sakinago
Gold Member
- Sep 13, 2012
- 5,320
- 1,632
- 280
What am I lying about? Point it out.The only reason you skipped the issue because it “won’t be agreed upon”, is because it’s the issue the pro choice side doesn’t want to discuss or have an honest conversation about. There’s an absolute zero chance to come to any sort of agreement or understanding if one side keeps avoiding the topic. The fact that no one will ever change their minds so why bother is a total cop-out. I used to be pro-choice back in the day when I never really honestly considered the issue, that was up until I was challenged and didn’t have anything to answer that challenge. Here’s my point and case, I’m not going to agree with all of your solutions to help curb abortions, yet you want to debate that instead of the main point of abortion. So why aren’t you applying the same standard of “it won’t be agreed upon so why bother”, there? The only reason I can think of why someone would do that is because it is a very common red herring that also doubles as a strawman to demonize the other side at the same time in the “see you don’t agree with helping out people in the way I want too, therefore you’re actually pro-death.” Some of your solutions don’t even address curbing abortion at all. If people have more affordable housing, they’re going to have safer sex? If we raise minimum wage they’re going to start having safer sex? If they have Medicare for all they’re going to have safer sex? Maybe there’s a slight argument for that one.It’s not a straw man argument to call out your red herrings. The issue is, whether or not it is life. It’s like debating how to lower murder rates without debating whether or not murder is wrong, and instead saying murder is still gonna happen anyway. That’s a pretty good example of a red herring, and that’s exactly what your doing. And in this scenario, you don’t have to agree with all the propositions to reduce murder if you don’t think they’re going to work with evidence backing it up.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
I maintain that it is a strawman argument for the reasons stated. I moved on from the issue of what is life and when it begins because it is futile and we will never agree. In addition, no matter what is done, abortion will not be eradicated and in fact, there are indications that there will be more abortions if outlawed vs. if we implement the programs and policies that I suggested. It is just plain stupid to think that you can end abortion
My point is not a red herring because it relates directly to the issue of reducing abortion which is the only practical goal. However, you fucking hypocrites wont admin=t any of this and keep beating the pro fetus drum. Calling yourselves pro life is a sick joke.
And what evidence is there that abortions will increase if outlawed. Are you suggesting that women would get pregnant, find and pay top dollar to a doctor or other shady character willing to break the law to provide an abortion, out of protest to the abortion ban? Or will the ban somehow cause people to forget to use birth control, and have to again find and pay top dollar to shady “doctors” to preform an abortion. I don’t see any scenario where it would make sense banning abortion would somehow increase it. What seems more likely is that it’ll decrease abortions pretty significantly for a few reasons. It’s going to be illegal, so more people will probably get their shit together and actually use birth control because there’s no more “safety net” backup plan for them. Those who still are negligent in the use of BC, aren’t going to have the option to go to PP to get one, they’d have to look to these shady “doctors” and pay top dollar to get it taken care of in a seedy motel somewhere. Those reasons seem way more likely to be the case than whatever other scenario there’d be that’d somehow increase abortion.
You’re the one coming here and posting lies and then claiming the left won’t have an honest discussion.
You have yet to have an honest discussion about the causes of abortion, and you have consistently avoided the question of a woman’s right to security of person.
You push the fiction that immorality and hedonism are driving the abortion rate instead of poverty and lack of financial or job security for poor pregnant women.
The American abortion rate is a strong statement about the failure of public policy to protect the poorest and weakest in society. On that much we can agree. If public policy provided more protections and security for the living parents, there would be no need to protect the unborn.
The causes of abortion are not using birth control when you should’ve. Using birth control means abortion is unecasary. Taking a pill once a day is not like trying to budget for your retirement. We could easily train pigeons to take a pill once a day, and that’s not even the easiest type of birth control to use. If you don’t want kids, and are having sex, use birth control. You won’t need an abortion. Ta-da problem solved.