-->
@Lemming
Why not explain to Pro Lifer's why Roe v. Wade is not against their beliefs then?
the pro-lifers are not the one's trying to overturn roe v. wade
Supreme Court Votes to overturn Roe v Wade Draft Shows.
Posts
Total:
324
-->
@Lemming
Why do/would embryo exist in such quantity?
in-vitro fertilization
-->
@3RU7AL
Who else is interested in overturning Roe V Wade?
Maybe we don't need in-vitro fertilization?
-->
@Lemming
Who else is interested in overturning Roe V Wade?
only the "pro-life" + "abortion = murder" team wants to change the status-quo
-->
@Lemming
Maybe we don't need in-vitro fertilization?
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports about 4 million births per year in the U.S., meaning 1 to 2 percent of all U.S. births annually are via IVF.
-->
@3RU7AL
Well, if one killed a baby moments before birth, I'd see that as murder.
There 'are Pro Lifer's, who are willing to meet a middle ground though,
Yet most of the argument on the site that I've noticed, has been Pro Choicer's saying killing a baby moments before birth is fine.
I still don't see the need for in-vitro fertilization?
I lean towards Antinatalism a bit myself, though I don't think I'd classify my stance or politics as that.
I'm for Pro Life, because I view a life in motion, as a life in motion,
Living human's gotta live, is my gist.
-->
@Lemming
I still don't see the need for in-vitro fertilization?
4 million IVF births a year in the united states alone.
it's a fertility treatment for couples who are unable to have an "unassisted" pregnancy
-->
@3RU7AL
Again, I lean towards Antinatalism a bit myself,
People being able to have kids at the cost of killing embryos, isn't valuable to me.
-->
@Lemming
Yet most of the argument on the site that I've noticed, has been Pro Choicer's saying killing a baby moments before birth is fine.
i think the pro-choicer argument is "abortion is terrible and shocking and disgusting"
but
the choice is 100% the mother's choice
the government
and your neighbors
have ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS telling a pregnant woman she is somehow FORCED to carry a pregnancy to term
the government is ONLY supposed to resolve disputes between citizens
if your neighbor has an abortion, it causes you no HARM - - it does not make the woman "a danger to society"
-->
@3RU7AL
If Pro Choicers are unable to say that killing a baby moments before birth is not right,
They're going to have trouble winning over Pro Lifers who aren't,
The pro-life" + "abortion = murder" team,
As you claim are the only ones trying to overturn Roe v. Wade,
If you explained Roe v. Wade as matching a Pro Life stance,
You'd have more Pro Lifers being positive towards it, if it does indeed match a Pro Life stance,
But if Pro Choice just says killing babies moments before birth for convenience is fine,
I see Pro Lifers being 'for overturning Roe v. Wade,
As people just keeping saying privacy and bodily sovereignty, with no mention of the sacred.
-->
@Lemming
i very much appreciate your perspective on this situation
the "abortion = murder" is actually quite a compelling argument to most
but it's hard to "dial that back" at all
so i guess we should all settle in
for a future without privacy
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't think that Pro Lifers want a future without privacy,
But as already said, rights aren't absolutes, they lean on other rights,
Take Typhoid Mary,
If someone is 'highly suspected of spreading disease, knowingly or not,
It's not wrong to take information about their body,
Which you might view as private, arguing a person has a right to their own blood.
But that privacy is denied in 'that instance, does not mean 'every instance of privacy is denied.
-->
@Lemming
Take Typhoid Mary,
great example
(IFF) there is strong evidence that an individual is a danger to society (THEN) that danger must be mitigated
this is within the scope of the function of government
-->
@3RU7AL
Pro Life view,
A baby, moments from being born, is a member of society,
-->
@Lemming
I don't think that Pro Lifers want a future without privacy,
both republicans and democrats have been moving towards a "zero-privacy" goal-line
the fact that no meaningful reforms or prosecutions have resulted from the edward snowden revelations demonstrates public complacency on the subject
-->
@Lemming
Pro Life view,A baby, moments from being born, is a member of society,
Pro Life view,
a homeless person is a criminal if they setup a tent on public land
-->
@3RU7AL
Would a homeless baby a criminal if they setup a tent on public land,
And I don't mean in someone's body,
I mean if a homeless baby was on someone's lawn,
Would that baby be arrested for trespassing?
-->
@Lemming
Would that baby be arrested for trespassing?
that would be a decision for the land-owner
unless of course there was a city ordinance against camping in that area
in which case, it would be up to the discretion of the neighbors
but they'd likely be more inclined to help an infant than an adult (because of human instinct)
This is great. I am glad to see attempts twoards illegalization seeing as abortion should be illegal from conception.
-->
@Novice
This is great. I am glad to see attempts twoards illegalization seeing as abortion should be illegal from conception.
prepare to be giddy
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't think the baby would be arrested,
And that most people would find the idea absurd,
A homeless adult is not equivalent to a homeless baby.
Though there 'is argument that a homeless individual 'also deserves help,
They can be difficult to manage,
Offer them a job, they don't want a job, happens sometimes.
Try to talk to them, or get them mental help, beyond societies ability, at times.
Of the nearly 4 million American children who are born each year, only about 18,000 are voluntarily relinquished for adoption.
The number of abortions per year in the USA is 890,000. Wefare is going to syrocket once abortions are ended.
-->
@3RU7AL
"i think the pro-choicer argument is "abortion is terrible and shocking and disgusting"
but
the choice is 100% the mother's choice"
I think most pro-choicers aren't bothered at all about abortion. Andrew Cuomo ordered that New York be lit up with Pink lights to celebrate the radically pro-abortion bill (Reproductive Health Act) that passed. It's a law allowing abortions until birth in some cases, and letting non-doctors commit abortions. Cuomo said, " we celebrate this achievement and shine a bright light forward for the rest of the nation to follow.”
"the government and your neighbors have ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS telling a pregnant woman she is somehow FORCED to carry a pregnancy to term.
the government is ONLY supposed to resolve disputes between citizens if your neighbor has an abortion, it causes you no HARM - - it does not make the woman "a danger to society"
So I would assume that you mean the entire pregnancy, right? And you use this on the basis that it's her body, her choice. So any woman should be able to kill the unborn even up to the natural delivery, right?
The mother is the danger to the child who can't speak up as he/she is being killed. Based on your position the unborn has no rights under the law, they are nothing unless the mother wants to allow them to live.
I find your position so tragic.
-->
@FLRW
'Of the nearly 4 million American children who are born each year, only about 18,000 are voluntarily relinquished for adoption.
The number of abortions per year in the USA is 890,000. Wefare is going to syrocket once abortions are ended."
Around 4 million babies are born in the United States each year. According to the Adoption Network statistics, around 140,000 children are adopted by American families each year, and around 62% of babies in domestic infant adoptions were placed with their adoptive families within a month of birth.
So you are suggesting that we kill to solve societal problems, over population etc. How about killing those born who might be handicapped, mentally challenged, the wrong sex, gender? Let's deceive people into believing that a handicapped person is less than human not worthy of life. This kind of language and thinking dehumanizes the unborn. But then the pro-choice/abort side uses careful language to sound more kill friendly.
-->
@imdancin
Point 1…….We don’t confront anyone by yelling, screaming.
I asked the question why you go to abortion clinics and confront. I said nothing about yelling and screaming yet I'm sure that happens as well as the fundmentalis nut cases who shoot to kill. Sick.
Most groups go
to pray. We abide by the law concerning restrictions, where to stand
etc.
No your not aiding the pregnant women or anyone a part of that process. You are virtual rapist and nusiance to society uneccessarily. Sick.
The fact that we are anti-abortion should not matter as other groups in our country are very free to be seen and heard.
Natural abortion happens all the time and it is relabled as a misscarriage, but is an abortion. Your medically induced or other kinds of human induced abortion. Again your a virtual rapist.
And you have
the gall to say we are violent? LOL
False. never said you personally were violent. Your confusing me with some one else, In fact this response to you is the firsts time Ive mentioned violence by anti-human-induced abortion.
Point 2….Mother to be?
Yes, I make differrentiations regarding egg, fertilized ege, travel the uterus, 9 months gestation, born out, umbical cord cut or not, first inspiration of breath or not. You narrowed minded virtual rapist ignore the pregnant womans concerns, one of which is the most important, one, that the fetus/baby is an organsim o f the pregnant woman who is not a mother until the baby is born out, umbilical chord cut, and the baby has taken its first inspiraiton of breath to become and independent individual human seperate frome the pregnant woman.
No at the moment of fertilization the woman becomes a mother.
No, because, I make a distinctions here and you do not. You want the whole process to be either black or white and and in no way is that the set of circumstances were dealing with. Your a sick virtual rapist.
That which she help create is not a part of her, it is a separate human being with its own DNA, fingerprints, organs, circulatory system etc. So you say the mother should be able to kill her child because she is ethical and moral. So she has the right to kill it up until the unborn natural delivery…wow.
YOur still confused and have not ability to differrentiate and make distinctions of the processs involved. Pregnancy and the pregnant womans concerns is a complex process, of which you and your kind need to keep your friggin noses out of her bodily business. Sick is what you are.'
Point 3….Others are there to kill the unborn. The person that drove her to the abortion mill, the receptionist or office staff that takes the money, the nurses who help get her ready and the doctor who carries the killing out.
You a virtual rapist who needs to be re-educated in the ethics of morality, to aid in your sick in the head health issues.
Do no harm?????? LMAO Just brutally kill the unborn inside the womb.
What is diffferrence between allowing to die, by giving no aid after birth or duing pregnancy, and your "brutally killing". You just throw that word in there to make you sound like your the person on the higher moral ground when you are not.
The pregnant woman is on the highest mortal ground, until, the baby/fetuses umbilical cord has been cut, and the baby has taken its first inspiration of breath.
Your have absolutely zero compassion, empathy or prayers for the pregnant woman who may become a mother of a living breathing, independent individual human. This is partly why your sick-n-head in these regards and my guess is many others.
-->
@imdancin
But then the pro-choice/abort side uses careful language to sound more kill friendly.
doesn't it seem a little strange to you that the "pro-life" team is also overwhelmingly "pro-war" and "pro-death-penalty" and "anti-welfare" and "anti-LGBTQ+" ?
doesn't it seem a little strange to you that the "pro-choice" team is overwhelmingly "anti-war" and "anti-death-penalty" and "pro-welfare" and "pro-LGBTQ+" ?
-->
@imdancin
The mother is the danger to the child who can't speak up as he/she is being killed.
imagine living in a country where, if your child reported that you spanked them, the state would be obligated to place them in foster care
-->
@3RU7AL
I think that happens in our own country now.
-->
@imdancin
There is no law against spanking a child or using, what the law calls, "reasonable discipline."
Parents have the right to use corporal punishment. There is no law against it.
The old doctrine of spare the rod, spoil the child has not been criminalized, as some people believe.
Spanking "crosses the line" only when the discipline would be considered unreasonable.
In short, there is no bright line test. These matters are decided on a case by case basis.
-->
@3RU7AL
"doesn't it seem a little strange to you that the "pro-life" team is also overwhelmingly "pro-war" and "pro-death-penalty" and "anti-welfare" and "anti-LGBTQ+" ?
doesn't it seem a little strange to you that the "pro-choice" team is overwhelmingly "anti-war" and "anti-death-penalty" and "pro-welfare" and "pro-LGBTQ+" ?"
What facts do you have to be able to say what you just did?
I am not pro-war in all instances. Do I think the WW2 was necessary to stop Hitler? Absolutely To free humans from the death camps and ovens, yes.
Was the Civil War necessary? Absolutely To free blacks from oppressive forces, yes.
I believe any war fought in defense is justified. The war must be for a just cause and the intentions must be good. Resolutions should have been tried before.
Personally I have problems with the death penalty because I know innocent peoples lives have been taken. I have read the scriptures and of course i know what they say.
"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience." Romans 13:1-5
In the New Testament, Jesus emphasizes mercy, not judgement. I don't think it endorses or condemns the death penalty. But God demanded strict and heavy penalties in the Old Testament. I don't think any punishment should be carried out for revenge but for the protection of citizens. Take the shooting of the children in school in Texas yesterday, do I think the shooter should have gotten the death penalty. Absolutely yes.
I did not get on this site yesterday because I literally cried all day. My heart is broken for those parent who lost their babies. The authorities all talk about gun control, arming the schools etc etc, same pathetic excuses and gibberish from both sides of the aisle...and it keeps happening over and over. It is happening because people have no moral compass...God has been stripped from our society and it seems everything is relative, no difference between good and bad, no respect for elders (the shooter shot his own grandma), the break down of the family. When a nation mocks and eliminates God...this is what happens. The USA has rebelled against God and hell is on earth. What foundational reasoning is this evil happening? The absence of God. Let's forget the symptoms of these problems and get back to the right foundation so that we can raise generations of people who love life, one another and who put God first so that good can follow. Man will never provide the solution, only God will.
As far as LGBTQ goes...I think you know my answer. I stand on sin biblically. My two uncles were gay and in the closet with most the people they knew. Their choice and they were fine with it. I loved them both unconditionally. I traveled with them and was very close. They knew I was a believer in fact they were too. I never condemned them, God will judge in the end. I only believe there is one sin that keeps someone from eternal salvation with God....and that sin is to deny Christ, who He said He was and what He came to do.
I can respect the gay community, in fact I am commanded to love them and I do...but I stand on what God says is sin.