• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • 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!

Why is abortion acceptable?

Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

minnie616 said:
Late term abortions are not elective. They are for medical reasons and are moral.

Abortions past 21 weeks are rare. In fact there are only 4 clinic doctors in the US who are skilled enough and trained enough to perform abortions at late stage for catastrophic defects or if irreparable damage to a major bodiliy function such as ( stroke, heart attack, paralysis from the neck down, kidney damage, liver damage etc) would occur if the pregnancy continued.

From Romper :
Click to expand...

China and Norh Korea are two countries that have no limits on late-term abortions. Are the United States values on par with those two countries?
 
Elvira said:
Yeah, that's what Hitler claimed, too...:roll:
Click to expand...

so then you think it is moral to force women to remain pregnant against their will? Yes or no?
 
Lursa said:
so then you think it is moral to force women to remain pregnant against their will? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

So kill the innocent in the matter...yeah, that's real Christian of ya...:roll:
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Bucky said:
Stop trying to legislate your morality into laws.

1. Having a baby is never 100% safe. Any abortion can be argued to save a woman's life. Eating Big Macs and Whoppers can be considered dangerous to one's life. Do you want laws banning fast food hamburgers as well?

2. If a fetus has even a 0.00009% chance at survival, 0.00009% does not mean 0%.
Click to expand...

How uninformed you are. Pro-choice is the opposite of legislating anything for anyone.

Pro-choice means that each woman can decide for herself what is best for her and her family, both current and future. No laws are needed to force her decision either way.

Thank you for acknowledging that no pregnancy can ever be assumed to be safe. Now if you'd like to explain why you believe a woman must take that risk against her will (if there was such legislation)...that would be great. Why?
 
Bucky said:
Christian Pastors are not preaching young girls to have unprotected sex to get pregnant and have abortions.
Click to expand...

I have never even remotely referred to any such thing. Why are you bringing it up in this discussion or to me?
 
Elvira said:
I beg to differ...there are a lot of Sunday Christians...
Click to expand...

Ah, the exposure of your ignorance that you believe that Christians need to go to a church to worship and communicate with God. Just 'putting in an appearance' isnt going to do it, so I suggest you take that into consideration next Sunday in your pew. Christianity is about how you worship the Lord and treat other people. Has nothing to do with 'church'.
 
Elvira said:
So kill the innocent in the matter...yeah, that's real Christian of ya...:roll:
Click to expand...

It was a yes or no question...why didnt you answer it?

Is it moral to force women to remain pregnant against their will?

(You can tell me what the woman is guilty of later)
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Lursa said:
How uninformed you are. Pro-choice is the opposite of legislating anything for anyone.

Pro-choice means that each woman can decide for herself what is best for her and her family, both current and future. No laws are needed to force her decision either way.

Thank you for acknowledging that no pregnancy can ever be assumed to be safe. Now if you'd like to explain why you believe a woman must take that risk against her will (if there was such legislation)...that would be great. Why?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear Lurs, when you mean Woman, you mean any aged female correct?
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Bucky said:
Just to be clear Lurs, when you mean Woman, you mean any aged female correct?
Click to expand...

Pregnancy is a significant risk for any age woman.
 
Lursa said:
Ah, the exposure of your ignorance that you believe that Christians need to go to a church to worship and communicate with God. Just 'putting in an appearance' isnt going to do it, so I suggest you take that into consideration next Sunday in your pew. Christianity is about how you worship the Lord and treat other people. Has nothing to do with 'church'.
Click to expand...

Did I say that? No...I said it is a front...a facade...a fake...just as those claiming to be Christian but proving false to its works...2 Timothy 3:1-5...
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Lursa said:
Pregnancy is a significant risk for any age woman.
Click to expand...

So is life...:roll:
 
Lursa said:
It was a yes or no question...why didnt you answer it?

Is it moral to force women to remain pregnant against their will?

(You can tell me what the woman is guilty of later)
Click to expand...

I can tell you what she is not guilty of...the taking a human life...
 
Bucky said:
yet find aborting a baby after birth murder.
Click to expand...

No such thing as post-birth abortion.

Your view of women’s choices regarding what they do with their bodies is absolutely irrelevant. Each woman decides for herself what is the right/best choice, and I’m glad about that.

Elvira said:
Yeah, that's what Hitler claimed, too...:roll:
Click to expand...
Hitler wasn’t a Christian.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
No such thing as post-birth abortion.

Your view of women’s choices regarding what they do with their bodies is absolutely irrelevant. Each woman decides for herself what is the right/best choice, and I’m glad about that.


Hitler wasn’t a Christian.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree but he made that claim, just like a few on this forum, but there is not enough evidence to convict them of such a charge, just like Hitler...
 
minnie616 said:
Really?

Then let me make it clear.
An unborn is not a child.

I had 6 known pregnancies.
I have 4 born children.
I had 2 miscarriages.
The miscarriages never were children and they will never be children.

Calling them a child/children before they are born does not make them a child or children.
Click to expand...
Then maybe you'd be willing to explain what species an unborn child is, if it's not a child.

At the moment of conception, the child develops a unique DNA sequence, and is biologically human. Even if we assume that it cannot be called a child(Which is quite the assumption), it would still necessarily be human since their species does not change based on stage of development.

Following this to the logical conclusion, the unjustified killing of said child or human would be inherently unethical.
 
Elvira said:
Oh, I agree but he made that claim, just like a few on this forum, but there is not enough evidence to convict them of such a charge, just like Hitler...
Click to expand...
Why do you think others are lying? What charge?
 
Lursa said:
so then you think it is moral to force women to remain pregnant against their will? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

"Remaining pregnant" is passive, nothing must be done for an individual to continue their pregnancy, the process naturally continues if nobody does anything. The active position is when the individual seeks to terminate the pregnancy, in which case force is required to unjustifiably end the life of the child, this is an initiation of force, and therefor unethical.
 
When does it become ok for one person to decide to end the life of another based only on "I don't want this child". You can fool yourself all you want but its a child, its a human child, it will be a human child when its delivered and it will never be anything other than. Your convincing yourself that its not a baby, not a human, not a child is your delusion.
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Elvira said:
So is life...:roll:
Click to expand...

So do you want the govt to force you to risk your life against your will? Would that be moral? Yes or no?

(You seem to have a problem with the most simple yes or no questions. Why is that?)
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Bucky said:
China and Norh Korea are two countries that have no limits on late-term abortions. Are the United States values on par with those two countries?
Click to expand...

According to your president, both countries are to be idolized.
 
Integrityrespec said:
When does it become ok for one person to decide to end the life of another based only on "I don't want this child". You can fool yourself all you want but its a child, its a human child, it will be a human child when its delivered and it will never be anything other than. Your convincing yourself that its not a baby, not a human, not a child is your delusion.
Click to expand...

When does it become ok for someone to support govt force against women to remain against pregnant their will when they display such utter ignorance about the issue?

THis is why it's so important to have a Constitution to protect us and our rights...too many low-information voters out there.
 
Re: We don't know enough to choose wisely; it may be beyond us politically/socially, even if we do k

Lursa said:
So do you want the govt to force you to risk your life against your will? Would that be moral? Yes or no?

(You seem to have a problem with the most simple yes or no questions. Why is that?)
Click to expand...

Swoosh...right over your head...:roll:
 
Raelia said:
"Remaining pregnant" is passive, nothing must be done for an individual to continue their pregnancy, the process naturally continues if nobody does anything. The active position is when the individual seeks to terminate the pregnancy, in which case force is required to unjustifiably end the life of the child, this is an initiation of force, and therefor unethical.
Click to expand...

I said 'use force.' That means the law and legal consequences for women who choose abortion. And then what 'means' do you think the govt would use to prevent the abortion if it's against her will?
 
Lursa said:
When does it become ok for someone to support govt force against women to remain against pregnant their will when they display such utter ignorance about the issue?

THis is why it's so important to have a Constitution to protect us and our rights...too many low-information voters out there.
Click to expand...

Christians do not need a constitution to tell them right from wrong...:roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom