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

[syrenn]

I'm keeping up. It's you who seems to be lagging. Do try harder.

There is a difference from having a life of your own and having cells that are alive.

The child is put into motion at conception. Done. Period. Game, set, match. You keep rationalizing the ability to stop life. Just admit it. Murder of something tiny that you can't see is something you are able to justify to yourself. The viability of the child has nothing to do with whether it's worthy of protection or not.

As for my parental status, if you're inferring that my position as pro-life is less than fully valid because I haven't adopted...well you're failing there too.

It is a life once those cells are viable. That is my opinion, you have a different one.

Again, c- section it out at 4 weeks. Give it a life of its own.

 

[Anguille]

I swear to God, I am not trying to be mean or callous here,

 

[Anguille]

At this point, I don't care if I'm being mean or not. .

Getting closer to the truth here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Should everyone stay out of eachother's face when it comes to detonating a bomb inside an abortion clinic full of people?

As far as your hypo goes, answer it yourself.

At what age, and for what reason, does killing a child in cold blood go from being an okay thing to a not-okay thing?
Why is it wrong to kill you now if if was okay when you were younger?

Your term "child" is subjective. It is a matter of opinion at what point cells become a "child" and at what point cells have a stand alone life of their own.


The standard LEGAL time now is 14 weeks.

You've just disproven yourself. You said it's subjective, yet you've given an objective definition (14 weeks).

Whatever the state of the law is, that fact that it's not cuddly or even visible doesnt change the fact that it's human life. Growing from the moment it gets all chromosomes.

Seriously. Humans need clear pregnancy bellies.

Being 'human' based on counting the chromosomes is an irrelevant measure. There is absolutely no meaningful relevant similarity between a born person and a fertilized human egg.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me see if I got this straight

Ejaculating into someone's body without their okay is bad

Ripping their limbs off, crushing their skull, poisoning them or otherwise killing them without consulting them is okay?

How does that make sense, exactly?

What happens when someone uses RU 486?

Who's forcing you to have abortions, if you don't want to?

 

[Anguille]

Get help or get gone.

The one who could use some help here is you. Though I don't think there is much that can be done for someone with such a taste for sadism as you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How old were you, ravi, when killing you in cold blood went form being an okay thing to a not-okay thing and why did it suddenly become not-okay?

It was definitely ok in the first 9 weeks, which is when RU486 can be used. What's your problem with that?

 

[Anguille]

Just as you should have no problem surviving just fine in Siberia, regardless of being unprepared and unequipped to do so. Right?

Do i say not to assist the 4 week old cells once it is outside of its host environment? Do i say new born babies do not require assistance to survive? Do i say children do not need assistance to survive? No, i do not. Just as a baby needs assistance to survive in a new environment I would need assistance to survive in Siberia.

Again, feel free to give all the assistance to 4 week old tissue on a table you want. See if it survives.

If i was given all the assistance i wanted in Siberia...i would survive just fine.

I find it very sad that you see the first picture not as a developing human being but rather as an utterly disposable 'thing' just because it has not yet developed enough to survive on it's own outside of the womb.

I notice, by eliminating her from the photos, you've already symbolically disposed of the "thing" with whose bodies those fetuses reside.

Hypocrite.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your Constitutional scholarship rivals your biological and medical learning.

The Constitution never said anyone was" 3/5 human". The Enumeration Clause, dealing with how Representatives are apportioned, says this:

". . . which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Doesn't say a damned thing about anyone being a fraction of a human, or even a fraction of a person.

Property, on the other hand, they definitely WERE. That, however, has nothing to do with whether or not they were "real human beings". So again, if they weren't humans until the Civil Rights Act magically conveyed humanity upon them, what sort of animal were they? Or perhaps they were insects? Plants?

You've answered your own question but you're too stupid to see that. They were included in the phrase "all other persons." And you know who wasn't included in that phrase? The unborn. The founders didn't count the unborn as persons and neither do rational people.

Because they're not and the constitution backs that up.

Loser.

You know who else wasn't counted?

Women.

We needed a constitutional amendment to make it clear that females are people, too.

(Clearly, you're not familiar with the suffragettes.)

So let's go ahead and run with your argument and see where that takes us, eh?

Which proves that you need a constitutional amendment to give fetuses personhood.

 

[Grace]

Define: viable

We can save preemies today we couldn't have decades ago. It's a moving target.

Does grandma become free game when she's on a respirator?

Why does 'viability' mean anything at all?


Had enough time? What about all the time you had to decide to not engage in unprotected sex or to keep your clothes on if you're not ready to provide and care for a child?

How about this variable? It was time enough for the guy to keep his dick in his pants and since he didnt, had a woody and thought hed show some "power" and "control" and his banty rooster mentality needed to force himself on someone weaker to step up and own what he did, but didnt, and therefore got his sorry ass thrown in jail because what he did was ILLEGAL and called RAPE.

Howzat for variables, insinuations, finger pointing and overall GUESSING scenarios of which nobody knows jack shit about while arguing a point over and over and over and over again?

Seriously, Grace, how about you get some counseling and stop projecting your own emotional issues all over the rest of us? This is not a group-therapy session, and emotional reactions substituting for logical thought is one of the worst sorts of dishonesty around.

The fact that something bad happened to you does not make anything you say on the subject automatically right, nor does it entitle you to shut down any discussion on the topic that you don't like or want to hear. Victimhood does not convey infallibility.

I swear to God, I am not trying to be mean or callous here, but it honestly sounds to me like you've spent a lot of time since the attack with people tiptoeing around you, patting you on the back and saying, "Poor baby, whatever makes you feel better about it", to the point where you've gotten the idea that you have a right to expect that from everyone. You don't, nor do I think it's been helpful, judging by the amount of hatred and bitterness you're spewing all around you.

The truth is, I think the attitudes and perspectives you were taught about pregnancy, abortion, and perhaps femaleness in general, left you badly-equipped to deal with what happened. They don't seem to have offered you any point from which you can gain peace or a positive outlook and move on. If I didn't object to the stridently negative battle cry of "My body, my choice!" for any other reason, I would object to it because of that.

Lastly, you should really get past this whole "No one else can POSSIBLY know how I feel, no one else has suffered like I have!" idea. You don't know any of us in real life, and you have no way of knowing what we've been through, but you should at least be mature enough to know that your experience is, sadly, far from unique.

Actually, I havent thought about it for many years. Did it affect how I am today? In certain ways, yes. But not even my friends know so how can I be asking for pats on the back?

As much as you and other pro lifers want to hear it, it IS my choice what I choose to allow to grow IN my body. Just as its your choice to think its wrong.

Others that did what I did, for the same reasons I did it, WOULD understand the battle of "how do I handle this?". At least, i would hope so.
For the record, since nobody bothered to ask and instead chose to call me a baby killer, I got rid of it because it was an "inconvenience", blah blah blah...I aborted at 4 weeks. Maybe a day later, maybe a day sooner. My doctor and I kept on it until tests could be confirmed because he and I both planned to remove it. As soon as possible. And I did.
IF it were me wishy washing and it had a heart beat (that comes 5 weeks, I believe), I dont know what I would have done. Thats not the point anyway. Yall have your views and opinions just as I have mine. You say I have no right to what grows inside my body that I didnt ask to be put there. I say I do. The problem began when I was attacked by people for not doing what THEY wanted me to do.

Now let me ask this. Those who think its so wrong to abort.....WHAT IF your daughter was 13. Her grandpa raped her and she got pregnant. Would you REALLY insist that your child carry the child made from an incestuous rape because the fetus is alive and a baby and has the right to live even though your daughter screams at the very thought?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I've stipulated that the zygote/embryo/fetus is human.

I'm still waiting for someone to prove to me that relevant in the context of deciding the right or wrong, the legality or illegality,

of a 1st trimester abortion,

the use of RU486,

the use of the morning after pill,

the discarding of fertilized eggs at a fertility clinic.

Anyone? No one?

So you concur that from conception it is a human being. Good.

Now you want to know the 'right and wrong' of destroying that human being via:

abortion
RU486
discarding fertilized eggs at a fertility clinic
(I believe the morning after pill prevents conception)



It's been answered throughout this thread. So sad that you can't see the answer for yourself.

Try answering JB's question that's been asked of you ad nauseum.

It is human only because the term is used so broadly that a fertilized egg qualifies for being termed a 'human' despite the fact that its only resemblance to a human is its number of chromosomes.

In other words, whether or not it's 'human' by name is totally irrelevant to the argument.

Sadly, a bunch of pro-choicers here have fallen for the false premise that it is relevant.

 

[Anguille]

That the law in 1973 went back to the original intent of the founders is IMO, why people should get over themselves.

If you don't want an abortion simply don't have one.

So if you don't want a negroe, don't buy one?

If you don't want to rape grace, don't?

If you don't want to set off a car bomb in Time square, don't?

Have a problem with killing or hurting people? Don't do it yourself and let those who enjoy it have their fun!

I think you should be banned for your unremitting nastiness toward Grace. And quite frankly, it is a shame you weren't aborted.

I stopped reading the Puke's posts a while back. I think they do serve a purpose, however grim. To demonstrate just how ingrained misogyny is in some of these so called pro-lifers.

 

[Anguille]

It's not just religious. I am pro-life for entirely NON-religious reasons. From the moment of conception it's life. All that's ever going to be there is there. Nothing else needed or added.

Is it a life of its own or just living tissue?

If it is a stand alone life, there should be no reason it cannot be removed from an unwilling host.

If it needs a host then it is not a life of its own, and requires the cooperation of the host. The host has the final say about providing that service.

Nice logical fallacy. It's called a false dichotomy, if you weren't already aware.

The host doesn't have final say about providing "that service." No matter how it got there, the baby is growing life.

Puke out that dichotomy to the side and ask yourself a simpler question - "are the cells alive?" One simple question. Much easier to answer. If the answer is yes, then BOOM you're terminating LIFE. You're murdering - terminating life without a justification like self-defense or war.

BTW, you prove an excellent point with your wording at how absolutely terrible it is when people use language like "service" to devalue life. The anti-life movement absolutely de-values life in its rhetoric. Over and over you have to unpersonalize children and life tp rationalize your "choice" which amounts to murder for hire.

Stop making life easier on yourself at the expense of a living (as you've admitted it is) being.

Aren't you devaluing the life of a pregnant woman when you refer to her as a host?

 

[Anguille]

Should all abortions be illegal?

Should the fertilized egg be constitutionally protected as a person, the way born Americans are?

They will never answer that one.

They like the rhetoric, they like the 'abortion is murder', and 'baby killer', and 'holocaust' sloganeering,

but they can't make a rational argument against allowing a pregnant woman a reasonable opportunity early on in a pregnancy the right to choose to terminate it,

so we get the exploiting of fallacious emotionalism instead.

Outside of a few mental cases, these people no more believe that a fertilized egg is a person than I do.

I agree.

And I'm still trying to figure out how some of them can insist abortion is murder and then turn around and insist murder should not be punished.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I find it very sad that you see the first picture not as a developing human being but rather as an utterly disposable 'thing' just because it has not yet developed enough to survive on it's own outside of the womb.

And at 4 weeks an embryo is indistinguishable from any other animal embryo.

That's it? The fact that it's indistinguishable makes it ok to murder? Wow. You really need to stop rationalizing so hard there.

You're admitting that it's life. It is alive. You're stopping that life. End of story.

Then we can assume you would support making any abortion, including the earliest form such as using RU 486

a crime of murder, with the appropriate consequences for those women convicted of same?

If I am wrong, tell us your actual position, specifically.

I assume you believe murderers should be treated AS murderers...

 

[NYcarbineer]

They will never answer that one.

They like the rhetoric, they like the 'abortion is murder', and 'baby killer', and 'holocaust' sloganeering,

but they can't make a rational argument against allowing a pregnant woman a reasonable opportunity early on in a pregnancy the right to choose to terminate it,

so we get the exploiting of fallacious emotionalism instead.

Outside of a few mental cases, these people no more believe that a fertilized egg is a person than I do.

I agree.

And I'm still trying to figure out how some of them can insist abortion is murder and then turn around and insist murder should not be punished.

I think it was Zoomboing who howled that I was trying to paint him as an extremist by suggesting that should be his position.

Imagine, thinking someone who commits a murder is a murderer!!!

 

[Anguille]

Oh knock it off, jillian. Go find ANYWHERE in ANY abortion thread where I've EVER ONCE brought religion (mine or any other) into it. Go ahead, FIND IT. That's really bullshit you know? I thought you above that kind of shit.

A fertilized chicken egg is a chicken in the earliest stages of life.

whether or not life should be PROTECTED from conception is a religious concept. I do not share that concept.

and for the record, i thought you were above the rightwing picture posting. we all know what a fetus looks like. having pictures shoved in one's face does nothing to change anyone's minds.

The only one I see mentioning religion is YOU. From conception is not just a religious concept.

Too bad, a picture is worth a thousand words. Want me to post the aborted baby pics? Might that change some minds? Or will you all just close your eyes and say 'no, no just a blob of cells'.

Aside which you don't know me very well. I post pics quite often. Ask anyone.

Go ahead and post your gruesome pics. We all know you drool over them.

For the record. I've seen them many times. Often they are doctored but it makes no difference to me if they are or not. I'm not squeamish. Nor do I allow cheap tricks to overcome my ability to reason.

 

[Anguille]

They like the rhetoric, they like the 'abortion is murder', and 'baby killer', and 'holocaust' sloganeering,

but they can't make a rational argument against allowing a pregnant woman a reasonable opportunity early on in a pregnancy the right to choose to terminate it,

so we get the exploiting of fallacious emotionalism instead.

Outside of a few mental cases, these people no more believe that a fertilized egg is a person than I do.

I agree.

And I'm still trying to figure out how some of them can insist abortion is murder and then turn around and insist murder should not be punished.

I think it was Zoomboing who howled that I was trying to paint him as an extremist by suggesting that should be his position.

Imagine, thinking someone who commits a murder is a murderer!!!

Zoom Boink just hates it when you use logic. It really gets her backhairs up.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Founders did not put fetal protections into the Constitution despite the fact that abortion up until the time of quickening was generally legal in the colonies.

A constitutional amendment is necessary to change that, if anyone cares about the legal business of all this.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I agree.

And I'm still trying to figure out how some of them can insist abortion is murder and then turn around and insist murder should not be punished.

I think it was Zoomboing who howled that I was trying to paint him as an extremist by suggesting that should be his position.

Imagine, thinking someone who commits a murder is a murderer!!!

Zoom Boink just hates it when you use logic. It really gets her backhairs up.

Well I've never had much rapport with women who sport back hair. Even when I drank