Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Contraception is the way to go and nobody is against it.
Well it prevents pregnancy correct?
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.
And sometimes the woman is FORCED to conceive.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....
noThe 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.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.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....
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?
So killing a baby at 8 1/2 months is OK with you?
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?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.Logic tells y
Its simple logic.
No. It's simpleton logic.Explain your position or get lost. Or are you incapable of doing so?Its simple logic.
No. It's simpleton logic.
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.
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?
.. when a 5 week old fetus has a heart?
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!
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!
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?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.Logic tells y
No. It's simpleton logic.Explain your position or get lost. Or are you incapable of doing so?No. It's simpleton logic.
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.
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?
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.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?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.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.
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?
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.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?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.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.
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?
You haven't been paying attention.
TTFN. Maybe next time we can have a two way discussion. You know, a good old fashion back and forth.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.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?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?
You haven't been paying attention.
Thanks for the discussion. Ciao.
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.
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!