• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

abortion and breast cancer

  • Thread starter Thread starter FallingPianos
  • Start date Start date
F

FallingPianos

why is it that people listen to organizations that have a moral opposition to abortion, to get information about the risks/complications of it? doesn't it seem obvious that pro-life organizations might be biased?

the link between abortion and breast cancer is a myth that refuses to die.

here is what some leading medical organizations have to say on the matter:

 
Yep. I posted about this awhile back:
link

Good points.
Good luck trying to convince anybody of anything, though.
Right-minded people already know the truth, while prolifers will continue to believe what they've heard in church or read on luvthatfetus.org, rather than statements by the American Cancer Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and every other reputable medical authority in the field.

I mean, if you actually had cancer, would you go to a priest, pastor, or politician for treatment?
Why, then, would so many trust the word of these people when it comes medical issues, especially when their opinion is in direct opposition to that of every mainstream medical authority and every legitimate medical organization in the country?
 

Well, I know that all them fanshy national organizashuns, they is jusht tools of them go-darned liberals, yissir. I always trusht mah pastor for my daughter's health- he ish jusht so smart!

That's why.
 

Why would someone believe that stuff in the first place?
 
Why would someone believe that stuff in the first place?

Because they want to.
Because some people believe abortion is a heinous crime, an atrocity... and it upsets them to imagine that those who commit this crime get away scot-free. They want to believe there is some "consequence" to it, some punishment; breast cancer, post-traumatic stress syndrome, something.
They cannot reconcile themselves to a world where those who "murder children" (in their view) go on to live happily and healthily ever after.
 

Well, abortion is killing a child, but I've given up on trying to debate it since it's never going to be solved anyway. But the stuff that some of these groups say is just ridiculous.
 
Well, abortion is killing a child, but I've given up on trying to debate it since it's never going to be solved anyway. But the stuff that some of these groups say is just ridiculous.

No, abortion is not "killing a child".
Killing a child would never be permitted by law, any more than forcing women to be slaves to biological function will (ever again) be permitted by law.

Beyond that, your attitude toward abortion is sensible and prudent.
 
No, abortion is not "killing a child".
Killing a child would never be permitted by law, any more than forcing women to be slaves to biological function will (ever again) be permitted by law.
Bla, bla, bla. I could throw pro-life rhetoric at you all day long too, but we both know it will never convince either of us, will it?

Beyond that, your attitude toward abortion is sensible and prudent.

I sure :mrgreen: thought so.
 
Bla, bla, bla. I could throw pro-life rhetoric at you all day long too, but we both know it will never convince either of us, will it?

There's typically an 'h' at the end of "blah", and I have no need to convince you of anything; my beliefs are law. Yours are nothing. I debate the issue only as a matter of courtesy. In truth, your opinions (and those of other anti-choicers) are irrelevant.

I sure :mrgreen: thought so.

Good.
It's nice that we agree on something.
 

For now...but I'm just going to leave the abortion forum, since it's a lot like spinning my chair around really fast, it's fun for awhile but seeing the same thing so many times will make you sick.
 
For now...but I'm just going to leave the abortion forum, since it's a lot like spinning my chair around really fast, it's fun for awhile but seeing the same thing so many times will make you sick.

That is your perogative. Hasta.
 

The law is a fickle thing, built upon the opinions and interpretations of men. Change their minds, and the laws will follow-- whether you think their opinions are legal, moral, Constitutional or not.

When it comes down to it, the law is nothing more than a big man with a gun. And if I'm locked in a room alone with an opponent and a big man with a gun, it would be suicidal to pretend my opponent's arguments are irrelevant while he's whispering them in the big man's ear.
 
But none of the data actually explains anything. Correlation does not equal causation. There could be other shared reasons for why these women are at greater risk of breast cancer. Until I see a biological mechanism to explain why these women that have abortions have an increased chance of breast cancer, I really wouldn't worry about that the stats.

For example, a large majority of retirees will require cateract surgery. Now is the cateracts caused by retireing or is caused by old age? Stats are useless without deep analysis.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…