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.

 

Obama Defends Roe v. Wade As Way for ‘Our Daughters’ to Have Same Chance As Sons to ‘Fulfill T

page: 10
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Enjoy your "win".

Thank You

We always have spirited debates, I'll go a little easy on you next time.

It's the back and forth I enjoy.




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Thank You

We always have spirited debates, I'll go a little easy on you next time.

It's the back and forth I enjoy.


Tell me you're joking....everything you've been saying borders on irrational, & quite honestly I didn't even understand a couple of your post. You say beez is pro-life for babies, but not pro-life for old folks because he won't send them each a check for a million dollars??

Please explain yourself because this is possibly the most nonsensical bs I've ever heard.... but if you're trying to be funny I'll admit I did chuckle at the sheer stupidity.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   
I read all these posts and I do not see one talking about the dad's rights???

Doesn't it take two to create a child. If the man and woman willingly have consensual sex knowing they are not protected with birth control, they know they could create a baby. Why after this consensual act, does the man not have a say as well? He may want his child and would be happy raising him/her.

Is it because she has to carry the term? She knew that when they had sex. I also thought Obama just signed a bill handing out "Free" contraceptives. Is that not true?

I realize this is a sensitive issue, and I am a man. I am not begging for controversy I am asking because I want feedback.

Be gentle, some women and religious followers get pretty militant about this issue.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by lampsalot
My problem with the pro-abortion people is they use semantics and guilt tripping to justify their position, rather than real solid arguments.
Sounds like projection to me. Pro Lifers holding up signs of aborted babies isn't guilt tripping to you? And don't even get me started on semantics.


They always say 'it's a woman's body', which is fallacious because a fetus has its own DNA.
Which doesn't change the fact that it's still in the womans body, living off of said body.


They say fetuses are unconscious but how can we know this for sure? How do we even know newborns and infants are conscious? Hardly anyone can remember being that age.
Whether or not they are doesn't change the fact that they're still inside of a woman's body, living off of that body.

I know i'm repeating myself, but that's really the only argument pro-choicers (or pro-abortion as you cluelessly refer to them as) need.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raelsatu
. You say beez is pro-life for babies, but not pro-life for old folks

I am answering you because of the above quote.
That is what I said to Beez, and he twisted it, at least he thinks he did , to mean I want to kill young and old.

Took me a few post to get Beez to that point. (hence the million dollars)

Ok

My point is ...... People get so bent out of shape to protect "young " humans, but when a older person gets sick, the attitude becomes, "not my concern" , "your on your own"

Why does one life hold more value than the other.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raelsatu

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Thank You

We always have spirited debates, I'll go a little easy on you next time.

It's the back and forth I enjoy.


Tell me you're joking....everything you've been saying borders on irrational, & quite honestly I didn't even understand a couple of your post. You say beez is pro-life for babies, but not pro-life for old folks because he won't send them each a check for a million dollars??

Please explain yourself because this is possibly the most nonsensical bs I've ever heard.... but if you're trying to be funny I'll admit I did chuckle at the sheer stupidity.


There's just some people you can debate with, others, you can't.

It's easier to concede to a foolish argument than debate the irrationality of the topic sometimes.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 
The difference is self-determination and the devaluing of an innocent unborn babies worth.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 
The difference is self-determination and the devaluing of an innocent unborn babies worth.


So should it not be the woman's choice to Self Determine?

(btw I missed ya Beez)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 
The difference is self-determination and the devaluing of an innocent unborn babies worth.


So should it not be the woman's choice to Self Determine?

(btw I missed ya Beez)

As the law is now, a woman is allowed to kill, to murder her unborn baby.
For all those that support the decision to kill, to murder an unborn baby, well, that's something you all are going to have to live with.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

As the law is now, a woman is allowed to kill, to murder her unborn baby.
For all those that support the decision to kill, to murder an unborn baby, well, that's something you all are going to have to live with.

Murder is an opinion word.
But ok,
A women's right to choose, is the law at the moment.

Enjoyed our chat sir,
edit on 24-1-2012 by Tw0Sides because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

My point is ...... People get so bent out of shape to protect "young " humans, but when a older person gets sick, the attitude becomes, "not my concern" , "your on your own"

Why does one life hold more value than the other.


Regardless of the financial/medical situation of either [old or newborn] life, the solution is not to kill them. The moral dilemmas of the human race are already brimming over, and it seems like our solution to every conflict of interest nowadays is --- violence.

We start wars over resources & for religious/political reasons. In poverty-stricken regions people kill & rape each-other for next to nothing. Even the rich murder to benefit their pocket. And now --- we abort all fetuses deemed unwanted & make up any excuse to justify it. How does that make us any better to take the most helpless of lifeforms, those of our very essence, and terminate them like nothing more than roaches?

One of the 8 stages of genocide is dehumanization. Once you dehumanize a person(s) it sets the precedent for murder, torture, & rape. In this case mass fetacide.

I do not advocate ignoring the well-being of older folk; I in fact encourage families and friends to take care of each-other through the good AND the bad. There are cases where illness befalls loved ones & our financial situation cannot provide for much more than basic alleviation. But that doesn't mean we give up. & It certainly doesn't mean we just kill them.

However I believe there are cases where consented euthanasia doesn't seem like such a bad route. At-least in that situation the person who is suffering greatly wants to, an consents to ending their life. A fetus is a completely different story in multiple aspects. Apart from the fact it cannot consent, it is also at the very beginning.

edit on 24-1-2012 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
I applaud Obama for coming out, especially during an election cycle, to preserve the "right to choose" of women! OP, I couldn't disagree with you more. No one is trying to take away your right to give birth.

OP, you are looking at the world through rosey colored glasses. Not all women will make good moms, or will become better people for having given birth.


Then maybe they shouldn't get pregnant. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.
edit on 24-1-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sharpenmycleats
I read all these posts and I do not see one talking about the dad's rights???

Doesn't it take two to create a child. If the man and woman willingly have consensual sex knowing they are not protected with birth control, they know they could create a baby. Why after this consensual act, does the man not have a say as well? He may want his child and would be happy raising him/her.

Is it because she has to carry the term? She knew that when they had sex. I also thought Obama just signed a bill handing out "Free" contraceptives. Is that not true?

I realize this is a sensitive issue, and I am a man. I am not begging for controversy I am asking because I want feedback.

Be gentle, some women and religious followers get pretty militant about this issue.



Good point. I have seen many cases where the father is not even told he is a father. Sometimes the reason was because "he would want to keep it". I have a major problem with that. Because it is the woman who carries the child though, it is unlikely that fathers will ever have equal consideration. I doubt a father would have any legal rights in a case where the woman wanted an abortion but the father wanted to raise the kid himself. It should be discussed BEFORE sex...but that will rarely happen.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by beezzer

As the law is now, a woman is allowed to kill, to murder her unborn baby.
For all those that support the decision to kill, to murder an unborn baby, well, that's something you all are going to have to live with.

Murder is an opinion word.
But ok,
A women's right to choose, is the law at the moment.

Enjoyed our chat sir,
edit on 24-1-2012 by Tw0Sides because: (no reason given)



When does murder turn into an opinion word? I'm not asking to be smart alec or start an argument. I want to understand how you reached that point of view. What word do you see fitting to use? And when would the word murder be appropriate to you concerning abortion?...Would you consider partial birth abortions murder? Where is the cut off point?



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


So that justifies murder? OK...not going to get into that fight...I agree with op...I had that choice to make, pregnant, unmarried, brand new career....never would I condone killing a baby...especially because it's inconvenient. Do you know that Margaret Sanger started the whole women's right to choose/contraception movement as a form of eugenics? She said in her own works, It had to be desquised as something "good" so blacks and the poor useless eaters would fall for it. Obama is continuing that tradition using his own children for the cause, he is a disgusting human being.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Condoms break.
That's the simple reason why they can't be trusted alone. No girl should be denied contraception. No matter her age. Because there are sick people looking for girls younger and younger each year.
edit on 1/7/12 by Avalessa because: Wanted to clarify.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Surely your body is the most important piece of private property you own? So surely with that said, women should be allowed to evict anything or anyone they dont want inside them. Thats if you believe in private property right?



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Exactly. But women are afraid to get abortions, even if it would save their life (especially when the baby would die soon after being born), because everyone is yelling at them and calling them baby killers. Does the world really want a bunch of 12 year old mothers or children of rapists that the mother secretly hates because it has her attacker's face?

My opinion is this: if you have a penis, you aren't allowed to argue against abortion.

I would like to note that I sound angry because we discuss this a lot in my AP US Government class and we often debate this subject.
edit on 1/7/12 by Avalessa because: Clarification



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by paxnatus
To regard a human life as a burden that would prevent one from following their dream is just degrading and sexist! Not to mention sick and twisted.


Feminist dogma is rather based on their cries of 'me, me, me!'.

In other words, feminists do tend to be extremely self absorbed and self centred.

To be clear, I think women should be allowed to have an abortion in certain circumstances, but to claim that an abortion is justified on the basis of 'fulfilling their dreams', smacks of the most unbelievable level of selfishness and self centeredness.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:16 AM
link   
at the moment, virginia, I believe has a bill coming up that would grant the constitutional rights to unborns.....

so my question is this, what if a women is on a necessary medication that is needed to keep her functioning in our world that is not healthy for babies, and she gets pregnant...

what happens then, do we institutionalize the mother for nine month and deny her the meds?
or do we harm the baby with the meds??

if we have two beings, within one body, both being considered "equal"...well, there's a whole mess of ways that their interests could be contrary to each other!!!

so, at what age do you propose to strip that newborn of her rights (if she is a female)???



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join