It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What I love about the pro-life logic...

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Hit return too soon
edit on 28-8-2014 by Iamthatbish because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   
I am an atheist. I am against abortion after 9 weeks except in extreme cases and then never after the age of viability at 21 weeks.

However, those who are against 100% against abortion need to compromise and be willing to foot the bill for induced premature delivery. Foot the medical bills or don't complain about the mother being on welfare later.

No matter who responsible someone is, birth control fails and more often than we would like to believe. A decent portion of failure is user error. Most people aren't even educated on how to use it properly, so while they are actively trying to be responsible, they put the condom on wrong or take the pill improperly.

It is not uncommon for young responsible married couples or people in committed relationships, who are not prepared to have a baby, do everything right, or believe they are doing everything right, to have an accidental pregnancy. I am 100% for the belief that every time you have sex, you need to go into it knowing a baby could be the result. However, it is awfully hard to tell married couple or people in a committed relationship not to have sex.

Not every one who has an unwanted pregnancy was irresponsible.



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: Bazart



It is illogical to hold someone accountable and then to remove accountability because they might make a choice your not on board with. Illogical and quite offensive actually.



It is , in fact , illogical to condone or support in any way - a person with a proven track record of bad decision making ... making life and death decisions . It is illogical and maybe even dumb to do so .

Pro choice :
That guy cute ?
Kiss ?
Time alone ?
Sex ? Condom ?

Lots of choices already made by a person who doesn't want to be pregnant .
A fool would support further decision making by such a person.
Supporting a life or death decision by such a genius - is exploitive and cheapening for everyone involved . Dumb .


Yet you still hold them accountable over the track record of poor decision making??

Don't be coy. It's a fallacy to say "you spilt the milk but I can't trust you to clean it up, your to stupid to know how to deal with it"


Oh , I don't suggest holding the person accountable ( at this point ) - because it's too late for that .
Just paying the bill at the clinic is the only accountability we can hope for ...

I mean MYSELF as accountable to myself and my own sense of dignity . Something that countless health-care professionals , activists , and apologists have a different definition of .

I don't mean to sound patronizing , but it is WE who CAN make decisions ( I presume ) who have to make a choice .



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: SearchLightsInc

My last line was "when" the baby has rights.
So just for #s and giggles when do you feel the baby has rights?
Myself being an atheist and having low moral standards (being a blasphemer) lol..
I feel the first trimester is a good happy middle ground but what do I know, how bout you?


That's not the question that concerns me, I'm genuinely stumped that some deem the pregnancy a woman's responsibility and yet attempt to remove all decision making from her hands because she's not responsible enough???



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bazart

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: Bazart



It is illogical to hold someone accountable and then to remove accountability because they might make a choice your not on board with. Illogical and quite offensive actually.



It is , in fact , illogical to condone or support in any way - a person with a proven track record of bad decision making ... making life and death decisions . It is illogical and maybe even dumb to do so .

Pro choice :
That guy cute ?
Kiss ?
Time alone ?
Sex ? Condom ?

Lots of choices already made by a person who doesn't want to be pregnant .
A fool would support further decision making by such a person.
Supporting a life or death decision by such a genius - is exploitive and cheapening for everyone involved . Dumb .


Yet you still hold them accountable over the track record of poor decision making??

Don't be coy. It's a fallacy to say "you spilt the milk but I can't trust you to clean it up, your to stupid to know how to deal with it"


Oh , I don't suggest holding the person accountable ( at this point ) - because it's too late for that .
Just paying the bill at the clinic is the only accountability we can hope for ...

I mean MYSELF as accountable to myself and my own sense of dignity . Something that countless health-care professionals , activists , and apologists have a different definition of .

I don't mean to sound patronizing , but it is WE who CAN make decisions ( I presume ) who have to make a choice .


I think the point your missing here is that you are either accountable for yourself or your not. If she is responsible for letting herself get pregnant then who is anyone to step in and tell her what she's gonna do?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:14 PM
link   
I'm completely pro choice.

That being said anyone that wants to try and force a woman to maintain a pregnancy for months hasn't thought through the emotional and physical welling being of both the mother and the child.

If a woman can't take the time to take care of herself during the pregnancy, what kind of chance does the developing fetus have? Its not for me to judge anyone's choices. Would I have an abortion? No. Not even when the Dr offered because the baby was causing me complecations. How many people actually can so that?

Babies are very precious. I don't understand why some people wait so long to decide a baby isn't precious to them. I certainly know that no one had better tell me what I can do with my body. It should be my choice.

For all of you that don't like it, just keep in mind there are alternative methods of aborting a fetus. By limiting the medical methods woman will simply go underground. History have proven this. How can you put one life as priority over another?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: SearchLightsInc

Honestly, it is illogical for a liberal to condone any form of abortion when we all know that one of their prime directives is that no one should be intentionally killed by another. That would extend to and include a fertilized human egg. Logically, a fertilized egg, having had an outside influence directed at it, is no longer entirely a part of or the property of the host parent. Therefore, it has guaranteed rights beyond the wishes of the host.

This one point the liberals have bassackwards, but more than likely highly touted merely because it defies the conservative views on the subject.


edit on 28-8-2014 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: SearchLightsInc

My last line was "when" the baby has rights.
So just for #s and giggles when do you feel the baby has rights?
Myself being an atheist and having low moral standards (being a blasphemer) lol..
I feel the first trimester is a good happy middle ground but what do I know, how bout you?


That's not the question that concerns me, I'm genuinely stumped that some deem the pregnancy a woman's responsibility and yet attempt to remove all decision making from her hands because she's not responsible enough???


Haha!
Now who's avoiding the question?
I agree that men are equally responsible for pregnancy.
Now when does the child get the right to choose to live?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
That being said, if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant, why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy?

two definitions of the word "responsible" are not interchangeable as you have used them.
"if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant"
This is a cause and effect.Being the primary cause of something and so able to be blamed or credited for it.
"why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy? "
This is about duties and making decisions.
just because she's responsible(partly) for pregnancy doesn't mean she's a responsible person
I would say if she didn't want a child, she already has shown poor judgement but the ultimate decisions should be made by the two baby creating parties.



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   

That being said, if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant, why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy?

It is illogical to hold someone accountable and then to remove accountability because they might make a choice your not on board with. Illogical and quite offensive actually.


Usually, discussions relating logic and the abortion argument end like this.

Pro-Life: So, logic and reason shows us there is no way to know that the unborn is not a true human being, and killing something that may very well be a human is reckless, and immoral.

Pro-Choice: So what, the law says I can. Butt out!

I know that sounds silly, but it's true, I've been in a few of these discussions, but this one is a little different. Here, we're turning two things into one, by the magic of words.

Becoming pregnant is one event, man and woman, you know the drill. Then things happen. Maybe enough to cause a miscarriage, maybe the guy decides to run away from you, maybe you get short on money, maybe nothing in particular happens, but time has gone by.

Now we have a pregnant woman. We can leave all of the past behind us for a moment. Now there is a second, and entirely different decision. Does she carry it to term? The law gives her sole authority on the decision, even if she's too young to drink, drive, vote, or get a tattoo.

What logical argument can possibly exist to say that society can not pass laws to reduce the number of legal choices in such a case, if it feels it's in society's best interest?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:20 PM
link   






Not every one who has an unwanted pregnancy was irresponsible.


Correct , of course ... now - what's next ?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: SearchLightsInc

Honestly, it is illogical for a liberal to condone any form of abortion when we all know that one of their prime directives is that no one should be intentionally killed by another. that would extent to and include a fertilized human egg.

This one point the liberals have bassackwards, but more than likely highly touted merely because it defies the conservative views on the subject.



It has previously been discussed in this thread, society has not yet agreed on a majority when a potential human becomes a human with rights. That being the case, your debate about liberals going against their own beliefs is null and void.



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   
I LOVE people arguing over something that is an issue that seldom affects their lives. But they want to tell others theirs. BOTH SIDES people. This is silly. It's done. Roe vs Wade. 40 years ago. It's not going to change so why beak about it?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: charles1952

That being said, if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant, why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy?

It is illogical to hold someone accountable and then to remove accountability because they might make a choice your not on board with. Illogical and quite offensive actually.


Usually, discussions relating logic and the abortion argument end like this.

Pro-Life: So, logic and reason shows us there is no way to know that the unborn is not a true human being, and killing something that may very well be a human is reckless, and immoral.

Pro-Choice: So what, the law says I can. Butt out!

I know that sounds silly, but it's true, I've been in a few of these discussions, but this one is a little different. Here, we're turning two things into one, by the magic of words.

Becoming pregnant is one event, man and woman, you know the drill. Then things happen. Maybe enough to cause a miscarriage, maybe the guy decides to run away from you, maybe you get short on money, maybe nothing in particular happens, but time has gone by.

Now we have a pregnant woman. We can leave all of the past behind us for a moment. Now there is a second, and entirely different decision. Does she carry it to term? The law gives her sole authority on the decision, even if she's too young to drink, drive, vote, or get a tattoo.

What logical argument can possibly exist to say that society can not pass laws to reduce the number of legal choices in such a case, if it feels it's in society's best interest?


Yes but if you deem a woman responsible for getting pregnant then who are you to step in after the fact and tell her what she can and cannot do with her body?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
I LOVE people arguing over something that is an issue that seldom affects their lives. But they want to tell others theirs. BOTH SIDES people. This is silly. It's done. Roe vs Wade. 40 years ago. It's not going to change so why beak about it?


I'm not trying to tell anyone, I'm just discussing the paradigm of a woman's role in this whole messed up debate!



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: SearchLightsInc

We all know what causes pregnancy. We all know what pregnancy is. Its not like you went swimming in a dirty pool and got invaded by a parasite. Once you're pregnant there is a human being growing inside of you. Period.

Killing your own child has got to be one of the most despicable and selfish acts a person could ever commit. I just don't understand how anyone could choose to do it in the first place, much less demand the right to a choice in the matter.



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: intrepid
I LOVE people arguing over something that is an issue that seldom affects their lives. But they want to tell others theirs. BOTH SIDES people. This is silly. It's done. Roe vs Wade. 40 years ago. It's not going to change so why beak about it?


I'm not trying to tell anyone, I'm just discussing the paradigm of a woman's role in this whole messed up debate!


There is no debate. That debate was settled in the SCOTUS 40 years ago. Arguing it now would be like trying to kill a chicken that you already ate. It's the media that keeps this non-issue front and center. Answer this:

"Do you think the SCOTUS will EVER repeal Roe vs Wade"?



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Quote :
If she is responsible for letting herself get pregnant then who is anyone to step in and tell her what she's gonna do? : Quote

I think it takes two to tango ; I 'm avoiding the ' herself ' - though she will bear the burden the most , in more ways than one .

It's too late to step in and tell her what to do : she's a woman now .

However unpopular these days ( here in US ) , a little guidance goes a long way . Too many 'orphans ' , on their own - trying to be ' responsible ' with little or no training . IMO .
edit on 28-8-2014 by Bazart because: havtakillya



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
I LOVE people arguing over something that is an issue that seldom affects their lives. But they want to tell others theirs. BOTH SIDES people. This is silly. It's done. Roe vs Wade. 40 years ago. It's not going to change so why beak about it?


I admit that I DON'T LIKE it when complete strangers think they know something ( anything ? ) about my life .



posted on Aug, 28 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: EyesOpenMouthShut

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
That being said, if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant, why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy?

two definitions of the word "responsible" are not interchangeable as you have used them.
"if a woman is mainly responsible for allowing herself to get pregnant"
This is a cause and effect.Being the primary cause of something and so able to be blamed or credited for it.
"why then can she not be deemed responsible enough to make decisions about that pregnancy? "
This is about duties and making decisions.
just because she's responsible(partly) for pregnancy doesn't mean she's a responsible person
I would say if she didn't want a child, she already has shown poor judgement but the ultimate decisions should be made by the two baby creating parties.


First of all, nice try.
Your trying to be clever with the English language but the problem is, you don't understand the English language.

Stating that the word responsible has two different meanings made me belly laugh. Being "responsible" includes both holding yourself accountable for things that belong to you, in this case the body. It also includes making decisions for the things you are accountable for, in this case, your body.

There's no 2 separate meanings, just someone trying to blow up an obvious paradigm by trying to play with words and meanings..

Better luck next time chuck




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join