(01-22-2018 09:12 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 06:27 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 02:38 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 03:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Released by an anti-choice group. Mmkay.

You mean a pro-life group rather than a pro-death group.

But I'm sure the pro-death group would be completely unbiased.

Pro-Choice is kind of a contradiction in terms. The unborn children have no say in the matter.

It depends on how you view it, unborn baby or a cluster of cells. Where that line gets crossed is all philosophical until around the end of the first trimester, IMO.

It's an issue people are just going to have to disagree on. There's not (and won't be) enough push from either side to make it budge from where it is. It doesn't move the majority of the country either way. People are generally satisfied where we are on this issue.

I think the proponents of abortion are satisfied, we're where they want us. Don't think those of us opposed are satisfied.

In this issue, the satisfaction of the those either all for it or all against it isn't important. The moderates are the largest contingent. According to Gallup the good majority of Americans are satisfied with it being legal under certain circumstances. I'm sure the 29% for it under any circumstance and the 18% against it in any circumstance aren't satisfied with where they are, but the rest aren't gonna waste the breath on the issue.

It's just an issue to get the passionates to the polls out of fear that someone is going to make moves against their side. An easy button to push.

(01-22-2018 04:57 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  So instead the woman has no say in the matter.

So what... they baby up and snuck in uninvited so it needs to die...

(01-22-2018 09:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I’ll just never understand how one can be so sure in their viewpoints of another’s life.

That they can support the right for a person to arbitrarily kill another... I agree completely.

Quote:I’ve seen enough neglect in my life and yes never being born is a better existence than being neglected and abused mentally and physically.

And, borrowing from above, are you "so sure in your viewpoint" that you're ok with a kid being killed in the womb..

Quote:I will NEVER understand that.

A person (healthy / good parents), is a person (healthy / bad parents), is a person (unhealthy)...

It's not really complicated Mach. I can recommend some reading for you to help, a lot of small words.

Quote:No libertarian could be in favor of such an astounding invasion of ones privacy.

If the libertarian believes life begins at conception (or viability) then protecting that life from an assault by another (even their mother/doctor) is completely in line with their philosophy.

Quote:It’s a medical privacy issue at heart.

The right to kill someone else is not about medical privacy...

Bull..... I’ve said this from time to time even when I’m mad at you guys. I believe you think you are doing the right thing and deep down inside I respect it, but also deep down inside I know you guys are just terribly wrong and you’ll never convince me I’m wrong. Won’t happen. It kept me away from the church for twenty years. I’ve reconciled that part of my life, I just think you guys are just pawns in the chess game.

(01-22-2018 11:10 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I believe you think you are doing the right thing and deep down inside I respect it, but also deep down inside I know you guys are just terribly wrong

Then maybe, just maybe, don't be so smug as to say "I’ll just never understand how one can be so sure in their viewpoints of another’s life"... When you yourself are being that smug.

Smug enough to call someone "a pawn" because they disagree with you about when life beings.

(01-22-2018 06:27 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 02:38 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 03:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 02:45 PM)bullet Wrote:  So why is the Democratic Party so anti-life? I think the answer is simple. 2nd biggest contributor to their Georgia 6th candidate-Planned Parenthood. Democrats are supporting their donors.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/01/1...-time.html

"...An annual poll released Wednesday by The Knights of Columbus and Marist on Americans’ abortion views found that 63 percent of Americans now strongly support a ban on abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, up from 59 percent just a year ago. The number of Democrats who support the same ban has increased to 56 percent from 49 percent in January 2017. Also noteworthy is that 61 percent of Democrats want significant restrictions on abortion.
The poll also found that 62 percent of Americans said they believe life begins within the first three months of a woman’s pregnancy. Among those who believe life begins at conception, 46 percent said they believe so because it is “a biological and scientific fact,” versus 45 percent who said they believe it based on “a philosophical or religious belief....”"

Released by an anti-choice group. Mmkay.

You mean a pro-life group rather than a pro-death group.

But I'm sure the pro-death group would be completely unbiased.

Pro-Choice is kind of a contradiction in terms. The unborn children have no say in the matter.

It depends on how you view it, unborn baby or a cluster of cells. Where that line gets crossed is all philosophical until around the end of the first trimester, IMO.

It's an issue people are just going to have to disagree on. There's not (and won't be) enough push from either side to make it budge from where it is. It doesn't move the majority of the country either way. People are generally satisfied where we are on this issue.

I believe human life begins at conception and abortion, as a form of birth control, is morally wrong. But I understand there is a lot of disagreement on when human life begins and not everything that is morally wrong should be illegal. But there should be more restrictions. Partial birth abortion is just not justifiable under any moral code.

Smug..... me.

If you knew me in real life you wouldn’t think that way. Written communication is easily misconstrued.

Pawn being used. The R’s use you guys like the D’s use unions. Truth

(01-22-2018 11:16 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Smug..... me.

If you knew me in real life you wouldn’t think that way. Written communication is easily misconstrued.

Perhaps...

you come across calling me a pawn because I believe life begins at conception.
you constantly treat people who disagree with you like idiots

You come across as smug.

That’s probably your brain telling you that. I have such mad argumentive skills your brain is telling you your position is idiotic. It’s like one of those errors in a computer OS logic board. It would be hard day to day arguing with me from the inferior position.

I get it.............

(01-22-2018 11:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 06:27 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 03:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 02:38 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-21-2018 03:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Released by an anti-choice group. Mmkay.

You mean a pro-life group rather than a pro-death group.

But I'm sure the pro-death group would be completely unbiased.

Pro-Choice is kind of a contradiction in terms. The unborn children have no say in the matter.

It depends on how you view it, unborn baby or a cluster of cells. Where that line gets crossed is all philosophical until around the end of the first trimester, IMO.

It's an issue people are just going to have to disagree on. There's not (and won't be) enough push from either side to make it budge from where it is. It doesn't move the majority of the country either way. People are generally satisfied where we are on this issue.

I believe human life begins at conception and abortion, as a form of birth control, is morally wrong. But I understand there is a lot of disagreement on when human life begins and not everything that is morally wrong should be illegal. But there should be more restrictions. Partial birth abortion is just not justifiable under any moral code.

I personally agree.

(01-22-2018 11:27 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  That’s probably your brain telling you that. I have such mad argumentive skills your brain is telling you your position is idiotic. It’s like one of those errors in a computer OS logic board. It would be hard day to day arguing with me from the inferior position.

I get it.............

Argumentative skills aren't necessarily debate or persuasive skills.

(01-22-2018 11:27 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I have such mad argumentive skills your brain is telling you your position is idiotic. It’s like one of those errors in a computer OS logic board.

So.... back to strait trolling...

FFS Mach, Trump broke you... I miss what you used to be

My goodness brother......... you had to laugh at that............

Woke myself up chuckling about it and had to pop on here to see if I got a smile back. Nothing but a warm hearted joke on my part. Still think it’s funny.

Birth controle is cheap or free.
If a woman is raped or sexually abused or a minor, while the baby could survive, her choice, but Doctor must notify authorities.
Of course life of mother no matter how old the child.


So every other woman is.......I want the sex but not the baby. That's crap but fine. Instead of taking a pill before sex they want to take it after sex?
Instead of taking a free or extremely cheap pill they want a medical procedure.

Ok fine. Just make the decision. Perhaps medicine should look to create a better pregnancy test. Something a woman can check weekly that is cheap as a daily pill.

At least don't hurt something that feels pain. At least don't kill something that's alive outside the womb.

Not just for convenience for Christ's sake.


We have a population problem in America. We are shipping them in from over seas and over the desert legally and illegally. Home grown kids are best.
Society needs to support every pregnant mother in every way.

The Village should protect life of babies instead of burning down Frankensteins.

Life does begin at conception. It's just one of those truths that indisputable. Argue over viability if you like. Brain function. Or any other processes that follow that beginning.

(01-22-2018 09:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I’ll just never understand how one can be so sure in their viewpoints of another’s life.

That life we're so sure about... it's an innocent child.

The baby just wants to immigrate to the United States.

If you dont believe life begins at conception, then you need to explain why you are denying science.

(01-22-2018 10:07 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-22-2018 04:22 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I'm opposed to abortion BUT
A couple I've known for some time really really wanted to have a child.

.....

I have a hard time supporting laws that leave critical medical decisions up to judges in an emergency situation and I have a hard time supporting laws that make doctors fear for their freedom and livelihood in critical situations.

I'm sorry I've never seen *ANYONE* say that if the mother is going to die that she should not be afforded an abortion. At the point where one/both of their lives are in danger it's triage.

This is an example a lot of pro-abortion folks bring up which is *1* exceedingly rare and *2* something everyone agrees one.

Quote:Want to ban it at viability, I'm cool with that.

The problem is that viability is a moving target. Kids can be born at 22 weeks now and are viable. 10 years ago that was 28 weeks. In five years it's 17 weeks.

"viability" is not a hard and fixed word or time.

You missed my point. I specifically said no one is going to say that life of the mother shouldn't be an exception.
The problem I was pointing out is that judicial order is not an acceptable oversight at all and we have to be careful or doctors will be afraid of being second guessed.