'Planned Parenthood' Advises Pimp of Underage Sex Slaves

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
apbt55 hit the nail right on the head!! If a woman partakes in an activity knowing full well the consequence/s of the act, her rights are superseded when another life is created. Save your breath Ryan, do NOT argue a case for rape and incest when they account for less than one percent of the total number.[/quote]

I don’t have to argue “the case” for rape and incest. If she wants an abortion, it is her right to have one, regardless of the circumstances or how it makes you feel. Deal with it.
[/quote]

Look I don’t agree with just about anything this guy posts regarding either economics or life in general but he’s right about this. Abortion is legal and its nobodys business but the person who wants it.

It shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers but either you think the govenement should stay out of peoples lives or you don’t.

[quote]JoeGood wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
apbt55 hit the nail right on the head!! If a woman partakes in an activity knowing full well the consequence/s of the act, her rights are superseded when another life is created. Save your breath Ryan, do NOT argue a case for rape and incest when they account for less than one percent of the total number.[/quote]

I don’t have to argue “the case” for rape and incest. If she wants an abortion, it is her right to have one, regardless of the circumstances or how it makes you feel. Deal with it.
[/quote]

Look I don’t agree with just about anything this guy posts regarding either economics or life in general but he’s right about this. Abortion is legal and its nobodys business but the person who wants it.

It shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers but either you think the govenement should stay out of peoples lives or you don’t. [/quote]

Wrong. I don’t think anyone here think that the government shouldn’t interfere when humans are being killed.

Staying out of people’s lives really means protecting natural negative rights. Which actually means they are PRO interference when rights are being violated.

You are arguing the case for the whole because less than 1 percent of the total? Am I following you correctly?

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
apbt55 hit the nail right on the head!! If a woman partakes in an activity knowing full well the consequence/s of the act, her rights are superseded when another life is created. Save your breath Ryan, do NOT argue a case for rape and incest when they account for less than one percent of the total number.[/quote]

I don’t have to argue “the case” for rape and incest. If she wants an abortion, it is her right to have one, regardless of the circumstances or how it makes you feel. Deal with it.
[/quote]

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Ryan,

How to you square this…

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Even if I give you the assumption that the fetus is a human with no argument, [/quote]

with this…

[quote] A one or two month old fetus is no different from an animal.
[/quote]

and this:

?
[/quote]

Could you clarify your question? I think I understand what you mean, but if I’m right, then the argument is intractable, and if I’m wrong my answer will be inappropriate.

No, someone who rails against “intrusive government” when they try to raise marginal income tax rates by 2%, and then turns around and attempts to use that government to literally deprive half the population of control of their own bodies is a prick.

Blah blah blah, rationalize away all you want to, facts are facts, regardless of where they come from.

No, only in your authoritarian dream world.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:you are a college student, probably using some sort of assistance, being funded by our money.

so by your logic it is our money, so scoiety can say you are worthless and end your life.

good logic.
[/quote]

Regardless of whether it is good logic or not, it’s not mine, you just pulled it out of your ass.

As soon as I am inside of and connected to your body, you can decide whether I live or die. Until then, it’s simply an astoundingly absurd analogy, demonstrating either gross ignorance, or shameful dishonesty.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
You are arguing the case for the whole because less than 1 percent of the total? Am I following you correctly?[/quote]

No, you are not. Your entire premise starts with the assumption that abortion is wrong unless the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. Or in other words, that you have the right to make a woman’s personal decisions for her except in a couple of scenarios. I am telling you that your assumptions are flawed.

In actuality, the circumstances under which conception took place are utterly irrelevant–it is the woman’s body in all cases, and you don’t have the least to right to tell her what she will and will not do with it. If she wants an abortion because she doesn’t like the way it makes her belly look in her favorite dress, that is her right.

It would be quite a shame if that were the only reason she sought an abortion, but it is still her right.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]makkun wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

The mother forfeits those rights when she engages in an act that causes pregnancy, actions have consequences. just like criminals forfeit certain rights when they commit crimes.[/quote]

Am I the only one who feels that this isn’t the warmest analogy? Not to make too fine a point about it, but it does sound rather like a punishment for wrongdoing rather than an embrace of the wonders of conception.

It begs a question: Does a man lose any rights as well by committing an act that causes pregnancy, for example a right to keep his money by having to pay child support?

Just trying to understand your perspective.

Makkun[/quote]

No I was just using that analogy to imply abortion is a criminal act. Just like neglect. Just like feeding your child draino because you no longer want to take care of them.

and yes the father shares responsibility and if he chooses not to be accountable should financially or criminally punished for those actions.[/quote]

I think I understand your point. Technically though, a legally executed abortion is not a criminal act, even though you are arguing it is wrong, unethical, immoral. I think I understand from your post that you would like it to be a criminal / unlawful act though. I think I understand your view better now. Thanks.

Can I ask a follow up question, please? If the pregnancy has not come to pass due to the woman’s own volition (i.e. rape and in a wider sense, statutory rape), does abortion in your view become less immoral (or worth being made a criminal act)? I get the argument for taking responsibility for your own acts - thanks DD as well for clarifying - but what about when there is none on behalf of the woman? Does the fetus’ / child’s existence itself preclude the woman’s ability to break off a pregnancy that was forced upon her? And as a follow up, should that be made illegal as well?

Makkun

[quote]JoeGood wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
apbt55 hit the nail right on the head!! If a woman partakes in an activity knowing full well the consequence/s of the act, her rights are superseded when another life is created. Save your breath Ryan, do NOT argue a case for rape and incest when they account for less than one percent of the total number.[/quote]

I don’t have to argue “the case” for rape and incest. If she wants an abortion, it is her right to have one, regardless of the circumstances or how it makes you feel. Deal with it.
[/quote]

Look I don’t agree with just about anything this guy posts regarding either economics or life in general but he’s right about this. Abortion is legal and its nobodys business but the person who wants it.

It shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers but either you think the govenement should stay out of peoples lives or you don’t. [/quote]

False Dichotomy.

A lot of bad things were legal through the years, from slavery, genocide, lynching, quartering, lethal human experimenting, &c. So…because those things are legal it’s nobody’s business but the person that wants to do it? I am not saying abortion is wrong because of this, but legality doesn’t make it right or wrong. The action itself is right or wrong by itself.

People that fought to turn over prohibition saw that just because it was illegal to have alcohol, doesn’t dictate whether alcohol or drinking alcohol is inherently right or wrong.

[quote]makkun wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that this isn’t the warmest analogy?

Makkun[/quote]

Yes, I am more worried about protecting the rights of the women, then taking away her rights. She has the right to know what she is doing to make sure she knows the full weight of their actions, she needs to be informed that she is in no undefined terms ending the life of her child that has done no wrong, ending an innocent life.

There is a few states which have implemented this, but not all of them.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]makkun wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that this isn’t the warmest analogy?

Makkun[/quote]

Yes, I am more worried about protecting the rights of the women, then taking away her rights. She has the right to know what she is doing to make sure she knows the full weight of their actions, she needs to be informed that she is in no undefined terms ending the life of her child that has done no wrong, ending an innocent life.

There is a few states which have implemented this, but not all of them.[/quote]

Given the full extent of available information on abortion, including all negative possible consequences, does that absolve the woman from committing from what I assume you see as an immoral act? Or does it make it worse, as it’s now an even more informed decision?

Makkun

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
In actuality, the circumstances under which conception took place are utterly irrelevant–it is the woman’s body in all cases, and you don’t have the least to right to tell her what she will and will not do with it. If she wants an abortion because she doesn’t like the way it makes her belly look in her favorite dress, that is her right.

It would be quite a shame if that were the only reason she sought an abortion, but it is still her right.
[/quote]

You are one of the dumbest and most pretentious assholes on T-Nation. In all my time reading PWI I don’t think you have said anything intelligent. Conservative hillbillies are a bastion of wise comments compared to you.

Have you ever spent time thinking through the abortion issue? Learning about a fetuses development etc.

If you have then please tell us why it is her right. Give us your analysis of the situation. Woo us all with your deep insight.

Is it her right to leave her baby at home to starve to death? What makes it being part of her body any different? You seem to make the distinction that because something is inside of you, you can do whatever you want to it. Why make the distinction? What is the ethical basis for it? That you can’t just give your fetus up for adoption?

End of the day you emotionally disconnect from the situation and see fetuses as sort of tumors or parasites. Thats ok. My ancestors didn’t believe black people were really human in the same way whites were. It was one of the reasons slavery was so hard to abolish. But they weren’t evil people. Even the slaveholders back in the day weren’t evil people. Just backwards folk.

[quote]makkun wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]makkun wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that this isn’t the warmest analogy?

Makkun[/quote]

Yes, I am more worried about protecting the rights of the women, then taking away her rights. She has the right to know what she is doing to make sure she knows the full weight of their actions, she needs to be informed that she is in no undefined terms ending the life of her child that has done no wrong, ending an innocent life.

There is a few states which have implemented this, but not all of them.[/quote]

Given the full extent of available information on abortion, including all negative possible consequences, does that absolve the woman from committing from what I assume you see as an immoral act? Or does it make it worse, as it’s now an even more informed decision?

Makkun[/quote]

Still an immoral act.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
In actuality, the circumstances under which conception took place are utterly irrelevant–it is the woman’s body in all cases, and you don’t have the least to right to tell her what she will and will not do with it. If she wants an abortion because she doesn’t like the way it makes her belly look in her favorite dress, that is her right.

It would be quite a shame if that were the only reason she sought an abortion, but it is still her right.
[/quote]

…So, it’s cool if she kills her child because she doesn’t like the way her child makes her belly look in her favorite dress?

[quote]makkun wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]makkun wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

The mother forfeits those rights when she engages in an act that causes pregnancy, actions have consequences. just like criminals forfeit certain rights when they commit crimes.[/quote]

Am I the only one who feels that this isn’t the warmest analogy? Not to make too fine a point about it, but it does sound rather like a punishment for wrongdoing rather than an embrace of the wonders of conception.

It begs a question: Does a man lose any rights as well by committing an act that causes pregnancy, for example a right to keep his money by having to pay child support?

Just trying to understand your perspective.

Makkun[/quote]

No I was just using that analogy to imply abortion is a criminal act. Just like neglect. Just like feeding your child draino because you no longer want to take care of them.

and yes the father shares responsibility and if he chooses not to be accountable should financially or criminally punished for those actions.[/quote]

I think I understand your point. Technically though, a legally executed abortion is not a criminal act, even though you are arguing it is wrong, unethical, immoral. I think I understand from your post that you would like it to be a criminal / unlawful act though. I think I understand your view better now. Thanks.

Can I ask a follow up question, please? If the pregnancy has not come to pass due to the woman’s own volition (i.e. rape and in a wider sense, statutory rape), does abortion in your view become less immoral (or worth being made a criminal act)? I get the argument for taking responsibility for your own acts - thanks DD as well for clarifying - but what about when there is none on behalf of the woman? Does the fetus’ / child’s existence itself preclude the woman’s ability to break off a pregnancy that was forced upon her? And as a follow up, should that be made illegal as well?

Makkun[/quote]

I think in these instances we need to educate females to come to get treatment right away. I may catch flack for this, but I see no issue with the morning after pill or plan b, for instances of rape. But once it get’s further along you are still killing a human. the primary action of morning after and plan b is to stop implantation if there is zygote formation.

You seem rational, maybe you can explain to me how it is different to kill a baby that is viable at 6 months, or one 6 months post birth because you realize you can’t afford it.

I just want to hear an argument from someone isn’t going to be like we aren’t responsible for our actions, it is my body no matter what I do.

In that line, how come when you murder a pregnant women, you get 2 counts of murder?

why the hypocrisy?

And to ryan, The point of gov’t is to protect people’s rights, one of which is the right to life, not have it stolen from you. The only way your argument can possibly hold is if you don’t see a baby as human life. And if this is true, take a science class.

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
[…]

I think in these instances we need to educate females to come to get treatment right away. I may catch flack for this, but I see no issue with the morning after pill or plan b, for instances of rape. But once it get’s further along you are still killing a human. the primary action of morning after and plan b is to stop implantation if there is zygote formation.[/quote]

You certainly wouldn’t get flak from me wrt using emergency contraceptives, as they are obviously always the better alternative to an abortion. Unfortunately rape comes with the most difficult emotional circumstances, feelings of shame, regular heavy handedness by the authorities and a lousy conviction rate. No wonder some many cases aren’t reported, or reported too late. I think it would require more than just ‘educating women’ to solve this problem.

Late abortions make up a very small number of abortions, and most laws tend to regulate them quite heavily - they are not the norm. Pulling it back to the more usual time frame around 12 weeks (which is a time when a good number of pregnancies still abort naturally if I remember correctly), or any time in that time frame brings up the question where life begins. I don’t have an answer to that - and I always thought it didn’t really matter; the decision to abort is tough and terrible to have to make under any circumstances - and the later the worse it gets naturally.

Does it cost a life? Yes, it does from some point onwards - and following the arguments wrt taking responsibility for one’s actions, I agree that they need to be taken into account. Yet, our laws permit a number of circumstances under which a life can be taken (as part of law enforcement, defence, or even sending people to die in often senseless wars far away for questionable motives). Being opposed to taking lives is certainly well intended - but to be consistent that would require one to be a complete pacifist (and probably become a vegan in the process). People kill other people, and often it’s sanctioned by some form of legal framework - so just arguing that taking a life is generally wrong doesn’t really convince me.

For me, technically an abortion is just another legal option to take a life in the pursuit of hopefully protecting another - whether that is to prevent that the child will be born to live unloved and in destitution, or to protect the potential mother’s life (from illness, the results of rape, or even the backstreet ‘doctor’ who would do more damage than necessary). That may seem hard hearted towards the child that will not be born - but to think that our societies aren’t regularly committing people to die is imho a bit of an illusion (see above).

So effectively, it’s comes down to where we draw the line - do we agree with sending soldiers to die and kill (often plenty of innocent children in a far away country), do we agree with people being killed for having committed what we define as crimes, do we run our health service in a way that will lead to some people being uninsurable and let them die due to economic circumstances? Every society tends to find its answers somewhere along those issues. Abortion is just one of them, but by far not the only one. I hope that makes some sense, even though admittedly it’s not a jolly view of humanity.[quote]

I just want to hear an argument from someone isn’t going to be like we aren’t responsible for our actions, it is my body no matter what I do.[/quote]

I think we are very responsible for our actions - and women who have aborted are normally very much aware of that - but in the end, yes, it is their body and whether I agree with every individual choice people make, they are entitled to make the ultimate choice about it. The aim is to make sure that the number of times of this choice is being made is minimised - being restrictive on abortions will not do the trick though imho.[quote]

In that line, how come when you murder a pregnant women, you get 2 counts of murder?

why the hypocrisy?[/quote]

Don’t know - not my law, and it seems inconsistent to me as well. Probably someone with a more legally trained mind may be better able to give an answer. Any number of unlawful killings is a grave matter, and even the ones we commit lawfully should warn us that something’s wrong.

Makkun

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
I think in these instances we need to educate females to come to get treatment right away. I may catch flack for this, but I see no issue with the morning after pill or plan b, for instances of rape. But once it get’s further along you are still killing a human. the primary action of morning after and plan b is to stop implantation if there is zygote formation.
[/quote]

That’s because it’s abortifacient same as the pill, IUDs, &c.

Defund PP. No reason tax dollars should go to that abortion mill.

Abortion is killing.

Some people need killing but they usually aren’t babies.

Are you sure about that Big Banana?