Lets end the "pro-life" "pro-choice" bullshit shall we

[Pogo]

^^ "posting the same way over and over and expecting different results"

 

[Steven_R]

I love ppl like Edge. Ppl like edge don't have something they stand for he is part of the "anti's" the group of people who are anti whatever a democrat does for no reason. Like an opinion animal. He doesn't know why he just knows he doesn't like the other person so if disagreeing with that person means cutting his own throat then hand him the knife.

Those people aren't the rational group. If a Dem came out against Suicide Edge would start tying a noose

There are enough people on the Dem side who are so anti-Republican that if suicide Prevention were a Republican priority, they would demand students be told "Down the Road, not Across the Street".

Both sides suck.

 

[KevinWestern]

Once a woman takes responsibility for getting pregnant, she is responsible for the baby inside her as well.

Yea, but as I brought up earlier there are many instances where the woman is not responsible for getting pregnant, like in situations where she was raped. Say a lady was raped and her pregnancy poses a grave danger to her health.

What then?

 

[mamooth]

Like I said, I just mostly hate people who think throwing a live baby into the trash and letting it die is hunky-dory.

PETA gets just as crazy about cows.

That's why I consider both PETA and you to be dishonest 'tards. Most people do.

Is there any difference at all between you and PETA? You both lie your asses off and make up whackaloon definitions of what a person is, and then froth that anyone not as crazy as you is a murderer. I don't see any discernible difference between pro-lifers and PETA freaks.

 

[Edgetho]

I love ppl like Edge. Ppl like edge don't have something they stand for he is part of the "anti's" the group of people who are anti whatever a democrat does for no reason. Like an opinion animal. He doesn't know why he just knows he doesn't like the other person so if disagreeing with that person means cutting his own throat then hand him the knife.

Those people aren't the rational group. If a Dem came out against Suicide Edge would start tying a noose

There are enough people on the Dem side who are so anti-Republican that if suicide Prevention were a Republican priority, they would demand students be told "Down the Road, not Across the Street".

Both sides suck.

Bullshit.

For over one hundred years, Republicans tried to get anti-slavery legislation passed and after we fought and killed hundreds of thousands of dimocrap scum we tried to pass anti-lynching laws, had to send Federal Troops to the dimocrap South, and tried to keep dimocraps from undoing all the good we had done for Blacks.

But dimocraps stood in the way for over 100 years. Then, in a State of panic, because the South was turning more Conservative, dimocrap scum decided abruptly in 1963 to buy the Black Vote by stealing money from people who work for it and giving it to people who vote dimocrap...... Which Black People never did in any numbers.

Martin Luther King was a lifelong Republican. As were the VAST majority of Blacks prior to 1964.

Then in 1964, dimocraps just simply got out of the way and passed the Civil Rights Bill. The same one that Algore Sr, Robert KKK Byrd and several other prominent dimocraps filibustered in 1957.

Same bill before it was watered down. People (especially the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM and Academia) give all the credit to LBJ and dimocraps when the fact is, Everett Dirksen got the bill pushed through.

dimocraps stole what we had been trying to do for over 100 years and claimed credit for it.

And they fucked it up. As usual.

Just like Social Security. A joke. It's about to go belly-up.

Where's the sense in trying to pay 2013 Bills with 1964 money? Complicated. Much too complicated for the average dimocrap. But there's just no sense in it

It's a bad joke. If you could have put all the money you gave to the Feds and combined it with all the money contributed on your behalf by your employers into a Mutual Fund.... You could retire a multi-millionaire.

Easy

And how about their "War on Poverty"?

How's that working?

dimocraps are a joke. The entire party. And most of their voters.

Don't give me that 'both parties' shit.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

Talk about circular reasoning.

Just because it is legal does not mean it should be. If the world worked that way ot would have been wrong to fight against slavery, which was legal, and Jim Crow laws, because they were legal.

But. please, feel free to keep pretending you actually have an argument.

 

[mamooth]

Edge, you understand you're stupid and crazy, right?

Don't worry. Even if you don't understand it, everyone else does.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

True.

Utterly and completely false.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I've always said, both "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are dishonest labels. Each implies that anybody who doesn't agree with me is "anti-life" or "anti-choice", and that's bullshit both times.

All it is is a way of baiting and polarizing. It does nothing to address the issue, which kind of indicates the proponents of such charged terms are not really interested in the issue -- they're interested in personally winning some rhetorical sports event.

Which explains why you actually addressed the issue which is that the OP is full of shit.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I think a lot of folks consider what's inside the female to be "human life", and therefore should be protected regardless of what the woman wants or does not want to do. I mean, there are good points on both sides of the equation.

Personally, I don't like abortion but can't quite make the leap to making that decision for someone else (and make it illegal). Two reasons for this are:

1.) if you make abortion illegal, people still will get them under considerably riskier circumstances
2.) who am I to tell a woman who was raped, and whose pregnancy poses a risk to health that she can't get an abortion. I just don't want to get in there, personally...

But I do think casual abortions (ie healthy mom who got pregnant in a non traumatic) should be difficult to get.

Damn, I love arguments based on the "I only pretend to care to score points" premise.

1. What makes going to a doctors office riskier that going to an unregulated clinic run by a racist asswipe like Gosnell?
2. Why does how a woman got pregnant change the value of human life?

 

[OKTexas]

How about we compare this to another legal activity, smoking. Most folks have no problem making smokers second class citizens, taxing the hell out of them and restricting areas where they can engage in this legal activity. So what's the problem making sure abortions are done safely by medical professionals who are fully equipped to handle any complication. You have no problem messing over smokers for the supposed safety of others, yet you advocate abortions be cheap and plentiful knowing it will destroy at least one life and could affect many more. Go figure.

The problem is that not even you agree with taxing and restricting the areas but you are advocating it as a solution when it goes against everything you believe in

Really, how so? All I did is contrast what you said against other socially accepted norms restricting legal activities. Care to elaborate?

 

[Defiant1]

Once a woman takes responsibility for getting pregnant, she is responsible for the baby inside her as well.

Yea, but as I brought up earlier there are many instances where the woman is not responsible for getting pregnant, like in situations where she was raped. Say a lady was raped and her pregnancy poses a grave danger to her health.

What then?

Abortion should only be allowed if the birth of the baby poses a grave danger to a woman's life.

Not health. Health is too broad, it can mean anything.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

uh being pro-choice does not mean you dont have morals. This is why this will never be settled. People like you saying stupid hyperbolic shit.
Soon allie will be in here to turn it into her rant on how the left are nazi's.

In some cultures it is moral to have slavery, or for the wife to be killed when her husband dies. The difference between us is you judge people by your morals, and insist that the government make me live by them. That makes you the hypocrite.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How about we compare this to another legal activity, smoking. Most folks have no problem making smokers second class citizens, taxing the hell out of them and restricting areas where they can engage in this legal activity. So what's the problem making sure abortions are done safely by medical professionals who are fully equipped to handle any complication. You have no problem messing over smokers for the supposed safety of others, yet you advocate abortions be cheap and plentiful knowing it will destroy at least one life and could affect many more. Go figure.

The problem is that not even you agree with taxing and restricting the areas but you are advocating it as a solution when it goes against everything you believe in

The real problem is you are calling him a hypocrite for ding the same thing you do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

^^ "posting the same way over and over and expecting different results"

No post above his.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I think a lot of folks consider what's inside the female to be "human life", and therefore should be protected regardless of what the woman wants or does not want to do. I mean, there are good points on both sides of the equation.

Personally, I don't like abortion but can't quite make the leap to making that decision for someone else (and make it illegal). Two reasons for this are:

1.) if you make abortion illegal, people still will get them under considerably riskier circumstances
2.) who am I to tell a woman who was raped, and whose pregnancy poses a risk to health that she can't get an abortion. I just don't want to get in there, personally...

But I do think casual abortions (ie healthy mom who got pregnant in a non traumatic) should be difficult to get.

That's incredibly rare but it begs the question - Does anyone really believe that making it difficult to get a safe and legal abortion, or not allowing those women to abort -

Does anyone believe that THAT will make for a better mother? A well fed child even though born to someone who can hardly afford to feed themselves? A responsible father (sperm donor) stepping forward to take HALF the responsibility for the next 20 years?

If people care about the fetus, they would want that fetus to be wanted, loved, cared for, fed, educated.

Fetuses are just a political football for the rw's.

Just as no one has the right to control any woman's reproduction, no has the right to ask why she is aborting. And that will never ever change.

 

[flacaltenn]

CC.. I'm pro-choice on damn near everything. But I figured out a long time ago that because I support a right for these things to be individual decisions, doesn't mean that I LIKE it or even APPROVE of it..

As for the arg. about "not making it harder, because it's legal" ---- that's a diff story. I would expect that all the Women's Issues voters would WANT abortions to be in a safer and cleaner enviro.. But as you see in Texas right now --- EVEN LEGISLATING minimum standards for abortion clinics is an "unwanted intrusion" on "their access" to womens' services.

I don't mind making prostitution or drug access "a little harder". As long as one still has the choice to participate or not. So I see nothing wrong or inconsistent in restricting ACCESS to choices. For abortion that would include limits on late term or partial birth abortion, a waiting and counseling period, or standards for care.

If someone was to have a sudden urge to visit a Nevada brothel, I truly wouldn't mind if there was a billboard on the road coming in advocating chastity and marraige fidelity..

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

I mean you can always ask someone but I guess putting it through your filter is easier to process.

"legality and shit"?

Regular Plato we got here

Very indicative of the way fetuses are used for political ends.

These are the same people who whine about drone killings while praising the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children by the illegal and unnecessary Iraq tax-funded slaughter.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I think a lot of folks consider what's inside the female to be "human life", and therefore should be protected regardless of what the woman wants or does not want to do. I mean, there are good points on both sides of the equation.

Personally, I don't like abortion but can't quite make the leap to making that decision for someone else (and make it illegal). Two reasons for this are:

1.) if you make abortion illegal, people still will get them under considerably riskier circumstances
2.) who am I to tell a woman who was raped, and whose pregnancy poses a risk to health that she can't get an abortion. I just don't want to get in there, personally...

But I do think casual abortions (ie healthy mom who got pregnant in a non traumatic) should be difficult to get.

It comes down to 'chattel'

In the old days, a wife was considered the property of the man -- Chattel.

Slaves were chattel. IOW, property.

These days you can not hold a human being in chattel. Well, you can but you'll end up dying in prison like that guy in Cleveland. So it's not a smart move.

The argument comes down to this.... At what point is the fetus a Human Being?

Religious types thinks it's at the moment of inceptio,

dimocrap SCUM think it's not until the baby sticks its head of the mommy's Vag and cries "Mama".

And some more radical dimocrap scum aren't even convinced it's a human at that point.

We've all heard the stories of dimocrap scum murdering born-alive infants, throwing them in the garbage and letting them die there.

But hey, they're dimocraps. It's how they roll.

I don't subscribe to the 'instant human' status the religious right wants to award babies at conception either.

Mostly, I just hate dimocraps. Everything they stand for is sick, depraved, disgusting, corrupt, dishonest, Anti-American, racist, hateful -- Did I miss anything?

So if they're for something. I'm against it at first glance. And nothing has really changed my mind on this topic

dimocraps are never right. About anything. They're just too stupid

And they argue like certified imbecilic children

Especially funny coming from one who wants the state to control and force women to give birth. Same with not allowing women to buy birth control while allowing men to buy Viagra.

You were "against it at first glance" and never bothered to educate yourself since.

 

[Edgetho]

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

uh being pro-choice does not mean you dont have morals. This is why this will never be settled. People like you saying stupid hyperbolic shit.
Soon allie will be in here to turn it into her rant on how the left are nazi's.

In some cultures it is moral to have slavery, or for the wife to be killed when her husband dies. The difference between us is you judge people by your morals, and insist that the government make me live by them. That makes you the hypocrite.

There's the old story of a Rajah going to see a British Major in Southern India about the Major's arrest of several men who had participated in the rather sick practice of "Sati".

Where they burn the surviving wife of the dead husband alive.

The Rajah was pissed and insisted that the British Major honor the ancient Indian Custom.

The British Major looked at him coolly and said, "I will honor your custom of Sati if you honor our customs as well."

The Rajah was quite pleased with himself, agreed and turned to walk away when the British Major stopped him and said, "It is our custom to hang people who organize and commit such traditions."