Wait On That Abortion

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

I'll sum it up quickly.

1. Abortion is legal. Your arguments are irrelevant because of this. The race is over and the claim of foul was disallowed by the stewards. Continued debate is a gross waste of taxpayer money.

So when Roe v Wade is overturned by a future Supreme Court, you're fine with that as well? Good.

Because it will be overturned, as it must be, since it is obvious that life begins at conception and the current sad state of affairs must be discontinued. The current liberal worshiping at the feet of the Warren Burger court notwithstanding, science is proving the legalism view obsolete.

This is akin to the Catholic Church sticking to their "Earth is at the center of the universe, and by extension the solar system" argument in the face of Galileo disproving that, and being excommunicated. It's laughable. Power and the force of law aside, if the law seems nonsensical, it calls the entire government role into question.

Abortion will again be illegal, as it should be, and this embarrassing and tragic episode, fatal to 40,000,000+ persons, will be over.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by joeydb

So when Roe v Wade is overturned by a future Supreme Court, you're fine with that as well? Good.

Because it will be overturned, as it must be, since it is obvious that life begins at conception and the current sad state of affairs must be discontinued. The current liberal worshiping at the feet of the Warren Burger court notwithstanding, science is proving the legalism view obsolete.

This is akin to the Catholic Church sticking to their "Earth is at the center of the universe, and by extension the solar system" argument in the face of Galileo disproving that, and being excommunicated. It's laughable. Power and the force of law aside, if the law seems nonsensical, it calls the entire government role into question.

Abortion will again be illegal, as it should be, and this embarrassing and tragic episode, fatal to 40,000,000+ persons, will be over.

It won't be overturned. Remember before ROE Wade it was legal in some states. It will revert to a state's rights issue which quite frankly I don't have a problem with. Yes, I'm Pro-Choice, but I'm a big proponent of state's rights...and I myself would never have an abortion to the point where we didn't even have the test on our fetus at the time for Down's Syndrome. We both said if that's what we have, that's the way it is...but I don't represent everyone nor should I.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

It won't be overturned. Remember before ROE Wade it was legal in some states. It will revert to a state's rights issue which quite frankly I don't have a problem with. Yes, I'm Pro-Choice, but I'm a big proponent of state's rights...and I myself would never have an abortion to the point where we didn't even have the test on our fetus at the time for Down's Syndrome. We both said if that's what we have, that's the way it is...but I don't represent everyone nor should I.

That's true regarding state's rights, and I also support state's rights and think that many issues currently under the federal umbrella do not need to be so.

But, I must point out, if life does begin at conception, abortion becomes synonomous with murder. Murder is outlawed everywhere in the United States at the local level, in addition to the state level in many cases.

When did laws prohibiting murder become anything less than absolute? We can't call the case for abortion a self-defense situation UNLESS the life of the mother is legitimately in jeopardy.

The main detrement to the Burger court decision is that it did not prove that life begins anywhere BUT conception. It argued viability, and an implied right to privacy that does not exist in the Constitution. Privacy and secrecy in covering up a crime of murder is no great virtue - in fact, we authorize wiretaps all the time to root out the terrorists and the mafia. The inescapable fact remains that life beginning at conception precludes morally any use of abortion - legal or not.

When you consider the Democratic Party's "Pro-Choice" stance, it was laughable that during the Bill Clinton 1992 and 1996 campaigns, the party asserted themselves as "the party for the children". Not the ones systematically destroyed through abortion.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's true regarding state's rights, and I also support state's rights and think that many issues currently under the federal umbrella do not need to be so.

But, I must point out, if life does begin at conception, abortion becomes synonomous with murder. Murder is outlawed everywhere in the United States at the local level, in addition to the state level in many cases.

When did laws prohibiting murder become anything less than absolute? We can't call the case for abortion a self-defense situation UNLESS the life of the mother is legitimately in jeopardy.

The main detrement to the Burger court decision is that it did not prove that life begins anywhere BUT conception. It argued viability, and an implied right to privacy that does not exist in the Constitution. Privacy and secrecy in covering up a crime of murder is no great virtue - in fact, we authorize wiretaps all the time to root out the terrorists and the mafia. The inescapable fact remains that life beginning at conception precludes morally any use of abortion - legal or not.

When you consider the Democratic Party's "Pro-Choice" stance, it was laughable that during the Bill Clinton 1992 and 1996 campaigns, the party asserted themselves as "the party for the children". Not the ones systematically destroyed through abortion.

huge question there, one in which even you equivocate. above you said it was obvious, but already in this post, you're at 'if'. it's a point that's been argued, vociferously, by every side.
as far as using birth control, many do so, and not always successfully. so much for that argument...
you feel strongly about this, as is your right. so i say again, don't have one. but don't feel the need to push your beliefs on others. roe v wade won't be overturned. for as long as women have become pregnant, there have been those who don't wish to be, and who have done things to try to change that fact.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

huge question there, one in which even you equivocate. above you said it was obvious, but already in this post, you're at 'if'. it's a point that's been argued, vociferously, by every side.
as far as using birth control, many do so, and not always successfully. so much for that argument...
you feel strongly about this, as is your right. so i say again, don't have one. but don't feel the need to push your beliefs on others. roe v wade won't be overturned. for as long as women have become pregnant, there have been those who don't wish to be, and who have done things to try to change that fact.

There is no equivocation intended. I had no idea you'd hang on my every word, but I should have written "Since" instead of "if". I was following the philosophical train of thought which I believe is supported by the facts we have available to us.

Again, "if you believe in abortion, don't have one" can be rewritten equivalently as "if you don't believe in murder, don't commit one". The latter statement is absurd. The highest crime one person can inflict on another needs to be prevented by more stringent means than simple persuasion. There is no valid choice to be made in favor of terminating another innocent human being's existence. The condition of being pregnant is terminated upon delivery. Once you have the baby, you are no longer pregnant.

As for those who don't wish to be pregnant, a situation which you correctly point out has been happening for thousands of years alongside other forms of bad judgment exercised by humans. That is, as they say, "the breaks".

As civil libertarians have quoted for a long time "Your freedom stops at the tip of my nose." This is true of all of the cells having my DNA. Your freedom stops where it injures me. And that is also true of the unborn individual, with his or her unique DNA. The would-be (and "will-be" mother, after Roe v. Wade is overturned) may not undertake any action that would harm or kill that new individual. Period.

The barbarism of abortion cloaked in the terminology of a medical procedure is not some great new advance like supersonic flight or space travel. We are fortunate that it did not exist for much of our history. It is time for the sexually active adults to act like adults, use proper judgment, restraint, and preparedness. True prevention is the real solution here. There should not be a need for this -- certainly not 40 million plus being slaughtered over 38 years. That's about 7 times as many innocent people as Hitler killed. It's disgusting. It's indefensible on an intellectual level. Many who support abortion are just deathly scared of having to use more responsibility in how they conduct their sexual lifestyle.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

There is no equivocation intended. I had no idea you'd hang on my every word, but I should have written "Since" instead of "if". I was following the philosophical train of thought which I believe is supported by the facts we have available to us.

Again, "if you believe in abortion, don't have one" can be rewritten equivalently as "if you don't believe in murder, don't commit one". The latter statement is absurd. The highest crime one person can inflict on another needs to be prevented by more stringent means than simple persuasion. There is no valid choice to be made in favor of terminating another innocent human being's existence. The condition of being pregnant is terminated upon delivery. Once you have the baby, you are no longer pregnant.

As for those who don't wish to be pregnant, a situation which you correctly point out has been happening for thousands of years alongside other forms of bad judgment exercised by humans. That is, as they say, "the breaks".

As civil libertarians have quoted for a long time "Your freedom stops at the tip of my nose." This is true of all of the cells having my DNA. Your freedom stops where it injures me. And that is also true of the unborn individual, with his or her unique DNA. The would-be (and "will-be" mother, after Roe v. Wade is overturned) may not undertake any action that would harm or kill that new individual. Period.

The barbarism of abortion cloaked in the terminology of a medical procedure is not some great new advance like supersonic flight or space travel. We are fortunate that it did not exist for much of our history. It is time for the sexually active adults to act like adults, use proper judgment, restraint, and preparedness. True prevention is the real solution here. There should not be a need for this -- certainly not 40 million plus being slaughtered over 38 years. That's about 7 times as many innocent people as Hitler killed. It's disgusting. It's indefensible on an intellectual level. Many who support abortion are just deathly scared of having to use more responsibility in how they conduct their sexual lifestyle.

it's your opinion, but not a fact, that abortion is 'murder'. many disagree. some say life begins at conception, others say no. seeing as how roe v wade has existed for as long as it has, i'm not figuring that will change. there've been opportunities over the years for the supreme court to overturn the law; it hasn't happened. i doubt it ever will.
and i'd say many who support the ability to choose do so because they don't want people minding their business, and feel the same towards others.
and yes, prevention is all well and good, but not foolproof. no doubt you saw my story above about a woman on birth control who is now 7 weeks pregnant. they warn you when you have procedures done that it's not 100 % guaranteed. a few years ago a woman i ran into told me that, surprise, she was pregnant five years after a tubal. now, what did she do that was irresponsible? nothing.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's your opinion, but not a fact, that abortion is 'murder'. many disagree. some say life begins at conception, others say no. seeing as how roe v wade has existed for as long as it has, i'm not figuring that will change. there've been opportunities over the years for the supreme court to overturn the law; it hasn't happened. i doubt it ever will.
and i'd say many who support the ability to choose do so because they don't want people minding their business, and feel the same towards others.
and yes, prevention is all well and good, but not foolproof. no doubt you saw my story above about a woman on birth control who is now 7 weeks pregnant. they warn you when you have procedures done that it's not 100 % guaranteed. a few years ago a woman i ran into told me that, surprise, she was pregnant five years after a tubal. now, what did she do that was irresponsible? nothing.

You could be right about Roe v. Wade. Maybe abortion will slowly wither away like Big Tobacco has. Less of the population smoke now than ever, and tobacco has remained legal. The education of the people about the negatives of tobacco smoking has done a lot to reduce that. In my generation, very few of teenagers I knew smoked. Some still do, it might never go to zero, but it is a hell of a lot less than it used to be.

If the view of "life begins at conception" pollenates as I hope it does, people will simply not opt for it as often.

There will always be exceptions, nothing is foolproof, but it would be a great start if the 95% or so of abortions that are stemming from absolute non-preparedness are eliminated.

If it was my decision, I'd have the guts to end it. My action would be unpopular with close to half the current population, but in 30 years or so several million individuals under 30 might appreciate it.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Abortion will again be illegal, as it should be, and this embarrassing and tragic episode, fatal to 40,000,000+ persons, will be over.

If you value 40,000,000 lives so strongly, I strongly suggest you stop railing against any programs that help those in poverty, without jobs, public health, trying to defund Planned Parenthood, etc. You can't continue to pick and choose when you respect life as a "person", and when you do not. It appears that for many, respect and concern for "life" ends at birth.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

If you value 40,000,000 lives so strongly, I strongly suggest you stop railing against any programs that help those in poverty, without jobs, public health, trying to defund Planned Parenthood, etc. You can't continue to pick and choose when you respect life as a "person", and when you do not. It appears that for many, respect and concern for "life" ends at birth.

How about instead of abortion, people who can't afford to have children simply do not get pregnant in the first place? Why is that so unthinkable?

It is up to those individuals to exercise discipline and good planning in order to avoid the situation where an "unwanted pregnancy" occurs.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by joeydb

How about instead of abortion, people who can't afford to have children simply do not get pregnant in the first place? Why is that so unthinkable?

It is up to those individuals to exercise discipline and good planning in order to avoid the situation where an "unwanted pregnancy" occurs.

Not realistic.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Not realistic.

Fine. Then have the baby. Murder is not an option.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

How about instead of abortion, people who can't afford to have children simply do not get pregnant in the first place? Why is that so unthinkable?

It is up to those individuals to exercise discipline and good planning in order to avoid the situation where an "unwanted pregnancy" occurs.

Yes, exactly. So why are you butting in and trying to make government control that?

If one is rabidly anti-abortion, I would would think it logical and helpful to promote, support and contribute to programs that teach exactly those things you outline, above. Planning, responsibility, etc. Why don't you?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

If one is rabidly anti-abortion, I would would think it logical and helpful to promote, support and contribute to programs that teach exactly those things you outline, above. Planning, responsibility, etc. Why don't you?

Who said I wasn't? Truly preventative measures (pre-conception) are something many people, including me, support. It's probably 90 something percent.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Who said I wasn't? Truly preventative measures (pre-conception) are something many people, including me, support. It's probably 90 something percent.

You are against defunding Planned Parenthood? You are against defunding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act? You are against defunding sex education in schools?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

You are against defunding Planned Parenthood? You are against defunding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act? You are against defunding sex education in schools?

I thought you just said that ObamaCare doesn't provide funding for abortion. Why would anyone's opposition to this (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- what a misnomer) have any bearing on the abortion issue then?

I am for the cessation of Planned Parenthoods abortion services. You can cast that any way you like.

[Honu]

Im feeling pretty blessed right now that I was born gay and that I dont have to worry about the one and only way to get pregnant and the 15 or 20 ways to not get pregnant.
Im all for humans being implanted with something that keeps them from impregnating or becoming pregnant when they are born until the time that they they CHOOSE to have a child.
One step further, just an idea, have people prove that they can provide for the child and that they are smart enough to raise them.
No longer is the need for people to have 10 kids to mind the farm we have machines to do that.
I know all this seems absurd but in this day and age(except in the case of rape) there really truly is no reason for people to be reproducing without it being something they want.