• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Our Own Auschwiz[W:602]

Re: Our Own Auschwiz

HowardBThiname said:
So, we have a comment that a fetus is not equal to a woman, but that someone who causes harm to the woman and causes her to lose the fetus should still be punished.

That works against, not for, abortion rights, my friend.

In reality, there was no dictate whatsoever about rights of a fetus to live. Women knew what to do and they did it.
Click to expand...

No it doesnt. It treats the fetus more like property .
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

HowardBThiname said:
So, we have a comment that a fetus is not equal to a woman, but that someone who causes harm to the woman and causes her to lose the fetus should still be punished.

That works against, not for, abortion rights, my friend.

In reality, there was no dictate whatsoever about rights of a fetus to live. Women knew what to do and they did it.
Click to expand...

Because the law is about the harm and loss to the woman. It's not a homicide charge. A pregnant woman choosing to carry and raise a child...you dont think such a loss is devastating?
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Lursa said:
Because the law is about the harm and loss to the woman. It's not a homicide charge. A pregnant woman choosing to carry and raise a child...you dont think such a loss is devastating?
Click to expand...

Actually, that loss was about a loss to the woman's husband. Women had no claim to their own children then -- they were counted as property of the father. Is that what you want today? For the father of a fetus to have a claim against an abortion doctor?

Don't kid yourself, the Old Testament was not a fan of the fairer sex.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Bassman said:
Then your "god" is Satan.Not where the absolute Truth of Scripture is concerned.
Click to expand...

Questions or claims about God/Satan/Bibles belong in another Forum. Not all subscribe to your religious beliefs.

Civilized nations are ruled by laws/rights/privileges. These laws, rights, and privileges are apparently what you hold conflicts with.

Obviously in nations ruled by law, not all human life possess the same rights and privileges. Even in theocracies you’ll find the same to be true. It’s understood that you disagree with the hierarchy of rights.

In my opinion you’ll find it difficult to establish an argument from your personal beliefs, regardless how true you think that they are.

To date, no pro-life advocates have been able to create an argument that devises a way to make all stages of human life equal within the law. You’re welcome to give it a shot.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

HowardBThiname said:
It gives it a value, whether as property or progeny. That's kind of anti-abortion there because it indicates some sort of value.
Click to expand...

Sing that song all you want. It still emphatically is a bad argument.

Ask the pro-lifers who went ape**** at the thought that PP was selling fetal tissue.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

year2late said:
Sing that song all you want. It still emphatically is a bad argument.

Ask the pro-lifers who went ape**** at the thought that PP was selling fetal tissue.
Click to expand...

I rarely sing. Can't carry a tune.

I'm just telling you that you're presenting a lame argument. You can only use that argument against someone who believes a fetus is of the same value as its mother. It works then. But, there's no reason to use it against me because I'm already pro-choice, so it's a step backwards.

Do you see what I'm saying?
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

HowardBThiname said:
I rarely sing. Can't carry a tune.

I'm just telling you that you're presenting a lame argument. You can only use that argument against someone who believes a fetus is of the same value as its mother. It works then. But, there's no reason to use it against me because I'm already pro-choice, so it's a step backwards.

Do you see what I'm saying?
Click to expand...

Nope. Your argument was nonsensical for the reasons I stated.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Bassman said:
https://world.wng.org/2016/01/the_american_holocaust

To date since the horrendous Roe decision, we lost the equivalent of three generations of Americans to these slaughterhouses. They do not liberate women, they liberate men. The excuses in favor of killing our offspring can fill an entire encyclopedia.
Click to expand...

And the large majority of these are convenience abortions. These self-involved cretins weren't decent enough to carry the child and have it adopted away for a chance at life. They killed it off so they could go out and party, and men like abortions because they don't have to worry about child support or be stuck marrying some hag they don't love.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
And the large majority of these are convenience abortions. These self-involved cretins weren't decent enough to carry the child and have it adopted away for a chance at life. They killed it off so they could go out and party, and men like abortions because they don't have to worry about child support or be stuck marrying some hag they don't love.
Click to expand...

Do you have proof of the bolded?
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Scrabaholic said:
The vast majority of women who abort feel relief and do not regret it.
Click to expand...

Sure, it's an easy way out of a predicament you got yourself into. That doesn't make it right, and it also doesn't mean those women aren't self-involved slobs.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
These people don't want kids or don't want more kids and don't want to be troubled with more. Legitimate medical issues are a fraction.

Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion Statistics
Click to expand...

You do realize that most serious complications happen later in pregnancy.

My OB/GYN and I anticipated an uneventful pregnancy. I was the right age, in great health, active, perfect childbearing hips.....

By the time all was said and done...I had multiple major complications...up to and including kidney damage. The reason I am not going to dialysis 3 days a week is the fact that I had access to high quality health care and insurance that assured that I could have regular visits with an experienced OB/GYN that was close to my home. I also had resources enough to maintain my health care insurance and home (etc) for the nearly six months I was off work. I ended up with major surgery due to further complications.

If I did not have such resources....I would have been relegated to an overburdened county clinic that likely would have missed my condition until my kidneys may have been irretrievably lost.

Most women who choose abortion are already struggling to care for a child at home. Being off work for months (or being offered less shifts due to physical condition)would mean potentially losing a home, phone, or other utilities.

Most women who choose abortion do not have the luxury to go 10s of thousands of dollars in debt because a pregnancy takes a turn for the worse.

So pardon me if I roll my eyes at your legitimate medical issues comment. It does not take into account the fact that serious complications are a reality and a woman may not want to risk such serious complications.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
And the large majority of these are convenience abortions. These self-involved cretins weren't decent enough to carry the child and have it adopted away for a chance at life. They killed it off so they could go out and party, and men like abortions because they don't have to worry about child support or be stuck marrying some hag they don't love.
Click to expand...

The 95+% of all abortions are pea-sized and unaware and flushed painlessly from the womb. They arent 'children.'

And if you consider our lives, the entirety of women's lives, as 'conveniences,' well you dont have much respect for yourself or the rest of us.

Interestingly when the CDC and other data is released on numbers and reasons for abortion, convenience and capriciousness and whim (another popular one) are not on those lists.

So women dont consider having abortions out of convenience.

So then I would ask, is it more important to treat the unborn or the woman 'humanely'? Is it morally right to treat the entirety of a woman's life....her health, her future,her right to self-determination, her current children and future children, her ability to live in a safe secure neighborhood, her ability to stay off welfare, her being able to develop a career or trade instead of just a 'job,' her chance at higher education, even her very life....as 'conveniences?' I that what you would teach your son or aughter about their commitments to their own lives?

If you choose to consider the entirety of ourr lives that way, it's a sad and condemning reflection on you....certainly it gives you no moral High Ground.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Lursa said:
The 95+% of all abortions are pea-sized and unaware and flushed painlessly from the womb. They arent 'children.'

And if you consider our lives, the entirety of women's lives, as 'conveniences,' well you dont have much respect for yourself or the rest of us.

Interestingly when the CDC and other data is released on numbers and reasons for abortion, convenience and capriciousness and whim (another popular one) are not on those lists.

So women dont consider having abortions out of convenience.

So then I would ask, is it more important to treat the unborn or the woman 'humanely'? Is it morally right to treat the entirety of a woman's life....her health, her future,her right to self-determination, her current children and future children, her ability to live in a safe secure neighborhood, her ability to stay off welfare, her being able to develop a career or trade instead of just a 'job,' her chance at higher education, even her very life....as 'conveniences?' I that what you would teach your son or aughter about their commitments to their own lives?

If you choose to consider the entirety of ourr lives that way, it's a sad and condemning reflection on you....certainly it gives you no moral High Ground.
Click to expand...

Yes, when you can carry a child to term and adopt it away and chose not to, you're having a convenience abortion. It is solely for your personal convenience. You don't want a kid, and you don't want the inconvenience of carrying to term.

It really is that simple and trying to hair-split over the size of the fetus isn't an argument.

And yes, I do have moral high ground. I never had a convenience abortion.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Lursa said:
Didnt see 'convenience' listed.
Click to expand...

If it's not for medical reasons and the woman can carry to term and adopt but chooses not to, it's convenience by definition. "Don't want."
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

Jetboogieman said:
In your singular opinion... Glad we cleared that up.
Click to expand...

When you can carry a baby to term but choose not to because you don't want a child, it's a convenience abortion.

Why not just admit you advocate such behavior?
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
Yes, when you can carry a child to term and adopt it away and chose not to, you're having a convenience abortion. It is solely for your personal convenience. You don't want a kid, and you don't want the inconvenience of carrying to term.

It really is that simple and trying to hair-split over the size of the fetus isn't an argument.

And yes, I do have moral high ground. I never had a convenience abortion.
Click to expand...

Again, if you see the entirety of women's lives as made up of 'conveniences', perhaps that is a window into your own life but the rest of us value our families, and contributions to society, and self-determination, and being able to not leech off of welfare if we dont need to.

The fact that you value the unborn over women does not give you any moral High Ground at all.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
When you can carry a baby to term but choose not to because you don't want a child, it's a convenience abortion.
Click to expand...

In your opinion.

Why not just admit you advocate such behavior?
Click to expand...

Why not just admit it's your singular opinion and nothing more?
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
When you can carry a baby to term but choose not to because you don't want a child, it's a convenience abortion.

Why not just admit you advocate such behavior?
Click to expand...

Convenience is a perfectly acceptable reason to have an abortion.
 
Re: Our Own Auschwiz

worksforpigs said:
If it's not for medical reasons and the woman can carry to term and adopt but chooses not to, it's convenience by definition. "Don't want."
Click to expand...

Not being able to afford or are not prepared are not 'dont want.' Having other kids to feed and care for is not 'dont want.' Maybe you should take a closer look at the list in your link.

Your oversimplification may apply to your personal experience, but not to all women.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom