Abortion Activists in U.S. Say They Are Losing the Battle

[26 X World Champs]

No..it was your refusal to admit that what you said was elitist blather...but now that it's obvious by your own admission that your statements were "ridiculous conclusions," I'm happy to let you off the hook without insisting you actually say the words "I was wrong" or admiting your elitist outlook. :2wave: I see why you have chosen that Yogi Berra quote for your sig. line....:mrgreen:

Nothing like allowing foolish pride to interfere with one's cognizant abilty to reason and grasp reality, you know? Just for fun, would you humor me and tell me what this means?

I'll tell you what will work against the anti-choice crowd, that is if I were to apply the same convoluted logic that you employ

Not sure how many times you need to read this to finally grasp the meaning and the obvious fact that I was pointing out that it was crazy logic...just like the crazy logic I was responding to. The fact that you still do not get it speaks about you, but I will leave it to others to decipher what that message is.

 

[Felicity]

Nothing like allowing foolish pride to interfere with one's cognizant abilty to reason and grasp reality, you know? Just for fun, would you humor me and tell me what this means?

I got your point a loooooong time ago--I think your pride is getting in the way here--not mine.......HOW one reasons does not mean that they do not adhere to the conclusion they draw and I've been trying to get you to disavow the CONCLUSION you stated--not the means of arriving at the conclusion.

You have been evasive about unequivocally denying the conclusion. Eventually I asked, "was it just an unintentional suggestion that people who subscribe to a religion are not as smart as people who don't?" and you answered, "Religious belief is not a measuring stick for intelligence, or lack thereof." But that doesn't address the abortion debate.

Clear it up, then. When you said, :"The better educated people are the more they are for pro-choice" it represents, and was meant to convey, a stupid conclusion and you completely disavow that the amount of "education" has anything to do with one's religious convictions or one's stance on the abortion debate. Is that your position?

A "yes" or "no" would suffice for you to be clear.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Clear it up, then. When you said, :"The better educated people are the more they are for pro-choice" it represents, and was meant to convey, a stupid conclusion and you completely disavow that the amount of "education" has anything to do with one's religious convictions or one's stance on the abortion debate. Is that your position?

A "yes" or "no" would suffice for you to be clear.

Why so stubborn? Your point is moot to everyone except you! Everyone else knew that I was being sarcastic to make my point. At no point did I ever say that I believed it to be true, only YOU wrote that I did, no words that I ever wrote substantiate your claim.

In simple words you're arguing with yourself....

 

[Felicity]

I guess a "yes" or a "no" was just too much to ask.:roll:

I guess you are unwilling to either confirm or deny you adhere to the conclusion you stated...I suppose that makes you either confused or a coward...since you don't have the conviction to be clear it leaves us only to make assumptions and from the evidence of evasion--I think it's the latter.

 

[jamesrage]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

What would you compare the extermination of so many innocent lives to and those who perpatrated those exterminations to?

 

[26 X World Champs]

I guess a "yes" or a "no" was just too much to ask.:roll:

I guess you are unwilling to either confirm or deny you adhere to the conclusion you stated...I suppose that makes you either confused or a coward...since you don't have the conviction to be clear it leaves us only to make assumptions and from the evidence of evasion--I think it's the latter.

Outstanding post, wouldn't expect any less from you. You've been very consistent in your inabilty to comprehend my written words. Scary actually that you seem unable to read somoene else's posts and understand the oh so obvious.

You might want to start reading this thread again, several times if that's what it takes. All the answers to the same question you ask over and over again have been written and explained ad nauseam.

 

[steen]

What would you compare the extermination of so many innocent lives to and those who perpatrated those exterminations to?

Any surgical procedure that is safe and removes non-sentient, non-sensate tissue.

 

[Alastor]

Actually... the guy above whom you all are bagging on is right. The more well-educated a person is, the more they tend to be pro-choice. I'll dig up some stats for you on the issue. It's sort of moot though, and I find it to be a trivial coincidence.

On a similar tangent of "weird and implicit but not very compelling" stats, I'll point out that most high-school drop-outs are Democrats, most people with a BS or BA are Republicans, and most people with Doctorates are Democrats again.

Also, people that have more education tend to be less religious (which might explain why the more educated they are the more likely they are to be pro-choice).

Hrmm... other trivia...

85% of elections in this country are won by the party/candidate/side of an issue that spent the most money.

And um... the longest tapeworm ever pulled from a human body measured over 33 feet in length.

And a duck's quack doesn't echo, and no one knows why.

Cheers.

 

[vergiss]

I hope murdering a baby before he or she leaves his or hers mother's womb will soon be a crime and these little nazis who facilitate these baby murders/abortion can be rounded up shot.

How pro-life of you. :roll: :doh

 

[Felicity]

Actually... the guy above whom you all are bagging on is right. The more well-educated a person is, the more they tend to be pro-choice. I'll dig up some stats for you on the issue. It's sort of moot though, and I find it to be a trivial coincidence..

And what are the stats on those who RECEIVE abortions? Hmmmmm....??? They are the one's who DEMONSTRATE that they put their money (literally) where their mouth is. It's all dandy that elitist pro-choicers live in their little theoretical world of "our body, our choice" but who's out their making that "choice" and suffering the real life consequences of that "choice" rather than sitting in an ivory tower of denial?

Letters after a name is no testament to being "educated"--it simply means an individual has had access to a very particular (and often propagandistic) "education." BTW---I am an "educator," I deal with it every day.


Also---look into the origins of University...seems to me I remember a particular Church was the foundation for what is now the modern University.....hmmmm...religion....education....how DID we ever make it through those Dark Ages...???

 

[Alastor]

And what are the stats on those who RECEIVE abortions?

I don't know. I don't believe they track such things.

The rest of your rant was... Well... Just a rant. So I've answered what I could.

 

[Felicity]

I don't know. I don't believe they track such things.

The rest of your rant was... Well... Just a rant. So I've answered what I could.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3422602.html

• Education. Among women aged 20 or older, those who had not graduated from high school accounted for 13% of abortions (Table 1). High school graduates made up 30% of women having an abortion, and those with at least some college, 57%.

The abortion rate among college graduates (13 per 1,000) was lower than average; moreover, women with college degrees were the only educational group to show a higher-than-average decline in abortion rates (30%) between 1994 and 2000. The relatively small proportion of pregnancies among college graduates that ended in abortion (21%) and the below-average pregnancy rate account for their low abortion rate. Women with some college had a pregnancy rate that was lower than average, but 38% of their pregnancies ended in abortion in 2000, resulting in the highest abortion rate of any educational group (26 per 1,000).

We also examined abortion rates by school enrollment status among women younger than 20 (not shown). Nearly two-thirds of adolescents who had an abortion were enrolled in school during the month they became pregnant. Enrollees had a lower abortion rate than adolescents who were not in school (19 vs. 65 per 1,000). The abortion rate for adolescents enrolled in school decreased by 29% between 1994 and 2000, and the rate for their out-of-school peers declined by 13%.

•Religious affiliation. The majority of women older than 17 who obtained an abortion reported a religious affiliation. The highest proportion (43%) identified themselves as Protestant. Twenty-seven percent of women having an abortion identified themselves as Catholic, and 8% as a member of another religion; 22% reported no religious affiliation. Thirteen percent identified themselves as "born-again" or evangelical, three-fourths of whom were Protestant (not shown).

Women affiliated with "other" religions and those who did not identify with any religion had the highest abortion rates (31 and 30 per 1,000, respectively). Women with no religious affiliation experienced the largest decline in abortion of all the groups examined (35%).

Guess that pretty much blows your comment out of the water, eh?

 

[26 X World Champs]

And what are the stats on those who RECEIVE abortions? Hmmmmm....??? They are the one's who DEMONSTRATE that they put their money (literally) where their mouth is. It's all dandy that elitist pro-choicers live in their little theoretical world of "our body, our choice" but who's out their making that "choice" and suffering the real life consequences of that "choice" rather than sitting in an ivory tower of denial?

Strawman argument, again? A pattern is developing in your posts. Lots and lots of unsubstantiated rhetoric and no facts. Who you think you're convincing, other than yourself? Here are some fun facts for you:

Fast Facts: U.S. Abortion Statistics
Tuesday, June 17, 2003

The following are some statistics about abortion in America:

Of the 1.6 million abortions performed in the U.S. each year, 91 percent are performed during the first trimester (12 or fewer weeks' gestation); 9 percent are performed in the second trimester (24 or fewer weeks' gestation); and only about 100 are performed in the third trimester (more than 24 weeks' gestation), approximately .01 percent of all abortions performed.

Approximately 1.5 million U.S. women with unwanted pregnancies choose abortion each year. Most are under 25 years old and unmarried. Women who are separated from their husbands and poor women are more likely to choose abortion than other women. More than two-thirds of the women who seek abortions have jobs. Nearly one-third are in school. More than two-thirds plan to have a child in the future.

Approximately 6 million women in the U.S. become pregnant every year. About half of those pregnancies are unintended. Either the woman or her partner did not use contraception or the contraceptive method failed.

Each year more than one million U.S. teenagers become pregnant — one in nine women aged 15-19 and one in five who are sexually active.

In 1988, the teenage pregnancy rate was 113 per 1,000 women aged 15-19. The rate was 74 per 1,000 among those aged 15-17.

50 percent of teenage pregnancies conceived in 1987 resulted in a birth, 36 percent in an abortion, and an estimated 14 percent in miscarriage.

The number of abortions for every 100 live births showed a gradual decline since 1980 (35.9) to 1992 (33.5). The number of legal abortions increased slightly from 1995 (at 1,210,883) to 1996 (at 1,221,585). This is an increase of 0.89 percent. Since the national population increased by about 0.92 percent from mid-1995 to mid-1996, the abortion per-capita rate has decreased slightly.

CDC figures for 1995 show that 20 percent of women having abortions are in their teens; 33 percent are ages 20 to 24, and 47 percent are ages 25 or older.

Eighty percent of women having abortions are single; 60 percent are white; 35 percent are black.

Eighty-two percent of the women having abortions are unmarried or separated.

Almost half of American women (43 percent) will have an abortion sometime in their lifetime.

Did I mention that the source for these stats is that bastion of liberal media, Fox News Channel?

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,880,00.html

I've yet to see you include any facts in what you've written in this thread (unless I missed it) but I have read lots of your posts that are incoherant and not in response to what others write. As I posted earlier you seem to be debating only with yourself since you've created opposing arguments from thin air and that have no basis in what I or others wrote.

 

[Felicity]

Just a little slow on the draw there aren't ya ...BTW Guttmacher is an affiliate of that bastion of conservatism--Planned Parenthood...:roll:

 

[Alastor]

Guess that pretty much blows your comment out of the water, eh?

Um... you asked what political affiliation women who got abortions was (as I understood it). I don't see that stat there.

Also, I said I didn't think they tracked such a stat (and still don't).

So... no, not really. I dunno what argument of mine you think you've just destroyed... to my knowledge I haven't made an argument; simply presented some statistical knowledge I'm aware of.

I did find this interesting though, and I think it merits thought and discussion:

The majority of women older than 17 who obtained an abortion reported a religious affiliation.

Fascinating. I would have put it the other way around. I wonder why this is the case, and what conclusions we might draw from that tid-bit.

 

[Felicity]

Um... you asked what political affiliation women who got abortions was (as I understood it). I don't see that stat there.

Also, I said I didn't think they tracked such a stat (and still don't).

What??? Did you read "DEMONSTRATE" as "DEMOCRAT" :rofl Too funny--PROOF you didn't even bother to read the post.

So... no, not really. I dunno what argument of mine you think you've just destroyed... to my knowledge I haven't made an argument; simply presented some statistical knowledge I'm aware of.

I also simply said "your comment" since I didn't think it rose to the level of "argument." You actually have to read posts to be able to respond to them with any semblence of sense...:doh


What we've got here folks is one who didn't say what he said, and one who doesn't read what he read!:2rofll:

 

[26 X World Champs]

What we've got here folks is one who didn't say what he said, and one who doesn't read what he read!:2rofll:

Then we have your posts that debate themselves with arguments only you are making. Makes for quite an interesting self-appraisal, now doesn't it?

 

[Alastor]

26 X,

Felicity's obviously just looking for a fight and grasping at straws. I'm not sure why either, as again I've never asserted any arguments either for or against either side on the issue.

I'd simply write it off as the author is clearly intent on being overwhelmingly irrational and unreasonable and ignore it. I think that's what everyone else is doing already anyway.

 

[Felicity]

26 X,

Felicity's obviously just looking for a fight and grasping at straws. I'm not sure why either, as again I've never asserted any arguments either for or against either side on the issue.

I'd simply write it off as the author is clearly intent on being overwhelmingly irrational and unreasonable and ignore it. I think that's what everyone else is doing already anyway.

I just find the "elitist" aspect of the pro-choice side is something that is deflected and ignored so frequently. I started a thread that dealt with the elitist foundations of Planned Parenthood and only vergiss and coffee saint had the guts to try and counter the ridiculousness of founder Margaret Sanger. Check it out and comment.... http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=6987

 

[Alastor]

I just find the "elitist" aspect of the pro-choice side is something that is deflected and ignored so frequently. I started a thread that dealt with the elitist...

I don't care.

That doesn't give you the right to try to attack me; especially in the flawed way you did. That doesn't make it okay to put words into my mouth - and then claim to debunk things you never addressed.

And if elitist attitudes make you mad... Hello, pot. You're black again.

Whatever someone else did to someone else someplace where you saw them and got angered by it... It doesn't make it okay to do it to me. All that does, is destroys your own credibility.

 

[Felicity]

I don't care.

That doesn't give you the right to try to attack me; especially in the flawed way you did. That doesn't make it okay to put words into my mouth - and then claim to debunk things you never addressed.

And if elitist attitudes make you mad... Hello, pot. You're black again.

Whatever someone else did to someone else someplace where you saw them and got angered by it... It doesn't make it okay to do it to me. All that does, is destroys your own credibility.

I gave evidence of your error--that is not an attack. That is debate. Here's a few other things you are in error about:

~in what "flawed way" did I give evidence of your error? Quoteing Guttmacher and staying on topic?

~Put words in your mouth? Since when is calling someone on their inattentiveness and striving to understand where they got the erroneous idea putting words in their mouth? What haven't I addressed? This is the typical brushoff post--the "I'm gonna take my ball and go home" playground nonsense.:roll:

~where do I say I'm "angry?" Margaret Sanger makes me angry--but she's dead--I'm not angry at you or 26X--I think your both full of it--but I'm not angry at you. Don't be so dang sensitive, use your head and reading skills, bring something worthy to the discussion rather than critiquing me--or DO take your ball and go home.

 

[vergiss]

Felicity... you're not doing a good job at debating your point.

 

[doughgirl]

"Any surgical procedure that is safe and removes non-sentient, non-sensate tissue."

Would that apply to some peoples brains Steen? A pro-choice one to be exact. :lol:

 

[jamesrage]

How pro-life of you. :roll: :doh

When it comes to the lives of innocences I am very pro-life,when it comes to these little nazis masqerading around as doctors and humans murdering the innocent unborn children they should be rounded up and shot before they do anymore harm.

 

[Alastor]

I gave evidence of your error--that is not an attack. That is debate. Here's a few other things you are in error about:

~in what "flawed way" did I give evidence of your error? Quoteing Guttmacher and staying on topic?

~Put words in your mouth? Since when is calling someone on their inattentiveness and striving to understand where they got the erroneous idea putting words in their mouth? What haven't I addressed? This is the typical brushoff post--the "I'm gonna take my ball and go home" playground nonsense.:roll:

~where do I say I'm "angry?" Margaret Sanger makes me angry--but she's dead--I'm not angry at you or 26X--I think your both full of it--but I'm not angry at you. Don't be so dang sensitive, use your head and reading skills, bring something worthy to the discussion rather than critiquing me--or DO take your ball and go home.

More childish banter, name calling, and bogus remarks. Let me know when you're ready to discuss things like an adult. For now, I'll just be content that most other people are ignoring you too.