• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why Am I Pro-Life

Why am I Opposed to Abortion

  • I am Christian, and the Bible forbids it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I am Christian, and God is against it

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • I am against killing living things

    Votes: 2 15.4%

  • I am against killing humans

    Votes: 6 46.2%

  • It just seems wrong

    Votes: 2 15.4%

  • I do not agree with current Law (please explain)

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • Total voters
    13
Navy Pride said:
People that are pro abortion have to tell theirselves that the baby in the womb is nothing but a clump of cells............If they ever thought about it at length and realized that they are actually killing an innocent defenseless human being the horror they would feel......Pro abortion people are not bad people...They are just wrong when it comes to when life begins........

I have said it before and will say it again.........Needless abortion is the most barbaric act one human being can perpetrate on another..............

May God bless the 40,000,000 innocent defenseless babies that have been killed in the womb since Roe V Wade was enacted in 1972.........
Click to expand...
What a load of emotional, histrionic claptrap
 
doughgirl said:
Is it rational to recognize the one child as a baby and pretend the other one isnt?
Click to expand...
There is neither a child, nor a baby before birth
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Life begins at conception.
Click to expand...
What an ignorant claim. life exists before conception, it merely continues at conception.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
I define a human being as a complete life form at any stage of development that contains a complete human genome, and for generosity, I also include those defects such as Down's Syndrome sufferers and Al Gore.
Click to expand...
And obviously alos hydatidiform moles.
Prove that life doesn't begin at conception. You're arguing against simple biology, so this should be entertaining.
Click to expand...
Sperm are alive. Egg are alive. life exists BEFORE conception; your claim is false.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
It's not metabolizing nutrients into cell structure?
Click to expand...
No more than the hydatidifom mole or even the unfertilized egg does.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
A sperm is not a living thing, it's a robot. An egg also, isn't "alive", it's a target.
Click to expand...
The level of ignorance you display regarding simple biological principles is astonishing.
Yes, the fetus is a human being.
Click to expand...
false.
 
doughgirl said:
And steen and the others
Click to expand...
You have GOT to get over your fixation with me. You are getting as bad as felicity.
 
"Ok, hows about a mental derelect who constantly spouts off deceptive claims, and blatant falsehoods"

List some falsehoods I have claimed and back it up with fact then.
You show me information that shows something different than what I posted.

"A heartbeat is just a reaction to the uterus contracting, nothing to get all up in arms about."

Site the fact on this. give us medical backup.

Gosh you pro-choicers are cold.
 
Because Steen you make it easy. You are the poster boy for the pro-choice side. We love guys like you because it makes our side look better.

It is the pro-choice side, not the pro-life position that is cruel and you very effectively demonstrate this.


STeen you said, "This site's claims have already been disproven previously. Your uncritical reposting of a known lie makes you a liar s well."

Who disproved them? I posted a website I found, that is legal isnt it?


STeen says, "There is neither a child, nor a baby before birth."

I love it love it. And the California courts were wrong by saying that Connor Peterson was a baby? :rofl (And he was 7 1/2 months)

You really are good Steen. Good for one laugh at least.
 
doughgirl said:
I love it love it. And the California courts were wrong by saying that Connor Peterson was a baby? :rofl (And he was 7 1/2 months)
Click to expand...

The Peterson case has NOTHING to do with this, because Laci Peterson did not have an abortion. Obviously, the courts see a distinct difference between a woman having an abortion and someone else murdering her while she is pregnant.
 
Engimo said:
I don't know, you can interpret the criteria for life to fit a sperm in the same way that you did for a fetus.
Click to expand...


I don't know about that. It doesn't grow, it can't make a new sperm, it does react to it's environment.

Maybe it's like a giant wiggly virus?
 
Stace said:
The Peterson case has NOTHING to do with this, because Laci Peterson did not have an abortion. Obviously, the courts see a distinct difference between a woman having an abortion and someone else murdering her while she is pregnant.
Click to expand...

Oh? Why? Is the standard then that if the cares about the fetus it's thus alive and eligible for victimhood, but if the mother doesn't care it's not alive and eligible for flushing?

Cruelty to animals demands higher standards than that.
 
steen said:
What an ignorant claim. life exists before conception, it merely continues at conception.
Click to expand...

Oh. If that's the case, you're finally admitting that the fetus is alive throughout the entire gestational period.

It's also human through the entire period, of course.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
I don't know about that. It doesn't grow, it can't make a new sperm, it does react to it's environment.

Maybe it's like a giant wiggly virus?
Click to expand...

A fetus doesn't make new fetuses either, and a sperm certainly does react to its environment. It travels through the woman's body and bores into an egg when it finds it, all responses to stimuli.
 
Stace said:
The Peterson case has NOTHING to do with this, because Laci Peterson did not have an abortion. Obviously, the courts see a distinct difference between a woman having an abortion and someone else murdering her while she is pregnant.
Click to expand...

Ah but Scott was convicted of two murders.......
 
Navy Pride said:
Ah but Scott was convicted of two murders.......
Click to expand...

You are legally allowed to cut yourself. You cannot legally cut other people - that is assault. This is in the same way that you cannot destroy other people's property, but they can destroy their own. Not only that, if I recall, the fetus was in the 3rd trimester and is not legal to abort (for the most part) anyway.
 
Engimo said:
You are legally allowed to cut yourself. You cannot legally cut other people - that is assault. This is in the same way that you cannot destroy other people's property, but they can destroy their own. Not only that, if I recall, the fetus was in the 3rd trimester and is not legal to abort (for the most part) anyway.
Click to expand...

PBA is in the 3rd trimester and although a law was passed to stop it the law is under appeal........
 
Navy Pride said:
PBA is in the 3rd trimester and although a law was passed to stop it the law is under appeal........
Click to expand...

Yes, most people do not support Partial-Birth Abortion and it is not generally legal - confirming what I said.
 
Engimo said:
Yes, most people do not support Partial-Birth Abortion and it is not generally legal - confirming what I said.
Click to expand...

Then why is the PBA law passed by Congress being appealed by the left in the SCOTUS?:confused:
 
Navy Pride said:
Then why is the PBA law passed by Congress being appealed by the left in the SCOTUS?:confused:
Click to expand...

Are they? I'd like to see a source for this.
 
Don't know if this is the same case, but the last time I heard a debate on a Partial birth abortion ban, it was because the law did not allow for medical emergencies. This is a clear violation of the woman's rights, no matter which side you are on. If this is the same case (don't know if Navy Pride has a different one in mind), that is the basis for the appeal. The ban has to include exceptions for situations in which the mother's life is in danger.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Oh? Why? Is the standard then that if the cares about the fetus it's thus alive and eligible for victimhood, but if the mother doesn't care it's not alive and eligible for flushing?

Cruelty to animals demands higher standards than that.
Click to expand...

No, the standard is the woman has a right to choose whether or not to continue the pregnancy. Abortion is legal, murder is not. With abortion, the woman chooses the fate of the fetus. With murder, that choice is taken away from her, and as with the Peterson case, her own life is taken as well.
 
Stace said, “The Peterson case has NOTHING to do with this, because Laci Peterson did not have an abortion. Obviously, the courts see a distinct difference between a woman having an abortion and someone else murdering her while she is pregnant.’

You tell me what the difference is? I see no difference. Laci could have gone to get a legal abortion couldn't’t she? That would be legal. Yet the courts recognize that she was carrying a BABY. They said so themselves in their rulings.
Scott Peterson was not a doctor. He did not have a vacuum, did not have a scalpel. But his actions caused Laci to lose her child. Scott knew this. He knew his actions would kill the child. The same way the doctors who perform abortions do. They are paid to finish the child off. To kill it. You tell me the difference? Both are murder.

“the courts see a distinct difference between a woman having an abortion and someone else murdering her while she is pregnant.’

No you are wrong…….they convicted Scott on two counts of murder. Scott murdered two people, Laci and as they put it, her unborn CHILD. Not fetus……….CHILD.

Engimo…..said, “You are legally allowed to cut yourself. You cannot legally cut other people - that is assault. This is in the same way that you cannot destroy other people's property, but they can destroy their own. Not only that, if I recall, the fetus was in the 3rd trimester and is not legal to abort (for the most part) anyway.”


What don’t you get? It is legal in many places in this country to abort in late stages.
You said you can't legally cut other people…..no but you think its ok if you dismember the unborn child in the womb alive? I would say this falls into that category would’t you?

Stace you said, “No, the standard is the woman has a right to choose whether or not to continue the pregnancy.”

Just say it……..she has the right to determine whether her child lives or dies. She is judge, jury and executioner.

“Abortion is legal, murder is not”

To hilarious to comment on. :lol:

“ With abortion, the woman chooses the fate of the fetus.”

And hon what would that be? Life and death maybe?


“With murder, that choice is taken away from her, and as with the Peterson case, her own life is taken as well.”

The courts spoke. They were clear…..Scott was convicted on two counts of murder. And they referred to to Connor by name and called him a child. They certainly humanized it didn’t they? Something those of you who are pro-abortion just hate. Makes ya look bad. :3oops:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom