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.

 

JUST IN: Trump defunds Planned Parenthood

page: 26
68
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Her need to fulfill her responsibilities in life, like taking care or her already born children.


That's what contraception is for.

Abortion isn't birth control.




posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Then stop using Christianity as the moral high ground to shame women for not wanting to carry a pregnancy to term, and to take away their reproductive rights.


edit on 20-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: projectvxn

BS. The biblical God was selfish. Wasn't he ethical? Aren't we made in his image?



Please stop with the religious arguments just because you think they're easier for you to argue.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: projectvxn

Then stop using Christianity as the moral high ground to shame women for not wanting to carry a pregnancy to term, and to take away their reproductive rights.



I haven't. I have cited biological facts and human ethics and morality.

My only mention of religion was to chide you for your asinine use of it.
edit on 8 20 2019 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




Abortion isn't birth control.


It is. But it isn't contraception.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: projectvxn

BS. The biblical God was selfish. Wasn't he ethical? Aren't we made in his image?



Please stop with the religious arguments just because you think they're easier for you to argue.


That's because it's the excuse that most people use to try to take women's rights away.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

That's fair, but I think more of a semantic argument.

My meaning was to illustrate that treating abortion as a contraceptive pill is unethical and morally wrong.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It's not a woman's right to kill her baby.

I don't care what most people use as an excuse. Pay attention to the fact that you're talking to ONE person.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn





My meaning was to illustrate that treating abortion as a contraceptive pill is unethical and morally wrong.


Well, it's not healthy, but I don't think abortion is immoral, so, there's that.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha


I think we can comfortably leave it at that.

Thanks for the debate. This was actually really good.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




It's not a woman's right to kill her baby.


...Her potential baby. A fertilized egg, an embryo, a fetus, is not a baby, yet. It is a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy, before viability.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

We won't agree on this one, I think.

But this illustrates the need for more debate out in the open on ethical grounds.

For what it's worth, I think the religious argument is the worst possible argument for the pro-life movement. I know I will never change that, but that is my opinion. I think if this is argued from a scientific and ethical standpoint we might actually be able to figure out a status quo we're all comfortable with.

It isn't all or nothing for me. But we do have to draw lines and we do need to recognize life as it is and not as it is convenient to our political sensibilities.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

Ah! You guys promised, when you passed that law under the GW Bush Administration, that you wouldn't use the law to leverage murder charges against women and their doctors who abort! LIARS!

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004, that was a pro-life elbow push, exploited the public's horror of Lacy Peterson's murder and her son Connor. It was meant to protect the unborn from the violence that women suffer, by punishing the abuser twice.

You see, it's all about choice. The woman's choice to keep or terminate her pregnancy. It's not your choice, it's not the government's choice. It's her choice. When you make the choice for her, to terminate her pregnancy, it's murder.

It's her body, her egg, her choice whether she wants to host this "life" to term, or not.



And this thread is about who pays for that procedure....right? So, if it is a woman's choice (just toss the father aside, he has no say at all it seems) then it should be her responsibility to pay for her choice. Not mine, nor yours by force (i.e. taxes). You want to donate, please do so...but do not force everyone to pay for another person's choice.

Right?



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

No, a baby needs someone to play the role of a mother. You dispute this fact you diminish the role of all those adoptive mothers out there and I am pretty sure you dont want to do that.
And a baby can survive an abortion only if it's close to being viable. There is no way currently that you can remove a first trimester baby from the womb and preserve its life. As far as your example of fetal surgery, I'm pretty sure that they keep the umbilical cord intact? So mom and baby aren't separated.

I dont know, you tell me. How much pain, suffering, disability, risk does this society have the right to expect a women to endure to bring a life into this world when the society holds it's right to have guns that can blow away dozens of kids in a second as being so far above those kids right to a safe school environment that they cant tolerate the idea of having to register those guns or submit to a background check? A society so unhinged that they are body slamming kids so hard to cause seizures and concussions over a hat being worn while the national anthem being played. My guess would be that not many people would tolerate another person inflicting the amount of discomfort your normal pregnancy causes for long without taking measures to end it. They just can end it by removing themselves from the irritation.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

See my post on the Hyde rule. No Federal dollars can go towards abortion. PP funds them with donations and outside funding etc. Based on most sources about 3% of their budget goes to funding abortions. NONE of that comes from federal money.
edit on 8/20/19 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: Krakatoa

See my post on the Hyde rule. No Federal dollars can go towards abortion. PP funds them with donations and outside funding etc


Then why are they backing out of title X? Do they not keep meticulous records to clearly show any auditor that no money from federal funding went to anything related to abortion?

I would be OK with that, if it was auditable and provable that the federal moneys were definitely not going toward funding a woman's choice to abort her pregnancy. Don't you think if PP could show that on a ledger, they would not have to even be concerned about this at all?



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Maybe because they're close to getting ash-canned for campaign donation fraud 😎



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Your strawmen are poorly constructed and you left your red herrings out in the sun too long.


edit on 8 20 2019 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa





And this thread is about who pays for that procedure....right?


Wrong. No, it's not.

Tax payer dollars are not going to on demand abortion, and Donald Trump's gag order doesn't do anything to curb abortion. It serves to remove more women from access to birth control.



posted on Aug, 20 2019 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Women do not lack access to birth control.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join