Pro-abortionists furious at Tim Tebow ad

[manifold]

I'm going to try to explain my pro-choice, anti-abortion sentiment in the simplest terms possible in the hopes that even the reactionaries might finally get it.

I believe that abortion at any point in the pregnancy is a sin against God, yourself, nature, life, karma or whatever you believe in.

I do not believe that, up to a certain point in the preganacy, abortion should be a crime.

Not all sins should also be crimes. And I especially cannot support making any sin a crime that will NEVER EVER EVER infringe upon me in ANY way.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

That reveals your position is NOT anchored in the "sanctity of life." If saving an innocent unborn was your core principle it wouldn't matter how the impregnation occurred. Without realizing it what you are saying is if a woman fucks without your explicit permission she is not recognizing your attempted domain over her body. If she gets pregnant she is punished by you trying to exert domain over her body by telling her what to do with it.

The Christian Right camp has one immutable property that is the cornerstone of all their major positions: Control. Ubiquitous control without challenge.

You should read the rest of the thread. But being the idiot you are, I doubt that it would clarify things. At what point did I say that a woman needed my permision to engage in sexual activity? And where exactly did I state that I wanted to punish a woman or that I wanted domain over her body?

I saw you trying to backpedal when someone else pointed out your position is based in control and not the sanctity of life. I didn't say you explicitly stated you want domain over womens' bodies. I clearly said:

"Without realizing it what you are saying is...."


I agree with you I am an idiot. I actually waste time discussing an issue with someone incapable of sincerity and throws out false accusations without even trying to back them up.

First of all I didn't backpedal, after reflecting on my original statement, I wasn't comfortable with the way I stated it and felt obligated to correct the record. Secondly I know what the fuck I'm saying so for you to suggest I didn't realize what I was saying is totally wrong. But people of your ilk try to spin the words of others to fit your agenda. The only one here hurling falsehoods is you. But at least you know your standing in life.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

i don't care if you made up a word for it...

no one is pro abortion. they are pro choice...

and pro your staying out of other people's moral decisions.

"no one is pro abortion. they are pro choice..." Same thing.

And I didn't make the word up, it's in the dictionary.

Pro-abortionist | Definition of Pro-abortionist at Dictionary.com:

Translation pro-abortionist - English-Spanish Collins dictionary - Reverso

And when googled it gets over 90 thousand results.

Oh puulllleeeease! We all know you guys use the term pro-abortionist in a pejorative manner to demonize dissent. Shit, you people ever capable of being honest?

Provide evidence that I have used "pro-abortionist" in a pejorative manner. And then you'll find that it is you that isn't being honest.

 

[Immanuel]

There was no intolerant comment. It was simply a prediction of irony and "gaydar" comes from many gays hiding their orientation.

No, sorry, that was an intolerant slam on homosexuals.

A tolerant person would not even recognize or mention his gayness like it was some sort of disease.

I can understand the comment about "fundies" and in that she is correct, but to mention the "gaydar" was a poor way of putting it. IMHO

Immie

It was pointing out hypocrisy from fundies. That was the sole purpose of the post. The term gaydar is not a pejorative.
gaydar.co.uk/

You may not think it is a pejorative, but in the context it was used, it clearly was.

So what if he is gay? Why point it out at all? As if you can tell someone is gay simply by looking at him or her? It was stereotypical to say the least. She made it sound like there was something wrong with being gay.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Lonestar Wrote:
When I say that I am pro-choice but against abortion it means that I believe without a doubt that an abortion stops a human life in its earliest stages of development. And, I believe without a doubt that there are times when an abortion can be the right course of action for a woman and her doctor to take, and I believe that that option should be legally available to them for those purposes.

I'm pro-life but I believe abortions should be legal and available for extreme cases, i.e rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger. But pro-choice advocates believe abortions should be allowed any time for whatever reason. A woman's choice should have been made long before she got pregnant.

This is an attitude I will never understand. If you honestly think abortion is murder, then why would you murder someone that is the product of rape or incest? It's not like it is the potential child's fault.

Maybe I missed something, but where did he say it was murder?

A person need not believe it to be murder to think it is wrong.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Are you suggesting that pro-abortionist aren't upset about the Tebow ad?

there's no such thing as a "pro-abortionist".

Yes, there is, but they are few and far between and most of them profit quite extensively from the procedure.

I do not know of anyone on this site that is pro-abortion.

Immie

 

[Foxfyre]

Are you suggesting that pro-abortionist aren't upset about the Tebow ad?

there's no such thing as a "pro-abortionist".

Yes, there is, but they are few and far between and most of them profit quite extensively from the procedure.

I do not know of anyone on this site that is pro-abortion.

Immie

Certainly those who criticized Sarah Palin for knowingly giving birth to a Downs Syndrome baby would be classified as pro abortion.

 

[Immanuel]

there's no such thing as a "pro-abortionist".

Yes, there is, but they are few and far between and most of them profit quite extensively from the procedure.

I do not know of anyone on this site that is pro-abortion.

Immie

Certainly those who criticized Sarah Palin for knowingly giving birth to a Downs Syndrome baby would be classified as pro abortion.

No they would not. They would simply be known as Palin Haters.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

I saw Tebrow speaking on TV yesterday. My gaydar went off big time. How happy are the fundies going to be about him after he and his mother come out in favor of same sex marriage and adoption by gay couples?

That is a pretty intolerant comment coming from a progressive. Your "gaydar"? You're making fun of a human being because you think he might be gay?

Why do so many libs slam homosexuals?

Immie

I'll be 100% behind Tebrow and his mummy when they come out in favor of same sex marriage and adoption by gay couples.

Clearly you are the one who thinks being gay is something to be made fun of.

Must suck to be so intollerant.

 

[Anguille]

I saw Tebrow speaking on TV yesterday. My gaydar went off big time. How happy are the fundies going to be about him after he and his mother come out in favor of same sex marriage and adoption by gay couples?

That is a pretty intolerant comment coming from a progressive. Your "gaydar"? You're making fun of a human being because you think he might be gay?

Why do so many libs slam homosexuals?

Immie

There was no intolerant comment. It was simply a prediction of irony and "gaydar" comes from many gays hiding their orientation.

You are right about my comment.

I learned the term gaydar from a gay friend and the meaning I learned didn't have anything to do with hiding gayness, more like intentionally giving out the signal.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, there is, but they are few and far between and most of them profit quite extensively from the procedure.

I do not know of anyone on this site that is pro-abortion.

Immie

Certainly those who criticized Sarah Palin for knowingly giving birth to a Downs Syndrome baby would be classified as pro abortion.

No they would not. They would simply be known as Palin Haters.

Immie

Well yeah, they're Palin haters. But I think if they criticize her for having the baby instead of aborting it, which they have done, that fits my definition of pro abortion too.

 

[Anguille]

That is a pretty intolerant comment coming from a progressive. Your "gaydar"? You're making fun of a human being because you think he might be gay?

Why do so many libs slam homosexuals?

Immie

There was no intolerant comment. It was simply a prediction of irony and "gaydar" comes from many gays hiding their orientation.

No, sorry, that was an intolerant slam on homosexuals.

A tolerant person would not even recognize or mention his gayness like it was some sort of disease.

I can understand the comment about "fundies" and in that she is correct, but to mention the "gaydar" was a poor way of putting it. IMHO

Immie

You have issues. Control freaks are known for that.

 

[Anguille]

I saw Tebrow speaking on TV yesterday. My gaydar went off big time. How happy are the fundies going to be about him after he and his mother come out in favor of same sex marriage and adoption by gay couples?

Don't be silly. He's a fundy. He'll just go for a cure.

 

[CurveLight]

there's no such thing as a "pro-abortionist".

Yes, there is, but they are few and far between and most of them profit quite extensively from the procedure.

I do not know of anyone on this site that is pro-abortion.

Immie

Certainly those who criticized Sarah Palin for knowingly giving birth to a Downs Syndrome baby would be classified as pro abortion.

Who are those people and what did they say?

 

[Anguille]

This is an attitude I will never understand. If you honestly think abortion is murder, then why would you murder someone that is the product of rape or incest? It's not like it is the potential child's fault.

I don't believe you should force anyone to have a child that was a produced through a criminal act. Although I'm really on the fence about whether or not these two exceptions should be considered and the reason is, I believe it may be abused. I suppose any woman could claim to have been raped and/or impregnated via incestous relations.

In a study conducted by the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute, entitled “Why Women Have Abortions,” women were asked to give specific reasons why they had an abortion. The top three answers were: 1. Unready for responsibility 2. Can't afford baby now 3. Concern about how having a baby would change her life.

The three reasons, which came in last place and were tied at 1 percent included: 1. Was a victim of rape or incest 2. Husband or partner wanted the abortion 3. Didn't want others to know she has had sex or is pregnant.

Thanks for answering but it still makes no sense to me. In other words, you are willing to murder for the sins of the father. IMO, that is very hypocritical.

Other than Allie Baba, who thinks no fetus should be aborted, regardless of rape, I've yet to see any forced birther give a logical and honest explanation why they would condemn the result of a rape or incest to death while demanding the result of any other kind of sexual encounter be carried to term.

I doubt I ever will.

 

[Anguille]

This is an attitude I will never understand. If you honestly think abortion is murder, then why would you murder someone that is the product of rape or incest? It's not like it is the potential child's fault.

I don't believe you should force anyone to have a child that was a produced through a criminal act. Although I'm really on the fence about whether or not these two exceptions should be considered and the reason is, I believe it may be abused. I suppose any woman could claim to have been raped and/or impregnated via incestous relations.

In a study conducted by the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute, entitled “Why Women Have Abortions,” women were asked to give specific reasons why they had an abortion. The top three answers were: 1. Unready for responsibility 2. Can't afford baby now 3. Concern about how having a baby would change her life.

The three reasons, which came in last place and were tied at 1 percent included: 1. Was a victim of rape or incest 2. Husband or partner wanted the abortion 3. Didn't want others to know she has had sex or is pregnant.

Thanks for answering but it still makes no sense to me. In other words, you are willing to murder for the sins of the father. IMO, that is very hypocritical.

Other than Allie Baba, who thinks no fetus should be aborted, regardless of rape, I've yet to see any forced birther give a logical and honest explanation why they would condemn the result of a rape or incest to death while demanding the result of any other kind of sexual encounter be carried to term.

I doubt I ever will see them provide one.

 

[Immanuel]

There was no intolerant comment. It was simply a prediction of irony and "gaydar" comes from many gays hiding their orientation.

No, sorry, that was an intolerant slam on homosexuals.

A tolerant person would not even recognize or mention his gayness like it was some sort of disease.

I can understand the comment about "fundies" and in that she is correct, but to mention the "gaydar" was a poor way of putting it. IMHO

Immie

You have issues. Control freaks are known for that.

Clearly you are the control freak.

Remember you are the one who wants to control the lives of smokers.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

This is an attitude I will never understand. If you honestly think abortion is murder, then why would you murder someone that is the product of rape or incest? It's not like it is the potential child's fault.

I don't believe you should force anyone to have a child that was a produced through a criminal act. Although I'm really on the fence about whether or not these two exceptions should be considered and the reason is, I believe it may be abused. I suppose any woman could claim to have been raped and/or impregnated via incestous relations.

In a study conducted by the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute, entitled “Why Women Have Abortions,” women were asked to give specific reasons why they had an abortion. The top three answers were: 1. Unready for responsibility 2. Can't afford baby now 3. Concern about how having a baby would change her life.

The three reasons, which came in last place and were tied at 1 percent included: 1. Was a victim of rape or incest 2. Husband or partner wanted the abortion 3. Didn't want others to know she has had sex or is pregnant.

Thanks for answering but it still makes no sense to me. In other words, you are willing to murder for the sins of the father. IMO, that is very hypocritical.

Other than Allie Baba, who thinks no fetus should be aborted, regardless of rape, I've yet to see any forced birther give a logical and honest explanation why they would condemn the result of a rape or incest to death while demanding the result of any other kind of sexual encounter be carried to term.

I doubt I ever will see them provide one.

 

[JimH52]

First of all, no one is Pro-Abortion. Not even those on the far left. It is a horrific procedure. The very title of this thread is very revealing.

 

[CurveLight]

You should read the rest of the thread. But being the idiot you are, I doubt that it would clarify things. At what point did I say that a woman needed my permision to engage in sexual activity? And where exactly did I state that I wanted to punish a woman or that I wanted domain over her body?

I saw you trying to backpedal when someone else pointed out your position is based in control and not the sanctity of life. I didn't say you explicitly stated you want domain over womens' bodies. I clearly said:

"Without realizing it what you are saying is...."


I agree with you I am an idiot. I actually waste time discussing an issue with someone incapable of sincerity and throws out false accusations without even trying to back them up.

First of all I didn't backpedal, after reflecting on my original statement, I wasn't comfortable with the way I stated it and felt obligated to correct the record. Secondly I know what the fuck I'm saying so for you to suggest I didn't realize what I was saying is totally wrong. But people of your ilk try to spin the words of others to fit your agenda. The only one here hurling falsehoods is you. But at least you know your standing in life.

So are you now against abortion in "extreme" cases?

You may know the words you are posting but you don't know the message sent from the description of your position. Words can be used to send a message different from their normal application and I will give you an example. If I said: "The logic of a lonestar falls somewhere between comatose and jello." what message would I be sending? Do you think it would be complimentary? Or do you think it would be another way of describing dumb?