• 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!

Norma McCorvey aka Jane Doe was paid by evangelicals to pretend she was anti-abortion

Of course - how can you refute what I said? Lol. No response required from you.
I'm not trying to diaolgue with you on that - I'm just pointing out how silly naive your response was.
Like as if she has to make more than one interviews! :lamo

Hahahaha "DEATHBED CONFESSION."

That's the height of the marketing they'd planned for her. Lol. No need for more than one so-called "confession."


Btw, I don't think she even knew she was dying when she was interviewed.
Yeah, she had a heart condition.....she was ill for quite sometime.

Unread. I told you I will not read this type of post - with the godawful red large font.
 
So what if she was paid? She saw herself as a paid spokesperson.
Where does it say that a spokesperson isn't entitled to any compensation?

She was paid for a good cause: to save innocent lives!


Lol. Before pro-life, she was paid for an evil cause! She was paid to promote killing babies!
Paying someone to promote the killing of the defenseless - nothing can get any more immoral - and disgusting - than that. :shrug:

Lol. A heinous agenda that's comparable, or even worse, than Hitler's!
Oh boy, and you guys are all outraged about this?
Gimme a break. :lol:

Thus......I find all this mock outrage about pro-life to be quite so hypocritical................. and funny.

Unread. Red font.
 
I'm LOL'ing at "butcher unborn babies". That is an oxymoron.
I know. You prefer the term 'slaughter of unborn babies'. But the relevant point remains...does her position, for or against, influence YOUR position on whether or not it is wrong to slaughter unborn babies?
 
I know. You prefer the term 'slaughter of unborn babies'. But the relevant point remains...does her position, for or against, influence YOUR position on whether or not it is wrong to slaughter unborn babies?

Nobody is "slaughtering unborn babies". That phrase is another oxymoron.
 
Nobody is "slaughtering unborn babies". That phrase is another oxymoron.
Sure they are. 800,000 in the us alone every year. That part is without question. The question is did you rely on Jane Roe to make your decision to support the slaughter of the unborn?
 
Sure they are. 800,000 in the us alone every year. That part is without question. The question is did you rely on Jane Roe to make your decision to support the slaughter of the unborn?

The question is: why you want 800,000 women you don't know to give birth to 800,000 children they can't support and you won't support?
 
The question is: why you want 800,000 women you don't know to give birth to 800,000 children they can't support and you won't support?
I think your priorities are totally ****ed up. Is that REALLY your rationale in all this? that being the case why do you support helping homeless people, indigent people, mentally incapacitated people, physically and mentally dependent people? With your logic, isnt it better to just let them die than to spend trillions taking care of them?
 
Sure they are. 800,000 in the us alone every year. That part is without question. The question is did you rely on Jane Roe to make your decision to support the slaughter of the unborn?

There is no "slaughter". EML has no place in the debate. Debate me without it or not at all.
 
I think your priorities are totally ****ed up. Is that REALLY your rationale in all this? that being the case why do you support helping homeless people, indigent people, mentally incapacitated people, physically and mentally dependent people? With your logic, isnt it better to just let them die than to spend trillions taking care of them?

Until you and the Christian Right start passing legislation for the already born children in need of support why would anyone believe your miserable little misanthropic hearts would give one **** about supporting 800,000 additional children. Don't try to claim I'm suggesting welfare. I'm not. The programs that support all children and the families they need are programs the Christian Right has never supported and never will: good public education, universal health insurance, a minimum wage that can support at least one person, maternity leave longer than 5 weeks, reproductive clinics, sane sex education, parks, clean air, water and soil, the CDC, the FDA, WHO, UNICEF, vaccination, childhood TV programming, affordable recreational opportunities. public nursing, well baby clinics, public libraries, cheap contraceptives that women control. The list goes on and on.

Spending trillions? You don't willing spend one dime on programs for healthy families and healthy children.
 
I’m shocked, anyone else?

I had no idea that she started opposing abortion in the first place... so I am pretty shocked about that.
 
I think your priorities are totally ****ed up. Is that REALLY your rationale in all this? that being the case why do you support helping homeless people, indigent people, mentally incapacitated people, physically and mentally dependent people? With your logic, isnt it better to just let them die than to spend trillions taking care of them?

You just answered your own question. One is a person and the fetus simply ain't.
 
You just answered your own question. One is a person and the fetus simply ain't.

Too bad.....personal opinion don't count in a serious discussion.
Lol - what more when it's such an illogical opinion! :lol:
 
I don’t know. This stinks to high heaven. If she wasn’t genuinely pro-life she was the greatest method actor who ever lived.

Father Pavone (who recieved her into the Catholic Church and officiated her funeral, and also spoke to her before she died) is convinced this is nonsense. Her family is likewise saying this is nonsense. I want to see the video first, and then be convinced it’s not edited out of context.

She didn’t just get paid for a couple of speeches, she led many people out of the pro-abortion camp, she broke off a same sex relationship, she was very much involved in the movement.

Yeah, money and stroking someone's ego is a strong incentive.
 
In a deathbed confession Jane Doe admitted to receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars to pretend she was against abortion. She says it was all an act for money.

In a documentary with Jane Doe herself she states that evangelicals paid her to be baptized and claim she was an anti-abortion crusader

Roe vs. Wade plaintiff was paid to turn on abortion: FX doc - Los Angeles Times

Jane Roe Said She Was Paid To Become An Anti-Abortion Crusader | HuffPost

Wow, just wow, it shows that McCorvey was doing something immoral for which she was paid to do by more immoral people, what a sham.

Reminds me of the ex Planned Parenthood workers that were offered a reward to testify. Their video was much beloved by pro-lifer. The video was taken as truth by pro-life sites. The pro-life sites neglected to say they were paid for their testimony. IIRC, when it came to testifying under oath.....probably not enough money for that.


If you have to pay to incentivize …..you get what you pay for. They say what you want to hear in hopes of more money or other incentive.
 
Too bad.....personal opinion don't count in a serious discussion.
Lol - what more when it's such an illogical opinion! :lol:

What constitutes a person is not my personal opinion... but a fact. You should also research 'logic' while you are at it.
 
What constitutes a person is not my personal opinion... but a fact. You should also research 'logic' while you are at it.
:roll:

Do you even understand the meaning of....... LOGIC? Let alone, how to apply it? :lol:




Lol. You, should do some SIMPLE RESEARCH!
Start with the simple dictionary:


here, from Merriam:

person -

1 : human, individual




Lol. What could be the biological offspring of a human couple?
MONKEY?
:lamo





You gave such a silly, juvenile opinion......which no doubt was quote-mined from, or inspired by silly, juvenile sites created by ignorant,
stupid people. I bet you were asleep during your biology class? :mrgreen:

here, so you can catch up with what you no doubt had missed:


The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins.

The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that corroborates that a unique human life starts when the sperm and egg bind to each other in a process of fusion of their respective membranes and a single hybrid cell called a zygote, or one-cell embryo, is created.
When Human Life Begins | American College of Pediatricians



Btw, I also gave you a sample on how you refute or maintain your argument: you provide something credible to back it up!
Pro-choice people hardly do that.



That's the problem with a lot of you pro-choice. You're all giving mostly cookie-cutter responses that you guys cluelessly harvested
from clueless sites!

This response is an appropriate, energy-saver one: one size fits all. :lamo

Your opinion defies logic!
 
Last edited:
:roll:

Do you even understand the meaning of....... LOGIC? Let alone, apply it? :lol:




Lol. You, should do some SIMPLE RESEARCH!
Start with the simple dictionary:


here, from Merriam:

person -

1 : human, individual




Lol. What could be the offspring of a human couple?
MONKEY?
:lamo



You gave such a silly, juvenile opinion......which no doubt was quote-mined from, or inspired by silly, juvenile sites created by ignorant,
stupid people.

That's the problem with a lot of you pro-choice. You're all giving mostly cookie-cutter responses that you guys cluelessly harvested
from clueless sites!

Your opinion defies logic!

IMHO, in the context of the abortion debate (a debate about the legality of abortion), I look at "person" only in the legal sense. (this is a discussion revolving around SCOTUS case)

"Personhood" is being sought by pro-lifer. In other words, the fetus is not a person, but prolifers are pushing for personhood to attach to zygote, embryo and fetus.

I understand that there are other meanings available.
 
IMHO, in the context of the abortion debate (a debate about the legality of abortion), I look at "person" only in the legal sense. (this is a discussion revolving around SCOTUS case)

"Personhood" is being sought by pro-lifer. In other words, the fetus is not a person, but prolifers are pushing for personhood to attach to zygote, embryo and fetus.

I understand that there are other meanings available.

Never mind legal sense! That's a desperate attempt by pro-choice to make the murder of the fetus acceptable.
They'll try anything to get away with murder!

Trying to squirm around it (perhaps to alleviate your own guilt for supporting and promoting what is heinously immoral and evil).....doesn't change the fact that a person is a human, and that the life of a human/person begins at conception!


The zygote/fetus .....is as human as a toddler..... an adolescent.....a prepubescent...... a teen.....

.....an adult....an elderly!


Being a fetus is part of the whole package!


You can't become a person without having been conceived!



Being a fetus does not make you any less human,

any more than being paralyzed......or, being unbelievably and jaw-droppingly stupid......

............. doesn't make a person a less human!
 
Last edited:
:roll:

Do you even understand the meaning of....... LOGIC? Let alone, how to apply it? :lol:




Lol. You, should do some SIMPLE RESEARCH!
Start with the simple dictionary:


here, from Merriam:

person -

1 : human, individual




Lol. What could be the biological offspring of a human couple?
MONKEY?
:lamo





You gave such a silly, juvenile opinion......which no doubt was quote-mined from, or inspired by silly, juvenile sites created by ignorant,
stupid people. I bet you were asleep during your biology class? :mrgreen:

here, so you can catch up with what you no doubt had missed:



When Human Life Begins | American College of Pediatricians



Btw, I also gave you a sample on how you refute or maintain your argument: you provide something credible to back it up!
Pro-choice people hardly do that.



That's the problem with a lot of you pro-choice. You're all giving mostly cookie-cutter responses that you guys cluelessly harvested
from clueless sites!

This response is an appropriate, energy-saver one: one size fits all. :lamo

Your opinion defies logic!

I won't debate a person that doesn't understand simple definitions so I will just defeat you on this one point as see if you understand. Since you don't even understand that in your own definition of person it says "individual" But let's move on to your whopping victory celebration!! Offspring.


Definition of offspring
1a: the product of the reproductive processes of an animal or plant : YOUNG, PROGENY
The disease can be transmitted from parent to offspring.
b: CHILD



Definition of child (Entry 1 of 3)
1a: a young person especially between infancy and puberty


Child | Definition of Child by Merriam-Webster

That means BORN. Not in the womb. BORN.
 
Never mind legal sense! That's a desperate attempt by pro-choice to make the murder of the fetus acceptable.
They'll try anything to get away with murder!

Call it murder for all I care. Aborting/Murdering the fetus should be and is legal. So much for your squirming around immorality. :lol:
 
I won't debate a person that doesn't understand simple definitions so I will just defeat you on this one point as see if you understand. Since you don't even understand that in your own definition of person it says "individual" But let's move on to your whopping victory celebration!! Offspring.


Definition of offspring
1a: the product of the reproductive processes of an animal or plant : YOUNG, PROGENY
The disease can be transmitted from parent to offspring.
b: CHILD
:lol:

It's going over your head. let me prove it:


You want to use child instead of offspring - okay.

What could be the biological offspring child of a human couple?
MONKEY?
:lamo



What could be the fetus created by a human couple?
GORILLA?



See? Did it change anything? :lol:






Definition of child (Entry 1 of 3)
1a: a young person especially between infancy and puberty


Child | Definition of Child by Merriam-Webster

That means BORN. Not in the womb. BORN.
:roll:


That doesn't make the fetus a lesser human.
The definition given is a description of another stage of development!

Oh boy. This is pathetic.

Btw, I'm not "debating" with you. I'm not even attempting to have a serious discussion with you.....how can I?
You've proven you don't even understand the issue that I've raised with you. :lol:

All I'm doing now is try to explain it to you as clearly....and as simple as I can.
 
Last edited:
:lol:

It's going over your head. let me prove it:


You want to use child instead of offspring - okay.

What could be the biological offspring child of a human couple?
MONKEY?
:lamo



What could be the fetus created by a human couple?
GORILLA?



See? Did it change anything? :lol:







:roll:


That doesn't make the fetus a lesser human.
The definition given is a description of another stage of development!

Oh boy. This is pathetic. Btw, I'm not "debating" with you. I'm not even attempting to have a serious discussion with you.....how can I?
You've proven you don't even understand the issue that I've raised with you. :lol:

Have your posts always been this stupid?
 
Last edited:
Never mind legal sense! That's a desperate attempt by pro-choice to make the murder of the fetus acceptable.
They'll try anything to get away with murder!

Trying to squirm around it (perhaps to alleviate your own guilt for supporting and promoting what is heinously immoral and evil).....doesn't change the fact that a person is a human, and that the life of a human/person begins at conception!


The zygote/fetus .....is as human as a toddler..... an adolescent.....a prepubescent...... a teen.....

.....an adult....an elderly!


Being a fetus is part of the whole package!


You can't become a person without having been conceived!



Being a fetus does not make you any less human,

any more than being paralyzed......or, being unbelievably and jaw-droppingly stupid......

............. doesn't make a person a less human!

When elective abortion is concerned, the decisions a woman makes about HER body (being the only legal person/human being involved in that decision) is NONE of your business. Nor is it the business of the government.
 
Back
Top Bottom