Another fire at another Planned Parenthood. Arson confirmed. [W:222]

[Northern Light]

If I recall correctly you don't support men having a choice in fatherhood.

If men have that choice then women should have that choice. I'm for equality.

But what we're seeing is the right wing saying that men shouldn't have to bear any responsibility for children they create if they don't want to, while they turn the other cheek on something like abortion.

Can't have it both ways. If a woman is forced to go through a body-altering pregnancy against her will, and maybe even medical complications, then you better believe that the man who played his part in getting her pregnant is going to be responsible for the outcome too.

 

[Lursa]

I just showed you the link explaining what I said. Yet you would still we suggest we kill the animals. Why do you like killing animals needlessly?

You suggested that rather than kill them mercifully, we turn them loose.

Not only is that cruel as NB pointed out, it harms natural habitats because they are unnatural predators or intruders. They do damage, kill wildlife, kill or eat other people's pets, carry disease, etc.

And yes...it's cruel. They cannot fend for themselves, they starve, they are hit by cars, killed by coyotes or other predators, dogs have no 'pack' to live with, which is cruel in itself.

I was a park ranger for 13 yrs. I saw many of these poor animals. I ended up 'adopting' a domestic rabbit, a parakeet, and a parrot, plus a snake and turtle not native to the region. Those were the lucky ones.

If these animals cannot be adopted, it may not be ideal to kill them but sometimes $$ leaves no choice. But that painless death is much less cruel than 'setting them free.'

 

[Lursa]

Because both acts you mentioned are violent.

So we shouldnt do them? You are implying all violent acts are wrong, is that correct?

 

[Henrin]

If men have that choice then women should have that choice. I'm for equality.

But what we're seeing is the right wing saying that men shouldn't have to bear any responsibility for children they create if they don't want to, while they turn the other cheek on something like abortion.

Can't have it both ways. If a woman is forced to go through a body-altering pregnancy against her will, and maybe even medical complications, then you better believe that the man who played his part in getting her pregnant is going to be responsible for the outcome too.

I'm pretty sure that wasn't the argument you made before. Are you just providing lip service to male rights to make your hypocrisy argument? As for me anyway, I support both sexes having their reproductive rights.

 

[Henrin]

So we shouldnt do them? You are implying all violent acts are wrong, is that correct?

How was I implying that? I was supporting the notion that committing violence to stop violence is morally justifiable. That when you know other humans are being killed the correct course of action is act to put a stop to it.

 

[Lursa]

How was I implying that? I was supporting the notion that committing violence to stop violence is morally justifiable. That when you know other humans are being killed the correct course of action is act to put a stop to it.

So then it's ok to kill the people at the slaughterhouse killing cows? Actually, since we established that chewing your food is violence (your definition said force causing damage to someone or something), then all of us should bear retribution from others trying to stop that violence?

 

[Northern Light]

Are you just providing lip service to male rights to make your hypocrisy argument?

Not sure what you mean? Sorry.

 

[Henrin]

So then it's ok to kill the people at the slaughterhouse killing cows? Actually, since we established that chewing your food is violence (your definition said force causing damage to someone or something), then all of us should bear retribution from others trying to stop that violence?

Cows are a different species that we raise to eat. They have nothing to do with my argument.

 

[Lursa]

Cows are a different species that we raise to eat. They have nothing to do with my argument.

Well then I guess you should stop claiming that abortion is violence, since apparently that is not the reason to object to it. By the definition you provided, the woman who colors my hair is using violence against me (damages the hair). As is my pedicurist. And my dentist, doing all that nasty drilling.

 

[Henrin]

Well then I guess you should stop claiming that abortion is violence, since apparently that is not the reason to object to it. By the definition you provided, the woman who colors my hair is using violence against me (damages the hair). As is my pedicurist. And my dentist, doing all that nasty drilling.

Do you even know why I provided the definition?

 

[nota bene]

I just showed you the link explaining what I said. Yet you would still we suggest we kill the animals. Why do you like killing animals needlessly? You get some kind of sick thrill out of it dont you? You should get therapy since only someone seriously sick in the head would want to kill animals when we dont have to.

It does not matter what country you are from. This is FACTS! and this is in fact how people train animals. If you know what the instinct is you know how to train and breed these animals. Since you know nothing you would sooner kill the animal. So no, what country an animal came from does not change biology! So you are full of ****. Putting a dog from china in America STILL MAKES IT A DOG. It did not suddenly change species. You have nothing backing up what you say other than the fact you must love seeing animals die. Which means your sick in the head. The fact you like shedding blood should not be the reason to needlessly kill creatures.

I guess if you change countries you suddenly become a ****ing fish right? Since that makes so much damn sense doesn't it? Show me the biology saying that you change depending what country you are in. I bet you cant and if you cant you are still full of ****, and just enjoy killing animals for pleasure. You have no real case.

I've never commented at DP on another's lack of reading comprehension, but I'm going to now because you didn't even understand what I meant by living "in the country." This was a reference to rural life, not to other nations.

There is no explanation that justifies your abusive comments here about my getting a sick thrill out of killing animals.

I suggest that you read Post #77. Lursa explains better than I did what happens to dogs and cats dumped in the country (again, this means outside the city limits/in rural areas).

 

[Removable Mind]

We do not abort babies to eat them. We abort the fetus since we accidentally got pregnant. The only reason we slaughter animals in a factory is so we can eat them. Its not simply "Well we did not feel like caring for you, so to death you go". I think the cruelty of having an abortion can be compared better to what we do with animals we can not adopt off. If we cant adopt a puppy in a pound a lot of times they are gassed or injected with a drug that kills them. Seems kind of selfish since you could have simply set the animal free but since humans have this idea they only deserve to live as pets, they just kill them off.

Yes, kill them off.... WOW! Is that what's happening to humanity? We've become a ruthless slaughter house for the unborn?

Your drama queen perception (along with all of your fellow pro-life advocates) is absolutely an unquantifiable, outlandish exaggeration.

This ain't about cows or puppies. This is about WOMEN who deserve to decide their size of family, their life goals in education and career.

THE MAJORITY OF CONCEPTIONS are brought to full-term and you and others who believe as you do just ignore this fact. You folks need to get over yourselves.

 

[Removable Mind]

Naw. You want to mass kill little humans. You prove it does no damage.

PLEAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZE....you've got to be joking! Okay, you've just now conceded to the REALITY that there are absolutely no negative impacts on humanity.

I can, however, see huge benefits derived from abortions!

 

[Henrin]

Not sure what you mean? Sorry.

Comments like this:

It's not exactly involuntary servitude if you elect to deposit your sperm into a person capable of conceiving a child. How hard is this to understand? You need to comprehend the sacredness of sex and where your essence is placed when you choose to do it. It's a sacred trust that you shouldn't enter into lightly. But our society doesn't treat it that way.

I'm sorry that nature is inequitable when it comes to how human reproduction happens, but this reality should be deeply understood by everyone in terms of their rights. There's no trickity mind-trick trick that's going to change the reality of nature, folks. Women inherently have more control over childbirth than men and that's never going to change no matter what laws are enacted.

The care of children is more important than your selfish desire to avoid responsibility. You did the deed, you planted the seed, so own up. No one is saying you have to be a parent - and in fact I think it's immoral to say otherwise - but you owe some material responsibility to the creation of that child. They represent the future of a family, a community, and the world. Children matter.

Btw, I can think of at least two other posts from you saying about the same thing.

 

[Lursa]

Do you even know why I provided the definition?

In an attempt to prove that abortion is 'violence.' Which it is not except in the most widely stretched use of the word, which is what I then pointed out, making the application of 'violence' to flushing an embryo from the womb pretty much worthless.

 

[Northern Light]

Comments like this:

Btw, I can think of at least two other posts from you saying about the same thing.

And?

I don't get what you're trying to accuse me of, sorry.

 

[Henrin]

And?

I don't get what you're trying to accuse me of, sorry.

That you don't support equality. That you lied when you said you support equally. That you are no better than the people you're criticizing.

 

[Northern Light]

That you don't support equality. That you lied when you said you support equally. That you are no better than the people you're criticizing.

If a man can terminate his parenthood, why should a woman not be able to do it?

I was calling out people who want to ban abortion yet also make it impossible for single mothers and their children to thrive. I'm actually against fathers terminating their responsibility. Women get all the slut shaming for getting pregnant when they didn't want to, yet the same detractors turn around and say fathers should get an opt-out.

It is a basic reality that women have more biological control and responsibility over the creation of children. It's no one's fault it's just how nature designed it. Abortion is a separate issue from parenthood anyway.

Still not really getting what you're on about. :shrug:

 

[Henrin]

If a man can terminate his parenthood, why should a woman not be able to do it?

I was calling out people who want to ban abortion yet also make it impossible for single mothers and their children to thrive. I'm actually against fathers terminating their responsibility. Women get all the slut shaming for getting pregnant when they didn't want to, yet the same detractors turn around and say fathers should get an opt-out.

It is a basic reality that women have more biological control and responsibility over the creation of children. It's no one's fault it's just how nature designed it. Abortion is a separate issue from parenthood anyway.

Still not really getting what you're on about. :shrug:

Abortion is not a separate issue from parenthood. Women avoid motherhood by getting an abortion, just as men avoid fatherhood by walking. Yes, nature gave women control over children and of the birth of the species, and I am in no way disputing that or challenging women's rights on the issue, but when you say it is ok to force men into fatherhood you are failing to uphold equality.

 

[minnie616]

Abortion is not a separate issue from parenthood. Women avoid motherhood by getting an abortion, just as men avoid fatherhood by walking. Yes, nature gave women control over children and of the birth of the species, and I am in no way disputing that or challenging women's rights on the issue, but when you say it is ok to force men into fatherhood you are failing to uphold equality.

Since DNA tests no longer allow men to walk away from fatherhood you think women should be forced to gestate a pregnancy ?

Is that the real reason you are against abortion?

 

[Henrin]

Since DNA tests no longer allow men to walk away from fatherhood you think women should be forced to gestate a pregnancy ?

Is that the real reason you are against abortion?

Where did you get that idea from?

 

[Northern Light]

Abortion is not a separate issue from parenthood. Women avoid motherhood by getting an abortion, just as men avoid fatherhood by walking. Yes, nature gave women control over children and of the birth of the species, and I am in no way disputing that or challenging women's rights on the issue, but when you say it is ok to force men into fatherhood you are failing to uphold equality.

Untrue. Abortion is about medicine, as SCOTUS ruled. If it were just an issue of parenthood, then the only concern would be giving birth and then abdicating that parenthood via adoption. But between conception and adoption, there's that whole body/mind-altering process that women have to go through which must always be their choice.

So no, it's not about parenthood. A pregnant woman is not a "mother" unless she decides to be. That's why in some states, killing a pregnant woman is a double homicide if it can be proven she intended to have the child and raise it as her own. Otherwise it's a single homicide. The intention of the pregnancy matters. Calling all pregnant women mothers is specious reasoning from a legal standpoint, even though it's social custom.

Women avoid pregnancy by getting an abortion. They don't avoid motherhood per se.

And you can never really force a man into fatherhood. All the courts do is make them pay financial support for their biological creation. It doesn't mean they have to take a parental role.

You're splitting hairs over non-sense, in order to look for a "gotcha" moment in my ethics. You can keep digging all you want but it won't work.

 

[minnie616]

Where did you get that idea from?

Your claim that it is not fair that men can no longer walk away claiming the " child is not mine" like they use to be able to do before DNA tests.

 

[Removable Mind]

Abortion is not a separate issue from parenthood. Women avoid motherhood by getting an abortion, just as men avoid fatherhood by walking. Yes, nature gave women control over children and of the birth of the species, and I am in no way disputing that or challenging women's rights on the issue, but when you say it is ok to force men into fatherhood you are failing to uphold equality.

You've yet to show that there is actually some kind of equality to uphold. It's not possible.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Arson investigation underway at Planned Parenthood in Thousand Oaks - LA Times



Let's see how many of our resident pro-lifers condone this attack or say, "I condemn it, but." No. There is no "but." You condemn this attack or you do not. You distance yourself from hypocrisy or you do not.

Maybe they did it to trade an eye for an eye? Or maybe a limb for a limb? How about an organ for an organ?