• 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!

Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense they know is not true about abortion.

Abortion is murder regardless of whether contraceptives are used or a couple is married and already has children.

no matter how many times you post this lie it will never be true nore will you be able to defend it in any way whatsoever

Facts:
abortion =/= murder
 
Technically lynching a slave wasn’t murder. Being pedantic is stupid. It’s still homicide even if current law says it’s ‘legal’.

FACTS
abortion =/= murder
abortion =/= homicide

ANYBODY that disagrees simply factually prove otherwise, thanks!
 
I think you're wrong, since that's the primary purpose of abortions.

:shock:

:lamo:lamo


wow thats hilarious. Move proof of what this topic is about.
 
Why post the statement "Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense they know is not true
about abortion" when the statement "Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense" will do?
 
(eye roll)Not HOW do you keep track? WHY do you keep track
"Keep track" implies I do it routinely. (So does "keep a tally".) I did it once for sake of argument in this thread.

If the deformations are catastrophic the fetus is not viable.

You were talking about cases where the fetus did not have a catastrophic defect.
Perhaps catastrophic foetal defects are the one extraordinary pocket of medicine where the average doctor's prognosis is 100% accurate, but I doubt it. Doubly so when there's a distressed mother present, the doctor may not regard the foetus as a human being, and his prognosis could well reflect what he believes will be least distressing for mom.

The bottom line being that not even the diagnosis of a catastrophic defect morally justifies the operation.

And yes, I know you vehemently disagree.
 
Perhaps catastrophic foetal defects are the one extraordinary pocket of medicine where the average doctor's prognosis is 100% accurate, but I doubt it. Doubly so when there's a distressed mother present, the doctor may not regard the foetus as a human being, and his prognosis could well reflect what he believes will be least distressing for mom.

The bottom line being that not even the diagnosis of a catastrophic defect morally justifies the operation.

And yes, I know you vehemently disagree.

I read this as your personal opinion, yes? Did you develop your opinion on your own or does it come from some authority? If so, what authority? I guess I'm asking you, "who says?"

Not the Constitution nor the law of the (US) land.

Not the great majority of Americans, not at least 90% of the American people when polled...in all polls. Nearly all Americans support medically-necessary abortions.

Not the majority of the world at large...no human rights organizations, national or global...support rights for the unborn (except some religious orgs).​

The morality of this issue is highly subjective, but most people do find common ground in supporting medically-necessary abortions which includes termination of severely defective fetuses.

Your personal opinion/belief on this issue is not a problem for anyone. Each person is welcome to their own...including women that would disagree with you and choose to have an abortion.

But I am curious, since your opinion is so extreme and not held in common with most (yes, most) people...do you believe that your opinion/belief should be forced on women by law? If so, knowing most people do not concur with you, how would you justify that?
 
"Keep track" implies I do it routinely. (So does "keep a tally".) I did it once for sake of argument in this thread.


Perhaps catastrophic foetal defects are the one extraordinary pocket of medicine where the average doctor's prognosis is 100% accurate, but I doubt it. Doubly so when there's a distressed mother present, the doctor may not regard the foetus as a human being, and his prognosis could well reflect what he believes will be least distressing for mom.

The bottom line being that not even the diagnosis of a catastrophic defect morally justifies the operation.

And yes, I know you vehemently disagree.

And I disagree with you.
Your opinion is just your own opinion. You do NOT hold the moral high ground especially in cases of Catastrophic fetal defects.

There are only 4 doctors in the United States ( as of 2013 who perform abortions past 20 weeks.

From the following.

In 2013, there were four doctors in the country who performed abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy, according to Slate. (Current numbers could be even lower.)...

Dr. Gunter supplied a few facts of her own. Only 1.3 percent of abortions happen at, or after, 21 weeks, she said, and 80 percent of those are the results of catastrophic defects with the fetus.

Dr. Gunter continued with a powerful explanation of why women generally seek out procedures like a late-term abortion.

Sometimes it can take weeks or even longer to fully understand what is going on with the fetus.

Some patients might think they can make it to term and then at 34 weeks cave and ask to be delivered because they just can’t bear one more person asking them about their baby. Do they just smile and walk away or say, 'Well, actually, my baby has no brain and will die at birth?' Some women go to term and others can’t.

To judge these women for requesting an early delivery is cruel on so many levels.

Which States Offer Late-Term Abortions? They Are Very Difficult To Access



And yes the early induction of a non= viable fetus ( even in the hospital ) is an abortion.
An early c-section of a non- viable fetus is also an abortion. #TheMoreYouKnow


Those early induction or c-sections of non-viable unborns are included in state abortion stats of all states that keep track of abortions.
 
Last edited:
Why post the statement "Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense they know is not true
about abortion" when the statement "Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense" will do?

It is a bit redundant. I put it in because they have to know they are reposting nonsense because they have been told many times, the actual facts. They post the nonsense again sometimes on the next page.
 
Those early induction or c-sections of non-viable unborns are included in state abortion stats of all states that keep track of abortions.

And I think early induction of such pregnacies in hospitals is probably much more frequent that than the clinics. I will have to look that up.
 
1.) no mater how many times you try to call it an "inconvenience" that doesnt make it true or even a logical claim
So I SHOULDN'T believe that an entirely healthy pregnancy is an inconveniance to the woman? don't threaten me with a good time!
2.) there was none, again thats a false narrative you are trying to sell that doesnt

That's not what the article says. It's just a matter of it being correlative or causative. I take it, you're against further studies?
 
Not legally in the US:

The law is not how facts are determined. The law also says a tomato is a vegetable. Science versus law. One is reality. The other is fiction.
 
You do understand the title of this thread is "Most conservative males keep reposting nonsense they know is not true about abortion."?

I do. I am demonstrating how full of **** it is.
 
And I disagree with you.
Your opinion is just your own opinion. You do NOT hold the moral high ground especially in cases of Catastrophic fetal defects.

There are only 4 doctors in the United States ( as of 2013 who perform abortions past 20 weeks.

From the following.



Which States Offer Late-Term Abortions? They Are Very Difficult To Access



And yes the early induction of a non= viable fetus ( even in the hospital ) is an abortion.
An early c-section of a non- viable fetus is also an abortion. #TheMoreYouKnow


Those early induction or c-sections of non-viable unborns are included in state abortion stats of all states that keep track of abortions.

If early induction and c-sections are viable options this means that intentionally poisoning and ripping apart an unborn human is not required.

Why is it still legal?
 
I read this as your personal opinion, yes? Did you develop your opinion on your own or does it come from some authority? If so, what authority? I guess I'm asking you, "who says?"
The body is the temple of God's Holy Spirit. Only God has the ability to grant life, and only He has the authority to take it away. Abortions are not among the circumstances where He permits man to take human life, excepting those performed to preserve the life of the mother. This is the only true and defensible conclusion we can draw from scripture.

In saying this, I don't mean to elicit "This is your religion, not mine." counterarguments, "The Bible doesn't say abortion is wrong." counterarguments, or @minnie616's erroneous appeal to "breath of life". Post them if you must, but I assure you I've heard them, analyzed them, pored over them with all diligence, discussed them with the ministry, and rejected them.

Instead, I'll simply posit the following: I'm either right or I'm wrong. Our debating morality here won't change whether I'm right or wrong. Frankly, no Christian should be coming to an Internet forum to decide whether I'm right or wrong. They should prayerfully seek out a church that lives by every word of God and consult the ministry for judgment. I'm answering your questions here not because I hope to persuade you of the correctness of my position, but as a courtesy to explain why I have no desire to debate the subject.

This thread shouldn't have turned into another abortion debate. The topic in the OP was conservative men speaking falsehoods about abortion. That arc has taken @weaver2 and I to #365, which she has yet to respond to. This will be my last post not in that arc.

Finally, as an answer to your last two questions, see the final paragraph of #326.
 
If early induction and c-sections are viable options this means that intentionally poisoning and ripping apart an unborn human is not required.

Why is it still legal?

Catholic hospitals and many other hospitals will not perform them ever though they are legal in cases where the fetus is non viable or irreparable damage to a major bodily function would occur if the pregnancy continued.


That is why OB/GYNs whose patients have those complications after 20 weeks send their patients to one of the 4 clinic doctors in the United States who will perform abortions for those extreme cases.

By the way:

If the unborn has already died or is dying it must be quickly removed to prevent the woman from getting a septic infection. Induction of labor can take 24 to 72 hours on average to complete the abortion. Therefore a D & E abortion ( dismemberment abortion ) is usually performed to prevent a life threatening septic infection.
 
Last edited:
Wrong. All of those are homicide.

Yes, that's what I wrote. I also wrote they are not murder.

All homicide is not murder, they are not synonyms.
 
The law is not how facts are determined. The law also says a tomato is a vegetable. Science versus law. One is reality. The other is fiction.

Legal facts are indeed determined by interpretations of the Constitution and other legal premises. And that law is based on the science as well, using biology as a foundation.

Where in science does it ever say that all human life has a right to life? Nowhere. Science is objective and applies no value. Rights are a man-made concept and subjective.
 
If early induction and c-sections are viable options this means that intentionally poisoning and ripping apart an unborn human is not required.

Why is it still legal?

The patient is the pregnant woman. It depends why the abortion is taking place. If it is imminent life or death, a crash C-section may be the safest for the patient. It depends how far along the patient is. Some late term abortions are early inducement of labor - my guess these are primarily for severe fetal defects. So the abortion is simply inducing labor. Remember that labor can be very stressful to the woman's body. So a doctor may not want the woman to go through labor yet C-section is not an option.

Bottom line, it is not our decision. It is a decision between a woman and her doctor .
 
The body is the temple of God's Holy Spirit. Only God has the ability to grant life, and only He has the authority to take it away. Abortions are not among the circumstances where He permits man to take human life, excepting those performed to preserve the life of the mother. This is the only true and defensible conclusion we can draw from scripture.

Thank you, that's why I wrote this:

Your personal opinion/belief on this issue is not a problem for anyone. Each person is welcome to their own...including women that would disagree with you and choose to have an abortion.

But I am curious, since your opinion is so extreme and not held in common with most (yes, most) people...do you believe that your opinion/belief should be forced on women by law? If so, knowing most people do not concur with you, how would you justify that?

Can you answer the bold tho? If not, that's fine. It means that someone would be willing to let the Bible overrule the Constitution...and when we get to that point, the discussion is more like discussing fantasy more than an issue. We live in the US, not a theocracy and it really just stretches things too far. But each person in America has the right to believe as you do...or as I do...that's also protected by the Const.
 
The body is the temple of God's Holy Spirit. Only God has the ability to grant life, and only He has the authority to take it away. Abortions are not among the circumstances where He permits man to take human life, excepting those performed to preserve the life of the mother. This is the only true and defensible conclusion we can draw from scripture.

In saying this, I don't mean to elicit "This is your religion, not mine." counterarguments, "The Bible doesn't say abortion is wrong." counterarguments, or @minnie616's erroneous appeal to "breath of life". Post them if you must, but I assure you I've heard them, analyzed them, pored over them with all diligence, discussed them with the ministry, and rejected them.
.


Yes , my religion teaches that ensoulment begins with the “ breath of life “ when the newborn takes its first breath.

It is our belief that God values souls and knows that 2/3 of all fertilized human eggs do not survive past a couple of weeks.



~~~~~~

I belive that fetuses are just the shells that a soul enters into at birth.
And if one is miscarried or aborted a soul has not been lost.
About two thirds of zygotes ( fertilized eggs ) are never implanted or self abort about the first week after implanting.
It does not matter that they had "unique" DNA.
They passed right though the body.



I had two miscarriages. my second one was a very deformed fetus.
If I had not had those two miscarriages my two youngest might never have been born
because my husband and I had wanted and planned for 4 children.


God sometimes works in very mysterious ways.
Sometimes things are not meant to be.
We have no idea if sometimes abortions are a part of God's plan,
just as miscarriages may sometimes be a part of God's plan.


I had two miscarriages between my 2 ed and 3rd child.
The first miscarriage was early on. I was about 5 to 6 weeks gestation.
If I had carried to term the due date would have been in March.
During my 4th pregnancy I went into premature labor when I was about 5 months gestation.
I was looking forward to a healthy baby.

My doctor was out of town so when I went into early labor we ended up at the ER.
They took a pregnancy test and told me I was no longer pregnant.
The doctor covering for my doctor did not want to come in that day so they shot me full of med's to try to stop the labor.
Then they took me to my room on the maternity floor to spend the night.
When I was transferring from the gurney to the bed the fetus was expelled and I accidentally saw it and how deformed it was.

It was a nightmare.

My doctor told me that the fetus was so deformed that even if I had carried it longer it never would have been viable.


If it had been a healthy pregnancy and I had carried it to term my due date would have been in November.

A little more than year later I learned I was pregnant again.
I was very worried I might miscarry again.
I had been irregular so the doctor sent me for an ultrasound to monitor how far along I was and if everything looked normal.
I was told my due date was the end of January.

I had some false labor mid January ,went to the hospital and I was sent back home.
I had false labor again the end of January but it stopped so the doctor ordered meds to induce the labor.
The contractions were coming too hard and too fast. They were worried about the stress on the unborn so they stopped the contractions.
My doctor ordered fetal activity tests 2 times a week for the next 4 weeks.
To make a long story shorter our "Miracle" child was born March 2 ed.
Two and half years later our youngest was born in November.

March and November ... God chose the same months my miscarried ones were due.
 
Last edited:
If early induction and c-sections are viable options this means that intentionally poisoning and ripping apart an unborn human is not required.

Why is it still legal?

Because the govt has no business practicing medicine. That is for doctors to do - they will recommend the procedure that is safest for the woman.
 
1.) So I SHOULDN'T believe that an entirely healthy pregnancy is an inconveniance to the woman? don't threaten me with a good time!


That's not what the article says. It's just a matter of it being correlative or causative. I take it, you're against further studies?

1.) you can believe what ever dishonest illogica stuff you like but honest educated objective people will continue to point out the nonsense it is
2.) wrong again like many pointed out what YOU claim the article says and means andd what it actually does are two different things hence why again much to my delight your claims have completely failed
 
1.) you can believe what ever dishonest illogica stuff you like but honest educated objective people will continue to point out the nonsense it is
I don't see why it's illogical to say "that's a baby forming in the womb, let's be cautious with how we approach it". If you're against abortion regulations so much, then why don't you boycott countries like the UK and Poland?
2.) wrong again like many pointed out what YOU claim the article says and means andd what it actually does are two different things hence why again much to my delight your claims have completely failed
You took a single line from the article, and ran with it. That's not my problem, that's yours. I didn't say that it is indeed true that abortions lead to mental illness, in fact, I pointed out an ACTUAL academic criticism of the study myself. You did not. You just deny everything it says, because one line says "there is no FOUNDED connection..." of course there is no founded connection, the study was correlative, not causative. My main concern was that, with abortion, you lose any potential for a healthy life, a productive life that could lead on to leadership even. Just as it is to my dismay that you do not support further studies. Do you not care about women?
 
DarkWizard12;10708196241.) said:
I don't see why it's illogical to say "that's a baby forming in the womb, let's be cautious with how we approach it". If you're against abortion regulations so much, then why don't you boycott countries like the UK and Poland?

You took a single line from the article, and ran with it. That's not my problem, that's yours. I didn't say that it is indeed true that abortions lead to mental illness, in fact, I pointed out an ACTUAL academic criticism of the study myself. You did not. You just deny everything it says, because one line says "there is no FOUNDED connection..." of course there is no founded connection, the study was correlative, not causative. My main concern was that, with abortion, you lose any potential for a healthy life, a productive life that could lead on to leadership even. Just as it is to my dismay that you do not support further studies. Do you not care about women?
this is going to be fun watching your dishonest posts fail at every turn is great. lol

1.) what you see doesnt matter to facts and reality. and now back peddling only further exposes your false claims. Your claim characterizing abortion as a right to be inconvenienced remains factually wrong.
2.) Wrong again its 1000% factually YOUR problem because you just posted ANOTHER lie..

If you disagree by all means support your lie and tell us "what single line from the article i ran with" and prove it. You wont cause you cant

:popcorn2:
 
Back
Top Bottom