Abortion is murder

[talloulou]

I just want to know why woman are the only ones that have the right to decide whether or not to have a baby. I mean if you dont want to acknowledge the fact that a fetus is a baby then fine. But why cant a man say that they dont want the child? If the woman wants to carry it then all he has to do is file some sort of document in court so he wont have to pay child support. I mean thats fair right? If woman can decide to not carry the child then the father should have a chance to decide if he wants to support it. That and maybe it would be possible to have the father file something that says he wants the baby and will pay reperations or whatever to the woman for carrying the child. There is no reason a child's life is a decision for only woman to make.

I agree that currently men have absolutely no reproductive rights and that is very unfair.

 

[talloulou]

Basic biology. Men can't get pregnant.

Women can't get pregnant without a man either.

They do. It's called 'leaving'.

That's not a fair statement in that in most cases men can't legally just leave without consequences. The states usually find away to get to their paycheck so unless the guy wants to work under the table for the rest of his life and avoid the law forever he generally has to step up and pay child support.

Uh....they do that now.

The women has to agree to let the man off the hook though. He can't get off the hook just because he wants to. If the women doesn't agree to let him off, which they usually don't, then he is stuck.

Plus whether a women lets him off the hook or not isn't really the point. A women can decide that a child of hers is not born. Even if a women agrees to sign papers letting a guy off the hook he still has a child out there in the world. Many women say they would rather abort then put a child up for adoption cause it would be harder knowing they have a kid out there that they aren't taken care of. I would think this same situation would apply to men. They might rather not have a kid out there period vs being let off a hook.

 

[FallingPianos]

You're right my mind won't be changed either and most of the prochoicers who post regularly won't change their minds. But I still see it as an opportunity to hear where someone else's viewpoint comes from. Mostly I do it though in case people are reading these posts that haven't made their mind up one way or the other. I like to keep our side represented for that reason.

it depends on how logically consistent their argument is. argument starts with an opinion that is then built upon using logic. for example, saying that a fetus has rights is stating an opinion, not a fact. but then you can take that opinion and use logic to conclude that abortion is wrong because the fetus has the right to live... unless the rights of the mother to her body outweigh that. which is another opinion...

but most people have dont purely logical arguments. you can point out the inconsistencies. they will either modify their argument to make it consistent, or sometimes they may even realise that the opinion they based their logic on isnt what they actually believe anymore.

of course, thats entirely dependent on your opponant being willing to listen to you. unfortunatly, not enough are.

 

[jallman]

We can keep this up as long as you can keep lying and misrepresenting every point in the debate. Get your emotions under control and stop lying.

How have I shown disrespect talloulou?

By refusing to get your emotions under control and by lying and further vilifying as demonstrated in this post. Okay talloullou, stace, steen, et al. Lets look at another tactic used by hysterical extremist pro-liars. Our willing example has switched tactics from misrepresenting everything she says to one of villifying her opponents. The core of the debate means even less now, because the focus shifts totally away from facts and moves to subtle defamation of anyone who shows no sign of capitulation. She will become more rabid, introducing props, some probably altered photographs (we will touch on that one more later), and very carefully selected "fact sheets" and op-ed pieces to continue the misrepresentation while she focuses all her energy into the attack.

Also note that the pro-choice response needs to only alter very slightly to counter her every word.

Steen is way over the top. I have worked in the pro-life field for over 12 years and I HAVE NEVER MET ANYONE who is as insensitive, cold, calloused, hard, calculated looking at this issue as Steen is. I TALK TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT ABORTION IS OK UP UNTIL A CERTAIN WEEK, BUT NONE LIKE STEEN, who thinks that dismembering the fetus is ok. Never met anyone whose views even remotely compare to his inhumane outlook on life.

Bullshit. steen is utilitarian to the core. He maintains a medical detachment when considering his opinions on a medical procedure. He is rational and thoughtful in his explanations. It is not a bad trait that he does not tolerate lies and misrepresentation. I patterned my style of dealing with you people after him, just with a little less hesitation to use aggression than he has. Get your emotions under control and stop vilifying and lying.

It is hard to debate while looking down the throat of monsters. I don’t.

You make your peace, obviously you need it to feel better.

Total bullshit meant to vilify your oposition while subjugating talloullou with your vicious imposition of undeserved guilt. From what I have seen of this guy, you will not have it that easy. Get your emotions under conrol and stop vilifying through lies.

Some of these are not hard at all. In fact they are no brainers.

Bullshit. Some, if not all of the questions (with the exception of the hitler one), are intriguing and deeply philosophical even despite the facts. Else we wouldnt see them as common themes in our debates. The Hitler/pro-life conparison is just pure hysterics and vilification attempted by you and your ilk to guilt society into capitulation with shock attacks using evil arhetypes. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Well you are right in one sense….the same people on this site who champion abortion will never change their minds and probably I am the only one who wont change my mind about abortion who is pro-life……and this debate on here will probably never go anywhere.

Bullshit. No one champions abortion. The choice is what is championed. Further, this debate can go anywhere once you stop with the hystrionics, hysterics, and lying. Get your emotions under control and stop vilifying/lying.

I will say that these guys are in the minority, the majority of the population who are for abortion aren’t like these guys.

Bullshit. You are trying to villify us by osctracizing us from our own political allies through implications that we are extremists. We are on a board where we are to debate our opinions. If you have some other suggestion as to what we should talk about in a thread that begins on the premise of a lie by its very title, on a forum thats called abortion, and on a forum where we debate the topics of the threads in those forums, please make one. In the meantime we will do what we all came here for while you get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

On the side of caution? Well heck I would think you would, it’s all about killing a living fetus, unborn child jallman.

Bullshit. There is no such thing as an unborn child. I err on the side of caution using science to determine the line. I wish no infliction of pain or death on a sentient and whole being. The fetus, until science proves otherwise to me, is not capable before 18 weeks without a doubt. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Ok you say you reason……you say you listen to fact…………..you say you are so open minded………..

Perhaps, this one small snippet is the only completely truthful statement you made.

I have told you millions of time on here that my niece was born at 21 ½ weeks. You think it would be ok to abort at this time? You think she felt nothing? I mean come on jallman………you are iffy this and iffy that. We are dealing with death here, the death of a living human being. Iffy doesn’t cut it.

Bullshit. My reasoning and line of demarcation have always been the same. When there is proven sentience, then there is personhood. Instead of relying on your histrionics, hysteria and guilt, I rely on quantifiable and qualifiable data like you will find posted in post note # 94 for the Parlaimentary Office of Science and technology. For everyone's convenience, I will quote this small excerpt:

While there are important religious and ethical dimensions to this issue, this POSTnote concerns itself solely with scientific and medical aspects.

It goes on to state:

...while the fetal nervous system mounts protective responses to noxious stimuli from an early age, they cannot be interpreted as percieving pain at least until nueral connections are established to the cortex-then seen as 26 weeks or more after conception.

Now this document states 26 weeks, however, there are other articles that suggest that it may be as soon as 22 weeks that there is a more stable brain pattern...I will find them a post later if you wish. For my comfort and to hold to my beliefs about personhood, life, death, compassion, and cruelty, I believe the cutoff should come safely before the line, thus I can confidently say 18 weeks. By that point the woman has had plenty of time to decide anyway. Its all very simple really. I am not iffy at all. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

 

[jallman]

Proper response to Bullshit and Vilification, Part Deux​

http://www.nrlc.org/news/2005/NRL01/UbornScience0105.html

You say the fetus can’t feel pain? Why are many states passing “Unborn Child Awareness acts”

Bullshit. I say the fetus after a certain point, which I clearly outlined, can feel pain AND has cognition, sentience, awareness, and personhood. I only laid that line out again for the benefit of newcomers to the discussion as I have already explained it to you. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying. Also you might try using something objective as source material, not some op-ed piece with an agenda to create its own truth as evident by:

Pro-lifers often have to be wary of some scientific endeavors, since many researchers use them to devise new ways to harm the unborn, in research that utilizes embryonic stem cells, new abortion techniques, fetal tissue transplants, and the like. But the overwhelming scientific evidence of the past 32 years makes it clear that unborn babies are human beings, and that the Roe decision is increasingly outdated and undeniably wrong.

Or the following taken from your next "source", what appears to be a prolife message board post that it titled:

UNBORN CHILD PAIN AWARENESS ACT [The lib/dems will implode on this one.]

Your last reference here is more of the same. It only concerns itself with some possible legislation that we have not heard about since this one post wonder.

Oh yeah...and Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Now read this one jallman.

This is fact.

www.legis.state.wi.us/2005/data/AB-321.pdf#search='pictures%20of%20unborn%20child%20at%2018%20weeks%20gestation'

Now notice in this document they refer to that which is being aborted as “UNBORN CHILD” “UNBORN CHILDREN”
They sorta personalize it don’t they?

Bullshit. This is legislation being introduced with an obvious agenda to enfoce a pro-life legal philosophy. It does not qualify as a source when discussing the medical/scientific aspects of abortion.

And now, wait for it...

wait for it...

Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

And on this website………….(http://www.saltshaker.us/AmericanIssues/Life/Stenberg v. Carhart.htm) Notice most states refer to the “thing” getting killed as “the unborn child”
The statute defines "partial birth abortion" as:
"an abortion procedure in which the person performing the abortion partially delivers vaginally a living unborn child before killing the unborn child and completing the delivery." §28-326(9).

Bullshit. More of the same, but if you insist :yawn:, here it goes:

Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Oh now you limit her? And why isn’t Steen all over you for this one?
You sure 18 weeks is enough? What if she and the doctor calculated her menstrual period wrong? Remember your killing jallman….are you 100% sure, positive on how you are erring?

My response...you guessed and are the lucky winner of a clue: Bullshit. Your unsupported attempt at making me seem careless with the variables is deceptive, vilifying, and hysterical. Drum roll please:

Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

So….jallman when does the heart beat? So your not offended by pictures of the slaughter that pro-lifers show?

http://www.sfuhl.org/k_appendix_2_heart.htm

Bullshit. A heartbeat does not equate to personhood. It is a primitive and repetitive bodily function that is necessary but not equal to personhood, life, or sentience. I am not offended by the pictures, other than the manipulations and misrepresentations of the ones that have been doctored that you see occassionally. I am offended by hysterics and a perverse need to shock guilt people into capitulation to a lie. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Here jallman you can purchase one of these……to record the sounds of your baby before you abort him. (http://www.healthchecksystems.com/babycom_doppler.htm)

Bullshit. See above post concerning the heart for why. And have another get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Wow here is another one…..http://www.ababyoutlets.com/baby_beat_fetal_heart_monitors.htm
Imagine jallman listening at 10 weeks to your “clump of cells” heat beat. Ha ha


In your opinion the tiny arms and legs and body parts don’t bother ya eh jallman? :doh

Anyone else want to ust finish this one off for me? You know the response by now. :mrgreen:

 

[FutureIncoming]

I agree that currently men have absolutely no reproductive rights and that is very unfair.

I see you are working to make it fair by banning abortion. Then all a man need do is commit rape, and his offspring are protected by the ban.
(and anti-abortionists think their policies are not stupid?)
One of the fundamental problems here is a faulty belief that there is some sort of duty or right to breed. No such thing! All through Nature, breeding is a privilige that has to be earned. For those that fail to earn it, their offspring simply die. See that phrase "reproductive rights" above? Exactly what I'm talking about! There isn't any such thing! Not for women, and not for men. There is only the right to try, and success at anything, from surviving the current day to breeding, is absolutely not ever guaranteed. So, the way it actually works among humans, is that women decide, when they have a choice, who gets to father her offspring. This is as much true for a single woman going to a sperm bank, as it is for the married woman having an affair that results in pregnancy that she passes off as her husband's. A very great deal of the historical suppression of women's freedom started almost immediately after humans stopped being exclusive hunter/gatherers, and started herding, thereby discovering that offspring didn't "just happen"; sex was required. Matriarchal societies almost immediately disappeared worldwide, replaced by systems in which men created social tie-downs for women, trying to keep them restrained long enough so that any individual man could be sure he was successfully passing his genes on, no matter what the women wanted. Banning abortion, of course, was part of social restraints tying down women. They could not be allowed, after all, to use abortion to say to the men that impregnated them, "you are not worthy of being fathers to our children". Even today, large numbers of men are simply not worthy. And I suspect that as a result a large percentage of those large numbers of men, because they are unworthy, jimmyjack being a prime example, and because they know it (excepting jimmyjack here, due to stupidity), want to ban abortion. Therefore it is obvious: Men do not deserve to have any Society-granted reproductive rights! Instead they need to learn how to earn the priviledge of breeding. With the women that would then choose them.

 

[talloulou]

I see you are working to make it fair by banning abortion. Then all a man need do is commit rape, and his offspring are protected by the ban.

Not if the women sees a dr or goes to the hospital which she should for many reasons! They will check you out, give you antibiotics to lower the possibility of some STDS, and in most hospitals in the US they will give you the morning after pill to ensure that pregnancy does not occur. Furthermore they will give you information regarding counseling to help you deal with the horrible experience and they will do a rape kit to be held for 60 days as evidence in case you decide you want to press charges against your attacker if he is someone you know or a stranger the police are able to hunt down. I highly recommend that any women who is raped do this. For their own physical and mental health. Plus the rape kit is held and you have 60 days to decide whether or not you want to press charges which is a good option to have.

One of the fundamental problems here is a faulty belief that there is some sort of duty or right to breed.

I don't believe that at all.

No such thing! All through Nature, breeding is a privilige that has to be earned. For those that fail to earn it, their offspring simply die.

I agree but spontaneous abortions or miscarriages are quite different from surgical abortions.

Furthermore I have nothing against birth control, condoms, or the MAP which in my opinion should be enough to prevent a surgical abortion.

See that phrase "reproductive rights" above? Exactly what I'm talking about! There isn't any such thing! Not for women, and not for men. There is only the right to try, and success at anything, from surviving the current day to breeding, is absolutely not ever guaranteed.

Yes, but women do have reproductive rights. They get to decide if their creation will remain in existence or be terminated. That is a huge right that men do not have.

So, the way it actually works among humans, is that women decide, when they have a choice, who gets to father her offspring. This is as much true for a single woman going to a sperm bank, as it is for the married woman having an affair that results in pregnancy that she passes off as her husband's. A very great deal of the historical suppression of women's freedom started almost immediately after humans stopped being exclusive hunter/gatherers, and started herding, thereby discovering that offspring didn't "just happen"; sex was required. Matriarchal societies almost immediately disappeared worldwide, replaced by systems in which men created social tie-downs for women, trying to keep them restrained long enough so that any individual man could be sure he was successfully passing his genes on, no matter what the women wanted. Banning abortion, of course, was part of social restraints tying down women. They could not be allowed, after all, to use abortion to say to the men that impregnated them, "you are not worthy of being fathers to our children". Even today, large numbers of men are simply not worthy. And I suspect that as a result a large percentage of those large numbers of men, because they are unworthy, jimmyjack being a prime example, and because they know it (excepting jimmyjack here, due to stupidity), want to ban abortion. Therefore it is obvious: Men do not deserve to have any Society-granted reproductive rights! Instead they need to learn how to earn the priviledge of breeding. With the women that would then choose them.

Some of those points are interesting. And while I will agree that in history women were tied down by the burden of pregnancy they are not today even if surgical abortion is banned. They still can pick men that are worthy. They still can use birth control, they can demand condoms, they can use the MAP if the aforementioned fail. If they are raped they can go to any hospital where they will be taken care of and in most cases without alot of questions asked. They have the right to decide if the rape will be prosecuted or if the hospital will just take care of them without involving the police in anyway. Women are much free-er today with or without surgical abortion. But free-er does not mean completely free of any and all consequences. If they don't take care of themselves and do the things that need doing to prevent pregnancy then at a certain point they just need to pay the consequences, deliver the baby, and either care for it or put it up for adoption.

The only exception to this would be when the mothers physical health is in direct danger or there is something wrong with the baby and it is not discovered until late in the pregnancy. I myself don't like the idea of aborting a fetus because it isn't perfect but there are some things that are quite a bit more than not being perfect and while I don't agree with it I can sympathize and understand why one would chose to abort a fetus with major health problems. These cases though are not the majority of abortion cases and I think it's important to note that.

 

[FutureIncoming]

see you are working to make it fair by banning abortion. Then all a man need do is commit rape, and his offspring are protected by the ban.

Not if the women sees a dr...

I'm talking about total bans of anything resembling abortion, like what the selfish males in South Dakota are trying to get away with. As far as I'm concerned, all they are doing is proving they are unworthy to breed, since they are trying so hard to ensure any pregnancies they cause, regardless of what the woman wants, cannot be terminated.

All through Nature, breeding is a privilige that has to be earned. For those that fail to earn it, their offspring simply die.

I agree but spontaneous abortions or miscarriages are quite different from surgical abortions.

You missed the point there, which had nothing to do with either miscarriage or abortion. One real-life example concerns a small group of buffaloe. If they fail to protect their calves adequately, wolves will kill and eat them. That is failure to successfully breed, just as much as if a pregnancy had never happened. Among humans, the social pressure inflicted upon young adults, by their own parents, to settle down and have kids, is a simple consequence of the overall fact that until you offspring have had offspring themselves, you cannot say you have really successfully passed your genes on.

 

[doughgirl]

SSlighting said, “I just want to know why woman are the only ones that have the right to decide whether or not to have a baby.”

Good question. Our present laws say two different things.

“I mean if you dont want to acknowledge the fact that a fetus is a baby then fine. But why cant a man say that they dont want the child?”

Many do by running away. Are law on one hand says you as a man have no decision whether or not the woman you impregnated has the child. It’s her body and the free gift you gave her is hers to decide what to do with. Free gift…end of story. HER DECISION TOTALLY. YOUR DNA DOESN’T MATTER.
Then the law says to the man if she decides to have the child……the free gift wasn’t enough you have to step up to the plate and pay because she is carrying your DNA.

“If the woman wants to carry it then all he has to do is file some sort of document in court so he wont have to pay child support. I mean thats fair right?”

Yes you would think I it would be. And by the present laws, he should not have to file anything. He legally should be able to walk away.

“If woman can decide to not carry the child then the father should have a chance to decide if he wants to support it.”

Seems fair……..but you don’t realize the father is nothing here. He has no rights.

“There is no reason a child's life is a decision for only woman to make.”

I agree, but our laws say something different. They are terribly inconsistent and are laws on this only BENEFIT THE WOMAN.

Ngdawg said, “There's every reason. It's HER body, her life and it involves a lot more than shelling out a few bucks every week.”

It is her body and her life and you are totally right it involves another life, the one growing inside her.
Now based on your statement here…………no man on earth owes a woman who has carried and given birth to a child support money to help with the child at all.

Every man paying child support today should not have to pay one dime, they should be free of all financial responsibility.

 

[doughgirl]

Talloulou said, “Comparing what prochoicers say to what people said about Hitler. Assuming Jallman doesn't care about little legs, arms, and other body parts. Jallman is a guy, I'm pretty sure, so he himself will never be responsible for little body parts in utero. Just because he supports a womens right to chose doesn't mean he wants all pregnant women to choose abortion it just means he doesn't feel he should take that choice away from them.

I'm sure it's perfectly possible for a man to be prochoice but at the same time when put in a "personal" situation he might do try to convince his girlfriend or wife to continue a pregnancy.”

Anything is possible.

Many in the pro-choice camp sound like the views of Hitler in regards to life. Type in Hitler and pro-abortion in your search engine and read. Jallman sets himself up talloulou. He said the unborn child is not dismembered. AND THAT USING HIS OWN TERMS IS BULLSHIT. And so because jallman is a guy we make exceptions to his comments? Who is responsible for the dismemberment talloulou? Does this procedure just happen by itself? This should only bother woman?


You can’t sit on the fence on this one. You either are against legal dismemberment, or you vote to allow it.
Whether you want abortion or not, if you allow others to do it you are condoning it.

Would you overturn Roe and place your vote against abortion or would you vote pro-choice and vote to ALLOW IT.

“My biggest thing with Steen is I never feel like I am debating or conversing with him in as much as I feel like I am being quickly dismissed by him and he often calls me a liar unfairly.”

Last night I went way back to the begging threads topics on abortion. I wanted to research what he has said in the past. He has been here a lot longer than I have and I wanted to see what his posts contained. The same thing. Over and over and over..he offers nothing but moles and if you counted how many times he said this line ,”more reivisionist linguistic hyperbole,” you would be into the thousands.

It’s just not me he calls liar, its everyone, hundreds before me. I am in an honored group. HE OFFERS NOTHING AND HIS ANSWERS ARE ROBOTIC. He says things for shock value only. Like....

Its absolutely incredible the things he says……..example(“when does a fetus become a baby-thread” post#104) He says there is no such thing as a partial birth abortion.

He only cares about the issue of enslaving woman and obviously does not recognize at all during the 9 months the unborn child. As he calls it regularly “a non-feeling tissue mass.” He views the woman to that of a slave if she has to carry the baby.
He does not see the unborn as a child as we all know. If you investigate various states documents on fetal pain bills on the books, our courts even talk about the "unborn child" using those terms.


Steen said (“Pro-choice give me a break” post 14) “For one, there is no baby until birth, so your argument doesn't make sense. Secondly, it doesn't matter, as the REAL issue is whether the woman is allowed to control her own body or not; that is so regardless of the "recipient." The status of the fetus is completely irrelevant, it can be a person 5 times over and still it doesn't have the right to her bodily resources against her will.”

So there you have it.

“See calling prochoicers monsters is dismissive and disrespectful.”

What do you call the “dismemberment” of the unborn talloulou? The truth hurts.

“You're right my mind won't be changed either and most of the prochoicers who post regularly won't change their minds. But I still see it as an opportunity to hear where someone else's viewpoint comes from. Mostly I do it though in case people are reading these posts that haven't made their mind up one way or the other. I like to keep our side represented for that reason.”

Every viewpoint imaginable has been presented already. I guess I misinterpreted how you view abortion. I had no idea you were not for overturning Roe and that you like jallman say your against abortion but vote for it because society it seems demands it. As I have said numerous times before, I find that position morally baffling.

“I agree but I also understand people are more likely to say things on here in a way that they might not do in person. I know I have been guilty of this.”

Well I am not one of them. I pretty much as you can imagine say what I have to say. Now you don’t know me in person, and I am very kind and compassionate when I talk to people about this….but I say what I believe to be the truth. And sometimes the truth hurts, but needs to be said anyway. I only wish someone had done that to me. And the truth of this matter is this……the majority of the population do not know what abortion really is and they do not know about fetal development. We need to educate people in this area. Because if the majority of woman who march in to kill their unborn child knew that their unborns heart was beating……..they just might change their minds. And the pro-choice camp doesn’t want woman to be infomed of this information.

 

[doughgirl]

“Steen is utilitarian to the core. He maintains a medical detachment when considering his opinions on a medical procedure. He is rational and thoughtful in his explanations. It is not a bad trait that he does not tolerate lies and misrepresentation. I patterned my style of dealing with you people after him, just with a little less hesitation to use aggression than he has. Get your emotions under control and stop vilifying and lying.”

Yes, he has a medical detachment alright, he has no clue to what medical science really says and he dismisses any source one might post as being full of lies.
He is for abortion up until full term. Do you find that acceptable, you who say that you are against partial birth abortion? YOu admire his views that much?

Lies? So the pro-life side lies and your side the pro-abortion side doesn’t lie? :rofl

Your hilariously funny. Your becoming like steen robotic in your answers. You use to think on here but you don’t, you repeat the same things over and over and over.
Come on jallman you can do better than that. Site some source and give us something. Site what medical science says about when the heart beat starts?

About Hitler….do the same thing as I told talloulou………..and investigate the comparisons as there are many.

Here I'll help you with one.... Think the saline abortion is painful?

Do you know where this was originally developed? The concentration camps of Nazi Germany. (Thomas Hilgers and Dennis Horans, eds, Abortion and Social Justice (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1972), 292.) You can find sites on eh internet for this also

“Bullshit. You are trying to villify us by osctracizing us from our own political allies through implications that we are extremists.”

Because you are. If steen is not an extremist I don’t know what one is. To be for the “right” of a pregnant woman to be able to march in an abortion clinic and terminate her 9 month unborn child????????????????????

You say that falls into the normal category?
You have said yourself no child is dismembered in the womb………..I call that over the top.

I would ask you one question jallman………….

Why do you(based on all you said on this thread)………….take the womans right to choose away from her at some point? What do you base that on? Do your morals have any part in this? Obviously you are not religious and don’t use God as a source in your decisions………what do you use? The heart beats in the unborn far before the date you set to kill it...so? You allow abortion while the heart is beating, why not allow it like steen does up until natural delivery? YOU ARE TAKING THE WOMANS CHOICE AWAY.......AS STEEN PUTS IT YOU ENSLAVE HER.

Your answers are iffy……..”maybe at this time, I’ll research more, maybe at that time, its a crap shoot for you and your playing with the life of someone else.”
You are careless in your answers.

“A heartbeat does not equate to personhood.”

No it has to do with life and death however. And if you stop one ……………….what happens? Tell us jallman………….WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU STOP A HEART THAT IS BEATING?

The only thing an abortion ensures is death to the child.

I'll leave ya with this one...

Gianna Jessens biological mother had a saline abortion in a southern California abortion clinic. She was severely burned and traumatized but managed to survive. Her medical records read Saline Abortion survivor. She is a grown woman today and travels around talking about abortion. Ask her what side is the cruel one jallman. (Tom Ehart, “She was an aborted Baby and Lived,” Brio, April 1992, 14-7.)



Isn’t it ironic that those who endorse this killing.... label those who oppose it as cruel? It’s hard to fathom this level of pro-choice cruelty towards precious children, then turn around and say they are pro-life. Amazing.

How do you do it?

 

[talloulou]

What do you call the “dismemberment” of the unborn talloulou? The truth hurts.

Look I'm not arguing that abortion isn't horrible, crude, or disgusting. What I'm arguing is that its unfair to make assumptions that someone who is prochoice finds dememberment appealing or assuming because they don't take the choice away that they aren't bothered by it one way or another.

When some prochoicers were stating that abortion pics are altered I asked them to produce some unaltered ones. I understand your desire to make them see how gruesome a procedure abortion can be however you can not assume that because they still believe in choice they are numb to the gruesomeness or worse that they enjoy it.

I had no idea you were not for overturning Roe and that you like jallman say your against abortion but vote for it because society it seems demands it.

I never NEVER said that but thanks for assuming it. See how those assumptions can fail you?

I've said it before and I'll say it again...I believe with birth control, condoms, and the morning after pill there is NO need for surgical abortions and thus I think surgical abortions should be banned except when the mother's life is physically at risk if she were to carry on with the pregnany.

And the truth of this matter is this……the majority of the population do not know what abortion really is

I agree it is talked about in very sterile clinical terms the majority of times and of course that is how prochoicers want it to be talked about.

and they do not know about fetal development.

Science doesnt even know all there is to know about fetal development or viability out of the womb. They learn more and more as time passes.

We need to educate people in this area. Because if the majority of woman who march in to kill their unborn child knew that their unborns heart was beating

You don't think most of them know a heart is beating? I bet they know at least that. If they don't then they themselves must be blamed for not getting more information! Prochoicers talk of terminating a pregnancy but it is a killing. There is something, no matter how you wish to refer to it, something that must be KILLED and if the killing doesn't happen the pregnancy continues. I think they all know at least that much.

……..they just might change their minds. And the pro-choice camp doesn’t want woman to be infomed of this information.

So inform without insulting. If you refrain from calling them monsters and telling them they are numb to or enjoy fetal dismemberment ect. they won't be able to dismiss you as easily.

 

[Captain America]

In my entire posting history or experiences on the internet, I have never seen a forum such as this, without at least one abortion thread. I have yet seen one of theses threads that ever reached any conclusions or consensus. I have yet to see one that didn't turn into a flame-fest.

It's a never ending diatribe. A dog chasing his tail.

It's all been said and done. A circular argument that don't mean :censored to a tree.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....:yawn:

 

[talloulou]

Doughgirl think about male circumcision. In my mind it's disgusting, horrible brutal procedure, and a cruel way to treat newborn males in the US. However I know some very reasonable people who have had their sons circumcised. They don't find the procedure itself appealing, they aren't in to torture, or brutalizing their newborns. They just believe there is nothing wrong with infant male circumcision and our society in the US has made this form of genital mutilation very socially acceptable. Now when I talk with moms about whether or not they are going to circumcise thier newborn males I don't tell the ones who are for it that they are monsters. Though in my MIND it's horrible.

I know it's not the same as abortion but it might help you understand what I mean when I say the prochoicer is not FOR dismemberment. Just like the parents who circumcise would argue that they aren't in to genital mutilation. In fact they don't see it as genital mutilation at all.

 

[ngdawg]

Doughgirl think about male circumcision. In my mind it's disgusting, horrible brutal procedure, and a cruel way to treat newborn males in the US. However I know some very reasonable people who have had their sons circumcised. They don't find the procedure itself appealing, they aren't in to torture, or brutalizing their newborns. They just believe there is nothing wrong with infant male circumcision and our society in the US has made this form of genital mutilation very socially acceptable. Now when I talk with moms about whether or not they are going to circumcise thier newborn males I don't tell the ones who are for it that they are monsters. Though in my MIND it's horrible.

I know it's not the same as abortion but it might help you understand what I mean when I say the prochoicer is not FOR dismemberment. Just like the parents who circumcise would argue that they aren't in to genital mutilation. In fact they don't see it as genital mutilation at all.

Eh, you're talking to a tree, Hon....the woman has internal issues:roll:

 

[jallman]

Yes, he has a medical detachment alright, he has no clue to what medical science really says and he dismisses any source one might post as being full of lies.
He is for abortion up until full term. Do you find that acceptable, you who say that you are against partial birth abortion? YOu admire his views that much?

I dont have to agree with every one of steens views to take a cue from his dealing with you. He has a good way of batting your sophistry aside and his responses are all your histrionics deserve.

Lies? So the pro-life side lies and your side the pro-abortion side doesn’t lie? :rofl

The pro-life side disseminates false information, doctored pictures, and tries to impose guilt where none is due.

Your hilariously funny.

And you are hilariously trifling, misinformed, and hysterical.

Your becoming like steen robotic in your answers. You use to think on here but you don’t, you repeat the same things over and over and over.
Come on jallman you can do better than that. Site some source and give us something. Site what medical science says about when the heart beat starts?

The answers are repeated because you present nothing new. There is only one way to deal with your hysterics and that is to bat them aside without a thought. Your hysterics are robotic in their own sense. Why should I put thought into responding to lies?

About Hitler….do the same thing as I told talloulou………..and investigate the comparisons as there are many.

I am not interested in hysterical pro-lie sites and their unwarranted, vilifying comparisons. Thats all I am seeing when I enter that search.

Here I'll help you with one.... Think the saline abortion is painful?

I dont care whether
Do you know where this was originally developed? The concentration camps of Nazi Germany. (Thomas Hilgers and Dennis Horans, eds, Abortion and Social Justice (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1972), 292.) You can find sites on eh internet for this also

I am not interested in the pain of the procedure. Further, where the procedure was developed is not a concern to me. Nazis created the VW Bug also, but I dont see you calling for an end to VW's manufacturing rights. :shock:

Because you are. If steen is not an extremist I don’t know what one is. To be for the “right” of a pregnant woman to be able to march in an abortion clinic and terminate her 9 month unborn child????????????????????

There is no such thing as the unborn child. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

You say that falls into the normal category?
You have said yourself no child is dismembered in the womb………..I call that over the top.

Bullshit. There is no such thing as an unborn child. Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

I would ask you one question jallman………….

Why do you(based on all you said on this thread)………….take the womans right to choose away from her at some point? What do you base that on? Do your morals have any part in this? Obviously you are not religious and don’t use God as a source in your decisions………what do you use? The heart beats in the unborn far before the date you set to kill it...so? You allow abortion while the heart is beating, why not allow it like steen does up until natural delivery? YOU ARE TAKING THE WOMANS CHOICE AWAY.......AS STEEN PUTS IT YOU ENSLAVE HER.

Bullshit. You know nothing about my religious affilliations as I try to keep them separate from this debate. My religious affilliations have no bearing on legality and medical fact. I have also explained time and again that the heart does not equate to personhood. I have also answered your question as to why I limit the choice. Read the previous posts, set your histrionic babble aside and ummm, yeah: Get your emotions under control and stop lying/vilifying.

Your answers are iffy……..”maybe at this time, I’ll research more, maybe at that time, its a crap shoot for you and your playing with the life of someone else.”
You are careless in your answers.

I never said maybe. And anyone who cares about a topic and doesnt research it is guilty of being careless. I suppose that works for you but not for me.

No it has to do with life and death however. And if you stop one ……………….what happens? Tell us jallman………….WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU STOP A HEART THAT IS BEATING?

In the most sophomoric sense, yes it does have to do with life and death. But it has nothing to do with sentience or complete personhood.

The only thing an abortion ensures is death to the child.

Bullshit and more bullshit. There is no death of a child during abortion. There is the alleviation of an unwanted medical condition and the result is the removal of a nonsentient byproduct of that condition. You are a hysterical liar.

I'll leave ya with this one...

Gianna Jessens biological mother had a saline abortion in a southern California abortion clinic. She was severely burned and traumatized but managed to survive. Her medical records read Saline Abortion survivor. She is a grown woman today and travels around talking about abortion. Ask her what side is the cruel one jallman. (Tom Ehart, “She was an aborted Baby and Lived,” Brio, April 1992, 14-7.)

And I am supposed to be moved by this how?

Isn’t it ironic that those who endorse this killing.... label those who oppose it as cruel? It’s hard to fathom this level of pro-choice cruelty towards precious children, then turn around and say they are pro-life. Amazing.

How do you do it?

I dont label you cruel. I label you a hysterical liar. I showed you a source with objectivity and scientific fact. It is very telling that you ignored that source altogether and continued your lying, vilifying, hysterical attack upon my person rather than speaking to the validity of the facts. You cant...you have only emotional, hysterical, histrionic, deceptive sophistry to present. You are worthless to your cause. You better pray for your side that fantasea or someone with a little credibility jumps in here soon to save your azz because you are being owned in this debate. Works for me though. :mrgreen:

 

[talloulou]

And I am supposed to be moved by this how?

I find it almost impossible not to be moved by Gianna Jessen's story. However the attempt to abort her took place at 7 months. I think there are many prochoicers who would not mind seeing abortions banned at such a late viable stage. I have met few prochoicers who believe abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months. Most believe there is a definite stage where the fetus is viable and should be born vs killed they just don't seem to agree on when that point is.

 

[jallman]

I find it almost impossible not to be moved by Gianna Jessen's story. However the attempt to abort her took place at 7 months. I think there are many prochoicers who would not mind seeing abortions banned at such a late viable stage. I have met few prochoicers who believe abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months. Most believe there is a definite stage where the fetus is viable and should be born vs killed they just don't seem to agree on when that point is.

Dont get me wrong...I am compassionate and moved by Gianna Jessen's story in and of itself. However, I refuse to let doughgirl cloud the issues we were discussing with some new and irrelevant insertion that is meant to do nothing more than try to wear me down with guilt and shock/horror attack. It is her MO to suddenly throw in some unrelated reference and then try to use it to vilify her opponent or undermine his confidence. I have come to expect this from her and so, I have a knee-jerk reaction to bat her hysterics aside and move right on with the core of the debate. It really is the only way to deal with her.

Actually, the only interest I have in this at all anymore, where she is concerned, is to use her as an example of the same kind of moonbatting you started your basement thread about. Of course, it is not hurting that every word she types only strengthens my position and wears down her own credibility, such as it is.

 

[Fantasea]

I don't recall ever having heard arguments, based on scientific or medical fact, that supported abortion.

Perhaps someone out there is willing to humor me with some.

 

[FallingPianos]

I don't recall ever having heard arguments, based on scientific or medical fact, that supported abortion.

Perhaps someone out there is willing to humor me with some.

support abortion in what way?

 

[steen]

...Anyone else want to ust finish this one off for me? You know the response by now. :mrgreen:

Te he. I stuck that villifying liar on ignore long ago.

 

[ngdawg]

I don't recall ever having heard arguments, based on scientific or medical fact, that supported abortion.

Perhaps someone out there is willing to humor me with some.

You can stop trying to bait. No one gave any because no one supports the procedure itself, they support the woman's right to choose it.
Nice effort, tho.
Why don't you stop with the digging and baiting and support with unbiased medical and scientific fact as to why it shouldn't be done.
Oh, and leave the histrionics and emotional pleas home. Just the facts.

 

[jallman]

You can stop trying to bait. No one gave any because no one supports the procedure itself, they support the woman's right to choose it.
Nice effort, tho.
Why don't you stop with the digging and baiting and support with unbiased medical and scientific fact as to why it shouldn't be done.
Oh, and leave the histrionics and emotional pleas home. Just the facts.

Whoa, I appreciate your fervor there ngdawg, but hold up. Watch yourself with this one, cuz she is slick. This is an old friend of mine from the forum, when I was just a wee lad of not much skill. I learned how to debate from this one and trust me, she has handed me my azz, so to speak, more than once. She'll lure you out in the open and then just snack on you if you dont watch it. Its good to see her around, but when she shows up, the pro-life side has half a chance. Doughgirl sure lucked out.

Now, fantasea...I heard your challenge...just take it as a sign of respect that I am getting my ducks in a row before I respond to it. I have missed this.

 

[steen]

Whoa, I appreciate your fervor there ngdawg, but hold up. Watch yourself with this one, cuz she is slick.

I don't know about that. She is another one who made an awful lot of false/ignorant claims about the fetus, science and medicine. She, the other f-girl, ptsdkid and doughgirl generally are in the same class, IMO.

 

[jallman]

I don't know about that. She is another one who made an awful lot of false/ignorant claims about the fetus, science and medicine. She, the other f-girl, ptsdkid and doughgirl generally are in the same class, IMO.

nah dude, I agree on the others, but fantasea has got some game. The rhetoric starts out the same, but she can walk the walk with it. she is the ONLY pro-lifer who has ever earned my respect.