• 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!

Why are people who are against abortion called Pro Life?

J

JoeyJoystick

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
1,845
Reaction score
978
Location
Thailand
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The question as is.

I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?

It seems to me that people who make such a difficult decision are more Pro Life than anti abortion people. Because life is not just a living thing. Life is living along with the quality of life that goes with it. A baby without a mom probably has a lower quality of life because the baby does not have his/her biological mother. Or the baby can be handicapped which also results in loss of Quality of Life.

Life without quality of life is not a life.


Joey
 
JoeyJoystick said:
The question as is.

I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?

It seems to me that people who make such a difficult decision are more Pro Life than anti abortion people. Because life is not just a living thing. Life is living along with the quality of life that goes with it. A baby without a mom probably has a lower quality of life because the baby does not have his/her biological mother. Or the baby can be handicapped which also results in loss of Quality of Life.

Life without quality of life is not a life.


Joey
Click to expand...
They aren't pro-life; they're pro-fetus. AND NOT all fetus's. Only the ones made the old fashioned way.
 
People get to call themselves what they want. I thought Dems were the party that respected that.
 
eman623 said:
People get to call themselves what they want. I thought Dems were the party that respected that.
Click to expand...

Hi Eman,

True, but that was not the question. The question is why this choice of words? And no offense, but I have no idea whether this is what they call themselves, or whether it is other people that refer to them as Pro Life.


Joey
 
JoeyJoystick said:
Hi Eman,

True, but that was not the question. The question is why this choice of words? And no offense, but I have no idea whether this is what they call themselves, or whether it is other people that refer to them as Pro Life.


Joey
Click to expand...
THEY call themselves pro-life. Mind you they also call themselves Moral, and everyone else Immoral.
 
JoeyJoystick said:
The question as is.

I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?

It seems to me that people who make such a difficult decision are more Pro Life than anti abortion people. Because life is not just a living thing. Life is living along with the quality of life that goes with it. A baby without a mom probably has a lower quality of life because the baby does not have his/her biological mother. Or the baby can be handicapped which also results in loss of Quality of Life.

Life without quality of life is not a life.


Joey
Click to expand...
Beats me. I call them pro fetus because after birth they could care less. Even during they really don't care as evidenced by various women forced to carry non viable or dead fetuses.
 
JoeyJoystick said:
Hi Eman,

True, but that was not the question. The question is why this choice of words? And no offense, but I have no idea whether this is what they call themselves, or whether it is other people that refer to them as Pro Life.


Joey
Click to expand...
They feel the words "pro life" accurately describe their position. They feel that the idea that "a life without quality is not a life" is not true and is in fact based on a false premise. All life has quality and if you could ask the unborn if it thinks its life has enough quality to be allowed to be born, the answer would always be YES!

BTW, full disclosure, I am neither 100% pro-life nor pro-choice. I fall in the middle. I can also understand the extremes well enough to explain them, even if I do not agree with them.
 

Why are people who are against abortion called Pro Life?​



That misnomer is one of their own choosing.
It's deliberately designed to suppress opposition - as in, "What fool could possibly be against life !!??"
It's nothing more than effective Madison Avenue marketing. But as so many people have pointed out since it's inception, it has nothing to do with being pro-life, because the preponderance of its proponents are not even willing to guarantee food, housing and healthcare to an infant once it's born, let alone the type of social support that will keep a human life viable.

The allegedly "pro-lifers" are OK as long as you can't abort it, but they don't give a **** if it starves to death once it's born. Just ask the pro-lifers point blank if they're willing to have their taxes raised to keep all the unwanted children alive. That will tell you who is actually "pro-life"! Perhaps 1/10th of 1% of them. Once the child whose life they claim to desperately want to save is born, then little Timmy and Sally are on their own. The utter hypocrisy of the "pro-life" crowd is boundless.
 
JoeyJoystick said:
The question as is.

I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?

It seems to me that people who make such a difficult decision are more Pro Life than anti abortion people. Because life is not just a living thing. Life is living along with the quality of life that goes with it. A baby without a mom probably has a lower quality of life because the baby does not have his/her biological mother. Or the baby can be handicapped which also results in loss of Quality of Life.

Life without quality of life is not a life.


Joey
Click to expand...
It really should be 'pro life until birth'.
 
eman623 said:
They feel the words "pro life" accurately describe their position. They feel that the idea that "a life without quality is not a life" is not true and is in fact based on a false premise. All life has quality and if you could ask the unborn if it thinks its life has enough quality to be allowed to be born, the answer would always be YES!

BTW, full disclosure, I am neither 100% pro-life nor pro-choice. I fall in the middle. I can also understand the extremes well enough to explain them, even if I do not agree with them.
Click to expand...
In the middle is by default pro choice. A true pro life person believes life begins at conception. If you believe that then it matters not how many weeks. After that it's a matter of pro choice with restrictions.
 
There are two sides to any issue. Usually they are defined as having different ideas about how to go about solving a particular problem. THIS issue is different.

The difference between the two sides on this issue:
One side wants the woman involved, her loved ones, and her doctor to make any decisions. This is called “personal liberty”.
The other side wants the government to force everyone to follow THEIR views and succumb to THEIR beliefs. That's why I refer to them as “forced birth”.

Choose your side. America usually ends up siding WITH personal liberty above other's (religious) beliefs.

Streamlined version;
Side A: Personal Liberty
Side B: Forced Birth
 
Last edited:
eman623 said:
They feel the words "pro life" accurately describe their position. They feel that the idea that "a life without quality is not a life" is not true and is in fact based on a false premise. All life has quality and if you could ask the unborn if it thinks its life has enough quality to be allowed to be born, the answer would always be YES!

BTW, full disclosure, I am neither 100% pro-life nor pro-choice. I fall in the middle. I can also understand the extremes well enough to explain them, even if I do not agree with them.
Click to expand...
The entitled are what bother me. For some reason, some people feel they're entitled to control women's reproductive choices and healthcare as if she were incapable of making decisions with her doctor and family. Almost like a smart dog or cow.

It's beyond disrespectful.

The government has no control in mens reproductive choices. You're not forbidden a vasectomy even if you don't have any children. They don't call your wife if you want one to ask her permission first. You can get as many women pregnant as you want, no consequences legally for you. Even in court, you just state what you make and they take whatever percentage YOU can afford not what those women need. It's not like they can take all your money.

So you want a partial choice in my reproductive choice and care. That's nice, I guess it's not as bad as those who want total control.
 
JoeyJoystick said:
I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?
Click to expand...
So what are you trying to imply? That all babies should be aborted because there is some level of risk to the mother? Well.....there goes the species.
 
JoeyJoystick said:
The question as is.

I do not get it why anti abortion people are called pro life, when the result can easily lead to the death of the mother? Is the life of the mother not important for people who are Pro Life?

It seems to me that people who make such a difficult decision are more Pro Life than anti abortion people. Because life is not just a living thing. Life is living along with the quality of life that goes with it. A baby without a mom probably has a lower quality of life because the baby does not have his/her biological mother. Or the baby can be handicapped which also results in loss of Quality of Life.

Life without quality of life is not a life.


Joey
Click to expand...
The part in bold. Really!! Are you reaching out to us from the 18th century or something? History fact Death rate for women in the 18th century that were treated by a doctor was a range from 5-29/1000. and only 25/1000 among unassisted women.
Your tag says japan and the death rate there is 4 women die per 100,000 live births. In america it is 24.4 deaths per 100,000 maternities.

I would give you that america has an unusually high death rate given a comparison to other modern first world countries. But that is more due to the fact that they have no health care system and are more than willing to turn a blind eye to the plight of poverty in america . Not because they are pro life.
 
LetsGoBrandon said:
So what are you trying to imply? That all babies should be aborted because there is some level of risk to the mother? Well.....there goes the species.
Click to expand...
You actually condone our government starting to force decisions that could potentially kill someone? Could ruin their life? Could put them on welfare for years?
You want that? Why?
 
Ginger Ale said:
You actually condone our government starting to force decisions that could potentially kill someone? Could ruin their life?
Click to expand...
Where have I done that? Or are you now suggesting that carrying a pregnancy to birth is attempted murder?
Ginger Ale said:
Could put them on welfare for years?
You want that? Why?
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the baby? Or the mom that wants to kill the baby before it's born?
 
Ginger Ale said:
You actually condone our government starting to force decisions that could potentially kill someone? Could ruin their life? Could put them on welfare for years?
You want that? Why?
Click to expand...
The argument for america, as to why you have such a high death rate is caused by a lack of a functioning health care system. the cost of just giving birth alone is around -
(No insurance) Total average hospital bill for a regular birth: $30,000. (No insurance) Total average hospital bill with a c-section: $50,000.
not only is it the poor who are more likely to die because they cannot afford proper health care.
But even among the middle and upper class the death rate is high because of poor health of the woman to begin with-
cardiovascular disease (hypertensive disorders, heart failure and stroke) is a major contributor to poor maternal health outcomes.

When bringing up the amount of women who die giving birth in america. Then it is not a pro life or pro choice debate. It is instead a debate on why americans do not have a universal health care system.

So the question you really should be asking is why does your government not create such a system,
 
LetsGoBrandon said:
Where have I done that? Or are you now suggesting that carrying a pregnancy to birth is attempted murder?

Are you referring to the baby? Or the mom that wants to kill the baby before it's born?
Click to expand...
There is no baby before birth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom