Conservative refuse to admit these facts are true

[soylentgreen]

Just because something leaves you better off doesn't make it the "right" thing to have done.

True, for some things and not for others.

But again your argument must be along the lines that women are not intelligent enough to actually figure out the difference. Or possibly it is that you know better than a women what is good for them..

Where did you get the ability to decide whether they are correct in their assessment of their own lives?

 

[Patriotic Voter]

I don't appreciate people lying about me, but it doesn't appear to be against the rules.

Weaver never lied about or to you. Everyone who attacks her as a person and person naturally is a conservative anti-choicer. People who are really pro-life and care a lot about the only two humans involved totally understand everything Weaver posted was a fact.

 

[KevinKohler]

True, for some things and not for others.

But again your argument must be along the lines that women are not intelligent enough to actually figure out the difference. Or possibly it is that you know better than a women what is good for them..

Where did you get the ability to decide whether they are correct in their assessment of their own lives?

Lol, I don't hold that opinion, pro lifers do.

OP asked why they don't accept certain facts...I answered.

 

[KevinKohler]

True, for some things and not for others.

But again your argument must be along the lines that women are not intelligent enough to actually figure out the difference. Or possibly it is that you know better than a women what is good for them..

Where did you get the ability to decide whether they are correct in their assessment of their own lives?

A CEO is better off, along with their company, by paying their staff the minimum they will accept, always at least 50% below the employees financial contribution to the company. Sometimes that means paying poverty level wages. But the share price and profitability of the company is high and getting higher. Its a fact that the CEOs opinion is, they are doing the right thing.

Do you agree? If not, why do you think the CEO is not smart enough to know what is best for themselves and their company?

 

[KevinKohler]

Weaver never lied about or to you. Everyone who attacks her as a person and person naturally is a conservative anti-choicer. People who are really pro-life and care a lot about the only two humans involved totally understand everything Weaver posted was a fact.

But that's not what the OP asked.

 

[Welkin]

These are true facts about abortion. Why won't pro-life advocates admit they are true?

*95% of women did the right thing by getting an abortion
Five years after abortion, nearly all women say it was the right decision, even those who struggled to make the decision supported the abortion years later.
*Anti-abortion women are the largest % of women getting abortions:
The majority of abortion patients indicated a religious affiliation: Seventeen percent identified as mainline Protestant, 13% as evangelical Protestant and 24% as Roman Catholic, while 8% identified with some other religion. Thirty-eight percent of patients did not identify with any religion. The proportion of women who identified as mainline Protestant declined by 24% since 2008, whereas the proportion with no affiliation increased by 38%�.
*Women who get abortions are responsible people:
85% of the women getting abortions have either part-time or full=time jobs.
45% are married or in stable relationships
59.3% have one or more children already
42.4% are aged 25 to 35
64% have attended college or have have a degree
66% plan to have children when they are financially able to provide necessities for them, and/or in a supportive relationship with a partner so their children will have two parents
64 % are using birth control: (rhythm and withdrawal are not considered birth control because their failure rate is so high).
*Women get abortions for very good reasons
The family can't financially support a child at this time.
The woman has responsibilities to work, parents, school or other children.
“I am too immature to raise a child�
Denying abortion in cases of unwanted pregnancies creates children that grow up with huge social problems.
*Conservatives created the marriage destroying legislation of aid to single mothers only.

Oops! We’re lost. | UC San Francisco
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/140517NCJRS.pdf
Females in the US Workforce
Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and Changes Since 2008 | Guttmacher Institute
Aid to Families with Dependent Children - Wikipedia

I used to be a pro-lifer. None of the points that you mentiones would have persuaded me to change my mind. It would still come down to the woman's rights, versus the child's rights, which is always going to be a very, very difficult switch to pull if you're looking at the issue objectively. No, what swung me around to being more pro-choice is that abortions during the third trimester are comparatively rare, and typically only done by specialists in very extenuating circumstances.

Once the fetus develops the ability to think, to be self-aware, then I think we hit a philosophical conundrum, but I see no moral conflict before that happens.

I also don't think Roe vs Wade will ever be overturned, no matter how much the conservatives try to stack the court, so the whole thing is just a moot wedge-issue.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Weaver never lied about or to you. Everyone who attacks her as a person and person naturally is a conservative anti-choicer. People who are really pro-life and care a lot about the only two humans involved totally understand everything Weaver posted was a fact.

Not her, but others have. I was talking in general.

 

[weaver2]

I used to be a pro-lifer. None of the points that you mentiones would have persuaded me to change my mind. It would still come down to the woman's rights, versus the child's rights, which is always going to be a very, very difficult switch to pull if you're looking at the issue objectively. No, what swung me around to being more pro-choice is that abortions during the third trimester are comparatively rare, and typically only done by specialists in very extenuating circumstances.
Once the fetus develops the ability to think, to be self-aware, then I think we hit a philosophical conundrum, but I see no moral conflict before that happens.
I also don't think Roe vs Wade will ever be overturned, no matter how much the conservatives try to stack the court, so the whole thing is just a moot wedge-issue.

You are right, one could still be against legal abortion and believe every one of the statistics/facts above. Which has the greater value the fetuses or the already born isn't resolved by acknowledging the truth of the above issues. The list was not meant to persuade a change in position. It was simply a statement of what the majority of pro-life advocates who post here refuse to acknowledge.

An intelligent conversation on regulations, limits or ethics of abortion is impossible until there is some agreement on what is fact and what is emotionalism or simply untrue. It is not possible to discuss anything while one side claims "women who get abortions are immoral" and the other claims there is no ethical component to the issue.

 

[KevinKohler]

IMO, even if a fetus is aware, it has no more a right to use a woman's body than, say, Donald Trump.

What if I were a paraplegic. And I needed someone else to help me live. Do I have the right to force another into that position? Of course not! That justification is how slavery comes about. It sucks, but mother nature is a bitch.

And then there's the utilitarian argument, from a societal view. Unwanted children have a tendency to become unwanted adults. Imagine a NYC where literally every child conceived is born and survived to adulthood. Imagine LA, San Fran, Houston, etc. And each of those people went on to have more people of their own.

Terrifying, really.

 

[soylentgreen]

Lol, I don't hold that opinion, pro lifers do.

OP asked why they don't accept certain facts...I answered.

Not just answer but try to justify as well. And like them failed.

 

[soylentgreen]

A CEO is better off, along with their company, by paying their staff the minimum they will accept, always at least 50% below the employees financial contribution to the company. Sometimes that means paying poverty level wages. But the share price and profitability of the company is high and getting higher. Its a fact that the CEOs opinion is, they are doing the right thing.

Do you agree? If not, why do you think the CEO is not smart enough to know what is best for themselves and their company?

A ceo that treats his employees badly by paying low wages and demonstrating a lack of care about his employees does not get the full service or loyalty. If they do not do their job well he does not get the profits he should .
This ceo is not smart enough to recognise that profit is not the only desirable outcome.

 

[KevinKohler]

Not just answer but try to justify as well. And like them failed.

Citation?

 

[KevinKohler]

A ceo that treats his employees badly by paying low wages and demonstrating a lack of care about his employees does not get the full service or loyalty. If they do not do their job well he does not get the profits he should .
This ceo is not smart enough to recognise that profit is not the only desirable outcome.

You and I agree on that, but the overwhelming majority of CEOs don't. I guess we're just smarter, right?

Or...it could, maybe...just maybe...be OPOSING opinions.

 

[soylentgreen]

IMO, even if a fetus is aware, it has no more a right to use a woman's body than, say, Donald Trump.

What if I were a paraplegic. And I needed someone else to help me live. Do I have the right to force another into that position? Of course not! That justification is how slavery comes about. It sucks, but mother nature is a bitch.

And then there's the utilitarian argument, from a societal view. Unwanted children have a tendency to become unwanted adults. Imagine a NYC where literally every child conceived is born and survived to adulthood. Imagine LA, San Fran, Houston, etc. And each of those people went on to have more people of their own.

Terrifying, really.

And again, your argument rests on the basis that women are to stupid to figure out for themselves whether they want a child or not. That they will if left to their own decisions make bad choices such as giving up on a pregnancy in the third term because they feel like it.

Most women who get to the third stage are wanting their child and that wanting is all that matters. Even a newly impregnated woman who wants a child gives that embryo the right to live.

 

[soylentgreen]

You and I agree on that, but the overwhelming majority of CEOs don't. I guess we're just smarter, right?

Or...it could, maybe...just maybe...be OPOSING opinions.

Statistics and history back what i have said. Abuse your workers and they will in the end do the business more harm than good. So no, not an opinion on my part but it is an unsupported opinion on the ceo's [part.

 

[soylentgreen]

Citation?

For what? Surely you do not think you made a plausible argument there?

 

[KevinKohler]

Statistics and history back what i have said. Abuse your workers and they will in the end do the business more harm than good. So no, not an opinion on my part but it is an unsupported opinion on the ceo's [part.

Define abuse?

Are Chinese company employees abused?
How about in Japan?
Or, how about pretty much every minimum wage employee in the US? Are you suggesting that all the companies that rely on MW employees are in the process of going under? High turnover, maybe...but having issues staying in business? Funny. Wall Mart doesn't see it that way. Or Target. Or Home Depot. Or Amazon. Or fast food, of which there are many. Or restaurants. Etc.

Your "facts" are not, in fact, facts. And THATS a fact, lol.

 

[KevinKohler]

For what? Surely you do not think you made a plausible argument there?

Back up your claim that I have tried to justify pretty much any argument supporting pro life, lol.

 

[soylentgreen]

Define abuse?

Are Chinese company employees abused?
How about in Japan?
Or, how about pretty much every minimum wage employee in the US? Are you suggesting that all the companies that rely on MW employees are in the process of going under? High turnover, maybe...but having issues staying in business? Funny. Wall Mart doesn't see it that way. Or Target. Or Home Depot. Or Amazon. Or fast food, of which there are many. Or restaurants. Etc.

Your "facts" are not, in fact, facts. And THATS a fact, lol.

You already did. Poor wages is one example of abuse.
The chinese can and do prosper on thew wages they receive. They can afford to give themselves and their children a better life. They are fast becoming the highest number of tourists in may countries because their low wages are only low if compared to the expense of living in america. Where as poor wages in america only means that workers are trapped in poverty.

America is a country that has seen some of the most violent riots against the poor working conditions. And the companies you mention cater to poverty that they help create.

 

[KevinKohler]

And again, your argument rests on the basis that women are to stupid to figure out for themselves whether they want a child or not. That they will if left to their own decisions make bad choices such as giving up on a pregnancy in the third term because they feel like it.

Most women who get to the third stage are wanting their child and that wanting is all that matters. Even a newly impregnated woman who wants a child gives that embryo the right to live.

No, my argument simply removes opinion as much as possible, and doesn't rely on emotion.

This is an emotionally charged subject, because it involves the subjugation of 1 half of the entire population.

I don't give 2 ****s about if a woman is smart enough to recognize 1 thing or another, etc. I really don't. Even Hellen Keller should have a right to body autonomy. And thanks to Roe vs Wade, they do. The end. So you can go on implying I'm mysigonist, etc, because maybe you've decided you don't like me, due to our previous interactions...I truly don't care. What I do care about...is this cause. And when people roll in with ****ty arguments (that's an opinion) based more in others opinions rather than facts, I feel that it hurts that cause, as it gives the other side leverage to "win" an argument. Sounds silly, and maybe it is. But that's my stake in this, for what its worth.

 

[soylentgreen]

Back up your claim that I have tried to justify pretty much any argument supporting pro life, lol.

All those posts where you claimed it was nothing more than opinion and even when shown that it was not you still tried to argue it was.

 

[KevinKohler]

You already did. Poor wages is one example of abuse.
The chinese can and do prosper on thew wages they receive. They can afford to give themselves and their children a better life. They are fast becoming the highest number of tourists in may countries because their low wages are only low if compared to the expense of living in america. Where as poor wages in america only means that workers are trapped in poverty.

America is a country that has seen some of the most violent riots against the poor working conditions. And the companies you mention cater to poverty that they help create.

Eh...your opinion on Chinese companies is noted, but I respectfully disagree. Hazardous working conditions, living conditions that in many areas are dictated by the employers (workers are property), etc.

So...these american companies...do they do the right thing? Or not?

 

[soylentgreen]

No, my argument simply removes opinion as much as possible, and doesn't rely on emotion.

This is an emotionally charged subject, because it involves the subjugation of 1 half of the entire population.

I don't give 2 ****s about if a woman is smart enough to recognize 1 thing or another, etc. I really don't. Even Hellen Keller should have a right to body autonomy. And thanks to Roe vs Wade, they do. The end. So you can go on implying I'm mysigonist, etc, because maybe you've decided you don't like me, due to our previous interactions...I truly don't care. What I do care about...is this cause. And when people roll in with ****ty arguments (that's an opinion) based more in others opinions rather than facts, I feel that it hurts that cause, as it gives the other side leverage to "win" an argument. Sounds silly, and maybe it is. But that's my stake in this, for what its worth.

I am not implying you are a misogynist. I am pointing out why your arguments are weak.

And it has been pointed out that your claim of it being an opinion was false. Yet you continued to argue as such.

And what you feel is irrelevant. It does not change the fact that you based your arguments on the idea that women cannot think for themselves.

 

[KevinKohler]

All those posts where you claimed it was nothing more than opinion and even when shown that it was not you still tried to argue it was.

OP lists a series of facts. About opinions. No getting away from that. They are opinions.

 

[KevinKohler]

I am not implying you are a misogynist. I am pointing out why your arguments are weak.

And it has been pointed out that your claim of it being an opinion was false. Yet you continued to argue as such.

And what you feel is irrelevant. It does not change the fact that you based your arguments on the idea that women cannot think for themselves.

No, my argument makes a woman's ability to think for themself irrelevant.

Because even dependants deserve the right to body autonomy.