Yep, gay marriage will definitely ruin the institution of marriage </sarcasm>

apple0154 said:
Are you bitching because I referred to something from a link you posted? You really are losing it, Freedom.

Here's what you asked.
Prove that every child born into poverty will be abused and/or neglected.
Prove that every child born to a single parent will be abused and/or neglected.
Prove that every child born, that wasn't planned, will be abused and/or neglected.

No, not every child. Let's use an analogy. Parents warn and stop children from running into the street. Why? Is every child that runs into the street going to get hit by a car? Probably not but the likelihood is much greater if they do.

Try to do some research. From poor school performance to gang membership to prisons check out the background of such children/young adults. And let's not forget the majority of those who oppose abortion also oppose social programs to help those kids.

Responsibility. Self-reliance. I'm sure you're familiar with those words spoken by Conservatives who don't give a damn about children.

Get your social programs in order before insisting more children be brought into the world. Support for young and single mothers. Activities and counseling for children from impoverished homes or, better yet, deal with the condition of impoverished homes.

Sex education, free condoms; whether or not the parents consent.

Before we give a child a pet we ensure the child can take care of it but you advocate people should have children when they have explicitly stated they don't want a child. That, my internet loony, is a big no-no. :nono:
Click to expand...

I can always tell when you struggle, in your attempt to appear to be right, and that's when your answers try to spin away from what was asked.

You keep promoting that children born into poverty will be neglected and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.
You keep promoting that children born into a single parent family will be negleted and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.
You keep promoting that children born into a family that didn't plan on the birth, will be neglected and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.

You also have failed to respond to what should have happened to all those pregnancies that occured during the great depression.

All you do is paint everything and everyone with the same big paint brush and when you're asked to prove that everyone deserves to be covered by the same brush, all you do is trot somemore rhetoric in an attempt to save your failed presentation.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Gee, I'm not sure that I want to allow you to move this to an area that makes you more comfortable.

Since your answer was "not every child", which Apple seems to promote is going to occur.
How is that determination made, so that "not every child" falls into that catagory?

I notice, just like Apple, you made the choice to avoid the statement about all the children born during the depression. Are you of the opinion that all those "poor people" should have aborted the pregnancies that occured, during that time period?
Click to expand...

i try to avoid the use of words like all or every

i do not think that every child born during the great depression should have been aborted - but, having said that it may have been better than raising children in a situation where poor nutrition will damage them and their mothers

however, if the parents could provide for their children then go ahead and have them

also, abortions were much more difficult and dangerous during that time period

and contraception was difficult to come by and chancy
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Then why is it so hard for you to address the following:

"Prove that every child born into poverty will be abused and/or neglected.
Prove that every child born to a single parent will be abused and/or neglected.
Prove that every child born, that wasn't planned, will be abused and/or neglected."
Click to expand...

I did address your questions in a previous post.

Do you also support this:

"By your standards, the majority of the children born during the time period of 1929 to almost 1940 should have been aborted."
Click to expand...

I wasn't around during the depression so I can't make a blanket statement, HOWEVER, those who had no home, no money for food and clothing, those who lived as vagrants.....yes, they should not have brought children into it.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I can always tell when you struggle, in your attempt to appear to be right, and that's when your answers try to spin away from what was asked.

You keep promoting that children born into poverty will be neglected and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.
You keep promoting that children born into a single parent family will be negleted and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.
You keep promoting that children born into a family that didn't plan on the birth, will be neglected and abused; but yet are unable to prove that this is a standard.

You also have failed to respond to what should have happened to all those pregnancies that occured during the great depression.

All you do is paint everything and everyone with the same big paint brush and when you're asked to prove that everyone deserves to be covered by the same brush, all you do is trot somemore rhetoric in an attempt to save your failed presentation.
Click to expand...

You're starting to bore me. Research statistics on children born into poverty and neglect.

There is no broad brush being used. Whether ALL children born into such circumstances will suffer or SOME will suffer the solution is to keep abortion a choice so the prospective parent can decide what's best. Surely you're able to grasp that one sentence.
 
Schadenfreude said:
i try to avoid the use of words like all or every

i do not think that every child born during the great depression should have been aborted - but, having said that it may have been better than raising children in a situation where poor nutrition will damage them and their mothers

however, if the parents could provide for their children then go ahead and have them

also, abortions were much more difficult and dangerous during that time period

and contraception was difficult to come by and chancy
Click to expand...

But what about how the poor little children suffered, through all those years of poverty and hunger and many them were unable to be supported by their parents?
 
apple0154 said:
I did address your questions in a previous post.



I wasn't around during the depression so I can't make a blanket statement, HOWEVER, those who had no home, no money for food and clothing, those who lived as vagrants.....yes, they should not have brought children into it.
Click to expand...

So you're only interested in circumstances that occur during your time period; but you are promoting that The dust bowl immigrants should have remained childless.

Are you also pushing for large abortion clinics for most of Africa and India?
 
apple0154 said:
You're starting to bore me. Research statistics on children born into poverty and neglect.

There is no broad brush being used. Whether ALL children born into such circumstances will suffer or SOME will suffer the solution is to keep abortion a choice so the prospective parent can decide what's best. Surely you're able to grasp that one sentence.
Click to expand...

I never challanged whether abortion should be available or not.
What I was challanging was your stupid conclusion that every child aborted was because it was unwanted and therefore Would be abused and neglected.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So you're only interested in circumstances that occur during your time period; but you are promoting that The dust bowl immigrants should have remained childless.
Click to expand...

It depends on the individual circumstances.

Are you also pushing for large abortion clinics for most of Africa and India?
Click to expand...

Absolutely! The option must be available for everyone. Also, public service info/education should be stepped up.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I never challanged whether abortion should be available or not.
What I was challanging was your stupid conclusion that every child aborted was because it was unwanted and therefore Would be abused and neglected.
Click to expand...

Huh? What's stupid about that conclusion? Obviously someone who has an abortion does not want a child.

As I mentioned before we have more concern over animals than we do children. We wouldn't think about giving someone a dog or cat who didn't want a pet because they wouldn't look after it properly. Why would we force someone to bear a child who doesn't want a child?
 
apple0154 said:
It depends on the individual circumstances.



Absolutely! The option must be available for everyone. Also, public service info/education should be stepped up.
Click to expand...

No shit; but you promote vast amoiunts of abortions, based on the possibility that circumstances will occur.
That is what makes you appear to be an idiot.

Just think; with abortion clinics in Africa and India, poverty could be wiped out in around 30 years.
This would occur; because there would be no people left to be in poverty.
You would make the British Empire builders, the White Power groups, and those who believe in Genetics, so proud.
 
apple0154 said:
Huh? What's stupid about that conclusion? Obviously someone who has an abortion does not want a child.

As I mentioned before we have more concern over animals than we do children. We wouldn't think about giving someone a dog or cat who didn't want a pet because they wouldn't look after it properly. Why would we force someone to bear a child who doesn't want a child?
Click to expand...

How nice that you equate children with animal; because it says more about you, then you realize.

You're stupid; because you continue to promote the idea that every child born into poverty will be unwanted, abused, and neglected.
It shows how much of an idiot you are.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
No shit; but you promote vast amoiunts of abortions, based on the possibility that circumstances will occur.
That is what makes you appear to be an idiot.

Just think; with abortion clinics in Africa and India, poverty could be wiped out in around 30 years.
This would occur; because there would be no people left to be in poverty.
You would make the British Empire builders, the White Power groups, and those who believe in Genetics, so proud.
Click to expand...

The only idiot is one who is not able to draw logical conclusions.

When there is a shortage of food/services less people will allow those who are here to have more. Only an idiot would conclude everyone would abort.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
How nice that you equate children with animal; because it says more about you, then you realize.

You're stupid; because you continue to promote the idea that every child born into poverty will be unwanted, abused, and neglected.
It shows how much of an idiot you are.
Click to expand...

Again, talking about idiots I said people have more concern for animals than they do for people.

You really do have difficulty with comprehension, don't you?
 
apple0154 said:
The only idiot is one who is not able to draw logical conclusions.

When there is a shortage of food/services less people will allow those who are here to have more. Only an idiot would conclude everyone would abort.
Click to expand...

But those in Africa and India would have to abort, seeing as how the food crises is becoming more drastic and according to you; no one should bring a child into such a situation.
 
apple0154 said:
Again, talking about idiots I said people have more concern for animals than they do for people.

You really do have difficulty with comprehension, don't you?
Click to expand...

Don't try to change your direction now.
You've brought animals into the discussion, way to many times, and attempted to make the comparisons.


You still haven't explained how you acquired the special ability, that allows you to do a pre-diagnostic decision as to which children will automatically be ignored and abused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top