Pro-Lifer Throws Incendiary Device at PP

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 4:57am

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
We went from talking about the actual events that occur and why the murder of children is wrong. Now we are talking about a completely hypothetical argument. Really? You want to go there?

Rape IMHO is the worst kind of crime imaginable. Right next to abortion. Even my worst enemy in the world does not deserve to be raped. Never once have you told me how a horrendous and violent behavior is made better by perpetuating the act with an even more violent behavior. Something tells me you will never respond to the statement I just made, but you will regarding all the following points shakes head

[quote]Oleena wrote:
The thing is, I don’t believe that abortion is always the right choice.[/quote]
Please enlighten me as to when the slaughter of children is ever excusable? Wait, it is coming . . . .

So you can help a woman wrestle with the decision to abort a child? In under an hour?! Remind me your level of education in the degree, along with practice in the field. And you believe it should be un-biased yet you have already decided that killing a defenseless child is acceptable. How is that NOT biased? My G-d, you and your stance IS biased!

Because they chose to act that way! Where you ever upset when you got a really awesome present for your birthday, but then your lower class, poor friend was ecstatic with a simple gift? Wonder why that would be? Because your friend choose to be HAPPY with the mediocre gift she received. Even Hollywood has made a few movies about the very topic!

So you tied her up more often? They must have taught you that practice in school.
Are you done building up your ‘hypothetical argument’?

Here you are AGAIN determining the future when you do not even know your own.

[quote]I’m simply arguing that it’s not fair of you to make that decision for someone else, because, just like it wont turn out bad all the time, it wont turn out good all the time either.
[/quote]
The option should still be given to THE CHILD!! Take a gander over at my AVI <----- Should I have been aborted because I spent six weeks in a coma and almost died? If I had been aborted I never would have to go through such a dramatic and horrendous day. Would you be happy if you were as fucked up as I was? How about six years later? And guess what? I still consider that single day to be the BEST one in my entire life, all while being my worst. Just because I lost the fight with a car means nothing to me! I still would never trade that day for ALL the great days of my life combined. I love this life, the one I am blessed and fortunate enough to still have. Why do women have the right to dismember a child, tear them literally limb from limb, when the child never experiences this world outside of the womb? Please realize no one knows the outcome of every child before being born into this world. In no way can you ever justify their slaughter.

Are we done with the hypothetical situations now? Maybe go back to reality?
[/quote]

“Tied her up more often”? lol. No, a painless restraint is when the staff team holds a person down until they calm down enough to stop trying to kill themselves. It only happens when the person is actually going for it (razor in hand, trying to tie sheets, taking substances, trying to run into traffic). If the person becomes worse, THEN they go to a hospital where they are either given so many substances that their ability to comprehend life fades (trying to talk to them is not happening) and they stop trying to commit suicide because of this, and/or they are given mild medications and tied up.

Would you rather we just let her do it? Do you see a better way of stopping it?

Also, you’re confused. I didn’t say I wouldn’t want the person’s life, I am saying many times the person being born ends up not wanting their life. Perhaps I personally would have done better, but given their parent’s unique combination of brain chemicals, which also might have made them have sex without protection even though they never wanted a baby, they end up very unhappy and oftentimes wishing they weren’t born. Your birthday present analogy had nothing to do with the scenario I presented.

The option of the child killing themselves will not be given until they are 18. They might still find a way of doing it, but that’s just how it works nowdays.

Do you really think that an unborn child who’s life is ended misses out? They never feel the negative of life, only the positive. How is that missing out?

Cortes · April 8, 2011, 5:05am

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
snicker So are you a hypocrite when you determine someone’s future before they even have spent a day in this world? All while you can never determine your own? Oleena can help you build straw men btw. Obviously you need help to do just that.

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
Chuckles

The whole Conservatives Vs Liberals inference/distinction point is kinda silly to say the least. Pretty redundant, really.

You don’t need to study much philosophy/politics to realize VIRTUALLY EVERYONE is a hypocrite.

To my mind, less abortions= More shitty parents= More fucked-up kids= A more fucked up future for pretty much everyone.

Seriously, what sane minded person doesn’t cringe at least a little bit when they find out some filthy little skank IS going have yet another baby, born into yet another crappy life situation??

Should we also try banning alcohol, just because SOME people might become alcoholics? [/quote]
[/quote]

Can you see in anything other than absolutes? We keep going around in the same circle, over and over and over. You say a life could turn out good then therefore, I’m at fault to say abortion of okay. I say yes, it could turn out good, it could also turn out bad, and I am not the right person to decide the chances in each case so why don’t we leave that up to the parents? And no, not all of them are going to not get pregnant even though they know their child didn’t have good chances. Not everyone has the same self-control.

The eugenics argument is stupid, as letting a parent decide about their own young is NOT the same thing as a government deciding for the parent. Prolifer’s seem to struggle with the ability to grasp the fact that leaving the decision up to the parent isn’t the same thing as the prochoicer making the decision for the parent.[/quote]

I can’t help myself.

The only one who can’t seem to grasp something is you: There is one person and one person only who should be determining whether or not someone lives or dies, and that is that person. You ARE arguing eugenics. There is no government necessary for eugenics. You are determining who does and does not have the right to not-be-murdered based upon an arbitrary and not even well defined standard.

And your argument leaves a big gaping hole it in that you still have not managed to fill, in which it is equally as justifiable to kill a child before, during or after birth, based solely on the subjective whim of the parents. You really seem to want to kill babies. I’m honestly not being mean spirited here. There are two or three decent arguments that the pro-choice side can follow that are actually somewhat compelling. The one that you have been making here is NOT one of them.

I suppose I should thank you. There has been scant little opposition from “your” side in this debate, and the pro-choicers are kind of letting you run the floor with these demented, sociopathic arguments. You are honestly a better advertisement for the pro-life side than any pro-lifer I can think of.

Cortes · April 8, 2011, 5:08am

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
I don’t see an unborn baby as a person.
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing with the class. And, why do you not see an unborn baby as a person?[/quote]

Lack of self-awareness. [/quote].

Newborns lack self-awareness too.

As do people in a coma.

Certain of the elderly suffering from Alzheimer’s or dementia…

Severely retarded people.

Again: Based upon your arguments so far, you are arguing for eugenics.

Cortes · April 8, 2011, 5:09am

Oleena: Do you believe in self-determination?

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 5:16am

And btw, the word “unbiased” means that you are not given to one side of an argument more than another, Kneed.

Therefore, if you wanted an unbiased opinion on whether or not to get an abortion, you would need someone who is not against either side. That doesn’t describe many religious folks I know.

I can’t believe you just made the argument that I am biased because I’m not against abortion. Being not against ISN’T the same thing as being for. I merely support the person making an educated opinion for themselves. I’m not going to see it as a positive thing if they choose abortion, nor do I see it as a thumbs up great thing if they choose to keep it, although either way I would help them with the same amount of love and care. Do you understand what unbiased means?

To put it more simply, it means you don’t talk up one side of the situation more than the other. In this situation, it means you show the women all of the social services help/protection she can get if she chooses life and you also give her all of the information about the process of abortion. Just information from the social services and from the doctor. You let her make the choice based on real life information and don’t give opinions. You don’t go in there and say “Your child’s life will be really terrible. What do you think about abortion?” lol.

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 5:27am

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
snicker So are you a hypocrite when you determine someone’s future before they even have spent a day in this world? All while you can never determine your own? Oleena can help you build straw men btw. Obviously you need help to do just that.

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
Chuckles

The whole Conservatives Vs Liberals inference/distinction point is kinda silly to say the least. Pretty redundant, really.

You don’t need to study much philosophy/politics to realize VIRTUALLY EVERYONE is a hypocrite.

To my mind, less abortions= More shitty parents= More fucked-up kids= A more fucked up future for pretty much everyone.

Seriously, what sane minded person doesn’t cringe at least a little bit when they find out some filthy little skank IS going have yet another baby, born into yet another crappy life situation??

Should we also try banning alcohol, just because SOME people might become alcoholics? [/quote]
[/quote]

Can you see in anything other than absolutes? We keep going around in the same circle, over and over and over. You say a life could turn out good then therefore, I’m at fault to say abortion of okay. I say yes, it could turn out good, it could also turn out bad, and I am not the right person to decide the chances in each case so why don’t we leave that up to the parents? And no, not all of them are going to not get pregnant even though they know their child didn’t have good chances. Not everyone has the same self-control.

The eugenics argument is stupid, as letting a parent decide about their own young is NOT the same thing as a government deciding for the parent. Prolifer’s seem to struggle with the ability to grasp the fact that leaving the decision up to the parent isn’t the same thing as the prochoicer making the decision for the parent.[/quote]

I can’t help myself.

The only one who can’t seem to grasp something is you: There is one person and one person only who should be determining whether or not someone lives or dies, and that is that person. You ARE arguing eugenics. There is no government necessary for eugenics. You are determining who does and does not have the right to not-be-murdered based upon an arbitrary and not even well defined standard.

And your argument leaves a big gaping hole it in that you still have not managed to fill, in which it is equally as justifiable to kill a child before, during or after birth, based solely on the subjective whim of the parents. You really seem to want to kill babies. I’m honestly not being mean spirited here. There are two or three decent arguments that the pro-choice side can follow that are actually somewhat compelling. The one that you have been making here is NOT one of them.

I suppose I should thank you. There has been scant little opposition from “your” side in this debate, and the pro-choicers are kind of letting you run the floor with these demented, sociopathic arguments. You are honestly a better advertisement for the pro-life side than any pro-lifer I can think of.
[/quote]

I didn’t say it was okay to kill the baby based on the will of the parents after birth. I said that in some situations if you have no help to offer a starving diseased child in another country, offering them a painless death if they chose it might be more compassionate than forcing them to live. Do you disagree with that?

Also, if you look back you’ll see that I don’t consider an unborn child a person and that ending life before it enters the world is not comparable to killing your child after it’s experienced the world outside its mother with its senses, including thoughts.

You pointed out “Oh no! This is eugenics! That’s turned out badly in the past when people have taken it too far with the government.” I was pointing out that government eugenics manipulation of an entire population is not the same thing as individual parents choosing to end their pregnancy and also pointed out that you not being able to see the difference is weird. Of course all of life is eugenics the way you’re throwing that word around.

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 5:34am

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Oleena: Do you believe in self-determination?[/quote]

What do you mean by this^^^? Do you mean do I believe it’s possible? Do I believe it should happen? Do I believe it does happen?

Also, what is your definition of self-determination, before we accidently start an argument that eventually boils down to definition. (I will use your definition and promise not to argue another)

Cortes · April 8, 2011, 5:37am

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Oleena: Do you believe in self-determination?[/quote]

What do you mean by this^^^? Do you mean do I believe it’s possible? Do I believe it should happen? Do I believe it does happen?

Also, what is your definition of self-determination, before we accidently start an argument that eventually boils down to definition. (I will use your definition and promise not to argue another)[/quote]

Do you believe that humans possess the ability and the right to determine their own destinies?

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 5:54am

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Oleena: Do you believe in self-determination?[/quote]

What do you mean by this^^^? Do you mean do I believe it’s possible? Do I believe it should happen? Do I believe it does happen?

Also, what is your definition of self-determination, before we accidently start an argument that eventually boils down to definition. (I will use your definition and promise not to argue another)[/quote]

Do you believe that humans possess the ability and the right to determine their own destinies?
[/quote]

I don’t know. On one hand, there is more and more evidence that brain chemicals greatly effect mood, which effect choices, thus if the person isn’t aware of how to manipulate brain chemicals or their chemicals are effected by genetics, they do not completely have the ability to determine their own destinies. Also, a person born into one place in the world doesn’t have the ability to reach the same life that a person born in another place does, so this limits their ability to control their destiny regardless of their bodily limits (think Afghanistan women).

Now your wording was, do I believe they possess they right to determine their own destinies. Realistically, not everyone in the world possesses the ability to determine their own destinies (Afghan women are once again a great example). You didn’t ask if I think they should receive that right, you just asked if they already possess it, so I would have to answer no.

Basically, there isn’t a blanket answer. It’s always situational because there are too many factors that effect it.

Brother_Chris · April 8, 2011, 5:55am

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
I don’t see an unborn baby as a person.
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing with the class. And, why do you not see an unborn baby as a person?[/quote]

Lack of self-awareness. [/quote]

Lack of self-awareness? So, because a one month old lacks self-awareness compared to a ten year old, it’s okay to kill the one month old, but not the ten year old?

Brother_Chris · April 8, 2011, 6:01am

[quote]Oleena wrote:
What?! Lack of self-control (aka “crazy”) is one of the biggest excuses people use to get less time for offenses or even let completely off the hook.[/quote]

No, don’t go changing the discussion. You said people that lack self-control, not people with mental diseases. You were not talking about mental diseases before, so don’t try to change the subject after I make an argument you don’t like.

Oh, this is wonderful. Now rapists don’t really lack self-control (as we were talking about), they are just crazy, you’d be a great defense attorney. “Your Honor, my client really can’t be held liable for his crimes, after all lack of self-control is a form of craziness.” That’s just weak.

Brother_Chris · April 8, 2011, 6:06am

[quote]Oleena wrote:

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
I don’t see an unborn baby as a person.
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing with the class. And, why do you not see an unborn baby as a person?[/quote]

Lack of self-awareness. [/quote]

Also, an unborn child has only experienced complete love, warmth, and being taken care of, which it doesn’t think about or understand. That’s on par with everything described by many sources as what happens to a good person when you die. That experience (of being in the womb) is not anything like being a person who has been born and knows the difference between need and want, pain and pleasure, etc. [/quote]

Yes, and I’m sure the babies I have seen in ultra-sound abortions (the youngest one I have seen was a baby at 13-14 weeks) where it shows them pulling away from the suction tube as their body is sucked apart and through the straw are really unaware and feeling the love as their body is pulled apart sometimes in a few seconds, sometimes much longer.

Brother_Chris · April 8, 2011, 6:08am

[quote]Oleena wrote:
will of the parents after birth.
[/quote]

Then please tell me what’s the difference between before and after birth?

orion · April 8, 2011, 6:43am

[quote]Oleena wrote:
And btw, the word “unbiased” means that you are not given to one side of an argument more than another, Kneed.
[/quote]

Does not work that way.

What would you say about someone who claimed to be unbiased when it came to rape?

Brother_Chris · April 8, 2011, 6:51am

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
And btw, the word “unbiased” means that you are not given to one side of an argument more than another, Kneed.
[/quote]

Does not work that way.

What would you say about someone who claimed to be unbiased when it came to rape?

[/quote]

lol.

Oleena · April 8, 2011, 7:26am

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Oleena wrote:
What?! Lack of self-control (aka “crazy”) is one of the biggest excuses people use to get less time for offenses or even let completely off the hook.[/quote]

No, don’t go changing the discussion. You said people that lack self-control, not people with mental diseases. You were not talking about mental diseases before, so don’t try to change the subject after I make an argument you don’t like.

Oh, this is wonderful. Now rapists don’t really lack self-control (as we were talking about), they are just crazy, you’d be a great defense attorney. “Your Honor, my client really can’t be held liable for his crimes, after all lack of self-control is a form of craziness.” That’s just weak.[/quote]

We’re getting really far off topic. My point was just a response to your argument that the court holds EVERYONE (you didn’t exclude any circumstances and made a blanket statement) to the same level of responsibility regardless of control, which it doesn’t. The court takes age, disorders, and a variety of factors including whether or not a person is related to someone into account regarding whether or not they will be held responsible for something, or whether that something is even considered a crime.

What is the difference between lacking self-control and “being crazy” in some cases? For instance, in the case of a bipolar 13 year old, they may know that it’s a good idea not to have sex with a random guy for no reason, but, because of their condition they lack the self-control to not do so. Many bipolar 1 will immediately try to do something just because it popped up into their head, for instance “I wonder if I can go 150 mph?” and instantly do it without further thought, when at another time they might not. I don’t know many people who commit rape who aren’t or couldn’t be diagnosed with some sort of a social disorder.

conservativedog · April 8, 2011, 7:28am

[quote]ColumboSteel wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]ColumboSteel wrote:

[quote]conservativedog wrote:
Here are two thoughts.

If some scum of the earth murders a pregnant woman guess what our American Justice System charges that scum of the earth with? If you said double homicide then you win the Weider Pro 400 Squat Cage capable of holding 210 lbs. plus 45 lb Olympic bar.

So how can this cockmite be charged with double homicide if what is inside the woman is not human life?

Secondly… if you have to kill it to keep it from growing then it must be LIFE. We go through different body stages but it’s all good. If I were the girl next door, 20 years old blond I would not sleep with Hugh Hefner. But he is still human life, even if he drools & wears depends.

HUMAN LIFE. It’s 2011 we have the technology to witness the miracle that happens inside a woman’s pregnant body. Pictures inside a woman’s belly shows the baby becoming large enough to be seen & at 8 weeks we see arms, legs and major joints forming. Toes and fingers are distinct. HUMAN LIFE it’s all good, even if Hugh Hefner wears depends.

Don’t buy into the lie that it’s not human. For the love of… what did you spill your seed in if it’s not human… http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/03/21/sc_man_who_had_sex_with_horse_released_from_prison/
[/quote]

You mean the same justice system that ruled on Roe vs. Wade and that has made abortion legal in this country? Somewhat of a contradiction. [/quote]

Yes, that is Precisely his point. Also, I completely agree with his point about life. We can debate all we want on whether a zygote, embryo, or fetus is a person. And we can debate all we want whether or not said zygote, embryo, or fetus is a form of life that deserves protection under the law. But please don’t be spouting off nonsense that it’s not human or not alive/“life”.

I think everybody here gets that already, and we’re just getting a little loose with the language in the heat of debate, but that little piece of ignorance drives me absolutely up a wall when I see it. There is zero scientific grounds for denying those two pieces of information.[/quote]

And when I hear people spouting off about how they feel they can limit the rights of others…well as you said, that little piece of ignorance drives me absolutely up a wall. I think we need a few more t-vixens in hear to see how they feel about someone telling them what they can and cant do with their bodies.[/quote]

Liberals are such one step thinkers. Don’t make this so easy. This lie that you can do with your body whatever you want does it include prostitution? No you can’t do that with your own body because laws govern against it.

How about having sex out in the middle of a mall with your own body. Hey it’s your body, nobody is going to tell you what you can do with your body will they? No. No.

Inject steroids into your own body without a doctors prescription? No you cant do that with your own body. How about giving yourself a heaping dose of heroin, crack or meth because after all it’s your body? No you can’t, even with your own body.

Drink alcohol at age 12 because you know you have anxiety and stress, and it’s your body. No NO, they don’t allow you to do that with your body.

Let’s sell your 1 month old baby girl to a stranger, after all it came out of your body and it’s yours?? Isn’t it?

No it isn’t and the sooner feminists grasp this concept they will grasp what they are doing in murdering a baby. It is a separate being growing inside your body. Just because it can’t fend for itself, feed itself doesn’t mean that isn’t the miracle of life. No different then in a freak accident you become a quadriplegic, can we abandon you in a downtown alley on a Sunday? Can you leave your grandmother with Alzheimers alone to fend for herself or will they come after you for neglect/abuse? Just because your not viable without life support doesn’t give anyone the right to end life or walk away from care just because your a wuss and don’t wish to be inconvenienced.

On a separate note what has feminism brought us besides ugly flight attendants?

orion · April 8, 2011, 11:32am

[quote]conservativedog wrote: