• 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!

The Term is Terrorism

Why is it reasonable to use abortions as a means of birth control?
You are going wildly off into the weeds here. No one is saying anything of that sort.

If you want to have unprotected sex, become pregnant, have an abortion, lather, rise, repeat, by all means, do please continue.

What happens when her birth control fails? Or his? Or for married couples that cant afford a kid yet, or more kids and their bc fails?

You choose to shame women yet there are many legitimate reasons why women get pregnant. Abstaining is just another way to punish women..or married couples.
 
I still stand by:
* fetus is a living human being
* killing a living human being is murder
* an abortion is the killing of a fetus
* an abortion is the killing a human being
* killing a human being is murder

Murder is the ILLEGAL/UNLAWFUL killing of a human being/person by a human being/person. Even if the fetus were a human being/person - and legally, it isn't - if abortion is legal, it CANNOT be murder. The death penalty kills human beings, but is not murder.
 
1.) translation abortion is not homicide then by definition, you just agreed, you can't have it both ways. "killing" is not part of an abortion definition or crucial to its meaning.
and yes a D&C is ONE of the types of ABORTIONS
2.) good thing i never did this lol so that strawman completely failed
3.) wow this nonsensical emotional strawman is even worse. Are you going to stay on topic or just make stuff up as you go along? lmao
4.) stand by what ever you want some of your claims are factually 100% false as proven already and standing by them doesnt change that
5.) correct
6.) false
7.) false
8.) false
9.) already said this and its still false

10.) actually every single one that is labeled false has been proven so. Denying this fact wont change anything, Yesterday they were false, today they are false and tomorw they will be false. Your feelings and opinions(just like mine) are meanignless and have ZERO impact to facts
11.) another failed strawman, again please stay on topic and discuss what is ACTAULLY being said
12.) correct . . HINT: . . BOTH are still abortions by facts and medical definitions :shrug:

Additional Hhint: 2 =2 because 2 = 2 all the time, not SOME of the time, if its was SOME of the time then they would NOT be equal lol
saying abortion = homicide is like saying shooting a gun = homicide its 100% factually false :shrug: this fact will never change

hence the fact remains abortion =/= homicide

again if you disagree simply stay on topic and PLEASE provide ONE single fact that makes them equal in your next post . . . ONE, thank you

Aborting a living human fetus, what are you doing? Letting it live? Nope. You are killing it.

Can we agree to this, first?
 
Murder is the ILLEGAL/UNLAWFUL killing of a human being/person by a human being/person. Even if the fetus were a human being/person - and legally, it isn't - if abortion is legal, it CANNOT be murder. The death penalty kills human beings, but is not murder.

So what you are saying, which is quite correct, that killing of the unborn is legal. I never disputed that.

I can also accept that since it's a legal killing (permitted by law), that it's not murder, which is a criminal / legal definition.
 
That's my opinion. Yes. Less does not mean 'none.'

However I provided a statement why I believe in valuing born people more. It also clearly has benefits for society overall, whereas no negative affects on society have been demonstrated.

Since they cannot be treated equally under the law...which do you value more?

No answer?

No answer?

What happens when her birth control fails? Or his? Or for married couples that cant afford a kid yet, or more kids and their bc fails?

You choose to shame women yet there are many legitimate reasons why women get pregnant. Abstaining is just another way to punish women..or married couples.

No answer?

What's with you and your fixation about 'valuing' the born over the unborn?

How about we apply the old Marine's motto?
 
Aborting a living human fetus, what are you doing? Letting it live? Nope. You are killing it.

Can we agree to this, first?

no we can not because thats not what "abortion" is BY DEFINITION
why would i agree to something that is factually not true and that facts and definitions say otherwise.

this isn't rocket science, "killing" has no impact on "abortion" definition . .

if the fetus is already dead, its an abortion
if the fetus is living and dies, its an abortion
if the fetus is living and remains living its an abortion

you do understand what the ACTUAL discussion is right?
the discussion is this: is abortion equal to homicide, the only factual answer is no. Definitions and fact proves this. DO you have ONE fact that makes them equal? ONE

Until you can provide ONE you've got nothing. In your next post please provide it or simply admit to the fact that abortion =/= homicide :shrug:
with or without your admittance that fact wont change
 
What's with you and your fixation about 'valuing' the born over the unborn?

How about we apply the old Marine's motto?

I dont know the Marine's motto unless it is Always faithful (Semper fidelis) and I dont see how that fits.

So I believe that the abortion debate is founded in valuing life...is it not? So why cant you answer my questions?

I do value the born over the unborn. I have explained why clearly. You have not explained why you value the unborn over the born. Why is that?

Meh, I'm not patient, here's one:

So those with no regard for women's lives and health and futures have the higher moral ground? They have clear consciences?

Why is that? Why are the unborn more deserving of those things than women?

If the unborn have equal rights, then the govt would by law have to intercede on behalf of the unborn...and women's rights to the same would be subordinated to that. Making women 2nd class citizens again. As it stands now, women have rights to those things and the govt protects that.
 
Last edited:
I dont know the Marine's motto unless it is Always faithful (Semper fidelis) and I dont see how that fits.

So I believe that the abortion debate is founded in valuing life...is it not? So why cant you answer my questions?

I do value the born over the unborn. I have explained why clearly. You have not explained why you value the unborn over the born. Why is that?

Of course won't believe or accept that I value both equally.
 
Of course won't believe or accept that I value both equally.

I explained that under our law and the Constitution, that isnt possible.

You seemed to get annoyed when I reposted things so perhaps you can go back and see that I did.

What would you like? Me to repost or you go see and answer?

Meh, I'm not patient, here's one:

So those with no regard for women's lives and health and futures have the higher moral ground? They have clear consciences?

Why is that? Why are the unborn more deserving of those things than women?

If the unborn have equal rights, then the govt would by law have to intercede on behalf of the unborn...and women's rights to the same would be subordinated to that. Making women 2nd class citizens again. As it stands now, women have rights to those things and the govt protects that.
 
Last edited:
I explained that under our law and the Constitution, that isnt possible.

You seemed to get annoyed when I reposted things so perhaps you can go back and see that I did.

What would you like? Me to repost or you go see and answer?

Meh, I'm not patient, here's one:



If the unborn have equal rights, then the govt would by law have to intercede on behalf of the unborn...and women's rights to the same would be subordinated to that. Making women 2nd class citizens again. As it stands now, women have rights to those things and the govt protects that.

The government is already interceding on behalf of the unborn in the form of abortion restrictions to the first 20 weeks after conception, if I recall.

Considering that, and your position that this restriction is subordinate the woman's 'right' to an abortion, it would seem to logically follow that you'd be a supporter of late term abortions as well. (Of course I don't want to put words in your mouth).

While I acknowledge that the restriction on abortion to the first 20 weeks of gestation does (unless a medical necessity to save the women's life) curb a woman's access to late term abortions, I can't help but believe that this balance is a decent, honorable and reasonable one.
 
While I acknowledge that the restriction on abortion to the first 20 weeks of gestation does (unless a medical necessity to save the women's life) curb a woman's access to late term abortions, I can't help but believe that this balance is a decent, honorable and reasonable one.

So then you do not object to current US federal abortion law?
 
While I acknowledge that the restriction on abortion to the first 20 weeks of gestation does (unless a medical necessity to save the women's life) curb a woman's access to late term abortions, I can't help but believe that this balance is a decent, honorable and reasonable one.

this is true, it is a decent balance, so is Rvw at 24 weeks.
Rvw or 20/21 weeks is about to close as equal as on can get but equality is impossible on this particular issue.
 
So then you do not object to current US federal abortion law?

It is the standing law of the land.

While anti-abortion activists continue to try to have RvW repealed or redressed in legislation, they aren't making any significant progress that I can discern.

As in many things in life, it's the balance and the balancing point where most of the reasonableness lies. I'd like to believe that abortions would happen before the neurons of the fetus make their connections so that they won't feel the pain of the abortion procedure. Not exactly sure which week of gestation those neural connections starts to develop.
 
It is the standing law of the land.

While anti-abortion activists continue to try to have RvW repealed or redressed in legislation, they aren't making any significant progress that I can discern.

As in many things in life, it's the balance and the balancing point where most of the reasonableness lies. I'd like to believe that abortions would happen before the neurons of the fetus make their connections so that they won't feel the pain of the abortion procedure. Not exactly sure which week of gestation those neural connections starts to develop.

It is ignorance if you think that the unborn feel pain during legal abortions.

The 98.5% that take place in the first trimester are just flushing an embryo from the womb...there is no pain.

For the rare, medically necessary 1.5% of late term abortions, anesthesia is administered. There is no pain.

You have latched onto something untrue, perhaps in order to perpetuate a negative view of abortion.
 
It is ignorance if you think that the unborn feel pain during legal abortions.

The 98.5% that take place in the first trimester are just flushing an embryo from the womb...there is no pain.

For the rare, medically necessary 1.5% of late term abortions, anesthesia is administered. There is no pain.

You have latched onto something untrue, perhaps in order to perpetuate a negative view of abortion.

Dunno. Seems to be a mixed result on that.

http://www.doctorsonfetalpain.com/

Unborn babies can feel pain
Scientific evidence reveals that unborn babies do, indeed, feel pain


The evidence of fetal pain

With the advent of sonograms and live-action ultrasound images, neonatologists and nurses are able to see unborn babies at 20 weeks gestation react physically to outside stimuli such as sound, light and touch. The sense of touch is so acute that even a single human hair drawn across an unborn baby's palm causes the baby to make a fist.

Surgeons entering the womb to perform corrective procedures on tiny unborn babies have seen those babies flinch, jerk and recoil from sharp objects and incisions.


“The neural pathways are present for pain to be experienced quite early by unborn babies,” explains Steven Calvin, M.D., perinatologist, chair of the Program in Human Rights Medicine, University of Minnesota, where he teaches obstetrics.
Unborn babies can feel pain during abortion

With Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court gave states the right to legislate abortion restrictions during a woman's second trimester. Many states enacted laws that make it more difficult to terminate a pregnancy. Among them, Arkansas, Minnesota, and Georgia require physicians to tell women that 20-week-old fetuses can feel pain during the procedure unless they are anesthetized. A newly released review of the scientific evidence, however, suggests the premise of those laws is wrong.
Fetuses cannot feel pain until at least the 28th week of gestation because they haven't formed the necessary nerve pathways, says Mark Rosen, an obstetrical anesthesiologist at the University of California at San Francisco. He and his colleagues determined that until the third trimester, "the wiring at the point where you feel pain, such as the skin, doesn't reach the emotional part where you feel pain, in the brain." Although fetuses start forming pain receptors eight weeks into development, the thalamus, the part of the brain that routes information to other areas, doesn't form for 20 more weeks. Without the thalamus, Rosen says, no information can reach the cortex for processing.
When Does a Fetus Feel Pain? | DiscoverMagazine.com

I'll just stick with 'I flat out don't know'. Is there a greater definitive on this?
 
Dunno. Seems to be a mixed result on that.

http://www.doctorsonfetalpain.com/

Unborn babies can feel pain

When Does a Fetus Feel Pain? | DiscoverMagazine.com

I'll just stick with 'I flat out don't know'. Is there a greater definitive on this?

They all support my post, that the 98.5% of early term unborn feel no pain (way before 20 weeks) and that late term fetuses receive anesthesia.

Anything else or are you just looking for something to cling to to enable you to keep your negative views of abortion?

(Did you actually read the stuff you posted? :doh)

Btw, I fixed one of the URLs because that wasnt the actual name of the article. The article didnt say 'during abortion.' Someone...you?...added that.
 
Last edited:
Intimidating tactics designed to prevent people from participating in a lawful activity--terrorism.

abortion-doctor-intimidation-chart.jpg


The Disturbing Levels Of Stalking And Intimidation Plaguing Abortion Doctors | ThinkProgress

I personally agree with prosecuting anybody stupid enough to terrorize women and / or doctors. And lock them up for 20 years.

I think that we as conservatives should set an example for the left, since they are involved too deeply in their support for violence against unborn human babies, and stop this madness.
 
Posted in error.
 
Left me confused so perhaps very successful.
 
I'll repeat an earlier point. The crusade against abortion is, IMO, less about saving babies than it is about distaste for women's sexual freedom.
 
Back
Top Bottom