The Issue of Abortion

apple0154 said:
BUZZ Wrong answer.

The only point of an abortion is to remove the fetus from the woman's body. If the primary purpose was to kill it women would insist on seeing it to ensure it was dead.

Any other bizarre beliefs you wish to share?
Click to expand...

Actually, only you would like to have a look at the corpse, because you revel in death and murder.
 
bravo said:
You shouldn't give this moron the courtesy of a response on the type of bullshit he posts...Orphanages, adoption, abuse, poverty, etc....are all far off the topic of discussion....
None of this has anything to do with abortion....any fuckin' clown that preaches its ok to kill babies to save them from poverty or abuse is plainly mentally defective. Why bother to seriously discuss anything with a psycho.
Click to expand...

Orphanages, adoption, abuse, poverty, etc. has everything to do with abortion. Abortion is preventing children from coming into the world and having to suffer through those things. That's the whole point of abortion.
 
apple0154 said:
Orphanages, adoption, abuse, poverty, etc. has everything to do with abortion. Abortion is preventing children from coming into the world and having to suffer through those things. That's the whole point of abortion.
Click to expand...

Really? Because before, you argued that the point of an abortion was to rid the body of a meaningless clump of cells that wasn't a human being. It now appears you acknowledge it is definitely not a meaningless clump of cells, but a human being which might potentially live in an orphanage or be poor. This is an interesting revelation indeed. Thanks for being so forthcoming with the truth.

The problem I have with your analysis is, you can't possibly determine what the course of life would be for every aborted human being. It's possible one of those aborted humans could have gone on to discover the cure for cancer. Perhaps they may have become a genetic biologist and pioneered a way to remove an embryo and preserve a life without having to terminate it?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
That was THEN and this is NOW, so please show the data that supports your assertion that aborted children would be neglected if they were allowed to live.
Click to expand...

THEN: Children were adopted or fostered on family farms. Basically a farm worker paid in room and board so while there was a demand for children adoption wasn't exactly a selfless act.

NOW: There are considerably fewer family farms so the need for young laborers is reduced.

THEN: Couples had children at a younger age and they had more children. It wasn't unusual for couples with 4 or 5 children to adopt another one.

NOW: Couples postpone child-bearing and most settle for one or two children.

Those two factors reduce the demand for adoptive children.

Then there's neglect. It should go without saying children in institutions would not receive the same nurturing as a child brought into a loving family.

So, we end up with less demand for adoptive children resulting in more of them living in institutions. Plus, considering the objection/apprehension to children living in single parent homes and homosexual homes that will also affect adoption. Add to that the idea some Conservative people put forward that living in such homes does not teach a child how a "normal" family functions how is a child living in an institution going to learn how a "normal" family functions?

While certain age groups have a higher number of abortions, abortions still happen across all age ranges showing the desire, in general, for children has waned. It's reasonable to conclude that should an additional million children be born yearly (currently 1.3 million abortions yearly) many will live out their childhood in an institution. It this really what we want?

Lastly, with an abundance of children available for adoption it's also reasonable to conclude restrictions would be eased. While I'm not suggesting blatant abuse would be tolerated adoptive couples might not be examined as closely.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Then go tell the penis fairy to stay out of the vagina fairy, until the responsibility fairy takes control.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the responsibility fairy has been falling down on the job since...well, for quite some time as noted below.

Gen.6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen.6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Surely one can not expect more from mortal man than could be obtained from the sons of God. After all, we're only human. :D
 
Dixie said:
Really? Because before, you argued that the point of an abortion was to rid the body of a meaningless clump of cells that wasn't a human being. It now appears you acknowledge it is definitely not a meaningless clump of cells, but a human being which might potentially live in an orphanage or be poor. This is an interesting revelation indeed. Thanks for being so forthcoming with the truth.
Click to expand...

I see you have difficulty with comprehension. It is a clump of cells that may or may not become a human being.

The problem I have with your analysis is, you can't possibly determine what the course of life would be for every aborted human being. It's possible one of those aborted humans could have gone on to discover the cure for cancer. Perhaps they may have become a genetic biologist and pioneered a way to remove an embryo and preserve a life without having to terminate it?
Click to expand...

That's true. What's also true is one could have gone on to become another Hitler or Osama Bin Laden.
 
apple0154 said:
I see you have difficulty with comprehension. It is a clump of cells that may or may not become a human being.



That's true. What's also true is one could have gone on to become another Hitler or Osama Bin Laden.
Click to expand...
The "clump of cells" is already a human being...it may of may not become a adult human being...

and its worth repeating, a thousand times if necessary...
Originally Posted by bravo
..Orphanages, adoption, abuse, poverty, etc....are all far off the topic of discussion....
None of this has anything to do with abortion....any fuckin' clown that preaches its ok to kill babies to save them from poverty or abuse is plainly mentally defective. Why bother to seriously discuss anything with a psycho.
 
apple0154 said:
THEN: Children were adopted or fostered on family farms. Basically a farm worker paid in room and board so while there was a demand for children adoption wasn't exactly a selfless act.

NOW: There are considerably fewer family farms so the need for young laborers is reduced.

THEN: Couples had children at a younger age and they had more children. It wasn't unusual for couples with 4 or 5 children to adopt another one.

NOW: Couples postpone child-bearing and most settle for one or two children.

Those two factors reduce the demand for adoptive children.

Then there's neglect. It should go without saying children in institutions would not receive the same nurturing as a child brought into a loving family.

So, we end up with less demand for adoptive children resulting in more of them living in institutions. Plus, considering the objection/apprehension to children living in single parent homes and homosexual homes that will also affect adoption. Add to that the idea some Conservative people put forward that living in such homes does not teach a child how a "normal" family functions how is a child living in an institution going to learn how a "normal" family functions?

While certain age groups have a higher number of abortions, abortions still happen across all age ranges showing the desire, in general, for children has waned. It's reasonable to conclude that should an additional million children be born yearly (currently 1.3 million abortions yearly) many will live out their childhood in an institution. It this really what we want?

Lastly, with an abundance of children available for adoption it's also reasonable to conclude restrictions would be eased. While I'm not suggesting blatant abuse would be tolerated adoptive couples might not be examined as closely.
Click to expand...

\
Irrelevant bullshit in pretty pink
 
apple0154 said:
Orphanages, adoption, abuse, poverty, etc. has everything to do with abortion. Abortion is preventing children from coming into the world and having to suffer through those things. That's the whole point of abortion.
Click to expand...

Apple, if you lived in Sub-saharan Africa, would you kill yourself? How about a ghetto in Detriot, Oakland or LA?
 
apple0154 said:
THEN: Children were adopted or fostered on family farms. Basically a farm worker paid in room and board so while there was a demand for children adoption wasn't exactly a selfless act.

NOW: There are considerably fewer family farms so the need for young laborers is reduced.

THEN: Couples had children at a younger age and they had more children. It wasn't unusual for couples with 4 or 5 children to adopt another one.

NOW: Couples postpone child-bearing and most settle for one or two children.

Those two factors reduce the demand for adoptive children.

Then there's neglect. It should go without saying children in institutions would not receive the same nurturing as a child brought into a loving family.

So, we end up with less demand for adoptive children resulting in more of them living in institutions. Plus, considering the objection/apprehension to children living in single parent homes and homosexual homes that will also affect adoption. Add to that the idea some Conservative people put forward that living in such homes does not teach a child how a "normal" family functions how is a child living in an institution going to learn how a "normal" family functions?

While certain age groups have a higher number of abortions, abortions still happen across all age ranges showing the desire, in general, for children has waned. It's reasonable to conclude that should an additional million children be born yearly (currently 1.3 million abortions yearly) many will live out their childhood in an institution. It this really what we want?

Lastly, with an abundance of children available for adoption it's also reasonable to conclude restrictions would be eased. While I'm not suggesting blatant abuse would be tolerated adoptive couples might not be examined as closely.
Click to expand...

You still haven't posted a single shread of evidence that supports the innuendo, suppositions, accusations, or assertions that you keep spewing.

Show where all those aborted babies would have been abused and/or neglected.

You are quickly losing what little credability you may have had. :palm:
 
apple0154 said:
Unfortunately, the responsibility fairy has been falling down on the job since...well, for quite some time as noted below.

Gen.6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen.6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Surely one can not expect more from mortal man than could be obtained from the sons of God. After all, we're only human. :D
Click to expand...

If you're going to use the Bible to attempt to support your position, then you can't just cherry pick the parts you want and really need to apply it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top