Why I don't respect the anti-abortion crowd

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 33
Topic's author
#1
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
Lets say you are a white person protesting police killings of black people because you believe a black life is equal to your own and you want to save their lives.  I should get away with calling you a, "Black Rights Activist" if you say, "Black Lives Matter" and I should be able to type in, "#BlackLivesMatter" into YouTube and get a bunch of BLM supporters with their videos.  I see these videos of Black Rights Activists and they would be proud to call themselves Black Rights Activists.

Lets say you are a born person protesting abortionists killings of zygote people because you believe a zygote life is equal to your own and you want to save their lives.  I should get away with calling you a, "Zygote Rights Activist" if you say, "Protect the Unborn" (aka, "Zygote Lives Matter") and I should be able to type in, "#ZygoteLivesMatter" into YouTube and get a bunch of ZLM supporters with their videos.  I do not see videos of Zygote Rights Activists when they protest; I see science videos about zygotes; but never Lila Rose or Classically Abby or Chloe Waked.  I can put in #ProLife and find stuff; and everyone is Pro life to an extent (otherwise we would all be suicidal), but those that want to ban abortion are Zygote Rights Activists.

They should start calling themselves ZLM, "Zygote Lives Matter" so they are more honest.  They would lose support because the normie thinks of that as silly, but at least it's honest.  I mean, they do that with, "Blue Lives Matter" when some number of cops are getting killed by people (although I would prefer the government just fund cops less and if your house gets robbed, then have stand your ground giving you the authority to defend your own home).

Blue Lives Matter has a movement because cops are obviously human beings.  Black Lives Matter has a movement because blacks are obviously human beings.  Zygote Lives Matter would have a movement if Zygotes were human beings, but no such movement exists.  Hell, I can't even find a, "Fetus Lives Matter" movement on YouTube.

People don't believe Zygotes (or even Fetuses) are human beings as much as they say they do.  I can find "Youth Lives Matter", but the Youth are pretty safe, so it's not a big concern.
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I was always a bit undecided on abortion issue, because there are arguments on both sides which are good.

And obviously, no one thinks fetus is equal to a born human, and everyone would rather sacrifice 1 fetus to save 1 born child than other way around, as born child is not only much more likely to survive, but is at better point in development if goal is to produce smart people as soon as possible.
#3
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
But if your argument is that they should name themselves "Zygote Rights Activist" because its honest, then I must say that being honest is less important than being cool.
#4
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Can I spam facepalms again?
#5
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,623
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I am not your boss.
#6
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Isn't it obvious that you use the terms pro-life because you believe your opponent doesn't believe a fetus or a zygote is life and you want to remind them it is a life by using the term.
#7
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
obviously, no one thinks fetus is equal to a born human, and everyone would rather sacrifice 1 fetus to save 1 born child than other way around
Most pro life individuals do think a fetus is equal to a newborn baby or small child,
Topic's author
#8
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
And obviously, no one thinks fetus is equal to a born human,
Nope; there are people that believe a fetus is as equal to an infant as an infant is to a 2 year old.

But if your argument is that they should name themselves "Zygote Rights Activist" because its honest, then I must say that being honest is less important than being cool.
That's the problem; people aren't honest with their label.  I would prefer it if the only people that called themselves Pro choice are libertarians; the left is Pro Abortion Legalization (PAL); the right is ANti Abortion Legalization (ANAL).
Topic's author
#9
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
Isn't it obvious that you use the terms pro-life because you believe your opponent doesn't believe a fetus or a zygote is life and you want to remind them it is a life by using the term.
A 2 year old is a life; everyone believes it should be illegal to kill a 2 year old.

A cancer cell is a life; everyone thinks you should be allowed to kill a cancer cell.

Some life should be illegal to kill; other life should be legal to kill.

Just be specific; those that want to ban abortion are pro zygote because they value a zygote as their equal.
Topic's author
#10
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@RationalMadman
Why?
#11
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
#Hashtagyourbelief
#Orelseyoudontbelieveit
#12
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
A 2 year old is a life; everyone believes it should be illegal to kill a 2 year old.
correct

A cancer cell is a life; everyone thinks you should be allowed to kill a cancer cell.
correct, it's just as ethical to kill as an apple or a cow

Some life should be illegal to kill; other life should be legal to kill.

correct, the dividing line should be human life and non human life. Or at least human life that isn't a threat to a reasonable person.

Just be specific; those that want to ban abortion are pro zygote because they value a zygote as their equal.
The debate for pro life people is around whether it is ethical to kill human life or not. The perception is that the pro choice people do not see a fetus as human life or see it as some lesser form of life to a baby or child. SO pro life people call it pro life to show the premise of their argument. The premise being that human life is sacred. Just like pro choice is called pro choice because their apparent premise is that women should have the freedom to choose whether to give birth or not and they perceive their ideological opponents are unaware of the concerns around the bodily autonomy of women. By using the term pro life we can see the pro lifer's main concern is preservation of life and by saying pro choice we can see the pro choice peoples main concern is about bodily autonomy. Saying zygote lifes matter has the potential of downplaying how important a pro lifer sees the life of an unborn child. Plus it is a strawman. I am pro life and I would be okay with the morning after pill or killing a zygote that formed 4 days into pregnancy. I would say it is more likely that the average person sees a fetus as an equal not a zygote.

the prochoice argument and I have been watching debates with peter singer so I am aware of their arguments is that a baby could be killed even just 5 minutes prior to giving birth and it would be ethical. I just don't personally see the difference between a baby 5 minutes prior to being born and one 5 minutes after being born. The view of the pro life people are that 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions should not happen unless there is a valid medical reason as determined between a doctor and a patient.
Topic's author
#13
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
Saying zygote lifes matter has the potential of downplaying how important a pro lifer sees the life of an unborn child.
Why?  If you believe a zygote is a human, then you would have no problem with saying, "Zygote Lives Matter" because you believe a zygote is a human.  Plus, in this polarized climate, most people that want to ban abortion would accept the new change to reflect accuracy.

Most left wing states banned abortion for fetuses that are developed enough, so many unborn children are already protected.  Those wanting to ban abortion have told me that they want it banned from conception, so they would then be, "Zygote Rights Activists".

 I am pro life and I would be okay with the morning after pill or killing a zygote that formed 4 days into pregnancy.
Why 4 days?  Why not 5 or 3?  Or 6 or 2?

the prochoice argument and I have been watching debates with peter singer so I am aware of their arguments is that a baby could be killed even just 5 minutes prior to giving birth and it would be ethical. I just don't personally see the difference between a baby 5 minutes prior to being born and one 5 minutes after being born. 
About half of left wing states already banned abortion this late into pregnancy and virtually every red state did as well.  

The view of the pro life people are that 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions should not happen unless there is a valid medical reason as determined between a doctor and a patient.
This is the, "leave the decision between the woman and her doctor" argument, which is the democrat position.

I am personally unsure about my position on abortion, although it does change a lot.  I have no problem unironically saying, "Zygote Lives Matter" in a way that sounds joking but it's serious if it's what I believed (this is because I don't care how popular or unpopular my framing is).  But because I don't think it should be legal to kill zygotes, I will get a vasectomy before I have sex with someone in a way that can get them pregnant if things go south and I think anyone that has my position on abortion should promote vasectomies before having potential pregnency producing sex.

It's not fair to put so much birth control effort on women when the man can get birth control done much easier.
#14
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Most left wing states banned abortion for fetuses that are developed enough, so many unborn children are already protected.  Those wanting to ban abortion have told me that they want it banned from conception, so they would then be, "Zygote Rights Activists".
Why do let wing politicians when pressed won't take hard stances on what limits there should be on abortion? Also nobody wants it banned from conception that is just silly. I never see a pro life activist circulating pictures of zygotes. They instead show pictures of fetuses showing fully formed but tiny human looking things.

Why 4 days?  Why not 5 or 3?  Or 6 or 2?
I just picked a number straight out of thin air, it could be the rest as well but I googled and it said the zygote forms after 4 days

About half of left wing states already banned abortion this late into pregnancy and virtually every red state did as well.  
I have met a number of pro-life leftwing people it doesn't shock me.

This is the, "leave the decision between the woman and her doctor" argument, which is the democrat position.
I know they say that to appeal to conservatives who are on the fence but I think most of them would mean between a woman and her conscience arguments.


I think I am a pretty typical pro lifer. I think first trimester leave it to the conscience of the woman but after that maybe it should be a decision for a woman and her doctor. They should have a medical reason for doing so such as a high risk pregnancy or a baby that is just not likely to make it or if they do make it they will have a very low quality of life. I can't imagine that a conservative would oppose an abortion that is high risk. I just remember stories of Obama supporting into law comfort rooms for abortions where they basically take a failed abortion and have the baby put into what they call a comfort room to starve or freeze and die. I would oppose that. I also heard a story of a woman trying to back out of an abortion right before the doctors went in and the doctors practically forcing her to do it and I would oppose something like that.

#15
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
  • In an undercover video released in April 2013, a D.C. abortionist admitted he would not intervene to save an abortion survivor. When asked about a baby being born alive during an attempted abortion, he said, “usually, at this point in your pregnancy, it’s too early to survive, usually. It will expire shortly after birth…it’s all in how vigorously you do things to help a fetus survive at this point.” Later he said, “we would not help it [the baby].  Let’s say. We wouldn’t—we wouldn’t—uh, intubate, let’s say.”
  • In another undercover video released in March 2017, a former Planned Parenthood medical director said that in order to determine whether to provide medical intervention for these babies, “You need to pay attention to who’s in the room.”
  • A Planned Parenthood lobbyist in 2013 opposed the Infants Born Alive Act in Florida, saying, “We believe that, you know, any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.” Abortion advocates leapt to the lobbyist’s defense, targeting the Infants Born Alive Act’s “fundamentally flawed assumption that this type of situation is a real risk” and asserting that born-alive infants were “incredibly unlikely.” However, since 2013 when the Act was signed into law, 42 babies have been born alive during abortions in Florida.
  • In a 2019 interview with WTOP in Washington, D.C., in which he endorsed a permissive late-term abortion bill, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam dismissed concerns about abortions performed while a woman is giving birth, explaining, “The infant would be delivered; the infant would be kept comfortable; the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desire, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
  • Abortion survivor Melissa Ohden testified to the House Judiciary Committee in 2015, “You wouldn’t know it by looking at me today, but in August of 1977, I survived a failed saline infusion abortion…. I know where children like me were left to die at St. Luke’s Hospital—a utility closet. In 2014, I met a nurse who assisted in a saline infusion abortion there in 1976, and delivered a living baby boy. After he was delivered alive, she followed her superior’s orders and placed him in the utility closet in a bucket of formaldehyde to be picked up later as medical waste after he died there, alone.”
  • Gianna Jessen, another adult survivor of abortion, also testified to the House Judiciary Committee in 2015, stating, “I was delivered alive in an abortion clinic in Los Angeles on April the 6th, 1977. My medical records state: ‘Born alive during saline abortion’ at 6 am. Thankfully, the abortionist was not at work yet. Had he been there, he would have ended my life with strangulation, suffocation, or leaving me there to die.”
  • Many young survivors have grown up and chosen to go public with their stories. The testimonies of individuals who were born alive during abortions are featured on https://abortionsurvivors.org/. A Fox News interview with Ohden and two other abortion survivors, one of whom testifies he lost an arm in the process, aired on February 11, 2019.
  • Late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell flouted Pennsylvania law for years before suspicion of the illegal sale of drugs caused the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration to raid his “House of Horrors” in 2010. Most disturbing among what they found was evidence of the intentional killing of babies who had survived Gosnell’s abortion procedures. These “snippings,” as he called them, involved using a scissors to sever the spine of babies who survived his brutal abortions.
  • In 2005, a mother delivered her 23-week-old baby in the toilet at EPOC Clinic in Orlando, Florida, and was shocked to see him move. Abortion staff not only refused to help but turned away paramedics, whom her friend had notified by calling 911. Angele could do no more than helplessly sit on the floor rocking and singing to her baby for 11 minutes until he died.
  • In 2006, Sycloria Williams delivered her 23-week-old baby on a recliner at A Gyn Diagnostic Center in Hialeah, Florida. When she began breathing and moving, abortion clinic owner Belkis Gonzalez cut the umbilical cord and zipped her into a biohazard bag, still alive.
  • In 2013, Jill Stanek testified before the House Judiciary Committee about her experience as a registered nurse in the labor and delivery department at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, where she discovered babies being aborted alive and shelved to die in the department’s soiled utility closet. She said, “I was traumatized and changed forever by my experience of holding a little abortion survivor for 45 minutes until he died, a 21/22-week-old baby who had been aborted because he had Down syndrome.”

This is the stuff I am against and pro choice people tend to dismiss these stories so I would have a hard time defending any of the above, which is why I prefer to call myself pro life
Topic's author
#16
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
Why do let wing politicians when pressed won't take hard stances on what limits there should be on abortion?
Because politicians dodge questions.

Also nobody wants it banned from conception that is just silly. 
Abortion law in the United States by state - Wikipedia states all the black states on the map want it banned from conception (with maybe an exception for r***).

 I never see a pro life activist circulating pictures of zygotes. They instead show pictures of fetuses showing fully formed but tiny human looking things.
That's because it's easier to defend something that looks like a zygote while pretending it looks like a fetus.

I just picked a number straight out of thin air, it could be the rest as well but I googled and it said the zygote forms after 4 days
So do you want to ban the killing of zygotes?

I know they say that to appeal to conservatives who are on the fence but I think most of them would mean between a woman and her conscience arguments.
I think they mean, "the woman and her doctor" and the doctor usually does what the woman wants anyways.

I think I am a pretty typical pro lifer. I think first trimester leave it to the conscience of the woman but after that maybe it should be a decision for a woman and her doctor. 
Legal abortion up until 12 weeks legalizes the majority of abortions and therefore is, "Pro Choice".  7 weeks is the 50/50 point; half of abortions are before; the other half are after.  90% are before 12 weeks.

Your position is pro choice and I'm not against that, but understand that.
Topic's author
#17
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
I'll respond to the 2nd comment later; it's almost 12:30 where I am (I live on the East Coast).
#18
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Because politicians dodge questions.
If the question is do you support abortion up right until 5 minutes before birth and they refuse to answer it's pretty obvious the answer is yes.

Abortion law in the United States by state - Wikipedia states all the black states on the map want it banned from conception (with maybe an exception for r***).
I clicked on exceptions and it mentioned the exceptions had to do with the mothers health, there is a link for exceptions so it doesn't appear to ban all abortions just all abortions that are unrelated to a mother's health concerns.

So do you want to ban the killing of zygotes?
no

I think they mean, "the woman and her doctor" and the doctor usually does what the woman wants anyway
That would be the issue. You would definitely want valid health concerns.


Your position is pro choice and I'm not against that, but understand that.
It really isn't. I cannot support a lot of the stuff I see pro choice activists saying or doing. None of them even mentions limits at all. They never speak with nuance, which means they probably don't have anything. In the mean time prolife activists are speaking with nuance and seem to be supporting things like the born alive bill that just says doctors cannot kill a baby if it survives an abortion and than pro choice people respond that the bill isn't neccessary because doctors don't do it, which makes no sense. If a law literally changes zero things what is the point of opposing it? It seems like a confession. Do you really think I would be less welcome to be at a pro life rally than a pro choice rally?

Because I would have a hard time supporting  singers arguments than I would supporting the statement that babies should not have their spinal cords cut if they happen to survive a late term abortion. The pro life crowd seems to be making statements that I have an easier time agreeing with

#19
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
here is what chat gpt said when i answered it's questions. I think it is wrong

Based on your responses, it seems like your stance on abortion leans more towards the pro-life perspective, with some nuanced views. Here's a summary based on your answers:

1. **Legally Restricted with Exceptions**: You believe that abortion should generally be legally restricted, but with certain exceptions. This aligns with the pro-life position, which seeks to limit abortion access through legal restrictions.

2. **Protection of Fetal Life**: Your primary concern in the abortion debate is the protection of fetal life. This is a key tenet of the pro-life perspective, which views abortion as morally wrong because it involves the termination of a human life.

3. **Decision between Woman and Doctor**: You believe that decisions about abortion should be made collaboratively between the woman and her doctor, based on what is in the best medical interests of the woman. This suggests a nuanced approach that takes into account medical considerations alongside ethical and moral concerns.

4. **Private Help, Not Government-Funded**: You prefer private assistance for pregnant women rather than government-funded support. This perspective reflects a limited role for government intervention in addressing issues related to crisis pregnancies and abortion.

5. **Intuitive Position**: Your stance on abortion appears to be based more on intuitive feelings rather than a deeply philosophical or ideological position. This suggests a pragmatic or personal approach to the issue.

6. **Exceptions**: While you oppose abortion in cases of rape, you believe that exceptions may be warranted in cases of incest and threats to the woman's life. This is consistent with a pro-life perspective that may make exceptions based on certain circumstances.

7. **Openness to Debate**: You are open to engaging in dialogue and debate on the issue of abortion, indicating a willingness to consider different viewpoints and perspectives.

8. **Lack of Personal Experience**: You do not have personal experiences that have shaped your views on abortion, suggesting that your stance is not influenced by direct personal circumstances or encounters.

9. **No Long-Term Goals**: You do not have specific long-term goals or aspirations regarding the abortion debate, indicating that your engagement with the issue may be more casual or occasional.

10. **Acceptance of First-Term Abortion**: You believe that first-term abortions are generally acceptable, which is a nuanced position within the pro-life perspective. This suggests a recognition of different considerations at various stages of pregnancy.

Overall, your stance on abortion combines elements of the pro-life perspective, such as a concern for fetal life and legal restrictions on abortion, with some exceptions and nuances based on medical considerations and personal beliefs.

i than asked it why i preferred pro life arguments and here was the response.

It's understandable to feel drawn to certain arguments and positions within the pro-life perspective, especially if you strongly oppose abortion and advocate for the protection of fetal life. However, if you find yourself conflicted or uncertain about aligning with the broader pro-choice movement, it's important to recognize that there can be diversity of opinions within both the pro-life and pro-choice camps.

Here are some considerations that may help you navigate your stance:

1. **Focus on Shared Values**: While you may have reservations about certain aspects of the pro-choice movement, such as opposition to restrictions on abortion or concerns about infanticide, it's possible to find common ground on other issues. For example, many pro-choice advocates also support policies aimed at reducing the need for abortion, such as access to comprehensive sex education, contraception, and healthcare.

2. **Engage in Dialogue**: Rather than feeling obligated to align with a specific movement or ideology, consider engaging in dialogue with individuals from diverse perspectives. This can help you better understand different viewpoints and articulate your own beliefs more effectively. By participating in respectful and constructive conversations, you may find areas of agreement or opportunities for mutual understanding.

3. **Emphasize Nuance**: Recognize that complex issues like abortion often defy simple categorization. While you may identify more closely with the pro-life perspective overall, you can still hold nuanced views on specific aspects of the abortion debate. For example, you may oppose most abortions but support exceptions in cases of rape, incest, or threats to the woman's life.

4. **Focus on Pragmatic Solutions**: Rather than aligning rigidly with one side of the debate, focus on practical solutions that address the underlying causes of abortion and support women in crisis pregnancies. This might involve advocating for policies and initiatives that provide comprehensive support and resources for pregnant women, including healthcare, social services, and counseling.

5. **Stay Informed and Critical**: Stay informed about developments in the abortion debate and critically evaluate arguments and evidence from both pro-life and pro-choice perspectives. Being well-informed and open-minded can help you navigate the complexities of the issue and make informed decisions about where you stand.

Ultimately, your beliefs and values are personal and may not neatly align with any single movement or ideology. It's okay to hold nuanced or evolving views on complex issues like abortion, and engaging with different perspectives can help you clarify and refine your stance over time.

I feel disgusted that this AI thinks I am pro choice like he is
#20
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I consider murdering babies to typically be unethical. If you read my above responses to underdog he seems to think that means I am pro choice. Am I retarded leftist now?
#21
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
I think I am a pretty typical pro lifer. I think first trimester leave it to the conscience of the woman but after that maybe it should be a decision for a woman and her doctor. 
Only in America is this the prolife side. In Europe etc this is the prochoice side. In fact even in totally prolife nations this is a prochoice stance.
#22
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
I think it does say a lot about the pro choice movement here. If you listen to hardcore pro choice proponents here they even advocate for termination one month after giving birth. https://www.equip.org/articles/peter-singers-bold-defense-of-infanticide/
Topic's author
#23
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
If the question is do you support abortion up right until 5 minutes before birth and they refuse to answer it's pretty obvious the answer is yes.
Or it could be they are in a democrat primary and there are many democrat voters that support legal abortion until the moment of birth, so you don't want to piss them off, but you want to get elected and you also want to appeal to independents who may or may not agree with you on abortion, so you lie about your position.  Politicians lie.

I clicked on exceptions and it mentioned the exceptions had to do with the mothers health, there is a link for exceptions so it doesn't appear to ban all abortions just all abortions that are unrelated to a mother's health concerns.
Yeah, but usually the right wing positions are, "ban in all situations unless the mother would die without one" or, "ban unless (exception), but if none apply, then at conception".

So do you want to ban the killing of zygotes?
no
Then when do you believe abortion should be banned by?  How many weeks?

They never speak with nuance, which means they probably don't have anything.
There are pro lifers and pro choicers that speak with nuance.

Do you really think I would be less welcome to be at a pro life rally than a pro choice rally?
I would say pro life rally because they tend to be more pro free speech.  A libertarian that is pro choice until viability would be more welcome at a pro life rally than a pro choice rally run by feminists who believe pro life speech should be banned due to it being hate speech towards women who are disproportionally black and Latina.  Although in general, I would argue male protestors tend to be better behaved than female protestors because men tend to have thicker skins.  I've gotten blocked by women wanting to ban abortion and women who wanted to legalize it.  It is much more rare for a man to cancel over political opinions I've noticed.  Men tend to be less puritan and less nit picky.

You seem to be moderate on abortion; I consider anything from legal up until 0*-24 weeks as moderate.

0* being 0 weeks unless r***, incest, life/health of the mother, fetal defect.

Wrt to the stories of basically partial birth abortion and/or letting the fetus die, if you want the fetus saved, then that's fine, but if it's the government's role to save life when the alternative is letting it die, then this can be used to justify universal healthcare, ending homelessness, and other aspects that bring America closer to socialism.
#24
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
What about Islamic terrorists.

Will you be inviting that "crowd" round for a chat and a cup of coffee?
#25
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@WyIted
You are Pro choice in denial, that's all to tell you.

Prolife are the absolutists not the other way around.
#26
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
Political opinions are a two way street. You hate them they hate you and I go to work and the whole political world can fuck off.
#27
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,164
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@WyIted
I consider murdering babies to typically be unethical. If you read my above responses to underdog he seems to think that means I am pro choice. Am I retarded leftist now?
There is an art and great utility in organizing concepts so that you're dealing with well defined boolean values (dichotomies).

This is an art that Underdog does not understand in the slightest. He tries to dichotomize arbitrary political polarities.


He adds onto that shallow (false) quantification:

I think I am a pretty typical pro lifer. I think first trimester leave it to the conscience of the woman but after that maybe it should be a decision for a woman and her doctor. 
Legal abortion up until 12 weeks legalizes the majority of abortions and therefore is, "Pro Choice".  7 weeks is the 50/50 point; half of abortions are before; the other half are after.  90% are before 12 weeks.

Your position is pro choice and I'm not against that, but understand that.
As if "prolife" vs "prochoice" was nothing more than a linear mapping projected onto the distribution for abortions within the gestation cycle.

There are absolutists on both side of the issue, and being 'extreme' or 'moderate' predicts nothing about the truthiness of your conclusions.

Here is another perfect example of when labels with imprecise definitions cause more harm than good, especially to people who think like underdog.
Topic's author
#28
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@zedvictor4
What about Islamic terrorists.
I believe violent terrorists should be put to death, defined as those that murder or r*** people known to be innocent for an ideology.
#29
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
So, your overriding regard for life is not overriding.

Which is what one would expect, in a biosphere where life is dependent upon death.
Topic's author
#30
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@zedvictor4
So, your overriding regard for life is not overriding.
I'm not claiming it is.  I'm anti-abortion, not pro-life.