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

[AllieBaba]

more sex offenders work in the education system than in ANY OTHER PROFESSION .

Can you source that, please?

Ooh...just came across this. Give me a little time and I'll source it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

'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.

I want to hear those arguments, then, in explicit detail. I want to hear those arguments make the case that criminalizing abortion,

making abortion a serious crime for which both abortionists and women who have abortions are given appropriately serious criminal punishments,

is a greater good to society/humanity as opposed to allowing pregnant women a reasonable window of opportunity to legally terminate a pregnancy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

So you honestly think that all poor women who get knocked up are too stupid to round up $500 for an abortion and too stupid to care for a child?

That's ridiculous. There is absolutely NO correlation between abortion and child abuse or neglect. NONE. There is no evidence that abortion prevents any sort of child abuse or child neglect. The people who abuse and neglect their children are NOT women who wanted abortions but *couldn't* get them.

And what makes you think that a woman who wants to kill her kid but can't would balk at putting the child up for adoption? Women who get pregnant can get a free ride throughout their pregnancy and all sorts of perks if they give the baby up for adoption. Do you really think poor women are universally too stupid to know that?

Abortion is all about flushing bad decisions down the drain.

So what?

Criminalizing abortion is about sending women to prison for the rest of their lives for having taken some pills that brought about the death of a small group of cells that happen to contain human DNA.

When someone can convince me THAT makes sense, then they can convince me abortion is murder.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your 14 year old daughter finds out she's a few weeks pregnant. She does NOT want to have a baby.

Pro - choice: She can go to a doctor, be given RU 486, and terminate the pregnancy.

Pro - life: Abortion is murder. Either she carries to term, or she tries to have an illegal abortion somehow, somewhere, and if caught,

goes to prison for many many years.

SOMEONE convince me scenario #2 above makes more sense in a civilized society.

 

[AllieBaba]

" Shakeshaft compared the priest abuse data with data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000. Extrapolating data from the latter, she estimated roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a school employee from a single decade—1991-2000. That compares with about five decades of cases of abusive priests.
Such figures led her to contend "the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."

Sex Abuse by Teachers Said Worse Than Catholic Church

 

[AllieBaba]

Your 14 year old daughter finds out she's a few weeks pregnant. She does NOT want to have a baby.

Pro - choice: She can go to a doctor, be given RU 486, and terminate the pregnancy.

Pro - life: Abortion is murder. Either she carries to term, or she tries to have an illegal abortion somehow, somewhere, and if caught,

goes to prison for many many years.

SOMEONE convince me scenario #2 above makes more sense in a civilized society.

You can't be convinced, and the arguments have already been made.

In which scenario do you think it's more likely that someone looks into the circumstances under which she was impregnated? Because it's almost certainly a much older man.

 

[AllieBaba]

And where do you get the garbage that she would go to jail for *many years*? That's hogwash. People who kill their (post birth) children don't go to jail for *many years*.

 

[AllieBaba]

JB:

"

Job of offenders

. Reflecting the reanalysis of the 2000 Hostile Hallways

data (published in 2001), Table 7 documents the percent of students who have been

targets of educator sexual misconduct by role of educator. Teachers are reported most
often, followed by coaches. Gallagher (2000) reported that teachers accounted for 90
percent of the school institutional sexual abuse cases in his analysis5.
Teachers whose job description includes time with individual students, such as
music teachers or coaches, are more likely to sexually abuse than other teachers.
Jennings and Tharp found that 25 percent of the educators in Texas who were disciplined
for sexual infractions involving students between 1995 and 2003 were coaches or music
teachers. Willmsen and O’Hagan found Washington state teachers who coach were
“three times more likely to be investigated by the state for sexual misconduct than noncoaching
teachers.” ​

​

http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/misconductreview/report.pdf​

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your 14 year old daughter finds out she's a few weeks pregnant. She does NOT want to have a baby.

Pro - choice: She can go to a doctor, be given RU 486, and terminate the pregnancy.

Pro - life: Abortion is murder. Either she carries to term, or she tries to have an illegal abortion somehow, somewhere, and if caught,

goes to prison for many many years.

SOMEONE convince me scenario #2 above makes more sense in a civilized society.

You can't be convinced, and the arguments have already been made.

In which scenario do you think it's more likely that someone looks into the circumstances under which she was impregnated? Because it's almost certainly a much older man.

No the arguments haven't. Not to me they haven't. I want to hear a good argument that scenario #2 makes more sense.

Your position is that society is best served by criminalizing abortion because somehow, under fear of imprisonment, 14 year old girls having unwanted babies will make it easier to find out if they were victims of statutory rape??

That's a sensible tradeoff in your opinion? That's your idea of a sound argument for criminalizing abortion?

Then what's your argument for criminalizing abortion if the woman is 35, married, and already has 3 children and neither her nor her husband want her to have another??

 

[NYcarbineer]

And where do you get the garbage that she would go to jail for *many years*? That's hogwash. People who kill their (post birth) children don't go to jail for *many years*.

Why wouldn't you want a woman to go to prison for 'many years' for murdering her unborn child?

You want to classify it as murder, and then condone it? What penalties, specifically, would you like to see imposed for the crime of murder by abortion?

 

[AllieBaba]

Your 14 year old daughter finds out she's a few weeks pregnant. She does NOT want to have a baby.

Pro - choice: She can go to a doctor, be given RU 486, and terminate the pregnancy.

Pro - life: Abortion is murder. Either she carries to term, or she tries to have an illegal abortion somehow, somewhere, and if caught,

goes to prison for many many years.

SOMEONE convince me scenario #2 above makes more sense in a civilized society.

You can't be convinced, and the arguments have already been made.

In which scenario do you think it's more likely that someone looks into the circumstances under which she was impregnated? Because it's almost certainly a much older man.

No the arguments haven't. Not to me they haven't. I want to hear a good argument that scenario #2 makes more sense.

Your position is that society is best served by criminalizing abortion because somehow, under fear of imprisonment, 14 year old girls having unwanted babies will make it easier to find out if they were victims of statutory rape??

That's a sensible tradeoff in your opinion? That's your idea of a sound argument for criminalizing abortion?

Then what's your argument for criminalizing abortion if the woman is 35, married, and already has 3 children and neither her nor her husband want her to have another??

False premise
Logical fallacy.

Which is why I said, you can't be convinced. And also why the title of this thread pertains to the dishonesty of the pro-abortionists. You make up fake scenarios that have no basis in fact, and you expect an intelligent argument about it.

 

[sinister59]

If one's position is defensible, shouldn't you be able to defend it with logical, cogent, well-thought-out arguments? Shouldn't you be able to discuss the matter in an honest and intelligent manner?

A blastocyst/foetus/etc is an organism. It is alive and it is genetically human.* These are verifiable, objective, demonstrable scientific facts. It is all a matter of basic biology.

Therefore, the child is be definition a living human organism. We are, therefore, dealing with a human life. To 'abort' a pregnancy is to bring about the end of those physiological and biological processes that identify this human organism as alive- it is to bring about the child's death.

It is therefore a scientific fact that when we speak of abortion, we speak of ending human life. As we are also humans, we are therefore dealing with a case of homicide- homicide is defined as the killing of a human being by another human being.

If your position is defensible- if the ending of this life is a defensible ac- then you should be able to demonstrate why this is justifiable or acceptable without denying the facts of what it is you support. When pretend that we're not dealing with a living human being, you reveal that one or both of the following is true:
-You do not know what it is you advocate; you are guided purely by your emotion and your programming. You should shut your fucking mouth and not speak about things you do not understand

-You know your position is indefensible; you must lie about what it is you advocate because you cannot honestly defend your position






*Yes, I know a foetus can die in utero without the woman's body expelling it [see: stone foetus] and that humans aren't the only species to experience pregnancy. Given the context, such things should go unsaid. Let us exercise a little critical thinking here.

funny how you think people that are for a women's rights of her own body are cowards ,yet anti -abortionist murder , blow up building , stay anonymous are heroes so your definition of coward is distorted . badly .woman's body are not public domain .

 

[AllieBaba]

Another lie.

Thanks for proving the OP correct.

 

[sinister59]

Another lie.

Thanks for proving the OP correct.

lie ?

 

[AllieBaba]

"funny how you think people that are for a women's rights of her own body are cowards ,yet anti -abortionist murder , blow up building , stay anonymous are heroes so your definition of coward is distorted . "

Lie.

Though it's so jumbled it's hard to decipher, stating "you think" and then jamming together a bunch of lies that you can't verify, is of course, a lie.

 

[sinister59]

"funny how you think people that are for a women's rights of her own body are cowards ,yet anti -abortionist murder , blow up building , stay anonymous are heroes so your definition of coward is distorted . "

Lie.

Though it's so jumbled it's hard to decipher, stating "you think" and then jamming together a bunch of lies that you can't verify, is of course, a lie.

wow I'd get my computer looked at if thats what you see .
its plain if your not stupid ? or a child trying to be funny .

you don't like people that aborted their pregnancy ? ok .

you think woman should not have the last say? ok

but to say doctors have not been murdered [oh wait I didn't take into consideration your moral stance on killing people doing things you don't approve of]

not one fucking lie .

clinics have been blown up , doctors have been lets say killed . ok because my guess is you think a christan doesn't murder sop that one is semantics .

as for you thoughts on me ? LOL fuck you I could care less . .

your just a putts anyway

 

[JBeukema]

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.

I want to hear those arguments, then, in explicit detail.

So you're pretending you never read her posts earlier in this thread?

Or are you just being dishonest again, as is your wont?

 

[JBeukema]

So you honestly think that all poor women who get knocked up are too stupid to round up $500 for an abortion and too stupid to care for a child?

That's ridiculous. There is absolutely NO correlation between abortion and child abuse or neglect. NONE. There is no evidence that abortion prevents any sort of child abuse or child neglect. The people who abuse and neglect their children are NOT women who wanted abortions but *couldn't* get them.

And what makes you think that a woman who wants to kill her kid but can't would balk at putting the child up for adoption? Women who get pregnant can get a free ride throughout their pregnancy and all sorts of perks if they give the baby up for adoption. Do you really think poor women are universally too stupid to know that?

Abortion is all about flushing bad decisions down the drain.

So what?

Criminalizing abortion is about sending women to prison for the rest of their lives for having taken some pills that brought about the death of a small group of cells that happen to contain human DNA.

Is your body not a mere collection of cells even today?

 

[JBeukema]

If one's position is defensible, shouldn't you be able to defend it with logical, cogent, well-thought-out arguments? Shouldn't you be able to discuss the matter in an honest and intelligent manner?

A blastocyst/foetus/etc is an organism. It is alive and it is genetically human.* These are verifiable, objective, demonstrable scientific facts. It is all a matter of basic biology.

Therefore, the child is be definition a living human organism. We are, therefore, dealing with a human life. To 'abort' a pregnancy is to bring about the end of those physiological and biological processes that identify this human organism as alive- it is to bring about the child's death.

It is therefore a scientific fact that when we speak of abortion, we speak of ending human life. As we are also humans, we are therefore dealing with a case of homicide- homicide is defined as the killing of a human being by another human being.

If your position is defensible- if the ending of this life is a defensible ac- then you should be able to demonstrate why this is justifiable or acceptable without denying the facts of what it is you support. When pretend that we're not dealing with a living human being, you reveal that one or both of the following is true:
-You do not know what it is you advocate; you are guided purely by your emotion and your programming. You should shut your fucking mouth and not speak about things you do not understand

-You know your position is indefensible; you must lie about what it is you advocate because you cannot honestly defend your position






*Yes, I know a foetus can die in utero without the woman's body expelling it [see: stone foetus] and that humans aren't the only species to experience pregnancy. Given the context, such things should go unsaid. Let us exercise a little critical thinking here.

funny how you think people that are for a women's rights of her own body are cowards

1) Not your body. Learn basic biology. Why do you people have to lie?

2) Where did I say they were cowards? Why do you people always lie?

,yet anti -abortionist murder , blow up building , stay anonymous are heroes

Do Cite.

Why can't you people ever be honest?

 

[JBeukema]

I'm tempted to call Poe's law on this one.