[W: 594] A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Why take such low road reply? I don't expect my ability to comprehend your verbal Circus poster posting is entirely my fault. I lay some blame on your verbose replies. I believe you are aware of my position on abortion, otherwise why the running dialogue?
You claim to be a technical writer, but can't wrap your mind about the few things I have written. That is puzzling.
I can't see engaging in semantics with you is constructive or uplifting for either of us. That is unfortunate, but dismissing another as foolish or ignorant is a cheap gambit.
I have stated that I respect you and so won't question your mastery of English as a language. I ask only the same from you.

Regards,
CP
.

I'm so confused! My reply was the exact same tenor and politeness of yours...I am learning from your style of posting. You claimed you could not ascertain my questions from my narrative. I do find it troubling that you dont realize that "question" marks identify "questions," but professed my hope that you would further educate yourself and return to the discussion.

It doesnt seem you have done so however. You accuse me of not understanding your words, yet you dont use words according to their proper definitions. Please see:

concernedpuma said:
I will answer the one clear question I see your reply...

How can one can be for more stringent abortion laws, and still be absolutely considerate of the Mothers life?

Very easily done. If the mother's life is in jeopardy, and that were a certainty, then the pregnancy ought be terminated, early on. I would not expect the parents(either of them) forfeit their life to bring forward an issue. That is considerate, yes?

Lursa said:
Not remotely. If she doesnt want to be pregnant or give birth, to suffer the pain, the sacrifices to her job and her family, etc...how is that considerate?

Is your idea of "considerate" endorsing laws that use force against her will? That's the opposite of 'considerate.'

I truly dont understand your use of the word. It's completely improper. (and certainly the same for 'absolutely')

I'm sure you dont believe I'm a mind reader? You continually claim to want respectful and productive discourse, yet have not demonstrated basic knowledge of punctuation (your own admission on not distinguishing my questions from my narrative) and you dont use the proper definitions of words. Surely you can see how this makes your "claim" difficult?

I am at your disposal at such time as you are interested in rejoining the discussion with the necessary reading/writing skills. Should you choose to continue to refine your exceptional level of passive-aggressive posting style as a diversion from actual discussion, I'm also happy to practice the same. The challenge of reaching your proficiency is exhilarating.

concernedpuma · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

weaver2 said:
Oh spare us your hypocritic male morality. "Your belief", "(women) .. were crafted", "I wouldn't expect" , "abortion ... a grotesque". !!

Until you get pregnant and make abortion into a sacrament you're nothing but a pompous male lecturing women because the evidence of sex is obvious while your moral lapses never see the light of day. You have no moral authority to judge pregnant women.

I would ask you in return to spare us the militant female gibberish
I won't spare you the truth. You need to buck up to it.
You have no moral authority to lecture men or women. You know that, right?
Until there is a case of self reproduction, I have as much authority to have an opinion on Human reproduction as anyone, including, and it seems, especially you!
That you can't seem to understand(I don't know how old you are): It takes a man and a woman to create another human isn't a plus. If you think your pompous attitude is proof otherwise, I suspect you paid more attention to geography than science.

A man has rights, and certainly responsibilities, with any pregnancy. You may not like it, but there it is.

Regards,
CP

concernedpuma · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:
I'm so confused! My reply was the exact same tenor and politeness of yours...I am learning from your style of posting. You claimed you could not ascertain my questions from my narrative. I do find it troubling that you dont realize that "question" marks identify "questions," but professed my hope that you would further educate yourself and return to the discussion.

It doesnt seem you have done so however. You accuse me of not understanding your words, yet you dont use words according to their proper definitions. Please see:

I'm sure you dont believe I'm a mind reader? You continually claim to want respectful and productive discourse, yet have not demonstrated basic knowledge of punctuation (your own admission on not distinguishing my questions from my narrative) and you dont use the proper definitions of words. Surely you can see how this makes your "claim" difficult?

I am at your disposal at such time as you are interested in rejoining the discussion with the necessary reading/writing skills. Should you choose to continue to refine your exceptional level of passive-aggressive posting style as a diversion from actual discussion, I'm also happy to practice the same. The challenge of reaching your proficiency is exhilarating.

Lursa, I believe we have wandered into the weeds. You know from my writing that I am versed in punctuation and definition. I don't know why you keep retreating to that sad narrative. We may be able to come to an argument, or agreement from here... I make the statement "Abortion is a fact of life, but should only be considered in cases of rape, incest, or the Mothers ability to survive delivery." Yes, or no? Short and concise, please.

Regards,
CP

year2late · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Y2L,
I repeat my respect and admiration for your difficulty. Further, you are of the best sort of us.
Dawdling back to nature, however, your frame was being crafted early on to deliver a child and then be a mother, even by your definition, right?
I hereby RESTATE my belief that there are genuine times when an abortion must be considered in the stark light of triage. I would never wonder that a Mother chose her own life over a dangerous birth. I wouldn't expect either that a woman should deliver a child of rape, or incest. Those conditions are known quite soon and all should be handled as rape very soon after incident. My biggest concern is abortion becoming a grotesque form of birth control. There are just too many ways to prevent pregnancy to instead abort a viable fetus.
Regards,
CP

I think the best way to prevent abortion is through the best possible contraception. Currently the most reliable contraception (long term forms that are not rendered ineffective by simple human error) would be implantables and IUDs. It is sad that what stands the best chance at preventing abortion is about twice the cost of an early abortion. The women who are most at risk for abortion (working poor) are too rich for Medicaid and too poor for self pay. So they buy the best contraception they can afford.

But I will agree, abortion should not be used as birth control.

weaver2 · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:
I'm so confused! My reply was the exact same tenor and politeness of yours...I am learning from your style of posting. You claimed you could not ascertain my questions from my narrative. I do find it troubling that you dont realize that "question" marks identify "questions," but professed my hope that you would further educate yourself and return to the discussion.

It doesnt seem you have done so however. You accuse me of not understanding your words, yet you dont use words according to their proper definitions. Please see:

I'm sure you dont believe I'm a mind reader? You continually claim to want respectful and productive discourse, yet have not demonstrated basic knowledge of punctuation (your own admission on not distinguishing my questions from my narrative) and you dont use the proper definitions of words. Surely you can see how this makes your "claim" difficult?

I am at your disposal at such time as you are interested in rejoining the discussion with the necessary reading/writing skills. Should you choose to continue to refine your exceptional level of passive-aggressive posting style as a diversion from actual discussion, I'm also happy to practice the same. The challenge of reaching your proficiency is exhilarating.

LOL. Too funny!

weaver2 · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Lursa, I believe we have wandered into the weeds. You know from my writing that I am versed in punctuation and definition. I don't know why you keep retreating to that sad narrative. We may be able to come to an argument, or agreement from here... I make the statement "Abortion is a fact of life, but should only be considered in cases of rape, incest, or the Mothers ability to survive delivery." Yes, or no? Short and concise, please.

Regards,
CP

Pompous ass!

weaver2 · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
I would ask you in return to spare us the militant female gibberish
I won't spare you the truth. You need to buck up to it.
You have no moral authority to lecture men or women. You know that, right?
Until there is a case of self reproduction, I have as much authority to have an opinion on Human reproduction as anyone, including, and it seems, especially you!
That you can't seem to understand(I don't know how old you are): It takes a man and a woman to create another human isn't a plus. If you think your pompous attitude is proof otherwise, I suspect you paid more attention to geography than science.

A man has rights, and certainly responsibilities, with any pregnancy. You may not like it, but there it is.
Regards,
CP

Spare you the female gibberish? From someone who posted: "I don't expect my ability to comprehend your verbal Circus poster posting is entirely my fault." LOL!!!!! " I don't expect my ability to comprehend ..... is entirely my fault". Yeah, any abilities you have probably aren't your fault!!!

And this gibberish:
You "have as much authority to have an opinion as anyone..." But women have "no moral authority"? BTW having an opinion doesn't require any authority.

Or this: women have no rights because their "frame was being crafted early on to deliver a child" and their only option is to "then become a mother". But, "A man has rights". " You may not like it but there it is". Reproductive rights for men but none for women?

What have you been reading that leads you to such chauvinism.

prometeus · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
I would ask you in return to spare us the militant female gibberish

Ity would also be nice if you spared us your ignorant gibberish.

I won't spare you the truth.

If only you wold know anything about it.

You need to buck up to it.

Take your own advice. Reality is something you need to familiarize yourself with.

You have no moral authority to lecture men or women. You know that, right?

Neither do you, yet here you are with your hypocrisy.

I have as much authority to have an opinion on Human reproduction as anyone

Yes but in your case the old adage about opinions and assholes comes to mind. Everybody has one and most stink and as far as opinion on this topic yours are ignorant at best.

It takes a man and a woman to create another human isn't a plus.

Wow, you came up with that all by yourself?

A man has rights

Everybody has rights, well at least in this nation.

and certainly responsibilities

And you are not the one to make the determination of what is responsible in other people's lives.

prometeus · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Integrityrespec said:
The life of the baby. The woman had the right to practice safe sex, she didn't and now has the responsibiity to raise the child.

Who the **** died and put you in charge to make that determination?

weaver2 · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

prometeus said:
Who the **** died and put you in charge to make that determination?

In 1973 the attorney who filed the initial lawsuit in Roe v. Wade was Linda Coffee, a Southern Baptist, and member of Park Cities Baptist Church in Dallas. She was one of the two Texas attorneys who argued Roe before the Supreme Court. Ms Coffee authored a series of legal proceedings which led to the 7-2 Supreme Court decision. Crux of the pleadings...centered on whether the state has a right to interfere in a doctor-patient decision.

The eventual decision, she explained, declared the state may not interfere with the decision to terminate a pregnancy until the fetus becomes “viable” sometime between the beginning of sixth and seventh months of pregnancy......the decision also denied the fetus status as a legal person under the due process clause of the 14th amendment. ”.... the ruling does not relieve each individual of standing firmly behind his or her moral or religious viewpoint about what a person is or when life begins, she emphasized......personhood is separate entirely from a moral or religious view of personhood.

The lead paragraph of the January 31, 1973 issue of the Baptist Press said the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v Wade “advanced the cause of religious liberty, human equality and justice.”

In 1979 Jerry Falwell and Paul Weyrich used the abortion issue to harness the political energy of religious right. For conservative men Ms Coffee's opinion that "(one should stand) firmly behind his or her moral or religious viewpoint about what a person is or when life begins" meant they were in charge of making sure women knew that their right to privacy and legalized abortion was immoral, irresponsible, brutal and uncaring even if it was legal. They conveniently forgot "the decision also denied the fetus status as a legal person under the due process clause of the 14th amendment".

It's an interesting history. Give a bigot a yard of morality and he'll think he is God.

prometeus · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

weaver2 said:
In 1973 the attorney who filed the initial lawsuit in Roe v. Wade was Linda Coffee, a Southern Baptist, and member of Park Cities Baptist Church in Dallas. She was one of the two Texas attorneys who argued Roe before the Supreme Court. Ms Coffee authored a series of legal proceedings which led to the 7-2 Supreme Court decision. Crux of the pleadings...centered on whether the state has a right to interfere in a doctor-patient decision.

The eventual decision, she explained, declared the state may not interfere with the decision to terminate a pregnancy until the fetus becomes “viable” sometime between the beginning of sixth and seventh months of pregnancy......the decision also denied the fetus status as a legal person under the due process clause of the 14th amendment. ”.... the ruling does not relieve each individual of standing firmly behind his or her moral or religious viewpoint about what a person is or when life begins, she emphasized......personhood is separate entirely from a moral or religious view of personhood.

The lead paragraph of the January 31, 1973 issue of the Baptist Press said the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v Wade “advanced the cause of religious liberty, human equality and justice.”

In 1979 Jerry Falwell and Paul Weyrich used the abortion issue to harness the political energy of religious right. For conservative men Ms Coffee's opinion that "(one should stand) firmly behind his or her moral or religious viewpoint about what a person is or when life begins" meant they were in charge of making sure women knew that their right to privacy and legalized abortion was immoral, irresponsible, brutal and uncaring even if it was legal. They conveniently forgot "the decision also denied the fetus status as a legal person under the due process clause of the 14th amendment".

It's an interesting history. Give a bigot a yard of morality and he'll think he is God.

Good post, far too many people really do not understand Roe and are oblivious both to its history and the anti-choice movement history.

Scrabaholic · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Integrityrespec said:
The life of the baby. The woman had the right to practice safe sex, she didn't and now has the responsibiity to raise the child.

There is no responsibility to gestate a pregnancy and give birth.

Over 50% of women who abort did use contraception. And the ones who didn't?:

The most common category of reasons for contraceptive nonuse was the perception that a woman was at low risk of becoming pregnant (cited by 33% of nonusers, including 6% who thought that they or their partner was sterile—Table 3, page 298). Concerns about contraceptive methods were cited by 32% of nonusers and included mainly problems with methods in the past (20%) and fear of side effects from methods (13%). A substantial proportion of women said they had had unexpected sex (27%), with 1% indicating that unwanted sex was a reason for nonuse. Slightly more than one in five women had been ambivalent about contraception. Twelve percent of nonusers had encountered problems accessing contraception, such as financial barriers, and 10% indicated their partner's preferences as a reason for nonuse. The least common reasons that nonusers reported reflected ambivalence about becoming pregnant (5%) and fear that their parents would learn they were sexually active (2%). One-third of nonusers indicated multiple categories of reasons for not having used a method. The most common overlap was between perceived low risk of pregnancy and not expecting to have secontracex (9% of all nonusers—not shown).
ptive-use-among-us-women-having-abortions-2000-2001

Scrabaholic · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
I believe you don't understand, though you seem to understand that with which what you disagree.

What??

Is your contention that a child has no mother, until birth? Nature will disprove that silly idea. Women's body's begin preparing for a child early on. Nature doesn't seem to understand abortion as a reproductive alternative, but rather its preparation deems birth a certainty.

Children are born. A woman is not a mother until she has given birth or adopted.

By the way, the played notion that an opponent is lesser than you conversationally because they disagree with you begins to bend back on the claimant.

I have never said any such thing.

If you don't know what I am writing of, ignore the post.

I can respond whenever I want.

Otherwise, stop the tawdry exercise in self aggrandizing of superiority pretense, by written expression of tongue clucking.
Regards,
CP

Stop lying about me.

Scrabaholic · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Scrabaholic said:
Over 50% of women who abort did use contraception. And the ones who didn't?:

I screwed up the link for the quoted material in my post. It's too late to edit. Here it is:

Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000-2001 | Guttmacher Institute

weaver2 · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
I believe you don't understand, though you seem to understand that with which what you disagree.

Is your contention that a child has no mother, until birth? Nature will disprove that silly idea. Women's body's begin preparing for a child early on. Nature doesn't seem to understand abortion as a reproductive alternative, but rather its preparation deems birth a certainty.

By the way, the played notion that an opponent is lesser than you conversationally because they disagree with you begins to bend back on the claimant.
If you don't know what I am writing of, ignore the post. Otherwise, stop the tawdry exercise in self aggrandizing of superiority pretense, by written expression of tongue clucking.
Regards,
CP

This has got to be from a translating app. It's not structurally English. The syntax is wrong. It is not idiomatically correct and the modifiers are weirdly incompatible.

Lursa · Aug 22, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

weaver2 said:
This has got to be from a translating app. It's not structurally English. The syntax is wrong. It is not idiomatically correct and the modifiers are weirdly incompatible.

:applaud:applaud

I know, right?

:2bow:

concernedpuma · Aug 25, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa said:
:applaud:applaud

I know, right?

:2bow:

Mob assault is not mob truth. Pompous? Me? I have never held that I was above anyone here. My biggest error was to take an opposing view in a thread peopled by fascist. No one in this recent string has interest in discussing the topic. Most are interested only in using the thread as a sounding board for their inalterable views. For that reason and that reason only, until I see genuine discussion with give and take, less the gratuitous insults, I resign my attempt at discourse.
Regards,
CP

concernedpuma · Aug 25, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

weaver2 said:
This has got to be from a translating app. It's not structurally English. The syntax is wrong. It is not idiomatically correct and the modifiers are weirdly incompatible.

Please feel free to proofread and correct. It is clear to you that my syntax and sentence structure needs your strong hand.
Regards,
CP

HIP56948 · Aug 25, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

bongsaway said:
Move to alabama, you'll feel right at home.

Was reading the other day how they (Alabama) was just about last in every quality of life attribute..gee, I wonder which political party ls in power there?..
Are you old enough to remember when Florida was a fairy decent state? I seem to remember when it was somewhere around 7-9 in quality if life. I think? it's 'bout 17th or worse now. (Before the monsters took over)

Lursa · Aug 26, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Mob assault is not mob truth. Pompous? Me? I have never held that I was above anyone here. My biggest error was to take an opposing view in a thread peopled by fascist. No one in this recent string has interest in discussing the topic. Most are interested only in using the thread as a sounding board for their inalterable views. For that reason and that reason only, until I see genuine discussion with give and take, less the gratuitous insults, I resign my attempt at discourse.
Regards,
CP

I asked you a simple question based on your own words, "absolute consideration." And your answer revolved around believing that 'absolute consideration' for a woman's life was to *allow her an abortion if her own life or health was in danger.* (and maybe after rape, I forget)

When I read something like that, I can see that further discussion is a waste of time.

And our opinions on your posts are based on you hiding behind an exceedingly passive-aggressive posting style. If you cant tell a question from the 'narrative' by the use of question marks, I dont know what to tell you.

weaver2 · Aug 26, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Please feel free to proofread and correct. It is clear to you that my syntax and sentence structure needs your strong hand.
Regards,
CP

Well, you need a strong hand for something.

weaver2 · Aug 26, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

concernedpuma said:
Mob assault is not mob truth. Pompous? Me? I have never held that I was above anyone here. My biggest error was to take an opposing view in a thread peopled by fascist. No one in this recent string has interest in discussing the topic. Most are interested only in using the thread as a sounding board for their inalterable views. For that reason and that reason only, until I see genuine discussion with give and take, less the gratuitous insults, I resign my attempt at discourse.
Regards,
CP

Your biggest error was defining discussion as everybody being amazed at you erudition and agreeing with your fatuous pomposities. You second error was defining people that disagreed with you as fascists.

There are many sound and sensible reasons for regulating abortion. None of yours fall into that category.

concernedpuma · Aug 29, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

weaver2 said:
Your biggest error was defining discussion as everybody being amazed at you erudition and agreeing with your fatuous pomposities. You second error was defining people that disagreed with you as fascists.

There are many sound and sensible reasons for regulating abortion. None of yours fall into that category.

This may be a sort of beginning to dialogue. I surely hope so.
I never intended(wouldn't know how) to impress or change another's mind with my words. I never expected my education to trump anyone else. This is the second time you have used pompous in one form or the other describe me. Don't you think calling me that, reflects back on your attitude?

In any event, I wholeheartedly object to Abortion on demand, but understand and support Abortion as required for medical necessity, rape, or incest.

Regards,
CP

Individual · Aug 31, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Gaius46 said:
How’s this for logical? You’re barking up the wrong tree. The baby’s humanity is isn’t what matters. What matters is the woman’s right to self determination. Her right to decide what to do with her body.

Not to mention it being HER creation.
I agree with Democrat Beto O'Rourke, "This is a decision that neither you, nor I, nor the United States government should be making. That’s a decision for the woman to make.”, but it's not a major vote deciding issue for me.
The Woman, even immediately post birth, should after examining her creation should have the Liberty to abort her creation OR allow it to become subjected to the jurisdiction of our Government. Once the choice to record the birth has been made, the laws created by our government then become applicable to the child as a citizen/member of our population.

Gaius46 · Aug 31, 2019

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Individual said:
Not to mention it being HER creation.
I agree with Democrat Beto O'Rourke, "This is a decision that neither you, nor I, nor the United States government should be making. That’s a decision for the woman to make.”, but it's not a major vote deciding issue for me.
The Woman, even immediately post birth, should after examining her creation should have the Liberty to abort her creation OR allow it to become subjected to the jurisdiction of our Government. Once the choice to record the birth has been made, the laws created by our government then become applicable to the child as a citizen/member of our population.

I was with you until the post birth comment. At birth the child is a living human citizen of the United States and the woman’s right to terminate the pregnancy has ended. Actually I put the point where the woman gives up her right to end the pregnancy earlier.

She can give the child up for adoption but she cannot kill it post birth.

[W: 594] A great question for pro abortion types

Lursa

Tenacious

concernedpuma

concernedpuma

year2late

IIJAFM

weaver2

weaver2

weaver2

prometeus

prometeus

weaver2

prometeus

Scrabaholic

certified batshit crazy

Scrabaholic

certified batshit crazy

Scrabaholic

certified batshit crazy

weaver2

Lursa

Tenacious

concernedpuma

concernedpuma

HIP56948

Lursa

Tenacious

weaver2

weaver2

concernedpuma

Individual

Gaius46