A question for the pro-abortion aka pro-choice crowd

[Dragon]

You can say it, but it bears no weight because it's just you saying you have personal knowledge of something that can't be verified.

You can either take my word for it or call me a liar. I strongly suggest you avoid the latter.

Please provide verification of Christian leaders proclaiming

At such time as I say that "Christian leaders" say anything, you can ask me for such verification, although odds are I'll already have provided it.

 

[Dragon]

Nice try at attempting minimize the vicious extermination of innocent human life......Unfortunately, it was another epic fail

Basic rule of discussion: Anyone who responds to an argument with neither reason nor evidence, but only with name-calling (e.g. "epic fail") has lost.

You just lost.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Nice try at attempting minimize the vicious extermination of innocent human life......Unfortunately, it was another epic fail

Basic rule of discussion: Anyone who responds to an argument with neither reason nor evidence, but only with name-calling (e.g. "epic fail") has lost.

You just lost.

Lost how?

"Epic fail" equals name calling?........

Look son, you better a grow a spine if you're going to play on this board. There are those of us up here who don't play that whiney shit.

Now, what you are clearly trying to do, as many who support the vicious extermination of innocent human life try to do, is minimize that life by whatever means possible.......Ball it up into a neat lil' rosey package to help you feel better about yourselves.

It's a crock of ******* shit, is what it is....And every time I see one of you attempting to do it, i'm calling you out on the sheer absurdity of it all.

 

[koshergrl]

You can say it, but it bears no weight because it's just you saying you have personal knowledge of something that can't be verified.

You can either take my word for it or call me a liar. I strongly suggest you avoid the latter.

Please provide verification of Christian leaders proclaiming

At such time as I say that "Christian leaders" say anything, you can ask me for such verification, although odds are I'll already have provided it.

I have no idea of knowing whether you're lying or not. What I'm saying is that you "saying so" in no way counts as any sort of verification. It isn't an acceptable method of debate and it doesn't count as proof that what you claim is true. It's just you saying "my experience tells me blah blah blah". That might be good enough for you to make wild assumptions, but thanks, it doesn't work for me. If it's such a wide spread practice for Christians to believe that children are a punishment for sinful behavior, I'm sure you'll have no problem providing verification of it.

Otherwise, it's just so much hot air.

And I can see that hot air is what you specialize. When you provide substance, other than just yammering about your superior (but unnamed and vague) personal experience, maybe I'll take you seriously. Until then, you're on the same level as a kid who says "My dad say so so I know it's true!"

 

[HotDogg]

human life is when an entity can survive on its own, like after birth, otherwise it's just an entity still parasiting its host.

 

[Dragon]

I have no idea of knowing whether you're lying or not.

My point exactly. I am relaying my personal experiences here, of people that I have known personally. Either I am relaying them correctly, or I am lying. There is no third alternative.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt, accepting your word that you, personally, don't consider pregnancy (ever) to be a punishment. I suggest you return the courtesy.

 

[koshergrl]

My personal opinion has nothing to do with your claiming that the religious right seeks to impose pregnancy upon women as a punishment.

You've provided nothing whatever to prove that's true. I know it isn't, but you claim it is...so prove it. Otherwise, give up using it as a takling point because it won't wash.

 

[Dragon]

Lost how?

I presented an argument, and you failed to rebut.

"Epic fail" equals name calling?

Of course it does. You had no argument or evidence to rebut what I said, so you called it a name.

Look son

Look jackass, my father's been dead for years and you're not one-hundredth the man he was. I am not your "son."

There are those of us up here who don't play that whiney shit.

You're certainly prone to do plenty of whining of your own, though. What you don't seem very good at so far is thinking.

Now, what you are clearly trying to do . . . is minimize that life by whatever means possible.

No, by means of logical argument. The use of the phrase "human life" instead of "human being" or "person" is a deliberate fogging of reality, a way of lumping a lump of protoplasm without a brain in with an actual person and confusing the differences between the two.

An embryo at conception IS minimal. It's human life, sure, as is every cell in a human body, but it isn't a PERSON. The difference between the two needs to be brought out.

Now, if you have an argument against this, some reason for us to believe that a one-celled organism should be considered the equivalent of a person, by all means present it. Otherwise, you lose, and make it clear that you are good at shouting, but damned poor at thinking, and perhaps identify with an embryo because you don't have much of a brain yourself, either.

 

[Dragon]

My personal opinion has nothing to do with your claiming that the religious right seeks to impose pregnancy upon women as a punishment.

I haven't made that claim.

 

[Wicked Jester]

My personal opinion has nothing to do with your claiming that the religious right seeks to impose pregnancy upon women as a punishment.

You've provided nothing whatever to prove that's true. I know it isn't, but you claim it is...so prove it. Otherwise, give up using it as a takling point because it won't wash.

It's an age old tactic used by the pro-choicers, and it fails every time.

Just the same as their age old attempts to minimize the innocent human life they support taking.

Both are nothing more than attempts to make themselves feel better about themselves.....A way to try and not feel guilt.

 

[Disenchanted61]

I cant confirm that it is "for selfish reason's. As I under it ... women who undergo abortion are emotionally
devastated for some time after the fact, but I am sure there are those that are without conscience.

So back to the uncertainty of subjectivity on this one.

 

[Dragon]

Both are nothing more than attempts to make themselves feel better about themselves.....A way to try and not feel guilt.

No, it's a way to fight back against those who would reduce women to brood-mare slavery. I feel no guilt about this at all. The fact that you would in my shoes simply means I'm smarter than you.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why do women abort their babies?

I understand there may be an ample number of reasons, but what, in your opinion would be the concensus?

I think it's purely for selfish reasons for the most part.

Your thoughts.

Its none of your business why they do it, it isn't your body, or your choice.

No one has the right to control a woman's body except the woman who owns it.

It really is that simple.

If you are against abortion, don't have one. In the mean time, mind your own business.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Lost how?

I presented an argument, and you failed to rebut.

"Epic fail" equals name calling?

Of course it does. You had no argument or evidence to rebut what I said, so you called it a name.



Look jackass, my father's been dead for years and you're not one-hundredth the man he was. I am not your "son."

There are those of us up here who don't play that whiney shit.

You're certainly prone to do plenty of whining of your own, though. What you don't seem very good at so far is thinking.

Now, what you are clearly trying to do . . . is minimize that life by whatever means possible.

No, by means of logical argument. The use of the phrase "human life" instead of "human being" or "person" is a deliberate fogging of reality, a way of lumping a lump of protoplasm without a brain in with an actual person and confusing the differences between the two.

An embryo at conception IS minimal. It's human life, sure, as is every cell in a human body, but it isn't a PERSON. The difference between the two needs to be brought out.

Now, if you have an argument against this, some reason for us to believe that a one-celled organism should be considered the equivalent of a person, by all means present it. Otherwise, you lose, and make it clear that you are good at shouting, but damned poor at thinking, and perhaps identify with an embryo because you don't have much of a brain yourself, either.

"Look jackass"?......You just resorted to "calling names".........

Game over!

Now, you even admit that conception IS human life....Correct there!...It's innocent human life. And NO!....every cell in the human BODY are not human life. They are cells, nothing more.

Christ, you pro-choicers are like the twoofers.....Keep repeating the same shit over and over again, in desperate attempts to make it stick......It's akin to nailing JELLO to the ******* wall.

One thing I wll always feel good about, I will never have to minimize innocent human life
in order to try to justify the vicious extermination of it......Nor will I have to try and cover for the guilt, of supporting the vicious extermination of innocent human life.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Actions have consequences but the only one people talk about is the woman's responsibility for getting or not getting pregnant.

It takes two to get pregnant. Men can walk away from the pregnancy they are half responsible for. Women cannot. Men should be forced to share responsibility. (That includes teabagger dead beat dads like Joe Walsh. He says he makes ONLY $175K a year and so cannot afford child support. Not surprising that this hypocrite is also anti-freedom for women.)

Every person who fights to take away a woman's right to decide for herself should be forced to take responsibility for that action. If you want to force a woman to have a baby, you should be ready to accept the responsibility for that action.

Te care of your own life and stay out of other people's - or pay for your share of the consequences of your actions.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Actions have consequences but the only one people talk about is the woman's responsibility for getting or not getting pregnant.

It takes two to get pregnant. Men can walk away from the pregnancy they are half responsible for. Women cannot. Men should be forced to share responsibility. (That includes teabagger dead beat dads like Joe Walsh. He says he makes ONLY $175K a year and so cannot afford child support. Not surprising that this hypocrite is also anti-freedom for women.)

Every person who fights to take away a woman's right to decide for herself should be forced to take responsibility for that action. If you want to force a woman to have a baby, you should be ready to accept the responsibility for that action.

Te care of your own life and stay out of other people's - or pay for your share of the consequences of your actions.

Yes men ARE just as responsible.....Now, should they not have rights when it comes to abortion, or are they just the cash cow, and nothing more then a tool used for conception?

 

[logical4u]

Here's what gets me about this issue...and those of you on the "right" are complete hypocrites.

Why not attack this problem at the beginning? Preventing unwanted pregnancy? Isn't that the idea?

It's a bit late to whine and complain after the pregnancy, isn't it?

Ask yourselves why not long ago every single republican voted against a bill which would've increased sex education in schools? Wouldn't that help decrease unwanted pregnacy, and thus the need for abortions? Republicans have consistently voted against all programs designed to prevent pregnancy.

The self-righteous hypocritical republicans remind me of the man cleaning up all the spilled water on his kitchen floor, and telling everyone what a great job he's doing...while ignoring the broken water pipe under the sink!

Want less abortions? Help prevent unwanted pregnancy!

Not long ago republicans controlled the House, Senate, White House and appointed 7 of the last 9 Supreme court justices...and they didn't do a damned thing about ending abortion.

They just use it as a campaign tool to rally the far right fringe of their base, and then all but forget the issue once elected.

That's hypocrisy in my book!

Only one form of birth control is "perfect". It is called abstinence. The politicians and their constituents that want to legislate immorality refuse to accept abstinence is a proven method. You want to pretend that "sex education" without morals will reduce the number of teenage pregnancies, when the opposite is true. But the far lefties don't see their own hypocrisy. They are too busy embracing corruption.

Name one person or politician that lobbies to legislate immorality.
You claim to be anti abortion yet oppose education to prevent pregnancy.
When I was growing up in the late 50s to the late 60s there was NO sex education in the schools and teen pregnancy was high as hell then.
Teen pregnancy is going down now. Down 37% in the last 20 years.

Your argument is not based on logic or fact to back it up.

Are we giving birth control to "girls" that are not 18? If they are not married, the gov't is supporting immorality. They are encouraging children to have sex out of wedlock (that would be "immoral"). Is there any program that pays unmarried women to have children? (that is immorality) Are we paying people that claim that they are disabled to have sex, and then pay to terminate the life they made? (that is immorality) Are we experimenting on tiny humans in the labs? (that is immorality) Are we mixing animal and human DNA (according to the President's executive order)? (that would be immorality)

Keep drinkin' the koolaid.

 

[logical4u]

But wouldn't abortion still be murder according to you in the cases of rape and incest? If you accept abortion in the cases of rape and incest, you are essentially condoning the murder of the child for the sins of the parents. Just playing some devil's advocate.

It is not necessarily the case that the fetus/embryo will grow into a person with thoughts and feelings if left alone. In fact, by best estimates about half of all fertilized eggs are miscarried naturally, most of the time before the woman even knows she's pregnant. In cases when the woman knows she's pregnant, the miscarriage rate is estimated to be between 15% and 25% (I googled these stats, multiple websites supported them). So there certainly is no guarantee that all aborted fetuses would have become fully functioning human beings, and it is likely that a decent percentage would have been miscarried naturally. In fact, if you truly believe that every fertilized egg is a human being, the destruction of which is murder, then you must think that the natural miscarriage rate of around 50% is the greatest tragedy in human history.

I'm not arguing that abortion is right, but I do believe that it must be legal in order to minimize human suffering overall. While making abortion illegal would probably lower the abortion rate somewhat, I think the cost of human life in the form of botched illegal abortions would heavily outweigh the "benefits" of making abortion illegal across the board. I think we have a pretty good, thoughtful middle ground established in most states when it comes to abortion laws.

There's no evidence that legalized abortion alleviates any suffering, in fact, quite the opposite. And again, you're pretending that without legalized abortion, there will be hordes of babies born as a result of rape and incest. Not so. Legalized abortion has never been required to deal with such situations (provided the mother reports the incident. If she doesn't, and seeks abortion later, she is seeking to protect the perp, which again is one of the primary functions of legalized abortion).

And people STILL DIE from botched abortions. Have you checked the numbers you're talking about? I think there were 30 deaths or so the last year before abortion was legalized. The pro-abortionists like to pretend that death was common, widespread, and in huge numbers. It wasn't. They also like to pretend that all women who get abortions legally now would still get abortions illegally and at risk to their own lives (more risk, anyway) if it was illegal. Also not true. Essentially, they pretend that all those who seek abortions are stupid, and criminal, at heart, and will ignore any law in order to kill the babies they carry.

It's a fantasy held by the left, a complete and total fabrication based on their disdain of the people they expect and encourage to kill their babies.

I never said anything about hordes of babies being born due to rape and incest without legalized abortion, so I don't know where you're getting that from. However, are you suggesting that if abortion was illegal there wouldn't be more babies born due to rape and incest? There obviously would be more babies born due to rape and incest if abortion were illegal, this isn't rocket science.

Besides, if you think abortion kills a lot of "babies," it's nothing compared to the monstrous death toll caused by natural miscarriages. Again, what do you think about the fact that about 50% of all fertilized eggs (equal to fully functioning human beings, according to you) are naturally miscarried? I don't see you crying over what I must imagine you consider to be the greatest human tragedy in the history of humanity. I mean, this makes heart disease look like a mild case of acne. Where is your outrage over the fact that we haven't figured out how to prevent half of all "human beings" from dying before they even leave the womb?

Are you really, really comparing accidental causes of death to deliberate murder?

 

[logical4u]

My real life solution is to advocate absintinence, educate children about the permanency of bad decisions when they are young, reward them for self control and responsibility at a young age, and quit telling them that it's perfectly normal for them to have sex. It's NOT normal or healthy for children to have sex, and we need to quit pretending it is. It leads to all sorts of depravity, emotional and physical issues for the kids. They aren't old enough to vote or drink, they aren't old enough for sex.

Pretty simple. And stop marketing abortion as a cure-all for behavior that shouldn't be taking place in teh first place. The fact that they can get abortions without input from their parents or naming the fathers is criminal, and needs to be stopped. Not solely because of the babies that are slaughtered, but because of the harm that is done to the children upon whom the abortions are being performed, and the way the perpetrators who abuse them are protected and delivered from all accountability.

your "real life solution" is a fantasy. and like most other good intentions, is naive.

and, once more, hon, feel free to never ever ever terminate a pregnancy. just stay out of other people's decision-making process. mmmmkay?

while you are entitled to your beliefs, i don't share them. And there's no reason in the world you should be able to impose those beliefs, which are based largely in your religious dogma, on others.

And yet, your religious dogma (that everyone must have sex, and cannot control themselves) is being forced onto children of people that do not believe that. It is legislated thru the education system. There is no balance, no rational plan, just: here children, this is birth control, go #$#%#% your brains out, and if the birth control doesn't work, we will take you to have a medical proceedure without your parents knowledge that can contribute to breast and uterine cancer in your future. Your beliefs are corrupt.

 

[logical4u]

your "real life solution" is a fantasy. and like most other good intentions, is naive.

and, once more, hon, feel free to never ever ever terminate a pregnancy. just stay out of other people's decision-making process. mmmmkay?

while you are entitled to your beliefs, i don't share them. And there's no reason in the world you should be able to impose those beliefs, which are based largely in your religious dogma, on others.

"terminate a pregnancy"

Ohhhhhhhhhh yeah!......I remember now, that's liberal code words for viciously exterminating an innocent life, who had no say so in the matter whatsoever.......Isn't that speeeeeeeciiiiiiaaaaaaaaaallllllll?

The NAZI'S would be so proud and impressed with you lib's!.........ACHTUNG BABIES!

you know, joker... you and i have no personal issue. so don't ever compare me to nazis.

no matter how much the rabid religious right thinks government should turn women into incubators.

I am tired of this. If the religious right was trying to turn women into incubators, then they, not the woman would be choosing who would impregnated her. They, not the woman would decide the frequency of sexual intercourse.

Women can choose. They can choose to use effective birth control. They can choose with who they have intercourse. They can choose not to have intercourse. Why isn't that enough "choice"? Why do you want to add "murder" as "choice"?