Pro lifers show no mercy

Lorca said:
What is irresponsible? Having casual sex? Getting pregnant? What is 'accidental' pregnancy? Unplanned, correct? It can happen with casual sex, or those in committed relationships or marriages. What is irresponsible here?


For ANYTHING we do, there may be consequences. And we may even be happy with those consequences. Who says an accidental or unplanned pregnancy is BAD? I thought you all thought "babies" were GOOD?

And it's certainly not stupid when women know they have options. Several. (Too bad you dont like them all.)

What is irresponsible is how someone deals with something...and if it affects someone else. I'm not irresponsible if consequences only affect me and dont impact others (meaning others have to take responsibility for my actions.) Abortion is a very responsible thing to do...as your stats pointed out. (But you ignore)

So...YOUR definition of 'irresponsible' doesnt really fit. That can be YOUR JUDGEMENT of someone's behavior....but as long as it doesnt affect you or anyone else, it's again, really none of your business. Not everyone judges people like that and hey....if you think getting pregnant is irresponsible, I would think you'd be in favor of ending it as soon as possible.
Click to expand...


There is no excuse for any woman to get pregnant in this day and age, none. And that includes women at a very early age with all the contraceptives available it only requires common sense and a minimum of self responsibility to avoid pregnancy during sex. This is feminist power play politics at work on your part, the sorcerer who uses religion to justify abortion on demand. It's power in exchange for sex and it is designed to minimize the man's role in the pro creation family unit simply for nothing else besides power for liberal feminists.

If couples could plan families and for the most part get what they planned before birth control and have sex without pregnancy, they certainly could accomplish sexual relations without pregnancy today minus any excuses "that something went wrong." during the sex.
 
Lorca said:
We're talking about the law here and a stance that 'your people' have basically supported. Why?

You just bobbed and weaved all over. Those things you wrote DO NOT factor into the basic stance of the pro-lifers. A broad general stance is that abortion is ok (not desirable...no one thinks that on either side) in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life is in danger.

WHY?

(btw I know it's judgemental on my part but I believe it is just evil of you to insist that a woman victim of rape or incest SHOULD have to carry to term. And you call me bloodthirsty? You wish to destroy a woman. That's just as likely as her dying in childbirth or having lifelong health issues...which may ALSO happen if forced to carry to term. I find that appalling so dont bother putting yourself up on some moral pedestal.)
Click to expand...

You may want to ask yourself why all these feminists come from wealth and privilege such as this cultist. Horses are expensive to purchase and maintain. Unless you're a middle class rancher or farmer and you deal with horses and livestock for profit almost everyone in the middle class cannot afford to maintain a horse. You may want to look into the cost of maintaining one on a yearly basis.

So what is the genesis of her disdain for white men and western society and her feminist abortion power politics? It begins in compulsory education and escalates through the university experience. These people do not come form poverty but rather privilege so where else do they acquire their moral relativist views as opposed to western Christian morals?
 
Lorca said:
W I believe it is just evil of you to insist that a woman victim of rape or incest SHOULD have to carry to term.
Click to expand...

W....T.....F.....okay, now you've passed from simply being dense to being outright offensive........did I not just say (about four times) that I didn't insist on a rape or incest victim carrying to term?.....but you say I am evil for insisting on it......
 
Lorca said:
Why value them less in those cases?
Click to expand...

because I'm a heartless moral opportunist........sort of like a liberal who lets mothers kill fifty million in order to insure a hundred thousand rape victims don't have to carry their children to term.......
 
I'm actually thrilled teabagging conservatards still want to fight this losing battle.
It's not as if dems are good much less really good.
Fucking idiot old fat white males like Philly and postmodernpagan will continue to scare of the dwindling moderate republican
Klan on morons
 
I Love America said:
You are being deliberately obtuse. It is called compromise. I will sadly give up my ZERO tolerance for abortion in the 1% of case that have you most concerned if it saves the lives of 99% of infants

It would appear that we are offering compromise. You know where both sides don't get everything they want. Obama talks about it all the time. You should hear him
Click to expand...

I have just never heard of murder ever being negotiated before then. I've never heard of situations where it's 'ok to murder' to reach some kind of compromise.

Because that's what you insist it is, right? Can you murder the rape baby that has been born to protect the mother? How is it any less devastating for her to be confronted with it once it has been born?

Do you have any other examples where murder is ok in a compromise?
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
because I'm a heartless moral opportunist........sort of like a liberal who lets mothers kill fifty million in order to insure a hundred thousand rape victims don't have to carry their children to term.......
Click to expand...


I have just never heard of murder ever being negotiated before then. I've never heard of situations where it's 'ok to murder' to reach some kind of compromise.

Because that's what you insist it is, right? Can you murder the rape baby that has been born to protect the mother? How is it any less devastating for her to be confronted with it once it has been born?

Do you have any other examples where murder is ok in a compromise?
 
Last edited:
philly rabbit said:
You may want to ask yourself why all these feminists come from wealth and privilege such as this cultist. Horses are expensive to purchase and maintain. Unless you're a middle class rancher or farmer and you deal with horses and livestock for profit almost everyone in the middle class cannot afford to maintain a horse. You may want to look into the cost of maintaining one on a yearly basis.
Click to expand...


ROFLMAO! Oh this is the BEST! A real gift in this thread, a gem.

Here's some rational reasoning for us: All feminists come from wealth? Women who get/support abortions are feminists. Yet all the stats posted in the thread indicate that many women get abortions because they cant afford them.

Every other woman in this thread that supports pro-life are feminists then? Evince, Christie, Dantes, all wealthy?

And did you really ASK me how much it costs to maintain a horse when you know I own at least one? Did you think the hay just appears in the barn? The farrier magically shoes for free? LOLOLOLOLOL

Your declaration that you must be wealthy to own a horse (and not do so for profit)....it 100% incorrect. Like everything else you post.

Keep 'em coming Silly Wabbit, keep 'em coming.
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
W....T.....F.....okay, now you've passed from simply being dense to being outright offensive........did I not just say (about four times) that I didn't insist on a rape or incest victim carrying to term?.....but you say I am evil for insisting on it......
Click to expand...

Your claim on the position of 'compromise' is that it is only ok because you are using it as a negotiation point that you will allow for what you consider 'greater good.' Meaning that if you had your way, she would NOT be allowed abortion in those cases.

Please, try to follow along.
 
The Dude said:
I'm actually thrilled teabagging conservatards still want to fight this losing battle.
It's not as if dems are good much less really good.
Fucking idiot old fat white males like Philly and postmodernpagan will continue to scare of the dwindling moderate republican
Klan on morons
Click to expand...

Roach Clip has a good point. This is federal constitutional law. And don't think for a moment that the Professor Baxters of the world are satisfied with queer marriage being imposed in the different states because those measures can be repealed by the people as difficult as it would be it would still be repealed before Roe vs. Wade.

For the pro life right, depending on strict constitutional judges being appointed to the SC wont do it either because the SC is too out of control with power.

See John Roberts as an example and how the right pinned their hopes on that charlatan.
 
philly rabbit said:
Roach Clip has a good point. This is federal constitutional law. And don't think for a moment that the Professor Baxters of the world are satisfied with queer marriage being imposed in the different states because those measures can be repealed by the people as difficult as it would be it would still be repealed before Roe vs. Wade.

For the pro life right, depending on strict constitutional judges being appointed to the SC wont do it either because the SC is too out of control with power.

See John Roberts as an example and how the right pinned their hopes on that charlatan.[/QUOTE
Your ilk is going the way of the buggy whip
Keep klanning
It's funny
Click to expand...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but I am evil for not allowing it even though I allow it.......does this appear logical to you?.....
Click to expand...

What office are you running for? Now you sound like a waffling politician.

You will 'allow' "murder' of the 'baby' in certain cases. Why all of a sudden is this murder ok? Does that appear logical to you?
 
Lorca said:
Those are not 'murder.' The pro-life side specifically claims abortion is murder.

Try again?
Click to expand...

Your kind of abortion is murder .. AOD.

Many so called pro lifers are actually pro choice because when it comes to a medical condition and it's either the woman or the child, this cannot be a pro life position.

You murder on the other hand for political expediency and feminist power politics.
 
Lorca said:
Those are not 'murder.' The pro-life side specifically claims abortion is murder.

Try again?
Click to expand...

actually, I've heard plenty of liberals toss around the word "murder" when it comes to collateral damage, capital punishment, and obviously when discussing "stand your ground" legislation.....
 
Lorca said:
What office are you running for? Now you sound like a waffling politician.

You will 'allow' "murder' of the 'baby' in certain cases. Why all of a sudden is this murder ok? Does that appear logical to you?
Click to expand...

???...is negotiation to achieve a goal logical?.....I would certainly think so......does the fact liberals might not, explain the current state of affairs in Washington?.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top