• 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!

What attracts anti-abortion males to this site?

EMNofSeattle said:
Yes. Everyone in the pro-life movement.
Click to expand...

So what do pro-lifers do after an unwanted baby is born to make sure it is immediateely adopted into a wonderful loving home and always be treated like a biological child of the adoptive parents?

Do all pro-lifers totally understand the realities of what usually happens to unwanted kids? What do pro-lifers want them to do? What do they want their parents to do? The answer is very personal.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The constitution to the extent it authorizes murder is wrong and I do not accept the constitution as a sufficient argument to establish morality
Click to expand...

Abortion never has been or will be murder. When you learn the word "murder" you will have no problem understanding this simple fact.
 
weaver2 said:
OK let's say that's what you are doing. Why here? Why on this site?
Click to expand...

I don't normally participate in such threads. I cannot strand listening to people who seem to have no concern for the rresults of their irresponsibility.

I was answering the question in the OP. This was the moral reason why men oppose abortion that was left out of post #1. Similar to why many men choose to serve in the military. To protect others.

The assumption seemed to be "control." I don't think very many men are like that, unless it is their child being aborted, but even then... Maybe they really want the child.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The constitution to the extent it authorizes murder is wrong and I do not accept the constitution as a sufficient argument to establish morality
Click to expand...

The same argument could be made for the death penalty. All it requires is to claim that it is murder as you are doing.

And again. Weigh the morality of denying woman the very right you would not deny yourself, the right to bodily autonomy.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I don't normally participate in such threads. I cannot strand listening to people who seem to have no concern for the rresults of their irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

Coming from a climate change denier, a person who cares nothing for the lives destroyed so long as you can push an idiot ideology, how hypocritical.


I was answering the question in the OP. This was the moral reason why men oppose abortion that was left out of post #1. Similar to why many men choose to serve in the military. To protect others.

The assumption seemed to be "control." I don't think very many men are like that, unless it is their child being aborted, but even then... Maybe they really want the child.
Click to expand...

You do not have a moral reason when you cannot even describe why the word innocent is being used for something that has done nothing to be labeled innocent or guilty.

Your not thinking something is not a good reason to assume something is so.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I don't normally participate in such threads. I cannot strand listening to people who seem to have no concern for the rresults of their irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

American women know when they have sex, if they get pregnant, that they have a few responsible options, abortion is one of them.

Perhaps this list will put your mind at rest. I'm sure it could be longer.

--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 believe you 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 child waiting will find a home. Those children waiting may be suffering, the unborn suffers nothing.​

Doesnt this demonstrate that abortion can indeed be a responsible option? If not, why not?
 
Last edited:
Lord of Planar said:
Not many, but at least many states are limiting third trimester abortions.
Click to expand...
If they are having an abortion that late in the pregnancy, it is for life or health of the mother or a severe deformity, life impacting condition of the fetus. If you have evidence to the contrary, post it. It should be from a non biased, reputable source.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I don’t know of anyone in the pro-life movement who supports murder after birth.
Click to expand...
Murder is a legal term. Plenty support various reasons killing is justified after birth. Murder is only murder when someone is killed in a way that violates a law, cannot be legally justified.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The death penalty is not murder.

There is no moral construction which makes the death penalty per se murder. Civil authorities have the obligation to protect the public peace and to punish offenses against such. You as the individual have no such prerogative to wantonly cause another’s death
Click to expand...
Neither is abortion.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Taylor said:
The same number as the number of death row inmates who are executed 1 minute before they successfully escape prison.
Click to expand...
How many abortions occur within a time frame that if 1 minute later they were born, they would survive?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The constitution to the extent it authorizes murder is wrong and I do not accept the constitution as a sufficient argument to establish morality
Click to expand...
Your morality doesnt have any bearing on the Constitution or its protections for actual born people.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Lord of Planar said:
Not at all. It's a person's value that doesn't make the distinction between viable tissue and a child.

Why is it that inside the womb, it's OK to kill the innocent life, but 1 minute later when born, it's not?

This doesn't make sense to me. Other than an excuse to to shoulder the burden.
Click to expand...
Because when it is born it is no longer physically attached to its mother and free to interact with the real world and conceptualise all of its expressions. An unborn baby is, just as the prefix signifies, not born and what is not born is not an individual and thus cannot have any rights.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The death penalty is not murder.

There is no moral construction which makes the death penalty per se murder. Civil authorities have the obligation to protect the public peace and to punish offenses against such. You as the individual have no such prerogative to wantonly cause another’s death
Click to expand...
Abortion is not murder.

There is no construction which makes abortion per se murder. Civil authorities have the obligation to preotect each and every citizen's right to liberty and to punish those who try to infringe upon or restrict this right.Only you as an individual have the right to make decisions about your own life and body.
 
soylentgreen said:
Coming from a climate change denier, a person who cares nothing for the lives destroyed so long as you can push an idiot ideology, how hypocritical.




You do not have a moral reason when you cannot even describe why the word innocent is being used for something that has done nothing to be labeled innocent or guilty.

Your not thinking something is not a good reason to assume something is so.
Click to expand...

Your thinking is really alien to me. As for your name-calling.... I am not a climate denier. You are obviously too ignorant to know the difference between denying science and being a proper scientific skeptic. I subscribe to several scientific journals that contain peer reviewed papers, and I read that material rather than the pundits out there. The fact that you use the improper label "denier" shows you are indoctrinated as well.

Good day.
 
Lursa said:
American women know when they have sex, if they get pregnant, that they have a few responsible options, abortion is one of them.

Perhaps this list will put your mind at rest. I'm sure it could be longer.

--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 believe you 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 child waiting will find a home. Those children waiting may be suffering, the unborn suffers nothing.​

Doesnt this demonstrate that abortion can indeed be a responsible option? If not, why not?
Click to expand...

The irresponsibility is having sex if you are not prepared for the risk of getting pregnant. Claiming abortion as an option makes it even worse, and now you are including abortion as birth control alternatives.

I'm sorry, to me this is idiotic. I wonder what other ways people conduct irresponsibility in life.
 
Lord of Planar said:
To defend innocent life.
Click to expand...

Most fetus defenders are concerned with only this one example of "innocent life". Other innocents are labeled, ridiculed, denied respect and certainly not defended.

Nope, defending the innocent looks like a cover.
 
weaver2 said:
Most fetus defenders are concerned with only this one example of "innocent life". Other innocents are labeled, ridiculed, denied respect and certainly not defended.

Nope, defending the innocent looks like a cover.
Click to expand...

Sound like the perspective of a closed mind to me, who refuses to consider the diversity of though.
 
roguenuke said:
How many abortions occur within a time frame that if 1 minute later they were born, they would survive?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yes, a much better question - hopefully the vast majority.
 
I've had enough of this immoral topic. I'm bailing.

Good luck you'all
 
To control women.

Well, unless their wife or daughter needs an abortion then they sneak off and do it.

Don't you just know that our president has paid for, and business expensed, at least half a dozen abortions.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The constitution to the extent it authorizes murder is wrong and I do not accept the constitution as a sufficient argument to establish morality
Click to expand...

Again, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. Why do you think it is?
 
Blue Donkey said:
Again, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. Why do you think it is?
Click to expand...

It is the intentional infliction of death on another human being by an individual. Which is always murder, the exact text of the penal code not withstanding it is murder on a moral level.

If the penal code was amended to declare any other group of human beings less then human and could be killed on your whim that does not make that action right.

You keep trying to argue the exact wording of specific laws as an argument. It is irrelevant, I don’t recognize the penal code as the final arbiter of morality. We know what murder is and you can’t defend abortion without weasel word definitions.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
It is the intentional infliction of death on another human being by an individual. Which is always murder, the exact text of the penal code not withstanding it is murder on a moral level.

If the penal code was amended to declare any other group of human beings less then human and could be killed on your whim that does not make that action right.

You keep trying to argue the exact wording of specific laws as an argument. It is irrelevant, I don’t recognize the penal code as the final arbiter of morality. We know what murder is and you can’t defend abortion without weasel word definitions.
Click to expand...

I am not talking about morality. I am just talking about what the word "murder" means. Morality is a totally separate issue.

The definition of murder is very specific - not just legally, but also in every English dictoinary. So abortion is not murder because it is excluded from these definitions, which are not about the morality of ending an unwanted prengancy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom