• 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

Eriech said:
I and we who support the 2cnd ammendment were called sociopaths by posters here ( A true hero...) who also have contributed to this thread. Just pointing out that the term is much more apt you all that support this wanton slaughter.

"Sociopath" gets thrown around pretty freely here. Just throwing it back where it belongs

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

That word should not be thrown around here.

When I saw you used it I checked to see if this thread had been flushed into the basement.

And pro choice people do not support won ton slaughter.

I already explained there is no slaughter when an abortion takes place since each pregnant woman makes her own choice whether to continue a pregnancy or chose to end it with a legal abortion.

Pro choice people want the pregnant woman to have her own choice even though most of us would not make that choice for ourselves.

I will not support a law or a country that did not allow legal elective abortions.

On the other side of the coin I will not support a law that would force a woman to have an abortion even if the unborn were so malformed that if it survived birth it would the cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.

Each pregnant woman should be able to chose what is best for her given situation for her given pregnancy.

Many women have chosen both birth and abortion at diffent times in their life’s. They have made different choices for different situations.
 
Last edited:
Eriech said:
I and we who support the 2cnd ammendment were called sociopaths by posters here ( A true hero...) who also have contributed to this thread. Just pointing out that the term is much more apt you all that support this wanton slaughter.

"Sociopath" gets thrown around pretty freely here. Just throwing it back where it belongs

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

I have never called anyone a sociopath, yet you called me one. Do two wrongs make a right?

There is no "wanton slaughter".
 
minnie616 said:
Name calling and insults speak not to the character of the target, but rather the attacker.
Click to expand...


Eriech said:
I and we who support the 2cnd ammendment were called sociopaths by posters here ( A true hero...) who also have contributed to this thread. Just pointing out that the term is much more apt you all that support this wanton slaughter.

"Sociopath" gets thrown around pretty freely here. Just throwing it back where it belongs

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

Scrabaholic said:
I have never called anyone a sociopath, yet you called me one. Do two wrongs make a right?

There is no "wanton slaughter".
Click to expand...

Agreed.
It was hateful of him to use that word especially since he admitted he did not like that word directed those who support the 2ed amendment.
 
Lursa said:
Because that heartbeat is inside a woman and has the potential to destroy her entire life. In a manner that cannot be predicted or prevented. If it could be, then aout 1000 women a yr in the US wouldnt die and another 70,000 suffer significant healthy consequences like kidney failure, stroke, aneurysm, pre-eclampsia, etc.
Click to expand...

So now we're in the business of killing people because they might cause something bad to happen, even though they haven't done anything yet?

Does that ring of a civilized or liberal society to you? What if the government determined that there is good reason that you might commit a crime one day, and decided to lock you up or execute you for it? After all, can't be too safe these days...

It's amazing that Lefties are so adamant at giving prisoners and terrorists a second chance with a fair shot at redemption, but an innocent baby who's only crime is being an inconvenience to the woman: nope straight to the acid bucket you go.
 
Crusader13 said:
Does that (abortion) ring of a civilized or liberal society to you?
Click to expand...

absolutely thats why the majority of first world countries whos citizens have rights and freedoms have laws based on prochoice and its mostly dictatorships and counties with out rights and freedoms that have laws based on prolife
this is why in america aboriton isnt going anywhere, we wont be going back wards and violating womens rights and treating them as a lessers
 
AGENT J said:
absolutely thats why the majority of first world countries whos citizens have rights and freedoms have laws based on prochoice and its mostly dictatorships and counties with out rights and freedoms that have laws based on prolife
this is why in america aboriton isnt going anywhere, we wont be going back wards and violating womens rights and treating them as a lessers
Click to expand...

Again - how would not having the right to end a human heartbeat make women somehow inferior to anyone else?

These first-world countries you so elegantly claim lead the way in morality and progress have also been responsible for some of the most oppressive and horrific laws in history. LOL @ thinking that just because America or Germany made something a law that it must mean those laws are good. Yeah, because America and Germany have never made mistakes in their laws. Nope never not even once :roll:
 
Crusader13 said:
1.)Again - how would not having the right to end a human heartbeat make women somehow inferior to anyone else?

2.) These first-world countries you so elegantly claim lead the way in morality and progress have also been responsible for some of the most oppressive and horrific laws in history. 2
3.) LOL @ thinking that just because America or Germany made something a law that it must mean those laws are good. Yeah, because America and Germany have never made mistakes in their laws. Nope never not even once :roll:
Click to expand...

1.) again women dont have that right now so i dont know what you are talking about. . . the topic is abortion and womans rights, thanks
2.) your feelings dont interest me i was simply pointing out FACTS
3.) who said that? oh wait nobody just a stupid strawman you made up that fails like the rest of your posts lol

your post fails again

You are free to be against womans rights but this country wont be :shrug:
 
Crusader13 said:
Again - how would not having the right to end a human heartbeat make women somehow inferior to anyone else?

These first-world countries you so elegantly claim lead the way in morality and progress have also been responsible for some of the most oppressive and horrific laws in history. LOL @ thinking that just because America or Germany made something a law that it must mean those laws are good. Yeah, because America and Germany have never made mistakes in their laws. Nope never not even once :roll:
Click to expand...

You will love iran
 
Eriech said:
We are all going to die anyway. What difference does it make if these lives never get a chance? Cold clinical unemotional......sociopath.

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

That's a strawman argument. It is not and never has been the argument of the pro-choice crowd that who lives or dies makes no difference. It is our position that there is a HUGE negative impact when the life of a fetus is given legal preference over that of a living woman.

We applaud the selflessness of women who undertake the potentially deadly act of pregnancy and birth. Conversely, we also applaud those women who recognize that they are unwilling to risk the physical damage of pregnancy or the vast responsibility of motherhood and do the responsible thing by terminating that pregnancy before it becomes a larger problem for the woman existentially, a man economically and society in general.

There are lots of fertilized eggs that "never get a chance". Most of them perish without the woman even knowing they are there, so your silly melodrama is unnecessary. The point, sir, is that when women DO have a choice, they make the right one for themselves and their families WAY more often than the vicarious, self-appointed, judgmental, Jesus-freaks on the right-wing ever could.

When you have to lie to make women and girls and their doctors in to murderous fiends, your misogynist agenda is on full display.
 
Eriech said:
No doubt for those who choose an abortion it is a very emotional issue as it should be. Talking specifically about abortion advocates......

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

Pro choice is not pro abortion.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC ) believe in Reproductive Choice. We do not try to force others to believe as we do. We just want Choice to make our own religious decisions regarding Reproduction.

We are pro choice including access to contraception.

We strive to lower the number of abortions through sex education, access to family planning, contraceptives, and adoption services.

While our member organizations are religiously and theologically diverse, they are unified in the commitment to preserve reproductive choice as a basic part of religious liberty.

Our rational, healing perspective looks beyond the bitter abortion debate to seek solutions to pressing problems such as unintended pregnancy, the spread of HIV/AIDS, inadequate health care and health insurance, and the severe reduction in reproductive health care services.

We support access to sex education, family planning and contraception, affordable child care and health care, and adoption services as well as safe, legal, abortion services, regardless of income. As an organization committed to reproductive justice, we work for public policies that ensure the medical, economic, and educational resources necessary for healthy families and communities that are equipped to nurture children in peace and love.
Click to expand...


From RCRC Healthy Reproductive Service’s
 
Last edited:
Crusader13 said:
Again - how would not having the right to end a human heartbeat make women somehow inferior to anyone else?
Click to expand...

What do you think making abortion illegal means? If you make a law(s), dont you have to enforce them? In a manner that is Constitutional?
 
Crusader13 said:
So now we're in the business of killing people because they might cause something bad to happen, even though they haven't done anything yet?

Does that ring of a civilized or liberal society to you? What if the government determined that there is good reason that you might commit a crime one day, and decided to lock you up or execute you for it? After all, can't be too safe these days...



It's amazing that Lefties are so adamant at giving prisoners and terrorists a second chance with a fair shot at redemption, but an innocent baby who's only crime is being an inconvenience to the woman: nope straight to the acid bucket you go.
Click to expand...

No people are killed during an abortion, unless the woman dies.

OTOH, abortion is 14 times safer than pregnancy/childbirth, so why should she take so much greater risk to have a kid she doesnt want/cant afford? There are already over 100,000 kids waiting to be adopted in the US. For each newborn added to that immense pool, it means one of those kids, waiting, hoping for a family, wont get one. They are aware, hoping...the unborn isnt.

(Yes, I can source ALL that.)

You want more numbers? Here:

2/3rds embryos don’t survive

Which fertilized eggs will become healthy human fetuses? Researchers predict with 93% accuracy -- ScienceDaily

Two-thirds of all human embryos fail to develop successfully. Now, in a new study, researchers have shown that they can predict with 93 percent certainty which fertilized eggs will make it to a critical developmental milestone and which will stall and die. The findings are important to the understanding of the fundamentals of human development at the earliest stages, which have largely remained a mystery despite the attention given to human embryonic stem cell research.
Click to expand...

Why should women be forced by law to sacrifice their health, even their lives, and their opportunities in life and forgo upholding their responsibilities to their families and employers and communities based on such poor odds for that embryonic life?

IMO that is completely rational, fair, and recognizes that women's rights are entitled to priority in all cases when there is an (imagined ) conflict between woman and unborn. (Imagined because the unborn have no rights)
 
Lursa said:
No people are killed during an abortion, unless the woman dies.

OTOH, abortion is 14 times safer than pregnancy/childbirth, so why should she take so much greater risk to have a kid she doesnt want/cant afford? There are already over 100,000 kids waiting to be adopted in the US. For each newborn added to that immense pool, it means one of those kids, waiting, hoping for a family, wont get one. They are aware, hoping...the unborn isnt.

(Yes, I can source ALL that.)

You want more numbers? Here:



Why should women be forced by law to sacrifice their health, even their lives, and their opportunities in life and forgo upholding their responsibilities to their families and employers and communities based on such poor odds for that embryonic life?

IMO that is completely rational, fair, and recognizes that women's rights are entitled to priority in all cases when there is an (imagined ) conflict between woman and unborn. (Imagined because the unborn have no rights)
Click to expand...

In california you can be tried for murder if you kill a fetus that isn't yours. If no people are killed during an abortion then what person was murdered during a fetus kill?
 
AlphaOmega said:
In california you can be tried for murder if you kill a fetus that isn't yours. If no people are killed during an abortion then what person was murdered during a fetus kill?
Click to expand...

Why does that law specifically exempt abortion providers then?
 
AlphaOmega said:
Sorry...clean debate. I'll answer your question after mine in "answered".
Click to expand...

Happy to answer yours.

It's a moronic law that makes no logical sense. That's why
 
AlphaOmega said:
In california you can be tried for murder if you kill a fetus that isn't yours. If no people are killed during an abortion then what person was murdered during a fetus kill?
Click to expand...


I guess you missed the part where the person can only be charged for murder of the fetus ( which has no rights ) if that person is sentenced for the murder of the pregnant woman. If the pregnant woman was not murdered and the fetus is killed the person who killed the fetus is not charged with murder.

(Imagine that ...kinda takes part of your talking points away.)

No person is killed during during an abortion.

Abortion is legal under the parameters of Roe.
 
Last edited:
minnie616 said:
I guess you missed the part where the person can only be charged for murder of the fetus ( which has no rights ) if that person is sentenced for the murder of the pregnant woman. If the pregnant woman was not murdered and the fetus is killed the person who killed the fetus is not charged with murder.

(Imagine that ...kinda takes part of your talking points away.)

No person is killed during during an abortion.

Abortion is legal under the parameters of Roe.
Click to expand...

My question stands either answer it or move on. The thread title asked for clean discussion.
 
vegas giants said:
I gave you the most honest answer possible
Click to expand...

This is a deflection tactic he has used multiple times in this thread and others with several posters. He doesn't want to answer fair questions, so he uses intellectual dishonesty and red herrings to avoid responding to those fair questions, then runs. He gets answers he doesn't like, so he withholds his answers under the pretense of falsely claiming your answer is only a 'response.' Very transparent and certainly not interested in 'clean debating.' Clear deflecting and dodging, but most certainly not 'clean debating.' Just look up thread for verification as to how many times he has used this tactic....I.E. 'You answer the question the way I want you to, or I will refuse to answer your fair question, and run from your fair question. "
 
Last edited:
Logician Man said:
This is a deflection tactic he has used multiple times in this thread with several posters. He doesn't want to answer fair questions, so he uses intellectual dishonest and red herrings to avoid responding to fair questions. He gets answers he doesn't like, so he withholds his answers under the pretense of falsely claiming your answer is only a 'response.' Very transparent and certainly not interested in 'clean debating.' Clear deflecting and dodging, but most certainly not 'clean debating.' Just look up thread for verification as to how many times he has used this tactic.
Click to expand...

Very very true. Well said
 
vegas giants said:
Let's say that house is on fire. There is a baby inside and 100 fertilized embryos. You can save one or the other. Who do you save?
Click to expand...
And I'm just sitting here thinking "who keeps 100 embryos in their home?" :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom