• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Life at Conception

lizzie said:
How much self-sufficiency? By that standard, the severely mentally retarded, or incapacitated as a result of severe neurological trauma would not be considered a member of our species, or alive.
Click to expand...

As in being biologically autonomous. Which the severely mentally retarded, incapacitated as a result of neurological trauma fall under.

Now rather or not they're persons (entities with rights) can actually be debated on those group of humans.
 
No need to dance around the issue, Planned Parenthood has already started their march for after-birth abortions.
 
Steve Ja said:
Yea guess my math was off a bit.
1.) Yea it concerns me when women feel pressured into and out of doing things. As long as its legal, there shouldn't be pressure involved. Also as another poster pointed out, the abuses involved with some pregnancies is concerning
Click to expand...

yes its a concern in general for anybody IF they are really pressured or they are just using it for an excuse but my point is it doesn't impact the topic at all
 
AGENT J said:
yes its a concern in general for anybody IF they are really pressured or they are just using it for an excuse but my point is it doesn't impact the topic at all
Click to expand...
No it doesn't
 
Steve Ja said:
Yup makes me sick
Click to expand...

Makes you sick? Great, you can actively make a difference in outreach to women's halfway houses and domestic abuse orgs. (Since you do not want to participate in reproductive counseling for women as alternatives to abortion as I suggested days ago and you declined)

In such cases, abusive or controlling relationships, it certainly seems like abortion can be the better option anyway. Just because a woman is pressured into an abortion doesnt mean it's a bad choice. If shes not in the position to support herself and baby....no matter what the outside pressures...abortion may give her the freedom and control she needs to be successful in life.

Do you have *any idea* how children handicap the woman in ANY relationship conflict? They put her at a huge disadvantage, one a man can easily exploit because most mothers will always put their kids first. A woman with kids now cannot just pick up and leave a bad marriage, an abusive relationship. She has to be able to care for them as well and many women do not want to remove a father figure from their children's lives. To go it on her own, with kids, is so much harder than for a man to just walk away, even if he does end up paying child support.
 
Lursa said:
Makes you sick? Great, you can actively make a difference in outreach to women's halfway houses and domestic abuse orgs. (Since you do not want to participate in reproductive counseling for women as alternatives to abortion as I suggested days ago and you declined)

In such cases, abusive or controlling relationships, it certainly seems like abortion can be the better option anyway. Just because a woman is pressured into an abortion doesnt mean it's a bad choice. If shes not in the position to support herself and baby....no matter what the outside pressures...abortion may give her the freedom and control she needs to be successful in life.

Do you have *any idea* how children handicap the woman in ANY relationship conflict? They put her at a huge disadvantage, one a man can easily exploit because most mothers will always put their kids first. A woman with kids now cannot just pick up and leave a bad marriage, an abusive relationship. She has to be able to care for them as well and many women do not want to remove a father figure from their children's lives. To go it on her own, with kids, is so much harder than for a man to just walk away, even if he does end up paying child support.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see where I declined anything. I'm fairly certain I said I'd love to work with those organizations.
 
Steve Ja said:
Not proposing any of that. It's how you are taking it. Not at all what I propose. Limiting the glut is not limiting the ability to do. Wanting to get rid of the glut before creating more is not limiting the act. I already said I support IVF, just not freezing the excess, why can't those be reused
Click to expand...

Actually, you did say that IVF's should be halted until the glut was eliminated, so I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm just going by what you actually did say.

And "not creating more" does mean halting IVF, no matter how much you protest that there's a difference. IVF's create more embryos that it uses as part of the process. So until you can provide an explanation of how these 400,000 frozen embryos will be used, when we have an excess of born children who can't find a home to adopt them, we are left with all these frozen embryos.

Which means your "get rid of the glut before creating more" leads to a ban on IVF.
 
Steve Ja said:
I am suggesting that if they can adopt a strangers kid, why couldn't they do it in this case. Also laugh all you want, I've made it pretty clear I support IVF, just not the glut of embryos. You can twist my words into an argument that does not exist if you wish.
Click to expand...

Since there aren't enough people to adopt the kids that have already been born, what makes you think there are enough people to adopt all the born kids *plus* the unborn frozen embryos?

That defies logic
 
scatt said:
Planned Parenthood endorses post-birth abortion - YouTube
Click to expand...

Here is what PLanned Parenthood said:

"Planned Parenthood condemns any physician who does not follow the law or endangers a woman's or a child's health, but we don't believe that politicians should be the ones who decide what constitutes the best, medically appropriate treatment in any given situation,"
Click to expand...


When one of lawmakers asked her what Planned Parenthood's position would be if a baby is born as a result of a botched abortion.
Snow said "We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family and the physician,"

That does mean the mom can kill the baby... It only means the mother,and her family along with the doctor can decide if extraordinary measure should be done to save the baby's life.


Even so the Born Alive law is still on the books.

From Wiki:

The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 ("BAIPA" Pub.L. 107–207, 116 Stat. 926, enacted August 5, 2002, 1 U.S.C. § 8) is an Act of Congress. It extends legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion. It was signed by President George W. Bush, a Republican.
Click to expand...

Born-Alive Infants Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently , the Florida legislators did not know about the 'Born Alive" act or they were just hoping to get in the news so pro life people would vote for them the next time they ran for office.
 
sangha said:
Don't you think it's a bit judgemental, sanctimonious and cruel to opine about subjects you haven't given any thought to?
Click to expand...
Yes it is, which is why i never have brought it up.
 
Steve Ja said:
Yes I'd love to see a lot of focus on the abuse and pressure these women get. It causes life long trauma for these women. Also maybe more pregnant women that are getting pressured and abused pursuing legal actions? I know easier said then done. This report saddens me more then just the % of abortions that might have been prevented without these situations, but as you pointed out the number of women abused physically and mentally, and even killed. A sad report regardless of what side of the issue you are on
Click to expand...

Would you pressure a woman to not abort? If you would, then you are a hypocrite.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Would you pressure a woman to not abort? If you would, then you are a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

no, I've already stated that in an earlier post. I said I respect her choice, since it is legal
 
Scrabaholic said:
I read posts in sequence. I had not come to that one when I posted my question.

You are consistent :)
Click to expand...
Thank You. I will say some things like IFV i know very little about, never gave the procedure much thought and actually thought it was something else.. it is apparent in how I discuss it
 
minnie616 said:
When one of lawmakers asked her what Planned Parenthood's position would be if a baby is born as a result of a botched abortion.
Snow said "We believe that any decision that's made should be left up to the woman, her family and the physician,"

That does mean the mom can kill the baby... It only means the mother,and her family along with the doctor can decide if extraordinary measure should be done to save the baby's life.
Click to expand...

Which most certainly can include killing the born human, and of course has included that, see Kermit Gosnell. Or was she confused about the question? Or was the talking point she had memorized not applicable to the question asked?

Does mean she can kill the born human?
 
scatt said:
Which most certainly can include killing the born human, and of course has included that, see Kermit Gosnell. Or was she confused about the question? Or was the talking point she had memorized not applicable to the question asked?

Does mean she can kill the born human?
Click to expand...

No, the mother , or the doctor etc cannot kill a born baby. They must follow the born alive act.

However the family does not need to take extraordinary measures ....meaning surgeries etc to save the life of a born alive infant.

Kermit Gosnell did not follow the born alive act . He killed those babies after he allowed them to be born alive and he was sentenced to jail for murder.
If I had been on that jury I would have voted for the death sentence for Gosnell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom