Home - List All Discussions

Does anyone go to prochoice web groups and stand up for life there?

by: Navynate

I'm just wondering if anyone else here goes to another web group (that is Prochoice) and tell them why abortion is wrong?

I wonder if it does much good to debate them in their web groups? If you show them the truth then maybe they will see the light and change their position on abortion, any thoughts?

reply from: shiprah

I was once a member of a style forum called luxfashion.com, when a woman posted an article expressing her disgust at a prolife woman who had convinced a philanthropist not to donate a large sum of money to abortion or something like that.  Everyone gave her sympathy and expressed much "If she's prolife that's fine, but how dare she interfere with my right to an abortion" sentiment.  When I said I thought the article was great and expressed my beliefs backed up with facts -- well, let's just say you've never seen forty angry net surfers attack someone so badly.  Profanity, ignorance, the works.  I no longer visit that site.  When one woman posted she had had an abortion in college after I had called it murder, and everyone else dared me to call her a murderer, I weakly and dishonestly made up some non-sense about how abortion was murder but women who had them weren't murderers.  In other words, I let these women intimidate me into not saying that, yes, killing your baby does make you a murderer. I don't have the stomach to deal with prochoice meaness online, although I don't mind defending my views face to face.

reply from: mom5

Nate, I have to agree with Shiprah.  What I have seen on these pro-choice forums are garbage.  Usually very young people, teens/young adults, who just want to talk about sexual freedom.

They are extremely angry people.  They will not talk about the abortion procedure itself.  They will not talk about women who regret their abortion.  They just want abortion to be legal for birth control. 

Although, if you can stand a pro-choice forum, by all means, give it a try.  But I tell you, it's really hard not to "sink" to their level. Just be firm in your postings and keep them "nice".

LOL!

reply from: Christian4life

I agree with Shiprah and Mom5.  I have to tell you, I have seen some of the pro-choice forums and those people are absolute fanatics.  They are very angry, very deep in denial, and not willing to listen to logic.  It is much too hard to go there and be outnumbered by them.  If someone like that comes here we can all support each other in answering their questions, as we did with dmourning and prochoicegirl.  It's much more helpful that way.  It is just too difficult to have to answer them all yourself, especially if you don't have a lot of free time.  But if you can find one with some pro-life people there to help you out, and you feel you are doing some good, by all means go right ahead. 

Just remember that sticks and stones may break your bones, but words can never hurt you!! 

reply from: Navynate

Ship and Mom,

If you want a good laugh then go to the Bush VS. Choice web site, then scroll down to the topic Hillery Takes a Stand, then click on comments. There you can read what I wrote and then read that someone called me a Male Chauvanist Pig. I point out the fact that there were a group of people who actually talked to women who had gotten pregnant from rape or incest. And the ones that gave birth to baby that was a result of the rape were happy that they had done that and that their baby was a part of their healing. And the ones who had an abortion said that the abortion was as bad or worse then the rape itself. This is a fact. I also said that having an abortion makes things worse not better for the women. After they get past the shock of being pregnant then they can heal from the rape and expecting a precious life is the best way to do that. I show them a fact that abortion makes being raped worse and they go on as if what I said wasn't true. It is true. Abortion is never the answer to any unplanned pregnacy. I love Patricia Heatons statement that women who have an unplanned pregnacy deserve unplanned joy. Amen, Patricia.     

The last person said that I'm a "sad, sorry, completely  wrong man." That only joy comes from when a baby is planned and not when a women is raped. They probably are really young and ignorant. Hopefully they will someday be alot more wise and smarter then they are now, like some of the people here who were prochoice but realized that abortion is wrong. And are now prolife. Sometimes it takes awhile for some wisdom to sink into the minds of some people. I'll write a thoughtful and compassionate response to them. The web site Bush VS. Choice is sponsored or run by Planned Parenthood. I can just see some of their members getting angry at my posts. But I don't care, they can get angry all they want. If one person reads what I wrote and realizes that they've been wrong all along, then any abuse from them is well worth it. Anyway, that's what's going on right now. Can they kick me off the website or not? If they do that's fine with me as well. We need to challange their lies and misinformation.       

reply from: Christian4life

Navynate, they all sound very stupid.  I hope you are doing some good, but I don't know if they are actually listening to you.

reply from: Navynate

Christian,

That is a very good point that they might not even be listening to me. I was wrong, it's not PP that is a sponsor of the group, it's NARAL. But there are so many Prolife people on there that you wouldn't know what kind of group it is without reading what the moderators write. So many times someone writes a post that totally proves what the prochoicers are saying wrong and yet they keep going as if nothing has changed their belief. Yeah, they are in deep denial, but then again some people in deep, deep denial can be reached, some are even on here. One post I wrote talked about the kinds of abortion and what happens when they perform those abortions. Then they come face to face with what actually happens in an abortion. Some of the prolifers can be a little over the top. One prochoicer wrote that if you don't like an abortion then don't have one. To that someone else wrote (a prolifer) "That's brilliant. If you're such a nut against domestic violence, don't beat you're wife. If you're so against war, don't built nuclear weapons. If you're so against drunk driving, don't buy a car.
All of these are just as logically fallacious as your ignorant statement." I think that it wasn't very nice, but true. Prochoice groups still say that if you don't like abortion then don't have one, that's most of their argument to this very day. The person who wrote that post is pointing out that it doesn't matter if you believe that something is wrong or not that you just have one. There are things that are wrong period. And abortion is one of them. And the comment about "Only a person without overies and a uterus would say such stupid phrases".Is very sexist. Women who have been through the same situation I talked about were saying that having a baby as a result of rape was a joy for them and a blessing. I guess being very sexist is OK when you're prochoice and not when you're a man. It's wrong anytime.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Of course their in denial, admitting they're wrong involves admitting that at the very least they've SANCTIONED murder. More likely, they've participated in it.

I think this too often gets overlooked by pro-lifers. For us the debate is: Is it a child or isn't it: For them the debate is: Am I a murderer or am I not?

reply from: Navynate

Good point Boris. But there are so many people who just can't work one more day in an abortion clinic. It's so much suffering and pain that anything is better then to put up with working one more day in one. It takes alot of pain and suffering on their part before they can't take it anymore, but they usually get there or they kill themselves. Some of the best prolife activists are those who worked in Abortion clinics or had one themselves. Not some, alot of them are those who have personal experience with abortion. 

How can you know that you've done those things to others? How does someone get to sleep at night knowing what they do all day?  

reply from: Allizdog2000

I don't go on the forums on the Pro-Abortion websites, but I DO monitor Planned Parenthood, I'm Not Sorry.com or .net, ALCU, NARAL Pro-Choice and National Organization of Woman (NOW) websites.
  
What I am looking for is their tactics for "us" in other-words how they combat the Pro-Life side, what they are currently doing and planning, what misinformation they are putting out, what they are planning.   Call it Intelligence gathering and analysis.

As for taking the war to their turf, I have in chatrooms.  But that becomes very frusterating.  Mostly being the only pro-life person among 30+ Pro-Abortionists.  They twist words around and take stuff waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of context.  Mostly just cruel people.

reply from: mom5

Hey Nate, I checked out the website and the posts. On the topic "what did you do" one poster (Lucia Opera Ghost) actually states that she/he (I can't figure out) is a minor and would sterilized themselves if they were not.

Did you read that?  So, leads me to believe what I said before,  dealing with minors  who have NO CLUE about love in life of children or life itself.  When I was a teen, I hated life.  At one point or another we all went through a time of "wish I wasn't born, etc."  If anyone didn't, they are lucky, because I think majority of teens go through this stage and hopefully never get so down as to commit suicide

What I seen from the Pro-Life posting was maturity.

What I see on this forum from Pro-Choicer's is they are trying to justify an abortion. More than likely they have been involved with an abortion.  Themselves or someone else.  What they don't realize that if they would just stop trying to justify it and say "hey it was wrong", then they will heal, their hearts will open/change, the anger will go away and eventually realize that it is ok to be Pro-Life.  

Just my thoughts.

reply from: Navynate

Alliz,

They really do take things out of context. One of them said that taking what I said to the next step would be for the Rapist to get parental rights and then that they would be forced to get married. I never even hinted at that, yet they still think that would happen if Abortion were outlawed in cases of rape. They do a good job of not answering the points that you bring up and then go off on a tangent that doesn't prove that abortion should be legal for rape victims at.And Yeah it can be frustrating, but there are alot of people in the NARAL group who are prolife.

Mom,

They really are young. Lucio is a teenage girl. Probably just keeps repeating the same old lies that all prochoicers tell. She doesn't know a whole lot (like most teenagers) about various things. I thought that I know so much when I was that age too, we all did. But then we grow up and realize that things are alot different then when you were younger and didn't know any better. Maybe her parents raised her to believe in prochoice. You learn things from your own experiences and then get a better grip of reality. Some people it takes quite awhile to see clearly. If I had had my way growing up, I would've had alot of friends and been somewhat popular. But since I wasn't then I was vulnerable to give into peer pressure. Teenagers think  that they are so smart and know everything.

In some ways I wonder if it's worth it to try and talk some sense into them. Maybe I'm off about Sanger, I think getting information from more then one source is a good idea. But I've also heard prolife groups say that alot of what she wrote was sanatised as well, so anything bad was taken out and the OK stuff was left in her writings. I don't know if that's true or not. But I sure wouldn't be surprised if that was the case that all her writings had been cleansed of anything that would make her look like the evil person she seemed to be. She's got alot of defenders out there who will do anything to keep her from getting a racist tag stuck to her and also stick PP with the same tag as well. I'm just so tired, not of the debates, but of using so much of my time debating people on NARAL's web site. I'm a college student right now,, even though I just turned 40 last month. I have to get my school work done first before I debate some prochoicers on a web site. If I don't graduate I'm not doing myself any good debating them.

I agree with Boris to see what they're up to and know what they have planned in attacking us. I've done that in the past as well. Now that I have an IBM Notebook (one of the things you get to use when you go to my school) and can get online much easier, (like anytime I want) then I can get the information I want and then take off. I better get going and get some of my HW done.

reply from: Christian4life

Yep, get that work done.  What are you studying to be?  Just curious.

reply from: Navynate

Christian,

I'm majoring in Business Management. I need more self discipline to work harder at my school work. I want the readers to also get something out of what I write. That's why I write about the people of Silent No More, because if anyone there has had an abortion and is starting to feel horrible about it, that they will try to find a Silent No More group where they live.  It won't change the minds of those who haven't had one and are prochoice, but those who are really starting to see that they really did kill their baby and will want to get help and healing. They also need to know that they aren't alone, and they aren't crazy either. That is some of the hardest things to realize when they are in counsiling and the councilor says that they just have to  get used to having had an abortion. These people aren't the crazy ones, they are the ones who are pushing abortion as a cure all for any problem pregnancy.  SNM people are extremely loving and caring people, as are alot of other post abortion ministries as well. We have true love on our side, when a women does some out of an abortion clinic it's the prolifers who are outside who will be with her to help her put her life back together again, not the prochoice groups (who claim to be so Prowomen). And the  they talk about how some women have some regret or even some joy after their abortion. It's more like a moment of Joy for a lifetime of pain and suffering is what abortion really does to women and men who are a part of abortions as well.   

reply from: Navynate

Christian,

I think that you might be right, I do have things that are more important things to do then argue with them. Some of them have come on here as well. I don't know if they're the ones who have been procoice here or not. Maybe just to see some of the things written here. Logic and common sense sure are lacking with the people who are prochoice. One of them even said that if her mom had wanted to abort her then that would've been OK with her. How can you debate intelligence like that? I would even say that it would've been a terrible tragady is she had been aborted. And yet she thinks that her mom should've had the right to abort her. Even the worst person in the world should've been born anyway. I can just imagine if the guy accross the street hadn't been born (he drank like a fish when I was growing up) then maybe I'ld be the one to drink like a fish and not him. He was in the Navy several years before I was, and without seeing what alcohol does to people then maybe that would've been me. I think that no matter what someone's life is like, that they can still have some good that they do for other people. Maybe it's what you don't want to do with your life. I had an uncle who smoked, and I never wanted to be like him either. I tried smoking once and never, ever again. I love the movie "It's a Wonderful Life". But sometimes it should be named, "Sometimes It's A Really Crappy Life, But Atleast It's Yours". Being alive is better then never having been born. Lucio is the one who said that her mom should've had the right to abort her. 

It amazes me how some people are so blinded in some ways.      

reply from: Dmourning

Hi friends, I'm baaaaaack! Well, I actually never really left, per se, but I've been lurking alot since our completely fruitless discussion from two weeks ago. I absolutely had to come out of hiding to ask this one simple question:

Really? Does this apply to such wonderful miracles named things like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot? Would you trade abortions for any of those 3 for the millions of lives (EACH) they ended?

This coming from a crowd that hides behind fairy tales to explain the world to them, no reply is really necessary.

It's funny. If you asked a pro-choice person who willingly hangs around pro-life forums, they would answer the exact same way about you guys. It's sort of like two little kids having an argument, "you're ugly", "no, YOU'RE ugly", "no, YOURRRE ugly", and so on. And so on. And so on...

Anyhow, it's so nice to be back. I'm looking forward to many more good times debating this issue with you guys.

reply from: mom5

It's funny. If you asked a pro-choice person who willingly hangs around pro-life forums, they would answer the exact same way about you guys. It's sort of like two little kids having an argument, "you're ugly", "no, YOU'RE ugly", "no, YOURRRE ugly", and so on. And so on. And so on... Anyhow, it's so nice to be back. I'm looking forward to many more good times debating this issue with you guys.

You know, I see your point.  It can go both ways on both sides.  Really in any debates that's how the other side feels.  Anyway, what really bothers me the most about the Pro-Choice forums is that they "dwell" on the rare and hard cases of abortion as an argument to keep them legal.  Can you explain to me why that is so?  When 95% of abortions are for birth control purposes.  

Another thing that I have heard Pro-Choicers say is that they want to see abortions become rare?  What does that mean?  I know that you, dmourning, have stated that abortions past 9 weeks are barbaric to you.  Would you mine please explaining this?  
 
Also, on the Pro-choice forums, I see alot of profanity and just general anger.  I know sometimes the discussions here get "heated", but I have never seen profanity.  And I have never seen someone tell someone to "shut up".  Now, I have said "go back to your pro-choice forum"  but everyone has the right to speak up. 

reply from: yoda

Birth is the moral right of every gestating human being. Killing any unborn baby would be morally wrong, because it has not yet done anything wrong.

reply from: Allizdog2000

This coming from a crowd that hides behind fairy tales to explain the world to them, no reply is really necessary.

Dmourning, You are referring to those that believe in the Bible.    No, I do not hide behind anything, I believe it is you hiding behind your computer in the safety of your home.  

reply from: Dmourning

Did I hear you right here? If you could go back in time, you wouldn't trade in the abortion of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin or Pol Pot to save the millions of lives they took based on this obtuse principle?

Of course, you say this while you are hiding behind your computer in the safety of your home. That's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?

reply from: shiprah

Really? Does this apply to such wonderful miracles named things like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot? Would you trade abortions for any of those 3 for the millions of lives (EACH) they ended?
I don't support abortion because there is no way to tell whether or not someone will grow up to do evil.  Do you really want to change the American belief that all men are innocent into proven guilty?  If we support abortion because someone might do evil, how about murder after birth?  Wouldn't it be equally justified to kill a three year old or twenty year old potential Hitler as a pre-born one?  Should we all run out the house with guns right now and kill anyone who might do the world harm?
This coming from a crowd that hides behind fairy tales to explain the world to them, no reply is really necessary. It's funny. If you asked a pro-choice person who willingly hangs around pro-life forums, they would answer the exact same way about you guys.
 Except they'd be lying.  You can't come up with one example of us being cruel, taking things out of context, or twisting words.  If you can please quote it.  If not quit lying.  Put up or shut up.

reply from: shiprah

Did I hear you right here? If you could go back in time, you wouldn't trade in the abortion of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin or Pol Pot to save the millions of lives they took based on this obtuse principle? Of course, you say this while you are hiding behind your computer in the safety of your home. That's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?

reply from: Dmourning

My question about Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot is purely hypothetical. It has no basis on any pro-choice argument whatsoever. Knowing what you know now, if you could go back in time, would you perform just 1 abortion on Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot to save the millions of lives they took?

I will refrain from religious bias when anti-choicers refrain from interfering in the lives of families and women.

http://www.armyofgod.com/Paulhillindex.html

Here's a good start. How is this any different than what you claim to be fighting? Try explaining how this is defensible.

reply from: shiprah

I will refrain from religious bias when anti-choicers refrain from interfering in the lives of families and women.
So your point is what, its okay to be prejudice against Christians because some people are prolife.  Do you realize the two groups aren't synonymous?  Will you continue being prejudice against Christians while there are atheist prolifers?  Prejudice is justified based on people's political views?  As far as stopping interference in the lives of families and women, I interfere in their lives everytime I support bans on child abuse, domestic abuse, or rape.  Maybe I should stop those interferences as well. http://www.armyofgod.com/Paulhillindex.html Here's a good start.
Paul's actions are defensible for the same reason Nat Turner's were.
How is this any different than what you claim to be fighting? Try explaining how this is defensible.
When I said us I meant this forum, obviously you couldn't find an example.

reply from: Allizdog2000

All Pro-Lifers and pro-abortionists:

Would you ever get out and march, protest and take on Pro-Lifers/Pro-Abortionists in a physical confrontation?

These questions are for ALL those that are "Pro-Choice" and Also Pro-Life.
I am not buying that 'We're not stooping to your level" or any variation of that.  Fights happen.
I am NOT, absolutely NOT talking about clinic violence or terrorism!!
While I absolutely agree clinic violence only supports the Pro-Choice cause and they just as evil as whom they hurt, I look down shamefully on Eric Rudolph and other terrorists.  Not one website calls any clinic terrorists saints or say any positive about them. 
I will say this again, I am NOT talking about clinic violence or terrorism, so do not get me wrong in what I am saying.

****I am speaking of street fighting, protests, clashing political views that spill out into the streets with fists*****    

Well historically street fighting has happened in California with protestors physically clashing with other protestors over the 2003 Governor re-call (Gov. Gray Davis supporters vs Gov. Davis detractors) and in San Francisco, L.A., San Diego, etc  Anti-War protestors vs. Pro-Military protestors/Angry Motorists.  
In Irvine in 1999, Communist supporters vs Anti-Communist Vietnamese.  
and numberous other places........
Not to mention, Chicago 1968, Kent State, etc etc........  

Anyone here been in an actual street fight over your views ? (either started or finished it) (Either Pro-life or Pro-Aborton)

reply from: Dmourning

That's actually because you know deep down you would trade just 1 abortion to save those millons of lives and it kills you that you won't actually admit to it in front of you camp. And don't give me this nonsense about not answering "hypothetical questions" because most of your arguments are based on hypotheticals. For example:

You lose a lot of credibility when you scoff at my hypothetical question to you, refuse to answer it based on that and then turn around and throw a hypothetical back at me.

Yes, it is ok to be prejudiceD against Christians. After all, they are the biggest hate group in the country. I look at atheist prolifers only with slightly less disdain than I do the Christian variety.

Nice, you support murder and terrorism to further your cause. No further comment is needed on your part...that speaks volumes about your pathetic character.

reply from: mom5

Yes, it is ok to be prejudiceD against Christians. After all, they are the biggest hate group in the country. I look at atheist prolifers only with slightly less disdain than I do the Christian variety.
 See, I really take an offense to this.  HATE??  I am a Christain and I do not HATE!  I do not even allow my children to say the word.   Just like I know there are Christains who are Pro-Choice.  You obviously have a problem with Christains and we know it already! Enough!
Nice, you support murder and terrorism to further your cause. No further comment is needed on your part...that speaks volumes about your pathetic character.
I visited the Army Of God website that you are refering to a long time ago... well, it made me sick!  I ,in no way, agree with any kind of violence for the cause, much less the death of an abortionist.  I actually got off the website quickly because for all I know the FBI monitors it (??????) and I'm afraid they may come and get me just for looking.  Hey - dmourning - don't think that every pro-lifer believes in that stuff!

reply from: mom5

Well, I can't help you here.  I run from fighting.  I myself like peaceful protests.  Even if someone was to "get into my face" , I would try my best to say nothing. So, I guess I really shouldn't even reply to your question, but I really think it looks bad to fight.

I saw on EWTN the march in San Francisco - the pro-choicers yelling, spitting, cussing everyone in the march for life - even the priests!  Talk about a straight ticket to HELL!  

I just believe that PRO-LIFE means love. And we should show it at all costs. 

reply from: Navynate

Mom,

I think most prolifers show that they love more then hate. I couldn't believe Paul Hill's web site either. He wasn't right at all. Killing someone DOES NOT PROVE THAT UNBORN BABIES BEING KILLED IS RIGHT!!!!!!! He proved that he was a compete hypacrite and had situational ethics. It's wrong to kill unless it's your life that is at stake, (it's called self defense and it's justified to take another life to save your own). But Abortion doesn't qualify at all as self defense. In alot of ways I believe that what we did in getting Saddam was a form of self defense, (but that's another topic for another web group). We don't need to discuss that here. But that's how I feel about that. Paul Hill was wrong, the vast majority of prolife groups wanted nothing to do with what he did or wanted to do. If it's legal to do then that's OK, but he didn't do that, he took the law into his own hands to hand out justice. Well only real judges can do that here on Earth. We shouldn't decide who should and shouldn't live, that's why abortion is wrong.      
  Dmourning,

If you were to spend alot of time with prolifers you would find that they are some of the nicest and loving people you would ever meet, the opposite of what you believe.

reply from: shiprah

That's actually because you know deep down you would trade just 1 abortion to save those millons of lives and it kills you that you won't actually admit to it in front of you camp. And don't give me this nonsense about not answering "hypothetical questions" because most of your arguments are based on hypotheticals.
Abortion, by definition, is not something you can trade.  It is the killing of an innocent who may or may not do something wrong in their lives.  If you could know whether or not you were aborting a potential killer, it wouldn't be abortion.
For example: You lose a lot of credibility when you scoff at my hypothetical question to you, refuse to answer it based on that and then turn around and throw a hypothetical back at me. Yes, it is ok to be prejudiceD against Christians. After all, they are the biggest hate group in the country.
How so?
I look at atheist prolifers only with slightly less disdain than I do the Christian variety. Nice, you support murder and terrorism to further your cause. No further comment is needed on your part...that speaks volumes about your pathetic character.
Amazing how its okay to abort a hitler who killed six million people, but it isn't okay to kill an abortionist who harms millions more.

reply from: Dmourning

Why don't you quit with your pseudo-witty rationalizations and answer the original question?

www.godhatesfags.com

http://www.armyofgod.com/Paulhillindex.html

http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/GetArticle.asp?id=144

Those should get you started. Christianity is the largest state sanctioned hate group in the country.

Nice try, but do a better job next time playing word games. I highly doubt Dr. Britton and his escort killed "millions". You sanction murder to further the "pro-life" cause. But in reality, you aren't pro-life at all.

reply from: shiprah

Why don't you quit with your pseudo-witty rationalizations and answer the original question?
I did, since abortion is the killing of an innocent with an unspecified future, it is impossible to abort someone if you already know their crimes
www.godhatesfags.com http://www.armyofgod.com/Paulhillindex.html http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/GetArticle.asp?id=144 Those should get you started. Christianity is the largest state sanctioned hate group in the country.
 Some people skew Christianity.  The problem is with bad people themselves, not the religion.  For example, what can you find in the actual teachings of Jesus that is hateful?
Nice try, but do a better job next time playing word games. I highly doubt Dr. Britton and his escort killed "millions". You sanction murder to further the "pro-life" cause. But in reality, you aren't pro-life at all.
They do.  44 million have been aborted

reply from: Dmourning

Nice. By refusing to answer the question, you have shown that you have no backbone. You have been presented with a yes/no question whose answer is plainly contrary to your views and you don't have what it takes to say the obvious answer. Instead you hide behind pseudo-witty half rationalizations to dodge the question.

You know, you seem to like to challenge people point for point no matter how off base you are. It seems that you do it just to amuse yourself sometimes. If a pro-choicer was to come here and tell you the sky was blue, would you try to debate them on it?

I respectfully disagree.

Why isn't the government pursuing christian hate and terrorist organizations with the same fervor it is pursuing muslim terrorist and other non-"patriotic" organizations? If you disagree with their tactics so much, why aren't you condemning them? They are giving you a bad name.

Again, Dr. Britton and his escort have not killed "millions", "44 million" or any other ludicrous number. In fact, they haven't killed ANYONE (considering the embryo isn't really a "child" or "baby" as you would like people to think)...Of course, let's not debate this because you and I both know where each other stand on this particular aspect of the abortion issue and us sitting here bickering about it would be pointless.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Really? Does this apply to such wonderful miracles named things like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot? Would you trade abortions for any of those 3 for the millions of lives (EACH) they ended?

You're assuming that people are pre-destined to commit evil. You're not a closet Calvinist, are you? People's gene's do not cause them to commit murder, and so Hitler, Pol Pot and any other mass murderer were not necessarily going to commit the horrific acts they did. Besides, as other people already pointed out, you wouldn't know they were going to commit murdr until they already had, so randomly aborting babies to try to avoid future crimes is kind of pointless isn't it?

Most important, though, is the fact that YOU don't even believe the hypothetical question you created. You have told us time and time again that fetuses aren't people. According to your own logic it would be impossible to abort Hitler, because you think that he somehow magically morphed into Hitler when he was born, but wasn't Hitler before then.

By the way, I think you claimed this was a "scientific view" of humanity.

reply from: Christian4life

Nice. By refusing to answer the question, you have shown that you have no backbone. You have been presented with a yes/no question whose answer is plainly contrary to your views and you don't have what it takes to say the obvious answer. Instead you hide behind pseudo-witty half rationalizations to dodge the question.

Hypocrite.  You asked her a question, she gave you an answer.  It wouldn't be abortion if she knew the person's future actions.  Nobody who has an abortion knows if the child they kill will grow up to be a killer or a saint.  That's a big part of WHY it's so evil.

You know, you seem to like to challenge people point for point no matter how off base you are. It seems that you do it just to amuse yourself sometimes. If a pro-choicer was to come here and tell you the sky was blue, would you try to debate them on it? I respectfully disagree. Why isn't the government pursuing christian hate and terrorist organizations with the same fervor it is pursuing muslim terrorist and other non-"patriotic" organizations?

Because for one thing they aren't Christian, just saying it means nothing, and for another thing, they aren't in a position of authority.  If what they do is illegal, it is the police's job to deal with them, not ours.

If you disagree with their tactics so much, why aren't you condemning them?

I don't condone them.  I believe in hating the sin not the sinner.
They are giving you a bad name. Again, Dr. Britton and his escort have not killed "millions", "44 million" or any other ludicrous number. In fact, they haven't killed ANYONE (considering the embryo isn't really a "child" or "baby" as you would like people to think)...
Oh really, then I guess a 6 month old baby in the womb who can feel pain, hear, dream, and think is just an "embryo".  I guess a newborn is just an "embryo."  If you have a problem with the fact that newborn babies are being cut to peices AFTER they are born from "failed" abortions, strangled, suffocated, or merely left to die of neglect by your friendly neighborhood abortionist, then why aren't YOU condemning THEM, they are giving you a bad name.
Of course, let's not debate this because you and I both know where each other stand on this particular aspect of the abortion issue and us sitting here bickering about it would be pointless.

Yes, let's not debate this because we already did and you lost.

reply from: chooselife

Dmourning - In response to your hypothetical question about Hitler.

No...I would not abort any of them. But you know what I would do. I would try to ensure that they were each raised in a loving 2 parent home. Each of the people you mentioned had devastating childhoods. Children are not born hating other people. They are taught it. I would simply try to keep them out of the environment that festered hate in them. There is always a better solution than abortion. However...I will give you that at first glance abortion always SEEMS to be the easier solution. You could have killed Hitler...but you still cannot kill hate. And you have taken a small group of people claiming to be christians and labeled all christians as hateful. I am a christian and I also work at a large church. I can tell you that I have never met a more caring and generous spirited group of people. I was always told that you cannot reject Christ because of other Christians. Christians are not perfect and I can guarantee with 100% accuracy that they will always let you down. But so will every other human being. You are prejudiced against Christians and attempt to justify it by a couple of websites. If you are going to hate an entire group of people it seems you should have a little bit more evidence than a couple of websites.

reply from: mom5

Hey dmourning - the websites that you are posting do not represent everyone in the Christain community.

Surely, you are not assuming that?

You have really neglected some of my questions to you.  Look a few posts back.  I asked you specifically about at one point you posted that abortion after 9 weeks is barbaric.  Explain yourself. 

You have yet to acknowledge the actual abortion procedures and discuss them on this forum, although you have had the opportunity numerous times. You just seem to be "standing up" against Christanity. And to be honest, I really can't follow your logic at times and I honestly try to understand what you are even saying.  Seems like your discussions always revert back to a topic that actually has nothing to do with abortion.  Like throwing out websites on homosexuality, etc.  Come on!  Sounds like you are your own personal HATE GROUP against Christains.  Leave it alone.

I am really trying to see where you are "coming" from - How about taking a deep breath and remain on tract on these forums, stop shooting off the hip and then maybe we all can discuss things with you.

reply from: shiprah

Many years ago, my father was a Jewish physician in Braunau, Austria. On one particular day, two babies had been delivered by one of his colleagues. One was a fine, healthy boy with a strong cry. His parents were extremely proud and happy. The other was a little girl, but her parents were extremely sad, for she was a Mongoloid baby. I followed them both for almost fifty years. The girl grew up, living at home, and was finally destined to be the one who nursed her mother through a very long and lingering illness after a stroke. I do not remember her name. I do, however, remember the boy’s name. He died in a bunker in Berlin. His name was Adolf Hitler."
Professor Lejeune, nobel prize winner and discover of the chromosonal deficiency that causes Down Syndrome, then called Mongoloidism often told this story.  The funny this is Dmourning, if you had had your way, most likely Hitler would have been allowed to live, and the sister would have been aborted.
You suggest abortion should be legal to stop potential Hitlers.  Here's my question for you, how can you allow abortion knowing what would have happened had it been chosen by the mother's of Mother Theresas, Martin Luther King, or Gandhi?  What the world have done without them?  With all of the people suffering from AIDS, cancer, etc., how dare you kill any baby who might potentially grow up to have the cure for these diseases?

reply from: Dmourning

I set myself up for that, didn't I?

Actually, you lost. You (as in forced birthers as a whole, not just you personally) only spew the same tired, emotionally charged but logically lacking argument of "It's a child", "it's a baby" and (my personal favorite), "baby killer". But the fact is, you people don't have a clue as to the proper terms for the different stages of development of humans in utero.

Answer this then, if birth actually occurs the at the moment of conception (as you ALL have REPEATLY claimed), why do you celebrate birthdays on the day you are actually born and not the day you were conceived. It makes sense that if life TRULY starts at that moment and you are BORN that moment then the day you actually get spit out doesn't really matter, does it?

I don't suppose you've ever taken any kind of European history class have you? If not, you should head down to your local community college and pony up the 400$ to register for one.

Christianity has held back scientific advancement and human progress for centuries. in the 1400-1500s, people who proposed and supported the heliocentric model (the notion that the Earth is NOT the center of the universe, thus contradicting the bible) of the universe were persecuted and murdered. Christianity was the sole motivation for the rape and murder of the natives by the early Spaniards who arrived here. Look up the "Requirimento" if you don't believe me. This was a document that was read to natives telling them to "become Christians or we will kill you and take everything you have". The inquisitions were nothing mroe than murderous rampages in the name of Christ.

Even today, Christianity is holding back all sorts of scientific progress (stem cell research, furthering evolutionary understanding, etc). Christianity is used as an excuse to keep gays and lesbians as second class citizens.

Christianity has a VERY long track record of being a hateful, spiteful, supersticious and poisonous plague on humanity. The story hasnt changed in almost 2000 years, the way its interpreted hasn't changed, either. It doesn't take a couple websites to point that out, although I thought those 3 websites are ones you could relate to since you are all on the same side on these issues.

If it makes you feel good about your place in the world and makes you feel as if there is some sort of meaning to the universe, great. But, to me, religion is a poison to human existence and personally, the world would be a world of peace if monotheistic religion didn't exist.

reply from: Dmourning

Easily.

Who's to say that doctor your pro-death buddies (that you admit to supporting) killed wouldn't have changed his ways and become the ultimate champion of the pro-life cause?

reply from: chooselife

Dmourning - We get it. You hate christians and you could care less about the unborn. I will not debate with you anymore about the goodness of Christian people. There is a verse in the Bible about "tossing your pearls to swine". I will not be giving you anything else to trample on. And as for the unborn, I feel pity for you that you cannot see the beauty and recognize the miracle of pregnancy. It is a shame for you that you exempt yourself from knowing this joy to continue to hold an ideal that is anything but.

reply from: shiprah

I don't suppose you've ever taken any kind of European history class have you? If not, you should head down to your local community college and pony up the 400$ to register for one. Christianity has held back scientific advancement and human progress for centuries. in the 1400-1500s, people who proposed and supported the heliocentric model (the notion that the Earth is NOT the center of the universe, thus contradicting the bible) of the universe were persecuted and murdered. Christianity was the sole motivation for the rape and murder of the natives by the early Spaniards who arrived here. Look up the "Requirimento" if you don't believe me. This was a document that was read to natives telling them to "become Christians or we will kill you and take everything you have". The inquisitions were nothing mroe than murderous rampages in the name of Christ. Even today, Christianity is holding back all sorts of scientific progress (stem cell research, furthering evolutionary understanding, etc). Christianity is used as an excuse to keep gays and lesbians as second class citizens. Christianity has a VERY long track record of being a hateful, spiteful, supersticious and poisonous plague on humanity. The story hasnt changed in almost 2000 years, the way its interpreted hasn't changed, either. It doesn't take a couple websites to point that out, although I thought those 3 websites are ones you could relate to since you are all on the same side on these issues. If it makes you feel good about your place in the world and makes you feel as if there is some sort of meaning to the universe, great. But, to me, religion is a poison to human existence and personally, the world would be a world of peace if monotheistic religion didn't exist.
So I gues you couldn't find examples of Jesus himself acting in a hateful manner.  All you have done is shown human fallacy.

reply from: shiprah

Easily. Who's to say that doctor your pro-death buddies (that you admit to supporting) killed wouldn't have changed his ways and become the ultimate champion of the pro-life cause?
Oh, so we should kill hitler but let alone abortionists because they might become prolife.  Maybe we should make Hussein an ambassador and see if he turns out to be a good person.

reply from: shiprah

Although what we say to Dmourning might be tossing pearls to swine, you never know when someone on the fence who responds to logic is reading this arguments and might have the same ideas D shares until they are convinced by some of ours.

reply from: Dmourning

Again, just try to answer the question as opposed to spewing some pseudo-witty rationalization. Think you can do that?

And therein lies the problem. There really aren't any examples of him acting in a hateful manner. Yet his followers do. How do you explain the numerous examples in my last post? How do you explain the requermiento? How can anyone be so arrogant as to think they can act as god's spokesman?

What happened to the mantra of conversion that you seem to espouse?

As long as you use terrorism, murder, stalking and harassment as means of getting your point across, I doubt you will win many "on the fence" converts to your cause. When's the last time you've heard of pro-choicers resorting to murder to try and get their point across?

reply from: Allizdog2000

Dmourning Said: 
As long as you use terrorism, murder, stalking and harassment as means of getting your point across, I doubt you will win many "on the fence" converts to your cause.

When's the last time you've heard of pro-choicers resorting to murder to try and get their point across?

Your post, the Third Post from "Gloria Feldt Resigns"
"Navynate, you probably hang around abortion clinics more than I do and probably have more interaction with the people that work there than me. I can't speak for the mental status of those people but I suppose they may be inclined to drink because they are being harassed and stalked by pro-lifers all the time. What do you think?" 

"When's the last time you've heard of pro-choicers resorting to murder to try and get their point across?"

Answer to your Question:
Maybe they should.  Maybe you should start it.  Then again you already do.  What do you do at an Abortion Clinic?  Are you a Janitor? Escort? Nurse? Physician? Secretary?   Probably a Janitor.
You contribute to murder either directly or indirectly by working at an abortion clinic.  Same as the NAZI guards that indirectly contributed to the 11 million people killed in the Concentration camps.  So, I am indeed comparing you to a Nazi Guard. (Or a Janitor that worked at a concentration camp)  You're no better, you are just as evil.  

When was the last time I heard of pro-choicers resorting to murder to try to get their point across???

Good case would be, In the late 1980's a pregnant American woman flying to France and bringing back some RU486.  Well, she chemically murdered her own child, to get a point accross.  

Another one would be the T-Shirt "I had an Abortion."  (I haven't seen a woman wear a shirt like that, but when I do I will pity her.)  Using HER personal killing to get a point accross.  

Dmourning Said:

Of course, you say this while you are hiding behind your computer in the safety of your home. That's sort of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it? 

I doubt it.  I am in San Diego.  Where are you at?  We'll see who is hiding behind their computer.

 

reply from: Dmourning

Allizdog,

Oh boy, you really stepped up and proved your identity huh? It must take a lot of courage to admit living in a city over over 1 million people, doesn't it?

I'm in Michigan, I guess I can expect a pro-lifer with a gun/knife/blunt weapon anyday now, eh? Wouldn't suprise me if one did, actually.

I actually don't work at an abortion clinic. Thank you, though, for making the assinine assumption that if I did work at one, I would be the janitor. I'm sure your coworkers at McDonalds will get a laugh out of that. Or, maybe judging from your avatar, you are in the army? That's something to be proud of, too. Get those Iraqis!!!

Or...maybe...she did it because the pregnancy was unwanted and she has the freedom to make decisions about her own reproductive health?

If by "pity" you mean "harass verbally and possibly physically" then yes, I believe you there.

reply from: Allizdog2000

Oh boy, you really stepped up and proved your identity huh? It must take a lot of courage to admit living in a city over over 1 million people, doesn't it?

I'm in Michigan, I guess I can expect a pro-lifer with a gun/knife/blunt weapon anyday now, eh? Wouldn't suprise me if one did, actually. 

I hope one does.

reply from: Dmourning

Oh you are a compassionate pro-lifer, aren't you?

You are a scumbag, the worst kind of human filth that has no business being alive. I hope you get cancer and die in real life.

reply from: Allizdog2000

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
That is......... NO Compassion for you!!

reply from: Dmourning

So what law firm do you work for Frederick?

reply from: Allizdog2000

So, you used Yahoo! to find me.  Now Call me.

reply from: mom5

Alliz - you are clowning around too much with the clown here and that's what he wants!

Of course, he will not tell us his involvement with the abortion industry.  According to his views, he would be an excellent abortionists, don't you think? 

We all have more moral values in our pinkie finger than he does in his whole body.  That's obvious from when a person can take a simple forum like this and decide that he wishes you would get cancer and die (in real life??)  

 

reply from: Dmourning

Drat, I guess you don't want to tell me because of that whole "hiding behind the computer" thing.

Yes, Mom5, but this is the same forum that brought us this classic:

The "pro-lifer" fired the first shot. Does that mean he has as little "moral values" as me?

reply from: mom5

Does it really matter who "fired" the first shot? 

You are shooting all the time dmourning in more ways than one! Your hate for Christains. I believe your hate for women, which I am figuring by reading between the lines. If you don't hate women, then say it please.  You have showed your "lesser" moral  values in these area much more than the sentence you quoted just now.

So.... your involvement in the abortion industry...you have yet to say... Avoidance again?

reply from: yoda

To the Prolifers on this forum: Please think about it before you respond in kind to the likes of dmourning. His tactic of personal invective serves no other purpose than to distract us away from any discussion of abortion, and if it is effective in doing that, he will have won a small victory.

reply from: terry

Gentlemen, (Allizdog and Dmourning)

If we can't keep the discussion civil, perhaps you should both spend the $400 dollars at your community college learning some restraint.  

There's no need for subtle threats of violence, nor harsh invectives.

Enough already!  

reply from: Dmourning

The Christians I hate (which are most of them) are the judgemental, supersticious and hateful scumbags that run around trying to instil their view of morality on the rest of the populace through legislation and chronic complaining (does the Parent's Television Council sound familiar?). The rest of them...I don't trust.

I have a great example of why you can't trust a Christian: A while back at work, there was this woman. Very nice person. She was always interested in chatting, talking about current issues (Iraq, the weather, etc), and so on. Her and I got along super. She laughed at my off-color jokes, we had common interests, etc. We got to talking and it turned out her husband was a DJ (for weddings, graduations and the like). I mentioned that I was getting married and hadn't found a DJ yet.

Ok long story short, we went to lunch to discuss it one day. What do you think she layed on me at lunch? "It would make me so happy if you invited the lord into your heart" Im paraphrasing here what she said exactly. Despite my rejections and request to "drop it", she persisted. That isn't the point, though. Her friendship wasn't friendship without strings attached. Her friendship was only a RUSE to proselytize me. She sat and begged me to go to church with her family. Give me a break.

Can't you people be friends with someone because you think they are a good person with no strings attached? That's a bitter subject for me. I don't like being messed with by people. Next subject.

Humor me, how do you figure I hate women? I don't get in their faces and yell "BABYKILLER" when they are going through tough emotional times, I don't demand that the only choice they have with respect to their reproductive health is no choice at all and I most certainly support NOW, PP and NARAL which are truly champions of women's rights.

You try to guilt women into relinquishing control of their bodies to someone other than themselves. This isn't hating?

And as for my role in the abortion "industry" - I have no role in it other than an ardent supporter of a woman's right to choose. That's all.

reply from: chooselife

Dmourning - As a christian this woman believes that if you do not accept Jesus as Lord you will be going to hell. Obviously she likes you and is concerned for you. Even if you don't agree with her beliefs...can you not appreciate that she cared enough for you to be concerned for your eternal destination. You accepting Christ doesn't affect her salvation one bit. But she knows what God has done for her and she wants for you to experience that same joy. As friends don't we give advice to each other based upon our own experiences? If I go to a restaurant and get horrible service and food I tell my friends so that they don't have to go through the same thing. Not one of them would suggest that I would only be their friends if they agreed not to go to that restaurant. See that decision doesn't affect me one way or the other. I only share the info with them because they ARE my friends and I want to be helpful in a way that I know how. And I think I speak for just about everyone on here that NO ONE has ever told a woman who had an abortion or was going to get one that she is/was a "babykiller" We fight abortion because the act harms women. Women suffer from abortion. If the best thing we as a society has to offer women is abortion then we are in a sad state. Wouldn't it be better if we could offer women employment opportunities that paid well and were considerate of her dual roles as professional and mother? Wouldn't it be better if colleges made it easier for moms to attend school by offering affordable and/or free childcare? And what if companies started doing this as well? And wouldn't it be better for women if men were actually taught (by their male role models) that women are to be treasured and loved...and not used, abused, and tossed out when they are finished? Abortion seems to be the easy way out....but it not only kills innocent infants....it is slowly killing the spirit of women all over the world. For that alone I fight abortion.

reply from: mom5

Dmourning - now, I really feel like there may be a person somewhere inside you... and I don't mean that to sound ugly or anything, but I was really wondering if you had any feelings at all.

I think Chooselife - pretty much hit the nail on the head with the lady you were talking about.  She couldn't have described it any better to you.  While, I am not good a writing my emotions the best in the world, I will share with you my feelings..... Before I was married, I didn't want to be a christain.  I thougt it would be too hard... how could you really have a good life being so called "perfect".... just telling the truth here.  Well, I too knew people like the lady you spoke about that just crawled my skin.  I avoided some of my past friends because they were SAVED.  They just got on my nerves to be around.  I couldn't say one cuss word around them and just felt like they were judging me ALL THE TIME!  God forbid I want to order a drink if we all went out to eat.  I think you probably know what I am talking about.  Well, to add to this story, I live in the south. Yes the bible belt.  We do have alot of Christains who are IN YOUR FACE!  I grew up Baptist.  There were things about the Baptist faith that I did not agree with. Most of all, and this exactly how I feel.... I do not like the "altar calls".  Let me describe in case you do not know,  at the end of a church service, the preacher stands up front and "calls" you to come up and talk to him and say the Jesus is your personnal savior.  Alot of people need that in their life.  When I was younger, I went up front and was baptized the next week.  But over time of being in the Baptist church, I started to feel anxious when the "altar call" came about.  It's really hard to describe that feeling.  Anyway, I stopped going to church as a teenager and didn't start back to church again until after I was married.

SORRY this is so long, but I still want to describe... my husband and I were married not in a civil ceremony, but a church ceremony.  We promised to God and ourselves, to be together until death do us part.  We decided that if we were to have children, we do need to raise them in church... but which church?  What kind of church?? I definitely was not going back to the Baptist Faith and have my children go through the same anxiety that I felt eveytime the I attented.  Anyway, I have found that not all churches are that way.  I am Episcopalian now and love it. 

What I want to tell you now dmourning... it doesn't matter how you worship..... God will find you!  Maybe not today... but God will find you someway.  Maybe not even through Christianity, which I hope He does, but there is so much more to Christainity then just trying to get everyone "saved".  When you realize the suffering of Christ and most of all his Mother, you can see how much He really doesn't want all of us to suffer.  He's already made the sacrifice.  Therefore I feel that it is my responsiblity to help end some of the suffering that I see from abortion.  Do you kinda see where I am coming from?  My religion gets my though the hurt the I feel from just knowing that womem are killing their children everyday.    I just hope that I have explained myself just a litte.

I became Pro-Life fully after having children.  I have lost two children and when you are pregnant and actually living on "pins and needles" day by day, worrying if you are going to loose a child... I does bring up some anger toward women who intentally kill their children.  I have since resolved that emotion and here is how.  These women are not being told the whole story about abortion.  They are being told that it is the only option if their life is not perfect.  No one's life is perfect.  I could loose everything that I own today - I could be bankrupt and loose it all, would I kill my children because I couldn't support them perfectly afterwards.... HELL no!  Then why should a woman kill her children to begin with. 

I want to add - to be a Christain, you must first act like one... I am friends with any one who respects me.  That lady should respect that you do not want to be  a Christain right now, however, she shouldn't like you said, have that as a string attached to your friendship. If you are not "influencing" her to not be a Christain, which I doubt you are, but I don't know... If you show hate for Christainity toward her the way you have today, then she doesn't need you as a friend.  Does that make sense?  But I think she cares for you.  Maybe you should just tell her that you and your wife are just not ready to go to church and leave it at that.   But, God will find you one day...

I didn't mean to preach... HA HA!  But I do think you for being open.  It lets us know more of where you are coming from.  All in all, you can trust Christains.  Give them a try again.

I want to clear one thing up with you..... I have never called a woman a "babykiller"  That is horrible. I call the abortionist a baby killer, because they are educated on the biology of the baby and they KNOW its a baby.

As for women's reproductive rights - they can choose not to get pregnant.  Now we talk about rape, incest, so-called 'health reasons", but let's be real.  95% of abortions are strictly for birth control purposes, I say, use your birth control "rights" before you conceive, if you are finished having children, fix it permantly.   Now, I also know that a lot of women will say "IT WAS AN ACCIDENT"  and that's were God comes in, because I don't think God can make an ACCIDENT--- just little blessing by surprise. When you start seeing just what a miracle it is to even get pregnant to begin with, the wonderful miracle of how the baby grows, then the wonderful experience of child birth, you can't be anything but pro-life!  I hope that you experience all that one day with your wife (future wife?)  and if you see it all as a miracle, then that's how God got ya!

As for you being a woman hater - well, the posts that you have made in the past have never mentioned care/compassion for the woman... just makes someone wonder... if I am wrong.. I apologize!

Sorry again to be so long and sorry for any misspelling - I don't claim to be a spelling queen!  I so wish this thing had spell check.

reply from: Christian4life

Well having had a similar experience with a Muslim person I can relate.  He talked to me all the time until he found out I was Christian.  Then he just ignored me altogethor, no reason, no goodbye, nothing.  If he had even TRIED to convert me that would be something, that would mean he at least wanted me to join his faith, but he didn't.  He flat out did not like me anymore JUST because I was a Christian.  That woman who tried to convert you actually did you a favor.  Just for a minute, entertain the idea that you MAY be wrong.  It certainly is possible.  You cannot prove that God does not exist, and you certainly cannot prove that Jesus didn't come to earth, as there is overwhelming evidence that he did.  At judgement day, what if God told you, hey, I sent so and so to tell you the truth, and you didn't listen to her then, so you can't tell me I didn't give you chances.

I hope you know you are completely alienating any Christian person who may be reading this and be on the fence about the abortion issue, and I'm glad for that.  Thank you.  The last thing the world needs is more Christians who sympathize with abortion. 

Women who think they need to kill the child inside them to be feminists are pitiful creatures.  I feel sorry for them.  I have my baby and I will never regret that for one second.  There are plenty of women like me who can say the same thing, despite less than ideal circumstances in which they became pregnant.  And there are far far more women who regret their abortion than who regret their child.  Why do you seem to think the former is the most compassionate?

reply from: Christian4life

Hi mom5 I am online right now too.  It's baby nap time!

Oh, and another thing, us "pushing our morals on you" Dmourning, is a good thing.  If we didn't you guys wouldn't HAVE any.  I'd like to see what you would do with the world if we weren't around to stop you.
Oh wait, I already did, it's called Nazi Germany.  Christians didn't speak up enough then, but we've sure learned our lesson from that now.  And don't tell me that Hitler was a Chrisitian.  That is a lie a lot of people keep repeating, but it isn't true.  Yes, he was as a child, before he had done anything so evil, but he turned away from God and hated Him after that because he was refused a high position in the church.  Just like Satan, he wanted all the glory for himself.  And when he couldn't have it, he turned against God and tried to make himself admired and revered like God.

Hitler hated God and Jesus throughout his riegn.  Hitler called the God of Christians and Jews one and the same (which is true), he also called Him "that wanderer of the desert that makes people act like mad dogs" or something like that.  I can find the exact quote if you want.

People who abort are trying to play God too.  The doctor who kills that baby is asserting himself in a dominat position over that child's very existance.  No human being should be able to decide when another human being's life should end.  Your moral code, if you have one, allows that.  Thank God not everyone thinks that way.

reply from: Christian4life

Getting back to the original subject, Nate, I tried a search on google for bush verses pro-choice, like yous said, but all that came up was this rediculous form letter.  I would like to find that website but have had no luck. 

reply from: mom5

http://www.bushvchoice.com/    go to post on our blog link

.... warning majority of these people are not very nice, you really have to kill them with kindness...you will see some profanity... and they will not completely answer questions concerning the abortion procedure (just few expections) and they won't really hear of percentages. I posted a little and NavyNate does also.  They come here too, I have itdeas as to who is who and I am still trying to figure some out. This pro-life forum website has been posted on their "blog" as they call it.

 I had a conversion with a "Future Abortion Provider", she was very polite and although I don't agree with her on everything, we did agree on a few things. I have also seen that they are not really up and up on laws.  One girl even stated to me that she didn't think abortion was legal all nine months... WRONG!  So, maybe posting there may bring some education to them... I don't know... but all in all, they just want to fight tooth and nail for legal abortions.  They want to bring up the rape/incest etc abortions time and time again.  And just like here, they really want you to be ugly and fight.  So, good luck if you give it a try... really I sometimes felt like Hey maybe I can show them something and other times I felt like they wanted me to slither with them, if you know what I mean.  

One person posted that he came to this website, we talked about all of God's children and then he WOKE UP.... just stuff like that... I so much wanted to post, "well, what would you have said if we called them all of Satan's children"  but I didn't.  See what I mean?  

 Nap time is up for me again!

reply from: Navynate

Mom,

Some of them are really polite and nice to others who disagree with them. Some are not so nice however. But it's a good thing to talk to them anyway. Someone who doesn't even post there might think about what you have to say and how you say it and realize that abortion is wrong and always will be. Some will, some won't. But you have to be aware of some of the people who aren't very nice though. There is so much ignorance in that group it's amazing. I wonder how many prochoice people there have ever thought of abortion from the prolife side of the debate? Not many, I'm afraid. But I can honestly say that I can see things from their side of the argument. But then I ask myself what's more important, a choice or an unbabies life? If the choice isn't to end that babies life then a choice is what's more important. But since the choice is specifically to end that babies life, then the life is more important then the choice to end that babies life.    

reply from: Dmourning

When will you christians wake up and realize there are 49,000,000 Americans who reject the forceful intrusion of your "morals". We won't just lay there and take it as you slowly try to turn the USA in to a theocracy. Assuming that another Hitler would rise up is absolutely the most assinine thing you have said yet.

if YOU were allowed to run rampant without "us" to stop you, christian reconstructionist lunatics like the Chalcedon Foundation would have their way and biblical lawbreakers would be stoned to death. Biblical lawbreakers, jews, what's the difference right?

Absolutely not, this is dilusional nonsense. The doctor is not asserting himself in any sort of dominant position. He is only doing so because the woman has consented to it. No one dragged her there. You are right about one thing, though, my moral code does allow for women to have reproductive freedom over their own bodies; something they have been denied for centuries under Christian morals.

reply from: yoda

Morals are an abstract concept, and as such cannot be forced upon anyone. Laws based on moral principles are as old as civilization itself, get used to them.

Whenever two people cooperate in the killing of an innocent third party, they are both equally guilty. Killing an innocent person is always an "act of dominance".

reply from: Christian4life

When will you christians wake up and realize there are 49,000,000 Americans who reject the forceful intrusion of your "morals".

Yes, and a lot of them are sitting in the prison cells because we told them THOU SHALT NOT KILL.  
 
We won't just lay there and take it as you slowly try to turn the USA in to a theocracy.

Oh give me a break.  Only the fanatics want that.
 
Assuming that another Hitler would rise up is absolutely the most assinine thing you have said yet. if YOU were allowed to run rampant without "us" to stop you, christian reconstructionist lunatics like the Chalcedon Foundation would have their way and biblical lawbreakers would be stoned to death.
 
A bit paranoid?
Biblical lawbreakers, jews, what's the difference right?

The is a heck of a lot of difference.  You want to take morals as well as the freedom to practice religion out of society, and don't tell me you don't - I've seen how it's already happening.

Absolutely not, this is dilusional nonsense. The doctor is not asserting himself in any sort of dominant position. He is only doing so because the woman has consented to it. No one dragged her there. You are right about one thing, though, my moral code does allow for women to have reproductive freedom over their own bodies; something they have been denied for centuries under Christian morals.

Yeah, you really supported Julie's reproductive freedom by telling her she's too darn young to reproduce because she's under 25.  Admit it, you support the freedom to kill, not create.

reply from: mom5

Absolutely not, this is dilusional nonsense. The doctor is not asserting himself in any sort of dominant position. He is only doing so because the woman has consented to it. No one dragged her there. .

I've seen them go in crying... does that constitute "dragged in"?

Abortion exploits women, most abortionists are men, it is usually done for the benefit of men. Sounds like domination to me.

reply from: Dmourning

If you have personally witnessed women entering abortion clinics, it was because you were standing there with a group of your prolife friends who were harassing her. That's why she was crying.

reply from: Allizdog2000

Dmourning, I am SURE you have, because you work at an Abortion Clinic somewhere in Michigan. 
Since you like pro-abortion websites, look at http://www.iamnotsorry.net  Full of stories of women that share their positive experiances their abortion.
 

reply from: Freud

To the original question asked....yes, in a manner of speaking......

To be totally forthcoming, I troll and flame online for a hobby....but do in fact use my personal beliefs as a basis for subject matter.

In the last week, it's been at http://www.prochoicetalk.com

A forum dedicated, as the name suggests to pro abortion related topics..... although they maintain they welcome pro-lifers.

Being both prolife AND prochoice (I wouldn't force someone against their will, but I pity those take the option), and a rather vulgar sort of a man at times, I took on the subject matter in a manner many of you probably would disagree with.

I began with hearty debate.......namely a question...To paraphrase myself, "If cause equals effect, and using multiple forms of birth control would do away with nearly every instance of an unwanted pregnancy in a consensual sexual encounter, why must abortion be symbolic for pro-choicer's views of their supposed bodily integrity? Why not gluttony, which only effects the body of one? something similar to that effect."

I was met with immediate contempt, and told I was a sexist pig from the patriarchal society. They did not allow for my belief in both camp's viewpoints...

Eventually they called for my banning.... after twisting statements I made in order to paint me as a violent online predator (suggesting that Federal law enforcement officials were going to take me into custody) The accusations didn't stand, and they backed down.... temporarily..

They then told me to leave.... that I was unwanted..... Basically, school ground behaviour akin to "you smell funny".

That's when I hatched a plan for peaceful protest..... a symbolic online protest which ironically, in it's actions represented the very example of abortion..... and in my particular viewpoint against abortion for convenience/ lack of personal responsibility's sake.

I refused to let them abort me from their forum...... I fought long and hard to remain in their debate forum and continue posting... When that failed, I waged a spam attack to disable them from aborting me from their forum or as you might have alrighty figured out....their "womb" after inviting me in for consensual action.

That's when they became extremely dirty in tactics.. this time insisting that I was a hacker and caused damage to their forum....another federal law subject....... eventually they backed down. I am not a hacker nor do I have the predilection for such things just to set the record straight....

I still post there, under a similar but different username (the other one was banned).

They continue to blanket generalize me as every dissenter they've ever had. I am so and so, and so and so, and another person, ext.....and the "scum of the earth".

Smear tactics....

an excerpt of what was written:

[QUOTE]Little recap of how www.Prochoicetalk.com played itself out of an argument:

(Prochoicetalk being a very "pro choice" pro abortion forum which claims to be interested in agreeable AND dissenting viewpoints for debate in their debate forum.)

I registered, began posting legitimate and articulated topics of conversation and debate.

Refusing to initially state my background or specific often seemingly at odds views on the various matters fully, far reaching generalisations were expertly grasped and awkwardly motioned towards me by those that did not ask those questions but chose to assume for the sake of silencing me in a well groomed smear tactic dating back since the beginning of mankind's collective bargaining consciousness.

Ever careful to not compromise my beliefs/views I returned the favour by picking apart logically the words and thoughts of the numerous pro-choice people attempting to smother me in a huge rugby styled melee.

Many of the PCT'ers turned rabid and lost the ability to reason with me, or reconcile with their stated beliefs....

More fuel for the emotional fires raging was added......

Name calling akin to McCarthyism and the Salem Witch Trials erupted.... I obliged, yet still choosing to never stray from the actual topics at hand...the discussion.... "the debate" this forum so sincerely insists it supports.

Calls were made for my banishment... because I would not coalesce. I would not desist, I would not melt into the fold. I was regulated to the level of an idiot savant for ever dare imply that cause=effect.

All the while, my major question remained largely unanswered.... "If we could do away with the need for an abortion, would both sides put down their guns and let it rest?" I cited personal responsibility as a method for preventing nearly any consensual sexual encounter from yielding offspring. Something both sides should be able to accept.....

Unfortunately, the replies amounted to, "I will be as responsible or irresponsible as I damn well please, it's my body, you can't dictate to me actions"..... a point I could not fundementally disagree with since I had begun to elaborate more on the fact that I was both Pro-Choice AND Pro-Life.

It was not however an adequate reply to the question of preventing the unplanned pregnancy, and I pointed this out.

I was met with "f you's" in php script nanny garbling, and a deluge of blood thirsty albeit generically and vaguely contrived posts for fodder's sake.  Clearly, this was an unpopular point.... personal responsibility for one's own actions before they caused an effect, not after the effect was caused.

I noted that for most, it wasn't about unplanned pregnancy, about whether it was an abortion or a murder.... it was about one's body. I wondered why a less flammable symbolic gesture couldn't be found instead of a heart wretching loaded subject for both sides..After all, science riding shotgun for personal responsibility and cause/effect could make it a near non issue.  Why not obesity and the right of a person to eat anything they damn well please and not be ridiculed or stopped? How about the subject of public nudity? The refusal to participate in drafts, forced service, membership? How about the right of any creature on this earth to go where it wants or needs on this earth without being barred or molested with citizenship issues? What about the laws people don't believe in and therefore break? why must they adhere to a law which effects their person without permission? Why is it wrong for pro-lifers to to break the law now that the laws are reversed to favour the pro-choicers when pre reversal, many pro choicers were breaking the laws of pro-lifers? There are a million and one anomalies to human existance, and we'd be here for the next lifetime if we tried to work out the largest most immense symbolic act to support the idea that a person has control over their own person. Yet science and knowledge offer a virtual ceasefire for the subject of unwanted pregnancies.

It's ironic what something so simple as taking a breath and looking for an outside answer can bring... when neither side wants the either to ever breath again. To be in the middle, as I and others are means that nothing that is said or done can ever be correct in the eyes of either faction..... Since we never chose either stance over the other.

Therefore, Pro-life and Pro-choice are the same. It's no longer a debate, but a war fought for winning's sake.

Some might look at my and Mr. Green's actions at prochoicetalk as "spam", but it could be no further from the truth.

What you have in this instance is a symbolic representation of the very subject matter we discuss on so many levels, one must wonder if irony and metaphor have ever met such a complete and crowning match before, ever.

A message board is a fertile body waiting to be impregnanted with new life and ideals... We create when we post. It's an action. A self described "debate subforum" implies that all are equals upon entering, and open minded interaction is free to run it's course. By posting in these forums, we show our consent for these ideals.

We consensually sign up, are consensually recieved, then we tango.

The problem arises when one realises that the message board seldom attracts equality in outcome.... inevitably, certain basic beliefs are held in higher esteem than their counterparts upon conception of the message board.... Like the human fetus, it takes some time for one gender/opposing force to be chosen over the other..... it must happen if the fetus or message board is to remain a life form/message board further.

Polarisation. One gender/faction is held at bay and not allowed to develop, lest the creation/message board fail.

The polarisation occurred long before I arrived to prochoicetalk, and the name implies long before it was born. Yet the board maintained it was a level playing field for debate.....

and debate did happen to a point, until my questions of personal responsibilty became to difficult for many members to idly stand by and refuse to answer any longer.....

I was met with contempt, scorn, and disgust.... I performed my end of the duty to debate, our natures in the equation, yet my presence was no longer acceptable to many. It was insisted that I had defects...not unlike a finding out your unborn child may or may not have one......... calls were made to abort (ban) me, because I was no longer desirable to the forum...even though it freely invited my presence and percieved mission to represent my "percieved" polarly opposed beliefs to the forum's namesake and focus. Those calls were not heeded at that point..... the situation and symbolism developed further from there.

I was warned that I could be expelled if I didn't fall into line, and stop defending my right to be there so vehemently...... yet I was invited there the moment they allowed me into their womb. My 80 posts of intelligent debate had fertilised a number of threads and posters, a creation was rapidly growing..... Baby "Cause and Effect". Already 10 toes, ten fingers, and the ability to smile on occasion at it's surroundings and existance..... the forum was pregnant, and quite late in the pregnancy. It began to dawn on a few, and screams of "it's our forum, we'll do as we want to you" began to sound.

I was warned to go with the unnatural expulsion of creative juices... to detach my claw's grip from the uterine walls since I was no longer a human being in their esteemed estimation.... I was a troll so they said.... not unlike being named a zeft or parasite (a common catchphrase there oddly enough).

Having silenced the clinical dissenters from the site, earlier expelling most of them... there were no protestors to bear witness or raise a placard....

I was banned, as was my brother in arms Mr. Green.... We were aborted.

And above all..... the very nature of cause and effect were aborted... we two babes left to paddle to safety and fend for ourselves in this hot topic, and the puddle of hypocrisy exhibited by Prochoicetalk.com and it's members.

We fought back.... with our right to exist.... the right to remain where invited and right to testify as human beings....

Some may call it spam...... But those with even an ounce of critical thinking realized it for what it was.

A right to life..........

But of course, who can disagree that the forum has a right to abort whomever it wants?

no one.

But then again......... this particular case shows the gross levels of hypocrisy and do as I say, not as I do behaviour probably ever exhibited on any message board ever.

Pro Choice forced to concede that "cause DOES equal effect" and they just proved it, amongst a number of other sore points undermining their platform.

But then again..... what do I care? I'm both pro-life and pro-choice.

What I care about is in fact faulty reasoning, and the drive of some people in any faction to place human emotion above logic, then place their head in the sand whilst targeting the opposing side as emotionists, spiritualists, or otherwise perverse unintelligent peoples.

Nice Job Prochoicetalk.com  :roll:

 

BTW-

Does it really matter which came first....the chicken or the egg? Find any human in any time of humanity, past present or future who can answer that one simple question with fact and total conclusion, and this abortion war has a foundation after all. But catch22's such as this can't be answered..... only managed the best we can in comprehension. Managing the hatch22 abortion subject demands that we stop looking for conclusion and lay down our rotten eggs and handfuls of chicken shit..... There is no answer. It will always be a half egg/half chicken one leg of yolk and the other on firm ground subject at best......[/QUOTE]

I realize that from my first few sentences, many of you might look upon me as filth.But I was raised a christian, and never forgot that Jesus surrounded himself with filth.

My tactics would probably offend the majority of you, and inflame those of you whom believe these actions are counterproductive to the ultimate goal of stopping abortions.

Maybe you're right...... But these people don't seem to care about anything other than running from personal responsibility and cause=effect... and I don't believe for a moment, remaining passive, or even clean and crisp of tongue will ever have any effect on them. For all intensive purposes, they don't care.

For those of you with a stomach which might handle rude, crass, often vulgar behaviour I supply these links for your perusal...  http://www.brawl-hall.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69813&page=1

and http://prochoicetalk.com/message-board-forum/viewforum.php?f=2

It's an often choppy disjointed ride to read, and has transpired for over a week (much of the original legitimate argument at PCT being deleted) but I think you may find in all the vulgarity and perversity an insight into the heads of the pro-choice youth.

I thank you for your time.

reply from: mom5

Standing across the street , due to federal laws and praying silently.  I guess that would be harassing to a pro-abort like you (I am tired of calling you pro-choice)

Then, just to get down to the dirty with you, at the age of 17, I had a close friend who was dragged into an abortion clinic by her all and well boyfriend...crying before and afterward... I still had to help her with her term paper afterward...   JERK!

 

reply from: Dmourning

Freud, that post was way to long.

Mom, just because a person is pro-choice doesn't mean they are pro-abortion. I've told you before I think the procedure can be quite brutal but that in no way means it should not be available for those who need it.

reply from: mom5

Let's talk about the procedure.... I've also asked you before, why do you think it is so brutal... and for who?  The woman?  The baby?    Explain youself.  Just thinking that it is brutal without saying anything further gets you nowhere. 

Yes, if you believe that abortion is okay.. you are pro-abortion. It seems to me that when someone insults someone else's right to have children.."Please tell me you are at least 25 yr old.. Younger is just way to young to be breeding".... now is that really pro-choice? 

reply from: yoda

Yes it does. It means you favor preserving abortion as a legal choice, which means that you are in favor of, rather than against abortion. Therefore you are proabortion.

reply from: Freud

And rl protests have many standing in the rain, for many hours catching colds sometimes...

depends on how you look at it... really

reply from: Christian4life

And rl protests have many standing in the rain, for many hours catching colds sometimes... depends on how you look at it... really

Freud you are a complicated person.  You don't have to be quite so complicated, I think you are just confusing yourself too much.  Anyway, welcome to the pro-life forums.   Don't worry, we don't cuss much.  As to your tactics, we may disagree with you at times, but that has yet to be proven out here.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Yes Freud, welcome to the forum!  Hopefully you won't run into the same problems here that you did there.

As for your Chicken and the Egg comment (I would quote it, but there is way too much to delete)  I don't think it matters much which came first, as far as abortion goes.  But I do think it's interesting that anyone who cracks open a fertilized chicken egg knows its a chicken immediately! (uggghhh!!!) 

reply from: Freud

And rl protests have many standing in the rain, for many hours catching colds sometimes... depends on how you look at it... really Freud you are a complicated person.  You don't have to be quite so complicated, I think you are just confusing yourself too much.  Anyway, welcome to the pro-life forums.   Don't worry, we don't cuss much.  As to your tactics, we may disagree with you at times, but that has yet to be proven out here.

Not confusion here.... at least in dry daylight hours..

The cussing/vulgarity bit is more to do with my predisposition, than this forum's.....

I'm no longer christian, but know a lot of christians that frown upon vulgarity.... to each and their own.

Thanks for the welcome.

reply from: Freud

thanks for the welcome.... and yes, I don't think a pro life mindset would be anti expression/ anti creationist when rendered on a message board....so cool.

as for your views on the chicken/egg scenario..... I see the analogy as something relevant to the topic matter at hand....

Imagine if you will the very first human cell.... pre man... the moment when it all began.....or alternately if you believe in a supreme being starting humanity... the moment of adam and eve...

Neither example can be proved one way or another, yet we're here...organically or cosmically..... one clearly should be valid and the other invalid....but good luck.... If you believe in cells and no god, aborting a pregnancy is not unlike becoming your own god, and stomping out humanity before the cells have time to exist solely on their own. Something clearly unnatural. Imagine if the first human threw itself off a cliff.

If you believe in a god, abortion is taking the sceptor away from the maestro.

reply from: BorisBadanov

thanks for the welcome.... and yes, I don't think a pro life mindset would be anti expression/ anti creationist when rendered on a message board....so cool. as for your views on the chicken/egg scenario..... I see the analogy as something relevant to the topic matter at hand.... Imagine if you will the very first human cell.... pre man... the moment when it all began.....or alternately if you believe in a supreme being starting humanity... the moment of adam and eve... Neither example can be proved one way or another, yet we're here...organically or cosmically..... one clearly should be valid and the other invalid....but good luck.... If you believe in cells and no god, aborting a pregnancy is not unlike becoming your own god, and stomping out humanity before the cells have time to exist solely on their own. Something clearly unnatural. Imagine if the first human threw itself off a cliff. If you believe in a god, abortion is taking the sceptor away from the maestro.

But you're treating embryonic life as if it's merely the potential, or cause of human life.  THe point most pro-lifers make is that there's nothing potential about a fetus, it's one of us already.

To correct your "maestro and scepter" analogy, it's got nothing to do with the scepter.  We're tearing up the sheet music and burning the instruments.

Or to go back to the chicken and the egg, if I eat an unfertilized egg I'm destroying the potential or cause of some future chicken, but I'm still not eating a chicken.

On the other hand, if it's fertilized. . .  Well, that's just gross!!!!

reply from: Freud

thanks for the welcome.... and yes, I don't think a pro life mindset would be anti expression/ anti creationist when rendered on a message board....so cool. as for your views on the chicken/egg scenario..... I see the analogy as something relevant to the topic matter at hand.... Imagine if you will the very first human cell.... pre man... the moment when it all began.....or alternately if you believe in a supreme being starting humanity... the moment of adam and eve... Neither example can be proved one way or another, yet we're here...organically or cosmically..... one clearly should be valid and the other invalid....but good luck.... If you believe in cells and no god, aborting a pregnancy is not unlike becoming your own god, and stomping out humanity before the cells have time to exist solely on their own. Something clearly unnatural. Imagine if the first human threw itself off a cliff. If you believe in a god, abortion is taking the sceptor away from the maestro.
 

I also believe that a fetus is a living human being, albeit an underdeveloped one... Its soul is far advanced than it's makeup. Maybe I should have clarified more readily with "fertilized cells" or fetus.... dunno

The sceptor traditionally decided who existed in a kingdom or realm, and who died. Held by a King or Emporer, sometimes by that culture's "God". I think your analogy is more nature related.... a more genetic analogy....but targeting the same thing mine has...albeit in a slightly different approach.  

Your first point.... you're saying that pre-insemination, the egg is a pawn... I agree.. It's just an egg.

Your second point, about being gross...... If it's now inseminated, it's a chicken.... What's the difference between eating a one month old chick, or a hen with one day left before expiring in it's nest bed from old age... It's all arbitrary... how old something is... the point is it exists.

Being grossed out by the yolk is a product of our upbringing.... animals don't turn their noses up if they find cartilage in their yolk.....It's still food... and alive enough to be eaten.

I wouldn't have so much of a problem with people that take abortions for the convenience factor if their abortion was about eating... If they ate everything they killed.... it was a death that reconciles with nature...no matter how repulsive many would find it.

reply from: Dmourning

Interesting. Why not?

reply from: shiprah

Being both prolife AND prochoice (I wouldn't force someone against their will, but I pity those take the option),
But when you're prochoice you allow others to force a human being to die.
and a rather vulgar sort of a man at times,
Please don't be vulgar, from the rest of your post I can tell you're much too intelligent to taint your discourse with foul behavior.
Welcome to the forum!

reply from: Freud

another rephrase is in order.... I was forced through 10 years of christian private schooling, attended church on average 3 times a week, and never for one fleeting moment cared about christianity...

It was chosen for me... I didn't choose it nor ever embrace it.

Some of the lessons are moral.... ok, fair enough..... they apply to nearly any situation, religious or not... I found the rest to be a bunch of man made folk lore reinterpreted so many times, and changed to suit agenda, that it holds no interest to either hear or read the bible ever again.

But that's just my personal opinion..... to each and their own.

reply from: Freud

It's not so easy as to stop a person from destroying themselves or something inside of them... no matter how you feel about the child.

I'm pro choice because it is a personal decision to do the right thing... not another's.... the right thing being to take responsibility for the child and your actions which caused the child, to have the child... both parents..

It's most probable that I will from time to time erupt into vulgarity and grandstanding to prove a point or entertain myself.... I will do my best to consider that the readership may be a bit younger, ext.....

Thanks for the welcomes

reply from: Dmourning

Welcome to the board, Freud.

reply from: shiprah

] It's not so easy as to stop a person from destroying themselves or something inside of them... no matter how you feel about the child.
it's not so easy to stop a person from comitting rape no matter how you feel about the woman
I'm pro choice because it is a personal decision to do the right thing... not another's....
So I guess you all support a man's decision to rape?
the right thing being to take responsibility for the child and your actions which caused the child, to have

reply from: Freud

 
With all do respect, that comparison is ridiculous....

I do not support abortion nor rape... but concede that abortion is self contained in one sphere of a person.... Far more different than one exercising will against another's demands not to do so.

Using rape as debate tool is foolish and makes the opposing side's arguments (and the moderate's) arguments seem initially stronger to the unbiased viewers. It also by default ties in rape with the dissent amongst the various ranks whether rape is a valid reason for an abortion. A side subject that I feel has it's on issues which need to be discussed without abortion in the mix. 

Your comments seem to me to be opportunistic and severly reliant on rail roading your beliefs against others in a confusing package that attempts to lead instead of debate or discuss.

I can see that you have very strong beliefs.... but this subject requires a small degree of tolerance for dissenting opinions..... and religious/moral values.

Reducing the number of abortions required would be a far better focus and no less important or immoral in premise......

It's also something both sides might come to see eye to eye too....... eventually... with understanding and mutual respect.

reply from: Dmourning

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head with Shiprah. She is cunning and deceitful with her arguments.

Freud, this is, I think, a fair assessment and something I agree with.

The problem is the question of how you go about reducing the number of abortions. It seems that some pro-lifers can agree that comprehensive sex-ed including the benefits of abstinence, birth control, etc is one of the top ways to go about this. Others, unfortunately, feel that abstinence only is the best way to acheive this (which statistics have shown plainly does not work).

reply from: mom5

Freud, this is, I think, a fair assessment and something I agree with. The problem is the question of how you go about reducing the number of abortions. It seems that some pro-lifers can agree that comprehensive sex-ed including the benefits of abstinence, birth control, etc is one of the top ways to go about this. Others, unfortunately, feel that abstinence only is the best way to acheive this (which statistics have shown plainly does not work).

I do agree that sex-ed, etc is the way to go...

Another way to reduce the amount of abortions... and it is rather simple acts that you can do everyday... respect family life!  When you are at the supermarket and you see a child acting up and the parents trying to take control... DON'T stare.  DON'T make fun of mini-vans HA HA!  DON'T make horrible comments when someone decides to have more than the 2.5 children. Speak to children and their mother in public, mention how cute they are (lie if you have to!)   And most of all, don't insult someone of a young age for choosing life for their child and wanting to have a family.  Don't insult someone if they want to be a stay-at-home Mom, (much less worry about their income). And if you know someone who is a stay-at-home Mom, tell her she has the best profession in the world.

reply from: Freud

Freud, this is, I think, a fair assessment and something I agree with. The problem is the question of how you go about reducing the number of abortions. It seems that some pro-lifers can agree that comprehensive sex-ed including the benefits of abstinence, birth control, etc is one of the top ways to go about this. Others, unfortunately, feel that abstinence only is the best way to acheive this (which statistics have shown plainly does not work).

Abstinance is the best way to prevent pregnancy..Who can dispute that?

But in this modern sex agenda based world of showcased tabloid movie stars, multiple divorces in a lifetime, and shirking of every personal responsibility that can be shirked..... abstinance is just a pipe dream....

Cause does equal effect......

It's an epidemic of modern industrialised and materialism driven society that we no longer consider ourselves to be beholden to anything we so do not like, or want.

Abortion will never be stopped, as long as there is exists an irresponsible woman/couple and a coat hanger handy.

Seems to me, abortion isn't so much the issue as the degradation of personal ethics and responsibility... abortion is an extension of that situation.

It's like banning firearms, and watching the crime rate go up......

then watching states that give out concealed pistol permits in mass to those that demonstrate clarity in psych and thoughts... then witnessing the crime rates reduce to new lows......

The killing is the problem...not the firearms..... but with the right to carry concealed, and hardly no one every using the right.... it's a moot point, and the personal responsibility to follow the law (not kill or commit crimes) is the focus......no longer the symbol of the gun, or weapon.

Abortion could become a concealed non smoking pistol one day...rarely unholstered, and even more rarely fired.

If as a society we continue to insist that 100 dead is far more horrific than 1 dead in a shooting spree...... then those that will not budge from making abortion certifiably, and entirely illegal..... shouldn't ever open their mouths when 1,000,000 people die in Africa, or 50,000 die in the middle east....

they've lost all logical credibility, and the very premises which they insist support their case. (ethics/morals, ext...)

reply from: Dmourning

Mom, you must have me figured out

I am the guy who stares laser beams at you in the restaurant when your children act up. I am the guy who drives a little, gas efficient car who scoffs at SUVs and other monstrosities, I am the guy who thinks people who have children at a young age (out of selfishness for wanting a baby/family and cant wait until they are ready, etc) are making huge mistakes.

So if I stop doing all these things, how will that reduce abortions? I dont get it!

reply from: mom5

As I SAID IN MY POST.... respect family life!

Don't tell me that I have to explain that one to you also! 

By respecting family life - it simply makes people unafraid of having a family.  Therefore, if an "accident" (as pro-choicers call it) happens, just maybe the young woman and man won't be afraid to choose life.  Can you comprehend that?

By the way, having children is NEVER a selfish act.  Didn't you mother tell you that? I'm sure changing you poop diapers and staying up all night with you was selfish.  So if you think having a family is a huge mistake and selfish (at a young age, let me specify your words), well I think having an abortion is a  huge mistake and selfish.  And we can agree to disagree on that.

reply from: mom5

BTW - dmourning - gosh.. I knew that was you.. I see you everywhere!  

reply from: yoda

I find that statement to be rather neblous and vague, Freud. Can you be more specific? And how do you differentiate between abortion and infanticide (other than the obvious legal differences)?

reply from: yoda

Well, at least you're not cunning with yours. You're just plain insulting, no class at all.

reply from: Freud

I find that statement to be rather neblous and vague, Freud. Can you be more specific? And how do you differentiate between abortion and infanticide (other than the obvious legal differences)?

Lacking the voice....or depending on the scientists, the ability to communicate, or depending on the viewpoint...whether the fetus is human, and when..... You have something inside of a person... an unquantified something in regards to the public sentiment and it's very apparent lack of unity.

A rapist is generally told "no" by a subject that can communicate...... the baby/fetus/zeft as some like to call it..... doesn't and can't..... that's the core of the issue.... and I'm not about to allow someone to attempt to make me take sides on something.... and therefore note your wording. I am both pro choice and pro life..... It's not my right to deny an individual's right to hurdle their own grey matters of their own ethics or lack of....... I may find it reprehensible that they abort... but obviously, I can't stop them... laws or not....nor know in most cases that a couple are pregnant before they do so....

Personally, I feel that abortion and infanticide are very similar, with the exception obviously being where the kid resides... in or out.

reply from: shiprah

I do not support abortion nor rape...
Supporting the legal right to abortion is support.
but concede that abortion is self contained in one sphere of a person....
No it isn't, if only one person is involved, the woman isn't pregnant.
Far more different than one exercising will against another's demands not to do so.
 It is far more different.  Rape doesn't leave the victim dead.
Using rape as debate tool is foolish
 it's wise because it compares the use of one person's body with no regard of another
and makes the opposing side's arguments (and the moderate's) arguments seem initially stronger to the unbiased viewers.
Really?  What unbiased viewers have told you this?
It also by default ties in rape with the dissent amongst the various ranks whether rape is a valid reason for an abortion. A side subject that I feel has it's on issues which need to be discussed without abortion in the mix.  Your comments seem to me to be opportunistic and severly reliant on rail roading your beliefs against others in a confusing package that attempts to lead instead of debate or discuss.
The argument is actually quite simple and it invites the opponent to discuss whether or not it is true that one person's freedom of choice only extends so far as that it doesn't harm another.
I can see that you have very strong beliefs.... but this subject requires a small degree of tolerance for dissenting opinions.....
and religious/moral values.
Abortion, like rape, racism, and pedophilia intolerable.
Reducing the number of abortions required
 no abortion is required
would be a far better focus and no less important or immoral in premise......
all abortion must stop, and to support less than this is immoral -- it's like when our nation made the slave trade illegal and kept slavery around
It's also something both sides might come to see eye to eye too.......
 no, not really.  People didn't see eye to eye on slavery, but it still ended, abortion must end whether or not people agree
eventually... with understanding and mutual respect.
One cannot respect someone who deliberately kills innocent children.

reply from: yoda

Right, shiprah. Also the rape of an unconscious woman, or woman who can't speak for any reason....... must be okay by that standard.

reply from: dadserna

Freud
Your analogy to banning firearms is interesting. However I think the reason the crime rate often goes down with increased gun ownership is the result (or potential result) of the consequences associated with committing a crime. Those consequences are the key. With the case of abortion, many women are not aware of the consequences. Evidence of this can be seen in the # of women who change their minds after seeing sonograms at crisis pregnanct centers. Also I think many women are desperate to try and solve todays hardships without considering the problems she creates for herself in the future.

Good to have you here

Welcome back Dmourning
 
hope you both stick around

reply from: jcgspam

Dmourning...
 If you think that women should have control over their bodies and be allowed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, a selfish act that considers only the needs of the mother, then why don't you believe that I should have that same control over my body to carry a child to term, which you also claim is a selfish act? And what about adoption? This, to me, is the most selfless act a person can committ.The recognition that you cannot provide for this child in the way that you know they need to be taken care of, so you choose to give them life and give them to a couple who desperately wants them and will take care of them in the way they should be. 
 Second, I think it's rather presumptious of you to decide when a person is ready to have a child. I, at 22 (when I had my daughter) had a college degree, a full time job with excellent benefits, a 5 bedroom house with 3 acres of yard for her to play in. My daughter has her own room, a playroom, more toys than any 10 children need and an entire walk in closet full of clothes. She is also well fed, up to date on all her immunizations and well child check ups and developing at a rate well above others her age. So explain to me in what way I was not ready to have a child simply because I was younger than 25? In what way did I make a huge mistake?

Julie  

reply from: Freud

I do not support abortion nor rape... Supporting the legal right to abortion is support. but concede that abortion is self contained in one sphere of a person.... No it isn't, if only one person is involved, the woman isn't pregnant. Far more different than one exercising will against another's demands not to do so.  It is far more different.  Rape doesn't leave the victim dead. Using rape as debate tool is foolish  it's wise because it compares the use of one person's body with no regard of another and makes the opposing side's arguments (and the moderate's) arguments seem initially stronger to the unbiased viewers. Really?  What unbiased viewers have told you this? It also by default ties in rape with the dissent amongst the various ranks whether rape is a valid reason for an abortion. A side subject that I feel has it's on issues which need to be discussed without abortion in the mix.  Your comments seem to me to be opportunistic and severly reliant on rail roading your beliefs against others in a confusing package that attempts to lead instead of debate or discuss. The argument is actually quite simple and it invites the opponent to discuss whether or not it is true that one person's freedom of choice only extends so far as that it doesn't harm another. I can see that you have very strong beliefs.... but this subject requires a small degree of tolerance for dissenting opinions..... and religious/moral values. Abortion, like rape, racism, and pedophilia intolerable. Reducing the number of abortions required  no abortion is required would be a far better focus and no less important or immoral in premise...... all abortion must stop, and to support less than this is immoral -- it's like when our nation made the slave trade illegal and kept slavery around It's also something both sides might come to see eye to eye too.......  no, not really.  People didn't see eye to eye on slavery, but it still ended, abortion must end whether or not people agree eventually... with understanding and mutual respect. One cannot respect someone who deliberately kills innocent children.

You have taken an inflammatory approach to conversing with me.... How you've quoted and responded to me, has been carefully considered to strike emotional chords, and sensationalize at the peak moments.

I do not appreciate your attitude or tact. You're incapable of mutual respect, and are a hot headed bully wanna be.

Let's just say for the sake of a number there are 200,001 abortions each year in country X.... down from 2,000,001 the previous year (due to abortion reducing information, and discussion that seeks to find some common ground for two sides that refuse to fully surrender to each other, ever)

One of those 200,001 expecting mothers still refuses to NOT have an abortion... vehemently......

The other 200,000 watch her carefully... they are moderates....

Your insisting that every one of those 200,001 expecting mothers not abort...... refusing to leave the one to her own devices...... works backwards....... and lets a good portion of those 200,000 find it easier to react to your agressive prying attiitude to their bodies and terminate with a conviction, which you incidentally created. The other 1,800,000 previously aborting mothers from the year before are on the war path as well............

That's a lot of dead babies..... because what? You wold rather fight for the baby you can't save, and let the others die by your own actions?

It's not about saving human life here? It's something far more symbolic and unreliant on the babies.... It's dogma...it's mantra...it's you getting to exert your spiritual or moralistic will against another.

You and others keep this attitude, and abortions will increase just to spite you shiprah... I know if I was an expecting woman... I'd consider it more closely.

reply from: yoda

What does that mean, really? That we should "give up" on an arbitrary number of babies, just to appease mothers considering abortion? How would we pick which ones to give up on?

reply from: Freud

What does that mean, really? That we should "give up" on an arbitrary number of babies, just to appease mothers considering abortion? How would we pick which ones to give up on?

Save the ones you can quite simply...

sex ed, contraception, ext.... counseling... and if a mother still goes through with it... what can you do? prevent women from throwing themselves down stairs and searching the tool shed because they REFUSE to listen to your point of view......

Pardon the pun, but it's like throwing the baby out with the bath water.... taking a blanket "you all must submit" approach... or "all or nothing".

So you help more pregnant mothers abort...... Your actions compelling others to act against your wanted outcome. It's inflammatory...... and backwards.... Some might even go as far as call it immoral.

reply from: yoda

Okay, that's a realistic attitude.

Honestly, I haven't seen any ProLifers take that approach.... but I've seen many proaborts try to put those words in their mouths, constructing "strawmen ProLifers" and then attacking them. Can you quote some ProLifer on this forum who has taken that approach?

reply from: Christian4life

What does that mean, really? That we should "give up" on an arbitrary number of babies, just to appease mothers considering abortion? How would we pick which ones to give up on? Save the ones you can quite simply... sex ed, contraception, ext.... counseling... and if a mother still goes through with it... what can you do? prevent women from throwing themselves down stairs and searching the tool shed because they REFUSE to listen to your point of view...... Pardon the pun, but it's like throwing the baby out with the bath water.... taking a blanket "you all must submit" approach... or "all or nothing". So you help more pregnant mothers abort...... Your actions compelling others to act against your wanted outcome. It's inflammatory...... and backwards.... Some might even go as far as call it immoral.

Yes I think you should prevent abortion whether it is legal or not.  If a woman feels compelled to mutilate her own body in order to kill her child, she is mentally sick and needs help.

reply from: Freud

Okay, that's a realistic attitude. Honestly, I haven't seen any ProLifers take that approach.... but I've seen many proaborts try to put those words in their mouths, constructing "strawmen ProLifers" and then attacking them. Can you quote some ProLifer on this forum who has taken that approach?

dunno... haven't read a lot of this forum yet... and even then.... it's how I approach the subject ultimately, that's most important to me.... as your approach does you I would think.

reply from: Freud

What does that mean, really? That we should "give up" on an arbitrary number of babies, just to appease mothers considering abortion? How would we pick which ones to give up on? Save the ones you can quite simply... sex ed, contraception, ext.... counseling... and if a mother still goes through with it... what can you do? prevent women from throwing themselves down stairs and searching the tool shed because they REFUSE to listen to your point of view...... Pardon the pun, but it's like throwing the baby out with the bath water.... taking a blanket "you all must submit" approach... or "all or nothing". So you help more pregnant mothers abort...... Your actions compelling others to act against your wanted outcome. It's inflammatory...... and backwards.... Some might even go as far as call it immoral. Yes I think you should prevent abortion whether it is legal or not.  If a woman feels compelled to mutilate her own body in order to kill her child, she is mentally sick and needs help.

Depends on how a person looks at it, or themselves... To you, you're calling it self mutilation... to the woman she might be calling an unwanted pregnancy self mutilation....

Besides...abortion was illegal before, and it still happened.... How do you tell if a woman is pregnant early along?

How would you ever know that she had an abortion?

You wouldn't...... What would you suggest? Family members spying upon each other? A 1-800-PREGGERS anonymous tip hotline?

Face it.... you can't save all..... and trying to not only pushes doctrine down another's throat, it causes more abortions by the reaction to your approach.

reply from: yoda

Are you familiar with the term "strawman"? When an anonymous group of ProLifers are criticized for their approach to the abortion debate, I have to wonder who these mysterious people are. Since you admit that you haven't seen anyone on this forum use that approach, I'll have to agree that those strawmen are doing it all wrong.

reply from: yoda

Actually that's not my quote, you have misattributed that one. But to respond to your statement, calling pregnancy "self-mutilation" is a rather bizarre attitude, IMHO.

If your question has to do with the enforcement of laws against abortion, then it's irrelevant to this discussion. How do they enforce the few they have now? Law enforcement is the responsibility of the authorities, not the posters on this forum.

reply from: Freud

Are you familiar with the term "strawman"? When an anonymous group of ProLifers are criticized for their approach to the abortion debate, I have to wonder who these mysterious people are. Since you admit that you haven't seen anyone on this forum use that approach, I'll have to agree that those strawmen are doing it all wrong.

Is there a reason why you're inferring such things, or do i rub you the wrong way for some peculiar reason?  I am not familiar with the terms and technicalities of the debate... and hope I never will be. Getting caught up in cloak and dagger warfare over a subject matter when it could be resolved potentially, strikes me akin to Cold War rhetoric and a fight for fighting's sake.

Actually that's not my quote, you have misattributed that one. But to respond to your statement, calling pregnancy "self-mutilation" is a rather bizarre attitude, IMHO.
 
I believe I stated that the other half may view an unwanted pregnancy a variation of self mutilation.. it was rhetorical.... It's bizarre to you most likely because it's the very thing you refuse to accept, and vice versa, the other side believing that a fetus isn't yet a human and finding your comments about the moment of conception to be backwards or bizarre.

Let's not play semantics....... Believe it or not, I truly am pro life, and pro choice...... and a libertarian if that sheds any light on where I come from.

If your question has to do with the enforcement of laws against abortion, then it's irrelevant to this discussion. How do they enforce the few they have now? Law enforcement is the responsibility of the authorities, not the posters on this forum.

It's very relevant to saving lives.... that is the discussion, is it not? Truth be known, I regularly disregard the following of laws I feel a personal or moral/ethical/philosophical obligation to do so with. As did the thousands and thousands of aborting women pre Roe vs Wade.....

So what? To you, you're carrying out your christian duty.... and to some others watching you... you're percieved as a fascist bible thumper whom doesn't recognise anything without biblical sanction. That hinders your mission more than it helps..... There is a distinct lack of respect for the freedom of choice by many in the pro life camp....

I'm not personally beholden to any religion, nor ever will be. And there are millions of other citizens of the world the same. Yet I respect the right of anyone to do as they please, as long as it doesn't affect me... A feeling shared and trumpeted by many of the pro-choice persuasion.....

Although I think that Jesus was just a decent guy with a great imagination and high morals, I'd like to think that there wouldn't have been any laws to prevent him walking in the desert, knowlingly getting tempted by his demons, and triumphing.... Don't see a woman with an unwanted pregnancy as any different...... It's her demon to fight.... or to her, her unwanted responsibility to deal with.

Yelling atop a soap box from the cliffs overlooking either of those examples is counterproductive and wrong...no matter what the intention is.

Where is the christian love and forgiveness and understanding in calling a woman faced with this temptation, and who takes the easy option, a murderer or whatnot?

The journey is hers to take...... neither you, nor the law, nor anyone else can't stop it.... You might as well be there for her before and after, and do your praying or whatever it is you do, while she's away.

I get this feeling of hate often coming from both sides... like the war is worth more than the reason for fighting to begin with.

Why doesn't everyone just put it all aside and learn to understand and respect each other......

The abortions would decrease as a side result.

reply from: yoda

Realistically, I could ask you the same question. You infer attitudes in ProLifers that I have not seen, especially on this forum..

I don't doubt the sincerity of your beliefs. I question ProLifers on things I can't understand the same as I do ProChoicers.

The act of stereotyping shows a lack of respect for individualism, IMHO. I am agnostic.

Okay, if you feel that way then you probably don't care about child serial killers, right?

Everything we do is our responsibility. Why is the killing of an unborn baby any different? Why should it be in a special category?

Then why call a serial child killer a murderer?

Yes, and be there for the serial child killer too, they need to be prayed for also....

Yes, let's learn to understand and respect serial child killlers while we're at it.......

reply from: Freud

Realistically, I could ask you the same question. You infer attitudes in ProLifers that I have not seen, especially on this forum..
 
The reluctance to bargain or come to workable arrangements with the other side based on percieved morals and ethics firmly rooted in the Judeo Christian mantra is very apparent at this forum and others. I did not infer that. I've stated that.

You haven't answered my question though. I would appreciate an answer.

I don't doubt the sincerity of your beliefs. I question ProLifers on things I can't understand the same as I do ProChoicers. [/quote]

But you ultimately are either a pro lifer or a pro choicer, is this not a correct assessment? Any questioning you may partake in carries with it your inclination to support the side you've chosen, and is not compromise nor even accurately labeled a question, ultimately.

The act of stereotyping shows a lack of respect for individualism, IMHO. I am agnostic.

I've paraphrased one of the few dominant themes coming from both camps...nothing more, nothing less. 

  Okay, if you feel that way then you probably don't care about child serial killers, right?

If the child does not wish to be harmed or killed, then that serial killer has neither the right to act upon the child.

Everything we do is our responsibility. Why is the killing of an unborn baby any different? Why should it be in a special category?

Firstly.... it's yet to be decided, and probably never will be, whether the fetus is a baby or just a fetus... especially in the primary months. Secondly, it's not just a fetus/baby.... it's one presence inside of another, and directly reliant on the mother/incubator depending on how your terminology and mindset swings. Thirdly, a forced invasion into another sentient being's body or ability to maintain that body is a clear violation of one's civil rights.

  Then why call a serial child killer a murderer?

If the serial killer was resisted or unwanted/uninvited, as they generally are... then yes the concept of "murder" applies.

  Yes, and be there for the serial child killer too, they need to be prayed for also....

That's what the religious do is it not? pray for sinners, pray for the needy... pray for their fellow man?

  Yes, let's learn to understand and respect serial child killlers while we're at it.......

Your analogy is severly flawed.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Realistically, I could ask you the same question. You infer attitudes in ProLifers that I have not seen, especially on this forum..   The reluctance to bargain or come to workable arrangements with the other side based on percieved morals and ethics firmly rooted in the Judeo Christian mantra is very apparent at this forum and others. I did not infer that. I've stated that. You haven't answered my question though. I would appreciate an answer.

What's your suggestion for a compromise?  If its working to help women who are pregnant be able to choose life for their children, its the other side that refuses to work toward that.  Thousands of pro-life organizations ignore the debate and simply provide pregnant women with help, support, and encouragement.  I don't see too many abortion organizations doing the same.

Okay, if you feel that way then you probably don't care about child serial killers, right? If the child does not wish to be harmed or killed, then that serial killer has neither the right to act upon the child.  

I think that's the point most of the pro-lifers are trying to make.  Absent a compelling argument to exclude fetuses from the human family, no one has a right to act upon an unborn child against that child's will.  That's a perfect Libertarian argument. 

I've never understood how a scientific fact -- two gametes meet in conception and create a new individual member of a particular species -- became this mystical question of the ages?  Has there ever been any scientific argument against the idea that a new individual member of the species comes into existence at conception?

As for the presence of one person inside another, I think its an interesting philosophical fact that bears some consideration in trying to understand how men and women differ.  We men never experience this close, internal presence of another human being.  It's pretty fascinating to think about.  But as for rights and autonomy, in the normal course of things, neither a womans rights or her autonomy are violated when she becomes pregnant.  When she hires a thug to invade her body and destroy the fetus, she's consenting, so again, autonomy and rights don't enter the picture, unless you're talking about the fetus.
 


I think you'll find it in the numerous retreats, counseling programs and dedicated clergy and professionals that help women get on with their lives when they are plagued with grief from a previous abortion.  The Christian position is that it is the law and God that judges; the Church forgives all who merely ask.



The point of the law is not necessarily to stop people from breaking the law, but to punish those who break it.  Murder still happens, drug use is rampant, even child abuse still exists.  The law doesn't stop these things, but it allows society to punish those who attack society through these anti-social behaviors and deter others from doing the same.  So the proper question is not whether abortions will still occur, but whether abortion is an attack against justice and society.  I certainly think it is, don't you?

I seriously doubt women have abortions because they feel disrespected by pro-lifers.  More often its because the feel disrespected by pro-choice men who put pressure on them to abort "inconvenient children" 

Until we stop treating some children as "unwanted," there is no real common ground.  There is no way I can respect someone who has such disrespect for human life, nor can I understand how a person can declare a child unwanted and chuck it down a disposal system. 

reply from: yoda

I thought I had. Which question are you referring to?

There are people who haven't taken a "side", and you seem to have identified yoursefl as one of those. Is that not accurate?

I'm an individual, nothing more and nothing less. Same goes for the others on this forum. We'd appreciate being treated as such, not as "just another brick in the wall".



How about newborns? They can't speak, is it wrong to kill them?

Firstly, your are wrong. Dictionaries establish that the vernacular term baby can be properly applied to unborn children. Secondly, dependency does not establish a moral reason to kill. Thirdly, babies do NOT "invade" their mothers, the are PLACED THERE by the father and usually the mother.



And unborn babies "want" to be killed?



And what is law enforcement for? Would you protect baby killers from the law?



Why?

reply from: Tobino

Freud and dmourning I invite you to watch a movie: http://www.silentscream.org/

reply from: Freud

I thought I had. Which question are you referring to? There are people who haven't taken a "side", and you seem to have identified yoursefl as one of those. Is that not accurate? I'm an individual, nothing more and nothing less. Same goes for the others on this forum. We'd appreciate being treated as such, not as "just another brick in the wall". How about newborns? They can't speak, is it wrong to kill them? Firstly, your are wrong. Dictionaries establish that the vernacular term baby can be properly applied to unborn children. Secondly, dependency does not establish a moral reason to kill. Thirdly, babies do NOT "invade" their mothers, the are PLACED THERE by the father and usually the mother. And unborn babies "want" to be killed? And what is law enforcement for? Would you protect baby killers from the law? Why?

this is why you make your camp look like a bunch of boobs.....

"Baby Killers"  :roll:

"And unborn babies "want" to be killed.

You won't concede that many others view the contents of a mother's wombs as something non sentient, and or without a soul...... to which the law currently supports to a degree.

If you can't tone your rhetoric down, how will you ever change someone's mind about abortion?

You're like a small terrier in a two dog across the fence exchange.....

No different than many of your adversaries in the pro-choice camp........

And as for demanding respect from me..... If you can't give it to the people in RL who disagree with you, and act differently, then how can you expect I give you the respect as an "individual" when all your points are pro-life dogma, while you scream to be "unique" and your own person?

As for the dictionary definition of baby........   I laughed hard at that to be honest...........

a fag is a cigarette and a bundles of sticks too.....

reply from: Freud

Freud and dmourning I invite you to watch a movie: http://www.silentscream.org/

Why would I want to watch it? Aside from the obvious connotations of what's to be found in it, I've already mentioned that I am pro life and pro choice...... You won't get any disagreement out of me.

Nor would a philosophical debate about how a person's body is their own and they have the ultimate right to exercise judgement over it, whether good or bad.

I will not be pidgeon holed because you expect people to polarize on this issue.

I'm at peace with my feelings and thoughts...... Yours are aggressive and war like.... they don't recognize peace....

reply from: Freud

Realistically, I could ask you the same question. You infer attitudes in ProLifers that I have not seen, especially on this forum..   The reluctance to bargain or come to workable arrangements with the other side based on percieved morals and ethics firmly rooted in the Judeo Christian mantra is very apparent at this forum and others. I did not infer that. I've stated that. You haven't answered my question though. I would appreciate an answer. What's your suggestion for a compromise?  If its working to help women who are pregnant be able to choose life for their children, its the other side that refuses to work toward that.  Thousands of pro-life organizations ignore the debate and simply provide pregnant women with help, support, and encouragement.  I don't see too many abortion organizations doing the same. Okay, if you feel that way then you probably don't care about child serial killers, right? If the child does not wish to be harmed or killed, then that serial killer has neither the right to act upon the child.   I think that's the point most of the pro-lifers are trying to make.  Absent a compelling argument to exclude fetuses from the human family, no one has a right to act upon an unborn child against that child's will.  That's a perfect Libertarian argument.  I've never understood how a scientific fact -- two gametes meet in conception and create a new individual member of a particular species -- became this mystical question of the ages?  Has there ever been any scientific argument against the idea that a new individual member of the species comes into existence at conception? As for the presence of one person inside another, I think its an interesting philosophical fact that bears some consideration in trying to understand how men and women differ.  We men never experience this close, internal presence of another human being.  It's pretty fascinating to think about.  But as for rights and autonomy, in the normal course of things, neither a womans rights or her autonomy are violated when she becomes pregnant.  When she hires a thug to invade her body and destroy the fetus, she's consenting, so again, autonomy and rights don't enter the picture, unless you're talking about the fetus.   I think you'll find it in the numerous retreats, counseling programs and dedicated clergy and professionals that help women get on with their lives when they are plagued with grief from a previous abortion.  The Christian position is that it is the law and God that judges; the Church forgives all who merely ask. The point of the law is not necessarily to stop people from breaking the law, but to punish those who break it.  Murder still happens, drug use is rampant, even child abuse still exists.  The law doesn't stop these things, but it allows society to punish those who attack society through these anti-social behaviors and deter others from doing the same.  So the proper question is not whether abortions will still occur, but whether abortion is an attack against justice and society.  I certainly think it is, don't you? I seriously doubt women have abortions because they feel disrespected by pro-lifers.  More often its because the feel disrespected by pro-choice men who put pressure on them to abort "inconvenient children"  Until we stop treating some children as "unwanted," there is no real common ground.  There is no way I can respect someone who has such disrespect for human life, nor can I understand how a person can declare a child unwanted and chuck it down a disposal system. 

To summarize... you point the finger at the other side... say it's their fault for not agreeing with you.... propose rolling back the law to suit your agenda, and have stated that you have no respect for the other side whatsoever.

That's sure to influence an expecting feminist with an unwanted pregnancy, or someone whom loathes religion and the morality they force on the non followers, or the scientific minded.

reply from: BorisBadanov

There are several feminists on this forum who once were pro-abortion who did have their mind changed by such arguments.  Obviously, not everyone who thinks abortion should be legal is close-minded. 

As for the loatihing religion, I'm not sure what religion has to do with it.  Some people use their own irrational prejudices to justify their actions, asside from that I can't see religion having much to do with whether abortion should be legal or not. 

reply from: BorisBadanov

You've already pigeon-holed yourself by stating that you believe abortion ought to remain legal.  That makes any claim by you to be "pro-life," "anti-abortion" or whatever, to be plain false.

You favor legalized abortion.  You can call that position either "pro-choice" or "pro-abortion," but you certainly can't call it "pro-life."

reply from: Tobino

Freud and dmourning I invite you to watch a movie: http://www.silentscream.org/

Why would I want to watch it? Aside from the obvious connotations of what's to be found in it, I've already mentioned that I am pro life and pro choice...... You won't get any disagreement out of me.

Nor would a philosophical debate about how a person's body is their own and they have the ultimate right to exercise judgement over it, whether good or bad.

I will not be pidgeon holed because you expect people to polarize on this issue.

I'm at peace with my feelings and thoughts...... Yours are aggressive and war like.... they don't recognize peace....

I'm at peace with my feelings and thoughts also and they are not at all aggressive and war like. I won't call your thoughts and feelings aggressive and warlike even though I disagree with them. As much as you protest, standing on the sidelines and stating you are neutral is taking a side. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (via Edmund Burke)

The movie is very well done, educational and you seem to have an open mind and enjoy learning. Why would you not watch it? Could you be afraid of seeing reality? Or worried you might have to take a side and it might not be the side you want to be on?

reply from: yoda

Nor do I. We agree on that.

There is no ligitimate question in your statement. The term "fetus" is a technical term for an unborn human in the third month or later of gestation. The term "baby" is a vernacular term which applies to all unborn children: MSN-Encarta Online: ( http://dictionary.msn.com/find/entry.asp?search=baby ) ba·by noun (plural ba·bies) 2. unborn child: a child that is still in the womb

Your characterizations are innacurate and argumentative. We are not trying to influence pregnant feminists exclusively, we are trying to influence any open-minded men and women who value the truth.

reply from: Freud

the morality that religion attempts to force on all people, and governments has a lot to do with the abortion topic.

and you can say that there are plenty of women whom were once pro-life but changed their minds to pro-choice later on......

and it still doesn't address the status quo...... two unrelenting unbudging sides that demand power above the other.

And you're right.... irrational prejudices abound on both sides of the debate.......

Rampant Feminism and Extreme Christianity are just a couple of them.

reply from: Freud

You've already pigeon-holed yourself by stating that you believe abortion ought to remain legal.  That makes any claim by you to be "pro-life," "anti-abortion" or whatever, to be plain false. You favor legalized abortion.  You can call that position either "pro-choice" or "pro-abortion," but you certainly can't call it "pro-life."

I also stated that I believe abortions are the wrong choice.

I favor special interest groups keeping their lobbie away from Washington, and Washington keeping their noses out of a very private difficult personal crossroad with a myriad of clashing sentiments surrounding it.

You're being obtuse about this.

reply from: Freud

Freud and dmourning I invite you to watch a movie: http://www.silentscream.org/ Why would I want to watch it? Aside from the obvious connotations of what's to be found in it, I've already mentioned that I am pro life and pro choice...... You won't get any disagreement out of me. Nor would a philosophical debate about how a person's body is their own and they have the ultimate right to exercise judgement over it, whether good or bad. I will not be pidgeon holed because you expect people to polarize on this issue. I'm at peace with my feelings and thoughts...... Yours are aggressive and war like.... they don't recognize peace....
 
I'm at peace with my feelings and thoughts also and they are not at all aggressive and war like. I won't call your thoughts and feelings aggressive and warlike even though I disagree with them. As much as you protest, standing on the sidelines and stating you are neutral is taking a side. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (via Edmund Burke) The movie is very well done, educational and you seem to have an open mind and enjoy learning. Why would you not watch it? Could you be afraid of seeing reality? Or worried you might have to take a side and it might not be the side you want to be on?

Burke also wrote:  "The cold neutrality of an impartial judge", not to mention the US subscribing to the concept of neutrality between religion and state...... if you want to get all quote like and indignant.

"A wise neuter joins with neither, but uses both as his honest interest leads him."  said Wiliam Penn

There is nothing out there I haven't seen nor read which will shed any further revelations.... and your "movie" if you want to call it that is no different than the other side's propoganda......

I will not pick a side...... It's silly of you to infer that a person must.

This subject is a grey matter...not black and white... not heaven and hell, and certaintly no right or wrong.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Fair enough, there is a lot of ambiguity in the abortion debate.  So, Help me out by describing what you do believe.

You've alread said abortion is the "wrong choice." 

Do you think abortion should remain legal for any woman that wants one, throughout all nine months of pregnancy for any reason whatsoever?

reply from: Freud

Nor do I. We agree on that.
 
That was someone elses quote...not mine.

There is no ligitimate question in your statement. The term "fetus" is a technical term for an unborn human in the third month or later of gestation. The term "baby" is a vernacular term which applies to all unborn children: MSN-Encarta Online: ( http://dictionary.msn.com/find/entry.asp?search=baby ) ba·by noun (plural ba·bies) 2. unborn child: a child that is still in the womb

end of the eighth week of conception actually......

and "old" is also used as a vernacular term, depending on the circumstances and user...... naming anyone from 20 yo to 105 years old as "old".

Notice how zygote is pretty clearly defined.......

Your characterizations are innacurate and argumentative. We are not trying to influence pregnant feminists exclusively, we are trying to influence any open-minded men and women who value the truth.

and you yet again...point fingers and feign exclusive ethical/moral/cultural license over another's viewpoints while calling your point of view the truth.....

"open minded men and women who value the truth" is the real argumentative characterization in this discussion we're having.....

reply from: mom5

whew.. I must have ADD,or whatever it is, because I absolutely can not keep up with these discussions... so I'm out... or maybe I just don't have time with two children... you all have fun!  

reply from: Freud

Fair enough, there is a lot of ambiguity in the abortion debate.  So, Help me out by describing what you do believe. You've alread said abortion is the "wrong choice."  Do you think abortion should remain legal for any woman that wants one, throughout all nine months of pregnancy for any reason whatsoever?

Do I want abortions to happen in any of those 9 months? Hell no.... I think it's disgusting and a vile practice.....

Do I think that the choice should exist... yes.... Other people are not me.. many find no moral/ethical/philosophical problems in doing so... people of different religions.. different cultures... different mindsets.....

I only agree with them that it's their body and their choice to make....not others.

But I also believe that there is room to move in the "personal responsibility" realm debate of this all......

Not through laws... but for discussion, and possible changing of minds by the pro-abort people.

This isn't immaculate conception after all..... and science/birth control/education exists to prevent many women from concieving an unwanted pregnancy...... If those steps aren't taken.... it seems to me to be irresponsible for them to solely focus on what they're going to do with the unwanted pregnancy, or preach to the masses to follow their lead.

People need to be taking more birth control...and multiple forms of it at once.....

Pretty much gets rid of most of the problem.........  when you've gotten it down to 99.9999 percent that it's impossible to conceive.

reply from: yoda

Then you need to take a bit more care in how you construct your posts.

I notice that you make your pronouncements sans documentation. Do you proclaim your authority to be greater than that of dictionaries in these matters?

No "license" has been "feigned", except in your mind. Such broad generalizations serve no useful purpose except to inflame the debate into a war of words.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Then you need to take a bit more care in how you construct your posts.

Actually, Yodavader, that was my bad.  I left out an extra "quote" command.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa

reply from: Freud

Then you need to take a bit more care in how you construct your posts.
 
touchy touchy, are we....

I notice that you make your pronouncements sans documentation. Do you proclaim your authority to be greater than that of dictionaries in these matters?

Yes... Dictionaries by nature reflect the common usage of a word over a period of time by a mass of peoples... whether correctly or not.

You'll notice that Supreme Court justices didn't read from the same dictionary as you might be reading when it came to their decisions in RW. 

And what needs to be documented, when it's common sense we're talking about here?

  No "license" has been "feigned", except in your mind. Such broad generalizations serve no useful purpose except to inflame the debate into a war of words.

Basically you boil down too:  "We're right, they're wrong... we'll make laws"..

You believe yourself to have some license to do so against other people, otherwise you wouldn't be suggesting or hanging out with those whom suggest making abortion illegal.

The only thing that inflames a situation is unwarranted aggression... say for instance, being prevented from peacefully living your life according to your own set of principles by groups or otherwise.....

Or being told that someone else makes the decisions for your body, and that you have no recourse.. since... "They are right, you are wrong, and they forced a law and dogma upon you" 

reply from: yoda

You are too quick to blame yourself. Everyone is responsible for their own posts, and their own attributions.

reply from: yoda

Not at all. Do you not wish your errors to be pointed out? How else can you improve?

I find those who claim more knowledge/authority that dictionaries always do so when they wish to exclude some of it's legitimate usages. And that's sad, because they only make their argument look bad. And there really are NO "incorrect" definitions in a dictionary, that's ridiculous. When a usage is reported in a dictionary, that means that enough people employ that usage to legitimize it.

The Supreme Court does not involve itself with the meanings of vernacular terms. When it publishes a decision, it uses the legal meanings of words for obvious reasons. Neither they, not anyone else with a minimum of intelligence makes the claim that legal definitions take precedence over vernacular definitions in a non-legalistic discussion.

And who needs documentation? I do, for one, when you attempt to encourage the killing of unborn children by your wild, undocumented claims. "Common sense"? That's not only NOT sensible, it's not EVEN common!



Your purely personal attacks betray your true purpose. You seek to inflame, to raise passions to the point where reasonable discussion cannot occur, and thereby change the subject away from abortion.

Oh, and BTW, posting on this forum is not a legitimate reason to stereotype me into an advocate for making abortion illegal again, or to stereotype anyone else with what I've said. We are INDIVIDUALS, and treating us as less than individuals betrays your true purpose here.

reply from: Freud

You are too quick to blame yourself. Everyone is responsible for their own posts, and their own attributions.

That line of reasoning ultimately ends with the originator of the comments, and anyone who wanted to take a cheap shot by assigning the error on someone else, then backpeddle when it was merely pointed out that the quote wasn't mine.

That line of reasoning.. "everyone is responsible for their own" also extends to real life, and the choices/decisions one makes... Remember you said it. Everyone is responsible for themselves, not others.

To that I agree with.

Not at all. Do you not wish your errors to be pointed out? How else can you improve?
 
That's been addressed already, and short of calling you names or such.... I will say that I'm laughing at you over this.

I find those who claim more knowledge/authority that dictionaries always do so when they wish to exclude some of it's legitimate usages.

not at all...... I didn't claim more knowledge or authority... I challenged the authority of a supposedly all inclusive written work that borrows from how people chose to use words verses what they are actually often mean. I find people whom selectively scour literature for a modicum of "backing" in a philosophical discussion to be more enthralled with trumping their opponent then engaging in meaningful discussion.
     If you notice that abortion was made illegal once upon a time... according to definitions and perceptions of that time... and now abortion is legal according to definitions and perceptions of current times.... for you to be insisting dictionaries and periodicals as conclusive reasoning for your pro life case..... is a tad bit opportunistic and hypocritical in my view..at least in this documentation segment of our debate.

 
So now you're attempting to totally seperate the dictionary from any legal meanings? Have you thought this through? The dictionary neither has to be 100 percent correct or incorrect... It just is..... both. It's a useful but flawed work, as it's created by humans and updated according to environment.... which legal perception has a hand to play in it as well. I'm looking at my cherished copy of "The Little Oxford Dictionary of Current English" compiled by George Ostler 1931 as I type to you.... It has plenty of archaic, seldom used or known word variations in it... Take for instance the word "gore"...

n.- Clotted blood
or n. wedge shaped piece inserted to narrow a garment.
or v. pierce with horn.

now go to dictionary.com and see how many various definitions that come up..... many the same...

but let's focus on the use of gore in regards to clotted blood..... will that stand up on court?

let's look at a medical dictionary...  http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?query=gore  heh... long behold it's still legitimate to some medical professionals and therefore would be recognized in court during say, a murder trial.....

nothing was said about the genre of movies though in these definitions of gore......

Documentation as I have shown, is arbitrary, and depends on whom is looking for it, why they're looking for it, and what they want to find........ It also can stand up in legal situations.... but it's dependent again on perception and a load of factors this conversation need not concern itself with lest we forget about our real disagreement. 

Why are you foaming at the mouth anyway? This is a discussion... not an epic battle for the forces of "good and evil".  I actually agree with some of what you probably believe in.... relax.. it's all good.

  Your purely personal attacks betray your true purpose. You seek to inflame, to raise passions to the point where reasonable discussion cannot occur, and thereby change the subject away from abortion. Oh, and BTW, posting on this forum is not a legitimate reason to stereotype me into an advocate for making abortion illegal again, or to stereotype anyone else with what I've said. We are INDIVIDUALS, and treating us as less than individuals betrays your true purpose here.

So you don't want to make abortion "illegal"? And the majority of posters here do neither?

I have remained logical and uneffected by emotions.... You read what I think. Nothing more or less. I haven't thrown out catch phrases like "murdering unborn children" or "my body my right"...... I'm here to discuss as a man that sees both sides of the debate and therefore propose alternatives to suit both parties, but for various different reasons... Does it matter how the other side comes to the table... if they actually come to the table?

How is a compromise any more vile than one side using the legislative branch to propel their case of the others?

Like I said..... I think this has more to do with religion/philosophy than abortion... Otherwise it would have been solved long before now.

It's a war without clear reason.

reply from: BorisBadanov

Considering that you, I, or any of our legislatures for that matter, have zero control over the laws right now, whether we disagree about the legality of abortion DOES seem to be pretty irrelevent.

I don't think too many p[ro-lifers disagree with you as to educating and working with women to help them choose not to abort.  As I said before, practically all efforts in that regard are by pro-lifers.

Contraception, unfortunately, is not the magic bullet you think it is.  Alan Guttmacher reports a high percentage of abortions are because of "contracpetive failure."  Then there's a whole group of women who were intending to use contraception, but didn't, and got pregnant.  Had they been discouraged from sex to begin with, they probably wouldn't have gotten themselves into a "risky" situation.  I think the truth is, most people who are sexually active will get pregnant or cause a pregnancy whether or not they are using contraception.  Statistics seem to indicate that, at least.

("There are lies, there are damned lies, then there are statistics" -- Mark Twain) 

reply from: Freud

Considering that you, I, or any of our legislatures for that matter, have zero control over the laws right now, whether we disagree about the legality of abortion DOES seem to be pretty irrelevent. I don't think too many p[ro-lifers disagree with you as to educating and working with women to help them choose not to abort.  As I said before, practically all efforts in that regard are by pro-lifers. Contraception, unfortunately, is not the magic bullet you think it is.  Alan Guttmacher reports a high percentage of abortions are because of "contracpetive failure."  Then there's a whole group of women who were intending to use contraception, but didn't, and got pregnant.  Had they been discouraged from sex to begin with, they probably wouldn't have gotten themselves into a "risky" situation.  I think the truth is, most people who are sexually active will get pregnant or cause a pregnancy whether or not they are using contraception.  Statistics seem to indicate that, at least. ("There are lies, there are damned lies, then there are statistics" -- Mark Twain) 

I challenge a couple to properly use three forms of contraception and still become pregnant.....

Discouraging sex has no bearing on it.... a small segment of the population may be prone to following that ideology..... but a look around us, and you'll agree that sex is sex is sex..........

I don't follow statistics too closely btw..... they're usually tainted by whomever seeks to tabulate them.

reply from: yoda

No, not at all. If you just copy and paste without paying any attention to what you're copying, the mistake is ALSO yours. But that's beside the point, I was just pointing out to you WHY I attributed it to you.

Good, laugher is the best medicine!

That's a bit of a self-contradiction, isn't it?

Methinks you are a bit confused on this subject. Dictionaries don't supply "reasoning", that's up to the reader. What they supply is PROOF of the correctness of a usage, pure and simple. Anyone who disparages the use of a dictionary during a debate is on very, very shaky ground.

Yes, I have. Vernacular dictionaries report common usage. Legal dictionaries report legal usages. Legal usage is like a whole different dialect of english, and it does not challenge common usage. It rules in all legal documents and discussions, but is irrelevant in vernacular documents and discussions.

You may have shown someone else that "documentation is arbitrary", but not me. Good documentation is always preferable to ordinary opinion, IMHO.

Well I just checked, and I can't find any foam.



I don't ADVOCATE making it illegal, nor do I oppose it. The "others" can speak to that subject for themselves, because they ARE individuals.

I have nothing against compromise, it's just that I haven't found any on this subject that make any sense. A baby is either dead or alive, there is no inbetween. And except for a genuine threat to life, none of the reasons women give for abortion amount to more than a rationalization for murder.

Well I disagree. I'm not religious, and I don't know of any philosophy that deals directly with it. I see it as purely a battle between those who want to shed innocent blood, and those who don't. And I think that's a very clear reason.

reply from: Freud

No, not at all. If you just copy and paste without paying any attention to what you're copying, the mistake is ALSO yours. But that's beside the point, I was just pointing out to you WHY I attributed it to you. Good, laugher is the best medicine! That's a bit of a self-contradiction, isn't it? Methinks you are a bit confused on this subject. Dictionaries don't supply "reasoning", that's up to the reader. What they supply is PROOF of the correctness of a usage, pure and simple. Anyone who disparages the use of a dictionary during a debate is on very, very shaky ground. Yes, I have. Vernacular dictionaries report common usage. Legal dictionaries report legal usages. Legal usage is like a whole different dialect of english, and it does not challenge common usage. It rules in all legal documents and discussions, but is irrelevant in vernacular documents and discussions. You may have shown someone else that "documentation is arbitrary", but not me. Good documentation is always preferable to ordinary opinion, IMHO. Well I just checked, and I can't find any foam. I don't ADVOCATE making it illegal, nor do I oppose it. The "others" can speak to that subject for themselves, because they ARE individuals. I have nothing against compromise, it's just that I haven't found any on this subject that make any sense. A baby is either dead or alive, there is no inbetween. And except for a genuine threat to life, none of the reasons women give for abortion amount to more than a rationalization for murder. Well I disagree. I'm not religious, and I don't know of any philosophy that deals directly with it. I see it as purely a battle between those who want to shed innocent blood, and those who don't. And I think that's a very clear reason.

That was more or less one big pile of self rationalizing back peddling on your part.....

You're obviously biting your tongue while selectively chosing what you'll focus or not focus on in my words.......

You now admit that you don't want to see it illegal or legal.... that you disagree with some whom do it for none other reason than one clear reason and such.... shortly after you end up calling it "murder".

You're bouncing around like a ping pong ball...... which is fine... if it's truly what you believe in....

Unlike some here, I don't insist that a person take a side over another.....

As long your beliefs refrain from trouncing my beliefs either physically, mentally, or legislatively....... to each and their own......

Free to choose..... but beholden to make the right choice by oneself and others.

and the whole quote tag thing btw....... give it a rest thanks..... I don't correct other's spelling errors when I quote them... why is it my responsibility to correct someone elses quote:
tags.....

Just admit that you misunderstood..... simple as that..... it happened, no harm, no foul....

reply from: yoda

To each his/her own, Fred. I don't think I peddled backwards, though.......

Let me check..... nope, no bite marks.....

"Now admit"? That's funny, it's my turn to laugh! Hey Fred, I never said otherwise!

Just trying to folow YOU, Fred!

Now, that puzzles me....... do you believe in "not trouncing the beliefs" of a child molester, for example?

reply from: Freud

To each his/her own, Fred. I don't think I peddled backwards, though....... Let me check..... nope, no bite marks..... "Now admit"? That's funny, it's my turn to laugh! Hey Fred, I never said otherwise! Just trying to folow YOU, Fred! Now, that puzzles me....... do you believe in "not trouncing the beliefs" of a child molester, for example?

You're partaking in theatrics now..... It's funny how I from the onset admitted that I troll and flame quite often, while demonstrating with my prose in this instance that I've put it aside for a topic I have an interest in..... You on the other hand.... seem to be approaching it from the opposite angle..... An angle if I too employed along with you, would have you twisted up in a further bout of emotional flip flopping.

Let's keep this proper... or go somewhere else and have it out, if the entertainment value of being a pedantic contrary court jester is a hobby you'd like to broaden upon.

I also will not be lead into a deflectory comparison discussion about child molestation.. I've made my views on sentience and autonomy known before.....

Yet Demourning is the one labeled as the trouble maker and stool stirrer on occasion?

reply from: yoda

"Theatrics"? I'm merely trying to respond on point to everything you say, Fred. I'm really hurt by that comment, Fred, how is that "theatrics"?

Bragging about your debate prowess a bit? ;-)

"Pedantic"? Oh, so you're one of the proaborts who delight in calling me that.... okay.

It doesn't matter what the offense is, Fred. How about kidnapping? How about abuse? Do you oppose laws that protect BORN CHILDREN or not?

Really? Who gave him that label?

reply from: Freud

"Theatrics"? I'm merely trying to respond on point to everything you say, Fred. I'm really hurt by that comment, Fred, how is that "theatrics"? Bragging about your debate prowess a bit? ;-) "Pedantic"? Oh, so you're one of the proaborts who delight in calling me that.... okay. It doesn't matter what the offense is, Fred. How about kidnapping? How about abuse? Do you oppose laws that protect BORN CHILDREN or not? Really? Who gave him that label?

  You're losing the plot on this.....   kick back and take a breather.

reply from: shiprah

And abortion is definitely an aggressive act that prevents a child from peacefully living his or her life.

reply from: BorisBadanov

You're making my point for me.  The fact that it would be a challenge for couples to use three forms of birth control correctly shows why pregnancies are almos inevitable over time when a couple contracepts.  In a given year, I challenge a couple to use one method of contraception correctly everytime they have sex.

reply from: yoda

Works for me, Fred, I could use some fresh air. Let's both take a break! :-)

reply from: Freud

And abortion is definitely an aggressive act that prevents a child from peacefully living his or her life.

According to you.... but not everyone is you..... you'd do well to remember that other people don't believe the fertilised egg is a child for some time until well into the pregnancy..... or in some cases at all, until birth.

All the mantra's in the world won't stop people from following their beliefs...... it's just unfortunate that this subject ultimately requires many in the pro life camp to form their opinions about their bodies and beliefs and project them onto others......

I'm tired of arrogant people spouting their opinions about how others should behave in this life, while labouring to make laws to support those opinions, and the subsequent enforcement of those opinionated laws.

Law is an evil double edged sword.

reply from: Freud

You're making my point for me.  The fact that it would be a challenge for couples to use three forms of birth control correctly shows why pregnancies are almos inevitable over time when a couple contracepts.  In a given year, I challenge a couple to use one method of contraception correctly everytime they have sex.

I don't think you have a point.... If three forms of birth control were used for a sexual encounter, reproduction rates would be nearly impossible to consider without some lengthy math formulas.

That cuts out the need for a huge number of abortions.... and having two sides further aggrevated towards each other..... with time, who knows "personal responsibility" and prevailing social conditions might see abortion become a thing of the past..... at the least the endless ranting and raving between the two sides.

reply from: Freud

Works for me, Fred, I could use some fresh air. Let's both take a break! :-)

I was never in this to get upset... just to discuss... I'll leave you to what you need to do in order to put things back into perspective.

reply from: shiprah

And abortion is definitely an aggressive act that prevents a child from peacefully living his or her life. According to you.... but not everyone is you..... you'd do well to remember that other people don't believe the fertilised egg is a child for some time until well into the pregnancy..... or in some cases at all, until birth.
However, since embroyologists agree with me, my definintion of this is correct.
All the mantra's in the world won't stop people from following their beliefs...... it's just unfortunate that this subject ultimately requires many in the pro life camp to form their opinions about their bodies and beliefs and project them onto others...... I'm tired of arrogant people spouting their opinions about how others should behave in this life, while labouring to make laws to support those opinions, and the subsequent enforcement of those opinionated laws. Law is an evil double edged sword.
Great, maybe I shouldn't force my opinions about wife beating on other peoples.  It's their life, let them make their own decisions.

reply from: Freud

And abortion is definitely an aggressive act that prevents a child from peacefully living his or her life. According to you.... but not everyone is you..... you'd do well to remember that other people don't believe the fertilised egg is a child for some time until well into the pregnancy..... or in some cases at all, until birth. However, since embroyologists agree with me, my definintion of this is correct. All the mantra's in the world won't stop people from following their beliefs...... it's just unfortunate that this subject ultimately requires many in the pro life camp to form their opinions about their bodies and beliefs and project them onto others...... I'm tired of arrogant people spouting their opinions about how others should behave in this life, while labouring to make laws to support those opinions, and the subsequent enforcement of those opinionated laws. Law is an evil double edged sword. Great, maybe I shouldn't force my opinions about wife beating on other peoples.  It's their life, let them make their own decisions.

that's a good start....

you'll notice that a good number of wife or husband beaters refuse to squeal on their loved ones, and react aggressively when it's tried. 

It's their life and their choices...... By all means, be there for whomever you can... IF THEY WANT IT.

and as for the science factor.... how religion picks and chooses what science lessons it teaches to it's masses....

but hey...... we didn't need to widely know that the earth was in fact not flat, centuries earlier.....

scientific facts are like ice cream flavours and gallop polls.... You'll find the flavour if you're looking for only that flavour.

Now tell me your favourite statistics...... :roll:

reply from: shiprah

Scientists like Nobel prize winner Professor Lejeune and embryologist Dr. Diane Irving agree with me.  Find even one embryologist who disagrees.

reply from: Freud

Shouldn't you be asking if there is one embryologist you don't agree with... after all..... they're the ones with the supposed knowledge....

You talk as if you're their manager........

ps- Tell me you're an embryologist.

reply from: yoda

Take a long look at that statement. "Other people" (who just happen to support abortion) "don't believe [it's] a child". Now is that a "convenient" adoption of terminology, or what? Which came first there, the inflexible denial of the label, or the desire to do anything possible to justify abortion? I'd wager the latter was the first and motivating factor there. Yes, all a proabort has to do is to say "Oh I don't think of it as a child" to self-righteously justify killing that little human being. History has shown that before an entire class of people are attacked, they must first be dehumanized. Coincidence?

Well then you ought to be very tired of all criminal laws, right? You ought to be an anarchist, right?

reply from: Tobino

Freud has stated that definitions and perceptions change according to 'current times'. Well, this is a new 'current time' and I (not speaking for all on this forum) am doing all I can to educate and inform to change society's perceptions again. The medical community has grown by leaps and bounds in fetology and they can see into the womb in ways they never could before (3d and 4d ultrasounds). They can operate on fetuses and replace them in the womb at astonishingly early gestation dates, and they can save fetuses born at earlier and earlier gestation stages. Did any of you happen to see reports on Rumaisa? She weighed 8.6 ounces, less than a can of soda, and was about the size of a cell phone when she was born in Sep. She was released to go home from Loyola University Medical Center in early January. Have you heard of embryos frozen for five years and successfully implanted and carried to term and are happy normal kids? Check into embryo adoption and the Snowflake program. These things were unheard of 32 years ago (at least I never heard of them. Did any of you?) It is time to redefine, educate the naive and change perceptions.





I cannot speak for the rest of you, but I personally do want to make abortion illegal. I would not have chosen an illegal abortion and I believe that the majority of abortions have been and are chosen only because it is legal, not because it is wanted by the female. However, I am realistic . . . abortion will never be made illegal until we change peoples hearts and perceptions. I believe education is crucial before abortion can be made illegal. Educate so that abortion is an unthinkable option. Educate so that people know that the choice is made before the deed. Educate so that people realize that the child is not at fault is the deed was unwanted. Educate so that people know that the chance of pregnancy is only 3-5 days out of every month, but the chance of catching one of more of the 50+ sexually transmitted diseases is 365 days a year. Educate the fact that a pregnancy is survivable and temporary, but abortion is rarely survivable by the child and is permanent for all involved. Educate that many STDs are deadly and lifelong afflictions, and that a condom doesn't protect against the deadliest. Educate, educate, educate....... These are my beliefs. I have a right to them. I have a right to voice them. I have a right to ignore your protestations just as the protestations against abortion were ignored when Roe v Wade was made legal by judicial fiat which overrode many State laws.



Like I said..... I think this has more to do with religion/philosophy than abortion... Otherwise it would have been solved long before now.

It's a war without clear reason.

I agree with Freud, it is a war. The people paying the ultimate price can't speak for themselves. They can't fight for themselves. They can't make their cries heard to the unhearing, unaware, or uncaring. 45 million American casualties in 32 years -- more than in the Revolutionary, Civil, WWI, WWII, Korean, and Vietnam wars combined. The combatants are the survivors, those who are born. I see three sides the born can choose to take: one side says the unborn can be killed at will, another side says the unborn cannot be killed at will, and another side sits on the sidelines and watches or ignores the battle. I am here as a female that has lived on all three sides of this war/debate. I don't see the alternatives Freud says he is bringing to the table. I don't think I am being obtuse, however I just don't see a fourth side to the war. I don't see a place at the table where I can sit without taking a stand. I see abortion as a human rights issue, and I believe that the unborn are human and deserving of the chance to make their own choices. I believe the 'cannot be killed at will' side is working to help both the unborn, and the parent(s), working to end the demand for abortion, working to protect the young female, working to protect the physical and mental health of women in crisis pregnancy. I believe the 'can be killed at will' side is working to protect the money making industry of the abortion providers, working to protect the men who prey on young females, working to defeat any measure that would protect the physical and mental health of women in crisis pregnancy, working to promote sex at any time with any one for any reason to increase the need for abortion. I believe both sides have their jerks and idiots and those who working from a gut reaction based on rhetoric. But I also believe that there are those on both sides who see clearly their reasons for choosing the side they are on. I believe that most of those on the third side, the watchers and ignorers are mostly uneducated on abortion and blind (willingly or unknowingly) to the ability or need to take a stand and that one day they will shaken awake by something in their lives. If any of you disagree with me that fine, well and good. You will not stop my message, you will not shake my belief, you will not quiet my voice. You can protest until your dying day that abortion is not wrong, but know that I and millions of other women who know the reality of abortion will also protest to our dying days that abortion solves nothing. That abortion hurts women, and men.

reply from: Freud

Take a long look at that statement. "Other people" (who just happen to support abortion) "don't believe [it's] a child". Now is that a "convenient" adoption of terminology, or what? Which came first there, the inflexible denial of the label, or the desire to do anything possible to justify abortion? I'd wager the latter was the first and motivating factor there. Yes, all a proabort has to do is to say "Oh I don't think of it as a child" to self-righteously justify killing that little human being. History has shown that before an entire class of people are attacked, they must first be dehumanized. Coincidence?
 
Why don't you just cut to the chase and state "You're other with us or against us" and be done with it?

It's obvious that my acceptance of both sides' point of views doesn't sit well with you. And I'd wager it's because you're fully entrenched in one culture and nation... hence unable to recognize diversity which exists in others.... Calling your nation a multicultural melting pot doesn't cut it either....

I can accept pretty much anything, as long as it doesn't go against another's wishes.... Abortion brings up a special scenario though.... Is it one person or two being affected... Is what in the womb a person with wishes? You nor I can answer that conclusively.... hence the problem.

You've littered your posts with very pro life catch phrases and sentiments.... It's obvious that you feel very strongly that way..... good for you.... you have a belief and you're following it.....

But as I keep repeating, upon many deaf ears.... you have no right to force your beliefs on others......

To even suggest that you have that right, to me, is something I would fight till the death... regardless if I am against many of the abortions that take place or not.

This very same reason is why I have two brothers in the service fighting in the M.E, and we don't get along on this issue... I will never amass in a collective fighting force in order to ram rod another side into acceptance.... unless the other side is collectively doing so to me, or my family and friends which are unable to stop it for themselves. It's barbaric and wrong.

Well then you ought to be very tired of all criminal laws, right? You ought to be an anarchist, right?

Stop leading... I'll never dance with you under those circumstances.....

I don't accept nor follow laws I believe or intrusive and baseless.....

I'd rather be my own person than a mindless sheep being led to the political slaughter....

I decide my own destiny, behaviour, and ethics..... (AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T FORCE UPON ANOTHER REAL HARM, SEVERE UNWARRANTED HARDSHIP, OR MY PERCEPTIONS OF RIGHT OR WRONG/PHILOSOPHY/ETHICS)

You can call that viewpoint what you like.....I'm sure you probably have a catch phrase for it....

But I care not what you think, or do ultimately.... Basically, you and your ilk shall never rule me. I suggest you deal with it, and move on.

reply from: Freud

Freud has stated that definitions and perceptions change according to 'current times'. Well, this is a new 'current time' and I (not speaking for all on this forum) am doing all I can to educate and inform to change society's perceptions again. The medical community has grown by leaps and bounds in fetology and they can see into the womb in ways they never could before (3d and 4d ultrasounds). They can operate on fetuses and replace them in the womb at astonishingly early gestation dates, and they can save fetuses born at earlier and earlier gestation stages. Did any of you happen to see reports on Rumaisa? She weighed 8.6 ounces, less than a can of soda, and was about the size of a cell phone when she was born in Sep. She was released to go home from Loyola University Medical Center in early January. Have you heard of embryos frozen for five years and successfully implanted and carried to term and are happy normal kids? Check into embryo adoption and the Snowflake program. These things were unheard of 32 years ago (at least I never heard of them. Did any of you?) It is time to redefine, educate the naive and change perceptions.
 
That's all fine and dandy... but the fetus is still just a fetus to some people's viewpoint.... to them, you're operating/freezing/ whatnot a simple life form that isn't yet a developed human being. What you propose to "redefine, educate, change" is another's perceptions with yours.... nothing more or less.

I cannot speak for the rest of you, but I personally do want to make abortion illegal. I would not have chosen an illegal abortion and I believe that the majority of abortions have been and are chosen only because it is legal, not because it is wanted by the female. However, I am realistic . . . abortion will never be made illegal until we change peoples hearts and perceptions. I believe education is crucial before abortion can be made illegal. Educate so that abortion is an unthinkable option. Educate so that people know that the choice is made before the deed. Educate so that people realize that the child is not at fault is the deed was unwanted. Educate so that people know that the chance of pregnancy is only 3-5 days out of every month, but the chance of catching one of more of the 50+ sexually transmitted diseases is 365 days a year. Educate the fact that a pregnancy is survivable and temporary, but abortion is rarely survivable by the child and is permanent for all involved. Educate that many STDs are deadly and lifelong afflictions, and that a condom doesn't protect against the deadliest. Educate, educate, educate.......

Anything you do which seeks to change a point of view to one you believe in, is human.... fair enough. Education would rid us of a huge number of abortions sought after, just by personal responsibility...

As for your belief that you're divinely esteemed enough to force people to follow those beliefs through LAW, is an act of aggression and arrogance against someone whom doesn't follow your line of thinking.

 
You have a right to your beliefs, to a voice, to ignore just as I have the overriding right to ignore them, and follow my beliefs, voice. I don't give a rat's hairy backside about which laws were enacted when and where.... making abortion illegal sbhould have never happened... likewise the need to reverse it through Roe vs. Wade... A clear case of generations of americans on their high horses using law to silence the other side.  This is and always will be a personal choice ultimately....

I agree with Freud, it is a war.  The people paying the ultimate price can't speak for themselves.
 
How ironic that the pro life often do this crusade calvary charge of their own sense of morality and ethics.. calling it a war and a war worth fighting... yet when a pro abort person severly reacts in a very war like manner, a call is put out by the pro lifers to punish through the courts and laws. Your statements are inflammatory Tobino... and if you said them to me on the street, I wouldn't think twice about letting the air out of your tyres, and exposing you as a marauding moral hypocrite... Hopefully you'd walk away feeling the complete horse's backside that you are mouthing off like right now.

You're being a moron actually... You refuse to acknowledge any other views than your own, and force them upon others.....  The alternative is for you to go out and see the world, meeting various people from various cultures and THEN form an opinion about what is right and what is wrong for EVERYONE.... while realizing that you don't have any more right to force your new opinion then this one you're oozing at the moment... That's the plain truth. People are different.... opinions vary, no one is one hundred percent correct.

 

Rhetoric? That's an understatement.. :roll:

 

That's all fine... you protest and do as you darn well choose... It's your right... Just be sure to keep it where it belongs... within yourself and your immediate sphere of existance..

You're not right... I'm not right... they aren't right.... NO ONE is correct on this... so keep the damn law out of it, and let people do as they're entitled to.... to live their lives, their beliefs, and actions. People are generally good at heart... if there is any agreement to be eventually had on this in human unity, it will come when it's ready....

reply from: BorisBadanov

Wow, talk about an unqualified statement!  When has anyone had the law or the courts, or heck, even the media, for that matter, go after them for talking about a war for reproductive rights, or the battle against right-wing anti-choicers.  It hasn't happened, and it won't.  No one is "punished through the courts and laws" for even the most war-like and inflammatory rhetoric against pro-lifers.  I don't mind reading the debates, I think you have a lot of good points to offer, but please -- stop making stuff up!!!! 

reply from: shiprah

  Why don't you just cut to the chase and state "You're other with us or against us" and be done with it? It's obvious that my acceptance of both sides' point of views doesn't sit well with you.
Of course not, there's nothing ambivalent about evil.  You aren't pro-Jewish and a Nazi sympathizer.  You aren't an abolitionist and pro-slavery.  You have to believe one is right and fight for that.  The worse crimes in history have come from those who know better accepting an evil point of view.
And I'd wager it's because you're fully entrenched in one culture and nation... hence unable to recognize diversity which exists in others.... Calling your nation a multicultural melting pot doesn't cut it either.... I can accept pretty much anything, as long as it doesn't go against another's wishes.... Abortion brings up a special scenario though.... Is it one person or two being affected... Is what in the womb a person with wishes? You nor I can answer that conclusively....
Of course we can.  Embryologists have answered it quite conclusively.  Because you don't want to believe them doesn't discredit your findings.
But as I keep repeating, upon many deaf ears.... you have no right to force your beliefs on others......
A prochoice mom forces her belief on her unborn baby
Q] Stop leading... I'll never dance with you under those circumstances..... I don't accept nor follow laws I believe or intrusive and baseless..... I'd rather be my own person than a mindless sheep being led to the political slaughter....
So does a klansman have the right to not follow a law agaisnt lynching if he finds it intrusive and baseless?  I mean, he probably feels blacks aren't real people either.
q]

reply from: shiprah

1. Freud, how are you even prolife if you don't know whether or not the unborn is a person?
2. Since abortion is legal all nine months of pregnancy, when the baby's heart is beating, it smiles, sucks it thumb, cries, dreams, has musical preference -- is it still not a person?
3. How does traveling through the birth canal magically make it a person?

reply from: Tobino

Talk about a knee jerk reaction. Did you not understand my post? I said educate first and foremost with the truth of what abortion does, how it is done, etc. Once people see how they have been lied to by the multi-million dollar abortion industry they themselves will call for a change in the laws and overturn RvW. If I sit meekly by and say nothing then that education will never come to be. The abortion industry certainly won't speak the truth. And neither will the typical feminists. Do you honestly think that the tobacco industry would have willingly come forward and said "Oh by the way . . ."? If folks like myslef don't come forward to speak, how is anything ever going to change? Please, Freud, I never said I was devinely esteemed -- that is your assumption and your generalization of all with whom you disagree.

a 9 person court decision via Rose v Wade overrode laws voted on by the american citizens in individual States. No personal choice for them at all. The rights of the new life are of no consequence in your view. They are in mine. The rights of people who voted are of no consequence in your view. They are in mine. How about if we overturn RvW, and leave it up to the citizens in each state to inact laws, or even at city, or county, or business level? -- but you would disagree with that wouldn't you? You see no problem with forcing people or businesses to support what they consider murder. But you can't prove that it is not murder, and you refuse to err on the side of caution. That to me is inhumane. (And you must give a rat's hairy backside or you wouldn't have been so careful to state your belief that RvW reversed law. RvW wrote into the constitution a right which is not there. In doing so they overrode the 'right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' of 45 million americans.)

You are the one who, on this forum, called it a war, not I. I for one just happen to agree with you and here you are lumping all who disagree with you into one hated group. Furthermore, I say that you are the one reacting in a very war like manner with rants containing physical threats if I dare to use my first ammendment rights to espouse my views in a public forum. Who 's the marauding moral hippocrite now? I don't want to punish anyone. I just want the killing to stop. I punish myself daily for being a serial killer. Post abortive women do a fine job in punishing themselves at some point in their lives without a single law to tell them to do so. I want to try to help them and to keep others from going through that. What so morally reprehensible about that to you? Why should you care? What is in it for you personally? Why are you trying to force your morality and ethical views on me?

I acknolwedge other viewpoints. I acknolwedge that yours differ from mine. I believe mine are right and that yours are wrong. My viewpoints come from experience, from firsthand knowledge. What do yours come from. Your inner conscience?

yep. from what I see of your opinions that's all you have to stand on.

typical. A call to stomp on my first ammendment rights yet again.

If there is no right and wrong then what are you doing here on this forum? What does is matter to you? When a 14 year old is molested by her father and she is dragged to the abortion clinic -- where are her rights? Years later, when she might look into her newborn babies eyes, examines his toes and she remembers the abortion she was forced to have -- what then? Your passive support for abortion allows young girls to believe that it is ok to walk in on their own and abort merely because it is legal. "It must be all right because the law says it is legal." When as an adult she learns the truth of child development and comes to believe she murdered her own blood, her own progeny - where are you for her then? Or where are you for the kids who are taught "sex - if it feels good do it as often and with as many parteners as you like" and therefore STDs rage in the teen community like wildfire. Many deadly, many lifelong. Your naivety shines right through the words you type.

(ps - I don't care about spelling -- I misspell/misstype often myself, but I was wondering whether misspelled tires by accident, or on purpose, or are you really accustomed to british spelling? I just found it quite amusing that you try to hint that I see everything through an american viewpoint and you know nothing about me, my heritage, or where I've been. I also find it amusing that if you do reside in a foreign country that you'd bother to come to a mostly american forum and fight over our laws. Could you be worried that as america goes so goes the rest of the world? And even more so, if you are american, you'd try to imply otherwise. rofl pps-I also don't particularily care if you consider my words inflamatory only because I consider yours to be even more so. I'm not the one name calling and making threats. I merely am voicing my opinion and you are struggling in attempts to prove I'm wrong.)

reply from: yoda

Lots of perverts out there believe that child molestation is RIGHT, just ask NAMBLA! Do you want to "keep the damn law out of it" where NAMBLA is concerned? Why discriminate against people that WE consider "perverts"?

"Live their lives, their beliefs, their actions"....... actually Fred, that's all we're asking. Let UNBORN people LIVE THEIR LIVES TOO!

reply from: Navynate

Freud,

Maybe you've never heard of NAMBLA before. Well the name says it all, NAMBLA stands for North American Man/Boy Love Association. The name says it all. Why should they be denied their rights? They believe that having sex with with boys is just fine with them. They don't give a rats butt about the abuse and hell that they are putting the boys who they have sex with through. They shouldn't have the right to abuse boys like that, they should be fixed or put away where they will never be able to hurt anyone ever again. It's the same with Abortion. It's denying the right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all life. You don't care about the babies being slaughtered in the womb, well I do care. It's wrong to kill them. Roe VS Wade was decided upon lies, and lots of them. How can you support 9 people in robes over ruling the laws of every state in finding a right within another right that doesn't exist in the Constitution?  Prochoice groups have been lying their backsides since before Roe VS Wade was decided and they haven't slowed down since then either. When your side has to lie all the time like Prochoice groups do then that really shows that they're wrong and they have not moral ground to stand on. Don't take my word for it, you can take the word of Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe in Roe VS Wade) said that she lied when she said that she had been gang raped, (a very key point to get sympathy from those who were prolife to switch and support abortion). Dr Bernard Nathanson said that he too lied when he said that from 5,000 to 10,000 women were dying from illegal abortions each year. He also said that over 50% OF Americans supported abortion laws being relaxed and loosened, another lie.

Freud, your side has a problem with telling the truth. They've told so many lies that they've even started to believe their own lies. People who have worked in abortion clinics have said that they had to lie all the time to those women and girls who came in for abortions. And what about selling aborted baby body parts as well? It happens. Here's a hyper link to a page that has the price list of aborted baby body parts. http://readthetruth.com/fleshtrade.htm
 Are you going to ignore that this does happen and that experiments are being done on babies that have been aborted. Then again, you probably don't have a problem with that happening do you? Babies are also being born alive and then left alone to die on their own. Babies are being killed after they're born when the abortionist fails at killing them in the womb. How can you support babies literally being torn limb from limb. They are torn apart in the womb during an abortion, then when every part has been pulled out the nurse or abortionist puts them back together like a puzzle to make sure that they didn't leave anything in the mother. Does that sound like something that you wouldn't mind happening to you? Of course not!!! It's not right to have someone do that to you, but it's OK to have over 45 million babies to die by some sort of way that's just as horrible as that. Why is it wrong for someone to do that to you, but OK to have that happen to 45 million babies? Just because they're in the womb and you're not makes a difference. But at one time that could've been your mother who could've killed you. I'm sure it would've been wrong to have aborted you. But don't you think that those babies who are aborted would choose to live if they had the choice to make? Why should some live and some to be slaughtered?   

reply from: mom5

You're being a moron actually... You refuse to acknowledge any other views than your own, and force them upon others.....  The alternative is for you to go out and see the world, meeting various people from various cultures and THEN form an opinion about what is right and what is wrong for EVERYONE.... while realizing that you don't have any more right to force your new opinion then this one you're oozing at the moment... That's the plain truth. People are different.... opinions vary, no one is one hundred percent correct.  

I have to pipe in here and say this statement to Tobino ticks me OFF!  You are telling a woman who has had two abortions that she is moron for her views and she doesn't acknowledge other views than her own.... Well, Freud... She LIVED the other view ultimately, just like some others on this forum.  She has every right to have her views... I do not see where she is forcing her views on anyone... and NO, no one has to keep their views to themselves...Would you say the same to a woman wearing that lovely t-shirt that says "I had an abortion"... would that be keeping views to herself...no that's "in your face"...

Tobino, like many other women, is tired of seeing women suffer from abortion... she wants to educate women on the EFFECT...(cause and effect as you so love).  I hope that I am not the only person on this forum who found your comment demeaning and insulting.

reply from: yoda

No, you're not. Although I prefer to let others respond to such insults themselves, I completely support your reaction in this example.

What I've noticed over the months I've been involved in the abortion debate is that proaborts nearly always resort to personal attacks, since they have no other ammunition to throw. They do it in the hope of changing the subject and getting ProLifers involved in a personal war of words. If they are able to do that, they consider that a "victory".

reply from: mom5

No, you're not. Although I prefer to let others respond to such insults themselves, I completely support your reaction in this example. What I've noticed over the months I've been involved in the abortion debate is that proaborts nearly always resort to personal attacks, since they have no other ammunition to throw. They do it in the hope of changing the subject and getting ProLifers involved in a personal war of words. If they are able to do that, they consider that a "victory".

You know Yoda - that's the hardest part!  While I may not be able to "debate" all of my views with "proof" like the pro-aborts want, at least I debate from the heart and my heart tells me that abortion is wrong and insulting another person is wrong!

Maybe they resort to personal attacks because they have nothing else to attack with... you know, maybe even the personal attacks are a direct result of the anger inside of them.  The whole compassion and care for women on the pro-abort side is ridiculous...if they cared about women (and men) such as Tobino and you, and what all you both have went through with abortion, they wouldn't make the personal attacks... but they don't care.  I sometimes feel that the Pro-Abort community thinks that it is a woman's responsiblity to abort if she is not in the "perfect" situation. 

Thanks for your post Yoda!

reply from: yoda

You're entirely welcome, Mom. :-)

reply from: Navynate

Mom,

How can a group trully care about a group of people or a person when they want something for them that will harm them? How many parents want their kids to kids to use illegal drugs, drink alcohol when they're still kids and do other things that are self distructive? Would anyone in their right minds want anyone of their family members to do things that are very distructive and will damage them for the rest of their lives? With family like that, who needs enimies? Nobody would want that. Abortion is distructive and bad for those who have anything to do with it. 

I read an interesting thing lately. It was about those people who worked in concentration camps who were also Jews as well. They helped put the bodies into the ovens to burn and other jobs as well. They were called Sondercommandoes. And the  interesting fact that caught my attention was that they had to shut down their emotions to be able to survive doing their jobs from day to day. But that's what happens when people have to do jobs that are really tough to do day after day. Human beings are able to do that. I think that those people who work in the abortion industry also do the same thing as well. They have to to be able to see the blood and gore that they see day after day and not go crazy. I also think that those who have had abortions or those who have had something to do with an abortion also shut down parts of their emotions as well, until they are ready to feel again, then they will start to have feelings again. It's just too painful to feel all the pain, it's a defense mechanism in each of us to be able to survive. People who have been affected by abortion have a hard time feeling without the pain becoming too great to bare. If abortion was right and should be allowed, then why does abortion takes such a huge toll on those who have had one, those who have had something to do with one or those who have worked in the abortion industry? It's not like when someone has a tooth extracted or anything like that at all. How can people who are prochoice say that abortion doesn't take a huge toll on most of the people involved with abortion? It does take a huge toll. But of course prochoicers will deny that's true, (just one of a million lies that prochoicers say). 

       

reply from: anyboy

Christian4Life: [QUOTE]Christians didn't speak up enough then, but we've sure learned our lesson from that now.  And don't tell me that Hitler was a Chrisitian.  That is a lie a lot of people keep repeating, but it isn't true.  Yes, he was as a child, before he had done anything so evil, but he turned away from God and hated Him after that because he was refused a high position in the church.  Just like Satan, he wanted all the glory for himself.  And when he couldn't have it, he turned against God and tried to make himself admired and revered like God.

Hitler hated God and Jesus throughout his riegn.  Hitler called the God of Christians and Jews one and the same (which is true), he also called Him "that wanderer of the desert that makes people act like mad dogs" or something like that.  I can find the exact quote if you want.[/QUOTE]

Who is feeding you these bizarre stories?
Just curious.

reply from: carpediem

Do you think that young people don't have a say in the matter? I am a teen and I don't want abortion to be legal for birth control. It's wrong to use abortion as a method for birth control but you cannot make it illegal. Every woman should have a choice about what she does to her body. You are stereotyping. I'll try not to "sink" to your level in my posts. I'll try to keep them nice as well...lol.

reply from: yoda

How about "every unborn baby" having an eventual choice about what he/she does with his/her body? Would you be in favor of that, or just turning a blind eye to the killing of such babies?

reply from: Navynate

Carp,

What do you think over 1 million abortions a year happen for? It certainly isn't rape, incest and life of the mother. Those aren't the reasons why over 1 million abortions happen each year. The vast majority of them happen for purely elective reasons (for the most part birth control).  Why can't you make it illegal? It was for every year until 1973 when the Supreme Court decided Roe VS Wade based upon lies and bad constitutional law. Justice Blackmon or Brennon (I can't remember which one it was) said that they decided that abortion was the right thing to do when it came to women's rights. Well, guess what, the SC's job is not to decide what is best for women's rights, their job is to interpret the law and the constitution. They failed to do that. They created rights and laws where there weren't any. There is nothing in the constitution about the right to privacy (that was the right that they found was right that the right to an abortion was in) as far as abortion goes. Abortion was known about during the time when the constitution was written, yet the right to kill an unborn baby wasn't in it. It had always been looked at as a crime and murder. If you want to read more about that then get the book, Natural Rights and the Right to Choose, it's by Hadley Arkes. For the founders of America, abortion was wrong, life began at the moment of conception. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was a right given to all human life. I haveen't read a whole lot from the book Natural Rights and the Right to Choose, but I will when I have more time.        

reply from: mom5

Do you think that young people don't have a say in the matter? I am a teen and I don't want abortion to be legal for birth control. It's wrong to use abortion as a method for birth control but you cannot make it illegal. Every woman should have a choice about what she does to her body. You are stereotyping. I'll try not to "sink" to your level in my posts. I'll try to keep them nice as well...lol.

OK - I was a teen once...I was Pro-Choice until... I grew up, seen what a miracle it is to even conceive a child. And wham!  I am pro-life.  Do teens have a say?  Sure, but most of them want to keep abortion legal for birth control reasons. "Every woman should have a choice about what she does with her body"  that the same "reason" that EVERY pro-choice teen has... you see carpediem... there is another body involved... it is called a child...it is also called a blessing... it is also called a miracle...it is also called a human! 

"I don't want abortion legal for birth control purposes" Well, stand up girl!  Look at the statisics well over 95% of abortions are performed for birth control reasons.  The same reasons someone pops a birth control pill... the same reasons someone chooses abortion.  Sounds like birth control.  If you really believe your statement... stand up... say abortion is wrong for birth control reasons.  You are letting the pro-choice community drown you in their sayings..."my body, my choice"

Sterotyping, not at all.  I have read and seen those forums and been involved.  Abortion is a very sensitive and moral issue and it is not taken seriously by the young pro-choicers at all.  "Sink" to their level...it's a level of cussing and personal attacks is what it is.  I have been attacked on the pro-choice forums.  Some of us on this forum have been attacked personally by pro-choicers.  It's seems to be a "last resort" when nothing else can be said to defend their position.  And to be honest, on the pro-choice forum there ARE a lot of younger people than older...so I would say, in my opinion and observations, everything I said in my post was factual.

I hope as a teen you can start researching and learning everything there is to know about abortion. 

You also said "It's wrong to use abortion as a method for birth control but you cannot make it illegal" - I personally can not make abortion illegal.  Our country is pretty far from seeing abortion illegal.  So don't worry, I'm not a threat because #1, I'm not in a black robe (none of us are on this forum) #2, I'm not the President (none of us are on this forum)  #3, I am a mother(best profession in the world), a woman who has seen the suffering that abortion can do. I am tired of it!  I have already helped save one soul and I believe that women deserve better than abortion.  As soon as I can get my children a little older.. I plan on helping women at all levels of motherhood.  You see Pro-lIfe people care for them both... the child and the woman...and let's not forget the men who so desperately want the child that a woman can legally kill.

LOL to you carpediem! Welcome to the forum. 

reply from: Navynate

Carp,

Welcome to the group. I was a teenager once too. I wasn't prochoice then, but I still had the same attitude that I knew everything then. But I've seen so much that makes me more prolife then I could've ever imagined when I was in HS. I've seen how the lack of respect for other people can have on those who they couldn't care less about. I've seen women who sold themselves for money and talked to them as well, (but I've have and never ever will use their services for pleasure) to find out what they were like.

Carp, I'm not saying that teens don't have a say in the matter, but they also have a very limited amount of experience in the real world. As a teenager alot of the things that happen to you is sheltered for you. I mean to say that you're sheltered for the most part as a teenager. Yes, you do experience things in the big wide world, but you don't have very much first hand experience with alot of things and people. I've been to countries where the people are dirt poor, and have next to nothing, and are happy anyway. I didn't know alot of things that actually happen until I joined the US Navy and served for almost 8 years. It really was an eye opening experience, let me tell you. After I had been in awhile and been to alot of other countries is when I found out how little I really did know when I was in HS. When you see things on TV is nothing like seeing it with your own eyes. You really have no idea how other people live in other countries until you actually go to one yourself. Maybe you have done that already, if you have then you're way ahead of where most of the teenagers are in America today. Most have only been to Mexico and/or Canada and that's it as far as being overseases goes. Alot of people are prochoice until they have a baby of their own. Then they really see what the debate is all about.

reply from: northernlight

I belong to a multicultural families group.  On our debate board we have discussed abortion and I'm always floored at the responses.  Our group is made up of primarily very young women, ages 19-28 with biracial children.  Many of them have had 1 or more abortions and claim to "have no regret, it was the right decision at the time...."  The more I argue for life the more I am bashed.   I must admit, however, that I'm not the best of debators-so I tended to lose my cool.  It's hard to argue against liberals with no conscience or religious morals.  I would say--yes abortion IS MURDER and they'd say "when do I serve my time??!!" 

reply from: yoda

Northernlight, that's an easy one. "Murder" (in noun form) is defined as the "illegal killing of a human being", so technically abortion is not murder. "Murder" (in the verb form) can be applied to the act of abortion, however. So you can say that "killing an innocent unborn baby is a murderous act", and be totally correct.

And the thing about the "right decision at the time" argument is that it doesn't hold up to the test of time. If 20 years down the road, they decide it wasn't really such a great decision, and they wish they hadn't killed their own child, there is nothing they can do about it.

reply from: Allizdog2000

They have no moral conscience, no religious morality and they make their own morality.  So you can not argue with them.   You are dealing with people that worship Rikki Lake and Maury Povich.  

reply from: northernlight

That's what is so frustrating, yodavater, they WILL NEVER admit it was the wrong decision! 

reply from: shiprah

The issue of remorse is tricky within the prolife movement.  Some prolifers claim all women regret their abortions deep inside -- however some women stand by their decisions.  The truth is that regret is irrevelant.  Confederates didn't regret owning slaves -- that didn't mean slavery was morally correct.  We have to realize that although many women do feel healthy guilt or even feel destructive behaviors (and need our help), some will never regret what they did, but that doesn't change the fact that its wrong.

reply from: yoda

True, some people will lie to themselves and others to their last breath. But very many of them will wear down from all that denial over the years, and the result is some very, very depressed people.

reply from: Tam

Absolutely. Whether or not they're repentant is completely irrelevant. Many murderers are unrepentant. That doesn't mean it wasn't murder.

And of course many women do regret it, terribly. I do sidewalk counseling with a few women who regret their abortions and are activists trying to help other women avoid the trauma they have experienced.

reply from: northernlight

It's astounding that these women can love and care for their children, be totally in love with them and then say they have no regret about the child they aborted.  The more I've pressed the issue, the more outraged they become.  I think many young women are a bit "brainwashed"  and it's soooo sad. 

reply from: yoda

northernlight, perhaps you touched a raw nerve? Perhaps you challenged their carefully constructed denial of the truth that they had killed their own flesh and blood?

reply from: mom5

Raw Nerve definitely!  Let me tell you what I was told about women regretting their abortions on a pro-choice forum...Ready...

The women do not regret the abortion, they regret the situtation they were in.

My reply.... a "situtation" can happen a anytime in a woman's life.  A man could leave her, she could loose a job, etc...does that mean she can still kill a child because of her "situtation"?

Denial.  It's a horrible thing.

reply from: northernlight

That's a great response mom 5.  I'll have to use that next time!

reply from: yoda

Situations change, but once a child is dead it stays dead forever.

reply from: kayani

Well, I'm brand new here, and I can say I've done the complete opposite of what this thread is asking. Here I am, a pro-choicer, at a pro-life forum. I am proud to be here, defending my beliefs and rights. Nice to meet you.

reply from: Navynate

Welcome Kayani,

I enjoy going on Prochoice group web sites. If I didn't then I wouldn't learn that, guilt is induced because of prolifers and fake gory photos. I didn't know that women regret their abortions because of prolifers. and fake gory photos. Note sarcasm. That's nuts, the photos aren't fake and people regret their abortions because they have come face to face with the fact that they killed their own flesh and blood. Can you say D-E-N-I-A-L? Supporters of the Nazi's denied that the photos of the Holocaust were real as well. But too many had eyewitness evidence that they were true, and people who used to work in abortion clinics say that those photos of aborted babies are real as well.

Kayani, if you want to know the truth about abortion then go to web sites like Abort 73.com and look at those photos and then think about what actually happens when an abortion is performed. Those pix are what actually happens when a baby is aborted.

reply from: Navynate

Does anyone want to answer someone who said that people who regret their abortions are because prolifers make them guilt ridden with emotion-laden and because of fake gory photos?  To say that is nothing but crap. You can put manure in a silver pan or on a platter, but it's still manure. You can try to make abortion sound as nice and compassionate as you want, but it's still the death of an unborn baby. It's at Bush V Choice under the Tell it like it is.

reply from: kayani

I actually am well informed about the truths of abortion, and am also aware that, while some women do experience regret, others do not.  And no, it is not just an issue of denial.  For my family, I honestly believe that abortion was the best choice in our situation.  When I was about 2 years old, my mother became pregnant for the second time, but this time, as revealed by ultrasounds and other tests, the baby was developing abnormally due to a severe spinal problem.  The child would be born severely handicapped, never able to even sit up unsupported and would be completely dependent all his life.  My mom was faced with a decision she never thought she would have to make, under these circumstances, began considering abortion as a serious option.  Having this child would mean that he would be dependent on her for the rest of her life.  Even if she would not have minded that, once my mother passed away, she would leave him as a burdon on the rest of her family, most particularly me, probably, who was certainly not asking for such a thing, nor even capable of making such a decision at that time.  My mother terminated her pregnancy 5 months after it began, and no, she has not regreted it.  It was the right choice for my family, and I fight to keep it a viable choice for others.

reply from: chooselife

Kayani - I want to share a story that a mom with a severely handicapped child shared with me. This woman had a child who was confined to a wheelchair, could not speak, walk, go to the bathroom w/o her mother's help, eat w/o assistance, etc. I looked at the mother (ashamedly on my part) with a look of pity that she must have been very used to seeing. She said one of the most eloquent statements I have ever heard. She told me, "My daughter has taught me one of the greatest lessons in life....one that I would not have grasped had her precious life not happened. Yes, my daughter is completely dependent on me for everything. Without me she would surely die for I provide everything that she needs. But without her I would surely be dead because she taught me how to love God. Through her I can see how helpless I am before the Lord and that without Him I am nothing. God sent me this child to show me through the love of my own child....how very much He loves me. " At the time I was not a Christian and was barely out of highschool. But now that I am a mother I have come to truely be blessed by her testimony. I feel sad that you feel some people (your own sibling at that) are better off dead because you or someone else thought it to be true. I encourage you to visit the website http://www.notdeadyet.org. Here is a quote from their founder:

People with disabilities have an opportunity to lead society from the isolation and despair of today into a renewed recognition of belonging and community for all. The idea that people with disabilities are not worthy of society's acceptance or resources is not new. We see this form of hatred throughout history, often masked as benevolence. But for the first time in history, people with disabilities are organizing our community to fight back, to demand the equal protection of the law.

-- Diane Coleman, J.D., Founder, Not Dead Yet

Here are some more facts about disability and quality of life:

86% of spinal cord injured high-level quadriplegics rated their quality of life as average or better than average. Only 17% of their ER doctors, nurses, and technicians thought they would have an average or better quality of life if they acquired quadriplegic (KA Gerhart et al., Annals of Emergency Medicine, 1994, vol. 23, 807-812).

No differences were found between 190 physically disabled persons and 195 "able bodied" persons on ratings of life satisfaction, frustration with life or mood (P Cameron et al., Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1973, vol. 41, 207- 214).

The duration of disability was positively related with acceptance of disability in persons with spinal cord injury-related paralysis. Severity of disability was of no importance in accepting life with a disability (F Woodrich & JB Patterson, Journal of Rehabilitation, 1983, July-Sept., 26-30).

60% of paraplegics reported feelings more positively about themselves since becoming disabled (C Ray & J West, Paraplegia, 1984, vol. 22, 75-86).

Interviews and tests administered to 133 persons with severe mobility disabilities revealed no differences between them and the nondisabled norm on psychosocial measures. In another study, no significant difference was found between persons with severe disabilities (requiring wheelchair use and daily personal assistance) and persons with no disabilities on quality of life measures (R Stensman, Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 1985, vol. 17, 87-99).

In a study of life satisfaction of quadriplegics, fewer than a third of those who used ventilators expressed dissatisfaction with their lives. There is evidence that life satisfaction scores are higher in persons who have had more time to adjust to disability (JR Bach & MC Tilton, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1994, vol. 75, 626-632).

Spinal cord injured rehabilitation patients were similar to the general population on self-ratings of depression, yet hospital staff consistently overestimated the patients' level of depression (LA Cushman & MP Dijkers, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1990, vol. 71, 191-196.

Three-quarters of persons with spinal cord injuries rated their quality of life as good or excellent. Amount of paralysis made no difference, but people who used ventilators rated their quality of life higher than those not needing ventilators (GG Whiteneck et al., Rocky Mountain Spinal Cord Injury System Report to the National Institute of Handicapped Research, 1985, 29-33.

Elderly paralyzed veterans rated their quality of life higher than similarly aged men without disabilities (MG Eisenberg & CC Saltz, Paraplegia, 1991, vol. 29, 514-520).

reply from: Navynate

Choose,

Thank you for having that hyperlink in your post. I try to be as understanding as I can be, but then reading what they have to say about various issues, I realize that I need to really see things from their perspective. And that nobody can determine who should die based on their life situation. Since they are disabled doesn't mean that they are less important then anyone else. It's wrong to say that someone's life isn't worth living just because they are in a wheelchair or disabled. Joni Ericson Tada is one phemoninal lady. She is just incredible, and she would never trade her wheelchair for your life the way it was before she got injured. We need to be reminded about those things that really matter and are really important, and those things that really aren't that important as far as the big picture goes. That's why I love working with the Special Olympics, because they are so loving and so much fun as well. They also make you see what is important and what isn't.

Just because they are disabled doesn't mean that they have a terrible life and want to die. I have a cousin who is disabled because her mom had polio when she was pregnant with her, my Aunt recovered from it, but she never has and she will never walk. She's a wonderful person. My sister even had her in her wedding too.     

reply from: kayani

Kayani - I want to share a story that a mom with a severely handicapped child shared with me. This woman had a child who was confined to a wheelchair, could not speak, walk, go to the bathroom w/o her mother's help, eat w/o assistance, etc. I looked at the mother (ashamedly on my part) with a look of pity that she must have been very used to seeing. She said one of the most eloquent statements I have ever heard. She told me, "My daughter has taught me one of the greatest lessons in life....one that I would not have grasped had her precious life not happened. Yes, my daughter is completely dependent on me for everything. Without me she would surely die for I provide everything that she needs. But without her I would surely be dead because she taught me how to love God. Through her I can see how helpless I am before the Lord and that without Him I am nothing. God sent me this child to show me through the love of my own child....how very much He loves me. " At the time I was not a Christian and was barely out of highschool. But now that I am a mother I have come to truely be blessed by her testimony.
 Beautiful as you may have found that quote, I do not believe in god and it had no meaningful effect on me.  As I do not believe in god, I have never and still do not find it necessary to have a handicapped sibling so that i could learn to love this god, which I don't believe in in the first place. 

I feel sad that you feel some people (your own sibling at that) are better off dead because you or someone else thought it to be true.
I didn't say he deserved/was better off dead, just that my family was not open/able to care for such a child.  In addition, I must thank my mother, for not subjecting me to having to look after a dependent sibling after her passing.  I consider that to be very considerate.

reply from: Della22

Well, kayani, since you do not believe in God I think it best to give you another perspective. Since you're prochoice this will be righ tup your alley. Goes along with the what ifs (if you can ask what if it's a case of rape, incest or genetic abnormalites, I think it's fair o rme to ask a what if as well.)

What if you got into an accident? Say you're paralyzed and can't do anything for yourself. Something akin to what Christopher Reeve went through. Should your next of kin put a bullet in your head because you'll be a burden on them for the rest of your life? Now there's a touching sentiment!

If you don't mind me asking, what is your buisness here? Why did you come on here at all? Because you think you have some "valid" argument we have never heard? (trust me, I have heard them all and they're still dead wrong.) Are you trying to convert someone your way? (BTW, WON'T happen. It's more likely someone who's prochoice will change directions and come to OUR side of the argument.) Or maybe more likely, you enjoy getting people going. My youngest sister is like that and you know, my mother was told by her doctor that she should have an abortion because they "had too many kids." What kind of reason is that?? You are free to post on here, but forget about changing anyone. You will more than likely make NO impact other than on yourself.

reply from: Allizdog2000

She is here to try to make pro-life people "see the light".    In her saying "I didn't say he deserved/was better off dead, just that my family was not open/able to care for such a child.  In addition, I must thank my mother, for not subjecting me to having to look after a dependent sibling after her passing.  I consider that to be very considerate."

"He" yet again implies human.  The Abortion ended a human life.  Her brother's life was ended for financial reasons.  "In addition, I must thank my mother, for not subjecting me to having to look after a dependent sibling after her passing.  I consider that to be very considerate", "As I do not believe in god, I have never and still do not find it necessary to have a handicapped sibling so that i could learn to love this god, which I don't believe in in the first place."

What truely SELFISH statements.  

  

reply from: Della22

Nah, Allizdog, I think she's on here to get things stirring. My little sister loves trouble and that's what I see her posting as. Of course we could take away ALL her power by not replying. She would probably get mad and stomp off. My youngest sister likes to get people's goats by taking the most controversial side to something or even  (in this case) the morally wrong side. Don't let her get ya upset. Her points are meaningless as anyone can see. She's just on here to defend her mother because she made a choice once for abortion. It's a defense thing. If I saw my mom doing something wrong I'd probably try to find an excuse for her too. Because...

BABIES LOVE THEIR MOTHERS WHETHER OR NOT THE MOTHER LOVES THEM. THAT INCLUDES THOSE BABIES WHOSE MOTHERS KILLED THEM IN A SELFISH BRUTAL ACT.

reply from: Navynate

Kay,

Religious beliefs have nothing to do with abortion. There are several people who are either atheists who are prolife or those who have other beliefs. Prolifers cut across all varius kinds of groups of people. There are even gay and lesbian prolifers as well. I have no idea if anyone on here is gay or lesbian. Just like prochoicers cut across all groups too. Being prolife isn't on a persons religious beliefs. It's based on the belief that unborn babies are alive and deserve to have their life protected by law (as it was for most states before Roe V Wade was wrongly decided)  and by the constitution.   

reply from: yoda

So you're doing the complete opposite of "Topic Title: Does anyone go to prochoice web groups and stand up for life there?"

Okay, in other words, you're here standing up for death here.

reply from: yoda

Then if the emphasis is really on what's best for your mother and you, why not expand the principle to born children? Why not kill crippled children already born? What's the difference?

reply from: shiprah

Kaylani, because the handicapped are human, and because I don't belive their are castes of humanity, the handicapped are entitled to life just as the rest of us.

reply from: kayani

Then if the emphasis is really on what's best for your mother and you, why not expand the principle to born children? Why not kill crippled children already born? What's the difference?

I believe that the difference is that, after birth, he is not directly and soley dependent on my mother's body.  He could now recieve care from others, should my mom have been unwilling/unable to do it herself.  It is no longer fatal for him to exist outside the womb, but as long as he must remain in my mother's body to survive (up to about 6 months), he is a part of her, and her choice.

reply from: kayani

Well I don't believe in human-supremacy.  If you do not mind me asking, are you a meat-eater?

reply from: Tam

Well I don't believe in human-supremacy.  If you do not mind me asking, are you a meat-eater?

Wow, kayani, you really surprise me. You're about to get on shiprah's case for eating meat? And, you know, you're right. If you feel that eating meat is disgusting and immoral, well, I agree with you. But, I have to wonder what the heck you could possibly be thinking to refuse to extend your obvious compassion and respect for animals to unborn children. I wonder what you think of that gorilla abortion we were discussing in another topic. There were too many gorillas at the zoo so they aborted one of them to keep the population down. They apparently videotaped it. At the time, some of us were wondering who that sort of video might sway to the pro-life side. We figured only someone who was really into animals but also pro-abortion. Well, if you would like to see why we are so opposed to abortion, perhaps you might consider taking a look at the gorilla abortion video. I don't know where to get a copy but there must be some way. This brings up many interesting issues, such as who the heck those humans think they are to decide whether that gorilla mom wanted her baby or not. It sure wasn't HER "choice" to have her baby killed inside her womb. And apparently the video does show how the abortion affected the unborn baby gorilla. As in, you see this baby gorilla get brutally slaughtered in utero. I feel like if you were to watch something like that you would not support abortion. And don't start in about how you don't support abortion. You support it being legal and that is what is meant. What shiprah was trying to say was not that humans are supreme. She might think so, who knows, but that's not what she said. She said that handicapped human beings are no less worthy of life than average human beings. And average human beings are no less worthy of life than gifted human beings. That all human beings are equal. I agree with you about human supremacy. I don't believe it either. But if we don't have the "right" to slaughter animals or disabled humans, why do you think it is ok to slaughter the unborn children? And do not tell me "slaughter" is the wrong word. A picture is worth a thousand words, and a video of an abortion might be a thousand pictures that are worth one word: slaughter.

reply from: shiprah

Well I don't believe in human-supremacy.  If you do not mind me asking, are you a meat-eater?

I occasionally eat meat -- as do animals, however I definitely respect all life.  I believe that humans should be the caretakers of the animal kingdom.  However, I don't equate the slaughter of cows for steak with the mass killing of the Holocaust.  I don't consider hitching a horse to a plow the same as owning a slave.  I don't think that eating meat is the same as abortion.   No human has the right to kill another -- even if that human is disabled.

reply from: yoda

How does being dependent upon only one person take away your moral right to life? If a born person is dependent upon ONLY one person for their very life, does that take away their right to life? Suppose a mother has a born child and lives isolated from society, so that child would die if not for her mother? Does that take away the born child's moral right to life? What moral basis do you have for giving the sole supporter of a human being the moral right to take away that life?

"A part of her?" Like a TAPEWORM, PERHAPS? Is a tapeworm a "part of you" if it's in your gut?


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics