Planned Parenthood

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
341

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

It’s called a compromise. I’d rather save hundreds of thousands of lives and allow for a legal exception. I still think it’s murder, but can sympathies with both victims.

Same deal with a health exception.
Same deal with collateral damage.

342

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

When good and evil compromise, only evil has anything to gain.

343

[quote]pat wrote:
Target 1, lets get the number cut in half. Let’s shoot for 600,000 abortions a year. Once we have gotten there, then we shoot for half of that, and we continue to cut it down until we succeed in having less than 10,000. If we could get that number down to less than 10,000 I would, at that point fly the victory flag. I do not realistically think we could ever achieve 0. We obviously have to consider life of the mother situations and I think some legislation would have passed if they had life of mother, incest and rape concessions. But some of those boneheads would not compromise to get a bill past meaning no bill passed. We have to take it on little by little. If we try that approach rather than wait on the SCOTUS to reverse Roe v. Wade we’ll make abortion a thing of the past a lot sooner. [/quote]

In reality target 1 is more easily accomplished by reducing the number of people who feel need to resort to abortion, not passing laws making it harder to do so.

There are many countries where its legal, which ones have the lowest rate and how does it compare to the US?

344

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I didn’t even think of it on that level, lol. I just laughed hard at the whole admitting they “don’t stand up for all people” just the ones they choose to. Just like a democrat, people are only people if THEY say so. At least it isn’t slaves or Jim Crow this time…[/quote]

Well it speaks to their altered definitions of a lot of things, say like ‘tolerance’. That means we have to tolerate and even support their points of view, but contrary opinions are not tolerable. We have to tolerate them, but they do not have to return in kind and yet somehow its all fair.
Abortion isn’t abortion, it’s ‘women’s rights’ or ‘women’s health’ and if you are pro-life, you are anti-woman, you even hate women. It’s not government mandated wealth redistribution, it’s ‘income equality’, I could go on and on.
The common theme still applies, that is transient between this thread and the ‘Political Correctness’ thread. Those on the left often substitute facts for rhetoric and to many people are suckers. It’s simply a matter of calling what is evil, good and what is good, evil. It’s really nothing more than that and with the support of the media, they have been remarkably good at this type of marketing.

And what would we do with all those unwanted babies? I’d like the chance to find out. What a difference if everybody in the country cared just 1% more about somebody other than themselves.[/quote]

You’re acting as if the republicans don’t do the same thing. In regards to abortion I think most of society has already accepted it. I’m not saying that makes it right. But to make it illegal wont stop people from finding other ways. And no, I don’t believe this should be publicly funded. Do you disagree with abortion in cases of rape and/or if it is causing health issue for the mother?[/quote]

Republicans do different things, but they do not redefine terminology, however I happily concede they are far from perfect or even decent. They are less bad. I am less concerned with the political party as I am with the ideology that people on the left submit to, rather than people on the right; at the citizen level.
Most of society does not accept it. A large portion of society does, but not most. The same could be said of slavery, it was an accepted practice by a large portion of society. That didn’t make it right and we got rid of it. Does slavery still happen? Yep, but very little of it and the fact that laws are broken does not mean we should not have those laws. Our prisons are full of people who have broken every single law this country has.
You don’t give up on something that is right just because a lot of people want it or like it. You fight for every heart and mind you can get and the tide will turn and it is turning.
These videos have created a shit storm and they have dropped a bomb on planned parenthood. I have heard reports of several people start the process of changing their mind or who actually have changed their minds about abortion because of these videos. I consider them a resounding success.
Whether or not planned parenthood has broken any laws is questionable. I think there is enough evidence to investigate that, but that’s not really the point. What they have done is expose abortion for what it really is, the taking of human life, and the callousness of the people who practice it and the disregard they have towards human life. Indeed, evil in this case, wears a dress.

Anyway, to answer your question I have two answers for it.
The problem with even rape/ incest remains abortion still kills a human being. As tragic as the circumstances may be, surrounding the conception of that child that fact remains.
However, those cases make up very few of the abortions done in this country. I would support any legislation that reduces, illegalizes abortions with exclusions for rape and incest. I will compromise there to get rid of most abortions. I am perfectly willing and I think the movement could make a lot of progress by taking an incremental approach.
Target 1, lets get the number cut in half. Let’s shoot for 600,000 abortions a year. Once we have gotten there, then we shoot for half of that, and we continue to cut it down until we succeed in having less than 10,000. If we could get that number down to less than 10,000 I would, at that point fly the victory flag. I do not realistically think we could ever achieve 0. We obviously have to consider life of the mother situations and I think some legislation would have passed if they had life of mother, incest and rape concessions. But some of those boneheads would not compromise to get a bill past meaning no bill passed. We have to take it on little by little. If we try that approach rather than wait on the SCOTUS to reverse Roe v. Wade we’ll make abortion a thing of the past a lot sooner. [/quote]

I’m not saying I disagree with you. In the cases of rape and incest is it still not murder? Aren’t you at that point still supporting murder? As small as the number may be, murder is still murder.[/quote]

True and I said as much. Murder is illegal and people still murder. But if can reduce the murder rate from 1.2 million to 600,000 would you not take that opportunity? Numbers matter here, unfortunately.

345

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]hmm87 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I didn’t even think of it on that level, lol. I just laughed hard at the whole admitting they “don’t stand up for all people” just the ones they choose to. Just like a democrat, people are only people if THEY say so. At least it isn’t slaves or Jim Crow this time…[/quote]

Well it speaks to their altered definitions of a lot of things, say like ‘tolerance’. That means we have to tolerate and even support their points of view, but contrary opinions are not tolerable. We have to tolerate them, but they do not have to return in kind and yet somehow its all fair.
Abortion isn’t abortion, it’s ‘women’s rights’ or ‘women’s health’ and if you are pro-life, you are anti-woman, you even hate women. It’s not government mandated wealth redistribution, it’s ‘income equality’, I could go on and on.
The common theme still applies, that is transient between this thread and the ‘Political Correctness’ thread. Those on the left often substitute facts for rhetoric and to many people are suckers. It’s simply a matter of calling what is evil, good and what is good, evil. It’s really nothing more than that and with the support of the media, they have been remarkably good at this type of marketing.

And what would we do with all those unwanted babies? I’d like the chance to find out. What a difference if everybody in the country cared just 1% more about somebody other than themselves.[/quote]

You’re acting as if the republicans don’t do the same thing. In regards to abortion I think most of society has already accepted it. I’m not saying that makes it right. But to make it illegal wont stop people from finding other ways. And no, I don’t believe this should be publicly funded. Do you disagree with abortion in cases of rape and/or if it is causing health issue for the mother?[/quote]

Republicans do different things, but they do not redefine terminology, however I happily concede they are far from perfect or even decent. They are less bad. I am less concerned with the political party as I am with the ideology that people on the left submit to, rather than people on the right; at the citizen level.
Most of society does not accept it. A large portion of society does, but not most. The same could be said of slavery, it was an accepted practice by a large portion of society. That didn’t make it right and we got rid of it. Does slavery still happen? Yep, but very little of it and the fact that laws are broken does not mean we should not have those laws. Our prisons are full of people who have broken every single law this country has.
You don’t give up on something that is right just because a lot of people want it or like it. You fight for every heart and mind you can get and the tide will turn and it is turning.
These videos have created a shit storm and they have dropped a bomb on planned parenthood. I have heard reports of several people start the process of changing their mind or who actually have changed their minds about abortion because of these videos. I consider them a resounding success.
Whether or not planned parenthood has broken any laws is questionable. I think there is enough evidence to investigate that, but that’s not really the point. What they have done is expose abortion for what it really is, the taking of human life, and the callousness of the people who practice it and the disregard they have towards human life. Indeed, evil in this case, wears a dress.

Anyway, to answer your question I have two answers for it.
The problem with even rape/ incest remains abortion still kills a human being. As tragic as the circumstances may be, surrounding the conception of that child that fact remains.
However, those cases make up very few of the abortions done in this country. I would support any legislation that reduces, illegalizes abortions with exclusions for rape and incest. I will compromise there to get rid of most abortions. I am perfectly willing and I think the movement could make a lot of progress by taking an incremental approach.
Target 1, lets get the number cut in half. Let’s shoot for 600,000 abortions a year. Once we have gotten there, then we shoot for half of that, and we continue to cut it down until we succeed in having less than 10,000. If we could get that number down to less than 10,000 I would, at that point fly the victory flag. I do not realistically think we could ever achieve 0. We obviously have to consider life of the mother situations and I think some legislation would have passed if they had life of mother, incest and rape concessions. But some of those boneheads would not compromise to get a bill past meaning no bill passed. We have to take it on little by little. If we try that approach rather than wait on the SCOTUS to reverse Roe v. Wade we’ll make abortion a thing of the past a lot sooner. [/quote]

I’m not saying I disagree with you. In the cases of rape and incest is it still not murder? Aren’t you at that point still supporting murder? As small as the number may be, murder is still murder.[/quote]

This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

Which is the stance I hold to. The logistics dictate you have to reduce the murder rate incrementally. 1.2 million is to hard to take on all at once.

346

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Target 1, lets get the number cut in half. Let’s shoot for 600,000 abortions a year. Once we have gotten there, then we shoot for half of that, and we continue to cut it down until we succeed in having less than 10,000. If we could get that number down to less than 10,000 I would, at that point fly the victory flag. I do not realistically think we could ever achieve 0. We obviously have to consider life of the mother situations and I think some legislation would have passed if they had life of mother, incest and rape concessions. But some of those boneheads would not compromise to get a bill past meaning no bill passed. We have to take it on little by little. If we try that approach rather than wait on the SCOTUS to reverse Roe v. Wade we’ll make abortion a thing of the past a lot sooner. [/quote]

In reality target 1 is more easily accomplished by reducing the number of people who feel need to resort to abortion, not passing laws making it harder to do so.

There are many countries where its legal, which ones have the lowest rate and how does it compare to the US?[/quote]

That’s bullshit. Other countries are not the U.S., what they do, does not really matter because the rule of law matters more or less depending on whose soil you are standing on. The rule of law matters here.
Legal action is the fastest and most efficient way to dramatically reduce the amount of abortions in the U.S. They may not be the case in a banana republic, or in Europe where people will smoke standing next to a ‘No Smoking’ sign.
It’s also the fastest way to educate people on the reality of what abortion is. The law already recognizes the humaness of the unborn in cases that are not abortion. Right now the law is inconsistent and it needs to be consistent.

347

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Target 1, lets get the number cut in half. Let’s shoot for 600,000 abortions a year. Once we have gotten there, then we shoot for half of that, and we continue to cut it down until we succeed in having less than 10,000. If we could get that number down to less than 10,000 I would, at that point fly the victory flag. I do not realistically think we could ever achieve 0. We obviously have to consider life of the mother situations and I think some legislation would have passed if they had life of mother, incest and rape concessions. But some of those boneheads would not compromise to get a bill past meaning no bill passed. We have to take it on little by little. If we try that approach rather than wait on the SCOTUS to reverse Roe v. Wade we’ll make abortion a thing of the past a lot sooner. [/quote]

In reality target 1 is more easily accomplished by reducing the number of people who feel need to resort to abortion, not passing laws making it harder to do so.

There are many countries where its legal, which ones have the lowest rate and how does it compare to the US?[/quote]

That’s bullshit. Other countries are not the U.S., what they do, does not really matter because the rule of law matters more or less depending on whose soil you are standing on. The rule of law matters here.
Legal action is the fastest and most efficient way to dramatically reduce the amount of abortions in the U.S. They may not be the case in a banana republic, or in Europe where people will smoke standing next to a ‘No Smoking’ sign.
It’s also the fastest way to educate people on the reality of what abortion is. The law already recognizes the humaness of the unborn in cases that are not abortion. Right now the law is inconsistent and it needs to be consistent.[/quote]

I know you’re Catholic. Do you fall into the anti-contraception camp? It’s doctrine according to the Catechism. It seems to me that it is untenable to be both against contraception and abortion (not that you are). Abstinence seems to be the answer that most devout Catholics offer in discussion, but I feel that it goes against an overwhelming biological imperative.

348

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

When good and evil compromise, only evil has anything to gain.

[/quote]

When you take a drugged rape victim to the emergency room, then you can speak of the good and evil of abortion. No victim has a moral obligation to carry the progeny of a rapist to term.

349

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

When good and evil compromise, only evil has anything to gain.

[/quote]

When you take a drugged rape victim to the emergency room, then you can speak of the good and evil of abortion. No victim has a moral obligation to carry the progeny of a rapist to term.

[/quote]

Or if I was conceived via rape? Could I comment on good and evil then?

350

[quote]Bismark wrote:
When you take a drugged rape victim to the emergency room, then you can speak of the good and evil of abortion. No victim has a moral obligation to carry the progeny of a rapist to term.

[/quote]

Quick question: Do you mean, any rapist or just her rapist? For example, if “Jane’s” current boyfriend failed to get affirmative consent during a sexual encounter in a previous relationship, and Jane subsequently was impregnated by her boyfriend, is she also free of the moral obligation to carry the progeny of this rapist’s baby to term?

By, “to term” I assume you mean 40 weeks. Would an abortion at 39 weeks be copacetic?

If Jane were impregnated by her boyfriend and subsequently found out he had killed a man in a bar fight, could she then morally abort the fetus? How about if she found out he had embezzled hundreds of thousands from a bank? Too many parking tickets?

I suppose that was more than one question.

351

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
“Teller and I would personally kill every chimp in the world with our bare hands, to save one street junky with AIDS.” - Penn Jillette.
[/quote]

I would like to see Penn and Teller attempt to kill just one chimp with their bare hands.

Would not end well for them. And the street junky would still die of AIDS.

355

[quote]Bismark wrote:

I know you’re Catholic. Do you fall into the anti-contraception camp? It’s doctrine according to the Catechism. It seems to me that it is untenable to be both against contraception and abortion (not that you are). Abstinence seems to be the answer that most devout Catholics offer in discussion, but I feel that it goes against an overwhelming biological imperative. [/quote]

How I feel about contraception is not really relevant. Contraception has never been more accessible, affordable, or acceptable than it is today and there is no correlation between increased contraception availability and the amount of abortions annually. So I don’t by the argument until I see some hard evidence.
However, if I have to pick the lesser of the two, I will pick contraception all day and twice on Sunday, provided the method used is itself not an abortifacient, but prevents contraception in the first place. I do not give a rat’s ass if people use contraception or not. I am not interested in micromanaging people’s lives. I do care if people kill human beings, especially on a mass level, we all have skin in that game.

This is not a religious issue for me. I don’t drag religion into it, I don’t have to. It’s a life or death issue and speaks to the heart of the most basic of morality.

356

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

This is why an absolute stance against all abortion cases is the only valid one, including some birth control methods. Anything else and your no different than the people your arguing with, except that your line in the sand is drawn somewhere else.[/quote]

When good and evil compromise, only evil has anything to gain.

[/quote]

When you take a drugged rape victim to the emergency room, then you can speak of the good and evil of abortion. No victim has a moral obligation to carry the progeny of a rapist to term.

[/quote]

Fine. I will give you the one and you give me the other 1,999,999 others. Like I said I would allow that legal exception, even if I do not agree with it to save the majority. Rape/ incest accounts for very few abortions. Every life matters, but so do numbers. And we have to cut that number waaaaay down from 1.2 million even if I have to bend to something I do not believe in. When we’re talking 10,000 abortions a year, then I will be more interested in each case and how we can reduce the incidences.

Maybe we can kill the rapist instead of the baby and let mom pull the switch? ← (That’s hyperbole)

357

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:
“Teller and I would personally kill every chimp in the world with our bare hands, to save one street junky with AIDS.” - Penn Jillette.
[/quote]

I would like to see Penn and Teller attempt to kill just one chimp with their bare hands.

Would not end well for them. And the street junky would still die of AIDS.[/quote]

lulz… Yep. And why a street junky? Not that I am against saving the life of a street junky, but a lot of different kinds of people have AIDS. I guess it’s an odd specification.

359

The story about Barry threatening States trying to defund Pedophile Promoter is quite hilarious! I know Barry is nothing more than a puppet but it will be scary how far he will can get trying to act like a leader of a corrupt and evil administration.

360

Thanks for the link push!

The last paragraph is spot on! ?I mean, we don?t even allow prisoners condemned to death to be approached for donation because it?s unethical,? Deisher adds. ?So, as a society we know this is wrong?we have laws against it. And while people like to say the babies are going to die anyway?they?re going to be aborted?it?s sort of like an execution that?s planned, and we as a society recognize that it?s absolutely unethical to take advantage of the remains of that human being.?

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Genetic Research Scientist . . . . http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/17/genetic-research-scientist-likely-some-aborted-babies-are-alive-until-their-hearts-are-cut-out/ [/quote]