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.

 

Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

page: 3
127
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I don't think that Annie was ever suggesting that people should violate the law. Are you insinuating that Annie is wrong, and women's medical consultations and doctors' recommendations and provisions should be run past you and John Q Public first?




posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Roe v Wade says 6 months.

I couldn't tell you. It's not my field; and this pro-life vs pro-choice kind of ordeal isn't my scene.

I've always pulled out, and no babies.
edit on 4-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Yes, in spite of pulling out, it is possible to get pregnant from preseminal fluid... Pre-seminal fluid does not contain any sperm, however, if sperm is “left behind” in the urethra from a previous ejaculation, it can come in contact with the fluid. The leftover sperm comes forth to the tip of the penis during arousal, possibly causing some sperm to be carried in this fluid, and into the partner’s body

And no sex during ovulation is a good idea,....but drunken hook ups do happen, casual sex is not a crime, and should a pregnancy happened because of it...I don't think its fair to penalise the woman for it IMHO
edit on 4-2-2017 by JD163 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

I didn't ask you personal baby making history.

I asked how a 'scientist' could actually manage to abort a late term baby and extinguish its life before it has a chance to draw breath.


I don't care.

That's up to the scientist.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

So at month 9 women can abort their babies in your view. Got it.


Not your business.


You think a woman should be allowed to terminate a baby at 9 months and its no one elses business.

That is disgusting.


Is it currently legal to do that?

NO



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

Can you describe the circumstances that would encourage a physician to provide a late term abortion?


EDIT: Actually, I'm sure there is no shortage of highly disturbed sadistic types out there who love chopping up dead baby fetuses. It's kind of like how many would-be serial killers join the military and pray for wars.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   
As long as they are eating meat that's not pro-life. That's pure hypocrisy.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: windword

Roe v Wade says 6 months.


Wrong and wrong.


I couldn't tell you. It's not my field; and this pro-life vs pro-choice kind of ordeal isn't my scene.

I've always pulled out, and no babies.


Maybe you should find out what the law that you're against actually says, before you go off on embarrassing tangents of blissful ignorance.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Of course, no sex, no pregnancy.....but you know how it goes,....people do have sex, and having sex is not the same as agreeing to carrying a fetus to term.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

I didn't ask you personal baby making history.

I asked how a 'scientist' could actually manage to abort a late term baby and extinguish its life before it has a chance to draw breath.


So, you're not really interested in someone with real life experience.

Didn't think so. No one ever is on this subject.

edit on 4-2-2017 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: JD163
a reply to: schuyler

'Accidents' do happen,....no contraceptive is 100%


So what? Does that mean you have the right to kill a baby? Because it was an "accident"? You still had to engage in sex to make it happen. It doesn't happen with spontaneous generation--unless you believe God did it.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I just looked at it dude. I dont speak in absolutes unless I've already confirmed, is how I live. You should all learn that about me, as it'd save me a lot of hassle.


Abortion-rights advocates argue that the proposed bill violates the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which holds that women have a constitutional right to abortion up until viability, or the point at which the fetus is capable of surviving outside the womb—typically around the 22nd to 24th week.
www.theatlantic.com...

edit on 4-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: windword

Can you describe the circumstances that would encourage a physician to provide a late term abortion?


EDIT: Actually, I'm sure there is no shortage of highly disturbed sadistic types out there who love chopping up dead baby fetuses. It's kind of like how many would-be serial killers join the military and pray for wars.


That's not what I asked you. I'll rephrase.

What is "late term"?

Can you describe a circumstance in which a moral and competent physician would recommend a legal late term abortion to a pregnant woman?



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

I didn't ask you personal baby making history.

I asked how a 'scientist' could actually manage to abort a late term baby and extinguish its life before it has a chance to draw breath.


So, you're not really interested in someone with real life experience.

Didn't think so. No one ever is on this subject.


Your response there was red herring. Just like the one you just gave grambler. And now you're trying to keep that one going? All to dodge the moral quagmire your 'its okay to murder new born babies' worldview. Pathetic.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: windword

Roe v Wade says 6 months.


Wrong and wrong.


I couldn't tell you. It's not my field; and this pro-life vs pro-choice kind of ordeal isn't my scene.

I've always pulled out, and no babies.


Maybe you should find out what the law that you're against actually says, before you go off on embarrassing tangents of blissful ignorance.



I actually stopped participating in these threads because no one cares what the facts are or to listen to someone who's actually had an abortion.

AND - - states have gone crazy - - its hard to keep up with laws of different states.

However, I am pretty sure the fetus can be taken at anytime if the mother's life is at stake (in some states).

edit on 4-2-2017 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Grambler

I don't think that Annie was ever suggesting that people should violate the law. Are you insinuating that Annie is wrong, and women's medical consultations and doctors' recommendations and provisions should be run past you and John Q Public first?





She was suggesting that society should have no say in rather or not a 9 month old is terminated.

I am insinuating that this is wrong, and I am doing it as emphatically as I can. This statement is one of the most selfish, evil vile statements I have ever read.

Annee didn't say anything about caveats for mediacl decisions etc. She said its the womans body, her choice, and no one else has the right to say anything. Notice how she says


Business of person responsible for a minimum of the next 18 years.

Not your business.


Thats a pretty black and white statement. Its only one persons decision to make, the mother. Even at nine months says ignoranceisbliss. Annee says "Not your business" In other words, the woman can do whatever she damn well pleases to that nine month old baby.

If society had no say in rather a nine month old is terminated, why does society have a say in anything?

A father decides he wants to beat his children severely for misbehaving, what right is it of society to interfere?

Dylan Roof just wanted to murder some black folks. Well that was between him and those black folks, right? The rest of society has no right to influence his choice?

I can't believe you want to mince words about this and refuse to condemn it.

Again, this is one of the most radical extreme disgusting comments I have ever heard.

If Annee would like to backtrack her statement, I would be relieved and more than happy to hear it.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: windword

Can you describe the circumstances that would encourage a physician to provide a late term abortion?


EDIT: Actually, I'm sure there is no shortage of highly disturbed sadistic types out there who love chopping up dead baby fetuses. It's kind of like how many would-be serial killers join the military and pray for wars.


That's not what I asked you. I'll rephrase.

What is "late term"?

Can you describe a circumstance in which a moral and competent physician would recommend a legal late term abortion to a pregnant woman?


Why would one? Are physicians also therapists and / or social workers too? Or are you trying to turn is into an issue of medical reasons? If that's your game, how about we also debate the merits of the Hippocratic Oath while we're at it?



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

I didn't ask you personal baby making history.

I asked how a 'scientist' could actually manage to abort a late term baby and extinguish its life before it has a chance to draw breath.


So, you're not really interested in someone with real life experience.

Didn't think so. No one ever is on this subject.


Your response there was red herring. Just like the one you just gave grambler. And now you're trying to keep that one going? All to dodge the moral quagmire your 'its okay to murder new born babies' worldview. Pathetic.


Who is murdering newborns?



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: JD163
a reply to: schuyler

'Accidents' do happen,....no contraceptive is 100%


So what? Does that mean you have the right to kill a baby? Because it was an "accident"? You still had to engage in sex to make it happen. It doesn't happen with spontaneous generation--unless you believe God did it.


Right to kill a baby? Of course not,....but the law says its legal to terminate a pregnancy up to a certain point.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

I didn't ask you personal baby making history.

I asked how a 'scientist' could actually manage to abort a late term baby and extinguish its life before it has a chance to draw breath.


So, you're not really interested in someone with real life experience.

Didn't think so. No one ever is on this subject.


Your response there was red herring. Just like the one you just gave grambler. And now you're trying to keep that one going? All to dodge the moral quagmire your 'its okay to murder new born babies' worldview. Pathetic.


I don't care.

It is YOUR personal emotional/moral issue.

It is not mine.



new topics

top topics



 
127
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join