Home - List All Discussions

Am I Pro-Life?

by: Yuuki

Really now. Let's go look at some definitions, since apparently those are the ultimate authority. Also, let's try to be objective here - I know that's hard.
pro-life
? ?/pro??la?f/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [proh-lahyf] Show IPA
- adjective
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life.
Compare pro-choice.
Oh yes, let's compare! But later.
I'd like to touch on one particular aspect of those definitions that I think is relevant to the "proabort vs pro-choice" discussion.
A HOSTILE alternative. Not a kind one; not a compliment. I wonder... if I look under pro-choice, is pro-abortion listed as a hostile alternative too? Unfortunately no, it's not. I wonder how I go about suggesting that...
Anyway, here's a comparison to pro-choice:
Hm... I don't approve of abortion, so... can't possibly be pro-choice.
------------
Let us also take note that NONE of these definitions discuss birth control, IVF or embryonic stem cell research. So throwing those into the mix is senseless. If we're going to define ourselves according to the dictionary, then we can only go off of what is included in those definitions.
Pro-life says you're opposed to legal abortion. I am.
Pro-choice says you're for legal abortion. I'm not. Oh, and since some of you INSIST that pro-abortion and pro-choice mean the same thing, if I'm not pro-choice then I also cannot be pro-abortion.
Is this really hard? No, it's not.

reply from: Shenanigans

I dunno, really. I see some posts of yours and I think "Pro-Life" and see others and think "WTF?"
Like that one about how you posted you were forced to abort, and then you said it worked out well for you in the end. If your'e going to argue abortion is bad, don't say that being forced to abort worked in your favour.
That'd be like saying getting raped worked in your favour because you learnt to change your locks!
And you could have had that baby, got your education, job et cetera all without being forced to kill a child.

reply from: Yuuki

Um, I never posted such a thing, so yeah. That might be why you're going WTF. My MOTHER was forced to abort and it made her pro-life. I was forced to fly down to Florida. It made me realise what a loser my fiance was, and I was able to turn around my life. No abortion involved.

reply from: 4given

dictionaty.. To thine own self...

reply from: Shenanigans

My mistake. I was under the impression you'd had an abortion and was forced too, just as your mother was forced to abort... I must of read it wrong. Apologies.
As to the topic at hand, I still think you have a few quirks in your thinking that could class you a little further from the pro-life blip on the spectrum. But we all gotta start somewhere.

reply from: Cecilia

To me you are.
but why do you care what nancy or yoda says to you about it?
why don't you answer the question about how your mother didn't have a "choice" to abort yet you told me there's always a choice when i talked about my own situation?

reply from: Faramir

I'm not sure what YOU are, but by her statement above and many others, it's obvious what NANCYU is.
But I'm too much of a gentleman to say it (again)...

reply from: Yuuki

My mistake. I was under the impression you'd had an abortion and was forced too, just as your mother was forced to abort... I must of read it wrong. Apologies.
As to the topic at hand, I still think you have a few quirks in your thinking that could class you a little further from the pro-life blip on the spectrum. But we all gotta start somewhere.
If they are quirks that have nothing directly to do with abortion itself then they are irrelevant to Yoda's beloved definition. Or they should be; but we know they're really not. These include birth control, IVF and ESCR.

reply from: Yuuki

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.

reply from: yoda

Obviously, you haven't read any of my posts lately. I've gone to great lengths and tried repeatedly to reassure her that I don't care what she calls herself. Is that good enough for you?

reply from: yoda

Wow, because I post linked, valid definitions for legitimate dictionaries you call them "my beloved definitions"?
You really hate academic accuracy, don't you? Just not enough "elbow room" in them to allow you to twist them around, is there? You can't use your creativity to manufacture definitions when I keep posting the real ones, can you?
Have you looked at the results of your poll lately? 4-1: NO

reply from: Cecilia

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.

reply from: Cecilia

Obviously, you haven't read any of my posts lately. I've gone to great lengths and tried repeatedly to reassure her that I don't care what she calls herself. Is that good enough for you?
it is actually not about you and what you think, it's about her and why she thinks as she does.
You both have problems with your egos.

reply from: yoda

Then if it's not, why do you put my name in your post like that?
Is it too difficult to leave my name out of your rants when it "isn't about me"?

reply from: Cecilia

Then if it's not, why do you put my name in your post like that?
Is it too difficult to leave my name out of your rants when it "isn't about me"?
you are a joke.
I asked her why does she care what you think, and you think it's about you.
And you call that a "rant". did you retire your dictionary.

reply from: Yuuki

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.
Like when!? Proof please gal, because I don't think ANYONE who was forced to abort is at fault.

reply from: Yuuki

Wow, because I post linked, valid definitions for legitimate dictionaries you call them "my beloved definitions"?
You really hate academic accuracy, don't you? Just not enough "elbow room" in them to allow you to twist them around, is there? You can't use your creativity to manufacture definitions when I keep posting the real ones, can you?
Have you looked at the results of your poll lately? 4-1: NO
Your obsession with dictionaries goes back all the years I've "known" you. Also, it's actually 3:2 for yes I am according to the dictionary.

reply from: carolemarie

I believe you are prolife....
who thinks you are not? (I mean who sane thinks you are not)

reply from: nancyu

What do you consider to be sanity? Someone who thinks abortion is "no big deal" or someone who knows it is murder of an innocent person? Someone who gives tea and chocolate to a woman who has just killed her child as though she had suffered a bad dream and just needed a little comforting? Or someone who actually recognizes the enormity of what she had done?
If you believe that it is actually a person who is killed by abortion you would be able to see who the sane ones are on this forum.

reply from: yoda

Since you specifically put my name in it, why do you not want to discuss that?
Why do you avoid saying why you put my name in it?

reply from: yoda

My respect for academic integrity, you mean? And your disrespect for academic integrity goes back a long ways, too. You used to use it to explain why unborn humans "are not babies", and such. You may have finally given up that old crappy line, but you still cling to your nasty attacks on academic integrity in the definition of words that you wish to re-define in some proabort way. Old habits die hard, don't they?

reply from: yoda

Exactly. Some here seem to think that any demonstration of devotion to the cause of the unborn is "insane", and that we ought to treat this as some silly pastime we do just to amuse ourselves.

reply from: Yuuki

My respect for academic integrity, you mean? And your disrespect for academic integrity goes back a long ways, too. You used to use it to explain why unborn humans "are not babies", and such. You may have finally given up that old crappy line, but you still cling to your nasty attacks on academic integrity in the definition of words that you wish to re-define in some proabort way. Old habits die hard, don't they?
What about the rest of my post? Yes, I did used to be pro-choice, and now I'm not. I don't think questioning the dictionary is a aspect solely reserved for pro-choicers, either. That's ridiculous, really.

reply from: Yuuki

I consider Yoda to be sane, but he does not consider me pro-life despite the dictionary definition. Which makes him a hypocrite to his own standards.

reply from: yoda

Nothing like that is "reserved", but it's been my observation that in the context of this debate, those who attack dictionaries are always leaning towards abortion. And for obvious reasons, since they wish to redefine already established terms that can refer to the unborn, in such a way as to exclude them.
I've already told you dozens of times I don't care what you call yourself, isn't that enough for you? You and I both know that your words fit within the proper definition of the term prolife, and that's all I have to say about that.

reply from: Cecilia

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.
Like when!? Proof please gal, because I don't think ANYONE who was forced to abort is at fault.
These are untrue assumptions probably based on the American culture of today.
Welcome to a broader world, where there is no 911 or leaving your husband as options.
Why couldn't you leave your husband? Why couldn't you call 911?
There was actually a time before 911. You must be very young. Different cultures and situations make it impossble for women to leave their husbands.
I'm 23, almost 24 and I don't consider that "very young". I consider 12 "very young". Impossible means tied to a chair or locked in a room. Impossible does not mean afraid. 911 has been around since before I was born, which was 1984. There were also plain old police stations you could call before the convenience of 911. The point was "contact the police", not "argue about 911".
you will have a hard time weaseling out of this but I understand. You want to give your mother an extra pass, that is in our nature.
Your mother had options, she had a choice, and she choce abortion. That is okay- she is not a 'bad' person or a 'bad' mother.

reply from: Yuuki

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.
Like when!? Proof please gal, because I don't think ANYONE who was forced to abort is at fault.
These are untrue assumptions probably based on the American culture of today.
Welcome to a broader world, where there is no 911 or leaving your husband as options.
Why couldn't you leave your husband? Why couldn't you call 911?
There was actually a time before 911. You must be very young. Different cultures and situations make it impossble for women to leave their husbands.
I'm 23, almost 24 and I don't consider that "very young". I consider 12 "very young". Impossible means tied to a chair or locked in a room. Impossible does not mean afraid. 911 has been around since before I was born, which was 1984. There were also plain old police stations you could call before the convenience of 911. The point was "contact the police", not "argue about 911".
you will have a hard time weaseling out of this but I understand. You want to give your mother an extra pass, that is in our nature.
Your mother had options, she had a choice, and she choce abortion. That is okay- she is not a 'bad' person or a 'bad' mother.
You did have options, so did my mom. I'm not saying she didn't. I'm saying the choice she made was the only one she thought she could make at the time. Same goes for you. And I have never thought my mother was a bad person for aborting, kthnxbai. I have had someone accuse her of being abusive because she spanked me though. I smacked that person down, too.
My point here is firstly, yes these women do have "other choices". Secondly, they feel one option or the other is so horrific, frightening, etc, that it isn't really an "option" to them. So they chose abortion. And I will not condemn them for that. In this sense, therefore, they were "forced" to abort. And that's the whole point of this, isn't it? Proving that women can be forced. I don't recall saying you were NOT forced, simply that you did have other options.
I still don't feel it was "impossible" for you to leave your husband. It was not "impossible" for my mother to avoid her abortion, either. However, you were both emotionally forced into thinking abortion was your only "good" option.
Is that clearer? This isn't about the reality of either situation. It is, in fact, about your perceptions of the situation at the time. At the time, both of you felt like you had no other real choices that were practical or safe or sane. And I do not condemn women for that. I do not condemn you.
Yes, my mother could have become a runaway or gone to a shelter and been disowned. But she didn't consider that a logical action to take. She may not have considered it at all; it probably didn't even occur to her to run away. Many women in abusive relationships don't think to run away either.

reply from: Yuuki

I am not justifying the choice to abort, I am simply not condemning it in these cases. There really is a difference between hating the sin and hating the sinner. Extenuating circumstances.
I don't condemn my friend who accidentally murdered someone either. And neither did the law. And I think even for born people, if you kill them out of fear like this, then you are not entirely at fault. The people who pressured you are also at fault.
Killing someone is not a god thing in anyone's book, and my friend will have to live with that on his heart for the rest of his life. But at least in his case, he had to accept it face on; he couldn't hide behind "well he wasn't a person because he wasn't born" or "my body my choice". So in that sense it was easier for him to accept what he'd done and move on from it.
Women who abort, however, can hide behind that. My mother doesn't, however. She told me she still wonders about what life would have been like, and the child. So she too has accepted what she's done.
I'm not saying that either woman's choice to abort was ethically right; but compared to what, exactly? Compared to the other option they had? Should we not even compare their choices?

reply from: yoda

Goodness, that sounds a lot like what AOG members say about the killing of abortionists.......

reply from: Yuuki

Goodness, that sounds a lot like what AOG members say about the killing of abortionists.......
Hey, if they feel those murderers are justified then that's how they feel. But I bet those murderers were under a lot LESS emotional stress than a woman who is forced to abort. I'd be more willing to bet those murderers are in fact sociopaths.

reply from: Yuuki

I don't "condemn" women for choosing to abort, but I have no problem with condemning the choice.
And I didn't say I am NOT condemning the choice. If it sounded like that, then forgive me.
It's justifiable to the degree that I wouldn't throw them in jail for it any more than I would throw my friend in jail.
You don't understand what it's like being in that position, clearly. It feels like you are being "forced". You feel like you didn't have a choice. Even if there is one there, you feel you cannot choose it.
Yes one could, but only if you've been in a similar situation. Until then, listen to those who have, for we have experiences you do not.
That doesn't even make any sense.
Again, until you've been there, and done that, you can't really be an authority on it.
And my friend who murdered someone else placed less value on their life than his own and that of the lives of his friends in his house. But he is not in jail and should not be, because he defended himself against an aggressor. The case was so clear that it didn't even go to court. It was dismissed right out.

reply from: Cecilia

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.
Like when!? Proof please gal, because I don't think ANYONE who was forced to abort is at fault.
These are untrue assumptions probably based on the American culture of today.
Welcome to a broader world, where there is no 911 or leaving your husband as options.
Why couldn't you leave your husband? Why couldn't you call 911?
There was actually a time before 911. You must be very young. Different cultures and situations make it impossble for women to leave their husbands.
I'm 23, almost 24 and I don't consider that "very young". I consider 12 "very young". Impossible means tied to a chair or locked in a room. Impossible does not mean afraid. 911 has been around since before I was born, which was 1984. There were also plain old police stations you could call before the convenience of 911. The point was "contact the police", not "argue about 911".
you will have a hard time weaseling out of this but I understand. You want to give your mother an extra pass, that is in our nature.
Your mother had options, she had a choice, and she choce abortion. That is okay- she is not a 'bad' person or a 'bad' mother.
You did have options, so did my mom. I'm not saying she didn't. I'm saying the choice she made was the only one she thought she could make at the time. Same goes for you. And I have never thought my mother was a bad person for aborting, kthnxbai. I have had someone accuse her of being abusive because she spanked me though. I smacked that person down, too.
My point here is firstly, yes these women do have "other choices". Secondly, they feel one option or the other is so horrific, frightening, etc, that it isn't really an "option" to them. So they chose abortion. And I will not condemn them for that. In this sense, therefore, they were "forced" to abort. And that's the whole point of this, isn't it? Proving that women can be forced. I don't recall saying you were NOT forced, simply that you did have other options.
I still don't feel it was "impossible" for you to leave your husband. It was not "impossible" for my mother to avoid her abortion, either. However, you were both emotionally forced into thinking abortion was your only "good" option.
Is that clearer? This isn't about the reality of either situation. It is, in fact, about your perceptions of the situation at the time. At the time, both of you felt like you had no other real choices that were practical or safe or sane. And I do not condemn women for that. I do not condemn you.
Yes, my mother could have become a runaway or gone to a shelter and been disowned. But she didn't consider that a logical action to take. She may not have considered it at all; it probably didn't even occur to her to run away. Many women in abusive relationships don't think to run away either.
it is much simpler than you are making it.
your mother had a choice. she chose to abort( and that is okay). you are justifying her decision now by saying that she didn't really have a choice because the alternative was terrible in her perceptions.
You have now justified her abortion and the abortions of millions of other women.
You said: Even if there is one there, you feel you cannot choose it. Again, until you've been there, and done that, you can't really be an authority on it.
so if you have not had an unwanted pregnancy or abortion, you should probably allow others to make their own choices because what can you know about it?
you sound more prochoice than i think you even believe you are.

reply from: nancyu

Have a drink of water. I didn't vote in this poll.

reply from: nancyu

Right here in your own pudding yuuki. You are here to speak in favor of abortifacient birth control and embryonic stem cell research.
Whether it's convenient for you to admit it or not -- (human) embryos are human beings. You advocate their destruction. That is not pro life, and it is beyond "pro choice"
You're not only supporting a woman's right to choose, you are advocating the intentional destruction of innocent human beings.
You are pro abortion.

reply from: yoda

Wow, that's practically an endorsement of abortionist killing......
I can understand your thinking that, because if you have no passion, no real emotional attachment to this issue, and approach it strictly from an academic standpoint, it would of course be hard to understand how someone's passions could lead them to kill. Seeing a parade of people march into the baby killing place week after week can indeed be stressful if you feel passionately about the loss of innocent life.

reply from: yoda

That's not very convincing. That "feeling that you cannot choose it" is itself a choice. By giving in to that "feeling" you have made a choice to kill your baby, because you cannot bear the consequences of not killing your baby. You have made a choice in your own best interests, at the cost of your baby's life.

reply from: Yuuki

That's not very convincing. That "feeling that you cannot choose it" is itself a choice. By giving in to that "feeling" you have made a choice to kill your baby, because you cannot bear the consequences of not killing your baby. You have made a choice in your own best interests, at the cost of your baby's life.
I'm not saying it isn't a choice. I'm saying that for the person at the time it DOESN'T feel like a choice. Why is that hard to understand? Maybe if you've never been there you can't possibly comprehend it, and if that's so then I hope no one who has never been in that position ever ends up there, because it sucks.
This is all about perception. What we on the outside see is almost completely irrelevant to the person on the inside. They view themselves as stuck between a rock and a hard place, and they can only see one choice. That is NOT their fault.

reply from: Yuuki

Right here in your own pudding yuuki. You are here to speak in favor of abortifacient birth control and embryonic stem cell research.
Whether it's convenient for you to admit it or not -- (human) embryos are human beings. You advocate their destruction. That is not pro life, and it is beyond "pro choice"
You're not only supporting a woman's right to choose, you are advocating the intentional destruction of innocent human beings.
You are pro abortion.
Yoda has already stated that birth control has nothing to do with abortion dearie. Please try to keep up. Secondly, it has been proven numerous times on this forum that not only does most birth control NOT cause a failure to implant, but that a failure to implant is NOT an abortion.
You are pro-stupidity.

reply from: Yuuki

No, I have not been forced to abort. I have however been in a different position that I have already shared in detail here I was forced to do something and felt as if I had no other choice. And I have maintained throughout this that anyone who has not felt like they've been forced to do ANYTHING, not just abort, cannot fathom how it feels.
I am not saying you can't have an opinion. But I am saying that unless you have been forced to do something monumental against your will that you can't really understand how these women feel. And that's ALL I'm saying.
Makes sense doesn't it? Unless you've been in a similar situation, you can't really understand how it feels.
And I will again state: Yes, OF COURSE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE HAD CHOICES. Yes, they did MAKE a choice; however, to THEM, from where THEY stood, through their eyes, they saw only one choice. And it doesn't matter why they were blinded from the other choices.
For myself, yes I could have stayed with a deadbeat fiancee in NY, dropped out of college, worked for minimum wage and burned the last bridges to a family that had been so close to me my whole life and was only trying to save me. But the influence of my parents is extremely powerful in my life, so when they say "pick your mother up at the airport and drive to Florida" I do it. And then, thank God, I stayed and broke up with my fiancee and went back to college. They saved me; but at the time, I felt like I had no choice.

reply from: Yuuki

I have answered why my mother didn't think she had a "choice". To choose between complete disownment or a "quick, simple" abortion at the time didn't seem like much of a choice to her at all - comparable to having a gun against your head. She was not empowered; she was a frightened college student. I speak directly of how SHE felt about her situation, and she felt she was forced. I think it's incredibly wrong and rude to try and force all women who aborted and are now pro-life to say "it was my choice 100%". I don't even know what the point behind such emotional abuse is supposed to be.
you didn't answer the question. your views are hypocritical. your mother gets a free pass but you were up in my behind about the same thing.
Like when!? Proof please gal, because I don't think ANYONE who was forced to abort is at fault.
These are untrue assumptions probably based on the American culture of today.
Welcome to a broader world, where there is no 911 or leaving your husband as options.
Why couldn't you leave your husband? Why couldn't you call 911?
There was actually a time before 911. You must be very young. Different cultures and situations make it impossble for women to leave their husbands.
I'm 23, almost 24 and I don't consider that "very young". I consider 12 "very young". Impossible means tied to a chair or locked in a room. Impossible does not mean afraid. 911 has been around since before I was born, which was 1984. There were also plain old police stations you could call before the convenience of 911. The point was "contact the police", not "argue about 911".
you will have a hard time weaseling out of this but I understand. You want to give your mother an extra pass, that is in our nature.
Your mother had options, she had a choice, and she choce abortion. That is okay- she is not a 'bad' person or a 'bad' mother.
You did have options, so did my mom. I'm not saying she didn't. I'm saying the choice she made was the only one she thought she could make at the time. Same goes for you. And I have never thought my mother was a bad person for aborting, kthnxbai. I have had someone accuse her of being abusive because she spanked me though. I smacked that person down, too.
My point here is firstly, yes these women do have "other choices". Secondly, they feel one option or the other is so horrific, frightening, etc, that it isn't really an "option" to them. So they chose abortion. And I will not condemn them for that. In this sense, therefore, they were "forced" to abort. And that's the whole point of this, isn't it? Proving that women can be forced. I don't recall saying you were NOT forced, simply that you did have other options.
I still don't feel it was "impossible" for you to leave your husband. It was not "impossible" for my mother to avoid her abortion, either. However, you were both emotionally forced into thinking abortion was your only "good" option.
Is that clearer? This isn't about the reality of either situation. It is, in fact, about your perceptions of the situation at the time. At the time, both of you felt like you had no other real choices that were practical or safe or sane. And I do not condemn women for that. I do not condemn you.
Yes, my mother could have become a runaway or gone to a shelter and been disowned. But she didn't consider that a logical action to take. She may not have considered it at all; it probably didn't even occur to her to run away. Many women in abusive relationships don't think to run away either.
it is much simpler than you are making it.
your mother had a choice. she chose to abort( and that is okay). you are justifying her decision now by saying that she didn't really have a choice because the alternative was terrible in her perceptions.
No, it's not okay to abort. She killed her child. That's not "okay". She was nearly 20 weeks along; in today's world, the child might almost have survived. There is NOTHING "okay" about the choice she made.
Let's go back to my friend who murdered someone in self defense, shall we? He murdered someone. There is nothing "okay" about that. But he is not in jail. Someone else murderers someone in cold blood, and they go to jail for life. Can you understand the difference between those two cases? The murder itself isn't justified; however, the murderer is forgiven in the first case because of extenuating circumstances. Murder is never justified. But we can forgive the person who did it if the situation was out of their control. My friend could have chosen not to stab the other man. But from where he was at the time, he felt he had no other choice.
Is this ANY clearer? I'm not forgiving the crime, I'm forgiving the person. Two people I've never known are dead because of people I care for, people I am close to. And both of those people are innocent.
I have forgiven the women, but not their actions. I can't believe you don't see the difference there.
Murder is still murder. Murder is illegal. Abortion should be illegal too. But no, I do not feel women who abort if it is illegal should be sent to jail on the first offense. I do feel they should have to go to some kind of therapy or something, since clearly there was a serious force in their life that made them think they needed to break the law and kill someone. Because these women may view their abortion as self defense, or like they were forced to do it, I cannot condemn them because by law, we do not condemn such things when it comes to murdering born people. I'm not really saying anything wild and crazy here. These laws are already in place.
Not really. If you want to view forgiveness as being pro-choice then that's your right. I view it as being Christian and a good person.

reply from: Yuuki

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.

reply from: Faramir

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
Do you see abortion as an injustice?
Do you believe life in the womb deserves to be protected by law?
Do you believe abortion should be illegal (note that I understand it's already illegal where nancyu lives)?

reply from: yoda

That's still not convincing. Deciding to go with that "feeling" IS a choice.

reply from: yoda

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.

reply from: nancyu

Really now. Let's go look at some definitions, since apparently those are the ultimate authority. Also, let's try to be objective here - I know that's hard.
pro-life
? ?/pro??la?f/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [proh-lahyf] Show IPA
- adjective
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life.
Compare pro-choice.
Oh yes, let's compare! But later.
I'd like to touch on one particular aspect of those definitions that I think is relevant to the "proabort vs pro-choice" discussion.
A HOSTILE alternative. Not a kind one; not a compliment. I wonder... if I look under pro-choice, is pro-abortion listed as a hostile alternative too? Unfortunately no, it's not. I wonder how I go about suggesting that...
Anyway, here's a comparison to pro-choice:
Hm... I don't approve of abortion, so... can't possibly be pro-choice.
------------
Let us also take note that NONE of these definitions discuss birth control, IVF or embryonic stem cell research. So throwing those into the mix is senseless. If we're going to define ourselves according to the dictionary, then we can only go off of what is included in those definitions.
Pro-life says you're opposed to legal abortion. I am.
Pro-choice says you're for legal abortion. I'm not. Oh, and since some of you INSIST that pro-abortion and pro-choice mean the same thing, if I'm not pro-choice then I also cannot be pro-abortion.
Is this really hard? No, it's not.

reply from: Cecilia

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
No, you argue that women have no choice and are forced to abort simply because they strongly prefer that to the alternative. You are rationalizing the choice itself....I'm sorry you can't see that. Everyone else can...You even went so far as to assert that we can't understand because we haven't "been there," even though you admit you have not "been there" either. The fact that you have made difficult choices means nothing. Most of us have. You implied that you had some unique insight into the choice to abort, but it turns out that is not the case. Still, you seem desperate to make excuses for those who have.
I get the feeling there is more to this than is readily apparent, but I don't think there is much more that I can say, so I guess I'm done.
I think there is more to the story too. This sure seems wishy washy to me.

reply from: nancyu

Right here in your own pudding yuuki. You are here to speak in favor of abortifacient birth control and embryonic stem cell research.
Whether it's convenient for you to admit it or not -- (human) embryos are human beings. You advocate their destruction. That is not pro life, and it is beyond "pro choice"
You're not only supporting a woman's right to choose, you are advocating the intentional destruction of innocent human beings.
You are pro abortion.
Yoda has already stated that birth control has nothing to do with abortion dearie. Please try to keep up. Secondly, it has been proven numerous times on this forum that not only does most birth control NOT cause a failure to implant, but that a failure to implant is NOT an abortion.
You are pro-stupidity.
You stated in your own post dearie that being pro life is: quote "Advocating full legal protection of human embryos or fetuses"
You don't. You're not pro life even according to YOUR OWN definition.

reply from: Yuuki

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
No, you argue that women have no choice
Stop. You are not understanding me.
I argue that the woman herself FELT like she had no choice. I also stated several times that she did in fact HAVE other choices, but was unwilling/unable to see these choices as valuable.
So no, I do not argue that women have no choice.
THEY feel like they are "forced". Is this reality? Probably not, but it is important to remember that this is from the perspective of the woman in the situation. She is most likely frightened and being accosted with ultimatums from all sides, along with fear-inducing propaganda. Reality, or even logic, is probably the furthest thing from her state of mind.
No I'm not, but that's because you still think I'm saying she had no choice. I'm not.
I'm sorry you can't actually understand what I'm typping, since you have repeatedly said I'm saying something I'm not.
I said you cannot understand how it feels to think you are being forced to do something. I never said it had to specifically be about abortion, but nice try agan. Your attempts to twist and writhe out of this are almost humorous. I used two separate examples on purpose, to strengthen the statement I made about it being force in general, not just being forced to abort.
And I'll state again, because maybe this time it'll sink in: These people FEEL they have no choice, when in fact they really DO have other choices. THEY HAVE OTHER CHOICES. They just don't realize it, don't want to realize it, or feel those other choices are impossible/impratical. There can be nothing farther from the truth, but people in these positions don't realise this. And they can't be blamed for that.
Uh, okay, that's completely crazy. Life is full of difficult choices, and they are very meaningful indeed! How we deal with them and learn to deal with it better for the next one influences who we are and how we think and feel. I would not be who I am today were it not for the difficult decisions I have made. That is certainly FAR from meaning "nothing".
That doesn't make them meaningless.
No, I said I had insight on feeling like you've been forced into something. But again, nice try to make me look like a liar. I never said, never implied, and never claimed that I know what it is like to be forced to abort. I DO know what it's like to consider abortion. I know what it is like to feel like I've been forced to make a decision. I know what it is like to be faced with a possible accidental pregnancy.
I get the feeling you haven't actually been reading what I've been typing, but that might just be me. You're just so damned intent on disproving me.

reply from: Yuuki

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.

reply from: Yuuki

That's still not convincing. Deciding to go with that "feeling" IS a choice.
I KNOW. I'm not saying it ISN'T a choice. I'm saying that the PERSON doesn't REALIZE or is unwilling to admit that they are making a choice, and so they feel FORCED.

reply from: Yuuki

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
Do you see abortion as an injustice?
Do you believe life in the womb deserves to be protected by law?
Do you believe abortion should be illegal (note that I understand it's already illegal where nancyu lives)?
Do you see murder as an injustice?
Do you believe life deserves to be protected by law?
Do you believe murder should be illegal?
Do you believe any of the above should send my friend to jail, who murdered someone in self defense? He could have chosen not to attack, but then HE'D be dead and possibly all his friends inside the house.
Yes, abortion is an injustice.
Yes, life should be protected by law.
Yes, elective abortion should be illegal.
But none of the above should condemn a frightened woman to jail for doing an act of what she considered to be self defense.
I've already stated #3 numerous times over the past YEAR btw.

reply from: Yuuki

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
No, you argue that women have no choice and are forced to abort simply because they strongly prefer that to the alternative. You are rationalizing the choice itself....I'm sorry you can't see that. Everyone else can...You even went so far as to assert that we can't understand because we haven't "been there," even though you admit you have not "been there" either. The fact that you have made difficult choices means nothing. Most of us have. You implied that you had some unique insight into the choice to abort, but it turns out that is not the case. Still, you seem desperate to make excuses for those who have.
I get the feeling there is more to this than is readily apparent, but I don't think there is much more that I can say, so I guess I'm done.
I think there is more to the story too. This sure seems wishy washy to me.
Yall would love it if I suddenly confessed to having had an abortion, but it'll never happen because I don't lie.

reply from: scopia19822

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
It depends on a persons religious beliefs. I personally am opposed to HBC, but dont oppose giving the MAP to a rape victim.However I think that BC is a moral/religious issue. Im more concearned about the woman whos pregnant and is going to walk into a PP to abort her child than a woman on the Pill.

reply from: Yuuki

Right here in your own pudding yuuki. You are here to speak in favor of abortifacient birth control and embryonic stem cell research.
Whether it's convenient for you to admit it or not -- (human) embryos are human beings. You advocate their destruction. That is not pro life, and it is beyond "pro choice"
You're not only supporting a woman's right to choose, you are advocating the intentional destruction of innocent human beings.
You are pro abortion.
Yoda has already stated that birth control has nothing to do with abortion dearie. Please try to keep up. Secondly, it has been proven numerous times on this forum that not only does most birth control NOT cause a failure to implant, but that a failure to implant is NOT an abortion.
You are pro-stupidity.
You stated in your own post dearie that being pro life is: quote "Advocating full legal protection of human embryos or fetuses"
You don't. You're not pro life even according to YOUR OWN definition.
Nancy, Nancy. Even a foaming-at-the-mouth rabid anti-choicer like yourself should realise that one does not have to fit ALL of the definitions in order to fit the description. That's why dictionaries HAVE more than one definition under the word. Otherwise, yarn would have to be BOTH a sewing material AND a "long, drawn out verbally-spoken story" at the same time. I don't think a physical object like yarn is capable of being a verbally spoken story.

reply from: Yuuki

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
It depends on a persons religious beliefs. I personally am opposed to HBC, but dont oppose giving the MAP to a rape victim.However I think that BC is a moral/religious issue. Im more concearned about the woman whos pregnant and is going to walk into a PP to abort her child than a woman on the Pill.
A miscarriage is not dependent on religious belief, Carole. It is a medically defined condition. It can only happen during an established pregnancy, and pregnancy is not established until implantation.
That said, the facts remain that on HBC, you are LESS LIKELY to have a failed implantation that you are OFF of birth control. I don't care how you interpret our religion, it can't change the facts. So the only reason I can find that anyone has stated for being against HBC is because it interferes with the woman's natural cycle and prevents the natural course of nature. Including all of those naturally dead embryos. But hey! That's a personal choice.
I agree; I'm much more concerned personally with changing people's attitudes about unexpected pregnancies than I am about their use of birth control. If they're using HBC properly, chances are they're NOT walking into a clinic.

reply from: scopia19822

Lib, Im not Carole . Im aware of what a miscarriage is as defined inmedical books. I was talking about the view by some that HBC can be viewed as an abortificent and a persons religious and moral worldview is going to shape how they view HBC and abortion.

reply from: Yuuki

Sorry, same icon. Wasn't looking. XD I think the reference to religion caught me off guard too.
I just can't understand the abortifacient viewpoint, because as far as I know the facts to be, it can't possibly cause a real abortion. And it's theorized effect of preventing implantation in the rare case of breakthrough ovulation is also unproven. In fact, I think it's been debunked!

reply from: Faramir

Then what is it you've said that's causing one of our star posters to call you a "pro-abort"?
I don't see anything "pro-abortish" about any of your statements here.

reply from: Yuuki

Then what is it you've said that's causing one of our star posters to call you a "pro-abort"?
I don't see anything "pro-abortish" about any of your statements here.
I have sympathy for women who abort.
I don't hate Planned Parenthood with the heat of a thousand suns.
I understand the mindset of a woman who feels like she has been forced to abort, and consider that a valid argument towards keeping her out of jail if/when abortion becomes illegal.
I am pro-birth control, because I feel it saves lives and prevents abortions.
I am on the wall, but still okay with ESCR with methods that do not kill the embryo and using only existing embryos.
I question pro-lifers as often as I question pro-choicers on their beliefs and statements.
I voted in November regarding issues other than abortion.
I don't spend every waking moment promoting the pro-life cause.
I don't constantly spew obscenities at women who are pro-choice or have aborted.
I don't call pro-choicers "pro-aborts".
I don't call women who have aborted "murderers".
I don't protest outside clinics.
I don't call pro-choicers "butt-nuggets".
I don't think women who have sex outside of marriage are sl*ts, wh*res or anything else degrading.

reply from: Faramir

I don't say "pro-abort" either, mainly because I think it sounds stupid, though I resent the label "pro-choice," because it is not about choice but about abortion rights.
From what you've stated in recent posts, you are clearly within the definition of what it means to be "pro-life" and nancyu owes you an apology.

reply from: scopia19822

"I have sympathy for women who abort."
It depends on why they aborted and if they are truly repentent
"I don't hate Planned Parenthood with the heat of a thousand suns."
I hate them even more than I hate Walmart. And I really hate Walmart.
"I understand the mindset of a woman who feels like she has been forced to abort, and consider that a valid argument towards keeping her out of jail if/when abortion becomes illegal. "
Those who forced her should be the ones to go to jail along with the abortionist and their staff
"I am pro-birth control, because I feel it saves lives and prevents abortions."
Religiously Im oppossed to BC, however this is something the govermnent should stay out of. I have some concearns about the safety of HBC and the IUD.
"I am on the wall, but still okay with ESCR with methods that do not kill the embryo and using only existing embryos. "
Human beings are human beings and should not be used to experiment on like some lab rats or used for spare parts etc.
I question pro-lifers as often as I question pro-choicers on their beliefs and statements.
"I voted in November regarding issues other than abortion. "
I did as well however abortion and the protection of all human life is the most important issue.
I don't spend every waking moment promoting the pro-life cause.
"I don't constantly spew obscenities at women who are pro-choice or have aborted."
I dont either
"I don't call pro-choicers "pro-aborts"."
I don't call women who have aborted "murderers".
I call them that because they support abortion rights hence they are proabortion
"I don't protest outside clinics."
I go and offer assistance and information/referrals. You would be amazed at how many women are not aware of the alternatives and services available. For a lot of them its only the clinic protesters presence that alerts them to their existance.
"I don't call pro-choicers "butt-nuggets"."
me nither
"I don't think women who have sex outside of marriage are sl*ts, wh*res or anything else degrading."
I dont either, but sex outside of marriage IMHO is wrong,

reply from: yoda

Wow, you're really trying hard to sound just like a proabort..... and doing a great job of it, too.

reply from: Yuuki

I don't say "pro-abort" either, mainly because I think it sounds stupid, though I resent the label "pro-choice," because it is not about choice but about abortion rights.
From what you've stated in recent posts, you are clearly within the definition of what it means to be "pro-life" and nancyu owes you an apology.
It's about the right to choose what you do with your own body; it's about choosing birth, abortion or adoption. Obviously abortion shouldn't be a choice. Nancyu can stick a lighter in her arse for all I care heheh.

reply from: Yuuki

That doesn't matter to me. It is my job to forgive first; if they cannot forgive themselves that is their job. God doesn't say "forgive people after they've repented and only if they're really sorry".
I'm honestly neutral about Walmart. It's got pros and cons.
That's kind of how I feel too. Like, say for instance Mean Person forces Other Guy to kill Lady. Other Guy shouldn't go to jail imo, but Mean Person should.
The government is involved with it as far as the FDA goes. It really is very safe. IUDs were a little unsafe when they first came out but that was over 30 years ago now. They are much safer and complications are rare. Mirena is the best one. The copper coil, however, has a high risk of preventing implantation and should not be considered contraception as it does not consistently prevent conception.
It happens all the time. People get paid to be lab rats. But as I said, I am on the wall about this. How would I feel if I were now my age and learned I'd been an IVF embryo who had been used to harvest stem cells from? I really can't say if I'd feel proud or utterly horrified. Queasiness comes to mind more than pride at the moment.
Abortion was the most important issue to you then. It was not the most important issue to me. I felt the protection of lives overseas was also very important, and I'm glad as hell we have Obama in there, now that my brother is over in Afghanistan. I don't want him over there a moment longer than needs be, and you can bet the Republicans and McCain wouldn't have ended this war.
I support nuclear power, that doesn't make me pro-nukes. Proabortion is an insult and a slur IMO and thus I do not use it.
I don't think it is wrong.

reply from: Yuuki

Wow, you're really trying hard to sound just like a proabort..... and doing a great job of it, too.
In regards to Nancyu, most of us are so far off of her expectations radar we might as all be pro-choicers in her mind. I insult her because she insults me. I'm not allowed to bite back?

reply from: scopia19822

"The government is involved with it as far as the FDA goes. It really is very safe. IUDs were a little unsafe when they first came out but that was over 30 years ago now. They are much safer and complications are rare. Mirena is the best one. The copper coil, however, has a high risk of preventing implantation and should not be considered contraception as it does not consistently prevent conception."
I had the Mirena inserted at my 6 wk check up after my son was born. Two weeks later I was in the hospital ER hemmoraging with a fever of 104 from an infection . That is when I started having bleeding problems.

reply from: Yuuki

Did I say "complications never ever happen"? NO. I said they're RARE.
I'm very sorry you got an infection from the insertion of the Mirena. But that's not the fault of the device itself; that is the fault of the doctor who inserted it. Your bleeding problems are most likely a result of the effects of the infection as well, and have nothing to do with the Mirena device. I'd sue the doctor if I were you.

reply from: scopia19822

"Did I say "complications never ever happen"? NO. I said they're RARE.
I'm very sorry you got an infection from the insertion of the Mirena. But that's not the fault of the device itself; that is the fault of the doctor who inserted it. Your bleeding problems are most likely a result of the effects of the infection as well, and have nothing to do with the Mirena device. I'd sue the doctor if I were you"
Have you not ever heard of products/devices being defective? Mirena isnt a medication taken to treat a illness. IMHO all IUDS should be taken off the market until the safety of all brands evaulated thoroughly.

reply from: yoda

Who said anything about being "allowed"? I just think it's interesting that YOUR insults sound exactly like they were coming from a proabort.

reply from: Yuuki

Who said anything about being "allowed"? I just think it's interesting that YOUR insults sound exactly like they were coming from a proabort.
It's interesting because it's funny. She is rabid in my opinion.

reply from: Yuuki

Of course some products are defective, but the product itself could not have caused your infection. Infections like that are caused by an introduction of bacteria into the womb during the insertion process. Something wasn't clean, and it's unlikely to have been the mirena device itself, at least not out of the package. Maybe the doctor set it on an unsanitized napkin or tray before inserting it. Maybe he touched your sheet before touching the IUD. Who knows? Bacteria is everywhere. But it is unlikely that the product itself was tainted. Thousands of women have the Mirena inserted and carry it every day and are just fine. If it was the product itself, all of those women would be sick.

reply from: nancyu

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
Abortion is a form of birth control.

reply from: Yuuki

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
Abortion is a form of birth control.
Oh for the love of god. Hormonal contraceptive birth control. You're just being asinine now.

reply from: nancyu

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
Abortion is a form of birth control.
Oh for the love of god. Hormonal contraceptive birth control. You're just being asinine now.
I'm not being asinine. There are many "forms" of birth control. Hormonal contraceptive birth control is one form that no one would dissapprove of, except there aren't any that are safe and effective at the same time.
Stop pretending you are ignorant of this fact. The only way to make hormonal birth control effective is by adding an abortifacient. An agent to prevent implantation.
YOU KNOW THIS.

reply from: Cecilia

No, no no. I have never had an abortion. I've never been pregnant. I've worried about it though, thought I was at one time. But no, thank GOD, I was never pregnant and have never had an abortion. I did consider it though, and did feel it was my only choice, since I would have refused to let my mother raise the child (she said she'd refuse to let me abort and go through what she did and raise the child herself since she also wouldn't let me adopt it out) and didn't want to disappoint my parents to that enormous degree. So I thought I'd just abort in secret.
My arguments don't justify every single murder, so how could they justify every single abortion? My arguments don't justify ANY abortion or murder, in fact. They simply FORGIVE the person who did it.
No, you argue that women have no choice and are forced to abort simply because they strongly prefer that to the alternative. You are rationalizing the choice itself....I'm sorry you can't see that. Everyone else can...You even went so far as to assert that we can't understand because we haven't "been there," even though you admit you have not "been there" either. The fact that you have made difficult choices means nothing. Most of us have. You implied that you had some unique insight into the choice to abort, but it turns out that is not the case. Still, you seem desperate to make excuses for those who have.
I get the feeling there is more to this than is readily apparent, but I don't think there is much more that I can say, so I guess I'm done.
I think there is more to the story too. This sure seems wishy washy to me.
Yall would love it if I suddenly confessed to having had an abortion, but it'll never happen because I don't lie.
No, i would not, because you would be one confused young lady. Even more so than you are now.

reply from: Cecilia

Wow, you're really trying hard to sound just like a proabort..... and doing a great job of it, too.
In regards to Nancyu, most of us are so far off of her expectations radar we might as all be pro-choicers in her mind. I insult her because she insults me. I'm not allowed to bite back?
Childish...and I just read you talking about bloom's taxonomy like high brow.

reply from: Yuuki

Wow, you're really trying hard to sound just like a proabort..... and doing a great job of it, too.
In regards to Nancyu, most of us are so far off of her expectations radar we might as all be pro-choicers in her mind. I insult her because she insults me. I'm not allowed to bite back?
Childish...and I just read you talking about bloom's taxonomy like high brow.
I was taught never to start a fight, but I can damn well finish them. Self defense is far from childish. My insults towards her are far and few between the multitudes of ones she showers upon me; yet you only see fit to comment when I occasionally jab back. Hm.

reply from: Yuuki

How would I be confused? How AM I confused?

reply from: Yuuki

1. When did I become an authority on anything?
2. When did I say that?
3. I do not agree with that statement at all. Many types of BC are the moral equivalent of abortion, IMO.
No form of birth control is capable of causing miscarriage, aka abortion.
Abortion is a form of birth control.
Oh for the love of god. Hormonal contraceptive birth control. You're just being asinine now.
I'm not being asinine. There are many "forms" of birth control. Hormonal contraceptive birth control is one form that no one would dissapprove of, except there aren't any that are safe and effective at the same time.
Stop pretending you are ignorant of this fact. The only way to make hormonal birth control effective is by adding an abortifacient. An agent to prevent implantation.
YOU KNOW THIS.
It is quite a lie. Preventing implantation is not an abortion. You can keep gibbering though.

reply from: yoda

Technically, no. Do you formulate your morality entirely on semantic technicalities?
How do you feel about the killing of innocent human beings in general, by any means?

reply from: Yuuki

Technically, no. Do you formulate your morality entirely on semantic technicalities?
How do you feel about the killing of innocent human beings in general, by any means?
You formulated YOUR statement that I am not pro-life entirely on semantic technicalities of one dictionary's definition of pro-life, which you interpreted to read as "against legal abortion NOW" despite there being NO proof of that or hint of it in the definition.

reply from: yoda

You formulated YOUR statement .
I see you ignored the question...... and I can guess why.

reply from: Faramir

What do you consider to be sanity? Someone who thinks abortion is "no big deal" or someone who knows it is murder of an innocent person? Someone who gives tea and chocolate to a woman who has just killed her child as though she had suffered a bad dream and just needed a little comforting? Or someone who actually recognizes the enormity of what she had done?
If you believe that it is actually a person who is killed by abortion you would be able to see who the sane ones are on this forum.
Another gem from the lovely and gracious nancyu, who doesn't mind twisting and distorting the truth when she twists the knife...

reply from: Faramir

Who said anything about being "allowed"? I just think it's interesting that YOUR insults sound exactly like they were coming from a proabort.
It's interesting because it's funny. She is rabid in my opinion.
You give her too much credit.
She just uses this topic as an excuse to lay her nasty trips on people.
Don't be fooled to think it's about "the babies."

reply from: nancyu

Would you like to discuss BC? I noticed that you offered no response to this post from another thread:
By using the qualifier "abortifacient," you are essentially saying "killing is killing." Had you said "birth control does destroy innocent human beings," I would say the statement was debatable. There is evidence that hormonal BC could have a secondary abortifacient effect, but it would be arguably rare, and certainly not intentional. The intention is the same as the primary function, which is to prevent conception.
So, is there a risk of abortifacient effect? Obviously. Does the risk outweigh the potential for positive results? I would argue that it does. Many argue that no risk is acceptable, but I find that to be unreasonable.
To start with, BC prevents unwanted pregnancies, which, in turn, obviously prevents abortions. Since the abortifacient effect would be not only unintentional, but also very rare according to our best speculations (nobody can know for sure exactly how likely it would be), I think the potential for "good" far outweighs the potential for "bad."
For those who insist that no risk is acceptable, however small, I ask if there is a risk to your child's life involved with other activities (like automotive travel, recreational swimming, etc.), and whether these "risks" are acceptable in your view....Think carefully before answering....
You haven't put me on "ignore," have you? Do you find any fault with my logic? Let's discuss!
Yes CP, I have put you on ignore, but not because I find fault with your logic. Exactly the opposite. I generally agree with most things you say. However, arguing with you makes me tired. Keep in mind please that I am a simple minded pro life person. I don't have the expert debating skills that you do.
But anyway...acceptable vs unacceptable risks. Which ones do you want to discuss? And what do those have to do with whether or not Yuuki is pro life?
In my opinion birth control does not fit in with a pro life point of view. Doesn't "pro life" mean welcoming life, not preventing life. I know that birth control is not necessarily murder, but it is not "pro life" either.

reply from: Faramir

Birth control goes against the moral code of some, and IMHO it has led to the abortion culture we now have, and I'm referring to all forms of birth control, including spermicide and dams, and any device that could not be an abortifacient, but according to accepted definitions of what a prolifer is, I don't think someone who approves of birth control can be exempted as a prolifer for that reason.
To be "pro-life" is not necessarily to "welcome" life but to be opposed to the destruction of life which has begun.
I believe Sarah Palin favors some methods of birth control, and yet we regard her as "pro-life," do we not?

reply from: scopia19822

The focus of the prolife community at this moment should be on the women who are going to walk into PP to abort their established pregnancies. BC should be a moral decision not the governments other than the safety aspects.

reply from: Yuuki

That's the first logical statement I've heard regarding this. But alas, it's not entirely true. As a philosophical point I can see your logic. However, Yoda has informed me that philosophical discussions of words and their meanings is pointless, so I'll have to go back to the dictionary definition, which mentions absolutely nothing about "preventing" life, and only speaks of being opposed to elective abortion.
Just kidding. I'll play; I like philosophical discussions.
Pro means "for". I am for life, but only life that actually exists. And in the abortion debate, that specifically means the life of the unborn child. Until sperm meets egg, I don't care. Donate your eggs, freeze your sperm, whatever. I am "for" the life of the unborn child once it exists.
In another sense, as I've said, HCs (hormonal contraceptives) save a woman's eggs from ovulation. This means they are there, alive, for later use. Even NFP cannot prevent ovulation. A potential life is prevented, lost, flushed away, every period for a woman on NFP. Those same eggs would be saved if she used HCs. So in my opinion, HCs don't necessarily prevent any more life than NFP. They in fact store it, save it for later.
If one were to be truly "pro-life" according to your philosophical definition, one would have to demand that every possible life a woman could create be created. What about all of the sperm that die during sex? What about the dozens of embryos that naturally miscarry or fail to implant? How is normal sex "pro-life" at all?

reply from: Yuuki

Well that's why I'm not demanding everyone uses birth control. I'm simply saying it should be available to people who do want to use it. Our focus should not be on demonizing the act of sex, but on humanizing the child for those who have forgotten what it really is.

reply from: Yuuki

Or any other abortion clinic.

reply from: nancyu

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"

reply from: nancyu

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Bored with the discussion already CP?

reply from: Cecilia

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Wow that is pretty extreme. Women who may not want to conceive every cycle are now advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.

reply from: Faramir

If the intent of the birth control device is not to be an abortifacient, and if that is an extremely rare occurrance, then I don't think what you are saying is valid (though I do not advocate the use of any type of contraception).

reply from: Cecilia

If the intent of the birth control device is not to be an abortifacient, and if that is an extremely rare occurrance, then I don't think what you are saying is valid (though I do not advocate the use of any type of contraception).
What? Why?

reply from: scopia19822

Faramir is a Catholic and our faith teaches that ABC is morally wrong, however other than the safety regulations by the FDA its a moral issue. Im not so concearned about a woman being on the Pill as I am a woman walking into a PP or NAF clinic to kill her unborn child.

reply from: Faramir

What does "ABC" mean?
We both agree that all forms of BC are immoral, and I agree with you that the main concern is prevention of abortion.
I don't know enough about the pill to speak authoritatively, but from what I have heard, whether it is an abortifacient is debatable.
Certainly that is not the primary means by which it prevents conception.

reply from: scopia19822

ABC=artificial birth control

reply from: Yuuki

Abstinence "prevents life". I don't feel anyone who practices abstinence can really be "pro-life" because they are preventing the lives of children every month.
[/sarcasm]

reply from: yoda

There must be some other poster named "Yoda" here, because I didn't say that. I said word definitions are an academic matter, not a philosophical one. And they are.
"Hot" means high temperature, too, but "hot dog" means something else altogether.

reply from: yoda

If one knows that their BC device can kill new human beings by not allowing them to implant, then it would be impossible to have the intent "not to kill".

reply from: nancyu

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Bored with the discussion already CP?
I apologize for not staying online 24/7 so that I can immediately respond to your replies, especially since you have neglected to address a single point I raised.....
Do you oppose pregnant women being allowed to travel by motorized conveyance? If not, it would seem that you must accept that you are not "prolife" according to your logic....
Hey you were on line when I bumped this. I don't stay on 24/7 either.
You know that traveling by motor car is nothing at all like using birth control that is known to be abortifacient. Keep playing dumb, and I'll continue ignoring you. I don't like to waste time arguing with brick walls.

reply from: nancyu

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Wow that is pretty extreme. Women who may not want to conceive every cycle are now advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
A woman who doesn't want to conceive every cycle should use a form of prevention that doesn't include an agent that kills a child that is accidentally conceived.

reply from: Cecilia

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Wow that is pretty extreme. Women who may not want to conceive every cycle are now advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
A woman who doesn't want to conceive every cycle should use a form of prevention that doesn't include an agent that kills a child that is accidentally conceived.
Why?

reply from: nancyu

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Wow that is pretty extreme. Women who may not want to conceive every cycle are now advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
A woman who doesn't want to conceive every cycle should use a form of prevention that doesn't include an agent that kills a child that is accidentally conceived.
Why?
Because killing children is wrong.

reply from: Cecilia

Another reason I sometimes put you on ignore is that I think you are intentionally confusing a simple issue.
Yes. A woman who takes steps to prevent pregnancy is probably not "pro life." (There may be exceptions)
And a woman who uses or advocates the use of birth control that is known to be abortifacient is more than "not pro life" she is an advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
If she knows that one of the ways that birth control works is by preventing implantation, and she uses or advocates the use thereof, that is intentional. It's like saying, " I know I aimed and fired the gun, but I wasn't sure of whether or not it was loaded, so it wasn't intentional"
Wow that is pretty extreme. Women who may not want to conceive every cycle are now advocate of intentionally killing innocent human beings.
A woman who doesn't want to conceive every cycle should use a form of prevention that doesn't include an agent that kills a child that is accidentally conceived.
Why?
Because killing children is wrong.
that's funny. how can you even talk to someone who believes that women using the pill are all murderers.
the prolife position is at least consistantly delusionary.

reply from: Yuuki

What specific agent would that be? Progesterone? Nope, not lethal... Estrogen? Nope, not lethal.

reply from: Yuuki

If one knows that their BC device can kill new human beings by not allowing them to implant, then it would be impossible to have the intent "not to kill".
If one knows the act of sex can lead to a child and that chances are more likely than not that it will fail to implant or miscarry soon after, then it would be impossible to have the intent "not to kill".

reply from: Yuuki

There must be some other poster named "Yoda" here, because I didn't say that. I said word definitions are an academic matter, not a philosophical one. And they are.
"Hot" means high temperature, too, but "hot dog" means something else altogether.
We're not talking about hot dogs. And I was not the first person to dissect the word; attack the other person before me, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

reply from: yoda

Wrong.
Since there is no perfect way to conceive and gestate, there is no reason to feel any guilt about getting pregnant the normal way.
But, maybe you will start a crusade?

reply from: yoda

No, but I was. Got a problem with that? Can't handle the comparison of a pair of two word phrases? Too complicated for you?
Who made that mistake first is of no relevance or importance, it's still a mistake.
I just correct you because I like you.

reply from: Faramir

nancyu,
You have admitted to using birth control pills.
How many children do you think you killed?

reply from: Faramir

If one knows that their BC device can kill new human beings by not allowing them to implant, then it would be impossible to have the intent "not to kill".
If one knows the act of sex can lead to a child and that chances are more likely than not that it will fail to implant or miscarry soon after, then it would be impossible to have the intent "not to kill".
Please...you are smarter than this.
Every conception ends in death.
Everyone dies at some point, whether in the womb, as a baby, as a young adult, or at 110.
Creating a life that dies NATURALLY or by accident is not to to kill that life.

reply from: Shenanigans

Aren't we being clear? What about it aren't you understanding?
Intending non-conception by actively taking something that prevents conception or shedding of a zygote is very different then performing a sex act when conditions of the body may be adverse the the newly formed zygote.
One is natural.
One is not.
One is nature acting against the wishes of the individuals.
One is the indivdual sidestepping nature.
If a person has sex with intent and purpose of conception, then it's not their fault their body refuses to go along with their plans. They are not "murderers" or responsible for the failed conception or death in utuero of the life.
When you actively seek out Rx for the pill, or the MAP, when you fill Rx, then go home, fill a glass of water, and then pop a pill, swallow pill you are actively engaging in behavior that is adverse to the life of the zygote. The intent there is to destory the zygote or prevent its creation.
When you have sex, wishing a child, and one is conceived, you cannot be held responsible for the conditoin of your uterine lining or the DNA structure of the newly conceived individual.
75-90% of conceptions do not succeed to implanation (how the hell they got that stat I don't know) but not every union of sperm and egg results in a zygote that is viable, there could be genetic errors or timing errors or some other fatal flaw, or the lining may not be friendly to the zygote or the body may have an issue.
Would you blame cancer on the person who falls prey to it? Since it was their body?
Please, please, explain to us what it is about willing an end by taking a pill and having an end happen against your wish that you dont' understand.

reply from: Yuuki

What's wrong with preventing conception? Conception is fertilization, not implantation. Does that clear things up a bit? Preventing conception does not kill a baby.

reply from: Cecilia

If you believe that applies to Nancy, just say so, but please do not paint me with that same brush. I believe my "prolife position" to be both reasonable and logically sound. If I am wrong about that, please elaborate.
Your views on birth control are reasonable.

reply from: nancyu

What specific agent would that be? Progesterone? Nope, not lethal... Estrogen? Nope, not lethal.
http://www.healthline.com/multumcontent/ethinyl-estradiol-norethindrone?utm_medium=ask&utm_source=smart&utm_campaign=article&utm_term=Ortho-Novum&ask_return=Ortho-Novum+(ethinyl+estradiol-norethindrone)

reply from: nancyu

If you believe that applies to Nancy, just say so, but please do not paint me with that same brush. I believe my "prolife position" to be both reasonable and logically sound. If I am wrong about that, please elaborate.
I have never said that women using the pill are all murderers.

reply from: Bgraphics

It seems to me that you are still doing a little soul searching.

reply from: Yuuki

What specific agent would that be? Progesterone? Nope, not lethal... Estrogen? Nope, not lethal.
http://www.healthline.com/multumcontent/ethinyl-estradiol-norethindrone?utm_medium=ask&utm_source=smart&utm_campaign=article&utm_term=Ortho-Novum&ask_return=Ortho-Novum+(ethinyl+estradiol-norethindrone)
That is not a single chemical designed PURPOSELY to kill the unborn child. The hormones are designed to PURPOSELY PREVENT ovulation, though. Did you know that using the NFP method leads to an increased chance of you having sex on the fringes of ovulation, when the endometrium IS TOO THIN to support the life of a fertilized egg, and/or the egg is no longer healthy enough to become a baby. This leads to an increase of pre-implantation deaths, failures to implant, and early miscarriages. Much higher, in fact, than on HCs.
Driving in a car could inadvertently lead to you accidentally running over a cat and killing it, but that doesn't mean the tires were designed to run cats over.

reply from: Shenanigans

Yeah, I am.
However, with that said, I beleive all barrier or man made contraception is gravely immoral and an offence against the dignity of the person. I also beleive sex out of wedlock is immoral.
I will never be using any form of man made contraception. But I'm not adversed to other people using it because I'm aware there are people out there who are also not adverse to killing a concieved child, therefore, I"d rather people use BC then have an aboriton.
However, medically I'm against hormonal contracetpion because of the danger it poses to women, its a dangerous concuction of drugs that prevents the body doing something it does naturally. Playign with the natural goings on of the body is rather dangerous. I"ve seen some pretty damning evidence against the pill and more and more doctors are refusing to Rx it, not because of moral convictions but because of how damn unsafe it is.

reply from: Shenanigans

I have no problem with preventing conception.
I have problesm with any form of "contraception" that works by discarding the newly concieved life. The IUD and the MAP for example act by flushing out the zygote or preventing implantation. Some forms of HC work as a secondary purpose of making the uterine lining unfriendly to the conceptus and prevent implantation.
The harsh reality is no one really knows how HC works, just that it seems too.

reply from: Yuuki

Hormonal Contraceptives do NOT act by "disposing" of newly created life. They act by preventing conception. Otherwise, they can't very well be called "contraceptives", can they? The secondary "function" you speak of is only theorized, and supported not by fact, but by smoke and mirrors and extremists against hormonal contaceptives.
You are much more likely to "dispose" of newly created life OFF of birth control than you are ON it.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiCU46_lWeE

reply from: churchmouse

Faramir you are right.
Nancy should ask the Holy Spirit to put a seal upon her lips. She should read Psalm 141:3. It is about being humble. God will always be on the side of humility and kindness and forgiveness and graciousness.
Conflict is inevitable, the way one responds to it is our choice. And if we respond correctly God will build us up. We need to look beyond the conflict to the consequences of the words that we say.
OUR RESPONSE IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY and it shows where our heart really is.
Yoda have you ever seen a poll that was accurate? Seems to me the one about me was tampered with. LOL
This isn't about yukki ,cecielia, yoda or me for that matter. This is totally about the unborn child who is being slaughtered as we speak. Lets keep our eyes and focus on that.

reply from: nancyu

I have some questions before I vote in your poll.
Do you support full legal personhood for all unborn children?
Do you believe that the life of a human being begins at conception?
Do you believe anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings?

reply from: Yuuki

I have some questions before I vote in your poll.
Do you support full legal personhood for all unborn children?
Do you believe that the life of a human being begins at conception?
Do you believe anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings?
Faramir asked similar questions. Go read the answers. I'm done spoon feeding you.

reply from: Bgraphics

I have some questions before I vote in your poll.
Do you support full legal personhood for all unborn children?
Do you believe that the life of a human being begins at conception?
Do you believe anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings?
Faramir asked similar questions. Go read the answers. I'm done spoon feeding you.
A simple no would answer the question instead of avoiding his/her question.
If I remember correctly no would be your answer on all 3 questions followed w/ a long winded explination as to why you wouldn't answer yes.

reply from: Yuuki

I have some questions before I vote in your poll.
Do you support full legal personhood for all unborn children?
Do you believe that the life of a human being begins at conception?
Do you believe anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings?
Faramir asked similar questions. Go read the answers. I'm done spoon feeding you.
A simple no would answer the question instead of avoiding his/her question.
If I remember correctly no would be your answer on all 3 questions followed w/ a long winded explination as to why you wouldn't answer yes.
I'm done being polite or succinct with her, what with her screetching about me being a liar all over the forum. Also, you recall wrong 100% since my answers were all yes with explanations as to why.

reply from: Bgraphics

I have some questions before I vote in your poll.
Do you support full legal personhood for all unborn children?
YES. good...
Do you believe that the life of a human being begins at conception?
Yes, great...
Do you believe anyone has the right to intentionally kill innocent human beings?
"YES" hum. A prolifer would never say such things.
I find it disturbing you think killing innocent human beings is okey

reply from: Yuuki

I was referring to Faramir's questions, idiot. And no, I do not have them memorized. I do know that my answers were for the most part yes, and that they convinced Faramir that I am pro-life. But go dig up HIS questions.
Also, I do love how you've made it look like Nancyu is the one answering those questions above.


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