If you need two signatures to dissolve a marriage, why should you only need 1 to dissolve a potential human being?El_Zo1212oBecause marriage is an equal partnership. Pregnancy is not.Â
Why are people who are pro-life demonized?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Wrong. It's better to entrust the health of a child to the father that does want it. The mother will do her part out of self preservation.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
So it's better to trust the health of the fetus to a mother who doesn't want it? I'm sure that will work out well
lostrib
I said fetus, not child. The mother carries the fetusÂ
Did you miss the second half of the above? If she is prevented from aborting, then she'll do what's necessary to ensure her own health for the time after it's born. And I would imagine that the same court that prohibits her abortion without his consent would also mandate prenatal care and so on.
Because marriage is an equal partnership. Pregnancy is not. That's the most ridiculous thing I've read so far. Both sides have to agree to divorce- to split up friends and net worth and living arrangements, but she has the only say in destroying a potential human being. That's a disgusting mindset.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"]If you need two signatures to dissolve a marriage, why should you only need 1 to dissolve a potential human being?toast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Because marriage is an equal partnership. Pregnancy is not. That's the most ridiculous thing I've read so far. Both sides have to agree to divorce- to split up friends and net worth and living arrangements, but she has the only say in destroying a potential human being. That's a disgusting mindset.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"]If you need two signatures to dissolve a marriage, why should you only need 1 to dissolve a potential human being?El_Zo1212o
well considering she is the one who has to carry it for 9 months and give birth to it, doesn't seem so equal
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] Wrong. It's better to entrust the health of a child to the father that does want it. The mother will do her part out of self preservation.El_Zo1212o
I said fetus, not child. The mother carries the fetusÂ
Did you miss the second half of the above? If she is prevented from aborting, then she'll do what's necessary to ensure her own health for the time after it's born. And I would imagine that the same court that prohibits her abortion without his consent would also mandate prenatal care and so on.And how is that going to stop her from harming the fetus in some way? Â
[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] It's as much his as hers, genetically. That fact alone should outweigh where it's incubated. You don't get to claim autonomy over your body after you've shared it with a man and decided to grow something that belongs to both of you inside it.El_Zo1212oBut the woman isn't sharing her bodily autonomy with the man who impregnated her - she's merely holding something that came from him. And she has the right to do whatever she wants with it because it's her uterus, not the man's. If the man doesn't like it, too bad for him. It's not his choice. Granted, there's nothing wrong potential parents discussion abortion together before making a decision about it, but ultimately only the pregnant person has a say in whether he/she aborts the fetus. I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.
what if her plans are worth more than 6 million dollars?
Did you miss the second half of the above? If she is prevented from aborting, then she'll do what's necessary to ensure her own health for the time after it's born. And I would imagine that the same court that prohibits her abortion without his consent would also mandate prenatal care and so on.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
I said fetus, not child. The mother carries the fetusÂ
lostrib
And how is that going to stop her from harming the fetus in some way? Â
Because 'harming the fetus in some way' is likely to do more damage to herself than she is willing to commit to. Why do women choose abortion? Because they don't want to spend the better part of a year incubating the life form then the next 16-20 years caring for it. They've got other plans. Well, doing a dozen belly flops onto the pavement or paying people to punch you in the gut over and over again could very easily cause your death when you're pregnant. Death is a far greater inconvenience than most of a year and your old highschool body shape. Like I said, self interest.I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] But the woman isn't sharing her bodily autonomy with the man who impregnated her - she's merely holding something that came from him. And she has the right to do whatever she wants with it because it's her uterus, not the man's. If the man doesn't like it, too bad for him. It's not his choice. Granted, there's nothing wrong potential parents discussion abortion together before making a decision about it, but ultimately only the pregnant person has a say in whether he/she aborts the fetus.lostrib
what if her plans are worth more than 6 million dollars?
F*ck her plans anyway. Should have taken a breath and made him put on a rubber then.[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] Did you miss the second half of the above? If she is prevented from aborting, then she'll do what's necessary to ensure her own health for the time after it's born. And I would imagine that the same court that prohibits her abortion without his consent would also mandate prenatal care and so on.El_Zo1212o
And how is that going to stop her from harming the fetus in some way? Â
Because 'harming the fetus in some way' is likely to do more damage to herself than she is willing to commit to. Why do women choose abortion? Because they don't want to spend the better part of a year incubating the life form then the next 16-20 years caring for it. They've got other plans. Well, doing a dozen belly flops onto the pavement or paying people to punch you in the gut over and over again could very easily cause your death when you're pregnant. Death is a far greater inconvenience than most of a year and your old highschool body shape. Like I said, self interest.Or she could just drink in excess and smoke
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.El_Zo1212o
what if her plans are worth more than 6 million dollars?
F*ck her plans anyway. Should have taken a breath and made him put on a rubber then.that didn't answer the question
I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.El_Zo1212o
Ok. That's even worse. Just because she accepts the risks involved in incubating a life form doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to, you know, change her mind. Consent can be revoked at any time for any reason.
Anyway, there's no reason arguing with you further, given that respect for bodily autonomy is clearly not your reason for accepting some forms of abortion. We have no common ground, and so we're just going to keep talking past each other.Â
F*ck her plans anyway. Should have taken a breath and made him put on a rubber then.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
what if her plans are worth more than 6 million dollars?
lostrib
that didn't answer the question
Sure it did. If her plans were worth that much money, she should have prevented herself from getting pregnant in the first place. But then, if it was worth $6M, he'd probably be convinced to go along with the abortion.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"]I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.ghoklebutter
Ok. That's even worse. Just because she accepts the risks involved in incubating a life form doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to, you know, change her mind. Consent can be revoked at any time for any reason.
Anyway, there's no reason arguing with you further, given that respect for bodily autonomy is clearly not your reason for accepting some forms of abortion. We have no common ground, and so we're just going to keep talking past each other.Â
My whole point here is that it shouldn't be up to her to change her own mind, she should have to change HIS mind, too. The kid would be partly his, too. You're right, there. I'm not against abortion- I'm against the woman's right to unilaterally(turns out it is 1"T")destroy something that is part of both people.[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"]I didn't say 'sharing,' I said 'surrendered.' By getting pregnant, she made the decision to accept the risks involved in incubating a life form. If she has a permanent partner, then they are both are responsible for that decision. Unless they both agree to reverse that decision, what right does she have to destroy a potential human being on her own whim? If there's a tie in the voting, the choice should go to the course that saves lives, and f*ck her sense of convenience. If it will(or very likely could) kill her, but he wants to risk it? Scrape it away, because a living human being is of more value than a potential human being. If she wants to be rid of it because she doesn't want to wait 2-5 years to finish college, but he wants to raise it- by himself if necessary? F*ck her- her plans are worth less than a potential human life.El_Zo1212o
Ok. That's even worse. Just because she accepts the risks involved in incubating a life form doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to, you know, change her mind. Consent can be revoked at any time for any reason.
Anyway, there's no reason arguing with you further, given that respect for bodily autonomy is clearly not your reason for accepting some forms of abortion. We have no common ground, and so we're just going to keep talking past each other.Â
My whole point here is that it shouldn't be up to her to change her own mind, she should have to change HIS mind, too. The kid would be partly his, too. You're right, there. I'm not against abortion- I'm against the woman's right to unilaterally(turns out it is 1"T")destroy something that is part of both people.But the man doesn't have to go through pregnancy. so why should he have a say?
Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.BMD004Perfect example of a closed minded moron.
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] F*ck her plans anyway. Should have taken a breath and made him put on a rubber then.El_Zo1212o
that didn't answer the question
Sure it did. If her plans were worth that much money, she should have prevented herself from getting pregnant in the first place. But then, if it was worth $6M, he'd probably be convinced to go along with the abortion.No, you said that her plans arent worth as much as a potential human life. Â So if her plans are worth more than a potential human life, then can we abort it?
Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.BMD004
And when the "conservatives" call those "liberals" baby killers?
Perfect example of a closed minded moron.[QUOTE="BMD004"]Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.toast_burner
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing women as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent unborn, in their minds.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Perfect example of a closed minded moron.[QUOTE="BMD004"]Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.BMD004
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent in their minds.Are you really that stupid?I'm aware what the arguments for pro-life are. Unlike you I'm not so closed minded that I refuse to try and see things through another perspective. I just don't think that the reasoning they use is valid enough to justify their views. Pro-choice seems like the much more logical stance.Â
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Perfect example of a closed minded moron.[QUOTE="BMD004"]Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.BMD004
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing women as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent unborn, in their minds.well until that child is born, and then fvck it. It's on its own
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Perfect example of a closed minded moron.[QUOTE="BMD004"]Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of.BMD004
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing women as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent unborn, in their minds.That's the entire point, there's no one right answer to this issue, yet conservatives think that their answer is the one that should be forced on the rest of the coutnry. Â Whether or not abortion is right is a moral decision that ultimately should rest with the person responsible for carrying the child to term (or not). Â Pro-choice recognizes the right of the mother to make that decision, Anti-abortion forces that choice on her. Â If conservatives think that abortion is immoral then they're perfectly welcome to not have abortions themselves.
Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent in their minds.Are you really that stupid?[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Perfect example of a closed minded moron.
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
toast_burner
I'm aware what the arguments for pro-life are. Unlike you I'm not so closed minded that I refuse to try and see things through another perspective. I just don't think that the reasoning they use is valid enough to justify their views. Pro-choice seems like the much more logical stance.Â
Because I disagree with you that means I am closed-minded? You act like I haven't also thought about the issue and looked at it from all angles.Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing women as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent unborn, in their minds.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Perfect example of a closed minded moron.
Ever thought that maybe people are pro-choice because they support peoples freedom to be incharge of their own lifes?Â
Funny that conservatives claim to be infavour of small government yet they want the government to tell you who you can and can't fvck and marry, and what you can and can't do with your own body.Â
theone86
That's the entire point, there's no one right answer to this issue, yet conservatives think that their answer is the one that should be forced on the rest of the coutnry. Â Whether or not abortion is right is a moral decision that ultimately should rest with the person responsible for carrying the child to term (or not). Â Pro-choice recognizes the right of the mother to make that decision, Anti-abortion forces that choice on her. Â If conservatives think that abortion is immoral then they're perfectly welcome to not have abortions themselves.
No, because conservatives see it as no different than killing another human. So they cannot allow innocent humans to be killed at the discression of another. Not killing is the default option.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Are you really that stupid?[QUOTE="BMD004"]Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent in their minds.BMD004
I'm aware what the arguments for pro-life are. Unlike you I'm not so closed minded that I refuse to try and see things through another perspective. I just don't think that the reasoning they use is valid enough to justify their views. Pro-choice seems like the much more logical stance.Â
Because I disagree with you that means I am closed-minded? You act like I haven't also thought about the issue and looked at it from all angles. You're closed minded because rather than looking at the opposing sides views you just make shit up.Because I disagree with you that means I am closed-minded? You act like I haven't also thought about the issue and looked at it from all angles. You're closed minded because rather than looking at the opposing sides views you just make shit up.That is not true. I know the views of the other side. Tell me... what have I made up?[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Are you really that stupid?
I'm aware what the arguments for pro-life are. Unlike you I'm not so closed minded that I refuse to try and see things through another perspective. I just don't think that the reasoning they use is valid enough to justify their views. Pro-choice seems like the much more logical stance.Â
toast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]You're closed minded because rather than looking at the opposing sides views you just make shit up.That is not true. I know the views of the other side. Tell me... what have I made up?[QUOTE="BMD004"]Because I disagree with you that means I am closed-minded? You act like I haven't also thought about the issue and looked at it from all angles. BMD004
"Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of."
Not a single bit of truth in there. You should apologize.Â
That is not true. I know the views of the other side. Tell me... what have I made up?[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]You're closed minded because rather than looking at the opposing sides views you just make shit up.
toast_burner
"Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of."
Not a single bit of truth in there. You should apologize.Â
Do you not see conservatives as trying to restrict women's choice?[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="BMD004"]Ever stopped to think that conservatives also believe in freedom to be in charge of one's own life? Which is why they act as the voice for the unborn who cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives see unborn babies as human life. Therefore a woman has no choice to kill it just the same as you don't have the choice to legally kill any other human. You are seeing women as a victim of conservative oppression when that isn't the case at all. Conservatives just see the issue differently. To conservatives, It isn't about denying a woman rights. It is about protecting the rights of the innocent unborn, in their minds.BMD004
That's the entire point, there's no one right answer to this issue, yet conservatives think that their answer is the one that should be forced on the rest of the coutnry. Â Whether or not abortion is right is a moral decision that ultimately should rest with the person responsible for carrying the child to term (or not). Â Pro-choice recognizes the right of the mother to make that decision, Anti-abortion forces that choice on her. Â If conservatives think that abortion is immoral then they're perfectly welcome to not have abortions themselves.
No, because conservatives see it as no different than killing another human. So they cannot allow innocent humans to be killed at the discression of another. Not killing is the default option.Just because they see it that way does not make it so. Â Being able to accept that one's own view does not hold for the rest of the world is as important as sticking to one's principles.
No, because conservatives see it as no different than killing another human. So they cannot allow innocent humans to be killed at the discression of another. Not killing is the default option.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="theone86"]
That's the entire point, there's no one right answer to this issue, yet conservatives think that their answer is the one that should be forced on the rest of the coutnry. Â Whether or not abortion is right is a moral decision that ultimately should rest with the person responsible for carrying the child to term (or not). Â Pro-choice recognizes the right of the mother to make that decision, Anti-abortion forces that choice on her. Â If conservatives think that abortion is immoral then they're perfectly welcome to not have abortions themselves.
theone86
Just because they see it that way does not make it so. Â Being able to accept that one's own view does not hold for the rest of the world is as important as sticking to one's principles.
Sure, but that cuts both ways.[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="BMD004"]That is not true. I know the views of the other side. Tell me... what have I made up?BMD004
"Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of."
Not a single bit of truth in there. You should apologize.Â
Do you not see conservatives as trying to restrict women's choice?Yes because they are. I do understand that they do so because they believe it's for the greater good.ÂÂ
You still owe me an appology btw.Â
Do you not see conservatives as trying to restrict women's choice?Yes because they are. I do understand that they do so because they believe it's for the greater good. So then I am correct.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]
"Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of."
Not a single bit of truth in there. You should apologize.Â
toast_burner
My whole point here is that it shouldn't be up to her to change her own mind, she should have to change HIS mind, too. The kid would be partly his, too. You're right, there. I'm not against abortion- I'm against the woman's right to unilaterally(turns out it is 1"T")destroy something that is part of both people.But the man doesn't have to go through pregnancy. so why should he have a say? Because it is part of him. How do you not get this?[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]
Ok. That's even worse. Just because she accepts the risks involved in incubating a life form doesn't mean that she doesn't have the right to, you know, change her mind. Consent can be revoked at any time for any reason.
Anyway, there's no reason arguing with you further, given that respect for bodily autonomy is clearly not your reason for accepting some forms of abortion. We have no common ground, and so we're just going to keep talking past each other.Â
toast_burner
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Yes because they are. I do understand that they do so because they believe it's for the greater good. So then I am correct.Not at all. You'd g]hve to be pretty damn stupid to think you are.[QUOTE="BMD004"]Do you not see conservatives as trying to restrict women's choice?BMD004
And how are they not limiting womans rights?Â
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]But the man doesn't have to go through pregnancy. so why should he have a say? Because it is part of him. How do you not get this?[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] My whole point here is that it shouldn't be up to her to change her own mind, she should have to change HIS mind, too. The kid would be partly his, too. You're right, there. I'm not against abortion- I'm against the woman's right to unilaterally(turns out it is 1"T")destroy something that is part of both people.El_Zo1212o
no it isn't
[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] That's my point- it's not just HER body anymore- when she allowed him to put his genetic material into her, she placed her body in trust to a life form growing inside it. If both of the people involved in creating that life form decide it's too inconvenient to have to care for it for the next 20 or so years, fine. But if either one doesn't agree with the decision to stop it from growing into a human being, both parties should have a choice in the matter- just like they both chose to begin it in the first place. How exactly does that equate to 'she was asking for it'?El_Zo1212o
Who cares about life forms? We destroy life forms constantly and think nothing of it. Why is this even part of the debate?
I didn't make it part of the debate. I was talking about the man vs the woman in who gets a say on whether or not the life form is destroyed.The woman is the one who has to carry it. The woman is the one who has to put her health at stake over it, and the woman is the one who ultimately has to care for it.
[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="BMD004"]No, because conservatives see it as no different than killing another human. So they cannot allow innocent humans to be killed at the discression of another. Not killing is the default option.BMD004
Just because they see it that way does not make it so. Â Being able to accept that one's own view does not hold for the rest of the world is as important as sticking to one's principles.
Sure, but that cuts both ways.Yes, and pro-choicers recognize that, which is why they support individual choice. Â If a conservative mother wants to protect the "life" of her fetus then she can go ahead and carry it to term. Â It's when conservatives think they can make that decision for everyone that there's a problem.
Sure it did. If her plans were worth that much money, she should have prevented herself from getting pregnant in the first place. But then, if it was worth $6M, he'd probably be convinced to go along with the abortion.[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
that didn't answer the question
lostrib
No, you said that her plans arent worth as much as a potential human life. Â So if her plans are worth more than a potential human life, then can we abort it?
And who sets the dollar value of a human life?So then I am correct.Not at all. You'd g]hve to be pretty damn stupid to think you are.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Yes because they are. I do understand that they do so because they believe it's for the greater good.Â
toast_burner
And how are they not limiting womans rights?Â
Ok, let's run this back here. I said those who are pro-choice feel like conservatives are oppressing women by denying them a choice, and because they feel they are oppressive they think it gives them a right to demonize them.Â
You said that I was completely off base and should apoligize.
Â
In this thread, you have admitted that conservatives are against women by restricting their choice. You have then proceeded to call me close-minded and stupid.
Â
You are completly proving my point.
Do you not see conservatives as trying to restrict women's choice?Yes because they are. I do understand that they do so because they believe it's for the greater good.Â[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]
"Because in a liberal's mind, conservatives are the opposition to their beliefs. Conservatives are the oppressors that they must fight against. So in their mind it isn't that conservatives are sticking up for the unborn. It is that they are oppressing women by restricting their "choice". So they must be demonized for their "insensitivity". Same thing with why they are called racist, homophobes, bigots, sexist, or whatever dispicable name you can think of."
Not a single bit of truth in there. You should apologize.Â
toast_burner
Â
You still owe me an appology btw.Â
Way to shoot your argument in the foot, there, Barn.[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] Sure it did. If her plans were worth that much money, she should have prevented herself from getting pregnant in the first place. But then, if it was worth $6M, he'd probably be convinced to go along with the abortion.El_Zo1212o
No, you said that her plans arent worth as much as a potential human life. Â So if her plans are worth more than a potential human life, then can we abort it?
And who sets the dollar value of a human life?It has been set. Â The US government has estimated the value of a single life at 6-7 million dollars.
Sure, but that cuts both ways.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Just because they see it that way does not make it so. Â Being able to accept that one's own view does not hold for the rest of the world is as important as sticking to one's principles.
theone86
Yes, and pro-choicers recognize that, which is why they support individual choice. Â If a conservative mother wants to protect the "life" of her fetus then she can go ahead and carry it to term. Â It's when conservatives think they can make that decision for everyone that there's a problem.
Conservatives are making a decision based on the unborn baby. They feel the unborn has a right to life. A "choice" to live, if you will.[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]Sure, but that cuts both ways.BMD004
Yes, and pro-choicers recognize that, which is why they support individual choice. Â If a conservative mother wants to protect the "life" of her fetus then she can go ahead and carry it to term. Â It's when conservatives think they can make that decision for everyone that there's a problem.
Conservatives are making a decision based on the unborn baby. They feel the unborn has a right to life. A "choice" to live, if you will.it can't make a choice. it's a fetus
Not at all. You'd g]hve to be pretty damn stupid to think you are.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]So then I am correct.BMD004
And how are they not limiting womans rights?Â
Ok, let's run this back here. I said those who are pro-choice feel like conservatives are oppressing women by denying them a choice, and because they feel they are oppressive they think it gives them a right to demonize them.Â
You said that I was completely off base and should apoligize.
Â
In this thread, you have admitted that conservatives are against women by restricting their choice. You have then proceeded to call me close-minded and stupid.
Â
You are completly proving my point.
Learn to read. If you get annoyed when I call you stupid then stop acting so stupid.Where did I say they demonize women? And where did I say restricting rights is always bad?Â
I really hope you're a troll. because this is absolutely pathetic.
[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]Sure, but that cuts both ways.BMD004
Yes, and pro-choicers recognize that, which is why they support individual choice. Â If a conservative mother wants to protect the "life" of her fetus then she can go ahead and carry it to term. Â It's when conservatives think they can make that decision for everyone that there's a problem.
Conservatives are making a decision based on the unborn baby. They feel the unborn has a right to life. A "choice" to live, if you will.And that's a completley subjective feeling, hence why choice is best.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment