Pro-abortionists furious at Tim Tebow ad

[Immanuel]

If the babyhatin lefties really are "pro-choice but anti-abortion", why would they be so up in arms about a woman that made the choice not to use her womb as a tomb? You would think that the "anti-abortion, pro-choice" crowd would be behind Mrs. Tebow.

Of course, that assumes that the "pro-choice, anti-abortion" crowd has an iota of courage and honesty

As stated earlier, choicers are more concerned with governmental interference than being "pro-abortion" and to be frank, I think it should be said that I haven't heard any choicers bad mouthing Mrs. Tebow.

These "women's groups" are organizations that claim to speak for women, but don't necessarily speak for all women or even all women that belong to their organization just as The Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family and other Christian organizations don't speak for all Christians. Also, these "women's groups" get paid a hell of a lot of money for speaking out for abortion rights.

Immie

So why the gripe about this woman's choice?

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

 

[logical4u]

Two cells are not a "child" any more than an egg is a chicken.



and there's no such thing as a pro-abortionist. keep your religious zealotry away from the bodies of people who aren't interested in it.

Most children that are aborted are already formed, you can see eyes, hands and arms, legs, feet and toes. Most abortions are performed long after those cells have grown into a very 'young' person.

 

[dipshitliberal]

Wow. That's some scary logic. The same principle behind being against rape is the same principle being behind pro-choice: Honoring women the Right to do what they want with their own bodies.

How does "tricking" a woman into killing her "child" (by telling her 'it' is not a child, like 'it' could be born a cat or a dog), "HONOR" her?
When she realizes what she did (usually years later), who can comfort her? She has killed her child, voluntarily. What a terrible burden to bear for the rest of a life.

You anti-Choicers are the most consistent post editors in the world. Where is there any trickery in saying we should honor womens' Right to privacy and sole domain over their bodies?

the trickery lies in claiming you are anti-abortion yet pro-choice, and that a human fetus isn't human.

 

[dipshitliberal]

As stated earlier, choicers are more concerned with governmental interference than being "pro-abortion" and to be frank, I think it should be said that I haven't heard any choicers bad mouthing Mrs. Tebow.

These "women's groups" are organizations that claim to speak for women, but don't necessarily speak for all women or even all women that belong to their organization just as The Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family and other Christian organizations don't speak for all Christians. Also, these "women's groups" get paid a hell of a lot of money for speaking out for abortion rights.

Immie

So why the gripe about this woman's choice?

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

 

[CurveLight]

I'm against abortions and I'm still not certain about the "extreme" cases, my nature is to say any and all abortions are wrong, however rape cases bother me in that the woman would have to make the choice whether to raise the child or put it up for adoption. Surely she wouldn't want to raise the child, it being a constant reminder of the horror of being raped.

But if I had to be nailed down to one decision I'd have to favor life over death in all cases with the only exception being the life of the mother being threatened.

Would you support a law regulating all semen emissions from males 18 years and older?

libs are idiots.

Welcome to USMB! Thank you so much for being upfront that your purpose here is anything but discussion.

 

[dipshitliberal]

Would you support a law regulating all semen emissions from males 18 years and older?

libs are idiots.

Welcome to USMB! Thank you so much for being upfront that your purpose here is anything but discussion.

my response to your quote was perfectly appropriate. And thanks for the welcome.

 

[CurveLight]

So why the gripe about this woman's choice?

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

You obviously fell for the dishonest OP. If you had read the article you would see there was no protest endemic to this ad. I would fill you in but don't want to deprive you of the joys of obtaining information on an issue before trying to discuss it.

 

[mudwhistle]

I used to hate Tim because he always beats my Vols.

Now I love him.

 

[CurveLight]

How does "tricking" a woman into killing her "child" (by telling her 'it' is not a child, like 'it' could be born a cat or a dog), "HONOR" her?
When she realizes what she did (usually years later), who can comfort her? She has killed her child, voluntarily. What a terrible burden to bear for the rest of a life.

You anti-Choicers are the most consistent post editors in the world. Where is there any trickery in saying we should honor womens' Right to privacy and sole domain over their bodies?

the trickery lies in claiming you are anti-abortion yet pro-choice, and that a human fetus isn't human.

Well einstein, a fetus is not a human. That. Is. Why. It. Is. Called. A. Fetus. If you knew my position you would know I have already said the label given is irrelevant. There is also no trickery in being pro-Choice. That is referencing the legal position.

 

[dipshitliberal]

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

You obviously fell for the dishonest OP. If you had read the article you would see there was no protest endemic to this ad. I would fill you in but don't want to deprive you of the joys of obtaining information on an issue before trying to discuss it.

bullshit. a bunch of you baby-hatin lefties have issue with the ad. Perhaps once you actually see the ad, you will have adequate information with which to base your protestations.

 

[dipshitliberal]

You anti-Choicers are the most consistent post editors in the world. Where is there any trickery in saying we should honor womens' Right to privacy and sole domain over their bodies?

the trickery lies in claiming you are anti-abortion yet pro-choice, and that a human fetus isn't human.

Well einstein, a fetus is not a human. That. Is. Why. It. Is. Called. A. Fetus. If you knew my position you would know I have already said the label given is irrelevant. There is also no trickery in being pro-Choice. That is referencing the legal position.

A human fetus is not a human? what species is it? Does not the human fetus share 100% of the genetic structure of....homo sapiens?

You are pro.......choose to kill human fetuses for any reason whatsoever.

 

[manu1959]

You anti-Choicers are the most consistent post editors in the world. Where is there any trickery in saying we should honor womens' Right to privacy and sole domain over their bodies?

the trickery lies in claiming you are anti-abortion yet pro-choice, and that a human fetus isn't human.

Well einstein, a fetus is not a human. That. Is. Why. It. Is. Called. A. Fetus. If you knew my position you would know I have already said the label given is irrelevant. There is also no trickery in being pro-Choice. That is referencing the legal position.

is. a. child. not. a. human. because. it. is. called. a. child.

 

[dipshitliberal]

At what stage of development does the human DNA enter the non-human fetus, CurveLight?

 

[CurveLight]

Yea that makes alot of sense.

Its like saying "I'm against murder but I am against any laws that make it illegal".

No. It's nothing like that but we knew you would not understand. The problem is you refuse to admit you want to force yourself (your views) between women's legs. You keep skipping over that part. Let's try a rough analogy. Let's say you don't like beets (or insert any food you don't like) and since you don't like them there should be a law that makes all beets illegal. Would you support that law?

How about if we made a law were children under two weren't considered to be human, and if you wanted, you (either parent) could take your child to "a center" and have them "eliminated"? It would be the "parent's" right to choose?

Trying to equate the unborn with 2 year olds is a great example of intellectual dishonesty.

 

[CurveLight]

At what stage of development does the human DNA enter the non-human fetus, CurveLight?

That is wholly irrelevant. Anti-Choicers seem incapable of grasping the very simple concept of privacy. I don't care what label you give. In fact, I will help you out and make this proposal: At the very moment of conception it is a human being. Can we agree on that premise?

 

[Immanuel]

So why the gripe about this woman's choice?

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

$$$$$$$$$$$ and lot's of it.

Immie

 

[CurveLight]

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

You obviously fell for the dishonest OP. If you had read the article you would see there was no protest endemic to this ad. I would fill you in but don't want to deprive you of the joys of obtaining information on an issue before trying to discuss it.

bullshit. a bunch of you baby-hatin lefties have issue with the ad. Perhaps once you actually see the ad, you will have adequate information with which to base your protestations.

You sure you want to embarrass yourself so soon? I've already stated I disagree with the protest and think it's stupid. If you read the article you would see the protest is not about the ad itself. Bah! You've just proven to be someone to make conclusions based on your ignorance and assumptions.

 

[logical4u]

Wow. That's some scary logic. The same principle behind being against rape is the same principle being behind pro-choice: Honoring women the Right to do what they want with their own bodies.

How does "tricking" a woman into killing her "child" (by telling her 'it' is not a child, like 'it' could be born a cat or a dog), "HONOR" her?
When she realizes what she did (usually years later), who can comfort her? She has killed her child, voluntarily. What a terrible burden to bear for the rest of a life.

You anti-Choicers are the most consistent post editors in the world. Where is there any trickery in saying we should honor womens' Right to privacy and sole domain over their bodies?

Answer my question first.

 

[Anguille]

bullshit. a bunch of you baby-hatin lefties have issue with the ad. Perhaps once you actually see the ad, you will have adequate information with which to base your protestations.

" Baby-hating, baby killers ...."

All inventions of the doctor killing cult.

 

[CurveLight]

Like I said, I don't hear many women gripping about this woman's choice. I hear abortion lobbyists gripping about this ad. It is what these lobbyists are paid to do.

That is what these organizations get funded for. These organizations don't speak for women but they get paid by pro-choice women mostly because those women see these groups as fighting against government intervention. It is true that these groups are more vocal about abortion rights than most women, even most pro-choice women, but these groups are funded because they are effective.

The Christian Coalition doesn't speak for Christians and quite frankly, they don't speak for Christ either, but they get funded... by Christians.

Immie

so why make a stink over an ad that celebrates the "choice" made by this woman to use her womb for intended purpose? Especially if the opponents of the ad truly are "pro-choice, yet anti-abortion"?

$$$$$$$$$$$ and lot's of it.

Immie

I agree with you on that. If there was no whining then chances are none of us would have known about it nor been affected after the ad aired. Both lobbyist groups raise a stink over dumb shit to help generate income. The complaint the station is "aligning" itself with FOF over this is pure bullshit. It's nothing but a cheap scare tactic to try and make people feel like the Half-Time Show would be SCOTUS overturning R v W.