Home - List All Discussions

How Much Time Should She Do?

If Abortion=Murder, then Women Who Abort MUST Be Jailed!!!

by: fetalisa

You MUST see this video wherein a reporter asks abortion clinic protesters;
If abortions become illegal, how much (jail) time should women do?
The clinic protesters provide the most ABSURD answers, including;
1.I don't know.
2. Just pray for them.
3. Women who abort should not be punished if abortions are illegal.
4. I don't have an answer for that.
5. I've never really thought about it. (Even after 2-5 years of protesting, these loons have never asked themselves this question?)
6. It's hard to say.
7. There's no point in punishing women who have abortions, since abortion is punishment enough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk6t_tdOkwo
It is too funny, as well as utterly absurd, that after 35 years of hearing these prolife loons claim abortion=murder, they can't bring themselves to state that if abortion is murder, then women who have them should be tried for murder. Of course, we know why the prolife ignoramuses won't make that claim. They know full well the public will simply stop listening to such an extremist viewpoint. Yet, these abortion clinic protesters lack the intellectual capacity and good common sense to understand that, if abortion is indeed equivalent to murder, then women who have abortions must be tried for murder. This video reveals, in no uncertain terms, the pure, unadulterated hypocrisy of those who protest at abortion clinics, while demonstrating the extreme stupidity of the prolife position at the same time. Even worse are the ones in the video who claim there should be no punishment for women who abort. If there is to be no punishment for women who abort, assuming abortion became illegal, what possible reason would there be to make abortion a crime? Have you ever heard of a crime that has no punishment? I haven't, but such is the stupidity of the prolife.
Fortunately for us, the unborn most certainly are not persons, have never been recognized as persons throughout history and so therefore, do not possess the legal rights that persons do. Why in the world should a 3 inch long embryo with a tail, have the same legal rights as persons? Common sense tells us that non-sentient, non-conscious, non-persons should most certainly not have the same legal rights that persons do, no more than non-sentient, non-conscious, non-persons in the form of head of cabbage have a right to life.
In any event, be sure and check out this video, as no other video I have seen reveals the abject stupidity and total lack of common sense of the prolifers as this video does.

reply from: carolemarie

Actually, all we have to do is make performing an abortion against the law and then the DR. will be the ones who are jailed, not the women

reply from: joe

Agreed. Pro-life advocates need to start acting like it is murder. Since you pro-choice advocates claim it is not, then air the "procedure" on national television or during your right to choose commercials...hypocrites!!!

reply from: LiberalChiRo

So in other words...
Only prosecute the guys selling heroin, who cares about the people using it?
Personally yes; I feel the woman who aborts and the heroin addict are both victims of a criminal act. They both need therapy and help, not jail time.

reply from: fetalisa

Why? There is nothing AT ALL wrong with abortion.
I feel sorry for you that the entire point of this thread has very obviously flown completely over your head. If abortion is murder and we jail the doctors, why let the women, who are accessories to murder, walk away scot-free?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

There's nothing at all wrong with killing a child just because it's in the womb? Why does a few inches of skin matter so much?

reply from: fetalisa

By all means, please do. Such an extreme position will only marginalize the forced-birth movement to a more further out fringe.
35 years after Roe and you prolifers still can't find the clue bus which demonstrates arguments intended to invoke emotional reactions aren't working? Put open heart surgery on tv. It is just as gross. Just because ALL surgeries are gross, does not mean they should be banned.
Here's a clue: Why not try RATIONAL and LOGICAL arguments to advance your forced-birth arguments, instead of emotional ones, which, 35 years after Roe, still aren't working?

reply from: fetalisa

Then abortion is not murder to you. (I will leave the false idea that abortion is a criminal act to another time. Abortion is obviously not a criminal act in our society, nor was it considered so in numerous societies throughout history.)

reply from: fetalisa

Children are counted in a census. Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not. Gee, I wonder why that might be?

reply from: joe

35 years after Roe and you prolifers still can't find the clue bus which demonstrates arguments intended to invoke emotional reactions aren't working? Put open heart surgery on tv. It is just as gross. Just because ALL surgeries are gross, does not mean they should be banned.
Here's a clue: Why not try RATIONAL and LOGICAL arguments to advance your forced-birth arguments, instead of emotional ones, which, 35 years after Roe, still aren't working?
Run hypocrite....this has nothing to do with emotion. I seen surgeries on television but have not seen a abortion performed on television.
You advocate this murder and are AFRAID to death to show what you advocate....Why?????????????????
I have no problem having this murder shown to the world, you on the other hand have a major problem showing the truth! HYPOCRITES!

reply from: joe

By all means, please do. Such an extreme position will only marginalize the forced-birth movement to a more further out fringe.
Okay. It is murder and those who kill should be jailed. (Repeat as necessary).

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Children are counted in a census. Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not. Gee, I wonder why that might be?
Because they are not citizens of the united states yet. Neither is a visitor from mexico. Is it ok to kill them too?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Then abortion is not murder to you. (I will leave the false idea that abortion is a criminal act to another time. Abortion is obviously not a criminal act in our society, nor was it considered so in numerous societies throughout history.)
I consider the woman to be an accessory to manslaughter under duress, and it is murder on the part of the doctor. I believe no woman would abort if she were given the proper support; thus, she is under duress form our very society to think that abortion is the right answer.
Also, is your signature implying that the unborn are slaves? Slavery is illegal in the united states; thus, you are advocating the illegal and inhuman treatment of the unborn. Slavery was ruled as inhuman treatment. Your signature is not promoting the pro-choice standpoint, it is strengthening the pro-life standpoint.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

The visitor from Mexico is still counted in a Census.
Not OUR census, which is what we are talking about.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

We are talking about abortion in the USA, or did you once again forget that the web address of this forum is Pro-Life AMERICA?

reply from: fetalisa

ALL anti-abortion arguments rely on emotional reactions in place of reason.
Then why don't you complain to the networks instead of me? If you wish to see abortions performed on television, isn't it far more rational and logical to direct your request to a television network, rather than gripe about it on a web forum? THINK!
At no point have I advocated murder.
I advocate guilt-free killing of non-sentient, non-conscious, non-persons, such as bugs, plants, zygotes, embryos and fetuses. None of those cases are murder, otherwise Raid, Weed-B-Gone and abortion would be illegal. I do not cry for the life lost if I chop down a head of cabbage. I do not cry for the life lost if I step on a bug. I do not cry over abortion either. For what reason would I?
Oh I get it. You have some personally chosen, made-up definition of murder and you are pissed off the world pays your personally chosen moral code no mind at all. Will you next be pissed off that the sky is blue and not green with yellow polka dots?
We all know the truth here. If you do not like alcohoi, don't drink alcohol. If you do not like violent TV, change the channel. If you do not like abortion, do not have one. The truth will set you free.

reply from: fetalisa

A visitor from Mexico is a person in possession of a right to life, by fact of their birth. Don't you think it foolish to attempt to argue against abortion when you do not even have the most basic grasp of the facts and legal ideas involved here?

reply from: fetalisa

I am sorry the women you know are so weak willed that they can not make a decision for themselves on their own.
Our society is not based on your personally chosen moral code. If you don't like being drunk, don't drink alcohol. Just because you don't like being drunk, is no reason to ban alcohol from all other citizens of this country. Your dislike of it is your issue, which means YOU must deal with it, NOT the rest of us. As if prohibition ever worked anyway.
You believe women too stupid to make a decision on their own. You believe women are easily led to do as you wish. I feel sorry for the women in your life.
You mean the 'right' answer according to your personally chosen moral code, which none in our society are obligated to live by.
My signature speaks the truth about forced-birthers such as yourself, which would turn women into nothing more than brood mares, having no choice whatsoever as to whether to have a child or not. Without the choice as to whether one's family will or will not expand, women become slaves to simple biology.
You can't enslave that which lacks sentience or consciousness. Can you enslave a rock or a plant?
It is you who would rob women of bodily autonomy, making them slaves to biology and no better than brood mares. Such views are morally repugnant and disgusting, which is precisely why abortion is still legal 35 years after the Roe decision.

reply from: fetalisa

A visitor from Mexico is a person in possession of a right to life, by fact of their birth. Don't you think it foolish to attempt to argue against abortion when you do not even have the most basic grasp of the facts and legal ideas involved here?

reply from: joe

Dodge. Pathetic attempt to hide your true fear of showing what abortion is. It should be shown to the world, the murderers about to kill the unborn and in sex education programs.
But hypocrites like you oppose the idea. How can you support something you cannot even watch...cowards.

reply from: fetalisa

HAHAHA! Sure dude! No one in the country has ever seen the gruesome pictures of abortions that forced birthers such as yourself like to show at clinic protests, as well as post from one end of the internet to the other. Given that these gruesome pictures, which probably aren't even aborted fetuses anyway, has done NOTHING to change public opinion about abortion, you somehow magically believe that showing moving pictures instead of these still photos, will somehow change public opinion instead. Additionally, you prove that your god is simply a projection of your own self, in that you wish us all to pretend I somehow fear putting such films on television. I say, contact the tv networks and get it done. Such gruesome films will have as much effect on public opinion of abortion just as the still photos have, which is NONE.
Do you have any RATIONAL and LOGICAL arguments as to why I should care if a 3 inch long embryo with a tail is killed by an abortion? Do you have any rational arguments as to why the world is not affected AT ALL by abortion? Do you have an rational arguments as to why, had I been aborted, NONE ON THE PLANET, including myself, would EVER HAVE KNOWN THE DIFFERENCE?
You have the legal right to show your own children "The Silent Scream," "Ice Age," or any other movie of your choosing, as well as whatever pictures of supposed aborted fetuses you wish. How in the name of imaginary gods you expect you have some right to FORCE other kids to watch such nonsense is beyond me. It is as if you think yourself god, knowing better than everyone else what is best for their children. You act like a socialist who thinks they knows what is best for all society, when your absurd arguments reveal intellectual and rational deficiencies that even those with Down's Syndrome would be ashamed to witness.
The only hypocrite here is you. You have no right whatsoever to dictate to other parents how their children will be educated. Believe it or not, America really isn't all about you and your personally chosen morals.
Sucks for you the Constitution guarantees that ALL have the right to determine the size of their families, regardless of what absurd, outlandish and freakishly extremist views you may have on the issues.

reply from: joe

False. You know damn well showing the procedure will sway public opinion and the proof is your movements fierce objection to have it shown. Liars.
If abortion was a stand alone issue, you murderers would lose.

reply from: joe

That argument can be used against born human beings as well. I am sure you are not advocating killing those individuals...are you?

reply from: fetalisa

If I believed showing the procedures on tv would turn public opinion AGAINST abortion, why would I so strongly advocate that you contact the tv networks and make it happen? I have clearly stated showing the procedures on tv would have the same effect as so-called abortion photos have had, which is NONE. Seriously, after you forced-birthers have paraded photos of the dead 'children' of others for 35 years, yet abortion is still legal, why would I possibly be against showing abortion on tv? Good luck getting viewers, however. There are far more interesting things to see on tv as it is.
Oh I will let the readers here decide which of the two of us are being honest and which not.
Dang! You really are ignorant on the abortion issue. The prochoice do not stand in the way of your thoughtless utopia wherein all women are brood mare slaves to biology. The Constitution is what is really in your way.

reply from: joe

But you can "force" them to learn about sex and abortion but not watch what abortion actually is!!!
Your hypocrisy is astonishing........

reply from: joe

What was it like before Roe vs. Wade, idiot. When we the people had representation not some pathetic interpretation on the right to kill from some judges.

reply from: joe

If I believed showing the procedures on tv would turn public opinion AGAINST abortion, why would I so strongly advocate that you contact the tv networks and make it happen? I have clearly stated showing the procedures on tv would have the same effect as so-called abortion photos have had, which is NONE. Seriously, after you forced-birthers have paraded photos of the dead 'children' of others for 35 years, yet abortion is still legal, why would I possibly be against showing abortion on tv? Good luck getting viewers, however. There are far more interesting things to see on tv as it is.
Do you think we voted to make abortion legal. Learn some history.

reply from: joe

You mean my "personally chosen morals" that includes not to kill innocent human beings?!?!

reply from: fetalisa

You do not wish for kids to learn 'what an abortion really is.' You wish for kids to learn YOUR OPINIONS of what an abortion is. This is not Nazi Germany and you are not Hitler, so you have no right whatsoever to dictate what is taught in schools without the input from other parents. America really isn't all about you, your opinions, nor your personally chosen moral codes.
Go set up a dictatorship and form another country where you are king. Then the Constitution and other parents will not be in the way of the brainwashing you wish to cram down the throats of kids without input from other parents.

reply from: joe

So let me get this straight, you wish to "inform" kids about abortion but not show what a perfectly "legit" procedure looks like. LOL.
Who here is trying to brainwash kids??? (Hint: fetalisa)

reply from: fetalisa

That's an easy one to answer. Doctors began lobbying to ban abortion in America in the late 1800s, because abortion techniques at the time were DEADLY to women, with anywhere from a 50-80% death rate to mothers. Over time, abortion technology improved, to the point that aborting was safer than carrying to term. Don't you know that if abortions had a 50% maternal death rate today, abortion would still be illegal?
It's about consent. Rape is illegal if the woman does not consent to have sex with a man. Stealing my car is illegal, if you do not have consent to drive my car. Using the body or bodily organs of another is illegal without consent.
If you had some dread kidney disease and would die without the use of my kidney, you have no legal right whatsoever to use my kidney to stay alive, without my consent. The same is true of zygotes, embryos and fetuses.
All you are arguing for is a special right that even born people do not have. An unborn has no right whatsover to use the uterus of a woman without her consent, no more than you have a right to use my kidney without my consent, even though you might die without my kidney.
And abortion certainly does grant a right to kill non-sentient, non-conscious, non-persons, in the form of zygotes, embryos and fetuses. This no different than stepping on a bug or pulling up a weed, which are both also non-sentient, non-conscious, non-persons.

reply from: joe

My Opinion???????????
Show the kids what abortion is...after you wipe the tears away, they can decide for themselves.
You are right, I am not Hilter. I do not believe in killing innocent human lives, you on the other hand would fit right in Nazi Germany.

reply from: fetalisa

Do we WANT to put civil rights up to a vote? Should we vote on whether black people or women should have the right to vote or not? Should we vote on whether slavery should be legal or not? Should we vote on whether couples have a right to determine the size of their families?
You do not vote on such things in a free society, because in a free society, it is indisputably right that blacks and women can vote and that people have the right to determine the size of their own families.

reply from: fetalisa

Question: The forced birthers have, for 35 years, claimed abortion is murder. 35 years later, the public DOES NOT believe abortion is anywhere equal to murder and in fact, public opinion on abortion has remained steady in every poll conducted since Roe was decided. Given that repeating abortion=murder and abortion kills innocent human beings for 35 years running, does it make sense to keep repeating a line of argument that isn't working to convince the public of your views?
OF COURSE abortion kills! WHO ***** CARES? Why should I care if a human being, 3 inches long, with a tail, is killed in an abortion? It is non-sentient, non-conscious life, in the form of a non-person. Given that a bug I step on is also a non-sentient, non-conscious, non-person that is also killed and I feel no guilt or remorse for stepping on that bug, for what reason should ANYONE in the public care, if a non-sentient, non-conscious, non-person in the form of a zygote, embryo or fetus is killed by an abortion?
So you can repeat ALL YOU WISH that abortion kills 'innocent human beings.' It doesn't change the fact that the public does not see it as the same as killing a mother of father of 5 and NEVER WILL SEE IT AS THE SAME. Face it. Our society doesn't consider the killing of non-sentient, non-conscious life in the form of non-persons to be immoral. If repeating for 35 years that abortion is the killing of 'innocent human beings' has gotten you nowhere........what might that tell you?

reply from: joe

Was it always indisputable???
Every human being should have the indisputable right to live. Our past has shown human error...

reply from: fetalisa

Provide a direct quote where I have ever claimed such and I will be more than happy to address it. As it is, I have made no statements whatsoever as to whether abortion should be addressed or not, insofar as sex education in schools. Anyone with half a brain who had read what I did post about this, would know the only answer I would have would be:
What is taught about abortion in sex education classes in schools (or even whether abortion should be brought up in sex education class at all) would depend on the consensus of the parents.
Why don't you address arguments I actually made, instead of making up arguments, then pretending that I made them? Again, show a direct quote from any of my posts, where I have ever stated I wish to 'inform' kids about abortion in sex education in public schools. Unlike you, I do not pretend to know what is best for everyone, so the most I could say is, how abortion is addressed in public sex education classes or if it is to be addressed at all, could only come from a consensus of the parents.

reply from: joe

Other than the fact that a few months from now that human being will be sentient and conscious. Other than the fact that every poster here was non-sentient, non conscious during their lifetime.
The honest and good people CARE.

reply from: joe

Your religion specifies that you should kill homosexuals and adulterers.
So much for your 'indisputable right to live'.
Christianity does not advocate killing innocent human beings.

reply from: fetalisa

Drop your god complex, realize that you do not know everything, realize that you are not the only parent with kids in school and you might finally realize that you do not get to determine what other people's children are taught regarding abortion in a public school sex education class. If other's people kids are in that school, those parents, too, have a right to determine what their kids will and will not be taught in sex education class (or even not allow their kids to attend the class at all.)
You act as if you are. You act as if you, and you alone, should have the legal right to decide what other children are taught in sex education classes in schools. The fact that those other children have parents, who have a say in what their children are taught, totally escapes you. Sorry, but you are not better than everyone else. You are not more educated than everyone else. You are not more moral than everyone else. You have no right to usurp the authority of other parents over their own children.
You have revealed far more about yourself here than you realize. You believe the only way to convince society of your views is to force them on all, without input from other parents, as if those other parents have no right or say in the education of their own children. What does it say about your views, that this is the only way you could see them eventually enacted?
So all with whom you disagree are no better than Nazis? How old are you? 10?

reply from: joe

That is true, but I do know that killing innocent human beings is and always will be wrong.

reply from: joe

Not the one that disagree...that is silly. Just the ones that advocate killing innocent human beings, like you.

reply from: joe

Did you not read how Jesus saved the woman guilty of adultery from being stoned???

reply from: fetalisa

Who cares? It's not sentient nor conscious at the time it is killed. It's the same reason you can buy weed killer at Wal-mart and use it without guilt. The weeds are also non-sentient and non-conscious.
Yet, had I been aborted, no one on the planet, including me, would ever have known the difference. So tell me again why abortion is wrong?
The honest and good people CARE.

reply from: joe

You mean a weed will become sentient and conscious!!!!

reply from: joe

Okay fetalisa, it has been fun but now I have to go back to my family which was not aborted and enjoy the gift God has given me.

reply from: joe

Stoning a homosexual is against the teachings of Christ. He would have saved him too.

reply from: carolemarie

First of all, Christians are under the New Testament, which does not say to kill homosexuals.
Second, the OT had laws and if you broke them the result was death. However, for death to be given there had to be two eyewitnesses to the crime. Obviously there would be no eyewitness to a private sexual encounter....
In the OT, we find lots of laws, but proving a matter to be so strict that it can't be done

reply from: carolemarie

It is also pointless to argue for women to be jailed for getting an abortion.
Pro-choicer's bring it up because they want the public to believe that is the goal of prolifers, which it isn't, with the exception of the nut cases.
The prolife movement has consistantely said that they want to go after those who profit financially by performing abortion, not women.

reply from: fetalisa

Our society does not condemn the killing of non-sentient, non-conscious life in the form of non-persons. That is precisely why things such as Raid and Weed-B-Gone are legal. Don't you get it? You forced birthers have been claiming abortion is murder for 35 years. The public still isn't buying it. Do you think that means there is something wrong with the public, or is the problem with the arguments of the forced birthers?

reply from: fetalisa

Because the public will right you forced birthers off as loons and never listen to you again if you dare suggest it.
Sorry, but whenever the forced birthers say abortion is murder and should be outlawed, the next question is what is the penalty for a woman who has an abortion were it banned. You can't say on the one hand, abortion is murder, but then say women won't be jailed. If she participates in murder, she must be jailed. Period. The End.
The prolife movement has consistantely said that they want to go after those who profit financially by performing abortion, not women.

reply from: carolemarie

So, for example, what's wrong with being transsexual or homosexual?
The NT says nothing about either, right?
The NT says that homosexuality is a sin, along with a whole pile of things. It doesn't say we are to stone, kill or harm homosexuals. We are suppose to love them and care about them and tell them about Jesus and let God change what He wants to change. That would also mean not denying them a job, food, shelter etc...
We believe the behavior is wrong, but the person is valuable to God and by extention to us.
It says nothing about transsexuals.

reply from: CharlesD

1st chapter of Romans.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

You must have read, "Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? A Christian Response." The authors say Sodom was not destroyed for sodomy. Rather, it was because they were a band of thugs who used force, violence and rape. Sodomy is a wonderful loving expression in a commited gay union according to the authors.
I would agree with Romans that sodomy is unnatural, and outlawed.

reply from: abc123

I Corinthians 6:9-11
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
Homosexuality along with everything else mentioned in I Cor 6:9-11 is an unrighteous act, those who practice it will not inherit the kingdom of God. Verse 11 is the good news.....Such WERE some of you!
I Timothy 1:9-10
realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,
The law of God is for the unrighteous who commit and practice the acts listed. The law of God is to bring a proud sinner to repentance, knowing that they can't do it own their own and need God help them when they are tempted. Jesus was tempted....but He did not sin.
Romans 6:12-18
Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.
You can be free from your sin, place your trust in Jesus. You seem to be trying to find justifications for your lifestyle. It sounds like you have searched this out in the bible, you will never find the bible, old or new testament, stating homosexuality as acceptable, just as you will never find any other immoral sexual relation acceptable. Homosexuality is no greater of a sin than adultery or fornication or theft, etc....The difference is, and I don't know what country you are from but homosexuality is something that in America is becoming accepted and taught in our schools, and is making anyone who speaks against it a homophobe.
I mean look at the other verses that are in Chapter 18 of Leviticus:
Verse 6-18
All verses about not having sexual relations with family members (incest)
Verse 20
You shall not have intercourse with your neighbor's wife, to be defiled with her (Adultery)
Verse 21
You shall not give any of your offspring to offer them to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God; I am the LORD. (Molech is a god that sacrificed children)
Verse 23
Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion. (Beastiality)
So we have taken out of our society one of these verses and decided to call something God called evil and an abomination something good today? What are your views on incest and adulteryand child sacrifice and beastiality?
I don't know if you are truly seeking out answers from the bible or not, I urge you to take the word of God as truth and to believe that what God says and not lean on your own understanding or justifications.

reply from: Antibigot

Question: The forced birthers have, for 35 years, claimed abortion is murder. 35 years later, the public DOES NOT believe abortion is anywhere equal to murder and in fact, public opinion on abortion has remained steady in every poll conducted since Roe was decided. Given that repeating abortion=murder and abortion kills innocent human beings for 35 years running, does it make sense to keep repeating a line of argument that isn't working to convince the public of your views?
OF COURSE abortion kills! WHO ***** CARES? Why should I care if a human being, 3 inches long, with a tail, is killed in an abortion? It is non-sentient, non-conscious life, in the form of a non-person. Given that a bug I step on is also a non-sentient, non-conscious, non-person that is also killed and I feel no guilt or remorse for stepping on that bug, for what reason should ANYONE in the public care, if a non-sentient, non-conscious, non-person in the form of a zygote, embryo or fetus is killed by an abortion?
So you can repeat ALL YOU WISH that abortion kills 'innocent human beings.' It doesn't change the fact that the public does not see it as the same as killing a mother of father of 5 and NEVER WILL SEE IT AS THE SAME. Face it. Our society doesn't consider the killing of non-sentient, non-conscious life in the form of non-persons to be immoral. If repeating for 35 years that abortion is the killing of 'innocent human beings' has gotten you nowhere........what might that tell you?
Abortion isn't murder because it's legal. I see it as a form of homicide. A human is being killed, but legally. With a born person, if you kill him or her with malice (actual murder), it wouldn't matter how sentient or conscious he or she would be!
I have a question: Since you don't care that the unborn are killed just because they aren't sentient or conscious, does that mean you care just a little bit for someone born who has little sentience or conscious? What if they are in a coma? What if they have a serious disability? It doesn't matter if they are killed? Or do you think people have to have SOME conscious or sentience to be considered murder? If so, does that mean you are absolutely against abortion after the second trimester?

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Just a thought about the idea of showing videos of abortions in school or on TV - if that would happen, it would also become necessary to show people having SEX very graphically, so that it can be a warning against how terrible it is.
Do you really want your children watching porn in the name of education?

reply from: joe

Abortion is not pornography. Point being, show the truth on both sides. Why do pro-choice advocates hide what they advocate from the public in public? They have no problem putting Planned Parenthood within a short walking distance from high schools but a problem showing a "legitimate" medical procedure??? Doctors in legitimate industries don't have a problem showing their procedures but then again murder is not pretty and showing it just might change the public opinion enough to warrant their concern.
Show the absolute truth on both sides and then let the people decide.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Abortion is not pornography. Point being, show the truth on both sides. Why do pro-choice advocates hide what they advocate from the public in public? They have no problem putting Planned Parenthood within a short walking distance from high schools but a problem showing a "legitimate" medical procedure??? Doctors in legitimate industries don't have a problem showing their procedures but then again murder is not pretty and showing it just might change the public opinion enough to warrant their concern.
Show the absolute truth on both sides and then let the people decide.
I don't consider actual videos of sex to be pornographic either, but I don't think it's appropriate to show them on TV or in schools.
The Discovery Health Channel shows actual surgery (with a warning that it will be graphic and unsuitable for some viewers) so maybe you can contact them and ask them to show abortions at various stages.

reply from: joe

I do consider videos of sex acts pornographic.
I thought those who are PROUD of their right to choose should have no problem advocating video of this "procedure" to be implemented into school curriculum. I guess they are proud of the right but not the result. Murder is recognizable within seconds.

reply from: fetalisa

1. Sodomy is legal ALL ACROSS THE LAND thanks to the Supremes!
2. Sodomy is unnatural FOR YOU!
3. I feel sorry for your spouse.

reply from: fetalisa

Am I the only one here who finds it absurd that the entire sin hypothesis rests on the story of a talking serpent? I mean, if you read a story that has a talking lion discussing a tin man that had no heart, would you believe such a tin man could actually exist, based solely on the fact a talking lion says so? Serpents do not even have vocal chords, which means it is impossible for serpents to speak. Why believe a talking serpent but not a talking lion?
You seem to believe your pet religious fantasies require others to justify their sexual orientation according to your pet religious fantasies, which claims a sexual orientation is wrong or immoral based on what a talking serpent once said. Can you see the absurdity of your position?
The bible also states leprosy can be cured by chanting incantations over the blood of dead birds. We all know you would high tail your behind off to a doctor if you had leprosy and completely ignore what the bible says.
The bible also states repeatedly, that whatever you ask in Jesus's name, having faith, you will receive. If Christians believed this nonsense, none of them would buy insurance. If your house burns down, just ask Jesus for another. But Christians don't do this. They all have insurance because they know Jesus won't come through.
Sex is no more moral or immoral than a knife is. A knife can be used to cut up food to feed a child or stab your spouse in the heart. Likewise, sex can be used constructively or destructively. To claim knives or sex is immoral takes a child-like mentality and understanding of life.
But the only proof you have that sin exists is a talking serpent, which is no different than a big bad wolf threatening to blow down a house, which is no evidence at all.
You can't teach homosexuality, no more than you could teach a brown-eyed person to have blue eyes.
Well the Constitution guarantees the rights of ALL US citizens. And this is true regardless of what your book of talking serpents and asses state. In America, the Constitution trumps your little book of false prophecies in every case.
But you don't have so much as one shred of proof for the existence of your god, other than your little book of talking animals!
fa*ble - A usually short narrative making an edifying or cautionary point and often employing as characters animals that speak and act like humans. The American HeritageĀ® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition - Copyright Ā© 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Compare the above definition to Genesis 3:1 and Numbers 22:28 and you will discover you live your life based on what are, by definition, FABLES!
You can't point to a single psychological study which proves incest is beneficial. ALL studies of incest show it results in long-term psychological damage if left untreated. It is so well studied that experts can provide a list of behaviors common to all untreated victims of incest.
We still have laws against it, but they are rarely enforced. Having to give up one's marriage, house and in some cases kids, makes the consequences not worth it. Personally, those who sneak behind a partner's back, I find no better than high schoolers who sneak smokes in the bathroom. Be an adult, get up in your partner's face and TELL THEM you wish to screw around BEFORE you do it, so your partner can make an informed choice about the relationship. But that's just my opinion.
Illegal. Children have a right to life. Sacrifice a child and go to jail. End of story. Such laws serve an evolutionary purpose in allowing continuation of the species.
American society does not support non-consensual sex, which is one reason why rape is banned. Since animals can't consent, sex with them is off limits. I would argue those who practice bestiality anyway have deep issues which must be solved. Once could only resort to it if they lacked the ability to interact and connect with other people.
I am not, no more than I would read a 2000 year old medical text to find a cure for a disease. It's severely outdated and written by rather uneducated bronze age goat herders, so has no relevance whatsoever to modern life.
Without proof, I have no reason to believe your god exists. For all you know, Zeus might be the real god. You can't prove he isn't.

reply from: fetalisa

Can you not read? I have repeatedly stated you can show whatever you wish in school, as long as you have the consent of the other parents.
Who wouldn't be proud of the result? One minute you are pregnant and the next minute you are not, with practically no health risk at all from the surgery. The technology could not get any better than that.
Except that 35 years after Roe, the public still doesn't believe the lie that abortion=murder. That must really suck for forced-birthers such as yourself.

reply from: joe

Who wouldn't be proud of the result? One minute you are pregnant and the next minute you are not, with practically no health risk at all from the surgery. The technology could not get any better than that.
Words of a proud Holocaust supporter. I am sure those "doctors" would have appreciated our technology.
Yet you killers fight to prevent your "surgery" from being shown...pathetic. Last time I checked Planned Parenthood still has no video of abortion procedures they are so proud of.

reply from: joe

Right. That is why your movement is dead afraid having Roe vs Wade overturned. Scared to have the public vote on a stand alone issue such as murder...cowards.

reply from: fetalisa

Sticks and stones............
What is pathetic is how you keep pretending that anyone is stopping abortion surgeries from being shown. The movie "The Silent Scream' has not been banned. Go ahead and show your movies. It wiil have just as much effect as the photos of alleged aborted fetuses you forced birthers have been parading around for years. In the end, abortion will still be legal and if you don't like abortion, you simply do not have one. It really is that simple.
I have relatives who had gall bladder surgery and didn't have videos of that taken either. Surely they are sickos for not wishing to record every surgery they ever undertook.

reply from: joe

Can you not read? I have repeatedly stated you can show whatever you wish in school, as long as you have the consent of the other parents.
Do you still not understand? Your movement in general has a huge objection to televising the act of murder.
I can read your lies but do you understand simple reasoning?

reply from: fetalisa

Don't broadcast your ignorance all over these forums and the internet at large in this manner. How sad that you are so dumb you think this is about overturning Roe v Wade. The only way you could possibly institute your thoughtless utopia that an embryo no larger than the period at the end of this sentence is a person, is if you overturned the Constitution. You are too ignorant to realize the leaders of the forced birth movement are well aware of this, yet play the forced birthers such as yourself like fiddles, convincing you it is about overturning Roe, when the real issue is overturning the Constitution. Had you bothered to read the Roe decision, you would know this, but you are too happy in your own ignorance.
Oh I am just shaking in my boots that the forced birthers will be able to overturn the Constitution.

reply from: fetalisa

What are you going on about now? You can't even count the acts of murder shown on television in a one week time span. Hell, we see it so often we are desensitized to it. Not that abortion has anything to do with murder, outside of the fantasies in your mind, that is.

reply from: joe

What is pathetic is how you keep pretending that anyone is stopping abortion surgeries from being shown. The movie "The Silent Scream' has not been banned. Go ahead and show your movies. It wiil have just as much effect as the photos of alleged aborted fetuses you forced birthers have been parading around for years. In the end, abortion will still be legal and if you don't like abortion, you simply do not have one. It really is that simple.
You know damn well the media will not allow the murder to be shown even if pro-life groups pay for the ad.

reply from: joe

What are you going on about now? You can't even count the acts of murder shown on television in a one week time span. Hell, we see it so often we are desensitized to it. Not that abortion has anything to do with murder, outside of the fantasies in your mind, that is.
And yet you fear the truth to be shown....lie to yourself over and over, make yourself feel better.

reply from: fetalisa

You need to make up your mind. First you get all offended that you can't show your little propaganda film in the schools, as if the taxpayers fund the schools as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda. Next, you start ripping on the media for not showing your little propaganda films, as if the media exists as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda.
NEWSFLASH: TV networks want the largest number of viewers, so have no motivation whatsoever to show propaganda films that appeal to the 1-2% of viewers on the crackpot fringes of society, who happen to believe a zygote is a person.

reply from: fetalisa

You need to make up your mind. First you get all offended that you can't show your little propaganda film in the schools, as if the taxpayers fund the schools as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda. Next, you start ripping on the media for not showing your little propaganda films, as if the media exists as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda.
NEWSFLASH: TV networks want the largest number of viewers, so have no motivation whatsoever to show propaganda films that appeal to the 1-2% of viewers on the crackpot fringes of society, who happen to believe a zygote is a person.

reply from: joe

You need to make up your mind. First you get all offended that you can't show your little propaganda film in the schools, as if the taxpayers fund the schools as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda. Next, you start ripping on the media for not showing your little propaganda films, as if the media exists as a platform for your personally chosen immoral agenda.
NEWSFLASH: TV networks want the largest number of viewers, so have no motivation whatsoever to show propaganda films that appeal to the 1-2% of viewers on the crackpot fringes of society, who happen to believe a zygote is a person.
Those who murder and then cover up their crimes offend me....get it????
Show the murder to the world and then lets see what happens to your precious "right".

reply from: joe

Don't broadcast your ignorance all over these forums and the internet at large in this manner. How sad that you are so dumb you think this is about overturning Roe v Wade. The only way you could possibly institute your thoughtless utopia that an embryo no larger than the period at the end of this sentence is a person, is if you overturned the Constitution. You are too ignorant to realize the leaders of the forced birth movement are well aware of this, yet play the forced birthers such as yourself like fiddles, convincing you it is about overturning Roe, when the real issue is overturning the Constitution. Had you bothered to read the Roe decision, you would know this, but you are too happy in your own ignorance.
The right to privacy equals the right to kill innocent human life. That interpretation...idiot.
It is your movement that fears the overturn of Roe v Wade...get that straight.

reply from: joe

"McCain-Palin: Dangerous and Extreme
McCain-Palin is the most anti-choice presidential campaign ever. They support:
* A ban on abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest;
* The overturn of Roe v. Wade; and
* Anti-choice judges.
Please watch this video and sign up today to help us defeat McCain-Palin."
(NARAL Pro-Choice America)

reply from: fetalisa

Actually, it's about bodily autonomy. A woman has the right to bodily autonomy, without which, she is a slave, which is exactly what the forced birthers want.
That exists in the fantasies of your own mind. The reality is you can't get past the Constitution on the forced birth issue. The Constitution clearly demonstrates the unborn are not constitutional persons, which is precisely why they lack constitutional rights and that is precisely why a 'right to life' for the unborn is wholly imaginary. That's what the forced birthers will never get past, short of overturning the Constitution. Amending it won't work, because any amendment stating otherwise would contradict the Constitution.

reply from: joe

That exists in the fantasies of your own mind. The reality is you can't get past the Constitution on the forced birth issue. The Constitution clearly demonstrates the unborn are not constitutional persons, which is precisely why they lack constitutional rights and that is precisely why a 'right to life' for the unborn is wholly imaginary. That's what the forced birthers will never get past, short of overturning the Constitution. Amending it won't work, because any amendment stating otherwise would contradict the Constitution.
"McCain-Palin: Dangerous and Extreme
McCain-Palin is the most anti-choice presidential campaign ever. They support:
* A ban on abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest;
* The overturn of Roe v. Wade; and
* Anti-choice judges.
Please watch this video and sign up today to help us defeat McCain-Palin."
(NARAL Pro-Choice America)

reply from: fetalisa

This is precisely why I am so glad McCain picked her. The more extremist, the fewer the votes. Public opinion polls have remained consistent on abortion since Roe was decided. Overwhelmingly, the public agrees that forcing a rape victim or incest victim to birth a child is wholly wrong, immoral and certainly benefits neither the woman or any child who might be birthed as a result.
On the other hand, I do not worry if McCain/Palin were elected, even though the polls show that to be highly unlikely. The politicians play the forced birthers in elections, but do nothing for them once elected, because they know the only way to achieve a forced birth nation is to overturn the Constitution. But the forced birthers buy the con in every election and follow the forced birth candidate like mindless lemmings. They fall for the scam every single time.

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

Women, doctors and fathers who abort should face the same penalty as any other person engaging in first degree intentional homicide.

reply from: carolemarie

Luckily you don't write the laws and common sense will prevail. Abortion can be ended and only Dr. need to lose their licence/go to jail for performing abortions.
Which is what the prolife movement has been saying they want to do for the last 33+ years.


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