A valid political point - How are liberals pro-abortion but anti-torture?

reply to post by Blaine91555


Oh this is great....and who is it that is anti-contraception in this country? I forget....

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic

 

So are you saying if you let a human zygote develop inside a womans body for the next nine months and give her all the things it needs that it will never develop into a baby?

Still sensationalizing I see. I never said that, nor did I imply it.

You keep trying to take this debate to the same place, but you are conveniently ignoring the facts, and are conveniently ignoring my actual statments.

Please, get better.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Yeah you missed the post here where I apologized for that one. My bad.

reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic


Me get better. You posted on here that no one thinks abortion is the right thing to do, but yet you still support it. So who is not being true to themselves?

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic

 

Me get better. You posted on here that no one thinks abortion is the right thing to do, but yet you still support it. So who is not being true to themselves?

Again, go ahead and reread the threads. I have no desire to explain these things again, as it is obviously over your head.

Get better.

reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic


Yep. You are way smarter than me. I bow to your superior intellect. You are my new master. Does that make you feel a little less upset?

Seriously though, to me, your argument doesnt make sense. I guess you would say the same about mine.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic

 

Yep. You are way smarter than me. I bow to your superior intellect. You are my new master. Does that make you feel a little less upset?

Seriously though, to me, your argument doesnt make sense. I guess you would say the same about mine.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

You are still sensationalizing I see, and doing it even off-topic. Impressive.

When you actually research the subject, you will understand a little more.

reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic


Really all I have to say is that in my opinion it is going to be a baby as soon as the egg and sperm come together to form a new unique set of DNA. You really arent ever going to change my mind about that, just as I am never going to change your mind. I am not ever going to support abortion because I think it is more or less the same as murder. Its not a religious thing for me. It is just what I think of as common sense. You can believe whatever you like as well, since I have no power to control someones thoughts. I just think it is kind of foolish to be terminating children's lives. If that is sensationalizing things then call me a sensationalist. I can live with that.

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic

 

Really all I have to say is that in my opinion it is going to be a baby as soon as the egg and sperm come together to form a new unique set of DNA. You really arent ever going to change my mind about that, just as I am never going to change your mind. I am not ever going to support abortion because I think it is more or less the same as murder. Its not a religious thing for me. It is just what I think of as common sense. You can believe whatever you like as well, since I have no power to control someones thoughts. I just think it is kind of foolish to be terminating children's lives. If that is sensationalizing things then call me a sensationalist. I can live with that.

Was planet earth what it is today when more than two molecules of hydrogen formed ? NO!

Was a Ford the can that roles off the assembly line when the first joint is welded? NO!

Is a cake egg and flour ? NO!

Is a cancerous growth in someone's brain a child ? NO!

The foetus is not a human being, it is simply a collection of cells living in a parasitic state - it has no brain function until 16 weeks - till then it is a collection of cells. Calling this a human being is no different to calling rack on the ground the Taj Mahal - yes these are the fundamental building blocks but they in no way represent the product we see at 24 weeks.

The vast majority of fertilisations are rejected, well over 60% (I believe the figure is around 70%) - so what you are saying is that this natural process is somehow wrong.

You need to read the science behind this, study the facts rather than relying on religious, normative, emotional claptrap - becuase unfortunately that's what it is -

I know this will be picked apart so I'm only posting once in this thread as to maintain composure.

I support pro-choice because it's pro-choice. It's your body, you make that decision. What happens if you are married and on the pill and the pill fails? What happens when condoms break? What happens if you cannot financially support a child and do not want to go through pregnancy/put it up for adoption? What happens if you are raped? What happens if the baby is diagnosed with a debilitating condition before birth?

I think if it's your fetus, and your body, it's your decision.

I think that some of the innocent people that we torture have nothing to do with anything. I don't think torturing them will make things get better, I think it will make political conflicts worse. America preaches fairness and trials and legal processes. I don't think we should be hypocrites.

And honestly you can say all the bad things you want about abortion but it's been happening for hundreds of years. If it gets made illegal in the USA, I'm either leaving the country or doing some serious research on herbal abortion. The government shouldn't have anything to do with my body, my cells and my partner's cells. My genes. No, that is my decision.

what has this to do with being a liberal ?

people who are conservatives are very liberal on violating human rights
people who are liberals are very conservative on being free

if you have no rigth over yourself, your just a cattle no matter what political ideology you belive in.

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
I know this will be picked apart so I'm only posting once in this thread as to maintain composure.

I support pro-choice because it's pro-choice. It's your body, you make that decision. What happens if you are married and on the pill and the pill fails? What happens when condoms break? What happens if you cannot financially support a child and do not want to go through pregnancy/put it up for adoption? What happens if you are raped? What happens if the baby is diagnosed with a debilitating condition before birth?

I think if it's your fetus, and your body, it's your decision.

I think that some of the innocent people that we torture have nothing to do with anything. I don't think torturing them will make things get better, I think it will make political conflicts worse. America preaches fairness and trials and legal processes. I don't think we should be hypocrites.

And honestly you can say all the bad things you want about abortion but it's been happening for hundreds of years. If it gets made illegal in the USA, I'm either leaving the country or doing some serious research on herbal abortion. The government shouldn't have anything to do with my body, my cells and my partner's cells. My genes. No, that is my decision.

Thanks for sharnng your opinion. I think if you are married and you accidentaly get pregnant then like every other thing that happens in your life that you didnt plan, you adjust, sacrifice, and do your best to make the best of a situation that goes against your plan. Why? Because it is the right and responsible thing to do.

I honestly just dont see how you can say it is wrong to torture.. which it may be. But then also say you would abort your own child because it was an inconventient accident. Doesnt that child have a right to live its life? But you are free to believe what you want and I wish you the best with whatever decision you make.

Really in a perfect world the government woudnt even have to make this illegal because people would value the potential of the lives of their children.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

reply to post by justsomeboreddude


Well for me, it's not about convenience. I pay for my birth control, I follow all directions, and the pill I take is 99.9% effective. But if for some reason I fell into that .1%, it's not like I wasn't trying.

The reason I would abort in that case is because I want the best life for my child. I would not want to bring a child into the world when I cannot house it, feed it, clothe it, or sustain a job that allows me to do so. Until I have completed my education, I would be unable to care for a child. And although many people are looking to adopt a child, many more children are homeless or in foster care. I would not want a child that I created to possibly have a bad life.

I am very scientific and I am not religious, and I think perhaps that sometimes goes hand in hand with liberals (not always) and conservatives are more religious. So I don't have the Bible hanging over my head, only my interests and those for my offspring and their optimal survival. I am not yet developed enough to have a child physically, I would probably have medical problems because of my small size, and even when I am ready to have a child in maybe 10 years, I will probably require a C section. This is considered major surgery and I do not have the money to go through this procedure safely at this point in time, along with all the prenatal care that I would need to make sure my child is healthy.

I also don't believe that a fetus' brain is developed enough to be considered conscious until the third trimester, and I don't believe that a fetus can sustain it's own life until that point. My mother is a midwife and I know these facts with complete certainty in all but VERY VERY rare cases that are usually not backed up very well.

I would never have a third trimester abortion. I would never have unprotected sex. I take the pill because it is the best form of birth control for me, personally. I do not consider that, in my own case, aborting a fetus if I did happen to conceive one would be considered "torture."

For the record, I do believe there are better forms of abortion available based on situations and circumstances. I also know a few people who have had abortions, and they are all confident that they made the right choice for themselves at the time. I also know many people who have had children at 17 or 18. I know that if I did so, my child would not be living an optimal life if it did continue to develop.

So... I mean... that's why. Everyone should be on birth control. But for the record, if I did happen to get pregnant now (on the pill), my fetus would be at high risk for many complications and occasionally abortions are required for medical reasons due to this factor.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


Once again thanks for sharing. I understand what you are saying. I am even for abortion when its a medical issue that could kill the mother or even with a rape case. It is almost never right to set one rule that applies to every situation so you have to take into account those special circumstances.

I just want to share one thing with you that I think we sometimes miss growing up spoiled in the western world. Kids dont need a lot to be happy. If you just give them love and meet their basic needs they are good to go for the most part. They dont need our idea of the optimal life. In fact, some of the people I admire and am most envious of are the people in the Third World. They dont have what we have but they always have sense of dignity that we/I seem to lack. So it makes me realize that having everything is not that important in development, it maybe is even a detriment. Not to say I dont spoil my kids though.

Anyway, I hope you dont have an accident and I wish you the best with your future. Good job for being responsible and using birth control.

Originally posted by Finalized
If you are pro-abortion, then you have to be pro-death penalty; if you are pro-death penalty, then you have to be pro-abortion.

On the flip side,

If you are anti-abortion, then you have to be anti-death penalty; if you are anti-death penalty, then you have to be anti-abortion.

That is absurdly sloppy logic. I for example and pro choice but I oppose the death penalty.

My philosophy is harm no one-intentionally.

I am liberal and against abortion, torture, war profiteering.
However I am on the fence regarding the death penalty for warmongers like Cheney.

Originally posted by jdub297


So is it "a woman who can afford it has the right to control her body;" and "reproductive rights " diminish in inverse proportion to wealth?

Then how do liberals justify state-funded abortions, or state-funded anything, if your ability to enjoy your freedom is tied to how much your lifestyle costs?

Sort answer: Yes. Because no matter which choice is made, there is an expense that somebody must bear.

You justify state-funded abortions when their cost is outweighed by the cost of state-funded child-raising.

reply to post by nasdack24k


I feel like if the states refuse to fund abortions, there will be organizations that pop up that raise money and receive donations to help people afford abortions if they want them.

And if not and it comes down to it, I'll make an organization like that.

You're right though. State's shouldn't fund abortion if children are suffering without proper childcare.

Although maybe it should be 50-50? 25-75? I don't know.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


No I think that is when they specifically should fund abortions.

I live in an area with a huge meth epidemic. Trust me, there are people whose kids would ave been way better off had they been aborted.

The fact is you can't trade an abortion for meth. The same is not true of EBT food cards and WIC vouchers.

[edit on 5/7/2009 by nasdack24k]

reply to post by nasdack24k


Ohhh! Sorry, I misunderstood you.
I never really thought about this before, so I'm not sure what my thoughts are on the issue.

I think honestly both should be funded. But I know many people have problems with their tax money going to fund "evil murder" abortions. Of course I don't agree with that.

But in a way, in some areas abortion is the "birth control" and people have many, many abortions. If they're on their 6th one, and still getting state funding and not needing to pay, they're not going to get the message to use protection. And as you said, areas where there is a high drug rate, very significant poverty fraction, sometimes you need to weigh the risks and benefits.

Which is where prevention spending comes in. In my mind, that's the best way to start. Non-abstinence only education, and birth control funding. From there, you fund abortions for those who really cannot afford them and need them, and then you also fund (equally? more? less?) additional child care facilities.

It's a vicious cycle, though.

[edit on 5/7/2009 by ravenshadow13]