Why Can't The So-Called Pro-Life Crowd Be Honest?

[Ravi]

It's fetus, not foetus.

You really want to argue over preferred spellings?

Merriam-Webster recognizes it

Foetus - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

It is alive in the same sense that your germ cell and embryo are but it is not determined when it becomes a living human being.

The embryo is an organism. The germ cells are not organisms- they are cells of the parents' bodies (the parents are organisms).

Seriously, why didn't any of these people learn the meaning of the word "organism" in school? I have lost count of the number of times some halfwit has confidently babbled out this egregious crap.

Biological Levels of Organization

Cell - The structural, functional and biological unit of all organisms.

Tissue - An aggregate of cells in an organism that have similar structure and function.

Organ - A group of tissues that perform a specific function or group of functions.

Organ system - A group of organs that work together to carry out a particular task.

Organism - An individual living thing that can react to stimuli, reproduce, grow, and maintain homeostasis.

Learn it, live it, love it, chumps. Sheesh.

Still laughing at your belief that germ cells merge into an embryo.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I didnt read this thread in its entirety. But I certainly hope someone from both sides pointed out that not all abortions are done out of irresponsibility. For instance, a woman who has been raped and in turn inpregnated. Or a minor who may have been raped.

Furthermore, in a world quickly becoming overpopulated, is it really smart for someone who can not afford to do so, to have a child? So that child can grow up in poverty, to continue the spiral of probably making the same mistake (if not worse) than the parent(s) has made?

Oh, right. I forgot. The only people that believe in "pro-life", also believe Jesus is going to ride a velociraptor back down from heaven and save all the good god fearing christians. lmao.

Carry on.

Why would anyone NEED to point out a statistically insignificant number of abortions that no one has ever denied? What purpose is served by discussing abortion in terms of 1% of them? Do we discuss all men in terms of the tiny number of them who are rapists?

Furthermore, are you sure you want to advocate killing children as a favor to the children? Is that really an argument you want to make, that it's better to be cut to pieces and thrown away than to potentially have an unhappy childhood?

Or is the argument you want to make that those damned lower classes should have their breeding restricted so they don't overrun their betters? Because if so, that argument has been made many times in history, by many people, and I don't think you want to be associated with any of them.

Please prove to us that the only people who are pro-life are religious, let alone that they SPECIFICALLY espouse the theory you have attributed to them. Otherwise, your smarmy, self-important, supercilious ass owes one WHOPPER of an apology for being such a public douchebag.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I do not think abstinence education is a joke. I think abstinence-only education is a joke. I think abstinence should be taught as the only 100% effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancy. As long as abstinence is practiced there will be no unwanted pregnancy. Unfortunately, reality must be taken into account and our very liberal views on sex and teen-age sex play a part in the effectiveness of abstinence.

I, too was one of those 16 year old boys, but, don't tell anyone, I made it through high school with my virginity... unfortunately... part of that was because my girl friend was part Cherokee Indian with a mom that would literally take her husband apart for any mistake on his part... I was not about to get on my girlfriend's mom's bad side. Also, they owned a wolf that hated teen-aged boys. If I so much as held my girlfriend's hand while "dog" was present, I was taking my life into my own hands.

I am not opposed to sex education or birth control. I am opposed to schools giving out condoms. In my opinion, it is not the place of the school districts to promote teen-aged sex.

Immie

Good point, I guess I have no issue with it being a part of sex-ed but I don't think people with a lot of opportunities would really take it serious. But if some did and it saved a potential unwanted pregnancy even once it'd be worth it.

Yeah personally I think handing out condoms in public schools is weird too, high school kids know where they can buy condoms I don't think they don't buy them because they don't know where to get them. I think many don't use them because they don't take the potential consequences seriously, like having an unwanted pregnancy or an STD.

Luckily I was and am still scared to death of both of those things.

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

Besides, you don't actually have to buy them. Do you know how many places GIVE those things away? I mean, hell. MY company is looking at getting some printed with our logo and handing them out for advertising. They're not exactly hard to come by (no puns intended).

 

[Cecilie1200]

A fair point. So, if this is about pro-life, shouldnt that also encompass the quality of said life? What is the percentage of people procreating into poverty? I think if you dug around, you would find that the poorer people are, the more children they tend to have. Education has a lot to do with this. Procreating into poverty only continues that spiral.

Do you know how incredibly lame it is to answer your own post?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I did answer your question. That is an extremely small percentage of women.

However, to spell it out for you, when you choose to have sex, protected or not, you choose to take the risk of ending up with a pregnancy. Plain and simple, there are no guarantees on the box of condoms or in the instructions on how to use the pill that you will not end up with a pregnancy. If you choose to have sex, you run the risk of ending up with a pregnancy.

Either accept that risk or choose not to have sex.

Immie

Or have an abortion.
I can't imagine why anyone would insist that a child should be born because a woman took a risk and things went badly.
Where is the respect for the child? They are human too, you know.

So it's out of respect for the unborn and helpless that you kill it?

Yup. They're doing that kid a favor, because it's just SO HORRIBLE to live a less-than-perfect life.

Of course, by that logic, I would be justified in killing liberals, because it's just SO HORRIBLE to live life being stupid.

 

[Anguille]

Immie, I still don't see anywhere in that post where I used the term "unborn child".

You didn't. But your wording clearly indicates that you do not consider a fetus to be human. I suppose you will start playing semantic games. Guess, you are admitting defeat.

Immie

I've made it clear in other posts that I do not consider fetuses to be human beings. So what's your beef? It seems like you thought you could trap me in some word game but failed. I guess the title of this thread makes a valid point.

For shame, Immie! Try again.

 

[Immanuel]

Good point, I guess I have no issue with it being a part of sex-ed but I don't think people with a lot of opportunities would really take it serious. But if some did and it saved a potential unwanted pregnancy even once it'd be worth it.

Yeah personally I think handing out condoms in public schools is weird too, high school kids know where they can buy condoms I don't think they don't buy them because they don't know where to get them. I think many don't use them because they don't take the potential consequences seriously, like having an unwanted pregnancy or an STD.

Luckily I was and am still scared to death of both of those things.

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

Besides, you don't actually have to buy them. Do you know how many places GIVE those things away? I mean, hell. MY company is looking at getting some printed with our logo and handing them out for advertising. They're not exactly hard to come by (no puns intended).

It has been a heck of a long time since I went shopping for condoms. My wife had her tubes tied when she decided that we were done having children. My youngest is 19.

I would agree with you, if you are not man enough to buy them then you are not man enough to have sex. That won't stop them from doing it though.

I have no idea how many places give them away, but how many of those places have some hot chick doing the giving? I mean, that's just what a kid wants when he goes to ask for a free condom is some gorgeous young woman that gets a rise out of him (pun intended) handing him a condom. Of course, when your a teen-aged boy, just about any woman can cause that kind of a reaction.

Immie

 

[RDD_1210]

A fair point. So, if this is about pro-life, shouldnt that also encompass the quality of said life? What is the percentage of people procreating into poverty? I think if you dug around, you would find that the poorer people are, the more children they tend to have. Education has a lot to do with this. Procreating into poverty only continues that spiral.

Do you know how incredibly lame it is to answer your own post?

As lame as comparing someone to Hitler?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm law abiding... but I have a lead foot. I even have a couple of speeding tickets to my name to prove that.

I know a lot of people that would never park in a handicapped parking space but will smoke pot in the privacy of their own homes.

I know you and I disagree on this and unfortunately, I don't think either one of us will ever be able to prove our beliefs with actual real life events. I think your belief that abortion numbers sky-rocketed with the legalization of abortion is incorrect as is your belief that making it illegal would reverse that trend. There were most likely just as many abortions the year before legalization as there were the year after, it is simply that it was legal to admit to an abortion after whereas before it would have gotten both the woman and, if she had someone else help her, that other person in trouble.

Because abortion is seen to be socially acceptable in these days and times, even making it illegal will not make it rare.

Immie

Yes, there will always be people who ignore and flout the law. That's why we have full prisons.

Nevertheless, consider that while you may have speeding tickets, I'll betcha you haven't been dinged for felony speeding, because while you fudge the speed limits, you respect the law enough to not go 100 miles an hour through town. Right?

Kind of the point. Bending smaller laws a little is a whole 'nother thing from breaking major ones for the vast majority of us. We calculate the risks versus the rewards, factor in the odds of actually getting caught, and then we decide on the course of action with the most desirable likely outcome. If abortions were largely illegal, they would also largely NOT be the chosen course of action.

Not through town, but there was that stretch of Utah Desert on the way from California to Nebraska... um, is there a statute of limitations on speeding?

As for it not being the chosen course of action, it seems to me that you are assuming that the overturning of Roe would mean that abortion would become illegal in most places in the U.S. I don't think that would happen. I think we'd have states that made it illegal right next to ones that made it legal. I think it would be a literal nightmare. I think we would have a small amount of "back alley" abortions, but I think the majority of women would simply get on a plane or take a train or car to the nearest legal abortion clinic and solve their problem, thus doing nothing at all to reduce the number of abortions.

Is the goal here to overturn Roe or to reduce the number of abortions?

Immie

No, I don't assume that overturning Roe would mean abortion would become illegal in most places. That is why I said, "if abortions were largely illegal", rather than "if Roe v. Wade was overturned".

The ultimate goal is to reduce the number of abortions. The shorter-term goal of overturning Roe v. Wade would be a step toward accomplishing that, and would also achieve the secondary goals of returning power back to the states where it belongs, and eliminating an egregious flaw in United States law.

 

[Anguille]

Ravi, just because you think that creationism and science are non-compatible doesn't mean there aren't those of us who love science and see it as God's map of life. I'm certainly not scared of science, though I think most of the head-in-the-sand anti-creationists are definitely afraid of faith...and of a lot of science, too, when it doesn't fit their concept of the way things ought to be.

If I recall correctly, Ravi was actually chiming in to support the human-dog hybrid argument. In fact, it's possible it even WAS Ravi. That may be why I originally put her idiotic butt on ignore.

Lying doesn't become you.

Does anything become Cecilie?

So you're on ignore too.

LOL! She only says that when she's wreery wreery mad!

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

Besides, you don't actually have to buy them. Do you know how many places GIVE those things away? I mean, hell. MY company is looking at getting some printed with our logo and handing them out for advertising. They're not exactly hard to come by (no puns intended).

It has been a heck of a long time since I went shopping for condoms. My wife had her tubes tied when she decided that we were done having children. My youngest is 19.

I would agree with you, if you are not man enough to buy them then you are not man enough to have sex. That won't stop them from doing it though.

I have no idea how many places give them away, but how many of those places have some hot chick doing the giving? I mean, that's just what a kid wants when he goes to ask for a free condom is some gorgeous young woman that gets a rise out of him (pun intended) handing him a condom. Of course, when your a teen-aged boy, just about any woman can cause that kind of a reaction.

Immie

The point still being, condoms are not difficult to acquire, one way or another.

 

[Immanuel]

Immie, I still don't see anywhere in that post where I used the term "unborn child".

You didn't. But your wording clearly indicates that you do not consider a fetus to be human. I suppose you will start playing semantic games. Guess, you are admitting defeat.

Immie

I've made it clear in other posts that I do not consider fetuses to be human beings. So what's your beef? It seems like you thought you could trap me in some word game but failed. I guess the title of this thread makes a valid point.

For shame, Immie! Try again.

You're the one that made the lame post about respecting the "child" when you don't even consider it human.

Are you afraid to answer my question about what your opinion is on whether a woman who has used birth control and had it fail on her is justified in having an abortion?

I did answer your question. That is an extremely small percentage of women.

However, to spell it out for you, when you choose to have sex, protected or not, you choose to take the risk of ending up with a pregnancy. Plain and simple, there are no guarantees on the box of condoms or in the instructions on how to use the pill that you will not end up with a pregnancy. If you choose to have sex, you run the risk of ending up with a pregnancy.

Either accept that risk or choose not to have sex.

Immie

Or have an abortion.
I can't imagine why anyone would insist that a child should be born because a woman took a risk and things went badly.
Where is the respect for the child? They are human too, you know.

Now please get back on topic.

Immie

 

[RDD_1210]

Anti-abortion supporters are only concerned with imposing their moral agenda. If they were actually concerned about the well being of these children you would see them adopting these unwanted children left and right to ensure they have the upbringing they deserve.

 

[Anguille]

Good point, I guess I have no issue with it being a part of sex-ed but I don't think people with a lot of opportunities would really take it serious. But if some did and it saved a potential unwanted pregnancy even once it'd be worth it.

Yeah personally I think handing out condoms in public schools is weird too, high school kids know where they can buy condoms I don't think they don't buy them because they don't know where to get them. I think many don't use them because they don't take the potential consequences seriously, like having an unwanted pregnancy or an STD.

Luckily I was and am still scared to death of both of those things.

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

.

Be that as it may, boys are sill biologically man enough to be having sex. I think Immie makes a very valid point. When I was in high school I worked behind the counter of a small independantly owned pharmacy. The owner kept the condoms behind the counter. Never once was I asked to get someone a box of condoms, all the men, regardless of their age, would ask to see the pharmacist and then tell him what they wanted.

 

[Anguille]

Or have an abortion.
I can't imagine why anyone would insist that a child should be born because a woman took a risk and things went badly.
Where is the respect for the child? They are human too, you know.

So it's out of respect for the unborn and helpless that you kill it?

Yup. They're doing that kid a favor, because it's just SO HORRIBLE to live a less-than-perfect life.

Of course, by that logic, I would be justified in killing liberals, because it's just SO HORRIBLE to live life being stupid.

Ahh! The Puke-enema defense.

 

[Immanuel]

I think one of the reasons they don't buy them is because they are too damned embarrassed to go ask for them. Put them as one of the toys in "Cracker Jacks" and they would have no problem getting them, but to go and ask the clerk (who may very well be "hot" herself) at the counter of the pharmacy for a box of Trojans is, well, just not going to happen.

Immie

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

.

Be that as it may, boys are sill biologically man enough to be having sex. I think Immie makes a very valid point. When I was in high school I worked behind the counter of a small independantly owned pharmacy. The owner kept the condoms behind the counter. Never once was I asked to get someone a box of condoms, all the men, regardless of their age, would ask to see the pharmacist and then tell him what they wanted.

Or send the girl in to buy them.

What can I say, most of us at that age are cowards.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

Anti-abortion supporters are only concerned with imposing their moral agenda. If they were actually concerned about the well being of these children you would see them adopting these unwanted children left and right to ensure they have the upbringing they deserve.

Quite true. I've yet to see this argument successfully refuted by anyone.

 

[Anguille]

If you're not man enough to buy a box of condoms, you're not man enough to be having sex.

.

Be that as it may, boys are sill biologically man enough to be having sex. I think Immie makes a very valid point. When I was in high school I worked behind the counter of a small independantly owned pharmacy. The owner kept the condoms behind the counter. Never once was I asked to get someone a box of condoms, all the men, regardless of their age, would ask to see the pharmacist and then tell him what they wanted.

Or send the girl in to buy them.

What can I say, most of us at that age are cowards.

Immie

I wasn't just my classmates that were too shy. It was my classmates fathers too!

 

[Cecilie1200]

It has been a heck of a long time since I went shopping for condoms. My wife had her tubes tied when she decided that we were done having children. My youngest is 19.

I would agree with you, if you are not man enough to buy them then you are not man enough to have sex. That won't stop them from doing it though.

I have no idea how many places give them away, but how many of those places have some hot chick doing the giving? I mean, that's just what a kid wants when he goes to ask for a free condom is some gorgeous young woman that gets a rise out of him (pun intended) handing him a condom. Of course, when your a teen-aged boy, just about any woman can cause that kind of a reaction.

Immie

The point still being, condoms are not difficult to acquire, one way or another.

sadly your parents couldnt get ahold of some

How many hours did you spend coming up with THAT clever little zinger? Oh, the pain . . . the pain.

 

[AllieBaba]

Anti-abortion supporters are only concerned with imposing their moral agenda. If they were actually concerned about the well being of these children you would see them adopting these unwanted children left and right to ensure they have the upbringing they deserve.

Gosh, that's original. We've sure as shit never heard that particular idiocy before.