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

[Amadoos]

And for the record, I would never force my child to give up a child. Ever. I would support her implicitely in her decision to keep it, and I would provide all the support necessary to help her be a successful mother. And I wuoldn't doing that by telling her horror stories of the terrible tole pregnancy takes on a body, or threaten her with forcing her to give up her childre or have it ripped from her body, either.

thanks, I've had 4 children. The ones I had young weren't the ones who gave me difficulty, incidentally, adn that is true of most mothers. Usually, each subsequent child is a little more difficult and risky. Birth is risky. So is abortion.

It's not your call either way.




Thankfully.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Maybe it was explained and I missed it, but how can someone be ok with abortion of a raped mother and still be pro life?


How is the fetus/baby any different in this instance?

 

[Gadawg73]

And for the record, I would never force my child to give up a child. Ever. I would support her implicitely in her decision to keep it, and I would provide all the support necessary to help her be a successful mother. And I wuoldn't doing that by telling her horror stories of the terrible tole pregnancy takes on a body, or threaten her with forcing her to give up her childre or have it ripped from her body, either.

thanks, I've had 4 children. The ones I had young weren't the ones who gave me difficulty, incidentally, adn that is true of most mothers. Usually, each subsequent child is a little more difficult and risky. Birth is risky. So is abortion.

You can't force her to give the child up.
Talk about a straw man.

 

[Gadawg73]

Maybe it was explained and I missed it, but how can someone be ok with abortion of a raped mother and still be pro life?


How is the fetus/baby any different in this instance?

They want an out for themselves.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Could not tell you how many rape cases I have worked over the years for that reason.
And it wasn't rape 95% of the time.
But that is ok, sending an innocent man to trial and possibly prisonso they can get THEIR abortion.
Typical right wing religous right knee jerk reaction.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Don't tell me how to answer. I answer however I damn well please.

Not murder as defined by law........What they would be are irresponsible morons, continually engaging in the extermination of innocent human life, while full well knowing they could prevent it.

Next.

I didn't tell you how to answer, I simply told you what would have been a sufficient answer to my question. So I'll take your answer as a 'yes, they are guilty of murder in my eyes.' Hmmmm.....I think you might fit in quite well with the congregation at a small, but quite well known church in Topeka, Kansas.

Murder by law......No.

So, your question was not a simple yes or no, slapdick.

You can take my answer however you like....You're opinion lends about as much credibility as the steaming turd my dog left on the lawn this morning does.


But, you would definitely have fit right in with the NAZI's leading the Jews to their demise, eh?

You didn't answer his question sir, would you personally view what the couple was doing as infanticide? Not what the law or a gov't says.

However you did do a spectacular job of provided us crazed, fanatical hyperbole that I would only expect from a woman on crack and at the height of her period.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Maybe it was explained and I missed it, but how can someone be ok with abortion of a raped mother and still be pro life?


How is the fetus/baby any different in this instance?

They want an out for themselves.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Could not tell you how many rape cases I have worked over the years for that reason.
And it wasn't rape 95% of the time.
But that is ok, sending an innocent man to trial and possibly prisonso they can get THEIR abortion.
Typical right wing religous right knee jerk reaction.

Yeah its' quite confusing, I always hear how an early term fetus is innocent life, why is it less innocent at that stage than a pregnancy from 2 consenting adults? Is the fetus/baby not innocent because of the actions of the father?

That seems awfully judgemental to me.

 

[koshergrl]

Regarding motivations, I observe two motivations in the anti-abortion movement, as I briefly touched on earlier. Some members of it are genuinely concerned with protecting unborn fetuses. Others use that as a smokescreen or a means to the end of returning women to sexual servitude as they were in the past, when marriage was a form of property ownership, rape of one's spouse was a non-crime, and women were expected to be the virginal property of their male relatives until marriage upon which they became the subordinate, submissive property of their husbands.

The reason why this motivates some people to the anti-abortion movement is because legal, safe, available abortion (like birth control) results in female sexual freedom. A woman is free these days to control her own sexual behavior and fertility. If her husband rapes her, that's now a crime. If she is unmarried and wants to have sex with someone, she can, without fear of pregnancy as a consequence (although she still has to watch out for STDs). To the anti-feminist wing of the anti-abortion movement, this seems like unjustifiable permissiveness and they want to restore the consequences of sinful sex to women so that fear of those consequences might keep their legs crossed more.

There's a simple test to determine whether a given member of the anti-abortion movement belongs to its truly pro-life wing or merely to its anti-feminist wing, and I invite all anti-abortion participants on this thread to take that test. It involves answering one simple question.

If you were writing a law to make abortion illegal once more, would you make an exception allowing termination of a pregnancy that resulted from rape?

You parrot the usual pro-choice talking points quite well, I'll give ya' that!

There are only three reasons that would validate abortion:


Other than those three, there is no valid reason to exterminate innocent human life.

Ya' see, what the pro-choicers are all about, like most left wingers are all about, is doing away with any personal responsibility.....Whatever they can do to make their lives easierl, without having to care about their decisions, take the personal responsibility angle out of the equation........Hence, "hey, if I get pregnant, no problem, i'll just abort the lil' bastard."

And i'll ask you a question that ALWAYS boggles the minds of the pro-choicers:

Why shouldn't the father have a choice in the abortion decision?

After all, the pro-choicers always seem to the think the father is just a tool in conception, and should only be pulled out of the box when it's time be the cash cow after birth......The woman knows the risks taken when deciding to spread her legs. She knows her womb may damn sure end up harboring an innocent human life, as does the male......It takes both to create life. Equal responsibility.....There is no life without sperm meeting egg. after all......So, tell us why the father should have no rights in the decision to kill that child.

THREE * VALID * REASONS ARE




1) Risk to a mothers life.

2) Incest related pregnancy.

3) Rape.

see you beat yourself over the head with that answer

IF a fetus is a *human life * why should it be sacrificed cus the father took part in a illegal act ( rape )

of the father pregnated a female in his own family ) (incest )

why should the FETUS (BABY ) BE SACRIFICED FOR THAT WHAT SIN ,HARM .ILLEGAL ACT
did the baby do to have it life taken???




this is where you anti abortions folks are hypocritical

plus you approve and support INVITRO INSEMINATION a procedure in which many FETUSES /EMBRYO,s are distroyed

I REST MY CASE

No, this is where the pro-abortionists lie. The pro-life crowd has never advocated that women who face danger and death from carrying a child be forced to carry that child. Prior to Roe v. Wade, doctors performed abortions perfectly legally and with the blessings of all in order to save these women. Of course it VERY RARELY HAPPENS. If you think differently, or know of a case where a woman was forced to carry a childl to term despite the fact that it was sucking the life out of her and resulted in her death, kindly share those statistics. You won't, because they don't exist, and it never happened.

The same with incest. The few times, statistically speaking, that it has taken place and the woman has conceived, and REPORTED IT before the baby was viable, abortions have historically been avaialble lto them. This is another lie perppetuated by the pro-abortionists...that pro-lifers have in the past "forced" victims of these crimes to carry and deliver these monster children of rape and violence...against their will. You paint a (false) picture of these poor victimized women being strapped to their hospital beds until such time the fiendish monsters are able to safely be ripped from their bodies, leaving the women broken, insane, and ignored, while the children are bustled off to some ward for monster children that are raised to be killing machines for the state or some such thing (as we all know that all chidlren of poor women, raped women and victims of incest are criminal monsters from birth).

It's a lie, and a scare tactic. This has never happened and legalized abortion is not necessary to prevent it from continuing to happen. Women who report incest then, as today, will continue to be offeredthe option of timely abortion....note the word "timely". Waiting until you're 6 months pregnant probably won't cut it, but I'm sure there are doctors who will be willing to perform the service.

Meanwhile, one of PP's primary functions in our society is to protect the rapsits, the incest perps, from an y sort of accountability as they herd their underaged victims into the clinics...where few questions are asked (including "who paid for your visit today" or "what is the name and age of the father of the child", and asnwers that are given are never looked into. You have a vested interested in protecting child rapists, families whre incest is a generational occurrence, and rape, you go right ahead and keep lying about how the pro-lifers have always "forced" mothers to carry those children. It's a scare tactic perpetrated by the butchers who make their money off those very people you are pretending to defend by lying about them....

 

[InDoctriNation]

You parrot the usual pro-choice talking points quite well, I'll give ya' that!

There are only three reasons that would validate abortion:


Other than those three, there is no valid reason to exterminate innocent human life.

Ya' see, what the pro-choicers are all about, like most left wingers are all about, is doing away with any personal responsibility.....Whatever they can do to make their lives easierl, without having to care about their decisions, take the personal responsibility angle out of the equation........Hence, "hey, if I get pregnant, no problem, i'll just abort the lil' bastard."

And i'll ask you a question that ALWAYS boggles the minds of the pro-choicers:

Why shouldn't the father have a choice in the abortion decision?

After all, the pro-choicers always seem to the think the father is just a tool in conception, and should only be pulled out of the box when it's time be the cash cow after birth......The woman knows the risks taken when deciding to spread her legs. She knows her womb may damn sure end up harboring an innocent human life, as does the male......It takes both to create life. Equal responsibility.....There is no life without sperm meeting egg. after all......So, tell us why the father should have no rights in the decision to kill that child.

THREE * VALID * REASONS ARE




1) Risk to a mothers life.

2) Incest related pregnancy.

3) Rape.

see you beat yourself over the head with that answer

IF a fetus is a *human life * why should it be sacrificed cus the father took part in a illegal act ( rape )

of the father pregnated a female in his own family ) (incest )

why should the FETUS (BABY ) BE SACRIFICED FOR THAT WHAT SIN ,HARM .ILLEGAL ACT
did the baby do to have it life taken???




this is where you anti abortions folks are hypocritical

plus you approve and support INVITRO INSEMINATION a procedure in which many FETUSES /EMBRYO,s are distroyed

I REST MY CASE

No, this is where the pro-abortionists lie. The pro-life crowd has never advocated that women who face danger and death from carrying a child be forced to carry that child. Prior to Roe v. Wade, doctors performed abortions perfectly legally and with the blessings of all in order to save these women. Of course it VERY RARELY HAPPENS. If you think differently, or know of a case where a woman was forced to carry a childl to term despite the fact that it was sucking the life out of her and resulted in her death, kindly share those statistics. You won't, because they don't exist, and it never happened.

The same with incest. The few times, statistically speaking, that it has taken place and the woman has conceived, and REPORTED IT before the baby was viable, abortions have historically been avaialble lto them. This is another lie perppetuated by the pro-abortionists...that pro-lifers have in the past "forced" victims of these crimes to carry and deliver these monster children of rape and violence...against their will. You paint a (false) picture of these poor victimized women being strapped to their hospital beds until such time the fiendish monsters are able to safely be ripped from their bodies, leaving the women broken, insane, and ignored, while the children are bustled off to some ward for monster children that are raised to be killing machines for the state or some such thing (as we all know that all chidlren of poor women, raped women and victims of incest are criminal monsters from birth).

It's a lie, and a scare tactic. This has never happened and legalized abortion is not necessary to prevent it from continuing to happen. Women who report incest then, as today, will continue to be offeredthe option of timely abortion....note the word "timely". Waiting until you're 6 months pregnant probably won't cut it, but I'm sure there are doctors who will be willing to perform the service.

Meanwhile, one of PP's primary functions in our society is to protect the rapsits, the incest perps, from an y sort of accountability as they herd their underaged victims into the clinics...where few questions are asked (including "who paid for your visit today" or "what is the name and age of the father of the child", and asnwers that are given are never looked into. You have a vested interested in protecting child rapists, families whre incest is a generational occurrence, and rape, you go right ahead and keep lying about how the pro-lifers have always "forced" mothers to carry those children. It's a scare tactic perpetrated by the butchers who make their money off those very people you are pretending to defend by lying about them....

Wow, I've never seen someone go so far out of their way to prove their inconsistency and hypocrisy, and not even come close to addressing the point made be the poster you are replying to. Bravo.

 

[koshergrl]

No stats I see. Because they don't exist. Women in the US have never been forced to bear the children of rape, incest, or to carry chidlren at the risk of their own lives.

Doesn't happen. But keep right on pretending it does. And people like me will keep right on asking you to show the evidence.

 

[Dr.Drock]

No stats I see. Because they don't exist. Women in the US have never been forced to bear the children of rape, incest, or to carry chidlren at the risk of their own lives.

Doesn't happen. But keep right on pretending it does. And people like me will keep right on asking you to show the evidence.

I didn't say a single word about laws.

I'm asking how can someone say they're anti-abortion, when they have no moral issue with abortions in rape cases.


What's the difference in terms of the fetus/baby? If you view every pregnancy at every stage as a living baby, how can you be ok with it being done away with in rape cases?

 

[InDoctriNation]

No stats I see. Because they don't exist. Women in the US have never been forced to bear the children of rape, incest, or to carry chidlren at the risk of their own lives.

Doesn't happen. But keep right on pretending it does. And people like me will keep right on asking you to show the evidence.

You can't be that dumb, can you? Go back and read the post you replied to. He was not arguing that women have ever been forced to bear the children of rape, incest, or to carry children at the risk of their own lives. He was arguing that if you are to be consistent in your belief that a fetus is a human being equal to anyone else walking around out of the womb, then how can you accept abortion in the case of rape, incest, or threat to the mother's life? The fetus is just as innocent in these cases as any consensual case, yet you make an exception. This proves your inconsistency. Can't believe I had to hold your hand through it like a small child and spell it out for you like that. Jesus...

 

[Dragon]

So, the father IS just a tool in the creation of life

That isn't what I said. I said that while the fetus is in gestation, the mother should have the sole determining say in whether or not to bring it to term. If the father were "just a tool," that would continue to be the case after the child is born, and I don't believe that.

Btw, I believe that embryo is human life

Sorry, but you don't. If you did, you wouldn't make an exception and allow abortion in the case of rape.

 

[Wicked Jester]

So, the father IS just a tool in the creation of life

That isn't what I said. I said that while the fetus is in gestation, the mother should have the sole determining say in whether or not to bring it to term. If the father were "just a tool," that would continue to be the case after the child is born, and I don't believe that.

Btw, I believe that embryo is human life

Sorry, but you don't. If you did, you wouldn't make an exception and allow abortion in the case of rape.

Who the fuck are you to tell ANYBODY what they think, ya' pompous lil' fuckin moron?

I already told what the fuck my reasoning is. You don't like it, too fuckin' bad.





LMAO!

 

[Dragon]

Who the fuck are you to tell ANYBODY what they think, ya' pompous lil' fuckin moron?

Someone capable of reasoning logically and pointing out the obvious. If you actually thought abortion was murder, you wouldn't say it was all right to murder the child of a rapist.

I already told what the fuck my reasoning is.

And I already told you why it doesn't hold water. It's not that I "don't like it," it's that it's wrong.

 

[Amadoos]

I think that anyone who lives in the good ol' USA should be for everyone having a choice. That's one of our founding principles. The land of the free.

 

[InDoctriNation]

Who the fuck are you to tell ANYBODY what they think, ya' pompous lil' fuckin moron?

Someone capable of reasoning logically and pointing out the obvious. If you actually thought abortion was murder, you wouldn't say it was all right to murder the child of a rapist.

I already told what the fuck my reasoning is.

And I already told you why it doesn't hold water. It's not that I "don't like it," it's that it's wrong.

Arguing with someone who thinks brute force beats logic is like pissing into a tornado.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Who the fuck are you to tell ANYBODY what they think, ya' pompous lil' fuckin moron?

Someone capable of reasoning logically and pointing out the obvious. If you actually thought abortion was murder, you wouldn't say it was all right to murder the child of a rapist.

I already told what the fuck my reasoning is.

And I already told you why it doesn't hold water. It's not that I "don't like it," it's that it's wrong.

Arguing with someone who thinks brute force beats logic is like pissing into a tornado.

LMAO!

When any of you pro-choicer loons throws out some logic, let me know.

 

[JohnA]

No stats I see. Because they don't exist. Women in the US have never been forced to bear the children of rape, incest, or to carry chidlren at the risk of their own lives.

Doesn't happen. But keep right on pretending it does. And people like me will keep right on asking you to show the evidence.

ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT the fetus / embryo or whatever stage you want to address is in the anti abortionist mind a * human being * .

you cant have it both ways if you can make exceptions to your belief for rape and incest then there can easily be a exception made for mothers who dont not want to birth for any reason .

its as simple as that its either a human life from conception or it isnt
you cant conveniently make exceptions and kill a human if your belief is it has a right to live from conception
thats where your contraditions are

 

[Dragon]

When any of you pro-choicer loons throws out some logic, let me know.

You do seem to have some trouble seeing it for yourself. I'll keep that in mind.

 

[Dr.Drock]

When any of you pro-choicer loons throws out some logic, let me know.

You do seem to have some trouble seeing it for yourself. I'll keep that in mind.

Don't you see his obvious logic?

"ABORTION IS BABY KILLING!!!!!!!!! DO YOU HEAR ME?!?!?!? BABY KIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINGGGGGGGGG"

"So you're ok with "killing babies" in the instances of rape and incest?"

"Yes, of course, why not?"