• 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!

Abortion 201

Lursa said:
It was refuted with my argument AND sources that backed it. It was your 'turn' to either refute my argument or admit you failed. You have done neither, choosing instead to pretend you have and then bob and weave to avoid actually doing so.

Again: it's the height of irony to see you beating a personal opinion 'dead horse' on morality all the while lying on a level that reaches clear immoral behavior.
Click to expand...
What argument from you? I have seen no argument from you.
 
Angel said:
What argument from you? I have seen no argument from you.
Click to expand...

Ha, that's just how myopic and closed off to refutation you are.

Again...you need to look to your own inadequacies...not those of others...to discover why you have continually failed to convince ~99% of anyone viewing that you have a legitimate argument.
 
Lursa said:
Ha, that's just how myopic and closed off to refutation you are.

Again...you need to look to your own inadequacies...not those of others...to discover why you have continually failed to convince ~99% of anyone viewing that you have a legitimate argument.
Click to expand...
I can't convince 100% of the parrots in the Amazon, but that doesn't reflect poorly on my argument, does it?
 
Angel said:
I can't convince 100% of the parrots in the Amazon, but that doesn't reflect poorly on my argument, does it?
Click to expand...

That's it! That's the only audience that your 'arguments' would be appropriate for your personal opinions of morality!

And if you cant convince them, surely you cant believe you'd convince the posters here?
 
Angel said:
I can't convince 100% of the parrots in the Amazon, but that doesn't reflect poorly on my argument, does it?
Click to expand...

Lursa said:
...And if you cant convince them, surely you cant believe you'd convince the posters here?
Click to expand...
This gave me a chuckle, I confess. I mean, you don't even understand your own posts!
 
Angel said:
This gave me a chuckle, I confess. I mean, you don't even understand your own posts!
Click to expand...

You had better read that again...I can understand your reticence, you seem to find any kind of self-examination painful.

You couldnt even be honest and post the entire quote.
 
Lursa said:
You had better read that again...I can understand your reticence, you seem to find any kind of self-examination painful.

You couldnt even be honest and post the entire quote.
Click to expand...
Likewise Islam justifies the killing, raping and enslaving infidels. Maybe that is the Muslim connection to the left.Hitler was equally enamored with Ialam.

Kill them now or kill them later is a justification for abortion used this week.

There are rationalizations for abominations; one being that it lawful. Many many atrocities in the history of mankind have been lawful.

Lursa wants evidence; she will have to look inward and see the light. Until then there is only blackness. Abortion currently is a lawful murder acceptable to about half the country.



Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
Likewise Islam justifies the killing, raping and enslaving infidels. Maybe that is the Muslim connection to the left.Hitler was equally enamored with Ialam.

Kill them now or kill them later is a justification for abortion used this week.

There are rationalizations for abominations; one being that it lawful. Many many atrocities in the history of mankind have been lawful.

Lursa wants evidence; she will have to look inward and see the light. Until then there is only blackness. Abortion currently is a lawful murder acceptable to about half the country.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I am not aware of any such 'justifications' for women needing to choose abortion.

Perhaps you value women's lives and their responsibilities towards their current families, dependents, their obligations and commitments to employer, church, community, society, as less important than gestating the unborn which has a 2/3 chance of not surviving to birth naturally.

I dont know but that's up to you. I look at the socio-economic support of women, in order to improve and stabilize their situations, a better investment in society, as then they are better prepared to become good parents.
 
EASIER TO CONVINCE PARROTS THAN PRO-CHOICE-PRO-ABORTION ADVOCATES​
Lursa said:
Angel said:
I can't convince 100% of the parrots in the Amazon, but that doesn't reflect poorly on my argument, does it?
Click to expand...
That's it! That's the only audience that your 'arguments' would be appropriate for your personal opinions of morality!

And if you cant convince them, surely you cant believe you'd convince the posters here?
Click to expand...

"And if you cant convince them [parrots], surely you cant believe you'd convince the posters here?"
-- Lursa
​
 
Eriech said:
Likewise Islam justifies the killing, raping and enslaving infidels. Maybe that is the Muslim connection to the left.Hitler was equally enamored with Ialam.

Kill them now or kill them later is a justification for abortion used this week.

There are rationalizations for abominations; one being that it lawful. Many many atrocities in the history of mankind have been lawful.

Lursa wants evidence; she will have to look inward and see the light. Until then there is only blackness. Abortion currently is a lawful murder acceptable to about half the country.



Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes I saw that quote and when read in context, he was discussing the hypocrisy of the Alablama govt, and perhaps the people there, who would demand women give birth against their will and then yet refuse to properly fund Medicaid, child services programs, hospitals, etc...meaning they are more concerned about 'quantity' rather than quality of life.

I feel the opposite, focusing on quality of life and the overall health of society. There are no negative effects of abortion on society....unless perhaps you can list some?
 
Angel said:
EASIER TO CONVINCE PARROTS THAN PRO-CHOICE-PRO-ABORTION ADVOCATES


"And if you cant convince them [parrots], surely you cant believe you'd convince the posters here?"
-- Lursa
​
Click to expand...

:2bow:

Pretty sure that once again, you have no idea what you are posting. :mrgreen:

If you have a bull**** argument...lesser intelligences may be fooled but not people. According to you, you fail on both fronts! :lamo
 
Lursa said:
Yes I saw that quote and when read in context, he was discussing the hypocrisy of the Alablama govt, and perhaps the people there, who would demand women give birth against their will and then yet refuse to properly fund Medicaid, child services programs, hospitals, etc...meaning they are more concerned about 'quantity' rather than quality of life.

I feel the opposite, focusing on quality of life and the overall health of society. There are no negative effects of abortion on society....unless perhaps you can list some?
Click to expand...
Life is not valued. Disposable. Fatherhood is not valued. Inconsequential.

Commitment not valued. Honor not valued.

I grew up in a time that if you got a girl pregnant you'd better like her enough to marry and raise that child. Now it is whatever......

Abortions and single parenthood have grown dramatically since January 22, 1973.

Huge cost to society



Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
Life is not valued. Disposable. Fatherhood is not valued. Inconsequential.

Commitment not valued. Honor not valued.

I grew up in a time that if you got a girl pregnant you'd better like her enough to marry and raise that child. Now it is whatever......

Abortions and single parenthood have grown dramatically since January 22, 1973.

Huge cost to society

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Women's lives...not valued. We are not here just to fulfill other's expectations of life and reproduction. And there is no cost to society...unless you can describe or list that?

And when it comes to commitments, I was pretty clear that the woman knows best how to choose in order to uphold her commitments...not strangers.

Perhaps you had better face the realities of today. There's no reason not to enjoy sex and use it to develop intimacy in a relationship...or not. As long as both have the same expectations. It's not like people are all of a sudden, after millenia, going to start having less sex. Today, most couples do use contraception or have reasons not needing it (pregnancy, age, infertility, etc): up to 80-90% (we do have the data).

However let's look at the math:

--most couples are using birth control

--properly and consistently non-surgical birth control is about 98% effective

--millions of Americans have sex millions and millions of times a day

--that means there will still be 10's of thousands of accidental pregnancies *every single day*.​

Also, your info is wrong. Abortions spiked in the 80s...the abortion rate continues to go down every year.
 
Lursa said:
Women's lives...not valued. We are not here just to fulfill other's expectations of life and reproduction. And there is no cost to society...unless you can describe or list that?

And when it comes to commitments, I was pretty clear that the woman knows best how to choose in order to uphold her commitments...not strangers.

Perhaps you had better face the realities of today. There's no reason not to enjoy sex and use it to develop intimacy in a relationship...or not. As long as both have the same expectations. It's not like people are all of a sudden, after millenia, going to start having less sex. Today, most couples do use contraception or have reasons not needing it (pregnancy, age, infertility, etc): up to 80-90% (we do have the data).

However let's look at the math:

--most couples are using birth control

--properly and consistently non-surgical birth control is about 98% effective

--millions of Americans have sex millions and millions of times a day

--that means there will still be 10's of thousands of accidental pregnancies *every single day*.​

Also, your info is wrong. Abortions spiked in the 80s...the abortion rate continues to go down every year.
Click to expand...
Yes, we are closer to sex with no consequence. Is society better for it?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
Yes, we are closer to sex with no consequence. Is society better for it?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You have not explained how it's worse.

You have not explained how abortion harms society in any way.

It seems you cannot even acknowledge the actual content in my posts.
 
Eriech said:
Yes, we are closer to sex with no consequence. Is society better for it?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

btw, what would be bad about sex without consequences?
 
Is society better for it? Apparently you believe so.
Sex without consequence is a benefit I presume? No value of life, good?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
Is society better for it? Apparently you believe so.
Sex without consequence is a benefit I presume? No value of life, good?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I have an entire list of the positive effects of abortion on society. But I asked YOU what the negatives are. So, please?

And you answer with more questions again. Why? Are you incapable of providing your own opinions?

What could be bad about sex without consequences? I have no idea...please explain. If there's no consequences, it goes without saying that means no accidental pregnancies, no STDs, etc etc etc. So what is your answer?
 
Eriech said:
There is nothing wrong with masterbation.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

@_@

That's your answer? To my questions?

Here are the questions:

What are the negative effects of abortion on society?

and

What's wrong with sex without consequences?

If there was 'nothing wrong with masturbation' why do people go to such great lengths to risk the consequences of sex? See, the more you try to avoid answering, the deeper in you get. Why not just be direct and honest from the start?
 
I gave you my answer. Fatherless children. Loss of respect for life.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
Life is not valued. Disposable. Fatherhood is not valued. Inconsequential.

Commitment not valued. Honor not valued.

I grew up in a time that if you got a girl pregnant you'd better like her enough to marry and raise that child. Now it is whatever......

Abortions and single parenthood have grown dramatically since January 22, 1973.

Huge cost to society
Click to expand...

Personally, I still feel there would not be so many single parents if the pro life movement did not demonize abortion and glorify unwed mothers for choosing to continue unwanted pregnancies.
Look at how many pro life /conservatives congratulated and defended Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol when she became a single unwed mother.

From this article:

As the co-authors of Red Families v. Blue Families, we often give talks about the recent rise in what’s called the “nonmarital birthrate,” or the idea that more than 40 percent of children are now born to women who aren’t married. Sometimes at our talks someone will come up to us, confess his or her encounter with single parenthood, and say something like:

“When my daughter got pregnant and decided to keep the child, we were OK with that because we are Christians. When she decided not to marry the father, we were relieved because we knew he would be bad for her and the marriage would never work.”

They express these two beliefs—that they are Christian and thus uncomfortable with abortion and that they are relieved their daughter decided to raise the child alone—as if they are not connected.

But in fact this may be one of the stranger, more unexpected legacies of the pro-life movement that arose in the 40 years since Roe v. Wade: In conservative communities, the hardening of anti-abortion attitudes may have increased the acceptance of single-parent families. And by contrast, in less conservative communities, the willingness to accept abortion has helped create more stable families.

Researchers have considered many reasons for the rise in the nonmarital birthrate—the welfare state, the decline of morals, the increasing independence of women, even gay marriage.

But one that people on neither the left nor the right talk about much is how it’s connected to abortion. The working class had long dealt with the inconvenient fact of an accidental pregnancy through the shotgun marriage. As blue-collar jobs paying a family wage have disappeared, however, so has early marriage.

Women are then left with two choices:

They can delay childbearing (which might entail getting an abortion at some point) until the right man comes along or get more comfortable with the idea of becoming single mothers.

College-educated elites have endorsed the first option, but everyone else is drifting toward the second.

In geographical regions and social classes where the stigma for having an abortion is high, the nonmarital birthrate is also high. Without really thinking about it or setting up any structures to support it, women in more conservative communities are raising children alone. This is a legacy the pro-life movement has not really grappled with....
Click to expand...

Read more:

Did the pro-life movement lead to more single moms?
 
Last edited:
Eriech said:
I gave you my answer. Fatherless children. Loss of respect for life.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Abortion does not result in fatherless children. :doh And I asked earlier why you valued the unborn life over that of women? The women are contributing members of society, so their loss, including their capacity to contribute to society, IS harmful to society.

And if you mean that as an answer to "What's wrong with sex without consequences?" again: that means no fatherless children, no loss of respect for loss of life because there are no accidental pregnancies.

Soooo? Are you having difficulty with English? I really dont understand your inability to directly answer the questions.
 
Last edited:
There is a stretch of 84 in Connecticut that has a 55 mile an hour speed limit. If you can go 80 you will be run over. It is not enforced. There used to be a rule that if you got a girl pregnant you would stand up. Gone.
I might have a long gone sense of responsibility but that is gone too. We incentivise inconsequential sex. Abortion makes it a no risk. Welfare adds incentive for some.
There is no correlation between fatherless children and Roe; right?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Eriech said:
There is a stretch of 84 in Connecticut that has a 55 mile an hour speed limit. If you can go 80 you will be run over. It is not enforced. There used to be a rule that if you got a girl pregnant you would stand up. Gone.
I might have a long gone sense of responsibility but that is gone too. We incentivise inconsequential sex. Abortion makes it a no risk. Welfare adds incentive for some.
There is no correlation between fatherless children and Roe; right?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

?? You make little sense and my guess is you refuse to answer directly because it would prove things you dont want to believe. How do you get run over if you're the one driving 80?

Let me ask you: how does RvW...which recognizes women have a right to abortion, lead to MORE fatherless children? This is the 2nd time I've asked.

As for responsibility, (& since you also cant tell me why having sex without consequences is wrong)....here's why abortion can be a very responsible choice:

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid you cant afford and expecting tax payers to take up that burden with public assistance.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid you arent emotionally prepared to have and may abuse or neglect.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid if you know you wont stop drinking, smoking, doing drugs, etc that will damage the unborn.

--There's nothing responsible about remaining pregnant and dropping out of high school or college or missing work and not fulfilling your potential in society.

--There's nothing responsible about remaining pregnant/having a child and not being able to fulfill your other commitments and obligations to family, dependents, employer, church, community, society.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid and giving it up for adoption when there are already over 100,000 kids in America waiting to be adopted. It means one less waiting will find a home. IMO it's unethical to encourage a woman to have a kid unnecessarily when so many are waiting for homes.​

Is this something you can agree with? It's factual, so I'm not sure why you wouldnt, even if you dont believe in elective abortion. It's still the right, responsible decision for some women.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom