CDZ Why Do You Support Abortion

[initforme]

If one is against abortion one is for gift assistance after the child is born. Can't have it both ways.

 

[initforme]

Contraception is the way to go and nobody is against it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Contraception is the way to go and nobody is against it.

You sure about that last part?

 

[initforme]

Well it prevents pregnancy correct?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well it prevents pregnancy correct?

Shit. This is tedious. I said the last part.

You said nobody is against it I think you are mistaken. Lots of people are dead set against contraception. Some will tell you that they don't want to pay for others to have it....but that's bullshit. They don't pay for it any more than they pay for any medical service. They want people to have reproduction in mind when they screw.

 

[ChrisL]

Well it prevents pregnancy correct?

Shit. This is tedious. I said the last part.

You said nobody is against it I think you are mistaken. Lots of people are dead set against contraception. Some will tell you that they don't want to pay for others to have it....but that's bullshit. They don't pay for it any more than they pay for any medical service. They want people to have reproduction in mind when they screw.

Except for when it comes to themselves of course. That is only applicable to women! A good bunch of them are hypocrites anyways!

 

[Gracie]

I dont support abortion but I wont fight against it because its none of my business what a woman does with her body.

Don't you think it's important to fight for a human life that's defenseless?
They did not ask to be conceived....

And sometimes the woman is FORCED to conceive.

 

[Gracie]

I dont support abortion but I wont fight against it because its none of my business what a woman does with her body.

Don't you think it's important to fight for a human life that's defenseless?
They did not ask to be conceived....

Not if its inside the body of someone that doesnt want it. Once it leaves that sanctuary i would place my life on the line for a child.

So, the life doesn't mean as much while it's developing and inside someone else? Or do you view it only a "semi-life" or, since the laws says it's OK to do it, it's on her conscience and we can wash our hands of it?

The life means just as much. The point is that its none of my business until it ceases using the womans body as a host without permission.

So killing a baby at 8 1/2 months is OK with you?

no

 

[JoeMoma]

Excellent. Your next question.

Do you consider the "morning after pill" y

Logic tells y

Its simple logic.

No. It's simpleton logic.

Its simple logic.

No. It's simpleton logic.

Explain your position or get lost. Or are you incapable of doing so?

I'm very capable. I'm just not sure you are worth the time yet.

A question.....is it possible to be in favor of legal abortions and desirous of a world with no abortions? Think a moment before answering.

After you answer that, I will decide if you merit any more thought on my part. Please note...if decide that you do....you'll be asked to answer another question before moving forward.

Your ball.

Yes, it is possible. Of course, if we had a world with no abortions, it would be a moot point whether abortions are legal or not.

Since the current state of our world is that their are multitudes of people that will seek and have abortions, supporting the legality of abortions is supporting abortion.

Also, its very possible for a person to support something that goes against his desires. For example, a father may support his daughter in her marriage to someone the father does not like. The father may desire that the daughter either marry someone else or stay single, yet he supports his daughter living her own life as she sees fit.

What people desire and what they support are not necessary the same thing.

A valiant attempt. I will continue. I am curious regarding why your tone is so accusatory when you acknowledge that people who think abortion should be legal are not necessarily so evil that they actually like abortions and desire to see more of them. Let's deal with that later.

My next important question:

Do you consider the "morning after pill" to be a form of abortion?

Actually, it is my turn to ask you a question. I have already answered one for you. How is supporting keeping abortion legal not supporting abortion?

 

[jillian]

.. when a 5 week old fetus has a heart?

no one wants abortions or "supports abortion". i support choice because it isn't for old white men in government to control women's bodies.

you start the oddest threads.

and no doubt we needed one more where idiots can call people who are pro choice and believe you aren't smart enough to make other people's moral choices for them "murderers".

 

[KissMy]

SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled and reaffirmed a woman's right to choose in the first trimester.

this is about the zillionth time i've posted this info on this forum, but here you go...

In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face.

Because abortions lie within a pregnant woman's "zone of privacy," the abortion decision "and its effectuation" are fundamental rights that are protected by the Constitution from regulation by the states...

The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Roe v. Wade 1973 PBS

I'm not talking about men and politicians.

Are we so brainwashed to think since SCOTUS says it, it's OK??? I'm talking about what is morally correct, not what is LEGAL!

According to who's morals?

 

[jillian]

SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled and reaffirmed a woman's right to choose in the first trimester.

this is about the zillionth time i've posted this info on this forum, but here you go...




In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face.

Because abortions lie within a pregnant woman's "zone of privacy," the abortion decision "and its effectuation" are fundamental rights that are protected by the Constitution from regulation by the states...

The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Roe v. Wade 1973 PBS

I'm not talking about men and politicians.

Are we so brainwashed to think since SCOTUS says it, it's OK??? I'm talking about what is morally correct, not what is LEGAL!

no. but i think we're sick to death of people like you pretending they know what's moral and what is right for someone else.

and, unfortunately, people like you affect the climate in regards to women exercising their rights and end up creating circumstances like the terrorist who shot up planned parenthood last week.

no doubt that was moral to you.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Excellent. Your next question.

Do you consider the "morning after pill" y

Logic tells y

No. It's simpleton logic.

No. It's simpleton logic.

Explain your position or get lost. Or are you incapable of doing so?

I'm very capable. I'm just not sure you are worth the time yet.

A question.....is it possible to be in favor of legal abortions and desirous of a world with no abortions? Think a moment before answering.

After you answer that, I will decide if you merit any more thought on my part. Please note...if decide that you do....you'll be asked to answer another question before moving forward.

Your ball.

Yes, it is possible. Of course, if we had a world with no abortions, it would be a moot point whether abortions are legal or not.

Since the current state of our world is that their are multitudes of people that will seek and have abortions, supporting the legality of abortions is supporting abortion.

Also, its very possible for a person to support something that goes against his desires. For example, a father may support his daughter in her marriage to someone the father does not like. The father may desire that the daughter either marry someone else or stay single, yet he supports his daughter living her own life as she sees fit.

What people desire and what they support are not necessary the same thing.

A valiant attempt. I will continue. I am curious regarding why your tone is so accusatory when you acknowledge that people who think abortion should be legal are not necessarily so evil that they actually like abortions and desire to see more of them. Let's deal with that later.

My next important question:

Do you consider the "morning after pill" to be a form of abortion?

Actually, it is my turn to ask you a question. I have already answered one for you. How is supporting keeping abortion legal not supporting abortion?

You haven't been paying attention.

 

[JoeMoma]

Excellent. Your next question.

Do you consider the "morning after pill" y

Logic tells y

Explain your position or get lost. Or are you incapable of doing so?

I'm very capable. I'm just not sure you are worth the time yet.

A question.....is it possible to be in favor of legal abortions and desirous of a world with no abortions? Think a moment before answering.

After you answer that, I will decide if you merit any more thought on my part. Please note...if decide that you do....you'll be asked to answer another question before moving forward.

Your ball.

Yes, it is possible. Of course, if we had a world with no abortions, it would be a moot point whether abortions are legal or not.

Since the current state of our world is that their are multitudes of people that will seek and have abortions, supporting the legality of abortions is supporting abortion.

Also, its very possible for a person to support something that goes against his desires. For example, a father may support his daughter in her marriage to someone the father does not like. The father may desire that the daughter either marry someone else or stay single, yet he supports his daughter living her own life as she sees fit.

What people desire and what they support are not necessary the same thing.

A valiant attempt. I will continue. I am curious regarding why your tone is so accusatory when you acknowledge that people who think abortion should be legal are not necessarily so evil that they actually like abortions and desire to see more of them. Let's deal with that later.

My next important question:

Do you consider the "morning after pill" to be a form of abortion?

Actually, it is my turn to ask you a question. I have already answered one for you. How is supporting keeping abortion legal not supporting abortion?

You haven't been paying attention.

Sure I have. You want to be the one who dictates the rules for this discussion/debate. I am not going to cede that power to you.If you can't explain your position without leading me through a list of questions, then that's your problem. If you somehow think the morning after pill is relevant, then feel free to tell me why.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Excellent. Your next question.

Do you consider the "morning after pill" y

Logic tells y
I'm very capable. I'm just not sure you are worth the time yet.

A question.....is it possible to be in favor of legal abortions and desirous of a world with no abortions? Think a moment before answering.

After you answer that, I will decide if you merit any more thought on my part. Please note...if decide that you do....you'll be asked to answer another question before moving forward.

Your ball.

Yes, it is possible. Of course, if we had a world with no abortions, it would be a moot point whether abortions are legal or not.

Since the current state of our world is that their are multitudes of people that will seek and have abortions, supporting the legality of abortions is supporting abortion.

Also, its very possible for a person to support something that goes against his desires. For example, a father may support his daughter in her marriage to someone the father does not like. The father may desire that the daughter either marry someone else or stay single, yet he supports his daughter living her own life as she sees fit.

What people desire and what they support are not necessary the same thing.

A valiant attempt. I will continue. I am curious regarding why your tone is so accusatory when you acknowledge that people who think abortion should be legal are not necessarily so evil that they actually like abortions and desire to see more of them. Let's deal with that later.

My next important question:

Do you consider the "morning after pill" to be a form of abortion?

Actually, it is my turn to ask you a question. I have already answered one for you. How is supporting keeping abortion legal not supporting abortion?

You haven't been paying attention.

Sure I have. You want to be the one who dictates the rules for this discussion/debate. I am not going to cede that power to you.If you can't explain your position without leading me through a list of questions, then that's your problem. If you somehow think the morning after pill is relevant, then feel free to tell me why.

Thanks for the discussion. Ciao.

 

[JoeMoma]

Excellent. Your next question.

Do you consider the "morning after pill" y

Yes, it is possible. Of course, if we had a world with no abortions, it would be a moot point whether abortions are legal or not.

Since the current state of our world is that their are multitudes of people that will seek and have abortions, supporting the legality of abortions is supporting abortion.

Also, its very possible for a person to support something that goes against his desires. For example, a father may support his daughter in her marriage to someone the father does not like. The father may desire that the daughter either marry someone else or stay single, yet he supports his daughter living her own life as she sees fit.

What people desire and what they support are not necessary the same thing.

A valiant attempt. I will continue. I am curious regarding why your tone is so accusatory when you acknowledge that people who think abortion should be legal are not necessarily so evil that they actually like abortions and desire to see more of them. Let's deal with that later.

My next important question:

Do you consider the "morning after pill" to be a form of abortion?

Actually, it is my turn to ask you a question. I have already answered one for you. How is supporting keeping abortion legal not supporting abortion?

You haven't been paying attention.

Sure I have. You want to be the one who dictates the rules for this discussion/debate. I am not going to cede that power to you.If you can't explain your position without leading me through a list of questions, then that's your problem. If you somehow think the morning after pill is relevant, then feel free to tell me why.

Thanks for the discussion. Ciao.

TTFN. Maybe next time we can have a two way discussion. You know, a good old fashion back and forth.

 

[Valerie]

SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled and reaffirmed a woman's right to choose in the first trimester.

this is about the zillionth time i've posted this info on this forum, but here you go...




In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face.

Because abortions lie within a pregnant woman's "zone of privacy," the abortion decision "and its effectuation" are fundamental rights that are protected by the Constitution from regulation by the states...

The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Roe v. Wade 1973 PBS

I'm not talking about men and politicians.

Are we so brainwashed to think since SCOTUS says it, it's OK??? I'm talking about what is morally correct, not what is LEGAL!

no. but i think we're sick to death of people like you pretending they know what's moral and what is right for someone else.

and, unfortunately, people like you affect the climate in regards to women exercising their rights and end up creating circumstances like the terrorist who shot up planned parenthood last week.

no doubt that was moral to you.

imo what scotus ruled has clear moral superiority over the alternative, and that's not by mistake either...

 

[Valerie]

SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled and reaffirmed a woman's right to choose in the first trimester.

this is about the zillionth time i've posted this info on this forum, but here you go...




In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Harry Blackmun (who was chosen because of his prior experience as counsel to the Mayo Clinic), the Court ruled that the Texas statute violated Jane Roe's constitutional right to privacy. The Court argued that the Constitution's First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's "zone of privacy" against state laws and cited past cases ruling that marriage, contraception, and child rearing are activities covered in this "zone of privacy." The Court then argued that the "zone of privacy" was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." This decision involved myriad physical, psychological, and economic stresses a pregnant woman must face.

Because abortions lie within a pregnant woman's "zone of privacy," the abortion decision "and its effectuation" are fundamental rights that are protected by the Constitution from regulation by the states...

The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Roe v. Wade 1973 PBS

I'm not talking about men and politicians.

Are we so brainwashed to think since SCOTUS says it, it's OK??? I'm talking about what is morally correct, not what is LEGAL!

those men in black robes you scoffed at are the legal scholars of our highest court.

your ilk wants to play God and dictate to your fellow citizens what is their morally superior choice.. ?

choosing to impose our Government any further into our reproductive privacy is immoral.

forcing women to endure invasive procedures against their will is immoral.

rubbing their choice in their face in a ghoulish gauntlet of images so your ilk can feel more moral is more repulsive than the images themselves...

 

[Mac1958]

I support abortion, despite how much I dislike it, because I think a civilization will always have to make nasty choices that benefits itself in the long run. Bringing unwanted children into the world to me is a net negative.

What I'd like to see is both ends of this argument pool their considerable passion and resources into minimizing the REAL problem, which is DEMAND for abortion. But that can't happen, because both sides are far too narcissistic to work with the other.

Making this tougher for me is the way my "side" of the issue is so dishonest. They'd rather equate a fetus with an inanimate object than be honest that it indeed is innocent human life. But that's what zealots do, they lie.
.

 

[Valerie]

if self righteous thugs would stop pushing for more legislation, there would be no problem.

and the GOP might win more national elections.