• 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!

Seeking Clean Discussion and to Understand Pro-Choice Stance

minnie616 said:
An unborn is human.

Legally , in the United States it is not a human being.

You have been told that multiple times. But go ahead and keep you your repetitive questions since it seems to be your MO and you seem to never get tired of asking them., over and over, and over again.

However , some of us are trying hard to keep this a clean discussion for our OP who sincerely wanted to understand why some of us are pro choice.
Click to expand...

So in California you can be tried for murder of a non human being correct?
 
Logician Man said:
Please provide a credible link to support your positive claim that the 'Left's policies' are 'pro-murder.'. Otherwise that claim can, and will, will be summarily dismissed
Click to expand...

Ending a heartbeat against the will of the person is murder. Science, biology, medicine, and the law all agree with me on that one. It is only the aggressive lobbying by the left that this atrocity is allowed.

We are essentially at the point in this debate where you keep falling back on the same excuses the Nazis used during the Holocaust to take the sting out of their detestable actions.
 
Crusader13 said:
Ending a heartbeat against the will of the person is murder. Science, biology, medicine, and the law all agree with me on that one. It is only the aggressive lobbying by the left that this atrocity is allowed.

We are essentially at the point in this debate where you keep falling back on the same excuses the Nazis used during the Holocaust to take the sting out of their detestable actions.
Click to expand...

If, as you proclaim, ending a heartbeat is indeed 'murder'....why aren't police storming abortion clinics and arresting the doctors performing. and the females receiving, those 'legal' abortions, and shutting down those abortion clinics ? ( because the law does 'not' agree with you regarding abortion ). We are essentially at the point in this debate where your posts/claims are paramount to intellectual dishonesty, ignorance of facts, or both. Now, please answer the fair question, or your defeat will also be accepted....your call...
 
Last edited:
Crusader13 said:
Ending a heartbeat against the will of the person is murder. Science, biology, medicine, and the law all agree with me on that one. It is only the aggressive lobbying by the left that this atrocity is allowed.

We are essentially at the point in this debate where you keep falling back on the same excuses the Nazis used during the Holocaust to take the sting out of their detestable actions.
Click to expand...

Not when you are the next of kin and the person is not capable of giving consent for themselves. We do this every day when next of kin remove their family members from life support.
 
If Roe v Wade is overturned, is every miscarriage or stillbirth investigated as a murder?
 
Scrabaholic said:
The code says 'unlawful'. Do you know what that word means?
Click to expand...

Malice is unlawful. Did you read the code? It appears you are just blurting things out to disrupt clean debate. There are other places you can troll. This thread is not one of them.
 
AlphaOmega said:
Nope not at all. I don't do word salad as I stated. What was hard to understand about my statement?
Click to expand...

Claiming 'word salad' is simply another way of stating 'I opt not to answer a fair question and hide behind yet another silly, obvious deflection'. Hell, anyone can use that ridiculous ploy to run from answering fair questions as you clearly did.....BUSTED!
 
Eriech said:
Then if you cannot or will not take care of it you MUST have an abortion. Why should you have a choice? If you can't take care of yourself then you can't take care of another. Logical extension of your post.

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

I didn't say anything about taking care of yourself. And no to forced abortion. That goes against a woman's bodily autonomy.
 
Logician Man said:
Claiming 'word salad' is simply another way of stating 'I opt not to answer a fair question and hide behind yet another silly, obvious deflection. Hell, anyone can use that ridiculous ploy to run from answering fair questions as you clearly did.....BUSTED!
Click to expand...
I clearly stated I would answer your question when you made it cogent. That way we we can ensure it is answered correctly. It's called debating.
 
AlphaOmega said:
I clearly stated I would answer your question when you made it cogent. That way we we can ensure it is answered correctly. It's called debating.
Click to expand...

The only one here claiming the question is not cogent is you....think about that, and how it reflects on you,and you only, as well as your cherished 'credibility'. You're not debating, you're stalling and dodging, as has been pointed out by a third party poster.
 
Crusader13 said:
Ending a heartbeat against the will of the person is murder. Science, biology, medicine, and the law all agree with me on that one. It is only the aggressive lobbying by the left that this atrocity is allowed.

We are essentially at the point in this debate where you keep falling back on the same excuses the Nazis used during the Holocaust to take the sting out of their detestable actions.
Click to expand...

Godwin's Law. You forfeit the debate.
 
AlphaOmega said:
Malice is unlawful. Did you read the code? It appears you are just blurting things out to disrupt clean debate. There are other places you can troll. This thread is not one of them.
Click to expand...

Yes, I read it. The action has to be unlawful for it to be murder.
 
AlphaOmega said:
Please read the thread. When you acknowledge the written posts we can continue. I don't argue fact.
Click to expand...

I have..

Its clear that you don't want to continue because you don't have any logic behind your position.

Like I said.. you don't see pro choicers protesting on the steps of state legislatures because of a law that gives extra penalties to someone if they hurt a pregnant lady.

I get it.. you don't want to have a logical debate.. because you don't have any logic.

All this: is it a life, does it have rights.. and so on... is absolutely meaningless to the discussion... What matters is WHO makes the decision. You and the government?

Or the person who is the parent and whose body is going to be affected by that decision?


You don't want to have that argument.. because basically your position violates the rights of both the fetus/embryo.. and the mother.
 
HumblePi said:
I'll not get into all the other questions you want to discuss on abortion. I can only attest to reasons a woman's life may be in jeopardy if her pregnancy is allowed to go to term.

First, I'm a nurse and have worked in OB/GYN. I have been present in the delivery room during births and have also worked in the nursery with the newborns. I have seen birth defects such as newborns born with Anencephaly and Hydrocephalus. The former means the infant was born without a skull, it survived for a very short time, no more than a couple of hours. The later, Hydrocephalus, is a condition where cerebrospinal fluid builds up in the brain cavities and the brain swells. If caught early enough, it can be treated and the infant may even survive. The child I witnessed in pediatrics did not survive. I watched the grieving mother sit day and night with this child of hers laid out on her legs with his head supported by her knees. It was a scene so heartbreaking that no woman should ever have to live through that much anguish. These anomalies would be evident on ultrasound during the early stage of pregnancy.

No pregnancy is risk free. Some conditions which might threaten the life of the mother are severe infections, heart failure and severe cases of preeclampsia, in which there is a high risk of stroke.

Cecily Kellogg, 44,is a writer who lives near Philadelphia. This was the situation she faced when she was nearly six months pregnant with twin boys in 2004 and she developed severe preeclampsia. One fetus had already died and "my liver had shut down, my kidneys had shut down and they were expecting me to start seizing at any minute,". The doctors said they had to quickly dilate her cervix and perform an abortion to save her. "I fought it," she says. "But they told me I would die — that it was either me and my son or just my son."
Click to expand...

At the end of the day.. this is the issue.

Not whether its a life, or when life starts.. or what rights a fertilized egg has. THIS is the issue..

WHO DECIDES? This decision impacts both the mother and the egg/fetus/embryo/baby.. We recognize in this country that when a person cannot speak for themselves.. the family has the decision to make... NOT the government.
And this decision effects both.

Anti abortionists.. do NOT want to argue this.. because at the end of the day.. they have no answer. In fact.. most of them.. that call themselves "pro life".. would have no problem with a child dying because the parents refuse easy, lifesaving medical care because of their religious beliefs. Anti abortionists don't want the government making decisions for them.. they just want to force their beliefs onto others.. no matter how much injury it causes.
 
jaeger19 said:
I have..

Its clear that you don't want to continue because you don't have any logic behind your position.

Like I said.. you don't see pro choicers protesting on the steps of state legislatures because of a law that gives extra penalties to someone if they hurt a pregnant lady.

I get it.. you don't want to have a logical debate.. because you don't have any logic.

All this: is it a life, does it have rights.. and so on... is absolutely meaningless to the discussion... What matters is WHO makes the decision. You and the government?

Or the person who is the parent and whose body is going to be affected by that decision?


You don't want to have that argument.. because basically your position violates the rights of both the fetus/embryo.. and the mother.
Click to expand...

There's no true argument there, everything is built on emotional rhetoric, like falsely describing legal abortions as horrific, traumatic, blood-rending events.

Total lie, since 97.5% of all abortions consist of flushing a pea-sized or smaller unborn painlessly from the womb.

And the rest, medically necessary, legally require an anesthetic, lethal injection before proceding with the procedure. And the fake outrage at the dismembering of the dead fetus, as if it could feel it :roll: What's clear tho, is that they'd prefer it not be, and just do more internal damage to the woman.

Yeah...the lying, the complete disregard for women...no moral High Ground there.
 
Lursa said:
There's no true argument there, everything is built on emotional rhetoric, like falsely describing legal abortions as horrific, traumatic, blood-rending events.

Total lie, since 97.5% of all abortions consist of flushing a pea-sized or smaller unborn painlessly from the womb.

And the rest, medically necessary, legally require an anesthetic, lethal injection before proceding with the procedure. And the fake outrage at the dismembering of the dead fetus, as if it could feel it :roll: What's clear tho, is that they'd prefer it not be, and just do more internal damage to the woman.

Yeah...the lying, the complete disregard for women...no moral High Ground there.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

What really ticks me off is this claim of moral high ground.. when they don't care that my 14 year old patient who was raped and beaten.. could die if she continues to carry the child..

AND then, I have to look into the scared eyes of a 6 year old that needs a blood transfusion..but his parents won't allow a blood transfusions... but instead elect for "healing by prayer".

And this six year old looks me in the face and says "I don't want to die". And I can't do a thing because the parents have the right to take him home regardless of his medical needs.. because of their religious beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom