Abortion: wrong or just sort of wrong?

Jarod said:
Not all of them, but the root of the idea that we should not have birth control and should also not have abortion comes from a desire to keep women pregnant at young ages. It keeps them in their place. It promotes less educated families and results in larger Church Membership and more dependence on charity. It makes the rich more powerful.
Click to expand...

just when you think liberals could not get any more stupid, Jarod shows up.....
 
Jarod said:
If the Conservatives truly wanted less abortion they would abandon the effort to make it illegal and spend that time and money and effort on promoting pre-conception Birth Control.
Click to expand...

and if you would stop promoting free and easy post-conception birth control as a constitutional righht, maybe more folks would consider pre-conception birth control to be of importance.......
 
maineman said:
your answer was much more explicit. You didn't claim to link to a site where others discussed what their view of the perfect case was.... you stated, quite clearly, that you link contained WHAT SCOTUS CONSIDERS A POSSIBLE CHALLENGE. If you wrote the sentence inaccurately, perhaps simply saying that would be more elegant than doing otherwise.
Click to expand...


Seriously, you are being inane here. The link actually provides BOTH what pro life advocates believe good challenges and what SCOTUS is considering taking up. But more specifically to the question YOU posited, it provides an answer. It also clearly provided proof to the other poster I responded to, an answer as well.
 
Jarod said:
Not all of them, but the root of the idea that we should not have birth control and should also not have abortion comes from a desire to keep women pregnant at young ages. It keeps them in their place. It promotes less educated families and results in larger Church Membership and more dependence on charity. It makes the rich more powerful.
Click to expand...

do you have documentation that proves this theory of yours?
 
christiefan915 said:
Look, you can snark and deflect until the cows come home. I'm used to that from cons. All I want to know is why no anti-choice group has been able to overturn Roe v. Wade whether through SCOTUS or Congress. It's a simple question. And yes, I did read your link and assume you know the petition was denied on 1/13/14.
Click to expand...

It was a simplistic question, and you have ignored the reasoned response. The snark is all yours.
 
XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
One does not need to be pregnant to understand abortion on demand is an abominable act. It's like saying you can't have an opinion unless you personally experience something. If that we're the case there would never exist any real controversy over anything, and life would cease to have meaning or order, and laws would be of no real value.
Click to expand...

"Abortion on demand" is the rallying cry of cons who want to denigrate women for electing their legal right to choose.
 
It used to be legal to own other human beings, that hardly makes calling the practice evil, wrong. Abortion on demand should not be legal just as owning slaves should never have been legal. Both argue(d) their rights under the guise that the humanness of the person was in question.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
really?.....if a con had an abortion, then killing babies is a good thing?.....when liberals stop telling young people they have a right to kill unborn children, when they stop telling people they are nothing but parasites, THEN you can get rid of the taint you carry with you whereever you go.....
Click to expand...

I didn't say "killing babies" was a good thing and your putting words in my mouth is a pitiful way of trying to make a point. But I do understand that you have no real comeback to the fact that con women have abortions and both con men and con women support abortion. Your comments about liberals, blah blah blah is lazy.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
atheism?....no, that was your example....
Click to expand...

No, that was a different point that you are trying to worm your way out of. This one had to do with your inaccurate claim about 500 foot buffer zones and protests at churches. YOUR EXAMPLE is invalid because there are few protests at churches. If there were a lot of them then there might be a call for a buffer zone.

You are so lousy at this.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
let them stop killing children and we'll let them distribute all the condoms you want to pay for.....
Click to expand...

Abortion is only 3% of PP's services. The other 97% focuses on contraception, education, medical problems, referrals etc. Furthermore, all their services aren't free.

Now in a brand-new decision Kansas can strip two Planned Parenthood centers of federal family planning money. That should knock your socks off.

Q: How much of Planned Parenthood’s services are dedicated to abortions? Does the federal government fund those procedures?

A: Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yeah right.....liberals are falling all over themselves trying to reduce abortion.....the mere mention that a doctor ought to tell the mother before hand that its killing something is enough to get you clamoring about the infringement....and claiming we're just doing it because we want to punish people for having sex, for fuck sake.....
Click to expand...

Savvy people reduce abortion by using proper contraception. And cons like you bash the agencies that provide it, or fall back on the snide remarks that women just need to keep their legs together.
 
christiefan915 said:
I didn't say "killing babies" was a good thing and your putting words in my mouth is a pitiful way of trying to make a point. But I do understand that you have no real comeback to the fact that con women have abortions and both con men and con women support abortion. Your comments about liberals, blah blah blah is lazy.
Click to expand...

right....because we all know that both parties have as part of their platform, the right to unrestricted access to abortion.....
 
XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
Seriously, you are being inane here. The link actually provides BOTH what pro life advocates believe good challenges and what SCOTUS is considering taking up. But more specifically to the question YOU posited, it provides an answer. It also clearly provided proof to the other poster I responded to, an answer as well.
Click to expand...

inelegant AND cowardly..... a twofer!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top