Where are you?

[ChrisL]

This thread has veered off in a strange direction. How did we get to discussing abortions? Lol.

 

[BluesLegend]

I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects?

We shouldn't, they should be aborted, especially trisomes. We already have too many healthy children to care for without additional sick ones.

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

By your logic we should screen the unborn for defects and kill any who would be a financial burden. If only we could screen for addictions we could kill those unborn too and nip the problem right in the bud. Ooops.

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

BTW, I really do not consider a fertilized egg or an embryo to be a person. They are POTENTIAL people, but at the time when they are an egg or an embryo, they are just that - an egg or an embryo. I would certainly not, however, be against shrinking the time period in which a person would be allowed to abort the child. I would be fine with limiting it to the 1st trimester of the pregnancy unless there is a life threatening or altering complication. I think by the end of the 1st trimester, a person should have decided.

Yes there is common ground for terminating a pregnancy very early on. I would not argue over a couple dozen cells that have divided. But over 100,000 2nd trimester abortions a year? Disturbing.

The numbers are incredibly high. I don't know who all these people are, but relatively speaking that is not an extremely large number considering we are a country of over 300 million people.

Personally I believe that number should be much lower. If the life of the mother is in danger okay, but a 2nd trimester abortion just because the mother doesn't want the baby I'm not okay with that. Certainly after birth the mother loses 100% of her choice right, she isn't allowed to kill the baby for any reason. So should that threshold be dialed back if so how far?

Abortion is a particularly difficult societal issue that people have struggled with for a long time. In my 50+ years on the planet the boundaries on abortion and a number of other societal issues have been pushed to extremes, I'm just wondering where it ends. How far are we willing push the boundaries on what is considered acceptable?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

This thread has veered off in a strange direction. How did we get to discussing abortions? Lol.

Probably because both ISIS and the American Taliban hate faggots and legal abortion. Peas in a pod.

 

[BluesLegend]

On the other hand I become unwillingly involved when the government uses my money to fund abortions.

Which doesn't happen, by law, you goddamn idiot...

Translation, you are ignorant of the law and government funding. Seriously, get a pet cat or something I don't have time to pay attention to the likes of you.

 

[ChrisL]

This thread has veered off in a strange direction. How did we get to discussing abortions? Lol.

Probably because both ISIS and the American Taliban hate faggots and legal abortion. Peas in a pod.

I guess. They're okay with raping little girls though, the irony.

 

[BluesLegend]

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

You ignore reality, not my concern, and there are many solutions to abortion, you just don't approve of most of them since it means unmarried women can still fuck...

You must be really desperate to attempt to engage me in a discussion. Let me guess most people have you on ignore, shocker.

I don't post for you, you stupid bitch. This is a Public Forum, lean what that means.

Calm yourself, you will pop a vein or have an epileptic fit or something.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

This thread has veered off in a strange direction. How did we get to discussing abortions? Lol.

Probably because both ISIS and the American Taliban hate faggots and legal abortion. Peas in a pod.

I guess. They're okay with raping little girls though, the irony.

So is the American Taliban, see: Duggars, The...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

You ignore reality, not my concern, and there are many solutions to abortion, you just don't approve of most of them since it means unmarried women can still fuck...

You must be really desperate to attempt to engage me in a discussion. Let me guess most people have you on ignore, shocker.

I don't post for you, you stupid bitch. This is a Public Forum, lean what that means.

Calm yourself, you will pop a vein or have an epileptic fit or something.

Nope, I'm trying to introduce you to reality, and the Internet where this is not a private fucking conversation over herbal tea.

 

[BluesLegend]

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

You ignore reality, not my concern, and there are many solutions to abortion, you just don't approve of most of them since it means unmarried women can still fuck...

You must be really desperate to attempt to engage me in a discussion. Let me guess most people have you on ignore, shocker.

I don't post for you, you stupid bitch. This is a Public Forum, lean what that means.

Calm yourself, you will pop a vein or have an epileptic fit or something.

Nope, I'm trying to introduce you to reality, and the Internet where this is not a private fucking conversation over herbal tea.

You seem angry, perhaps therapy or a soothing cup of hot chocolate would help.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You ignore reality, not my concern, and there are many solutions to abortion, you just don't approve of most of them since it means unmarried women can still fuck...

You must be really desperate to attempt to engage me in a discussion. Let me guess most people have you on ignore, shocker.

I don't post for you, you stupid bitch. This is a Public Forum, lean what that means.

Calm yourself, you will pop a vein or have an epileptic fit or something.

Nope, I'm trying to introduce you to reality, and the Internet where this is not a private fucking conversation over herbal tea.

You seem angry, perhaps therapy or a soothing cup of hot chocolate would help.

Americans are dumb as dog shit, of course I'm angry.

 

[Coyote]

I think a lot of women who are getting abortions may be drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. too. Are you conservatives ready to pay for these drug addicted babies and their medical care and their hospital stays. These are unwanted children. Their own "moms" (if that is what you would call them) do not want them, and you want to make these women give birth? Oh yeah, GREEAAAT idea.

By your logic we should screen the unborn for defects and kill any who would be a financial burden. If only we could screen for addictions we could kill those unborn too and nip the problem right in the bud. Ooops.

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

Nope.

 

[Coyote]

I think a lot of women who are getting abortions may be drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. too. Are you conservatives ready to pay for these drug addicted babies and their medical care and their hospital stays. These are unwanted children. Their own "moms" (if that is what you would call them) do not want them, and you want to make these women give birth? Oh yeah, GREEAAAT idea.

By your logic we should screen the unborn for defects and kill any who would be a financial burden. If only we could screen for addictions we could kill those unborn too and nip the problem right in the bud. Ooops.

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

No, I am just a person who tries to take on a realistic perspective of the world around me. I don't think it is a good idea to force women, who may not be very good people, to have babies.

Also, I find it rather hypocritical that a lot of conservatives would like to force women to have babies but then have NO plans on how to care for all of these unwanted babies.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.

Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.

Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".

When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?

 

[Coyote]

I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects?

We shouldn't, they should be aborted, especially trisomes. We already have too many healthy children to care for without additional sick ones.

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

By your logic we should screen the unborn for defects and kill any who would be a financial burden. If only we could screen for addictions we could kill those unborn too and nip the problem right in the bud. Ooops.

Nice straw man. Perhaps you should try concentrating on what I actually said. Are you willing to pay for these unwanted children's upbringings, as they reside in state custody or foster homes?

You suggested that helpless human fetuses should be killed because nobody is willing to pay for the drug addicted mom and baby's medical care and hospital stays. I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects? Your attempt to excuse abortion puts you on a very slippery slope.

Because those babies are WANTED by their parents. It is up to the potential parent whether or not they will become a parent, not you!

You are in free fall on this slippery slope now, so the bar should be if you don't want the baby just kill it in the womb? Does the mom have no responsibility to the fetus for getting pregnant in the first place?

Sadly, no, some women do not. Some people are drug addicts, some are just not very good people, etc. I'm sure some have perfectly legitimate reasons too. My point being, it's really not MY business. If it was someone I know or a family member of mine, then that's a little different. I feel then I would have some advice to give, but still not my place to force a pregnancy or a baby on another person. It's their decision. If they want to do that and live with that, that's on them. The people who actually want to be parents and would be good parents won't be aborting their children.

Not all people - not even most people - have abortions because they are "bad people" or even drug addicts. They find themselves pregnant, at a bad time in life, for what ever reason. Maybe birth control failed, maybe she's still in highschool, maybe the family lost their jobs or their homes.

 

[BluesLegend]

By your logic we should screen the unborn for defects and kill any who would be a financial burden. If only we could screen for addictions we could kill those unborn too and nip the problem right in the bud. Ooops.

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

No, I am just a person who tries to take on a realistic perspective of the world around me. I don't think it is a good idea to force women, who may not be very good people, to have babies.

Also, I find it rather hypocritical that a lot of conservatives would like to force women to have babies but then have NO plans on how to care for all of these unwanted babies.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.

Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.

Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".

When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?

100,000+ 2nd trimester abortions a year are just a microscopic clump of cells? Why don't you return when we can have an honest discussion which my guess will be never.

 

[Coyote]

I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects?

We shouldn't, they should be aborted, especially trisomes. We already have too many healthy children to care for without additional sick ones.

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

BTW, I really do not consider a fertilized egg or an embryo to be a person. They are POTENTIAL people, but at the time when they are an egg or an embryo, they are just that - an egg or an embryo. I would certainly not, however, be against shrinking the time period in which a person would be allowed to abort the child. I would be fine with limiting it to the 1st trimester of the pregnancy unless there is a life threatening or altering complication. I think by the end of the 1st trimester, a person should have decided.

Yes there is common ground for terminating a pregnancy very early on. I would not argue over a couple dozen cells that have divided. But over 100,000 2nd trimester abortions a year? Disturbing.

The numbers are incredibly high. I don't know who all these people are, but relatively speaking that is not an extremely large number considering we are a country of over 300 million people.

Personally I believe that number should be much lower. If the life of the mother is in danger okay, but a 2nd trimester abortion just because the mother doesn't want the baby I'm not okay with that. Certainly after birth the mother loses 100% of her choice right, she isn't allowed to kill the baby for any reason. So should that threshold be dialed back if so how far?

Abortion is a particularly difficult societal issue that people have struggled with for a long time. In my 50+ years on the planet the boundaries on abortion and a number of other societal issues have been pushed to extremes, I'm just wondering where it ends. How far are we willing push the boundaries on what is considered acceptable?

In my opinion, the way to limit abortions is through education on birth control, free access to birth control, education and help with/funding for non-abortion alternatives including ways to help the woman regain what she might have lost through an unwanted pregnancy (dropping out of school). There are a lot of ways to encourage women to make the choice to have the baby - but forcing her to carry through a pregnancy against her will should not be one of them.

I don't agree with unlimited abortions. Starting in the last trimester, it should only be for medically necessary reasons, and I believe in most states it is pretty restricted. Second trimester is iffy. There are some horrendous birth defects that can't be detected early in the pregnancy - for example anacephaly, where the baby is born without a brain. Those baby's die almost immediately after birth. Forcing a woman to carry that against her will would be cruel. Some choose to do it.

 

[ChrisL]

This thread has veered off in a strange direction. How did we get to discussing abortions? Lol.

Probably because both ISIS and the American Taliban hate faggots and legal abortion. Peas in a pod.

I guess. They're okay with raping little girls though, the irony.

So is the American Taliban, see: Duggars, The...

They rape children? Is that the allegation you're making?

 

[Coyote]

No one said that. Ooops.

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

No, I am just a person who tries to take on a realistic perspective of the world around me. I don't think it is a good idea to force women, who may not be very good people, to have babies.

Also, I find it rather hypocritical that a lot of conservatives would like to force women to have babies but then have NO plans on how to care for all of these unwanted babies.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.

Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.

Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".

When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?

100,000+ 2nd trimester abortions a year are just a microscopic clump of cells? Why don't you return when we can have an honest discussion which my guess will be never.

Who was talking about 2nd trimester abortions?

How about you stop injecting your own words into another person's statements and then maybe we can discuss things like adults.

 

[ChrisL]

You are just uncomfortable with people pointing out the horror of abortion and poking holes in the excuses you tell yourself to make it seem okay to kill a helpless human life in the womb.

No, I am just a person who tries to take on a realistic perspective of the world around me. I don't think it is a good idea to force women, who may not be very good people, to have babies.

Also, I find it rather hypocritical that a lot of conservatives would like to force women to have babies but then have NO plans on how to care for all of these unwanted babies.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.

Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.

Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".

When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?

100,000+ 2nd trimester abortions a year are just a microscopic clump of cells? Why don't you return when we can have an honest discussion which my guess will be never.

Who was talking about 2nd trimester abortions?

How about you stop injecting your own words into another person's statements and then maybe we can discuss things like adults.

Probably because of me. I was saying that I wouldn't have a problem with limiting abortion to the first trimester (except for cases like you mentioned, where the mother's life is in danger, baby is severely deformed, etc.)

 

[Coyote]

No, I am just a person who tries to take on a realistic perspective of the world around me. I don't think it is a good idea to force women, who may not be very good people, to have babies.

Also, I find it rather hypocritical that a lot of conservatives would like to force women to have babies but then have NO plans on how to care for all of these unwanted babies.

I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.

Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.

Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".

When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?

100,000+ 2nd trimester abortions a year are just a microscopic clump of cells? Why don't you return when we can have an honest discussion which my guess will be never.

Who was talking about 2nd trimester abortions?

How about you stop injecting your own words into another person's statements and then maybe we can discuss things like adults.

Probably because of me. I was saying that I wouldn't have a problem with limiting abortion to the first trimester (except for cases like you mentioned, where the mother's life is in danger, baby is severely deformed, etc.)

I'm not quite willing to limit it to the first trimester only...but I would definately not agree with elective abortions in the third trimester.

 

[ChrisL]

I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects?

We shouldn't, they should be aborted, especially trisomes. We already have too many healthy children to care for without additional sick ones.

Reminder: I ignore your stupid posts.

Nice straw man. Perhaps you should try concentrating on what I actually said. Are you willing to pay for these unwanted children's upbringings, as they reside in state custody or foster homes?

You suggested that helpless human fetuses should be killed because nobody is willing to pay for the drug addicted mom and baby's medical care and hospital stays. I just expanded on your logic, why waste money then on fetuses with birth defects? Your attempt to excuse abortion puts you on a very slippery slope.

Because those babies are WANTED by their parents. It is up to the potential parent whether or not they will become a parent, not you!

You are in free fall on this slippery slope now, so the bar should be if you don't want the baby just kill it in the womb? Does the mom have no responsibility to the fetus for getting pregnant in the first place?

Sadly, no, some women do not. Some people are drug addicts, some are just not very good people, etc. I'm sure some have perfectly legitimate reasons too. My point being, it's really not MY business. If it was someone I know or a family member of mine, then that's a little different. I feel then I would have some advice to give, but still not my place to force a pregnancy or a baby on another person. It's their decision. If they want to do that and live with that, that's on them. The people who actually want to be parents and would be good parents won't be aborting their children.

Not all people - not even most people - have abortions because they are "bad people" or even drug addicts. They find themselves pregnant, at a bad time in life, for what ever reason. Maybe birth control failed, maybe she's still in highschool, maybe the family lost their jobs or their homes.

Sure. That's why I said some women.

There are some seriously messed up people in this world though and they probably have no business being parents. Just look around THIS place for an example!