Abortion tussle at debate was wow

originally posted by: Ghost147

I don't believe I've ever met a person who is "pro abortion". What I have met are people who believe that a woman should be able to have the option.

We see countries all over the world who forbid abortion, and that's not going to stop someone from doing it themselves in an extremely dangerous way.

I honestly know very little about either side of the argument, but I see far more advantages in having the option then forbidding it entirely.

So you are saying the pro-choice camp is not about having an abortion even on the third trimester?

BTW, we also see countries, and progressive/leftwing groups and countries force abortions on millions of people all over the globe.

What I am countering here is the claim that abortion on the third trimester are needed to save a woman's life when that is a lie.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: randomthoughts12

only god has that right.

I'm anti-abortion and religious and that's still bullsh*t to me.

It's the pregnant woman's right. No one else.
If her life is in danger why/how the f*ck would it be the government's job to intervene?

No one is questioning when her life is in danger.

How about when the woman's life is not in danger? Does she have right to terminate the unborn child?

originally posted by: crimsongod21
What I love is conservatives are all about "small" government then invite them in to tell people, women in this case, what they can or cannot do with there bodies.

Yes, small government. As in decentralized and majority powers in the individual states, which can regulate the legality of a medical procedure under certain circumstances.

My mom is alive today due to an abortion many people wish was illegal.....f that...i am glad I had my mother around while I was growing up...

Was her life in danger? What made the procedure illegal?

a reply to: BlackProject

The system itself has made it very hard for parents to adopt... There are many, many parents in waiting lists waiting for years for the red tape to clear to adopt children. Many are even denied even when they would be good parents and would be able to provide for these children...

BTW, how in the world does the fact that it is very hard these days for parents to adopt make "abortion on the third trimester more viable?... The problem is with the adoption red tape, hence the red tape has to be fixed instead of telling women "abort, abort, abort day and night"...

BTW, giving a comedian's stance is not giving facts... You do know that, or don't you?...

originally posted by: crimsongod21
What I love is conservatives are all about "small" government then invite them in to tell people, women in this case, what they can or cannot do with there bodies.

You know, in another thread an ATS member asked me, "where does the U.S. Constitution say human fetuses have rights". That member seems to be unawares, as many others, that the U.S. Constitution states that any right not covered under the other amendments shall be decided by the states (each state). This is what Roe vs Wade does, yet the "pro-choice" crowd wants to stop that.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: crimsongod21
What I love is conservatives are all about "small" government then invite them in to tell people, women in this case, what they can or cannot do with there bodies.

You know, in another thread an ATS member asked me, "where does the U.S. Constitution say human fetuses have rights". That member seems to be unawares, as many others, that the U.S. Constitution states that any right not covered under the other amendments shall be decided by the states (each state). This is what Roe vs Wade does, yet the "pro-choice" crowd wants to stop that.

I think you have misinterpreted the 9th Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
en.wikipedia.org...

Also, there is no way one can construe that the constitution bestows rights on the unborn.
14th Amendment, Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
en.wikipedia.org...

One must be born to attain constitutional rights.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: randomthoughts12

only god has that right.

I'm anti-abortion and religious and that's still bullsh*t to me.

It's the pregnant woman's right. No one else.
If her life is in danger why/how the f*ck would it be the government's job to intervene?

No one is questioning when her life is in danger.

How about when the woman's life is not in danger? Does she have right to terminate the unborn child?

Yes, of course. Elective abortion is legal in the USA up until fetal viability, according to Roe V Wade.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: randomthoughts12

only god has that right.

I'm anti-abortion and religious and that's still bullsh*t to me.

It's the pregnant woman's right. No one else.
If her life is in danger why/how the f*ck would it be the government's job to intervene?

No one is questioning when her life is in danger.

How about when the woman's life is not in danger? Does she have right to terminate the unborn child?

Yes, of course. Elective abortion is legal in the USA up until fetal viability, according to Roe V Wade.

And that is what is sick and wrong with the pro-abortion crowd. They applaud the legal killing of innocent human lives so long as they are less than 3 months old.

Just because something is legal does not make it right.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Not everyone has to agree with you or adopt your moral code. I believe in the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal choice.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Not everyone has to agree with you or adopt your moral code. I believe in the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal choice.

Sanctity is probably the last word that should be used in the context of ending an innocent and naive human life.

Damnit, this website has lost its mind. Springer where are you? Make a thread or something. Your mods are failing left and right (double entendre :p).

You know this is the elections and politics forum, right?

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Not everyone has to agree with you or adopt your moral code. I believe in the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal choice.

Sanctity is probably the last word that should be used in the context of ending an innocent and naive human life.

I understand that you believe that women should be punished for having sex, by being forced to carry to term any unwanted pregnancy that ensues from a tryst. But, the Supreme Court disagrees with you and does set the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal reproductive choices above your moral outrage.

Like I said earlier, Roe v Wade isn't broken, so there's no need to fix it.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Not everyone has to agree with you or adopt your moral code. I believe in the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal choice.

Sanctity is probably the last word that should be used in the context of ending an innocent and naive human life.

I understand that you believe that women should be punished for having sex, by being forced to carry to term any unwanted pregnancy that ensues from a tryst.

I understand that you think people should not face the consequence of their poor decision making skills.

But, the Supreme Court disagrees with you and does set the sanctity of a woman's autonomy and personal reproductive choices above your moral outrage.

Do you really think the killing of a child is a holy and sacred right? If so, I don't want to meet your god.

Like I said earlier, Roe v Wade isn't broken, so there's no need to fix it.

So you agree the states still have the right to regulate and even forbid abortions. Good to know.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

I understand that you think people should not face the consequence of their poor decision making skills.

Oh, the consequences are faced. You don't get to dictate those consequences by forcing women to carry their unwanted pregnancies to term. Abortion is a consequence of an unwanted pregnancy.

Do you really think the killing of a child is a holy and sacred right?

A fertilized egg isn't a child. An embryo nor a fetus is a child. But to answer your question, YES, tending to our own garden, trimming back branches, pulling weeds and planting seeds is our "sacred right".

If so, I don't want to meet your god.

Just read your own Bible. Your own biblical god has no problem with abortion, birth control or murdering pregnant women and children already born.

originally posted by: windword
Oh, the consequences are faced. You don't get to dictate those consequences by forcing women to carry their unwanted pregnancies to term. Abortion is a consequence of an unwanted pregnancy.

And pregnancy is the consequence of sex. Rape/Incest account for about 1% of abortions. So 99% of abortions occur from a woman who can't understand basic biology.

A fertilized egg isn't a child. An embryo nor a fetus is a child.

About that lack of biology understanding...

But to answer your question, YES, tending to our own garden, trimming back branches, pulling weeds and planting seeds is our "sacred right".

So now a child is a weed and gardening is sacred. Planting weed seeds? Some lack of agriculture understanding too.

Just read your own Bible. Your own biblical god has no problem with abortion, birth control or murdering pregnant women and children already born.

So now you are shifting away from what you consider sacred and holy. Just admit it was a bad word choice.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

So now you are shifting away from what you consider sacred and holy. Just admit it was a bad word choice.

No! My body, my autonomy and my reproductive choice is sacred, regardless of what you think.

So now a child is a weed and gardening is sacred. Planting weed seeds? Some lack of agriculture understanding too.

Yes. An unwanted pregnancy can be comparable to a weed. A decision to end a pregnancy with a dire prognosis is comparable to cutting back branches. Yes, my garden is the result of my choices and is sacred.

About that lack of biology understanding...

An acorn is NOT an oak tree. An embryo is not a child.

And pregnancy is the consequence of sex.

So?

So 99% of abortions occur from a woman who can't understand basic biology.

So? You think stupid women should be forced into parenthood as a punishment for being stupid?

a reply to: windword

considering that they don't want the schools to teach that basic biology, I would say that maybe they want the stupid women, bringing stupid kids into the world, to grow up so stupid that they will eagerly volunteer to go into their wars and labor force earning less than they need to live.

not having sex is the only 100% effective way to assure a pregnancy won't occur, no matter what birth control is used, there is a risk involved that it will happen. and, then, they are griping because the health insurance that is provided to women includes coverage for birth control.
still wish that the women and men in this country who enjoy their right to control when and how many children they bring into the world would proclaim a "Just say no" week or better yet, month. would be interesting, even more interesting if trump's wife joined in!

a reply to: dawnstar

considering that they don't want the schools to teach that basic biology, I would say that maybe they want the stupid women, bringing stupid kids into the world, to grow up so stupid that they will eagerly volunteer to go into their wars and labor force earning less than they need to live.

Biology is "God" to these people, and you're not supposed to tempt or challenge God, unless it's cancer or polio or crop eating bugs and animals, or a mountain in the way of a planned roadway or golf course, then it's okay to tamper with nature! The world is our oyster to use and abuse as we please, unless it's woman trying to challenge God's curse/punishment on Eve and her decedents for her/our part in our supposed "original sin"!

a reply to: windword

The world is our oyster to use and abuse as we please, unless it's woman trying to challenge God's curse/punishment on Eve and her decedents for her/our part in our supposed "original sin"!

that right there is probably a good part of the problem.....children are a curse, a punishment to women....
not a blessing for society to charish, a joy, so motherhood has been demeaned, our children are most often considered to be nuisances, they're too loud, oh look, they are blocking the road, playing their baseball game, so what if no cars are coming down the road, they are in front of my house! why doesn't she shut that danged baby up so I can enjoy my meal... and on and on. to chose to be a mother, to care and give unconditional love like that to another is the definition of sacrifice, but they want to see it a a curse, or a punishment, or an obligation....
and when you are talking about those third trimester abortions, well that sacrifice that they feel a women has an obligation might last a heck of alot longer than 18-20 years. she might die of old age wondering who will care for the disabled child who can neither talk or walk, or feed itself because of some terrible birth defect, like she had done for most of her adult life.

sacrifices that are forced on someone, regardless of weather they would willingly take them or not, turn into obligations, or punishments, and tend to be more apt to be resented.