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.

 

Support Abortion? Watch this video and please defend your decisions...

page: 20
8
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


And once again, someone is using an extreme example to defend abortion, while so many more are aborted for other reasons.

I am not here to talk about extremes.

I'm here to talk about the other 99%.




posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 



I'm here to talk about the other 99%.


Then you should have made that clear in your first post.

Maybe people wouldn't have wasted their time on this then without knowing that you were not willing to discuss the scope and reality of the situation.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
double post

[edit on 27-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


And once again, someone is using an extreme example to defend abortion, while so many more are aborted for other reasons.

I am not here to talk about extremes.

I'm here to talk about the other 99%.



Hello? What extreme?

I'm talking about 99% as well.

I believe that 99% of the abortions that happen before the halfway point are fine.

No problemo... Let it happen... Why not?

What' I'm saying is that the debate is when should this not be allowed anymore.

Now, I don't agree with late term abortions.. but I don't think they should be banned because of that 20% of situations where it is a health issue.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I have made this abundantly clear from page one, once someone brought the argument up. I have posted so many times on this thread, that very line of reasoning.
But everyone ignores this.

You cannot watch said video, and tell me that it seems just when some girl/couple doesn't want to be burdened, they just kill this baby.

That is why I said that extremes don't work. They make up such a small percentage, that the argument is unjustifiable.

But thanks for clarifying what you thought I should do.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

No it's ignorant to use Emotionally charged propaganda to support your stance against a woman's right to choose.


The question of whether or not a woman has a right to choose is not answered by the emotional charge of a disgusting video.

It's a philosophical one, not an emotional one... that is why it's ignorant.



Emotionally charged?

Gee Hunka,, YOUR intellect is STAGGERING!

Propaganda? Gee Hunka doesn't that mean "emotionally charged"

Ignorant for using it?

I don't think so, unless you can find a more accurate depiction of what woman are actually doing and to what this so called blob of useless meat really look like and what it really experiences during this barbaric asnine procedure, what you think of it is not about the OP's ignorance.

IT is about YOUR DENIAL

The denial of a baby a woman wants to have the right to choose killing is she so pleases and THAT is what this is about and we have a right to call it what it is and it is bloody murder and using this as an escape for the consequences of or casual sex without thinking this may have serious consequences, than YOU are the one who needs to wake UP!

SEX is far to free far to exploited far too perverse and far too many ramifications for those not willing to be responsible for their own actions.

A condom breaks

opps Someone dies!

a Diaphram isn't positioned correctly

Opps Die Bastard!

Someone just needed to get off and it just happened

CONDEMNED GUILTY! NOW DIE BABY DIE!

It's a womans right to choose!

Choose what?

Choose whether my son or daughter, your son or daughter or who ever it was that gets her pregnant, gets to live or die and from what I can tell, if it is your son,,

you could care less because to YOU it is only a philosophical argument and not an emotional one.

Yeah riiiight

PfffT!



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Did you watch the video?

You keep talking about late term abortions, so why is that?

What point is the baby at (in age) when that video was taken?

Still don't know, do you?

I can;'t talk to someone who only wants to shift the argument.

You have made it clear, that a healthy woman who is in fine financial condition, should feel freel to end a pregnancy at the period of what, 4 months?
That you have no say in such a thing.
Well, I argue that I will take the stand in defense, as the voice that might argue for just a few more months, for a shot at life, has no voice inside that BELLY.
Especially since the one person who should defend it's life the hardest, has been led to believe that it is too difficult to deal with the consequences of their own actions. That death for the fetus is somehow justifiable.

Why not use that example to defend abortion?



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 


Why do you persist on judging people who have abortions so rudely in your statements then say you don’t throw stones? In your OP you called abortion infanticide (killing an infant), which is simply ignorant and incorrect and offensive. None of us are supporting killing infants. Please stop contradicting yourself, either own up to your own statements or don’t point fingers at others.

And please show some statistics or unbiased studies that support your claims about abortions (and those who have them). Otherwise you are just stating your own opinion as well.


[edit on 27-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Originally posted by Angus123

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


I have had to watch such videos on this site, yes.

And I have seen that in person.

But death in war is a two way street, so I say that your analogy is incorrect.


So.... if the fetus could fight back it'd be cool?

[edit on 27-3-2009 by Angus123]


Is this all pro death people know how to do? Is find extreme consequences unrelated to anything else that has to do with this subject and assume because we don't agree with the murder of innocents that we think killing under other asinine conditions is all right?


The old Religion is the cause of all the wars and other human atrocities is a canard I would gladly prove wrong and that it was Countries where religion was NOT, where you will find the biggest genocides far exceeding any number of those you can falsely accuse in the religion is evil examples. In fact Planned Parenthood's biggest most profitable product, is not birth control, but Birth arrest. They arrest the natural progression of a birth that is already in progress, and they do this in what is surely the largest genocide of a people whose only wrong was to be in the most unsafe most dangerous place on the planet today,,


Their mothers womb


Wait... killing of innocents? So you're saying killing is kosher, so long as the victim isn't an "innocent." Okay. Define innocent, and then show me where that addendum appears on those stone tablets that start off thou shalt not kill.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


FYI, he put you on ignore if you weren't so angry and fire and brimstoney, you may have seen where he said that a page or so back. Hate to say you wasted your time on another long fiery gospel, but.....



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 

Probably because Some Pro-choice people are accusing others of 'Comprehension deficits', 'Religious nut jobs' and accusing me of not having 'Reading Fundamentals'.

Not you.
I am so tired of the insults!!!



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 

Probably because Some Pro-choice people are accusing others of 'Comprehension deficits', 'Religious nut jobs' and accusing me of not having 'Reading Fundamentals'.

Not you.
I am so tired of the insults!!!


I get that, and I understand that these debates get heated but I’m just so frustrated with the OPs double talk.

And I am in no way saying there is anything wrong with him getting heated, because I have done so and even confused you with someone else and was very, very rude, but I it seems that he wants to ignore half of his argument when someone points out that it is equally judgmental. I think if he wants to bring an issue up then he should be willing to defend his own statements instead of complaining about others.




[edit on 27-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I see.
No one watches the video.
No one offers stats to support their arguments.
Everyone brings religion into it, and then make a myriad of assumptions about the OP and his arguments.
They want proof that churches take care of women, and then when offered it, refuse to even acknowledge it.

It IS infanticide, as I see this "fetus" as what it truly is. A Baby.

I am not throwing stones, just picking targets my friend.
But I noticed that no one will actually deal with my facts or arguments.
You all just keep shifting the sand...



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 



But I noticed that no one will actually deal with my facts or arguments.


What facts or argument? So far I've seen no facts from you. I countered your argument several pages back and you did not even bother to respond to several of my counters or my first reply to you. Where have you been?



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
Probably because Some Pro-choice people are accusing others of 'Comprehension deficits', 'Religious nut jobs' and accusing me of not having 'Reading Fundamentals'.


Well, the first two are mine so I guess I have to respond, lol. First, the poster I was responding to did NOT understand what I had typed, that was very clear, that or he/she was intentionally acting like he/she didn't and on an internet forum you can afford give people the benefit of the doubt that they are not dishonest, so I did. As for religious nut jobs, I stand by that statement. I don't single out ANY religion, christians are the only religion that are so passionate about this subject, and so you flood this topic. But I think all of you who subscribe to organized religion are crazy, sorry, again I don't hate you. You seem to read fine though.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 


Show me one law in the US that supports infanticide. You won't find one. Just because you believe abortion is infanticide does not make it so.

Edit: Just want to say I'm going off line for a few hours, but look forward to evidence being presented from you. I'll look it over when I return.

[edit on 27-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by dbates
reply to post by Heike
 

That merely states that Congress can't make laws restricting religion. Unless your religion is based on aborting babies, then your out or luck. Congress can pass laws restricting abortion.



Actually it swings both ways...

First Amendment: Free Exercise:


The first amendment to the Constitution protects the free exercise of religion. It does not protect just the free exercise of Christianity nor does it suggest that Christianity and Christians should be have special protections and privileges. The authors used the term "religion," meaning that all religions have exactly the same status before the law and the government. If they had thought that Christianity were special, they'd have said so; instead, they treated it like every other religion.


First Amendment: No Establishment:


The first amendment to the Constitution also prohibits the government from "establishing" any religion. The meaning of "establishment" is hotly debated and some insist that it merely means that the government can't create a national religion. This reading is too narrow and would make the clause all but meaningless. To have relevance, it must mean that the government can't favor, endorse, promote, or support any religions just as it can't hinder any: it must remain as neutral as possible.



You don't think Christianity is what they had in mindhuh?

WRONG! supreme.justia.com...

It is EVERYTHING they had in mind and our nation was founded on the tenets of Christianity and in spite of what Atheists, gays lezbians, Pro Death by infanticiders have done to revise history, the FACT is you almost got away with it but the bill to preserve this country's christian heritage the likes of them employing the ACLU has so often tried but a bill to put back phrases like "so help me God" on the end of FDR's speech was replaced after being removed because it offended the anti christs of this country yet the bloody slaughter of abortion doesn't offend them UNLESS someone shows it to them and not even they can stand seeing the evil this is so they like you,, call it Propaganda. They like you Call it an abortion rather than infanticide, they like you call it planned parenthood rarher than genocide and death at the hands of casual sex taught by progressives in our debased public schools. The same public schools where teaching gays sex which has nothing to do with biology and may be a reason we have so many saying Ooops! and another baby bites the dust.



[edit on 27-3-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 


Show me one law in the US that supports infanticide. You won't find one. Just because you believe abortion is infanticide does not make it so.


Obama the sole person in both the house and senate argued the defense of such a bill. It was called called the Born Alive infant protection act and is one of the most repugnant evils I have ever heard a member of Government argue.

Obama fought for this depraved negligence to be carried out four times. Our Obama, an elected official and now our fraudulently elected illegal alien President



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 

Probably because Some Pro-choice people are accusing others of 'Comprehension deficits', 'Religious nut jobs' and accusing me of not having 'Reading Fundamentals'.

Not you.
I am so tired of the insults!!!


I get that, and I understand that these debates get heated but I’m just so frustrated with the OPs double talk.

And I am in no way saying there is anything wrong with him getting heated, because I have done so and even confused you with someone else and was very, very rude, but I it seems that he wants to ignore half of his argument when someone points out that it is equally judgmental. I think if he wants to bring an issue up then he should be willing to defend his own statements instead of complaining about others.




[edit on 27-3-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]


Raps the Bat the only one talkin out both sides of there mouth is YOU because you simply can not follow instructions just like you couldn't in the gay marriage thread I was in with you.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi
Raps the Bat the only one talkin out both sides of there mouth is YOU because you simply can not follow instructions just like you couldn't in the gay marriage thread I was in with you.




I see now, you're THAT kind of extremists. I doubt your true passion for any of these subjects, you are just arguing positions that have been forced into your head from probably very early on. You should LOVE gay people, they can't have abortions...



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join