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

[Cecilie1200]

Perhaps you could start by telling us WHY "this right fades over time", in your inestimable opinion. YOURS, not the Guttmacher Institute Bullet Points list, if you please.

Because rights are never in a vacuum and are always dependent and affected by other rights. The right fades over time because the life form in the woman's body grows and acquires more rights. The bigger the fetus, the more likely it is viable, the more it acquires right.

I'm not sure how much more I can say.

I wonder. If a woman is pregnant with twins, and reaches a point where she likely needs an abortion to save her life, do you think she should be forced to carry out the pregnancy? Or should she take her chances and go through with the pregnancy?

You can tell me why "bigger" equals "acquires more rights". And what you really MEAN is "viable outside the womb", since the fetus is ALREADY viable in the environment for which nature has designed him for that part of his life. So perhaps you could ALSO tell me why location equals "acquires more rights".

You could also explain to me why a woman would "need an abortion to save her life", Dr. Welby. And no, I don't have a problem with aborting a baby who is already doomed (which, offhand, are the only situations I can think of where the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy itself). If you want to cook up hypothetical scenarios, be more specific. And DON'T think you're going to turn the abortion debate to "rape, incest, endangered mothers!" I have little patience with people who want to hide a million dead babies a year behind the skirts of the hard cases.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The bigger the fetus, the more likely it is viable, the more it acquires right.

So... fat kids have more rights than skinny kids?

What about underweight children?

Or is the target 'viability'? What the hell does that mean? You know we can save preemies today who were not 'viable' decades ago, right? 'Viability', then, is a moving and meaningless target. What about a child born on time at full size with a congenital heart defect or breathing problems? Left alone, the child will die - it is not 'viable'.

Does that mean that, instead of providing emergency medical care, we should crush her skull?

What about old people on respirators? People having heart attacks? People on dialysis?

I'm not sure how much more I can say.

You haven't said anything at all.

So just to be clear, you are against all abortions, regardless of the circumstances. Life of the mother, rape, incest, no situation is not a murder that should be punished.

What kind of sick fucker thinks of a baby as "punishment"?

By the way, JB isn't actually against abortion, if I remember correctly. He just thinks your rationalizations are dishonest crap. So do I, come to that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So... fat kids have more rights than skinny kids?

What about underweight children?

Or is the target 'viability'? What the hell does that mean? You know we can save preemies today who were not 'viable' decades ago, right? 'Viability', then, is a moving and meaningless target. What about a child born on time at full size with a congenital heart defect or breathing problems? Left alone, the child will die - it is not 'viable'.

Does that mean that, instead of providing emergency medical care, we should crush her skull?

What about old people on respirators? People having heart attacks? People on dialysis?

You haven't said anything at all.

So just to be clear, you are against all abortions, regardless of the circumstances. Life of the mother, rape, incest, no situation is not a murder that should be punished.

if abortion is murder, what does the rape of the mother have to do with murder of the child?

It allows her to go from a sympathetic victim to a disgusting victimizer, just like her rapist.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So just to be clear, you are against all abortions, regardless of the circumstances. Life of the mother, rape, incest, no situation is not a murder that should be punished.

if abortion is murder, what does the rape of the mother have to do with murder of the child?

It has to do with the fact that I find it unfair to impose what could be a huge burden on the rape victim (carrying through a pregnancy).

You didn't impose anything on her. Her rapist did. How does allowing her to victimize ANOTHER, even more innocent person make the situation better?

And what kind of sick, twisted asshole thinks of a baby as a "huge burden"?

 

[Cecilie1200]

So just to be clear, you are against all abortions, regardless of the circumstances. Life of the mother, rape, incest, no situation is not a murder that should be punished.

My views are in this thread and others- in great depth.

Why won't you answer the question?

At what point did what fundamental aspect of your nature change that made killing you in cold blood go from being an okay thing to a not-okay thing?

You said it had to do with size. At what length/weight does a person have a right to life that makes it not-okay to kill them for convenience?

93% of all abortions are out of convenience. Less than 1% involve rape. Stop exploiting the suffering of rape victims like the piece of shit you are and address the question.

Apparently being polite, which I would find an easy goal to achieve, eludes you.

I find it impressive though that you are willing to carry on a conversation with a 'piece of ****'.

I'm not going to try to quantify the exact boundary because it's a futile exercise. But I can tell you that if it's 8 cells you are talking about, that is a cost society should be able to live with. 40 weeks? Then I would need a very compelling reason, and the only one I can think of is life of the mother.

We kill over a million babies in this country every year, and you think it's a "futile exercise" to try to determine whether and when those lives ought to be saved?

Society "should be able to live with" the cost of killing someone if they're small enough? Man, I hope you don't suddenly decide that you don't like midgets.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It has to do with the fact that I find it unfair to impose what could be a huge burden on the rape victim (carrying through a pregnancy).

so it's only murder if the woman isn't raped?

It's always killing, but if you mean murder in the legal/criminal sense, I don't think it is.

Meaningless answer. You know perfectly well he knows it's not illegal, and that he means "murder" in the sense of "killing another human being".

Don't start parsing the grammar now, because it's already hard enough to get to the bottom of what you really believe, aside from "I want women to think I'm a nice guy, so I say what they want to hear".

 

[Cecilie1200]

It has to do with the fact that I find it unfair to impose what could be a huge burden on the rape victim (carrying through a pregnancy).

Better to impose the death penalty on the child?

So you believe the right to convenience outweighs the right to life?

Stop making this a black and white debate.

When we send a bomb on top of the house that we know contains one terrorist/enemy and his family, we are apparently able to find the nuances.

It's the right to control one's body outweighing the growing right to life, up to a point.

Stop trying to make this a "shades of grey" debate. Reality is pretty black and white: either it's reality, or it's not. So far, you refuse to talk about facts, and instead want to give us your vague impressions and opinions.

Who is this "we" who's finding nuances to killing terrorists? What nuances?

No one's talking about the woman's body except you. We're talking about the totally OTHER, separate body involved here.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Apparently being polite, which I would find an easy goal to achieve, eludes you.

Want me to be polite? Stop being a dishonest fuckwit and exploiter of rape victims and answer the fucking question. It's not a hard question.

At what point did what fundamental aspect of your nature change that made killing you go from being an okay thing to being a not-okay thing?

So you can't tell me why killing one child is okay and killing another is not okay? You can't tell me why shooting you in the face is not okay but punching a hole in your head and vacuuming your brains out or ripping you limb from limb is
Why?


Why not? What's the difference?


What changed?

Then I would need a very compelling reason, and the only one I can think of is life of the mother.

What about halfway through birth? Or when crowning starts? Zor when her water breaks? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that? Or an hour before that...?

What changes?

8 cells is not a baby. 16 cells is not a baby. 32 cells is not a baby. etc.

If embryos are destroyed in fertility clinics, are these abortions too?

How are YOU defining "baby"? Buy a dictionary, chum.

No, they aren't abortions, but yes, they are killing babies. Why do you assume other people view the world the same way you do?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why is he bitching about the language in the DoI?

What does that have to do with the subject at hand?

As I pointed out, any pretext on which to say, "Oh, he's religious, so that invalidates anything he says and I don't have to actually debate" is more than welcome to pro-aborts. It's the political debate equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming as loudly as possible.

Good point, I'm mean it's not like I haven't posted dozens of times in this very thread. Better to just assume I posted a couple times because I wanted to avoid debate.


Settle down, maybe hit a bong a few times, anything you need to do to be able to debate this issue like an adult.


It's clear it isn't just an isolated problem with Allie, the overwhelming majority of pro-lifers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, almost all of you sound like emotional children.

Oh, you post a lot of shit. Doesn't mean you listen to anyone else, or that a lot of your shit doesn't amount to "Oh, good, I found a reason to dismiss you instead of responding".

Judging by the source, I'll forego the drugs, thanks. It's obvious that some people around here have already killed more brain cells than they can spare.

Are we defining "debate like an adult" as "looking for some pretext on which to run away from people's questions", the way you do? Because believe me, doing ANYTHING the way you do is not and never will be a goal in my life. I prefer intellectual honesty.

It's also clear this isn't just an isolated problem with you, but that the overwhelming majority of pro-baby killers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, rather than frantically searching for ways to demonize their opponents so they don't have to answer questions. You sound like pathetic, lying cowards.

 

[AllieBaba]

Debating like an adult is code for "eschew facts" and "ignore the humanity of children".

 

[Cecilie1200]

But I'll repeat my stance in summary because often times it seems what I want as a pro-choicer is the same as what pro-lifers want.

I want it to be a states issue, so I want Roe vs Wade overturned as it infringes on many state's rights. Abortion isn't a big issue to me so if my state voted into act pro-life legislation it wouldn't be a big deal to me, my only concern would be the creation of an abortion black market where you're moving abortions from the doctors office to the back alley and having women self-perform them.

Yes, repeating your own position - as though anyone was confused by the nuances of "killing babies is good" - is definitely the equivalent of listening to other people and responding to them. Oh, wait, it's not. Here's what it is:

If we ever want to hear a self-absorbed discourse on what you think, we'll ask you. Of course, you won't be aware of it, since you have your fingers in your ears. Poltroon.

 

[Cecilie1200]

8 cells is not a baby. 16 cells is not a baby. 32 cells is not a baby. etc.

• S: (n) baby (an unborn child; a human fetus) "I felt healthy and very feminine carrying the baby"; "it was great to feel my baby moving about inside"

WordNet Search - 3.1

If embryos are destroyed in fertility clinics, are these abortions too?

S: (n) abortion (termination of pregnancy)
WordNet Search - 3.1


Why can't you people ever be honest?

At what age did you become a 'baby' by whatever definition makes you feel good about killing children?

When does someone stop becoming a 'baby'?

The question is, more properly, when does someone stop BEING a baby, since you never "become" one. You are one from the start of your existence. And the answer is, when you move on to another stage of life.

Seriously, don't you own a dictionary? These words all have definitions, y'know.

 

[Dr.Drock]

As I pointed out, any pretext on which to say, "Oh, he's religious, so that invalidates anything he says and I don't have to actually debate" is more than welcome to pro-aborts. It's the political debate equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming as loudly as possible.

Good point, I'm mean it's not like I haven't posted dozens of times in this very thread. Better to just assume I posted a couple times because I wanted to avoid debate.


Settle down, maybe hit a bong a few times, anything you need to do to be able to debate this issue like an adult.


It's clear it isn't just an isolated problem with Allie, the overwhelming majority of pro-lifers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, almost all of you sound like emotional children.

Oh, you post a lot of shit. Doesn't mean you listen to anyone else, or that a lot of your shit doesn't amount to "Oh, good, I found a reason to dismiss you instead of responding".

Judging by the source, I'll forego the drugs, thanks. It's obvious that some people around here have already killed more brain cells than they can spare.

Are we defining "debate like an adult" as "looking for some pretext on which to run away from people's questions", the way you do? Because believe me, doing ANYTHING the way you do is not and never will be a goal in my life. I prefer intellectual honesty.

It's also clear this isn't just an isolated problem with you, but that the overwhelming majority of pro-baby killers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, rather than frantically searching for ways to demonize their opponents so they don't have to answer questions. You sound like pathetic, lying cowards.

No I listen, why I listen I dunno, when half of your posts are childish 3rd grade insults. Yes I can see how important intellectual honesty is to you, thus the name-calling, as the easiest way to tell in life if an adult is intellectual is to see how high of a quota for name-calls they have in a day is.

I see you evaded the question posed to you about what you think of abortions if the mom is going to die from birth, incest, etc, standard operating procedure for you guys again.

And, as happens almost everytime with pro-lifers, DESPITE agreeing with them on how gov't should handle abortions their #1 goal in "discussing" the issue is insults. I could agree with them in every single way on how the issue should be handled, and yet still, the most important thing to them is relieving their daily insecurities through name-calling and tantrum-throwing.

 

[American Legacy]

But I'll repeat my stance in summary because often times it seems what I want as a pro-choicer is the same as what pro-lifers want.

I want it to be a states issue, so I want Roe vs Wade overturned as it infringes on many state's rights. Abortion isn't a big issue to me so if my state voted into act pro-life legislation it wouldn't be a big deal to me, my only concern would be the creation of an abortion black market where you're moving abortions from the doctors office to the back alley and having women self-perform them.

This is the equivalent of a lot of wrong-headed opinions in the 1840s and 1850s. You're not a slave holder yourself so it doesn't really matter to you what the states decide to do. Abortion is as much about a woman's choice to do with her body as slavery was an individual's choice what to do with his property. Regardless of how dependent they are on others, human beings are not property. No one has the right to destroy an innocent human life.

If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she can keep her legs crossed. If she is pregnant and doesn't want to raise the child once it's born, she given sign over her parental rights and give it up for adoption. That's the choice she has.

 

[Gadawg73]

if abortion is murder, what does the rape of the mother have to do with murder of the child?

It has to do with the fact that I find it unfair to impose what could be a huge burden on the rape victim (carrying through a pregnancy).

You didn't impose anything on her. Her rapist did. How does allowing her to victimize ANOTHER, even more innocent person make the situation better?

And what kind of sick, twisted asshole thinks of a baby as a "huge burden"?

That is not the fact that was presented and you know it.
Rape victims are all burdened by being raped and having to carry that baby is a constant reminder of the rape.
Show me a rape victim not burdened by being raped and getting pregnant.
Where do you get these absurd talking points? Being raped and carrying that child not being a burden. You are bat shit crazy.

 

[Gadawg73]

But I'll repeat my stance in summary because often times it seems what I want as a pro-choicer is the same as what pro-lifers want.

I want it to be a states issue, so I want Roe vs Wade overturned as it infringes on many state's rights. Abortion isn't a big issue to me so if my state voted into act pro-life legislation it wouldn't be a big deal to me, my only concern would be the creation of an abortion black market where you're moving abortions from the doctors office to the back alley and having women self-perform them.

This is the equivalent of a lot of wrong-headed opinions in the 1840s and 1850s. You're not a slave holder yourself so it doesn't really matter to you what the states decide to do. Abortion is as much about a woman's choice to do with her body as slavery was an individual's choice what to do with his property. Regardless of how dependent they are on others, human beings are not property. No one has the right to destroy an innocent human life.

If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she can keep her legs crossed. If she is pregnant and doesn't want to raise the child once it's born, she given sign over her parental rights and give it up for adoption. That's the choice she has.

OK, then what do we do about it?
We allow the states to each define what it is and make criminal code accordingly?
If you don't know that IS ALL THAT WILL HAPPEN if Roe was over turned today then you do not know any law.
What do we do? Specifics.

 

[Gadawg73]

Good point, I'm mean it's not like I haven't posted dozens of times in this very thread. Better to just assume I posted a couple times because I wanted to avoid debate.


Settle down, maybe hit a bong a few times, anything you need to do to be able to debate this issue like an adult.


It's clear it isn't just an isolated problem with Allie, the overwhelming majority of pro-lifers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, almost all of you sound like emotional children.

Oh, you post a lot of shit. Doesn't mean you listen to anyone else, or that a lot of your shit doesn't amount to "Oh, good, I found a reason to dismiss you instead of responding".

Judging by the source, I'll forego the drugs, thanks. It's obvious that some people around here have already killed more brain cells than they can spare.

Are we defining "debate like an adult" as "looking for some pretext on which to run away from people's questions", the way you do? Because believe me, doing ANYTHING the way you do is not and never will be a goal in my life. I prefer intellectual honesty.

It's also clear this isn't just an isolated problem with you, but that the overwhelming majority of pro-baby killers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, rather than frantically searching for ways to demonize their opponents so they don't have to answer questions. You sound like pathetic, lying cowards.

No I listen, why I listen I dunno, when half of your posts are childish 3rd grade insults. Yes I can see how important intellectual honesty is to you, thus the name-calling, as the easiest way to tell in life if an adult is intellectual is to see how high of a quota for name-calls they have in a day is.

I see you evaded the question posed to you about what you think of abortions if the mom is going to die from birth, incest, etc, standard operating procedure for you guys again.

And, as happens almost everytime with pro-lifers, DESPITE agreeing with them on how gov't should handle abortions their #1 goal in "discussing" the issue is insults. I could agree with them in every single way on how the issue should be handled, and yet still, the most important thing to them is relieving their daily insecurities through name-calling and tantrum-throwing.

Emotional drama queens rule in their homes so they assume they rule everywhere else they go.
When facts are absent all they have is drama and name calling.
When I used to cross the lines for 4 quarters of battle I always knew when I had my man beat and defeated when the insults started.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Oh, you post a lot of shit. Doesn't mean you listen to anyone else, or that a lot of your shit doesn't amount to "Oh, good, I found a reason to dismiss you instead of responding".

Judging by the source, I'll forego the drugs, thanks. It's obvious that some people around here have already killed more brain cells than they can spare.

Are we defining "debate like an adult" as "looking for some pretext on which to run away from people's questions", the way you do? Because believe me, doing ANYTHING the way you do is not and never will be a goal in my life. I prefer intellectual honesty.

It's also clear this isn't just an isolated problem with you, but that the overwhelming majority of pro-baby killers are completely incapable of debating the subject like rational adults, rather than frantically searching for ways to demonize their opponents so they don't have to answer questions. You sound like pathetic, lying cowards.

No I listen, why I listen I dunno, when half of your posts are childish 3rd grade insults. Yes I can see how important intellectual honesty is to you, thus the name-calling, as the easiest way to tell in life if an adult is intellectual is to see how high of a quota for name-calls they have in a day is.

I see you evaded the question posed to you about what you think of abortions if the mom is going to die from birth, incest, etc, standard operating procedure for you guys again.

And, as happens almost everytime with pro-lifers, DESPITE agreeing with them on how gov't should handle abortions their #1 goal in "discussing" the issue is insults. I could agree with them in every single way on how the issue should be handled, and yet still, the most important thing to them is relieving their daily insecurities through name-calling and tantrum-throwing.

Emotional drama queens rule in their homes so they assume they rule everywhere else they go.
When facts are absent all they have is drama and name calling.
When I used to cross the lines for 4 quarters of battle I always knew when I had my man beat and defeated when the insults started.

I even spoke some truth to power with Allie, she admitted she doesn't stoop to this stuff in real life, it's all a message board schtick which is probably the same way Cecille is. I'm really doubting she runs around calling people doo-doo heads in the real world, probably just on here.

 

[Gadawg73]

My response to Jbeukema, post 1820

(sorry for the delay responding, this is a big and busy forum…)

My opinion is irrelevant, I simply note the legal status of the issue and the current thinking of the courts, providing documentation accordingly.

It doesn’t mean I approve or disapprove, or believe it’s right or wrong – I do accept it as settled law and have moved on.

For those who are opposed to abortion and wish to see it banned/outlawed, however, you’ve got a long, hard road to negotiate. The best chance was lost with Casey in 1992, that was almost 20 years ago. And Roe and Griswold are well over 30 years decided. I’m not saying overturning Griswold/Roe/Casey can’t be done, but eliminating the right to privacy is going to be a tough sell to most Americans, whether abortion is factored in or not.

Keep sidestepping me, pro-choicers.

It's all you CAN do...as you dont want to have a real debate.

And what exactly is there to debate?

The issue isn’t really about abortion per se but how to end it. It could be argued simply banning it would be as effective as banning marijuana is now or alcohol during the 1920s, which wouldn’t end it at all. Americans historically don’t respond well being told what to do concerning things they consider private.

The scary part is that most Americans these days can tell you who won American Idol and is leading with points on Dancing with the Stars but they have no clue as to how the legal system works and how laws are passed.
These are the same folks that state they want this and that law and do everything they can to avoid jury duty as they brag when they get out of it.
I always found it ironic how the Drug War was fought legally with the illegal drugs being called "Contolled Substances".
There wasn't very much control over them if they had to be illegal. And time has shown there is absolutely NO control over any of them and never will be.
Abortion is a family decision and the government should stay out of it. NO LAW ever stops abortion and only damn fools believe there is one that would stop it.

 

[Gadawg73]

No I listen, why I listen I dunno, when half of your posts are childish 3rd grade insults. Yes I can see how important intellectual honesty is to you, thus the name-calling, as the easiest way to tell in life if an adult is intellectual is to see how high of a quota for name-calls they have in a day is.

I see you evaded the question posed to you about what you think of abortions if the mom is going to die from birth, incest, etc, standard operating procedure for you guys again.

And, as happens almost everytime with pro-lifers, DESPITE agreeing with them on how gov't should handle abortions their #1 goal in "discussing" the issue is insults. I could agree with them in every single way on how the issue should be handled, and yet still, the most important thing to them is relieving their daily insecurities through name-calling and tantrum-throwing.

Emotional drama queens rule in their homes so they assume they rule everywhere else they go.
When facts are absent all they have is drama and name calling.
When I used to cross the lines for 4 quarters of battle I always knew when I had my man beat and defeated when the insults started.

I even spoke some truth to power with Allie, she admitted she doesn't stoop to this stuff in real life, it's all a message board schtick which is probably the same way Cecille is. I'm really doubting she runs around calling people doo-doo heads in the real world, probably just on here.

ALL political power comes from the barrell of either guns, pussy or opium pipes and people seem to like it that way.
Here is no exception.