whatdrought Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: Yes. As soon as a fetus becomes viable I think abortion is no different than murduring a baby. I've never much cared for the viability argument because it assumes that someone's viability is determined by someone else not killing them... Essentially we're saying that if it's 19 weeks we can kill it, but if we accidentally get the dates wrong and it hits 20 weeks (literally 7 days, 168 hours later) then it's a human and killing it is wrong. If I leave my neighbor alone, their life is viable and they'll keep living, but if I shoot him in the face all the sudden he isn't so viable. How is that different? I assume you see it so because it's the woman's body, but there are a ton of people dependent on other people, and we don't give them wholesale permission to kill them. If viability means not dependent on other people, then most aren't until they're 18 years old... many even later. Edited May 18, 2019 by whatdrought
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said: Even with people like DC Tom who claims he is pro choice but not for himself, only for others. What the ***** is this preternatural stupidity? I believe everyone but me should be able to make their own moral determination? 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: The most premature surviving baby was born at 21 weeks. This is her at four years old. I always said just throw me in a dumpster as a baby instead of aborting me as there's always the chance I'll be found and live a normal life. I don't like to chastise people who are pro choice though as they believe they are morally correct in advocating for the rights of a woman to do what they want with their body. And how much did it cost to keep her alive at 21 weeks? This will become a "controlling health care costs" issue at some point soon. The age of viability will be determined by how much the medical services costs to keep the premature baby alive. Honestly surprised it hasn't gone there yet.
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: What the ***** is this preternatural stupidity? I believe everyone but me should be able to make their own moral determination? Read again.
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 Just now, 3rdnlng said: Read again. I read it three times. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: I read it three times. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney. Let me put it this way: I think that you and I come from the same position. I believe that abortion is not for me but that I can't make that decision for other people. It is their decision (up to a point) to make and they'll have to reconcile that with their God. If that is not your position, let me know. Otherwise the only difference between us regarding abortion is what we call ourselves. You call yourself pro choice, I call myself pro life. 1
Doc Brown Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 13 minutes ago, whatdrought said: Its not a tactic to point to the statistical reality of the position. If pro-abortion proponents were to come to the table and say “no abortions except rape and *****” we could have a different conversation. I would still say no, but at least we’d be operating from honesty. But they hide behind that while trying to push their ultimate agenda (hello NY). The problem with an exception is that you’re excusing something that is wrong. My belief and the belief of other pro-life people is that terminating a pregnancy is an unnatural taking of life. Supposing the life was conceived in rape doesn’t change that- it’s the old standard of two wrongs making no rights. Another layer in this conversation is that the left is simultaneously off the deep end in trying to re-define rape and sexual assault. Not to even mention the number of women who would lie about the circumstances involved in the conception... how do you prove that? my bottom line is this. Either it’s always fine or it’s always not. That’s why I was slightly pissed at all the pro-life people losing their ***** about the NY law and VA attempted law.. yeah, given our view it’s a travesty, but it doesn’t matter when they’re being killed... they’re being killed. I was just playing devil's advocate because you said abortions due to rape were rare and the pro choice people use the same rationale by saying late term abortions are rare. There can be laws set up to make it mandatory to report the rape within a certain time period after the occurence in order to qualify for that exemption. 1 minute ago, whatdrought said: I've never much cared for the viability argument because it assumes that someone's viability is determined by someone else not killing them... Essentially we're saying that if it's 19 weeks we can kill it, but if we accidentally get the dates wrong and it hits 20 weeks (literally 7 days, 168 hours later) then it's a human and killing it is wrong. If I leave my neighbor alone, their life is viable and they'll keep living, but if I shoot him in the face all the sudden he isn't so viable. How is that different? I assume you see it so because it's the woman's body, but there are a ton of people dependent on other people, and we don't give them wholesale permission to kill them. Babies aren't viable until they're 18 years old (some much later even). Because there has to be a cutoff at some point. You may believe it's at conception.
whatdrought Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Doc Brown said: I was just playing devil's advocate because you said abortions due to rape were rare and the pro choice people use the same rationale by saying late term abortions are rare. There can be laws set up to make it mandatory to report the rape within a certain time period after the occurence in order to qualify for that exemption. Because there has to be a cutoff at some point. You may believe it's at conception. I gotcha. Late term abortions are rare now because they're illegal most places... so that's kinda a duh. More to the point, they're more than welcome to use that argument. I'm saying no abortion should be plentiful. Meh, seems like a super sketchy place to get into. What do you do with a rape victim who wants an abortion but was too traumatized to report it until she's 25 weeks pregnant? If you don't give her the abortion, you're saying that her plight is less than that of the other women who are allowed to do that if they're not quite as traumatized. If you do give it to her, then you've violated the standard. I think it's all building answers to questions that don't even need to be asked. I've also seen plenty of articles by people who chose life after a rape who are glad and thankful that they did... I've never seen one by someone who chose life and regrets that decision... This also circles back around to adoption and the way that that's all screwed up and shouldn't be. I do believe it is. More to the point, I think the bigger issue is that we're building systems from a broken premise. Nature dictates that a conceived child left alone in the womb will either grow to a full term baby to be born, or else something catastrophic will happen and a miscarriage/stillbirth will occur. Those are literally the only two options that nature provides for the end of a pregnancy. We're the ones that decided the system needed to be modified, and i've honestly never seen a good reason for that.
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2019 Posted May 18, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: I was just playing devil's advocate because you said abortions due to rape were rare and the pro choice people use the same rationale by saying late term abortions are rare. There can be laws set up to make it mandatory to report the rape within a certain time period after the occurence in order to qualify for that exemption. Because there has to be a cutoff at some point. You may believe it's at conception. No exemptions for rape or inncest. Wherever the go/no go cutoff is set separates a legal abortion from a murder. Is it ok to murder a baby because the father was a rapist? Edited May 18, 2019 by 3rdnlng
B-Man Posted May 19, 2019 Posted May 19, 2019 NEW YORK TIMES ON NEW ABORTION LAWS: RALPH NORTHAM WHO? Mr. Trump is using the issue to rouse his base, including the crucial voting bloc of Christian conservatives for whom abortion is an overarching issue. His false statements that Democrats would “execute” newborn babies — which he has repeated on his Twitter feed, during his State of the Union address and at campaign rallies, sometimes as he mimics swaddling a baby — are being picked up and repeated by conservatives all over the country.” Catch that description? That the President is making “false statements that Democrats would ‘execute’ newborn babies.” And right there this story becomes a jewel of an example of left-wing journalism by omission, in this case from the New York Times. Missing entirely from the article was the name of Virginia Democratic Governor Ralph Northam. It was Northam, appearing on a radio show, who stirred the hornets nest by saying this about aborting babies when the mother is in labor. The direct quote was this, as reported here at National Review Online: “If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he continued. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” REMINDER: this isn't just another loudmouth politician, he is a pediatric neurologist Here’s video of Northam uttering those words shortly before his medical school era blackface scandal erupted. Speaking of the latter, as a Times headline noted in early April: ‘‘It Just Went Poof’: The Strange Aftermath of Virginia’s Cascade of Political Scandals. The passive tense in the headline is telling. The Times can keep a story alive when it wants to, such as when the Gray Lady ran nearly 100 stories on the Augusta National Golf Club between 2001 and mid-2003. Similarly, the paper in Northam’s backyard ran approximately 100 stories in the fall of 2006 on George Allen’s “macaca” gaffe. The media’s selective amnesia on Northam’s blackface and endorsement of infanticide might lead a cynical person to conclude that they’re Democratic Party operatives with bylines, or something. . 52Posted a 4
B-Man Posted May 19, 2019 Posted May 19, 2019 Democrat Rep. Pramila Jayapal (WA) says "you can't say you're a Democrat ... if you're against abortion" We’ve come a long way from the Clintonian formulation of “safe, legal, and rare." . 2
B-Man Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 For the posters here who think that the abortion issue favors the democrats 81% of Americans -- including half who are pro-choice -- say abortion should be restricted in the last 3 months of pregnancy Every 2020 Democratic candidate has endorsed abortion up until birth -- with ZERO restrictions Democrats are too radical for their own voters
DC Tom Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 44 minutes ago, B-Man said: For the posters here who think that the abortion issue favors the democrats 81% of Americans -- including half who are pro-choice -- say abortion should be restricted in the last 3 months of pregnancy Every 2020 Democratic candidate has endorsed abortion up until birth -- with ZERO restrictions Democrats are too radical for their own voters "Republican war on women" favors the Democrats. Facts don't matter.
B-Man Posted May 21, 2019 Posted May 21, 2019 (edited) Lila RoseVerified account @LilaGraceRose 8h8 hours ago When you use: Rape In-cest.......................Really, that's blocked ? Disability Poverty Foster care As the reason abortion is necessary, you are telling millions of people who were conceived in, or have overcome these circumstances, that their life is not valuable Our worth as humans isn’t conditional, it is inherent Edited May 21, 2019 by B-Man
B-Man Posted May 21, 2019 Posted May 21, 2019 Abortion activists plan to gather across the nation today to protest state laws that protect unborn babies from abortion. The protests are a response to Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, Missouri and other states that are trying to protect unborn babies by banning or restricting abortions after an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable. They also are drawing attention away from other states like New York and Vermont, which recently passed radical abortion laws legalizing the killing of unborn babies for basically any reason up to birth. Behind the “Stop the Bans” protests are some of the most powerful, well-funded abortion groups in the country: Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, NARAL and the Women’s March, The Hill reports. They are demanding unrestricted abortions up to birth and taxpayer funded abortions. These celebrity ‘boycotts’ of Georgia after heartbeat bill signed into law seem to be softening
DC Tom Posted May 21, 2019 Posted May 21, 2019 29 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: ... What? It actually makes sense. Women I know who've put up their kids for adoption have lived through their lives with the "What if?" and "Did I do the right thing?" and "Is he better off?" and "If I'd kept her, by now she'd be..." questions. Abortion is much more final. Adoption, women carry the knowledge there's a living person out there that they brought into the world, but are not part of their lives, and have to live with being a "mother without motherhood." From all I've seen, it's more difficult to deal with, long-term. 1 1
B-Man Posted May 21, 2019 Posted May 21, 2019 My, How Far We’ve Come. Here’s Where Every 2020 Democratic Presidential Candidate Stands on Late-Term Abortion .
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 21, 2019 Posted May 21, 2019 6 hours ago, DC Tom said: It actually makes sense. Women I know who've put up their kids for adoption have lived through their lives with the "What if?" and "Did I do the right thing?" and "Is he better off?" and "If I'd kept her, by now she'd be..." questions. Abortion is much more final. Adoption, women carry the knowledge there's a living person out there that they brought into the world, but are not part of their lives, and have to live with being a "mother without motherhood." From all I've seen, it's more difficult to deal with, long-term. Nnnnnh. That depends on your definition of long-term.
Recommended Posts