As a general principle, a universal truism, if your political philosophy often leaves you unwilling to answer simple questions about it . . .

[g5000]

Simple answers are for simpletons who can't deal with all the messy gray areas in life.

There is no gray area. You either believe an unborn child has value the day before it is born or you don't.

These women demonstrated by their evasive answers that they do not believe such a child has value.

They just handed the pro-life movement a huge fundraising campaign.

 

[Kondor3]

...You're only interested in... the elimination of a woman's rights.

I do not believe that this is the case with most Pro-Lifers...

They are not Anti-Abortion...

They are Pro-Life...

It's just that THEY hold a vastly different view of when Life begins in the womb than you do...

For the most part, they're not trying to lessen or take-away rights... they're trying to protect innocent babies from being butchered, yes?

 

[g5000]

When your position is indefensible then just cry racism when that fact is brought to light

Yeah, that whole "systemic racism" response was an abortion.

While we could debate for years if black poverty is the result of systemic racism, which I believe to some extent it is, that woman's weird twisty path was ridiculous.

I'm sure there is a huge correlation between abortions and poverty, and since blacks are disproportionately poor, then it would stand to reason they would have a disproportionate number of abortions.

However, blacks need to take some accountability for their own culture which practically celebrates men who impregnate women and then not take any responsibility for the offspring.

Something like 80 percent of black children are born out of wedlock. That is a cultural disaster for which white people are in no way responsible.

The vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are the result of no birth control being used, or the improper or inconsistent use of birth control. And that is not white people's fault, either.

That woman's response further entrenched the black community's cultural flaws by trying to put all the blame on "systemic racism".

 

[g5000]

No they don't. Rape fetuses don't; defective and retarded fetuses don't have value, they only have costs.

That you believe a handicapped or mentally disabled person has no value is quite revealing. And disgusting.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

. . . it is your political philosophy that is flawed, not the questions.

Sure, there are questions that are in the vein of "have you stopped beating your wife," but most of the time when people won't answer questions about their own political positions, it is because they are not willing to defend their positions.

Here's one example, but it happens a lot:



If you honestly believe that a woman person capable of getting pregnant has the right to abort the baby right up until the moment of birth, just say so. If you believe that a reduction in abortions of black babies would be a bad thing, say so. If you believe that a baby born five minutes ago has value, but that the same baby had no value yesterday, say so.

It applies to both sides. If you are pro-life, and that means to you that women who are raped must carry the rapist's baby to delivery, be ready to say so. If you act like you never thought of that, it makes you look foolish.

As so often in politics, thinking things through is the solution. That plus honest debate with people who disagree with you.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes

There are only 4 instances where I think an abortion is worth considering and that should be between the patient and doctor at those 4 times

1) rape
2) incest
3)carrying to term would harm or kill the mother
4) baby has severe quality of life impairment

Also those 4 instances are very rare as most who get abortions these days do it for cosmetic reasons or because they were too lazy to use protection/mornin after pill

 

[g5000]

A valid answer to a question does not require it to be satisfying to he who asked. Become a better questioner and perhaps your questions may yield better answers.

Total horseshit. She was easily able to answer the question if a baby has value the day after it is born. And yet she could not answer the same question about a baby the day before it is born.

That revealed her true mindset.

There could not possibly have been a better question to expose her depravity, and she realized it. So she felt she needed to dodge and weave and look like a damned fool.

 

[g5000]

It has some value ranging between nothing and everything to whatever concerned parties happen to be involved. Ask a vague question, get a vague answer.

It was not a vague question. Please explain how the day after question is not vague yet the day before question is.

After, not vague. Before, vague?

Give me a fucking break!

 

[g5000]

The democrat answer to the killing of babies always returns to the same place. But, but, but, what about rape, incest, or fetal abnormalities.

Yep, I've been pointing out for years on this forum that these sick fucks are using the victims of rape and incest as human shields for the overwhelming portion of abortions that are convenience abortions.

It does not get any sicker than that.

 

[whitehall]

. . . it is your political philosophy that is flawed, not the questions.

Sure, there are questions that are in the vein of "have you stopped beating your wife," but most of the time when people won't answer questions about their own political positions, it is because they are not willing to defend their positions.

Here's one example, but it happens a lot:



If you honestly believe that a woman person capable of getting pregnant has the right to abort the baby right up until the moment of birth, just say so. If you believe that a reduction in abortions of black babies would be a bad thing, say so. If you believe that a baby born five minutes ago has value, but that the same baby had no value yesterday, say so.

It applies to both sides. If you are pro-life, and that means to you that women who are raped must carry the rapist's baby to delivery, be ready to say so. If you act like you never thought of that, it makes you look foolish.

As so often in politics, thinking things through is the solution. That plus honest debate with people who disagree with you.

You look kind of politically foolish and ignorant when you think a woman who was impregnated with a rapist baby would bring the child to full term before seeking other legal means of dealing with it. You are hopelessly ignorant and politically motivated if you think there is is no remedy for a pregnant rape victim even after RvW was overturned.

 

[g5000]

She wasn't obligated to answer a gotcha question.

If someone robs a bank and then a cop asks them if they robbed the bank, that is neither a gotcha question nor a loaded question.

These woman could not admit their true beliefs. They knew it would not look good to the majority of Americans.

They were the worst possible representatives of the pro-abortion movement. It's as if they went out and found the most radical assholes in the country.

 

[g5000]

A Berkeley professor’s Senate testimony didn’t go how the left thinks it did​

​

The whole thing quickly became a Rorschach test. Many progressives cheered to see Professor Bridges school a reactionary Republican. But conservatives also cheered, because they see a gift to Republican election campaigns.

Unlike a Rorschach test, however, this one has a right answer, and the progressives have it wrong. Moreover, the fact that they can’t see just how badly this exchange went for their side shows what a big mistake it was to let academia and media institutions turn into left-wing monocultures.

[snip]

In most of America, “Does a late-term fetus have value?” is a softball. And when Hawley leaped in to ask whether women are the ones who give birth — a question few Americans today would struggle with — she resorted to extended question-begging. That might be fine for a Berkeley classroom. But it just won’t do for a political debate in which the majority of voters disagree with you.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The reason for no straight answer is that the woman knew that her truthful answer would have revealed too much of the pro-abortion movement's actual beliefs.

The answer to the value of a child before birth to them would be this: It has the value it is assigned by the mother, and no more. None at all.

They would apply the same to a baby born five minutes ago. But they knew to refuse to answer that would be also too revealing.

The truth is that if a mother woman non-birthing person aborts a baby because it has Down's Syndrome and that baby survives the abortion, they would want it to be killed or at least allowed to die through neglect. It is Lebensunwertes Leben (life-unworthy life) as their ideological predecessors called it.

 

[alang1216]

That would be a totally different question, wouldn't it?

.

No the question is exactly the same. Are you saying a simple 'yes' or 'no' is now insufficient?

 

[alang1216]

They were not asked a loaded question.

It was not a simple question, it was fully loaded. A simple question would have been "Do you think women should have the right to make decisions about their bodies?".

Let me ask you the same question. Yes or no?

 

[alang1216]

These woman could not admit their true beliefs. They knew it would not look good to the majority of Americans.

The question was not but should have been, who gets to decide the fate of that woman, the woman or the state? That is the question she answered and her answer was the woman. If you think the state should decide, that is your right.

I don't think anyone in the country likes abortion or thinks we should have more of them but most people realize that giving people freedom to decide their fate may have some very unfortunate reactions. If you don't like abortion you should be working to remove the incentives that women have to choose them.

 

[Donald H]

Something like 80 percent of black children are born out of wedlock. That is a cultural disaster for which white people are in no way responsible.

Yes, white people are responsible. It the 80% is true then you're talking about in America. It might be something you would like to discuss. You've said a few other things that aren't true too.

 

[g5000]

It was not a simple question, it was fully loaded. A simple question would have been "Do you think women should have the right to make decisions about their bodies?".

Let me ask you the same question. Yes or no

Yes. But her rights end at the tip of the nose of the unborn child.

No one has a right to terminate the life of another human being just because that human being is inconvenient.

 

[Circe]

Yes. But her rights end at the tip of the nose of the unborn child.

No one has a right to terminate the life of another human being just because that human being is inconvenient.

Sure we do, in most states now.

 

[g5000]

Yes, white people are responsible. It the 80% is true then you're talking about in America. It might be something you would like to discuss. You've said a few other things that aren't true too.

How are white people responsible for the 80 percent of black babies being born to unwed mothers?

That rate has been climbing for decades. How are whites to blame for that?

An analysis of out-of-wedlock births in the United States | Brookings

George Akerlof and Janet Yellen look at the decline in shotgun marriages and rise in the births out of wedlock.

www.brookings.edu

2010: Blacks struggle with 72 percent unwed mothers rate

 

[Circe]

Yep, I've been pointing out for years on this forum that these sick fucks are using the victims of rape and incest as human shields for the overwhelming portion of abortions that are convenience abortions.

It does not get any sicker than that.

Sure it does: infanticide was the usual recourse for essentially always. Still is, in China and India and Africa, anywhere abortion is not easy to achieve. Read Bare Branches for a full analysis and historical treatment of infanticide in recent and current societies worldwide, with some discussion of historical civilizations that had good records, such as Rome. Millions and billions of infanticides, usually female but often also male after the first.