Most Americans "pro-life."

[fossten]

Don't eat that. It's life, does it have the same rights and is it just like a human, that's the argument. Nothing to do with being a coward, taking the pragmatic approach.

If we go by your terms, then what do we do with cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in immediate danger?

I've already answered this issue. You might bother to scroll up.

Guess how many cases of rape, incest, and danger to the mother there actually are in proportion to the actual number of abortions performed? Less than 1 percent. You're trying to use the exception to justify the rule now.

Gloria Steinem admitted back in 1985 that to make abortion legal in those cases would be forcing women to lie. Norma McCorvey (try google) made up a story about being gang raped at a circus so she could get an abortion. Now she admits she lied.

Instead of encouraging her to kill her child, we should be showing love, compassion, and concern for the mother and her baby, whether she chooses to have the child or give it up for adoption. Killing the child is not necessary in any case. Rape is violent, but when the mother kills her child she is committing a second act of violence, toward her own child.

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

i have just taken yours' and fosstens' lead here. when i first came into this section of the forum it's been rampant. the ball has been in YOUR court, and i was just volleying back. you should go back about 60 pages of threads here and look. when i said i call myself atheist, the attacks started AGAINST me first. so, i took that style and owned it. now you wanna whine about personal attacks. any time your ready to cease and desist, i'm ready as well.

I co-sign this post.

It's an odd hypocrisy, things that demonstrate a lack of moral responsibility are tolerated when it comes to federal funding, but once there's a moral judgment to made on the subject, knee-jerk activists suddenly manufacturer some "church/state" issue. Decisions guided by the moral teachings of a church are not a violation of the 1st amendment.

So if you support federal funding of abortion, it's o.k.
but to oppose it is to be an exercise of your morality and an imposition of your religion, thus it's wrong and to be dismissed.

But that entire debate should be moot anyway. The federal government's authority should not extend into this arena. Where does the federal government get the right to spend money on issues such as this one? They've ceased that power and responsibility by reinterpreting what they like call a "living constitution."

Arguably, a local or state government could make that kind of decision, but the federal government does not- or at least shouldn't be able to.

...but specifically regarding your post, Planned Parenthood used to received about $50M a year from the federal government directly, and another $50M through Medicaid. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the number has gone up in recent years.

This involves women's lives. I would like this funded. I dont consider fetus' to be alive, so it's a non-issue for me in those sectors.

Why did you bring up how much it costs to go through with abortions?

 

[fossten]

This involves women's lives. I would like this funded. I dont consider fetus' to be alive, so it's a non-issue for me in those sectors.

Many people also don't consider blacks to be human. Are they right?

What scientific research did you do to come to the conclusion that fetuses aren't alive? And at what point in their gestation do they suddenly 'become alive?'

Please share.

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

Many people also don't consider blacks to be human. Are they right?

What scientific research did you do to come to the conclusion that fetuses aren't alive? And at what point in their gestation do they suddenly 'become alive?'

Please share.

Peoples opinion on black people, and women in America are pretty different. But, just for fun, who doesn't think they're human?

It's my own opinion that fetus' aren't alive. When do they become alive? I like the Chinese standard, one breath outside of the womb they become "alive".

 

[fossten]

It's my own opinion that fetus' aren't alive. When do they become alive? I like the Chinese standard, one breath outside of the womb they become "alive".

Why do you like that standard? Does it make things more convenient for you if you can't keep your pecker in your pocket and you get a girl 'in trouble?'

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

Why do you like that standard? Does it make things more convenient for you if you can't keep your pecker in your pocket and you get a girl 'in trouble?'

Heh. No, i just don't see it as a big issue is all. If i had to categorize it i would say that the fetus is an organ. Like, a heart, a spleen, a kidney, etc.

I am going to write an essay sometime on perception. I think this would be a good thing to write about.

Young vs Old
Religion vs Religion vs Atheism
etc etc

 

[hrmwrm]

Don't give me that crap. You came in here originally perpetuating false stereotypes of people of faith in general and Christians specifically. We called you on it and pointed out how it was false. You started getting more and more indignant, rude and out and out hostile toward us. Rather then turn the other cheek, we treated you the same. However, the big difference is, and always has been, that we don't stoop to dishonest and deceptive means to express that. We always gave a reasonable counter to what you were saying. You, on the other hand, notoriously made (and still do) fallacious argument aimed more and more at smearing us as well as proving your point, or disproving ours. After we called you on that, you started with your infamous "wall 'o' text" posts.

You were the one who started this and who ultimately perpetuates it through your vindictiveness and dishonesty in your blatant smears, fallacious arguments and "wall 'o' text" posts.

The ball is, and always has been, in your court on this. Stop lying and trying to mischaracterize it as something it is not.

where in this thread have i done that?
oh, i see now, you're going to have your childish tantrum in EVERY thread against me. so this has now become a personal vendetta of yours. and you call ME childish.

 

[hrmwrm]

Bologna. Either it's a life or it isn't. Come on, grow a backbone.

that's what i keep asking you about. is ALL life sacred or not? if not, then you are only being selective in your arguement and only use it in times of convenience.

 

[Calabrio]

If i had to categorize it i would say that the fetus is an organ. Like, a heart, a spleen, a kidney, etc.

But at no point does a heart, spleen, or kidney have consciousness? That really is a bizarre statement, and a "categorization" that I suspect you have selected based on convenience rather than logic.

However, let me ask, at what point does this "body part" become an individual?

 

[shagdrum]

where in this thread have i done that?

I never said "this thread". I was responding to your claim that,

"when i first came into this section of the forum it's [smearing, distorting, lying, harassing, etc.] been rampant"
​

Now you are changing the context of what I was responding to; effectively quoting me out of context in another attempt to dodge and deflect as well as smear me.

oh, i see now, you're going to have your childish tantrum in EVERY thread against me. so this has now become a personal vendetta of yours. and you call ME childish.

No, but I am going to correct your lies, distortions and fallacies when I see them. Beyond that, I am going to treat you with the same lack of civility and lack of consideration that you habitually show others and/or other points of view here.

If you would look at the original post I responded to, you were making a specious argument [post #25], which I pointed out [post #26]. You then hurled an accusation of that same type of fallacious argument back at me even though it was not at all appropriate to what I was saying [post#27]. You simply threw it back at me in spite. These type of habitually spiteful, vindictive and dishonest actions throughout this forum on your part are why there is no pretense of civility in how I respond to you.

 

[shagdrum]

If i had to categorize it i would say that the fetus is an organ. Like, a heart, a spleen, a kidney, etc.

All organs have the same blood type and DNA of the person they reside in. A fetus can have a different blood type and does have different DNA then the person they reside in.

 

[TheDude]

I've already answered this issue. You might bother to scroll up.

Guess how many cases of rape, incest, and danger to the mother there actually are in proportion to the actual number of abortions performed? Less than 1 percent. You're trying to use the exception to justify the rule now.

Gloria Steinem admitted back in 1985 that to make abortion legal in those cases would be forcing women to lie. Norma McCorvey (try google) made up a story about being gang raped at a circus so she could get an abortion. Now she admits she lied.

Instead of encouraging her to kill her child, we should be showing love, compassion, and concern for the mother and her baby, whether she chooses to have the child or give it up for adoption. Killing the child is not necessary in any case. Rape is violent, but when the mother kills her child she is committing a second act of violence, toward her own child.

Your feelings aside, you'd still be forcing a woman who was forcibly impregnated to bear a child she did not want, if abortion is made illegal. 1% or no.

Not sure where you get this "encouraging her to kill her child", I don't think there's written mandate where abortion clinics promote abortion.

Forgot if it passed or not, but some state was trying to pass a law that would require a woman going through an abortion to look at an ultrasound of her fetus before said abortion could take place. I agree with that.

 

[TheDude]

It's my own opinion that fetus' aren't alive. When do they become alive? I like the Chinese standard, one breath outside of the womb they become "alive".

Do you honestly believe that? I do hope you're just saying that to get a rise out of certain people.

 

[shagdrum]

I am curious, if it were put to a vote (as in, an amendment), where do you think the majority of the country would come down on it? Would abortion be made illegal in any and every circumstance? Would it be made legal in any and every circumstance (even partial birth)? Would there be a middle ground somewhere and what do you think it would be?

Personally, I think we would probably make abortion generally illegal except for certain instances.

 

[Mr Wiggl3s]

Do you honestly believe that? I do hope you're just saying that to get a rise out of certain people.

No, i actually believe that.

 

[TheDude]

I am curious, if it were put to a vote (as in, an amendment), where do you think the majority of the country would come down on it? Would abortion be made illegal in any and every circumstance? Would it be made legal in any and every circumstance (even partial birth)? Would there be a middle ground somewhere and what do you think it would be?

Personally, I think we would probably make abortion generally illegal except for certain instances.

If it was just a vote 'yes or no' thing, I don't think it would become illegal, IE Roe Vs. Wade would remain.

What instances would you see it being legal and how would you justify those instances in an 'abortion illegal' setting?

 

[TheDude]

No, i actually believe that.

You do realize that a fetus can survive outside the womb at 5 months?

 

[fossten]

Your feelings aside, you'd still be forcing a woman who was forcibly impregnated to bear a child she did not want, if abortion is made illegal. 1% or no.

You're forgetting about the rights of the child.

Not sure where you get this "encouraging her to kill her child", I don't think there's written mandate where abortion clinics promote abortion.

Forgot if it passed or not, but some state was trying to pass a law that would require a woman going through an abortion to look at an ultrasound of her fetus before said abortion could take place. I agree with that.

Abortion clinics manifestly encourage and even persuade women to have abortions. This is documented.

 

[shagdrum]

If it was just a vote 'yes or no' thing, I don't think it would become illegal, IE Roe Vs. Wade would remain.

What instances would you see it being legal and how would you justify those instances in an 'abortion illegal' setting?

The big three always given are rape, incest and a danger to the mothers life. I would imagine that society would come down allowing at least those. I don't know what standard it would give for any other potential instances to fall under allowing for abortion under a law where it generally would not be allowed. The "danger to the mothers life" one is the strongest of the three, even the Catholic church has no problem with that one, assuming the abortion is the unintentional byproduct of another medical procedure. The other two are harder to justify, IMO as they are still aimed at protecting the mother's "right to choose" at the expense of a baby's "right to life".

 

[topher5150]

what really sickens me is that a fourteen year old girl can get away with aborting her baby with out her parents knowledge, but if some one kills a dog they raise three kinds of kell about it

 

[fossten]

The big three always given are rape, incest and a danger to the mothers life. I would imagine that society would come down allowing at least those. I don't know what standard it would give for any other potential instances to fall under allowing for abortion under a law where it generally would not be allowed. The "danger to the mothers life" one is the strongest of the three, even the Catholic church has no problem with that one, assuming the abortion is the unintentional byproduct of another medical procedure. The other two are harder to justify, IMO as they are still aimed at protecting the mother's "right to choose" at the expense of a baby's "right to life".

I've never heard of a case like this. Women would be encouraged to lie. To abide by the hippocratic oath, the doctor should try to save both the life of the mother and the life of the baby.

Remember that abortion is big business. Doctors make tons of money slaughtering the unborn. Shut it off first, then deal with the 1 in a million case where the mother's life is in danger.

Stop compromising with morals.