Poll of the Day > Do you mostly consider yourself to be pro choice or pro life?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4
ReturnOfFa 03/25/22 1:14:21 PM #101:	captainjeff87 posted... For the most part I'd say pro choice If the woman is raped, had a miscarriage, has some sort of health issue in which giving birth could cause adverse effects on her or the baby or if it's an incest baby then by all means get an abortion However if it's a case of the woman having irresponsible sex every weekend with the first dude that buys her a drink then have the baby and put it up for adoption instead of killing it because you have no self control not really sure how forcing that particular hypothetical example that isn't a statistical reality to bring the child to term is especially intelligent --- girls like my fa <cite>ReturnOfFa posted [p:963744533] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>captainjeff87 posted... </cite> <quote>For the most part I'd say pro choice If the woman is raped, had a miscarriage, has some sort of health issue in which giving birth could cause adverse effects on her or the baby or if it's an incest baby then by all means get an abortion However if it's a case of the woman having irresponsible sex every weekend with the first dude that buys her a drink then have the baby and put it up for adoption instead of killing it because you have no self control</quote>not really sure how forcing that particular hypothetical example that isn't a statistical reality to bring the child to term is especially intelligent </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_Strong_Fox 03/25/22 1:15:32 PM #102:	Wanded posted... it's not a point, it's just reality lol a fetus is the child of his/her parents I hope you know that no matter how much we see them as children were still gonna abort their asses lmao At least thats how I think. --- Here we are, back to the blue. <cite>The_Strong_Fox posted [p:963744567] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>it's not a point, it's just reality lol a fetus is the child of his/her parents</quote>I hope you know that no matter how much we see them as children were still gonna abort their asses lmao At least thats how I think. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Interstella5555 03/25/22 1:30:21 PM #103:	captainjeff87 posted... For the most part I'd say pro choice If the woman is raped, had a miscarriage, has some sort of health issue in which giving birth could cause adverse effects on her or the baby or if it's an incest baby then by all means get an abortion This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion. <cite>Interstella5555 posted [p:963744942] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>captainjeff87 posted... </cite> <quote>For the most part I'd say pro choice If the woman is raped, had a miscarriage, has some sort of health issue in which giving birth could cause adverse effects on her or the baby or if it's an incest baby then by all means get an abortion</quote> This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ReturnOfFa 03/25/22 1:34:12 PM #104:	Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544 --- girls like my fa <cite>ReturnOfFa posted [p:963745059] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_Strong_Fox 03/25/22 1:56:05 PM #105:	Interstella5555 posted... This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion. Quite the long shot to use one thing someone said as proof were all lost. Almost a bit sad. --- Here we are, back to the blue. <cite>The_Strong_Fox posted [p:963745604] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Interstella5555 posted... </cite> <quote>This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion.</quote>Quite the long shot to use one thing someone said as proof were all lost. Almost a bit sad. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_Strong_Fox 03/25/22 1:57:01 PM #106:	ReturnOfFa posted... Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544 What the fuck? --- Here we are, back to the blue. <cite>The_Strong_Fox posted [p:963745624] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>ReturnOfFa posted... </cite> <quote>Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544</quote>What the fuck? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 03/25/22 2:15:59 PM #107:	ParanoidObsessive posted... Not really. What he's essentially saying is that you shouldn't be aborting in the third trimester. Which... is something even most pro-abortion advocates would agree with. Arguably, it's almost never true. If anything, it's usually the ultimate expression of lust. And occasionally the ultimate expression of victimization through rape. No because pro-abortion is not a thing. Gaawa_chan posted... What's odd to me is that there are references to abortion in Abrahamic texts... teaching people to use abortion as a test to see if a woman is cheating on her husband. :-/ No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times. Wanded posted... it is though Nah. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:963746091] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>ParanoidObsessive posted...</cite> <quote> Not really. What he's essentially saying is that you shouldn't be aborting in the third trimester. Which... is something even most pro-abortion advocates would agree with. Arguably, it's almost never true. If anything, it's usually the ultimate expression of lust. And occasionally the ultimate expression of victimization through rape.</quote> No because pro-abortion is not a thing. Gaawa_chan posted...</cite> <quote> What's odd to me is that there are references to abortion in Abrahamic texts... teaching people to use abortion as a test to see if a woman is cheating on her husband. :-/ </quote> No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times. Wanded posted...</cite> <quote> it is though </quote> Nah.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 03/25/22 2:23:12 PM #108:	kind9 posted... But I already answered that. I said "not emotion, appeal to emotion" meaning I wasn't accusing you of being emotional, I was saying that the type of argument in the meme, and that I usually hear from pro-lifers, is an appeal to emotion. I'm finished with that topic now. Mainly I'm curious why and when you give personhood to the fetus or embryo or whatever. What is your personal justification for that? when he/her begins to exist as a new human being with distinct and new human dna i don't think it's an appeal to emotion, before i explain why though, you've said that you are pro choice because my side makes appeals to emotion/religious ethics, yet in a quick scroll through this topic i find the ultimate expression of victimization through rape. Abortion is medical care, as is health care related to preventing maternal mortality in general Pro-life is tyranny they don't actually care about the babies whose lives they claim to be protecting. They just want to punish women for having sex. there are references to abortion in Abrahamic texts... teaching people to use abortion as a test to see if a woman is cheating on her husband it happen so much in the Bible it is actually the other side making appeals to emotion/religious ethics nonstop, did you just happen to miss all this? shouldn't you, seeing all this, be neutral on the subject according to what you've said? --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963746280] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>kind9 posted... </cite> <quote>But I already answered that. I said "not emotion, appeal to emotion" meaning I wasn't accusing you of being emotional, I was saying that the type of argument in the meme, and that I usually hear from pro-lifers, is an appeal to emotion. I'm finished with that topic now. Mainly I'm curious why and when you give personhood to the fetus or embryo or whatever. What is your personal justification for that?</quote>when he/her begins to exist as a new human being with distinct and new human dna i don't think it's an appeal to emotion, before i explain why though, you've said that you are pro choice because my side makes appeals to emotion/religious ethics, yet in a quick scroll through this topic i find <quote>the ultimate expression of victimization through rape.</quote> <quote>Abortion is medical care, as is health care related to preventing maternal mortality in general</quote> <quote>Pro-life is tyranny</quote> <quote> they don't actually care about the babies whose lives they claim to be protecting. They just want to punish women for having sex.</quote> <quote>there are references to abortion in Abrahamic texts... teaching people to use abortion as a test to see if a woman is cheating on her husband</quote> <quote>it happen so much in the Bible</quote> it is actually the other side making appeals to emotion/religious ethics nonstop, did you just happen to miss all this? shouldn't you, seeing all this, be neutral on the subject according to what you've said? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 03/25/22 2:24:02 PM #109:	Revelation34 posted... Nah https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0QHw7iy1Rg --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963746300] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>Nah</quote>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0QHw7iy1Rg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 03/25/22 2:39:53 PM #110:	Revelation34 posted... No because pro-abortion is not a thing. https://secularhumanism.org/2016/07/cont-why-i-am-pro-abortion-not-just-pro-choice/ --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963746727] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>No because pro-abortion is not a thing.</quote> <quote>https://secularhumanism.org/2016/07/cont-why-i-am-pro-abortion-not-just-pro-choice/</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sodium-chloride 03/25/22 3:33:17 PM #111:	Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? <cite>sodium-chloride posted [p:963748075] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
captainjeff87 03/25/22 3:59:45 PM #112:	Interstella5555 posted... This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion. I'll be the first to admit that was a horrible example and a complete misunderstanding on my part and I apologize for that but I still stand by my other points --- PSN: CaptainJeff87 (please say Gfaqs in friend request msg) <cite>captainjeff87 posted [p:963748747] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Interstella5555 posted... </cite> <quote>This is why you people are truly lost, you don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about, please tell me more aobut women who had miscarrigaes and then went and got an abortion.</quote>I'll be the first to admit that was a horrible example and a complete misunderstanding on my part and I apologize for that but I still stand by my other points </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Gaawa_chan 03/25/22 4:12:53 PM #113:	Revelation34 posted... No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times. ... They also don't use the words "gay" or "homosexual" but most people have no problem admitting that the concepts are there. --- Hi <cite>Gaawa_chan posted [p:963749122] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times.</quote>... They also don't use the words "gay" or "homosexual" but most people have no problem admitting that the concepts are there. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 03/25/22 5:01:44 PM #114:	Revelation34 posted... No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times. You know the English language didn't exist in Biblical times? --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:963750456] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>No there isn't. Abortion is not mentioned at all in any religious text simply because the word of term did not exist in biblical times.</quote>You know the English language didn't exist in Biblical times? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 03/26/22 12:59:29 AM #115:	Metalsonic66 posted... You know the English language didn't exist in Biblical times? Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:963761180] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Metalsonic66 posted...</cite> <quote> You know the English language didn't exist in Biblical times? </quote> Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Unbridled9 03/26/22 5:11:13 AM #116:	sodium-chloride posted... Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? It's a matter of perspective. To a pro-life person all human life is sacred with, at most, EXTREMELY few exceptions. So an abortion is, effectively, state-sanctioned murder. And to top it off it's being done not for health reasons or the like, but because a woman was irresponsible and now wants an 'easy out' so she can resume living a care-free life by killing the child and likely doing so again and again. It's not a question of 'women's right to her own body' or whatever else. It's about dealing with irresponsible women living irresponsible lives and making unborn children pay the price. If you talk to them you'll find the majority are okay with it when there's health issues (or at least understanding of why someone would want one). A lesser, but still decent, amount would also be understanding in cases of rape and/or incest (and it's really messed up that there's an 'and' there). But they don't see the pro-choice arguments it that way. They see it as some girl going out and partying wildly, getting drunk, doing drugs, having unprotected sex, and everything else than murdering the resulting child instead of, say, reforming their lives or giving it up for adoption or anything else. So approving of it is like approving of both hedonistic lifestyles and child murder. You won't ever budge them on that either because doing so means they either have to accept that human life isn't sacred, which is not happening (especially since many of them are religious), or that the fetus isn't human, which is extremely difficult at best because even if you believe it isn't human there's no denying it will become human several months down the line. This is why it's a fruitless battle. Pro-life see it as approving of state-sanctioned murder and irresponsible living. Pro-choice see it as defending a woman's right to her own body and so-forth. Neither side is really willing to condemn the extremists on their own side and both have adopted an 'all-or-nothing' attitude regarding the subject. --- No more shall man have wings to bear him to paradise. Henceforth, he shall walk. - Venat <cite>Unbridled9 posted [p:963763711] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>sodium-chloride posted... </cite> <quote>Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)?</quote> It's a matter of perspective. To a pro-life person all human life is sacred with, at most, EXTREMELY few exceptions. So an abortion is, effectively, state-sanctioned murder. And to top it off it's being done not for health reasons or the like, but because a woman was irresponsible and now wants an 'easy out' so she can resume living a care-free life by killing the child and likely doing so again and again. It's not a question of 'women's right to her own body' or whatever else. It's about dealing with irresponsible women living irresponsible lives and making unborn children pay the price. If you talk to them you'll find the majority are okay with it when there's health issues (or at least understanding of why someone would want one). A lesser, but still decent, amount would also be understanding in cases of rape and/or incest (and it's really messed up that there's an 'and' there). But they don't see the pro-choice arguments it that way. They see it as some girl going out and partying wildly, getting drunk, doing drugs, having unprotected sex, and everything else than murdering the resulting child instead of, say, reforming their lives or giving it up for adoption or anything else. So approving of it is like approving of both hedonistic lifestyles and child murder. You won't ever budge them on that either because doing so means they either have to accept that human life isn't sacred, which is not happening (especially since many of them are religious), or that the fetus isn't human, which is extremely difficult at best because even if you believe it isn't human there's no denying it will become human several months down the line. This is why it's a fruitless battle. Pro-life see it as approving of state-sanctioned murder and irresponsible living. Pro-choice see it as defending a woman's right to her own body and so-forth. Neither side is really willing to condemn the extremists on their own side and both have adopted an 'all-or-nothing' attitude regarding the subject. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#117	Post #117 was unavailable or deleted.
Metalsonic66 03/26/22 7:35:54 AM #118:	Revelation34 posted... Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong. The term being used doesn't mean anything? Because other languages exist? --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:963764906] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong.</quote>The term being used doesn't mean anything? Because other languages exist? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sodium-chloride 03/26/22 8:17:10 AM #119:	Unbridled9 posted... It's a matter of perspective... That's great but that didn't answer any of the questions I asked. <cite>sodium-chloride posted [p:963765303] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Unbridled9 posted... </cite> <quote>It's a matter of perspective...</quote> That's great but that didn't answer any of the questions I asked. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 03/26/22 3:05:48 PM #120:	sodium-chloride posted... Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? there are minor effects but you can say my life wouldn't change in both scenarios, i was already born so it's not like i can be aborted. if democrats tomorrow make it legal to murder 1 year olds for the same economic reasons you mentioned, it would also not affect me, i'm already past that age, it would also not affect you but wouldn't you fight against it? some people definitely wouldn't care or bat an eye because it has nothing to do with them, i'm one of the people who would care. --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963773011] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>sodium-chloride posted... </cite> <quote>Questions for pro-lifers: how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? Would you go out on the streets and protest? How would your life be affected? What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)?</quote>there are minor effects but you can say my life wouldn't change in both scenarios, i was already born so it's not like i can be aborted. if democrats tomorrow make it legal to murder 1 year olds for the same economic reasons you mentioned, it would also not affect me, i'm already past that age, it would also not affect you but wouldn't you fight against it? some people definitely wouldn't care or bat an eye because it has nothing to do with them, i'm one of the people who would care. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Unbridled9 03/27/22 6:36:19 AM #121:	sodium-chloride posted... That's great but that didn't answer any of the questions I asked. It kind of did? Pro-life people don't consider those questions relevant because the impact it has on them personally is not part of their issue with it. Bringing it around to 'personal impact' probably just makes it worse TBH because it's not only telling them that you think they should only care when it affects them personally, but they see themselves speaking up for those who can't. Also, that's just a terrible argument to make in general. There's LOOOOOT of things that don't affect you personally that people still care about. Imagine if, in order to stand up for LGBT rights, you had to BE LGBT yourself. They're not going to make a distinction there. Since you asked though... Each question one by one. how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? For most people in general, not much at all. Of course there's a lot of people out there whose lives wouldn't change if it was 100% illegal either. And I don't mean in the 'they'll do back alley abortions' way Fa seems to think. Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? That can only be answered on an individual level. I personally suspect you'd see church-based initiatives to protest it that don't really go much of anywheres. I feel the vast majority would grumble and accept it but would also do everything they could to stop it from happening. Would you go out on the streets and protest? Can only be answered on an individual level. How would your life be affected? As I said before; for most people it wouldn't. Least not directly. What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? For many of them it would be a huge morale boost; but then they'd go back to living their daily lives while probably only caring whenever someone tried to make it legal again or some back-alley doctor got discovered. It's been illegal throughout the majority of modern history so it's not like there isn't a lot of examples here. Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? This is a very bad argument. It's basically implying that these things are all horrible. Net negatives. Especially to someone who sees human life as inherently sacred. You're pretty much saying it's better to be dead or to have never existed than to be poor or in the foster system and that the entire world would be a better place with less of these people because they'd be dead/never existing. You'll never win that argument and it's going to do nothing more than paint you as a horrifically elitist monster. It would be even worse given that a lot of the people who would advocate for such a point are seen as being upper-middle or flat-out upper-class coastal city elites while the pro-life people are seen as being a bunch of relatively rural/suburb, small-town, lower-middle/lower class people. Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? Thing is, abortion's not going to have an effect on the rate of this, just the number. Even if it could it's a lengthy discussion about socio-economics that I doubt anyone in this thread really understands. It's also pretty one-sided since you're only bringing up the women (and even then only those who get raped) and completely ignoring the problems boys in the same situation would have to deal with. --- No more shall man have wings to bear him to paradise. Henceforth, he shall walk. - Venat <cite>Unbridled9 posted [p:963789220] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>sodium-chloride posted... </cite> <quote>That's great but that didn't answer any of the questions I asked.</quote> It kind of did? Pro-life people don't consider those questions relevant because the impact it has on them personally is not part of their issue with it. Bringing it around to 'personal impact' probably just makes it worse TBH because it's not only telling them that you think they should only care when it affects them personally, but they see themselves speaking up for those who can't. Also, that's just a terrible argument to make in general. There's LOOOOOT of things that don't affect you personally that people still care about. Imagine if, in order to stand up for LGBT rights, you had to BE LGBT yourself. They're not going to make a distinction there. Since you asked though... Each question one by one. how would your life change if abortions were 100% legal? For most people in general, not much at all. Of course there's a lot of people out there whose lives wouldn't change if it was 100% illegal either. And I don't mean in the 'they'll do back alley abortions' way Fa seems to think. Would you actively go out and prevent women from obtaining them? That can only be answered on an individual level. I personally suspect you'd see church-based initiatives to protest it that don't really go much of anywheres. I feel the vast majority would grumble and accept it but would also do everything they could to stop it from happening. Would you go out on the streets and protest? Can only be answered on an individual level. How would your life be affected? As I said before; for most people it wouldn't. Least not directly. What happens if all of a sudden abortion is illegal across the country? For many of them it would be a huge morale boost; but then they'd go back to living their daily lives while probably only caring whenever someone tried to make it legal again or some back-alley doctor got discovered. It's been illegal throughout the majority of modern history so it's not like there isn't a lot of examples here. Is it preferable to live in a world with significantly more children growing up in bad/poor homes or in the foster system? This is a very bad argument. It's basically implying that these things are all horrible. Net negatives. Especially to someone who sees human life as inherently sacred. You're pretty much saying it's better to be dead or to have never existed than to be poor or in the foster system and that the entire world would be a better place with less of these people because they'd be dead/never existing. You'll never win that argument and it's going to do nothing more than paint you as a horrifically elitist monster. It would be even worse given that a lot of the people who would advocate for such a point are seen as being upper-middle or flat-out upper-class coastal city elites while the pro-life people are seen as being a bunch of relatively rural/suburb, small-town, lower-middle/lower class people. Where some women have to experience something that was forced upon them (rape)? Thing is, abortion's not going to have an effect on the rate of this, just the number. Even if it could it's a lengthy discussion about socio-economics that I doubt anyone in this thread really understands. It's also pretty one-sided since you're only bringing up the women (and even then only those who get raped) and completely ignoring the problems boys in the same situation would have to deal with. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ReturnOfFa 03/27/22 2:33:11 PM #122:	Revelation34 posted... Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong. LOL there are other ways that the Bible mentions Abortion besides using the english word for it. --- girls like my fa <cite>ReturnOfFa posted [p:963796577] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>Which means the term was never used so using the bible as a source to be pro-life is wrong.</quote>LOL there are other ways that the Bible mentions Abortion besides using the english word for it. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 03/27/22 2:38:44 PM #123:	ReturnOfFa posted... LOL there are other ways that the Bible mentions Abortion besides using the english word for it. Nah it never does. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:963796709] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>ReturnOfFa posted...</cite> <quote> LOL there are other ways that the Bible mentions Abortion besides using the english word for it. </quote> Nah it never does.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pedro45 03/27/22 2:45:03 PM #124:	Y'all know you're arguing over word choice in the bible when it's been fabricated for years? Just saying...even Hobby Lobby was found to have a museum with fake bible scriptures. It's more about content these days if you're gonna be following "the book". --- Warning: Sometimes biased http://i.imgur.com/V0x5fw8.jpg http://i.imgur.com/IOovUge.gif http://i.imgur.com/zw7bqPH.jpg <cite>pedro45 posted [p:963796834] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Y'all know you're arguing over word choice in the bible when it's been fabricated for years? Just saying...even Hobby Lobby was found to have a museum with fake bible scriptures. It's more about content these days if you're gonna be following "the book". </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Unbridled9 03/27/22 2:50:40 PM #125:	Revelation34 posted... Nah it never does. The Bible barely mentions it at all in fact. IIRC the closest is some passage about what happens if two men fight and accidentally cause a pregnant woman to miscarry as a result. To me this implies it wasn't really a 'thing' then. --- No more shall man have wings to bear him to paradise. Henceforth, he shall walk. - Venat <cite>Unbridled9 posted [p:963796975] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>Nah it never does.</quote> The Bible barely mentions it at all in fact. IIRC the closest is some passage about what happens if two men fight and accidentally cause a pregnant woman to miscarry as a result. To me this implies it wasn't really a 'thing' then. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zareth 03/27/22 7:06:37 PM #126:	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays --- In my opinion, all slavery is wrong, even the really fancy kind - Mead <cite>Zareth posted [p:963802602] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 03/27/22 7:35:56 PM #127:	Zareth posted... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays +1 Internets --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:963803217] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays</quote>+1 Internets </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 03/29/22 3:48:48 PM #128:	Wanded posted... https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/1/AAQ2WmAADEGf.jpg And then what? There's a whole lot more involved in preserving a life than simply not aborting it, after all. What do you do to protect the baby from starving? From being exposed to the elements? From all the potential adverse effects of being the child of a single parent and/or of unprepared parents? What about protecting it from naturally or accidentally miscarrying? From sickness? From whatever other dangers might be thrown at it? That is why you're being (completely correctly) accused of making an appeal to emotion: You're not making any sort of argument that considers the practical reality of the situation. You're calling your opponents baby murderers and leaving it at that as though the decision to abort or not abort is limited to simply that decision. It is not. Not remotely. ReturnOfFa posted... Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544 This is indeed the really of anti-abortion laws that pro-lifers rarely consider. If abortion is illegal, every single miscarriage must be criminally investigated as a potential murder. Losing a pregnancy after falling down the stairs could be considered manslaughter if a jury decides you should have had a runner on there to make them less slippery. Neural tube defects due to not taking enough vitamin K? Criminal neglect. And the despicable reality of that is that the only way for a woman to prove her innocence (since guilt is presumed) is by having a doctor determine the miscarriage to be an accident, which means low-income mothers (already at the highest risk of becoming accidentally pregnant and of miscarrying, due to being unable to afford prenatal care) aren't going to be able to afford to do so, so you're going to have a whole lot of lower-class women going to jail for losing their pregnancies. It's not a good situation, and Texas' (and others') approach of encouraging outright witch hunts for women suspected of having abortions will only make it even worse. Unbridled9 posted... And to top it off it's being done not for health reasons or the like, but because a woman was irresponsible and now wants an 'easy out' so she can resume living a care-free life by killing the child and likely doing so again and again. The most effective form of birth control is a vasectomy, which is 99.85% effective. That figure means that, for every 1000 men using that as their sole form of birth control, you'll see 1 pregnancy per year. Those figures are a little hard to apply on a personal scale, since frequency of sex varies so much from person to person, but it's quite useful on a population scale. There are approximately 85 million men between the ages of 18 and 65 in the US, roughly 65-70% of whom are sexually active, for a total of about 57 million. If every single sexually active man in the US got a vasectomy and didn't use any other birth control than that, we could still expect to see 85,500 unplanned pregnancies a year. Of course, vasectomies aren't exactly most people's go-to birth control option, given how (mostly) permanent they are, so most people rely on less effective options. For easy math, we'll assume there are the same number of sexually active women as men and establish the same parameters (100% usage rate of the contraceptive in question, typical use) to evaluate other options: Hormonal IUD: 0.4% failure rate, 228,000 pregnancies Copper IUD: 0.8% failure rate, 456,000 pregnancies Pill/patch/ring: 7% failure rate, 3.99 million pregnancies Diaphragm: 17% failure rate, 9.69 million pregnancies Male condom: 13% failure rate, 7.41 million pregnancies Fertility awareness: 23% failure rate, 13.11 million pregnancies Tubal ligation: 0.5% failure rate, 285,000 pregnancies Obviously, these are extreme hypothetical situations. Not every sexually active person wants to avoid getting pregnant, but they illustrate the reality of the situation: Unplanned/unwanted pregnancies are not just the product of being irresponsible. Characterizing them as though they are flagrantly ignores the reality that birth control is not infallible and that there will always be a significant number of unplanned pregnancies even if everyone is responsible about it. At the same time, however, expecting the entire world to abstain from all non-reproductive sex is hardly reasonable. Sex is fun, and with any form of birth control, the risk of pregnancy from any given act of sex is negligible enough that there's little reason to let it get in the way of having that fun. On a population scale, however, that means unwanted pregnancies. Having the option to abort those instead of taking the risk and suffering associated with carrying the children to term is not "rewarding irresponsible hedonism," it's mitigating that last little vestige of bad luck that no amount of responsibility can stamp out. Are there people who end up pregnant because they didn't use birth control? Of course, and that is irresponsible, but you can't justify throwing every responsible sexually active person under the bus based on the irresponsibility of those other people. If you want to cut down on that, look at subsidizing birth control and improving sex ed, both of which have been exhaustively proven to reduce unplanned pregnancy rates. Unbridled9 posted... Pro-life people don't consider those questions relevant because the impact it has on them personally is not part of their issue with it. Bringing it around to 'personal impact' probably just makes it worse TBH because it's not only telling them that you think they should only care when it affects them personally, but they see themselves speaking up for those who can't. Here's the thing, though: It does personally affect other people. It causes them a great deal of harm, in fact. Pregnancy and childbirth kill people, and even when they don't, they're not exactly pleasant experiences. Heck, an American woman is 10-15 times more likely to die as a consequence of carrying a pregnancy to term than anyone is to develop a serious side effect from any of the Covid vaccines (let alone die from one), but you certainly don't see the anti-abortion folks clamouring to force those on people (and in terms of the risks being taken on, this is the equivalent of arresting people for not getting the jab, so "force" is actually the right word here). When they "speak up for those who can't," they are choosing to prioritize the life of a pre-conscious person over the comfort, safety, and life of somebody who is very much conscious. Advocating for abortion to be illegal is advocating for the suffering of those women that would otherwise have one, under the pretense of caring about a child that won't even be aware of the process ("caring" which, again, stops the instant the baby takes a breath). It's easy to do that from an ivory tower of not being affected either way, but these are very real consequences, which those who will only ever have to consider this matter hypothetically need to realize before opening their mouths. This, incidentally, is why pro-life men need to shut up and leave the issue to those that actually have a stake in it. Nobody should ever demand a sacrifice from others that they will never have to make themselves. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:963856982] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/1/AAQ2WmAADEGf.jpg</quote> And then what? There's a whole lot more involved in preserving a life than simply not aborting it, after all. What do you do to protect the baby from starving? From being exposed to the elements? From all the potential adverse effects of being the child of a single parent and/or of unprepared parents? What about protecting it from naturally or accidentally miscarrying? From sickness? From whatever other dangers might be thrown at it? That is why you're being (completely correctly) accused of making an appeal to emotion: You're not making any sort of argument that considers the practical reality of the situation. You're calling your opponents baby murderers and leaving it at that as though the decision to abort or not abort is limited to simply that decision. It is not. Not remotely. ReturnOfFa posted... </cite> <quote>Welcome to America: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544</quote> This is indeed the really of anti-abortion laws that pro-lifers rarely consider. If abortion is illegal, every single miscarriage must be criminally investigated as a potential murder. Losing a pregnancy after falling down the stairs could be considered manslaughter if a jury decides you should have had a runner on there to make them less slippery. Neural tube defects due to not taking enough vitamin K? Criminal neglect. And the despicable reality of that is that the only way for a woman to prove her innocence (since guilt is presumed) is by having a doctor determine the miscarriage to be an accident, which means low-income mothers (already at the highest risk of becoming accidentally pregnant and of miscarrying, due to being unable to afford prenatal care) aren't going to be able to afford to do so, so you're going to have a whole lot of lower-class women going to jail for losing their pregnancies. It's not a good situation, and Texas' (and others') approach of encouraging outright witch hunts for women suspected of having abortions will only make it even worse. Unbridled9 posted... </cite> <quote>And to top it off it's being done not for health reasons or the like, but because a woman was irresponsible and now wants an 'easy out' so she can resume living a care-free life by killing the child and likely doing so again and again.</quote> The most effective form of birth control is a vasectomy, which is 99.85% effective. That figure means that, for every 1000 men using that as their sole form of birth control, you'll see 1 pregnancy per year. Those figures are a little hard to apply on a personal scale, since frequency of sex varies so much from person to person, but it's quite useful on a population scale. There are approximately 85 million men between the ages of 18 and 65 in the US, roughly 65-70% of whom are sexually active, for a total of about 57 million. If every single sexually active man in the US got a vasectomy and didn't use any other birth control than that, we could still expect to see 85,500 unplanned pregnancies a year. Of course, vasectomies aren't exactly most people's go-to birth control option, given how (mostly) permanent they are, so most people rely on less effective options. For easy math, we'll assume there are the same number of sexually active women as men and establish the same parameters (100% usage rate of the contraceptive in question, typical use) to evaluate other options: Hormonal IUD: 0.4% failure rate, 228,000 pregnanciesCopper IUD: 0.8% failure rate, 456,000 pregnanciesPill/patch/ring: 7% failure rate, 3.99 million pregnanciesDiaphragm: 17% failure rate, 9.69 million pregnanciesMale condom: 13% failure rate, 7.41 million pregnanciesFertility awareness: 23% failure rate, 13.11 million pregnanciesTubal ligation: 0.5% failure rate, 285,000 pregnanciesObviously, these are extreme hypothetical situations. Not every sexually active person wants to avoid getting pregnant, but they illustrate the reality of the situation: Unplanned/unwanted pregnancies are not just the product of being irresponsible. Characterizing them as though they are flagrantly ignores the reality that birth control is not infallible and that there will always be a significant number of unplanned pregnancies even if everyone is responsible about it. At the same time, however, expecting the entire world to abstain from all non-reproductive sex is hardly reasonable. Sex is fun, and with any form of birth control, the risk of pregnancy from any given act of sex is negligible enough that there's little reason to let it get in the way of having that fun. On a population scale, however, that means unwanted pregnancies. Having the option to abort those instead of taking the risk and suffering associated with carrying the children to term is not "rewarding irresponsible hedonism," it's mitigating that last little vestige of bad luck that no amount of responsibility can stamp out. Are there people who end up pregnant because they didn't use birth control? Of course, and that is irresponsible, but you can't justify throwing every responsible sexually active person under the bus based on the irresponsibility of those other people. If you want to cut down on that, look at subsidizing birth control and improving sex ed, both of which have been exhaustively proven to reduce unplanned pregnancy rates. Unbridled9 posted... </cite> <quote>Pro-life people don't consider those questions relevant because the impact it has on them personally is not part of their issue with it. Bringing it around to 'personal impact' probably just makes it worse TBH because it's not only telling them that you think they should only care when it affects them personally, but they see themselves speaking up for those who can't.</quote> Here's the thing, though: It does personally affect other people. It causes them a great deal of harm, in fact. Pregnancy and childbirth kill people, and even when they don't, they're not exactly pleasant experiences. Heck, an American woman is 10-15 times more likely to die as a consequence of carrying a pregnancy to term than anyone is to develop a serious side effect from any of the Covid vaccines (let alone die from one), but you certainly don't see the anti-abortion folks clamouring to force those on people (and in terms of the risks being taken on, this is the equivalent of arresting people for not getting the jab, so "force" is actually the right word here). When they "speak up for those who can't," they are choosing to prioritize the life of a pre-conscious person over the comfort, safety, and life of somebody who is very much conscious. Advocating for abortion to be illegal is advocating for the suffering of those women that would otherwise have one, under the pretense of caring about a child that won't even be aware of the process ("caring" which, again, stops the instant the baby takes a breath). It's easy to do that from an ivory tower of not being affected either way, but these are very real consequences, which those who will only ever have to consider this matter hypothetically need to realize before opening their mouths. This, incidentally, is why pro-life men need to shut up and leave the issue to those that actually have a stake in it. Nobody should ever demand a sacrifice from others that they will never have to make themselves. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Gaawa_chan 03/29/22 6:13:58 PM #129:	This is a video worth watching if you don't know much about women's health. The Q&A section is interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjB5Jakytyc --- Hi <cite>Gaawa_chan posted [p:963861271] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>This is a video worth watching if you don't know much about women's health. The Q&A section is interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjB5Jakytyc </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 03/30/22 6:03:52 AM #130:	Zareth posted... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays since when have fallacies become jokes? XD adjl posted... And then what? There's a whole lot more involved in preserving a life than simply not aborting it, after all. What do you do to protect the baby from starving? From being exposed to the elements? From all the potential adverse effects of being the child of a single parent and/or of unprepared parents? What about protecting it from naturally or accidentally miscarrying? From sickness? From whatever other dangers might be thrown at it? That is why you're being (completely correctly) accused of making an appeal to emotion: You're not making any sort of argument that considers the practical reality of the situation. You're calling your opponents baby murderers and leaving it at that as though the decision to abort or not abort is limited to simply that decision. It is not. Not remotely. https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/1/8/AAQ2WmAADFMm.jpg "maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets. --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963874203] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays</quote>since when have fallacies become jokes? XD adjl posted... </cite> <quote>And then what? There's a whole lot more involved in preserving a life than simply not aborting it, after all. What do you do to protect the baby from starving? From being exposed to the elements? From all the potential adverse effects of being the child of a single parent and/or of unprepared parents? What about protecting it from naturally or accidentally miscarrying? From sickness? From whatever other dangers might be thrown at it? That is why you're being (completely correctly) accused of making an appeal to emotion: You're not making any sort of argument that considers the practical reality of the situation. You're calling your opponents baby murderers and leaving it at that as though the decision to abort or not abort is limited to simply that decision. It is not. Not remotely.</quote>https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/1/8/AAQ2WmAADFMm.jpg "maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 03/30/22 11:11:56 AM #131:	Wanded posted... since when have fallacies become jokes? XD https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/1/8/AAQ2WmAADFMm.jpg "maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets. Good luck murdering a fetus. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:963878759] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted...</cite> <quote> since when have fallacies become jokes? XD https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/1/8/AAQ2WmAADFMm.jpg "maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets. </quote> Good luck murdering a fetus.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Notschmendrake 03/30/22 11:50:13 AM #132:	I dont have a horse in this race, since I don't care about other people's children. Wanded, you should consider using the slavery comparison if you really want to get this topic rolling. Tell them how we used to justify the horrendous treatment of black people by claiming they werent people too. That's always a fun argument to watch. <cite>Notschmendrake posted [p:963879663] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>I dont have a horse in this race, since I don't care about other people's children. Wanded, you should consider using the slavery comparison if you really want to get this topic rolling. Tell them how we used to justify the horrendous treatment of black people by claiming they werent people too. That's always a fun argument to watch. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BUMPED2002 03/30/22 12:00:29 PM #133:	I think people should be allowed to make their own medical decisions period and whether I agree or not doesn't factor into it. Would people like if the Government told you what kind of treatment they thought you should have just because they don't agree with your choice of treatment. I am against abortion but I also think that's a woman's decision to make along with the father and at the end of the day no matter what she does, that woman has to live with her decision right or wrong. --- SpankageBros <cite>BUMPED2002 posted [p:963879894] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>I think people should be allowed to make their own medical decisions period and whether I agree or not doesn't factor into it. Would people like if the Government told you what kind of treatment they thought you should have just because they don't agree with your choice of treatment. I am against abortion but I also think that's a woman's decision to make along with the father and at the end of the day no matter what she does, that woman has to live with her decision right or wrong. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zareth 03/30/22 4:18:23 PM #134:	Wanded posted... since when have fallacies become jokes? XD I mean all the fallacies you regularly post are jokes --- In my opinion, all slavery is wrong, even the really fancy kind - Mead <cite>Zareth posted [p:963886426] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>since when have fallacies become jokes? XD</quote>I mean all the fallacies you regularly post are jokes </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 03/31/22 11:17:22 AM #135:	Wanded posted... "maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets. None of that answers the question you have been asked. Try again. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:963906424] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>"maybe they'll suffer or die so let's murder them" peak liberal logic right here i'm sorry but i disagree with you, i don't think we should genocide the mentally ill homeless people in our streets.</quote> None of that answers the question you have been asked. Try again. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ReturnOfFa 03/31/22 3:03:15 PM #136:	Controversy time! o_O DC Police Find 5 Fetuses In Home Of Anti-Abortion Activist Lauren Handy https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dc-police-fetuses-anti-abortion-activist-lauren-handy_n_6245e9a5e4b068157f749d7f --- girls like my fa <cite>ReturnOfFa posted [p:963912201] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Controversy time! o_O DC Police Find 5 Fetuses In Home Of Anti-Abortion Activist Lauren Handy https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dc-police-fetuses-anti-abortion-activist-lauren-handy_n_6245e9a5e4b068157f749d7f </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Gaawa_chan 03/31/22 10:45:53 PM #137:	ReturnOfFa posted... Controversy time! o_O DC Police Find 5 Fetuses In Home Of Anti-Abortion Activist Lauren Handy https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dc-police-fetuses-anti-abortion-activist-lauren-handy_n_6245e9a5e4b068157f749d7f Ah yes... https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/15/1857976/--The-Only-Moral-Abortion-is-My-Abortion-an-article-by-Joyce-Arthur --- Hi <cite>Gaawa_chan posted [p:963923798] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>ReturnOfFa posted... </cite> <quote>Controversy time! o_O DC Police Find 5 Fetuses In Home Of Anti-Abortion Activist Lauren Handy https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dc-police-fetuses-anti-abortion-activist-lauren-handy_n_6245e9a5e4b068157f749d7f</quote>Ah yes... https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/15/1857976/--The-Only-Moral-Abortion-is-My-Abortion-an-article-by-Joyce-Arthur </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 04/03/22 9:52:31 AM #138:	Zareth posted... I mean all the fallacies you regularly post are jokes see the difference is my jokes have a leg standing on reality and morality while the jokes he made do not adjl posted... None of that answers the question you have been asked. Try again. I did, you're just being purposefully obtuse because i know you're smart enough to connect the dots unlike most libs here, but sure, if you insist i spell every little thing out and we do this the long way then let's go i guess... there isn't a single question on this board on any topic that i am evading or will not answer if people want me to, if i didn't answer it's because i didn't see it (gamefaqs stopped notifying me for replies for some reason), a lot of libs here on the other hand are unable to answer my questions, not saying you're one of them...but we'll see. first of all the question of "but what do we do after" is an irrelevant pivot to the topic of whether abortion is bad or not which is the topic at hand that you are not addressing, if it's bad then there should be a consensus of wanting to prevent it but it doesn't seem you actually think it's bad, on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!", so do you think abortion is bad? to directly answer, people should help as much as they can (as pro life organizations often do) and even if no one can help abortion is still bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason because murder is bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason. X maybe being sick someday isn't a good reason to murder X and imo it takes a heavy amount of biased self blindness to make such arguments/points, was this not a partisan political issue you all would have 100% not have made such points and call them out as ludicrous if i made points with similar logic. unprepared parents can be be prepared, this is 2022, all the info you need is online and again there are pro life organizations who help with these kind of stuff, are people dumber than they were 200 years ago or throughout most of history when there wasn't internet or technology and mothers were mostly very young? because that's basically the point you just made and again i feel like you would have made fun of such a point had this been another topic. natural or accidental miscarrying isn't abortion which is intentional. if you're gonna attempt to counter my point, let me make it clearer because libs have a tendency to confuse what i'm saying and take things to bizzare places, my point is that adults shouldn't be able to intentionally take the life of extremely young individual human beings who can't defend themselves because of unbased prophecies, mights and maybes. i still don't see how what i did is appeal to emotion, if i say murder is bad is that an appeal to emotion? your claim can stay logically consistent only if the answer to this question is yes. i answered your several questions and posed 2 of my one, is abortion bad and is "murder is bad" an emotional appeal, can you answer them with a direct straightforward answer? Revelation34 posted... Good luck murdering a fetus. well it's not hard, all one has to do is perform an abortion --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:963985706] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>I mean all the fallacies you regularly post are jokes</quote>see the difference is my jokes have a leg standing on reality and morality while the jokes he made do not adjl posted... </cite> <quote>None of that answers the question you have been asked. Try again.</quote>I did, you're just being purposefully obtuse because i know you're smart enough to connect the dots unlike most libs here, but sure, if you insist i spell every little thing out and we do this the long way then let's go i guess... there isn't a single question on this board on any topic that i am evading or will not answer if people want me to, if i didn't answer it's because i didn't see it (gamefaqs stopped notifying me for replies for some reason), a lot of libs here on the other hand are unable to answer my questions, not saying you're one of them...but we'll see. first of all the question of "but what do we do after" is an irrelevant pivot to the topic of whether abortion is bad or not which is the topic at hand that you are not addressing, if it's bad then there should be a consensus of wanting to prevent it but it doesn't seem you actually think it's bad, on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!", so do you think abortion is bad? to directly answer, people should help as much as they can (as pro life organizations often do) and even if no one can help abortion is still bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason because murder is bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason. X maybe being sick someday isn't a good reason to murder X and imo it takes a heavy amount of biased self blindness to make such arguments/points, was this not a partisan political issue you all would have 100% not have made such points and call them out as ludicrous if i made points with similar logic. unprepared parents can be be prepared, this is 2022, all the info you need is online and again there are pro life organizations who help with these kind of stuff, are people dumber than they were 200 years ago or throughout most of history when there wasn't internet or technology and mothers were mostly very young? because that's basically the point you just made and again i feel like you would have made fun of such a point had this been another topic. natural or accidental miscarrying isn't abortion which is intentional. if you're gonna attempt to counter my point, let me make it clearer because libs have a tendency to confuse what i'm saying and take things to bizzare places, my point is that adults shouldn't be able to intentionally take the life of extremely young individual human beings who can't defend themselves because of unbased prophecies, mights and maybes. i still don't see how what i did is appeal to emotion, if i say murder is bad is that an appeal to emotion? your claim can stay logically consistent only if the answer to this question is yes. i answered your several questions and posed 2 of my one, is abortion bad and is "murder is bad" an emotional appeal, can you answer them with a direct straightforward answer? Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>Good luck murdering a fetus.</quote>well it's not hard, all one has to do is perform an abortion </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 04/03/22 10:48:20 AM #139:	Wanded posted... well it's not hard, all one has to do is perform an abortion By definition it isn't murder. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:963986654] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted...</cite> <quote>well it's not hard, all one has to do is perform an abortion</quote> By definition it isn't murder.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zareth 04/03/22 4:17:28 PM #140:	Wanded posted... see the difference is my jokes have a leg standing on reality and morality while the jokes he made do not Your reality maybe, not the one we actually live in. Keep believing that the president is the one who controls gas prices. --- In my opinion, all slavery is wrong, even the really fancy kind - Mead <cite>Zareth posted [p:963993411] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>see the difference is my jokes have a leg standing on reality and morality while the jokes he made do not</quote>Your reality maybe, not the one we actually live in. Keep believing that the president is the one who controls gas prices. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 04/04/22 2:14:08 AM #141:	Revelation34 posted... By definition it isn't murder. By definition it's necessarily murder. Zareth posted... Your reality maybe, not the one we actually live in. Keep believing that the president is the one who controls gas prices. did i say he controls them? no action of the president can effect gas prices. true of false? --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:964007697] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Revelation34 posted... </cite> <quote>By definition it isn't murder.</quote>By definition it's necessarily murder. Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>Your reality maybe, not the one we actually live in. Keep believing that the president is the one who controls gas prices.</quote>did i say he controls them? no action of the president can effect gas prices. true of false? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zareth 04/04/22 2:38:34 AM #142:	Wanded posted... did i say he controls them? You sure love those "I did that!" stickers --- In my opinion, all slavery is wrong, even the really fancy kind - Mead <cite>Zareth posted [p:964007968] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>did i say he controls them?</quote>You sure love those "I did that!" stickers </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Gaawa_chan 04/04/22 3:45:59 AM #143:	Wanded posted... By definition it's necessarily murder. If I don't donate my kidney to save someone else, did I murder them because I refused to let them use my body? Wanded, how many people have you murdered every day that you didn't give a blood donation? Less risky and physically damaging than pregnancy, and saves MULTIPLE lives each time you do it. --- Hi <cite>Gaawa_chan posted [p:964008625] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>By definition it's necessarily murder.</quote>If I don't donate my kidney to save someone else, did I murder them because I refused to let them use my body? Wanded, how many people have you murdered every day that you didn't give a blood donation? Less risky and physically damaging than pregnancy, and saves MULTIPLE lives each time you do it. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 04/04/22 11:31:45 AM #144:	Wanded posted... first of all the question of "but what do we do after" is an irrelevant pivot to the topic of whether abortion is bad or not Not at all. Without that piece, "I want abortion to be illegal because I care about the lives of those children" becomes a bald-faced lie. Caring about somebody's survival means caring about their entire life, not just their gestation. If you aren't willing to commit to that, you aren't willing to commit to what you claim is the fundamental basis of your position, which suggests that the actual basis is something you're unwilling to admit (and for many pro-lifers, the actual basis is wanting to punish women for having sex and the "pro-life" thing is a flimsy effort to disguise that as something more palatable). Wanded posted... the topic of whether abortion is bad or not which is the topic at hand that you are not addressing, if it's bad then there should be a consensus of wanting to prevent it but it doesn't seem you actually think it's bad, on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!", so do you think abortion is bad? adjl posted... Pro choice, but on top of that, pro-making it as easy as possible for people to avoid unwanted pregnancies. In my ideal world, there would be no abortions, not because nobody was allowed to get them, but because nobody ever had an unwanted pregnancy. Subsidized birth control, comprehensive sex ed, better (and more affordable) prenatal care to ensure maternal safety... It's never going to be perfect, obviously, but there's a lot more that can be done to reduce unwanted pregnancy rates than is being done, especially in the areas with the strongest pushes to make abortion illegal (who seem averse to such solutions for some very mysterious reason). TL;DR: Abortion is bad, but trying to reduce abortion rates by forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is also bad. Stopping the issue at the source is more effective and has better outcomes for everyone involved. Wanded posted... on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!", This doesn't actually happen on any meaningful scale. You would do well to rely less on straw bogeymen to make your points. Wanded posted... unprepared parents can be be prepared, this is 2022, all the info you need is online and again there are pro life organizations who help with these kind of stuff The Wikihow page on parenting isn't going to pay for feeding a child, or provide child care while a single parent works the long hours needed to support their family, or provide prenatal care to minimize the risk of being killed or injured by the process of pregnancy, or bring back a mother who was killed by her pregnancy (reminder that the US has one of the worst maternal mortality rates in the developed world). This isn't an issue of not knowing how to be a parent, it's an issue of children being a tremendous burden in every capacity, and no amount of "this is 2022" is going to alleviate that. Wanded posted... i still don't see how what i did is appeal to emotion, if i say murder is bad is that an appeal to emotion? your claim can stay logically consistent only if the answer to this question is yes. On its own, yes. We'll put aside the issue of legalistic morality (by definition, killing somebody is only murder if it's illegal, so that phrase could be interpreted as saying "killing is bad if it's illegal," but I don't believe that's what you're trying to say), but you need to establish a logically consistent framework for deciding when and why it's bad to take somebody's life. If you don't do that, you're relying on people reacting emotionally to the concept of murder to make your point for you instead of substantiating it with any sort of concrete rationale. If you do, then you're relating the subject at hand to that logical framework to come up with a consistent, defensible position. So let's do that: Why is killing people (we'll move away from the term "murder" to avoid legalistic confusion) bad? Having defined that, are there any circumstances in which killing somebody could be considered acceptable, despite being bad? Wanded posted... even if no one can help abortion is still bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason because murder is bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason. All other things being equal, sure. But you seem to be forgetting that the fetus is not the only individual being considered here, and all other things are not equal. This is not simply a matter of choosing between "kill baby" and "don't kill baby." This is a matter of choosing between "kill baby" and "force woman to endure pregnancy," which in turn means subjecting the woman to a considerable amount of pain, danger, financial hardship, and disruption to everyday life (especially if she works in a physically demanding field) against her will. Some women will choose the latter option for themselves, and there's nothing wrong with that. What's wrong is taking away the choice by making the former illegal. Not aborting a pregnancy comes with a very, very significant cost, the vast majority of which is borne by the pregnant woman. People have made legitimate self-dense claims for killing conscious humans over less than that, and this is talking about somebody pre-conscious (comparable to taking a vegetative person off life support). Forcing her to bear that cost (especially as somebody who will never even have to consider bearing it themselves, to return to the point of "don't force somebody to make a sacrifice you will never have to make") is very much not right. Again, to flirt with whatboutism, contextualize this by considering the Covid vaccine: The notion of forcing every person in the world to take the shot for the sake of saving millions of lives is completely unfathomable, given the potential for side effects and the insistence on respecting bodily and medical autonomy. Pregnancy, however (especially in the US, compared to other developed nations), is a couple orders of magnitude more dangerous and harmful in every regard, so why is the notion of saving lives enough to justify forcing people who don't want to carry a pregnancy to term to do so? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:964014338] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>first of all the question of "but what do we do after" is an irrelevant pivot to the topic of whether abortion is bad or not</quote> Not at all. Without that piece, "I want abortion to be illegal because I care about the lives of those children" becomes a bald-faced lie. Caring about somebody's survival means caring about their entire life, not just their gestation. If you aren't willing to commit to that, you aren't willing to commit to what you claim is the fundamental basis of your position, which suggests that the actual basis is something you're unwilling to admit (and for many pro-lifers, the actual basis is wanting to punish women for having sex and the "pro-life" thing is a flimsy effort to disguise that as something more palatable). Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>the topic of whether abortion is bad or not which is the topic at hand that you are not addressing, if it's bad then there should be a consensus of wanting to prevent it but it doesn't seem you actually think it's bad, on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!", so do you think abortion is bad?</quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Pro choice, but on top of that, pro-making it as easy as possible for people to avoid unwanted pregnancies. In my ideal world, there would be no abortions, not because nobody was allowed to get them, but because nobody ever had an unwanted pregnancy. Subsidized birth control, comprehensive sex ed, better (and more affordable) prenatal care to ensure maternal safety... It's never going to be perfect, obviously, but there's a lot more that can be done to reduce unwanted pregnancy rates than is being done, especially in the areas with the strongest pushes to make abortion illegal (who seem averse to such solutions for some very mysterious reason).</quote> TL;DR: Abortion is bad, but trying to reduce abortion rates by forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is also bad. Stopping the issue at the source is more effective and has better outcomes for everyone involved. Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>on your side it's often viewed as a positive good thing, a rite of liberal passage even - "abort babies to own the cons!",</quote> This doesn't actually happen on any meaningful scale. You would do well to rely less on straw bogeymen to make your points. Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>unprepared parents can be be prepared, this is 2022, all the info you need is online and again there are pro life organizations who help with these kind of stuff</quote> The Wikihow page on parenting isn't going to pay for feeding a child, or provide child care while a single parent works the long hours needed to support their family, or provide prenatal care to minimize the risk of being killed or injured by the process of pregnancy, or bring back a mother who was killed by her pregnancy (reminder that the US has one of the worst maternal mortality rates in the developed world). This isn't an issue of not knowing how to be a parent, it's an issue of children being a tremendous burden in every capacity, and no amount of "this is 2022" is going to alleviate that. Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>i still don't see how what i did is appeal to emotion, if i say murder is bad is that an appeal to emotion? your claim can stay logically consistent only if the answer to this question is yes.</quote> On its own, yes. We'll put aside the issue of legalistic morality (by definition, killing somebody is only murder if it's illegal, so that phrase could be interpreted as saying "killing is bad if it's illegal," but I don't believe that's what you're trying to say), but you need to establish a logically consistent framework for deciding when and why it's bad to take somebody's life. If you don't do that, you're relying on people reacting emotionally to the concept of murder to make your point for you instead of substantiating it with any sort of concrete rationale. If you do, then you're relating the subject at hand to that logical framework to come up with a consistent, defensible position. So let's do that: Why is killing people (we'll move away from the term "murder" to avoid legalistic confusion) bad? Having defined that, are there any circumstances in which killing somebody could be considered acceptable, despite being bad? Wanded posted... </cite> <quote>even if no one can help abortion is still bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason because murder is bad and shouldn't be done for no good reason.</quote> All other things being equal, sure. But you seem to be forgetting that the fetus is not the only individual being considered here, and all other things are not equal. This is not simply a matter of choosing between "kill baby" and "don't kill baby." This is a matter of choosing between "kill baby" and "force woman to endure pregnancy," which in turn means subjecting the woman to a considerable amount of pain, danger, financial hardship, and disruption to everyday life (especially if she works in a physically demanding field) against her will. Some women will choose the latter option for themselves, and there's nothing wrong with that. What's wrong is taking away the choice by making the former illegal. Not aborting a pregnancy comes with a very, very significant cost, the vast majority of which is borne by the pregnant woman. People have made legitimate self-dense claims for killing conscious humans over less than that, and this is talking about somebody pre-conscious (comparable to taking a vegetative person off life support). Forcing her to bear that cost (especially as somebody who will never even have to consider bearing it themselves, to return to the point of "don't force somebody to make a sacrifice you will never have to make") is very much not right. Again, to flirt with whatboutism, contextualize this by considering the Covid vaccine: The notion of forcing every person in the world to take the shot for the sake of saving millions of lives is completely unfathomable, given the potential for side effects and the insistence on respecting bodily and medical autonomy. Pregnancy, however (especially in the US, compared to other developed nations), is a couple orders of magnitude more dangerous and harmful in every regard, so why is the notion of saving lives enough to justify forcing people who don't want to carry a pregnancy to term to do so? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blorfenburger 04/05/22 3:42:38 AM #145:	*Destroy the child* --- I use inverted controls, I hate fandoms, and I aim to be the Pinball Wizard. I'm the Assman. Come on boy you know what I'm all about. <cite>Blorfenburger posted [p:964035642] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Destroy the child </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zareth 04/05/22 3:56:57 AM #146:	Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning. --- In my opinion, all slavery is wrong, even the really fancy kind - Mead <cite>Zareth posted [p:964035798] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Blorfenburger 04/05/22 4:14:39 AM #147:	Zareth posted... Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning. You frightened me --- I use inverted controls, I hate fandoms, and I aim to be the Pinball Wizard. I'm the Assman. Come on boy you know what I'm all about. <cite>Blorfenburger posted [p:964035940] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning.</quote>You frightened me </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
The_Strong_Fox 04/05/22 11:20:53 AM #148:	Zareth posted... Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning. Why dont you love me too? --- Here we are, back to the blue. <cite>The_Strong_Fox posted [p:964041573] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>Blorfenburger I love you, your account name, your post, your sig, everything. Keep doing what you do, you're winning.</quote>Why dont you love me too? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Wanded 04/15/22 4:59:24 AM #149:	Zareth posted... You sure love those "I did that!" stickers so you can't quote where i said that, those are memes. now answer my second question Gaawa_chan posted... If I don't donate my kidney to save someone else, did I murder them because I refused to let them use my body? Wanded, how many people have you murdered every day that you didn't give a blood donation? Less risky and physically damaging than pregnancy, and saves MULTIPLE lives each time you do it. none because i'm not directly responsible for what's killing them, i'm just doing nothing and am pro mothers doing the same, if you choose to do nothing instead of abortion then no one gets murdered lol same goes for your kidney scenario, if x stabs y who now needs a kidney to survive, then x is responsible and is a murderer if z doesn't donate his kidney, if you stabbed y then in this case imo you are morally obligated to donate him your kidney and will be the one responsible in case he dies. of course these analogies are irrelevant to abortion for several reasons, one of which is the abortionist committing murder while the human not donating blood/kidney is not murdering or even killing, in fact that human is unrelated to the cause of death, another is the fact abortion results in the death of your own child, not just a stranger you don't know. if parents don't feed their newborn which dies as a result, are they responsible for the death? are they obligated to feed the newborn? why? are you obligated to feed their newborn in the exact same capacity as the parents? i'll answer adjl in a few days i'm unwillingly being forced to touch grass --- I stand with Israel. #FightAntisemitism <cite>Wanded posted [p:964299860] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Zareth posted... </cite> <quote>You sure love those "I did that!" stickers</quote>so you can't quote where i said that, those are memes. now answer my second question Gaawa_chan posted... </cite> <quote>If I don't donate my kidney to save someone else, did I murder them because I refused to let them use my body? Wanded, how many people have you murdered every day that you didn't give a blood donation? Less risky and physically damaging than pregnancy, and saves MULTIPLE lives each time you do it.</quote>none because i'm not directly responsible for what's killing them, i'm just doing nothing and am pro mothers doing the same, if you choose to do nothing instead of abortion then no one gets murdered lol same goes for your kidney scenario, if x stabs y who now needs a kidney to survive, then x is responsible and is a murderer if z doesn't donate his kidney, if you stabbed y then in this case imo you are morally obligated to donate him your kidney and will be the one responsible in case he dies. of course these analogies are irrelevant to abortion for several reasons, one of which is the abortionist committing murder while the human not donating blood/kidney is not murdering or even killing, in fact that human is unrelated to the cause of death, another is the fact abortion results in the death of your own child, not just a stranger you don't know. if parents don't feed their newborn which dies as a result, are they responsible for the death? are they obligated to feed the newborn? why? are you obligated to feed their newborn in the exact same capacity as the parents? i'll answer adjl in a few days i'm unwillingly being forced to touch grass </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34 04/15/22 5:44:18 AM #150:	Wanded posted... so you can't quote where i said that, those are memes. now answer my second question none because i'm not directly responsible for what's killing them, i'm just doing nothing and am pro mothers doing the same, if you choose to do nothing instead of abortion then no one gets murdered lol same goes for your kidney scenario, if x stabs y who now needs a kidney to survive, then x is responsible and is a murderer if z doesn't donate his kidney, if you stabbed y then in this case imo you are morally obligated to donate him your kidney and will be the one responsible in case he dies. of course these analogies are irrelevant to abortion for several reasons, one of which is the abortionist committing murder while the human not donating blood/kidney is not murdering or even killing, in fact that human is unrelated to the cause of death, another is the fact abortion results in the death of your own child, not just a stranger you don't know. if parents don't feed their newborn which dies as a result, are they responsible for the death? are they obligated to feed the newborn? why? are you obligated to feed their newborn in the exact same capacity as the parents? i'll answer adjl in a few days i'm unwillingly being forced to touch grass Citation needed. --- Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms <cite>Revelation34 posted [p:964300187] in Do you mos... [t:79951529]...</cite> <quote>Wanded posted...</cite> <quote> so you can't quote where i said that, those are memes. now answer my second question none because i'm not directly responsible for what's killing them, i'm just doing nothing and am pro mothers doing the same, if you choose to do nothing instead of abortion then no one gets murdered lol same goes for your kidney scenario, if x stabs y who now needs a kidney to survive, then x is responsible and is a murderer if z doesn't donate his kidney, if you stabbed y then in this case imo you are morally obligated to donate him your kidney and will be the one responsible in case he dies. of course these analogies are irrelevant to abortion for several reasons, one of which is the abortionist committing murder while the human not donating blood/kidney is not murdering or even killing, in fact that human is unrelated to the cause of death, another is the fact abortion results in the death of your own child, not just a stranger you don't know. if parents don't feed their newborn which dies as a result, are they responsible for the death? are they obligated to feed the newborn? why? are you obligated to feed their newborn in the exact same capacity as the parents? i'll answer adjl in a few days i'm unwillingly being forced to touch grass </quote> Citation needed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4

Poll of the Day > Do you mostly consider yourself to be pro choice or pro life? (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > Do you mostly consider yourself to be pro choice or pro life?