• 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!

Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

Patriotic Voter

Patriotic Voter

Smarter than trolls
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
30,488
Reaction score
8,841
Location
Flaw-i-duh
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It seems everyone who claims to be a pro-lifer is unable to provide a single shred of factual evidence that the mother's quality of life is completely irrelevant, then has no interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. You are not a pro-lifer if all you care about is the mere existence of unwanted babies, not every baby's life. You know what can happen to babies who should not exist today because the mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier. If you were taught anything about female puberty in school, you know girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade. If you ever suffered the problems pregnant women have literally every day just because they are pregnant, there is no reason to wish that on women who tried to avoid conceiving offspring. It is not about nine months versus a whole life, but nine months and a whole life.
 
Last edited:
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

You've made it quite known on this forum that you think all pro-lifers hate women and born children. What would be the point in trying to convince you otherwise? You're set in your ways - you're set in your opinions.
 
Josie said:
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

You've made it quite known on this forum that you think all pro-lifers hate women and born children. What would be the point in trying to convince you otherwise? You're set in your ways - you're set in your opinions.
Click to expand...

It is not "what would be the point" It is "can you make a point. "

No matter how set in their ways a pro lifer is. It is still easy enough to sink any argument they make and make them look foolish.

Whether they accept their defeat or not is irrelevant even expected.

but the best a pro lifer can do is as you have done. Nothing.
 
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?"

Personally, I don't think so. From all I have read in their posts, it appears "pro-lifers" care far more about forcing women to stay pregnant and give birth as punishment for choosing to have sex, which is basically controlling women, than anything else.
 
Josie said:
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

You've made it quite known on this forum that you think all pro-lifers hate women and born children. What would be the point in trying to convince you otherwise? You're set in your ways - you're set in your opinions.
Click to expand...

Why bother to respond with a non-response?
 
Prolifers, want to attack abortion on a state basis. Thus, they can drive out the MINORITY women, by their harsh SYSTEMIC RACISM, who will get abortions in blue states. Thus, the white women in those red states, will be forced to have their WHITE children. For as Oreilly said, WHITE FOLKS are not reproducing fast enough. The plan is to pack red states with white folks, so that at least on a state basis, they can remain the dominant culture.
 
Guyzilla said:
Prolifers, want to attack abortion on a state basis. Thus, they can drive out the MINORITY women, by their harsh SYSTEMIC RACISM, who will get abortions in blue states. Thus, the white women in those red states, will be forced to have their WHITE children. For as Oreilly said, WHITE FOLKS are not reproducing fast enough. The plan is to pack red states with white folks, so that at least on a state basis, they can remain the dominant culture.
Click to expand...

Not saying this is part of any plan but what is wrong with it? I've heard people advocating for minorities for years bragging about how whites will one day be a minority and that then they (blacks, Hispanics) will "rule".
 
Blue Donkey said:
It seems everyone who claims to be a pro-lifer is unable to provide a single shred of factual evidence that the mother's quality of life is completely irrelevant, then has no interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. You are not a pro-lifer if all you care about is the mere existence of unwanted babies, not every baby's life. You know what can happen to babies who should not exist today because the mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier. If you were taught anything about female puberty in school, you know girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade. If you ever suffered the problems pregnant women have literally every day just because they are pregnant, there is no reason to wish that on women who tried to avoid conceiving offspring. It is not about nine months versus a whole life, but nine months and a whole life.
Click to expand...

The problem to me is when the "quality of life" argument is meant to mean "shovel huge amounts of money at them"
 
Blue Donkey said:
It seems everyone who claims to be a pro-lifer is unable to provide a single shred of factual evidence that the mother's quality of life is completely irrelevant, then has no interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. You are not a pro-lifer if all you care about is the mere existence of unwanted babies, not every baby's life. You know what can happen to babies who should not exist today because the mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier. If you were taught anything about female puberty in school, you know girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade. If you ever suffered the problems pregnant women have literally every day just because they are pregnant, there is no reason to wish that on women who tried to avoid conceiving offspring. It is not about nine months versus a whole life, but nine months and a whole life.
Click to expand...
"Quality of life"? Seriously? I'm pretty sure she knew the risk of having unprotected sex and took it willingly. There are any number of contraceptive methods available.

Also, not all "surprise babies" are mistreated or abused.
 
Josie said:
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

You've made it quite known on this forum that you think all pro-lifers hate women and born children. What would be the point in trying to convince you otherwise? You're set in your ways - you're set in your opinions.
Click to expand...


And you've made no effort to present a view that you do care about mothers and children.
 
weaver2 said:
And you've made no effort to present a view that you do care about mothers and children.
Click to expand...

I have. Over and over and over and over again. It doesn't matter to most pro-choicers. They want to believe what they want to believe.
 
weaver2 said:
And you've made no effort to present a view that you do care about mothers and children.
Click to expand...
That was an instant, irritated pop-off answer. Let me re-phrase it. Pro-life advocates have shown very little evidence that they understand or care to understand about women faced with unplanned, unwanted pregnancies or the children born from them. In fact it's safe to say that no pro-life advocate has ever posted anything that indicates they care at all about women faced with such pregnancies other than to claim they shouldn't be having sex if they can't support a child. You seem to think you have shown tremendous empathy for women and children. Your posts say that empathy is not extended to women faced with an unwanted pregnancy that will harm, may even destroy her already born family.

The only reason abortion proponents call unborn offspring "clumps of cells" is to try to take the emotion of it so they feel better about killing a young human. You can't take emotions out of it. You can lie to yourself and say that it's just like a tumor or a parasite, but that's just what it is -- lying. Getting pregnant is emotional. Being pregnant is emotional. Thinking about your unborn is emotional. Feeling your unborn grow inside of you is emotional. If you see nothing emotional about killing your unborn child then you're either exceptionally ignorant of basic biology or you're some kind of sociopath.
Click to expand...

Josie said:
I'm sorry -- are you under the impression that Planned Parenthood is the only way for women to get medical care?
Because, just like emotions, race can't be eliminated from the topic. So only born black lives matter. RightYes, emotions are always higher on the pro-life side because we DON'T ignore the facts. We know a ZEF is a human and we find it abhorrent that some people think those humans are property to be tossed away like trash.
Incorrect. Pro-choicers attempt to eliminate emotion from the conversation entirely. When bringing up biological facts about fetal development, pro-choicers say you can't do that because it's an "emotional plea." If I say that a 14-week gestation fetus has eyes, arms, legs, fingers, toes, pro-choicers don't want to hear it -- it's an "emotional plea." Hell yeah it's emotional. It's a HUMAN - a CHILD- a little baby. Pro-choicers don't want to think about a fetus having arms, legs, fingers, toes, eyes -- they want to pretend that it's just a blob so that they don't feel that natural emotion. Pro-choicers almost never admit that a ZEF is a human. They say a ZEF is just a "clump of cells," "like a tumor," "parasite" or just a part of the mother's body when everyone who went through 5th grade health class know that's not true.
Click to expand...


Do you not see the irony in your own reply here? You say that this election is about saving lives, but are perfectly okay with some lives being snuffed out because they "never should have existed" in the first place. So which is it? You want to save human lives or you're okay with some of them dying because they weren't supposed to exist? Do you know how many of those lives who "never should have existed" are black? Don't they matter?
Click to expand...

(On PP)..... they also end the lives of millions of humans which is abhorrent.
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by GDViking
Good after he is elected he can take the money from trumps failed wall and return funding to planned parenthood and prevent more abortions.
The idiots running around screaming about "baby killers" completely ignore the fact that planned parenthood prevents far more unwanted pregnancies than they terminate.
You want to prevent abortions, prevent unwanted pregnancies.
They treat abortion as the last option.
They are involved in education and distribution of contraceptives, and std prevention.
For many young women they are their only option for feminine healthcare.

Originally Posted by Josie
Why do I never see pro-choicers here call out people on your side who say idiotic things like this?
Click to expand...
What's idiotic about GDViking's post???????
 
Bullseye said:
"Quality of life"? Seriously? I'm pretty sure she knew the risk of having unprotected sex and took it willingly. There are any number of contraceptive methods available.

Also, not all "surprise babies" are mistreated or abused.
Click to expand...

You intentionally ignored this part: "The mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier." The mother was either raped or using a form of contraception if the pregnancy was unintentional. I have no idea how you can assume I included people who chose to have unprotected sex with their partners.

Of course not all unwanted children are abused, neglected, or homeless. But the reality is people like Colin Kaepernick are exceptions. What is most likely to happen? What usually happens? I want to see unbiased data that show what really happens to most children who were never wanted by their own parents or anyone else.
 
Blue Donkey said:
You intentionally ignored this part: "The mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier." The mother was either raped or using a form of contraception if the pregnancy was unintentional. I have no idea how you can assume I included people who chose to have unprotected sex with their partners.

Of course not all unwanted children are abused, neglected, or homeless. But the reality is people like Colin Kaepernick are exceptions. What is most likely to happen? What usually happens? I want to see unbiased data that show what really happens to most children who were never wanted by their own parents or anyone else.
Click to expand...
Only the most hard core pro-lifers don't accept abortion for rape or incest or if the mother's life is in danger. Most polls I've seen have 10-20% bands on either end, e.g. no abortion EVER or Aborts 'r' Us shops on every corner. Most, as I said are more reasonable
 
weaver2 said:
That was an instant, irritated pop-off answer. Let me re-phrase it. Pro-life advocates have shown very little evidence that they understand or care to understand about women faced with unplanned, unwanted pregnancies or the children born from them. In fact it's safe to say that no pro-life advocate has ever posted anything that indicates they care at all about women faced with such pregnancies other than to claim they shouldn't be having sex if they can't support a child. You seem to think you have shown tremendous empathy for women and children. Your posts say that empathy is not extended to women faced with an unwanted pregnancy that will harm, may even destroy her already born family.
Click to expand...

There are hundreds (if not thousands) of charities run by pro-life people that are designed to help women who are facing a pregnancy they aren't financially or emotionally ready for. I support them as do many of my pro-life friends. I am a teacher of very young students. I care very deeply about them and have financially supported their families often. I keep extra food in case one of my students didn't get supper or breakfast or both. I let them sleep when I can tell they were up all night long because their moron parents don't make them go to bed or showed them scary movies that keep them awake all night or they have some sort of turmoil going on at home. I have purchased school supplies and clothing for my students. I have cried with my students who are emotionally distraught and devastated.

To say that pro-lifers don't care about born children is gross generalization that isn't at all what the majority of pro-lifers think or believe. I'm sure there are a few idiots out there who hate children, but they certainly aren't any pro-lifers I've ever met.

What's idiotic about GDViking's post???????
Click to expand...

If you would've left the link in place, I could've gone back to find the exact conversation. My response to GD was him saying a fetus isn't even alive until it's born. Which, as we all should know, is idiotic.
 
weaver2 said:
What's idiotic about GDViking's post???????
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing, obviously. GDV could not have expressed it any better. It is very unfortunate that many anti-choicers refuse to accept those facts about Planned Parenthood.
 
Bullseye said:
Only the most hard core pro-lifers don't accept abortion for rape or incest or if the mother's life is in danger. Most polls I've seen have 10-20% bands on either end, e.g. no abortion EVER or Aborts 'r' Us shops on every corner. Most, as I said are more reasonable
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I know some people on the "no abortions ever" end.
 
Blue Donkey said:
Unfortunately I know some people on the "no abortions ever" end.
Click to expand...

Just like some people are on the infanticide level. There are extremists on both sides.
 
Blue Donkey said:
Unfortunately I know some people on the "no abortions ever" end.
Click to expand...
Me, too. But they're few and far between. Maybe of the righties I know tend to be fiscal/defense conservative but socially liberal - at least somewhat.
 
Josie said:
There are hundreds (if not thousands) of charities run by pro-life people that are designed to help women who are facing a pregnancy they aren't financially or emotionally ready for. I support them as do many of my pro-life friends. I am a teacher of very young students. I care very deeply about them and have financially supported their families often. I keep extra food in case one of my students didn't get supper or breakfast or both. I let them sleep when I can tell they were up all night long because their moron parents don't make them go to bed or showed them scary movies that keep them awake all night or they have some sort of turmoil going on at home. I have purchased school supplies and clothing for my students. I have cried with my students who are emotionally distraught and devastated.

To say that pro-lifers don't care about born children is gross generalization that isn't at all what the majority of pro-lifers think or believe. I'm sure there are a few idiots out there who hate children, but they certainly aren't any pro-lifers I've ever met.



If you would've left the link in place, I could've gone back to find the exact conversation. My response to GD was him saying a fetus isn't even alive until it's born. Which, as we all should know, is idiotic.
Click to expand...

In the post you responded to I did not say pro-life advocates did not care about children or mothers. You are obviously a very caring day care provider. What I said was that pro-life advocates didn't show any empathy or understanding for women facing unwanted pregnancies. The major shortcomings of Catholic and evangelical crisis pregnancy centers have been pretty thoroughly exposed for what they really are, birth and adoption centers masquerading as medical clinics. I'm sure you and other volunteers feel very moral every time you chalk up a new baby to your list of mothers who wanted an abortion but mistakenly wandered into your "clinic" and was assured that they would receive all the help they could possibly need. I can go into this further if you wish.

However empathic you and others are about the children of your own kind quite frankly pro-life posts indicate that nobody gives a **** about the already born children of women making the decision to get abortions. I'd be glad to read any post you can find from a pro-lifer that shows one drop of human kindness toward the 75% of the pregnant women and their families living at or below the poverty line that are facing deeper maybe even permanent poverty status if a a child or additional child is brought into the family situation.

Is this GDViking's line that caused you to call him an idiot? "Oh if it's not breathing it's not alive, and every miscarriage/abortion is God's will. He obviously did not want that thing to become alive..." I left it out because it's sarcasm. I had no idea you took that seriously. Apparently the lack of empathy gene for poor women facing an unwanted pregnancy is paired with an absence of the sarcasm detection gene.
 
Last edited:
Josie said:
Do any "pro-lifers" care about the mothers and babies?

You've made it quite known on this forum that you think all pro-lifers hate women and born children. What would be the point in trying to convince you otherwise? You're set in your ways - you're set in your opinions.
Click to expand...

Thank you Josie. Miss BlueJackass seems to have the erroneous idea that the government, or Pro-lifers, have an obligation to raise her kid if "she" decides not to abort it.

She seems to think that "...girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade" through some magical occurrence. She seems to think that others should have an interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. She seems to forget that it is HER problem, and NO ONE ELSE. Have they stopped teaching personal responsibility?
 
smallvoice said:
Thank you Josie. Miss BlueJackass seems to have the erroneous idea that the government, or Pro-lifers, have an obligation to raise her kid if "she" decides not to abort it.

She seems to think that "...girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade" through some magical occurrence. She seems to think that others should have an interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. She seems to forget that it is HER problem, and NO ONE ELSE. Have they stopped teaching personal responsibility?
Click to expand...

Please give the exact posts from which you got these comments by Blue. I have read most of what she has posted and I don't believe I've seen anything like any of the above you say she has posted.
 
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, What About Abortion (PDF)
Isn’t abortion acceptable in the case of rape or incest?
While the emotional arguments for abortion in these situ- ations might seem compelling,the fact of the matter is that it is wrong to take the life of one innocent victim (the unborn child), and further burden the life of the other victim of these horrible situations, the mother. It is indeed a strange logic that would have us kill an innocent unborn baby for the crime of his father.

National Association of Evangelicals refuses to make its official position on abortion public.

"But while society is finally recognizing that rape is an act of violence against an innocent victim, it still fails to recognize that abortion is also an act of violence against another innocent victim. If the woman does become pregnant, a rare but possible occurrence, she may be made to feel twice as tainted when society is not prepared to cope with the circumstances of this child's conception. Counselors and abortion providers encourage abortion as the perfect "solution."
Irrationally, society expects her to kill her unborn child, not for something the child has done, but for the crime of his/her father. Once again the mother is pitted against her child.
Subjecting her to an abortion only compounds the initial violence of the rape."
Rape, Incest, Fetal Abnormality :: Catholic News Agency


Both Real Marriage and When God Writes Your Love Story have chapters where they tell the story of someone who suffers from rape or sexual assault. …..Both books describe rape/sexual assault and consensual sex as having similar “consequences.” When God Writes Your Love Story tells the story of a twelve-year-old girl who is raped by an older boy. This story is immediately followed by the story of a college- aged couple who decide to have consensual sex. Both stories emphasize “lost virginity” (Ludy & Ludy, 2009, p. 235), but do not point out the difference between two people
The Journal of Integrated Social Sciences ~ ISSN 1942-1052 ~ Volume 4(1) 2014 - 68 -
Both books emphasize letting Jesus “wash you clean, white as snow, and give you a fresh start” (Ludy & Ludy, 2009, p. 245).
“YOU ARE NOT YOUR OWN:”
RAPE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND CONSENT IN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN DATING BOOKS: http://www.jiss.org/documents/volume_4/issue_1/JISS 2014 4(1) 55-74 Christian Dating Books.pdf


The New Religious Right
The SBC (Southern Baptist Convention)voted against ordination of women, the right to an abortion (even in the case of rape or incest), and with it called “secular humanism”
To the Right: The Transformation of American Conservatism - Jerome L. Himmelstein - Google Books
Bullseye said:
Only the most hard core pro-lifers don't accept abortion for rape or incest or if the mother's life is in danger. Most polls I've seen have 10-20% bands on either end, e.g. no abortion EVER or Aborts 'r' Us shops on every corner. Most, as I said are more reasonable
Click to expand...
 
weaver2 said:
The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, What About Abortion (PDF)
Isn’t abortion acceptable in the case of rape or incest?
While the emotional arguments for abortion in these situ- ations might seem compelling,the fact of the matter is that it is wrong to take the life of one innocent victim (the unborn child), and further burden the life of the other victim of these horrible situations, the mother. It is indeed a strange logic that would have us kill an innocent unborn baby for the crime of his father.

National Association of Evangelicals refuses to make its official position on abortion public.

"But while society is finally recognizing that rape is an act of violence against an innocent victim, it still fails to recognize that abortion is also an act of violence against another innocent victim. If the woman does become pregnant, a rare but possible occurrence, she may be made to feel twice as tainted when society is not prepared to cope with the circumstances of this child's conception. Counselors and abortion providers encourage abortion as the perfect "solution."
Irrationally, society expects her to kill her unborn child, not for something the child has done, but for the crime of his/her father. Once again the mother is pitted against her child.
Subjecting her to an abortion only compounds the initial violence of the rape."
Rape, Incest, Fetal Abnormality :: Catholic News Agency


Both Real Marriage and When God Writes Your Love Story have chapters where they tell the story of someone who suffers from rape or sexual assault. …..Both books describe rape/sexual assault and consensual sex as having similar “consequences.” When God Writes Your Love Story tells the story of a twelve-year-old girl who is raped by an older boy. This story is immediately followed by the story of a college- aged couple who decide to have consensual sex. Both stories emphasize “lost virginity” (Ludy & Ludy, 2009, p. 235), but do not point out the difference between two people
The Journal of Integrated Social Sciences ~ ISSN 1942-1052 ~ Volume 4(1) 2014 - 68 -
Both books emphasize letting Jesus “wash you clean, white as snow, and give you a fresh start” (Ludy & Ludy, 2009, p. 245).
“YOU ARE NOT YOUR OWN:”
RAPE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND CONSENT IN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN DATING BOOKS: http://www.jiss.org/documents/volume_4/issue_1/JISS 2014 4(1) 55-74 Christian Dating Books.pdf


The New Religious Right
The SBC (Southern Baptist Convention)voted against ordination of women, the right to an abortion (even in the case of rape or incest), and with it called “secular humanism”
To the Right: The Transformation of American Conservatism - Jerome L. Himmelstein - Google Books
Click to expand...
You understand the concept of "most", right?
 
Blue Donkey said:
It seems everyone who claims to be a pro-lifer is unable to provide a single shred of factual evidence that the mother's quality of life is completely irrelevant, then has no interest in what happens to the baby: abuse, neglect, lacking a home, never being adopted, etc. You are not a pro-lifer if all you care about is the mere existence of unwanted babies, not every baby's life. You know what can happen to babies who should not exist today because the mothers had tried to avoid getting pregnant nine months earlier. If you were taught anything about female puberty in school, you know girls can get pregnant when they are in fifth grade. If you ever suffered the problems pregnant women have literally every day just because they are pregnant, there is no reason to wish that on women who tried to avoid conceiving offspring. It is not about nine months versus a whole life, but nine months and a whole life.
Click to expand...

it is irrelavant when you CHOSE TO HAVE A KID!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom