• 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!

Abortion Is Against Science And Common Sense, Its Murder

Re: Darwin & evolution

marke said:
Yes, abortion is murder. Yes, killing innocent cops is murder. Yes, killing Jews in gas chambers is murder. Yes, killing millions of disarmed landowners for refusing to yield to inhumane, unreasonable, socialistic communist government demands is murder. I can go on all day like this.
Click to expand...

/// YES. abortion is murder. //// <---- If this is true ( which it clearly is not ), why aren't those who receive and perform abortions being arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned for the crime of 'murder' ?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

weaver2 said:
That is straight out of the propaganda from Priests for Life run by Fr Pavone. And extreme Catholic anti-abortion organization. Fr. Pavone has been discredited by the Church. You really shouldn't be quoting him since he has been in trouble with the law several times for his propaganda.

Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Body Parts


This link will take you to all of Priests for Life propaganda videos. You are probably familiar with all of their lies.
Click to expand...

Don't claim the facts are not facts just because sites you disapprove of posts the facts as well. Here is more evidence of what is going on in the real world:

Two Companies That Sold Aborted Baby Parts for Planned Parenthood Forced to Close Down | LifeNews.com
 
Last edited:
Re: Darwin & evolution

marke said:
Yes, abortion is murder. Yes, killing innocent cops is murder. Yes, killing Jews in gas chambers is murder. Yes, killing millions of disarmed landowners for refusing to yield to inhumane, unreasonable, socialistic communist government demands is murder. I can go on all day like this.
Click to expand...

I can go on all day //// like this. //// <---- Well, yes you can. But posting lies all day will only make you look foolish and intellectually dishonest......not that you really seem to care about such things.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
/// you can twist the leftist baby-killing any way you want. //// You're the one doing the twisting, marke. Killing 'babies' is murder, and is illegal. So, if a baby is 'murdered', someone will be criminally charged. That doesn't happen when one gets an abortion. Why ? Because the unborn aren't 'babies. "
Click to expand...

Correct, an "unborn" is a potential child. That is why RvW was a mistake and should be overturned, IMO.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Scorps2000 said:
Correct, an "unborn" is a potential child. That is why RvW was a mistake and should be overturned, IMO.
Click to expand...

And if it is, what should be the penalty for any woman who receives an illegal abortion ?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
And if it is, what should be the penalty for any woman who receives an illegal abortion ?
Click to expand...

No penalty for the woman, she is a "victim" the doctor should pay the price.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Scorps2000 said:
That's why "victim" is in quotes. :peace
Click to expand...

Are you not going to explain your reasoning as to why the female is a 'victim', and should not be charged criminally, should she actively seek a provider for an abortion, should RvW be overturned ?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
And if it is, what should be the penalty for any woman who receives an illegal abortion ?
Click to expand...

What should be the penalty for killing an innocent black man for racist reasons? What penalty for killing cops? What penalty for killing Jews? What penalty for killing in the name of Allah? What penalty for killing innocent unborn babies?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
Are you not going to explain your reasoning as to why the female is a 'victim', and should not be charged criminally, should she actively seek a provider for an abortion, should RvW be overturned ?
Click to expand...

Okay sure here we go.
Abortion is legal now and has been for a while. Should RvW be overturned abortions will not stop, I believe that most people would agree with that.
The fact that "doctors" are ready, willing and able to perform abortions even if illegal, some may even advertise. The woman could be considered a victim.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

marke said:
What should be the penalty for killing an innocent black man for racist reasons? What penalty for killing cops? What penalty for killing Jews? What penalty for killing in the name of Allah? What penalty for killing innocent unborn babies?
Click to expand...

Once again, marke....there are no unborn babies. If there were, killing them would be a crime punishable by law. That isn't the law of the land. If you can't keep up with the facts, maybe you should cease discussing a topic until you educate yourself and understand the actual facts of that topic.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Scorps2000 said:
Okay sure here we go.
Abortion is legal now and has been for a while. Should RvW be overturned abortions will not stop, I believe that most people would agree with that.
The fact that "doctors" are ready, willing and able to perform abortions even if illegal, some may even advertise. The woman could be considered a victim.
Click to expand...

How does advertising make a woman actively seeking her own abortion a 'victim' ? The advertiser isn't forcing her to use his/her service. Correct ?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

marke said:
The "damn nuisance unborn baby" becomes the victim in an abortion.
Click to expand...

3RD heads up just this morning. There are no ' unborn babies.' Otherwise those unborns would have the same rights as you or I, and per the laws of the land......they don't. If you disagree, feel free to post any legal statutes proving otherwise. ( good luck with that one )
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
Once again, marke....there are no unborn babies.
Click to expand...

Don't be stubbornly ignorantly obtuse. Congress passed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004, recognizing the fact that embryos and fetuses in utero are legal victims, if they are killed during acts of violence.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
How does advertising make a woman actively seeking her own abortion a 'victim' ? The advertiser isn't forcing her to use his/her service. Correct ?
Click to expand...

Okay, you are correct. Legally the woman isn't a victim, but some people would consider her a victim, wouldn't you agree with that?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

marke said:
Don't be stubbornly ignorantly obtuse. Congress passed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004, recognizing the fact that embryos and fetuses in utero are legal victims, if they are killed during acts of violence.
Click to expand...

Here is some more education for you,marke. Those rights belong to the state....not the unborn..Now do you understand why it may be a good idea to stop discussing a topic you clearly have no actual facts on ?
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Scorps2000 said:
Okay, you are correct. Legally the woman isn't a victim, but some people would consider her a victim, wouldn't you agree with that?
Click to expand...

Only if the woman was somehow mentally impaired to the point she was incapable of realizing getting an abortion would terminate the unborn, and the provider was aware of this mental impairment, but still wilfully chose to provide the abortion. I really don't see that holding up in any court of law, like, say people who sue cigarette companies because the tobacco company didn't provide full disclosure as to the side effects of using their product.
 
Re: Love me, love my dogma

marke said:
…

SHOCK: Babies were potentially aborted alive to get livers for university research
Click to expand...

But these are our old pals from their war on Planned Parenthood:

"Background[edit]

"In 2006, James O'Keefe met Lila Rose, founder of an abortion-abortion group on the UCLA campus.[1] They recorded encounters in Planned Parenthood clinics. Rose posed as a pregnant teenager seeking advice (a 15-year-old girl impregnated by a 23-year-old male); they made two videos and released them on YouTube.[2]

"David Daleiden met Lila Rose at a Junior State of America meeting, running the Live Action chapter at Claremont McKenna College in 2007, and was the organization’s director of research "during the early stages" of the project to make secret recordings of Planned Parenthood clinics.[3] Daleiden went on to create an organization called "Center for Medical Progress".[4][5]"

(My emphasis - more @ Live Action (organization) - Wikipedia)

& of course, all researchers publish their findings on YouTube. My understanding is that the Nobel Prize Committee is dropping their standard procedure in favor of paying Beavis & Butt-Head to recommend Nobel laureates to the committee.

So how reliable is liveaction.org? Bear in mind that Ms. Lila Rose, mentioned above, was the founder, @ the tender age of 15.
 
Re: Darwin & evolution

Scorps2000 said:
Okay sure here we go.
Abortion is legal now and has been for a while. Should RvW be overturned abortions will not stop, I believe that most people would agree with that.
The fact that "doctors" are ready, willing and able to perform abortions even if illegal, some may even advertise. The woman could be considered a victim.
Click to expand...

Actually 7 out of 10 people do not want to overturn Roe.

From a January 2013 article :

By Aaron Blake January 22, 2013
It's hard to get 70 percent of Americans to agree on much of anything these days. But, for the first time, one of those things is Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

According to a new poll from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, released on the law's 40th anniversary Tuesday,
fully seven in 10 Americans say they would oppose the overturning of the Supreme Court decision.

And perhaps more remarkably, 57 percent say they "feel strongly" that it should not be overturned.

In other words, politically speaking, it's time for Republicans to stop talking about Roe v. Wade.
Click to expand...

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...blicans-should-stop-talking-about-roe-v-wade/



If Roe v Wade were overturned ( highly unlikely) whether or not to ban abortions would go back to each individual state.

Many states would choose to keep abortions legal.
 
Last edited:
Re: Darwin & evolution

Logician Man said:
Here is some more education for you,marke. Those rights belong to the state....not the unborn..Now do you understand why it may be a good idea to stop discussing a topic you clearly have no actual facts on ?
Click to expand...
The unborn victims of violence refer to the non-human state, not living human beings?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom