• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the best way of decreasing the abortion rates?[W:118]

RamFel said:
IT is true. That's why I keep saying it. It has NOTHING to do with the abortion debate.

We have to get the focus off the women and on the Baby. That''s where the real issue is.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with it. And no, with the abortion there is never a baby at all.
 
RamFel said:
So it sounds like you have never seen a dead baby before.

Click this and scroll down a bit on this link. It's the main reason why I am against abortion. And note the note above the photo. Sick! Are these the kind of people you love to support?

Abortionist Kept Dead Babies in Storage Unit | ClinicQuotes
Click to expand...

But even if some late abortions take place, that is not the reality of abortion because most abortions take place far before a real body is formed.
 
Peter King said:
But even if some late abortions take place, that is not the reality of abortion because most abortions take place far before a real body is formed.
Click to expand...

What qualifies as a real body?
 
Peter King said:
But even if some late abortions take place, that is not the reality of abortion because most abortions take place far before a real body is formed.
Click to expand...
What is it before it's real? A cartoon?
 
Henrin said:
What qualifies as a real body?
Click to expand...
I have to wonder about pro-choice...they don't think a fetus is real until it's born. It bogles the mind.

Although I have to give credit for originality, I haven't heard "the fetus is imaginary until it's born" argument before.
 
Scrabaholic said:
28 pages in and no anti choicers have promoted this as the best way of decreasing the number of abortions.....
Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:
But it's no surprise, Scraba. Anti-Choice are hell bent on pushing for laws to be used to coerce and undermine women's rights. It's all about control for them. Liberty for all...is not their friend. Authoritarianism is totally their MO. They thrive on it.
Click to expand...

Hi friends. I can't help but notice you're myopically ignoring reality again.

Would you like some help with that? Why golly, sure, I will be right happy to repeat myself for the eleventy zillionth time. It certainly doesn't get annoying having to do so, at all. No, sir.

a) No one has a right to kill another human being in aggression, ever, so prohibiting such killing could never violate anyone's rights.
b) Laws against homicide are not authoritarianism; they are part of the minimal state possible, a night watchman state.
c) Making [a laundry list] of goods and services "free on demand" is not a viable option for anyone who opposes socialism. Unlike you two, who both sit on the far left of the economic spectrum, many of us here do not believe in using tax dollars to buy goods or services for individual citizens.

TANSTAAFL. It's not "free" at all - we pay for it. And we should never have to buy you things at gunpoint, as that is ethically wrong.
 
Jerry said:
And that's your mistake :) our conversation didn't involve you at all.
Click to expand...

LMAO wrong again since the thread proves i didnt butt into your conversation you butted into mine, hopefully in the future you can avoid this mistake
facts win again
 
JayDubya said:
Hi friends. I can't help but notice you're myopically ignoring reality again.

Would you like some help with that? Why golly, sure, I will be right happy to repeat myself for the eleventy zillionth time. It certainly doesn't get annoying having to do so, at all. No, sir.

a) No one has a right to kill another human being in aggression, ever, so prohibiting such killing could never violate anyone's rights.
b) Laws against homicide are not authoritarianism; they are part of the minimal state possible, a night watchman state.
c) Making [a laundry list] of goods and services "free on demand" is not a viable option for anyone who opposes socialism. Unlike you two, who both sit on the far left of the economic spectrum, many of us here do not believe in using tax dollars to buy goods or services for individual citizens.

TANSTAAFL. It's not "free" at all - we pay for it. And we should never have to buy you things at gunpoint, as that is ethically wrong.
Click to expand...

another failed starwman. nobody is talking about a right to kill LMAO please stay on topic
as usual your post completely fails since its based on a mentally inane and failed strawman
 
JayDubya said:
All humans, including the ones you want to see dead and the ones your liker has violently killed.
Click to expand...

two more failed strawmen that you cant support
 
Jerry said:
I have to wonder about pro-choice...they don't think a fetus is real until it's born. It bogles the mind.

Although I have to give credit for originality, I haven't heard "the fetus is imaginary until it's born" argument before.
Click to expand...

That's probably due to the fact that you just imagined it.
 
Manc Skipper said:
That's probably due to the fact that you just imagined it.
Click to expand...

Maybe you can help explain what qualifies as a real body. Is there a such thing as a fake body? Is it like ghost in the shell?
 
Henrin said:
Maybe you can help explain what qualifies as a real body. Is there a such thing as a fake body? Is it like ghost in the shell?
Click to expand...

Thanks, now I'll have Inner Universe in my head all day. :)
 
AGENT J said:
LMAO wrong again since the thread proves i didnt butt into your conversation you butted into mine, hopefully in the future you can avoid this mistake
facts win again
Click to expand...
Hmm I don't see your name on the posts I was quoting. You should probably read the thread before assuming it supports your position. Anyway, did you have a better definition of the word "everyone"?
 
Jerry said:
Hmm I don't see your name on the posts I was quoting. You should probably read the thread before assuming it supports your position. Anyway, did you have a better definition of the word "everyone"?
Click to expand...

correct thats why you shoulda butted out thanks for proving me right . . again
facts win again
 
RamFel said:
IT is true. That's why I keep saying it. It has NOTHING to do with the abortion debate.

We have to get the focus off the women and on the Baby. That''s where the real issue is.
Click to expand...


If you want to decrease abortions the focus needs to be ON the women and prevention of unwanted pregnancy.

The only way the focus on the fetus works is if you want to figure out how to turn the unwanted pregnancy into a wanted one. The only tactic I have seen thus far is fingerwagging, calling women murderers and such. That has not worked .

So the focus back on the women and prevention of unwanted pregnancy is where the payoff is.

Heck, it should be on the men as well - they should have their own long term birth control methods.
 
RamFel said:
We have to get the focus off the women and on the Baby. That''s where the real issue is.
Click to expand...

BOOM! and there it is
its actually about TWO lives not just ONE like you want it to be . . . BUT this is par for the course for SOME pro-life people, they view pregnant women as lessers and their legal and human rights dont matter
 
Jerry said:
The statment was "equal rights for women". Do you not think women are born?

"Equal rights for <group>" is a contradiction. Equality requires that everyone have the same rights, not just women.
Click to expand...

OK.

You took it out of context.

But your comment is fine as a standalone.
 
Jerry said:
Everyone - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Click to expand...

LOL Well that works for me, or are you taking this out of context too?

It says that everyone is all persons. I'll go along with that, since that exactly what I implied.

Here's the definition of 'person' to support your definition of 'everyone.'

U.S. Code § 8 - “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant

1 U.S. Code § 8 -

(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.
 
Last edited:
RamFel said:
It's not dishonest at all.
Click to expand...
Of course it is. Only in your world are lies, exaggerations and misrepresentations not dishonest, but in the real world they are.

But since you raise the question I really have to ask you if you really believe the horse manure that you shovel?
Click to expand...
It takes a special level of ignorance to call facts and reality horse manure. The hypocrisy of your post is just the added bonus.

I find that hard to believe since it is wrong.
Click to expand...
Obviously, facts and reality do present a challenge to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom