I have to ask.

[BDBoop]

Why do you keep saying "I am correct", as though you uttering the words make them true?

I am correct and you place far too much importance on the right of one human to judge the importance (significance) of another.

What is my motivation....since you know me so well?

 

[mac]

Because whether you intend to or not, enforcing a "life begins at conception" standard upon women is enforcement of an archaic and patriarchal morality intended solely to keep dem bitches in line cuz, you know, it's kinda hard to express independence if you got one kid hanging to the leg, another one attached to your tit, and another one in the belly weighting you down.

You another one of those all rights and no responsibility types?

 

[mac]

Why do you keep saying "I am correct", as though you uttering the words make them true?

Concerning my opinion on a matter that has no clear definition the response "I am correct" is a perfectly valid counter to "you are wrong"

 

[BDBoop]

For somebody who will never be pregnant, you sure are mouthy.

You another one of those all rights and no responsibility types?

 

[jallman]

You another one of those all rights and no responsibility types?

You another one of those "make assumptions and never listen" types?

 

[mac]

You another one of those "make assumptions and never listen" types?

Who made an assumption? I asked a question in order to avoid assumption.

 

[mac]

For somebody who will never be pregnant, you sure are mouthy.

And you sure are rude.

 

[BDBoop]

No, I'm honest.

And you sure are rude.

 

[jallman]

Who made an assumption? I asked a question in order to avoid assumption.

Sounded rather rhetorical to me. But to answer your question, no, I am not one of the types you mentioned. I firmly believe in responsibility for one's actions which is why I believe in strict limitations on abortions.

 

[Demon of Light]

It would be oh so helpful if you could show me where I once mentioned pleasure or satisfaction. kthanx.

I was referring to a mindset that your posts exemplify focusing on the near-term. Of course, you did make an allusion to pleasure and satisfaction with the comment "it's kinda hard to express independence if you got one kid hanging to the leg, another one attached to your tit, and another one in the belly weighting you down."

This portrays an abortion ban as creating an undesired burden and essentially preventing someone from the fullest pleasure and satisfaction possible.

again, didn't make either argument unless I did it while sleepwalking and the forum magically erases it every time I log in. Can YOU show me where I made either argument?

Like I said, I was not making a specific claim about your posts, but rather about the mindset that leads to positions like yours. You certainly do think that what you consider a presently insignificant life is not as important as what another person wants or "needs" to insure their satisfaction.

There's nothing "individual" about a mass of cells without any cognition, awareness, response to stimulus, etc. There is nothing "individual" about a slug of flesh that, removed from the womb and the resources being charitably given it, would die within minutes.

Fragility and individuality are not mutually exclusive.

Anyone who has read history should consider the consequences of medieval fantasies of subjugation of women as nothing more than baby vessels.

I know many strong, independent mothers. The notion that preventing women from ending their pregnancy will make them slaves to men is just absurd. I am not precluding that some may be against abortion due to having such a mindset, but the two do not go hand-in-hand like the mindset I mentioned with regards to the "pro-choice" side.

 

[jallman]

I was referring to a mindset that your posts exemplify focusing on the near-term. Of course, you did make an allusion to pleasure and satisfaction with the comment "it's kinda hard to express independence if you got one kid hanging to the leg, another one attached to your tit, and another one in the belly weighting you down."

This portrays an abortion ban as creating an undesired burden and essentially preventing someone from the fullest pleasure and satisfaction possible.

Well that's quite a stretch. I mean, if you are going to just make **** up, there's not much of a point for me to continue. I'm not really one to argue with someone's fantasies.

 

[mac]

Sounded rather rhetorical to me. But to answer your question, no, I am not one of the types you mentioned. I firmly believe in responsibility for one's actions which is why I believe in strict limitations on abortions.

And what strict limitations are those?

 

[mac]

No, I'm honest.

Ditto, and I am correct.

 

[mac]

Well that's quite a stretch. I mean, if you are going to just make **** up, there's not much of a point for me to continue. I'm not really one to argue with someone's fantasies.

Well, I took it pretty much the same way as DOL. Whatever did you mean if we are both wrong about your statement?

 

[jallman]

And what strict limitations are those?

First of all, a strict cut off limitation...no abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy except where the mother's life is in danger. By the 15th week, she's had plenty of time to decide and the development of the fetus is such that it is not just possible, but highly probably that all connection in the CNS have been made.

Second, there should be a limitation on the number of abortions women have so it's not used as birth control. Third, I don't think the state should fund abortions at all through any means. In the event of a minor pursuing an abortion, it should be the law that parents are notified.

That's just a few.

 

[jallman]

Well, I took it pretty much the same way as DOL.

OK, well there's nothing stopping you both from being wrong at the same time. :shrug:

Whatever did you mean if we are both wrong about your statement?

I meant exactly what I said in my statement. Not my fault that the two of you falsely extrapolated a more convenient premise to argue rathat than the one I stated.

 

[mac]

First of all, a strict cut off limitation...no abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy except where the mother's life is in danger. By the 15th week, she's had plenty of time to decide and the development of the fetus is such that it is not just possible, but highly probably that all connection in the CNS have been made.

Second, there should be a limitation on the number of abortions women have so it's not used as birth control. Third, I don't think the state should fund abortions at all through any means. In the event of a minor pursuing an abortion, it should be the law that parents are notified.

That's just a few.

Well, why does it matter if the brain is plugged in? why shouldn't a woman be able to get as many abortions as she wishes? If one, why not three...or ten? Why shouldn't a minor be able to do as an adult and why should her privacy be violated?

 

[mac]

OK, well there's nothing stopping you both from being wrong at the same time. :shrug:



I meant exactly what I said in my statement. Not my fault that the two of you falsely extrapolated a more convenient premise to argue rathat than the one I stated.

Very convenient. Perhaps it has something to do with the manner in which you are communicating your opinions?

 

[jallman]

Well, why does it matter if the brain is plugged in?

moral consequence

why shouldn't a woman be able to get as many abortions as she wishes? If one, why not three...or ten?

Damage done to her own body from repeated abortion procedures.

Why shouldn't a minor be able to do as an adult and why should her privacy be violated?

She doesn't have the same rights under the law as an adult. Also, parents have rights to parent their children.

 

[jallman]

Very convenient. Perhaps it has something to do with the manner in which you are communicating your opinions?

Perhaps it has something to do with an agenda on your part rather than an honest look at what is being communicated?

 

[mac]

moral consequence

Who's morals?

Damage done to her own body from repeated abortion procedures.

Isn't that her decision to make? I mean, it is her body after all.

She doesn't have the same rights under the law as an adult. Also, parents have rights to parent their children.

Why doesn't she? She is a born human, why are her rights somehow less than any other's?

 

[mac]

Perhaps it has something to do with an agenda on your part rather than an honest look at what is being communicated?

Perhaps, or it may just be your miscommunication.

 

[jallman]

Who's morals?

That would be society's collective moral agreements.

Isn't that her decision to make? I mean, it is her body after all.

Do you want some responsibility or not?

Why doesn't she? She is a born human, why are her rights somehow less than any other's?

Minors are not permitted to sign off on any other medical procedure without parental consent. An abortion is a medical procedure.

 

[jallman]

Perhaps, or it may just be your miscommunication.

Perhaps, or it may just be your poor reading comprehension.

 

[Demon of Light]

Well that's quite a stretch. I mean, if you are going to just make **** up, there's not much of a point for me to continue. I'm not really one to argue with someone's fantasies.

What jallman was thinking before this post: "Crap! He caught me! All right, when in doubt deny! Deny! Deny!"

You even referred to a woman's unborn child as "weighing her down" implying that somehow the woman would be prevented from having greater happiness if she could not get an abortion. Certainly you aren't painting the image of a happy mother, but rather drawing a picture of some down-on-her-luck mom that would be better off if she could have gotten an abortion.