South Dakota

[FallingPianos]

Yes, but rape is already illegal.

yes it is, as it should be, but that doesnt change the fact that it happens.

those women who were raped, and are seeking abortions, have not raised their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

 

[jimmyjack]

yes it is, as it should be, but that doesnt change the fact that it happens.

those women who were raped, and are seeking abortions, have not raised their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

No, not their sexual gratification, but they have still raised their own interests above that of another individual’s life, should they seek an abortion upon getting pregnant.

 

[FallingPianos]

No, not their sexual gratification, but they have still raised their own interests above that of another individual’s life, should they seek an abortion upon getting pregnant.

that is true.

 

[Fantasea]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
The Pro-Death crowd

To whom are you refering? Those who are in favour of the death penalty?

I don't imagine that your memory is failing, yet you ask me to repeat something I have told you many times before.

Here we go.

For a child in the womb there are two deliberate alternatives; life or death.

If one rejects abortion, one is part of the Life crowd.

If one countenances abortion, one is part of the Death crowd.

It's as simple as that.

 

[Fantasea]

yes it is, as it should be, but that doesnt change the fact that it happens.

those women who were raped, and are seeking abortions, have not raised their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

Why not tell us how many of the nearly 50 million US abortions since Roe v. Wade can be attributed to rape.

That way, we will have some idea of the magnitude of the problem that concerns you.

 

[FallingPianos]

Why not tell us how many of the nearly 50 million US abortions since Roe v. Wade can be attributed to rape.

That way, we will have some idea of the magnitude of the problem that concerns you.

the number of women raped, does not change the fact that those that were, were not raising their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

 

[Fantasea]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
Why not tell us how many of the nearly 50 million US abortions since Roe v. Wade can be attributed to rape.

That way, we will have some idea of the magnitude of the problem that concerns you.

the number of women raped, does not change the fact that those that were, were not raising their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

Can you say, "Cop out"?

 

[FallingPianos]

Can you say, "Cop out"?

If a woman has an abortion as if it is a form of birth control, then the act of abortion means its conclusion is purely a consequence of sexual gratification, since the woman has raised her sexual satisfaction above the welfare of another individual.

unless she was raped.

Yes, but rape is already illegal.

yes it is, as it should be, but that doesnt change the fact that it happens.

those women who were raped, and are seeking abortions, have not raised their own sexual gratification above the life of their fetus.

No, not their sexual gratification, but they have still raised their own interests above that of another individual’s life, should they seek an abortion upon getting pregnant.

that is true.

the percentage of mothers seeking abortion after a rape, has absolutly no bearing on my point that those that are doing so, are not placing sexual gratification above the life of the fetus.

 

[vergiss]

A man has no say whether abortion happens or not.

Oh? What about all those women reluctant to get abortions, but whose boyfriends/husbands threaten to disappear if they don't? Wouldn't it then technically be because the father wanted sexual gratification, or isn't that misogynistic enough for you? :roll:

What does sexual gratification have to do with it, anyway? Unless she is somehow perverse enough to derive sexual excitement from getting an abortion, it has nothing to do with the termination of pregnancy. That is, not unless you're talking about the sex act that took place to allow conception. What are you saying, then? Sex that is not intended for pro-creation is immoral? Or is it just that women being sexually liberated, as men are, is immoral? :doh

 

[jimmyjack]

Oh? What about all those women reluctant to get abortions, but whose boyfriends/husbands threaten to disappear if they don't? Wouldn't it then technically be because the father wanted sexual gratification, or isn't that misogynistic enough for you?

A man has no say whether abortion happens or not.

What does sexual gratification have to do with it, anyway? Unless she is somehow perverse enough to derive sexual excitement from getting an abortion

We will never know, but what we do know is that there are millions of abortions every year, that seems to me like people know that sex leads to pregnancy, or are there really that many people lacking in the basic facts of biology.

 

[vergiss]

A man has no say whether abortion happens or not.

As in, he can't physically hold her down while she gets a termination, or lock her away to prevent one? Uh, no. He can, however, pressure her, threaten her, or less nastily, reach a decision with her.

We will never know, but what we do know is that there are millions of abortions every year, that seems to me like people know that sex leads to pregnancy, or are there really that many people lacking in the basic facts of biology.

So you want women to stop having sex unless she intends to pro-create?

 

[jimmyjack]

As in, he can't physically hold her down while she gets a termination, or lock her away to prevent one? Uh, no. He can, however, pressure her, threaten her, or less nastily, reach a decision with her.

Argue all you like, a man has no say whether abortion happens or not, it's a fact.

So you want women to stop having sex unless she intends to pro-create?

Yes.

 

[vergiss]

Argue all you like, a man has no say whether abortion happens or not, it's a fact.

So he's free of all responsibility for the termination, even if he drove her there and waited while it happened?

Yes.

How many kids do you want? Three, for example? So you're honestly telling me you'll only have sex three times in your life? :lol:

 

[jimmyjack]

So he's free of all responsibility for the termination, even if he drove her there and waited while it happened?

Facts are facts.

So you're honestly telling me you'll only have sex three times in your life? :lol:

I haven't said I honestly want three kids.

 

[vergiss]

Facts are facts.

Fact is, you're a misogynistic prick.

I haven't said I honestly want three kids.

I was using 3 as an example, dimwit. Adjust the number according to how many you do want. :roll: So, are you honestly telling me you'll only have sex X amount of times, when you intend to conceive?

 

[jimmyjack]

Fact is, you're a misogynistic prick.

In is not a fact.

Yet another in the long line of Virgiss lies.

I was using 3 as an example, dimwit. Adjust the number according to how many you do want. :roll: So, are you honestly telling me you'll only have sex X amount of times, when you intend to conceive?

Is this an equation?

If y = x should I square root the tangent.

Answer: vergiss thinks sex three times will equal three kids.

 

[vergiss]

In is not a fact.

Yet another in the long line of Virgiss lies.

The man has sex with the woman. He at worst pressures and threatens her, at best agrees upon a mutual decision to get an abortion. He drives her to the hospital, and waits while it happens. Yet he's completely blameless? There's no other conclusion that can be drawn from that opinion, except that you're a dickhead deliberately seeking to place sole blame on the wicked, slutty women, whilst foolishly deciding the men are totally innocent.

Is this an equation?

If y = x should I square root the tangent.

Answer: vergiss thinks sex three times will equal three kids.

If you and your partner are lucky and fertile, you'll concieve upon first try.

 

[FallingPianos]

Yes.

sucks for her, and her man.

 

[FallingPianos]

If you and your partner are lucky and fertile, you'll concieve upon first try.

:rofl

if they are fertile and extremely lucky.

 

[Kelzie]

Fact is, you're a misogynistic prick.



I was using 3 as an example, dimwit. Adjust the number according to how many you do want. :roll: So, are you honestly telling me you'll only have sex X amount of times, when you intend to conceive?

[mod mode]

:smash:

Fact is you're not allowed to say stuff like that vergiss and you know it. Take it to the basement next time.

[/mod mode]

 

[RightinNYC]

If you and your partner are lucky and fertile, you'll concieve upon first try.

Not quite. Among fertile couples trying to conceive, even after a year of intercourse, only 85% are pregnant. The chance of a healthy, fertile couple getting pregnant in any month, having unprotected sex every day, are less that 1 in 4.

It's not exactly one to one.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/73/87993.htm
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Conceiving_a_baby_tips?OpenDocument

 

[vergiss]

Oy gevault. Now you're just arguing about something of little importance.

Right. So he and his wife might even get to have sex 10 times. :lol: Doesn't remove from the ridiculousness, does it?

 

[Maya]

Imagine the scenario !!
if i get pregnant if i don't want to , and am disturbed about it . But i am not allowed to have an abortion . What i would do is resent the baby to the extent that i won't care about stopping alcohol , drugs , smoking during my pregnany .I'd be like screw this goverment and baby for ruining my life . Ofcourse i'd be screwed up too . No doubt .
What would that lead to is a poor child with down syndrome or some physical , mental defect . Then i'd dump it on the State to take care fo the baby after the handicapped baby is born............let them put it up for adoption now !!

How would that be for pro lifers ??????????????????????????????????/

 

[Fantasea]

Imagine the scenario !!
if i get pregnant if i don't want to , and am disturbed about it . But i am not allowed to have an abortion . What i would do is resent the baby to the extent that i won't care about stopping alcohol , drugs , smoking during my pregnany .I'd be like screw this goverment and baby for ruining my life . Ofcourse i'd be screwed up too . No doubt .
What would that lead to is a poor child with down syndrome or some physical , mental defect . Then i'd dump it on the State to take care fo the baby after the handicapped baby is born............let them put it up for adoption now !!

How would that be for pro lifers ??????????????????????????????????/

It would probably make more sense to abort the goofy mother you cite in your example, however, we don't do that do we? On the other hand, the situation you describe occurs frequently and when it does, the state makes every effort to protect that life, as well it should.

 

[jimmyjack]

Imagine the scenario !!
if i get pregnant if i don't want to , and am disturbed about it . But i am not allowed to have an abortion . What i would do is resent the baby to the extent that i won't care about stopping alcohol , drugs , smoking during my pregnany .I'd be like screw this goverment and baby for ruining my life . Ofcourse i'd be screwed up too . No doubt .
What would that lead to is a poor child with down syndrome or some physical , mental defect . Then i'd dump it on the State to take care fo the baby after the handicapped baby is born............let them put it up for adoption now !!

How would that be for pro lifers ??????????????????????????????????/

Political bias optional, civility a must!