Abortion "rights" unpopular

My opinion of the terms being discussed depends on the current usage of the terms in discussion.

When you say "we", who are you talking about? Are you in private chat with others, or privy to information not in these forums?

BTW, it's ok if you don't understand or are confused by the discussion. I'm sure it's not the only time this has happened to you.

Which of the following lives should be saved from an abortion?

A)

B)

C)

D)

BTW, only one of them is human..... though it's kinda hard to tell..... maybe we should save them all just to be sure.....

You never know....

(This is not my full thoughts on this topic, but I'll get to that later. This is just to see what people actually think of the little cuties here. )

You might have noticed I don't answer many of your posts. It's because they don't argue points. This is more of the same. If you have a point to be made, great, if you want to make snide comments about those with whom you disagree, I'll ignore you. Thanks, and have a wonderful day, my dear.

If they are human beings, by all means, save them all.

Of course abortion is legal and can be safely performed in all states. I am not sure what any of the restrictions really accomplish, but they seem to be soemthing that a particularly vocal segments of american society accepts as progress.

Frankly i think a liberal eduction is the most valueable and effective anti-abortion method ever. Unfortunatley education is hardly the goal of the american public school system. And of course the neo cons would teach ID and not evolution, which goes to show their commitment to education.

Oh, many of them have argued points, but you choose to ignore them just the same, or tell me I'm trying to derail the thread, when I'm just responding to your post. I don't expect a response from you on the more humorous or snide remarks. Don't call me dear, or any other term of endearment. I've asked you to not use those terms in the past, and you seem to ignore that.

Virgil only reads decent, manly books.

Actually, they are all just photographs. Der.

Are you thinking of this guy too?

If they are photos of humans, save all the humans. Doy

(derailing a thread, yes, but come on, isn't this one ready for derailing, already?)

I HATE it when people call me dear and they aren't, you know, dear to me. It's SOOOOO patronizing. There is this fellow who owns a cab company locally who calls each woman customer dear. I mean, he might as well take the whole plunge into sexism and just tell me, when I ask when my car is coming, "don't you worry your pretty little head about it, dear." That is the tone that is being communicated; one can almost visualize the patting of hands and hear the simpering voice. Ewwwww.

If someone is related to me very closely or has kissed me full on the mouth without being punched, that person is then eligible to call me 'dear' but not before.

Agreed, I sooo hate it when someone calls my dear, dear. It makes me see rather redly. (pun intended)

Some pro-lifer you are... isn't every life sacred, human or otherwise? Der.

Now sweetie-pie, don't get ya sef in a twist, this heah is a ferum, an wezum can sayz whats we wants. So just chill ya sef down, honey.

Sure, every life is sacred. I just ate a huge steak. That cow is now part of me. Thank God for cows, and potatoes.

mkay then, sugar-shorts! I will know that you're just jokin' around and not serious when you post, and all. hehe. Thanks for clearing that up, stickybuns! =D (or is that honeybuns? I am sorry... can't quite get that southern slang right for some reason)

How dare you call me sugar-shorts? I have never been so offended in all my born days! I can't even think I'm so mad. But when I become unmad I'm going to give you are real good talking to, young lady!!!

Now sticky-buns, that there is real southern compliment. helhelhel

Does anyone else think it is hilarious that the abortion right UNPOPULAR thread has reached 267+ posts??

Certainly seems unpopular to me....

Yes, I know, abortion "rights" is unpopular, it seems that way to millions.

I'm taking a break from the forums for a while. All this beating my head against the wall is giving me migraines.

This argument is very simple. Both sides are pro-choice, it's just a difference of opinion on at what point in time that choice comes into play as well as a difference in opinion on when life begins.

Anti-abortion: Women (and men) have the choice to decide when to have sex. After that, both parents should take responsibility for the child if one should occur. Both parties involved are well aware that the biological function of sex is to result in pregnancy and that the only 100% effective means of contraception is abstinance....or oral sex!

We believe that life begins at or near conception. Personally, I don't know when and neither do scientists so I prefer to err on the side of letting the zygote/fetus/sack of cells/potential human/baby live. We believe that the zygote/fetus/sack of cells/potential human/baby is a separate individual who happens to live inside the mother. And, indeed, modern medical science has pushed the stage of viability into the second trimester. Premies born in the late second trimester have a good chance of survival. Therefore, we believe that if they could otherwise survive outside of the mother, killing them is murder.

In short: We believe the act of abortion is killing babies. Looking at it from that angle, you can see how we could be so passionate.

Many of us believe in the MAP, me included.

Pro-abortion: Women should have the right to choose right up to the point the head leaves the vagina at which point the fetus officially becomes a baby and therefore protected by the Constitution. Before then it is a parasite and more importanly a part of the mother's body which she should, and currently does, have the right to remove if she so chooses.

Pro-abortionists fear government intervention in their biological decisions and understandably so. Moreover, they are concerned for the health and safety of women who will seek an abortion anyway. They feel making abortion illegal is akin to, say, making breast cancer treatment illegal.

Thus you can understand why they are so passionate.

They believe that the answer to making abortions rare is better sex education and greater access to cheap contraceptives.

So basically, no matter what the Pro-abortion side says, the Anti-abortion side hears as "I think killing babies should be a right." Conversely, no matter what the Anti-abortion side says, the Pro-abortion side only hears "I want to enslave women." And round and round it goes.

I think both sides have part of the answer. Simply making abortions illegal will just send women into the back alleys and certainly cause them great harm and even death. While there will always be those who will resort to such tactics, the best way to reduce these numbers is better sex education, better access to cheap contraceptives, adoption and foster care reform, and a lot more personal responsibility from both sexes.

In the end it is up to the voters. Still, legislation will not be the end of this issue. Should abortion become illegal in this country once again, abortion advocates will continue their fight just as the anti-abortion groups do now.

Hopefully one day science will settle this argument once and for all by either determining precisely when life begins, finding a foolproof contraceptive for both sexes, and/or finding a minimally invasive way to remove the fetus from the mother and let it continue its development either in a new host or an artificial womb.

That said, I'm off to bed. I wish you all well. Enjoy bashing each other. I'll see you...well, some other time.

-Kiamat Dusk

This thread has gone on too long.

I read it and ignored it because it was bunk from the beginning. A close examination shows that this was a very, very biased polling.

Terminology debate. So? How many of the 59% believe it's a "full" / "viable" / "complete" human life? Heck, 100% could believe that it's an "undeveloped human life" and they could all still be pro-choice. The key is in the qualifiers, and this stat lacks them.


Of course life begins at conception ... for that matter, life began at single-celled organisms. This question is obviously vaguely worded.


And the same stat probably applies to pro-life; I would say most people think that abortion stance isn't an issue at all in Supreme Court nomination. Where is the stat on whether people think Justices need to be pro-life? Conveniently missing.

The bottom line is that 10% of people are like you, Kevn, and staunchly pro-life, and 10% are pro-choice to an extreme, and 80% of us want you to stop being so pushy with your opinions.


Most people are against any filibuster. So what? This question also is pro-choice or pro-life neutral, so it really doesn't prove anything anyway.


So? sex-selection abortions are something both pro-lifers and pro-choicers agree is generally selfish and petty.


That's a pretty good idea, no? This doesn't exactly scream out pro or against abortion. It supports people making big difficult decisions not on the spur of the moment.


I'm surprised this isn't higher. Why shouldn't parents be notified of major surgery that their children are going through, when they are directly responsible for the health, safety, and overall welfare of their children?

...

These stats are bunk, Kevn. They don't support your claims. Please take your propaganda spin-doctoring elsewhere. goodbye.

Those stats are your opinion. Or did you post some kind of study/poll to support your opinion?

If we are guessing, I say 50% are pro-life to the point of voting for pro-life candidates. And 35% are pro-abortion enough to vote for pro-abortion candidates. 15% are not interested. That's why the Republicans control the presidency, congress and now the courts.

Awesome!