CHOICE is useless and stupid.

No, you are trying to change the subject, and make the abortion debate about every damned thing under the sun EXCEPT abortion. I have no interest in the "facts and logic" of deflecting, thank you very much. Unlike you, I don't have to be afraid or ashamed of what I'm advocating.

Holy shit! Thank you!! You admit that that you have no interest in facts and logic! That is astounding, and explains so much!! Thank you! My work is done here.

"Holy shit! I'm going to pretend you said what I wanted to hear, so I don't have to address what you said! That is astounding, although I do it every damn time I open my mouth! Now that I have declared a victory I am too dickless to win honestly, I will run away!"

Call me when you sack up, litte man.

Not pretending. You said it! Own it. ! Grow a backbone.

 

[Dragonlady]

I have been married for more than a few decades. LOL. That should answer your question.

More than half of the women who have abortions in any given month are married or in a long term committed relationship. Are you seriously suggesting that married couples should forego sex unless they are prepared to give birth to a child they cannot afford to raise?

You don’t want people to have children they can’t afford. You don’t want to pay for income supports for poor families, or for their health care, or to educate their children.

You don’t want poor women to have job security if they become pregnant, nor do you want them to have maternity leave or subsidized health care.

But should a poor woman get pregnant with another child she cannot afford to raise, you want to make damn good and sure she pays dearly for having had sex, or having her birth control fail because she had a choice. She coulda kept her legs closed.

Lol
Not getting pregnant is extremely easy to do, it’s called responsibility. Most abortions are not a product of responsibility. No one should ever have to pay for someone else’s responsibility. So shut the fuck up

What does a MAN know about getting pregnant or not getting pregnant. Is your period regular, do YOU tolerate strong hormones well? Do you have any allergies to latex, or the chemicals used in spermicides? Are you willing to take drugs which increase your risk of heart attack or cancer?

Go home Russian troll.

It's useless to talk about this subject with people who can't get pregnant and usually don't use any form of birth control.

You're right. Nothing's perfect. All forms of birth control have a failure rate. Mostly because we humans make mistakes.

Or things like doctors who don't tell their patients that the antibiotic they just prescribed them will make the pill ineffective. I know someone who got pregnant that way.

Even having a your tubes tied or a vasectomy isn't 100%.

When my oldest sister was doing her OB residency she had a patient who had her tubes tied. Her husband had a vasectomy. She ended up pregnant.

I had an assistant who had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

An old boyfriend of mine sister in law had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

Nothing is perfect. However something is better than nothing. Use birth control if you don't want to be pregnant.

I just worry about women. Women are going to end up dying and in prison. Women are going to have to endure investigations into a miscarriage. In just ectopic pregnancy alone, over 65 thousand American women would die a year if they're denied that abortion. No woman ever survives an ectopic pregnancy without an abortion. Whether it's done before the woman's life is put in jeopardy or when the woman is in an ER fighting for her life because she was denied that life saving abortion. No woman should have to die because her pregnancy went wrong and no woman should ever have to justify a miscarriage.

Well, lucky for you that I'M here, then, isn't it? Been pregnant three times, used hormonal birth control methods, and actually got pregnant with my last child not only while I was on the birth control, but also on the weekend that my menstrual period started. I was also 39 at the time, so I'm not sure the odds could have been longer for that pregnancy starting without duplicating the Virgin Birth. So whatcha got that's just too specific for everyone to understand?

According to Sakinago you could not possibly have gotten pregnant, but you were also stupid for having done so. She believes the pharmaceutical companies optimistic stats.

I have a very handsome one year old grandson conceived while my daughter was on the pill. They were planning on having another baby in a year so this was a little early.

 

[sartre play]

The day a law is filed supporting taking away any rights over a mans body from him
then you can talk to me about men making laws about a women's body.
Any one who thinks women are not smart & need men to make laws about women's body's
are the monsters.

 

[Rustic]

It's kind of fun watching Blackrook meltdown. Does a Catholic have to confess meltdowns to pedophile priests?

Catholics represent Catholics and only Catholics… As far as the priests homosexual behavior goes... why would you care?

I tend to oppose pedophiles, especially when they are institutionalized. I'm funny that way.

The priests are closet homosexual’s/pedophiles… Who gives a fucking shit.
They will soon get their asses kicked

 

[Rustic]

...I said a dead baby is a dead baby, and your justifications and excuses won't wash the blood away.

A pro-abortion person marked my post as "funny."

So, pro-abortion people think dead babies are "funny."

Anyone who thinks a dead baby is funny is damned.

Dead baby parts are very profitable to the progressive’s... Fact
Feminists love to kill the helpless....

We're all waiting for the day when you have something relevant, intelligent and useful to contribute. Not holding by breath.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

More than half of the women who have abortions in any given month are married or in a long term committed relationship. Are you seriously suggesting that married couples should forego sex unless they are prepared to give birth to a child they cannot afford to raise?

You don’t want people to have children they can’t afford. You don’t want to pay for income supports for poor families, or for their health care, or to educate their children.

You don’t want poor women to have job security if they become pregnant, nor do you want them to have maternity leave or subsidized health care.

But should a poor woman get pregnant with another child she cannot afford to raise, you want to make damn good and sure she pays dearly for having had sex, or having her birth control fail because she had a choice. She coulda kept her legs closed.

Lol
Not getting pregnant is extremely easy to do, it’s called responsibility. Most abortions are not a product of responsibility. No one should ever have to pay for someone else’s responsibility. So shut the fuck up

What does a MAN know about getting pregnant or not getting pregnant. Is your period regular, do YOU tolerate strong hormones well? Do you have any allergies to latex, or the chemicals used in spermicides? Are you willing to take drugs which increase your risk of heart attack or cancer?

Go home Russian troll.

It's useless to talk about this subject with people who can't get pregnant and usually don't use any form of birth control.

You're right. Nothing's perfect. All forms of birth control have a failure rate. Mostly because we humans make mistakes.

Or things like doctors who don't tell their patients that the antibiotic they just prescribed them will make the pill ineffective. I know someone who got pregnant that way.

Even having a your tubes tied or a vasectomy isn't 100%.

When my oldest sister was doing her OB residency she had a patient who had her tubes tied. Her husband had a vasectomy. She ended up pregnant.

I had an assistant who had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

An old boyfriend of mine sister in law had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

Nothing is perfect. However something is better than nothing. Use birth control if you don't want to be pregnant.

I just worry about women. Women are going to end up dying and in prison. Women are going to have to endure investigations into a miscarriage. In just ectopic pregnancy alone, over 65 thousand American women would die a year if they're denied that abortion. No woman ever survives an ectopic pregnancy without an abortion. Whether it's done before the woman's life is put in jeopardy or when the woman is in an ER fighting for her life because she was denied that life saving abortion. No woman should have to die because her pregnancy went wrong and no woman should ever have to justify a miscarriage.

Well, lucky for you that I'M here, then, isn't it? Been pregnant three times, used hormonal birth control methods, and actually got pregnant with my last child not only while I was on the birth control, but also on the weekend that my menstrual period started. I was also 39 at the time, so I'm not sure the odds could have been longer for that pregnancy starting without duplicating the Virgin Birth. So whatcha got that's just too specific for everyone to understand?

According to Sakinago you could not possibly have gotten pregnant, but you were also stupid for having done so. She believes the pharmaceutical companies optimistic stats.

I have a very handsome one year old grandson conceived while my daughter was on the pill. They were planning on having another baby in a year so this was a little early.

Why didn't your son in law (assuming he WAS your son in law) use a condom as a backup?

 

[jc456]

...I said a dead baby is a dead baby, and your justifications and excuses won't wash the blood away.

A pro-abortion person marked my post as "funny."

So, pro-abortion people think dead babies are "funny."

Anyone who thinks a dead baby is funny is damned.

Dead baby parts are very profitable to the progressive’s... Fact
Feminists love to kill the helpless....

We're all waiting for the day when you have something relevant, intelligent and useful to contribute. Not holding by breath.

Funny I was thinking the same thing about all you leftists

 

[jc456]

I do, thank you!

Do you have unprotected sex every time you see one? Who has the problem here?

Never mind. You could never get pregnant by the normal route. One look at you would cause impotence.

Have a nice day!

I have been married for more than a few decades. LOL. That should answer your question.

More than half of the women who have abortions in any given month are married or in a long term committed relationship. Are you seriously suggesting that married couples should forego sex unless they are prepared to give birth to a child they cannot afford to raise?

You don’t want people to have children they can’t afford. You don’t want to pay for income supports for poor families, or for their health care, or to educate their children.

You don’t want poor women to have job security if they become pregnant, nor do you want them to have maternity leave or subsidized health care.

But should a poor woman get pregnant with another child she cannot afford to raise, you want to make damn good and sure she pays dearly for having had sex, or having her birth control fail because she had a choice. She coulda kept her legs closed.

Lol
Not getting pregnant is extremely easy to do, it’s called responsibility. Most abortions are not a product of responsibility. No one should ever have to pay for someone else’s responsibility. So shut the fuck up

What does a MAN know about getting pregnant or not getting pregnant. Is your period regular, do YOU tolerate strong hormones well? Do you have any allergies to latex, or the chemicals used in spermicides? Are you willing to take drugs which increase your risk of heart attack or cancer?

Go home Russian troll.

It's useless to talk about this subject with people who can't get pregnant and usually don't use any form of birth control.

You're right. Nothing's perfect. All forms of birth control have a failure rate. Mostly because we humans make mistakes.

Or things like doctors who don't tell their patients that the antibiotic they just prescribed them will make the pill ineffective. I know someone who got pregnant that way.

Even having a your tubes tied or a vasectomy isn't 100%.

When my oldest sister was doing her OB residency she had a patient who had her tubes tied. Her husband had a vasectomy. She ended up pregnant.

I had an assistant who had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

An old boyfriend of mine sister in law had her tubes tied. She ended up pregnant.

Nothing is perfect. However something is better than nothing. Use birth control if you don't want to be pregnant.

I just worry about women. Women are going to end up dying and in prison. Women are going to have to endure investigations into a miscarriage. In just ectopic pregnancy alone, over 65 thousand American women would die a year if they're denied that abortion. No woman ever survives an ectopic pregnancy without an abortion. Whether it's done before the woman's life is put in jeopardy or when the woman is in an ER fighting for her life because she was denied that life saving abortion. No woman should have to die because her pregnancy went wrong and no woman should ever have to justify a miscarriage.

I think women should be responsible for their bodies if they want to use it for sex! Not my responsibility or any one else’s

 

[jc456]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

Thank you for that brilliant, thoughtful and informative commentary. As always, you excel in your boost the level of intellectual discourse to the highest level. We can all learn so much from you. God bless.

Now, perhaps you would like to comment on the issues that I raised that can actually reduce the demand for abortion. Please tell us more about how pro life you are .

Why would I respond to your issues? They’re all excuses not issues. Fetus is alive, you can’t change that no matter how many times you wish to. People are expected to be responsible for themselves correct?

 

[jc456]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

I just heard, "Look, over there!" *point left* "Squirrel!" *point right* "Up there! A distraction!" *points up*

I don't even recall the last time I saw that much goalpost moving in one post. You're gonna give yourself a hernia.

How the hell am I moving goal posts.?? I am trying to cut through the bullshit, the rhetoric the hysteria, the lies and misinformation. I am trying to focus the issue on facts and logic, something that you and certain others here seem to be incapable of. To bleat and blather about how those who are in favor of CHOICE is useless and stupid.

No, you are trying to change the subject, and make the abortion debate about every damned thing under the sun EXCEPT abortion. I have no interest in the "facts and logic" of deflecting, thank you very much. Unlike you, I don't have to be afraid or ashamed of what I'm advocating.

Holy shit! Thank you!! You admit that that you have no interest in facts and logic! That is astounding, and explains so much!! Thank you! My work is done here.

You haven’t provided any!.

 

[jc456]

The day a law is filed supporting taking away any rights over a mans body from him
then you can talk to me about men making laws about a women's body.
Any one who thinks women are not smart & need men to make laws about women's body's
are the monsters.

If you’re so smart, why are you getting pregnant when you don’t want to be? See to me, that’s stupid and irresponsible. Just me though.

See when a dick goes in, there’s a probability that you could get pregnant! You don’t sound smart at all!

 

[sakinago]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

I’ve already said before in this thread, on your first period, you send a form into government, what BC you want, gets delivered to your door (or procedure paid for) automatically. Then say bye bye to abortion.

The fact that it still will happen doesn’t make it less than a crime. You could say the exact same thing for murder. But it’s not going to be driven underground to a heavy degree at all. Rare cases here and there, for people that can afford it (it’s going to be stupid expensive, this isn’t Botox injections we’re talking about) and still stupid enough to not use BC. That’s a fair compromise, no excuse for abortion (we’ll allow the .00001% cases of incest and rape). Don’t start with the BC failure shit either, we’re talking 99.9% efficacy rates outside of non-chemical IUDs that are still very effective. (which just means legal lingo for covering our ass if you did not use correctly). If you’re worried about condoms breaking, use lube...way easier problem to solve than getting an abortion. Take your pills, get mirena, use a condom, they’re free and delivered to your door when you need them.

That is quite an unhinged rant that completely fails to address the issue that I raised and exposed your delusion that outlawing abortion will end abortion. It is not just about birth control either. To be clear, I am not "pro abortion" I am pro choice. There is a big difference.

My question to you was, and still is : Are you really pro life? Again, these are the questions that I asked which you avoided.

Do you support......

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

This is a test to prove that you are really pro life as opposed to being "pro fetus" like most of you hysterical anti abortion people are.

There’s nothing unhinged about what I said. Whenever you hear this type of ridiculous characterization, like “unhinged”, you know you’re hovering over the target, because someone sound in their beliefs doesn’t have to resort to tactics like that and the rest of your entire deflectionary, red herring response that followed. Your issues are putting the cart, and an entire engineless RV before the horse. Whether or not a fetus is human life takes priority over anything else...because if it is, abortion is killing human life. So, if it is killing, we need to stop it obviously. It’s like not including the people who stopped looking for work, or who work part time hoping for something better into the unemployment numbers (which we still do). You’re not addressing the issue at hand when you do that...except in this case it’s life and death.

I’ll answer your stupid, red herring questions once, then no more. This is the stupidest tactic I’ve ever heard of BTW, calling people who think a fetus is human life pro-death because they don’t 100% agree with Bernie Sanders. Outrageous, and you need to grow up and have an honest conversation for once. Anyway moving on.

Meaningful comprehensive sex education, yes. Where specifically does it fail now? And how would you improve it? I’m open to any suggestions.

Available and affordable BC. I just answered that, this will be me third time now. I’m all for government sending the pill straight to your door or paying for your IUD. All for free. Why you’d have to ask that again is beyond me, unless you don’t really listen, or read, and this is a cookie cutter response. It isn’t like it’s not readily available and un-affordable now. It might be one of the most available and affordable things out there. Coffee might have it beat, but not much else. Any place that sells aspirin (very affordable and available by any metric you want to use) will also sell condoms for cheaper. There’s still vending machines with condoms in fucking bathrooms, that’s pretty damn available. You can go to a pharmacy, any pharmacy, they’re everywhere, and pick up pills for 40 bucks I think. That’ll last you a month and is just about the same cost as using a condom every day. So what exactly is so unaffordable, and unavailable with birth control now?

I’m for universal health care, but that doesn’t mean what I’m guessing you think it means. We should go with the Swiss system, that also happens to be the best in the world, by far. Look it up, I’m sure you’re confusing universal with single payer. Single payer may be fine and dandy for the average person with a cold, or basically anything treatable by a general practitioner, but blows for anyone who needs specialized care. This is why virtually all the countries that have single payer systems, still have private health insurance industries for people who can afford it. If single payer was so wonderful, private insurance obviously would not be needed, and there wouldn’t be a two tier system. At best, socialism is the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. Again this is when it is run effectively, with people who truly care. Sounds fine and dandy up until you realize that for the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people (utilitarianism), means that by necessity, you need to overlook the minority. The minority when it comes to healthcare are people who need specialized care. Something that the Swiss and US systems have the absolute best in world of, and something that’s pretty lacking in the countries with single payer systems, although you don’t hear too much complaint because it’s a minority. Moving on

Affordable housing. Even with our stupidly inflated housing prices, we have some of the most affordable housing out there. The average home size in America is 2500 sq ft. Contrast that to Europe, where the average is 900 sq ft. So do you want a government that’s already overextended that adds a trillion in debt a year, to make that an average of 3000 sq ft? They can’t cover the entitlements already in place, but sure let’s just give our children more debt, hopefully we’ll be dead by that time.

Pre school. Women gained the right to have full time jobs, now it’s expected of them to have full time jobs in our economy. They lost the right to stay at home with the kids. That’s the current state of affairs. Good for the 20% of women who want to work full time, really shitty for the other 20% who want to be housewives, and also difficult for the rest of the 60% in between who want to have plenty of family time, but want to work as well. If you want to put the financial burden of full time healthcare for free on everyone, it’s going to be really shitty for 80% of women paying for the 20% who want to work full time and have free daycare.

Food stamps already exist. They’re heavily used as well. Used in a way that suggest we never pulled out of the recession properly.

“Living minimum wage”. Show me an instance where this isn’t a job killer and I’ll be aboard. All that does is create less hires, and raises cost of goods. But yea, an 18 year old fry cook deserves 17$ an hour...no, what they need to do instead is get technical training for things like welding if college isn’t the best option for them. There’s tons of the technical jobs out there, but we send all our kids to college that maybe shouldn’t who’ll either drop out, choose a major for a career that doesn’t exist/disappearing, and then are saddled with debt, and go back to their minimum wage job. This is all a bit more nuanced, and a much more complex problem than a simple solution like “well just give them more money” can fix.

We already have laws against discrimination, so this is another idiotic topic that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, or claims that anyone who doesn’t agree with Bernie 100% is pro-death. That’s about as silly as it gets. Can we talk about the real topic that actually involves potentially life and death decisions?

 

[sakinago]

Why, precisely, given that that IS the actual point of contention here?

That is not a point of contention. I doubt even the most ardent pro-choice advocate would argue that a fetus is not alive (or at least part of a living being). Instead, I think the points of contention would be whether a fetus is a person, or whether it is a separate being from the mother.

I would guess that the fetus being a separate living being is the point you are saying is in contention.

What else is it if it isn’t a separate living being? There’s no magic going on here, it’s living, it’s human, it’s separate. There’s no magical benchmark of “oh, exactly 22 weeks since conception, it’s now a living separate being.” We all know what happens, well, most should and those who don’t are willfully blind. It meets every threshold of the scientific definition of life. It’s not it’s mother, it’s not a tumor, it’s not an extra bag of skin, it has its own unique DNA. It’s not a fly, it’s not a horse, it’s not a sock, it’s not anything that’s not a human.

Person is an abstract term. What constitutes a “person”? Why are we basing what is and isn’t life on these abstract terms when we’ve had a functioning scientific definition of human life, and life in general, a long ass time ago?

Some argue that until a certain point of development, a fetus is still a part of the mother. At least, that is the impression I have gotten from a number of people in these sorts of arguments.

As far as what is a person, it is important in a Constitutional sense. The Constitution grants various rights and protections to persons, so determining what constitutes a person can be a very important consideration.

I don't want to argue the pros or cons of abortion. I'm trying to limit myself to very specific details; in this case, the idea that the important question is whether a fetus is alive. That is just an over-simplification of the question IMO. I prefer it to be clearer, as I don't think the vast majority of people, regardless of their opinions about abortion, would say that a fetus is made up of anything but living tissue. As I said, the argument would be whether the fetus is separate from the mother, or whether the fetus constitutes a person, and at what time those things occur.

I'm trying to have the question put forth as clearly as possible, I'm not answering the question. Abortion arguments almost inevitably go nowhere.

Anyone who argues that a fetus is still part of his mother at ANY point is decades out-of-date scientifically, and should educate himself.

The Constitution doesn't actually have a damned thing to do with this, and never did. The REAL Constitution, that is, not the invented "living" Constitution that sprouts new "emanations" and "penumbras" every time you turn your back on it.

Why are you in a thread about abortion if you don't want to discuss the topic of abortion?

The question of whether or not a fetus is alive is not an over-simplification. It's the basic starting point that has to be established and acknowledged before you can discuss anything else. Abortion advocates always want to gloss past it so they don't ever have to state right out that they were wrong/lying on this subject since forever. Trying to "be clearer" without definitively answering that first question is nothing more than trying to AVOID that question and change the subject. I mean, look at you. You're trying to make it about this, that, and the other thing that allows you to slide right on by that fundamental question.

But okay, I can also answer all your other issues. A fetus is made up of living tissue, but that's a deflection, because "living tissue" is not the point. He is made up of living tissue, because he IS A LIVING ORGANISM, separate and distinct from all other living organisms, and all living organisms are made up - by definition - of living tissue. I am, you are, presumably even Cecile Richards is.

Not only is a fetus a living organism, distinct from the OTHER living organism which is his mother, he is a separate living organism from the moment of conception. There is no other point in time to which you can point with any level of scientific evidence and accuracy and say, "There. That is the moment when he became a separate organism, because XYZ."

"Personhood" is a bullshit, made-up concept which has no basis in scientific, medical fact. It is all about "feelz". There are hyper-emotional, hypo-intelligent dunderheads out there who will insist, with great passion, that their pets are "people". I can tell you that all three of my children were persons the whole time I carried them in my uterus, and with just as much conviction - although probably NOT the same level of desperation - as a woman heading into a Planned Parenthood will insist that her unborn offspring is NOT a person. Unless you have a scientific definition of "person", it all gets us exactly nowhere useful.

Abortion arguments almost inevitably go nowhere because, like you, people refuse to answer the question so we can move forward on the same, settled footing together.

You are arguing with yourself. I haven't said that a fetus is not alive, nor that it is not a separate being. I've pointed out that the question "Is a fetus alive?" is different from the question "Is a fetus a separate living being?", just as it is different from the question "Is a fetus a person?". You may not see a distinction between the question of if a fetus is alive and if a fetus is a separate living being, but it exists. I think a subject as contentious as abortion would be best discussed or argued with very clearly defined points.

The Constitution doesn't have anything to do with the abortion debate? OK....

I can discuss abortion without arguing my position about it. Besides, I'll join in any thread I care to.

Of course personhood is not a scientific term. So what? Do you think the abortion debate is based solely on scientific knowledge?

I'm not trying to make anything about "this, that, and the other thing that allows (me) to slide right on by." I'm pointing out that JC456's comment that "there is but one question, is a fetus alive?" is not the only, or even an especially accurate, question. It's a minor point, but as I said, with an issue this contentious, clearly defined phrasing seems best.

I haven't refused to answer anything. I don't recall you actually asking me if a fetus is alive, but if you've been unable to figure it out from my posts, yes, I readily accept that it is.

My point is why bring in unanswerable philosophical questions, when science has already answered those questions. Not only had it answered those questions, it already provided a solution long ago in the form of birth control.

I also never skipped over the question of is a fetus a separate living being. That answer is yes, because it is nothing else. Parasites don’t suddenly become life once they latch onto a host, even though they may depend on the host for life. They also don’t become one with the host. How is it we definitively apply that simple logic to the likes of tapeworms, but not to our own? Why are we creating a vague abstraction for humans that we don’t apply to the rest of nature. It’s because people don’t want to take responsibilty for the act of reproduction. You may not intend to have a baby. That’s just what happens when two people launch their gametes at eachother, sometimes the guys buckshot hits the girls clay pigeon. You can try to reason or justify that responsibility away, but in doing so we are overlooking cold hard facts here we’ve known for a very long time. Because sex is fun, but sex also requires responsibility. You can’t simply reason that responsibility away, but there are very simple, easy, accessible, effective steps to have the fun without the responsibility.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

Thank you for that brilliant, thoughtful and informative commentary. As always, you excel in your boost the level of intellectual discourse to the highest level. We can all learn so much from you. God bless.

Now, perhaps you would like to comment on the issues that I raised that can actually reduce the demand for abortion. Please tell us more about how pro life you are .

Why would I respond to your issues? They’re all excuses not issues. Fetus is alive, you can’t change that no matter how many times you wish to. People are expected to be responsible for themselves correct?

Are you just playing stupid games or do you really believe your own bullshit. Do you know what a straw man argument is...?? You just used that logical fallacy where you attribute an argument to me that I didn't make , and then refute it to claim victory. Where the fuck did I ever say that a fetus is not alive. ?

All of the things that I listed are in fact issue that can be used to reduce the need for abortion. That is my point that you refuse to deal with, but instead, keep bleating about the evils of abortion If you had any decency and intelligence, you would embrace them all. Apparently you have neither

 

[jc456]

It is certainly true that those who oppose legal abortion are monsters, and they are stupid monsters for thinking that outlawing abortion will actually end abortion. It will only relegate abortion to the underground, unsanitary, unqualified practitioners who do not have access to proper medical facilities and equipment putting women at enormous risk.

Lets just set the debate about when life begins, whether or not it is a matter of privacy rights, and false equivalency logical fallacies comparing it to murder. The fact is that legal or not, women will have abortions for various reasons, Why not channel the energy in ways that reduce the demand and need for abortion, of which there are many?

I would really like to know how many of the people here who rail against abortion are willing to support the direction of resources to programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies and that provide supports to people who might choose to carry a child to term if they knew that help was available. That includes:

Meaningful and comprehensive sex education
Readily available and affordable birth control
Universal health care'
Affordable Housing
Nutritional programs such as food stamps'
Affordable pre school and day care
A living minimum wage
Laws against discrimination.

If you are opposed to any or all of these things but claim to be " pro life" let me tell you something . YOU ARE NOT PRO LIFE . You are a monster, and a stupid, hypocritical monster at that.

Thank you for that brilliant, thoughtful and informative commentary. As always, you excel in your boost the level of intellectual discourse to the highest level. We can all learn so much from you. God bless.

Now, perhaps you would like to comment on the issues that I raised that can actually reduce the demand for abortion. Please tell us more about how pro life you are .

Why would I respond to your issues? They’re all excuses not issues. Fetus is alive, you can’t change that no matter how many times you wish to. People are expected to be responsible for themselves correct?

Are you just playing stupid games or do you really believe your own bullshit. Do you know what a straw man argument is...?? You just used that logical fallacy where you attribute an argument to me that I didn't make , and then refute it to claim victory. Where the fuck did I ever say that a fetus is not alive. ?

All of the things that I listed are in fact issue that can be used to reduce the need for abortion. That is my point that you refuse to deal with, but instead, keep bleating about the evils of abortion If you had any decency and intelligence, you would embrace them all. Apparently you have neither

And I said personal fking responsibility!

Is a fetus live?