Planned Parenthood

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
921

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
I’ve read through most of this thread… and man it is brutal. I’m only jumping in real quick to give old style some support, as I agree with him.

Yes, I know, unique human life at conception. However, I do not think that “unique human life” DNA has the same choices as the mother, and the mother has the option to aport up to 20 weeks.

I understand the arguments put forth here, so not need to get into them again. My only point is that every pro-life person here says they are right, science shows it, and history will prove it. There are two sides to this, and I remain pro-choice, up to a point, even after hearing all the well sounded points made.

One of the main issues I see with Planned Parenthood debate, is that it becomes a pro-life vs. pro-abortion issue. I think it would be better to focus not on that debate, but on defunding Planned Parenthood and why that makes sense. I believe that is the better way to get pro-choice people to get onboard with defunding Planned Parenthood, which is my stance.

Carry on.[/quote]
You just stated that you do not believe in the inherent worth, or natural rights of human beings. I only ask that you realize first that you deny natural human rights (most importantly the right to life) and that you consider what that means in practice. You are in exclusive company with the most reviled movements and people in history. There are others groups that have reserved and deligAted the right to life based on the exact same logic. You are in bed with the likes of the Nazis, slave traders, and pretty much every genocidal movement in recorded history. [/quote]

I get your analogy but that is not how I see it. I do not view someone that has had an abortion as a Nazi equivalent.

Are you saying that the only stance is life at conception? Any other view point is 100% flawed and there is no grey area? If that is the case, there is no point of having a discussion. [/quote]
Actually, science says human life at conception. That is scientific fact. If there are natural human rights there is only one factual conclusion. If you deny human rights to a living human you are by logical necessity denying natural human rights. I’m just calling it a spade. The attempt at erecting qualifications for what human lives deserve and don’t deserve human rights is, again factually, the exclusive territory of the most evil ideas ever brought into practice. And you are correct, there nazi comparison falls short. Their eugenics programs weren’t nearly as successful and they didn’t manage to kill as many human beings as abortion.

922

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

I don’t like abortion, and hope I never have to consider it. I would rather have children born into the world wanted and loved if the mother can determine early in her pregnancy that she does not want a child.

[/quote]

So you’re cool with people that shake their crying infants to death or just leave them in dumpsters to die then?

Clearly they are unwanted and unloved, your criteria for if someone is allowed rights. So you must be okay with it, right? If not, why not?

[/quote]

No, I don’t think that is ok. In that case, the mother chose to have the baby (she could have had an abortion), and suffers the consequences of that choice if she chooses to neglect that child.

I don’t view a under 20-week fetus the same as a baby, so I see a difference between the two scenarios.[/quote]
And I don’t view people who deny natural human rights the same as a functional normal non- evil human. Where does that leave us? Should I arrive at a similar conclusion about the worth and ownership of your life? Certain anyone who denies human rights doesn’t deserve them. [/quote]

Not sure where to go with this one. I don’t deserve to live because I don’t view an under 20-week fetus the same as a human being? Sorry that is how you see it, I see it differently.[/quote]

A 20 week fetus is a human. You can “view” it however you want. Your veiw of something should change what human rights are. Again slave owners didn’t veiw blacks the same as a real white human being either. They were then justified in slavery?

923

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
I’ve read through most of this thread… and man it is brutal. I’m only jumping in real quick to give old style some support, as I agree with him.

Yes, I know, unique human life at conception. However, I do not think that “unique human life” DNA has the same choices as the mother, and the mother has the option to aport up to 20 weeks.

I understand the arguments put forth here, so not need to get into them again. My only point is that every pro-life person here says they are right, science shows it, and history will prove it. There are two sides to this, and I remain pro-choice, up to a point, even after hearing all the well sounded points made.

One of the main issues I see with Planned Parenthood debate, is that it becomes a pro-life vs. pro-abortion issue. I think it would be better to focus not on that debate, but on defunding Planned Parenthood and why that makes sense. I believe that is the better way to get pro-choice people to get onboard with defunding Planned Parenthood, which is my stance.

Carry on.[/quote]
You just stated that you do not believe in the inherent worth, or natural rights of human beings. I only ask that you realize first that you deny natural human rights (most importantly the right to life) and that you consider what that means in practice. You are in exclusive company with the most reviled movements and people in history. There are others groups that have reserved and deligAted the right to life based on the exact same logic. You are in bed with the likes of the Nazis, slave traders, and pretty much every genocidal movement in recorded history. [/quote]

I get your analogy but that is not how I see it. I do not view someone that has had an abortion as a Nazi equivalent.

Are you saying that the only stance is life at conception? Any other view point is 100% flawed and there is no grey area? If that is the case, there is no point of having a discussion. [/quote]
Actually, science says human life at conception. That is scientific fact. If there are natural human rights there is only one factual conclusion. If you deny human rights to a living human you are by logical necessity denying natural human rights. I’m just calling it a spade. The attempt at erecting qualifications for what human lives deserve and don’t deserve human rights is, again factually, the exclusive territory of the most evil ideas ever brought into practice. And you are correct, there nazi comparison falls short. Their eugenics programs weren’t nearly as successful and they didn’t manage to kill as many human beings as abortion. [/quote]

If everyone saw it that way we would go to war with every country performing abortions, I am evil and so is roughly half the world.

We clearly disagree, but getting into whether or not pro-choice people are Nazis (or worse as you say) isn’t productive debate.

924

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

I don’t like abortion, and hope I never have to consider it. I would rather have children born into the world wanted and loved if the mother can determine early in her pregnancy that she does not want a child.

[/quote]

So you’re cool with people that shake their crying infants to death or just leave them in dumpsters to die then?

Clearly they are unwanted and unloved, your criteria for if someone is allowed rights. So you must be okay with it, right? If not, why not?

[/quote]

No, I don’t think that is ok. In that case, the mother chose to have the baby (she could have had an abortion), and suffers the consequences of that choice if she chooses to neglect that child.

I don’t view a under 20-week fetus the same as a baby, so I see a difference between the two scenarios.[/quote]
And I don’t view people who deny natural human rights the same as a functional normal non- evil human. Where does that leave us? Should I arrive at a similar conclusion about the worth and ownership of your life? Certain anyone who denies human rights doesn’t deserve them. [/quote]

Not sure where to go with this one. I don’t deserve to live because I don’t view an under 20-week fetus the same as a human being? Sorry that is how you see it, I see it differently.[/quote]

A 20 week fetus is a human. You can “view” it however you want. Your veiw of something should change what human rights are. Again slave owners didn’t veiw blacks the same as a real white human being either. They were then justified in slavery?
[/quote]

I’m sure that is how they justified it in their minds. History has shown us they are wrong.

I understand the comparison, if that is the point you were trying to make.

925

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
I’ve read through most of this thread… and man it is brutal. I’m only jumping in real quick to give old style some support, as I agree with him.

Yes, I know, unique human life at conception. However, I do not think that “unique human life” DNA has the same choices as the mother, and the mother has the option to aport up to 20 weeks.

I understand the arguments put forth here, so not need to get into them again. My only point is that every pro-life person here says they are right, science shows it, and history will prove it. There are two sides to this, and I remain pro-choice, up to a point, even after hearing all the well sounded points made.

One of the main issues I see with Planned Parenthood debate, is that it becomes a pro-life vs. pro-abortion issue. I think it would be better to focus not on that debate, but on defunding Planned Parenthood and why that makes sense. I believe that is the better way to get pro-choice people to get onboard with defunding Planned Parenthood, which is my stance.

Carry on.[/quote]
You just stated that you do not believe in the inherent worth, or natural rights of human beings. I only ask that you realize first that you deny natural human rights (most importantly the right to life) and that you consider what that means in practice. You are in exclusive company with the most reviled movements and people in history. There are others groups that have reserved and deligAted the right to life based on the exact same logic. You are in bed with the likes of the Nazis, slave traders, and pretty much every genocidal movement in recorded history. [/quote]

I get your analogy but that is not how I see it. I do not view someone that has had an abortion as a Nazi equivalent.

Are you saying that the only stance is life at conception? Any other view point is 100% flawed and there is no grey area? If that is the case, there is no point of having a discussion. [/quote]
Actually, science says human life at conception. That is scientific fact. If there are natural human rights there is only one factual conclusion. If you deny human rights to a living human you are by logical necessity denying natural human rights. I’m just calling it a spade. The attempt at erecting qualifications for what human lives deserve and don’t deserve human rights is, again factually, the exclusive territory of the most evil ideas ever brought into practice. And you are correct, there nazi comparison falls short. Their eugenics programs weren’t nearly as successful and they didn’t manage to kill as many human beings as abortion. [/quote]

If everyone saw it that way we would go to war with every country performing abortions, I am evil and so is roughly half the world.

We clearly disagree, but getting into whether or not pro-choice people are Nazis (or worse as you say) isn’t productive debate.[/quote]
Yes, half the world is evil. Again, look at your history. Same arguments went for slavery and nazis. Half or more of the world is often on the side of evil

Debate? I wasn’t debating. I’m not trying to change your belief, I’m only stating what you already believe without any doublespeak. If you think me stating your own position and pointing to relivant history is an argument against you, that’s your own insecurity.

926

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

I don’t like abortion, and hope I never have to consider it. I would rather have children born into the world wanted and loved if the mother can determine early in her pregnancy that she does not want a child.

[/quote]

So you’re cool with people that shake their crying infants to death or just leave them in dumpsters to die then?

Clearly they are unwanted and unloved, your criteria for if someone is allowed rights. So you must be okay with it, right? If not, why not?

[/quote]

No, I don’t think that is ok. In that case, the mother chose to have the baby (she could have had an abortion), and suffers the consequences of that choice if she chooses to neglect that child.

I don’t view a under 20-week fetus the same as a baby, so I see a difference between the two scenarios.[/quote]
And I don’t view people who deny natural human rights the same as a functional normal non- evil human. Where does that leave us? Should I arrive at a similar conclusion about the worth and ownership of your life? Certain anyone who denies human rights doesn’t deserve them. [/quote]

You wouldn’t be the first person to arrive at this conclusion. People who have bombed abortion clinics share this opinion.

927

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]oldstyle00 wrote:
Now you can say Oldstyle that shit is rare, but guess what it isn’t very rare when shit like that is happening to you. When you have a loved one laying in a hospital bed struggling its very real and not rare.[/quote]

When someone breaks into your house, and tries to murder you and rape your wife and daughter, if you kill them before they get the chance, did you murder them?

No. You acted in self defense.

Why would the death of an innocent child through abortion not come with the same shades of gray?

You guys aren’t putting a shade of grey on it. You guys are saying an abortion equals murder no matter what. If you put a shade of grey on it then you are saying you are for murder. I don’t see your position any other way if you are for abortions in select circumstances then you become a hypocrite. You can’t say life begins at conception well except if the woman was raped or had sex with their cousin then that fertilized egg isn’t as important. Then in the same breath say a 16 year old whos birth control failed I don’t agree with your abortion because your baby is somehow more of a unique human then a woman who was raped. You are picking a choosing, which doesn’t follow your conception=unique human, so you can’t abort it.

End of the day, if Health of the Mother reasons was actually the purpose of the left supporting abortion (this includes rape and incest), then the political battle wouldn’t be taking place. Because the abortion count would be around 3k a year and looked at as a tragic medical procedure where people were placed in a tough position.

I do not believe that for one second. I have watched all the Republican debates the majority of them up there when asked the question said there should be no exception. Marco Rubio actually changed his position from in the case of rape, insest, and welfare of the mother to no exception.

Unfortunately, as Drew so aptly pointed out, pro-aborts want it legal for a lot more reasons than Health of the Mother, namely the arrogant assumption that being dead is better than being born poor or into a situation that isn’t Dan fucking Blizeran.

It’s funny, but my pro-abort wife and I had this conversation when she was pregnant with my daughter. She told me if I chose here over my daughter she would pissed, and it likely would have ruined my marriage. Her words “I’ve lived my life, she needs the opportunity to.” I’m thankful I didn’t have to make that choice.

I agree my wife has said the same thing in our 3 pregnancies.

First off, it isn’t my view that a unique life begins at conception, it is irrefutable scientific fact. And nothing but “muah feels” has been posted to refute that fact.

Nobody ever says it is about “feels” I have written in my posts people (medical experts and scientists who do not believe life begins at conception. Actually when Roe v Wade was in the supreme court they sent a Doctor up to the mayo clinic to find out when life begins guess what he came back with no definitive answer. That is part of the reason the court stated it begins when the fetus can live outside the womb. You are using Scientific fact when it should be theory. I have shown not every expert agrees with you, there are experts at damn near every fetal life stage trying to determine when a human is living and thus granted the same rights.

Secondly, see above in regards to the surgery.

Third, again where it attacks doesn’t make it NOT a unique human life. You brought this up as a fallacy, I get that. But it doesn’t show anything, or refute any scientific facts you continue to refuse to acknowledge. [/quote]

I am not refusing to acknowledge them, I understand where you are coming from I am saying there is no scientific fact on the matter.

Is in vitro fertilization another one of those grey areas? There are fertilized eggs that are not used, should those then be saved and implanted into other woman because they are unique humans. Those have the potential to be a fetus just as much as a fertilized egg inside a woman.

I am just trying to point out there is a lot of grey area on this subject, I get your hard lined on it I respect that I am just trying to bring different perspectives to the subject.

928

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
So you’re saying some unique lives matter more than other unique lives. Interestingly enough so did this guy named Hilter.
[/quote]

So do millions/billions of other people, maybe he shared a slightly different opinion causing his name to be brought up more often than the others…

Do you like dogs? Interestingly enough so did this guy named Hitler.

929

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

I don’t like abortion, and hope I never have to consider it. I would rather have children born into the world wanted and loved if the mother can determine early in her pregnancy that she does not want a child.

[/quote]

So you’re cool with people that shake their crying infants to death or just leave them in dumpsters to die then?

Clearly they are unwanted and unloved, your criteria for if someone is allowed rights. So you must be okay with it, right? If not, why not?

[/quote]

No, I don’t think that is ok. In that case, the mother chose to have the baby (she could have had an abortion), and suffers the consequences of that choice if she chooses to neglect that child.

I don’t view a under 20-week fetus the same as a baby, so I see a difference between the two scenarios.[/quote]
And I don’t view people who deny natural human rights the same as a functional normal non- evil human. Where does that leave us? Should I arrive at a similar conclusion about the worth and ownership of your life? Certain anyone who denies human rights doesn’t deserve them. [/quote]

You wouldn’t be the first person to arrive at this conclusion. People who have bombed abortion clinics share this opinion.[/quote]
Exactly, kind of funny ain’t it. The people bombing abortion clinics are running with the same arguments as the pro abortion crowd.

930

800×493 36.6 KB

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
I’ve read through most of this thread… and man it is brutal. I’m only jumping in real quick to give old style some support, as I agree with him.

Yes, I know, unique human life at conception. However, I do not think that “unique human life” DNA has the same choices as the mother, and the mother has the option to aport up to 20 weeks.

I understand the arguments put forth here, so not need to get into them again. My only point is that every pro-life person here says they are right, science shows it, and history will prove it. There are two sides to this, and I remain pro-choice, up to a point, even after hearing all the well sounded points made.

One of the main issues I see with Planned Parenthood debate, is that it becomes a pro-life vs. pro-abortion issue. I think it would be better to focus not on that debate, but on defunding Planned Parenthood and why that makes sense. I believe that is the better way to get pro-choice people to get onboard with defunding Planned Parenthood, which is my stance.

Carry on.[/quote]
You just stated that you do not believe in the inherent worth, or natural rights of human beings. I only ask that you realize first that you deny natural human rights (most importantly the right to life) and that you consider what that means in practice. You are in exclusive company with the most reviled movements and people in history. There are others groups that have reserved and deligAted the right to life based on the exact same logic. You are in bed with the likes of the Nazis, slave traders, and pretty much every genocidal movement in recorded history. [/quote]

I get your analogy but that is not how I see it. I do not view someone that has had an abortion as a Nazi equivalent.

Are you saying that the only stance is life at conception? Any other view point is 100% flawed and there is no grey area? If that is the case, there is no point of having a discussion. [/quote]
Actually, science says human life at conception. That is scientific fact. If there are natural human rights there is only one factual conclusion. If you deny human rights to a living human you are by logical necessity denying natural human rights. I’m just calling it a spade. The attempt at erecting qualifications for what human lives deserve and don’t deserve human rights is, again factually, the exclusive territory of the most evil ideas ever brought into practice. And you are correct, there nazi comparison falls short. Their eugenics programs weren’t nearly as successful and they didn’t manage to kill as many human beings as abortion. [/quote]

If everyone saw it that way we would go to war with every country performing abortions, I am evil and so is roughly half the world.

We clearly disagree, but getting into whether or not pro-choice people are Nazis (or worse as you say) isn’t productive debate.[/quote]

Its more then half the world.

933

[quote]oldstyle00 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]oldstyle00 wrote:
Now you can say Oldstyle that shit is rare, but guess what it isn’t very rare when shit like that is happening to you. When you have a loved one laying in a hospital bed struggling its very real and not rare.[/quote]

When someone breaks into your house, and tries to murder you and rape your wife and daughter, if you kill them before they get the chance, did you murder them?

No. You acted in self defense.

Why would the death of an innocent child through abortion not come with the same shades of gray?

You guys aren’t putting a shade of grey on it. You guys are saying an abortion equals murder no matter what. If you put a shade of grey on it then you are saying you are for murder. I don’t see your position any other way if you are for abortions in select circumstances then you become a hypocrite. You can’t say life begins at conception well except if the woman was raped or had sex with their cousin then that fertilized egg isn’t as important. Then in the same breath say a 16 year old whos birth control failed I don’t agree with your abortion because your baby is somehow more of a unique human then a woman who was raped. You are picking a choosing, which doesn’t follow your conception=unique human, so you can’t abort it.

End of the day, if Health of the Mother reasons was actually the purpose of the left supporting abortion (this includes rape and incest), then the political battle wouldn’t be taking place. Because the abortion count would be around 3k a year and looked at as a tragic medical procedure where people were placed in a tough position.

I do not believe that for one second. I have watched all the Republican debates the majority of them up there when asked the question said there should be no exception. Marco Rubio actually changed his position from in the case of rape, insest, and welfare of the mother to no exception.

Unfortunately, as Drew so aptly pointed out, pro-aborts want it legal for a lot more reasons than Health of the Mother, namely the arrogant assumption that being dead is better than being born poor or into a situation that isn’t Dan fucking Blizeran.

It’s funny, but my pro-abort wife and I had this conversation when she was pregnant with my daughter. She told me if I chose here over my daughter she would pissed, and it likely would have ruined my marriage. Her words “I’ve lived my life, she needs the opportunity to.” I’m thankful I didn’t have to make that choice.

I agree my wife has said the same thing in our 3 pregnancies.

First off, it isn’t my view that a unique life begins at conception, it is irrefutable scientific fact. And nothing but “muah feels” has been posted to refute that fact.

Nobody ever says it is about “feels” I have written in my posts people (medical experts and scientists who do not believe life begins at conception. Actually when Roe v Wade was in the supreme court they sent a Doctor up to the mayo clinic to find out when life begins guess what he came back with no definitive answer. That is part of the reason the court stated it begins when the fetus can live outside the womb. You are using Scientific fact when it should be theory. I have shown not every expert agrees with you, there are experts at damn near every fetal life stage trying to determine when a human is living and thus granted the same rights.

Secondly, see above in regards to the surgery.

Third, again where it attacks doesn’t make it NOT a unique human life. You brought this up as a fallacy, I get that. But it doesn’t show anything, or refute any scientific facts you continue to refuse to acknowledge. [/quote]

I am not refusing to acknowledge them, I understand where you are coming from I am saying there is no scientific fact on the matter.

Is in vitro fertilization another one of those grey areas? There are fertilized eggs that are not used, should those then be saved and implanted into other woman because they are unique humans. Those have the potential to be a fetus just as much as a fertilized egg inside a woman.

I am just trying to point out there is a lot of grey area on this subject, I get your hard lined on it I respect that I am just trying to bring different perspectives to the subject.
[/quote]

Sorry Beans still trying to figure things out on here my comments kind of look like yours.

937

[quote]oldstyle00 wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Drew1411 wrote:
I’ve read through most of this thread… and man it is brutal. I’m only jumping in real quick to give old style some support, as I agree with him.

Yes, I know, unique human life at conception. However, I do not think that “unique human life” DNA has the same choices as the mother, and the mother has the option to aport up to 20 weeks.

I understand the arguments put forth here, so not need to get into them again. My only point is that every pro-life person here says they are right, science shows it, and history will prove it. There are two sides to this, and I remain pro-choice, up to a point, even after hearing all the well sounded points made.

One of the main issues I see with Planned Parenthood debate, is that it becomes a pro-life vs. pro-abortion issue. I think it would be better to focus not on that debate, but on defunding Planned Parenthood and why that makes sense. I believe that is the better way to get pro-choice people to get onboard with defunding Planned Parenthood, which is my stance.

Carry on.[/quote]
You just stated that you do not believe in the inherent worth, or natural rights of human beings. I only ask that you realize first that you deny natural human rights (most importantly the right to life) and that you consider what that means in practice. You are in exclusive company with the most reviled movements and people in history. There are others groups that have reserved and deligAted the right to life based on the exact same logic. You are in bed with the likes of the Nazis, slave traders, and pretty much every genocidal movement in recorded history. [/quote]

I get your analogy but that is not how I see it. I do not view someone that has had an abortion as a Nazi equivalent.

Are you saying that the only stance is life at conception? Any other view point is 100% flawed and there is no grey area? If that is the case, there is no point of having a discussion. [/quote]
Actually, science says human life at conception. That is scientific fact. If there are natural human rights there is only one factual conclusion. If you deny human rights to a living human you are by logical necessity denying natural human rights. I’m just calling it a spade. The attempt at erecting qualifications for what human lives deserve and don’t deserve human rights is, again factually, the exclusive territory of the most evil ideas ever brought into practice. And you are correct, there nazi comparison falls short. Their eugenics programs weren’t nearly as successful and they didn’t manage to kill as many human beings as abortion. [/quote]

If everyone saw it that way we would go to war with every country performing abortions, I am evil and so is roughly half the world.

We clearly disagree, but getting into whether or not pro-choice people are Nazis (or worse as you say) isn’t productive debate.[/quote]

Its more then half the world.
[/quote]
Looks like a map of slavery laws a couple of hundred years ago.