What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

[prometeus]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Of course, the hypothetical government subsidies for child support would be welcome by some, especially the mythical "welfare queen."

Do you know the incidence of real "welfare queens" in real life?

Women would be getting pregnant over and over for the welfare checks, no doubt.

You base that on what exactly?

Would you prefer that women abort and therefore lessen the influx of new taxpayers?

No, I prefer that every woman make the decision for herself and what is best for her particular situation.

The real question is, why does someone (or something, i.e. the government) pretend to be interested in the welfare of children, and then defer the responsibility of that welfare to a third party.

What third party?

But when a law exists that oppresses a class of people

What law and what oppression?

When biological fathers are not prepared for the responsibility of fatherhood, we tell them, "you better get ready."

Do you have a better solution, if it works I am all for it.

Should we also vote to beat and subdue a class of individuals based on their heritage or gender?

Meaning?

 

[Celebrity]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Do you know the incidence of real "welfare queens" in real life?

No, that's why I call them mythical. Like the unicorn, they do not exist in nature.

You base that on what exactly?

Economic sarcasm. I'm not going to be pregnant, and I have no way of telling if it's not true.

No, I prefer that every woman make the decision for herself and what is best for her particular situation.

Ironically, you prefer to give women preferential treatment under the law.

What third party?

The only third party which can be responsible for a support order: a patron.

Am I missing something? Why are we here? Why is the sky blue? Do sounds make noise? Who was phone? Does time move forward or backward? Does society exist outside itself on some higher order of social construction?

What law and what oppression?

Any law which does not permit men to abort is oppressive of men. For starters, a law which compels men on penalty of perjury to provide a DNA sample (personal information) and assumes they are responsible if they do not comply.

Do you have a better solution, if it works I am all for it.

Ok, don't oppress men. That's my solution. We don't oppress women, why shouldn't we also not oppress men? Because it's inconvenient for a politician to assume responsibility for his or her words, when that responsibility can be forced on a class of people.

Meaning?

I'm not sure what the meaning of this response is.

 

[trouble13]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

How so? If ensuring that a new born child's needs are met v. dictating to a woman when to reproduce is the same for you then we should just leave it at a disagreement.
What do you propose instead?

Where is anything here about what I believe and who is "both"?

If you go back to post 30 you said there should be no debate because stupid people should stay out of other peoples lives.

Your attacking the prolife people for trying to tell a women what to do under the rationale that is about protecting an innocent life.

Imo your contradicting yourself if you say its not about the child and its a personal decission that we should not intefere with but than tell men they must support the child because its not about him its about that childs welfare. It strikes me as being contradictory in principle.

So to answer your earlier question yes i think the gov should provide welfare for children who are declared unwanted prior to birth but are born anyhow. I think that is the fairest option of the ones available.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[AGENT J]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Since the early 60's[SUP]1[/SUP], the phrase "pro life" has often been interpreted as being in violation of a woman's bodily autonomy, by the following definition:

pro-life (prō-līf′)
adj.
Advocating the legal protection of human embryos and fetuses, especially by favoring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life.

Advocacy for legal protection of human embryos and fetuses is essential to treating "pro life" as a political doctrine, beyond what I might believe about biological life. Here are some things that I believe are important to the life of young children: adequate prenatal care, parental leave (including adoption leave), and early childhood education. Abortion is like a miscarriage which is preventable. We can make choices at any time before pregnancy that stop an abortion from happening.

I am nominally pro life, because I resent the misnomer that is "pro-choice." You will find that I agree with the pro choice agenda on the importance of the three things listed above that are important to life. Not all pro choice people agree, but some do, and I don't like to think of people who abort as people who kill babies. When a life is lost by miscarriage or abortion, it is unfortunate for anyone who wants to add a family member to their group.

I resent the misnomer of "pro choice" which is assigned to anyone who believes a woman has the right to decide what to do with her body, because it does not include people who believe that men have the right to decide what to do with their lives. Biological life has worked with social life to produce and improve prenatal care, parental leave and early childhood education. I don't think it's pro life to take away these things and it's certainly not pro choice. The choice between putting food on the table for one's family and buying a contraceptive for one's family is not a real choice.

In any political arena, we have to deal with the questions associated with the scarcity of resources. I'm not interested in discussing the availability of birth control as a resource in this thread. Naturalists and feminists would have you believe that the simplest answer is also the best answer. According to the heuristic of Occam's Razor, feminists don't know what they're talking about. Condoms add a synthetic element to sex, and birth control techniques like withdrawal and the rhythm method require a significant amount of coordination. It would be far simpler to just make the baby; when you decide to not make a baby, Occam's Razor still applies. The withdrawal method will not work for women and the rhythm method will not work for men, unless men and women are cooperative.

Because men and women are not cooperative, how can society continue to support people who want to reproduce, without punishing those who are not prepared to reproduce?


1. pro-life. (n.d.) Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary. (2010). Retrieved August 5 2016 from Pro-lifeww.thefreedictionary.com/pro-life - definition of pro-lifeww.thefreedictionary.com/pro-life by The Free Dictionary

Just like everything else in the world all it means is that's how a person identifies themselves and thats it. It means nothign more just like conservative, liberal, christian, democrat, muslim, republican etc etc

If one wants to know more that simply what flag they fly then one has to ASK that individual,otherwise its simply assumption and speculation. This is pretty basic stuff.

 

[trouble13]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

In addition to the above, there is not always equal access to parental leave for men and women. Women seem to collectively want equal pay, yet some women are not willing to relinquish their status as primary caretakers of infants, and feel that they deserve a higher order of treatment in the workplace due to their role in their family outside of work. We make choices in our lives, and what choices we make as a society seem to reflect a desire to allow women to live as caretakers and men to lead professional lives. That is why men and women do not have equal access to custody. But I digress.

I just want to expand on this point a bit further.

This gender bias your touching on stems back to societies roots when we survived as clans. The gender roles have been clearly defined for thousands of years. Only recently has that changed.

In the past the mans domain was everything outside of the home and the womans domain was everything inside the home.

Men were the hunters and protectors. Women were in charge of managing the resources and nurturing the family.

This basic philosiphy has transcended from generation to generation in even some of the most innocuous forms.

Men are judged by the condition of their car and lawn. Women are judged by how the house is decorated and the apperance of her children.

Women became unhappy with this arraingment and want greater opprotunity outside of the home but when they resist relinquishing their control inside of the home to men.

When is the last time you went to somebodys home that was dominated by a mans decor. Its a very rare thing.

Another bias i saw just today on the news. A woman killed her parents and was convicted. She called her boyfreind after the fact and he helped her try to cover up the crime. Now the state is going after him. How many times have we seen it the other way around where the woman helped the guy and the state chose not to prosecute her. Its another aspect of the cultural gender bias in place



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Celebrity]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

I just want to expand on this point a bit further.

This gender bias your touching on stems back to societies roots when we survived as clans. The gender roles have been clearly defined for thousands of years. Only recently has that changed.

In the past the mans domain was everything outside of the home and the womans domain was everything inside the home.

Men were the hunters and protectors. Women were in charge of managing the resources and nurturing the family.

This basic philosiphy has transcended from generation to generation in even some of the most innocuous forms.

Men are judged by the condition of their car and lawn. Women are judged by how the house is decorated and the apperance of her children.

Women became unhappy with this arraingment and want greater opprotunity outside of the home but when they resist relinquishing their control inside of the home to men.

When is the last time you went to somebodys home that was dominated by a mans decor. Its a very rare thing.

Another bias i saw just today on the news. A woman killed her parents and was convicted. She called her boyfreind after the fact and he helped her try to cover up the crime. Now the state is going after him. How many times have we seen it the other way around where the woman helped the guy and the state chose not to prosecute her. Its another aspect of the cultural gender bias in place



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

As I said, I had digressed from the topic on that point, so I made a new thread.

 

[prometeus]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

If you go back to post 30 you said there should be no debate because stupid people should stay out of other peoples lives.

Yes I remember and stand by it.

Your attacking the prolife people for trying to tell a women what to do under the rationale that is about protecting an innocent life.

Hence the label of stupid.

Imo your contradicting yourself

So noted.

So to answer your earlier question yes i think the gov should provide welfare for children who are declared unwanted prior to birth but are born anyhow. I think that is the fairest option of the ones available.

I am not against that, but most abortion opponents would be up in arms over their precious tax dollars going to socialist programs.

 

[trouble13]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

I am not against that, but most abortion opponents would be up in arms over their precious tax dollars going to socialist programs.

Ok, but how are you any better if your telling people to stay out of womens motherhood choices but than excuse interfering with men making fatherhood choices.




Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[prometeus]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Ok, but how are you any better if your telling people to stay out of womens motherhood choices but than excuse interfering with men making fatherhood choices.

I do no such thing. Ensuring the wellbeing of a child has absolutely no role in fatherhood choices. Those are made before the child is born.

 

[Celebrity]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Yes I remember and stand by it.

Hence the label of stupid.

So noted.

I am not against that, but most abortion opponents would be up in arms over their precious tax dollars going to socialist programs.

Some people don't want a socialist program for all people. Conclusion: torture only men with a socialist program, and allow women to choose whether or not women and men have to be involved.

I do no such thing. Ensuring the wellbeing of a child has absolutely no role in fatherhood choices. Those are made before the child is born.

Here I can see we have departed from reality and transcended into the "only women have the right to make choices after sex, not men" realm of misandry.

 

[prometeus]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Some people don't want a socialist program for all people.

Learn the meaning of socialist first.

Conclusion: torture only men with a socialist program

No, only your idiocy

Here I can see we have departed from reality and transcended into the "only women have the right to make choices after sex, not men" realm of misandry.

Write a complaint to mother nature and after that learn to deal with reality.

 

[trouble13]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

I do no such thing. Ensuring the wellbeing of a child has absolutely no role in fatherhood choices. Those are made before the child is born.

Who made what choices?
Many men become fathers without any choice. Only when they intentionally set out to impregnate a woman was it done by choice. In any other case it was accidental for him.

When wome get pregnant accidentally we allow them the choice to not be a mother in a number of ways. Men we offer no alternatives that diviate from the mothers choice and than in some circumstances we demand he finacially support her.

One of the main objections proxhoice make about the prolife position is that nobody has the right to control womens decissions. Imo its hypocritical to take that position but also advocate controling mens decission under the rationale that now its about whats best for the child.

1. The child was born against the fathers will

2. He cant give it up for adoption if he is unprepared for parenthood

3. The finacial support might be intended to be used on the child but it goes to the woman for her to use any way she wants. We hope it goes to the fathers child but it may go to another fathers child, on the mother herself or even a new lover. There is no accountability for how his money is spent.



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[prometeus]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Who made what choices?

Has no one explained the birds and the bees to you?

Many men become fathers without any choice.

That is simply not true. Every one has a choice and in this case it varies with gender and it is the fault of mother nature.
You are attempting to change a biological difference with legal measures. It does not work well or is fair.

When wome get pregnant accidentally we allow them the choice to not be a mother in a number of ways.

Isn't nature a bitch?

Men we offer no alternatives that diviate from the mothers choice and than in some circumstances we demand he finacially support her.

You are confusing alimony with child support.

One of the main objections proxhoice make about the prolife position is that nobody has the right to control womens decissions.

Bingo.

Imo its hypocritical to take that position but also advocate controling mens decission

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. No one is controlling men's decision. Those decisions are just different than women's.

under the rationale that now its about whats best for the child.

It is not a "rationale' but a fact that a child has needs and those have to be met.

The child was born against the fathers will

Not quite.

He cant give it up for adoption if he is unprepared for parenthood

That is true but not by any intention of any woman.

The finacial support might be intended to be used on the child but it goes to the woman for her to use any way she wants.

That can be addressed by law.
Is your concern strictly a financial one?

 

[trouble13]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Has no one explained the birds and the bees to you?

No need to be snarky. The point of conception is not when we decide if a baby is going to be attempted to be born. The point of no changing your mind comes at the point of viability. Prior to that neither of them is committed to be parents.

That is simply not true. Every one has a choice and in this case it varies with gender and it is the fault of mother nature.
You are attempting to change a biological difference with legal measures. It does not work well or is fair.

We are not talking about different choices that nature provides. Abortions are not natural. Adoptions are not a biological function. They are cultural mechanisms and there is no reason we can not provide equitable mechinisms for men too other than we choose not to.

Isn't nature a bitch?

Well if we are going using the laws of nature as the standard. Nature does not tie men to their off spring.

You are confusing alimony with child support.

Might as well call it alimony because it amounts to the same thing. She is not accountable for how the money is spent.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. No one is controlling men's decision. Those decisions are just different than women's.

Pay her the amount of money we tell you to or go to jail is not a decission.

It is not a "rationale' but a fact that a child has needs and those have to be met.

Mother choose to have the child, the mother should provide for it. Nobody forced her to give birth.

Not quite.

Your being dishonest now.

That is true but not by any intention of any woman.

What difference does the mothers intent mean. The law allows women to give their children away over a fathers objections but does not give men that same right. Its a gender bias law.

That can be addressed by law.
Is your concern strictly a financial one?

Everything i brought up can be adressed by the law. The law being unfairly gender bias is the problem.

Your telling prolife people to stay out of other peoples buisiness but all these things that you support are interfeering with peoples buisiness. Its none of your buisiness to what extent a father wants to partcipate in his childs life but your all up in it. You have no moral high ground to criticize prolifers who are doing the same thing.

To answer your question, no it has little to do with the money. That is one aspect but its about both genders having the freedom to make autonomous choices about how to be a parent or not to be one at all. Its about equality



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Celebrity]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

Learn the meaning of socialist first.

Is social welfare more your style? Maybe social justice? What about socioeconomics? Let me know what you want to do.

 

[prometeus]

Re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"

The point of conception is not when we decide if a baby is going to be attempted to be born.

Who said anything to that effect?

The point of no changing your mind comes at the point of viability.

That is the woman's point. Due to gender differences women and men have different decisions to make at different points in time. That is how nature set things up. You seem to have great difficulty in recognizing some realities.

We are not talking about different choices that nature provides.

That has to be the starting point if you with to deal with reality.

Abortions are not natural.

Of course they are.

Adoptions are not a biological function.

Nobody said they are.

They are cultural mechanisms and there is no reason we can not provide equitable mechinisms for men too other than we choose not to.

As I said earlier, I am open to suggestions, you offered one and I said I was fine with it.

Well if we are going using the laws of nature as the standard.

No, just as reality.

Nature does not tie men to their off spring.

Yea, but some people are above animal behavior.

Might as well call it alimony because it amounts to the same thing.

Are you bitter about an ex and alimony?

She is not accountable for how the money is spent.

As I said, that can be addressed by laws.

Pay her the amount of money we tell you to or go to jail is not a decission.

NO, his decision was made earlier.

Mother choose to have the child, the mother should provide for it.

How noble of you. May I suggest that you refrain from having kids at all.

Nobody forced her to give birth.

So you would force her to have an abortion?

Your being dishonest now.

You are attempting to project.

What difference does the mothers intent mean.

All the difference.

The law allows women to give their children away over a fathers objections but does not give men that same right.

BS that is simply not true.

Everything i brought up can be adressed by the law.

Anything can be addressed by law. The only question is if it becomes fair in an objective way.

The law being unfairly gender bias is the problem.

No, the gender bias comes from nature, the law only attempts to compensate.

Your telling prolife people to stay out of other peoples buisiness

No, I am telling everyone to stay out of other people's lives when it comes to body sovereignty, medical decisions and decisions to reproduce.

but all these things that you support are interfeering with peoples buisiness.

Not the same thing, as I have already explained.

Its none of your buisiness to what extent a father wants to partcipate in his childs life

True, nor have I claimed it to be.

but your all up in it.

That is your opinion, but not fact.

You have no moral high ground to criticize prolifers who are doing the same thing.

Actually I do, as it does not involve their bodies.

To answer your question, no it has little to do with the money.

It sure looks that way though.

its about both genders having the freedom to make autonomous choices about how to be a parent or not to be one at all.

And they do have that in different ways, as nature has allowed. The very best thing we can do is make sure that both boys and girls know all the aspects as early as passible. It is called education, something far too many abortion opponents are against.

Its about equality

In as much as nature makes possible.

 

[ecofarm]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Because men are often forced to support a kid that they did not choose to have...

Others get to choose what you do with your body? Yikes, and some Repubs scream slavery at taxes. Dude chose to take his chances. If he disagrees with the decision, he should have chosen more wisely.

 

[_Sal]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Others get to choose what you do with your body? Yikes, and some Repubs scream slavery at taxes. Dude chose to take his chances. If he disagrees with the decision, he should have chosen more wisely.

absolutely

I do not understand why this isn't perfectly clear to all

 

[ecofarm]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

absolutely

I do not understand why this isn't perfectly clear to all

I might note I'd like to see the deadline pushed back to the first trimester in the developed world where facilities are easily available. I consider that "pro-life (mild)". We can start with one week less.

 

[_Sal]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

I might note I'd like to see the deadline pushed back to the first trimester in the developed world where facilities are easily available. I consider that "pro-life (mild)". We can start with one week less.

yes, we have the capability to be "fairly accurate" of a positive or negative within a few weeks

 

[LaylaWindu]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

I might note I'd like to see the deadline pushed back to the first trimester in the developed world where facilities are easily available. I consider that "pro-life (mild)". We can start with one week less.

As a pro-lifer I would LOVE the limit at 12 weeks with of course reasonable exceptions but currently facilities are not easily available. The stereotypical battle between both groups makes it that way. But yes if moving the restrictions to 23 weeks to help push back is needed I'd be on board with that. I'm on record saying I'd much prefer a european type system, around 16 weeks or so and in this country abortion is never going to be banned.

 

[ecofarm]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

yes, we have the capability to be "fairly accurate" of a positive or negative within a few weeks

As a pro-lifer I would LOVE the limit at 12 weeks with of course reasonable exceptions but currently facilities are not easily available. The stereotypical battle between both groups makes it that way. But yes if moving the restrictions to 23 weeks to help push back is needed I'd be on board with that. I'm on record saying I'd much prefer a european type system, around 16 weeks or so and in this country abortion is never going to be banned.

Seems a reasonable compromise. I'd suggest moving the deadline back a couple weeks and calling the issue closed for a bit.

 

[LaylaWindu]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Seems a reasonable compromise. I'd suggest moving the deadline back a couple weeks and calling the issue closed for a bit.

Well IMO the issue is closed until the powers to be stop with the dishonest pushback on RvW and start with honest compromise. Many prolifers like myself and the ones in my groups groan at some of these movements based on "women's health". They are counterproductive because they don't fool anybody and typically what happens is eventually they end in a court ruling now taking away any wiggle room we had to work in and start honest discussion. Like many things right now the extremists are running the show and it doesn't bode well.

 

[Henrin]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

As a pro-lifer I would LOVE the limit at 12 weeks with of course reasonable exceptions but currently facilities are not easily available. The stereotypical battle between both groups makes it that way. But yes if moving the restrictions to 23 weeks to help push back is needed I'd be on board with that. I'm on record saying I'd much prefer a european type system, around 16 weeks or so and in this country abortion is never going to be banned.

How is that not a pro-choice position? I don't think you know what the term pro-life means. It doesn't mean that it's ok for the woman to kill the unborn for X amount of weeks.

 

[Henrin]

re: What does it mean to be "pro life?"[W:156]

Seems a reasonable compromise. I'd suggest moving the deadline back a couple weeks and calling the issue closed for a bit.

Why in the hell would a pro-life person compromise with pro-choice people? If you believe killing the unborn is wrong outside of self defense reasons then I fail to understand why you would give away everything you believe in to allow women to abort for X amount of weeks for any reason whatsoever.