Pro Life vs Pro Choice

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#201 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Alot are, and I bet the numbers are higher than were led to believe to the abuse keeping their mouths shut and the organization covering it up.

Still, don't take sex advice from repressed virgins. common sense.

CaveJohnson1
What do you mean by "repressed virgins"? Aren't all virgins who aren't asexual by definition repressed? Isn't that almost a tautology. I don't even understand why you suggest I shouldn't take sex advice from virgins when the majority of them are healthier than your typical sex fanatic in my experience.
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#202 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
The abortion debate can NOT be settled by such black and white labels. I am pro-"whatever-decision-best-benefits-those-involved-on-a-case-by-case-basis". I've become quite indifferent to the abortion debate solely because it really just isn't any of my business what other people do, nor is it my right to judge those decisions they make. I find both extremist camps to be quite detestable in terms of how they think their opinion should be law. Life isn't "sacred," nor is it "just a clump of cells." The lesser of two evils is always preferable.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#203 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]The abortion debate can NOT be settled by such black and white labels. I am pro-"whatever-decision-best-benefits-those-involved-on-a-case-by-case-basis". I've become quite indifferent to the abortion debate solely because it really just isn't any of my business what other people do, nor is it my right to judge those decisions they make. I find both extremist camps to be quite detestable in terms of how they think their opinion should be law. Life isn't "sacred," nor is it "just a clump of cells." The lesser of two evils is always preferable.

That sounds like something a pro-choicer would say.
Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

60737

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#204 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 60737 Posts

Only one of these "beliefs" has the gall to force people to do something, which is far far far worse than getting an abortion imo.

Prochoice is the best of both worlds; prolife is the best example of religion and narrow view of morals dictating policy.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#205 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Only one of these "beliefs" has the gall to force people to do something, which is far far far worse than getting an abortion imo.

Prochoice is the best of both worlds; prolife is the best example of religion and narrow view of morals dictating policy.

mrbojangles25
Force as a means to prevent force (abortion) is not immoral nor should it be illegal.
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#206 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
That sounds like something a pro-choicer would say.Genetic_Code
Which would be a false positive since I find the use of abortion as retroactive birth control to be quite morally reprehensible, from a personal perspective.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#207 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts
Which would be a false positive since I find the use of abortion as retroactive birth control to be quite morally reprehensible, from a personal perspective.foxhound_fox
I don't understand this line of thinking though. You would want the government to protect your rights. Why is it that those rights or the protection of those rights only come with birth? Why is it that abortion is just a personal matter, whereas postnatal murder is not?
Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

60737

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#208 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 60737 Posts

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Only one of these "beliefs" has the gall to force people to do something, which is far far far worse than getting an abortion imo.

Prochoice is the best of both worlds; prolife is the best example of religion and narrow view of morals dictating policy.

Genetic_Code

Force as a means to prevent force (abortion) is not immoral nor should it be illegal.

So what you are saying isthat itis not immoral nor should it be illegal to force a pregnant women to keep her child?

That is pretty awful. No one has the right to make such a personal, subjective choice for someone else.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#209 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
I don't understand this line of thinking though. You would want the government to protect your rights. Why is it that those rights or the protection of those rights only come with birth? Why is it that abortion is just a personal matter, whereas postnatal murder is not?Genetic_Code
To the first question: Because that is what is legally determined as law. Just because someone doesn't accept it, doesn't make it less of a law. To the second: Because the legal definition of life starts at birth. -- One has to draw a line in the sand somewhere, because the issue of abortion and adoption is not as black and white as you are trying to make it seem. In an ideal society where all children get equal opportunities for not only life, but fulfilling that life to its fullest, and where scientists can extract a foetus from the womb and either implant it in a willing parent or test tube; I'll be the first in line to condemn the practice of abortion.... but in our modern society where 10-12 year-old orphan rape victims are forced to raise children due to morally- and emotionally-motivated laws (when abortion was illegal and unsafe) I would rather the government rot than have them impose that kind of suffering on a CHILD. The law is supposed to protect its citizenry from harm... not protect it from itself.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#210 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

So what you are saying isthat itis not immoral nor should it be illegal to force a pregnant women to keep her child?

That is pretty awful. No one has the right to make such a personal, subjective choice for someone else.

mrbojangles25

That is correct. Let me ask you the same question you just asked me by omitting one word:

So what you are saying is that it is not immoral nor should it be illegal to force a woman to keep her child?

Read it again and see if you don't come to the same conclusion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#211 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]To the first question: Because that is what is legally determined as law. Just because someone doesn't accept it, doesn't make it less of a law. To the second: Because the legal definition of life starts at birth.

Legality does not determine reality though. Just because an individual doesn't have a legal name does not mean they do not have rights.
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#212 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
Legality does not determine reality though. Just because an individual doesn't have a legal name does not mean they do not have rights.Genetic_Code
And? What are you moving into with this point? You just stated some rhetoric and left it at that. The law can be wrong, but the current law is what those in power believe is best for the most amount of people. And for someone who claims to be "pro-life," it is definitely something they should support. Unless of course it isn't the actual "life" they are interested in, but the ability to enforce their personal beliefs on others.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#213 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

And? What are you moving into with this point? You just stated some rhetoric and left it at that.

The law can be wrong, but the current law is what those in power believe is best for the most amount of people. And for someone who claims to be "pro-life," it is definitely something they should support. Unless of course it isn't the actual "life" they are interested in, but the ability to enforce their personal beliefs on others.foxhound_fox

You said that life legally begins at birth. I think that rights should begin with life begins, which is at fertilization. Do you believe life begins at fertilization or do you believe it begins sometime else? If you believe that it begins sometime before birth and you support the legality of an abortion after that point, then you are not being a consistent life advocate.

This isn't about enforcing personal beliefs. This is about protecting life.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#214 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
You said that life legally begins at birth. I think that rights should begin with life begins, which is at fertilization. Do you believe life begins at fertilization or do you believe it begins sometime else? If you believe that it begins sometime before birth and you support the legality of an abortion after that point, then you are not being a consistent life advocate. This isn't about enforcing personal beliefs. This is about protecting life.Genetic_Code
This is precisely about enforcing personal beliefs. You think life begins at conception. Others think it begins when the heart starts to beat. Others still think it begins when brain activity starts. And the law defines that it starts at birth. It doesn't matter when I "believe" life begins, because that should not factor into the debate. The facts as we have them make birth the only logical point to set the line in the sand... which is why the law chooses that specific point. And what of the life of the mother? Do you support abortions when the mother's life is in danger? If you don't, then you aren't "pro-life." Please re-read my last post, because I am in favour of the position that saves the most lives from suffering... not arbitrary lines drawn in the sand, backed by moralistic and emotional arguments that have no basis in fact.
Avatar image for sniffington
sniffington

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#215 sniffington
Member since 2011 • 25 Posts
pro choice all the way. but im gay so why do i care?
Avatar image for CaveJohnson1
CaveJohnson1

1714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#216 CaveJohnson1
Member since 2011 • 1714 Posts

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Alot are, and I bet the numbers are higher than were led to believe to the abuse keeping their mouths shut and the organization covering it up.

Still, don't take sex advice from repressed virgins. common sense.

Genetic_Code

What do you mean by "repressed virgins"? Aren't all virgins who aren't asexual by definition repressed? Isn't that almost a tautology. I don't even understand why you suggest I shouldn't take sex advice from virgins when the majority of them are healthier than your typical sex fanatic in my experience.

Catholic church....

Not being allowed to have sex with a woman isn't mentally healthy, when sexuality is repressed it comes out anyway, just in weird way.

For evidence of this see: Reality.

People who have had sex are going to be more experienced.....

Avatar image for Vesica_Prime
Vesica_Prime

7062

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#217 Vesica_Prime
Member since 2009 • 7062 Posts

Not being allowed to have sex with a woman isn't mentally healthy, when sexuality is repressed it comes out anyway, just in weird way.

For evidence of this see: Reality.

People who have had sex are going to be more experienced.....

CaveJohnson1

You do know that not all Christians kiss the ground that the Pope/some other high ranking wizard man or whatever walks on and see them as perfect, moral, models for humanity?

Avatar image for CaveJohnson1
CaveJohnson1

1714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#218 CaveJohnson1
Member since 2011 • 1714 Posts

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Not being allowed to have sex with a woman isn't mentally healthy, when sexuality is repressed it comes out anyway, just in weird way.

For evidence of this see: Reality.

People who have had sex are going to be more experienced.....

Vesica_Prime

You do know that not all Christians kiss the ground that the Pope/some other high ranking wizard man or whatever walks on and see them as perfect, moral, models for humanity?

Enough do to result in the deaths of millions.

Avatar image for Vesica_Prime
Vesica_Prime

7062

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#219 Vesica_Prime
Member since 2009 • 7062 Posts

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

Not being allowed to have sex with a woman isn't mentally healthy, when sexuality is repressed it comes out anyway, just in weird way.

For evidence of this see: Reality.

People who have had sex are going to be more experienced.....

CaveJohnson1

You do know that not all Christians kiss the ground that the Pope/some other high ranking wizard man or whatever walks on and see them as perfect, moral, models for humanity?

Enough do to result in the deaths of millions.

Makes me think of that topic the other day where people were whining about how some zoo wasn't saving a penguin because they lacked the money.

Why do people whine about such mundane things when people actions are literally killing millions? I would think those would be talked about more ofted.

I guess that being a statistic gets rid of the sting a bit.

You're talking to me as if I am actually defending the actions of the Catholic Church and not condemn them on a regular basis. Or hell I'm going to hazard a guess and say that you think that I am Catholic.

And no I don't whine and complain about something as mundane and banal as penguins dying due to lack of funds. Way to place words in my mouth.