[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Juan Blanco wrote:
"The result of abortion, according to Brownback, is the complete killing of a whole class of people in America.
Between 80 percent to 90 percent of the children in America diagnosed with Down’s Syndrome will be killed in the womb simply because they have a positive genetic test which can be wrong, and is often wrong, but they would have a positive genetic test for Down’s Syndrome and they will be killed."
Other than reducing the McDonalds employee pool I don’t see anything wrong with this.[/quote]
Why are the people so aggressive about controling womens reproductive rights the first to suddenly adopt a “shit happens… not my problem!” attitude once the kid is born?
[/quote]
Because it’s not a right it’s a person and killing a person is murder despite where they reside. If you want to argue something argue it is not killing a person. If you do not think killing people is wrong then I have no argument with you.
Don’t want a kid, don’t fuck. It’s just that simple. Fucking causes children to happen.
This has been happening billions of times over thousands and thousands of years. You’d think people would have figured that out by now.
The good news is that natural selection is working out in this case. The pro-abortion folks are killing off thier own voting pool. It won’t belong unitl they are small minority.
[quote]pat36 wrote:
Because it’s not a right it’s a person and killing a person is murder despite where they reside. If you want to argue something argue it is not killing a person. If you do not think killing people is wrong then I have no argument with you.
[/quote]
Absolutely!
At 8 weeks, he sure looks human to me. Let me know if you think arms, legs, fingers, toes, ears, functioning brain controlling muscle, eyes, nose mouth etc. is NOT human (as in a person).
Look who said these quotes… Pro-choice and abortion-performing doctors etc… This is why some of us say it’s murder. And remember, these are pro-choice people talking here.
Pro-choice author Magda Denes:
"There was not one abortion doctor who, at some point in the questioning, did not say, “This is murder.”
Dr. Neville Sender, abortion clinic founder:
"We know that its killing. But the state permits killing under certain circumstances."
Pro-abortionist and former Planned Parenthood president Mary Calderone:
"Abortion is the taking of a life."
Being “pro-abortion” would mean supporting that as many women as possible get abortions (or that all babies be aborted), it would mean asserting that abortion is always preferable to carrying a pregnancy to term, and trying to force women who don’t want to get an abortion to get an abortion.
…
Your position is pro-abortion.
The fictitious position you described is so ridiculous I am at a loss for words. Good job.[/quote]
So you’re saying that supporting someones right to something automatically makes you “pro-whatever”?
This ?lab? is a depot for Family Planning Associates, California?s largest abortion mill chain. Every container holds a baby who was murdered by abortion. The size of the container is proportional to the age of the child. The larger containers hold 2nd trimester babies. Each of these children deserved to live.
Why are the people so aggressive about controling womens reproductive rights the first to suddenly adopt a “shit happens… not my problem!” attitude once the kid is born?
Because it’s not a right it’s a person and killing a person is murder despite where they reside. If you want to argue something argue it is not killing a person. If you do not think killing people is wrong then I have no argument with you.
Don’t want a kid, don’t fuck. It’s just that simple. Fucking causes children to happen.
This has been happening billions of times over thousands and thousands of years. You’d think people would have figured that out by now.
The good news is that natural selection is working out in this case. The pro-abortion folks are killing off thier own voting pool. It won’t belong unitl they are small minority.[/quote]
I do not believe that abortion is murder. Yes, it results in the death of a human, but equating abortion with homicide is the same as equating ordering a hamburger at McDonalds with stabbing your neighbors dog (since both result in the death of an animal).
Abortion is a woman exercising her right to govern her own body. Unfortunatly, as it stands now, there is no way for the unborn child to continue living without the support of her body. I’m an advocate of finding a way to make this happen, thus protecting the rights of both the woman and the child.
Yes, fucking means risking pregnancy, the same way driving means risking a car accident, the same way playing sports means risking injury, the same way eating means risking choking. Just because an action has some inherent risks does not mean you have no alternative than to “Deal with the consequences of your actions!” should risk become reality.
And please… be fucking serious… you’re suggesting that being pro-choice is genetic? Do you think all opinions on every matter are genetic, or just this opinion on this matter?
[quote]derek wrote:
Look who said these quotes… Pro-choice and abortion-performing doctors etc… This is why some of us say it’s murder. And remember, these are pro-choice people talking here.
Pro-choice author Magda Denes:
"There was not one abortion doctor who, at some point in the questioning, did not say, “This is murder.”
Dr. Neville Sender, abortion clinic founder:
"We know that its killing. But the state permits killing under certain circumstances."
Pro-abortionist and former Planned Parenthood president Mary Calderone:
"Abortion is the taking of a life." [/quote]
So I suppose taking someone off of life support is also murder, since it results in the loss of a human life?
And certainly assisted suidice (regardless of the consent or wishes of the patient) is murder, since it results in the loss of a human life.
Funny, I hear little complaints about the war in Iraq from your side of the table, despite the fact that it, too, results in the loss of many human lives.
Would you also say that not supporting or contributing to organizations that provide food and medicine to poor and needy people is also murder, since it (albeit indirectly) results in the loss of human life?
Or are there some instances where a choice or action that results in the loss of a human life is not the same as murder?
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I do not believe that abortion is murder.
[/quote]
You don’t, but the people that perform them do. I tend to listen to them… no offense.
I also tend to think of adults capable of defending themselves, thinking for themselves and deaths as a result of war somewhat differenly than the most precious form of human life (unborn baby) but that’s just crazy ol’ me talkin’.
So I suppose taking someone off of life support is also murder, since it results in the loss of a human life?
And certainly assisted suidice (regardless of the consent or wishes of the patient) is murder, since it results in the loss of a human life.
Funny, I hear little complaints about the war in Iraq from your side of the table, despite the fact that it, too, results in the loss of many human lives.
Would you also say that not supporting or contributing to organizations that provide food and medicine to poor and needy people is also murder, since it (albeit indirectly) results in the loss of human life?
Or are there some instances where a choice or action that results in the loss of a human life is not the same as murder?[/quote]
Being “pro-abortion” would mean supporting that as many women as possible get abortions (or that all babies be aborted), it would mean asserting that abortion is always preferable to carrying a pregnancy to term, and trying to force women who don’t want to get an abortion to get an abortion.
…
Your position is pro-abortion.
The fictitious position you described is so ridiculous I am at a loss for words. Good job.[/quote]
Being “pro-abortion” would mean supporting that as many women as possible get abortions (or that all babies be aborted), it would mean asserting that abortion is always preferable to carrying a pregnancy to term, and trying to force women who don’t want to get an abortion to get an abortion.
…
Your position is pro-abortion.
The fictitious position you described is so ridiculous I am at a loss for words. Good job.
So you’re saying that supporting someones right to something automatically makes you “pro-whatever”?
Can you apply the same logic universally? [/quote]
I am saying there are 2 camps. Pro-abortion and anti-abortion.
You appear to be in the pro-abortion camp.
Calling it a choice (a positive sounding word) instead of an abortion means that you understand it is a horrible thing and you are trying to use language to disguise the horror.
Be honest about the issue and don’t play word games.
Being “pro-abortion” would mean supporting that as many women as possible get abortions (or that all babies be aborted), it would mean asserting that abortion is always preferable to carrying a pregnancy to term, and trying to force women who don’t want to get an abortion to get an abortion.
…
Your position is pro-abortion.
The fictitious position you described is so ridiculous I am at a loss for words. Good job.
His position is anti-forced pregnancy[/quote]
Certainly more creative and closer to the subject matter than the ambiguous and feel good term pro-choice.
…and the sarcastic jackassery is for what, exactly?[/quote]
It’s for providing a moment of hilarity during a discussion of something I find personally horrifying and disgustiing. And anyway, I sometimes take personal pleasure in mocking the views of others. I’m seeking counseling for that.
No, I’m not. And no, I won’t.
[quote]The point I was tyring to make is that it would be more optimal to figure out a way to protect both the reproductive rights of women AND the right to life of yet-to-be-born children, instead of being forced to make a choice between the two.
Whats so offensive about that?[/quote]
Your point is good and valid, and not at all offensive. The point I would like to make is this: If the abortion debate truly hinges upon the issue of “Rights”, then we should be trying to define who does have rights, and who does not have rights.
I, for example, have a right to swing my fist through the air. But that right stops right around the end of your nose. Thus, my right to swing my fist through the air is not inconsistent with your right to walk down the street not getting punched constantly in the face.
Does a woman’s right to NOT have a child end anywhere, and if so, where?
[quote]derek wrote:
So you need a beating too?
[/quote]
Wow, internet threats…now I’m infamous. Just so you know it doesn’t accomplish anything to make these kinds of threats unless you want people to know what a douche bag you are.
Free speech doesn’t mean anything in your world does it? All the BS about how great the military is for defending our “rights” that pours out of your mouth is just rhetoric which you don’t even believe. You are the worst kind of liar.
