Wait On That Abortion

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Not really. At least not in the way the term is used in general -- "pro-life" positions do not leave room for women to make decisions about their own bodies. The "pro-life" position (unless you're using it in a personal abstract, and not the common way we know it) wants to have people completely uninvolved in the situation (legislators) making choices for women, rather than women making them for themselves.

In that way, the "pro-life" position as it's generally understood does not leave room for the pro-choice position at all, because it inherently erases choice -- that's basically the main feature of the entire position.

Exactly. Not only that, you'd be surprised how many people who are "pro-life" have no problem with an abortion for someone who was raped or incest...yet if it is murder, it is murder in that case as well.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Exactly. Not only that, you'd be surprised how many people who are "pro-life" have no problem with an abortion for someone who was raped or incest...yet if it is murder, it is murder in that case as well.

That shows the degree emotion is involved in this topic. As I've said, I cannot supporting forcing women to have a child by legislation but I'm still very uneasy with the number of abortions in this country...I didn't take the time to do the math but easily over 40 million since "Roe"...that's a staggering total!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

... pro choice people aren't necessarily pro-abortion. they may be pro-mind your business, let another person make up their mind type people, ....

Precisely. To say someone who is in favor of abortion being legal doesn't mean they are not pro-life. I'm anti-abortion, but completely pro-choice. I absolutely will defend a woman's right to not have my opinion interfere in her life, and her choice of legal health care.

It reminds me of when Bush stuck his stupid, arrogant, government nose into Terry Schiavo's life. I am sick of this generally Republican attitude of thinking that the purpose of government is to control the lives, ethics and morals of others! Government has no business in such interference.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

About 130,000 women...in one year and that's assuming they are the only ones (those having multiple abortions not being considered). As I said, "many", I'm not being critical of their decisions, it's their choice, but it is using abortion as a birth control method.

That is a tiny number (compared to what I expected)

[Riot]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

That makes you "pro-choice."

The pro-choice position leaves room for the other side, and those opposed to abortion to not have them, because it's their choice.

The anti-choice position does not leave room for the other side.

Well stated. That is also known as "Big Government Takeover Of Individual Healthcare"

[Riot]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

That shows the degree emotion is involved in this topic. As I've said, I cannot supporting forcing women to have a child by legislation but I'm still very uneasy with the number of abortions in this country...I didn't take the time to do the math but easily over 40 million since "Roe"...that's a staggering total!

It would be nice if some in our government wouldn't take away programs teaching sex education & birth control classes, and organizations that prevent pregnancy like Planned Parenthood.

[Cannon Shell]

This thread proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only should abortion be legal, it should be practiced more often.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Riot

It would be nice if some in our government wouldn't take away programs teaching sex education & birth control classes, and organizations that prevent pregnancy like Planned Parenthood.

According to Republican rants, Planned Parenthood is nothing but abortion clinics, this is obviously not the case but folks accept that nonsense as fact. I admit that it disturbs me that the most vocal critics of a woman's right to make her own decision are opposed to education in birth control and likewise offer few if any alternatives.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

40 years after roe v wade, and people still want to make it the #1 issue. it's not. if you don't believe in it, don't get one. otherwise, myofb.

Since abortion = murder, would you then postulate:

"If you don't believe in murder, don't commit one?"

It doesn't quite sound the same, does it?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I admit that it disturbs me that the most vocal critics of a woman's right to make her own decision are opposed to education in birth control and likewise offer few if any alternatives.

Uh, how about self-control and preparation? They sell condoms at every pharmacy and convenience store these days. You can be good to go with a three minute delay and about $1 in cost.

Here's an answer until we get a full reversal of the lunacy of the "Roe v. Wade" decision: make the price of abortion high, around a half-million dollars for instance, with no taxpayer involvement. If you screw up, you can get a loan and eventually pay it off like a mortgage or a college education - both of which you'll probably never see. But it's amazing what responsibility emerges in an individual when there is a strong financial reason for it. "Unlimited abortions for free" under Obamacare is the exact opposite of the theoretical plan proposed above.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

who the hell is pro death?

Just the pro-abortion crowd.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

They don't kill babies they abort a fetus.

That's the same thing. Here's why:

1 sperm + 1 egg becomes 1 fertilized zygote (a singular human cell that has a distinctly different genetic code than the mother and the father).

That zygote will immediately begin the process of replicating and growing. Without interference it will eventually become a human infant in 9 months, which is why people invented the procedure of abortion in the first place.

This also leads to the inescapable scientific conclusion that life begins at conception based on:

the unique DNA, the immediate and sustained growth in volume and complexity, and the fact that prior to conception, no one organism can exist in two pieces.

Progression is:
Zygote -> Blastocyst -> Embryo -> Fetus -> Infant

As anyone knows who has seen CSI or the O.J. Simpson Trial, among other examples, a unique DNA series corresponds to a unique individual. If you find a DNA sample at a crime scene that does not match your current list of suspects, the correct conclusion is that you need to keep looking for a yet unknown individual.

So, unfortunately for the pro-abortion crowd, the fetus, by definition, is someone else's "body". Stating it again, in any human, all non-reproductive cells have 46 chromosomes (the bundles that DNA is arranged in), and, of those non-reproductive cells, all of them match the code of DNA in each other.

The two exceptions are
1) a pregnant female since the child in her womb has his/her own DNA series and
2) God forbid, a cancerous mutation in an adult of either sex.

The unique DNA, the "blueprint" for our construction, signals a unique individual. Legalisms will not obscure or circumvent that truth. Every abortion that has ever taken place was the taking of a life. Sometimes that might have been necessary to save a mother's life. But to whatever extent it was not necessary and was "chosen", it was a pre-meditated murder committed by the would-be mother with the doctor as an accessory.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's the same thing. Here's why:

1 sperm + 1 egg becomes 1 fertilized zygote (a singular human cell that has a distinctly different genetic code than the mother and the father).

That zygote will immediately begin the process of replicating and growing. Without interference it will eventually become a human infant in 9 months, which is why people invented the procedure of abortion in the first place.

This also leads to the inescapable scientific conclusion that life begins at conception based on:

the unique DNA, the immediate and sustained growth in volume and complexity, and the fact that prior to conception, no one organism can exist in two pieces.

Progression is:
Zygote -> Blastocyst -> Embryo -> Fetus -> Infant

As anyone knows who has seen CSI or the O.J. Simpson Trial, among other examples, a unique DNA series corresponds to a unique individual. If you find a DNA sample at a crime scene that does not match your current list of suspects, the correct conclusion is that you need to keep looking for a yet unknown individual.

So, unfortunately for the pro-abortion crowd, the fetus, by definition, is someone else's "body". Stating it again, in any human, all non-reproductive cells have 46 chromosomes (the bundles that DNA is arranged in), and, of those non-reproductive cells, all of them match the code of DNA in each other.

The two exceptions are
1) a pregnant female since the child in her womb has his/her own DNA series and
2) God forbid, a cancerous mutation in an adult of either sex.

The unique DNA, the "blueprint" for our construction, signals a unique individual. Legalisms will not obscure or circumvent that truth. Every abortion that has ever taken place was the taking of a life. Sometimes that might have been necessary to save a mother's life. But to whatever extent it was not necessary and was "chosen", it was a pre-meditated murder committed by the would-be mother with the doctor as an accessory.

You are wrong however it is a great cut and paste job.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

You are wrong however it is a great cut and paste job.

Cut and paste from where? I assure the post is original.

Thanks for enumerating the points where my argument is misguided.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Interesting! I've known several young women who used abortion as exactly that. One of my best friends when I returned to school in 1971 after my tour of duty in the army had at least 4 abortions, her mindset being it was her preferred method of birth control. Over the years I have known several more women who have had multiple abortions...all would say it was "birth control".

I think those girls are as sick as serial killers.

I'm pro nothing. I dont think abortion is a good thing but I cant tell anyone what to do with their own body. Rape, under 18, medical problems, go for it and it should be paid by healthcare.

If you are using abortion as a means of birth control it should break your bank account (cost tens of thousands) and you should have your tubes tied mandatory.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I think it is ironic certain pro life people are also blatant homophobes. Fetus's should have rights, but not gays.

Make a lot of sense.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by joeydb

. "Unlimited abortions for free" under Obamacare .

I cant possibly believe that this statement is true.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I cant possibly believe that this statement is true.

Well, I don't know any better than you do what form ObamaCare will ultimately take if not repealed. But there are articles stating that it could happen.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....ding-has-begun

Even if there are no abortion-specific restrictions, I concede that there might be a lifetime cap on medical expenditure per patient in general, and that the abortions would be limited alongside other medical procedures in that way.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Well, I don't know any better than you do what form ObamaCare will ultimately take if not repealed. But there are articles stating that it could happen.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....ding-has-begun

Even if there are no abortion-specific restrictions, I concede that there might be a lifetime cap on medical expenditure per patient in general, and that the abortions would be limited alongside other medical procedures in that way.

abortion should only be considered a health care problem if the woman was raped, under 18 or could die from complications from pregnancy.

If a woman gets pregnant and CHOOSES abortion, it should not be considered a health care problem, and she should pay big bucks out of her own pocket.

[Antitrust32]

Also I dont really understand why we call it ObamaCare. I dont think Obama had any real input. Neither did the Senate since they just slipped it through in a shady way. It's really PelosiCare... which is much worse.