• 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!

The Solution to the Abortion Problem is... [W:398]

VanceMack said:
Yes...I know. You have dehumanized them which is why I think your position that you dont care if 10 million babies a year are aborted because they simply dont matter to you. I respect at least your candor.
Click to expand...

Show where I EVER said they aren't human, or retract.
 
minnie616 said:
As a non profit the Planned Parenthood organization gives no money to political causes.
Private donors give.

From a Fox News article:



Planned Parenthood workers, PACs donated $25M to Dems since 2000 | Fox News

As noted they are two separate entities.

The Planned a Parenthood Medical Clinics ( the one that receives federal funds ) and the Planned Parenthood action Fund ( the political action committee) are separate.

The funds the medical service gets are not a part of the funds that the PAC uses for political purposes.
Click to expand...
:lamo

That ****s funny right there.
 
Scrabaholic said:
No, you know that if you answer, you will lose the debate.
Click to expand...
If you think comparing human to cows is a legit argument, you arent even in the debate. You asked a stupid question.
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo

That ****s funny right there.
Click to expand...

No , private funds are private funds and if donors want to donate to a PAC they can donate to that PAC.

If a private donor wants to donate to an abortion fund they can.

If they want to donate to Prists for life they can.
If they want to donate to right to life PAC to try to elect republicans they can.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
Do I personally believe it boils down to if its a baby? No...I personally believe that it boils human beings impacted by the whole thing. The prospective mother, the unborn child, connected families...hell...society in general. I think we as a society have cheapened all life by our willingness to butcher millions of unborn children as if it just doesnt matter. I think the mentality reflects in murders, in rapes, in poverty rates, in cases of child abuse and neglect. Thats why I believe it matters.
Click to expand...
Assuming that's true, does any of that bad stuff happen when women have tumors removed? No. So these "impacts" you're referring to can only occur when people think it's a baby.

You started out saying no you don't agree with me, but then you ended up totally agreeing with me. :)
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo Classic. Equating the butchering of an unbron child to open heart surgery. **** just keeps getting better and better.
Click to expand...
The only thing classic here is the utter ignorance and mindless emotional drivel in your post.
 
VanceMack said:
If you think comparing human to cows is a legit argument, you arent even in the debate. You asked a stupid question.
Click to expand...

Show where I compared "human (sic) to cows". And while you're at it, you never showed where I said that zefs aren't human.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Not according to pro life zealots...
Click to expand...

I can see the word ''slaughtered'' being harshly used and accurate depending on what method is used to perform the abortion and how long into the pregnancy it's performed.

It's all fine and dandy since that's a word that doesn't matter in the abortion debate and it's useless to try to trap someone into a meaningless game of semantics.

Jay didn't take the bait on that one. :)
 
Last edited:
phattonez said:
And the murder of an unborn child impacts the parents, grandparents, relatives, etc. This isn't hard.
Click to expand...

We know that murder is a term specifically used for the unjustified killing of a person.

I remember a few years back you actually tried to debate the topic and the best you did was try to link ''potentiality'' with personhood and that didn't work out well.

So now you're responses are typical of a K-Strategist organism.
 
minnie616 said:
No , private funds are private funds and if donors want to donate to a PAC they can donate to that PAC.

If a private donor wants to donate to an abortion fund they can.

If they want to donate to Prists for life they can.
If they want to donate to right to life PAC to try to elect republicans they can.
Click to expand...

No...that's just some laugh out loud funny shot for anyone to pretend there is a difference between PP and their PAC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
prometeus said:
The only thing classic here is the utter ignorance and mindless emotional drivel in your post.
Click to expand...

Riiiiiiiight. You and the rest of the lot are foamy over accurate descriptive terms. You are so twisted you can't get out of your own way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Scrabaholic said:
Show where I compared "human (sic) to cows". And while you're at it, you never showed where I said that zefs aren't human.
Click to expand...
The second you infuse this stupid question...

"How many born, breathing, feeling cows were slaughtered for the convenience of people who like to eat meat?"

into a discussion on abortion (ironically...a discussion in which I am not at all threatening your precious political cause) you demonstrate that you cant be taken seriously in the discussion.
 
Peter King said:
I do not understand the rationale of comparing a ZEF of a human to that of a rat.
Click to expand...
AT ABOUT THE TIME MOST ABORTIONS ARE DONE (something I probably should have stated in that other post), no unborn human is as well-developed as a rat. For later-stage unborn humans, I tend to compare them to pigs, because pigs are mentally superior even to just-born humans --and yet we routinely kill pigs, just as we routinely kill rats, entirely because both species are mere-animal entities.

LOGICALLY, if one is not Stupidly Prejudiced, killing an unborn human because it also is a mere-animal entity should not be of any greater concern than killing a rat or a pig. It's not like there is any shortage of rats, pigs, and unborn humans, after all!

Peter King said:
It is obvious that humans at the moment of birth is far superior to that of a rat IMHO.
Click to expand...
SEE ABOVE.

Peter King said:
I can understand how that would be somewhat to very offensive for every women/man who have ever had a child.
Click to expand...
FACTS ARE FACTS. Getting offended because one doesn't like a Fact is not going to change the Fact --something abortion opponents seem to refuse to be willing to learn.

Peter King said:
Not being a person/human being and having no personhoodrights is relevant and objectively correct, but comparing it to a rat fetus is just off putting even for me as a pro-choicer.
Click to expand...
NOT QUALIFYING AS A PERSON IS EXACTLY WHY AN UNBORN HUMAN IS A MERE-ANIMAL ENTITY --of no greater concern than a rat or a pig (and I wasn't talking about the fetal forms of those animals --it is their adult forms that are mentally superior to various unborn humans, yet insufficiently superior to not be routinely killed). So see again the above part that starts with "Facts are Facts"....
 
Bucky said:
You'll have to excuse Future. He isn't pro-choice, he is pro-aboriton.
Click to expand...
A STUPID LIE. I've said multiple times that I'm pro-choice, and that it bothers me not at all if someone chooses to carry a pregnancy to term. Someone who is "pro abortion" would have a different stand, than I.

Bucky said:
He believes abortion is fundamental to reduce the human population.
Click to expand...
FALSE. Abortion is a tool, most useful as a backup plan, effective birth control when ordinary contraceptives fail. There are those who would abuse that tool in the manner you suggest, but I'm not one of them.
 
JayDubya said:
In this case, comparing human beings to rats is
Click to expand...
JUST ANOTHER STUPID LIE SPOUTED BY JAYDUBYA. Unborn humans are not "beings", and you **still** haven't presented the slightest bit of Objectively Verifiable data to support your otherwise-idiotic Positive Claim.

IF YOU ACTUALLY STUDIED THE AVAILABLE FACTS, you might find that ordinary rats are more likely to qualify as "beings" than unborn humans at 12 weeks after conception, when most abortions are done.
 
JayDubya said:
Abortion [is] killing someone else
Click to expand...
STUPIDLY, LYINGLY FALSE. A "someone else" is a person, a "being" --and you have yet to offer the slightest bit of data showing that an unborn human qualifes as a "being". Until you do, abortion of an unwanted unborn human is no worse than killing an unwanted rat.
 
JayDubya said:
NO1CURR, they're cows. They are not a member of a sapient species; they have no rights. They are property.
Click to expand...
HYDATIDIFORM MOLES AND BRAIN-DEAD ADULTS ON LIFE-SUPPORT ARE MEMBERS OF A SAPIENT SPECIES, BUT YOU BIGOTEDLY WOULD DENY THEM RIGHTS.
AND TRUE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES WILL DESERVE RIGHTS BUT NOT BELONG TO ANY SAPIENT SPECIES.
The above was quoted/written to point out the Fact that you actually do not have a valid rationale for assigning some entity rights. All you have ever exhibited is Stupid Prejudice and Ignorance and Bigotry.
 
VanceMack said:
You can reduce them all you like.
Click to expand...
NOT NECESSARY. THEY ARE WHAT THEY ARE, mere-animal entities that act worse than ordinary parasites.

VanceMack said:
You can dehumanized them all you like.
Click to expand...
NOT NECESSARY. Plenty of human criminals have been sentenced to death over the millennia, for actions that many prosecutors have called "parasitic upon Society".

VanceMack said:
It won't change reality.
Click to expand...
FACTS ARE FACTS. ONE ASPECT OF REALITY IS THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH USES THE WORD "PERSON" THROUGHOUT, AND DOESN'T USE THE WORD "HUMAN" EVEN ONCE. Therefore persons have rights and humans don't (except when they also qualify as persons, duh!). Shall I start asking **you** to provide some Objectively Verifiable Data that unborn humans qualify as persons instead of mere-animal entities?
 
My answer is to make a compromise.

1. All abortions are illegal after the begining of the 5th month of pregnancy. If aborted its considered murder the by the doctor and the women.

2. All children under the age 18 need to have the parent or legal gaurdians consent unless legal emancipated

3. If a father wants to have an abortion but the women does not then he can sign a legally not responsible for care or money document. Must be signed before the baby is born. Which provents the mother to go after the father for child support.

4. States have the right to imposed stricter laws if they so feel like it.

All problems solved. Religous people will be mad cuz there are young undevloped pregnancies being aborted so what start a councling group. Feminest will be upset cuz they want late term abortions so what its murder now get used to it. And men sense they have no rights to abort or keep a baby since its only a womens choice arnt forced into caring for a child they never wanted in the first place.

Sociaty wins, how am i wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom