A great first step to ending Abortion!

LV426 said:
You're the one whose entire world view is shaped by a book of fables commissioned and adapted just 400 years ago by an English King from Scotland.

That's fucking stupid no matter how you spin it.
Click to expand...

Really, and you have proof they are fables, I mean historically speaking, not your hatred of anything good.
 
Oneuli said:
That depends. The answer would be obvious if you cared about those fetal lives. Then the reason you should pay to cut down on unwanted pregnancies would be to cut down on the number of times women choose to end such pregnancies, thereby preventing those fetal deaths. But since you don't care even a little about those fetuses, other than as an excuse for punishing women, you struggle to think of any reason you'd want to do things like subsidizing contraception. Thus, you give away your real motives.

I could take an abortion-criminalization activist's proclaimed concern for fetal life seriously, if that activism were part of a suite of policy activism to prevent fetal deaths. If the activist also was pushing for expanded support for prenatal healthcare, obesity prevention, contraception, proven sex ed, etc., then it would look like he really did care about preventing fetal deaths, and the abortion criminalization was just the most radical policy in support of that agenda. But, pretty much without fail, the abortion-criminalization activists are either completely uninterested in any path to preventing fetal death that doesn't involve punishing women, or they're even actively hostile to such paths (such as the huge cross-over between the abortion-criminalization activists and the activists who fought to make contraception less affordable). That's why I don't take seriously their professed concern for those fetal lives. They clearly don't give a shit about the fetuses. They just see them as a debating point they can use in putting our criminal law to work in enforcing their religious taboos around sex.
Click to expand...

Punishing women by not allowing them to kill their BABIES? Again pay for your own form of contraception. Why should I subsidize your sex life, just because you can't be responsible, and show self control?
We have the best prenatal health care in the world!
Obesity prevention?
Sex Ed is in schools, anything not taught should be handled by the parents!
Sex isn't taboo to the Church, it should be enjoyed often within a marriage!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
After reading this thread, I believe I've come a possibility that we should all consider.

Taking into account the number of times she's expressed her hatred for Whites, her detest of children, her failures in life, and her obvious self loathing, I've arrived at the possible conclusion.

It is possible that the Living Victim (LV) was raped, by a white man, prior to Roe vs Wade and her very religious family refused to allow her to have an abortion, then after the birth of the child, the family cared for it and accepted it into the family; but the Living Victim viewed the child as a betrayal, by her family, and then went down a part of wrong choices, which has caused the many failures in the life of the Living Victim, due to her family probably blaming her for the rape and continually pointing out that she should have stayed away from the people and places that they warned her of.

The final result of this, is why the Living Victim abhors children and why she blames whites for her miserable existence.

Instead of trying to reason with her, the Living Victim should be pitied and everyone should wish for her hopeful return to being a productive person, along with her finally coming to terms with her pain and her negative outlook on life in general.

I suggest professional help for her, even at this late stage of her life.
Click to expand...

odd.....I came to an opposite assumption......having aborted her first four children she can't deal with the guilt she would feel if suddenly the world didn't agree she had done an heroic thing by protecting her freedom.....
 
Wolverine said:
Punishing women by not allowing them to kill their BABIES?
Click to expand...

No. As you're aware, nobody here is speaking in favor of killing babies. We're talking about fetuses, not babies.

Again pay for your own form of contraception. Why should I subsidize your sex life, just because you can't be responsible, and show self control?
Click to expand...

I already answered that question, but I'll repeat myself. If you HONESTLY cared about fetal lives, you'd be at least as willing to make your tax money available for contraception (thus lowering unwanted pregnancies and fetal deaths), as you are to make your tax money available for dealing out criminal punishment for women who end their pregnancies. The fact that you aren't willing to pay to help fund contraception, but are willing to pay to punish women, shows your real drive here. It isn't about those fetuses, for you. It's about your sex hang-ups, and the desire to inflict suffering on women who run afoul of your religious taboos. Although both subsidized contraception and abortion criminalization are strategies for reducing fetal deaths, only one of them makes women suffer, and so that's the only one that appeals to you.

We have the best prenatal health care in the world!
Click to expand...

Where do you think the US ranks, globally, for infant mortality? Provide a specific number, please.

Obesity prevention?
Click to expand...

Yes. Obesity is a well-understood risk factor for miscarriage. So, the more obesity you have among women of childbearing years, the more fetal deaths you can expect. Government policies focused on reducing obesity will mean fewer fetuses dying needlessly. If the lives of fetuses were a genuine driver for you, this would be an important issue for you. But since obesity-prevention policies are not ways to enforce archaic sexual hangups by way of hurting women, it just doesn't do anything for you.

Sex Ed is in schools, anything not taught should be handled by the parents!
Click to expand...

The problem is that sex ed has too frequently wasted time on a quasi-religious indoctrination into the cult of virginity. These "abstinence only" approaches are proven failures, when it comes to preventing disease and unwanted pregnancy. They actually INCREASE the chance that when a kid ends up having sex, it's more likely to be unprotected sex. So, a good strategy for preventing unwanted pregnancies (and thereby abortions) is to tell the holy rollers to keep their chastity fetish out of the schools, and instead focus programs on proven, practical approaches. Unfortunately, many of the same people who most vocally pretend to care about fetal lives, when it comes to abortion criminalization, have also been in favor of promoting the failed abstinence-only focus in sex ed, rather than approaches that emphasize contraception.

Sex isn't taboo to the Church, it should be enjoyed often within a marriage!
Click to expand...

Extramarital sex is taboo within many churches, including those that have played the biggest role in trying to pervert our law into criminalizing the choice to end a pregnancy. The reason that such a large share of anti-choice activists don't focus on these other means I've discussed to decrease fetal deaths is that they don't want to diminish the punishment of those who break their sex taboo. They think sex should be about procreation, and unwanted pregnancies are righteous punishment for those who choose to have sex for other reasons, meaning anything that makes that experience less punishing is suspect, from their perspective.
 
The Catholic hordes of excess children migrating North is a result of zero Family Planning.

If you support a million people migrating to America every year, you should support zero Family Planning.
 
Oneuli said:
No. As you're aware, nobody here is speaking in favor of killing babies. We're talking about fetuses, not babies.



I already answered that question, but I'll repeat myself. If you HONESTLY cared about fetal lives, you'd be at least as willing to make your tax money available for contraception (thus lowering unwanted pregnancies and fetal deaths), as you are to make your tax money available for dealing out criminal punishment for women who end their pregnancies. The fact that you aren't willing to pay to help fund contraception, but are willing to pay to punish women, shows your real drive here. It isn't about those fetuses, for you. It's about your sex hang-ups, and the desire to inflict suffering on women who run afoul of your religious taboos. Although both subsidized contraception and abortion criminalization are strategies for reducing fetal deaths, only one of them makes women suffer, and so that's the only one that appeals to you.



Where do you think the US ranks, globally, for infant mortality? Provide a specific number, please.



Yes. Obesity is a well-understood risk factor for miscarriage. So, the more obesity you have among women of childbearing years, the more fetal deaths you can expect. Government policies focused on reducing obesity will mean fewer fetuses dying needlessly. If the lives of fetuses were a genuine driver for you, this would be an important issue for you. But since obesity-prevention policies are not ways to enforce archaic sexual hangups by way of hurting women, it just doesn't do anything for you.



The problem is that sex ed has too frequently wasted time on a quasi-religious indoctrination into the cult of virginity. These "abstinence only" approaches are proven failures, when it comes to preventing disease and unwanted pregnancy. They actually INCREASE the chance that when a kid ends up having sex, it's more likely to be unprotected sex. So, a good strategy for preventing unwanted pregnancies (and thereby abortions) is to tell the holy rollers to keep their chastity fetish out of the schools, and instead focus programs on proven, practical approaches. Unfortunately, many of the same people who most vocally pretend to care about fetal lives, when it comes to abortion criminalization, have also been in favor of promoting the failed abstinence-only focus in sex ed, rather than approaches that emphasize contraception.



Extramarital sex is taboo within many churches, including those that have played the biggest role in trying to pervert our law into criminalizing the choice to end a pregnancy. The reason that such a large share of anti-choice activists don't focus on these other means I've discussed to decrease fetal deaths is that they don't want to diminish the punishment of those who break their sex taboo. They think sex should be about procreation, and unwanted pregnancies are righteous punishment for those who choose to have sex for other reasons, meaning anything that makes that experience less punishing is suspect, from their perspective.
Click to expand...

I can't carry on this conversation any longer, what the oman is carrying is a child when people are pregnant they do not say you should have felt the fetus kick or what sex do you thing the fetus is. That term is used to ease the aching soul of baby killers who know they are doing wrong
 
Abortion is a necessity.

Every fucking Trumpanzee on this forum should have been aborted.
Their mothers should be arrested for not aborting.

I personally don't think that it's too late.
 
Wolverine said:
I can't carry on this conversation any longer...
Click to expand...
Yes, that tends to happen when people are defeated this soundly in a debate.

what the oman is carrying is a child
Click to expand...

No, it's a fetus.

when people are pregnant they do not say you should have felt the fetus kick or what sex do you thing the fetus is
Click to expand...

People also refer to their pets as their "kids" and their "babies." That doesn't make it so.

Still, we needn't bog down in semantics. If you want to call fetuses babies, or unicorns, for that matter, the issue is still the same: if you are genuinely concerned about preventing unnecessary deaths of fetuses, there are a large number of policy options for that which do not require hijacking our criminal law to punish women. You can support any number of policies that would make the left your ardent allies. You should ask yourself why you'd rather spend your money punishing women than, say, helping them to prevent unwanted pregnancies or to succeed in carrying wanted pregnancies to term.
 
rjhenn said:
If you only support such things through charity, then you really don't support them at all.
Click to expand...
Oh really?? Then let's add in a national church tax to make supporting churches across America "real" support, since "only supporting through charity" is "not really supporting at all"... Would THAT be more up your alley? ;) ;)

Do you even realize how many millions of people choose to support an insane amount of different things purely through charity?? It IS real support, dude... as opposed to what you propose, which isn't even support at all, but rather, compulsion...


rjhenn said:
That seems to be the norm for pro-lifers, care about the life until birth, but after that, it's on its own, somebody else's problem.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Nice of you to admit that it is life.

You do realize that I am not opposed to those things themselves, but simply the method of their implementation, right??
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
After reading this thread, I believe I've come a possibility that we should all consider.

Taking into account the number of times she's expressed her hatred for Whites, her detest of children, her failures in life, and her obvious self loathing, I've arrived at the possible conclusion.

It is possible that the Living Victim (LV) was raped, by a white man, prior to Roe vs Wade and her very religious family refused to allow her to have an abortion, then after the birth of the child, the family cared for it and accepted it into the family; but the Living Victim viewed the child as a betrayal, by her family, and then went down a part of wrong choices, which has caused the many failures in the life of the Living Victim, due to her family probably blaming her for the rape and continually pointing out that she should have stayed away from the people and places that they warned her of.

The final result of this, is why the Living Victim abhors children and why she blames whites for her miserable existence.

Instead of trying to reason with her, the Living Victim should be pitied and everyone should wish for her hopeful return to being a productive person, along with her finally coming to terms with her pain and her negative outlook on life in general.

I suggest professional help for her, even at this late stage of her life.
Click to expand...

And even Christie is groaning over the terrible emotional pain that the Living Victim (LV) must be experiencing.

Good job Christie. :good4u:
 
gfm7175 said:
No one, but you're still missing the point... I am being forced to accept that murdering unborn children is perfectly fine. My choice to live in a state which bans it has been taken away by roe v wade...

That's the problem with legislating morality on a national level (unconstitutionally, I might add) rather than on a state level.
Click to expand...

It's currently legal and you still don't accept it. Who's forcing you to do anything? What does your proximity to abortion have to do with anything?
 
Oneuli said:
No. As you're aware, nobody here is speaking in favor of killing babies. We're talking about fetuses, not babies.
Click to expand...

science says shut the fuck up.......

If you HONESTLY cared about fetal lives
Click to expand...

on the other hand, if you honestly cared about human fetal lives you wouldn't kill them and cut them into tiny pieces......

Where do you think the US ranks, globally, for infant mortality? Provide a specific number, please.
Click to expand...

in the top 5%......right where you would expect them to be......

fewer fetuses dying needlessly.
Click to expand...
are you pretending that mothers killing their unborn children isn't the number one cause of fetal mortality?......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top