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

[Truthseeker420]

And humans should be responsible and if they aren't then there should be consequences for the bad choices they make.
If not then we end up with what we have now. A failed system.
Taxpayers don't raise children and should never be forced to pay for someone else that is unqualified to do so. PARENTS do. If you are not mature enough to raise your own children then someone that is CAN.

We shouldn't be forced to pay for bad decisions(criminal) bankers made either. But the question what do we do? And is helping a woman raise a child worth preventing an abortion?

LOL, if a woman is dumb enough to have a child they can not afford how can she raise it?
Giving an 18 year old child cash, housing, food stamps, WIC, and other benefits helps raise a child?
You have lost your mind.

No woman knows if they can afford a child or not? I would trust an 18 year old being more responsible with my tax dollars than a 50 year old banker.

 

[AllieBaba]

And humans should be responsible and if they aren't then there should be consequences for the bad choices they make.
If not then we end up with what we have now. A failed system.
Taxpayers don't raise children and should never be forced to pay for someone else that is unqualified to do so. PARENTS do. If you are not mature enough to raise your own children then someone that is CAN.

We shouldn't be forced to pay for bad decisions(criminal) bankers made either. But the question what do we do? And is helping a woman raise a child worth preventing an abortion?

LOL, if a woman is dumb enough to have a child they can not afford how can she raise it?
Giving an 18 year old child cash, housing, food stamps, WIC, and other benefits helps raise a child?
You have lost your mind.

How on earth you can say that providing a child with food and shelter is not helping that child, I don't know.

So you really think poor kids are better off dead?

Do you think we should end all assistance to children? Because that's what you just said. That it doesn't do any good....and if it doesn't do any good, then it follows you think it should be eradicated.

 

[Gadawg73]

We shouldn't be forced to pay for bad decisions(criminal) bankers made either. But the question what do we do? And is helping a woman raise a child worth preventing an abortion?

LOL, if a woman is dumb enough to have a child they can not afford how can she raise it?
Giving an 18 year old child cash, housing, food stamps, WIC, and other benefits helps raise a child?
You have lost your mind.

How on earth you can say that providing a child with food and shelter is not helping that child, I don't know.

So you really think poor kids are better off dead?

Do you think we should end all assistance to children? Because that's what you just said. That it doesn't do any good....and if it doesn't do any good, then it follows you think it should be eradicated.

The system we have in place is:
Any woman can get pregnant at age 18, demand housing, WIC, food stamps, energy assistance and free health care.
And one wonders why at age 19 she has another child.
You take the child from this incompetent 18 year old mother and place it in another home.
And see how fast the current failed system changes over night.
Alliie speaks out of both sides of her mouth. She speaks all the time about how bad these mothers are and now she wants them to raise the kids.
No one said leave them for dead dumbass.

 

[AllieBaba]

You're a fucking idiot. But that doesn't stop you from blathering nonsensically about topics you know nothing about.

So carry on, I guess.

 

[JBeukema]

Democrats always go on about how hard it is for their slutty daughters to get birth control.

Yet they have no problem finding an abortionist.

Why is that?

Maybe you should teach your kids where the condoms are at Walgreens instead of where all those beloved old hags with hangers are that you talk about so much.

 

[JBeukema]

Democrats always go on about how hard it is for their slutty daughters to get birth control.

Yet they have no problem finding an abortionist.

Why is that?

Maybe you should teach your kids where the condoms are at Walgreens instead of where all those beloved old hags with hangers are that you talk about so much.

Hi, you have received -21 reputation points from Vanquish.
Reputation was given for this post.

I guess the truth hurts.

So, Van... why can these girls find an abortionist but not a box of condoms?

 

[taichiliberal]

Poster JBeukema has stated that abortion is used as birth control in "93% of the cases". I have repeatedly asked him to produce the link to the agency (state, federal, private) that has stated this statistic. To date, JB just keeps stating that the link is "in this thread", but will NOT produce it him/herself.

This is a pattern similar to the one recently pulled by Senator John Kyl (R-AZ), when he stated on the Senate floor "If you want an abortion you go to Planned Parenthood and that is what Planned Parenthood does.....well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does"....when in fact it's actually 3%, of which NO GOV'T funding can be applied by law. Now since this incident, Kyl's aides made a public statement saying that what he said on the Senate floor was "not intended to be a factual statement"....and subsequently he had the statement scrubbed from the Congressional record! But unfortunately for Kyl, the internet doesn't easily forget.

Now the Only Evidence That Jon Kyl Lied About Planned Parenthood Will Be the Entire Internet -- Daily Intel

ThinkProgress » Defending Riders, Sen. Kyl Falsely Claims 90 Percent Of Planned Parenthood

It should be REAL interesting to see if JB will continue to bluff and bluster while avoiding a simple burden of proof.

 

[JBeukema]

RETARD
​

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487476

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487904

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-60.html#post3497540

 

[JBeukema]

Seriously, why can't you people ever be honest?

Why do you have to lie about what you advocate? Unless your own conscience tells you it's indefensible...

 

[digger]

OK, I'll be honest. I crave baby flesh. Have ever since I can remember. I'm never really content unless I have baby flesh. And legal abortion provides me with a steady and convenient supply. If abortion were illegal, I would have to go to all sorts of trouble to find the back alley abortion providers. So really I'm just in it for the expedience.

 

[taichiliberal]

RETARD
​

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487476

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487904

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-60.html#post3497540

You are retarded, JB...because ther reports claims that the title social reasons include instances such as the mother deciding the child is unwanted or 'inconvenient'.

That DOES NOT mean that 93% of abortions are for those reasons alone, you willfully ignorant clod. "Instances" does not equate "totality". Go back and read what comes under Guttmacher's heading of "social reasons"...or get an adult you trust to explain it to you.

 

[hipeter924]

Abortion should be allowed on cases of rape, or due to the poverty of the parents (especially in Africa where population growth is out of control).

Where it gets complex is over cases with genetic defects, some are so severe (aka no stomach or heart) that they necessitate abortion, but I disagree over disability and minor defects. Myself having a disability (and recovered from it), I have to imagine what if my parents had aborted me, what if parents aborted children because they had a leg missing, or because they were autistic, dyslexic and so on. In my opinion that is murder.

 

[NYcarbineer]

All humans look like that at that age, barring severe developmental defects.


How can x not look like x?

Oh yeah, you're a dishonest sack of shit who can't admit what you advocate.

Why do you run away from debating the people who have stipulated that the embryo/fetuse is in fact human?

Do cite.

Why do you have to lie?

It's true. I've stipulated to your assertion that the embryo/fetus is human, but I've argued that that fact in and of itself does not change my opinion that it is a better option for our society to offer a woman a reasonable window of opportunity to terminate a pregnancy, and to protect that as a right,

than it is to make any termination of any pregnancy, at any time, a crime.

You have offered nothing of substance to contradict that.

Now is your chance. Here and now you can make the case that our society would be better served if your view was made law,

and your view was that abortion at any time ought to be at least the crime of manslaughter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Seriously, why can't you people ever be honest?

Why do you have to lie about what you advocate? Unless your own conscience tells you it's indefensible...

I haven't.

What about my position have I lied about?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Democrats always go on about how hard it is for their slutty daughters to get birth control.

Yet they have no problem finding an abortionist.

Why is that?

Maybe you should teach your kids where the condoms are at Walgreens instead of where all those beloved old hags with hangers are that you talk about so much.

Hi, you have received -21 reputation points from Vanquish.
Reputation was given for this post.

I guess the truth hurts.

So, Van... why can these girls find an abortionist but not a box of condoms?

Who can't find condoms? Who specifically has made that complaint?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you thought it was referring to you, it was.

I have never met anyone that was pro abortion and no one here has ever defined what that means.
Ever.

'Pro-abortion' has simply become a propaganda term used by the anti-choicers as part of their arsenal of fallacious arguments against abortion rights.

It's very hard to make a logical argument against offering women a legally protected reasonable window of opportunity to choose to terminate a pregnancy,

in fact, I've heard never one (take that as a challenge, folks). Thus, of course, the illogical arguments against that choice rule the debate,

from the anti-choice side.This thread is a perfect example.

And as you see,

no matter how much you challenge them to do so, no anti-abortionists can step forward and make such an argument.

 

[Immanuel]

RETARD
​

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487476

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487904

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-60.html#post3497540

You are retarded, JB...because ther reports claims that the title social reasons include instances such as the mother deciding the child is unwanted or 'inconvenient'.

That DOES NOT mean that 93% of abortions are for those reasons alone, you willfully ignorant clod. "Instances" does not equate "totality". Go back and read what comes under Guttmacher's heading of "social reasons"...or get an adult you trust to explain it to you.

Here you go, TL:

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/011003/ov_ab.pdf

Page 10 shows the primary reasons that mothers undergo abortions.

93% of those are for convenience sake. That does not mean those are easy decisions to make, but they were made for nothing more than birth control reasons. Mommy simply didn't want the baby.

According to Guttmacher, the average number of "reasons" a mother gives is I believe between 3 and 4. I did not go back and look. However, the primary reason is stated on page 10. I think it is pretty evident that secondary reasons are generally nothing more than "excuses".

Immie

 

[Gadawg73]

RETARD
​

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487476

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-27.html#post3487904

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-abortion-crowd-be-honest-60.html#post3497540

You are retarded, JB...because ther reports claims that the title social reasons include instances such as the mother deciding the child is unwanted or 'inconvenient'.

That DOES NOT mean that 93% of abortions are for those reasons alone, you willfully ignorant clod. "Instances" does not equate "totality". Go back and read what comes under Guttmacher's heading of "social reasons"...or get an adult you trust to explain it to you.

Here you go, TL:

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/011003/ov_ab.pdf

Page 10 shows the primary reasons that mothers undergo abortions.

93% of those are for convenience sake. That does not mean those are easy decisions to make, but they were made for nothing more than birth control reasons. Mommy simply didn't want the baby.

According to Guttmacher, the average number of "reasons" a mother gives is I believe between 3 and 4. I did not go back and look. However, the primary reason is stated on page 10. I think it is pretty evident that secondary reasons are generally nothing more than "excuses".

Immie

I agree with that and believe it is wrong.
Facts are facts.
Facts are also that out of that 93% that do it for convenience only:
100% of them that have $$$ will find a doctor to legally perform the abortion for "the safety of the mother" and not be challenged at all.
The others that have no $$ will have the kids that they do not want and do not know how to care for.
Abortion is terrible but no law stops it. Just adds more hypocrisy to it.

 

[Immanuel]

You are retarded, JB...because ther reports claims that the title social reasons include instances such as the mother deciding the child is unwanted or 'inconvenient'.

That DOES NOT mean that 93% of abortions are for those reasons alone, you willfully ignorant clod. "Instances" does not equate "totality". Go back and read what comes under Guttmacher's heading of "social reasons"...or get an adult you trust to explain it to you.

Here you go, TL:

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/011003/ov_ab.pdf

Page 10 shows the primary reasons that mothers undergo abortions.

93% of those are for convenience sake. That does not mean those are easy decisions to make, but they were made for nothing more than birth control reasons. Mommy simply didn't want the baby.

According to Guttmacher, the average number of "reasons" a mother gives is I believe between 3 and 4. I did not go back and look. However, the primary reason is stated on page 10. I think it is pretty evident that secondary reasons are generally nothing more than "excuses".

Immie

I agree with that and believe it is wrong.
Facts are facts.
Facts are also that out of that 93% that do it for convenience only:
100% of them that have $$$ will find a doctor to legally perform the abortion for "the safety of the mother" and not be challenged at all.
The others that have no $$ will have the kids that they do not want and do not know how to care for.
Abortion is terrible but no law stops it. Just adds more hypocrisy to it.

Abortion is terrible but no law stops it.

I am not quite sure that you don't mean what I am about to write but I'm not sure if your wording is just different than what I think or you meant something else.

Overturning Roe won't end or even reduce the number of abortions. I know Allie disagrees with me on that and has numbers to back up her claim that there was a huge increase in the number of abortions (I contend the increase was in the number of reported abortions). However, things are different today than they were almost 40 years ago when Roe became the law of the land. Simply making abortion illegal (even in every state) would not reduce the numbers. With the available drugs we have today, nothing would change.

Overturning Roe is not the answer to reducing the number of abortions. The answer is dependent upon education and changing the views of society both in regards to sex and abortion.

Immie

 

[AllieBaba]

I have never met anyone that was pro abortion and no one here has ever defined what that means.
Ever.

'Pro-abortion' has simply become a propaganda term used by the anti-choicers as part of their arsenal of fallacious arguments against abortion rights.

It's very hard to make a logical argument against offering women a legally protected reasonable window of opportunity to choose to terminate a pregnancy,

in fact, I've heard never one (take that as a challenge, folks). Thus, of course, the illogical arguments against that choice rule the debate,

from the anti-choice side.This thread is a perfect example.

And as you see,

no matter how much you challenge them to do so, no anti-abortionists can step forward and make such an argument.

What a lie. But of course, if you're to promote the killing of children, you have to lie. There is no way to defend it, otherwise.
There are many arguments against it. The primary ones are that the abortion system protects child rapists, and devalues the lives of children.