I have proof "Pro-life" people are not HONEST

[ladyflash]

OUR TREATMENT OF SPONTANEOUS ABORTIONS PROVE WE'RE ALL PRO-CHOICE



information about: Spontaneous Abortions (miscarriages)

"It is estimated that up to 50% of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant."


This FACT should mobilize all "pro-life" people into action. But it won't. That's because except for a few extremists, we're all pro-choice. Millions of Americans go to work each day, even as over 10,000 "babies" are killed in our country. What's more than that, a woman's own body is the culprit more often than not.

Now, if you really believe that each fertilized egg is a human being deserving of constitutional protection, then you better get moving.

Imagine if up to 50% of 2 year olds, or 20 year olds die "spontaneously". Would we ignore them too. Would we ignore their name; forget about their life?

I would imagine we'd institute a "war on that disease" approach, and focus our resources.

The reality is an embryo is not a human being. It is human life tissue that could potentially become a human being under the best circumstances.

For us to be seriously pro-life, we would monitor women monthly or even weekly to check for conception. Next, we'd proscribe specific healthcare to maximize the chance of a successful pregnancy. In addition, we'd name the child at conception, give them a social security number, and offer them the equal protection of all our laws.Also, we would have a funeral once we found out about their demise. Sure all of this would render women 2nd class citizens, but that's the opportunity cost.

All pro-life people should remember the 100's millions of natural abortions, when you complain about the 40 million chosen by women.

Craig Farmer

making the word "liberal" safe again!

As a pro-choice supporter, I'm disappointed that you've put forward such a lame and pitiful argument. Unfortunately, it's ridiculous arguments like this one that get 'liberal' pro-choice supporters a bad name. There is a massive difference between an embryo dying naturally and an abortion (although that's not to say abortion is murder.)

 

[ngdawg]

You doofus membranes, degrade me more, it hurts.

You have a son and you do not agree with the childbirth assessment?
Are you lying about being a father? I would suggest that it is you who might be the child...if not in age than in mind. Why would you lie? Why would you dismiss this? Hmmm, interesting and insightful...

Who said anything about being a father, 'doofus membrane'?.....(which is really not accepted here, so cut the name calling) Perhaps your mode of operation would be better suited to a chatroom. This is not one.

 

[BodiSatva]

My "mode of operation" turned "silly" for a post or two, relax please.
Doofus membrane should be an obvious "silly" goof along the same line of degrading as calling somebody a kid of 11 or 12 when no other attempt has been made to communicate... at least mine was humorous...was your an actual insult? THAT would indicate that you are not only lying regarding the father issue but that you are a hypocrite regarding goofy debating styles as well?

Originally Posted by ngdawg:

Who said anything about being a father

Originally Posted by ngdawg:

but then again, my son just turned 14

Unless I am missing something, it looks like you did. I have been mistaken before, but this certainly looks like concrete evidence showing that you can't even follow the conversation. I will have to declare that you in contradicted yourself here, so the question is, what is the truth?

ngdawg, are you in fact a father or not? Hopefully so. Your credibility is already shot, at least be honest with this question so it can be determined if you should even ever be taken seriously again. :2wave:

 

[ngdawg]

No, I am not a father and the fact that you can't figure this whole thing out is totally :lamo :2rofll:
So no worries...I can't debate someone who can't understand the nature of parenthood to begin with:roll:

 

[Kelzie]

No, I am not a father and the fact that you can't figure this whole thing out is totally :lamo :2rofll:
So no worries...I can't debate someone who can't understand the nature of parenthood to begin with:roll:

I really find it pretty humorous too. Like the one joke about the dad and his son who gets in a car accident. The son gets taken to the hospital and the doc takes one look at him and says "I can't operate on this kid. He is my son". People never get it.

 

[BodiSatva]

Semantics? Not-Biological? Step-son? Adopted? Multiple personalities? Multiple Internet Identities? A covert operative bent on psychological mind-games? Hmmm...

Please educate me, as a parent of multiple children, who "can't understand the nature of parenthood to begin with". This will help; I fear that I need it.

Ohh, haha, NICE! I will leave the above just to show that I do not have an ego to hide and that it actually did take me this long to figure it out and that this has been funny at my expense...

Mother!

If you are not a father, then…duh!

I presumed that you were a guy because of the ghetto 'dawg' name that guys throw around. I was incorrect. Not that dawg IS ghetto, it is simply that I assumed it was a slang reference. I became a victim to my own rule of not assuming. I am a doofus.

Not paying attention to the mother/father reference in a post is a far cry from not understanding the "nature of parenthood" though...please, haHA!

BUT! You have still evaded the initial point by diverting the thread away from my goofy yet correct points regarding the danger of childbirth. So while this has been fun, it appears that you might not "understand the nature of parenthood to begin with". Being a mother though, I am sure that you do, which leaves me to wonder…why were you dismissive and rude to begin with? Not a very compassionate or empathetic motherly trait.

EDIT:
Gee, thank Kelzie.
I did get it before your post at least...thank goodness.

 

[FutureIncoming]

There is a difference between going to some rat nazi with the nerve to perpatrate him or her self as doctor to murder your child and fertilized eggs that spontaneously die.

Yes, there is a difference. So? An unborn human is a living animal organism, not significantly different from a fly or a rat or a pig or a deer. And humans generally accept the killing of flies and rats and pigs and deer. Why, then, should there be non-acceptance of killing of unborn human animals?

Let me ask some equivalent questions.
What general statement can you make, that is provably Objectively True (e.g. "The Earth is spherical"), from which it can be logically deduced that abortions should be prohibited? Why should abortions be prohibited if no provable logical foundation for it exists? Why is an anti-abortion law different from a law that makes it illegal to, for example, shoot your dog?

 

[taxedout]

"It is estimated that up to 50% of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant."

This FACT should mobilize all "pro-life" people into action. But it won't. That's because except for a few extremists, we're all pro-choice. Millions of Americans go to work each day, even as over 10,000 "babies" are killed in our country. What's more than that, a woman's own body is the culprit more often than not.

Now, if you really believe that each fertilized egg is a human being deserving of constitutional protection, then you better get moving.

This argument is so intrinsically void of logic, as to be comical.

 

[ngdawg]

Semantics? Not-Biological? Step-son? Adopted? Multiple personalities? Multiple Internet Identities? A covert operative bent on psychological mind-games? Hmmm...

Please educate me, as a parent of multiple children, who "can't understand the nature of parenthood to begin with". This will help; I fear that I need it.

Ohh, haha, NICE! I will leave the above just to show that I do not have an ego to hide and that it actually did take me this long to figure it out and that this has been funny at my expense...

Mother!

If you are not a father, then…duh!

I presumed that you were a guy because of the ghetto 'dawg' name that guys throw around. I was incorrect. Not that dawg IS ghetto, it is simply that I assumed it was a slang reference. I became a victim to my own rule of not assuming. I am a doofus.

Not paying attention to the mother/father reference in a post is a far cry from not understanding the "nature of parenthood" though...please, haHA!

There was no mother-father reference, I said I had a son.

BUT! You have still evaded the initial point by diverting the thread away from my goofy yet correct points regarding the danger of childbirth. So while this has been fun, it appears that you might not "understand the nature of parenthood to begin with". Being a mother though, I am sure that you do, which leaves me to wonder…why were you dismissive and rude to begin with? Not a very compassionate or empathetic motherly trait.

You aren't my kid, so I have no need to be empathetic to you. Come in with ridiculous, childish 'haha' type posts and be prepared to be called to task on it.
As far as understanding the nature of parenthood, being a parent of multiples might qualify me as does the dangers inherent in pregnancies, without going into morbid detail. Once again, your presumptions skidded off the road and into a tree.
And, the next time you try to inject some humor? Show it as such, please. Or, be funny :roll:

 

[BodiSatva]

"There was no mother-father reference, I said I had a son."
Right, we got it, I owned it already. Nice job trying to maintain the objective superior intellect...get over the childish nature of my post...maturity takes many forms, are you really this boring?

"called to task on it" are you serious? do you feel a need to do so? Called to task...hmmm...nice. You could have just lightened up and thought, oh well, that wasn't so funny, but I can see a point or so, but naw, throw out a 'how old are you'...that was a sweet move, again. You own it.

You have no need to be empathetic with your kid either. I am sure that you are though...but by all means, be a tough unyielding chick with me for no good reason:2razz:

There is no "might" about it...it does. Unless you were asleep through them all and took no parenting class and never thought about any inherent danger once...nice try evading again, this is getting pathetic...Do you have some moral or intellectual superiority that I should be aware of? Nope. You have a 14 year old and you argue like this?

I thought it was funny, I thought it was apparent...Funny is subjective though.

Take it easy DAWG!

 

[ngdawg]

:2rofll: :2rofll:

Nope...ya just ain't that funny....and you have ADD....I didn't ask your age, I just agreed with the initial assessment...my intellectual superiority is superior, indeed:mrgreen:


Back to the regularly scheduled program.....:2wave:

 

[steen]

...Why do most Liberal Pro-Choice advocates not support Capital Punishment?
Seems to be a bit of HYPOCRISY here! HAha, NICE!...

Could you grow up a bit and then come back?

 

[steen]

ngdawg, are you in fact a father or not? Hopefully so. Your credibility is already shot, at least be honest with this question so it can be determined if you should even ever be taken seriously again. :2wave:

Bwahaha. This is so old that you should have gotten it. Guess your credibility is sunk majorly here.:rofl

 

[Skip]

Could you grow up a bit and then come back?

Amen! If that's the best you got (referring to the "If you are pro-choice, then why not capital punishment? Hur hur!" statement), as I wholly suspect it is, then you got a whole lot a' nothin'.

Part of the reason why it is so difficult for me to take any of you seriously is because you won't stop calling me a babykiller long enough for me to actually seriously debate any of you.

 

[BodiSatva]

Bodi said:
"Why do most Liberal Pro-Choice advocates not support Capital Punishment?"
- Explain what is incorrect about this statement...of course, the fact that most of the Liberal Pro-Choice advocates that I have encountered, and I have encountered many here in the S.F. Bay Area, are anti-Capital Punishment should not hinder any more of your inane off the hip comments. Yet, this fact does apparently cause some to start tossing out little inflammatory comments instead of inquiring...bewildering yet interesting. This is a display of a person with lack of credibility, for this person can't seem to even enter the discussion. Let's here some more "it is such an immature opinion to begin with and I wont waste my time" garbage. Would you feel better just dismissing? Can you maintain a dialogue? There is only one wise course of action at this point…

To MidwestLiberal:
- I never called you a babykiller. Not only did I not say that (obviously) but; I never implied it anywhere at anytime. You include me in that group though when you use the “you” form immediately after commenting about me. If that misunderstanding lead you to this...
"If that's the best you got...as I wholly suspect it is, then you got a whole lot a' nothin'."
- Then I would understand your comment. If not, if you think that my comments include you being a babykiller…if this is actually your best assessment, and in your words you "wholly suspect it is"...then you actually have nothing. If what I have said so far does not yet make sense, then helping you further will not do any good; I don’t have the time…sorry. I probably wont even bother with you again, but that does depend on the level of your response.

To steen:
"This is so old that you should have gotten it. Guess your credibility is sunk majorly here"
- I did get it, perhaps I could have gotten it earlier . But really, was that for real? That was pathetic. This is a major problem with people. There is a lack of responsibility and lack of recognition when one does take responsibility, and it is permeating society. Mine should be one of the only credible opinions here; it appears that I am one of the few that actually takes responsibility for what they say, most just ignore, evade or lie. Besides, most people “here” are egomaniacs who have little to no credibility in the first place, and your attitude thus fair categorizes you as one of these people. I am sure that it is apparent what I think of your opinion…
"Could you grow up a bit and then come back?"
- The world is big and scary...there are all sorts of people out there. I grew up a while ago. Is that how you talk to people? On the playground, maybe...Didn't your momma teach you any manners?

You followed what I said this entire discussion, and that was still your assessment?
No? Try again then.
Yes? That sucks. You may depart whenever you feel ready then. I think that I have spent enough time assisting you from your fruitless folly.

To ngdawg:
Oh my...ADD comments...more evasion…superior indeed...
Take it easy DAWG!
You are actually a waste of time.

 

[steen]

What is this sophist crap?

 

[ngdawg]

What is this sophist crap?

Beats me, I came here cuz I was promised chocolate....still waiting...:doh


Steen, if you were to go back and take a look at each anti-choicer's opening, it is done with their idea of light-hearted 'so, how do we do this, fellas' banter(Except for the 'crashers-those that come in off the street accusatory and agenda-ridden). As it progresses and they stay a while and we play head games on them, they start with the 'facts', normally culled from 'pro-life' sites and bait for replies, which we, of course, supply, with our own facts. Well, they can't be disputed at every turn, after all, so phase 3 goes into effect. That would be the word-twisting and names. You say 'aborted fetus', get countered with 'dead baby!', ad nauseum. More facts, more counters and the harsher names come out. "Liberal leftist murderers", and of course, my personal favorite, "PRO-abortion". Now, I know of pro football players, pro race car drivers, but I don't know any pro-abortions. In fact the most off-the-wall person in that group is one who has HAD an abortion.:roll:
So....now these threads are getting threadbare...they're posting 'facts', but now they edit and make assumptions about what they edited. They evade, avoid and go running to their Webster's in the hopes they will find something, ANYTHING that will make their arguments make sense. They overstate the obvious while avoiding the simple. And when they really get beet red in the face, they toss out.....NAZI! GENOCIDE! EUGENICS!:mrgreen:
It's wearing quite thin, really and getting rather old...they simply do NOT have any compassion for a woman in despair, they have NO respect for law, for that woman or for the most basic fundamental right-to live freely without outside interferences and the dictatorship of ignorance.

 

[talloulou]

Beats me, I came here cuz I was promised chocolate....still waiting...:doh


Steen, if you were to go back and take a look at each anti-choicer's opening, it is done with their idea of light-hearted 'so, how do we do this, fellas' banter(Except for the 'crashers-those that come in off the street accusatory and agenda-ridden). As it progresses and they stay a while and we play head games on them, they start with the 'facts', normally culled from 'pro-life' sites and bait for replies, which we, of course, supply, with our own facts. Well, they can't be disputed at every turn, after all, so phase 3 goes into effect. That would be the word-twisting and names. You say 'aborted fetus', get countered with 'dead baby!', ad nauseum. More facts, more counters and the harsher names come out. "Liberal leftist murderers", and of course, my personal favorite, "PRO-abortion". Now, I know of pro football players, pro race car drivers, but I don't know any pro-abortions. In fact the most off-the-wall person in that group is one who has HAD an abortion.:roll:
So....now these threads are getting threadbare...they're posting 'facts', but now they edit and make assumptions about what they edited. They evade, avoid and go running to their Webster's in the hopes they will find something, ANYTHING that will make their arguments make sense. They overstate the obvious while avoiding the simple. And when they really get beet red in the face, they toss out.....NAZI! GENOCIDE! EUGENICS!:mrgreen:
It's wearing quite thin, really and getting rather old...they simply do NOT have any compassion for a woman in despair, they have NO respect for law, for that woman or for the most basic fundamental right-to live freely without outside interferences and the dictatorship of ignorance.

What a stank pile of cow dung! I have compassion for women who are pregnant and not ready to have a baby. My compassion just doesn't ignore the life growing inside of them.

I also have respect for the law and understand the legality of abortion currently. However like the death penalty I'd like to see abortion banned for the sake of our society.

And I have never yelled NAZI or GENOCIDE but it is

Feticide which I may start yelling more not 'cause it in anyway helps my cause but if we are just going to get all dramatic with the wrongful characterizations of one another perhaps the word will come in use.

 

[ngdawg]

When you put a potential ahead of the one that has to bear ALL the responsibilities...when you say nothing about the person that has to go through the agonizing decision making and some loss, one way or another, when you ignore, when you sidestep the basic fact that the law sides with this person's personal life....you show you have no compassion.
As in any generalization, the fact that you may not have uttered one word listed, maybe another not, is not germaine....you argue against 'semantics', then include them. You read posts that said nothing to which you respond, gathering outrageous conclusions from nonexistent wording...and beat dead horses while being laughed at over it.
As the OP has stated, so-called 'pro-life' people are not honest. How could you be? The basic right of freedom to live unencumbered by the actions of over-zealous incompassionates is staring you in the face, with all its 'facts' and opinions on paper. You are swinging wildly at shadows and hoping for a knock-out....
The cheap entertainment has become a bore.

 

[talloulou]

When you put a potential ahead of the one that has to bear ALL the responsibilities

All children have the potential to reach adulthood, nothing more nothing less. Most of them likely will live to adulthood just as many unborns would likely be born if not ripped from the womb. You hide behind the word potential using it as some means to devalue that which develops in the womb. The fact of the matter is we all have the potential to live to see tomorrow but some may not. Does that make them in anyway less valuable today?

...when you say nothing about the person that has to go through the agonizing decision making and some loss, one way or another

I believe women should be educated. I believe education is power. I believe women have the power to not put themselves in situations where a surgical abortion is necessary. I make exceptions when the womens actual physical health is in danger. I also volunteer and donate time and money to help people who are in situations that require a helping hand. I believe in communities and working together to achieve great things. I am very compassionate not only in words but in deeds. How dare you question that?

, when you ignore, when you sidestep the basic fact that the law sides with this person's personal life

I have never said the law isn't on the prochoice side. However laws have been changed throughout history and just because something is currently legal does not mean it always will be.

As in any generalization, the fact that you may not have uttered one word listed, maybe another not, is not germaine

It's not? So it doesn't matter if some prolifers do not yell NAZI and genocide? They may still easily be lumped into some ridiculous catagory to suit your argument?

Are all prochoicers so very different from me? Don't the large majority actually have no problem taking away personal choice at varying stages of fetal development? There are actually few who believe the fetus has no value whatsoever up until birth. Many draw the line at viability. Can they not be accused of not caring about the mothers personal choice too?

 

[ngdawg]

And what was it you suggested be used in your previous post? How is that any different?
Value is as value does. Basing a premise on potential is like buying one chicken and hoping it lays enough eggs to feed you for a year....it has the potential to do so, but the thought behind it is foolish.
Look, as someone who went through 10 *****in years of fertility treatments before having kids, almost losing them twice, I think I have an idea of value.
I also have an idea of what a person values in their own life and it's not up to ME to tell them they can or can't value something. Not up to you either.
If you want kids around, have a dozen...adopt a dozen languishing in foster care. But you simply have NO right to tell anyone what they should value, how they should live and what they should do with their bodies. Do you NOT get that at all??? *knock knock* anyone in there?:roll:

 

[talloulou]

But you simply have NO right to tell anyone what they should value, how they should live and what they should do with their bodies. Do you NOT get that at all??? *knock knock* anyone in there?:roll:

I don't believe one human should have the right to kill another that is unable to defend themselves. One day the law may agree with me. Personal choice is important in our society however when ones personal choice causes the taking of anothers life the law has all kinds of legal ways to decide whether or not the killing was justified.

The whole personal choice argument works well with something like pornography....if you don't like it don't watch it. However when you are talking about whether one person has the right to end another human life in progress that argument doesn't hold up as well.

 

[steen]

Beats me, I came here cuz I was promised chocolate....still waiting...

The little wrapped Dove chocolates? I'll kill for those.

Steen, if you were to go back and take a look at each anti-choicer's opening, it is done with their idea of light-hearted 'so, how do we do this, fellas' banter(Except for the 'crashers-those that come in off the street accusatory and agenda-ridden). As it progresses and they stay a while and we play head games on them, they start with the 'facts', normally culled from 'pro-life' sites and bait for replies, which we, of course, supply, with our own facts. Well, they can't be disputed at every turn, after all, so phase 3 goes into effect. That would be the word-twisting and names. You say 'aborted fetus', get countered with 'dead baby!', ad nauseum. More facts, more counters and the harsher names come out. "Liberal leftist murderers", and of course, my personal favorite, "PRO-abortion".

LOL, yes you got that one right. I am very fed up with the false claims. (Not that anybody would have noticed yet )

Now, I know of pro football players, pro race car drivers, but I don't know any pro-abortions. In fact the most off-the-wall person in that group is one who has HAD an abortion.:roll:

Well, one of them, anyway. I have 3-4 people on permanent ignore because there simply is no purpose inj any interaction with them. I can only handle so much dishonesty before I become ban-bait.

So....now these threads are getting threadbare...they're posting 'facts', but now they edit and make assumptions about what they edited. They evade, avoid and go running to their Webster's in the hopes they will find something, ANYTHING that will make their arguments make sense. They overstate the obvious while avoiding the simple. And when they really get beet red in the face, they toss out.....NAZI! GENOCIDE! EUGENICS!:mrgreen:

Yes, it is emotional histrionics misrepresented as facts.

It's wearing quite thin, really and getting rather old...they simply do NOT have any compassion for a woman in despair, they have NO respect for law, for that woman or for the most basic fundamental right-to live freely without outside interferences and the dictatorship of ignorance.

Agreed. You can speak for me any time and probably better than I can.

 

[steen]

but it is Feticide

Well, less than half of the time. The rest, the majority would be embryocide. But then, that would be a correct description, yes.

which I may start yelling more not 'cause it in anyway helps my cause but if we are just going to get all dramatic with the wrongful characterizations of one another perhaps the word will come in use.

What is dramatic about it? It is factual.

 

[steen]

I believe women should be educated. I believe education is power. I believe women have the power to not put themselves in situations where a surgical abortion is necessary.

Utterly ignoring that almost 60% of abortions are after the use of contraception. :roll:

I make exceptions when the womens actual physical health is in danger. I also volunteer and donate time and money to help people who are in situations that require a helping hand. I believe in communities and working together to achieve great things. I am very compassionate not only in words but in deeds. How dare you question that?

What are you doing about the pro-life politicians who oppose sex-ed, oppose contraception and access to same, or who claim "welfare reform" and cut support to pregnant teens? Because certainly, they don't listen to pro-choice. Are you talking to them and chastizing them for their extreme misogyny?