There is Everything Wrong with Abortion
Ocean56

AOL

#229538 Apr 21, 2013
Expert in all Things wrote:
Pretty sure I speak for more than a handful of people when I say, "THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH!" by choosing NOT to extend your gene pool, we need many more like you.
Actually, goofy, I was posting the positive childfree message for girls and young women who know they never want kids but are being PRESSURED by family or religious community to have them anyway.

I'm a happy "done after one" mom, with NO desire or intention of having more. For me, ONE child was all I wanted, for a growing number of women, the number of kids they want is ZERO. Contrary to what anti-choicers want everyone to believe, motherhood is NOT what ALL women want. Just because a woman can reproduce doesn't mean she HAS to. Motherhood is an OPTION for women, not a requirement.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229539 Apr 21, 2013
[QUOTE who="Sister Kathryn Lust"<quoted text>"Murder" is a legal term. It means 'illegal killing'. Abortion is legal, therefore, it is not 'murder'. It is killing, which has been legalized. Just like the death penalty, killing in war, and killing for self defense.
<quoted text>[/QUOTE]

It isn’t legal to kill somebody with the death penalty just because we might think it would be a fun thing to do. We don’t kill in war because we feel that it is our body and therefore our choice to do whatever we feel compelled to do with it if somebody might get in our way. We don’t kill in self-defense because of our desire to be free from the burden of having somebody to care for. In all of these cases the only justifiable reason for killing is in self-defense. Again, what does being legal have anything to do with your argument, and if the legality of abortion is not the basis of your argument, why do you and all the others feel compelled to bring it up after you've run out of all other line of rational debate? Ooops! Never mind, I think I just answered my own question.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229540 Apr 21, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text><quoted text>
I frankly don't care how small the 'section' of abortions done to save lives is - if safe and medically regulated abortion is criminalized, women who need it to save our lives will lose access to it, just like every other woman in the country, and women will die for the sake of the 'convenience' and 'conscience' of fetus worshipers such as yourself. Pardon me if I don't find that palatable.
Almost all recent legislation that would prohibit abortion has exceptions for the health of the mother. None of the legislation that you’re talking about will pass, and I have my doubts as to which side it even originates from. Don’t believe anything Planned Parenthood tells you, they are a fanatical pro-abortion organization that will tell you anything to promote their agenda.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229541 Apr 21, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well you can argue all day about what we should, but your should doesn't equal my should and you're not allowed to should all over me.
The right thing to you isn't the right thing to me. Moral relativism.
I have a right to should on you anytime I feel like it. Moral relativism.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229542 Apr 21, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
Morality is totally subjective.
What is moral for me may not be for you. It is immoral for me to drink alcohol. It is not immoral for everyone else.
It is not immoral for me to live with my boyfriend, but it may be for someone else.
Morals are what is right and wrong for the individual.
If it is wrong for you to have an abortion, don't do so. But it wasn't wrong for me to do so.
However flawed, I’m alright with that until your moral opinions involve infringing on the rights of another individual, which abortion does. It seems that you believe morals are subjective only until they infringe on your rights. No wonder things are so messed up.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229543 Apr 21, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
It isn’t legal to kill somebody with the death penalty just because we might think it would be a fun thing to do. We don’t kill in war because we feel that it is our body and therefore our choice to do whatever we feel compelled to do with it if somebody might get in our way. We don’t kill in self-defense because of our desire to be free from the burden of having somebody to care for. In all of these cases the only justifiable reason for killing is in self-defense. Again, what does being legal have anything to do with your argument, and if the legality of abortion is not the basis of your argument, why do you and all the others feel compelled to bring it up after you've run out of all other line of rational debate? Ooops! Never mind, I think I just answered my own question.
I think you just had a conversation with yourself.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229544 Apr 21, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Almost all recent legislation that would prohibit abortion has exceptions for the health of the mother. None of the legislation that you’re talking about will pass, and I have my doubts as to which side it even originates from. Don’t believe anything Planned Parenthood tells you, they are a fanatical pro-abortion organization that will tell you anything to promote their agenda.
The very fact that you have no problem with this sort of legislation even being proposed, negates your argument.

You just want women to die, whether from illegal abortion, or the complications of pregnancy, in service to your fetus worship.

If you think I agree to take lessons in morality from you, you're sadly mistaken.
Expert in all Things

Redding, CA

#229545 Apr 21, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Advice for men who wish women would stop having abortions:
Don't f... any women.
End of story.
Some men aren't like that, some of them are thoughtful enough to provide brand new coat hangers.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Columbus, OH

#229546 Apr 21, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a right to should on you anytime I feel like it. Moral relativism.
You can TRY, but you will fail.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#229547 Apr 21, 2013
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>
Also none of your business at all. Right?
Yes, not my business if they want to have or not have an abortion. However, I am not one who is telling others that they MUST make the same choice I did.
I attempted to bring all my pregnancies to term.
That was MY CHOICE, and nobody else had a say in it.
It IS my business to see that women have their rights protected and have a choice if they don't want to attempt to bring their pregnancies to term.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#229548 Apr 21, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
However flawed, I’m alright with that until your moral opinions involve infringing on the rights of another individual, which abortion does. It seems that you believe morals are subjective only until they infringe on your rights. No wonder things are so messed up.
You are still wrong. Abortion removes a wad of unwanted goo, no person involved except the woman who doesn't want to be pregnant and her physician. Nobody's rights are being infringed upon unless someone is coercing her into having the abortion.
Usually when that happens it's the man who impregnated the woman who is coercing her to abort.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229549 Apr 21, 2013
Expert in all Things wrote:
<quoted text>
Some men aren't like that, some of them are thoughtful enough to provide brand new coat hangers.
And I'm sure you're one of those thoughtful and considerate souls. Why, I'd bet you even take the coats off of them first.

Kudos!!

(Please detect heavy sarcasm.)
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229550 Apr 21, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>You are still wrong. Abortion removes a wad of unwanted goo, no person involved except the woman who doesn't want to be pregnant and her physician. Nobody's rights are being infringed upon unless someone is coercing her into having the abortion.
Usually when that happens it's the man who impregnated the woman who is coercing her to abort.
Defining an unborn child as a “wad of goo” is simply a scientific misinterpretation on your part, so that means you are starting right off the bat with a scientific fallacy. Your “wad of goo” premise concerning the physical characteristics of the child is also irrelevant when most cases of abortion are ever committed. Based on these facts, I believe that in all likelihood the only person's rights that you care about are your own

The legal decision may be left up to the parent, but the moral decision on whether to kill that child is the child’s only, who won’t be able to speak for themselves for a few more years yet. If you at that point still make the determination to snuff out their life, you can ask them if they would like you to. Other than that I have no opinion on this matter one way or the other. It should solely the child’s decision when they become old enough to make it.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229551 Apr 21, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Defining an unborn child as a “wad of goo” is simply a scientific misinterpretation on your part, so that means you are starting right off the bat with a scientific fallacy. Your “wad of goo” premise concerning the physical characteristics of the child is also irrelevant when most cases of abortion are ever committed. Based on these facts, I believe that in all likelihood the only person's rights that you care about are your own
The legal decision may be left up to the parent, but the moral decision on whether to kill that child is the child’s only, who won’t be able to speak for themselves for a few more years yet. If you at that point still make the determination to snuff out their life, you can ask them if they would like you to. Other than that I have no opinion on this matter one way or the other. It should solely the child’s decision when they become old enough to make it.
So I take it, you're in favor of suicide?
LightForce

Warren, MI

#229552 Apr 21, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>So I take it, you're in favor of suicide?
It is that person's moral decision to decide their OWN fate, pertaining to themselves only. I never said that I was in favor of suicide. I would in most cases do whatever I could to stop it. If a person has more than one choice, I will always try to convince them to make the one that is in their best interest or in the best interest of others. But enough about me..........

The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#229553 Apr 21, 2013
I wonder how many of these "pro lifers" are ignoring situations such as Savita Halappanavar .....

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#229555 Apr 21, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
I wonder how many of these "pro lifers" are ignoring situations such as Savita Halappanavar .....
Abortion should be legal only in the extreme cases.For example if the mother's life is in danger or the pregnancy due to rape or incest etc

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229556 Apr 21, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
I wonder how many of these "pro lifers" are ignoring situations such as Savita Halappanavar .....
I wonder how many of them are as passionate about saving the 'lives' of human embryos in freezers world wide, awaiting implantation or disposal? Or the thousands of them which are discarded immediately, after in vitro fertilization has been performed?

I'm guessing, since we never hear any protest whatsoever about them from the so-called 'pro-life' crowd, that these 'babies' just don't fit the script, poor things. They don't reside in a woman.

It's only when they can control a uterus, that the fetus worshipers are satisfied. Petri dishes don't advance the so-called 'pro-life' agenda.

Since: Jul 10

Minneapolis, MN

#229557 Apr 21, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I wonder how many of them are as passionate about saving the 'lives' of human embryos in freezers world wide, awaiting implantation or disposal? Or the thousands of them which are discarded immediately, after in vitro fertilization has been performed?
I'm guessing, since we never hear any protest whatsoever about them from the so-called 'pro-life' crowd, that these 'babies' just don't fit the script, poor things. They don't reside in a woman.
It's only when they can control a uterus, that the fetus worshipers are satisfied. Petri dishes don't advance the so-called 'pro-life' agenda.
part of why some of them will not agree to IVFs. is that it gives them a chance to shout that the folks doing it is playing "God". when many of those protesting, are farmers or other type of job or hobby that deals with animal and or plant life. and some of those use breeding programs to get the best in either livestock and or plant life.
.
plus, they do not realize that many of our choices alter something or someone. this includes getting a operation to save our life. what we eat. how we eat it. what we wear for clothing. no matter what we do. everyone of us here in a way "plays God".

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#229558 Apr 21, 2013
Sangelia wrote:
<quoted text>
part of why some of them will not agree to IVFs. is that it gives them a chance to shout that the folks doing it is playing "God". when many of those protesting, are farmers or other type of job or hobby that deals with animal and or plant life. and some of those use breeding programs to get the best in either livestock and or plant life.
.
plus, they do not realize that many of our choices alter something or someone. this includes getting a operation to save our life. what we eat. how we eat it. what we wear for clothing. no matter what we do. everyone of us here in a way "plays God".
I suspect most of them give IVF a pass, because it's 'creating life'. Whatever furthers IVF is fine with them, and if we started disallowing the 'leftovers' to be destroyed, or frozen for later use, it would threaten the efficacy of the procedure. So these 'babies' just really don't matter to them, and they never deny that by protesting their destruction....

The so-called 'pro-life' movement is primarily comprised of these hypocrites.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Future of Politics in America 1 min Nohweh 154
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 5 min Bongo 87,852
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min MARKOTHUMEA 665,101
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 18 min Pegasus 284,467
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 44 min Al Capone 3,380
'Sugar Daddys' and 'College 'Prostitutes' 1 hr andet1987 2
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 1 hr Liamm 441
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 14 hr nanoanomaly 977,190
More from around the web