• 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!

Pro life is not the opposite of pro-choice.

DarkWizard12

Sir Poop A lot
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
15,254
Reaction score
3,208
Location
Beirut
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
I don't think people who claim to be "pro-life" are anti-choice.

I think they just believe in the right to life.

The opposite of "pro-life" is not "pro-choice". if we we're to believe that we would have to ask what is the opposite of the word "life"?

In my opinion, the opposite to the word "life" is the word "death".

That wouldn't be a very good movement to advocate for, in my opinion.

So I think its called the "pro-choice" movement (in the context of abortion) because that is the most convenient thing to call it.

I'm pro-life, but I'm also pro-choice. You have the right to make any choice you want and I will fight to defend that.

The choices you make however, may have some form of consequences. Risk are taken with any choice.

If you drive a car, you risk crashing and dying.
If you boil chickpeas, you risk over cooking them turning them to mush.
If you have sex, you risk falling pregnant.
If you mix two chemicals you risk an explosion.

Only one of the above scenarios has another option following that, which involves taking away someone else's right to live a potential life of happiness.

Don't mince my words, I will never advocate to take a choice away from you. If you make a choice, I believe responsibility and accountability should be attached to the outcome of that choice. That's all.

Thanks for your time.
 
I don't think people who claim to be "pro-life" are anti-choice.

I think they just believe in the right to life.

The opposite of "pro-life" is not "pro-choice". if we we're to believe that we would have to ask what is the opposite of the word "life"?

In my opinion, the opposite to the word "life" is the word "death".

That wouldn't be a very good movement to advocate for, in my opinion.

So I think its called the "pro-choice" movement (in the context of abortion) because that is the most convenient thing to call it.

I'm pro-life, but I'm also pro-choice. You have the right to make any choice you want and I will fight to defend that.

The choices you make however, may have some form of consequences. Risk are taken with any choice.

If you drive a car, you risk crashing and dying.
If you boil chickpeas, you risk over cooking them turning them to mush.
If you have sex, you risk falling pregnant.
If you mix two chemicals you risk an explosion.

Only one of the above scenarios has another option following that, which involves taking away someone else's right to live a potential life of happiness.

Don't mince my words, I will never advocate to take a choice away from you. If you make a choice, I believe responsibility and accountability should be attached to the outcome of that choice. That's all.

Thanks for your time.

Sure there are consequences for choosing to have sex and becoming pregnant. There's a safer medical procedure available (currently). It's painful, costly, can cause infertility, permanent health damage, even death...but it's still 14 times safer than pregnancy/childbirth.

Do you recognize that abortion is also a consequence?

Do you believe that strangers or the govt should ALSO be allowed to choose what consequence women must face?
Sounds like 'no' to that 2nd question.(y) So then why did you mention the unborn and pretend that it has a right to live? There's no such state or govt law that recognizes rights for the unborn.

How is it responsible to have a kid you cant afford, or know you wont raise conscientiously, know you'll have to take public assistance to raise, or will add to the huge pool of ~100,000 kids already waiting to be adopted in the US?

Abortion 14 times safer than childbirth
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.
Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.
link
 
Last edited:
I don't think people who claim to be "pro-life" are anti-choice.

I think they just believe in the right to life.

The opposite of "pro-life" is not "pro-choice". if we we're to believe that we would have to ask what is the opposite of the word "life"?

In my opinion, the opposite to the word "life" is the word "death".

That wouldn't be a very good movement to advocate for, in my opinion.

So I think its called the "pro-choice" movement (in the context of abortion) because that is the most convenient thing to call it.

I'm pro-life, but I'm also pro-choice. You have the right to make any choice you want and I will fight to defend that.

The choices you make however, may have some form of consequences. Risk are taken with any choice.

If you drive a car, you risk crashing and dying.
If you boil chickpeas, you risk over cooking them turning them to mush.
If you have sex, you risk falling pregnant.
If you mix two chemicals you risk an explosion.

Only one of the above scenarios has another option following that, which involves taking away someone else's right to live a potential life of happiness.

Don't mince my words, I will never advocate to take a choice away from you. If you make a choice, I believe responsibility and accountability should be attached to the outcome of that choice. That's all.

Thanks for your time.

The pro life movement hates women. They don't care about life or they'd care about BORN babies.

I think that hating women should have consequences, so I agree with your overall premise
 
I don't think people who claim to be "pro-life" are anti-choice.

I think they just believe in the right to life.

The opposite of "pro-life" is not "pro-choice". if we we're to believe that we would have to ask what is the opposite of the word "life"?

In my opinion, the opposite to the word "life" is the word "death".

That wouldn't be a very good movement to advocate for, in my opinion.

So I think its called the "pro-choice" movement (in the context of abortion) because that is the most convenient thing to call it.

I'm pro-life, but I'm also pro-choice. You have the right to make any choice you want and I will fight to defend that.

The choices you make however, may have some form of consequences. Risk are taken with any choice.

If you drive a car, you risk crashing and dying.
If you boil chickpeas, you risk over cooking them turning them to mush.
If you have sex, you risk falling pregnant.
If you mix two chemicals you risk an explosion.

Only one of the above scenarios has another option following that, which involves taking away someone else's right to live a potential life of happiness.

Don't mince my words, I will never advocate to take a choice away from you. If you make a choice, I believe responsibility and accountability should be attached to the outcome of that choice. That's all.

Thanks for your time.


One's right ends when it encroaches and/or eliminates another's right.
 
The name "pro-life" is used by both anti-abortion adherents, who want anti-abortion laws to prevent abortion as a woman's individual choice in all or most all circumstances, and "pro-choice" adherents, who either support the individual choices of woman and doctor in Roe v Wade or something very similar to it.

However, where there are strict anti-abortion laws, there is higher maternal mortality, higher infant mortality, and greater danger of serious injury and illness of pregnancy related causes. Where there is greater choice afforded to the individual woman, there is the opposite. It is on this basis that pro-choice means pro-life, and that pro-life lies.

We can truly say, "Pro-life is a lie. They don't care if people die." Only people ignorant enough to believe that embryos and fetuses are equal persons do not understand this.
 
This is one of the problems with labels.

When one hears pro choice many people hear pro abortion.

When one hears anti abortion many people hear anti choice.

Here is a thought. A pro choice person can also be anti abortion.
 
The pro life movement hates women. They don't care about life or they'd care about BORN babies.

I think that hating women should have consequences, so I agree with your overall premise

I can assure you, I do not hate women, and I do care about born babies. I am not religious and belong to no religion. I am not pro-life as I believe in capital punishment and in the sometime necessity of war. I believe in choices for lots of things, so I am not anti-choice. What I am against is pre-born baby extermination.
 
The pro-life crowd seem to have little use for the living.

They like the fetus because it is pure and without sin. Once you come out of the chute, you're just a damned sinner and its every man and woman for themself.
 
We're on the verge of 20 years of young women teaching old men about the right to privacy.
i think it's a sleight of hand to say this is about the right to privacy. If I cheat on my girlfriend, though entirely legal, no one would expect me to have the right to privacy. If I am caught, 99% chance she will hear about it. Right to privacy just doesn't mean anything in terms of consequence. It's like arguing over the price of rice in china, it's a completely different topic than "should abortion be legal in all circumstances"? How privacy plays a part, if any, on the topic of abortion can be discussed later on.
 
The pro life movement hates women. They don't care about life or they'd care about BORN babies.
We do very much care that Born babies aren't able to get the formula they need because of the inflation and supply issues under Biden.

I think that hating women should have consequences, so I agree with your overall premise
I can't find anyone who appreciates women more than the pro-life.
 
i think it's a sleight of hand to say this is about the right to privacy. If I cheat on my girlfriend, though entirely legal, no one would expect me to have the right to privacy. If I am caught, 99% chance she will hear about it. Right to privacy just doesn't mean anything in terms of consequence. It's like arguing over the price of rice in china, it's a completely different topic than "should abortion be legal in all circumstances"? How privacy plays a part, if any, on the topic of abortion can be discussed later on.
Except you can never be prosecuted for cheating on your girlfriend. The right to privacy doesn't mean that other people are not allowed to find out about something if you carelessly reveal it. The right to privacy means the government can't legally compel you to reveal private information.
 
i think it's a sleight of hand to say this is about the right to privacy. If I cheat on my girlfriend, though entirely legal, no one would expect me to have the right to privacy. If I am caught, 99% chance she will hear about it. Right to privacy just doesn't mean anything in terms of consequence. It's like arguing over the price of rice in china, it's a completely different topic than "should abortion be legal in all circumstances"? How privacy plays a part, if any, on the topic of abortion can be discussed later on.
Previously posted:

You and most people in this thread are using the word 'privacy' too literally.​
The court deliberations for the different precedents based on privacy a) were not for the most part decided by the RvW bench. I dont think any were. (hence 'pre') And b) were very clear on how they were being applied. It's not about 'hiding' information from others, it's about the right to conduct marriage, contraception, reproduction, medical decisions, etc without intrusion from the govt. That the govt had no right to decide those things for or deny them to individuals.​

If you want to know exactly how they were used in RvW and how they applied them...read it. Google it, see the list that Minnie616 posts all the time. Then articulate, from that, how you think they were not used properly.

But those precedents have been used in the federal courts (and probably state) for decades to support many other decisions/issues besides abortion.
 
We do very much care that Born babies aren't able to get the formula they need because of the inflation and supply issues under Biden.

Biden is not responsible for supply issues.

BTW, most women can breastfeed. If necessary, we can go back to utilizing wet nurses. The shortages of formula can be dealt with.



I can't find anyone who appreciates women more than the pro-life.
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
We do very much care that Born babies aren't able to get the formula they need because of the inflation and supply issues under Biden.

I can't find anyone who appreciates women more than the pro-life.

Look harder. Anyone that would deny women a safer procedure and ignore their will, deny their right to consent as individuals, doesnt even respect women. Such people value the unborn more than the woman.
 
We do very much care that Born babies aren't able to get the formula they need because of the inflation and supply issues under Biden.


I can't find anyone who appreciates women more than the pro-life.
Pro life people rarely want single mothers to get more welfare. They don't care about born babies. They hate women.

The formula stuff is more right wing bullshit. Biden doesn't run factories
 
Back
Top Bottom