Liberals On Abortion

[Monk-Eye]

" Nomian Dick In Taters Suffering None "

* Salvific Faith Of Some Catholic Democrats *

My favorite is DEVOUT Catholic Pelosi who is pro baby murder.

Are the antinomian hypocrites also your favorites , as they clamor to institute legalism rather than following a tenet of its paradoxical creed to remove all laws while suffer others ?

Many catholics option compassion and forgiveness for those wanton for abortion , and many catholics emphasize social programs to support those in need .

There are different catholic charities but some are big facilitators of illegal immigration into the us .

* Ravenous Omnivores Yelling " Base ! " *

The damned dirty apes exact killing and suffering upon sentient beings globally , and yet its most vain goons demand to dictate an exception from exploitation beginning at conception for any damned dirty ape , even before sentience is physically possilbe and empathy for suffering would be legitimate .

 

[Jake Winker Frogen]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

 

[Monk-Eye]

* Wonky Stale Sheltered Childish Insults *

"The roe v wade decision is 100% consistent with us constitution and is 100% ethical ."
If I ever needed a brain transplant I’d want yours….’cause I’d want one that had never been used.

Did you get that insult from home schooling playground or from a video of the outside world ?

* Not Born Not Entitled To Equal Protection Irrespective Of Authoritarian Thugs *

Watch how easy it is to prove you a dunce......Article 1, section 8 enumerates the authorized powers of the government.
See if you can show where Row v Wade fits.

What does that have to do with the powers of the judicial branch to decide the constitutionality of laws devised by trolls ?

* Just Another Wanna Be Bureaucratic Big Boss Thug *

....it's not the weather being discussed when you hear folks refer to 'twenty below...' It's your IQ.

Do you also do comedy naked ?

As it was suggested to oac , if you want social subsistence for the illegal migrant , perhaps take some nude pictures , sell them and donate the money to that cause .

Likewise , perhaps you might follow the same advise and donate the money to sustain the financial requirements of those disenfranchised and faced with further financial setbacks to change their mind about abortion .

There is one thing clearly understood about property tax assessors is that they encourage people to live in squalor because as soon as anyone demonstrates the least bit of progress , just as a mafia big boss , they come around to get their cut .

There does not seem to be any doubt that your perspectives are on par with government goons who do not consider it consequence of their trade but expect it as their obligation to ensure that putting individuals further behind in financial and social status is for the benefit of all .

 

[JoeB131]

How romantic coming from the guy who swiped up on Indiana Jones for a moniker.

Um, what does my Avatar have to do with the point I made about how you nutters can't enforce your silly laws?

You do know the difference between a Moniker and an Avatar, right?

 

[JoeB131]

As I said, there is no validation of the decision in the Constitution.

See, I knew she couldn't answer the question. 14th Amendment. Clearly states that the government can't take control of our bodies.

Nonsesne.

There are no 'penumbras' except for liars and Liberals......is that redundant?

Then by your logic, the Griswold decision was equally unconstitutional. You really can't say Roe was wrongly decided but Griswold wasn't.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

 

[PoliticalChic]

A Clinton judge gave away his bias in the case of 'boys' calling themselves girls, and competing against actual girls.

" Connecticut: Judge Rules Transgender Sprinters Competing Against Girls Cannot Be Called "Males" In Court . . . Or Else
This complaint centered on an alleged violation of Title IX in that the biological girls are deprived of “opportunities for participation, recruitment, and scholarships.”

The filing against the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) has made it into the courts, and District Court Judge Robert Chatigny ruled that the attorneys for the biological girls cannot refer to the transgender sprinters as males and must instead say “transgender females.”

Connecticut: Judge Rules Transgender Sprinters Competing Against Girls Cannot Be Called

Judge Chatigny: 'we'll need to do something .... I don't want to bully you, but at the same time, I don't want you to be bullying anybody else'

www.thenewscommenter.com

But wait....there's more>


"Judge asked to step down in Connecticut transgender case
Lawyers argue order on filings shows bias
Attorneys have filed a motion to disqualify a federal judge from their lawsuit against a Connecticut policy that allows transgender girls to compete in girls’ and women’s athletics, noting that the judge has ordered that transgender athletes not be referred to as “male” in hearings and court filings.

Attorneys from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative Christian nonprofit, filed a motion Friday to remove U.S. District Judge Robert N. Chatigny from the lawsuit, saying his order is “unjustified and inconsistent with the appearance of impartiality.”

“Plaintiffs’ counsel have the right and professional responsibility to communicate clearly and accurately about their case and to present their arguments in a manner consistent with their legal theories and the dispositive facts,” the ADF attorneys say in the motion to disqualify Judge Chatigny."

Judge Robert Chatigny asked to step down from transgender suit

Attorneys have filed a motion to disqualify a federal judge from their lawsuit against a Connecticut policy that allows transgender girls to compete in girls’ and women’s athletics, noting that the judge has ordered that transgender athletes not be referred to as “male” in hearings and court...

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[Jake Winker Frogen]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

"Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal. "


Over 98% of abortions are for nothing more than convenience.



And percentages don't answer the moral question of killing the innocent....November 12, 1933 93.5% of German electorate (43,000,000) voted in favor of Nazi policies.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

"Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal. "


Over 98% of abortions are for nothing more than convenience.



And percentages don't answer the moral question of killing the innocent....November 12, 1933 93.5% of German electorate (43,000,000) voted in favor of Nazi policies.

I get so immensely tired of this tripe about "53% of Americans believe in legal abortions for very specific cases, so that means they're pro-abortion!" Or, expressed another - more realistic - way, those 53% of Americans believe abortion should be ILLEGAL in most cases.

I believe abortion should be legal in the case of ectopic pregnancy. By leftist illogic, that would make ME "pro-abortion". This makes as much sense as saying that I'm a supporter of legal generalized drug use because I'm in favor of prescription medications.

 

[Jake Winker Frogen]

We could go around in circles forever on this, the polls are clear you conceptions of when abortion is necessary or should be legal is not the majority of Americans conception.

 

[Jake Winker Frogen]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

"Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal. "


Over 98% of abortions are for nothing more than convenience.



And percentages don't answer the moral question of killing the innocent....November 12, 1933 93.5% of German electorate (43,000,000) voted in favor of Nazi policies.

I have already answered the moral question, you just do not like the answer, you demand your morals are universal morals.

Must fanatics do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

"Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal. "


Over 98% of abortions are for nothing more than convenience.



And percentages don't answer the moral question of killing the innocent....November 12, 1933 93.5% of German electorate (43,000,000) voted in favor of Nazi policies.

I have already answered the moral question, you just do not like the answer, you demand your morals are universal morals.

Must fanatics do.

Everyone who can hold the title of 'moral' believes as I do. Your 'rules' are the rules of pagans.....child murder and human sacrifice.

BTW, even before the events on Sinai, there were rules for humanity.

Before Sinai and the Ten Commandments, there were the rules called the Noahide Laws, based on reason and a desire to be able to live with other people, laws against bad behavior, the idea that these injured society: bans on murder, theft, idolatry, sexual immorality, animal cruelty, cursing God, and the need to set up courts to punish the infractions. They are incumbent on everyone, whether one respects the Bible or not, because they are so obvious.
The benefit of the Bible is that it tells society how to be good.

“Noahide Laws, also called Noachian Laws, a Jewish Talmudic designation for seven biblical laws given to Adam and to Noah before the revelation to Moses on Mt. Sinai and consequently binding on all mankind.” Noahide Laws | Judaism


“According to Jewish tradition, non-Jews who adhere to these laws …are said to be followers of Noahidism and regarded as righteous gentiles, who are assured of a place in …the world to come, the final reward of the righteous.” Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia


The rules apply to all mankind....only savages abjure same.
Raise your paw.

 

[JoeB131]

Everyone who can hold the title of 'moral' believes as I do. Your 'rules' are the rules of pagans.....child murder and human sacrifice.

BTW, even before the events on Sinai, there were rules for humanity.

Before Sinai and the Ten Commandments, there were the rules called the Noahide Laws, based on reason and a desire to be able to live with other people, laws against bad behavior, the idea that these injured society: bans on murder, theft, idolatry, sexual immorality, animal cruelty, cursing God, and the need to set up courts to punish the infractions. They are incumbent on everyone, whether one respects the Bible or not, because they are so obvious.
The benefit of the Bible is that it tells society how to be good.

“Noahide Laws, also called Noachian Laws, a Jewish Talmudic designation for seven biblical laws given to Adam and to Noah before the revelation to Moses on Mt. Sinai and consequently binding on all mankind.” Noahide Laws | Judaism


“According to Jewish tradition, non-Jews who adhere to these laws …are said to be followers of Noahidism and regarded as righteous gentiles, who are assured of a place in …the world to come, the final reward of the righteous.” Seven Laws of Noah - Wikipedia

Um, these are the same stories that also had Talking Snakes and Giant in them.

Not sure if we should use a book of fairy tales from the Bronze Age to define our morals today.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The definition of life is not a shroom tap dance into a philosophical question, it is a matter of science.

What we do with life, how we protect it, or kill it, is a political, legal and social question.

And history reveals humans will never always agree on when to kill and when not to?

That is the real question. Fault line.

The pro life people want to protect that life at any cost, the pro choice feel some times it is justified to kill it for a greater social purpose.

The former argument is tainted by an inability to see other considerations such as mental state of the mother or their often unwillingness to support social programs for such life born.

The latter argument is tainted by an inability to face honestly what is being done, killing. Perhaps for a greater good, perhaps not, but it is killing.

Legal

No, I'm sorry, we're not "tainted by the inability to see other considerations". We see them just fine . . . and then we reject them because killing someone because it stresses and depresses you for them to be alive is evil and sociopathic.

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that people are ignoring your "rational" choice not because they aren't as brilliant as you, but because they aren't serial killers.

I am not making a choice, you are. Your flag is firmly planted on one side. I am examining all sides.

Personally I would never encourage a woman to have one, nor would I legally prevent her so under current law.

That you see them as serial killers reveals the myopia of your position. They of course see your position as fundamentalist, anti rationalist and hypocritical.

If all killing is serial killing then under such logic US military people in war are serial killers, as in every war many innocents are killed. States that allow the death penalty and everyone who supports that are serial killers, because the context of the killing in your position is not thought about.

The fact is throughout history every civilisation has countenanced some form of killing for what they believed is the greater social good.


Many people in America just do not see it your way, rather they see forcing a woman to give birth to a life she cannot mentally or emotionally handle, or making it illegal and hence she terminates in horrible conditions putting her life in danger is the immoral thing to do.

So you will always remain in a polarised tribe, wondering why you cannot get a complete abortion ban for probably the rest of your life, never understanding why much of the country considers it justified for the reasons I have explained above.

Honey, you made a choice. You just don't have the stones to recognize and acknowledge that you did, and to live with responsibility for the consequences.

And I quote: "Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good."

THAT is a choice, whether you want to admit it or not. It is, "I recognize that this is a living human, and I choose to believe that it is nevertheless okay to kill him to achieve my purposes."

And for the record, I'm not calling all killing serial-killing; I'm calling YOUR PARTICULAR MINDSET that of a sociopathic serial-killer. To the extent that someone supporting abortion also echoes this "I recognize this as a human life, but I believe it is okay to kill him anyway", I am including them with you in the serial killer category. But your attempt to normalize your way of thinking by assuming that everyone who supports abortion views it just like you do is invalid, because most of them don't. Therefore, your attempt to make out that I'm calling EVERY supporter of abortion a serial killer is also invalid. I'm actually just talking about YOU at the moment. You are a sociopath who is telling yourself that your lack of morals and conscience actually makes you better and smarter than other people. I believe I have heard that same line of thought from several people . . . when they were interviewed on death row.

I have made no personal choice, I have never councelled anyone to have an abortion nor forced any woman to risk her life or mental health to give birth.

I allow the individual concerned to make the personal moral choice, you on the other hand have decided to make the choice for them.

You would make a great Grand Inquisitor.


Of course taking a life is a moral choice, I have stated that from the start.

Just as forcing a person to risk their life or mental health to give birth is a moral choice.


Society has to weigh both, and consider what is morally best for the society as a whole.

Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal.

The moral choice has been made by society, you just don't like it.

Abortion

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life? Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

news.gallup.com

"Society has made that moral choice, currently 53% of Americans believe abortion should be legal under certain conditions compared to only 21% who believe like you it should be illegal. "


Over 98% of abortions are for nothing more than convenience.



And percentages don't answer the moral question of killing the innocent....November 12, 1933 93.5% of German electorate (43,000,000) voted in favor of Nazi policies.

I have already answered the moral question, you just do not like the answer, you demand your morals are universal morals.

Must fanatics do.

You answered the moral question, and I responded to it. You just seem to think that your worldview should be accepted as objective reality.

Most sociopaths do.

 

[Dana7360]

The entire Republican idea is "every life is meaningful, until it is born then we do not give a shit."

The entire Democrat idea is "Assert my opinion as fact so that I don't have to deal with the topic."

Hold your breath waiting for ANYONE to get defensive about not having your approval, moron.

To the contrary, I find your disapproval boosts my self esteem and general happiness.

I don't know what's more breathtaking: your unintentional irony or your massive tone-deafness and hypocrisy.

Probably both in equal measure, I am a balanced guy like that.

Still the US abortion debate, as I outlined is a polarised irrational mess, both sides.

But then most American political discourse is these days.

And whose fault is that? I won't say there are some dogmatic slogan-shouters on the pro-life side, but I'll be damned if I've ever seen anything BUT that from the pro-aborts. Even the ones who try to play at being calm and rational are still parroting talking points with their fingers in their ears.

And while we're on the subject, it's the pro-aborts that are utterly and completely unwilling to compromise on the subject. They won't even countenance the "infringement" of safety regulations on abortion clinics that are completely standard in any other medical facility you care to name. Hell, as far as I can tell, they refuse to consider the same level of safety regulations that are standard in tattoo parlors.

I agree the Pro Choice people can be extremely irrational, for instance I think their argument a conceived life is not a life until we say it is one is not only irrational but has other dubious moral side effects.

Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good.

But the Pro Life people can be just as irrational, even on rare occasion terrorism and murder.

A fertilized egg isn't life.

Tell me what life is in an ectopic pregnancy.

I've asked so many anti choice people that question. I've never received an answer.

Maybe you will.

 

[Dana7360]

The entire Republican idea is "every life is meaningful, until it is born then we do not give a shit."

The entire Democrat idea is "Assert my opinion as fact so that I don't have to deal with the topic."

Hold your breath waiting for ANYONE to get defensive about not having your approval, moron.

To the contrary, I find your disapproval boosts my self esteem and general happiness.

I don't know what's more breathtaking: your unintentional irony or your massive tone-deafness and hypocrisy.

Probably both in equal measure, I am a balanced guy like that.

Still the US abortion debate, as I outlined is a polarised irrational mess, both sides.

But then most American political discourse is these days.

And whose fault is that? I won't say there are some dogmatic slogan-shouters on the pro-life side, but I'll be damned if I've ever seen anything BUT that from the pro-aborts. Even the ones who try to play at being calm and rational are still parroting talking points with their fingers in their ears.

And while we're on the subject, it's the pro-aborts that are utterly and completely unwilling to compromise on the subject. They won't even countenance the "infringement" of safety regulations on abortion clinics that are completely standard in any other medical facility you care to name. Hell, as far as I can tell, they refuse to consider the same level of safety regulations that are standard in tattoo parlors.

I agree the Pro Choice people can be extremely irrational, for instance I think their argument a conceived life is not a life until we say it is one is not only irrational but has other dubious moral side effects.

Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good.

But the Pro Life people can be just as irrational, even on rare occasion terrorism and murder.

Excuse me, but trying to equate the entire pro-life side of the debate with a handful of rare lunatics is also irrational, not to mention dishonest. Would you consider it reasonable for me to say, "Bernie Sanders supporters are irrational, even on rare occasions murder and assassination" just because one Sanders-supporting nutjob decided to shoot him some Congressmembers?

There is a lot of irrational discourse writ large on the Pro Life side too, you cannot see it because your flag is planted squarely on that side.

I approach the issue not committed to either side but rather social utility balanced by ethics.

There are no easy answers on this as banning it will not end it but only see it conducted in worse conditions, if history be our guide yet making it too easy or not admitting it is a grave decision also probably increases the number of abortions.

What increases abortions is the following:

Allowing insurance to not cover birth control.

Not teaching factual sex education.

Not having proper medical facilities with birth control available.

Continuing to allow men to walk away from their own flesh and blood.

Not providing proper education and opportunities.

Not providing paid pregnancy leave. Or any pregnancy leave time.

Not providing job security for pregnant women so they know they will have a job to go back to if they take time off for the child.

Not providing proper health care.

Not providing reliable and good child care.

Not raising the minimum wage to make sure everyone working has a living wage.

Rape and giving the barbaric man who raped her parental rights to any pregnancy they cause by that sick and barbaric crime.

That's just a short list of the reasons why abortion is necessary.

I sure would like to know the reason why women stop having their constitutional right to privacy with their bodies stopped because she became pregnant.

I would like to know why women's HIPAA rights get to be thrown out the window and violated because she got pregnant.

I would like to know where it says in the constitution that anyone has the right to tell women how to live their lives and what to do with their own bodies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The entire Republican idea is "every life is meaningful, until it is born then we do not give a shit."

The entire Democrat idea is "Assert my opinion as fact so that I don't have to deal with the topic."

Hold your breath waiting for ANYONE to get defensive about not having your approval, moron.

To the contrary, I find your disapproval boosts my self esteem and general happiness.

I don't know what's more breathtaking: your unintentional irony or your massive tone-deafness and hypocrisy.

Probably both in equal measure, I am a balanced guy like that.

Still the US abortion debate, as I outlined is a polarised irrational mess, both sides.

But then most American political discourse is these days.

And whose fault is that? I won't say there are some dogmatic slogan-shouters on the pro-life side, but I'll be damned if I've ever seen anything BUT that from the pro-aborts. Even the ones who try to play at being calm and rational are still parroting talking points with their fingers in their ears.

And while we're on the subject, it's the pro-aborts that are utterly and completely unwilling to compromise on the subject. They won't even countenance the "infringement" of safety regulations on abortion clinics that are completely standard in any other medical facility you care to name. Hell, as far as I can tell, they refuse to consider the same level of safety regulations that are standard in tattoo parlors.

I agree the Pro Choice people can be extremely irrational, for instance I think their argument a conceived life is not a life until we say it is one is not only irrational but has other dubious moral side effects.

Just admit it is a life but some time taking a life is allowed for the greater good.

But the Pro Life people can be just as irrational, even on rare occasion terrorism and murder.

Excuse me, but trying to equate the entire pro-life side of the debate with a handful of rare lunatics is also irrational, not to mention dishonest. Would you consider it reasonable for me to say, "Bernie Sanders supporters are irrational, even on rare occasions murder and assassination" just because one Sanders-supporting nutjob decided to shoot him some Congressmembers?

There is a lot of irrational discourse writ large on the Pro Life side too, you cannot see it because your flag is planted squarely on that side.

I approach the issue not committed to either side but rather social utility balanced by ethics.

There are no easy answers on this as banning it will not end it but only see it conducted in worse conditions, if history be our guide yet making it too easy or not admitting it is a grave decision also probably increases the number of abortions.

What increases abortions is the following:

Allowing insurance to not cover birth control.

Not teaching factual sex education.

Not having proper medical facilities with birth control available.

Continuing to allow men to walk away from their own flesh and blood.

Not providing proper education and opportunities.

Not providing paid pregnancy leave. Or any pregnancy leave time.

Not providing job security for pregnant women so they know they will have a job to go back to if they take time off for the child.

Not providing proper health care.

Not providing reliable and good child care.

Not raising the minimum wage to make sure everyone working has a living wage.

Rape and giving the barbaric man who raped her parental rights to any pregnancy they cause by that sick and barbaric crime.

That's just a short list of the reasons why abortion is necessary.

I sure would like to know the reason why women stop having their constitutional right to privacy with their bodies stopped because she became pregnant.

I would like to know why women's HIPAA rights get to be thrown out the window and violated because she got pregnant.

I would like to know where it says in the constitution that anyone has the right to tell women how to live their lives and what to do with their own bodies.

The unborn is not any more 'part of their body' than is a six month old they are breast feeding.

Wanna kill that as well?

 

[Dana7360]

How romantic coming from the guy who swiped up on Indiana Jones for a moniker.

Um, what does my Avatar have to do with the point I made about how you nutters can't enforce your silly laws?

You do know the difference between a Moniker and an Avatar, right?

The beautress person didn't have a logical, mature and honest reply to your post.

So that beauttress person tried to change the subject using your avatar.

 

[JoeB131]

The unborn is not any more 'part of their body' than is a six month old they are breast feeding.

Wanna kill that as well?

You can feed a six month old with a bottle.... a fetus, not so much.