Why Can't the Pro-Choice Crowd Be Honest?

[manifold]

He said so here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...sue-mcdonalds-over-beating-6.html#post3582539

I don't see him claiming to be pro choice there?

Then your comprehension sucks.

But whatcha gonna do?

But since I'm in a charitable mood, I'll explain.

1. JB called someone a statist
2. I commented on the irony saying that 100% of JB's positions are statist.
3. JB challenged me to provide an example
4. I said his position on abortion (assuming of course based on his diatribe in the OP here that he is pro-life).
5. JB replied, "pro-choice" is statist?

Now, if you cannot follow this well enough to understand that JB is claiming to be pro-choice, then you're really really really fuck'n retarded. No offense.

 

[AllieBaba]

"Currently, the Alan Guttmacher Institute is an important source for estimates of both legal and illegal abortions worldwide. AGI is an extension of an organization engaged in intense political lobbying for the completely unrestrained practice of abortion. High abortion rates are in their political (and financial) interests for a number of reasons. For example, high numbers of illegal abortions are an element of their rationalization for legalized abortion.
Thus, when AGI estimates high rates of illegal abortions in the developing world these estimates bear scrutiny. Many such estimates are based on limited surveys. Some such surveys are limited to urban areas, which are not representative of rural areas. Other studies use compound assumptions to develop a figure for illegal abortions from data on hospitalizations for miscarriages."
Abortion statistics and other data

 

[JBeukema]

JB --- are you pro-choice?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...o-abortion-crowd-be-honest-6.html#post3477722

I'm reading that as until the mind begins to form in the fetus, you believe that abortion kills/destroys a human being (human life) but does not kill/destroys a person. Your cutoff point is when the fetus becomes 'aware' and that you're ok with abortion prior to that point?

Pretty much, yeah.

This principle is even enshrined in our laws elsewhere. It is illegal to throw a puppy against the wall because it is sentient. To end the its existence or to willfully inflict pain and suffering upon it is forbidden. Ants are not seen as as having sentient minds and self-awareness, so we don't think anything of wiping them out or stepping on them.

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't see him claiming to be pro choice there?

Then your comprehension sucks.

But whatcha gonna do?

But since I'm in a charitable mood, I'll explain.

1. JB called someone a statist
2. I commented on the irony saying that 100% of JB's positions are statist.
3. JB challenged me to provide an example
4. I said his position on abortion (assuming of course based on his diatribe in the OP here that he is pro-life).
5. JB replied, "pro-choice" is statist?

Now, if you cannot follow this well enough to understand that JB is claiming to be pro-choice, then you're really really really fuck'n retarded. No offense.

Asking if "pro-choice" is statist is not an admission of being pro choice, mantard.

Basic English skills, mantard. No offense.

 

[Dr.Drock]

We also tell men to not rape attractive young girls

We also tell people to not bash eachother's skulls in with rocks when angry

We also tell people to not simple take their neighbor's car if they want it
We also tell people to not kill their children out of pure convenience because they don't want stretch marks

Call me crazy, but I guess I don't equate all those things to the simple act of sex.

Yes, you do. They're all simple instincts- and that is your entire argument for advocating the killing of one's children out of simple convenience because you don't want to grow up and be responsible for your actions and decisions in life.

I've never had the instinct to want to bash someone's head in, get laid? I've had that instinct many-a-time.

 

[manifold]

Then your comprehension sucks.

But whatcha gonna do?

But since I'm in a charitable mood, I'll explain.

1. JB called someone a statist
2. I commented on the irony saying that 100% of JB's positions are statist.
3. JB challenged me to provide an example
4. I said his position on abortion (assuming of course based on his diatribe in the OP here that he is pro-life).
5. JB replied, "pro-choice" is statist?

Now, if you cannot follow this well enough to understand that JB is claiming to be pro-choice, then you're really really really fuck'n retarded. No offense.

Asking if "pro-choice" is statist is not an admission of being pro choice

I couldn't possibly make you look any dumber than you do yourself. So I'm not even gonna try.

 

[AllieBaba]

I have a good grasp of the English language.

"Pro-choice is statist?" is not the same as "I am pro-choice".

But carry on, I find it amusing as well.

 

[manifold]

I'm reading that as until the mind begins to form in the fetus, you believe that abortion kills/destroys a human being (human life) but does not kill/destroys a person. Your cutoff point is when the fetus becomes 'aware' and that you're ok with abortion prior to that point?

Pretty much, yeah.

For the dimwitted, this is a 'pro-choice' (also politically spun as 'pro-abortion') position.

The only question now is whether JB is being honest with himself.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Allie, whether you agreed with it or not, did you see my point when I was talking about why I don't call people who approve of wars that I don't approve of baby killers?

 

[AllieBaba]

It's completely unrelated to this topic. I understand your point, but it's not a valid one.

 

[manifold]

Just in case you missed it...


The author of the OP, JBeukema, insists that he is pro-choice.

If the irony of this fact doesn't smack you square in the face, then go back and re-read the OP.

If the irony is still lost on you, you're not very bright.

But whatcha gonna do?

Insists he's pro-choice?

Huh?

Are you satisfied now?

And more importantly, how fuck'n funny is that OP given this revelation?

 

[Dr.Drock]

It's completely unrelated to this topic. I understand your point, but it's not a valid one.

Of course it's a diff topic, the principle of understanding diff views was the point.

 

[AllieBaba]

Just in case you missed it...


The author of the OP, JBeukema, insists that he is pro-choice.

If the irony of this fact doesn't smack you square in the face, then go back and re-read the OP.

If the irony is still lost on you, you're not very bright.

But whatcha gonna do?

Insists he's pro-choice?

Huh?

Are you satisfied now?

And more importantly, how fuck'n funny is that OP given this revelation?

The OP isn't particularly funny, but you certainly are.

JB has always been pro-life. It sucks because I think he's a lunatic, but he's quite articulate and fairly consistent on this subject. Your posturing is just silly.

 

[manifold]

JB has always been pro-life. It sucks because I think he's a lunatic, but he's quite articulate and fairly consistent on this subject. Your posturing is just silly.

Scroll up a few posts retard. JB admitted to supporting abortion "up to a certain point" in the pregnancy.

That's pro-choice twatstick.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I'm reading that as until the mind begins to form in the fetus, you believe that abortion kills/destroys a human being (human life) but does not kill/destroys a person. Your cutoff point is when the fetus becomes 'aware' and that you're ok with abortion prior to that point?

Pretty much, yeah.

For the dimwitted, this is a 'pro-choice' (also politically spun as 'pro-abortion') position.

The only question now is whether JB is being honest with himself.

Where was this said? In this thread or the other one you linked and if so can you give me the particular page?

 

[AllieBaba]

JB has always been pro-life. It sucks because I think he's a lunatic, but he's quite articulate and fairly consistent on this subject. Your posturing is just silly.

Scroll up a few posts retard. JB admitted to supporting abortion "up to a certain point" in the pregnancy.

That's pro-choice twatstick.

Oh, was that the post you linked to?

Nope. I suggest you are limited by your recent lobotomy, and get well soon.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Pretty much, yeah.

For the dimwitted, this is a 'pro-choice' (also politically spun as 'pro-abortion') position.

The only question now is whether JB is being honest with himself.

Where was this said? In this thread or the other one you linked and if so can you give me the particular page?

In this thread just a few pages back.

Mani said JB was pro-choice and Allie was saying he is pro-life.

From his answer to my question

I'm reading that as until the mind begins to form in the fetus, you believe that abortion kills/destroys a human being (human life) but does not kill/destroys a person. Your cutoff point is when the fetus becomes 'aware' and that you're ok with abortion prior to that point?

Pretty much, yeah.

This principle is even enshrined in our laws elsewhere. It is illegal to throw a puppy against the wall because it is sentient. To end the its existence or to willfully inflict pain and suffering upon it is forbidden. Ants are not seen as as having sentient minds and self-awareness, so we don't think anything of wiping them out or stepping on them.

JB is ok with abortion up until a fetus becomes sentient or self-aware.

He's calling out other pro-choice people for being dishonest because he readily admits that abortion takes a human life but (for him) it does not take the life of a person. i.e., because the fetus has not yet become 'aware' they are not yet 'persons' in their own right. That's his 'threshold', if you will, of abortion.

He's asked the following questions many times of the pro-choice crowd but no one has answered. JB has. .. what changes is that the fetus becomes self-aware. He's just asking why others haven't answered.

Why? What fundamental thing about your nature changes when you moved three feet to the left that made it no longer okay to swing you buy the legs and smash your skull against a wall, vacuum out your brain, rip you limb from limb, poison you, suffocate or drown you, or otherwise kill you?

What about when you had one toe in? When you were halfway out? When you were crowning? What changes?

Do I have to wait 'til the umbilical cord is cut? What about the afterbirth?

Although from reading all of JB's posts in this thread I get the impression that even though his pov is firmly in the 'self-aware' camp, he is still against abortion because it destroys a human life -- although to him not a person.

JB, if I'm wrong please correct me.

 

[manifold]

JB is ok with abortion up until a fetus becomes sentient or self-aware.

And unless he believes that this occurs at conception, he is pro-choice.

Fact, not opinion.

 

[Zoom-boing]

JB is ok with abortion up until a fetus becomes sentient or self-aware.

And unless he believes that this occurs at conception, he is pro-choice.

Fact, not opinion.

And? He's answered the questions he's asked. Other haven't . . . that was the point of the thread.

 

[manifold]

JB is ok with abortion up until a fetus becomes sentient or self-aware.

And unless he believes that this occurs at conception, he is pro-choice.

Fact, not opinion.

And? He's answered the questions he's asked. Other haven't . . . that was the point of the thread.

I answered his question. He was annoyed that I blew the premise of his OP out of the water so he threw a tantrum and refused to acknowledge that his challenge was met.

Imagine how funny it was to find out later that he claims to be pro-choice.