Pro lifers show no mercy

Because I dont waste irrational and unnatural emotions on the developing tissue inside women that may never even be born, it's quite clear to me why it should be illegal for other people to tell a woman what to do with her body.

its obvious you waste no emotion on children.....
 
do you distinguish based on motive when you say a woman should be free to kill her unborn children?......less than 5% of abortions have anything to do with rape, incest, or the health of the mother, yet that is the only thing you want to talk about.......

It shows how little you value you women and their rights when you think that an abortion and the decision to have one is 'a whim.' As the pro-lifer Truth Detector posted, most women have abortions to preserve their futures.....getting more education, developing jobs/careers, maintaining healthy relationships (cuz bad relationships create dysfunctional families and abused kids), or they cant afford them and need to do something irresponsible to survive....like take public assistance.

Thankfully, the law does NOT allow you to decide that a woman has to sacrifice all that...even tho apparently you believe you have the right to do so.

That, and the fact that you still irrationally refer to 'children' when the bearer does not.

Funny, you cut out the part of the post where that was explained quite clearly to you.

Did you have some motor skill issue? Couldnt comprehend the words? Chose to ignore them? Hey, it's multiple choice...go for it!
 
its obvious you waste no emotion on children.....

Again, you are unable to separate reality from unborn.

I know and love many children. Apparently you attempt to do so to clumps of unreachable tissue inside of women you dont even know.

Very very creepy. Yucky, actually.
 
Funny, you cut out the part of the post where that was explained quite clearly to you.

I only cut out the stupid parts......they don't need to abandon their education, career or health.....all they have to do is let someone who doesn't want to kill children adopt the child......
 
nice try.....saying her right to life can supersede the child's right to life is not the same as saying all her rights supersede those of the child......

Sorreh....Mr. Mayor (is it Dog Catcher? Selectman? Governor?)...what ever office, it easily comes down the the risks to her health and life.

And you have no right to tell her what risks to take with her life. Professionally, familial, financially, and most basic of all....her right to life.
 
is it impossible to get an education while you're pregnant?......why would you think getting pregnant is going to prevent it?.......the maximum sacrifice the woman will have to undergo is the nine months between getting pregnant and putting the child up for adoption......most women aren't even aware they are pregnant for the first one or two months......lets make it seven......

Not even relevant.

You do not have the right to tell her what risks she should take with her life and future health. They are significant....you may minimize them but that is just a mark of disrespect. One that you have not been able to substantiate by telling me what risks to your life you'd take on demand by a stranger or authority?
 
I only cut out the stupid parts......they don't need to abandon their education, career or health.....all they have to do is let someone who doesn't want to kill children adopt the child......

Not even relevant.

You do not have the right to tell her what risks she should take with her life and future health. They are significant....you may minimize them but that is just a mark of disrespect. One that you have not been able to substantiate by telling me what risks to your life you'd take on demand by a stranger or authority?

..........................
 
and we've already established from the data collected that she's safer carrying the child to term than having an abortion.......why do you keep ignoring that?.......

The risks to life and health are not up to YOU to decide. WHy do you keep ignoring that?

"what risks to your life that you didnt believe in would you take take on demand by a stranger or authority?"
 
by telling me what risks to your life you'd take on demand by a stranger or authority?

I would expect that authority to tell me I may not kill anyone unless there is a risk to my life......and that is what the authorities tell both me and the pregnant woman......
 
do you seriously think it isn't a reality that the unborn child is a living human?......

Potentially, only maybe.

Therefore, it should not take precedence over the established rights of a already born woman.

Keep trying to squirm your way around it. Omsbudsman? Schoolboard? Director of Public Services? Oh Oh Oh, I know! Director of Welfare!
 
The risks to life and health are not up to YOU to decide. WHy do you keep ignoring that?

"what risks to your life that you didnt believe in would you take take on demand by a stranger or authority?"

telling a pregnant woman she cannot have an abortion simply is not creating any risk to her life, except in those rare situations where she has always been permitted and still would be permitted to have an abortion........your strawman has been burned to ashes several times already......live with it....
 
I would expect that authority to tell me I may not kill anyone unless there is a risk to my life......and that is what the authorities tell both me and the pregnant woman......

Except with abortion. Where, as we've established, that fetus does not have rights that supersede the woman's.

You never did tell me of ANY instances where we allow killing a baby (by definition, born) to protect the mother's life or save her from severe mental anguish after rape.
 
Except with abortion. Where, as we've established, that fetus does not have rights that supersede the woman's.

we certainly have NOT established that, except to the extent that the current law denies protection of the rights of the unborn child......the child's right to life supersedes ALL of the woman's rights except her own right to life.....
 
telling a pregnant woman she cannot have an abortion simply is not creating any risk to her life, except in those rare situations where she has always been permitted and still would be permitted to have an abortion........your strawman has been burned to ashes several times already......live with it....

Not remotely burned. I have (at least) 3 people in my life that died in childbirth. Most recently, a friend's wife, her 2nd child...they both died in childbirth...no signs, no medical issues up to that point....

It's not just anecdotal, it IS statistical and it is NOT insignificant. Most importantly, it is not up to YOU or any govt authority to DECIDE if a woman should take that risk or the risk of lifelong health complications.

Again...tell me in what circumstances that would be acceptable for you? To force you to take a risk that could kill you or damage your health for life?
 
we certainly have NOT established that, except to the extent that the current law denies protection of the rights of the unborn child......the child's right to life supersedes ALL of the woman's rights except her own right to life.....

Most pro-lifers accept it for cases of rape and incest...so?
 
Back
Top