The Abortion Thread

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
901

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

Pro choice. Not pro abortion.

902

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
And as I predicted, you continue to ignore the reality of human nature.[/quote]

How do I ignore the reality of human nature? I hold a view of human nature that has been proven to be true for coming on 2000+ years. [/quote]

Poor simple Chris. Step outside your circle of bible thumpers for a day or two.

903

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
And as I predicted, you continue to ignore the reality of human nature.[/quote]

How do I ignore the reality of human nature? I hold a view of human nature that has been proven to be true for a little more than 6000 years. [/quote]

Fixed

904

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

905

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

I like how you guys use the term “pro-abortion” as though we go around with coat-hangers pro-actively engaging in ‘feticide’.

It’s telling of your manipulative, emotionally driven argument tactics; but I guess that’s only to be expected from the ‘anti-freedom’ side of the debate. See? I can play games too.

On a more personal level, I was under the impression that you are not religious, so what’s your beef with abortion?[/quote]

You’re either for abortion or against it. If you are for it, you are pro-abortion. The term pro-choice technically doesn’t mean anything, you could be talking about ice cream. If you are for abortion then be proud and definitive of your stance, don’t hide behind silly words or slogans that have no real meaning. [/quote]

Wrong right off the bat. There’s a difference between being always ‘for’ abortion (pro-abortion) and being ‘for’ the woman’s choice (hence, pro-choice).

It’s actually pretty simple so long as you’re not a stubborn jack-ass about it.

I’m “pro-abortion” in the same way you’re “anti-freedom”. Both labels are equally inaccurate. While ‘pro-abortion’ implies I am always in favour of abortion and not simply in favour of the freedom for a woman to choose for herself, ‘anti-freedom’ implies you are always against freedom and not just against a woman’s freedom to chose to get an abortion or not.

If you want to call me ‘pro-abortion’, so be it, but then you have no right to complain when I say you’re ‘anti-freedom’. [/quote]

That’s ok. I’m resolutely “anti-freedom” when it comes to our so-called right to kill someone else.

And to be “pro-choice”, you have to fully accept both choices and their moral consequences : ie, you have to be “pro-abortion”.

Btw, how pro-choice are you, really ?
Do you think it would be ok if each and evey woman in the world aborted her child ?
That would be their choice and their inalienable right, after all.

906

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

I like how you guys use the term “pro-abortion” as though we go around with coat-hangers pro-actively engaging in ‘feticide’.

It’s telling of your manipulative, emotionally driven argument tactics; but I guess that’s only to be expected from the ‘anti-freedom’ side of the debate. See? I can play games too.

On a more personal level, I was under the impression that you are not religious, so what’s your beef with abortion?[/quote]

You’re either for abortion or against it. If you are for it, you are pro-abortion. The term pro-choice technically doesn’t mean anything, you could be talking about ice cream. If you are for abortion then be proud and definitive of your stance, don’t hide behind silly words or slogans that have no real meaning. [/quote]

Wrong right off the bat. There’s a difference between being always ‘for’ abortion (pro-abortion) and being ‘for’ the woman’s choice (hence, pro-choice).

It’s actually pretty simple so long as you’re not a stubborn jack-ass about it.

I’m “pro-abortion” in the same way you’re “anti-freedom”. Both labels are equally inaccurate. While ‘pro-abortion’ implies I am always in favour of abortion and not simply in favour of the freedom for a woman to choose for herself, ‘anti-freedom’ implies you are always against freedom and not just against a woman’s freedom to chose to get an abortion or not.

If you want to call me ‘pro-abortion’, so be it, but then you have no right to complain when I say you’re ‘anti-freedom’. [/quote]

When it comes to killing a human life, I am very anti-freedom. If you determine freedom by the restrictions or lack there of when it comes to the taking of human life, I am as anti-freedom as you can get.
Labels are bullshit. You are either for or against killing the unborn, bottom line.

907

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

[/quote]

Pretty much sums it up concisely. No more should have to be said.

908

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

Pro choice. Not pro abortion.[/quote]

No. If support the ‘choice’ to abort, you are pro-abortion. You’re just trying to make it sound prettier, it’s not it’s ugly.

909

An abortion is a single event, to be pro-abortion you are in favor of it in 1 particular case. Since there are apparently millions of these you cannot have an opinion on each individual case without knowing all the facts. This is why the term pro choice is used so the person most qualified to make this decision is able to (the mother). By saying someone who supports abortion in most cases is pro-abortion is not true because it implies they support it in all cases.

910

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

[/quote]

You spend a suspicious amount of effort re-asserting that your motives are not religious…

Anyway, you disagree with abortion because it’s killing another life, yes? Then I presume that your value human life more than human joy?

Would you agree that it’s better to live a life of misery and loneliness than to not live at all?

911

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

I like how you guys use the term “pro-abortion” as though we go around with coat-hangers pro-actively engaging in ‘feticide’.

It’s telling of your manipulative, emotionally driven argument tactics; but I guess that’s only to be expected from the ‘anti-freedom’ side of the debate. See? I can play games too.

On a more personal level, I was under the impression that you are not religious, so what’s your beef with abortion?[/quote]

You’re either for abortion or against it. If you are for it, you are pro-abortion. The term pro-choice technically doesn’t mean anything, you could be talking about ice cream. If you are for abortion then be proud and definitive of your stance, don’t hide behind silly words or slogans that have no real meaning. [/quote]

Wrong right off the bat. There’s a difference between being always ‘for’ abortion (pro-abortion) and being ‘for’ the woman’s choice (hence, pro-choice).

It’s actually pretty simple so long as you’re not a stubborn jack-ass about it.

I’m “pro-abortion” in the same way you’re “anti-freedom”. Both labels are equally inaccurate. While ‘pro-abortion’ implies I am always in favour of abortion and not simply in favour of the freedom for a woman to choose for herself, ‘anti-freedom’ implies you are always against freedom and not just against a woman’s freedom to chose to get an abortion or not.

If you want to call me ‘pro-abortion’, so be it, but then you have no right to complain when I say you’re ‘anti-freedom’. [/quote]

That’s ok. I’m resolutely “anti-freedom” when it comes to our so-called right to kill someone else.

And to be “pro-choice”, you have to fully accept both choices and their moral consequences : ie, you have to be “pro-abortion”.

Btw, how pro-choice are you, really ?
Do you think it would be ok if each and evey woman in the world aborted her child ?
That would be their choice and their inalienable right, after all.

[/quote]

Human’s aren’t so special as far as I’m concerned. If we chose to stop pro-creating, nothing of value would be lost.

I have no complaints here.

912

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

I like how you guys use the term “pro-abortion” as though we go around with coat-hangers pro-actively engaging in ‘feticide’.

It’s telling of your manipulative, emotionally driven argument tactics; but I guess that’s only to be expected from the ‘anti-freedom’ side of the debate. See? I can play games too.

On a more personal level, I was under the impression that you are not religious, so what’s your beef with abortion?[/quote]

You’re either for abortion or against it. If you are for it, you are pro-abortion. The term pro-choice technically doesn’t mean anything, you could be talking about ice cream. If you are for abortion then be proud and definitive of your stance, don’t hide behind silly words or slogans that have no real meaning. [/quote]

Wrong right off the bat. There’s a difference between being always ‘for’ abortion (pro-abortion) and being ‘for’ the woman’s choice (hence, pro-choice).

It’s actually pretty simple so long as you’re not a stubborn jack-ass about it.

I’m “pro-abortion” in the same way you’re “anti-freedom”. Both labels are equally inaccurate. While ‘pro-abortion’ implies I am always in favour of abortion and not simply in favour of the freedom for a woman to choose for herself, ‘anti-freedom’ implies you are always against freedom and not just against a woman’s freedom to chose to get an abortion or not.

If you want to call me ‘pro-abortion’, so be it, but then you have no right to complain when I say you’re ‘anti-freedom’. [/quote]

When it comes to killing a human life, I am very anti-freedom. If you determine freedom by the restrictions or lack there of when it comes to the taking of human life, I am as anti-freedom as you can get.
Labels are bullshit. You are either for or against killing the unborn, bottom line.[/quote]

Then we agree. I am pro-abortion and your are anti-freedom.

913

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

[/quote]

Pretty much sums it up concisely. No more should have to be said.[/quote]

Keep dreaming.

914

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
An abortion is a single event, to be pro-abortion you are in favor of it in 1 particular case. Since there are apparently millions of these you cannot have an opinion on each individual case without knowing all the facts. This is why the term pro choice is used so the person most qualified to make this decision is able to (the mother). By saying someone who supports abortion in most cases is pro-abortion is not true because it implies they support it in all cases.[/quote]

It’s not about 1 abortion or millions of abortions.
it’s about a law that legalize abortion.

Once the law is passed, there can be 1 abortion or millions of abortion. It’s legal in both cases. Under this law, abortion is a right, and this right can be freely used.
So, if you support this law, you support de facto the possibility of billions of abortions.
And more importantly, your own position leaves you with nothing to say and nothing to oppose against a single abortion.

That, or you are inconsistent.

Btw, we are all “pro-choice”. Myself included.
As far as i know, no one supported forced abortions in this thread.
“Pro-lifers” are absolutely “pro-choice”, they simply think that people should face the moral, legal and penal consequences of their choices.

915

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

Pro choice. Not pro abortion.[/quote]

No. If support the ‘choice’ to abort, you are pro-abortion. You’re just trying to make it sound prettier, it’s not it’s ugly.[/quote]

Just like how if the choice is to not abort, you are anti-abortion. Oh wait, that’s retarded because it’s too ad-hoc to accurately describe the pro-choice position…

Well at least your title is accurate; pro-life… except when it comes to killing ‘terrorists’ and certain criminals… hmm perhaps you are the ones just trying to make your position sound prettier.

916

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

[/quote]

You spend a suspicious amount of effort re-asserting that your motives are not religious…

Anyway, you disagree with abortion because it’s killing another life, yes? Then I presume that your value human life more than human joy?

Would you agree that it’s better to live a life of misery and loneliness than to not live at all?[/quote]

Morality is not about “which state is better ?” it’s about “which action is good or evil ?”.
Misery and loneliness may explain (but not excuse) a suicide. It never justifies a murder.

917

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Well I’ll be damned. And here I though the “killing” thread was the first time we’ve ever had a conversation.

But it seems your memory is only slightly better than mine as our short exchange (and I’m talking only-4-or-5-posts-long short) was on the topic of whether or not one could determine the conciousness of another living thing (specifically a fetus/ young child). You never actually told me your position on the matter and honestly I assumed you were pro-choice and simply splitting hairs (rather fine hairs at that). I didn’t read any of your other posts. Actually those are probably the first posts of yours I’ve ever read, at least that I can remember.

As for the matter of my ‘stereotypes’, I would actually prefer that you don’t appeal to God when arguing against legalized abortions. The fact of the matter is, your position is easier to tare apart when you agree to the constraints of logic.

So no, me asking why you oppose abortions is not due to any inability to accept a non-religious answer, just the opposite actually, but that’s a nice jump in conclusions.

If you don’t want to tell me why, that’s fine; However, I do issue the challenge to you to debate me on this topic.

Your move. [/quote]

I’m not sure anyone appealed to God in this thread.
Actually, i think i have the exact same “beef” against legalized abortion than the other pro-lifers who posted in this thread :
-Abortion is the killing of an human life.
-Its legalization does imply the moral and legal dehumanization of a part of mankind, which is dangerous precedent.

That’s all.
That’s more than enough.
And this argument is not a religious one.

[/quote]

You spend a suspicious amount of effort re-asserting that your motives are not religious…

Anyway, you disagree with abortion because it’s killing another life, yes? Then I presume that your value human life more than human joy?

Would you agree that it’s better to live a life of misery and loneliness than to not live at all?[/quote]

Morality is not about “which state is better ?” it’s about “which action is good or evil ?”.
Misery and loneliness may explain (but not excuse) a suicide. It never justifies a murder.

[/quote]

No, it is about which state is better because that’s the choice. Since you find this to be a question of morality, ‘better’ for you means ‘less immoral’.

Would misery and loneliness explain a mercy killing?

918

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Can a cow/calf, a mare/foal, a dog/puppy or any other mammals young be described as a parasite? No they cannot. Why only the distinction for humans? [/quote]

I have no idea. Ask the person who said it, because I didn’t.

I never, ever once called a fetus a parasite or said it was parasitic. How you came to that conclusion is beyond me.

Did someone slip some weed in my morning coffee? Am I losing my mind?

Why are you trying to argue with me when I agree with you? I stated as much in plain English, which you just quoted.

Holy shit.

No one did that.

Holy shit again.

Please explain how the above equates to below.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
However his claims that the unborn is parasitic [/quote]

EDIT: took out 2 f-bombs[/quote]

Holy shit! I’ve been trying to read through this thread, but I can’t get past this exchange. Only in the twilight zone of PWI can a poster be as crystal clear as possible and still have his message be convoluted and twisted into the exact opposite of his point! This is the exact reason PWI is garbage.

It’s a shame to because good discussion could be had in this forums.

919

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
An abortion is a single event, to be pro-abortion you are in favor of it in 1 particular case. Since there are apparently millions of these you cannot have an opinion on each individual case without knowing all the facts. This is why the term pro choice is used so the person most qualified to make this decision is able to (the mother). By saying someone who supports abortion in most cases is pro-abortion is not true because it implies they support it in all cases.[/quote]

It’s not about 1 abortion or millions of abortions.
it’s about a law that legalize abortion.

Once the law is passed, there can be 1 abortion or millions of abortion. It’s legal in both cases. Under this law, abortion is a right, and this right can be freely used.
So, if you support this law, you support de facto the possibility of billions of abortions.
And more importantly, your own position leaves you with nothing to say and nothing to oppose against a single abortion.

That, or you are inconsistent.

Btw, we are all “pro-choice”. Myself included.
As far as i know, no one supported forced abortions in this thread.
“Pro-lifers” are absolutely “pro-choice”, they simply think that people should face the moral, legal and penal consequences of their choices.[/quote]

What about the fact you can be against abortions but hold choice at a higher value?

920

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]imhungry wrote:
(personal) Question(s): Has anyone in this thread been involved with a woman/girl who has had an abortion?

Does anyone have any real experience with the subject matter? [/quote]

I haven’t been with any, I have known them though. One was bat shit crazy…[/quote]

And I’m the King of France.[/quote]

Then, your pro-abortion stance is quite excusable.
You just spent 219 years without a head, after all.
[/quote]

I like how you guys use the term “pro-abortion” as though we go around with coat-hangers pro-actively engaging in ‘feticide’.

It’s telling of your manipulative, emotionally driven argument tactics; but I guess that’s only to be expected from the ‘anti-freedom’ side of the debate. See? I can play games too.

On a more personal level, I was under the impression that you are not religious, so what’s your beef with abortion?[/quote]

You’re either for abortion or against it. If you are for it, you are pro-abortion. The term pro-choice technically doesn’t mean anything, you could be talking about ice cream. If you are for abortion then be proud and definitive of your stance, don’t hide behind silly words or slogans that have no real meaning. [/quote]

Wrong right off the bat. There’s a difference between being always ‘for’ abortion (pro-abortion) and being ‘for’ the woman’s choice (hence, pro-choice).

It’s actually pretty simple so long as you’re not a stubborn jack-ass about it.

I’m “pro-abortion” in the same way you’re “anti-freedom”. Both labels are equally inaccurate. While ‘pro-abortion’ implies I am always in favour of abortion and not simply in favour of the freedom for a woman to choose for herself, ‘anti-freedom’ implies you are always against freedom and not just against a woman’s freedom to chose to get an abortion or not.

If you want to call me ‘pro-abortion’, so be it, but then you have no right to complain when I say you’re ‘anti-freedom’. [/quote]

When it comes to killing a human life, I am very anti-freedom. If you determine freedom by the restrictions or lack there of when it comes to the taking of human life, I am as anti-freedom as you can get.
Labels are bullshit. You are either for or against killing the unborn, bottom line.[/quote]

Then we agree. I am pro-abortion and your are anti-freedom. [/quote]

So you consider the word ‘freedom’ as being defined on whether you are free to take a human life willy-nilly? That’s odd.
Okay, so in your little bizarre world, where being able to kill people is equivilent with freedom, I am anti-freedom.
In the real world, where freedom doesn’t include the freedom to kill at will I am not anti-freedom.
Fortunately, I live in the real world, and not your little weird world. So you are still wrong, you just don’t know it.